Is it discrimination??

[reahead]

Our local primary school are offering after school booster classes for the year 6 children they think with extra support reach a level 5. However other children that the school feel even wit6h extra support will not recieve a level 5 are denied this opportunity.

Are these children not allowed the opportunity to improve thier attainment from thier starting point even though may not recieve a level 5? despite the fact they may however improve.

Seems to me the school have done this to reflect well when these results are published. The children not predicted to recieve a level 5 are mainly special educational needs so why are they not being given an equal opportunity along with their peers to improve thier attainment?

Before you get all hot and bothered, check what support is being offered to those aiming for level 4 or below in school time.

The usual TA support within the entitlement of all childrenn on a SEN register. I think its a good idea but would like like to see all children given the same oportunity.

Thanks for your comment, I welcome lots of views

I completely understand where you are coming from, but booster classes have been used by primary schools for over a decade now to support children who are borderline at certain levels to achieve the higher level.

Traditionally boosters have been designed to secure the levelling of children borderline level 3 to level 4. I have been a year six teacher where we used the boost budget to split the cohort into three streamed classes, top, middle, bottom if you will, and then have three excellent teachers each being able to target the children in their set to support all the learning and all children to achieve their potential. This is one school's approach, your school has a different approach. Maybe you need to speak to the Headteacher and ascertain what they are doing for the children who are not being "boosted", maybe remmoving the potential Level 5's from the class means that the teaching can be more targetted for the remaining children and therefore their needs are being better met. I am not sure you have the whole story yet, so I would go in and ask the question.

It is not discrimination to use special funding for some children and not others, discrimination is based on children not being facilitated to access the curriculum, where their needs rpevent them frm accessing as a "normal" child. School may have a good programme already in place to support all the other children. You need to establish this before you fire off.

Hope that helps.

Often schools have a set of booster classes in Y6 for L3/4 borderlines, and a diff set of booster classes for L4/5 borderlines.

It's nothing to do with being on the SEN register or not, so it's def not discrimination.

thank you, its quite clearly nothing to do with being on the SEN register as these children with low attainments are not being boosted as not predicted to achieve the desirable level, therefore are they being treated less favourable by not being given booster places.

I agree that average ability children should also recieve extra support so hot under the collar I am not and have not fired of just yet as it is put, just opening up a debate on ethics and valuing other opinions:)

thank you for this

We discussed exactly this at a governors meeting. The teachers are giving up their time - unpaid - to run these booster sessions.

Kids who are a secure level 5 aren't offered them either. And probably some of their parents would want it just as much as anyone else.

The kids on level 2 and 3 should have been receiving interventions for years now....

the HT flat out said she wouldn't offer it if she had to offer it to all, and because the teachers are doing it unpaid, I can see her point.

Its nice to know I,m not the only one doing a fairly large amount of unpaid work in the public sector and extremly good of teachers to show their dedication & commitment to childrens learning. But then there are the breaks every six weeks to help recharge the batteries (joke, the holidays are earned.)

But I still feel and as do the some of the children exempt from this course that 'it's just for the clever kids'.

I wish it were true that SEN kids were getting the appropiate intervention for years now. If that were true there would be no call for new green paper.
Thank you IndigoBell

Well, it shouldn't be 'just for the clever kids' - because the clever kids should already be a secure level 5 and so not needing booster sessions....

In my school about half the kids are invited to various booster classes....

Just to add to the debate, in my DS's school all DC are given these booster sessions, streamed into 2 or 3 groups. Some stay with the class teacher and others work with an extra 'booster' teacher. Those who stay with the class teacher are also 'boosted' as the teacher concentrates on their particular deficits. As it happens the extra teacher takes the higher level maths group and the lower level literacy. In a one form entry school it's the only opportunity to set across the year group. 2 and 3 form entry schools set for Maths as a matter of course and often for literacy, too, especially in year 6.

Thats interesting EllenJane1. So my mind hasn't been changed. There is a group that are working beyond the requirement level, those borderline needing a push and all the while the attainment gap increases between those with the lower attainment and their peers.

