ok, what can we actually do about this rubbish sen system

[kojackscat]

I read on here, day after day, about schools letting out kids down. Refusals to fill in ehcp forms, lies like ' you wont get a plan for behaviour problems ' and now I've just read 'ms schools don't do ehcp'

So, how do we get this system changed?
I know we are all exhausted from fighting for our children, but does anyone have the energy for one more fight?

We need publicity, petitions, lobbying, whatever else, to bring this to the publics attention.
We need teachers to be better trained in sen, sencos to have better understanding of the law, Las to have more/different duties, perhaps separate assessing and funding bodies.
Anyone up for starting a campaign on this? We cant let it continue to let our children down.

You should name and shame the school then, charis. I dont mean on here, I mean submit a complaint to the la.

However, I am now leaving this thread. Thanks to all of you who have joined me, if anyone else is interested,please pm me.
I cant stay here anymore, as I don't believe this is a constructive discussion.

what would your advice to a LA be in this situation

My advice ( and her mother agrees with me) is leave her alone.

( This is my sister's daughter we are talking about)

She is 15 and has had virtually one to one now for 10 years. thousands, possibly as much as half a million has been spent on her"education". She has had assessments, targets, paperwork, IEPs etc absolutely non stop, and all for nothing. |She never has and never will reach p1 ( blink in response to a light)

Her mental age is minus 3 months, in other words she never has and never will develop one single iota intellectually since being born three months early 15 years ago.

She never has and never will even recognise her mother's face or voice.

So tell me, what was the point of all that education she has had?

And why is it offensive to ask?

there has to be a line. It is insane not to have a line.

And if money, resources and staff wasn't being wasted on this sort of child, there would be more for others.

And by the way, I love my niece.

Charis, my son didn't learn solely because he had a 1 to 1 tutor. He learnt because he had a specialist tutor using dyslexia-specific approaches which were not developed solely for him but were approaches known to work successfully with a number of dyslexic children. And if you go to a dyslexia specific school you will again see approaches being used on the basis that they are researched and experience has demonstrated that they work, not because the schools are "learning the child".

You should name and shame the school then, charis. I dont mean on here, I mean submit a complaint to the la

I did at the time.

dyslexia-specific approaches which were not developed solely for him but were approaches known to work successfully with a number of dyslexic children. And if you go to a dyslexia specific school you will again see approaches being used on the basis that they are researched and experience has demonstrated that they work

This is an illusion. Not only are there no universally agreed upon dyslexia-specific approaches, there is also no actual official definition of "dyslexia"

It changes constantly.

Also the "approaches" change all the time, and not only that but totally contradict each other. What one school or teacher or school of though advocate, another strongly condems.

take the whole lap top question. Mnay people promote the use of laptops for dyslexic children to write with. Many people ban them from using laptops even when the rest of the class do.

( I'm on the anti- laptop side, I've seen use of ICT seriously impair educational development)

I'm not against what you are trying to do, but I think you are starting with some very basic false assumptions.

if we really want to revolutionise the experience and outcomes for SEN children we need to start from questioning the very basics.

What range of diagnosis are being given and what is the rational for classifying different SEN the way they are currently classified. What are the actual problems that children have, and how can they be treated. (THis is a medical question, not an educational one - educational scientific research is worthless, just a bunch of non scientists doing non research and making silly unfounded recommendations)

What are we aiming for? This involves NOT BEING OFFENDED BY THE QUESTIONS!

There is no point in simply gearing yourselves up to "fight the system" because the system isn't actually fighting you. There is just a reality that some parents can't see. You are "fighting" the reality.

Of course if you would rather go off half cocked, getting offended, choosing not to believe unpalatable truths, fighting people who are not the enemy, that is up to you.

Good job the uk has a great benefit system then isn't it? We can all get a grip and let benefits soak this up at adulthood.

We either do something or nothing. Something could be taking LAs to court right down to questioning if the senco who told you your child had to be at p levels in year two before something steps in.

Doing nothing is easier by far. Accept all that is said at face value, let a child with a high IQ leave school with no gcse's and claim the dole.

You'd still be judged whatever you do.

Personally I don't give much of a crap. I just do what I think is right - right now. I don't think it's right all of societies problems to be put up and shut up. That's the attitude that see things like systemic abuse. Shut your mouth, no one cares, no one belives you. So what?

Charis, I did not suggest there is any one universally agreed set of dyslexia specific approaches. Naturally not, since dyslexia does not manifest itself in only one way. The point is, however, that there are a number of proven approaches and teachers can be trained in their use. Clearly you don't simply leave this to teachers' instincts according to the nature of the child in front of them.

