Reception staggered starts are overkill?! UPDATE

[SMLSML]

I posted recently about how people manage staggered starts for reception... A lot of people said legally that schools have to take them full time if asked. For context my little one starts in September and will do 3 weeks of 2 hour sessions...

She currently goes to preschool full time and after-school club until 5pm. Childcare aside I honestly do think she will find it very disruptive and think we'll spend more time taking her to and from school. 4 other parents agree with me, however this is the response I've had from the headteacher... Is it even worth challenging? I totally get the gradual approach but 3 weeks feels overkill...

Just unsure of what to do and no idea how I'll manage 😩 I honestly don't believe it'll be beneficial for my little one either. Any advice appreciated!

I couldn’t give two s*s about annoying the staff though. My kids are in school to learn, not for me to make friends with the teachers.

We work - it’s not a choice. What do you suggest parents do with no options? Take their child to work? Quit their jobs?

Awkward schools like yours give schooling a bad name. You show no empathy with parents and no flexibility or care for the families. Good schools and teachers work WITH families, to genuinely help.

My reception age child is in mainstream in a primary school with both an ASD base and a base for children with learning difficulties. There is integration of children from the bases into the mainstream class as appropriate/as guided by their EHCPs. it’s a wonderful, inclusive school I couldn’t be happier with.

The school don’t do a staggered start in reception as they found it was actually more disruptive for the children, especially those with SEN (and their parents - it’s not like childcare for children with complex needs is easy to find). They start midweek via inset days, so they are only in for 2 days in the first week, but it’s 2 full days then straight into full days 5 days a week.

DH and I are both NHS shift workers with no local family and 3 weeks of 2 hour days on top of the school summer holidays for our elder child would be catastrophic. I know school isn’t childcare but equally that is a ridiculous length of settling in for working parents.

If school isn't childcare... why did schools have to provide spaces for "keyworker" children 5 years ago?
The answer... it is a form of childcare.

Anyway... I'd ask the school how it benefits the children if a parent loses their job.

Absolutely ridiculous. DD did two half days and then full days from the following Monday. That seemed fine for most kids, as like yours, most had come from normal school hours at preschool. The year before they had done about a week of staggered starts but found it more problematic than this year's approach.

I agree with you that 3 weeks is surely more detrimental than not! Madness.

DD school had mornings only for the first two days then mornings plus lunchtime for the next two days then a whole day on Friday.
DS did a half day on the Thursday and then was straight to a whole day from Friday. DS is autistic so would have found it very difficult to cope with a long staggered start as he likes routine and the quicker he gets into a routine the happier he is!

Since your child will not be CSA until the first of 1st Jan 2026 if you did take a term time holiday for the first two weeks of term then you cannot be fined (since only parents of CSA children can be). Since schools are so strict with term time holidays I would be tempted to take one whilst you can without being fined!

I would tell them she’s starting after Christmas/half term/ 3 weeks in. Full time and have her in her normal nursery for 3 weeks.

The other thing I’d argue, is reception is exactly when you need to save leave for school holidays, as a lot of holiday clubs won’t take 4 year olds at all (so summer born kids are really screwed) and some will only take reception aged children for half days. 3 weeks of leave to facilitate a ridiculous settling in period is going to leave you extremely short for the rest of the year. Reception on both occasions have been the most fraught years for us for covering school holidays, far worse than the nursery years.

To whoever said they think teachers could do home visits and other 'new class admin' in the 6 week holidays, you do realise that's the teacher's free time, right? And 30 home visits, including notes afterwards on any unexpected support the child might need take a huge amount of time (assuming they all happen). Whatever your opinion on staggered starts, or whether home visits are necessary, that's not gonna happen. Nor is it going to happen in the last month of summer term, because the teacher has 30 other children to teach, get ready for year 1 etc. Bits and pieces of admin can get done then depending on activities and workload but the children in Reception at that point take priority.

