What went wrong
Before our son started, a UK specialist service set out, in writing, the support he needed in school. The left column below summarises that assessment. The right column is our own account of what we experienced being delivered. The right column is our experience and opinion, based on our children's reports and the notes we kept at the time.
Structured instruction, extra time, and reduced emphasis on speed.
Time-pressured, rapid worksheet completion; short windows to answer; answers written on the board before he had understood.
Repeated instructions, visual supports, and tasks broken into clear steps.
Topics covered "very lightly" then moved on; limited chance to question or develop understanding; curriculum experienced as rote.
Regular movement breaks, a calm space, and a pre-agreed regulation plan.
Breaks cut short for concert practice; regulation tools discouraged; no regulation plan put in place.
A trusted adult, brief check-ins, and the avoidance of punitive responses.
Public correction and conduct-point deductions — despite our specific written request to avoid them — and seating alongside disruptive pupils.
Homework to consolidate learning and support enjoyment (in line with the school's own policy).
Heavy daily homework and constant testing; 63 pages set over Easter; much of it generic worksheets unrelated to lessons; parents re-teaching for hours.
Assessed-needs information understood and acted on by the people teaching him.
We re-sent his special-needs form to the class teacher on 31 March "in case it hasn't been shared"; no adjustment-planning meeting was ever convened.
The school's own special-needs policy says that, when a child with a disability is admitted, the school will arrange a meeting with the parents "to discuss the disability; its effect on the pupil; and the measures and adjustments agreed... so as to not place the pupil at a substantial disadvantage." On our account:
The school's policy contains a clause saying its obligations "are not unlimited" and that it can't be held responsible for refusing further adjustments once reasonable ones "have been agreed and implemented" but are "found to be insufficient." In our view that clause can't help here: on our account, no adjustments were ever agreed or implemented in the first place, so there was nothing to find "insufficient."
Beyond the special-needs issues, these are concerns we noted at the time, affecting both children. They are our account, drawn from our children's reports and our contemporaneous notes, and we raise them as matters we believe warrant scrutiny.
To be clear. We are not, on this page, alleging unlawful conduct or naming anyone. These are the things we observed and recorded as parents, and the gap we experienced between what our son's assessment said he needed and what we saw delivered. We share them so other families can ask their own questions.