I can feel my blood pressure rising just reading that document!
Exactly who has decided that assessment and paperwork is 'unnecessary'? I bet assessment is 'not in the best interests' of DC and makes them 'look different'. So, don't even bother asking for your child to be assessed and if you have them privately assessed this will be evidence that you don't care about the well-being of your DC. I wonder how LAs justify conducting lots of unnecessary assessment when preparing defence for Tribunal when suddenly it is seen as essential to conduct EP, SALT and OT assessment despite the fact that assessments have just been carried out by independent specialists?
The use of the words 'quality' and 'strengths' is designed to underline that the subjective view of the CT that DC are 'fine' is the strongest expert evidence available (with no pesky 'unnecessary' objective assessment indicating the opposite).
As all DC in the m/s can have their needs met (no matter how complex) by the Local Offer, there can logically be no needs for which there is not already provision.
Where is the evidence (academic research) that claims that having a statement is stigmatising or that statutory assessment is intimidating? Note the concern of the potential impact on older children? Of course, there are far more older DC as needs become more apparent and expectations increase as they progress through primary school. Plus there is the 'need' to document academic failure (5 years+ in DS1's old school) to be eligible for support.
The quotes are just bog-standard dictionary of sociology stuff.
ime with DS2 the school are happy to put anything in writing, especially if it is not legally enforceable. This does not mean that the provision will actually be delivered - DS2's statemented provision was not delivered and even when the LA wrote short-term targets the school would only actually deliver the provision on a couple of occasions rather than daily, throughout the day and then delete the target with no indication of any progress. I have been told that there is no longer any need for an IEP or any other document of short-term SMART targets, just a Provision Map with no measurement of progress.
DS2 has problems with writing and the OT had provided special paper and recommended 10-15 mins practice per day. The SENCO claimed this had been provided but was being stopped because DS1 did not like it. Lots of statemented provision has been abandoned and disappeared from the IEP (favour to me) because 'DS2 did not like it' (dictaphone, mini-computer, handwriting practice, prompt sheet, rewards, pencil case, wobble cushion, sloping desk etc). I asked for copies of the sheets (having already seen they were all blank) but was told that the school did not have any because they didn't know that I expected them to keep them. Logically that would mean that they had already binned or shredded the handwriting practice that DS2 had done that day!
A note of caution though - my recent experience of Tribunal was a shock as these were exactly the views expressed by the Judge and I was slapped down at every opportunity and even told by the judge that parental written comments were sufficient. Parents were only asked for verbal evidence at the end of the day after our legal rep had complained and even then the Judge would not allow me to speak but addressed her questions specifically to DH.
She describes the school as a 'model of inclusion' in her Ruling.
Still justifiably 