Has anyone used the ruling in the most recent report from the Schools Adjudicator to successfully challenge compulsory part-time entry in Reception?

[heheheheheheh]

grips://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/393886/OSA_Annual_Report_2014.pdf para 58 states that schools must provide full-time places from the start of the autumn term.

My dc's school offers only part-time places until the end of September, and they justify it by saying it helps the children settle. Many schools in the UK adopt different approaches to the settling-in process, but there is no research into how this affects outcomes. I note that all the schools I know in the independent sector offer full-time places from day one, so I doubt the claims that part-time Reception education is ultimately better for children - otherwise the people paying for their children's education would be demanding it.

The part-time period is very hard for working parents and has a disproportionate impact on people in lower-paid jobs as these almost always have less flexibility for taking leave.

I'm sure that by challenging the school on this I will be known as "that parent", which is not the best way to start things off, but it bothers me that schools can apparently operate in breach of rulings like this, particularly when the impact on families and their incomes is difficult.

So has anyone else challenged their dc's school on this with success?

Bad link: www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/393886/OSA_Annual_Report_2014.pdf

Good luck. Ds is at state school in London where all local schools start Reception with full days, just adding a few kids each day over 2 weeks.

Following with interest. My DC2 is due to start next September. I am a lone parent on a middle income in an inflexible sector. I have no family in a position to help and all the schools around here have part time Reception places until the end of September. I am already worrying about how I will make it work.

To be honest I do not see how you can fail to win such a case in law. The admission regs are very clear that the school has to allow part or full time attendance from September. It is absolutely the parent's decision about what to do. The school cannot insist on part time attendance.
Having said that I know lots of schools who insist on this part time attendance and I do not hear anybody saying that this is illegal, the parents all do what they are told. If you want full time education for your child you should insist but undoubtedly you will be "that parent". But you may start a revolution at the school, with other like-minded parents.

Admission - the one uncertainty I feel I have is that the school does offer full-time education from the last day in September onwards. Could they argue that in this way they are meeting the requirements in the admissions code 2.16? Or does the adjudicator's ruling that children should be able to attend full time from the start of the autumn term mean that the school is in breach of the code?

Could they argue that in this way they are meeting the requirements in the admissions code 2.16?

They could try but the adjudicator would not agree and would overrule any such provision in their admission arrangements. If the school wanted to challenge that they would have to go to judicial review. If they were foolish enough to attempt that I think they would lose as the adjudicator's decision is clearly not unreasonable.

My daughter starts Reception in 2 weeks as they have staggered entry youngest start first. She will also be part time until early October. This works brilliantly for me as she is the type of child who will need time to settle. However I do think it is hard on working parents. I think schools should offer a choice of being part time for a few weeks or starting on full days depending on what suits the child and parent.

Thank you prh47bridge and admission- I know you are both schools admissions legends on this board so I'm cheered by your responses. I'll let you know how I get on.

Update: the school said they think it's better for children to have a more gradual start but agreed that reception dc are entitled to full-time education from the start of term.

Dc will going full time next week. I hope this is useful to other parents in a similar situation: I had expected the school to argue the case but they were aware of the implications of the Admissions Code and I found myself pushing at an open door. It's clear the school would prefer a more gradual entry but they acknowledged they couldn't insist on it.

Which is typical. They know they are not legal but assume that the vast majority of parents will simply do as told, in fact a lot like their expectation of the children!

When dd2 started reception 2 years ago I needed her to be full time straight away as I'd split with my Ex and I couldn't manage the part time start which lasted 4 weeks

Dd went to school with the rest of reception in the morning then joined the nursery class for the rest of the day

The school still follows the phased entry but other parents have now gone straight to full time after I stuck my neck out and became that parent

Any parent who is working can request up to four weeks' unpaid parental leave per year which could help with this but in practice it might not be affordable, the parent might have used up all their leave by age 4, or it might be a bad time for the employer (Sep and Oct are busy for my employer for example).
I'm therefore watching this thread with care.

My dd starts reception on Wednesday 9-3 and then following Monday full time 9-3.25. My son has already started school 2 days back at juniors.

Our school puts the onus on parents to decide whether to pick up at 12/1 or whenever. There were some parents in ds' class still doing part time at Christmas. We were full time from the moment he could. We both work ft and frankly I couldn't be doing with all the faffing.