As for your niece, it's a matter of quality of life, isn't it? Do you do your best to give her as fulfilling and stimulating a life as possible, or do you leave her staring at the wall all day? I remember talking to the foster parent of a similarly disabled child. Her view was that, although the child was never going to gain any useful skills, he was entitled to the best quality of life possible and she was damn well going to fight to ensure he got it. And she was absolutely right. The day we decide such children are not worth helping is the day our society becomes something I don't want to live in.

loup and ici thank you for your posts. You have both said what I was thinking so much better than I could.

I'm not offended by the questions, charis . Not in the slightest. They're questions that everyone in civil society - Parliament, Whitehall, local authorities, NHS central commissioning groups, and families - have to think about.

It's your answers to these questions that offend me. Your counsel of despair. Your craven acceptance of a fixed, unstoppable "reality" of outcome - the same line of argument that was once used to sterilise and institutionalise children like mine, and that still damns the life chances of the marginalised today.

Your understanding of financial "reality" offends me. At best, it's a laughably naive understanding of the way in which public sector finances operate. At worst, it's sock puppetry for those who would take us back to the glory days of the 1930s.

And your casual, arrogant, broad-brush dismissal of the value of educational research offends me. The rigorous, peer-reviewed research into language disorders from people like Dorothy Bishop and Kathryn Mason has made a major difference to the ability of specialist SALTs to meet my kids' needs. The work of the National Sensory Impairment Partnership underpins every approach my kids' fantastic teachers of the deaf take. Educational research has genuinely transformed their life chances.

I loathe most of the things that Michael Gove stands for. But when I heard him talk about "enemies of promise," I sat up and listened. Because I knew exactly who he was talking about. I suspect that you do too.

Charis, I've just read your post of 19:20.

I'm taking the unusual step of reporting it. Not to Mumsnet HQ. I have no interest in shutting this thread down.

I am however going to draw this thread to the attention of Ofsted's National Director of Schools, and Ofsted's lead HMI for SEND issues. They are drawing up the new inspection framework for Ofsted's new duty to inspect local authority SEN services, and they asked me to draw particularly eye-catching examples from the front-line.

As you had little joy in reporting the cleaner incident to your LA, I'm sure that you'll be happy to know that other avenues of complaint exist, and that the incident you describe would almost certainly count as a qualifying complaint for Ofsted.

I think the world has changed so much that Charis can't keep up. We know SO MUCH MORE than we did ten years ago that parents are empowered with knowledge, and that is very threatening.

I have to say it, Charis. You can not see the point in parents "fighting" because you represent the exact attitude that they, we, come up against.

If what was happening to your niece in the way of education was so abusive, then the assessment of her needs and actions taken to meet those assessed needs were way off the mark. Tell me, did you, or anyone else advocate for her, or did you just shrug it off?

And your nice is not representative of the many other thousands of children with SEN. 2 of those are mine. Their needs are not trivial. As a bottom line, I felt that sending my eldest to a school of 170 kids to be in a class of 25 was abusive. It was making him ill and he ended up needing constant 1:1 because he could not bring himself to set foot in that classroom. He was learning nothing in any ordered way. His teacher managed to use email to set him a little work, but he got no direct teaching. His tolerance of adult direction became less and less. He was not receiving the adequate education to which he is legally entitled because the school could not meet his needs, despite their best efforts.

It took me a year to get him into his current school. LA admitted that they'd deliberately stalled. The school is 45 miles away, in another county. He has grown so much there and is showing some real talents. He loves school now. He visibly shrinks by about a foot when we go to collect DS2 from his old school. For all that they were a willing and inclusive school, it's still a source of traumatic memories for him. It will cost over half a million to have him there until he's 19, but it's worth every penny because he's far more likely to be able to live independently as a tax paying adult. There's an estimate that only 10% of adults with ASD are in full time employment, but the school has an almost 100% record in getting some very anxious, fragile and even volatile young men into meaningful further or higher eduction, training or employment in something that they love.

He is not a child who is unresponsive to his environment. He is too responsive to his environment. He is also very bright and his mental health is very fragile. His ideas of justice and his moral compass are all over the place. Doing nothing has never been a viable option. Doing nothing would be neglectful and potentially dangerous. I do not feel the slightest bit greedy in having ensured that he has so much targeted intervention now because it's better than prison. Infinitely better than a premature, avoidable death by suicide or "misadventure".

He doesn't have full time 1:1 at this school, btw, because he doesn't need it. It's not the answer for him. His behaviour is much less of an issue with all the sensory stress removed and 1:1 work is targeted on specific areas that need attention, as well as places where he is so far ahead of other kids in his class (largely self taught, too) that he's on his own curriculum.

Charis, I'm wondering whether your reference to teacher training in the law on SEN coming under child protection indicates that, in the area where you are SEN adviser, that is what happens? If so, I assume you have advised that that is wholly incorrect and that teachers need proper training in SEN and the relevant law?

