Parents of new reception starters: you do not have to start your child part-time or later in the term, no matter what the school says

[The3]

If your child is starting in reception at a state school, they are entitled to full-time education from the beginning of the Autumn term.

You can choose to send them part-time before they reach compulsory school age, but the school cannot insist that you do. Many schools present parents with transition arrangements which may be a later start, weeks of alternating mornings and afternoons, or gradual attendance building up to half term. Schools tend not to inform parents that these are optional, leaving lots of working families in the lurch when it comes to children who’ve left full-time nursery or other childcare, and plenty of people take unpaid leave or use up large chunks of their annual leave allowance dealing with the consequences of part-time or late starts.

If this is the case, for you, you can insist that your child begins school full time from day one. Your child has a right to this, if they are at a state school, and there is some very clear guidance from the Office of the Schools’ Adjudicator to explain this.

I’m posting this as my dc’s school had a six-week transition period, which would have meant I had to take all of my annual leave allowance to cover it, as I’d be able to attend work for less than an hour a day. I insisted on my dc’s right to full-time education, and it was fine, and many other parents sent their children in over the next few days, so more than half were full-time way before the end of the school’s transition period. Dc thrived at school, and transition from full-time nursery to full-time school was pretty straightforward all-in-all.

Totally agree with you.
Until your child is compulsory school age (the term after they turn 5), you can send them in as much or as little as they’re ready for. Whether that’s full time from September or half days or 2/3 days a week until Easter.
You can also defer a Summer born child for the whole year and start them in Reception when they’re 5.

I would be careful about advising parents to take a course of action that primarily benefits working parents, rather than the children who are starting school.

It depends if you feel your dc would benefit from the stability and predictability of regular school attendance, or whether a period of partial attendance would be the best course.

You, as the parent, are entitled to make this decision, and can continue part-time until your dc is compulsory school age. It isn’t up to the schoool.

"I would be careful about advising parents to take a course of action that primarily benefits working parents, rather than the children who are starting school."

The children of working parents have typically been doing a daycare schedule that is longer than the average school day for several years by the time they start school.

It is generally less disruptive for children to do a full day at school rather than juggled about between a mish-mash of different arrangements.

It is also more supportive for children to have parents who are not worn out and stressed, and to be able to enjoy more holiday time with their parents (which is more likely to happen when parents are not wasting half their annual leave with this nonsense).

Some schools seem to think we are living in 1950 and that most kids are being away from their mothers for the first time ever...?

I disagree with PP about children in full time nursery being ready for full time school. School is not the same as nursery. Nursery there is much more free choice and a lot less expectation for carpet sessions and concentrating. Not to mention that they are going from a 1:6 adult to child ration to a 1:15. This is so difficult for most children who are used to being able to do what they want and when they want with free flow snack times etc. There is a reason why staggered starts are used and it is unfair to throw a child into full time school in an unknown environment with up to 28 children they've never met before and adults they aren't familiar with.

Even if you still insist it is a good idea for your child and you're making that decision for them and not your own convenience, most schools have parent meetings in the pm if children are in the mornings, or have the other group of children in the pm if the class is initially split into two for transition. It is highly unlikely that any school will change it's entire plan for one child, but I guess there's no harm in asking, if you have the right to.

Does anyone have a link to the legislation/ guideline which says this? Not sure I'm googling the right thing

What alternative is there though for full time working parents?

It's simply not feasible to take annual leave for such a prolonged time - especially where transition periods are longer than a week! Parents need to save that annual leave for school holidays and essentially, having a few free days just for themselves also.

I work for a very flexible company and pretty much pick and choose my hours / work from home or the office but even they couldn't allow me to do 6 weeks of half days or full days annual leave in one block. For most, by the time you've dropped children off at school and got to work, it would be time to go back again for them.

Our DD is going to be in nursery from 7-4.30/5 from 9 months to school age, even then she's going to have to go to wraparound care so I don't see what difference it will make whether she's at school for a full day, if anything, it's more stability.

Even if you still insist it is a good idea for your child and you're making that decision for them and not your own convenience,

It's not a case of being for a parent's own convenience though is it? For many it will be a toss up between sending their children in from day one full time (or earlier at least) or having to put their children into holiday clubs at half term and / or Christmas. People need to work, don't have unlimited annual leave and many of us don't have grandparents or other people locally to help with childcare.

"I would be careful about advising parents to take a course of action that primarily benefits working parents, rather than the children who are starting school."

I actually laughed out loud when I read that. I'm fed up of all this 'the child is key' and the parents rights and considerations should be way down the list.

I matter too. You know.

I asked ds2's school if he could go full time ASAP, maybe after the first week of staggered starts and part to full days. School agreed. Realistically I knew what he rules were, so I knew that they couldn't refuse!!

