Teachers home visits for kids starting reception

[Auk1]

My neighbours just had a huge row about this. Shes fine, he most definitely is not. Overheard, (all windows are open as its so hot!) he said,” No f…ing way is any teacher coming in this house! Kids see their teacher's at school and thats that. Anyone comes knocking and they will meet with a violent f… ing reception!” He was so angry. He went on to say he knows of someone who is a meth head and has just started teaching, that there is no way he wants some random in his house. Then the front door slammed and she walked off down the road with her youngest.
I actually home ed my autistic 11 year old who heard all of this too. He piped up and said, “ Do you know what mum? The whole school system is broken and needs to be changed.” He went on to inform me that school has barely changed since it started, and that originally it was to train up factory workers!

We had two training days, Monday and Tuesday this week, and have done home visits on the Wednesday to Friday so we're fully prepared for the children to start with us on Monday.

Your view of 'surely you should be in school teaching?' Is subjective. For the sake of 3 extra days of schooling, we actually see our home visits as vital in the process of building relationships with the children and their families, so it's all part of the 'teaching' process for us at the start of the year. Just because we're not in the classroom with 30 children from day one of the school term, doesn't mean we're not working.

Schools up and down the country all have different routines for the start of Reception which they believe is best for the children they teach, whether that be a week of home visits before the children start, part time staggered starts, or all in full time from day one (or a mixture of all 3, ie home visits then full time, no home visits but part time for a week or so, home visits followed by part time for a little while etc). This will largely be dependent on the needs of the families in their catchment area. As a result of different routines, Reception children will naturally all do slightly different hours compared to their peers in other schools and different areas to start with. That's not a major problem in terms of their education though (in terms of pitting children from different schools against in other in terms of the experiences they ate are receiving) as they don't technically have to be in school until the term following their 5th birthday, so schools can set whatever hours/dates work for them while the children are settling in. By the time the settling in period is over and the true learning starts, they'll all be in full time regardless of school to school variations.

We understand that it's not easy for working parents if their Reception child doesn't start until a few days into the new term, or starts on part time hours, but it has honestly never been a problem where I am as parents accept and understand that a few days of home visits is a standard part of our indication process and make arrangements to accommodate this, whether that be annual leave, arranging childcare etc.

We do offer a handful of after school appointments each day to accommodate those who need it but encourage they are only booked if they are truly needed to save them for those where a daytime appointment is simply not an option. For anyone who still can't make it, we would atrange to meet with them for an informal chat after school one day, once their child has started, to go through everything, although this is a last resort as we do see the home visit as preferable. It works for us with the community we serve, I'm not saying it would work for everyone. Every school and area are different.

You state that as children don’t have to start school until their 5th birthday, the school can set the days and hours which work for them. This is legally incorrect. Schools are legally obliged to provide a full time education from the start of the September term after the 4th birthday. This is different from the compulsory school age.
I wish schools would be more open as to the legal position.

It worked best for our DT’s and DH and I as working parents for them to start full time from day one. We dropped them off at breakfast club (highlight of their day) at a similar time to the nursery drop off so a good routine.

Im intrigued how this worked as I've honestly never heard of any school accepting this request before. Legal right is a very subjective term here, especially as they don't have to be in school until the term after their 5th birthday. If the Reception class isn't in for the first few days because the teachers are conducting home visits, there actually isn't provision to teach your child in school for those 3 days. Same as how some classes are closed when teaching strikes have happened etc. If there's nobody to teach your child, there's nobody to teach them. If you're looking for a creche service where someone babysits your child for a few days until their class starts, there are services available out of school for this purpose. Your child isn't legally entitled to be doing the 3 R's from the first day their school is open to pupils in September so, if the Reception class aren't in for the first few days, babysitting would be the absolute best most schools could offer in these circumstances, which is hardly the best way for a child to start 'big school'. I'm assuming your child didn't partake in continuous provision and 'lessons' with other Reception children. I'm genuinely interested in how this worked.

We understand it can be difficult for parents to juggle these things but most seem to find a way of managing somehow. In my experience "we can't do that" often equates to "we don't want to as it inconveniences us" (I'm not saying this was the case with you, but it's so easy for people to say they can't do something when it's not strictly true, if they actually think outside the box and explore all avenues). With enough notice, even most working families are able to accommodate a staggered start to Reception somehow, between annual leave, childcare, calling on favours etc (I do understand it's not easy as I'm a working parent too but in most cases it is possible to juggle). I know the obvious argument is people shouldn't have to make alternative arrangements, but there are a lot of situations that occur when it comes to children that parents simply do have to manage from time to time and I do feel this is one.

