|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Diagnosing 'learning difficulties' -or worse- in children
|
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
oldandrew, you should probably read a little further down the wikipedia article and see the origin of the term to understand why it is in fact an example of metaphor.
In the meantime, as this thread is increasingly reminding me of Brer Rabbit and the tar-baby I am going to disengage, since however hard one tries the tar baby will go on saying nothing.
[ 13. September 2010, 18:52: Message edited by: BroJames ]
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
Don't play the victim with me. You joined the discussion claiming you knew the international experts and read neurological research papers. Now you don't understand what a "logical fallacy" is and can't even manage to use a dictionary or look it up on line. And that's without getting on to the bizarre story of your missing brain part.
Either you were having us on at the start or you are having us on, now. Either way, you might want to stick to engaging with the arguments rather than making everything about you in the future.
amber. also joined the discussion pointing out her particular ASD issues, about which you appear to know little. If you had read her post carefully you would understand that the term "straw man" was what she didn't understand.
She also didn't understand what a logical fallacy was, which is what I was referring to.
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
If you understood the issues around ASD you would appreciate why that kind of language is difficult for her.
This is getting ridiculous now. She didn't know what a straw man is. She didn't misinterpret it, she just didn't know what it meant. That is not a symptom of ASD, that is a symptom of not knowing what it means.
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
If you understood ASD you might have some appreciation for her expertise. You might also be less likely to be free in making personal accusations that she is 'playing victim', with the implication that she is somehow acting in bad faith.
Oh for pity's sake. By anybody's standard she can dish it out but not take it.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
oldandrew, you should probably read a little further down the wikipedia article and see the origin of the term to understand why it is in fact an example of metaphor.
Oh for pity's sake.
The origins of a name cannot make every use of the name a metaphor rather than a name.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142
|
Posted
As oldandrew is apparently continuing to deny the problems I have, thanks to the embarrassment of me being autistic, I am withdrawing from the debate. The prayer chain might yield clues in why I'm not debating clearly enough to impress him.
Posts: 5102 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
As oldandrew is apparently continuing to deny the problems I have,
Hey, you've just attributed to me an opinion I don't have.
Do you know what that's called?
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
thanks to the embarrassment of me being autistic,
I guess the "playing the victim" thing is habitual now.
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
I am withdrawing from the debate.
Don't leave any bits of your brain behind as you go...
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
This is an interesting, anecdotal, book on ADHD. It has some case studies of people who were labelled at school 'naughty' 'lazy' etc who actually were strugglimg with executive function differences.
Delivered from Distraction is another one which I come back to again and again.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pottage
Shipmate
# 9529
|
Posted
Interesting thread.
I've learned there's a lot more SEN provision within schools than I would have thought. But that makes it all the more surprising that (anecdotally I know, but it's what I have to go on) so many children with evident needs seem not to have them met. Or perhaps only have their needs met adequately after their parents have expended a considerable amount of time, money and emotional reserves forcing the issue through tribunal.
The SEN system seems to be open to abuse on all fronts. Anecdotally, pushy parents seek to have their child treated as dyslexic in order to game the exam system. To judge from the perplexing disparities between some adjacent schools' SEN statistics, some teachers shunt every vaguely plausible child into School Action so that when these children go on to do moderately well in examinations the school's measure of comparative added value is enhanced.
But although I would accept oldandrew's thesis that education rather than social engineering should be the focus of SEN provision in schools I think I've also learned that teachers may not be the best people to decide what accommodations someone with (for instance) an ASD might reasonably need. A well written Individual Education Plan might, for instance remind a class teacher that idioms as well as metaphors are opaque to many people with autism.
Posts: 701 | From: middle England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Liopleurodon
Mighty sea creature
# 4836
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by JimC:
I worry about sounding offensive here but...
A lot of children get anxious about school and don't particularly like loud noise - both ASD and non ASD. I'm not saying I'm unsympathetic but if we try to cater for every single child who experiences normal emotions in the way you suggest we'd never get anything done.
Worse, if you were unfortunate enough to attend my last school you'd be bullied for wearing the ear defenders. Some of the children doing the bullying would certainly be on the SEN register labelled with EBD or ESBD conditions.
Not offended ![[Smile]](smile.gif) I know a lot of kids get anxious about school. The thing is that if that anxiety is enough to make their lives a constant misery, generally someone should at least be asking the question of whether anything can be done to lessen that anxiety. If something can be done fairly easily, then it's a good idea to do it. We do this (or should do this) for kids who are anxious because they're being bullied, for instance.
I think it would be possible to persuade primary school aged kids not to bully because someone has ear defenders, or a wheelchair, or is a Sikh boy with long hair - the latter two occurred at my primary school and everyone understood that you didn't take the piss. I recognise that it's harder with older students but noise is less of an issue at secondary school. Moreover, it's not merely a case of "disliking" loud noise. I find loud noises physically painful, like someone drilling into my brain. It's such that tbh I probably would have picked ear defenders with bullying if that had been an option.
When you become an adult, you can avoid a career path which is incompatible with an ASD. I could never work somewhere loud and unpredictable or where I needed first class people-reading skills. I have a job that fits. You can't do that with school. School just is what it is.
Posts: 1921 | From: Lurking under the ship | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pottage:
A well written Individual Education Plan might, for instance remind a class teacher that idioms as well as metaphors are opaque to many people with autism.
Oh for pity's sake. It's the name of it, not a figure of speech. You really have managed to pick the wrong SEN condition here to try and catch me out with. I have successfully taught plenty of children on the autistic spectrum without having to reject all formal terminology that allowed for equivocation.
