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

DD’s school is doing a week of half days for one group while the othe group isn’t in. Then the first group isn’t in for a week while the other group has its week, then two days of half days for both groups then they finally bloody start on 20 September.

I don’t see how it will help her settle to be taken out if nursery for a week, then go back again, then out again, assuming she’s in the first group.

You have a right to full time education for your child and can require them to provide it. You won't be the only one so won't be "that parent"

Just write to them saying that your child is perfectly used to full time education at nursery (give typical hours) and such a long settling-in would be disruptive to their routine and detrimental to their transition to school, and therefore will be attending full time from the first day of term. You child has been awarded a full time place and the school is being paid by the government to provide a full time place. They do not have the power to deny that place except through official disciplinary "exclusion" procedures which clearly aren't relevant here. The half-time transition period is helpful to the kids who have been at home with a parent since birth but is the opposite of helpful to your child and they have no right to impose it.

Years ago, when eldest started school I missed out on a family holiday that summer to be able to take the time off for the 2 weeks half days staggered start. I was not best pleased but like many we have no local family support so couldn't see a way around it.

The school thankfully only does a week of this now.

It’s really normal (and annoying) to have a protracted settling in period for Reception children.

It's also unlawful to make it compulsory.

It worked well for my children. Difficult around work for lots of us but that’s life as a parent. The sick days with various bugs we’re harder to manage when they were younger as obviously you can’t plan for them.

This is exactly what my friend did, and received a snotty email back from the head saying "this is school, not childcare". It was overturned, friend is now on board of governors and head has moved on...

My son never went to nursery or any formal preschool, had 3 settling in sessions at school and then went full time from day one with no issues. His teacher told me she'd let me know if they had any concerns, which they didn't have to do. On the other hand, my friend's child had this for 4 weeks, having been in nursery full time from 12 months. They ended up using various friends and relatives, including me, to cover. I can tell you which child had the easier transition into school, and it wasn't the one being shuffled around to cover.

I always think its very telling that schools never trumpet their extended settling in process before the admissions process finishes, and so parents like the OP end up getting a shock.

Ds did full days at nursery and preschool but the change to school was still a big one as expectations are very different and he was mentally exhausted and cranky as hell the first term of school. He needed his bedtime in earlier when he started school too.

Our school only had a few days settling in time, but I think that was more for the benefit of the parents than the kids. His class size was only 15 so think that helped too.

Fully agree. If the point of having half days is to help children settle into school life, how does introducing a brand new temporary person to collect them at home time aid that settling?

They were not brand new. We made sure to use them for babysitting a few times before we used them for the school settling in period, we were present the first couple of times and made sure our children were comfortable.

The "this is school not childcare" line is exactly why there was no mention of childcare in my advice. This is solely about the child's right to full time education, nothing to do with childcare.

My reply was about the general principle of filling in the childcare gaps with temporary people, which you said everyone needs to find a way to deal with. Your kids were fine with being collected by people with whom they didn't have an established relationship, and you were clearly in a position to throw a bit of money at the problem to help them get to know each other a few days before school started. Other people's circumstances will be different.

Such a pain. I can see it could be useful to have the option of a staggered start as sensitive kids who haven't done similar length days at nursery might benefit. But an absolutely huge logistical pain for FT working parents who've spent four years relying on nursery. My kids are older now but this cropped up both times. It was proposed my son would do half days for 2 weeks. I had a chat with head teacher and she agreed it would be fine to do full days from the start. When my daughter was due to start there was a different head who proposed a bizarre scheme where they would do full days but in small staggered groups. So group 1 on Monday and Tuesday and then not return until groups 2 3 and 4 had all done a 2 day session. This made no sense as daughter would have started school then returned to nursery (if they still had space!) then school again. I asked if she could be in group 4 and luckily that was agreed. The head has always been very sniffy about working mothers "not supporting their child's education", even though she is one herself!

@JaukiVexnoydi believe me my friend was equally careful in her wording and as her child was September born and more than ready, the points she made about shorter days being unsettling and disruptive were sincere ones, not just a means to disguise an underlying annoyance about childcare. The school actually said they should send the girl to school in the morning and back to nursery in the afternoon!

Why are you pleased that your school made your children do 3 weeks of random half days, that meant you had to use precious annual leave and rope in another parent who was a SAHM?

What benefit did your children get out this?

I’m happy to use my annual leave for things with my children, starting school was a big thing and I wanted to be there for the first week. As for roping in ‘another parent’, she’s not just ‘another parent’, I did say she was my friend, a very close friend actually. Friends help each other out, we’re happy to do anything we can for each other, we are like sisters and second mums to each other’s children. 😊

Benefits to my kids? They were both nervous of starting school and when little, they both did better in smaller groups when first meeting people. The teacher really got to know my children and said herself that the smaller groups made that easier. One of my children is autistic, not diagnosed at that point, and walking into 12 children instead of more than double that was a lot less daunting, less noisy, less sensory issues, more quieter time with teacher/TA etc.

three weeks does sound a nightmare
does this not depend on the brrthday any more?

Ours did a day. Thankfully as I have a job!

Our school does this and it's a pain in the backside. In our case three weeks of 11.30 finish. It's how they have always done it.

The school doesn’t need to approve it - it’s a statutory requirement for full time education to be provided from the start of the September term.

What is physically or mentally tiring if in nursery 8- 6pm?

Shouldn't they just adapt the day so the first three weeks include more playtime & quiet activities so the children feel less stressed.

Having most households with a SAHP is a thing of the past, but it's bizarre that schools don't take this into account!

We've got 7 days of half days. All of reception in for the mornings so no benefit of smaller classes. I don't feel like it's going to benefit my daughter beyond the first couple of days. She'd benefit more from us having more annual leave left for half term / xmas. I can see how it might benefit kids who aren't used to whole days away but it's frustrating how it's presented, seemingly by all schools, as not up for discussion.

Totally feel your pain but I think all schools do it sadly (except private)

How do schools not provide it? Do they not contravene their requirement in some way by staggering the start

My child was in nursery from a young age so when she started school, was so fired up with energy after those half days. We we're having to find activity to wear her out each afternoon

Even a full day is only 6 hours

They do eventually get super tired though as I think school is more mentally draining

You will need to work from home, engage outside help and take leave for most of September

@Parker231 why are you telling me this? That is the point I was making. Have you confused me with someone else?

(On a practical level, the school does have to agree to have the child in the building though).