is this possible with my son?

Nicki

pigpen wrote: »

it is indeed...

Nicki.. at our primary it is the SENCO who has responsibility for the G&T as well.. I was led to believe that is the norm..

It can be the norm for the same person to do SEN and G and T provision but the budgets and parameters for the two are very different. You can't look at what's available for an SEN child in terms of funding or support and demand that for a G and T child, because they are also "special" but lots of parents try to do so.

I personally also find it patronising and complacent in the extreme to say "All children are special" when discussing educational support, as some children have disabilities which make them a heck of a lot more special than others, and in need of extra help.

pigpen

I understand they have different budgets.. but never even considered the same person wouldnt do both roles.

that said.. DD3 is on the SAP for literacy and on g&t for dance/drama.. I am definitely more militant in getting her up to par on the SAP than I am in pushing her drama!

It is nice all childrens achievements are acknowledged but I agree there is so much more the child with difficulties needs in more than just an academic way as well.. it isnt fair to compare the 2. That doesnt mean they are more deserving of a good education it means they are needing more support to get that education which G&T children dont necessarily need.

main stream settings with children who are borderline special school is probaby where the least support is.. at least here that seems to be the problem.. noone wants responsibility for these children.

In many ways I am very thankful my girls have physical problems which while they cant get about as well as their peers they can enjoy every other aspect and they wil give everything a go.. whereas DS2 who has minor, compared to many, learning difficulties really struggles to get any support from his school. I am thankful he hasnt got any worse issues.. the paed said he should have serious cerebral palsy given how long he was O2 deprived.

chocolate.buttons

When I read and agreed with Bennifred's comment, I took it to mean that children who are G + T do also have special educational needs (and therefore why SENCOs are generally in charge of that area too), in that their education programme also needs special attention to ensure that they still progress in their learning. In the same way that a child with a specific learning difficulty would struggle with the "average" level of teaching for an "average" child, so would a G+T pupil.
I'm not sure that Bennifred meant it as a slight against those children who have learning difficulties, such as your daughter, and certainly there was no mention of using SEN budget for G+T purposes. As you say, it is normal (and completely right) for schools to separate the two budgets anyway.

make_me_wise

Nicki wrote: »

How to make the parent of a child with a serious learning difficulty spit with rage!

My eldest child is gifted and talented. He was reading Harry Potter independently at age 6, doing maths several levels above his age, could explain anything happening in the news to everyone, and knew more history than his teachers. He needed differentiated work and challenges in the classroom, plus extra opportunities to keep him engaged. All of which came from the G and T school budget, as it should have done. He is not, and should not be, described as special needs.

My middle child has severe learning difficulties and autism. She has a full statement of special educational needs. She needs speech and language therapy and occupational therapy. At times she has 1:1 TA support. She needs work differentiated to a much lower level than her age group. She DOES have special needs and it is right that the school special educational needs budget should be spent on her, and on children with other specific learning difficulties such as dyslexia or those who just can't keep up with the pace of learning and are on school action or school action plus.

As a governor with responsibility for SEN and a parent of a child with SEN, it really really annoys me when parents of bright children try to argue that their child with no specific learning problem should be able to access the SEN budget. If they are bright, then they can already access every other opportunity in the school - all aspects of the curriculum, any lunchtime or after school clubs, etc - and in addition schools do have a G and T budget allocated to provide opportunities to stretch these kids too. They should not however be allowed to take money and resources away from the kids who need a lot of extra help to have any chance of keeping up.

Bright kids with dyslexia or aspergers are a different story, but budgets are set up so that each group of needs gets a fair allocation and one pushy group should not try and grab all the resources.

And don't even get me started on the parents, who think their perfectly average child should get extra attention and help to push them up to being in the gifted and talented set.

I whole heartedly agree with you. However no-one on this thread stated that gifted and talented kids should have access to SEN budgets. When the other poster said that g&t kids are as much 'special needs' as those with learning difficulties I think they meant that they have needs that must be met. Which is very true, as you confirmed yourself when advising us that your eldest son required this and that his needs were met. Therefore I am not sure why the poster you referred to makes you spit with rage.

Nicki

Usually when parents say a G and T child is as much special needs as a child on the SEN register, they mean that they want access to the same level of resources. That has been my experience every time this argument has been made to me in my governor role. The G and T budget is much much smaller than the SEN one, and the same kind of resources are just not available.

Bennifred attached the special needs "label" to the G and T child which inferred that was her argument. She also suggested the parent push for an Ed Psych referral. These are like gold dust in mainstream schools, there is a huge waiting list and even kids on school action plus with significant difficulties can't always access this provision. The only parents of G and T children I know who have had an Ed Psych report have commissioned and paid for it privately. The reason why most schools want an EP involved is for the purpose of statementing to provide the extra funding needed to implement their recommendations. You don't get a statement for being bright.

