Why are schools not held just as responsible as the LEA for the failures

[hoxtonbabe]

I have been reading through a few threads and the common none these last few months ( or in my case few years) is the issue with the school not implementing.

I understand that LA are ultimately responsible but given that schools also have a duty of care how is it so many of them can get away with what they do.

I suppose it depends on the issue so if a child needed say OT in school and LA didn't provide then I get that is the LA at fault but what happens if say the school have said they can offer xxx learning programme within school and their resources and then don't? That to me would be the school being at fault.

I think a lot of what we face as parents AFTER the ordeal of tribunal is then getting the school to comply and because they know they will never face any action like an LA does they just do whatever they feel like.

It's like a never ending vicious cycle of crap within the SEN system

[inappropriatelyemployed]

Fighting - and of course with no oversight from the LGO, it is easy to keep acting in this way.

Star - teachers can be dismissed for poor teaching. I have a friend who is an assistant head and she has had to do this several times. There is a procedure to follow but it is far from impossible. Also I think there is a difference in primary and secondary school teaching and those who take generic BEds and those who have degrees and take PGCEs. Also like anything to do with colleges, not all colleges are created equal so there are varying standards,

Boc and Sazale - I think it is the lies that are the most destructive. Schools pretend they did stuff when they didn't and I agree lack of oversight encourages impunity. But the oversight they have from the LA also supports the lies and even if they were overseen by the LGO what's the chances of that helping? So perhaps we need more personal integrity and a better oversight system for LAs and schools.

Without improving the oversight for LAs nothing will change for schools either.

[hoxtonbabe]

But starlight that's the thing, LAs do not monitor, that is the reality of all this, and when you as a parent highlight that the school can't or won't deliver they then collude with the school to cover this up as ultimately it is their necks on the chopping block. The school is more than happy to go along with this as it makes their life easier if they can get away with not providing xxx provision as its less paperwork, etc..and they know they can point most of the blame on the LA...take away that shield coupled with penalties of some sort, then I'm sure these schools will buck up their ideas.

I know this will not happen anytime soon, but I live in hope :-)

It's funny how when it suits them teachers (especially the SENCO) are EPs, SLT, OT and a judge with powers of removing provision when they feel fit, but as soon as that child leaves school and miserably fail in the real world or whist at school the behaviour worsens and as a parent you are looking for remedy due to their "super skills and high level of experience" suddenly its the parents fault and they profess that they are not SLTs, OT, etc and weasel their way out of any blame when the negligence claim comes a knocking at their door.

[inappropriatelyemployed]

The problem is, who would monitor? LAs do already in theory but as you say this amounts to little more than collusion in many areas.

The LGO could take complaints about schools. It did for a while. But they are beyond useless on SEN, and have no resources which makes a very convenient excuse to do a crap job.

Ofsted on a 2-3 day visit can't scratch beneath the surface and most Ofsted inspectors aren't skilled in SEN issues. Ofsted don't deal with complaints unless its safeguarding.

So you would need have a new body.

[hoxtonbabe]

Excellent point IE...personal integrity is just as important here.

I tell you what have us running the SEN system we will get it sorted, lol.

In theory the monitong set up and LGO, etc..should work however the people sitting at their desks doing the job are the problem...lack of ethics and a certain mindset is a huge problem

[sazale]

The special school my DD goes to is OFSTED outstanding! I know of 2 other parents this school year who have removed their children with ASD from it. They have also covered up for bullying of numerous pupils by a teacher who suddenly took early retirement when someone started legal action. The LA are fully aware of it.

[TOWIELA]

The indie mainstream school I had to withdrew my son from because he was heading towards a nervous breakdown is also Ofsted Outstanding. This school has appeared in glossy national magazines as "the" place to put dyslexic children. Hmmm, not my dyslexic son though!

[KOKOagainandagain]

ime experience, the LA treated the words of teachers as gospel truth, even where there was disagreement from parents, OT, SALT, EP, even consultant paediatricians.

On a day to day basis, the teachers believe that their own observations and beliefs trump those of any other professional. For example, the school are supporting DS2 'well' but OT recommends a move 'n' sit (or is it the other way around?) to attempt to reduce movement but the teacher erroneously believes that a cushion would increase movement and so does not provide one. Teachers find the fact that DS2 does not follow instructions and is both distracted and distracting challenging but won't use visual timetables because they think DS1 would not like to be seen to be different - despite elsewhere stating that he does not care how others perceive him - and won't use a token reward system as this is reserved for DC with a diagnosis of ASD.

ime even where a school is 'trying', the assessment reports of (LA/NHS)experts are vague and wooly and do not enable them to understand the needs of the child or how severe and persistent they are now/will continue to be. wrt DS2 provision was commonly not delivered/or was a waste of time as results of assessments were minimised in reports. Eg, one SALT assessment showed that DS2 had narrative delay. No other details. So provision was the TA listening to him read 3 times a weeks. I requested more info from the SALT and it turned out that despite being assessed using a test for younger children, his overall score showed delay over half of his chronological age. The SALT then went into the school to train the TA to deliver a different intervention.