I'm going through this at the moment. I could probably manage to accommodate part time for a week and a half by juggling work, coordinating pick ups with other mums I know and family helping out but I consider that to be much more disruptive!

Especially as a week and a half later DD will then have to go to full days.

I've informed the school she'll be attending full time from day 1.

I didn’t know that and am really annoyed that schools don’t make it clear that it’s not compulsory. I have several friends who really struggled with this, including one single parent friend who, at a very difficult time in general, got into trouble at work.

Like PPs, I find the trope that working parents do things to benefit ourselves over our DC annoying.

Parents being able to pay the bills benefits DC!

It’s debateable what arrangements most benefit DC, as individuals and on average. The staged thing affects three groups: DC, parents/carers and schools. IMO the main driver for this is the school, eg to mitigate big class sizes.

Six weeks is a bit much, our school only do a week transition which I think is fair. The only children who don't benefit from doing it are those going straight from the school nursery. As they have had many transition day already and even share some of the same staff.

I do think a lot of parents don't realise that even for children who have been in fulltime childcare school is different. They do need a short time to ajust. But six weeks is a bit OTT.

When my children finished at nursery, that's it, no more. So unless you have grandparents to help with these staggered starts and finishes, or have a childminder arranged because you work and are going to need one anyway, what are posters actually suggesting you actually DO?

You ask Work to cut your hours, change things, but for how long? A week? 2? How many people could continue that, all term? up until Easter?

Not many. Working parents.

Plus it's ridiculous. Even for non working parents. A week or 2 fine. But really within the month the teacher would presumably want them all in, into a routine, and settled?

I’m also not sure what primary schools expect you to do for these long transition periods of up to 6 weeks. What if you have a job that doesn’t allow any annual leave? Where are you meant to take the children? I know that school isn’t childcare but why is it so difficult.

Agree that prolonged transitions are crazy. DDs school has it for one week and the kids are fine.

Paying bills and saving holiday allowances for actual holidays is of greater importance to the child IMO.

I think the theory behind it is bullshit. If it really was all about the needs of the child there wouldn't be such a draconian approach to school absences once they are in full time where practically any request for absence is viewed as damaging to the child's education. You can't have it both ways!

“The only children who don't benefit from doing it are those going straight from the school nursery”

I disagree.

Lots of children find it confusing especially when the transition days are variable so a week of before lunch a week of til after lunch etc as there is no stability and just when they think they know what school is it changes.

I have the meeting next week to see what the proposal is for dc3.....dreading it

And even those who would benefit from shorter days to begin with might not if afternoons are a mix of care from whoever is available

Wow I didn’t know this! That is really useful-thanks for sharing.

It's not for the children's benefit
It's for the staff, so they don't have to cope with 30 new starters all together on the first day

My child's school did full days from day 2. Day one had staggered starts in the morning so kids could arrive and be settled before the next group of kids arrived. Transition days were once a month in the previous term.

I had heard this before and I think if DD school was doing a prolonged staggered start I would have no choice but to tell school she needed to be full time much sooner.
As it is, they are doing a week of half days, and between DP and I we will manage...but the irony is that to take the leave to do this staggered start she will be doing a full week holiday camp (with 9-3 days) in the summer holidays instead! Luckily it’s a drama camp which is her favourite thing.

I think for some children the staggered start is essential, for others it is totally unnecessary. But I guess it’s easier for the teachers to apply it to all. And we will enjoy some free time together on her afternoons that week.

As a Reception teacher I honestly think it makes no difference if they have a staggered start. In my experience if a child is going to struggle to settle in then that will happen regardless of whether they do a full day or not. I tend to think of it in terms of like when posters worry about their child settling in Nursery. The advise is usually the less they are there the longer it will take to feel comfortable in the new environment.

I wish I had known this eight years ago - our school insisted on half a term of mornings only. It was incredibly inconvenient and expensive, we had to find childcare for six weeks PT (both working, no other family local). My DD1 was 5 before she started full-time school and having spent four years in full-time nursery was ready for full-time school. The school has just this year changed it to two weeks - presumably after years of pressure from parents. One to two weeks seems reasonable but any longer and I think it is the teacher enjoying a rest.

I am not sure that schools must agree to summer borns going into YR if they defer for a year. Many schools ask them to join their cohort in Y1. They have deferred entry, not fine down a year.

It’s interesting that working parents want their children to be at school, full time, as soon as possible. Many posters on other threads think their children are not ready! I think most children are and the last year of nursery and YR and both the early years curriculum. They are not separate entities. It should, hopefully, be a seemless transition for most children, especially if the nursery is at the school.

I think some people make far too big a deal about starting school instead of seeing it as a natural progression that you and your child are working towards. I do think
Parents should object to part time if it doesn’t suit them or their child. I did and I wasn’t working!