I really am the last person on earth to use a metaphor conversationally, and even my idioms are pretty pedestrian.
(That is pedestrian in the sense of lacking in imagination, rather than literally walking around. Just in case anybody was confused there.)
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trudy Scrumptious
BBE Shieldmaiden
# 5647
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
Don't leave any bits of your brain behind as you go...
As this whole conversation has such potential for arousing hurt feelings and becoming personal, it is sometime a difficult judgment call to know where to draw the line. This comment, however, is definitely over the line of personal attack.
Please, everyone, let's try to stick to debating the issues, not the people involved. Attacking people rather than issues is an example of ad hominem, another classic logical fallacy.
Trudy Scrumptious, Purgatory Host
--------------------
Books and things.
I lied. There are no things. Just books.
Posts: 7428 | From: Closer to Paris than I am to Vancouver | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
As this whole conversation has such potential for arousing hurt feelings and becoming personal, it is sometime a difficult judgment call to know where to draw the line. This comment, however, is definitely over the line of personal attack.
It is not intended as a personal attack at all, and I apologise if anybody thought it was some kind of insult. It is a reference to Amber's bizarre claim earlier to have a bit of her brain missing. Perhaps you missed that.
You may also have missed Doc Tor calling me "just another nutbar". How about Bro James describing me as "the tarbaby" and making comments about English not being my subject? Or amber accusing me of mocking her disability? How about Chill accusing me of an alarming lack of factual knowledge? Or 3rdfooter calling me arrogant and suggesting I leave my ivory tower?
Or were none of these over the line of personal attack?
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trudy Scrumptious
BBE Shieldmaiden
# 5647
|
Posted
Oldandrew,
I can assure you that I have read the entire thread with great care. Upon reflection, I think you are correct that the "nutbar" and "tarbaby" comments were also personal attacks, which is why my initial impulse to issue a general warning to all was probably the correct one.
If you still think your comment to amber was not a personal attack and would like to debate my ruling as a host, please feel free to lodge a complaint in the Styx rather than discussing it further on this thread.
I think this is an interesting and important topic between several well-informed people with strong, though divergent, opinions, and would be much better without the ad hominem attacks.
Trudy Scrumptious, Purgatory Host
--------------------
Books and things.
I lied. There are no things. Just books.
Posts: 7428 | From: Closer to Paris than I am to Vancouver | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pottage
Shipmate
# 9529
|
Posted
For pity's sake I was acknowledging that you have made some valid points amongst your extravagant ranting against the entire "SEN racket" and all its works! Although I like to think that in your place I would not have needed to browbeat amber to prove my mettle.
Although I understood what you were referring to as a straw man, in my working environment the expression would be understood to refer to someone who isn't worth suing.
Posts: 701 | From: middle England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
There are several problems being conflated here. Many children now in mainstream schools were within many teachers' memories taught in special schools. The funding that is now spent in mainstream schools on SEN is now much higher than it was, but the closing of special schools was a cost-cutting exercise - so both things are to some extent accurate - there is less provision and it's difficult to obtain, and that SEN departments in secondary schools are often the largest department.
There are also other challenges - the SEN budget is supposed to be made up of what was ring-fenced money allocated to specific children to fulfil their statemented needs and a percentage of the key stage 3 and 4 monies (2% or 3%). That money has never been ring fenced. Learning Support Assistants are paid for out of the statement monies which can cause a number of problems:
- Those monies do not cover the amount of support that the statemented student is entitled to - some statements come with no additional funding, or funds that have gone into the general fund and not ring-fenced;
- when there is a contractual agreement with the local authority for the provision for each statement, which includes proving that the money allocated to that student has been spent on them there's a tendency for the LSA to be attached to the child with the money - which isn't always that effective - it doesn't allow for support of a group of students and it can deskill the statemented student;
- if a LSA is paid to support a specific student (and that may well be the name on their contract) they find it difficult to see that they should be supporting other students;
- because it is a poorly paid job the people doing the jobs will vary from those who are taking a job that allows them to be around for their own children (and take time off when their children are sick) to people getting experience on their way to teaching degrees
- LSAs can get delayed at the previous lesson so arrive late at the start of the lesson when they'd be most useful;
- any child on School Action Plus was entitled to 5 hours support - that's supposed to be funded by the Key Stage monies - and parents who know about this (told by the local authority) are putting pressure on the SEN department to provide that support;
- if a student does not have a statement of special educational needs, even if they are setting fire to the place and carrying an knife, you cannot pass that child on to an EBD unit (emotional behavioural difficulties special school) so there are regular screams from all dealing with such students demanding that the SENCo does something now - all those IEPs and placement at School Action Plus are the SENCo stacking up that paperwork to get a statement. We had a few like that - EBD units do not take students unless they have a full statement at a certain level of funding;
- btw - instructions to make sure the student has written their homework in their diary is almost certainly because the parent can't read what the child writes to be able to nag and support the doing of homework - and the poor SENCo has a daily phone call from said parent insisting they find out what the homework was ...
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
There are several problems being conflated here. Many children now in mainstream schools were within many teachers' memories taught in special schools. The funding that is now spent in mainstream schools on SEN is now much higher than it was, but the closing of special schools was a cost-cutting exercise - so both things are to some extent accurate - there is less provision and it's difficult to obtain, and that SEN departments in secondary schools are often the largest department.
