To think 2 and a half weeks 'lead in' to school is mad!

[fifitot]

DD started reception. The children have 4 days consisting of 2 hours, 4 days the following week from 9.30-2 and then it is not until the following week they start full time.

It's madness. Most of the kids in her class have been in the nursery anyway and hardly need nearly 3 weeks to bed in to school!

Talk about inconvenience for parents. I'm all for a gentle introduction for the kids but think this is ridiculous. Every other school near us does a couple of half days and then away they go! How people who work full time manage it I do not know.

It will be half term and they will have hardly done a full day in school!

yes nappy you are

saying that, i m so grateful that my dc and older sister went straight in 8.50-3.15 as his friend does monday/wednesday/friday 9-3.15 and then haas tuesday and thursday of NO school - WTF???

Now, Ormirian will remember but I am fairly sure our foirst school did half a term of random seeming swapping between half days on mornings and afternoons. Was hard work to manage around, luckily was on maternity elave but otherwise- !

Here, it's a staggered start for batches of kids, and after 2 days they let you know when your child is ready to go in- usually immediately. We are lucky though as most if not all schools in this area of Wales have a nursery attached to school that integrates a lot in the pre-school year.

Oh and WRT to starting tooe arly / getting them in rapidly- with ds3 I fought the LEA to get a Christmas part time then Easter full time start so deffo not that (SN and late july baby- double whammy- didn;t work out FT as we suspected so now in an SNU).

I have not read the whole of this thread so my contribution may already have been posted by someone else. All schools in my London Borough do half days until they break up til Christmas. I would kill for four weeks of half days. My DD went into Pre-school 8am til 6pm three days a week previous to this. The only reason we are coping is that I was made redundant, otherwise we would still be paying as much for childcare as we were before.

I am not complaining in some ways since it is nice to have her home for that bit longer, but it is insane for working parents.

OH and did I add anything about the unbelievable amount of running around that would have been involved if I still had my job, added to a 1.5 hour commute each way (JOY JOY JOY)

When they have been going to that school nursery 9-12 or 1-4 its seems a bit wacky to then go to school gradually for 3 hrs at a time or less in some cases so an even short er day , surely nursery school attached to the school gets them used to the environment anyhows. I am dreading my ds startting next sept as i cant see my employer letting me fanny about so then what do i do - start him 3 weeks later with no settling in? He goes 3 full days at day care as it is as well as switching to school nursery every day for the afternoon.

i have three weeks of 2 hrs a day, he would get more at preschool. it is a joke! and so un-needed. most kids have experience of childcare by this age.

Reception is a bit of a strange place anyway: it's play based, like nursery, but instead of having 1: 8 ratios, they have 1:15; DS1 has just started (and he was dying to go full days from the start), half days for 2 weeks and nowe "full time". I am very lucky in that his nursery runs an afterschool club and has picked him up on his half days when I'm working and taken him back to nursery, then on to afterschool club, all with people he has known for years. Had this not been possible, a hastily arranged childminder (if we could have found one) whom he didn't know, to fill in gaps I couldn't, would have been much more unsettling than just going "full time". I do realise that some children are more ready than others, (and that's not purely age based; another of my concerns about DS1 is that he is in the "younger" class, where the emphasis is much less "academic" than he's used to. The older class, is encouraged to take a reading book home for instance and the younger ones are not (WTF? As if being 4 days younger, which is all he is, being the eldest in the "younger" class, makes him less likely to want a story book); but for those children who aren't ready, staying in nursery for an extra term/ year would probably be much better than phased starts and faffing around. DS1 (and I) would be driven nuts by swapping mornings/ afternoons/ lunch/ not lunch.

It's bonkers.

I know one little boy who is doing mornings for a week, then it changes to afternoons for a week, then back onto mornings and then it is half term. He is confused already, and since they stagger the entry and he is one of the youngest all the other children have been there for a while, making friends without him.

What is the half-day thing for anyway? My DD (summer birthday) started on full days and it has been fine. It's not as if 4 year olds need naps. She loves it, everyone started at once, the children are responding to having a settled routine and noone is confused.

You are all entitled to demand full day schooling for your children, did you know that? If random teacher-centred timings (for often this is what they are) are difficult for your family to work with, this could well be an option.

It´s a pain, and totally unnecessary when your DC has already been full time in a nursery. It messes with the routine, and it can be hard to find childminders for just 2-3 weeks to cover. Not to mention the confusion in changing tax credits.

