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??

My DS1's birthday is in the Easter holidays, and as such, he was classed as a 'summer born'.

When he started, it worked like this : Born between 1st September and 31st January started FT in September. Born between 1st January and 31st March started PT in September, FT in January. Born between 1st April and 31st August started PT in January, FT after the Easter holidays.

However, DS1's year group was a particularly small year, a 1-form entry instead of a 2-form entry.

Because of this, and over half the DC being Summer born, they took two Sunmer born DC early, PT in September, FT in January. They chose based on their home visits who out of the oldest 6 Summer born would best cope with stating early.

DS1 was one of those. But he could easily have coped with FT straight away, and it was an enormous PITA as I live a long way from the school, and had an older DC there (moved there when DD was in Y2 and it was the only school that was LEA run and could be forced to take her in an infants class of 37 with 'space' ).

I had to be there at 8.55 to drop them both off, 12 to pick DS1 up, had to run and do a 25 min walk in 15 mins to get DS2 to pre-school for 12.15 (it only ran afternoon sessions), then back to the school at 3pm to pick up DD, and do the run to pre-school in 15 mins again to be there for 3.15. FOR A WHOLE BLOODY TERM!!

And to make it worse, I was working FT nights at the time, and would have to catch my sleep in 30 min bursts as my Ex worked day shift.

I still get about how much of a gaff around it was, just because of his DoB, and he personally was more than ready for FT.

Tbh, I look back 5 1/2 years ago, and wonder just how the hell I managed it. Don't think I'd be able to now!

"Give them a few weeks and they won't even remember that X started before them, or Y started after."

Just because they don't remember doesn't mean it won't have had an effect on the social dynamic of the class and where a child fits into it.

Joining a group last is hard socially. It creates extra social pressures for the children to fit in.

Putting that stress onto a small child to even out perceived advantages seems to me an appalling way to treat people whose welfare matters every bit as much as the youngest child in the class.

Two weeks is really dragging the arse out of it. If a child can only manage to start with two others they are not ready for school at all.

A few days should be plenty if you want to get all the children in in smaller groups.

I don't even think my DD was aware that other people started before her. One day she was on holiday, the next in reception. She seemed unaware of who had started when.

My DS, on the other hand, went to full daysfrom day 1, didn't know a soul and is a summer born boy. I feel he was massivelt disadvantaged by this and would have benefited from a staggered start.

You can't please everyone, all of the time can you? And ultimately people can vote with their feet and home ed, choose a different school, or in the case of the OP, as it's the massive disadvantage her DD will suffer that is under discussion, afford her daughter the same advantages her son is getting, and go private.

And for thosr who say it's the unfairness and not everyone us being treated the same...they are. They are all being trickled in by virtue of their DoB. Every single one if them.

Just because they don't remember doesn't mean it won't have had an effect on the social dynamic of the class and where a child fits into it. Joining a group last is hard socially. It creates extra social pressures for the children to fit in.

Social dynamics? Social pressures? Give me a break! For gods sake. It sounds like you are much more bothered and concerned by this then any child would be. Over thinking and i suspect some sort of anxiety thing here . . . that's you not your child.

As for joining a social group last, from what i can tell in reception they all mix together and mingle. They don't get into little cliques, maybe at secondary school but not at age 4.

Seriously you need to chill out, your going to make yourself ill!

what poopoo said.

Far more of an issue is not knowing anyone in the class. I'm not sure if the OP's DD falls into that category, but IMO she will get far more sympathy from the school and perhaps a change in her start date if she requests her DD starts earlier due to that fact rather than she is being disadvantaged by her DoB by being last in.

Of course someone has to be last whichever way they stagger them.

I agree that it's really not such a big deal when they're 4, especially in a small community when a lot of them will know each other anyway. Children start nursery / pre-school at staggered times, and a lot of the Reception kids are basically pre-school age. It's not like they're going into the jungle on I'm A Celeb - the order really would make a difference then!

bebejones Question that under the new guidelines. My DS is also August born and really struggled with the fact others were staying f/t and he did mornings having started later - he came from f/t day nursery so he could have delt with a full day.

These are, as far as I know, all well socialised children from three small villages.

I bumped into a mum this morning and her summer born son is first in (5 Sept) which she didn't understand because he is only doing mornings until January. And this is the first year they have taken the youngest in first, last year was the other way around. Hardly tried and tested is it? If the part timers are going in first, what are teachers doing in the afternoon?

Anyway, called the LEA and they were not even aware of the schools staggered dates, did not approve, said my DD could go on the first day if I requested and immediately asked if I wanted them to call the Head and sort it.
It seemed perfectly clear that my daughter was entitled to go to school on the first day regardless of the school's "policy".

I declined this kind offer, as a meeting with the Head (gently...) should sort this out. And I have a policy, myself, of "staggering" school staff exposure to my method of operation. They are new, and I'm am not sure how much experience they have had. I don't want anyone to get overexcited or overtired so best to introduce things gradually. I should think no more than 10 minutes to start with should get the ball rolling.

I cannot believe the hoops mothers like Wonky have had to go through! From what I have seen, the line between telling children what to do and telling their parents what to do seems not to exist!

kate unless you're being tongue-in-cheek there (and I hope you are) I really think you'd be better off in the private system.

" If the part timers are going in first, what are teachers doing in the afternoon?" Oh, probably nipping out for mani/pedis I should think. Why not phone up the LEA and report them?

youarekidding Do you know where I can find the info on new guidlines? I've seen it mentioned but can't find a link!