There are also other challenges - the SEN budget is supposed to be made up of what was ring-fenced money allocated to specific children to fulfil their statemented needs and a percentage of the key stage 3 and 4 monies (2% or 3%). That money has never been ring fenced. Learning Support Assistants are paid for out of the statement monies which can cause a number of problems:
Now THIS is very useful and helpful information and perspective. Sadly, it probably comes to late in the game as the thread went south days ago and is, I suspect, irretrievably doomed for the nether-regions right about now. I know I'm feeling pretty hellish about it.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Now THIS is very useful and helpful information and perspective.
It is indeed! Thank you, Curiosity killed!
Let me make sure I understand it right:
In the UK, it sounds like there are two kinds of "special needs" -- kids with "statements" and kids without.
If you get a kid with a statement at your school, you also get funds to meet their needs. Not enough funds, but maybe almost enough.
The kids with a statement also come with an LSA to help teach them. Because the plan was to have the LSA do whatever specialized teaching was required, the regular teachers haven't been properly trained to teach kids with special needs. Of course, the LSA may not be properly trained, either. But it sounds like this is set up to guarantee "turf wars" between teachers and LSAs.
And then you've got the kids who are struggling in school but don't have statements. There's no money designated for them. So any resources they get are seen as taking away resources for "ordinary" kids.
Is that about right?
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
infinite_monkey
Shipmate
# 11333
|
Posted
Very interesting!
It sounds, from this helpful information from Curiosity Killed... and a bit of internet research, as if the "Statement" is more or less analogous to the American IEP. Which is all about meeting criteria for one of 14 disabling conditions, which a kid needs to present with at an educationally significant level--it needs to meet established criteria, and it needs to have a major deleterious impact on the child's schooling.
Are the kids who have some pretty obvious learning needs, but don't have Statements, typically undiagnosed at this point? Previously tested, but found to not qualify? Something else?
I agree with Josephine and have found it in my own practice: it's hard when a) the kids without statements still need extra help and b) the "extra help" comes as a learning support assistant who may not have the training and/or supervision needed to deliver consistent quality services.
I guess not much of this directly relates to the initial question of the advantages and disadvantages of diagnosing milder disabilities: to tie it back, I guess I'd say it's important to get a clear sense, for each child, of what the "value added" of SEN/IEP participation would be, and how it plays out in each school or local educational system.
I've seen many a kid with a milder condition doing just fine for much if not most of their primary school experience, thanks to good, responsive teaching in the general education classroom and teachers going above and beyond to communicate, across the grades, about what works and what doesn't for the kid. I worry, though, sometimes about what may happen when the child goes from one carefully selected teacher who spends 6 hours a day with him, to the upper grades where the child has a different teacher every hour and a room that's sometimes twice as full of other kids. That's often when the stuff that's "just good teaching' might need to be documented as part of the child's services plan, to make sure those practices don't get lost in the shuffle.
--------------------
His light was lifted just above the Law,
And now we have to live with what we did with what we saw.
--Dar Williams, And a God Descended
Obligatory Blog Flog: www.otherteacher.wordpress.com
Posts: 1423 | From: left coast united states | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142
|
Posted
(returning to add for clarity: well, thanks to the wonders of modern day scans, one can tell if a bit of brain is missing. Thanks to brain injury before birth which they believe led to the autism, dyspraxia, faceblindness and specific learning difficulties I have, I really do have such a missing bit, it seems. I find it bizarre, but it's still true. I cope mostly. Sometimes quite badly, which is no-one's fault really.)
Posts: 5102 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
JimC
Shipmate
# 13842
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
- Those monies do not cover the amount of support that the statemented student is entitled to - some statements come with no additional funding, or funds that have gone into the general fund and not ring-fenced;
- when there is a contractual agreement with the local authority for the provision for each statement, which includes proving that the money allocated to that student has been spent on them there's a tendency for the LSA to be attached to the child with the money - which isn't always that effective - it doesn't allow for support of a group of students and it can deskill the statemented student;
- if a LSA is paid to support a specific student (and that may well be the name on their contract) they find it difficult to see that they should be supporting other students;
- because it is a poorly paid job the people doing the jobs will vary from those who are taking a job that allows them to be around for their own children (and take time off when their children are sick) to people getting experience on their way to teaching degrees
- LSAs can get delayed at the previous lesson so arrive late at the start of the lesson when they'd be most useful;
- any child on School Action Plus was entitled to 5 hours support - that's supposed to be funded by the Key Stage monies - and parents who know about this (told by the local authority) are putting pressure on the SEN department to provide that support;
- if a student does not have a statement of special educational needs, even if they are setting fire to the place and carrying an knife, you cannot pass that child on to an EBD unit (emotional behavioural difficulties special school) so there are regular screams from all dealing with such students demanding that the SENCo does something now - all those IEPs and placement at School Action Plus are the SENCo stacking up that paperwork to get a statement. We had a few like that - EBD units do not take students unless they have a full statement at a certain level of funding;
- btw - instructions to make sure the student has written their homework in their diary is almost certainly because the parent can't read what the child writes to be able to nag and support the doing of homework - and the poor SENCo has a daily phone call from said parent insisting they find out what the homework was ...
1. Counter to my experience where classroom teachers are hassled by various SEN interest groups to spend time and money making very specific resources (sometimes of dubious value) from their department budgets.
2. I'm surprised at this since I get the impression that most around here would like more money targeted at statemented children not less.
