Should I refuse reception settling in days if I can?

every year moving forward we offered families both options to choose according to needs and preferences.

Which is what every school should do! A sensible approach which allows everyone to start full time as is their right. Plus the benefit of settling in being simplified whilst also giving those who need a less full on start the chance to do what benefits them.

Honestly the most perfect solution.

By the same token, it's not just about those children either. Even assuming any exist in the class, which we don't know. OP also hasn't said that this is happening so they can all have smaller groups. One variant of the staggered start is whole class in for shorter hours so school staff can make home visits, for example.

You seem to be expecting the parents of those DC who would benefit from going full time straight away to prioritise hypothetical other children who might do better with shorter days. Why doesn't it work the other way around?

I dealt with this as a deputy headteacher 15 years ago, I can’t believe it’s still rumbling on.
A parent couldn’t do PT, we checked with the LA and they confirmed we had to offer FT. We adjusted and allowed it, it worked fine for everyone involved and from every year moving forward we offered families both options to choose according to needs and preferences.
Really not a big deal.

I remember my DD being upset she had to leave halfway through the day... shecwabted to wait for her big sister and go on the bus as obviously she was also a big girl now. And that was only 3 days...

Many children are in the school nursery, let alone private nurseries, for the full school day now. They don't need weeks if settling in.

If there was evidence it was beneficial, every school would do the same. But they don't.

(I like our Secondary school approach... they take the yr7s a day earlier so its quiet. The same would probably work with the younger children!)

The school would be legally incorrect if they refused to take from day one.

Having said that, if settling in is sensible, i.e. 2 half days type of thing, I would try to facilitate it, they do seem to get very tired starting school even though most of them have been in nursery

I agree with this. There is a school near us that does 3 weeks of settling. First week they're in either morning or afternoon, second week they swap, third week it's still half doing morning, half doing afternoon but they include lunch (so the morning children stay for lunch, and the afternoon children come in a bit earlier and have lunch).
I don't believe for a second that children are more settled doing a week of mornings, then a week of afternoons, then a week of mornings plus lunch, and then going full time. It sounds ridiculously unsettling.

It's not just about YOUR child though is it?

There will be others who benefit from smaller groups to begin with, and they won't get that if yours and others insist on going full time from day 1.

I think a week or even two of "settling in" is entirely reasonable for the school to plan for - and you knew this was coming so why have you used up all your holiday and are now stroppy about being asked to do something which is perfectly normal.

I'm also curious to know what if your child doesn't settle as well as you expect and needs those extra days? You have no contingency if you've booked out all your leave.

This is not true. Parents don't have to send a child in until after they turn 5, but schools offering children a place in reception must offer them a full time education

Having said that, if settling in is sensible, i.e. 2 half days type of thing, I would try to facilitate it, they do seem to get very tired starting school even though most of them have been in nursery

DS1 went in F/T straight away, no problem. He was used to 08:00- 17:55 in nursery. It turned out down the line that he's autistic, and actually getting straight into routine was probably more helpful than dithering about with random part days. The head teacher said that many parents worked and there was no appetite for part days.

DS2 two years later, it changed to a week of pissing around with various times. DS wanted to get down to be a big boy like his brother and was narked to be in and out of school like a hokey cokey. Fortunately I was no longer teaching at this point because I would have been unable to leave my own classes, and there were no other childcare options avaliable. Getting him to catch a couple of buses to the airport to get a flight to granny would no doubt be frowned upon.

The families least likely to be able to accommodate this are those where children are most likely to be used to childcare and the EYFS. Children that need it more are more likely to have parents that can manage it. Allowing families to opt-in to a p/t transition as needed is fine.

It always seems ironic that schools (SLT) are often quick to forget that many occupations don't have flexibility over working hours and annual leave when their staff are similarly affected.

I can't believe the staggered starts thing is so ongoing. Dd is 18 and started school after all the weeks of faffing about (mornings/afternoons/leave before lunch then leave after lunch) had been completed. It was fine.

Ds is 16 and had to do the start, headteacher acted like I was mad saying it was so much better as kids got tired and weren't upset in afternoon. For two weeks he had to be picked up halfway through day walk home then walk back and home again after collecting his sister. He was exhausted from the extra school run walk and just cried with me instead. Much happier when in school properly.

Poor ds 10 was collected by the hodge podge of my friends as I had a new job... Ending at 2.30 daily so I could be there after school every day as he needed more attention. But I couldn't then leave at 12 for two weeks.

When my son started school 14 years ago, he had 6 weeks of part time as a summer born. Luckily I was on maternity leave but he thought he had done something wrong as he wasn't allowed to stay for lunch with the other kids. It made transition to school harder for him. Fortunately, it was optional 4 years later, so my younger one was full time from day one.

Only if he's already 5 - in this country compulsory school age is the term after the child turns 5, so legally school don't need to provide the 39 weeks of schooling until then

That's not correct. Compulsory school age is separate to the age at which schools are required to offer a full time place. The age a child is required to be there doesn't equal the age at which the school is required to provide a full time place.

It's not from when they are 5 that's just completely inaccurate. They are entitled to a full time space from the September they turn 4. The documentation couldn't be clearer.

not until 5. ours refused.

Only if he's already 5 - in this country compulsory school age is the term after the child turns 5, so legally school don't need to provide the 39 weeks of schooling until then (nor do parents have to have their child in education until then). It may be inconvenient, but it's true, I know because parents in my child's year challenged it and failed.

It isn't OP's problem to sort. The school need to offer a full time place from day 1.

you just need to sort something. unpaid leave, work around it with DH, as family or friends. I get it is a total pain but it's your problem to sort...

The school have no choice but to take him. They are not doing the OP a favour. He's entitled to be there full time from day 1 and pretending otherwise is misleading and why parents don't feel like they can argue against the pointless settling in process some schools still operate.

Well said.

I honestly don't understand why people keep saying settling in sessions and staggered starts are beneficial. They're not, and most EYFS staff realise children cope better when they have routines and consistency, which won't happen until they start full time and with a full class.

In my experience, the staff aren't just sat around doing nothing on those half days, they're doing home visits and preparing for the new term. The school won't just take your child because half days are inconvenient for you - they're inconvenient for lots of people but they make arrangements (I used a childminder, other people asked family or friends).

Just send him in OP.

There'll be others doing the same, the evidence that short days are beneficial is absent, it doesn't work for you and your family and he's already well used to nursery.

But children can't truly settle into a situation until they're in full time and with a full class. Settling into a class of 10 and leaving at lunchtime isn't helpful when the reality is a class of 30 and full days.

And that's before we get to the the random people collecting, and confusion over why they're at school today, but then off for 2 days. Then back at nursery for a day, before another half a school day, and then being collected by great uncle Jim as both of their parents are at work.

My ds's nursery offered half days to help cover the transition period although of course you would have to transport between the two. Would that be an option?

Yes and to settle in he needs to experience the whole school day. He needs to understand the routine of going to school, having lunch and leaving at the end of the day. He needs the consistency of every day being the same not chopping and changing and some of the kids not being in or not eating dinner on Monday but eating it on Tuesday etc.

Routines are so important in helping them settle so how can days or weeks of uncertainty help him do that effectively?

Our school the reception teacher actually said it was better for the children to have clear understanding that its full days from day 1.