Anyone struggling with staggered start dates for school?

[chumsnut]

The headmaster of my son’s new school has decided to stagger the start date for kids in reception. This has been really stressful for me emotionally and financially. We already spent tonnes on wrap around care for the holidays. Plus, I had to spend tonnes on wrap around care for the stupid staggered start date. The kids only go to school 3 times over 1.5 weeks. This is terrible at the start of September as it clashes with deadlines. I don’t get why he has chosen to do this as we never given an explanation for it. Plus, very few parents got a place for after school care. I am really tempted to make a complaint as I am pretty sure that it is affected other families as well.

This is standard way of starting reception.

More schools these days do the full time start but it is an accepted method.

I don't think you will get far complaining about what is an accepted educational practice.

They are entitled to attend full time from day one so that's what I'd be asking for. Most schools understand that a few days of settling in is beneficial but there is no benefit in a child attending only 3 times in the space of a week and half and I'd argue as a former EYFS teacher that such an adhoc start at that age is actually detrimental, young children thrive on routine.

How much notice were you given that this was the plan? I think 3 sessions in what, 8? days is ridiculous but unfortunately you signed up to it when you sent your child there.
I do know someone who challenged it as their child was 5 already so argued they were compulsory school age so entitled to the full time hours so her child was in every day. But obviously depends on your child's age.

Agree it's shit, sympathies. Thankfully our whole school went back yesterday from nursery up to year 6

It’s absolutely ridiculous that some schools do this. Both mine started full days from day one (different schools). I don’t know any schools around here that do this, thank god, but I know some do. I know there are some children who have never been in any educational setting before, but the onus is on parents to support them in settling in and getting extra support if they need it, with things like personal care. Mine actually were jumping off the walls the first term of reception as it was a shorter day than they were used to.

I think most schools do this. My sons did part time for 4 weeks and then the ones who were ready did full time after that. DS2 and 2 others in his class stayed part time. DS2 went full time after easter.

YANBU and you also wouldn't be unreasonable to refuse and complain. It's fine for families who have a SAHP, but how on earth do they expect families with two FT working parents to manage? Most families I know struggle through the long summer holidays and gasp a sigh of relief when the term starts again.

Most schools might have done this in the past but they certainly don't now in my experience. Whilst many might have a few days where they only attend for the morning or afternoon I don't know any who only do random odd days here and there and certainly none who insist on part time until Easter.

It’s ridiculous. Who di they expect to look after them when not in school - the flower fairies? Not everyone has a handy and willing GP on tap, childminders will have reallocated places and AL will be spoke for for the rest of the school holidays throughout the year.

It’s mornings only first week….and lunch and afternoons 2nd week at our school…then full time from week 3

Our school did this, if your child went to their nursery then they kept those same mornings/afternoons or 2 1/2 days for the first week. Second week they added a lunch then third week in all the time.

This is for the benefit of the children, far easier to be able to give them attention when upset if there are only 15 children in rather than 30. Often one upset child sets another one off and usually there is a teacher and a TA.

You should have been given notice that there is a staggered start at your school. Some of my friends who worked full time took unpaid parental leave so they could be there for both drop off and pick up. It only happens in reception (and then secondary but that is a long way off and doesn't require childcare) and it is only for a couple of weeks. Yes shit for parents but better for the children.

Ours did this too.

Yes it's annoying but we were aware of it.

Re after school club there were only 30 places, there was always a waiting list.

When 20 year old dd was in Reception they did 2 hours a day for a month. I knew someone who had a child in a school where it carried on for about a term. By 17 year old dd it had gone down to 2 week settling in. Now it's 2 days at the same school.

It's so ridiculous. I can't tell you how many of my friends were jealous of our school which does a staggered start... over just 3 days. One friend had something insane like 3 weeks, all different start/end times.

I think it's ridiculous. Stagger, sure, to help them acclimatise. Doesn't need to take weeks.

Yes shit for parents but better for the children.

As I said above in my experience as a former EYFS teacher it's really not better for the children. How is adhoc days, confusion over whether today is a school day, worry over whether they are having lunch today or not and the general disruption of often chaotic collection and drop off schedules and being looked after by an assortment of people better for the children?

Completely agree. One of my favourite memories of DS, towards the end of his first term of reception is him coming to discuss school with me. Very seiorus - he'd given it some real thought and considered his argument. He said "Mum, I've thought about it, and I think school is pretty good. But I think I should go home at lunch time. The day is just a bit long."

I've heard lots of families say they've had this confusion very much with the staggered starts!

It is ridiculous, especially given many children are in nursery full time or at least three or four long days before they start school.

Mine started Reception last year and it was a total pain, we had no school at all this first week and then short hours/half days until the Thursday. My friend's school didn't have Reception in full time for four weeks. Unfortunately schools assume there is still a SAHM in every household. (We've just been invited to meet their new teacher on Monday... at 3.30pm 🙄).

Many years ago admittedly, when ds1 and then ds2 started primary, staggered starts were suggested for many weeks. I emailed Head and asked if they could go full time immediately. I knew my rights, I knew she was unable to refuse, but I still politely asked. It was agreed forthwith. I think more parents should question it, and politely ask of their children can go full time from day 1, which I'm not sure any Head can refuse, can they?

It may be ‘usual these days’ but, OP, you can just say no and send them in full time from day one.

My youngest is in year 6 so it might be different now. But it was the same from when my 18 year old started to when my 10 year old did so I wouldn't have thought it would have changed a lot. I did try to check on the school website just now out of curiosity but it didn't say so I imagine they just tell the parents of reception children.

I don’t think they assume that…..but they are not going to offer new teacher appointments in after school hours are they🤷‍♀️…..teachers have a life as well…..lots of schools don’t even do these….our local school doesn’t….it’s up to you whether you go

If your child has experience of full time childcare then insist on full days - they are entitled to them.

It's nice that they offer it but the lack of notice is the problematic part - I'm in meetings on Monday afternoon. The email very much reads as if there's an assumption you will be free and will attend.

I try to be involved and go to as much as I can, because I'm very lucky and wfh in a flexible job. But this is far from the first time the school just assumes someone is always available to attend something at very short notice.

That's absurd. My DD's school did:
Tuesday 9-12
Wednesday 9-1
Thurs and Fri 9-3
And on Monday they will be in full time, 8:45-3.

It's nice for them to have time to settle in but 3 times in 1.5 weeks is just making a meal of it.

"better for the kids" my arse.

All it means is that the kids wind up in a mad patch-work of ad-hoc childcare by parents struggling to make it work, increasing the number of transitions that kids have to make in a single day.

If the argument is that "Kids can't cope with a full day of school right off," then they can do free play in the afternoon for the first couple of weeks or whatever.

As I understand, parents can insist on fulltime right from the start if they want to, as this is their legal right.

Baffles me how women have children without thinking about at all about how they're going to accommodate school demands 4 years down the line.

If you can't do staggered starts, how are you going to do Sports Day, Parents Evening, Celebration Assemblies, school trip pick up/drop off etc etc, days where school is closed due to a problem with the water for eg.

I totally changed my career to prepare for all this. Honestly baffles me when every year we have the same thread yet you know that school is coming when you have a baby!