3. Agreed.
4. This is unprofessional on the part of the TA and possibly the teacher delaying them.
5. I don't have any experience of this.
6. I thought having an actual statement made it harder for schools to remove students from the mainstream.
7. This was aimed at me and I can almost certainly tell you it is not because the parent can't read. Such statements are there because the students are disorganised. 1) I know plenty of children who are disorganised but don't have an IEP. 2) Most good teachers will check that students have written H/W in planners and give clear instructions anyway. This is paperwork for the sake of it.
Posts: 181 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
JimC
Shipmate
# 13842
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
(returning to add for clarity: well, thanks to the wonders of modern day scans, one can tell if a bit of brain is missing. Thanks to brain injury before birth which they believe led to the autism, dyspraxia, faceblindness and specific learning difficulties I have, I really do have such a missing bit, it seems. I find it bizarre, but it's still true. I cope mostly. Sometimes quite badly, which is no-one's fault really.)
Hang on. A while ago you were producing evidence implying that autism is caused by structural and functional differences within the brain.
Now you are saying that your autism was likely caused by you losing part of your brain in an accident.
Clearly most autism sufferers will have a remarkably different brain to you which begs the question will we ever be able to sort the autistic from the non autistic by brain function alone?
Posts: 181 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
I'm sorry for linking my thoughts about Brer Rabbit and the tar baby to oldandrew in the way I did. It was a good characterization (for me) of the way this thread is working (and I'm staying out of it), but wrong to focus it on him in that way.
James
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
I'd also like to apologise - I expressed myself intemperately and shall withdraw with hostly admonishments ringing in my ears...
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
JimC - the funding that the Local Authority provides ring-fenced for a statemented student is only a part of the provision that the Local Authority expects to be accounted for that child. What you're describing as department funds is the 2% or 3% of Key Stage monies that should, by educational law, be spent on special needs resources. (2% or 3% because it varies with Key Stage and I can't be bothered to go look it up now).
In the local authority I was working, the 5 hours a week for the School Action Plus without ring-fenced funding had to be accounted for within the statement provision for the students with statements too. So the annual review for every statemented student had to show how the funding was used, including that 5 hours. For some statements, on lower funding bands, that was all the funding there was. Also for children on School Action Plus that the Local Authority were involved with, usually with specific needs like visual impairment who needed large print books and large print resources, or hearing impairments. The Specialist Teachers who came in to support those students also required an accounting of allocated funding. That's what comes out of the same pot that the departments are fighting for.
There's an OFSTED report out this morning saying that children are labelled with special needs too often -
quote:
Thousands of pupils are being wrongly labelled as having special educational needs when all they require is better teaching and support, Ofsted says.
The watchdog said up to a quarter of pupils in England identified as having special needs would not be labelled as such if schools focused more on teaching for all their children.
The good teachers who needed less support in their classrooms had a whole raft of additional resources in their classes. There was a history teacher who had all the resources differentiated and two levels of text book with different reading ages. Exercises were also differentiated, so he could hand out a task appropriate for each student and have them all feeding back to the same learning outcomes. When balancing needs and resources that don't stretch, some of the assessment made was made to place support where it was most needed. Classes like this one were the ones where I'd ask if he could cope without support when there weren't enough LSAs to go round through absence. In this case, the seating plan was planned, the behaviour control was in place, the homework was given out on slip of paper or as a worksheet to take home with instructions - so the students with visual impairments, poor reading ages, dyslexia or disorganisation through dyspraxia and ASD didn't struggle to copy it down from the board. That department also had a very good pass rate for History GCSE and students across the ability range opting to take it as they were supported by the teaching.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
fat-tony
Shipmate
# 13769
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
Is this relevant?
In that it supports a lot of what Oldandrew says.
Diagnosis made by untrained non medical professionals for a number of reasons including boosting CVA and parental pressure.
Many children are put on the SEN list and shouldn't be.
That those defending it don't seem to be able to put together a coherent argument....{though they have asked the teaching unions to comment not really the font of any knowledge regarding teachers, teaching and children. The war in Iraq; homosexuality and hating anyone to the political right of Joseph Stalin theyUnions are great on}
However it is a news report on a written report. Although some people here seem to have the time to read long tedious reports and then link to them(well I assume people read them first) I'll just wait to see what happens when the dust settles.
Posts: 74 | From: Springfield( The South) | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by JimC:
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
(returning to add for clarity: well, thanks to the wonders of modern day scans, one can tell if a bit of brain is missing. Thanks to brain injury before birth which they believe led to the autism, dyspraxia, faceblindness and specific learning difficulties I have, I really do have such a missing bit, it seems. I find it bizarre, but it's still true. I cope mostly. Sometimes quite badly, which is no-one's fault really.)
Hang on. A while ago you were producing evidence implying that autism is caused by structural and functional differences within the brain.
Now you are saying that your autism was likely caused by you losing part of your brain in an accident.
Clearly most autism sufferers will have a remarkably different brain to you which begs the question will we ever be able to sort the autistic from the non autistic by brain function alone?
Well, at the risk of having to reveal my entire medical history at this rate ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif) it wasn't a physical accident that caused the brain injury as such (I'm thinking of things like a car crash - that sort of accident), it was (I am told) the result of mum trying very very hard to abort me before birth and not quite succeeding. That's quite a difficult thing to talk about on here, and I'm doing so because it might help explain why I got upset yesterday. I'm not good at handling emotions and debate at the same time, alas. I should learn from that.
