Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think the whole "phasing in" thing at school is just a PITA!

292 replies

Maggietess · 01/09/2013 12:14

DD2 starts school tomorrow, the equivalent of reception class. We have first day she stays for an hour with mum or dad (great idea). Rest of this week shes in for 2 1/2 hours a day (OK I'm still with the idea in general).

Then some more kids start next week so we've another week of in til 1130.
Then the week after its 1230.
Then finally in the 4th week it's full day til 2.

And this is the improved version of settling in, it used to take nearly til halloween to get them all in with a couple of kids starting every day.

I can understand the teachers needing a couple of days, even a week to properly get to know everyone but is 3 full weeks of it not a bit ott???

They then repeat a slightly shortened version of this in P1.

Add to that that our junior school finishes at 2 and senior school at 3 and you have some parents doing collections at 12.30, 2 and 3. Total pita.

Surely its all just a bit unnecessary given that most kids these days will have been at some form of nursery before??

Or AIBtotallyU?

OP posts:
motownmover · 01/09/2013 22:46

I thought the law was changed so that your children could settle in quickly and you did not have to have ridiculous settling in periods.

wonkylegs · 01/09/2013 22:47

Staggered starts for my DS at reception actually caused huge problems with him settling in. He'd been at (a different) nursery full time since he was a baby and was used to a full 8-6 day... A week of an hour or so a day, then just up til lunch had him confused as to what the hell was going on. Teacher took me to one side and said she wasn't sure he was coping, must be the long day without mum blah blah, I explained actually this was a much shorter time without mummy and I was sure it was the mucking about with the day and sure enough as soon as he went FT he was fine.
It seemed particularly daft in his year as all but 4 kids had been in the exact same classroom(shared nursery/reception room) & group for nursery yet everybody had a long winded settling in period.

MrsCakesPremonition · 01/09/2013 22:52

I don't think it is necessary to faff about for weeks and weeks.
Our school does full days from day 1. They start on a Thursday (usually about 10 days after the rest of the school go back) and do two full days, then they have the weekend to rest up, then it's business as usual on the following Monday.
It really doesn't seem to cause any problems.

AnotherWorld · 01/09/2013 22:53

But this is my point they are not ridiculous for some children and you don't know how your child will react - and neither do they - so school and you talk and then plan for the worst.

Yes it's difficult to plan around. But it's also a one off thing.

Wheresmycaffeinedrip · 01/09/2013 22:55

No, it's a one off thing PER CHILD.

Retroformica · 01/09/2013 22:56

Our phase in involves 8 weeks and doing mornings or afternoons each week. Seemed to work really well for most kids. Mine especially. The few that had been in institutions pre school seemed to have better stamina. They were not the norm though.

AnotherWorld · 01/09/2013 22:57

Yes. Sorry. Per child. I only have three.

NiceTabard · 01/09/2013 22:58

Our school does 2.5 weeks settling in and says that if any children need longer that will be arranged between parents and teacher.

In DD1 year no-one needed that.

4 weeks or 6 weeks settling in is unnecessary for most children and disruptive for families.

School should plan for the majority - which will be a shorter settling in - and make arrangement for ones for whom that is not long enough.

Plenty of people on here have said their children were unsettled by the varying routine with settling in and would have been happier FT from start. Why are their needs less important than children who need longer.

NiceTabard · 01/09/2013 22:59

8 WEEKS? Shock

NiceTabard · 01/09/2013 23:00

Do you have many working families at your school Retro? Did they say how they managed that? What an absolute nightmare.

MrsCakesPremonition · 01/09/2013 23:01

One school I know of was still settling children in up to February half term.

AnotherWorld · 01/09/2013 23:02

(Sorry - my last comment was a bit goady)

Still comes back to "plan for the worst and hope for the best" to me. So when DS2 starts next year we will hope he settles quickly but work with the school on what's best for him (whilst planning how to spend all those lovely nursery fee savings...)

Iwillorderthefood · 01/09/2013 23:03

Not read it all, but just wanted to say, that parents of children with 4 or six week phase in are lucky. Where I live it's half days until January.

Wheresmycaffeinedrip · 01/09/2013 23:04

Planning for the worst can merely be providing the option. As a pp said, the needs of the other children should also be considered. They are just as important.