It prob has been done like this for years but in 2011 it,s not equal opportunity.....I did think for a while there IndigoBell you were swaying me, but with a lower than average amount of SEN's at this school and possibly yours it may not increase the work load of teachers to much to include this group in the booster sessions.

I prob should add that there is no difference between girls & boys accademic progress at this school and well above average amount of children achieve a level 5 making it a sought after school.

Ok, so this is how it works in my school - AFAIK

Booster groups are run out of school hours.
They are offered to kids who are either borderline Level 4 or borderline Level 5
They were offered to approx half the kids.

I assume you only got offered a booster session if you were either a 4a/5c or a 3a/4c

So if you were a level 5b+, 4b or 3b- you didn't get offered a booster session.

Is it fair? They have been at school for 4 years. And they are not being offered 10 hours of small group work out of hours. 10 hours out of 4 years.

All interventions etc. are targeted. We offer pyramid club to kids who are shy, computer club to kids who don't have computers at home, cooking club to kids whose parents don't feed them, extension clubs to G&T kids, and numerous interventions to kids who are on the SEN register.

So if you are allowed to offer those clubs to targeted children, why can't you also offer booster clubs to targeted kids?

If they invited everyone then it wouldn't be a booster club. It would have to be differentiated and all the rest. The point of these sessions is to run a small group and just target one thing. Teachers do it out of hours unpaid.

Seeing as my kids have benefited from numerous interventions, I do think it is fair to take 3a/4c kids and give them targeted support for 10 hours. What's unfair about that?

The govt has also given the school some 1:1 money, which has had to be spent on various groups of kids. Whether it was fair or not, that is how the money had to be spent.

If your child is not going to get a level 4 or a level 5, I personally think it's too late to be complaining a few weeks before SATs....... Again, they have been at the school for 4 years. And in all that time they have been studying the NC.

You'll see exactly the same happen again at GCSE level re booster classes for borderline children. Sadly this is engineered from the top as schools are judged so harshly via the league tables etc on how many attain the desired levels/grades. There is therefore a HUGE amount at stake for teachers to get as many borderline grades through to the next level.

Until, and unless the system changes ALL schools will devote extra attention to the borderline cases in some format or another. There is no point blaming an indvidual school for doing so, while the penalties to schools and careers if they don't (and their competitors do!) remains the same. If you object the fight needs to be taken to the politicians who have the power to change the system, not the invididual schools or HT's operating within that system. Primary teachers have campaigned for years on the unfairness of it all and how it impacts year 6 learning via their unions, alone they cannot do more.

If it helps most secondaries retest the kids upon entry to year 7 and go on their own internal grading for sets as they know just how "taught to the test" the results of primary sats have become and need to guage the children's true ability levels.

I agree bochead, like I said it is the schools interest to boost certain children so it reflects good on the school.

IndigoBell, I am not talking about my child and my child is not approaching year six sats.

Yes my child is SEN and recieves 1-1 support which is paid for by the LEA, not from schools funds and when the time comes he will be exempt from such clubs but his twin may be a candidate or may be a certain for a level 5.

I don't disagree on the borderline children recieving extra support and yes if cooking club is only open to underfed children and computer club to children that don't have computers then this to is also discrimination etc and as for the 10 hours for various other support for SEN this to is funded by the LEA.

Unfortunately it is up to the HT to decide on how to spend this money and on what rescources. Unless your SEN children are making significant progress (demonstrating money going where it is needed) in which their educational gap between them and their peers is being narrowed and if so there is no discrimination (other than the other clubs you mentioned) because there then likely to be candidates for borderline booster groups:)

Thank you

Reahead, I'm not disagreeing with you, but HT do have some parts of their funding ring-fenced for specific projects. Booster lessons are one such project. I prefer my DS's school's method of having booster lessons in school time so that all pupils can benefit. The extra booster teacher is paid, she is a regular supply teacher. Indigo is and I have been a school governor and the financing of schools is very structured and proscribed.

Yes I think I agree, this seems a fairer system.

But in comment to interventions SEN children have had for four years.....I would like to say and I think TA's are brilliant but they do the bulk of SEN children's teaching and whilst they may have this help to access the NC for the past four years, the other children have had the full attention of the qualified teacher. TA''s take over the most complex teaching with limited knowledge and often acting as advocates for children. How many parents would be up in arms to know the bulk of there non SEN childs teaching was carried out by a TA even if over seen?

