how to approach head/reception teacher about flexi schooling next year?

[nefnaf]

I am a LP and I run my own business so I am not in a position to HE full time. However, my DC and I attend a home school group on Tuesdays that I want to continue and he sees his dad e.o.friday which his dad wants to continue through his first year at school. Which would mean in an average month he would miss 6 days, every tues and every other fri.

He is barely 4 when he starts (summer born) and I know I don't have to send him at all, but he wants to go, just not full time. And I have to work, and can't afford to send him to the childminder instead. So it's full time or flexi, no other option :(

Has anyone else had this dilemma and sorted it out so that your local primary agreed to flexi? What are they school likely to say, or object to? I'd like to be fully prepared for the conversation before I approach the head of the school he's been allocated a place at.

Any advice would be great, thanks.

I do think the shift in guidance/regulations are going to turn HTs away from flexi-school arrangements, Martorana.

The 'home' part of a flexi-school arrangement used to be given code B, which is an 'attendance' code. Now, that has been restricted: "Therefore by using code B, schools are certifying that the education is supervised and measures have been taken to safeguard pupils. This code should not be used for any unsupervised educational activity or where a pupil is at home doing school work."

Now, the 'home' part of a flexi-school arrangement has to be given code C, an 'absence' code.

That means that if the OP's child is flexi-schooled and misses every Tuesday and every other Friday, then he'd miss (39x1) +(39 x 0.5) = 58.5 days per year, roughly, which equates to 117 sessions. It would bring his attendance down to 69.21% for the year, as opposed to 100% under the previous codings.

Sorry, forgot to give the link to the document.

Just so lougle-I can't see it is alarmist to point it out-especially when I did qualify as 'my bet'. Who would have foreseen that Heads can't grant holidays in term times? Not me.
It is my bet.

thanks for all your input - especially the links to policy/government guidelines. I'll let you know how we get on when I see the head :) Fingers crossed it's accepted.

I did meet a governor informally and discovered that 2 summer borns last year (currenly reception) have maintained 4 day weeks this year, so there is precedent at least in reception. I hope that will go in my favour. However, I also found out that this year for the first time ever, the school is oversubscribed, so while he has a place there is a waiting list. Which may not make them as helpful -who knows!

I'll report back!

Do let us know- after all that fuss it would be nice to have feedback! Good luck.
My son was an August birthday and he stayed in the nursery rather than reception and had half days- but things have changed. They are constantly changing.

Guys. Delphi is right. And has been polite and friendly throughout. I don't understand where this hostility comes from. I haven't seen such unwarranted bickering before in this section. Why?

Nefnaf I did this for the reception year. My dd is July born and I think I did it all year. As another poster said, the school encouraged it (it is and was then oversubscribed). I think we did 2 half days and three full days. The school said I was being very sensible!! Nobody called it flexi schooling (possibly as she was 4?) but I confess I have no idea how it was coded on the attendance stats. She is now 9, but I think the position for under 5s could be the same as it was for us.

I don't want to reignite it but there wasn't hostility as I see it, rather there was some very wrong info (eg selecting children from nursery etc) which did need to be dispelled. There is a lot of misinformation in admissions (some of my work is in this field and people would rather believe what someone in the playground tells them, drives me crazy!). Anyway good luck OP it is perfectly do-able and as I say, you may find the school encourage it.

Just to correct a few points... we flexi-schooled for several years. School was full and HT was absolutely fine with it - whether the school is full or not is completely irrelevant, the only deciding factor is whether the HT agrees that there is any benefit to the child.

Funding is not always affected, it depends on the individual LEA - my DD received full-time funding.

Children don't have to miss out and catch up on anything - in fact my DD shot ahead once we started flexi-ing.

Teachers don't have to spend any extra time 'catching up' pupils - this is a fallacy. It's what people think will happen but it doesn't have to at all!

To answer the OP's original question, I would do lots of research and write out exactly why you think it will benefit your child and address what concerns you think you'd have if you were the HT eg. but won't my teachers have to catch the child up? (No, we can work on things at home). What about socialistsation, won't they miss out on friendships? (no because we'd stay for lunchtimes) - things like that. Definitely also print out the DfE's guidelines on flexi-schooling as lots of HTs won't even have heard of it before and will want to know whether it's actually legal. Education Otherwise have a very helpful website. Good luck!!

Oh and th ecode thing is wrong too, I'm afraid - you can still flexi under Code B, you just have to fulfull certain criteria.

" LucasNorth

Oh and th ecode thing is wrong too, I'm afraid - you can still flexi under Code B, you just have to fulfull certain criteria."

Yes, but visiting his Father every other Friday isn't going to fulfil that criteria, is it?

Won't it depend what the father is doing? Good advice to write out the benefits and counter arguments first. I'm hoping the school will agree without too much fuss. Looks like it has for reception children last year.

Ah Lougie just seen you explanation re codes. is it still flexi if the child is under 5? May be worth the op establishing that or the school may be led down the wrong track leading it to refuse arrangements that it presumably found agreeable for children last year.

Yes, but visiting his Father every other Friday isn't going to fulfil that criteria, is it?

It could do - we know nothing about the circumstances!

Just for the record, my daughter flexi schools & is recorded under code B. Funding is unaffected. Our school is oversubscribed.

Completely agree! My parents are Church of England faith (albeit not devout) but my mum attended a Catholic church for 3 months to get me into the Catholic primary school near us because the Church of England one had terrible results/ parent and child satisfaction etc. My family was lucky because my year was under subscribed so I got in, whereas parents of children in the year below me had to do even more to get their children in. If a school has plenty of places available then it may be more lenient/willing to let you do 'part time' but if it's over subscribed why would they give the place to a child that's going to miss days as opposed to the child that's going to be there full time?

I feel it depends on your area/school though. The only thing you can do is arrange a meeting with the head and we what he/she says. If they agree to allow you to do flexi then great and if not, you know you'll have to consider your other options. Good luck either way though :)

"If a school has plenty of places available then it may be more lenient/willing to let you do 'part time' but if it's over subscribed why would they give the place to a child that's going to miss days as opposed to the child that's going to be there full time?"

Because the school doesn't have a choice about admitting a child.

There still seem to be some misconceptions going round about how admissions work. The school absolutely does not have the option of denying a child a place based on whether his parents want him to go part-time. There are specific published admissions criteria for each school. When a school is oversubscribed, applications are ranked according to how well each child meets the admissions criteria and places are allocated strictly in that order. These criteria commonly include being a looked-after child, distance from school, having siblings at the school etc, and in the case of faith schools such as the one you attended, church attendance. These are fixed, transparent criteria. There is no latitude whatsoever for school staff to introduce their own prejudice into the process.

The school does have a choice about whether to agree to a part-time arrangement for a child who has been admitted. If the school doesn't agree to it, any absences will be unauthorised. In the case of a child who is below compulsory school age, parents cannot be prosecuted for unauthorised absences. The child also cannot have his school place withdrawn because of unauthorised absences.

I'm not saying that is always the best way forward. Many parents care deeply about the relationship they have with a school, and would not take their child out if the school wasn't happy about it. My point is just that ultimately the school has no power to prevent parents from doing this. They certainly cannot deny a child a school place for this reason!

Any news OP?