Primary School Starting Dates - R they joking? How to change?

[Crouchendmumoftwo]

Hello,
Hello!
Im self employed and so is my husband and we have to work for our clients etc to pay the bills. I wrote to the school to ask if my son could be in the first wave of kids going in as we are working and we just have one granny who works.
Gobsmacked to see on the letter today his starting date is 17th September and then that is just till 12! He doesn't go full time till October the 4th!!
HA HA HA - knocks head against wall.

Blooming marvelous.
My husband says my letter probably annoyed them and that is why he is starting so late. My daughter starts in nursery too there - who knows when she starts - November - doing one hour a morning? They both attend full time nursery. My son will be nearly 5 (November) when he joins so not the youngest in the class.

Just wanted to find out if anyone is in a similar situation and is it worth going to the school to have an informal chat to see if they got the letter and if there was anychance of getting him in on the first wave! Probably not!

It all seems very odd - such a late start yet we have to work and earn money - what do people do?

Thanks!

The staggered start is very much against the interests of the child.

Working parents just cannot move a child in the middle of the day, and having small new joiner picking up on parents stress, whilst also coping with unfamiliar and temporary childcare, strikes me as just too much.

It would be in the child's interest to hold back, and send them when half days can be offered.

I think we need someone (who? Ombudsman?) to look at this practice, which has crept up rather than been announced, and make a proper judgement on the pros and cons. I doubt there is any evidence to support it, and I've never seen any good account of benefits over an ordinary start.

I do not think having difficulties with this is necessarily a sign of future difficulty in coping with school hours and term lengths, as these are normally published well in advance. New joiners, only finding out in June/July that their child is not wanted at school for the time of the published school times and dates are being entirely reasonable to air their difficulties.

I can only assume those who have chosen their child's preschool and school by age 21 months are going private. For many, "choice" of school is an illusion, and logistic difficulties are excluded from grounds of appeal.

I agree with Edith and many posters here.

I don't think the OP is expecting school to offer the same hours/service as a full-time nursery; however having phased start dates suits no-one except the SAHP, who in my experience don't like it either. There should be an optional half day for the first half-term for anyone who feels they need to avail of it.

Of course the OP will need childcare for her child; however she can't put a permanent solution in place because of this phased hours thing. Many childminders won't want to go out in the middle of other mindee's naps to pick up a child if it's only for 3 weeks. It's not worth the hassle. Holidays and inset days are completely different - they can be managed no problem with annual holidays and camps. You can't take 8 weeks or more annual holidays because your child's new school only offers 2.5 hours a day at first.

Of course, many posting here are lucky because they know the hours already. These have not yet been published by our school.

It's all ridiculous in my view.

Is there any evidence that these staggered starts benefit the children?

I can see lots of problems, not just for the parents, but for the children themselves; one enormous realisation in starting school is that it is permanent and this surely just confuses them .

To be honest, we don't do it to benefit the children, the head does it for benefits to staff I think. Children have to go through a riggerous assessment process when they start with us so Children are staggered to give staff chance to do all the assessments.

That makes sense. If it's to accommodate baseline testing, that didn't exist a school generation ago. Still really sucks for parents, and sets up a bad home/ school working relationship from the start.

So it does benefit the children then. If teachers have the time to do their assessments with fewer children around etc.

I know of a few families whose children haven't started full time until after the October half-term, which seems to definitely be stretching it out, but a few days up to a couple of weeks of shorter days/fewer children seems to make sense.

It definitely benefits some (maybe not all children) and some (but maybe not all classes). In my dd's class last Sept, there were a very good handful of children who had no English and a very good handful of children who hadn't been to nursery. A phased start with fewer children to get used to a completely new environment was most definitely of benefit to them.

Anyway, in regard to your question about how to change.

Do check the legal situation - I thought that as from this Sept schools had to provide full days if the parent/carer wanted it from the first day of term.

Does anyone have a link to this?

I agree with you Rosebud that it does definitely benefit the children :) but that wasn't why head set it up in our school but there are clear benefits for the children too you're right :)

This time last year I was very blasé about DS1 starting school and a bit annoyed about his staggered start. He had been in nursery from being 7 months.

I'm bloody glad they did stagger it. He really struggled - the two weeks were horrible, really hard to get him there. If he had gone in on day one with the full class there it would have been much worse.

Schools do it to help the kids, not for parents' convenience.

I really feel for you OP! Dh is self-employed (as am I technically, but I work for DH so it's v v v flexible). DD will start school in Septemer, she is an August baby and will be in the last group to start. She will be doing afternoons from 19th Septemer. (So going in after lunch) Then on the 1st October she switches to just mornings, coming home before lunch. Then on the 15th October she starts doing all day...for a week & then it's bloody half term!!

