Anyone dealt with a deliberately obstructive school....?

[Youarentkiddingme]

Who will go to every length possible to prevent you from having detail of what they are doing, how they are achieving and refuse to respond to emails and are down right insulting to you when you ask them a question that you can evidence?

How do you deal with it? It's making me feel like I'm going mad. It's making me both laugh and become stressed and on occasions angry because I know they are lying. (I have evidence).

It's making me feel like they are deliberately making things so difficult for me that they hope I'll go away and stop taking an interest in my child's education and expecting them to provide the Sen support they get funding for. (Not on EHCP)

I want more from mine and my DS life from contact checking of information, cross referring everything, fighting, phone calls and more importantly I want my MH back.

My favourite bit is the bit about how SA doesn't necessarily mean yiur child's needs will be identified and met! What's it for then? How does this, the non statutory assessment, non professional input version give expert opinions and advice. No wonder DS school think they have more expertise than Camhs and me on DS when they have the la telling them such!

IPa and yes it's still the same one as I have last updated September 2009. It's linked to from their Sen page which was updated 23/10/15

That linked document is a gem

You must save it. One day it will be referenced. But for now, just ignore it. It has no legal authority whatsoever.

Apply for an EHCP - no one else will.

We are all well beyond rhetoric and finding the 'right' audience at Tribunal. The gloves are off and we are in the territory of legal precedent now.

DS1's tutor came again today and, again, DS1 refused to meet with him. tbh I don't blame him. But DS1 has a statement that requires the LA to provide ASD specific counselling, OT and SALT which they have not done since DS1 was unable to return to ss a year ago - saving them about 50K+. Their only input was a tutor after DS1 had been out of school for 11 months.

What happens to SALT, OT and counselling when DC are unable to attend school?

The tutor is an OK person, I am sure, but his (or the LAs) main priority is money. This is always the reason why DS1 cannot receive non-academic support to enable re-entry into education.

He has no interest in DS1 eventually being able to attend indi ss school with onsite therapy and instead talks of home education and provision for 'young offenders' - no offence but totally the wrong peer group.

And he wonders why DS1 does not trust him?

Provision for Young offenders has he actually committed a crime or are they just aware what their lack of appropriate input does to the future of vulnerable children?

Hardly rocket science they become vunerable adults is it?

Perhaps the Judge from my recent Tribunal - which I think may have given birth to a new in-between concept of dedicated support (more than Class TA hover support but less than 1:1) - has been secretly working with your LA.

Your LA seem to have come up with the IPA (clearly made up) which is in-between needing more than SA+ (in old money) but is less than a Statement/EHCP. wtf

After saying that he was trying to get provision in place before DS1 was 16, even though the statement funds until 25, the tutor did concede that it was not actually cheaper to provide for DC of DS1 age compared to 'incarceration' or life-long reliance on state support.

DS1 has committed lots of crime on GTA but none in real life. He is a teetotal virgin who has never done illegal drugs more than can be said of me at age 15 I'm OK now though

my primary school was very obstructive.
It's frightening the depths they will sink to, isn't it?

talks of home education and provision for 'young offenders'

O_o

I don't think I could have this person in my house, keep. DS1 wouldn't want anything to do with him either.

I know ouryve what ever happened to the evidence that if a child is labelled (not diagnosed but give a label ) then they would likely play up to that.

So tell a child their future is in prison what stops them thinking - oh well, glossing someone is fine because it's my destiny.

I'm very surprised just how low some schools will sink. I've spent this evening writin a bullet point list of everything out from before he started to now, including information given, reports they say my views count but evidence where they've ignored them and ignored emails. My short bullet pointed list has become 5 typed pages

youare, no advice as massively brain fogged at the moment - but massive sympathies. Ds1's primary school and LA colluded to change the wording in his statement between us signing the copy we were happy with and it being finalised. Two sentences were changed, minimally at first glance, but the subtle changing of wording and punctuation totally undermined two of the most important elements of his support.

I think I gave up all hope of him ever being properly supported at that point and have pretty much been proven right.

Yes yes and yes. I fought all I could via appeal then finally decided I didn't want to have a break down.