The same area is noted on the scans of other autistic individuals: they note that lesions to that area also result in autism, as do failures in connection. All of them brain-structure related, all with the same sort of end result. That bit of the brain that links the amygdala to the central processing bits of the brain located behind the ear seems to be very important indeed. If it's missing or damaged, they also notice that we can't work out how close to stand to people, and some of us are over-friendly and think everyone is a friend and chat away and reveal far too much of ourselves on public message boards ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif) And we don't seem to ever learn from our social mistakes.
I'm very much looking forward to the upcoming research from the ARC which is examining 100 individuals to get further clarity on questions like this. Anyway, gotta get hubby ready for more tests and son over to his eye specialist, so I really am very tired and would like to apologise for any errors I'm making.
Posts: 5102 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fat-tony:
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
Is this relevant?
It's interesting, for sure. The new government are likely to change things and I wouldn't be surprised if that involved putting far less money into schools for SEN.
The report says, towards the end -
"Children's Minister Sarah Teather is calling for submissions for a Green Paper on the SEN provision system.
She says she wants to overhaul the system to give more choice for parents.
The Labour government tried, under a policy of "inclusion", to place pupils with special educational needs in mainstream schools wherever possible.
The Conservative-Liberal Democrat government says, in its coalition agreement, that it will "prevent the unnecessary closure of special schools, and remove the bias towards inclusion".
Interesting times.
I am off to a school today to work with several dyslexic pupils and teach their TAs effective intervention.
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
I have been trying to craft a post for about a week, about how diagnosis develops in medical science.
Firstly very little of it is done in laboratories, and very little of it is done by designed experiment.
As I understand it, what happens is a number of case studies happen. These are done by doctors normal specialists who are very good at clinical observation. They basically describe an interesting patient who is normally quite an extreme form of the illness.
What then happens is other often equally senior doctors will describe similar patients. If enough appear then the set of symptoms gets a label.
Once this happens there is a bit of a free for all, with many doctors wondering if they have patients with these symptoms. Often during this stage the diagnosis is stretched quite widely, too widely. I think we probably are in this situation with depression at present. Its the catch all diagnosis for an awful lot of mental distress; I am pretty sure there are mental illnesses there, just I am not sure that they are all the same sort. The thing is at this stage two things happen, a broadening of the subjective diagnosis to encompass more people and a diagnosis slip whereby this broadening changes what is seen as central to the diagnosis.
However doing brain tests is probably the most difficult area of medical science. Its expensive to scan people in a huge number of ways just to see if you can pick up differences. There is also the need to scan one healthy person for every sick person. Doctors like therefore to have a point to start at.
So sometimes doctors get lucky. Someone like Amber turns up with a definite brain injury that causes the same symptoms as one of these illnesses. They know where the brain injury is, so they then can scan to see if people with this illness have unusual patterns where that injury occurs. Also the nice thing with Ambers is that we know that the brain patterns cause the behaviour, not the behaviour causes the brain pattern. That is because we know what causes the brain pattern. People like Amber are often equally subject to case studies for just this reason. If the brain is a map where you are looking for buried treasure, people like Amber allow doctors to learn where the treasure is likely to be buried.
If this is the case you have moved from subjectively reported symptoms to a clinically measurable symptoms. There is still a lot of work to be done before they become a clinical test. What sort and level of difference is indicative of the illness/disability? How do we quantify it etc. Can this test be carried out in the numbers needed?
Now you have a fairly wide spread of people diagnosed with specific disability by a subjective measure and a known clinical test for that diagnosis. Almost certainly there is going to be no perfect overlap between these two groups. An 80% to 90% overlap is actually very good. The thing is that doctors are likely to view the new method as the gold standard rather than the old subjective method.
However this is the point at which there is a change in the definition of the illness. The illness instead of being defined by subjective ratings, is defined by the clinically measurable test. However almost inevitably some people with that diagnosis will not satisfy the test, and what is more it is totally possible for there to be undiagnosed people who do. What do you go with, the clinical test or the subjective diagnosis?
Often what happens is you go with the clinical test for new diagnoses. The people who don't fall into that group are moved off to another diagnosis. Some specialist carefully characterises a severe case and the whole process starts again.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
maryjones
Shipmate
# 13523
|
Posted
And now Ofsted are in on the act, supporting oldandrew bbc news
Posts: 75 | From: Gloucestershire | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pottage:
For pity's sake I was acknowledging that you have made some valid points amongst your extravagant ranting against the entire "SEN racket" and all its works!
So? Does that somehow make it okay to go along with attacking me for not assuming that autistic people can't cope with the names of concepts not being literal descriptions? Although your comment was one of the most mild, and it's inaccuracy was probably inadvertent rather than malicious, it was going along with one of the most dishonest and unpleasant attacks.
quote:
Originally posted by Pottage:
Although I like to think that in your place I would not have needed to browbeat amber to prove my mettle.
Again, I will remind you that amber began by claiming she was in with the international experts and studied neurological research, and thought nothing of making very objectionable comments about me.
I will certainly leave her alone now, but may I suggest that if people are concerned that she can't cope with being challenged then they advise her not to claim expertise she doesn't have, or to weigh into others?
quote:
Originally posted by Pottage:
Although I understood what you were referring to as a straw man, in my working environment the expression would be understood to refer to someone who isn't worth suing.
It has a number of meanings which, can easily be looked up by anybody who is unaware of what is meant.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by maryjones:
And now Ofsted are in on the act, supporting oldandrew bbc news
I think that makes you the third person to post that link.
