My child being placed with immediate effect on Reduced Timetable (Reception)

[breakingdads]

Hi,

Would like anyone who has experience with primary / reception education to help if possible. My child is in reception (he is the youngest in the year - in fact, born 2 days later would probably be starting this coming September). He has been in nursery and pre-school care full time since 2 without any problems, in fact glowing reports which eased my worries of him entering reception this past September. However in the last 3 months, apparantly, he has started to have some problems in class, with concentration, being tired, territorial etc which have resulted in some aggressive acts - hitting out. I have had this flagged up twice, but the school have said they have been able to deal with it. However last week, we got a call to say that he had injured a teacher and for this reason, he will be put on a reduced timetable with immediate effect. Obviously this has had a major impact on how we manage things with him not being in class at all now 5 mornings a week. Since it has happened I have found out that the incident seemed more accidental than premeditated (he had fallen asleep and the teacher had woke him up, which startled him and he jumped off the chair indavertently onto her hand which was on the floor). Now in the conversations I initially had, I was in absolute shock as I was being told "my child had broken a staff members arm) so was apologising profusely, to the point that I was just agreeing to everything they said. However as the matters sinks in, I am starting to wonder if the way they have acted is a)lawful b)ethical and c) in the best interest of my child. At this point in time, I have had no written information about his behaviour in class which has resulted in this reduced timetable, I have had no information on what they plan to do going forward, no plan etc I have signed nothing saying that my child can go to a reduced timetable. Literally just been told he can't come in anymore in the mornings - deal with it. I've just accepted things and muddled my way through this week. Obviously a solution could be that we have to continue with the reduced timetable and look at deferring him till this coming September. However all feedback received from the reception teacher is that he is managing his school work well, its just that he is not coping emotionally with the reception class. I've been told that with a class of 30 he can't expect to get any personal treatment, but the more I am reading about this - it seems there is an obligation for the school to look at every possible way of keeping a child in class and integrating them which doesn't seem to have happened. His behaviour with me is absolutely spot on so I am also trying to work out what is triggering his so called behaviour in class ( which again seems to be unrecorded and anecdotal at best ). If anyone has any constructive advice it would be much appreciated, as I feel I have agreed to something under "the fog" of being made to feel guilty on something that myself and child shouldnt really have been made to feel guilty of. Muddling through this week, but very difficult when full time working at the same time. My child hasn't got a clue what is happening, just keeps on asking when they can go back into school. Thanks again.

This.

Just turned 4 is very little. I used to work in reception and none of what you’ve described would be raising flags as abnormal.

Either way, there are formal protocols the school must follow when they consider moving a child to a reduced timetable and it sounds like they have not followed these procedures. And it sounds like they have not got their stories straight.

If it were me, I would ask for a meeting with the HT to discuss this. I would ask to clarify what support has been put in place already, and why they feel these measures have not worked.

A reduced timetable is an extreme reaction to one incident. If there are any other incidents, they will have been recorded (as it is a legal requirement for school to do so). If schools have concerns about behaviours, they should follow an Assess, Plan, Do, Review system, so they should have documentation from these interventions.

I agree @FloatingBean. I've gone through the links you posted (thanks for sharing them) and this is what the guidance says.

I know of one school who has done this with pupils they perceive to be 'challenging'.
only having the child part time is their way of pushing families to move to a school who can meet their needs better. These are children with clear needs and with EHCPs. the children that struggle but without EHCPs they are resistant to apply for EHCPs and say children don't need extra support when they really do. The school has lost so many pupils in the last 2years due to this I don't really understand the benefit to the school but they must have a reason.

This is where I am at the moment. At the very least in such a confusing situation I would have expected documentation about any incidents, documentation of what support has been in place (and the results thereon), then documentation re: any approval to moving him to a reduced timetable, and then their re-integration plans. I've seen nothing, signed nothing.

The only times I’ve known schools to put reduced timetables in place is where they have made a request for an EHCP and are waiting for it to be agreed so that the school has the appropriate funds from the LA to appoint a member of staff to support them. This generally allows for a successful mainstream placement for the child.

