New reception starters - delayed return

[sunrainwind]

My daughter's new school is not taking reception until the end of September and then only part time for a week. We have just been told this and I'm very unhappy. The guidance is that all children should return in the new school year and I'm not sure why it's ok to delay reception starters - can schools do this? Their reasoning is to give the returners some time in their old classes (which I can't see how it can work with the bubble system anyway).

@ishouldtryabiteachdayer no, nothing until the 28th unless they change their minds (which may happen based on how they've handled the situation recently - a lot of flipping on decisions they've made).

@sweepthehalls - we both have jobs that make it very hard to manage the school arrangements but we have a system that works normally with flexible shifts/paid childcare. Even harder as a teacher too - my work will probably give me some unpaid leave if I need it.

@jassyradlett - totally agree!

@sirfredfredgeorge - thanks - sounds like I could ask for full days from when they do go back from the 28th (could probably manage two half days) but probably will have to suck it up and accept she'll miss another 3.5 weeks on top of the rest most have missed.

@danni0509 that's really awful! Shocking.

I know she will love it when she does go, she's very ready and has lots of friends from pre school moving with her. It's only a small school and very nurturing (once they're there!!).

[quote sunrainwind]@realityofsen I know for sure I'm not the only one - I've only discussed it with two of my friends who have children it affects too and both are also very disheartened by it. I'm not planning on any legal challenge but wondered if it was worth a non confrontational email to the head but sounds like it's not - apart from potentially for that first week they're back when they're offering half days only.[/quote]
Oh god definitely don't mark yourself out as the emailing parent so early. Like others have said, Covid situation aside loads of primaries do this annoyingly long starting period for reception. It's a pain but it is what it is. For the sake of three weeks delay I really, really wouldn't send any kind of email to the head.

It's not statutory education in Year R. While this crisis is ongoing it makes sense to go back to the old system of starting at school the term after the child's 5th birthday. My older ones didn't have Year R then and it did them no harm at all.

My dd is in reception this year and wasn't full. Time until the end of September so schools definitely do this in 'normal' circumstances too. I would have expected it this year to be honest

When dd started reception 10 years ago, her school did part time for the first half time. It was a confusing mix of mornings, afternoons, mornings with lunch, lunch then afternoons etc and then they started them full time after the October half term. There was a very high percentage of SAHM, so it didn’t really affect many working Parents which is how I think they got away with it. We moved to a different part of the country and there would have been riots if school had suggested setting in to take that long, For Ds and dd2, half the year started on the Tuesday full time and the other half started on the Thursday full time. Both the head teacher and reception teacher are working parents which I think makes a massive difference.

Our school will be doing the same. They've said (privately) their priority is to get currently enrolled kids back and settled into school before getting the reception kids in. I'm not sure if they will be part time but they are going to be delayed.

Our school will be doing the same. They've said (privately) their priority is to get currently enrolled kids back and settled into school before getting the reception kids in. I'm not sure if they will be part time but they are going to be delayed.

One of the things I love about our school is there is none of this staggered start business. Full time from the first day. DD is going to be one of the youngest in Reception in September but I know she will be fine with this.

Sorry but I’m with you OP. Schools have months to plan, I struggle to see why they can’t

@Bringonspring They really don't. They received the guidance with 2 school weeks left of term. The last bout of guidance was changed 42 times.

Rubbish, it’s not hard. My school they all start back the 3 sept, pre school and reception. If my school can do others can.

This is all part and parcel of the bugger that is Corona virus.

It's not statutory education in Year R. While this crisis is ongoing it makes sense to go back to the old system of starting at school the term after the child's 5th birthday. My older ones didn't have Year R then and it did them no harm at all.

That only works if nursery and pre-school provision also adapts (and has space and funding to enable a staggered start across a year.)

It can’t, and it doesn’t.

OP, you are entitled by law to send them full time from day one, notwithstanding any particular arrangements in place due to coronavirus. If you search the threads on the primary education board you’ll find the material you need to quote at the schools.

And YANBU. And your dc will be just fine. Plenty of the other posters gasping at the brazen cruelty of sending a child full time on 3rd September are oddly unphased by the idea of sending a child full time on 3rd October, and would probably object to - for example - their GP, solicitor, midwife etc being absent for a month due to childcare reasons.

