Difficult SENCO??

[MBMum]

My DD started reception class and got an EHCP approved in summer, so applied through the normal route as she had no EHCP then at time of application.

I met the senco in the summer, her first call is 'if i had seen this EHCP before i would have said we cant accept DD as we cant meet her needs' - strike 1.

I am taking the LA to tribunal as the EHCP is almost 18months out of date, the content isnt applicable, really poorly written, inaccurate and provisions are vague and not quantified.

Second meeting with Senco 2 weeks into term - 'have you thought about SEN schools, this particular one is amazing etc i wish we had their facilities'

my reply - no i haven't, and in my mind thinking why is she pushing me already to look at different schools.

she never really responds, to my emails, doesn't involve me in any decisions regarding my DD or shares strategies, i have to keep asking for meetings and shes always 'too busy because i also teach you know'.

However she is happy for me to ask for more funding at tribunal yet refuses to outline how or what she will use it for when it comes to my dd.

Our lawyer who is running the tribunal application for us said ignore her- focus on tribunal and getting the right provisions for your child, you are on the right track doing the right things etc.

Any other parents out there having such experiences with MS senco?

I’m not clear about what year your DD is in now and how long the EHCP has been in place. If it’s eighteen months out of date, then has there been no review in that time.

What progress is she making and are you happy with that?

Certainly, the EHCP needs to be properly quantified, support specified and progress monitored and it’s quite reasonable that this should be outlined by the school quite specifically.

Unfortunately, it is the case, particularly in primary schools, that the SENCo is likely to have an almost full time teaching commitment. That doesn’t excuse her poor communication with you and failure to demonstrate how the school will support your child.

I think the lawyer is sensible in asking you to focus on what you want the outcome of the tribunal to be. If you want her to stay in mainstream, then the EHCP must be much more appropriate and the school must follow it. If you feel that alternative provision is better for her, focus on that.

The lawyer is right, ignore.

However she is happy for me to ask for more funding at tribunal yet refuses to outline how or what she will use it for when it comes to my dd.

This may be the SENCO not realising she needs to further explain the system to you further. The problem is the poor delivery of the explanation rather than the thoughts behind it. The SEP detailed, specified and quantified in F must be provided. That is what the funding will provide. However, in the B&F appeal, the Tribunal will be focused on needs and provision rather than funding. Then the LA is responsible for ensuring the SEP is provided. That includes ensuring there is sufficient funding.

Similarly, what you are calling strike one, isn’t unusual. Except the school couldn’t refuse to admit if they aren’t wholly independent and are named in I. The SENCO is right, the school should have been consulted legally and that is the point for the school to raise concerns or objections. Schools raising concerns is a normal part of the process. The SENCO could have explained this better.

Strike 2 also isn’t uncommon and many parents would be grateful for her honesty. Many schools bury their head in the sand. It is fine if your preference is mainstream. That is your right (except for a minority of cases). The SENCO is sharing her experience and this is perhaps a clash of styles. Once the SENCO knows your preference is for MS, she shouldn’t be constantly raising SS.

How many emails and meetings are you requesting/sending? Unless funded, regular meetings within a half term wouldn’t be typical. Her response could have been politer and more informative, though.

thanks for the helpful reply @EndlessLight

I have clearly expressed my preference for MS school because DD has worked 1:1 with a behaviour therapist for a while and she does phonics, number, uses language and with the right support she does so so well. the therapist used to go into the nursery, trained the staff and worked with DD in some sessions and the difference was incredible. at the start of term, i asked for one meeting witht he TA/staff and therapist so she could do a handover of what works and what strategies have proven successful with DD - i believe a collaborative approach between parents and professionals working wiht a child is always helpful for exchange of ideas particularly as the therapist experienced the same struggles as the school and used strategies to successfully overcome them.

as it stands the SENCO seems to feel they know what they are doing and i should leave them to it. however, when i see the daily feedback from the TA its clear that they are not understanding how to work with DD.

Yes i have a team of professionals assessing her so we get a better EHCP with better more quantified and suitable provisions. for me the sencos.s manner sometime is not helpful and rigid.

in my ind 1. lets get her assessed properly 2. identify needs and provisions 3. put the to practise and then if these are still not working then i will make a more informed decision around the setting.

i dont feel that is unreasonable.

I have clearly expressed my preference for MS school because DD has worked 1:1 with a behaviour therapist for a while and she does phonics, number, uses language and with the right support she does so so well.

Obviously what you have said IRL may be different, but ^this doesn’t actually say you have considered SS and decided your preference is MS. If you have said the above, that could explain why the SENCO still mentioned SS.

Why couldn’t the therapist share their views via either of the 2 meetings you have mentioned you have had or via paperwork if the therapist couldn’t attend?

Depending on what you mean by behaviour therapist, the SENCO’s reluctance may also be her/the school’s views of some behavioural therapies. If it was in the EHCP, they would clearly have to put those views to the side, but without it being in F the school may decide certain behavioural therapies are not in their pupil’s best interests (whether you disagree is a separate matter) and, again, depending on what you mean by behavioural therapy that their best endeavours duty does not include that (again, you may not agree).