If anything, the BBC description of the report suggests it is less scathing than some other media have indicated. The Guardian reported that it was half of SEN students who were wrongly diagnosed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/sep/14/half-special-needs-children-misdiagnosed
Hopefully, this might cause some people to consider the possibility that I haven't actually just invented this problem, and that it won't just go away if they behave appallingly to anybody who mentions it.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jenn.
Shipmate
# 5239
|
Posted
Having read the information on this thread and the bbc news article (although I admit I haven't read any other reports on the report) my feeling is that those pupils with a statement are being properly treated. The problem appears to be with those on school action and school action plus.
Are pupils put on SA or SA+ for monitoring towards a statement, or are they put there for other reasons? Are pupils ever removed from SA? I agree with oldandrew (not something I thought I would find myself saying) that sometimes these things are used as an excuse for bad behaviour and good teaching/proper discipline would solve many of the problems. On the other hand it seems to me that proper diagnosis is worthwhile for children as the statement is the gateway to real funding and treatment.
Personally, I would push for those children on SA and SA+ to be properly assessed as soon as possible and either removed from those lists or given statements. This would enable teachers to concentrate their efforts on those who really need the help and on developing their skills for general good teaching, rather than basic intervention skills for people who have problems which aren't actually going to be helped by the interventions involved.
Posts: 2282 | From: England | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
The report is available online:
http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/Ofsted-home/Publications-and-research/Browse-all-by/Documents-by-type/Thematic-reports/The-special-e ducational-needs-and-disability-review
I have only read the summary so far, but it certainly seems to be in agreement with my key points.
Schools are putting kids on the register because of academic deficits, and because of failures of teaching and pastoral care (presumably this includes behaviour). The inspectors easily found indefensible examples of misdiagnosis and estimated that half the children on School Action would not be there if teaching was better. As for those who were identified by outside agencies (i.e. school action plus and statemented kids) the specialist "help" they got was often worthless and that the people who provided it were completely unaccountable.
I'm sure some people will claim that if we just spent even more money on the system then it would work better, but it certainly looks as though OFSTED have wised up to the SEN racket.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jenn.
Shipmate
# 5239
|
Posted
oldandrew - do you think that if the children wrongly put on those registers were removed, the statemented children would get better teaching?
Posts: 2282 | From: England | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142
|
Posted
I haven't said anything deliberately untrue, as people who know me are well aware. If anything I've underplayed the role I have because I have no wish to put my actual name to this and nor should I have to. I work with many of the international experts and have lectured alongside some of them, and I read much of their research and they explain it to me. I think it's wonderful stuff. It doesn't make me a neurobiologist and I didn't claim to be one: too many brain circuits not working correctly alas, but I know where to find the starting points for such research and that's what I point people to.
And I do have a part of my brain missing.
And, because of that and the autism, my style of debating can be random and panicky, but it is not vicious or hurtful and I never intend it to be. It can lack social context, which means it reads wrongly. For that I apologise but cannot guarantee to be able to 'soften' it with the expertise that others use, because I lack that skill when very tired and stressed out.
I hope that is relatively clear.
Posts: 5102 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
fat-tony
Shipmate
# 13769
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
Hopefully, this might cause some people to consider the possibility that I haven't actually just invented this problem,
No, some people may consider a conspiracy where you've got all of the British media to time a news story just to help you debate on an online forum. Didn't realise you had so much power old chap.
Posts: 74 | From: Springfield( The South) | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pottage
Shipmate
# 9529
|
Posted
Oldandrew, I haven't joined those who have apologised to you because I don't believe I have cause. You appear to think that I have attacked you personally in my posting on this thread, but I have read back through my posts and I disagree. It was perhaps a little petty of me to insist on demonstrating to you that 'straw man' really IS an idiomatic expression, whatever you might think, but I felt cross with you at the time because of what seemed to me to be needlessly rude treatment of amber.
I have acknowledged already that I have picked up useful and interesting information about SEN provision from your posting on this thread. With the publication of the Ofsted report today I think there may be plenty of mileage in this thread yet. I hope in particular to read what you might be thinking of contributing in response to the call for submisisons to a Green Paper. How would a better system be structured? How might it deal with difficult cases, for example where it isn't clear cut whether a child needs some special provision from the school to access education satisfactoriy or help from some other agency like social services to bring order to a chaotic home life?
Posts: 701 | From: middle England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jenn.:
Having read the information on this thread and the bbc news article (although I admit I haven't read any other reports on the report) my feeling is that those pupils with a statement are being properly treated.
No, provision for statemented kids are included in the conclusion that "this additional provision was often not of good quality and did not lead to significantly better outcomes for the child or young person."
There is less of a difference between SAP and Statemented kids in terms of funding nowadays, anyway. Some of the things on this thread have contradicted how I thought the funding worked (so I am reluctant to say anything until I have double checked my facts) but money doesn't follow statements the way it used to.
quote:
Originally posted by Jenn.:
The problem appears to be with those on school action and school action plus.
Are pupils put on SA or SA+ for monitoring towards a statement, or are they put there for other reasons?
They are put there for "help".
quote:
Originally posted by Jenn.:
Are pupils ever removed from SA?
In theory, yes. I've only seen it happen though when I worked at a school where form tutors had responsibility for the decision in some cases.
quote:
Originally posted by Jenn.:
I agree with oldandrew (not something I thought I would find myself saying) that sometimes these things are used as an excuse for bad behaviour and good teaching/proper discipline would solve many of the problems. On the other hand it seems to me that proper diagnosis is worthwhile for children as the statement is the gateway to real funding and treatment.
As I said, I don't think statements are what they were for getting funding, and the OFSTED report found that the spending on support for statemented kids often did no good.
