´óÏó´«Ã½

UPDATE ON SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

Comments

1. At 05:03 PM on 14 May 2007, wrote:

   Good!

   It's a scandal, particularly for the party that patronised us with:

   "Education, education, education..."

   Fifi

2. At 05:09 PM on 14 May 2007, wrote:

   Re; Vyle -

   Due to Eddies copius posting some of the threads are disappearing - I'd be interested in an answer to my question on 'I Know'

   /blogs/pm/2007/05/i_know.shtml

3. At 05:18 PM on 14 May 2007, Frank Sudlow wrote:

   Great that Tony is reminding us of his education promise, but what a shame that he should look at Northampton Academy:
   In visting Northampton's Acadamy he visited a school which has broken all records in it's exclusions. It's excluded more than a full class of kids this year alone!! What sort of committment is that to providing excellent eduaction for the most deprived??

   The Academy is the nearest school to my house, yet many of the children in my area are denyed a place in the school in favour of the middle class kids from the other side of town - others are excluded and handed back to the Local Authority without any penalty to the school.

   They make little or NO commitment to supporting kids with Special Education Needs in the town, having taken over from a school which used to be excellent in this essential work.

   The result - other schools nearby are having to pick up their rejects and struggling as a result.

   The Academy has added nothing to the overall education of the town and caused real damage to provision in the immediate area

4. At 05:23 PM on 14 May 2007, Loretta Grace wrote:

   One of the moves Tony Blair made when first elected to the office of Prime Minister, was to cut back on provision for children with special educational needs by the encouragement of 'inclusion'. By cutting back on the finances available to Local Education Authorities for Special Needs Provision, 'inclusion' has been promoted DESPITE the needs of the pupils and to the detriment of many of them; not what the Statementing process of Baroness Warnock intended. Rather than a nurturing, safe and secure environment where their educational and social needs are supported, skills learnt and they are prepared for life after school, many of them have been thrust into a school consisting of a large mass of pupils, where they experience failure and are open to being ostricised and bullied. It is interesting that many school are now setting up 'autistic units' that is: special schools by another name, in order to provide for those on the autistic spectrum for whom life can be a very frightening existence in the best of environments.

   If we really care for those with special needs, we really need to consider providing at least adequately for them in childhood; when they get to adulthood, it is even harder for them.

5. At 05:50 PM on 14 May 2007, Tricia wrote:

   All areas of special needs eduation are chronically underfunded and under-resourced. The statementing process is a debacle, it can take years, with appeals at each and every stage and can cost parents many thousands of pounds to attain the support for their child that is every child's fundamental right - an education. Not all parent know how to access their rights, or have enough residual energy, or the financial means to engage in the 'battle'. To imply that there has been any improvement to this 'system' that there isn't a problem is childish. Society cannot go on allowing this to be pushed aside, it impacts on the education that all our children received, if Gordon Brown seriously wants to improve the level of qualifications attained by children this must be addressed. The cost to Society for failing these children is huge - billions, yet teachers are still not being given training in how to educate our special needs children. It costs very little to train a teacher properly. Why do the Government continue to waste the tax payers money??????

6. At 05:52 PM on 14 May 2007, CHRIS PATTY wrote:

   I only cought the very end of interview with T. Blair, and have missed this on-going discussion, because I had my grandchildren staying. This was only possible because they are home-educated, so lost no schooling in the process. My beef is that the several thousand of home-ed children are discriminated against financially by the state. Each child in the state system is allocated thousands of pounds a year without a single tiny flich. Home-ed children get no money, no rights of access to educational facillities, equipment or resources. Parents are unable to work, esp. if single,and mant are, so live at the lowest level of society - not the little rich kids often thought to make the numbers. They have no rights to sports facillities, and are not even given access to state education buildings. How about access to gyms, halls, equipment, etc. out of hours, in holidays, etc.? Oh I hear the voices raised, esp. health and safety, loud with "reasons" against this, and do understand this, but they are not insummountable. After all home-educators are responsible adults.
   It was a pleasure to have my girls, esp. one who would be classed as special needs- possibly dispraxia- who could not cope with formal time scales and regimens necessary to keep a school functioning, yet in the car she discovered the tricks of the 10 and 11 times tables, and other maths tricks, then applied it by sending her on immaginary shopping trips. By the time we'd been to Cleetorpes and back she was so excited by maths that she bought a note book to write everything down in. Her younger sister was in the car and picked up on what we were doing and started to join in. Neither of these would have had such fun in a classroom as they did shouting q and a 's accross the boating lake, and we took inhistory as there was a steam and vintage vehicle show on. However this was only possible because I financed it. Home-educators should be recognised, payed accordingly and offered assistance. Home-ed. groups exchange skills and teach each other, pass on and share equipment, knowledge and transport but need help from the state. Instead they just don't exist on the schooling plans at all.
   Thank you
   Chris