This seriously concerns me because there have been cases where parents pushing for proper SEN diagnosis and provision for their children have been accused of Munchausen's syndrome. In some LAs there seems to be a mindset that they will automatically assume that parents are making up and/or exaggerating their children's difficulties, and lumping SEN with child protection can only increase the danger of that happening.

There's someone posting on here that I've met before in another thread (have a look in the Further Education section if you can bear it).

This poster generally expresses views that are antagonistic to parents of SEN children. Where I posted about FE courses stating that I had been in contact with tutors on the course that my DS (with chronic health issues) is hoping to start, who said they could support him, this poster told me they must be lying - as having my son do the course would be totally unreasonable and the poster was fed up of having this course treated like a dust bin!

Like kojak I disengaged from the thread as other people's views were being drowned out by the posts from, and replying to, this individual. I'm certainly not against debating with people whose ideas differ from my own. I'm not sure though that there is anything to be gained by prolonging a debate which takes us so far from the spirit of the original post.

What's the thread title Running?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/further_education/2316680-Btec-or-AS-for-dc-with-health-attendance-issues

Thanks

Gosh what a surprise

Someone seems to have a real chip on their shoulder about kids with additional needs

I think the answer to this is massive and has largely to do with education in general.

Most coordinator roles in schools are not filled by people with qualification or particular interests (although they can be). Senco roles are often filled in the same way, no particular qualification or interest though it's often seen as needing a senior member of staff (though I have seen TAs given the role). Training for sen is pretty much like training in all areas of education, an ongoing game of Chinese whispers. One member of staff does training and feeds back to everyone else. In some areas that is sufficient but in many others it leaves most staff without training. Then if the one member of staff who had the training leaves and someone else takes their role, the training isn't repeated because the LEA aren't doing it anymore. They could only afford to fund it because the training was paid for as part of a new initiative. Therefore the school is left with half remembered second hand facts. That's before your even start on the training itself which is often generalised rubbish and full of the personal opinions of the person leading it (mmr causes autism, most sen is about parents getting dla, just looking for a label to cover bad parenting). If you have no experience of sen or a particular sen and someone (who allegedly knows their stuff because after all the LEA is paying then to give the training) tells you all this crap, you believe it. Especially when you go back and have it confirmed by other staff who have 'heard' the same thing.

Since the onset of inclusion schools have been essentially left to accommodate children that they had neither the money or the skills to deal with. This had led to many believing that inclusion doesn't work which then becomes a self fulfilling outcome. True, it is not appropriate for some but many are not supported properly but a claim of 'it hasn't worked' is still the end result. Often with an approval 'we shouldn't have to put up with this'

Money is available in the system as a whole but isn't at the level it is needed eg ring fenced in schools. It isn't available for training especially if the training itself isn't available. LEAs don't have an unlimited supply of money. Yet central government make promises that can't be kept because the money, infrastructure, staff or expertise are just not available. They don't want to pay for it either. They'd rather leave it for parents, schools and LEAs to scrap amongst themselves.

Ofsted etc are only interested in the bottom line which puts staff under immense pressure and time constraints. At the end of the day nobody cares how much time you've spent supporting child x or making sure child y gets the environment they need. As far as Ofsted are concerned sen "does not exist".

Parents do have to fight to get what their child needs. Some schools are great but usually because of a passionate and committed head rather than any governmental system or law.

So what would I do?

*I'd make senco a legally defined role with a minimum requirement in training.
*I'd scrap Ofsted in it's current role. Inspections for paperwork, health and safety etc but nothing else.
*Ofsted would instead be an ombudsman for parents to use to keep schools in line with the power to issue fines or compulsion orders. Also, in extreme cases, to remove heads or dissolve governing bodies of they have been wantonly wreck less or negligent.

• I'd create a national attainment framework with specific targets for all children so that parents could easily see where their children were and how they were progressing. Making it easier to complain to the school or get support from new Ofsted before years had elapsed.
• I'd make impossible to get funding for new initiatives unless there was actual evidence to back it up. The proposed royal college of teaching might help with this.
• I'd have a central bank of training that would be regularly repeated, especially sen training available at weekends and holidays as well as school time open to school staff, LEA staff and parents. We as teachers need to stop pretending we are on different teams. Materials would also be available online to read.
• I'd separate funding and assessment of sen. I know too many in LEAs who know they don't state the correct support a child needs because they know the LEA won't fund it. If they state it, the parents have ammunition to fight but they'll probably lose their jobs.
• I'd make it a requirement for any 'advisor' who makes suggestions on any aspect of school procedure, particularly classroom management to have to come into school and model how it is done. To many can't understand that schools are multifaceted dynamic places that aren't as simple as their plan would suggest.

I'm sure I'll think of some others.