I have no idea how working parents are supposed to deal with this kind of set up. I know it's supposed to help the kids but with these hours DD will be doing less hours than she is currently doing at pre-school. I do understand that they are challenged more at school & that they can find it very tiring, but knowing my DD she is going to be seriously hacked off not staying when she switches to just mornings (when others will be staying for lunch). I personally think she will find it confusing & frustrating to be backwards and forwards so much. I'm sure there must be a better way of doing things. Not sure why it has to be such a prolonged period of half days, staggered/soft start. I also think that it's (in the case of DDs school) wrong to group children by age. It doesn't neccesarily follow that because a child has an August Birthday they will struggle more than a child with a September/October Birthday.

I know several parents here do keep their nursery/preschool places until their child is full time at school. DDs preschool is next door to her school & they preschool staff fetch the children at lunch/take them to school at lunch (depending on if they are doing a morning or afternoon). Is there a preschool/playgroup nursey there next to your DS' school that does this?

I think it's fairly normal practise. My son didn't start til 21st September last year - he was in the last cohort going in - then he was half days until the last week of term! I asked how they decided the order of start dates and it was siblings first, then totally random.

I was pretty shocked to be honest. However, you will probably be in the same boat as the vast majority of parents at your school.

It benefits the children if you believe that they need to have a baseline assessment done on entry.

Whether parent or teachers believe a baseline assessment is necessary or not is completely irrelevant.

Having said that, children do need to be assessed in some way or how on earth would the teacher know what they already knew and what they needed to be taught.

We are talking about Reception here! You can check with their previous care provider if they've done phonics and if the kid can hold a pencil. That's really all the assessment possible. These are children starting school. They need to know everything.
The school my children attend has an excellent approach to this. The Head makes it clear that your child can start at the point you choose and go full time or part time as you choose until the term when they're 5. Sp parents can choose what will suit them and their child rather than scrabbling to make arrangements to suit the school.

Has anybody actually refused a staggered start and insisted on a start at the beginning of term? I really don't see how a school can oppose that. Terms starts and your child has a place, therefore they have a right to be there, being educated.

I agree with NL if the assessments can't be done in normal class time over the first few weeks, it's because of underesourcing. But dumping on parents is much easier than adequately funding the school system.

The head is very into figures and percentages etc. All baseline data submitted after assessments and then have to demonstrate each term what progress each child has made and this is tracked over the year!

Unfortunately, it won't be just the Head's whim. He'll need those figures. The problem is that the data is so complicated and the schools' so underesourced that they need to stagger the children's entry.

Following this with interest, as DS1's new school is a bit rubbish about communication.

To give you an indication, there is uniform but no uniform list - I've only been able to work it out by standing in the playground (pre-school is on same site although independent) and chats with pre-school parents with older children.

On the grapevine I've learned that there will be "several" taster sessions in July, at which "most" children will be in uniform. And that in September they do whole-class staggered start (a week 9-12, then a week 9-1, then full time, IIRC). Probably.

adelaofblois

"Re: DS was 26th August born. he went fulltime from the start. Two weeks in he tried to go on Saturday because he liked it so much!"

Hee! Very encouraging!

"That's really all the assessment possible. These are children starting school. They need to know everything."

Well, no. Some children will be able to read. Some will be able to do quite extensive maths. Others will need to learn to sit still for 30 seconds. Still others will need to learn to speak. There really is a big variation in children's starting levels - though most schools manage it through informal observations in the first few weeks of school, not sure why others need to do 'adult with small group on first day' type assessments as the EYFS profile is the same for all settings...

Indeed, teacher, though the extent of differentiation necessary will make a difference in how long assessments take, surely?

not to mention those that will need to be toilet trained.

My YR class staggered intake to 8 per week over September, oldest to youngest. I found it benefited kids in that that they had much more adult support available to them to help them settle in that first week. By week 4 the first group were old hands at routines, coat hanging, finding the loo, meaning adults were available to concentrate more on the new arrivals.

Some kids are fine, some need a huge amount of care in the first week, particularly with things like dinner hall and playground, which can be overwhelming and frightening for littlies.

It is a PITA for parents though.

Thank goodness this is being raised. My 3rd child is just about to start reception and yet again with 13 weeks of holidays to cover the additional staggered start is a nightmare to cover. He doesn't start full time until the 24th September, the others went back on the 6th. I've been trying to find any researched based evidence to support the school's stance on staggering the children in as I've never managed to find any parents supportive of it. I've recently become a parent governor at the school and therefore want to put this on the agenda as something to go out for parent consultation. When I've enquired about the school's reasons I've been fobbed off with the 'we find this is best for the children'. Personally I don't think this is true or good enough unless based on research (which I'm yet to find). As far as I can see the only benefits of staggering children's' entry to school is to the teachers. In the 6 years we've attended the school parents have never been consulted about this and think it really warrants parent feedback. Does anyone have any research that they can point me to? Much appreciated - I'd like to go into this armed with the right information if possible rather than just personal opinion.

our school tried to fo this. ny ds4 just startef ladt thursday. i refused the staggered start and sent him full time ftom the firdt day. i just wrote a letter pointing out that legally they have to offer full time from start if term. there was leguslation about it last yr.

get in touch with your lea. our lea supported parents saying they wanted to start full time and agreed the school who wanted them part time till the end of october were acting illegally.

they can offer part time but they must let you choose.