Fwd: [senco-forum] would this wording put you off?

Subject: Re: [senco-forum] would this wording put you off?

The 1:1?wording that was being discussed in relation to Iks's query was to do with TA support within a mainstream inclusive setting Sheridan. Ideal types of wording would be:
?
"The LA will arrange that xx will receive xx hours per week of 1:1 support from a designated TA (or designated TAs) to assist in?ensuring that the progammes and curriculum requirements as set out within this part of the statement are able to be delivered efficiently and successfuly. The TA(s) to be experienced/trained/qualified in providing for the special educational needs as set out in Part 2 of this statement".

If 1:1 provision from a TA implied high levels of 1:1 withdrawal (which it never does in my experience) this amount of withdrwal would amount to considerable modification and disapplication in respect of the National Curriculum access for this child.
?
As such modifications / disapplicatons have to be detailed within the statement -- it must always be clear as to how the TA is to be deployed. In virtually all cases it is to enable maximum inclusion and access to whole calss mainstream school curriculum and extra curricula activities.
?
Some small group or 1;1 sessions may be specified within statements -- for therapy or specialist tuition / literacy tuition /coaching -- but this should not be to such an extent as to cause significant loss of access to the full entitlements of National Curriculum requirements.
?
If there is such loss it must be specified as a disapplication or modification to the child's access to the National Curriculum -- and the alternative programmes clearly detailed within the actual statement. This is, of course, if the LA write the statement and specify programmes and staffing provsion?in accordance with the law and the Code of Practice.

Unfortunately the terms "flexibilty" and "independance training" (highly justifiable concepts in themselves) have become abused codes for watered down and signifcantly reduced / unreliable provision. If the use of such terms had not been the cause of so much loss of provision and disagreement as to what should be being provided in the past -- I would not have to keep advising parents to be very cautious and wary of such?phrases -- and to always insist on complete clarity on minimum levels and types of staffing provsion.

Hope this clarifies it for you Sheridan. Regards Brendan King

-----Original Message-----
From: Sheridan1 <sheridan.sharp1 at btinternet.com>
To: 'lk s' <lks1985 at hotmail.com>; senco-forum at lists.becta.org.uk
Sent: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 10.21pm
Subject: RE: [senco-forum] would this wording put you off?

Just a query from a non senco. I am a specialist teacher.  I would imagine a
Senco may question what specifically you are asking for. I expect different
schools will interpret what is specified by the terminology used or way it
is expressed in Statements.
To me the two terms are similar but different.

When you say you have asked for your child to be specified as needing   1:1
support, what specifically do you mean?

 I understand 1:1 support as - the child is taught on a ratio of one pupil
to one teacher/staff. The child is taught /supported on their own. Is this
what you mean?

I understand "individual support" as someone helping a specific child in the
classroom situation.  

Children get either or both of these kinds of support. 

I feel, support sometimes needs to be  a little flexible as the child gets
used to a new secondary school and finds new subjects and interests in which
they do well. When this happens the school can allow the child to be more
independent and the support can be reduced in those particular areas
allowing the support to be more focused in areas they still have difficulty.
All this depends on each individual child.

As a specialist teacher (LEA employed), in a secondary school, children are
withdrawn from class to see me on a 1:1 or 2:1 basis. Some of the pupils
also have individual in class support from other staff (TA's etc). 

Cheers

Sheridan

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.0/961 - Release Date: 19/08/2007
07:27

Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage. Plus, share and store photos and experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your favourite artists. Click Here for more information.

________________________________________________________________________
Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage.  Plus, share and store photos and experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your favourite artists. Find out more at http://info.aol.co.uk/joinnow/?ncid=548.