The days of part time hours for the whole first half term, which seemed to be the norm when we were kids, are long gone (or at least they should be) as schools do understand that that doesn't fit with modern life, where most parents work. However, most schools do still value a small element of staggered start, whether that's to accommodate home visits or to get to know the children in smaller groups for a short period of part time hours, in order to help them settle.

Most parents wouldn't expect their child to start nursery/pre-school full time from the off, with no settling in period. A short period of transition is accepted as a necessity. It's just as important at the start of Reception. It's a big change for them and one which needs to be handled carefully.

But the start of the September term for their Reception intake is set by individual schools, hence the legal grey area. That date is the date they are providing that from.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/staggered_starts_in_primary_scho

The question of a staggered start has been covered on numerous threads. It’s not up to schools to decide, it’s the schools parents. We opted for what was best for us as did many in DT’s classes.

Legal right is a very subjective term here, especially as they don't have to be in school until the term after their 5th birthday

@Parker231 is correct. The compulsory school age isn't relevant, as it isn't the same as the age at which a child is entitled to attend. They are entitled to the full time place from the September after they turn for, it just isn't compulsory that they take it up - it is compulsory that it is available.

A friend had to use this right recently. Her and her husband are secondary school teachers without family nearby. They can't do two weeks of half days, they have to be at work.

So please explain to me how it worked for you, as I'm generally interested. I've worked in 4 different schools and I've honestly never experienced a parent demand their child start from day 1 (as in the day Year 1-6 start). So I'm truly trying to get my head around how this works if the teacher and the rest of the class aren't in, and how it can be good for the child to start their school life in this way.

I still maintain that it's a very grey area. If schools couldn't legally do this, they wouldn't. But many school do operate a slightly different start date for their Reception children because the age of the children allows for some slight flexibility (I'm taking a matter or days, I don't know any school which keep Reception part time past the first couple of weeks of term now, personally). All schools start back on different days anyway regardless of year group. Some parents with kids at different schools have one go back on the Monday, one on Tuesday and one not until Thursday (for example). I don't really see this as being much different. Sometimes parents have to make alternative childcare arrangements for one or more of their children for a few days. These things happen.

If you do require your child to attend full time from day 1 of the school term because you genuinely can't work it any other way (which isn't many families, if we're talking real genuine need rather than don't want to) then I'd say it's your responsibility to find a school which accommodates this need when applying for a school place. There are plenty of schools out there who do seem to start Reception full time from the first day the other year groups start back now. I'd say those who don't clearly aren't the right school to suit you and your family's needs if you really can't make alternative arrangements for a few days at the start of term. Much like I'd say a school isn't right for you if you require wrap around care and they don't provide it.

We didn’t demand it - no need as it was our legal right. We simply notified the school that DT’s would be attending full time from day one. DT’s were in separate classes and roughly half of the other parents did the same. Their teacher was in class from the start of term following the timetable.
We didn’t make alternative childcare arrangements as it wasn’t in DT’s best interest. They had been at full time nursery since they were six months old and use to the routine. Neither DH and I wanted to waste our annual leave as this was needed for school holidays.

Sorry, reading back I do think there's been some crossed wires and confusion. I don't mean that I don't believe parents can't request this. My talk of grey areas isn't to suggest I think schools could reject such a request. I'm just saying that if it wasn't considered acceptable to stagger Reception start dates compared to the rest of the school, then schools wouldn't be able to do it. They do it because it's still widely accepted that a settling in period is good for them, as compulsory school age isn't until the term after 5 (apologies, it was poor wording on my part that reads like I'm saying schools keep them part time because legally they can).

I would still love for someone to explain to me how this worked for them, what it looks like in practice, as I just can't get my head around how schools can accommodate this request and, if I'm honest, I'm glad it's never something I've encountered to date as I just can't picture how it would work.

Just to clarify, I'm talking about a few days where the class isn't in because the teacher is doing home visits. I can of course understand how a school can accommodate a child full time once the children start part time, if the parents genuinely need them to.

