Staggered start is illegal exclusion

[HapptobeTHATparent]

DD turns 5 on 2nd September. Just received her school starter paperwork and it's a staggered start, so won't actually start full time until 16th September. No home visits so no need for staggered start. 26 children already attend the school nursery full time.

AIBU to accuse the school of illegal exclusion by not allowing DD and the 25 others already attending school (nursery) full time (plus any new starters who wish to start full time straight away), to return to school on the 1st September like the rest of the school.

State maintained school (not academy).

Slightly tounge in cheek, but also hoping for some links to documents I can quote at the school.

But may be, because she is a teacher, she knows she's not being OTT.

OP being a teacher is highly relevant as teachers cannot take leave except in school holidays. How on earth could two teacher parents take the time off to accommodate some of the more ridiculous settling regimes if there is no family nearby?

My friend works for the LA in education, in an managerial admin role, and is also not allowed leave in September!

Some of your comments are concerning - do you not advise parents of their rights for children to start full time from day one or is a staggered start presented as the only option?

It isn’t tough - if a parent wants their DC to start full time from day one, the school can’t refuse to provide full time education from the start. It’s not optional by the school

DH and I are both teachers and it was hideous doing part-time starts. DC1I was very lucky - her old nursery took her and even picked her up halfway through the day. DC2 the nursery took her but wouldn't collect so I had to go out from school in the middle of the day, collect her and take her to nursery. They were going to do this for two weeks but then after a couple of days they decided the class were so settled they would just let them start full time. That was much easier but I was a bit 😠 at the two weeks of additional nursery costs I'd stumped up for unnecessarily.

As PP have said though, they have to provide a statutory full time place from the first day of term so just inform the school you will be sending them full time.

Thankfully we didn't have this, everyone started full time in Sept unless they opted for a staggered start. We did have settling in sessions beforehand but these were on different days and different times so most could attend which was great.

Thank you for this.

I think that it's worth challenging schools every so often on how they manage the start of reception. Demographics are different for every school, but they're also changing over time. In our area, there are rather fewer full-time SAHMs than there used to be, and that means more parents for whom the staggered starts are problematic. We also have a new nursery in the area which runs 8-6 rather than 9-3, so probably rather more children who are used to longer days, and who aren't already signed up with a childminder.

I think it makes sense for schools to review regularly whether the benefits of a staggered start still outweigh the disadvantages, for their local population.

At least one of our local nurseries will do a lunchtime pick-up from the reception classes in September. This solves the parents' childcare problems, but in terms of settling, the children are still doing a full day, but in two settings. For those who weren't at that nursery, they're also having to get used to two new settings at once. It's difficult to see that it's benefitting those children to have a staggered start.

I don't think most people mind a little bit of staggering - having a few children start each day of the first week, but we had four weeks of half days (and a lot of grandparents on extended visits).

lanthanum
I agree with you.

It's also worth schools considering the impact on families with multiple children.

Is it really good for the family to have a parent doing 4 different school runs a day to accommodate an extended part time education that they haven't requested, more if breakfast clubs/wraparound/enrichments are involved?

The idea that households have one adult at home who can spend most of the day traipsing back and forth to school whilst pottering at home doing odd jobs in between is something from several decades ago

@Parker231

We actually do advise parents that their child is entitled to a full time start, but we also say that in our experience children benefit greatly from 2 days in smaller groups getting to know their teacher, completely new surroundings and new friends. We also offer an extended transition period beyond the first three days if that's what parents feel is best for their child. Interestingly, I've been taken up on the second option but never the first. It probably does depend entirely on a school's demographic. I'd be prepared to try an intake with no staggered start, as a previous poster suggested, it's good to challenge long-held assumptions and I like to think that most schools want to work with parents to make transition periods as successful as possible.

When my daughter started school (2 form entry) it was full time straight away or the option of half days for the first week. Not one parent chose the half days.

Ì honestly can't remember
.....my kids are now early 20s so it's a bit of a blur! I'm from UK originally so it did seem v odd to me. I guess it was in many ways easier fir the teacher to manage and the more 'established' kids helped the new ones integrate. The kids loved having new playmates every Monday lol

You are correct in the fact that your child can legally start on the 2nd. Everyone should also be aware that your cannot use the government funded hours with a childcare provider for those days at the beginning of the autumn term if your child starts reception that term. You may receive an unexpected invoice.