3 weeks of half days for reception children.

[Tohaveandtohold]

So my child is starting reception in sept and we got an email on Friday of their plans for
their transition and the new term. My main issue is they expect them to do 3 weeks of half day so half of the class will do 9-12 the first 2 weeks and then at week 3 they’ll be there for lunch so 9-12:45. The other half of the class will do half day in the afternoon.
I just feel this is out of touch. My child currently goes to nursery 4 days a week doing 8-6 though she’s picked up around 5 anyway and has never been clingy, so I can’t see how 3 weeks of half day will benefit her. Also we both work, luckily I’ll only go to the office 2 days a week so dh will pick up those days and we’re not using up all our annual leave unnecessarily. Can I request she only does half day for a week and that they have to provide her with full time education.
Like I don’t want to be ‘that’ parent at the beginning of her school journey but I feel 3 weeks is just ridiculous and out of touch

Thank you @immergeradeaus for a fantastic post.

Hopefully all the parents who are genuinely concerned about trying to make arrangements and thinking this is normal and they have to comply will see through all the scaremongering posts

I agree. Even if this thead helps one parent to realise they can send the full time from day one then that's a brilliant outcome. Parents shouldn't be worried about missing work or desperately searching for ad-hoc childcare. If they feel their child will manage then they should send their child in, and stop worrying about how they will manage to cover the staggered starts and weeks of half days

If many parents decide on full time from day one, I wonder how they would fit in home visits?

Not helped either by all these private nurseries that apparently accept school age kids to cover the hours they are legally entitled to be in school - nice little earner for them, isn't it?

What, you have to sit at home waiting for the school to visit you before the child can start?

We had home visits for the first week by teacher and TA, then a few pt days for some dc, then pt for all until September 20th

Parents forget that schools are for educating students - they should not be seen as childcare - that’s your own responsibility.

Sort of.

The reception teachers visit everyone at home and then start the kids when they have completed their home visits. They do a third of the class for a full day for three days and then everyone

Who is teaching the children who are attending full time from day one if teachers are out visiting?

The reception teachers visit everyone at home and then start the kids when they have completed their home visits.

That's ridiculous.

I don't think anyone does full time from day one in our school.

If we requested it, as our son is in the nursery already they would probably have him in there. It's not full so ratios would be fine.

But it's the risk the school choose to run in organising themselves this way so their decision

I don't think that's fair at all. If nurseries have the space available I wouldn't expect them to not offer it to school age children on principle. It's not their responsibility to fix the problem.

What is evident from this thread is widespread variation in practice of what is supposed to be a standardised national service, plus ignorance of and deliberate obfuscation of the law. Plus a big dollop of gender role stereotyping.

I agree!

My DC’s school didn’t do home visits. It’s not a universal thing. Most of the Reception starters had been in the school nursery, so had already met the Reception teacher through the nursery.

My DC’s school also starts Reception full time from day 1. Presumably because the school think it works best for most of the children.

Not helped either by all these private nurseries that apparently accept school age kids to cover the hours they are legally entitled to be in school - nice little earner for them, isn't it?
Parents can continue to claim their 15/30 hours funding until their child is compulsory school aged. One of my friends did it. It took a bit of pressure on the LA to accept it and they didn't like to publicise it, but it's possible.

I agree with you though on the principle that it's wrong some schools are refusing to offer the children's legal entitlement for several weeks.

Parents forget that schools are for educating students - they should not be seen as childcare - that’s your own responsibility
I agree with you. However if a parent chooses to educate their children through school, it is reasonable that the children access the full time education that they're entitled to during term time, not have multiple weeks on heavily reduced hours.

Parents will likely have arranged wrap-around childcare outside of the school day so could have the silly situation of sending their child to breakfast club/childminder, then to school for a morning, then have an afternoon where they have to take time off work, then an after school club that's paid for but not used because school haven't given the children their full legal entitlement.

Parents forget that schools are there to educate students. Childcare is your own responsibility.

as has been said more than once on this thread, that’s not how the country is set up. The presumption of benefit entitlement, divorce settlements etc is that once a child is in school, both parents are available to work.

It seems some schools have forgotten that they should be educating their recepetion students. Forcing children to do half days for weeks means a lot of lost learning time.

It doesn't become true just because you repeat it! Please read @immergeradeaus post about ten before yours, and the one quoting the Oxford City Council earlier in the thread.

Exactly!

My youngest starts in September too, his school do 1 morning for 2 hours in the first week (small groups of 8 I think so they get 1 day that week each), then the next week they leave just before lunch, then the week after they stay for lunch then go home and THEN, 4 weeks into term they go full time. I would be glad of your situation. Yes it’s a pain for working parents but kids do need that time to settle.

Well, the nurseries are fairly knowledgeable about all things to do with transition to school, and a lot of the time is spent preparing the children for moving on. When a parent comes to them and says “aargh, I’ve just found out that Bobby can’t go to school in the afternoons until October, can you take him then instead?” it wouldn’t be that hard for someone in the nursery to say “just to let you know you can insist the school do take him”.

And to the person who said that it’s not an earner for the nurseries because the parents can use the 15/30 hours funding, the nursery is still receiving that money (albeit that it barely touches the sides in terms of their actual costs).

Anyway, as I said earlier in the thread, I am really surprised that so many of you are reporting that nurseries did agree to take kids after they began a staggered school start because ours would have found that a monumental pain in the arse, as it messes up their intake numbers of parents who will stick with them for the whole year, creates the wrong balance of child ages and stages and puts pressure on staff to maintain ratios.

I really wish people would stop talking about children as if they are all the same.

THEN, 4 weeks into term they go full time. I would be glad of your situation. Yes it’s a pain for working parents but kids do need that time to settle.

That is ridiculous!!

Chldren don't need 4 weeks of random half days, they need stability and routine. Very few children benefit from a staggered start, and those who need it should be offered it. No school should be forcing children to miss 4 weeks of full time education, and no parent should need to take 4 weeks off or juggle ad-hoc childcare just to "settle" their child into school.

Yep, we didn’t have home visits, we did have a chance to bring the child to school for a 20 minute 1 on 1 chat with the teacher, I think that happened in July before school started though.