It’s nothing to do with if the parents genuinely need to - our DT’s couldn’t do a staggered start as we didn’t want them to (as well as no one to look after them). It’s up to the school to facilitate this. A staggered start isn’t in the best interests of all children.

Schools should be transparent and ensure parents are aware of their rights (they know their children best). I’ve certainly pointed it out in the many threads about this.

So if the teacher was in class the children had already started and you required full time, rather than part time? Is that right? As I totally understand how that can work. Athough it seems odd for them to do part time hours if half of their cohort genuinely did require full time from the off. Sound like they didn't really understand the needs of their local community to be honest. Why not just start everyone full time if that many genuinely needed it?

Requesting to start on the first day of term first came up with regards to home visits, which is what this thread originally started about. That is where I genuinely can't understand how this can work and see it as no different to siblings with different start back dates at different schools. If the class aren't in for those few days, they're not in. That's the grey area I was talking about with legal rights. You couldn't ask one school to accept your child on a training day, simply because your other child's school had started back that day. So how can anyone insist their child comes in if their teacher and class aren't?

The start of term date was published - that was the date DT’s started full time school. As I previously posted about half of the reception classes started then and had their class teacher with them all day. She was also the one who collected and delivered them to the staff running the breakfast and after school clubs. It’s not uncommon in areas with two full time working parents - more so when schools try and enforce a couple of weeks of part time hours. How the school did their arrangements didn’t interest me.

Ok we seem to be going around in circles here. As you've still not answered how it could work in the situation I outlined (home visits, teacher not in, class not in) I can only assume the situation I'm asking about isn't something you have personally experienced and therefore you don't have an answer for me in terms of how that could work.

Thank you for taking time to try and explain but it seems we're talking about completely different situations.

I can’t answer your question - DT’s were in full time from the start of the school term. Some other children were in, others weren’t. Teachers were there full time. Don’t know when they did visits as we declined it.
DT’s didn’t have any difficulties setting into school or breakfast and after school club. Although the school was excellent (I became a governor many years later) DT’s were only at the school one term as we moved them to a private international school as we are a trilingual family and wanted DT’s to have lessons in other than English.
The majority of our friends also didn’t use the staggered start operating in their schools.

To be honest, having scanned over the School Admissions Policy, I still feel we're at crossed purposes here.

It just says:-

Admission authorities must provide for the admission of all children in
the September following their fourth birthday.

To me that does indeed confirm that children have a right to a full time place in the September, which I've never disputed. If the school runs part time hours to begin with, and the parents require (or indeed simply want) full time this should be granted, and there's definitely ways schools can make this work.

What it does not state however is which date in September their child should start. It doesn't say it should be the same day other year groups return. As this thread is specifically about home visits, I assumed the people referencing children's right to a full time place were saying if Reception don't start on the first day back because the teacher is doing home visits the parents can exercise their right to say their child will be attending from day one. Actually, unless anyone can prove me otherwise that they've done this, I don't believe they do have a legal right to request this. I was originally told I was wrong, and am still prepared to accept this of someone could provide me with an example where they've successfully challenged this, but unless they can I stand by my belief that schools can indeed set a different start date for Reception if they choose to do home visits at the start of term and are not doing anything wrong in doing so.

It's no different to some secondary schools having certain year groups back on different days to stagger everyone's return. If the Reception class aren't in at all for the first few days, they aren't in. The school do not have to accommodate your child until Reception have officially started (although they would have to accommodate your child full time from the Reception start date if you wanted them to, even if the plan for the cohort on general is part time).

That is my understanding of it. I hope that clarifies my interpretation as I do think there have been some crossed wires.

Sorry you’ve not understood what happened when DT’s started school. It wasn’t a challenging process - just an email to the school advising what we would be doing. Not unusual so no problems when term started. Also not unusual to decline a home visit, particularly with two working parents.

You couldn't ask one school to accept your child on a training day, simply because your other child's school had started back that day. So how can anyone insist their child comes in if their teacher and class aren't?

schools choosing different training days would still mean every child was still in school for the requisite 190 days.

staggared stare incredibly disruptive to children. Speaking as the parent of two ND children they needed the routine to be established.

At my children’s school out of 2 reception classes only 1 parent took up the offer of a week of half days for their child. And they changed their mind on day 3.

