Posted: Apr 16, 2019 10:24 am
by UncertainSloth
tuco wrote:The aforementioned 'inclusion' has increased need for what action?

As far as I know, over here the main controversy seems to be that some parents bitch that the included pupils with special needs slow their own kids down. To counter this, assistants to teachers, for the pupils with special needs, are being placed in classrooms, tho the bitching does not seem to stop. Though the real reasons for bitching are perhaps indeed more complex.

the action we're discussing, isolation

some parents will always be concerned about their own cherub's progress if children with send are in the class - thing is, these should be provided for within the classroom under the send policy - this has gone on for a long time in primary here, though their role has changed massively (not their pay, though), and more recently in secondary where 1:1 seems to be more prevalent

we're back to government funding, though - many teaching assistants are losing their jobs (including my b-in-law, who was a 1:1 assistant for autistic pupils) or being absorbed into schools as 'cover supervisors' when schools can't afford supply teachers

however, i would still argue from my experience that a significant number of these disruptive pupils requiring true 'isolation' are not those with send, but behavioural or attitudinal issues caused by lack of provision for mental health (i've seen this as a teacher and a parent), deprivation, upbringing or environment etc -....or are just sods...

isolation was not correctly applied in the circumstances in the op, that much i know- and i can quite believe this goes on, as teachers try and seek some respite for themselves and others in class

it's not a good system