Dyslexic son failed 11+ (BUCKS) Please see enclosed details
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Dear sugar
I think the Education Act 1996 will just be a distraction, so my advice is not to go down that route.
I suspect the authority's view is that a working memory deficit is not a disability, but a processing speed deficit could be (don't ask me to explain!
). Although there's an obvious discrepancy with cognitive ability, my guess is that they didn't consider your son's processing speed to be low enough. Whether the LA representative will make these points, or whether he/she will simply say "I have no further information about the reasons for the previous panel's decision", I can't be sure.
All the same, the correct percentile for the processing speed will probably help your case. You can point out that your son has a relative weakness in both working memory and processing speed. At the very least this should count as an extenuating circumstance.
By all means say that you feel extra time would have made a difference, but my very strong advice - in your particular case - is that you should not get drawn into an argument about what is or isn't a disability. Leave that up to the panel to sort out.
I think the Education Act 1996 will just be a distraction, so my advice is not to go down that route.
I suspect the authority's view is that a working memory deficit is not a disability, but a processing speed deficit could be (don't ask me to explain!
). Although there's an obvious discrepancy with cognitive ability, my guess is that they didn't consider your son's processing speed to be low enough. Whether the LA representative will make these points, or whether he/she will simply say "I have no further information about the reasons for the previous panel's decision", I can't be sure.All the same, the correct percentile for the processing speed will probably help your case. You can point out that your son has a relative weakness in both working memory and processing speed. At the very least this should count as an extenuating circumstance.
By all means say that you feel extra time would have made a difference, but my very strong advice - in your particular case - is that you should not get drawn into an argument about what is or isn't a disability. Leave that up to the panel to sort out.
Etienne
Hi Etienne,
Thank you for your comments. I do think I now have a broard understanding of the issues and how I should move forward. Present the facts and all the evidence and let the panel deside. We have letters from Head, senco, Ed Psy. Rugby head all extremely positive. Here goes and in for next week.
I cannot thank you enough for all your help
XX
Thank you for your comments. I do think I now have a broard understanding of the issues and how I should move forward. Present the facts and all the evidence and let the panel deside. We have letters from Head, senco, Ed Psy. Rugby head all extremely positive. Here goes and in for next week.
I cannot thank you enough for all your help
XX
Just come home from appeal and before I pass out in take-a-way just thought I would put down questions for anybody who it may help.
Questions focused on reasons for gap in score. In your particular case think about all qs that cold come up and think about your answer.....nothing worse than your not sure what to say or your partner saying something you don't agree with!
Other questions, describe what your son is like generally?, What does he like to read?
In our case with dyslexia....What support is he getting in school currently?
Does he use dyslexia as an excuse?
Take-a -way here!
Questions focused on reasons for gap in score. In your particular case think about all qs that cold come up and think about your answer.....nothing worse than your not sure what to say or your partner saying something you don't agree with!
Other questions, describe what your son is like generally?, What does he like to read?
In our case with dyslexia....What support is he getting in school currently?
Does he use dyslexia as an excuse?
Take-a -way here!
Can someone help,
Today we got our appeal result and it was unsucessful. I am left confussed! We applied foe extra time and we were refused on the basis that...
'they did not consider my DD to be Disabled as defined in the DDA so were unable to consider adjusting the test materials, timings or conditions'
In the letter from the IAP,
The apeal panel 'considered my DDs diagnosis of Dyslexia and decided that he is disabled within the meaning of the DDA. However, the IAP concluded that although your child had been treated less favourably for a reason relating to the disability, it was for a justified reason, as they noted that reasonable ajustments had been considered by the LA on the evidence put before them. Accordingly, the IAP concluded that the LA had not discriminated against your child in the VRTs.
This does not make sense to me. Can anyone help?
Today we got our appeal result and it was unsucessful. I am left confussed! We applied foe extra time and we were refused on the basis that...
'they did not consider my DD to be Disabled as defined in the DDA so were unable to consider adjusting the test materials, timings or conditions'
In the letter from the IAP,
The apeal panel 'considered my DDs diagnosis of Dyslexia and decided that he is disabled within the meaning of the DDA. However, the IAP concluded that although your child had been treated less favourably for a reason relating to the disability, it was for a justified reason, as they noted that reasonable ajustments had been considered by the LA on the evidence put before them. Accordingly, the IAP concluded that the LA had not discriminated against your child in the VRTs.
This does not make sense to me. Can anyone help?
-
Sally-Anne
- Posts: 9235
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:10 pm
- Location: Buckinghamshire
Hi Sugar
I am really very sorry to hear about your appeal result. As for this ...
Etienne ...?
Sally-Anne
I am really very sorry to hear about your appeal result. As for this ...
... it reminds me of one of Sir Humphrey's speeches from "Yes, Minister".Sugar wrote:In the letter from the IAP,
The apeal panel 'considered my DDs diagnosis of Dyslexia and decided that he is disabled within the meaning of the DDA. However, the IAP concluded that although your child had been treated less favourably for a reason relating to the disability, it was for a justified reason, as they noted that reasonable ajustments had been considered by the LA on the evidence put before them. Accordingly, the IAP concluded that the LA had not discriminated against your child in the VRTs.
This does not make sense to me. Can anyone help?
Etienne ...?
Sally-Anne
