Parents rights on staggered reception start dates??

[kate2mum]

Hi,

My DD starts school in September. She is early Oct child so the oldest in her age group to start at reception at her village cofe school.

Went to a meeting with reception teacher and DD and was given lots of paperwork, amongst it being her "personal" start date which is 14 September, the Friday of the second week of school. Seemed a bit sly the way they did this, wasn't mentioned verbally at any time, just noted once in the 20 odd pages of bumff. I queried this and was told the youngest children go first, 3 or 4 children a day until the last staggered intake, my daughters. She starts with two other children she does not know, who did not go to her nursery.

I can understand the benefit of this system for the younger children and the teachers. I can see no benefit whatsoever to my DD and the more I think about it, the more I see only disadvantages to her. They are: she knows she is the oldest, most of the other children will have settled in and been at school for almost two weeks before she starts so she will be like a new girl, despite knowing almost all of them (and knowing they are all younger than her). By starting on the second Friday (which will be a blur) she won't really start to be there properly until the Monday of the third week, still feeling very new, while everyone else is settled. After a month of school for most of the others she will have had two weeks, etc. I can see this starting her off on the wrong foot for the whole term. For my DD a "staggered start" is about keeping her out of the way for two weeks while they deal with the other children.

If I can go anything to change this I will. But obviously going about it in a calm reasonable way!

Read some of the other threads about staggered starts including:

"The posters who say that schools are legally required to offer full time places from day one to all children are correct however there s a grey area around 'setting it' sessions.
For example the school mentioned up thread that insisted on part time until the term the child was 5 are not allowed to do that as of 2011 they must allow all children to be full time from September if they choose although the parent still has the right to send part time. Schools are allowed though to have for example a 'setting in' period of part time hours for a few weeks, the problem is finding out where the line is drawn between the two. I would say any school that uses the age of the child to restrict hours at school for more then a couple of weeks is breaking the law in regards to the right for a full time school place for the September after the child's 4th birthday.
Most of the cases mentioned in this thread would fall under 'setting in' sessions and therefore be within the law. I don't know if there have been any test cases in regards to this grey area and I hope some of the experts in these areas will know more about this then I do and can clarify where the line is drawn."

Also just wondering if she turned up on the first day of school ready for work, would they be legally entitled to turn her away? It is one thing to have a tacit agreement between the school and parents that she won't turn up during the school term, but IF she did turn up, could they refuse to teach her??

While I agree that some schools drag out the induction process too long, you are being dramatic.

They will be children starting school on the same day as yor dc, some the day before and some the day before that. Also, presuming that term starts on 1st September, the child that stated first will have days longer at school, rather than a month. That's nothing over the years at school.

Believe me, in the early years, being oldest on the class out weighs the day they start.

I think the main advantage is that when she starts she can hit the ground running and not be left to her own devices while the teachers deal with a raft of crying and upset barely four year olds.

I would ask the question given that you feel that strongly about it.

But take into account that the start date in this particular class is only going to be one factor out of many with regard to how each child settles, and may not actually have that much impact.

There are probably much bigger factors which will make a difference - individual temperament, plus the fact that some will already know each other (in a good and bad way!) through nursery / pre-school / parental friendships for example.

And if you are that unhappy, could you not go private, as you are doing for your DS?

"I do not want her to walk into a class of 27 settled children and be the last to go in"

I can see that it might be an issue if all 27 had started on Day One and your child was the only one to turn up two weeks later. But the class will have been used to new faces arriving each day and the group growing in size gradually. And actually, your dd is far more likely to have attention and 1:1 from the staff if she is one of a group of 3 on her first day, than one of a group of 30.

Said more succinctly than me clam, but that's what I was getting at.

Agree, Clam, staggering new joiners means the teachers can keep a special eye out on each new small set of children each day; it's easier to spot how the social dynamics change with new characters, or why they might be wrong when you know exactly what is different from the day before. OP said her DD is starting with 2 other children, and that otherwise she is already well acquainted with many of the others. The idea that social circles are fixed so early is silly; they most certainly are not. Especially with girls, the social situation fluxes and ebbs & changes A LOT, especially volatile in KS1 years.

I am a bit confusd because somewhere OP implied her DD has social anxiety?

I hate staggered starts. My DS is a summer born, actually the youngest in the year AND went to a different nursery because we moved during application process.(he started 2008)

His school did Monday 2nd week - Autumn borns f/t.
Thursday 2nd week - Spring borns p/t
Monday 3rd week - summer borns p/t
Monday week 5 - Spring borns f/t
Monday 7th week (after half term) summer borns f/t

They commented how my DS was finding it hard to settle in.

