Special school to university?

[inappropriatelyemployed]

Does anyone know whether there are any statistics on the numbers of children who have been in specialist provision who go on to university?

Does a specialist school place impede in any way?

I look at reports for some Indy SS and they are often rated very highly by Ofsted but expectations of academic achievement are substantially reduced so you get phrases like 'compares favourably with national averages' even in reports for AS specific provision which is considered outstanding. Why? This wouldn't be considered outstanding for mainstream schools.

I know there is more to Indy SS than academic provision but at 65k a year, you'd be wanting some decent exam results too.

ds2 is much the same ourvye. Two years ago he started saying he hated school but was a different child during holidays. In the past year he has been unable to switch off in the holidays either. Like you we kept him going at school for 'evidence'. We expect we may have to send him to fail at another school before the LEA accept our views - this is dreadful. Like you we have got all the advice about 'small group size, 'calm environment etc etc from the EP, SALT, CAMHS but ignored by the LEA. However, we have also seen the difference that attending a small school has made to his brother so we will fight.

It is really appalling that children are driven out of the system like this though
When my LA refers to EHE as Elective Home Education, I remind them that in our case it stands for Enforced Home Education. We didn't have a choice as there were no other options available for us.

The EP who did our assessments (exams access and statement) acknowledged that we'd been let down by countless of her colleagues over the years and she was clearly uncomfortable with that. I believe it may have gone towards the decision to agree SA by way of compensation.

I am sure that is part of the plan. Make it so difficult that you might just give up and drop out of the system altogether saving them thousands.

Also you do wonder what you are fighting for ultimately when the quality if services are so poor.

At least it shows the LA up for what they are really like and it is a relief to have a lawyer dealing with all this rather than having to deal with their nastiness directly.

Absolutely, OneInEight. I really do believe he could thrive, rather than survive at the NYorks school. We went to the summer fete and he really liked the surroundings and the classrooms (we wouldn't have wanted to fight for a place for him, only to find he wouldn't even set foot in the building!) I particularly like the fact that they actually encourage the boys' interests and use them as a foundation to build social skills. I also like the fact that he could start as a day pupil (though it's a 90 minute round trip from here) and move to boarding if that would benefit him, once he gets older.

What's not to fight for?!

I think it is great if you identify somewhere to fight for as a goal. It gives you a sense that the fight has purpose.

That is my problem. What are we fighting for? A home education package that they will never allow us control over so a succession of random tutors will be forced into home.

That was when it all fell into place for me. The realisation that the education system could never be equipped to support ds's needs fully, and the best we could hope for was that he'd get through to sixteen relatively unscathed. Was that really the best on offer? I came to see that if all I could manage was to keep his mental health intact, I would do more for him than the system could. That was my starting point and we build from there. But that realisation that the existing system isn't fit for purpose was key to what came next. I had to let go of all expectations of the powers that be being there to help and support, because experience had shown me that they weren't.

You're right about having a goal though. I'd also add that having the goal to focus on makes it more likely to be achievable. I know several home educators who've asked various authorities for generalised advice and come away with nothing, but if you're looking for something specific there's more chance they'll look into it for you.

It was like all my Christmases had come at once, when I learnt about this place IE. It does seem to be fairly unique and until then we had the same goodness knows what to look forward to. No way on Earth will he be going to the secondary that most local children end up at. It would be torture for him. Of course, if we can't secure early transition for him, then we'll have to visit next year, when he'll be in year 5, if only for the sake of not appearing obstructive.

This is the problem. If you don't find somewhere like this, you are stuck between continuing to shove your child into a school that can't meet his needs and making the provision up yourself.

The genius and Orwellian intention to force 'reintegration' will presumably come at out expense - i.e. they will expect us to continue accompanying DS to school for the occasional hour indefinitely and picking up the rest of his education ourselves. Well we are not doing it.

Then they send people to meetings to tell you how 'concerned' education officers are. How do these people live with themselves?

I'd suggest that, if they want you to be his TA, they pay you the going rate.

My altogether more ballsy alter ego would, anyhow.

