Annual Review - Educational Psychologist

[Sally44]

AR is next Friday.

Still not received reports yet.

Only school have sent theirs in.

School told me the EP has been into school and seen (assessed??) my son - don't they have to tell me about that beforehand?

As I know this EP doesn't like to do reports, can she come to the AR and talk about 'her findings' without any documented evidence at all?

[Karen A]

AR is next Friday.

Still not received reports yet.

Only school have sent theirs in.

School told me the EP has been into school and seen (assessed??) my son - don't they have to tell me about that beforehand?

As I know this EP doesn't like to do reports, can she come to the AR and talk about 'her findings' without any documented evidence at all?

 

Probably yes.

The EP that attends the AR has on previous occasions just popped in to see Ben on the day before the AR.

Is EP input documented in the Statement ?

 

 

[Sally44]

It is, but appears to be ambiguous, so I am asking for EP input to be specified and quantified at the AR.

 

I find this EP very frustrating because she doesn't do 'standardised tests' she prefers to see them in the classroom. However this makes it very hard to ascertain improvements from the last EP assessments carried out privately. She is also of the opinion that all children on the spectrum have difficulties with learning and therefore nothing needs to be done.

 

Also the SPLD teacher doesn't see him because that doesn't fall within her role. But she can say he is making adequate progress without ever having met him! Again this is ambiguous in the Statement and I am to get that quantified and specified as well.

 

It does say in the Statement that this first year my son was to receive a higher amount of professional input to determine whether a diagnosis of dyslexia/dyscalculia was relevant and to identify how to move his skills on. They were also to monitor and review all programmes and approaches being used. They have not done that. They have gone in to see him prior to the AR because I wrote a letter of non-compliance. Previously the EP was not even going to attend the AR.

 

But if there is no report. How can I challenge anything she says?

[Sally44]

Also the CoP says that all reports MUST be submitted at least two weeks beforehand.

So I presume I could postpone the AR if I do not have reports in.

[call me jaded]

Never seen EP input quantified and specified in a statement.

 

Plus it is very rare for an EP to attend ARs on a regular basis, and in truth is only happening because of your letter of non-compliance.

 

Yes you can refuse to have the meeting because of a failure to provide reports. I would question what would be achieved. You are considering a challenge to the EP's professional opinion. Unless you are going to show the EP reports to another EP you will not be able to do this, so I suggest that it would be more productive to 'work with' rather than try to challenge.

 

Look at what you want to come out of the meeting. Monitor and review is central to the AR process - the school will be monitoring and reviewing. They just may not be doing an assessment for dyslexia. IF you think an assessment is crucial then it may be easier to have one done privately rather than putting an enormous effort into policing the statement. Depending on what it shows you could then have a legitimate push for dyslexia/dyscalculia input.

 

From my own POV I am delighted when there's no EP at the review (we've never had one) because that means the school and I can just get on with it.

[Sally44]

Never seen EP input quantified and specified in a statement.

 

Plus it is very rare for an EP to attend ARs on a regular basis, and in truth is only happening because of your letter of non-compliance.

 

Yes you can refuse to have the meeting because of a failure to provide reports. I would question what would be achieved. You are considering a challenge to the EP's professional opinion. Unless you are going to show the EP reports to another EP you will not be able to do this, so I suggest that it would be more productive to 'work with' rather than try to challenge.

 

Look at what you want to come out of the meeting. Monitor and review is central to the AR process - the school will be monitoring and reviewing. They just may not be doing an assessment for dyslexia. IF you think an assessment is crucial then it may be easier to have one done privately rather than putting an enormous effort into policing the statement. Depending on what it shows you could then have a legitimate push for dyslexia/dyscalculia input.

 

From my own POV I am delighted when there's no EP at the review (we've never had one) because that means the school and I can just get on with it.

 

What I don't want is the EP to come along and start giving her opinion without any way of justifying it.

My son's Statement says that he is highly likely to be dyslexic and dyscalculic and that he fits the British Educational Psychologists criteria for both those SPLD. His Statement says that this last year was supposed to include professional input to varify this dx and to identify ways to move his skills on. This has not been done.

My son is assessed as at least high average cognitive ability, yet he is still on the P scales at age 9 and school are happy with that.

If dyslexia is itemised in section 2 of a Statement then there has to be recommendations on how that need will be met in section 3. That has to include input from suitably qualfied professionals. No-one at his current school is qualified as a SPLD teacher, or has additonal qualfications as an EP. Therefore his needs are not being met.

He has been seen privately by an EP who specialises in dyslexia, and he said he is too severely dyslexic even for a SPLD school as he cannot read or write independently at all.

His latest assessments say he can read 14 HFW.

The gap between him and his peers is widening and will continue to widen - quote from SENCO.

