Proposed statement Part 3 please crit it/shoot it down objective 2

[kafkesque]

Sorry long - I only have 15 days to respond. written by Herts thank-you
2. To develop Ds?s expressive and receptive language skills so he can express his needs, access the curriculum, reduce his anxiety and develop his relationships with others.
a) The headteacher/SENCO will ensure all staff are aware of DS?s language needs and adapt their teaching styles to accommodate his needs.
b) All adults working with DS will:
i) Model language and extend DS?s sentences.
ii) Use DS?s name to ?cue him in? to listen before giving an instruction or explanation.
iii) Explicitly teach the meaning of, or ensure DS?s understanding of, words that will be required for a learning task.
iv) Consider more explicit teaching useful PECS symbols and encouragement for DS to use them, or other objects and gestures to communicate.
v) Break tasks/instructions down into small steps and use simplified, clear, explicit language with repetition and visual cues to support understanding (eg using a ?Now and Next? board and a visual timetable).
vi) Will give DS additional time to process information and language to give his response. If he does not respond after a time, adults will repeat the question or instruction using the same language rather than re-phrasing so that he does not have to start processing from ?scratch?.
vii) Reduce frustration and encourage spontaneous communication, by acknowledging DS?s requests, even if it is not appropriate to allow him this at the time, eg. ?reading now, drawing next?, with visual support or referring back to the timetable.
c) The class teacher will continue to seek advice and support from Speech and Language Therapy, at their discretion.
d) To meet the above objective, DS?s needs can be best met by the integration of individualised targets into his daily activities in school and at home through a speech and language therapy programme.
e) The speech and language Therapist will devise and monitor the speech and language therapy programme.
f) The speech and language Therapist will monitor DS?s progress and review the programme for a minimum of 9 visits or the equivalent of 13 hours over the academic year. Within these visits, the following will take place:
i) The speech and language Therapist will jointly devise and prepare a programme and strategies with school staff and family.
ii) The speech and language Therapist/Assistant will work with DS to demonstrate/model specific SLT activities to a named staff member to develop his functional expressive language skills. These will be carried out for a minimum of 15 minutes at least 3 times a week within the educational setting. This may be with the whole class, in a small group or individually.
iii) The speech and language Therapist/Assistant will observe and monitor the implementation of the programme.
iv) The speech and language Therapist will, together with the family and school staff, jointly review the programme and outcomes termly and update/modify as required.

Lougle are you there?

I feel I need to appeal this part objective 2 the programme for a minimum of 9 visits or the equivalent of 13 hours over the academic year. It just doesn't seem enough.

there is a lot of " at their discretion" and "will consider" which needs to be removed. the school can say " we considered" or " we don't feel its needed" - therefore unenforceable.
A statement should be quantified and specified,
Is what intervention, who frequently, for how long and who will provide it and what their qualifications are.

Any SALT can you comment on the provision given? Moondog are you there?

Have you namechanged from a name beginning with H?

You are so clever starlight.

If you bear to change back I'd recommend it. People will remember you but your current name though excellent, makes you look like a bit of a pro in this and you might not therefore get as much help.

ok will change it back on next post just don't want LEA to know as I have mentioned them lol.

Ahh if I seem like a pro it was only with mumsnet help. I definitely could not have done it without you. This is the best resource for me and I suspect for others too. I am only as good as Mumsnet at the mo.

Thanks

9 visits is 3 per term. The SALT is not going to deliver speech and language therapy to your DS. That's not going to be their role. They are going to be 'devising a programme' - that is writing down on a piece of paper goals and activities that will promote the successful completion of those goals. They will also 'monitor the programme', which will mean the SALT coming into school and talking to the teacher to see how your DS is getting on and giving strategies to overcome any emerging issues.

"ii)The speech and language Therapist/Assistant will work with DS to demonstrate/model specific SLT activities to a named staff member to develop his functional expressive language skills. These will be carried out for a minimum of 15 minutes at least 3 times a week within the educational setting. This may be with the whole class, in a small group or individually."

Is poorly worded. It can imply that the SALT will spend 15 minutes with your DS, 3 times per week. What it actually means is that the SALT will use your DS as a teaching aid, demonstrating techniques and activities that will promote his S/L skills. The staff member will then use those techniques to deliver SLT for at least 15 minutes, at least 3 times per week. This does not have to be 1:1. They can use a small group or even address the whole class if they feel it is appropriate.

Mmm....I think it's a fairly wooly statement. Having said that, to get it changed you're going to have to demonstrate greater need. I'm not sure, given our discussions some months ago, that you'll be able to do that?

Can you think of any evidence you may have which demonstrates that a SALT must go in more than 3 times per term? Do you think he'll make such progress that targets will need to be changed that often??

Whoo hoo hello lougle.

Thanks for helping I really appreciate it.