Treatment is a medical matter not an educational one. The right to medical treatment should be a clinical matter.
quote:
Originally posted by Jenn.:
Personally, I would push for those children on SA and SA+ to be properly assessed as soon as possible and either removed from those lists or given statements.
Easier said than done. Many of the conditions are simply lists of behaviours without any clear medical cause. Diagnosis involves extensive studying of their behaviour by expensive professionals. It is a common complaint that this can't even be done for those who are severely afflicted, so doing it for 18.2% of the school population is not conceivable, which is why I have been raising the issue here of whether most of these medical conditions are actually well defined enough to be generally useful.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jenn.:
oldandrew - do you think that if the children wrongly put on those registers were removed, the statemented children would get better teaching?
I generally don't think centrally administered lists of personal entitlements help anybody. However, I recognise that they are particularly ineffective when they are stuffed full of kids who have nothing remotely resembling a disability.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pottage:
Oldandrew, I haven't joined those who have apologised to you because I don't believe I have cause.
I haven't asked you to apologise.
However, it would be nice if you recognised that the inability of some autistic people to deal with metaphor and figurative language does not normally extend to the names of things (even though names and figurative language can both be called "idioms"). As I said, when it comes to SEN then autistic conditions are what I have most experience of both professionally and socially, and I didn't take kindly to the suggestion that I was at fault and professionally deficient because I named a logical fallacy in a post to somebody with autism.
The first thing defenders of the SEN racket tend to do when teachers disagree with them is imply that they must be a bad teacher, your comment was only marginal in this and probably not worth apologising for, but I certainly feel I was entitled to challenge it and I hope you understand why.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
fat-tony
Shipmate
# 13769
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
There is less of a difference between SAP and Statemented kids in terms of funding nowadays, anyway. Some of the things on this thread have contradicted how I thought the funding worked (so I am reluctant to say anything until I have double checked my facts) but money doesn't follow statements the way it used to.
It might be a local authority issue. I'd not contradict Curiosity as from the last time I really got involved in an education debate on thie site I believe she explained she was a SENCO. I've only been in one meeting with the local authority advisor to discuss the possible admission of a statemented child as the Head and Senco were busy(not my area of direct responsibility at all). In the discussion I was being as helpfulas I could but when I asked how much money was attached to the pupil so I could work out what provision I could put in place so that the curriculum issues I'd identified could be dealt with he burst out laughing and told me that it hasn't been done like that for years. Other than feeling a trifle out of my depth I promised myself I'd look into it, but still not got round to it.
Posts: 74 | From: Springfield( The South) | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
Again, coming in from across the pond, it sounds like the current practice in the UK is that, when a child is failing academically, they're pretty much automatically referred for special education services of some sort or another. But the referral doesn't necessarily result in any sort of evaluation to determine the reason for the child's difficulties, or how to remediate or accommodate them. It just results in some rather unfocused "support."
Is that it?
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Again, coming in from across the pond, it sounds like the current practice in the UK is that, when a child is failing academically, they're pretty much automatically referred for special education services of some sort or another. But the referral doesn't necessarily result in any sort of evaluation to determine the reason for the child's difficulties, or how to remediate or accommodate them. It just results in some rather unfocused "support."
Is that it?
No.
It is an unaccountable bureaucracy sitting on a pile of resources (not necessarily money, but staffing and power). Like all bureaucracies it generates activity, and so SEN staff might look for academically weak kids to "help" but they might equally look for kids with low self-esteem or behaviour issues or suspected conditions they have just read about. In secondary they spend a lot of time on kids who have been identified by primary schools because the paperwork has already been started. Because they have these resources then teachers and managers might try and get help from them, and there is always paperwork to do, but it actually appears pretty arbitrary as to what they do in any give school, just as long as it creates the right paperwork. Sometimes they just throw their weight around, and most of the worst bullies I've encountered in teaching have been in SEN departments.
The biggest problem, though, are the true believers who genuinely think that children are perfect and everything that they do wrong is a medical or psychological problem and that they have a duty to make sure that some kids are never held responsible for their behaviour or effort, through amateur diagnoses. So you could not be more wrong in suggesting that there is a lack of "evaluation to determine the reason for the child's difficulties"; the problem is that there is too much evaluation. Nobody is ever bad or thick, they all have a condition and nobody is allowed to push or punish the child while the endless evaluation process for the non-existent condition is ongoing.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pottage
Shipmate
# 9529
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
However, it would be nice if you recognised that the inability of some autistic people to deal with metaphor and figurative language does not normally extend to the names of things (even though names and figurative language can both be called "idioms"). As I said, when it comes to SEN then autistic conditions are what I have most experience of both professionally and socially, and I didn't take kindly to the suggestion that I was at fault and professionally deficient because I named a logical fallacy in a post to somebody with autism.
The first thing defenders of the SEN racket tend to do when teachers disagree with them is imply that they must be a bad teacher, your comment was only marginal in this and probably not worth apologising for, but I certainly feel I was entitled to challenge it and I hope you understand why.
Actually, I didn't say that all figurative language is problematic for all autistic people. I know perfectly well that this isn't the case, so I wouldn't, and didn't say so. My comment was aimed solely at what seemed to be a purely bloody-minded refusal in various earlier posts to accept that you had used a figurative expression. It wasn't an attack on you in your professional capacity. Aside from anything else I have absolutely no idea who you are, what you teach, to whom, or where. But if you are accustomed to facing that sort of attack when you discuss this issue IRL then, yes, I suppose I can see why you might be peculiarly sensitive to even a perception of criticism. I hope it won't prevent you from addressing my questions.
