Tolstoy's review

[Tolstoy]

Okay we have decided to go for review. Accept the odds are short with DCs score but as we have an excellent alternative then we are prepared to take the risk as DC needs closure.

Etienne below is a quote from another thread.

Tolstoy = I have also seen mention of an Ed psych being part of the review panel ( i.e someone who would understand that inconsistent results can be related to un-diagnosed SEN))

Etienne = Just for the record, the review panel consists of three headteachers.
An Ed Psych is not part of the review panel, but is brought in to offer advice to the headteachers in specific cases (e.g. where the parent has raised SEN issues).

I will be raising possible/probable SEN and I believe the head teacher's report will concur with this. Therefore I need to somehow get this Ed-psych in on DCs review. Can I suggest it somewhere in the review statement or is it the case that as soon as a parent or head teacher flags it up the Ed-psych gets called in?

Many thanks,

Tolstoy and DC

[MamaBear]

good luck Tolstoy, Etienne and salyy anne will know better but there is a space on the review form for you "state your case" and you can draw attention to the ed psych report there.

cyber hugs to you and your dc.

[MamaBear]

sorry typo with sally anne's name.

[Etienne]

It would seem to depend on whether your case includes "an educational psychological or other complex assessment"!

Here is the exact wording:

Cases will be allocated to panels in no particular order or category except for cases previously
considered by the Special Access Panel (the panel that sits prior to the tests to consider requests for
adjustments to the test materials or conditions) or cases where an educational psychological or
other complex assessment has been provided. These will be allocated to a panel which will be
supported by an educational psychologist. The Educational Psychologist has no vote, providing
professional information to the SRP only.

[drummer]

Ed Psych reports are terribly expensive. Tolstoy, has your DC's school's SENCO run any assessments?

Many bright children with specific learning difficulties can get overlooked because their difficulty masks their ability and their ability masks their difficulty.

[BucksBornNBred]

Okay we have decided to go for review. Accept the odds are short with DCs score but as we have an excellent alternative then we are prepared to take the risk as DC needs closure.

Tolstoy, I don't know the details of your case so can't really comment other than to say that if our DC had a guaranteed place at your school, then we too would probably have opted for review and not appeal as the waiting and stress is very hard on everyone

Good luck and I'm keeping everything crossed for you and yours

[Tolstoy]

Ed Psych reports are terribly expensive. Tolstoy, has your DC's school's SENCO run any assessments?

Many bright children with specific learning difficulties can get overlooked because their difficulty masks their ability and their ability masks their difficulty.

That pretty much sums up our situation drummer

So just trying to maximize our options here. If I alert the panel to a possible/probable SEN issue that has been flagged up by test results and other supporting evidence plus the head teacher report also mentions this and DC is tested after the review has gone in and is found to have SEN then can I argue that the review was not FCO because of the absence of Ed psych to advise?

Also are there any stats available on the success rates of reviews where there has been SEN and the Ed Psych has been present compared to those where Ed psych hasn't?

Would be interested in hearing other posters experiences.

Thanks BBB been trying to sell it to DC as the best option all round regardless of how review goes and to be honest if his friend was going there as well he'd go anyway regardless of result.

[southbucks3]

Ed psychologist reports are v expensive, but you do feel like you should be throwing your all at it. Thankfully the lady we approached was amazingly honest and said that with ds his long term problem being recognised by the primary school and the professional care he was receiving was more than enough proof without her help. Some people won't be so honest.

Also an appeal panel last year stated in the group hearing that ed psych reports pertaining to conditions that had not been recognised by parents or school prior to the test would not be given any great value. Basically if there is a problem why wait until a negative 11+ test result to get a diagnosis. Obviously if the school has records of issues being flagged up prior to the test then a report may be the extra bit of clarification that a panel need to make a decision. However if the primary school has already got detailed information about the condition and their own reports and has been supportive use that and save your cash.

[Etienne]

Also an appeal panel last year stated in the group hearing that ed psych reports pertaining to conditions that had not been recognised by parents or school prior to the test would not be given any great value

I'm not at all sure that was a wise statement for them to make, but it depends on the context.

I'd agree that a review decision could not be found non-FCO on the basis of evidence that wasn't available to the review panel!

However, once a review is found to be non-FCO for whatever reason (or if there hasn't been a review), an appeal panel will move on to the 'qualification' stage. It must then give proper consideration under 'extenuating circumstances' to any new evidence of a previously undiagnosed condition. The more compelling the evidence, the more weight it should carry.

If I alert the panel to a possible/probable SEN issue that has been flagged up by test results and other supporting evidence plus the head teacher report also mentions this and DC is tested after the review has gone in and is found to have SEN then can I argue that the review was not FCO because of the absence of Ed psych to advise?

The stronger the evidence that went to the review panel, the easier it should be to complain about the absence of an Ed Psych - but I don't see how later evidence that never reached the SRP could be used retrospectively in deciding the FCO issue. What matters is the information that was available to the SRP at the time it took its decision.

Also are there any stats available on the success rates of reviews where there has been SEN and the Ed Psych has been present compared to those where Ed psych hasn't?

Not as far as I know.

[Tolstoy]

Thanks Etienne, I have to admit I am struggling to understand this FCO business despite all the reading so I will shove it on the back-burner until my brain catches up.

SB3 many DCs with specific learning difficulties cope at primary and the school even if they suspect something can't justify spending money on having them tested. A bright DC can mask quite severe issues. The schools often know unless it means the DC is severely under performing then they won't have the money to provide extra support anyway.

I know there are hugely differing opinions on this issue. Some argue that if a DC is hitting the required national targets then all is well, there is no onus on ensuring a suspected SEN DC exceeds them and the money should be directed at those DC who are not hitting them despite the fact that many never will. Others argue that it should be directed at DC who have a specific learning difficulty which means they are not achieving what they are capable of. Of course, as a head once told me, if those severely frustrated, underachieving for their ability (not some nationally recognized target) DC started chucking a few chairs around, the money for testing and support would soon come rolling in. It is a myth however to think that DC who are not being stretched for whatever reason will start misbehaving, many don't.

Therefore in an opt out county it is highly plausible that the first time a DC will be recognized as having a specific learning difficulty could well be the CEM transfer test which tests VR, NR and NVR. The VR is very different from other VR tests and unless a school does CATs a DC may never have been tested for NVR skills. Those DC will then be consigned to a school that, if it is a poorly performing Upper, will never give them a chance to excel. I am very glad I wasn't in that room when they made that statement or it is likely I would have become embroiled in a very heated argument at a rather stressful time and possibly not helped my DCs case! Probably best you have given me a bit of advance warning, should we get that far I shall ask DH to gag me at that point