I am seriously tempted to put down the SEN team as the emergency point of contact! If they feel so strongly mainstream is meeting his needs I am sure they will have no problem with that and I could go back to work!

Inappropriately I feel for you. This is heartbreaking. The experience at school has been very bad for your Ds, but it doesn't have to be the only possibility. You have this energy now. Unless you really want to HE, what you need is the right school and a fresh way to look for such a school.

My situation is very different, but just as a food for thought, when I was choosing a secondary school, everybody expected me to go for soft accommodating option, schools with a lot of experience of AS. I went into the opposite direction. I chosen a school that never had AS or any statemented DC. [bear with me] :) My bet was that they were very competent, skilled and well organised and run out of challenges. So, I bet, they would figure out how to meet my DD needs much faster and better and my DD would receive their full attention, rather then being just another of 8. It worked - especially in recruitment. They recruited an absolutely golden exceptional TA and other people supporting DD at school are very well qualified and capable. All I am trying to say is look for the right people that could help your DS, they exist somewhere. At least give it a good try. All the best to you

Precisely. Who are they expecting to look after him while we force him to follow their 're-integration' plan?

Thanks Vanilla. I think the TA is pivotal actually and sadly, even with a very good school, my son's experience has been blighted because both schools have had TAs who have been inflexible and not capable of doing the job they were hired for.

In terms of primary schools, we could not get a better school than the one he has and they will whole heartedly support us in whatever we want to do.

There are no SS options to change to at this time

For secondary, there isn't much option save for an exceptional senco at a secodnary school we saw but he needs to have a year out to clear his head at least before considering anything else.

And after forcing him into three different schools throughout his primary career, we need to be led by him a bit for now.

IE - perhaps EOTAS is the reason why CAMHS have resurfaced? DC need consultant authorisation for LA funded home tuition.

Reintegration is always the goal. The idea is that the tutor provides a bridge between home and the school for DC whose 'anxiety' prevents them from attending at present. DS1's tutor use to accompany DC to school - mind you, this counts as part of the five hours tuition a week.

Regardless of what they may have implied, this is the most 'cost-effective', and can be justified as 'appropriate' response (in that it is their usual response and that of other LAs).

I really would not be surprised if it were suggested that you were the cause of DS's 'alleged anxiety' - the email from the EP demonstrates this attitude. They seem to be half-way to constructing a narrative that DS is not 'really' anxious, the problem is your parenting (of course) and he is a spoilt brat (of course).

ime if parents do not wholeheartedly vocally support the reintegration plan - ignoring the fact that this plan is for your child to attend a school that can't meet their needs - they are considered to be 'negative' or to not give adequate praise (I think cartwheels and balloons are expected) and part (if not all) of the problem.

And after forcing him into three different schools throughout his primary career, we need to be led by him a bit for now
I felt this too. Ds had only been through two primaries by the time we deregistered, but when he moved to the second he was very enthusiastic about it and that was why it was successful in the short term. By the end he was so disheartened about the whole concept of school that I knew he'd never consider another transfer, and nor would he be able to cope with it. He needed, as you say, to clear his head.

KeepOn
It's always cheaper to blame the parents than to provide meaningful support, and budgets matter more than meeting children's needs, don't they?

It would seem that they stick to the tried and tested usual responses regardless.

Given the history, it was not unreasonable to expect the LA to behave differently. In fact, it was unreasonable to expect them to follow such an old, predictable course. And yet they do because it is cheaper. Even if you don't give up and go away they save money by using all delaying tactics they can.

I had months of campaigning to get DS1 into the pru as a stepping stone to school (yes, this would be great given that he hates transition) and I only got them to back off by complaining.

Realistically, if DS needs to be at home for a year you will need to deregister him.

Keeping -"perhaps EOTAS is the reason why CAMHS have resurfaced? DC need consultant authorisation for LA funded home tuition"

There is no law which says this at all and how could there be? The case law very clearly says quite the opposite.

I understand your point about their hope that they may be able to divert this on to me but the email from the EP was two and a half years ago in a different school in the middle of a different Tribunal. She was not the EP dealing with DS.

This school would not say that now and neither would the EP we have nor his SLT.

