Got the statement - help me uderstand it!

[HarijukuLover]

See this thread for background.

I have just received a proposed statement for DS in the post.

Part 2 has some factually incorrect stuff in it.

Part 3 has a long list of 'Objectives' for DS.

There is then some waffle about the National Curriculum.

Then it has a long list of what the school will provide (they are providing all of it anyway).

Then it says:

The LA considers that Harijuku's DS's needs will be met in mainstream school. The programme to support his needs will be provided by the school from it's total delegated budget in the context of the whole school inclusion policy. This will enable the school to provide 34.07 hours from a teaching assistant per week for his emotional and behavioural difficulties and general learning needs'.

Is this good and clear or not? What does it mean? What does all the stuff about funding mean?

There is also a bit headed 'To be provided by other agencies', which says a SALT will provide 'written advice/a programme to key school staff; input to IEP targets; a termly review of recommendations: and close liaison with parents' - doing all that anyway. This bit is guff, isn't it? No mention of how many hours per week/fortnight etc with a SALT.

Thank fuck I went overboard on getting reports from professionals togetehr and wrote an epic parental advice, too, because they have clearly not consulted anyone else other than an EP. Lazy bastards.

I would also seek advice from IPSEA, ACE or SOS;SEN over the content in Parts 2 and 3. They will tell you what both parts should actually say then you can work from that.
I would say that parts 2 and 3 both need a complete rewrite.

SALT should be in Part 2 as well as three.

It all looks far too woolly to be accepted so it will have to be rejected. No mention either about the TA being trained adequately!.

Provision by law needs to be both specified and quantified. This is neither in this current Statement doc.

www.ipsea.org.uk

I am meeting with the LEA on Weds next week. We have got a solicitor with SENDIST experience on standby, but cant get hold of her until Monday.

The thing is, we don't want any of what;s in the statement, because it has been in pace for 6 months and hasn't worked. Since they did the SA, we have been to see the local(ish) MS school with a dediacted ASD unit (which is perfect for DS, but which nobody from the LEA told us existed, surprise surprise)...and that is what we want.

So what am I arguing now? The whole thing needs a re-write. FFS.

been in place for 6 months

Yep, basically.

There is a good guide to going through a statement and taking it apart here

The SALT should specify visits eg half termly etc. It should also specify how much time the school will spend on the targets eg 20 minutes per day

You are arguing for better qualified staff who know how to teach a child with autism

You need to be saying that hours of TA time is not enough it has to be someone with the skill level to know how to teach. Lots in Lamb report and Institute of Education reports last year about how TA hours do not in themselves lead to progress - in fact the more TA time the less well the child did as they got less time with the teacher (I of E report used to be on DCSF site).

You need to say that the staff do not have the insight or training - ie it needs someone with substantial autism specific training not someone who has been on a few one day courses

You might even want to say the curriculum is the wrong curriculum it needs to be an autism specific curriculum

Thanks all. All helpful.

The solicitor will probably know this, but as a heads up over the weekend...what sort of arguments can I use to persuade them that a mainstream with specialist ASD unit is better than a mainstream with a full time 1:1 TA? I know my own arguments/reasons, but is there a specific way I need to word it/argue the case?

Thanks all a million times over.

Sorry Harijuku I have not read linked thread so this may have already been discussed - but can you not name the MS school with ASD unit on the statement as being the school of your choice?

Sounds like a typical crap Statement that they try to palm parents off with!

Have a look here www.treehouse.org.uk/help/meeting-childs-educational-needs/does-child-need-statement/-does-statement -look

and here nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/node/335017

for more information and advice.

The SEN Officers should know what should be in a Statement; they just try to get away with as little as possible.

Thanks for the links, TT's Wife.

The more I look over the statement, the more shoddy it looks.