Think what you like about staggered starts, and I recognise they are annoying and not in the best interests of all children (but the interests of the others may have to take precedence) but going straight to the governors, or writing an angry letter / email quoting legislation and demanding an immediate response on when obligations will be met won't solve your problem. You might get what you want (your child in full time from day 1) but you will have done a lot of damage to your relationship with the school and may struggle to build a supportive / cooperative relationship with the teacher or be taken seriously in future. If you can't just suck it up for the sake of a smooth transition or it will cause actual problems for your child then stay calm and respectful when discussing it.There is no need to be adversarial about it.
Write to the school setting out why the staggered start will be difficult for your child, or why it is in your child's best interests to be full time. Suggest a compromise (eg a few days of early pick ups) while making clear that the whole staggered start process proposed by the school cannot happen because of X Y Z (specific to your child, not as a general idea of 'staggered starts are annoying for parents' because school aren't interested in theory at this point, just your child. It is possible to get your point across firmly without pissing people off or causing unnecessary stress. The school will have a complaints policy on their website and the first step will almost certainly be to resolve an issue amicably rather than going straight to the governors.
Also, whoever recommended just dropping the kid off at 9 and coming back at 3:30 without confirming this with the school, you will potentially be making your child feel left out (if they are the only one in and left to play alone while the staff get the classroom ready until the others arrive), upset if there is noone to play with at lunchtime other than bigger children on a new playground, stressing staff. Basically they wont be being 'educated' just supervised because the school had set up the day in a certain way and are now having to scramble around your child because you didn't communicate with them properly.

A good point!

Also what if you are in a career were you cannot take leave in term time to accommodate the staggered start?

DH and I both work in education. DH is term time only, I have leave but cannot take it during term time (I have to get permission just for PD/Inset days)

No local family support.
3 weeks would have been impossible

A lot of people living pay check to pay check won’t be able to ‘just suck up’ 3 weeks of no pay. 2 or 3 days, maybe. But this is extreme.

And I’d hope teachers would be more professional than to harbour negative views about a child because their parents pushed back against a prolonged settling in period.

Where do you think working parents should find childcare from to cover a staggered start - let alone deal with children trying to cope with no structure to their day. We turned down a home visit as we were at work.
Not enough annual leave, no grandparents in the uk (and they have their own jobs), nursery have already filled their place, no childminders with vacancies for random hours.
If a staggered start was so beneficial - all schools would do them.

We quoted the legislation, as did many other parents and they were provided with full time education (not just supervision) from day one.

Where do you get the idea it's an independent school? Not seen that mentioned

There is also DFE attendance guidance to consider and use to support your case.
The process for offering part-time or phased starts for Reception children who are not yet of compulsory school age.
Under current DfE guidance (Working Together to Improve School Attendance, 2024), children are not legally required to attend full-time education until the term after their 5th birthday. However, once a full-time school place has been offered and accepted, parents have the right to request a full-time start from the beginning of the school year.

A part-time start must only be implemented with explicit parental agreement. If a parent does not agree, we must provide the full-time place from the agreed start date. Any absence outside a school-led part-time timetable (that lacks parental consent) must not be marked as unauthorised, as the child is not yet of compulsory school age.

A school may agree with parents to implement a short-term, part-time timetable (such as a phased start) without breaching attendance regulations.

This arrangement must be mutually agreed between the school and parents, and it should:

• Be clearly documented as a short-term, supportive measure;
• Specify the planned start and end dates;
• Include a review date and rationale;
• Ensure that attendance is recorded in the school’s register according to the sessions agreed with parents.

You could put pressure on by requesting an individual part time plan, as above or point out that as parents you don't agree…

Reception teacher here. I agree that 2 hours a day seems silly. We do 2 days of half days and then all in. How many classes are in reception? How many children in total and is it an open plan classroom or closed? My only worry is if you push for your child to be in full time. Then I assume they will be on their own for the majority of the day. At playtime and lunchtime especially whilst the other children are in 2 hours. Also your child won't be taught 'lessons' as the government baseline will need to be done and teaching will only being when the whole class is there. So what will your child actually do for 3 weeks?

Also when you looked around the different schools in your area. Did the school not mention that they did a 3 week staggered start? I assume not otherwise you wouldn't have chosen it? Was it your first choice?

