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!

School would be a huge transition for my daughter because where we live (Melbourne, Australia) nursery is not full time, what we call kindergarten is 15 hours a week and any care outside that is at a private childcare centre.

My daughter would attend 3 and 4 year old kindergarten 3 half days per week, 8:30-1:30. Primary school starts at age 5 (parents can decide if their child starts primary school between age 4 years 9 months and 6 years if that suits their child). Primary school is 5 days per week 9am to 3:15 or 3:30, with no school on Wednesdays in term 1 for reception children.

The government funds 15 hours a week for 3 and 4 year olds, as the research suggests that the benefits of early childhood education are for part time attendance from 3 years, and that more hours do not increase these benefits and can have some disadvantages.

So for my daughter to attend 4 longer days instead of 3 shorter ones would be a big adjustment for her and I’d prefer to settle her into school at her own pace. But I understand our situation with a stay at home parent is increasingly rare.

I do agree that schools should provide an option for the children of working parents (or any parent who opts in really) to attend full time hours if that’s what they need or prefer, and children who would benefit from a gradual transition should be able to have that option too.

The law in Australia is different to the UK no doubt.

It is very clear here that parents can send children full time from day 1 if they wish.

A lot of us have no idea who the other parents are. I don’t know of a single other person who is sending their child to start Reception at the same school as my DS.

I also have a very senior job role so can’t just suddenly find the best part of an extra month’s cover at the drop of a hat.

I assume the pre-school she goes to is not at the same school where she is starting reception?

Does the new school have an onsite nursery that offers wraparound care? My DD went to nursery and they had a wraparound session for the second half of the day plus afterschool club so she just went there after her reception hours.

Would your existing child care offer a pick up for the staggered start period? Some of the nurseries near us used to do it - there was a slightly higher cost because they had to have a couple of extra staff members due to ratios, but it wasn't excessive.

If the school does have existing wrap-around, rather than challenging the staggered starts, ask if there is any way the school could provide short term wraparound for the children who need it - more positive to offer a solution than challenge when you are unlikely to get anywhere

For us it wasn’t the challenge of the staggered start as it’s a legal right but the disruption to DT’s and the lack of random childcare

Do you know the other parents who aren't happy about it? You could approach the school/LA together. I'd suggest the LA, point out the LA have a statutory duty to provide full time education under section 19 of the Education Act 1996 and ask how they will be providing this as your child isn't allowed in school full time. They will soon address it with the school!

I really think for the sake of 3 weeks you'd be better to just try to make it work, as all parents and carers have had/will have to do in the years before and after this one. Even if school relent and your child is allowed to stay all day - how will they feel when everyone else goes home (or all but 4 go home) and they are left standing with the teacher and brought back inside.

I have a child starting reception and they will be transitioning into school over a 3 week period like yours. He will be in 9-12. It's a complete faff in terms of organising childcare - I get that. However I am also a Reception teacher myself and frankly no matter how ready or mature people think their child is, and no matter how carefully planned the school day is in the early weeks, put them in a room full of 30 4 year olds and you'd soon see how important a solid transition period is when starting school. Positive transition isn't just about the going in happily in the mornings - it is about establishing safe and predictable routines, information sharing and modelling in a calm environment, toileting arrangements, establishing frienships in a settled space, learning to move safely around the classroom and wider school, dinner arrangements, building trust on a group and individual level between child and all staff. It is a lot of new stuff for the kids. Even when built up slowly, it can easily descend into chaos. The school want the best start for all children and in their experience, taking into account the specific circumstances for the school and the children starting in Sept, this is the best way to cater for their needs and establish a positive first term at school. (And it's not designed to let teachers have 3 weeks of free afternoons in Sept - in the vast majority of schools all the afternoons during these three weeks will be spent providing cover for older classes or inputting assessment data for those staff - things like that).

Anyway, in short, I understand and share the frustration at what feels like a long transition period but really do believe it is set up to help all children experience a successful start to school.

