Daughter being excluded from prom

[user1471497170]

My daughter is year 11 and sits GCSEs next month. She has struggled throughout the whole of secondary school with friendships, MH/school anxiety, behaviour and approximately a year ago almost got sent to pru. She has never settled in school. However she has made significant improvement, not on any behaviour plan, is revising hard and should pass GCSEs and do her chosen subjects in college.

She has autism, anxiety and some physical health issues that are likely linked. Getting her into school is a struggle as she feels unhappy there but we make the effort and her attendance is good.

Although much improved her behaviour score is not high enough to meet the 90% prom threshold (reminders, uniform points and gokng to toilet when not permitted). She was informally told this week the final decision is that she will be excluded from prom.

Now all the girls have their tickets and she is beside herself. They are all making plans and talking about dresses and she now feels unable to continue going to school due to feeling so distressed about this. She is worried how she will cope with the sense of exclusion having to keep hearing about prom in school and assemblies

She's now at home. I have written to the school and submitted 2 complaints over the last 2 months however I have not received a satisfactory response. There has been no communication to me from the school about their decision or how they will support those excluded. Please can someone advise how I can escalate this further and if possible externally.

Why is it unreasonable?

Schools run reward trips for students that get a certain number of points, why can't prom be the same?

I did as this of you earlier in the thread - don’t know if you saw it? Would be interested in your POV on this.

“Can I ask what support would look like? Particularly for AUDHD? With one class teacher and 30 pupils, half of which are SEN?”

I don't think mainstream is working with 1 teacher to 30 pupils especially once the school /LA have failed to support for years.

However, I also feel that if support is right in the early days there is less support needed later in the school journey but what happens is early support isn't put in place and by the time a pupil gets to secondary the support needs are extensive

1 example would be
Child has just started in reception, they are anxious about being told off which causes them to shut down and not process the instructions. They haven't understood what is expected of them and they have got it wrong. Teacher gets cross. Child is even more scared of being told off.
They don't understand their numbers like all their peers. The teacher needs to to move on to higher numbers but they don't have the basics and so the work is getting harder and they can't follow it. They are scared and the teacher keeps telling them off for not listening

At this point the parents say child is resistant in morning and getting increasingly distressed. School say they are fine in school. Child isn't fine and is exploding at home. Anything resembling school work ends in child getting so distressed.

At this point a kind and gentle TA spending some time 1:1 would likely build the child's confidence, and address the lack of understanding quite quickly. If the issue is learning difficulties this will quickly be recognised if child isn't making progress 1:1 but if it is just missed understanding the gap will quickly resolve

Either way the child gets the support they need at the time so the issues doesn't become long term and build further.

But what is normally happening is a wait and see approach. This means the school do nothing meaningful straight away. The gap gets bigger, the confidence gets further destroyed and the child becomes more resistant and scared to attend school.

The longer this goes on the more expensive and complex any useful intervention become.
Instead school and LA offer interventions that may have been helpful several years ago but now aren't even going to touch the sides.

It is the opposite, they're offering a positive consequence for people who do comply.

Read up about the "ABC model" for behaviour change. I think the author is Braksick.

Not offering a child a ticket to a prom is not "traumatic" it's "disappointing".

As someone who has PTSD, I do think the deflation of what is required to constitute "trauma" is deeply offensive to those who have genuinely experienced traumatic experiences and plays straight into the hands of people who would totally defund SEND. I would suggest you don't add fuel to their fire.

There's someone somewhere on this thread very scathingly accusing me of wanting to deprive ' (the good') kids of social interaction.
So what's the point of the prom?
Is it a reward like in a workplace?
My view is that because of its significance at the end/ change of many kids school life it's a unique transition event. Transitions require resources to get them right.
It's become a cultural norm because schools have built it up into that. It's now part of the ending for many.
I've no problem with incentives as a concept
But because the prom is a social event that most kids expect and want to go to and it's also a key transition thing, using exclusion from it as a sanction is a particularly nasty development. I'm really surprised if that's become normalised. It's often going to be their last memory of school. It's not something I feel has been properly thought through at a macro level.
Like I said if there's a real safety issue where a kid's unmanageable in that situation there should be specific risk assessment. It's won't be a surprise by that stage.
People on here are talking as if they were unable to boundary kids before proms came along. Thats nonsense.

