Dear members of the Western Australian Parliamentary Inquiry into Support for Autistic Children and Young People in Schools,
I would like to submit the following for consideration. I ask if you can remove identifying information of all individuals in this submission to protect the privacy of the individuals involved. I would like you to keep my name confidential to protect my children’s privacy and the privacy of their school and teachers.
I am a disabled adult, with diagnoses of autism and ADHD, and I have two disabled children who also have diagnoses of autism and ADHD. Both of my children attend our local mainstream public primary school. This submission is in relation to my older child, who is in year 4 and addresses the following terms of reference for the inquiry:
Current Support available for autistic students in WA Schools, including consideration of how:
a) Evidence-based practices are implemented across the school system b) School supports are co-ordinated with other service areas to respond to the needs of autistic students and their families
Evidence Based Support via NDIS
My child has 2-4 visits per year to a Developmental Paediatrician per year, and fortnightly visits to a Speech therapist, Occupational Therapist, and a Psychologist. The supports recommended by our team are neurodiversity affirming, in line with the current Autism CRC Guidelines on Supporting Autistic Children. Supports have made an immense, positive impact in my child’s life and we as a family work hard to use them consistently wherever we go.
How Evidence Based Support for My Child is Implemented in the School System and Coordinated With Our NDIS
Services
Successes:
When individual teachers have agreed to implement supports in their classrooms as part of my child’s Individual Education Plan (IEP), this has worked very well. This involves my child’s NDIS therapists visiting the school and demonstrating how the supports work in real time. When the teachers see how effective the supports are, they are very happy to implement them. This leads to improved classroom environment, and a positive relationship between my child and their teachers. Our therapists trouble-shoot with the teacher to make supports practical for the classroom and for my child and other students.
Specific neurodiversity affirming supports that have worked well for my child, that were implemented in previous years this way were:
- Bridges Learning System
- Collaborative Proactive Solutions (Dr Ross Greene)
- LEANS (Learning About Neurodiversity In Schools - Neurodiversity training resources)
- Circle of Security Training (delivered by Ngala)
- Interoception Skills training (Kelly Mahler, Dr Emma Goodall)
- Environmental sensory adaptation and aid (individualsed to my child’s needs)
- Learning activities that are tailored to my child’s interests Challenges:
Unfortunately, some teachers don’t agree to put in supports recommended by NDIS professionals. Some teachers don’t consult with our family about supports. I know they are supposed to consult with families because this is explained in the federal law the Disability Standards for Education 2005 (DSE 2005).
This year the lack of supports and consultation has been very negative. The timeline or support requests and escalation of concerns is below. The issues are still unresolved as I write this submission.
Date Events
21st February - IEP meeting with child’s classroom teacher to request supports recommended by my
2023 child’s NDIS team. Teacher did not agree.
- Explanation for not agreeing to supports was not provided. 7th March - Meeting with the school Principal, re-requested an explanation for not agreeing to our
2023 supports, none provided.
- Re-explained the need for our supports. 16th March - New IEP emailed to me by the Principal. It contained different supports to what we
2023 originally requested, and was not appropriate for my child’s needs.
- Explanation requested by me for the changes.
- Explanation re-requested by me for not agreeing to our original supports.
- No explanations given. 22nd March - Complaint from me to the Department of Education, asking for explanation for not giving
2023 our supports, and explaining the negative impacts on my child.
4th April 2023 - Regional Education Office emailed and asked to meet with me
- No explanation given for not agreeing to our supports 5th April 2023 - I agreed to the meeting, and asked for disability adjustments for my own communication
disabilities
12th April 2023 - Regional Education Office emailed saying they would not be meeting with me, instead the
Region Lead psychologist will meet with the school.
-
No explanation given for the change of plan about the meeting
-
Still no explanation for not giving the requested supports. 5th May 2023 - I requested an update on my complaint from the regional office
17th May 2023 - Regional Education Office emailed saying the Region’s Lead Psychologist met with school
staff, and next SSEN-D would meet with school to advise them on supports for my child.
18th May 2023 - I requested consultation about SSEN-D input, because SSEN-D do not know my child and
their disabilities, so I am worried their advice won’t be suitable for my child’s needs.
23rd May 2023 - Regional Education Office confirms that SSEN-D advice will go ahead without consultation
with me. No explanation given.
26th May 2023 - I re-explain my worry that SSEN-D advice is being used as a disability adjustment without
consultation with me. This is not in line with the DSE 2005. Internal escalation of my concern is promised.
13th June 2023 - I asked for an update on my complaint
14th June 2023 - Regional Education Office says again that SSEN-D advice to the school will go ahead
without consultation with me. They also advise the IEP will not include our requested supports that require a whole school approach. No explanation is given for this decision.
18th June 2023 - I contacted Regional Education Office, re-explaining the need for IEP supports to be across
the whole school, as recommended by our NDIS team, and the multiple negative effects on my child from not having these supports.