Schools stagger starts and have part time attendance because they believe that's what's best for the DCs. It gives them time to adjust and settle in.

If you chose to ignore what's considered best for your child and insist on full time attendance then the school has little choice.

I insisted on full time reception back in 1996, school happy to accommodate. DS was the only reception child having school dinner for a couple of days, and was well-spoilt by the dinner ladies. He was only just 4.

Absolutely no difficulty settling in.

I challenged this, along with other parents when my Ds4 started school, he is now going in to year three. There wrre a number of threads about it then. It didn't cause any issues at school, they obviously knew the legal implications and sent out a letter saying parents could choose, so I think some still did part time.

My dd has just started at the same school, all children were offered full time from day one but with a note that if you wanted or felt your child needed to go part time that could be arranged.

As others have said there isn't any evidence that a staggered entry helps the children, it's not uniformly done in schools and for some it's a pita. I know a few schools that did staggered intake/part time attendance up until Oct half term with kids just doing three mornings etc and building up. Complete nightmare for anyone who was not a sahp, or anyone not very local to the school.

Also, part time won't be best for children who will end up having a mish mash of childcare arrangements- school then afternoon nursery or short term childminder. Much less confusing to get straight into school I think.

Good grief! Well thank you Mythical King for at least one person willing to be a little less selfish. Do you genuinely all think that most schools have a staggered intake just to be difficult? Do you think that the majority of schools in the country have devised their staggered transition policy purely to annoy parents or because reception teachers are lazier than the rest and want a few weeks with less children? There is an actually a rationale behind staggered intake which is about trying to make transiton the best possible for children to start school.
Some yawningly obvious points but bound to be made (hurled)....

Yes lots of children attend nursery full time and so can manage a full day but, I know this is VERY HARD FOR SOME PEOPLE TO GET THEIR HEAD AROUND, BUT it's not all about you and your child. The teacher and school is trying to get transition right for ALL children. They are trying to get to know your child, spend actual proper time talking to your child, making your child feel special, giving them individual 1-2-1 time and assess where they are and what they might need in those first few weeks emotionally, socially and academically. That often means a staggered intake to have less children in at one time or so staff can do home visits or nursery transfers.

Yes private schools tend to start full time from day 1, they also have reception class sizes of about 12 ...that would be less than half the size of a state school class with more teaching assistant support too. They also tend to have a much larger proportion of children meeting or exceeding early learning goals on entry.

So sorry, annoying of us I know to try and get right for your child. Hopefully you can all complain on mass and get 30 4 year old hearded in class from day one so you can not be inconvenienced by our attempts to get it right for your child's next 7 years with us. :(

ofgs its a few weeks

Most schools don't have some children for part of the week and different children for the rest of the week - they have them all till 12 and then all till 1 etc. That doesn't help the teachers get to know them in smaller groups (though if a minority of children stay all day, they will get to know those ones of course).

No Trouble, clearly and rather obviously I would have thought ,I don't talk to the parents in my school like this ......this being an anonymous Internet forum forcexpressing ones opinions!
Which bit of my post is balderdash though? I never said it wasn't difficult for parents .... My post wasn't talking about what's best for parents, I was stating what the vast majority of school leaders think is best for children! That would be my job! Contrary to popular opinion these days, schools aren't supposed to be childminding factilities set up for the benefit of parents.

My DC's school lets all parents decide what will work best for their own child until the term after their fifth birthday. So I've had one child start on 5 mornings, one who went full time and two somewhere in the middle. Everybody seems very happy with this, and I assume the school find it works as they've been doing it this way for at least the last 13 years. I can't understand why other schools don't do the same

But Effic, do you not realise how difficult it is for working parents with no flexibility? Neither dh nor myself are able to work around such an arrangement. Lots of working parents have their children in nursery full time until the end of Aug before starting that Sept. I know quite a few families where they've had to do that and go without a holiday so they could take annual leave in the sept instead. We have no family either so nobody to come and help out.
It may make it all less manic and stressful for you but it is a near impossible situation for some parents esp line parents on low salaries in inflexible jobs. They cannot afford to take unpaid leave. So I guess what you are saying is that the solution is for families to forgo a summer holiday the year a child starts school to enable them to take annual leave to make your job easier.