How would you interpret this statement wording?

[nitpicking]

'should have full access to the National Curriculum'.

What does this mean exactly? Does it mean that all parts of the curriculum should be covered and GCSE's catered for?

Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks

IME it doesn't mean anything more than 'should have full access to pencils'.

I bet the next bit reads 'differentiated', no?

I think it's one of those meaningless statements they throw in to pad out a statement.

OP, is the statement full of "should have", "access to" etc?

Ring IPSEA to go through the statement... sounds like one of those statements that aren't even worth the paper they are written on.

Thanks all. The majority of the statement is actually very specific and quantified.

Ha ha Star yes, differentiated is used but isn't it in most sm's?

What it means is that they are not disapplying him from MFL. They are attempting to stress that he should not be restricted in his education.

What's MFL?

mfl = modern foreign languages.

"should have", ought to read "must have"/"will have" or it's meaningless

This was quite significant at my tribunal as the access class only did functional skills as did the LA ss and as ds1 was of average intelligence had to have access to the full NC. Access can mean that DC need to leave the unit at secondary level as courses are not taught on site.

DS1's indi ss allows access to full NC on site.

I agree that it isn't meaningless. They are saying that this child should not be restricted to core subjects and disapplied for anything they might find tricky to teach. The school has to find a way to teach the child subjects which may be more difficult due to SEN. They can't do maths, literacy, colouring, gluing and sticking.