I have done the reintegration myself, in front of everyone so they can see for themselves and decide whether he should be in school. I have not just kept DS off and said I think he is too anxious for school. This is why all parties concluded he needed to be out of school as school was of no benefit to him.

ALL parties, not just me.

This is type of situation has demonstrated to me why it is sometimes important to have a lawyer involved. This cannot just be allowed to drift to a Tribunal.

The LA have a duty to provide a FULL-TIME education and they need to put that in place not spend months fannying around looking for ways out. The way to do this is judicial review for failing to education

IE - unfortunately there is case law and then there is usual practice. Unless you go to law, many of us have found, you get fobbed off with usual practice.

Although hard to believe, it is also, sadly, all too common for all parties to seemingly agree a way forward only to wake up on Groundhog Day.

Also if DS were assigned a tutor (categorised as a medical pupil) the LA would only have responsibility for providing a minimum of 5 hours per week. This is treated as a maximum. Only non-medical pupils (excluded) are entitled to full time education.

Yes, there is law and there is practice and that is why it is important to be able to use the law. Legal aid is available in a child's name for JR.

The law says children are entitled to an education suitable to their needs.

It is not correct to say children out of school for health reasons are not entitled to a full-time education.

Local authorities need to ensure children with health problems are not without education for more than 15 working days. So, if a child cannot attend school because of a health problem, after 15 days the council must intervene and provide suitable education for a minimum of five hours a week.

When assessing what is suitable provision, councils need to consider each child as an individual with different needs, abilities and circumstances ? there is no fixed answer.

However, the LGO says "councils should not assume the minimum
is adequate in the case of a school refuser or a school phobic child. In these cases, a council would need to consider what more was necessary. Indeed, whenever a council offers a child less than full-time education, it must regularly review the situation
with a view to increasing their hours as appropriate."

Ans "The council should work out what is suitable based on the individual needs of the child, taking full-time education as the
starting assumption."

IE - do you know when you read that every child matters crap and assume it is true but then personal experience teaches you that it is a crock? Welcome to EOTAS. What is written and what actually happens are two different things.

DS1 was out of school from Sept to May. He did not receive tuition until Nov. In all, over the period he received around half of his legal minimum entitlement. I complained and after around 5 months they replied and said basically 'never mind, you won so all's well that ends well'

Don't get me started on EOTAS You will make me very angry indeed

When DS was forced out of school I asked for home tuition - ah said the exceptionally caring LA carrot - you need to speak to EOTAS. Note the you need to - the LA wouldn't arrange any home ed for him, I had to do it.

So, I looked on our LA's EOTAS website and it showed all sorts of possibilities, such as distance learning, one-to-one tuition over the internet with an EOTAS tutor etc etc. Thought I'd struck gold and though 'I'll have some of that for DS thanks". So I rand EOTAs and asked for some distance and distance tuition, as advertised on their website . Their response:

"Those are our aspirations - they don't actually exist at the moment but we are 'working on it'".

I kid you not.

It was one of the most defining moments in my whole sorry saga - the advertisement of fictitious support

You could not make it out. I actually entered her response in the diary I was keeping and quoted her in the Parental Advice I wrote to show that there was absolutely nothing available to DS by this LA and more importantly, to show a wide audience who would see his Statement just what a bunch of shite those people were.

And yes, I know it's a phrase that we use a lot - but seriously 'How did that woman sleep at night' pedalling fresh air?

One day I may publish the dairies I kept. They are hilarious. I start of as a very reasonable parent and end up sounding like a psychopath after several months of dealing with these tossers. And the language deteriorates quite significantly as the diary proceeds.

Keeping - I agree about bad practice but the reality is this is one area where you can take proper legal action through proper courts, i.e. via judicial review, and not wait for a Tribunal to muddle through the mess.

Legal aid will cover expert advice too - from EPs, etc - if required to establish whether the duty to educate is being met.

The '15 days absence' rule is absolute bollocks in practice. I provided my LA with written evidence via email. After some time they decided this is not good enough as they require a signed copy via pigeon carrier (delay) and then they can't provide a tutor because there are 'staffing problems' and then it is the end of term and then they are reorganising ad infinitum.