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??

Felt quite relieved that my child didn't join until October when all the sodding about had been done. He got on just fine. Will consider missing the start of the school year and going on holiday if there is lots of messing about for my next one. The cost of childcare or missed work can be put towards it ;)

This is what our LEA says about starting school:
"The law requires that children reach school age following their fifth birthday.
In Gloucestershire, we offer a three year infant course. Children can start
primary/infant school/academy, if parents wish, in the September of the
school year in which they become five. This means that children wishing
to start school/academy in the academic year 2012/2013 will be born
between September 2007 and August 2008 inclusive.
In some schools/academies, children attend part time at first. This is to
help younger children get used to school life. Individual schools/academies
give details of their specific arrangements. The arrangements are at the
discretion of the Head Teacher."

Can't find anything that mentions the DfE guidlines about 38 week school provision for 4 year olds (like on the Surrey link up thread). That link says "For under fives, this offer of a place does not have to be full time as the Childcare Act 2006 requires three hours per day minimum. It would therefore be up to each school to decide whether their initial offer was for a full or part time place."

My 4 year old DD will not be in school for the first 2.5 weeks and will be doing less than 3 hours for the next 3.5 weeks.

DH thinks I need to let it go. He may well be right, the more I read, the more worked up about it I'm getting!!

Yes, my DD's start date was a slip of paper in a pack too. Seems a bit underhand doesn't it? With a date before they had met her, seen her learning journey, and before the stay and play hours in the last few weeks of this term. The complete lack of consultation about your individual child and when they know practically nothing about them except dob is no longer allowed if they want to stagger entry.

Happy to see comments about people on this thread needing to get a life and why is it such a big deal, but there are some with more relevant logistical problems than me, simply because some schools aren't being completely honest about reception entry.

Nothing wrong with being prepared. In a work environment, who goes into a meeting or situation with no information? Wouldn't you look, you know, a bit stupid?

Kate I think it's the lack of consultation that is winding me up the most. Without even knowing my DD they seem to have decided that she will struggle because she has an August Birthday! Just as they seem to have decided that your DD will cope better because she is older.

I would call the LEA because a statement can't cover everything. Like a non-consultation start date, which appears to be a fairly pivotal point.

Yeah, well, my DH doesn't bother to say "let it go" anymore, he just steps aside. Also I never discuss every cut and slice of a dilemma. I just say, I have a problem, (gap for dealing with it, sometimes MN might be involved), then I return saying I have a solution that I can live with (sometimes through gritted teeth). Either way, he is really not bothered as long as he is not tortured during the process. Luckily he does the same for me, so I am not subjected to every business crisis/slight/dilemma because I would DIE of boredom.

He says ditto.

This system would have caused no end of trouble for us a ds went to an all day nursery which didnt collect from school, so would have had to find another provider to cover the time. None of this is insurmountable, but if the benefits so far out weigh the negatives how come every school doesn't o it, or it is statutory? (where I am so schools do, others don't).

My son's school does staggered entry over 2 weeks and he was one of the first starters. He has severe autism and learning difficulties so starting school with only a few children in the classroom really helped him. He also had more time to get used to the new routines. He would have really struggled with 30 children at once.

That's the sort of thing I've been talking about Lambsie. Giving one child an 'advantage' does not necessarily disadvantage another child. But at the end of the day, it comes down to parental choice.

I think if schools were better at informing parents for the reasons behind their decisions, it might make more sense to those who question it. However, the school cannot discuss other children so, for example, would not be able to say there is a child with SEN who needs to settle into a smaller class before your child (and others) join.

It always comes back to not being able to please everyone, so someone ends up dissatisfied. But, again, that's what I mean when I say life's not fair and we all just have to do the best we can to be considerate of each other.

Just wait until these DC go into subsequent yrs, I can just see some of you storming in over every other issue you weren't "consulted" about.

Not true actually, am perfectly prepared for some strategies that benefit the class as a whole because most things can be done again and done differently.

But DD will never get another first day at school. So, yes, it is personal to her.

I have just found out that this year's staggering timetable (youngest first, oldest last) is an "experiment" as they haven't done it before. And this experiment will be reviewed afterwards to see how effective it was so they can decide what to do for next year. Not helpful for DD really as she won't be starting school again.