The only evidence I have is in Part 2 which I have not published on Mumsnet so far. Spared you all so far. LOL

It says under Communication
" Ds has a diagnosis of moderately to severely delayed understanding of language in the context of ASD. DS has a diagnosis of a severe delay in spoken language and communication in the context of his diagnosis of ASD."
The severity does not seem to match the provision? Which will my basis of appeal.

Indi says" The SLT needs to visit in school for a minimum of 18 visits annually, equivalent to 36 hours. This will allow for all the language and communication objectives to be met, supported and facilitated."

"DS's language skills are currently in line with his NC levels." What they don't say is they may be in line but educationally he is about two years behind on P levels still.

That's all concrete stuff I can think of for now,

They are attempting to argue that his SALT issues are a part of his ASD and so require ASD services predominantly rather than SALT.

The SALT needs to visit the school, not him according to that. The SALT could spend those 18 hours with the SENCO talking about ALL the kids on file, or sitting doing their paperwork. I woukd guess that a few of those hours will be given to TAC time plus AR time.

Just to give an idea. The tribunal gave ds weekly 1:1 SALT from a qualified SALT who had experience in both an educational setting plus ASD. The sessions were observed by a TA with 2 years experience working in a SALT base, who was ds' 1:1, who the delivered the 'programme' she had observed, 3 times a week 1:1 in addition to small group work.

This privision was beyond most people's dream, though awarded probably because they REALLY didn't want to give what we coukd prove he needed ie ABA.

It is important however that I make it clear at this point, that this SALT intervention was completely ineffective and the year he had with so much but no progression formed the basis of our next appeal.

So the Indi SALT has suggested 12 hours per term, split into 6 visits of 2 hours.

What on earth are they going to spend 2 hours talking about? Do you think your DS would cope with 2 hours of SALT intervention? What do you envisage as appropriate SALT?

I'm just thinking of my own DD. There's no way she would cope with 2 hours of designated SALT. Even if it was split into 1 hour interaction and 1 hour 'monitoring of the programme'.

What are your hopes for him regarding his speech and language? What do you think should change between his skills now and his skills at the end of one term/one year?

DS2 (7) on SA+ is visited individually at least once a term by a salt therapist as well as a salt specialist teacher. The class TA (who is moving classes with him next week) has been trained to deliver provision by the specialist teacher who monitors progress. When they visit the school for other DC they also see him.

DS1 (12) has a statement which specifies 1 hour per week 1:1 with SALT.

Tbh I would have wanted different wording in the indi report that could not be interpreted as anything but 1:1 for x amount of time each week.

I forgot to say that DS2 has 1:1 provision from the trained TA 3 times a week for 15 mins each time. He also has 1:1 for pronunciation twice a week for 10 mins and small group intervention for 20 mins per week.

He also has no diagnosis (but has been assessed lots for suspected ADHD/ASD/duel exceptionality/asynchronous development)

"Tbh I would have wanted different wording in the indi report that could not be interpreted as anything but 1:1 for x amount of time each week."

This may be digressing slightly, but what is the perceived benefit of 1:1 time with a SALT? Or perhaps my question should be 'What is the perceived benefit of 1:1 time with a SALT regularly for a child with a developmental, neurological condition?

I can fully understand it in a child with a physical condition where a SALT can offer specific exercises and may need to see visually the articulation of a speech sound, to assess what muscles are being used, or what movement the tongue makes, etc. However, for children who have developmental neurological conditions, the issue is not (usually) a physical one, but one of speech disorder/delay.

Those children benefit hugely from specific interventions and over-learning. Something like Language for Thinking is very helpful. Lots of opportunities to interact in structured ways with adult-led scaffolding.

That doesn't need to be a SALT. The SALT's role should be, in my view, a strategic one. Not an operational one. If all the SALTs are tied up looking at story boards with children who have already been assessed, then the children waiting for assessment will wait all the longer.

A cascade model, if done conscientiously, is much more effective, in my view.

DD1 had 1:1 SALT for 2 years and made virtually no progress at all. Then she started school and they used the cascade model. A SALT spends 30 minutes with her whole class (10 children) once per fortnight. She models activities to promote their S&L. The staff carry out those activities and techniques for the next fortnight. It's a total communication environment, so every body (including admin staff) use Makaton all the time, whether the child is verbal or non-verbal. She has come on hugely.

It's quality, not quantity, that matters.

I agree - provision may not be best provided by a therapist but included in regular short 1:1 provision provided by the TA/CT and backed up by normal teaching provision but this does not happen in m/s (unless you are describing provision in m/s?

It is important to have external input and review because in m/s the TA despite being trained is ineffective ime - DS2 has had additional sessions during the summer holidays and tbh has made more progress over the last month than in the last two years (pronunciation). I do recognise that the same progress cannot made with regard to pragmatic/functional/social use of language but before training by the salt this was operationalised by the school as listening to him read!