I have met good and bad in the NHS, teaching profession and even the LA. Years back, when DS1 was 7, I spoke on the phone to an SEN staff member at Essex CC. She advised me to apply for a statement despite what everyone else said - it had taken a long time but she had got a statement for her daughter. She said you will not even be on the radar without a statement. Bet she didn't last long though.

[fightingforfairness]

Oh yes Keep, school staff definitely have blinkers on and it's their way or nothing .

[inappropriatelyemployed]

I think this is particularly so with 'invisibility disabilities' as it is so easy to say 'he looks fine to me'.

I have had it for years with DS. We set up breaks etc for him so he isn't spending time out of class. TAs decide 'he looks ok to me' so don't offer a break.

DS says 'I hate Mrs X (TA) as she never lets me have my break'

I go to speak to Mrs X who says 'he can have a break whenever he wants one'.

I have to explain he is not likely to ask for a break because of his communciation difficulties so you have to pre-empt the need for breaks with a regular pattern of breaks which you can offer and then he can decide whether to take.

DS goes back into class. Mrs X offers a break. DS says no once and they never get offered a break.

DS says 'why don't they offer me breaks'

Mrs X said 'but he looked alright to me'


And on it goes until now ....... now you wouldn't' get him back in a school if you paid him.

[inappropriatelyemployed]

That should be "so he isn't spending all his time in class"

[fightingforfairness]

Yes, we had the 'nothing wrong with him' and 'he's choosing to behave like that' so they did things that wound him up. He had a phobia about something but records show that they decided to 'persist with it' as he was 'clearly choosing what suits'.

[inappropriatelyemployed]

You have all this nonsense so you put your poor child through assessments for (a) a diagnosis and (b) a statement.

At the end of it, you have a statement confirming your child's diagnosis and all the help the child needs because of the diagnosis.

Then, along comes a TA who decides he is just the same as everyone else until he does something 'rude' or 'inappropriate' or 'refuses' to do something.

Then, rather than saying 'aaah that is what they were talking about in the statement', the TA says 'what a rude boy'.

[inappropriatelyemployed]

So, how much further did the statement get you?

[KOKOagainandagain]

So far ...

a present DS1 likes (where he feels it is OK to be him)

a more positive future for him in all sorts of ways

a better present and future for the whole family

an end to the constant battle

an end to being always branded, including by other parents, as somehow 'difficult' and 'demanding' because, in truth, unless you are difficult and demanding sweet FA happens.

[hoxtonbabe]

Lol @ IE

I shouldn't laugh, but what you describe about the cycle of teachers and TA knowing best sounds the exact thing I go though...children with hidden disabilities get the real rough end of the stick, my DS has a hidden and for his entire secondary education he has receive no provision even after tribunals, amended statements etc..why? Because SENCO says she doesn't feel the need for him to have it!!

[fightingforfairness]

Ds was constantly chastised for his 'rudeness' (blunt words) which are a known trait.
Shame that the shoddy 'support' staff are not 'hidden'.

[inappropriatelyemployed]

Keeping - but that is not what a statement got you. YOU did that. You fought for that. A statement was not issued with what you wanted in it and you had to fifth for it to mean something.

This is what I mean.

A statement on its own is not enough. Even Ofsted say that.

Invariably, parents have to fight for the statement to mean something either by ensuring the child is in the right school or that the provision is actually put in place to effect.

Who has had a statement issued and been able to sit back and just let everyone get on with it?

[inappropriatelyemployed]

'Fight for it to mean something.' Stupid ipad!

[TOWIELA]

Keep - The very sad thing is this is why so many of us fight for indie ss. The same Statement, the same diagnosis and the same provision. If tribunal rule that my DS goes to indie ss, then I expect in a couple of months, I'll say the same as you. If they rule that he goes to the LA named mainstream school, then I will spend the next 2 years having to police provision which cant be delivered. That's if my son lasts 2 years there. Because if he goes to the school who has no experience in meeting the needs of a child like him, no doubt at some point i will have to withdraw him and home ed him. The question is, before i have to withdraw him, who will have the nervous breakdown first: me or him?

[KOKOagainandagain]

There was a huge difference in my case between the finalised statement and the statement that resulted from the tribunal process.

The final statement got none of the things referred to above in day to day life.

The one thing it got me was the right to appeal - or to level up as DS1 puts it.

But had we thought it was right for DS1 to be in the m/s, with the same statement etc we would have achieved none of the things that really matter listed above even if we had 'won' at tribunal.

It is not the statement but the environment that is key.

I have received emails from NAS re free schools with specific ASD focus in counties with no/little specialist provision - anyone else?

[TOWIELA]

"It is not the statement but the environment that is key." It's a great pity that LAs don't take heed of that! But environment has no place in SEN law.