I try to not care at all any more. I'm saving myself for AR because they don't do anything now. Possibly might go to appeal again.

But really I try not to get wound up. I am in process of seeing my younger son through the system with a very hands off approach so I'm too stressed to worry about them both.

Hi youare I've seen this document before. I suspect we're in the same LA. If we are, then this document was put together many years ago, it's completely out of date. It's appalling that local professionals are still drawing on it.

PM me later today if you want...

That'll teach me to not read the thread in full....

You know what's also appalling? The section containing these documents was updated in October. And the section was updated just a few weeks before a pilot Ofsted-CQC inspection of this LA's SEN services.

That inspection took place in November. This policy document is still on the website.

Ofsted clearly didn't pick up the fact that this document is 5 years out of date, that it refers to a legislative framework that no longer exists, and that blatantly misrepresents the pros and cons of statutory assessment.

What a fucking clown show this is.

That's interesting about the OFSTED inspection ugger there is no recent document relating to the IPA but even the LA have admitted to me they have no duristiction over it and it's effectively just a gentlemans agreement. So this leaves schools able to ignore needs they don't agree exist and fail to put in support because the LA will then say an IPA is sufficient and they don't need to assess for EHCP.

I think some of my case for EHCP assessment is going to have to centre on schools refusal to communicate with me and the ineffectiveness of an IPA as an alternative.

Your very close to my utterly lovely LA. I am sure there is much sharing of "best practice" between them. I might be moving to your LA soon

Lady I spoke to in LA called this evening to say head of Sen for area hasn't read my notes yet and to let me know she'll be in Monday and will catch her first thing. I have also been reassured they will speak to me before school. She actually sounds very much on my side and has said document I wrote last night of everything that's happened will help with EHCP and suggested I submit it with application.

I also mentioned a previous court case which has set precedence and hammered home that we cannot possibly know all DS needs with an actual assessment and that I have previous reports with needs that do exist clearly stated with recommendations of support that he use to receive.

My LA has a non statutory plan they try to fob people off with but they haven't sunk to the stigma depths yet - not in writing anyway. That is shocking.

With the school yes we experienced one of those. It is impossible - we left in the end - not just for DS he had ABA staff going in so was protected from them to some degree - but i found it too stressful. I was putting more energy into trying to deal with their egos, defensiveness and lies than I was into DS. In the end it just wasn't worth it, I needed to leave for my sake, it was too toxic. We found another school with a better attitude. In your shoes I would probably stay put and get the assessment and look to move once you get ehcp. I don't think schools like this change easily.

Schools like this don't change. Even with a ehcp.

Bang in with the ego thing. Our HT is a on a egotistical power trip. We will be leaving when the times right.

Oh yeah Ive absolutely no doubt in my mind it's an ego thing.

I've heard stories before of the downfalls of outstanding schools. It seems they really do talk the talk but have no real action to back it up. They expect once DS is within their 4 walls that I should "trust them to do their job due to their expertise".

Ive found some forms on county website for recording a child's views. I'm going to voice record DS views and then scribe them for him with a scripted copy of the conversation. Ds is talking a lot of too many children and noise and SENDCOP talks a lot of children's views being important.

Oh yeah he will be moving. The ironic thing is that for all the accusations of me being an anxious parent by the senco (not true!) I can feel anxiety and stress creeping in because of the reasons you said. It is a wierd feeling and I've said to la I flit between laughing at the rediculousless of the situation and feeling like I'm going mad because of the toxic nature of lies and game playing.

I've mad it clear that that the IPA is an old and out of date document, that it uses language that is directly opposite that of SENDCOP, and that it has no place in a child's education where Sen is evident as it has no ability to meet the child's needs due the the nature of it relying on schools recognising needs and a willingness to engage in the process.

It's hard to let it send you mad. That's why I'm very hands off with my toddler. If he goes to the same school I'm not planning to go in for meetings. If they ask for history I'm saying "non verbal asd - ask the LA they know him" I'm giving his medical records without heavy redacteding them. I'm not staying my opinions. In other words I'm giving no ammunition to say I'm mentally unstable or a bad neurotic person.