Posts: 701 | From: middle England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pottage:
My comment was aimed solely at what seemed to be a purely bloody-minded refusal in various earlier posts to accept that you had used a figurative expression. It wasn't an attack on you in your professional capacity.
The precise distinction between an attack on me and criticism of my bloody minded refusal to accept the content of an attack on me has escaped me.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
fat-tony - all Local Authorities were moving to provision mapping when I was still a SENCo a couple of years back. I was carefully using the past tense, but we are talking recent past and it takes a while to move attitudes on and change things, so a lot of what I was saying was relevant as to where we are. This Local Authority, the funding is still linked to students, but it's changing. Me, I've got out too, I'm back teaching, but in a special unit. I like students, not politics and paperwork.
Josephine, it really depends. We had feeder primary schools who did no placing of students on the SEN register and no paperwork, which meant when the little love we'd just acquired from them was one of those who was waving knives around and setting things on fire we had no evidence of previous behaviour to build a case on.
Jenn - I took kids off the SEN register as well as put them on, but I started from evidence of where they were and how they were coping. I also didn't get to do this independently - I did it in consultation with the heads of school and SMT (senior management team) because there were huge implications to what the SEN register looked like in recent years when the funding stream has been in the process of changing. If the school is in a deprived area, and this school was with 5% of all students with statements and 30% of the school in the bottom 10% academically, plus other indicators of deprivation, then having an SEN register that did not reflect this reality was going to mean funding dropping dramatically across the school. I did post something on this several pages back.
For a student to qualify for a statement of special educational needs you had to prove that the school has put support in place at various levels and that support has not worked - so some time at School Action Plus level of support. It's a massive paperchase to prove that things are being done. The annual review of a statement also looks at the level of support required and whether that level of support can be cut - sadly, in my experience, it meant the money went but the reporting did not.
The problem with any form of provision mapping or SEN provision in mainstream is that it's only going to work when all teachers are convinced that there is a need to support all the students in their classes - so they have differentiated their materials, have seating plans and behaviour plans in place, are 'teaching well'. What we regularly hear from teachers is that many students should not be in mainstream and they shouldn't have to teach them. And that the teacher training provision also spends time teaching how to differentiate and support a range of students in the classroom - which anecdotally is not always happening for secondary teachers.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pottage
Shipmate
# 9529
|
Posted
I don't want to derail this any further with our tangential duologue. I'll join the others who have withdrawn from engaging with you on this thread oldandrew. Perhaps I will glean answers to the questions I have asked from your exchanges with others.
Posts: 701 | From: middle England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Again, coming in from across the pond, it sounds like the current practice in the UK is that, when a child is failing academically, they're pretty much automatically referred for special education services of some sort or another. But the referral doesn't necessarily result in any sort of evaluation to determine the reason for the child's difficulties, or how to remediate or accommodate them. It just results in some rather unfocused "support."
Is that it?
No.
It is an unaccountable bureaucracy sitting on a pile of resources (not necessarily money, but staffing and power). Like all bureaucracies it generates activity, and so SEN staff might look for academically weak kids to "help" but they might equally look for kids with low self-esteem or behaviour issues or suspected conditions they have just read about. In secondary they spend a lot of time on kids who have been identified by primary schools because the paperwork has already been started. Because they have these resources then teachers and managers might try and get help from them, and there is always paperwork to do, but it actually appears pretty arbitrary as to what they do in any give school, just as long as it creates the right paperwork. Sometimes they just throw their weight around, and most of the worst bullies I've encountered in teaching have been in SEN departments.
The biggest problem, though, are the true believers who genuinely think that children are perfect and everything that they do wrong is a medical or psychological problem and that they have a duty to make sure that some kids are never held responsible for their behaviour or effort, through amateur diagnoses. So you could not be more wrong in suggesting that there is a lack of "evaluation to determine the reason for the child's difficulties"; the problem is that there is too much evaluation. Nobody is ever bad or thick, they all have a condition and nobody is allowed to push or punish the child while the endless evaluation process for the non-existent condition is ongoing.
You know, oldandrew, if you really want people to understand and sympathize with your point of view, you could try being less combative and more informative. I suspect there are a lot of people who might agree with a lot of what you have to say, but your way of saying it is so hostile that it's difficult to get to the content.
At this point, I'm genuinely curious about how special education works in the UK, both in theory and in practice. I know something about it, because I know parents in the UK who have kids with significant disabilities. Their experience hasn't sounded all that different from what we deal with here on this side of the pond. But it sounds like there's more to it than that.
I think the fact that we use similar words may obscure the fact that we may not be talking about the same things. For example, it sounds like the excessive evaluations that you're complaining about aren't anything that I would recognize as evaluations at all.
So, if you wouldn't mind toning down the rhetoric a bit, I'd like to understand your POV. I think it's quite possible that we don't disagree with each other as much as you might assume.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
The problem with any form of provision mapping or SEN provision in mainstream is that it's only going to work when all teachers are convinced that there is a need to support all the students in their classes
As I said earlier, the usual name for a treatment that only works if everybody believes in it, is a "placebo".
The reality is that SEN departments label kids as having a condition because they misbehave and this makes it harder to control the child. When teachers have enough of this and decide that the SEN department should do something about the problem they have caused, they then come in and blame the teacher for not "supporting" the child.
Thank God, there are signs that the game is now up.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