@avocadoze, Where is your evidence for that?
All bets are off with Covid. For a start, contrary to popular opinion, it's not even certain that schools will be open full-time.

Paragraph 2.16 (a) in the school admissions code, clarified by the Office of the Schools adjudicator in the 2013-2014 annual report.

I agree that COVID may change things, but even without COVID there were too many schools still preventing children from exercising their right to full-time education from the start of the autumn term, through these “settling in” arrangements.

I would be annoyed op as well, but wouldn't say anything in these strange times. Our school is usually full time immediately, but this year they are having an 8 day transition, fair enough though slightly inconvenient at the time. It would be very disruptive if my youngest had to wait a month later than my youngest to go back - particularly as she's already been attending the nursery class since September (with a gap obviously!)

You definitely don't have any legal right to send them at the moment - otherwise why have practically none of us been able to send their children to school for the last 4 months

@sirfredfredgeorge

Is the only case law on this not:

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/296261/ada2479_st_marks_primary_bournemouth_16aug13.pdf

Which makes it pretty clear that places have to be available full time immediately, however "normal" it might be to have an induction period. Obviously this year we have the added complication of covid, but indeed that sounds more of a reason to welcome all in children in immediately to mitigate any subsequent lockdown.

The "current years kids have missed months, so it's okay if you miss months" talk is quite depressing, it's not okay for anyone to miss school, and there the reasons to miss more school would need to be extremely compelling, and I can't see "giving them some time in their old class" is at all reasonable. Especially as that target does not require any delayed entry - although of course the new kids in reception might not have the optimum space when they're occupying they YR 6 space. But the whole idea doesn't seem productive anyway, a pointless re-settling of kids in their new classroom after a couple of weeks.

The new Admissions Code 2014 (which comes after this case) states explicitly that "Admission authorities must provide for the admission of all children in the September following their fourth birthday. The authority must make it clear in their arrangements that, where they have offered a child a place at a school: a) that child is entitled to a full-time place in the September following their fourth birthday;".

The case quoted sets out that children are entitled to go full time, and the school can't insist on part time. However, it doesn't set out that children all have to start on the same day.

From the OP, it seem that they are offering a place in September, albeit part time for a week. OP could push back on the part time element, but given that is only for a week, it may not be worth pushing it.

Our school is delaying the start of our reception class for a further week to (hopefully) enable the new children to take part in transition visits/activities in small groups as all of the usual transition, planned for the summer term had to be cancelled this year. Staff will also be making home visits, in some form during the first two weeks.

Our school is delaying the start of our reception class for a further week to (hopefully) enable the new children to take part in transition visits/activities in small groups as all of the usual transition, planned for the summer term had to be cancelled this year. Staff will also be making home visits, in some form during the first two weeks.

@snowballer - ok but this school doesn't have a long settling in period normally and they've changed the dates this week.

@tfoot75 - the difference is that all years are expected back next term so I'd like to see her back too and not miss another month.

@PatriciaHolm actually if they would have her full time for some of those days if would mean she could attend rather than not attend as we may not be able to facilitate half days with the childcare we can sort. I think we could manage two half days that week. I won't be making any formal legal challenge but I'd like to know the facts.

@hamptonedge that sounds good for the children and well planned. I'd be happy if that was planned.

[quote sunrainwind]@snowballer - ok but this school doesn't have a long settling in period normally and they've changed the dates this week.

@tfoot75 - the difference is that all years are expected back next term so I'd like to see her back too and not miss another month.

@PatriciaHolm actually if they would have her full time for some of those days if would mean she could attend rather than not attend as we may not be able to facilitate half days with the childcare we can sort. I think we could manage two half days that week. I won't be making any formal legal challenge but I'd like to know the facts.
[/quote]
Well yes, you are certainly legally entitled to insist on full time that week. What you need to consider, though, is what that would mean for her - are they just having half the class in at once (so she could be with other reception children all the time) or are they just having reception children in half the day (in which case she would end up on her own probably, as this year they are less likely to want to put her in with another year). That may impact the experience she has.

@PatriciaHolm the 2013-2014 annual report clarifies: it’s not just a place during September, they are entitled to attend full time from the start of term. I have challenged a school on this, successfully. They let my dc attend full time from the start, and then in subsequent years made it clear to all parents that they could do so. Two years after my dc started, they had got rid of the staggered start.