Being "consulted" is a specific requirement for this one time event.

Her first day at school will be the first day she attends, surely - regardless of when that is.

And whilst this timetable might be a new system to this particular school, it will have been chosen, by professionals, who have presumably seen it work elsewhere and had it recommended. They didn't just think it up to piss you off. And I highly doubt that any school would consult on such an issue. It seems to be a big deal to you, but presumably it's not considered to be so in the grand scheme of things.

Well they're going to have to start consulting, even if they think it's beneath them.

Arf at the idea that just because something is recommended by "professionals" that it's a good idea and us non-professionals should not have an opinion on it.

:o

The people who pay for the school think it's a big deal that they are implementing a policy like this in the way they are planning to, so the fact that some of uncritical Mumsnetters think it's "precious" to oppose stupid school policies is kind of beside the point.

One of my family members is one of the foremost respected educational consultants in UK, works in sorting out educational policy and school management as well as teaching practices so I guess he would probably count as professional .... Mention it to him the other day when talking about DS and he thought it sounded daft and impractical.

*mentioned

I am a professional (ex-teacher, now in new career). My friend is a primary head. There is, apparently, NO evidence to support this approach.

And consulting with parents is an OFSTED requirement. Under the new framework, if schools don't do it they will not do well.

clemetteattlee No-one is disputing schools' obligation to consult with parents. Massive improvements have been made in this area in recent years. But it's debateable as to what different Head Teachers will warrant consultation for.

bebe the childcare act is right with the minimum of 3 hours needing to be provided BUT they have to offer it over 38 weeks.

they do this at our school. DD starts at the nursery there this autumn and it will be close to October half term before she is even in, due to the staggered starts

:S

"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."

This made me :) OP.

But, only fair to say, just from one Kate to another, they have almost certainly seen it all before... Think they might have your MO sussed from the outset. I did.

Just an update. I spoke to the Head for half an hour on the phone in the last few days and she said it wouldn't be possible to change the date of start for my DD. I then requested that they reconsider using every argument except the legal one (that was for conversation II if required). So it was all very pleasant.

She came back to me today, having checked with the LEA and, er, the bottom line is my daughter can start on the first day of the term should I wish. Which I do. She did say, however, that she couldn't have all the parents just "deciding" what day their children wanted to start! But they can. I think she just hopes there will be no more requests.

I think the point is, legally, although the legislation has changed, there have been no test cases (who would spend the money to go to court? Not most parents, and not the schools), so the legislation hasn't been "interpreted" yet. Ie, only a judge can interprete legisation. But legal advisors to the LEAs can see there is very good cause for an interpretation that allows parents the right to start, quite reasonably, on the first day of term. Hence the LEA advice up the thread.

So thanks for your help! I would suggest anyone who is tearing their hair out about messed around start date/times should ask their school, nicely, to reconsider. And if they won't, contact the LEA and print out some of the advice above.

Also, far from "not having a life" by pursuing this (random implications from some people), in one week I have got the result I wanted, and therefore don't have to think about it any more, or moan about it all summer. Case closed.

Do you think DD's chances of being chosen as "Annie" in the school musical have been dealt a blow? Or will there be a cupcake penalty, and I'll be baking madly until Y4?

It's not that I don't understand your point, I do, and the school do too, most likely.

I do agree with the head though, schools can't have every parent making these sorts of decisions for themselves, can you imagine the potential for disruption there? And for emotion/convenience clouded judgement in some cases taking precidence over professional judgements? It's a more general point I know, but one that bears repeating perhaps. I'm sure you can see their point too.

It's a balance of rights and responsibilities IMO.

Anyway, glad you're happy with your outcome, I'm sure your dd can still be Annie one day :o Just don't go wading in over every tiny little thing, obv...

Our school scrapped the staggered start last year. Both kids and parents found staggered starts disruptive and it didn't work. This year half the class started the first day of term and the others the next day. The teacher said it was better because they all settled quicker and got used to the daily routine as a group rather than new people arriving in dribs and drabs. Good luck OP.