Why should parents just make it work when it’s not in the best interests of their DC’s? Parents are only asking schools to follow the legislation. I hope you have advised parents of their rights to send their DC’s full time from day one?
If a staggered start was so beneficial, why don’t all schools do it.

We didn’t have childcare cover for a staggered start and knew it wouldn’t benefit our DT’s do we sent them full time from day one.

Children aged 4 spending 6+ hours a day in school is not the developmental ideal regardless of legislation.

Local Authorities offer guidance and documentation to schools that strongly advise the implementation of a transition plan that suits the school and its specific context. Also, parents may not think it is in the best interests of their DC but how can they possibly know exactly how their child will react in a reception class environment when they've never been in a reception class environment? Nursery and wraparound care/child minder are not the same and even the most confident children are still very much emotionally and cognitively 4. They are 4! The school isn't doing it to piss parents off or put them out. They are trying to help them out and cover all bases when it comes to offering a supportive environment for all children.

Yes, I completely agree.
If we'd had to do so, we could have cobbled something together by taking some leave each, inviting relatives to stay, begging favours from random friends/other parents and the odd session at the old nursery maybe. But on what planet is that "settling" for a small child? Going from a predictable routine between home and nursery with consistent caregivers, to spending less time every day at school than they might at a soft play session and then the rest of the day in unpredictable settings with different people, some of whom they might not even know very well seems the very opposite of a smooth transition to me.
Something like the OP's school do might be great for a child who has to date spent most of their life at home with a SAHP or who has been looked after by a grandparent who will be there consistently to facilitate the transition but there are lots of families where that isn't the case and a long drawn out transition will actually be chaotic and unsettling. Even if I had been able to take 3 weeks off work to do all the drop offs, pick ups and care outside of the couple of school hours myself, I still think that would have have been unsettling for my children as it was neither the routine they knew or the one they needed to become accustomed to.
I don't think anyone is really complaining about the first day or two being a half day. Most people can see that there might be some benefit or at least no harm in that and can handle the logistics. (Our school didn't even do that actually but I would have understood if they had done.) But the OP and others aren't talking about a day or two of half days but several weeks of ridiculously short spells in school. Most schools don't do this so it's clearly not universally accepted as beneficial. The OP is asking for what she is legally entitled to and what is provided in many, probably most, other schools. There's absolutely nothing unreasonable about that.

We notified the school that DT’s would be starting full time from day one - together with breakfast and after school clubs. They were fine but wouldn’t have been on a staggered start with no one to look after them for random hours.

What do you notify parents about parents having a legal right to send their DC’s full time from day one?

Really? Because our outstanding mainstream primary school that also specialises in SEN says the complete opposite - that drawn out settling in causes more disruption for children, not less. It is also particularly difficult for children with SEN (and their families) who may not have the luxury of easily available wraparound care that isn’t their parents.

However I am also a Reception teacher myself and frankly no matter how ready or mature people think their child is, and no matter how carefully planned the school day is in the early weeks, put them in a room full of 30 4 year olds and you'd soon see how important a solid transition period is when starting school. Positive transition isn't just about the going in happily in the mornings - it is about establishing safe and predictable routines, information sharing and modelling in a calm environment, toileting arrangements, establishing frienships in a settled space, learning to move safely around the classroom and wider school, dinner arrangements, building trust on a group and individual level between child and all staff

One of mine did a staggered start.

The younger did not

There was absolutely no difference. Both were fine & thats with the younger being a late Aug birthday. Lots of schools around the country manage fine without it.

I really think for the sake of 3 weeks you'd be better to just try to make it work, as all parents and carers have had/will have to do in the years before and after this one. Even if school relent and your child is allowed to stay all day - how will they feel when everyone else goes home (or all but 4 go home) and they are left standing with the teacher and brought back inside.

My sister took this risk.

