Does the repeated presumption that any child with any form of SEND cannot be expected manage their own behaviour do children a disservice?
Does the repeated presumption that any child with any form of SEND cannot be expected manage their own behaviour do children a disservice?
I have an example of a school that denied a SEN child to go on an end of term reward trip The reason was low absence. The child was in partial care and visited their one parent for a week, in term, who was working away. Complex reasons, but for the benefit of child the trip was much needed. Then, once back, this child was sick due to their SEN, for a week. Classroom behaviour impeccable, progress great, but attendance "behaviour" needing improvement, so was denied the trip. The child's EHCP had a specific reference to social development with peers. Impact = There was a complaint to the school and the child totally disengaged for the rest of the term, including asking what's point in going if don't get reward for working hard. I hasten to add the school is a great one and did learn from this, they toed the line in the year, but noted a slight shift the following year. So does the repeated presumption that removal of end of school trips, where there is no danger, as sanctions, work? Does the repeated assumption that such "school" behaviour does not impact patent and child engagement, when there are national issues on attendance, correct?
@MichaelT1979 A much more problematic issue is that there is an all-too-common assumption that children with very specific, diagnosed special or additional needs are expected to comply with all sorts of expectations regardless of their challenges and with their needs often not being met.
@MichaelT1979 And it’s such a broad term used as Warwick uses it here we have no notion of what it means or refers to.
@MichaelT1979 Does the repeated presumption that SEND pupils can be sanctioned and punished out of their SEND do children a disservice?
@MichaelT1979 Does anyone make such an assumption?
@MichaelT1979 That is not the presumption, we only ask that a child's needs are considered and that consideration is given to what is causing the behaviour.