The Statement says that the aim is for his literacy and numeracy skills to become more age appropriate. That target has not been met.

He is being taught to read/write using phonics when it is already identified that he has central auditory processing disorder and hears and perceives sound incorrectly and stores incorrect phonological information. He has poor working memory and can only remember 4 items, by using a strategy of repeating them. So he cannot apply phonics to anything bigger than a 3 letter word.

He also has auditory processing delays.

phonics is an auditory teaching approach. Therefore they are trying to teach him to read/write using his areas of greatest difficulty.

His Statement says that he is to have a individualised literacy programme. He doesn't have that. He has the government approach of phonics.

 

It isn't just the EPs report that is not in. The SALT's report hasn't arrived. I also asked the OT for an update of what she had done regarding programmes with him in school. I have received no reply. The OT is supposed to see him termly in school. How can we review the Statement when everyone involved is not giving any information?

 

The CoP states reports MUST be in at least two weeks prior to allow parents time to read and understand them and to seek further clarification or additional professional advice. I have been given no such option.

[call me jaded]

Frustrating, I know, but policing the statement is nigh-on impossible - there is no effective mechanism to do it. Hence the findings of the Lamb Inquiry.

 

I'm confused - can't work out what you're looking for as an outcome. Your desired outcome is for differentiated support for SpLD? But the private EP report says it's too severe for SpLD provision to be effective? You want the EP to submit a report so you can challenge it?

 

What progress has been made during the year? What evidence do you have that Phonics isn't working? Do you have a reading scheme in mind to replace Phonics? Does the LA have SpLD outreach or teaching support services that could come in?

 

What do you want to change?

 

[Sally44]

Frustrating, I know, but policing the statement is nigh-on impossible - there is no effective mechanism to do it. Hence the findings of the Lamb Inquiry.

 

I'm confused - can't work out what you're looking for as an outcome. Your desired outcome is for differentiated support for SpLD? But the private EP report says it's too severe for SpLD provision to be effective? You want the EP to submit a report so you can challenge it?

 

What progress has been made during the year? What evidence do you have that Phonics isn't working? Do you have a reading scheme in mind to replace Phonics? Does the LA have SpLD outreach or teaching support services that could come in?

 

What do you want to change?

 

I want a SPLD teacher to be seeing my son for literacy and numeracy. He has not had that. The fact that he is so severe proves that he needs this input. Presently he has the same as everyone else in his class with support from his TA. All the children in his class have a statement or are on SA+, so all the work is differentiated anyway. The private report says that 'phonics' is not the way forward, as is the case for many dyslexic children.

I want the EP to submit a report so that I know what I am dealing with.

It is very hard to challenge anything if it is in ether and not done using standardised tests, and is not written down. What is the point of seeing him if she is not going to make any written recommendations?

The EP service states that they are there to 'identify' and support SEN needs. My son has not had access to the EP because the school say he is doing okay 'considering' his dx of an ASD.

From the end of year 2 to end year 3 he moved from P7 - P8 for reading, P6 - P7 for writing and remained at 1C for numeracy. Now he has been assessed before the AR and is said to be nearly 1C for reading, nearly P8 for writing and nearly 1B for numeracy.

The evidence I have that phonics is not working is the fact that he has central auditory processing disorder. He pronounces words wrong. He cannot apply phonics to spelling. Only yesterday he spelt 'my' 'ym' and 'ni'. He cannot read and he cannot write.

I have two suggested approaches for reading/writing. One is a morpheme approach which is used by this specialist school which is approved by my own LEA. Another is a reading scheme which still uses phonics, but uses pictures for each letter sound to help the child link the visual picture to the sound and also the picture helps with letter orientation.

The LEA does have a SPLD teacher, but she only gives telephone advice. I have been informed by the Dyslexia Association that that is illegal. IPSEA have said that any need itemised in section 2 of a statement must be specified and quantified in section 3 - therefore I need someone suitably qualified to put together a programme and monitor it. Typical teaching staff are not suitably qualified.

Ultimately I want to change the school because they cannot meet his needs. I want to see what the LEA is prepared to do. If they do give him SPLD teacher input, and the EP does monitor his progress twice yearly and another programme is used to help reinforce his literacy skills then I will see if that input can transfer to secondary school. But presently the school and LEA are causing me to push every inch of the way. There is no secondary school he can access in our LEA that has a suitable peer group and which can meet his needs.

His school report for AR says that he cannot access whole class learning due to auditory/sensory problems/attention/memory problems and his Statement says he should be taught in small groups. Yet other reports state he is much too capable for an autism unit. Some of his percentiles are around 92 and others are <1.

At secondary school age he will have to access mainstream classrooms, or go into the autism unit of a mainstream school or go to an ASD behavioural difficulties school. None of them are suitable.