I stand by my belief that schools can indeed set a different start date for Reception if they choose to do home visits at the start of term and are not doing anything wrong in doing so.

they can indeed, but they would have to then continue after the end of the school year for that year group in order to provide 190 days of full time education.

Again, there is nothing in the guidance that states the full time entitlement for Reception children has to be a full 190 days. That's where it is a grey area. It just states full time, as opposed to part time hours.

Unless anyone can prove me otherwise that they have successfully challenged this and somehow got their child in from day 1 of the school term, despite their child's teacher and class not actually being due to be in school on that day (based on the Reception start date they've set), I still maintain that schools are doing no wrong by starting Reception a few days after the rest of the school if offering home visits is the approach which they feel is best for their pupils.

As of yet, nobody has been able to tell me they did indeed do this and the school were able to accommodate their child despite their class technically being 'closed' that day.

Things happen in terms of schools being able to offer every single child 190 days per year. As I alluded to earlier, strike action meant some classes were shut on several occasions last year (I'm not getting into a debate about people's personal opinions on strikes, just stating facts that this happened). Snow days happen. Schools can sometimes be closed for the day due to having a burst pipe or no water, or because of elections (definitely not getting started on a debate on that one, again I'm just stating facts that this sometimes happens).

People are interpreting full time entitlement to mean they can attend every single proposed calendar school day during that academic year, regardless of circumstances, when in fact it doesn't actually state that.

I would love to know how those of you who simply keep responding with "they're entitled to it" expect a school to accommodate a child whose teacher and classmates aren't due to be in school with them for another few days according to the dates the school have outlined for their Reception cohort? I am fairly certain most schools would respond to such a request with "I'm sorry but that's not possible", and due to the guidance not stating the exact date their child's full time entitlement should start from, the school wouldn't actually be doing anything wrong. If they say Reception start on a particular date, that is the date they are offering your child a full time place from.

Again I am more than willing to be proved wrong by someone who has actually done this, but simply arguing back "they're entitled to it" without experience of challenging it isn't proving me wrong, it's simply a different interpretation of the guidance.

Just to clarify again that I am NOT talking about parents exercising their child's right to full time schooling once Reception have started, whenever that may be, as I know some of you do have experience of rejecting proposed part time hours. I totally understand how schools can accommodate this, with the class teacher in school. What I am talking about is cases where Reception start a few days later than the rest of the school because the teacher is out on home visits. They are two totally different scenarios. One is feasible, the other simply isn't in my mind and if anyone genuinely does have experience of successfully challenging for their child to be in from day one, despite school only being open for Years 1-6, I really would love to hear how it worked (genuinely interested).

Otherwise we're simply going round in circles with people either misunderstanding my question, telling me they've done it (when in fact you haven't in the exact scenario I am questioning) or simply telling me I'm wrong because children are entitled to a full time place, without considering how impractical it would be for a school to accommodate a child whose teacher and classmates are not in that day.

No I don't believe I've misunderstood anything you've said about the circumstances in which your children started school, it's just different to the circumstances I am asking about.

If they apparently "have to", then how come no schools who do start Reception a few days later than other year groups do go on longer in the summer than other year groups to make up the hours?

This doesn't happen, because they don't have to. If they can offer a full time place from the day they have stated Reception start, I believe they are fulfilling their legal duty, according to the guidance.

Again I challenge someone to prove me wrong and will honestly hold my hands up if it's proved I am but as of yet nobody has been able to provide me with anecdotal evidence where their child has actually started Reception on the very first day of the school term, despite their class not actually being due to be in.

People are interpreting full time entitlement differently, which is why it's a grey area. Unless the guidance states a child is entitled to a full time place from the very first day of term (which it doesn't, it just says September) schools are not actually doing anything wrong by starting Reception a few days later.

If it genuinely wasn't legal, schools wouldn't do it.

Upon investigation, it appears that schools closed due to elections are indeed required to make up the time or coincide it with a training day, so I admit I'm wrong to give that as an example of things happening which can get in the way of the 190 days entitlement.

I have no personal experience of schools being closed for elections so was unsure how it worked, but the way some people moan about it you can forgive me for assuming it meant their children miss out on a day of education (I can only assume those who moan about it don't actually realise this either).

I stand by my examples of no water, burst pipes, snow days and strike action as being reasons why sometimes schools or individual classes/year groups do end up closed on odd days though. Reception starts being delayed by a few days to accommodate home visits is just another example of this.