I had to change from having DS in full time nursery-preschool (all in same place), to school till 12.30 for one week, then childminder for afternoon, 2 weeks all morning including lunch, then child minder for afternoon. Finally, full day, followed by afterschool club at the school, a routine which has stayed the same for 3 years. Such a palaver, and DS would have been fine to just go in straight off.

You are also allowed to decide not to send your child in one day, or to go in late or finish early, if they get tired, until the beginning of the term after they are five.

Haliborange My 4 year old still has a nap!! In fact he has fallen asleep twice already at school.

ah, then perhaps full days would be a lot for him! My DD on the other hand seems not remotely tired by school (irritatingly, really!)

The thing I would most like to see in this country is more flexibility about the age at which children start school. I used to live in the US and it was quite normal for people to defer kindergarten or to do 2 years of kindergarten so their children could socialise properly and be ready for big school. I mean, DD is fine with full days and was bored at nursery but 4 does seem terribly young and I am not sure what the hurry is. Our LEA allocates school places at 4, but of course there is no legal requirement for children to attend school until 5 and even that is on the young side if you look at Germany etc.

Dd2 is doing mornings. She has lunch and I pick her up at 1pm. She is a Summer birthday. This was offered to all children born from January, but only a few took it up. There were two start days and if you were going full time straight away, well you started full time on the first day.

I can change her to full days whenever she wants.

This is the end of her second full week of mornings and I'm glad she's only doing mornings, as the tiredness is starting to show. It's not simply about hours, they have to get used to a whole new place and routine. I don't think the "she did the same number of hours at pre-school and could cope" reasoning holds up for some children. My dd2 did the same number of hours, but is much more tired after school than pre-school.

YABU. The optional change in school enrollment (from the term after 5th birthday to the September after 4th birthday) was to give parents more choice. If your child isn't ready for FT school or you don't want to participate in gradual settling programmes then don't. Keep your child at home or in childcare until they are 5.

my son nursery is quite OK and he adapted very well. however I don't like his key worker! she is lacking in enthusiasm and
she is not making eye contact with parents while talking. Also they don't have targets for kids that age? what do you think about targets for nursery? I think it is important especially for bilingual children -they need more support.

DS is now year 1. But in reception, autumn children started week 1, spring in week 2 and summer in week 3. All did 1 week till 12, then stayed for lunch. They started staying for the full day again in staggered weeks. DS is a summer baby and was full time by half term.

Yes, it was an inconvenience for parents. Worse though was the fact that it highlighted who the younger children were. His best friend from nursery was a December birthday. They no longer play together as some of the older boys in class told my DS that he couldn't play with them as he was too little. He apparently had to play with the summer boys. Teacher was not bothered by such issues as all happened in playground. But DS has lost a good friend. He did try to carry on playing with his friend but was outnumbered by the older (and much bigger) boys in class.

I hate staggered starts as feel it has disadvantaged my son so much.

I think the younger children should start first where they are all going to be full time by the end of September.

It's excessive but not as bad as my friend. Count your blessings. She has mornings only till half term. Then TILL XMAS she has to pick her kid up for lunch and bring her home then take her back again for the afternoon. WHAT???????????? For half a term. That seems ridiculous and quite disruptive for the kids - poor things will be exhausted. Full day plus going to school and back so many times.

Ours is a much quicker process and it worked fine for ds1, but he was at nursery in the same school and is also one of the oldest in class.

Thing is for some children they need 3 weeks of settling in. Remember some are only just 4.

and some are now just 5 (yesterday),and the eldest in the year and more than ready to go, i would go insane if dc had to fluff about and do am, then lunch, then after lunch etc

i agree it depends on the child, some are ready,some arnt,my now 5yr was more than ready to go to full time school last end of sept, when just 4, let alone jan/easter time but only do sept intake

its a shame schools dont do jan/easter intakes, like they used to do

DS went last year 1/2 adys till Christmas which was a nightmare for me as full time working mum. DD is due to go nxt year and now they only go 8:45 til 1pm for 6wks! nxt year will be even quicker I think. Its a tuff one as some kids ready 4 school others need time. On the continent they dont go till their 7yrs!!!

Scroobious - the switch to 4 doesn't seem very optional to me. Our LEA says that if you defer until your child is 5 they will go straight into year 1 rather than reception, so then they'll be disadvantaged by having missed out on starting with the others. Rocks and hard places. A true (and sensible) choice would be to be able to defer and to get a reception place when your child is 5.

I so agree with you, Haliborange.