We completed all of the transition plans ( visits to and by day nurseries, home visits if required, visits to school) whilst Y6 transitioned to secondary and had some planned sports sessions and whilst all other year groups moved up too.

All completed in June and July, including the Y6 pupils supporting new reception with their lunches.

Day 1 in September, 120 reception pupils, full time, unless their parents felt there was a need and in that case an individual part time plan out in place to meet the DfE attendance guidance.

We sent our DT’s full time from day one and in their two classes and number of other parents did the same - there was no sitting on their own. A teacher was with them providing full time education.

@Parker231 yes but that only works if more parents are willing to do the same as the OP. Otherwise her child will be on their own.

Oh God I remember this so well and it's a massive pain. Our school did:

Week 1- pick them up before the school has lunch

Week2 - pick them up after they've had some lunch

Week - normal school hours.

When my youngest started the second week was even more annoying as by the time I'd picked up youngest, got home and put the kettle on, I had to drive all the way back to collect the oldest. Absolutely ridiculous

I just don't see the need for it. If they must do it, one week should be the top.

My school also did this when myself and my sisters went and back then, most people had a parent at home to do this, but also, not as many had been in a full time care setting before

Nowadays, the likelihood of a child NOT having gone to nursery or preschool of some sort is rare and the staggered starts benefit only a small percentage of starters.

I've always thought it should be the other way around, plan for full time straight away and if a child needs smaller sessions, then arrange that with their parents.

Unlikely they will be the only one now as so many families have two full time working parents without annual leave to waste.

If a Headteacher is willing to flout the very clear Admissions Code like this, I would have concerns about that school. It's not a respectful way to treat parents.

I found when we were looking at primaries that they weren't very transparent about all sorts of things, including the existence and availability of wraparound and what the starting arrangements were. If you have an only child or are looking at schools for your eldest, you don't know what you don't know. Schools often don't confirm arrangements until parents have already given notice at nursery.

I understand schools have all sorts of pressures but they need to wise up that an increasingly small number of families have a parent at home/involved relatively young and healthy grandparents. And consider the teacher parents too.

I'd be astonished if more parents didn't come out of the woodwork if one parent makes a stand.

Sometimes you do have to make a stand, or nothing changes.

The teacher parents have it worse I think.

My youngest has a boy in her class who's mum works at the school. When they started, his grandad used to have to come and get him and would then bring him back at the end of school when his mum could leave with his older sister who was already there.

It just feels like such a faff and not everyone is lucky enough to have people around to help.

It's unfair to expect parents not to ask for something they are legally entitled to in case it might upset the school. I cannot think of another situation this would be expected of someone.

I'm an ex-teacher (although KS2 so this is not something I have experience of) and I usually side with the school on most MN threads but this is something I 100% would understand a parent being firm on. It's not being awkward or asking for something trivial for their child - some people literally cannot suck it up.

In the same way if my workplace tried to ask me to do overtime for no money, I'd call my union. Or if they asked me to do something I should be protected against under maternity law. If they told me I should suck it up because it would benefit my colleagues I'd laugh in their face. Laws exist to protect us and in this case - protect our children's right to full time education from the very start.

If this school feels that a staggered start is best then they need to fight that battle with the people who make the law. Until then, it needs to be optional. The fight is not with the parents. We should support people being informed of their legal rights.

There is no need to be aggressive but there's also no need for sucking anything up or offering compromises. OP can insist upon what she's legally entitled to without needing to be aggressive.

For the record, in the schools I've taught in, a parent calmly requesting something they are legally entitled to would never have made them that parent. It would likely have caused a lot of complaining about the law but that's it.

To me, "that parent" was the parent who told me I was violating her child's privacy when their child wrote a racist slur about another child on a school device and I saw it. "That parent" was the parent who expected me to parent their child, give sanctions for things they'd done wrong at home and 'make them' brush their teeth.

They have to take him.

OP needs to make it clear he will be starting full time in September from Day 1 and they have to facilitate it.