In the olden days we had grammar schools for kids who wanted to learn and get on in life. I was a grammar school girl. We didn't have the behaviour issues that I read about in today's schools. The top 25% of kids went to grammar school. I think grammar schools should be brought back in order to help those academic kids who want to learn and do well. My proviso would be that maybe 35-40% of kids should go to grammar.
The less academic kids went to secondary modern school. They were not forced to do 8 academic subjects and take exams. They focussed on more practical subjects such as woodwork and cookery. In today's society they would do DT , art, PE and computer studies; together with English and Maths. They didn't have anxiety and other mental health issues. They didn't go to university as so many less able kids do today.
The kids who were persistently trouble - taking knives to school, throwing chairs, assaulting other students, drug dealing, stealing - went to borstal. They were removed from the society of decent kids who just wanted to get on with life.
The kids who couldn't cope with everyday life were sent to special school or remedial school. From my reading of mumsnet it appears that over 25% of today's kids fall into the special school category. They all have special needs and need extra help. They are incapable of progressing at even secondary modern level. Many of them have mental health issues because they are unable to cope with actually going to school and becoming part of society.
It is too much to expect schools and teachers to deal with all these 4 categories in one large school, often in the same lesson. I think schools are too big anyway. Smaller, more specialised schools are the answer.

Normalised for 1-2% of children who have regularly disrupted the education experience of others. I have no issue with that. Transition event or not, if you've routinely got it wrong in school, the line is there that you can't go to prom.

Of course there are other ways to boundary children through school. Although I have had one example of a child who brought a knife to exams, can't PEX at that point but they were banned from prom.

Well bringing knives in would be a red line because that is a clear risk in a prom situation.
'Regularly disrupted' the op was talking about more like historic stuff. Uniform toilet other that sort of thing and it having resolved. .
So why not deal with the disruption through the usual routes which are more immediate and therefore likely to be more effective?
Kids need timely responses. By the time the prom sanction is applied they've forgotten why they exited the classroom 6 months ago- - were disruptive- they've even forgotten they did it. And that's as it should be they move on from year to year.
I feel like that as a sanction at that stage is about the teaching staff and senior leadership. It's got no benefit for the kid. It can only alienate.

I didn't say that I said many children are left with trauma from school. From the day to day environment

In addition we are picking up the prices of the trauma my child suffered in school. A child who can not go near a school building without a panic attack. So as someone who is living this reality do not dismiss our experience

Massively benefits the other kids. They can see there is a big consequence for being a dick for 5 years. Also benefits staff who see that SLT are supportive of behaviour and won't let poor behaviour into prom.

I'm not.

But what you've been equating throughout this thread is not getting a perk, i.e. an invite to a prom is in some way traumatic.

Obviously traumatic experiences can happen at school but they're rare and much more severe than not being invited to a party. I'm sure you'd be pretty appalled if someone suggested to you that's why your child is exhibited the symptoms they are and I hope they get the support they need.

Sometimes though when our child is hurting, it turns us into tiger mum's and when we're in that reactive space, everything is seen as a threat.

In this case, while the child has ND issues, they also seem like they've been a bit of a shit at times. ND doesn't automatically make you into a nice person, nor a well behaved one. Nor does it completely exempt you from life's consequences.

You do realise that people can have sympathy for your situation with your child without giving carte blanche to all disruptive behaviour right? Nuance is permitted.

I'm not equating anything. I'm explaining in response to others how schools are failing to properly support young people with SEN.
I brought up trauma in response to someone comment

I don't think stopping prom due to forgetting items, going to the toilet and uniform is appropriate based on the information from OP

Obviously, we all only have OP version of events and our own personal experiences to make judgements and based on that I don't feel stopping the young person attending prom was right.

My child won't get to go to prom because they are unable to go to school. They however, would have liked to go to have the opportunities their siblings and peers have.
School made them incredibly ill, but if they had managed to continue masking and going this not only would have continued to make them ill -
But had they struggled and overcome things their peers hadn't had to just to get into school each day. It would have really not been fair to have them prevented to go to prom. Two reasons one of the motivational factors of dragging themselves through such an uncomfortable and inappropriate environment for them would have been prom. The second is all the years of pain they endured just to be able to do things like prom with peers would be for nothing

My child didn't have behaviour issues at school but the were at a school that sanctioned not getting over a certain % on homework questions with detention.
My child was in detention weekly not because of behaviour but because the homework was too hard for them that they were never able to reach the target. The teacher admitted they had not the prior learning to be able to cope but that they wouldn't be able to teach things the pupil should have already understood.
Yes I understand that this sanction was to make sure pupils did their homework. But no I do not agree a blanket approach is appropriate when the punishment isn't about not doing the homework it's about ability to hit a target. A target which is the same for pupils with SEN as pupils who can get 100% with their eyes closed.

They also got extra kick put names up of those in detention up on a board for all to see.

I think @Leftrightmiddle for understandable reasons you're making some big assumptions. There's some interesting research about "sensemaking" and it's all about the biases and assumptions we make to interpret the world.

For you, right now, all of this is being interpreted through the lens of your experience.

But back to the OP, she has said about toilet trips (which would be when not permitted) and "reminders" which are often behavioural. It does not mean that the school has been remiss in raising any of these. And the fact the OP has waited till now to challenge them suggests that it was seen by her as reasonable earlier.

