Suze Report post Posted January 14, 2006 It states on my sons Statement that :The LEA will fund 10 hrs per wk additional classroom assistance to help focus/organise structured playground activities and support programmes....................(he also has 3 more hours in the form of typing and specialist literacy),...................My question is what does that mean exactly???..............An assistant was employed for those 10 hrs when his statement came through 2yrs ago.She works tues, weds, thurs, .Now a letter came home from school explaining that his class were to be split into 3 on tues, weds, thurs, during literacy and maths.His class teacher will take one group, the head another, and the lady that works with my son will take the 3rd.Can anyone see a problem here?,and if I complain do I have a leg to stand on? Strange that these "booster" classes have been implemented on the 3 mornings my son has an assistant. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nemesis Report post Posted January 14, 2006 Hi Suze, I'm not surprised you're unhappy with that. My son isn't statemented so I don't know what your rights are but I would certainly want to query that. It seems to me that school are taking advantage of a resource allocated specifically for your son Nemesis Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elainem Report post Posted January 14, 2006 I have asked out statement to be changed so that the TA works either one to one or in a small group with my ds. We have had similar where the resource has been viewed as shared when in fact it is in my ds statement. small group is ok as sometimes that is of benefit to my ds. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phasmid Report post Posted January 14, 2006 The LEA will fund 10 hrs per wk additional classroom assistance to help focus/organise structured playground activities and support programmes... Things that leap out to me here are 'classroom assistance' and 'to help focus/organise playground activities and support'. Firstly it does not state that the LEA will provide your son with 1-1 support, they will supply 'classroom assistance'. To me they are two different things. CA is not exclusive to your child where 1-1 would be. The other point is they (CA that is) are also supposed to be there at break/lunchtimes and that is specific. I would say this needs to be looked at when your childs statement comes up for review, the wording is far to ambiguous as it stands. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oracle Report post Posted January 14, 2006 Wise words from he who knows best Good advice Phasmid. I have the words quantified and specified now tattooed on my forehead Carole Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phasmid Report post Posted January 14, 2006 I think I have 'Mug' tattoed on mine most of the time Carole, occasionaly swapped for 'I'll do it - just ask' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Suze Report post Posted January 14, 2006 Phasmid.............thats exactly what I thought, too ambiguous ...........we have a review in April and it shall be changed, I,ll do my utmost .But if I did,nt have you I,d be in the same position I was in 2 yrs ago when after rejecting the initial statement I was so pleased to get this , thankful for anything . .Thankyou so much for your advice.Suzex. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UltraMum Report post Posted January 14, 2006 It states on my sons Statement that :The LEA will fund 10 hrs per wk additional classroom assistance to help focus/organise structured playground activities and support programmes....................(he also has 3 more hours in the form of typing and specialist literacy),...................My question is what does that mean exactly???..............An assistant was employed for those 10 hrs when his statement came through 2yrs ago.She works tues, weds, thurs, .Now a letter came home from school explaining that his class were to be split into 3 on tues, weds, thurs, during literacy and maths.His class teacher will take one group, the head another, and the lady that works with my son will take the 3rd.Can anyone see a problem here?,and if I complain do I have a leg to stand on? Strange that these "booster" classes have been implemented on the 3 mornings my son has an assistant. If this lady is taking his 'group' during literacy and maths then I fail to see how she can also be helping focus/organise structured playground activities and support programmes I think a letter to the head would be in order - to query how the school plan to continue to implement this provision in your son's statement - as the provision paid for and specified by the LEA now appears to be being used to provide booster classes. Point out that you would be happy to find out that you are labouring under a misapprehension but that this is how it appears at the moment with the information that you have. It'll be interesting to see what reply you get .... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Helen Report post Posted January 16, 2006 (edited) CA is not exclusive to your child where 1-1 would be. I know of a few occasions when the Senco and/or teaching staff would deliberately disregard the Statement when it came to 1:1 support. I was supposed to work on a 1:1 basis with a statemented child but the newly qualified class teacher was determined to put five other SEN children with me, these children had various difficulties. I was instructed initially by the classteacher and then by the Senco and when I disagreed with their instructions I went to the headteacher to explain the situation. The head asked me if my 1:1 was meeting his targets and when I confirmed that he was, the head told me that I had to take my instructions from the class teacher. (The matter didn't end there... ) A few of my friends are LSAs, they too have been in a similar position. My hubby and I went to our son's first parents evening in comp and when we spoke to one particular teacher he was absolutely furious that our son's LSA hadn't been present for the majority of the XXXXXXX lessons - the teacher told us that he knew the LSA hadn't been absent on the days that she should have provided support to our son because he had checked her attendance signature in the signing in book. This teacher wanted us to take the matter further with the Senco there and then. We didn't need prompting. My husband and I went to the Senco to clarify the situation, the Senco made up some rubbish explanation, but we knew she had lied to us because I immediately found faults with the explanation. We had to take the matter further with the LEA. Edited January 17, 2006 by Helen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phasmid Report post Posted January 16, 2006 This the very reason why it is important to get that statement wording pinned right down to the very last full stop! Give some schools an inch and they take as many miles as they can squeeze. Whilst it is ok to use a 1-1 with more than one pupil for thngs such as social skills if it says 1-1 then the primary focus should, in fact must be, the child with the statement that says 1-1. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
