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.

What a stupid comment. Teachers will still work full hours and believe it or not it’s not a cushy job….

For the benefit of the children. Schools are there for the children teachers have got enough to do without having to be personal assistants to the parents.

I don't know whether there's any actual evidence on whether staged starts in general are beneficial but I do know that starting summer-born children later or for fewer hours was found to be actively detrimental. Rather than making it easier for them to be the youngest it made it worse in terms of outcomes - which when you think about it makes sense because they were still the youngest but then also had less time in school than the children who started off at a comparative advantage anyway. This is why starting children at Christmas/Easter depending on birthday used to be really common and now isn't.

My DD only has one week of this. DH took the week off work to be able to take her/pick her up

First day, just an afternoon. Second day, just the morning. Third day, no school. Forth day morning with lunch, today a full day

What I will say is that I think it's a good idea that only the last day was the class of thirty. The previous days have been only fifteen. I don't think it would be a good idea for a child to go from a small class at nursery on a Friday to a class of thirty children they don't know on the Monday

Glad it was only one week of phasing in though, next week we'll use after school club

I had this a with my eldest but it had been abolished by the time my youngest started school.

It's not necessary for most kids who've attended nursery (Although most kids are a year older when starting school in Scotland) and it's a nightmare for working parents.

School is not childcare and is not for the convenience of parents. It is for education and the benefit of children.

HTH

This is not the case until January 1st at the earliest. And that would only be if your child had had their 5th birthday by then. Compulsory school is only for children over 5.

This sort of thing can be such a monumental pain in the arse. I really can't understand why schools fanny about so much, and some of them for weeks on end! I'd have thought it would be very unsettling for the children doing a few hours here, and a few hours there, then mixing it up again and again.

When my children first started school they went mornings only for the first week and then full time thereafter. So half sensible at least.

Personally, I would have favoured full time right from day 1. Cold turkey. Get it all over at once. Most of them have spent a fair bit of time in preschool or nursery anyway and are used to being out of the house for quite some time on many days of the week.

And there is absolutely no evidence that this benefits the children . It’s confusing and unsettling and puts extra pressure on families which is not good for the children .

3 and a half? For actual school? Is this the UK, as I thought it was September after 4th birthday for kids in England?

People are confusing 2 different rules.

Children are entitled to have f/t education provided from the September after their 4th birthday if that is what their parents wish. Hence schools have a duty to provide this option.

And also….

Children are required to be in f/t education from the term after their 5th birthday.

All the school is not childcare thing is slightly ridiculous though. By law children have to have an education and the default is school. Parents using reliable childcare have no choice but to pull children out of private nurseries that suit their needs much better to then suddenly cope with the lunacy of a school and holiday system that was put in place a century ago to accommodate the harvest.

It was definitely not better for my child to go to school for 2.5 hours in the morning for me to then race to school and take him back to nursery for the afternoon in my lunch break. He was confused, especially as all his nursery friends had fully left nursery.

Yes most children manage full days in nursery where they are in a familiar environment with trusted adults and carers. When transitioning to school they are in a new unfamiliar environment with new adults and new children and new routines.

Transition plans help the children to settle
into new routines and to build trust
in the environment and with the adults. 2 adults managing 30 4 year olds is no easy task. Especially if those 4 year olds are anxious and needy.

A holistic approach is needed to help meet the needs of ALL children .

I'm a Reception teacher (Inner London state school). We do a staggered start, taking 5 children a day for the first week (all half days), so all children are in by Friday. Then the whole class does full days from the following week.

I appreciate that it may seem inconvenient, but there are many, many good reasons for doing this.

Not all children have been in nursery. They may have a complete meltdown when left alone for the first time.

Roughly 40% of my class speak little or no English (as do their parents). They will need lots of additional support to settle in and understand even the most basic routines.

About 45% will have some kind of additional need. I say 'will have' because I've not met all of them yet. There are usually at least two children every year with substantial needs that we were unaware of. They will also need a lot of support. Imagine, for example, that five children in the class soil themselves regularly, or are sent to school in nappies, or have no sense of danger and cause harm to themselves or others. This is potentially manageable with a staggered start, but would be chaotic and potentially dangerous without.

School lunchtime can be incredibly stressful for new Reception children. Even sitting in the hall with lots of noisy older children is daunting. With five children every day, the TA and I can sit with them and make them feel more relaxed. (Bear in mind that some of them are still being fed by their parents, or might not be familiar with using cutlery).

If all children were neurotypical, I would still recommend a staggered start. It's a really big deal for them to start school and they should be supported to be comfortable and happy.

I can't answer the slightly sarcastic question about how it impacts learning outcomes per se, but can say confidently that none of my students were inhibited from reaching their Early Learning Goal because of this approach.

I hope that adds some useful perspective. Your own child might cope, which is great, but a significant number cannot.

This is useful thank you (and I was the one who asked about learning outcomes - it wasn't sarcastic at all, I am a worried parent of a Reception aged child who is concerned about whether the school is doing the right thing for her child, apologies if it came across that way).

I will say, I don't think the staggered approach you set out is what people are really talking about though. It sounds like it's just one week of staggered starts which most people can accommodate. I think it's the staggered starts that go on for weeks, or even months, that some people are questioning the value of. Your school's approach sounds eminently sensible.

We had an even more staggered start with DC started reception. There was a week she was in once for 2 hours. Then gradual build up to 4hrs a day then the full day. Took 1 month to settle. We have flexible jobs too so able to work around it but it was a pain. Also had no idea could request a full day from the start otherwise would have asked.

Just think yourselves lucky!
Back in the 80's when my son started reception, as he was summer born, the first term he was afternoons only, second term mornings only and it was only after Easter did he go full time. So in addition to being disadvantaged by being so much younger he only got half the schooling the older ones got. Lucky I was a sahm but that was a bit more usual back then

If there was evidence of the benefit of the benefits of part time starts, or schools even bothered to explain the reasons behind it would help. They is no consistency of approach between schools so it’s not as if this is based on best practice.

Our school had all children in from day one but 2.5 weeks of short days. Very tiring when you’re in a new school, then a new child minder having to return back to school for the older DC. Same problem for SAHP picking up reception and older children. My DC hated it and didn’t know if they were coming or going. Older DC actually does have SEN (diagnosed at 8) and other DC late August born. Both happier and more settled once on full
days. They could offer shorter days for those that need it but clearly parents can’t be trusted to know what’s best for our children. If any can link to evidence of the benefits of gradual starts I would be interested to see it.

@ThreeImaginaryBoys thank you. Helpful to hear a rational account

There weren’t staggered starts at my DC’s school. They had an introduction session at the school for a morning or afternoon the term before.

That is a good approach, and fair. Thanks for the explanation.

I think what people are really questioning though is not your method ,but the apparently scattergun approach adopted by some schools.

Having a small group in each day for a few days to get them used to the staff, environment and routines seems quite sensible. Having 30 in doing weird hours for weeks on end doesn’t.

Ft is from on 31 December, 31 March or 31 August following their fifth birthday - whichever comes first.

Compulsory school age is different to the entitlement to a full time reception place.

Children are entitled to a full time place in reception. It's in the school admissions code.

Parents then have a choice whether they want to go full time or part time as long as the child is full time once they reach compulsory school age.

Exactly. It's about what's best for the child. The state isn't a childminder.