I'm just so confused as to why my DDs school are starting the younger ones last. If all the staggered starts are to help them settle in and the younger children are the ones perceived to struggle the most (statistically speaking) and need the most 1:1 support, it baffles me why DDs school are bringing the younger ones in after the Autumn & Spring borns. All the mums I've spoken to here are unimpressed by the start dates/procedure but all seem a bit resigned to 'that's how it's done here'. I'm not usually one to rock the boat (I hate confrontation) but I can't really see how their current system is best for any of the children.

Kate2mum I'm glad the LEA were helpful and you will get a chance to sort it out with the school. More parents should be aware of the legislation changes!!

So glad you got the outcome you wanted OP, hope it all goes well for your dd at her new school

Tongue-so-firmly-in-cheek-can't-speak.

I don't care what they do with time! But when my child is on their books from 5 Sept but they say don't turn up because we don't want you here yet, I am kind of interested.

With regard to private schools, there are lots of parents who go through the state system until about 8 and switch to prep because that is when they start the slow process to sitting Common Entrance at 13. I think more people jump ship at Y4/5 than start their children at pre-prep. So as she is only four ("rising five" in the jargon) we don't think she needs to go private. Especially when we plan to marry her off to one of her brother's posh friends. Although must book her a few cookery courses.

And my DS was so behind (dyspraxia) and so down from being beaten up (I catalogued photo bruises on the computer by date) that we had to do whatever we could to make him happy. That is why he is a private school. If anyone asks about school now is just says it is "lovely" with the sigh of a boy who knows daily terror.

"And I have a policy, myself, of "staggering" school staff exposure to my method of operation. They are new, and I'm am not sure how much experience they have had. I don't want anyone to get overexcited or overtired so best to introduce things gradually. I should think no more than 10 minutes to start with should get the ball rolling."

:o

Well done kate2 :)

Yes Clem, the LEAs seem to be very aware of the legislation changes, or at least mine. They could not have been more helpful or more clear that DD should be at school on 5 Sept if that was my wish. The fact that there was no individual consultation on her start date also raised concerns.

Could schools possibly be reluctant to inform the parents of these changes? Most parents get their information from their child's school, but there appears to be some feet dragging...

"And for thosr who say it's the unfairness and not everyone us being treated the same...they are. They are all being trickled in by virtue of their DoB. Every single one if them."

Trickling them in "by virtue" of their DoB is not fair, that's my point.

It's a largely arbitrary basis on which to discriminate, which is unfair.

It creates an imbalance in the social situation that will greet each child and some children will miss out on days of school that they are entitled to.

Either way, it seems that schools are no longer going to be allowed to carry on with this bullshit, because it is recognised as unfair and without merit.

Bebe, were you personally consulted about your child's start date, or just given the date? Because that is also a big point for the LEA.

Because as was said up the thread, someone playing around with a spreadsheet and highlighter to choose your child's school start date is no longer acceptable.

If you contact your Local Education Authority by phone, you can ask questions about reception entry dates without giving the school by name, etc, unless you want to. I started off by saying my child had been accepted to one of their primary schools and had some questions about staggered entry.

Bebe I think someone linked to it further up the thread? Ring your LEA if I was you - seems to be the best option!! For me I couldn't get my head around the argument that the younger ones found it harder to settle in, poorer social skills, too young for longer days - YET, my DS came from FT day nursery 8-4, had to do day nursery for 10 days, school and CM for a few hours for 65 weeks and then school F/T. Far harder for a child to adjust to. Also if they have perceived poorer social skills starting them last when some friendships have been formed and giving them 3 instred of 6 hours to socialise hardly solves the issue does it. And despite what people say about children's friendships being fickle at this age (which they are!) they still last longer than 5 minutes meaning later starters have to intergrate into formed groups.

not 65 weeks!!!!!!!! 5 weeks!!!!!

Oh and just for a laugh - the school kept telling me DS didn't have to be FT until year 1 (true) in fact he didn't have to attend (true) they could only take him part time if they wanted (prob true was 2008) YET when he needed a day off for a tooth extraction he was marked as absent (medical) am and pm sessions (Oct so pt still) where as they had decided he could only do mornings the other days had a Y or something for the afternoon.

Bebe if you search for my posts in this thread higher up you will find the links. Good luck (I thought mine would have to be a confrontation but actually they changed policy within three days... Almost as if they knew that they weren't supposed to be doing it )

And I think there is no need to worry about being one of "those" parents, especially if you also play a positive role in the school. I work full-time so can't do the going in to help stuff, but I am a governor and so play a positive role that way. Our head stood up at the induction meeting last week and says he wanted the parents to be "critical friends"; they would much rather you show an interest as long as you are not hostile!

No we weren't consulted, just given a slip of paper in a pack at 'New Parent's Evening' which told us what DD would be doing and when. She has had one visit in to the school (the same day as we went in), and I know they haven't had her 'Leaning Journey' (really hate that term) folder yet or the transition report from her pre-school. We are due a 'parent interview' sometime next week (waiting on exact date & time) when we will meet her teacher & talk to her about DD so that she can learn more about her! I want to be well armed prepared for this. (But at the same time don't want to go in all guns blazing!!

For the first week and a half she will only be doing 2 hours a day. Then after that not quite 3 hours for the next 2 weeks. She's currently doing more than that at preschool & hasn't napped since she was 18months old. I personally think that for MY DD, this 'routine' will be far more difficult, disruptive & unsettling. Just when she will settle into afternoons she has to switch to mornings. Then at the point she settles into mornings she will start doing all day just in time for a week off!

(Sorry for all the 'quote' marks!!)

Must add, that she is due to be visiting the school every Weds afternoon for an hour or so until the end of term. So she will be used to the setting & know who the teacher & TA are.