My DS's statement has gone from nothing quantified at all to 17 hours very specific agreed provision/therapy presented to us at 9:30am on the morning of the Tribunal. Why are LAs allowed to do that! They had our version of the Working Document for 3 weeks, but still they are allowed to use last minute tactics!

[KOKOagainandagain]

We lost our claim for costs (£5k) and I have decided not to apply for permission to appeal despite the fact that I have adequate grounds - the tribunal accepted the word of the LA post-tribunal with no evidence (none existed) despite ample counter-evidence in the bundle.

LA's are allowed to get away with crap all the way. We got OOC indi ss but they gave us a bloody nose.

Towie - of course 'environment' is off the agenda

[WetAugust]

They do it because they know there are no penalties.

The LGO fails to deal effectively with maladministration.

There is no independent oversight and no penalties for behaving badly.

What I would really like to know: There are many teachers on this site/board. What has been the response from SENCO or the Head when you have expressed your concerns that any particular child may need SEN support?

Because it takes at least 3 levels of ignorance to leave a child unsupported, pick any of these who may be in contact with a child:
class teacher, subject teacher, SENCO, Head of Dept, Head of Year, Head.

Funny how there is a collective blindness?

Is failure to provide support a cultural thing that comes from the Head or just shit teaching failing to observe that their pupil may have difficulties?

I'm kinda 50/50 on each theory.

But looking at some of the teachers I've been in contact with - deputy heads with shaven bald heads and diamond earring in one ear, English teacher sporting a nose ring and weoring cheap flip flops, art teacher wearing vest that allows his very tatto0ed arms to be displayed ...... and this is an outstanding school according to the inspectors. What sort of message were they sending out to their pupils?
I guess she must have taken the nose ring out during the Ofsted inspection.

And this is where I'm going to go all Daily Mail on you - the problem is that 'anything goes' and nobody has the guts anymore because of everyone's u-man rights to say - "That's wrong".

If I was a Head and one of my teachers was determined to ape Farmer Giles prize bull I would tell her to take the bloody nose ring out during the hours I was paying for her services. I would also tell het to consider the effect it may have on her pupils. But I can't say that - can I? So I have to pussy0foot around hating the sight of her but unable to do bugger all about it.

My teachers were always appropriately dressed. the French teacher wore tailored suits every day. The Spanish teacher did a line in very chic tunic dresses with a blouse underneath, even the ancient science teacher managed a twin set and flowery skirt. Their dress was not a distraction (and certainly not to be emulated ).

No - the teachers I have met on the whole have been utter crap. The further ed lecturers I have met have been absolute heroes.

[TOWIELA]

Wet - well said. Although i'm not sure if we should go back to the dress code of my grammar school - the head used to regally arrive in assembly in full Oxford academic robes every single day!


Keep - Oh I'm sorry you lost the claim. It's such a bastard unfair system!

Last year my LA bullied me for months saying they were going bring costs against me because of their refusal to assess my DS. They sent continuous bullying letters to myself and the Tribunal whilst, on exactly the same days, I was having to come to terms with all the reports coming in from my experts saying in no uncertain terms how severe my son's disabilities are. The whole of August and September of last year was spent worried sick about him and these costs. They couldn't even resist having another dig about costs in their letter in which they conceded and agreed to assess. Exact same letter stating a) in light of new evidence we will SA but b) we are going to claim substantial costs from you

This they maintained until the October when the claim finally came in and they decided to go after my solicitor. As well as claiming substantial costs against my solicitor because of the LA's refusal to assess, they even tried to sue my solicitor for punitive damages because, the LA said, my solicitors were not acting in my DS's best interests so had denied him any provision. The judge threw it out.

I tell you, these people are barking mad! These people are in charge of the education of our vulnerable children! I couldn't even make up half of my DS's story if I tried!

[WetAugust]

Yep - all teachers in gowns and head wearing mortar board at Assembly each morning.

Punitive damages - which State of the US do they think they are? Dream on.

Something is driving this behaviour and it's more than just cost-saving. I mean I can understand the parents saying kid needs x support and LA offering y support and neither agreeing so they go to Tribunal that orders z support - that's a fair fight. But that sort of experience is becoming few and far between these days as parents get threatened with spurious child protection charges or fear financial penalties. Just who in the LA is driving all this?

It's a real pity that people are not brave enough to go to the Press about some of these LAs (and I count myself in the coward club here).

It would be so interesting to publish how much it has cost an LA in fighting individual cases in solicitors, barristers, EP, etc fees compared to what it was ordered to finance by Tribunals. And to publish the parents costs too. It's the HITS (Human Interest Stories) that interest people and that raise awareness and questioning and that ultimately get the system changed.

One of the saddest things I've ever heard was my own DS saying he will never have children unless he is sure he could afford to educate them privately. After what he went through I can understand his feelings.