Due to my job I am part of the EY cluster and commented during a meeting about staggered starts how hard it was for later starters. The HT of DS school disagreed. (we were having a professional discussion but she knew my feelings because we'd obviously had personal dealings)

Most people agreed with me.

The system then changed. (not by me but higher powers obviously!!!)

OP you are not making a name for yourself as one of 'those' parents - you are doing what you think is right for your DD. Best of luck.

Sorry if I sound so emphatic - that always happens when I write anything down, honestly if you met me you wouldn't think I had a strong opinion in my head.

I am a SAHM, so v. lucky not to have to juggle everything and they are not doing half days for months at a time like some schools seem to do. How does that work if you have a job!

DD is not especially anxious and is very sociable.

Sooo, it really could be me, not them..

Just give me a minute to recalculate my outrage..

lol. I am in next county north of you & DC school does not have your system, I think it's a small rural school thing to trickle in the starters, maybe because social circles can be so limited. No time off unless you're a farmer's child would amuse me, too. But we get a midweek day off in June just so parents can go to County Fair without skewing absence figures; in Leics & Notts only 10 yrs ago they used to (maybe still do) juggle school hols to coincide with factory fortnights (when factories all closed so many parents would be off work, anyway). It's not so unusual to juggle for local habits.

But I am still going to ask to speak to the Head. At least if she went in with a child she has known for two years, they would hold hands and go in together. She won't hold hands with children she has never met.

I agree with Clam. Also as an older child in the year your DD is at an enormous advantage to the younger children in pretty much every way. So perhaps this is just one small way the school is trying to even things up a little by getting the younger ones in a few days earlier.

Our school does this as well, i agree its frustrating and annoying but after the first two weeks everyone is in and you dont have to think about it again. Its just two weeks. They wont all of been there for two weeks apart from you dc. I dont think it will leave any lasting damage at all. My ds is now at the end of reception and his class has been fine.

You can't agree with clam that there is no disadvantage and also think the school is deliberately creating a disadvantage for older children to "even things up".

It's one or the other.

I wouldn't be happy if I felt the school was putting my child at a disadvantage because of when she happened to be born.

I do have two v. late July children, so I know what it is like to have those disadvantages, and that is exactly why DS is in a private school, because he just couldn't keep up, academically, with far more mature girls 11 months his senior (which oddly, one day, my own DD will be).

But whatever advantages DD has because of her dob, I fail to see why she should have the shortest straw for reception entry. And be separated by entry date to the children she is friends with.

They really drag the arse out of starting school these days.

Such unnecessary pissing about.

i am not sure on the legalities but i know that the school that my ds4 starts at this sept tried to have half days for all children until sept, only mornings or afternoons, no choice you just get allocated one or the other.

mornings were 9-11:30 and afternoons 12:30-3:15 anyway LOTS of parents complained, some got in touch with the lea and as far as i know the school is backing down and they can do half days if they want to, but they also offering full time from the first day of the sept term as i think they are legally required to do this now?

it is worth speaking the ht about, but calmly obviously :)

There is no one way that will please everyone.

But there is! As I explained in my previous post, some schools do let parents choose how much or little school their children do until they legally have to be in school full time. Some children start doing mornings only, others do full time straight away with the majority falling somewhere in between. Everybody's happy, presumably including the school who've been doing it 10+ years.

Haha, thanks Thing. I think that sums up the legal rights issue!

But Daisy, as an Oct baby, she should legally be in school full time shouldn't she, at the start of the school year (5 Sept)?. Only the school won't have her until they say so.

So, is this about your legal rights or whether your dd can walk into class holding hands with her friend?

No, it's the term after their 5th birthday.

Sorry it is a load of nonsense, either they are ready to start or they are not.

Leaving out some dc does seem a bit mean, whilst others get to go in and start school, make friends and get to know the teachers and Ta's

From Suffolk CC's website:

"All children can attend school full-time in the September following their 4th birthday"

daisy that is what the school my ds4 will attend did when ds3 started and now they will be doing pretty much that this sept, i will start ds4 full time he is march born, but alreayd does 2 full days at pre-school he will be fine with full days tho i suspect he may get tired, in which case i will do as i did with ds3 and give him a day off in the week, ds3 went mon and tue and thu and fri, having hte wed off, the school were fine with this.

i agree it is a pain for the school, there needs to be flexibility, particularly for working parents, but its hard to balance and i agree its hard for the teachers, legally tho i think schools do have to offer a full time place from the start of the sept term, i know our lea said the school was breaching guidlines by trying to enforce that all children went part time until oct half term, they can OFFER it but not enforce it was my understanding?