[SENco-forum] Re: SEN Criteria

So! you have a small special school with mainly PMLD and SLD pupils -- staffed to cater for these pupils with highly adapted curriculum programmes -- in very small classes with very enhanced staff-pupil ratios. And you want to off-load a very few MLD chuildren, who should be offered a full unadapted National Curriculum, who are articulate, fully street-wise, and just below avarage ability. You want to buss them away from there own locallity, away from the friends they will have already made, and from their siblings who may be at the local mainstream school -- where they will no longer be able to engage in after school activities and sports alongside their mainstream, local community, peers. They will be expected to mix in with (to them) a strange and scary mix of highly disabled children who will not be able to offer them anything in the way of stretching them socially and academically (they will suddenly be "top of the pile" in these respects -- with no higher performing role models).

My specialism before retirement was PMLD and SLD, after a long time in mainstream SEN. I worked in a small all-age special school that contained MLD/SLD and PMLD. The mix was entirely inappropriate and the existance of the school was to do with contingency and compromise -- not commonsense placement. This school no longer exists -- replaced by a secondary phase school for the latter type of children plus severly autistic children. 

You mention the agonies these MLD children go through in mainstream. The plain fact is that the vast majority of MLD pupils remain in mainstream, and within their local community, as they have as a human right and a right in current UK law. You want to turn back the clock and segregate these children in schools entirely inappropriate for them. It won't happen -- parents won't allow it. Imagine these parents visiting the area special school populated by PLML/SLD pupils. They will immediately reject the notion of their MLD children being placed with an entirely inappropriate coterie of pupils. Any SENDIST appeal panel will firmly reject the notion of such children being palced in an innappropriate setting -- in the situation where the law provides for the primacy of parental preference and retaining most pupils within mainstream. 

The answer is for the MLD children floundering and suffering in mainstream to have there needs sufficiently met through specific statements stating exactly what additional support, materials and equipment they must be provided with. Mainstream staff must accept their responsibilty to adapt their practices to provide for a wide range of moderately affected SEN children -- i.e.,virtually all (99%) of its local community. This is a human right and a matter  of UK law. 

There is no use ringing hands and whinging -- and using the excuse that the MLD SEN children are suffering in mainstream. The answer is not to hive them off to the far away special school (leaving the mainstream school with no hard to teach children) but to welcome them and include them with sufficient provision so that they are happy young people making progresss according to their ability. I know this has yet to be achieved for many SEN children in many mainstream schools -- but this must be the aim so that most children remain included within their local community for this crucial 11-13 yrs of their lives. They have to seek social and economic inclusion once they leave school -- this will be all the harder if they have been excluded from the mainstream of society during childhood. Brendan     

-----Original Message-----
From: jillclayton at mac.com
To: kngbrndn at aol.com
CC: SEN at tringham.net; senco-forum at lists.becta.org.uk
Sent: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 2.56PM
Subject: Re: [SENco-forum] Re: SEN Criteria

I heard last week that one local special school for MLD children, which changed to offer places only to PMD (profound & multiple difficulties) or SLD (severe Learning difficulties) MAY be about to offer some places to those MLD children who are unable to cope in mainstream. Currently, these unfortunate children spend time in a PRU followed by residential SEBD schools at a considerable distance. This is less suitable for them, reduces the link with their families and - possibly the deciding factor - is extremely expensive. 
I would not deny the right of children to a mainstream education. I strongly object to children going through agonies to support the theory of inclusion as it is too often applied. Jill 
On 26 Nov 2006, at 14:44, kngbrndn at aol.com wrote: 

> Hear Hear Sharon. All of the org's I have been involved with > (INCLUDING THE NUT) nut have warned Govt. decades ago that moves > towards "integration" and less reliance on seperate special schools > would involve a long period of "double funding". But most > substantial changes in structure for SEN have specifically ruled > out any additional central Govt funding. Inclusion has been used as > a covert method of ending / reducing specialist provision for SEN > CHILDREN, 
> BRENDAN 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: SEN at tringham.net 
> To: kngbrndn at aol.com; senco-forum at lists.becta.org.uk 
> Sent: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 10.34AM a
> Subject: RE: [SENco-forum] Re: SEN Criteria 
> 
> 
> My LEA did just that. It re-wrote its templates as 'criteria' and > added the 
> tiniest little caveat that said 'guidance only'. But if the LEA > fight every 
> step the school takes outside of the 'criteria' the school soon not > to rock the 
> boat & keep in line . 
> 
> With employers in ultimate control it can never be a balanced or > fair system 
> whatever policies are in place. Perhaps we could cut out the LEA > for all but 
> employment and building control. 
> 
> Similarly the government cannot have it both ways - inclusion without 
> specialist external input or additional teacher training. I would > like to meet 
> the idiot that told them inclusion was going to be a cheaper option. 
> 
> Sharon Tringham 
> 
> - 