Staged/part time starting of school is unfair?

[FurierTransform]

My DD has just started reception.
The school she's attending have this system where the children don't all start on the Monday full time, but have 4 x 2-3 hour sessions, spread across 2 weeks, to 'ease into it' before attending full hours.

AIBU to think this is totally ridiculous?

I'm sure many people have had to take 2 weeks holiday from their work to bridge this gap between their children finishing nursery, and actually starting school full time, so potentially now will have to forgo a summer holiday, or work over Christmas etc!
Luckily we have flexible jobs so have just about coped.

Seems so ill thought out and inconsiderate to families with 2 working parents.

Well it quite literally is an entitlement as outlined above. I wasn't aware at the time, and despite raising it as a significant issue in feedback consistently since then on behalf of many, school has never volunteered that this was an option. Obviously no one wants to get off on the wrong foot if they can help it, so I wouldn't complain lightly, but it's a bit odd schools can be so casual about it really. I can live with 1-2 weeks but we had 6. Then a constant refrain of how we had "so much to get through" before Christmas. Was odd.

I wish I’d known they can’t force you to do this if you request full time from the start. My DC didn’t start until mid October. Absolutely ridiculous, I had to fund a further 6 weeks of nursery and explain to him every day why he wasn’t going to school as we walked past lots of his school nursery friends in the morning (on the way to our expensive private nursery!!!)

Our school did half days for the youngest half of the year till half term. I don't remember what we did for DS, but for DD nursery picked her up from school and I picked her up from there at the usual time.

It is a pain, but some younger kids need time to get used to it. DD was the youngest in her year and absolutely did not need it!

Where? I haven't seen any

@longestlurkerever the duty to full time school doesn’t arise until on 31 December, 31 March or 31 August following their fifth birthday - whichever comes first.
So no, there is no “entitlement”. As I said above it’s as much of a transition in parents moving away from
the commercial luxe of nursery to stretched state provision
Though I think every year everyone moans about this !

Working in partnership with parents is supposed to be what good schools do.

It seems ridiculous. My nephew started nursery this week and is in full time hours but his big sister is not due to be in reception properly until nearly the end of the month. The nursery and school are right beside each other.

Most parents have just had 6 weeks+ of "making the effort" to cover the school holidays. Annual leave isn't infinite.

Some s hooks don't like to be up front about your rights.

However. a previous poster was right. Your child has the right to attend full time from the first day of term.

DD has just finished her first week and it was ft for all kids from day 1.

She only did a couple of mornings a week at nursery so I was dubious about the transition but there seems to be much less structure and fewer rules in reception than nursery and she’s been tired but not overwhelmed or exhausted.

It’s worked really well.

@Littlefish that’s not right.
Ft is from on 31 December, 31 March or 31 August following their fifth birthday - whichever comes first.

I was an Years Years leader for years. For the last 10 years we've given parents the choice of part time or full time for the first couple of weeks, depending on their child and their circumstances.

Almost all chose full time from day 1.

When my niece started school last year, she had (iirc) a four day week the first week, with 2 days of mornings and 2 days of afternoons, then full time the following week, which seemed very reasonable.

Some of these sound bloody ridiculous, though. Even a very shy child is unlikely to benefit from 2 terms of part time. 2 weeks to adjust to a new environment and different rules, sure, but I can't see what benefit there is in dragging it out much longer.

That's not right - see the link from the .gov page shared above. The duty to attend school applies the term after you turn 5. The duty to provide a full time place arises the term after your 4th birthday (in England). There's also the free childcare hours which you are entitled to if your child doesn't attend school.

@Wingingit11 I r just copied this from the county guidance for my county. Perhaps it varies geographically I. England.
'Children who have reached their fourth birthday are entitled to attend full-time in a reception class from the September after their fourth birthday.'

@longestlurkerever you beat me to it.

My dc are past this stage but I think it's ridiculous and probably way more confusing for the kids than just starting. I'd think one introductory morning/afternoon would suffice.

Yes I thought this as well, so it wouldn't have helped.

Also childminders will interpret their ratios as: if your child isn't in full time school yet they count as under 5s; once they are allowed in full time they count as 5s and over. My CM wouldn't have my son until the fourth week when he was in FT, anyway. I don't know if she was right, but it's something to be aware of.

Our school made it optional when DD started in 2019.
DS has just started reception this week and there was no staged start unless requested (3 class intake, 1 child in his class and I don’t know about other 2 classes).

they said they don’t feel it is very beneficial these days as the vast majority are coming from nursery and used to being in a learning environment all day. Plus they felt it was hard for parents to manage.

when they did do it, it wasn’t small groups, it was the whole class in together for a shorter day.

Not every child has been in nursery full time, and so the phases start is better for them. I don't think their start to school should be made more stressful for the convenience of parents. It won't harm the other kids who have been in full time to do part time for a week. I'm sure it is a PITA to have to juggle childcare or take leave but surely you'd rather every kid has a solid transition to school...?

YANBU, it's a pain in the arse. And presumably an absolute nightmare for any teacher parents who simply cannot take the time off. DD has a friend with two secondary school teachers for parents and they had to just insist she went in full time.

After reading about this on MN and panicking about how we would potentially cope I was relieved that DS's school didn't do this when he started reception last year. They had them all in full-time from day 1. They all settled and the teacher got to know them full-time so I'm a bit bemused by the fact that so many schools think it's necessary.

Incidentally DS had been in nursery for 2.5 days a week so it wasn't a case that he used to being in full-time. It was still absolutely fine.

My son was only 3 and a half when he started in school, one of the youngest in the year. It was 2 hours in the morning, then another hour, then another on top in the afternoon, it took ages for him to build up to 'full-time'. And I understood that, he was just a baby for God's sake. It's not all about you. It's not childcare. They've got to build up to it!

Can you provide the peer reviewed evidence that this is best for children. Two of my children would have struggled terribly with this , they needed a clear and regular routine , different hours and people every day would have massively unsettled them .,