Again, I would have thought this would have been broached when I got told of the reduced timetable. i.e, "we are putting him on a reduced timetable, but these are measures and plans we are working on in the interim to integrate him back in". But no, it was essentially as blunt as saying he is going to be put on a reduced timetable with immediate effect, so deal with it. I think I was just nodding along last week in shock, its only this week that I am questioning the procedures that seemingly have been missed.

My grandson is even younger being an August baby, his school make allowances and work with his mum to make school a safe and positive experience. I feel if the school are saying they can’t cope with a class of 30 4/5 year olds then something is wrong.

So when he goes back full time I take it he would return to the same class, they are not holding him back a year?

Make a list and have a meeting with the head, personally I would be stating that if he was so much of a problem then they had better refer him to SENCO.

It’s obviously puzzling and concerning for you OP. However, through this thread the general view of everyone seems to be that it seems the school has randomly got no good reason put your child on reduced timetable and have pulled the wool over your eyes.
I think this is unlikely… the school must have their reasons for this.
You need clarity on this so a meeting with the head teacher is the way to go, but try to take on the schools suggestions rather than being shocked or insistent on him returning full time.
No indications from nursery etc - this is now a school day where perhaps 30 children are following a routine … perhaps your child is struggling with the demands.

I am a primary school teacher, it does seem that school have not followed protocol on this. Parents are required to sign a document which has a clear start/end or review date to a reduced timetable. It may be that they will produce this when you ask, there will likely have had to say something to the authority regarding his lack of morning attendance.

Some schools are AWFUL with overreacting about things like this and have a overly zero tolerance policy.I am a family support practitioner and have seen it multiple times.It may be difficult to get them to budge, and unfortunately if they won't your only option may be to move schools....perhaps he has regressed in his behaviour because he isn't happy there anyway?
Reception is way too much pressure sometimes.

It varies massively according to the child. My son was late August and he struggled massively. He only dropped his nap a month before starting and fell asleep on the way home every night. I would have liked him to start a year later, but it wasn't possible then. He got a reputation for being naughty, when he was actually just very young. He's now in sixth form and is doing really well, but the early years were tough.

It is very frustrating @brbreakingdads as by the sound of it (I've just read your other posts) this is an illegal exclusion. It is very concerning that they don't have recorded evidence of behavioural issues (maybe because there aren't any?). And, as I already said, this is an extreme reaction to one incident - which was unintentional on your DCs part, so not really a behavioural issue after all!

I would ask for another meeting with the head and ask for more details - how long will this reduced timetable last, what is the aim of it, how long has the problem / issue gone on for, what can they do to support him and what can you do to support him?
If he was my son I'd be concerned if he is falling asleep at his desk. This should have been flagged previously?

@Mamoun my twins are 30 August. They’re in secondary now but in reception I’d pick them up and dtd1 especially would fall asleep in the car on the way home, I’d carry her to the sofa where she’d continue to sleep and then I’d wake for dinner and she’d go straight to bed after. This was the pattern up until Easter. I wouldn’t be surprised if she fell asleep in class. She was still napping up until July before school when I stopped the naps but she’d have happily continued. Totally normal healthy dc. She still loves her sleep now. Her sister needs far less sleep.

I would add though, just because they haven’t followed correct procedure doesn’t mean their reasons are unfounded. It’s not unusual for children to struggle to cope in Reception.

Not trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes, I have to believe that the school would have flagged any problems up to me at the time if he was creating such a disturbance. I have been spoken to once, and at that point they said they could deal with the situation. I would also have believed that they should have a record of such behaviour so that they can back up this move. I have seen no record of his behaviour produced, which at least would go someway for them to justify what has happened. Most of the posters on here have recommended further dialogue with the Head Teacher is needed and that is what I intend to do. Like I have said previously, the basis of the thread was to question if the school is following the right protocols. It might be that it is in my childs best interests that he does drop out of this year??? but I am seeking clarification on how the school is dealing with the matter currently.