Impact of Lack of Supports
Support Requested Impact on Child From Lack of Support
Improved availability of Physical and psychological distress sensory aids (ear When sensory aids can’t be located at school: School staff phoning parents to bring defenders) needed to sensory aids from home to school urgently or risk my child urinating in his clothes. manage toileting Risk of serious health problems. Neurodiversity education Verbal abuse by my child’s peers including threats they would “break his legs” for all students to Humiliating acts by peers including pointing and laughing at my child’s sensory understand and accept regulating strategies in the classroom, calling his name repeatedly in the classroom autistic differences until he becomes upset, asking him on the playground repeatedly if he has urinated in his pants School anxiety and psychological trauma Neurodiversity education Verbal abuse by a relief music teacher calling my child “nothing but a pest” when for all staff to understand my child asked for support to understand instructions autistic communication Anxiety and psychological trauma differences Support for my child’s Neglect and verbal abuse by classroom relief teacher who did not follow my child’s communication and request for support for auditory processing disabilities. My child couldn’t join in or auditory processing complete his classwork as a result. Instead this teacher told my child “you will differences listen”. This is discriminatory like telling a wheelchair user “you will walk” and leaving them without a wheelchair and unable to join in at school. Neurodiversity education Neglect by Education Assistants who misinterpret distress behaviors (dissociating) for all staff to understand as a deliberate choice to not join in. The EA said this as a reason why they did not signs of distress in autistic provide disability support to my child – the EA said my child “didn’t want help” children because they didn’t respond. Support for dyspraxia, My child was unable to access the activities in Physical Education, but I was not executive dysfunction contacted about this by the Phys Ed teacher until 2 weeks before the end of term and sensory regulation in 2. As a result, my child received a D grade for Physical Education. By contrast, in specialty subjects and my child’s mainstream weekend Parkour class, they have our recommended other activities outside supports in place. My child is able to be included in this weekend sport class and the classroom progress successfully with his age group. My child was unable to access the school swimming program, because school did not plan for any additional support to be in place, we had no IEP of agreed support, and my child’s NDIS funded autism swimming instructor advised this was not safe for my child. Adjustment of the School The School Wide Positive Behaviour Support program teaches behaviour Wide Positive Behaviour expectations which are put into a “matrix” that is displayed all over the school. The Support Program to be behaviours are totally unachievable for autistic students and not neurodiversity Inclusive of Autistic Pro- affirming. Things like making eye contact, sitting still to listen (not fidgeting), Social and Learning playing in a group/cooperatively instead of playing alone, not needing help for Behaviour organising your belongings. None of those things are part of being a good autistic person. SWPBS has destroyed my child’s self-esteem about being autistic. It also creates a school culture where teachers and students see autistic traits as shameful and negative, leading to exclusion and bullying Adjustment of the School The Good Standing Policy is linked to the school wide PBS program but involves Good Standing Policy to more punishments for behaviour that doesn’t match the PBS standards. The be Inclusive of Autistic punishments include: being socially excluded by your teacher such as sent out of and Disabled Students your classroom or to the office; being excluded from school activities like excursions and school celebrations. At the start of the year, every classroom got a visit from one of the school leadership staff who told students all the punishments. This made my autistic child scared to go to school, because they knew they could get shamed and punished for doing things that are just part of being autistic
Recommendations
I have a lot of admiration and respect for my child’s teachers and Principal. My mum and grandmother were teachers, so I know the passion and dedication teachers bring to their jobs. I am proud to say I have passed on this respect and admiration to my child, who in spite of all the hardship described above, wants to be a teacher when he grows up. It is very heartbreaking for me to send him to school each day when I know the teacher he loves so much doesn’t want to consult and collaborate with me about supporting my child. I try to keep my child confident that the school does like him and want to have him there. But it is very hard to keep this up when I know the teachers don’t care enough to stand up for my child’s rights and make some simple changes to how the school operates.
I do not blame any individuals at my child’s school for the lack of support and resulting harm to my child. I believe school staff are doing the best they can, but have no incentives or resources to understand and deliver on their legal responsibilities under the DSE 2005.
I think other states like New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia are on the right track. They monitor and publicly report school suspensions for disabled students, and take actions to improve equity. That way, they can see what works and what doesn’t. It also shows taxpayers whether school funds for disabled students are actually improving things for students or not.
I also think the South Australia Office for Autism is working well. They have consulted widely with the autistic community and are co-designing initiatives to improve the experiences of autistic and disabled students in schools.
So this is what I recommend:
-
Schools should be more accountable for spending taxpayer funds they receive for students with disabilities, including autistic students. At the moment there isn’t any financial or other incentive for schools and teachers to use the NDIS-funded approaches that work for autistic students into schools.
-
Schools should include autistic and disabled people when it comes to the planning and policies that affect those students. This would stop things like the School Wide PBS and Good Standing Policy from being so excluding, and so distressing. The autistic community has a saying “nothing about us without us”. This means we should be included in making policies. This can be achieved by awarding funding to schools for innovation and improvement projects that are co-designed by autistic people. I think Western Australia should also follow the South Australia Office for Autism model and their co-design and community consultation.
-
Schools should be rewarded for using supports that are neurodiversity affirming, and that celebrate the overall diversity of students and staff. This could be done as awards for schools, or funding packages for schools to develop and showcase innovations and improvements. This would also provide career and research opportunities to lift the profile of the WA education sector.
-
Schools should be more accountable for their obligations when it comes to consulting with autistic students and their families about disability adjustments. Schools should be audited, or accredited, based on whether or not they fulfil the responsibilities that are clear in the DSE 2005:
a. The responsibility for schools to consult with families about all disability adjustments i. Consultation to determine whether the adjustment is reasonable (not just the school unilaterally deciding their idea is the best approach). ii. Consultation needs to happen BEFORE the adjustment is used (not the school or DoE deciding unilaterally on a particular approach or method, then informing families after the fact). iii. Consultation about changes to requested adjustments: if schools want to change a requested adjustment, they need to justify how the change is less intrusive, AND not less beneficial.
b. The responsibility for schools declining a requested disability adjustments. Adjustments can be declined on the grounds they would cause unjustifiable hardship. However this can’t be just the school unilaterally deciding the adjustment is inconvenient. The school needs to formally weigh up the risks and benefits to all affected parties in order to make the decision.
- Complaints should be a performance measure for the DoE that is publicly reported, and targeted for improvement. My guess is many complaints are about disability discrimination. Until DoE starts reporting, and identifying which schools and approaches lead to less complaints, this is not going to improve.