I am recording everything if he gets to MS and doing my own thing without informing anyone.

I really think if I did try to keep battering the school I would have a stroke.

I can't decide if every teacher in the school is grossly negligent of Sen or just scared of going against the HT.

I used to work with theae IPAs - not sure if it's unique to our area or not. Really really hope your DS isn't at my old school - I was senco and they didn't replace me when I left, they just gave one of my TAs an extra £1k a year and passed the workload to him. Anyway totally irrelevant!
I just wanted to warn you to be clear on the outcomes you want for your DS. Target points, estimated levels of progress, etc these are statistics and could be manipulated and ultimately you want him to learn and be happy. Things like Handwriting and evidence of work will be far more important to you. You have your DS best interests at heart - make sure that is the message the LEA etc gets not that you have are pissed off with the lying school. Hope that makes sense!

Thanks bump that's useful advice. So far I've made it clear that the lying etc makes it impossible to work with the school but ultimately that means my DS needs aren't being met. I've made it clear they refuse to accept needs that are documented in favour for their own judgements through expertise. I've said they don't recognise his as having a SpLD as he had previously despite his verbal reasoning and literacy scores being extremely low. If his literacy score if based on the same system as curriculum score - taking the expected rate of progress - he'll reach his end of Aut term in year 7 target in year 10.
The problem is they are claiming his English is equivilent to old 4a. (I have grade from new system too) That's 2 sublevels progress in one term. Ds made 2 sublevels with daily interventions in year 6 and 1:1 support. So their actual grade shows he's doing well despite his difficulties. 2 teachers have looked at the assessment (DS showed me as on his laptop) and have both said its barely level 3. The school have refused to engage with me when I've asked them to show me where he mets the criteria for a 4a from the assessment.
If they could show me I'd be more willing to accept their judgement. But instead the senco threw the piece of paper back at me saying it's better than her year 3 DD can do. What does that tell me? A child who's just started year 3 would only be expected to be a solid level 2!

I know what is the expected level of progress per year. Ds was behind his target for all but stem subjects at end of Autumn term. Should I be expecting the expected rate of progress or be expecting accelerated rate of progress so he can reach his target? So should I be expecting them to get him to his progress 8/ attainment 8 predicted grade in all subjects? Baring in mind that he won't be doing some of the subjects at GCSE level.

Academic progress is very hard to prove if you just use levels (which don't exist anymore, or so schools will tell you even though they use the same points). DS2s current school use a formula of the below/expected/above for the year so the only feedback I get is 5-, 5 or 5+. This subjective system will never be able to tell you how far behind the child is but the schools still use Level Descriptors. www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/368298/KS1-KS2_Performance_descriptors_consultation.pdf

These are less detailed but based on the old level descriptors - for example english - www.slough.gov.uk/downloads/KS2-STA-writing-criteria-l2-6.pdf

This is a new system and so comparison to the old one is claimed to be meaningless. I have always used this document in the past schools-secure.essex.gov.uk/pupils/achievement-service/PEPs/Documents/National%20Curriculum%20Points%20Scale.pdf.

Levels/performance are supposed to be objective (2-3 observations of each level descriptor) but are really subjective teacher assessment and can always be falsified based on a single piece of work produced in special circumstances and written out as 'best'.

If you look at my old posts from about 2011-12, I used to bang on about measuring ratio gain during a wave 3 intervention using standardised testing wrt reading and spelling. I used the Rose Review of Dyslexia to do this <a class="break-all" href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/00659-2009DOM-EN.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/00659-2009DOM-EN.pdf

The LA will have expected and adequate rates of progress ('adequate' is usually half of 'expected' so 6 months, 2 NC points or 1 sub-level in an academic year). If you can prove using standardised testing that your DS are making less than adequate progress according to the LA criteria then it won't matter that the school are saying that there has been expected progress.

With DS1, standardised testing showed that he was only making 2-3 months progress in an academic year, meaning that the gap between him and peers was increasing, during an intervention like Accelerwrite/read, despite the fact that the school claimed he had made 3 sub levels progress in one academic year (having made 1 sub-level progress in the preceding 3 years).

HTH