Katie Finlayson

I always said - and I think I was usually being truthful - that "between us, we got 100% on this assessment. Individually, no one did. That means that every single person in this room has something to learn from someone else here, and that's why we're going to go through it together now".

I’m reminded of my first big boss telling us not to compare profit share (which was allocated via a ranking system) - ‘if you got less you’ll be upset and if you got more you’ll think it should be even more than that. No-one ends up happier.’

Of course we all did.

I recognise, as I said, that’s a leap from our wider structures (and as an approach it has pros and cons - I have experience and Thoughts on this), that you are of necessity working in.

and d made a fantastic leap into thinking about z. I think this is going to play really well into our next topic, because we can reinforce those ideas that weren’t quite making it through for everyone yet’ and the numbers - if at all - are just feedback on which parts they can each develop more.

I think this is a caring response to where we are but it’s also disheartening that it feels necessary. I would love a culture of safety where you could go straight to ‘a and b said some really interesting things about x, and c made me realise that we need to talk a bit more about y…

I’m totally paralysed below the knees and can’t use 80% of the muscles in my legs.

DWP claimed I don’t meet the standard rate for PIP mobility, let alone enhanced.

I try. But they end up bleeding into each other because boundaries are not my strong point :)

Primary 5-a-day with 4 levels of difficulty: bronze, silver, gold and platinum #corbett5aday #maths5aday Answers:
corbettmathsprimary.com/2018/05/30/5...

Ours is 20+ years old and has broken through the bottom twice but I reckon it’ll see us through…

Christmas tree decorated with thick red tinsel, lights and silver baubles, a few wrapped presents on the floor next to it.

Morning everyone :)

Of course these could all be managed in other ways, but it's convenient and we all trust each other not to be weird about things so why not?

We all have FindMe on too. It was very useful when I had to pick them up from college (hr drive) - they could tell how close I was and not have to wait out in the rain for too long. Split up and find each other around town. Tell if they've managed to get the train without constant checking in.

Sent details!

I do think a diagnosis is seen as key to feeling like you can ask for certain things (even though it shouldn’t be and legally isn’t), which drives the incentive for them. It’s a bit like an exam grade in a way - it’s a trusted proxy for showing all of the same evidence directly.

And that is indeed fairer but the net result is worse access for those with disabilities (and also those without). And most are afraid to ask for what they could need for fear of centres just pulling all support. Unintended consequences etc.

Instead of saying ‘this is what we can do and this is what we can’t’ (which some still do and I *think* is legally supportable under the EA if it meets the ‘reasonableness’ test), a significant number of centres just decided saying no to all was safer.

And there are ways in which it has made things worse. Niche case perhaps but we saw noticeable impacts on private candidate exam centres when a fear of being sued/accused of malpractice for not being able to provide AA came up.

People (at least in my circles) do know about EA but I think it is more about downstream practice due to a fear of EA being used that has the most day to day impact. The EA ‘reasonableness’ test is I think more equivocal than most educational practice for eg.

Yup. We have find me on for all the family. If they're getting the train home I can see how it's going since it's a half hour drive to pick them up - and they can see if I'm coming. It's not exactly stalking and they could turn it off if they wanted but they don't because it's convenient for us all.

I have a home ed contact whose daughter is in first term of ASNAC at Cambridge - she (the student) would be happy to be emailed about her interview experience last year if that's any help? I can DM you her email address if so.

(Not to say that *all* EHE families are happy with it - challenges and dissatisfaction are mentioned, and most originally expected school would work out so it's absolutely not a first choice for many. But something can be a forced choice *and* the right choice.)

Are SEND needs driving an increase in children being home educated? My talk from ResearchEd National 2025

I wouldn't say it's a study, but I did look at this: learnwhatyoulive.substack.com/p/are-send-n...

A feeling that SEN needs - espc autism - are not being met is certainly a big factor in home education decisions (though not the only one). Most of those families then feel EHE works better.

(I say this as someone who struggles with this balance, no judgement intended but a lot of awareness.)

Very much agree with this. The hollowing out of things like mums and toddlers groups has imo been really harmful for children’s development (and parents’ mental health and understanding of normal ranges and patterns of growth). And I also agree phones are a parental issue as much as a child one.

Well yes. But there is value in grouping common responses to common environments without that needing a value judgement attached. Part of the shift I’d like to see is towards this not being inherently good or bad, just useful to know, iyswim.

But the competitive nature of that approach makes it a zero sum game that only a few can ever ‘win’.

I do think that one set of skills/dispositions is disproportionately highly valued, particularly in our school systems (but also wider than that), and for well-meaning reasons we push everyone in that direction which can make those who aren’t at the top of that pile want to find a reason why.

Ben thanks for saying this. My child is never going to get a GCSE but still needs education. The focus on intelligence as central to judging if worthy of support is inhumane. Like going back to the days of declaring that some children are 'ineducable', like some children just don't matter.

Anyhoo, I think we are all looking at the wrong target. If we enable mainstream schools to meet the needs of MLD pupils, we will all be better off and less stressed and unhappy.

But not entirely population increase is it? Also prevalence within population (not saying anything about identification of need vs underlying increase of need as I just don’t know enough to disentangle these, and I’ve not seen anything else that convincingly does either).