Is this letter too arsey?

[KOKOagainandagain]

DS1 has been out of school since the beginning of the autumn term. He has medical authorisastion but is on his third tutor. The first one was lost due to 'reorganisation', the second laughed at his difficulties (I complained and she was gone) but now the third one has thrown a hissy fit in response to my giving her feedback that DS1 is unable to give her directly. She said that she can't teach DS1 and will find another tutor. (Clearly gives up at the first hurdle.)

She taught DS1 for the rest of the session but was a no-show the following day. I suspect (as she wanted to draft a letter immediately to the Inclusion Officer) that she has refused to return because of me. We are on the run-up to tribunal and the lea want to collect evidence that DS1 can cope in ms as has been named on the statement. My insistence on reporting failure to understand is problematic. Hence the return of mad momma.

"I was sorry to learn that you are unwell today. In future, I would appreciate being informed. As you are aware, DS1 finds change difficult to deal with, especially unexpected change. You were not contactable and DS1 was unable to understand your unexplained absence. He assumed that you were cross with him. He has written the enclosed letter to try and explain.

With regard to the session yesterday, DS1 did not understand that concrete nouns can be people, places or things. He thought that 'nouns' were only living things. This was partly because when naming living things he used my given name (xxx) and was told that this was a Proper Noun. He heard that this was a proper noun, as in 'correct'. He does not know what he does not understand, particularly when there is misunderstanding.

If you recall, DS1 struggled to name nouns that were things and had to be prompted to the extent that he was asked specific questions ('what are you sat on?' - 'chair?'). He then struggled to name another and had to be prompted again ('what are you sitting in front of?' - 'computer?'). He struggled to name another and was further prompted ('what else are you sitting at?' - 'table?'). DS1 was able to answer simple specific questions but had not grasped the concept of a noun. Perhaps it would be wise to ensure that DS1 is able to confidently demonstrate understanding rather than assuming that he understands abstract concepts because he is able to tentatively answer specific questions.

I hope that you find this information useful feedback and look forward to seeing you next week."

Love and kisses xxx (not)

What do you think? Too arsey?

Damn snail mail - I have already posted it

No point in commenting if you posted it already.

Sure it was very much deserved.

Reading between the lines there star you seem to be suggesting that it was a tad on the arsey side?

The only bit that sounds a bit arsey is:
Perhaps it would be wise to ensure that DS1 is able to confidently demonstrate understanding rather than assuming that he understands abstract concepts because he is able to tentatively answer specific questions.

But then it sounds like it's justified arsiness :o

OK it is arsey - but justified/deserved - thing is I am used to email where I don't send things til I have calmed down and then don't send them at all unless there is a tactical advantage.

Defensive action - she started muttering about DS1 not having the correct medical authorisation and her intention to write a report to her superiors. I am concerned at what she might do next.

They (the other side) might be constructing a case that mad momma is never satisfied - hence the tutor's desire to jump ship immediately that things were not perfect (my way or the highway) and to write her report at that instant.

I am concerned this was an inappropriate display of emotion

My only (constructive) comment, would be that the tone implies you are somehow her manager, employer, or in contract with her, when (I assume) you are actually 'contracted' with the medical education service rather than her.

For example, if I were complaining about the carers DD1 has, I would direct my complaint at the Agency, not the carers themselves.

lougle - I am not making a complaint, I am providing feedback. My comments would only make sense to the tutor. I did copy in the EOTAS co-ordinator at the lea.

Ok....first para sounds like a complaint to me. I'm sure she'll find it useful to know why your DS struggled with the tasks she set.

Good job I had already posted it.

I forgot to mention that the day she did not show up at the agreed time her mobile phone had been switched off and she made no attempt to contact me. I eventually received a call back from the receptionist at the PRU to which she is attached an hour and a half after the session was due to start.

Anyway this morning's post brought a copy of a letter she has sent to the EOTAS co-ordinator and Inclusion Officer. Basically it paints me as the problem (surprise, surprise) with my delusional belief that DS1 does not understand ms teaching/has difficulties that she can see no evidence of and needs specialist placement. She claims that she had always checked understanding and that DS1 always understands everything. She claims that DS1 was so enthusiastic that it was actually his idea that she gave him homework . She claims to have been using ABA teaching techniques 'which focuses on the positive, however I must state that within my sessions with DS1 I have not seen any negatives, only those that have been told to me by his mother.'

She says that I have told her that DS1 has difficulty processing (as is evidenced by several EP assessments, SALT assessments and GOSH APD assessments which place him on 0.3rd to 5th percentile) but that 'in my sessions with him I did not see any evidence of this'

At the time she reacted very strongly and personally (unprofessionaly - which she has now exacerbated by simply not turning up, with no communication, and getting another member of staff to claim that she was off sick that day) but after initially throwing her hands up and claiming that she was unable to teach him, she agreed that she would continue to teach him if or until she could find a better qualified or experienced teacher after I had reminded her that DS1 did not cope well with change and had already had 3 different tutors between November and December. I really did think that she was over-reacting, that immediately replacing the teacher was a disproportionate response to my reporting difficulties with homework. Especially as she had agreed not to give him any more homework.

She has written that her discussion with me has left her with 'the belief that we need to seek another teacher for DS1 as I do not feel that xxx is satisified that I can meet DS1's needs, despite all efforts to do so and sound educational planning' (she has taught him for less than 10 hours).