Lo amd behold 24 stayed on the first day and all were staying by day 3!

Yes really. Also speaking from an outstanding mainstream primary that specialises in SEN. My point it, schools are strongly advised to come up with a transition plan and are rightly able to choose what that looks like in their specific circumstances. Predictability can be provided within transition.

@Greentomatoes21 if 3 weeks transition is so important, why isn't your own school giving you that time off to enable your son to have the best transition?

@Greentomatoes21 - what information did you give parents about their legal right to send their DC’s full time from day one?

Predictability can be provided within transition

Can you expand on this? In our case (and a lot of other kids I know) it would mean 3 weeks of ferrying them around between any willing pair of adult hands that would be happy to have them/could be paid to have them. I’m not sure id agree that gives much predictability.

I also would like to know more about ‘schools being strongly advised to come up with a transition plan. A lot of schools have no transition at all (including ours) - are these schools going against some official guidance then?

Because I have made arrangements for childcare during the transition weeks. Yes it is a pain, as I said in my original comment, it is not easy to make suitable wraparound arrangements. And as I have said, it's about schools choosing transition that works best in their specific context and the children they are welcoming to the school. I have not said 3 weeks is the holy grail of transition.

Anyway, each to their own and clearly the majority of parents here disagree with me on this one. But, equally, I will not be convinced that a period of transition into reception is unimportant.

I take the point that what's best for the majority it not necessarily best for every single individual child.

Wishing everyone and OP a transition period/or not and a settled start for their kids in Sept.

Haven't RTFT but you aren't being unreasonable. I'd say the number of children who have never been in any care setting before starting reception is fewer than the number who have these days. It would make more sense to offer to allow those children that feel they can't manage, to leave early. It feels a very outdated approach.

Eldest DD started in 2008 and it was a term of mornings, a term of afternoons and full time from Easter then for her. Younger DDs were offered much less dramatic staggered starts. But still annoying (and arguably more disruptive!) to find childcare to fit around them. Not everyone is going to have a parent who can accommodate 2 hour sessions.

I wouldn't be letting it go either.

It would have been a nightmare if we hadn’t sent DT’s full time from day one. Their nursery places had already been filled, no childminders with the level of flexibility required, grandparents have jobs and don’t live in the uk, friends have jobs and their own children to organise, don’t know any SAHP’s. We probably would have had to try for a day nanny - expensive and a stranger to DT’s dealing with a disrupted routine.

Thankfully many schools don’t agree with a staggered start or are aware of their legal responsibilities to offer full time education from day one.

Yep. There is one childminder that serves our school that works 3 days per week. No others. 2 local nurseries that do not take on an ad hoc basis. We have no local family but MIL will travel 200 miles to help when needed. If our shift patterns had been bad we would have also needed to find a day nanny if there was 3 additional weeks to cover. We are fortunate we could (just about) afford that. A lot of families could not.

“[I]n the vast majority of schools all the afternoons during these three weeks will be spent providing cover for older classes or inputting assessment data for those staff - things like that).”

I’ve not taught for a few years now but I’d be very surprised if teachers were routinely being directed to input assessment data for other classes during what should be teaching time! Annex 5 of the School Teachers Pay and Conditions Document says that type of admin task should not be asked of teachers.

All but one of the schools I worked at had either no staggered start or one limited to a couple of days. Home/ nursery visits were in the summer term and covered by Year 6 transition, just-qualified student teachers, supply teachers or senior leaders. Some schools offered extra hours to lunchtime or part-time staff for the first week or so to help with transition. As far as I could tell there was no difference in attainment, behaviour or how settled the children were between the school that spent the whole first half-term on staggering attendance and the ones that had all pupils starting in the first week.

Thats the year my DS started and similar to the timescale given for the kids that were born later the school year. Mar-aug 04 group) I was lucky he had less staggered starts being born the previous Oct else he would've just had to stay in day nursery another 2 terms