Have I converted anyone if not I,ll agree to disagree....I think

ReaHead - quite seriously, if you get a chance become a governor. You learn lots and lots, it's really interesting, you get to find out more about how the school works and why decisions were made, and you get to build up relationships with important staff members.

I can't see it as discrimination at all, because my defn of the word would be to act against a certain set of people, ie not allowing blacks into a club or not allowing homosexuals into a club.

However having a club exclusively for children who are working at a level 3a just doesn't match my defn of the word discrimination.

As for SEN provision and interventions and TAs, everyone's experience is different. In my case both my DCs have been on loads and loads of TA run interventions. They don't have statements so they have not been funded by the LEA but rather by the school.

I'm pleased a TA is teaching my DD to read, not a teacher. A junior teacher knows absolutely nothing about teaching kids to read, whereas the TA has had loads of training on it, and loads of experience in it.

In general TAs can be better than teachers. Totally depends on the TA and on the teacher.

And I totally disagree with your comment about kids needing to demonstrate they are making progress in order for money to be spent on them. I think it is more likely to be true that the the kids whose parents shout the loudest get the most help.

Obv each school is different, and an awful lot is down to the HT. My school is inclusive. And kids on the SEN register do go to KS2 booster clubs.

I completely understand where you are coming from on this as booster groups cause alot of anxiety in our school where the money seems to be aimed at the top and the bottom (not necessarily SEN) with the wide range of 'average' children in the middle being left to fend for themselves. But then that is because our 'outstanding' is actually pretty rubbish.

As for discrimination, legally this has to be attached to a protected characteristic e.g. race, disability, gender, to be unlawful. For example, there is nothing to stop anyone discriminating against people in purple pants, yellow cars, etc etc

Maybe I will stand for governor, I have been thinking about it for a while and have enough knowledge regarding educational issues and childrens agenda.

Discrimination is to treat unfairly this is usually race, colour, sex, culture, disability and can be applied to a person or group. ACE have a brilliant brochure on discrimination.

Any child on an SEN register brings extra money into the school from the LEA so isn't from school's normal fund. This is because LEA placed extra funding to the schools instead of statementing children, hence why there are few statements....

I havn't said children need to demonstrate progress in order for them to have money spent on them.... I did say progress would demonstrate money was being spent wisely and on resources that work. At one point my child (and I know of another) couldn,t even have a reading book because there wasn't any for his reading level and the TA despite asking could not get funding for any, this is one example of appropiate resources. Yes TA's are great.

It does seem from various comments there is a variance between schools.

Thanks tho for the chat, its good to listen to different perspectives.

There's also quite a difference between LAs also, and with the proliferation of Academies, there will be even more variation.

Academies now there is a worrying concept for primary schools in particular.

My DSs soon to be secondary school is becoming an academy. Its stance is it's the only way forward to keep the level of staff etc it has now. I do worry about the eventual effect on central services even if they are protected for now. Had a long thread on this with Indigo last month.

I sat through a governors meeting last night where we stressed about this, academies mean changes to pay and conditions and pensions of teachers, possibly reducing standards, changes to school days and term times, central resources becoming too expensive to maintain, advisory services mainatin and raising standards being too expensive to get into primary schools, and the central respurces issue will affect all primary's whether they become and academy or not.....scary stuff really

fancy another and jammy dodger?

Yes, it's the excellent SEN advisory teaching service in my LA that I'm most concerned about. Indigo swears that they are protected, but with this lot in power, for how long? The secondary said it would continue to use them, for now.

Only whole, unbroken for me.

I used to work for an excellent advisory service, but they pushed funding out to schools, who opted back into a service level agreement, but it was the end of the service eventually because the money isn't ring fenced, and as school budgets tighten schools dip into this provision to meet other needs. I can only see this happening more and more, and as schools become academies then la lose economies of scale and those schools who stay state schools can't afford the support. I fear a very slippery slope, and the government is standing at the top pushing us all down!