ALL children should get as good an education as possible in a mainstream school but there tends to be 30 children in a class, with maybe one TA unless there are a lot of kids with genuine SEN. So it is reasonable to expect the teacher to think of an extension activity for the G and T child, to ratchet things up a level whenever that child has 1:1 time with an adult, to send home more advanced reading materials and to send them on out of school activities which will benefit them. It is, IMO, not reasonable to expect the G and T child to be given more 1:1 adult time than the "average" child in the class (because that time has to come from somewhere, and it will come from the other children's quota of 1:1). The worst that can happen to a G and T child is that they do not fulfil their absolute potential, but a decent parent can do a lot to ensure that doesnt happen at home, by providing suitable reading materials, trips to museums etc. It is reasonable to spend extra 1:1 time with a child with a learning difficulty, as proper input can lead to that child reaching a minimum level of achievement, eg being able to read and write, which may enable them to lead an independent, self financing life in adulthood which might otherwise not happen. Most parents dont have the specialist training to teach a child with difficulties basic maths or literacy.

It is an issue I feel strongly about hence why the glib statement that the G and T child is special needs too and should see the EP bugs me

Bennifred

Nicki wrote: »

Usually when parents say a G and T child is as much special needs as a child on the SEN register, they mean that they want access to the same level of resources. That has been my experience every time this argument has been made to me in my governor role. The G and T budget is much much smaller than the SEN one, and the same kind of resources are just not available.

Bennifred attached the special needs "label" to the G and T child which inferred that was her argument. She also suggested the parent push for an Ed Psych referral. These are like gold dust in mainstream schools, there is a huge waiting list and even kids on school action plus with significant difficulties can't always access this provision. The only parents of G and T children I know who have had an Ed Psych report have commissioned and paid for it privately. The reason why most schools want an EP involved is for the purpose of statementing to provide the extra funding needed to implement their recommendations. You don't get a statement for being bright.

ALL children should get as good an education as possible in a mainstream school but there tends to be 30 children in a class, with maybe one TA unless there are a lot of kids with genuine SEN. So it is reasonable to expect the teacher to think of an extension activity for the G and T child, to ratchet things up a level whenever that child has 1:1 time with an adult, to send home more advanced reading materials and to send them on out of school activities which will benefit them. It is, IMO, not reasonable to expect the G and T child to be given more 1:1 adult time than the "average" child in the class (because that time has to come from somewhere, and it will come from the other children's quota of 1:1). The worst that can happen to a G and T child is that they do not fulfil their absolute potential, but a decent parent can do a lot to ensure that doesnt happen at home, by providing suitable reading materials, trips to museums etc. It is reasonable to spend extra 1:1 time with a child with a learning difficulty, as proper input can lead to that child reaching a minimum level of achievement, eg being able to read and write, which may enable them to lead an independent, self financing life in adulthood which might otherwise not happen. Most parents dont have the specialist training to teach a child with difficulties basic maths or literacy.

It is an issue I feel strongly about hence why the glib statement that the G and T child is special needs too and should see the EP bugs me

Nicki - my post wasn't intended to be a glib statement, and I'm sorry to have annoyed you.:(
I think it is a matter of semantics, though, as I agree with everything you have said about access to resources, etc. As you have said, though, the G&T children do have additional needs (even if not "special" needs:p).
For info: I do not have a G&T child, but I do have a very bright, very dyslexic son - his school would not accept he has a problem until we had a private Ed Psych report carried out. I also work in a large secondary school, was a TA for several years, and am also a school governor, so am very aware of the issues you have raised.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

A G&T child that is left to kick their heels whilst the teacher concentrates on others is a dangerous creature.

Brains going at a million miles an hour.

All work done in a couple of minutes.

Teacher otherwise occupied, as usual.

Nobody paying attention to what they are doing.

Everyone assumes that you're such a good kid and how you can be left to amuse yourself.


Hmmmmmm......

thegirlintheattic

Nicki wrote: »

She also suggested the parent push for an Ed Psych referral. These are like gold dust in mainstream schools, there is a huge waiting list and even kids on school action plus with significant difficulties can't always access this provision. The only parents of G and T children I know who have had an Ed Psych report have commissioned and paid for it privately. The reason why most schools want an EP involved is for the purpose of statementing to provide the extra funding needed to implement their recommendations. You don't get a statement for being bright.

The OP has also said that her son's teacher has had to get in touch several times in the first two weeks back about behaviour. Assuming the teacher has been trying in class strategies to target this behaviour, it sounds like it is significant and so an EP report is an idea if his teacher's think the bad behaviour may stem from a SEN.

pigpen

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

A G&T child that is left to kick their heels whilst the teacher concentrates on others is a dangerous creature.

Brains going at a million miles an hour.

All work done in a couple of minutes.

Teacher otherwise occupied, as usual.

Nobody paying attention to what they are doing.

Everyone assumes that you're such a good kid and how you can be left to amuse yourself.


Hmmmmmm......

That stands for all children though doesnt it.. some children just have a poor attention span or are easily distracted they dont have to be bright for that.. says the mother of the scattiest air head in the world!

make_me_wise

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

A G&T child that is left to kick their heels whilst the teacher concentrates on others is a dangerous creature.

Brains going at a million miles an hour.

All work done in a couple of minutes.

Teacher otherwise occupied, as usual.

Nobody paying attention to what they are doing.

Everyone assumes that you're such a good kid and how you can be left to amuse yourself.


Hmmmmmm......

So true. Things can very quickly spiral out of control.