I empathise with your difficult situation, but it's not what the OP has been through and I think you're projecting that onto the thread. Not intentionally, not maliciously but just because you're justifiably upset. Read how many times you typed "my child". This isn't your child.

@Lemonthyme

Mumsnet is extremely hard.

If you comment without personal examples

• your told you know nothing about schools and sen

In this thread I have seen comments saying schools are making too many adjustments for SEN. when in reality not nearly enough is being done.

If you use personal examples to explain why SEN pupils are getting failed - your told your making the thread about your own situation 🤨

I recon OP won't be back with clarification as so many assumptions made against them

I agree, Walkden, but it's all part of the hyperbole some trot out when anyone dares to suggest their child should face consequences

As for the decently behaving majority possibly getting their prom cancelled, why would such parents care? If their precious doesn't get to go the rest can clearly go hang, and that'll be the school's fault too

Absolutely disgusting - I hope you never have to deal with suicide risks

Have a bit of empathy and understanding

And if you look back you will see this was in response to a comment and not directly related to a single event such as a Prom

Equally when parents say schools are doing nothing, teachers come back and say "what more can one human in a class of 30 children realistically do?". That isn't the fault of the child, but neither is it the fault of the school. In SOME circumstances, the child and parents use their SEN to excuse any poor behaviour. SOME parents expect unreasonable things from a mainstream secondary with responsibility for staff workload. Some of the things I've been asked for:

• check in every period with a child in my tutor group
• provide 1:1 tuition instead of mainstream classroom
• write all the notes into a child's book before the lesson
• let a child walk around school when they are struggling
• daily phonecall to parents re behaviour

None of these are at all reasonable yet parents will be out there slagging me off for not "meeting their child's needs".

Again a system issue if schools can not meet needs
30 children in a class isn't working for anyone.
Those who can't cope, the strain on the staff, and the other pupils who education if impacted.

The system needs to change.

Parents aren't asking for adjustments to make your life difficult, they are asking for anything that may make life slightly more bearable. They are asking for understanding

I understand you don't have the time or energy or resources you need to ensure every child gets an appropriate education
But that's because the system is failing

Thanks for replying. I can see from reading further that your experience is one of a parent whose child has struggled with mainstream.

You’re right in that one teacher cannot support 30 pupils, especially if half of them are SEN. There’s also pupil premium children, looked after children, ones with physical/medical impairment to support too. Much smaller class sizes, investment in expanding school buildings to enable that, extra support staff and a changed curriculum is what is needed and is what many staff want too (the reduction in stress would help with retainment).

But that’s not a vote winner as taxpayers just won’t fund it. I can think of no political party that will endorse it.

Whilst also working in school, I’m a parent of a SEN child who went through EBSA in secondary and bullying in primary, so I see both sides of the coin. [In fact, quite a number of staff have SEN children or SEN themselves so do understand.] Working in a school is an eye opener on how much pressure there is on staff - so yes, I can see by the time prom comes around and staff are asked to give up their time for it, many will just want an enjoyable fun event rather than a stressful one. And so they use behaviour assessment to do that, which may be a blunt instrument for some.

Last year, I had to supervise two lads who were both SEN and fixated on each other - friends occasionally but more often than not they would fall out and fight. It was an exhausting evening, at the end of an extremely stressful term and I’m not sure how long I can keep giving of myself to continually do this. (One parent did offer to supervise their lad but as the parent was SEN and fixated on the other child this would be a recipe for disaster so we politely declined.)

I feel I’m waffling now, but hopefully you get the gist.

@anonymoususer9876

I don't disagree with your comment

Tax payers won't want to fund it but the costs will be higher long term due to needs not being met in education
It's just kicking the can down the road

Absolutely it's a system issue.

However while the system is as it is, prom is used as it is. As a teacher I completely agree with poor behaviour excluding children from prom. Prom is a privilege, not a right.

Parents aren't asking for adjustments to make your life difficult, they are asking for anything that may make life slightly more bearable. They are asking for understanding

I'm asking for their understanding.

Do you not agree that those demands aren't possible in a mainstream school? They are impossible to provide in almost all cases. Surely parents must know that, so why ask?

Education is meant to be a right for every child too..
And yet so many children aren't getting an education. So now education is for the privileged people who don't have additional needs

And yet schools regularly say they can meet the pupils needs in mainstream and block the requests for alternative provision by saying they can meet needs.

I do understand teachers/schools are pressured to agree needs can be met by the LA but this isn't helping the pupil, the family or the teachers

Until honest conversations can be had about mainstream not meeting needs - it continues to be a problem for parents, pupils and teachers

Parents are asking because they know that mainstream isn't working and are being told that the school can meet needs which it clearly can't

There are no winners here