I'd ask to meet the Head again with the class teacher to come up with a plan.
If you are not happy and feel like there is a proper proposal to support your child, I'd then write to your chair of governors.

My August birthday boy struggled in reception and is now doing very well in his sixth form so don't give up hope! He'll get there. It's just the beginning and remember you can always change schools.

The school are not entitled to deny your DS a full time education just because there was an accident in the classroom that hurt a teacher. It was unfortunate, but it wasn't bad behaviour and it doesn't indicate a need for a reduced timetable.

If he is falling asleep in class regularly you might consider if he would be better off on a reduced timetable, but it may well not be the best idea and it certainly seems unlikely that skipping mornings (when he is likely to be more awake) and going in in the afternoon would be a good solution for him (and he is the one who counts in this calculation).

You are suddenly talking about having him redo reception, but until this accident, it hadn't even occurred to you. So I think you should hold fire on that idea completely. Take a step back and assess how well he is doing. How tired he is when he comes home, how much he seems to be getting out of it, etc.

I suspect what you have here is a head who was desperate to appease a shocked class teacher who needed hospital attention (and I do understand why a head might want to do this, they value their staff and are likely worried about turnover and wellbeing) and in doing so they have not prioritised your DS's wellbeing as they are required to. Or even thought about what has really happened here and what the impact on DS might be.

I think you should go back in, armed with the guidance on reduced timetables and your DS's right to a full time education. Tell them that they clearly haven't been following guidance and that you would like to discuss why they think it is in your DS's best interests. Ask for documentation on any ongoing behaviour problems they bring up and if they can not produce any tell them that it is clearly not significant if they haven't bothered to record it and that you expect them to discount it in considering a reduced timetable. If they have documentation, ask them why you have been given glowing reports without this being mentioned. Also, assuming you do think this, that you think a less drastic intervention would be a much more appropriate response if they haven't thought it necessary to involve you up til now and that you won't agree to a reduced timetable.

Approach this with them as joint endeavour to find the best solution for your DS if you can. But don't give in the way you did the first time - you clearly need to hold them to the standards they are required to meet. Be resolute about them clearly evidencing what they think is best and why. Push back if you don't agree. In this meeting, consider only your DS, not the teacher's well being.

If they refuse to take your DS back, start an official complaint and get in touch with your local council to see if there is anything they can do to enforce your DS's rights.

If you haven't done so, I would consider helping your DS write a "Sorry for stepping on your hand by accident" card for the teacher, though if it's been several days already, that might look a bit too forced to be appreciated.

I would also start looking around for another school. This might be a glitch and they end up getting over the shock of a reception teacher having to attend hospital because a 4 year old accidentally jumped on her hand. It may be the start of them victimizing your DS (if not intentionally). They obviously aren't too on the ball with procedures and that's a worry, but you have no idea what other schools are like. And you may be the kick up the backside they need to get it together a bit.

My understanding is that exclusions are temporary and not a punishment but to be used to put steps in place to mitigate future escalation. I’d be asking for their plan but overall I’d consider moving schools while he’s young enough to have minimal impact.

Loads of kids get sleepy at this age, especially soon after starting school and if they have a cold. My DS went to school in another country for the first few years and for 4-6 year olds there were a few floor mattresses in the corner where they could lie down when they needed to. My DS only did it a few times but some kids napped every day.

I agree-I think a conversation with the school about next steps is your priority here. If things are bad enough that a reduced timetable is needed, then what else needs to be put in place?

Can he back to preschool and start again next year? I would also apply for a different school. It is very odd if he was in full time nursery that he wasn't so exhausted. I would take him to the doctors as well.

Did and Dd were at a school like they.

The HT announced he didn’t believe in SENs he just thought children needed to work harder and he got rid of the SEN part in the school and forced all the SEN children out.

I think there were a few complaints to OFSTED and there was a surprise inspection and HT and all bar a few of the teachers were told to go home and substitute teachers were brought in.

There was other stuff going on as well
It went from Outstanding to in Special measures