She also claims that DS1 and I 'consented' for DS1s artwork to be copied and returned. However, after she had left DS1 was far from happy and did not want art he had done for his own pleasure to be taken away or be made school work. She suggested to me that I copy it and she take away the copies. I said I would still have to ask DS1. When she (not me) asked DS1 if it was OK to do so (obviously thinking he would say 'yes') he said 'no'. She does not mention that DS1 originally 'consented' but the directly to her (not reported by me) withdrew his consent.

I am hampered atm by strong emotions and need a little help to verbalise my . With the benefit of distance, in the context of approaching tribunal, how would you make sense of this and what would your response be?

TIA

Any advice gratefully received.

EOTAS are the current teaching staff for the purposes of reporting 'evidence' to tribunal so I feel I need to respond.

this is not going to sound helpful, but I mean it to be....is there any chance that you are coming across as controlling the information they get? eg sitting in on the sessions, and able to quote directly from them? it might be quite intimidating to have someone hovering/loitering/scribing!

notactuallyme

I know what you mean, but no - I have always absented myself totally in my study during teaching sessions - this is the third tutor since November. When I initially absented myself as usual she sent DS1 to ask me to come in because she wanted to talk to me and actually had both me and DH sat at the table. She moved from talking to DH and I to teaching DS1 and so we got up and left.

On the last occasion she actually asked me to sit at the table during the lesson. I was not happy - this is my only guaranteed respite time. Plus I did not think this was appropriate. I said I would compromise with a half-way house and make myself busy in the kitchen so I was in a different room but was not completely absent.

So I am not hovering or loitering and have the unnerving habit/skill of being able to recall conversations almost verbatim so I don't need to scribble.

Anybody who has ever had a child at home 24/7 will understand that any control-freak tendencies are hugely overwhelmed by the desire to have some time when you are not on duty or on call.

It is interesting that you would have this impression as this is clearly the one they are trying to give - ignore assessments by APD at GOSH, Daphne Keen and Margo Sharp and their recommedations for specialist placement - and make out that parents or mum are over-controlling/over-anxious/insane in the membrane. Par for the course.

Might be a load of crap but I still need to make an adequate defense/counter-attack. After all winning this argument would be to their advantage at tribunal.

Phew - both on the non hovering and non offence taking.
He's at home while you wait for a decision on a Statement? (Sorry for not knowing the whole story) Via Tribunal? Do you have any support for you in getting a good case put together?

notactuallyme

DS1 has a statement given in October. Too late for transition to secondary which failed. He has medically authorised absence (Daphne Keen). Statement named ms even though it has abjectly failed. Statement doesn't recognise all needs but 'just' SpLD (ignoring ASD, ADD, APD, SPD, etc). We are going to tribunal to appeal 2, 3 and 4 and have an IPSEA rep.

So at tribunal the case of the other side will succeed or fail on the basis of whether or not DS1's needs can be met in the ms. Deadline for lea response is this week.

star you are well familiar with the dirty tactics of leas - come and tell me off

Do you have a school in mind for part 4? So you are wanting specialist? Really glad you have ipsea on your side.

Have a named specialist indi school in part 4 - very worried about SE scandel - also dsylexia specialist but also large percentage of ASD (and no NT but SpLD without ASD can be socially astute/street-wise).

Ah, stop fretting. Whatever you do or don't do, LA staff have to report an interfering madwoman with a perfectly fine child, manufacturing SEN for her own entertainment. You've got DK, MS and GOSH... plus IPSEA... if tribunal wants to believe a random non-specialist tutor instead, then you just go back in 6-12m.

Or of course, you could just agree she is rubbish and instead briefly employ your own tutor, perhaps a qualified ASD specialist teacher who does school advice, home visits etc... This one hangs out with Wendy Lawson, Tony Attwood, Lianne Holliday Willey et al

Sorry, had a glass of wine now - the la have named m\s and you are arguing for indie ss? Good that ipsea are on board in that case as they are quite realisitc about the chances for private. And he's out while you get an outcome? Wishing you a lot of luck x

thanks notactuallyme

Maria - I am not sure that you mean to be but you are hilarious

Thanks for the resources

was meant to be tongue in cheek.. but actually it's true as well. Many LA tutors are on 'as-and-when' zero-hours contracts. So they wouldn't dare to bite the hand that feeds them; not like the --gutless- inexplicably frightened schoolteachers. Who in theory, could have the NUT / NASUWT protecting their jobs if they are threatened for doing them properly.

My advice would be, that if you are trying to counter the LA impression that your son is fine and you are manufacturing difficulties, less is more.

Your letter is very detailed and (I know it's sent now) does come across as a bit controlling in that you have very carefully analysed everything she has done or said, she can show it to her boss and say 'This is what I had to put up with!'

Perhaps a letter along the lines of 'Sorry not to have seen you today, DS was upset and thought he had done something wrong. Would it be possible for you to call next time?
When you invited me to join you in the session yesterday, my impression was that DS was not confident in fully understanding the noun concepts. I am sure you are able to track for that sort of thing, It'd be really helpful to me if you could share how you assess and track for comprehension. As you will no doubt be aware we have had a lot of frustration and difficulty with DS's education over the years and it has left both DS and us, his parents, quite anxious about monitoring his progress'.

This leaves you looking very reasonable and even acknowledges that you may have a little justifiable anxiety in relation to DS. Just a suggestion :)