Can a child's score go down instead of up.

[pim]

This is a bit of a strange one. But we've just had a review for DS, Yr 1. HIs results this year are lower than last year. Is that possible? In some areas he has gone down by 5 points on his p-scales. The Ed Pysch said that these can't be accurate as she didn't think DS was that low from her assessments.

 

I think the school have lowered them so that he would fit the criteria for a MLD school. I don't know if i should be grateful as the school are trying to get more help from him. Or they are trying to build a case that he should be in a special school.

 

But it was very upsetting to see this as I know he has made progress.

 

pim

[BusyLizzie100]

Oh Pim! Five points does seem a lot. Does that mean, for example, that he was on P8 and is now on P3??? that doesn't seem right at all.

 

Lizzie xx

[Suze]

<'> hi pim, my son can do well in a test on a good day, on a bad day he can barely do the test.My sons dyslexic aswell and in the past has had a very uneven profile in test situations.But I would,nt also be surprised if a school tweaked a score favourably or unfavourably depending on how they want the outcome to be.My son did incredibly well in his sats....................

[Kathryn]

Pim,

 

I don't know a lot about p scales but this does seem bizarre. Pretty serious if deliberate fixing is going on.

 

K x

[summertime]

p levels arent related to a test so the score wouldnt be dependant on his performance on the day, they are a set of levels which should show where the child is performing.

 

before the P levels a child in Y2 would achieve a level in their SATS between one and three (maybe four if bright and the school applied for it) but if they scored below a 1 they were classed as a W (for Working towards a level 1) the P levels break down that level so that a child can be seen as progressing through the level (or not in this case)

 

they are rather subjective though and to give an accurate level the child would need to be assessed by the same person in the same setting and would ideally be assessed by someone who knew the child well not just someone who comes in to do a one off observation

 

a drop of 5 does sound to me to be a lot, is this in just one area or are the y across the whole curriculum?

 

also one thing to consider is that reception year to Y1 is often a big transition. I know schools where reception children do little but play and then move to Y1 where they are expected to sit at tables and work for the whole day. this can be a very big change for a child with ASD and also can accentuate any differences that the child may have from his NT classmates whcih could make their communication difficulties more apparent

 

have a look at the levels and see if you think he has been properly assessed

 

 

http://www.qca.org.uk/8798.html

[pim]

Hi, thanks for all your replies.

 

In answer to some of your questions, my DS communication level has not gone down. In fact it's the opposite and he's a lot more communicative. He's very verbal. His scores haven't gone down across the board only in the ones he scored above P5. In his maths it went down from P8 to P3. But he loves numbers. He can count to more than 100. Understands what they are and can do simple sums, which I don't think is bad for a 5 1/2 year old. He's one of the youngest in his class. Of course he is behind his peers

 

The school want him to go to a special school and I think they've fiddled his scores so that he fits the criteria. I'm not so convinced that is the best placement for him now, having looked at 3 MLD schools. The SEN funding is changing here in April and the school have said they cannot afford the 15 hours support from his statement.

 

I'm wondering if I should say something or query this.

 

pim

[BusyLizzie100]

The SEN funding is changing here in April and the school have said they cannot afford the 15 hours support from his statement.

 

I'm wondering if I should say something or query this.

 

pim

 

Pim, this is shocking. We're in the same area and I think the whole SEN funding change is abysmal, but surely the drive behind it is to put the money INTO schools, so if your son has a STatement, then the funding for that will go into the school's budget... how can they say they cannot afford the 15 hours on his Statement? Are they using that element of the budget that should be protected by your son's Statement to support other children??

 

I'm sure IPSEA would be VERY interested to hear about that! I've spoken to IPSEA already several times about the implications of the funding changes. They looked into it and said it looks OK, but it really depends on what happens in practice. If your son's school is, in practice, not fulfilling the needs as set down by the Statement, then the system is not working.

 

This could, I suppose, be the school's way of saying that the new system is rubbish and they're using your son's case as a stick to beat the LEA with, but maybe that's just me being a little too cynical!