Picturesinthefirelight · 01/09/2013 23:05

Parental leave is a bit if a red herring though as although you ate entitled to it your employer has the right to say when you take it.

Do for example dh works in a school. He could have applied for parental leave but his head could say no September is a crucial time of year , new kids, new classes eye. Take your leave in 6 months time in March as we are slowing down for Easter.

Fairdene · 01/09/2013 23:10

I never did this sort of rubbish with mine. They just started at school - end of. Or at least they three days a week for a term, then five, but that was as phased as we got.

Original poster
Maggietess · 01/09/2013 23:10

So to summarise (I know you'll be quick to tell me if I screw up and summarise wrongly here!) yes it's a pita, most parents on this thread think it's difficult to manage but do manage to do it... Noone is entirely sure there's a strong rationale to it altho there's a definite feeling that some sort of phasing in is helpful.
Overall we would prefer it if after a small amount of general phasing in, for say the first week (to give kids opportunity to get used to new environment and routine) there was full time for all those except kids whose parents and teacher in conjunction thought would benefit from a prolonged settling in.

A smaller number think we should suck it up, we knew having kids was tough, it's not about us, it's only a small time in our lives and it's definitely in the kids best interests so roll with it!

Does that (roughly!!!) do it.

OP posts:
NiceTabard · 01/09/2013 23:13

1/2 days until January?

Picture YY and also you can't take it after your child turns 5 so will be irrelevant for some people - lots for people at IWillOrderTheFood's school.

This is surely impossible for people where there is no SAHP / part time & flexi type person in the household surely?

I am not sure that schools should be allowed to do that as the "norm". For children who need it is one thing but for all of them it seems just causing unnecessary and possibly really severe difficulties for the stability of families.

Wheresmycaffeinedrip · 01/09/2013 23:13

You forgot the number of posters who stated that it had a severe negative impact on the child and was infant counter productive

Wheresmycaffeinedrip · 01/09/2013 23:14

In fact Blush

NiceTabard · 01/09/2013 23:15

Yes I think it does Maggie.

Most employers will allow up to 2 weeks hols, more than that is therefore going to be a genuine problem for lots of people. I can't see there is any justification for 4 weeks / 6 weeks / 8 weeks / 12 weeks. That's just nuts.

Fairdene · 01/09/2013 23:21

That wouldn't summarise how I'd view such a ridiculous regime, had I had to suffer it.

I think a term or two of three days to start then five full days is more than adequate to do the job. None of my DC ever did a half day at all. What they do in Reception is hardly strenuous and the school days are geared to slow down as the DC do, after a extremely early lunch. It's all very gentle. I can't see that coming home at 3.30pm is any more physically or emotionally draining than coming home at 1.30pm after lunch, or even at noon before lunch. Basically, the deal is something to eat then a snooze or a story or telly. It's not strenuous either way.

Devora · 01/09/2013 23:42

Another one here whose school only does half days till January.

When my older child did that, I was luckily on adoption leave. The younger one is just starting the nursery class at that school, and they stagger their starting dates. She will not be STARTING her half day sessions for nearly three weeks. So by the time she is doing full school days she will have done FOUR TERMS at that school!

I am boggled at the posters who pompously tell us that schools are not here to sort out our childcare problems (and that we shouldn't have had our children if we dare to find any of this inconvenient). One of the things I do at work is to persuade businesses to provide more flexible, family-friendly work opportunities to parents. We try to get them to see how this makes sense for everyone, how recruiting from the widest possible pool delivers greater talent, how a worker who isn't freaking about their childcare arrangements is more likely to be settled and committed and productive.

Well, if it's good for business it's good for schools too. Of course it isn't their primary function to worry about parents' childcare arrangements, but if they take a more holistic view they will get more settled children, calmer and more co-operative parents, and more productive and loyal staff.

DingbatsFur · 01/09/2013 23:47

My son's first day of school starts tomorrow at 12. 12-2. Stupid system. It is not even nursery.

DingbatsFur · 01/09/2013 23:49

I am holding it all together with 2 condensed working patterns, a kind childminder and a mother imported from overseas.

Swipe left for the next trending thread