7. At 06:05 PM on 14 May 2007, stewart dakers wrote:

   what is disturbing about the coverage on SEN is the failure of reporters to acquaint themselves sufficiently with the material; for instance, think of the impact of TB beinbg confronted with the exclusion figures for Northampton ? These are crucial opportunities to confront political banality with real-life, rock face injustice, and we parents rely on journalists to put the suited desk jockeys on the spot.
   Also, I`m surprised nopt to see any reference to IPSEA,the country`s foremost advocacy charity for SEN; they are essential to parents,

8. At 06:09 PM on 14 May 2007, pc wrote:

   It should not be forgotten that the policy of 'inclusion' was / is based on financial considerations rather than the appropriate care being provided for special needs children. Who has been holding the purse strings? Not Mr 'nothing-to-do-with-me-mate' Blair who was interviewed today but his presumed successor Gordon Brown.

   Perhaps Mr Brown could explain the rationale behind this failure of New Labour's 'education x 3' policy and more importantly what and how he proposes to resolve the issues.

9. At 06:57 PM on 14 May 2007, Gillian wrote:

   Stewart Dakers (7) I totally agree with your point about reporters/journalists confronting politicians with questions directly arising out of the visit they are making.
   If a question to a politician is to have maximum impact it must be immediate and concrete, not something thrown in out of context. In my opinion, it should be something that the politician could reasonally be expected to have been briefed about for that particular visit. It should arise out of the reporter's own research. The audience would then be given a true insight into what was spin, and what was honest.
   You are right to suggest that the Academy's exclusion figures woud have been an ideal opportunity to have put this into practice and to have truly set the record straight.

10. At 09:08 AM on 15 May 2007, Pat Smith wrote:

    Tony Blair's comments ranged from broad generalisations to the very specific comments about that one school, which would not be typical at all of most SEN provision.

    He talked vaguely about the need to do something. Well he's had all these years!!!!! OK, (sigh) if it is a given that we really didn't know about SENs, about the crisis situation for our children and for their carers all this time, and now he is aware, and going to provide something, what and when????
    This is a current crisis, tragedy ...

    He hoped we would not listen too carefully. He hoped we would put words and meanings together which didn't belong together.

    Nice one Tony. Very good use of evasive deflecting misleading language.

    As to us only just becoming aware of certain special needs - give me strength!!! Pull the other one.
    I and many others have been emailing ministers, MPs, LEA officers etc for years. The wet indifferent deflective evasive responses made for despair.
    The information has been out there.
    Tony and all your ministers - where have you been all this time??? Where???
    The information you needed has been only too well documented in all the forms parents have to fill in for LEAs, from teachers, SENCOs etc. From tribunals etc.

    Why didn't they consult with education researchers in universities. It's all out there.

    How does Tony Blair inform his SEN policy?

    Please don't believe they didn't know about the need.
    They have actively and cynically resisted providing diagnosis and support for years, you can tell this from the cunning and knowing way they evade diagnosis and proivision.

11. At 10:49 AM on 15 May 2007, Tricia wrote:

    Ok, so we are all in agreement SEN provision is inadequate. There are 1.5 million children recognised as having some sort of special educational need in the system, year-in year-out. By my calculations that is 3 million parents and potentially 6 million grandparents who are affected by the issue as we speak. Are we getting the size of the issue? I fail to understand why we are still in the dark ages on this and how any Government is allowed to continue to sweep this under the carpet. The statistics are resonably constant so how we address the education of these children is not going to go away. SEN is not FIT FOR PURPOSE, please sign our petition on the pm's website. Eddie, why isn't the media doing more to raise the profile of this woeful situation? When we all become call centre operatives because India and China have stronger economies and better educated people, will we all cry into our hands asking where it all went wrong?

12. At 11:37 AM on 15 May 2007, Pat Smith wrote:

    I would like Eddie to ask the PM:

    When children with SENs have to be withdrawn from school because they cannot cope or are distressed, and have to be taught at home, (because the choice is largely mainstream or nothing), how do LEAs and central government monitor their progress?

    How are they counted, and does this figure appear in any official education stats?

    I would guess, myself, that they are conveniently "lost" to the system.

    
    

13. At 11:38 AM on 15 May 2007, Simon wrote:

    The comments about exclusions from academies are right on the mark. A question that needs asking is who pays for the children excluded from academies? The answer is the local authority. When children are ecluded from maintained schools the LA can claw back money to pay for alternative provision. That doesn't appear to be the case with Academies. Each excluded child that cannot get a place in an alternative school costs the local tax payers £10k and Academies do not contribute a penny to that.

14. At 12:46 PM on 15 May 2007, Guy Shinner wrote:

    Tony Blair's legacy tour...... how does he justify the expense to the tax payer of this series of trips around the country. The main aim seems to be to tell everyone what an amazing success he has been. I do not want my money spent on his ego massaging tour. Where is the benefit to the tax payer?
    As global warming is part of his "legacy" is there not the tinies bit of irony in the fact that he is flying around the country in a helicopter and presumably internationaly in a plane. Will he be telling us how he has saved the planet???