 

Lizzie xx

[pim]

HI

 

From what I can understand, the 15 hours from his statement is protected for next year. (That is the LEA will cover the 15 hours for next year). But not for the year after. But DS needs more than 15 hours. The school are finally agreeing with me on this. The school are saying they cannot afford this. That is why they are pushing for him to go to special school. They have written this in an email to me.

 

I have been told by 2 HT's that after April, statements are coming back with no hours stated and it's up to the school to continue supplying the support the child needs. Above 15 hours the school needs to apply for exceptional needs. This is very, very difficult to get.

 

I have looked at other mainstream schools for DS and so far no-one would want him. I have been told that they are already stretched to the limit and they could not afford to pay for the 15 hours support in his statement. This is from a school that has a very good SEN record. To another, which wouldn't want DS in their precious school.

 

pim

Edited March 11, 2007 by pim

[BusyLizzie100]

This is very worrying indeed. With the funding going into school budgets the Statement will no longer be a resource (ie funding) document, but it still details a child's needs and how the school has to support him/her. It is still a legal document. If the school is unable to fulfill the Statement and meet the child's needs, then the LEA is responsible. This is exactly the kind of thing that IPSEA was worried about.

 

Statements above 15 hours (ie for those children with exceptional needs) are different only in that the funding comes direct from the LEA, as it has done up til now with all Statements.

 

DS2 has his Review on Wednesday (gulp) so we may find out more then (or not!). He has 12 hours on his STatement, made up to 15 by school. We are actually arguing that he needs more than that and that mainstream is not working for him. I'll let you know how we get on!

 

By the way, for anyone else reading this, Pim and I are under the same LEA but this may not be the same situation elsewhere.

 

Lizzie x

[Kathryn]

From what I can understand, the 15 hours from his statement is protected for next year. (That is the LEA will cover the 15 hours for next year). But not for the year after. But DS needs more than 15 hours. The school are finally agreeing with me on this. The school are saying they cannot afford this. That is why they are pushing for him to go to special school. They have written this in an email to me.

 

Hang on to that email - it could come in very handy if the school are admitting that the current level of support isn't enough. It would be cheaper for the LEA to increase the hours in the statement than pay for a special school place. If you want your son to stay in mainstream, the law is on your side.

 

I have been told by 2 HT's that after April, statements are coming back with no hours stated and it's up to the school to continue supplying the support the child needs. Above 15 hours the school needs to apply for exceptional needs. This is very, very difficult to get.

 

This is downright illegal. The statement should detail all the provision a child needs - the obligation to quantify and specify the support is still there, and it's up to the LEA to make a decision on the amount and kind of support, after considering all the advice they've collected. I hope every parent who gets such a worthless document will immediately appeal to Sendist.

 

I've also forwarded details of the new funding changes to Ipsea. Another LEA undergoing funding changes was ordered by the DFES to change the information it gave to parents stating that "statements are no longer necessary". So if either of you see any information leaflets which "forget" to mention parents' rights and the LEA's obligations, Ipsea will be interested.

 

I really feel for both of you guys, and your children. <'> Although I'm out of the system now as far as SEN is concerned, I will never forget what this LEA put me through.

 

Good luck for the review, Lizzie

 

K x

[pim]

Well I've been given an explanation by his LSA as to why his scores are lower this year. Last year it was evaluated on what they thought he knew verbally. This year it was determined on written proof. DS finds writing extremely difficult. So as he can't write the numbers and words he knows they took that to mean he doesn't know them. I don't know if that's right or not.

 

pim

[Kathryn]

Well I've been given an explanation by his LSA as to why his scores are lower this year. Last year it was evaluated on what they thought he knew verbally. This year it was determined on written proof. DS finds writing extremely difficult. So as he can't write the numbers and words he knows they took that to mean he doesn't know them. I don't know if that's right or not.

 

pim

 

I don't know much about p scales, but I would think it's hardly an accurate indication of progress, if it's based only on written output. Surely the method of evaluation should be the same as last year to ensure consistency?

 

K x

[jlp]

My son is a very poor writer (P7 at Y2) but his other scores do acknowledge that he does know more than he can write - his literacy and numeracy scores were between 1A and 2C. It seems very unfair on your son if they think he can't write something then he doesn't know it (goodness knows what our scores would be then!).