Moose Jaw Forum

The Prairie South School Division recently opened the Early Learning Centre pilot project at Palliser Heights School. Their goal is to see it put in place at all of their schools over the next three years.

Board chair Ron Gleim says this is because of the enormous benefits it provides young children. "From what I've gathered and from what I've seen, kids that are in organized or school run day cares or pre-k programs is that they learn to deal with other kids and the things that they do learn are things that will help them when they get into kindergarten and grade one."

Gleim says the only problem is the program isn't funded by the provincial government. That's why they will be submitting a resolution at the Saskatchewan School Boards Association's Fall General Assembly to find out if they have the support of other school boards.

If they do, they can then lobby the Government to make pre-kindergarten programs a high priority in next year's budget process.

SOURCE - http://www.discovermoosejaw.com/index.p ... Itemid=399

I hate to come out as the evil one on this, but I am wondering when the school division is asking for more funds for this if they would not also ask for additional funding for those parents who decide that other arrangements are better for their non-school aged children?
I know that they are now far and few between in today's economy but what about families where one of the parents - typically a woman - stays at home with the child?

There are also many studies that have shown that children already start "formal" school early enough as it is for educational development and they should also be allowed to have adequate time to just be kids. So how much of this process has more to do with school boards increasing, or maintaining their "empire" and parents possibly wanting to be free of day care, rather than focusing on what is really appropriate and beneficial for the children?

Both of my youngest boys went to Pre-K. Not in any school, but at the Headstart Preschool on Stad W. The benefits of them going was beyond enormous and it helped provide them with some of the tools that they needed to get a good start in regular kindergarten with.

With that said, Headstart was never funded by PSSD or Holy Trinity. Applications for government funding are what kept it going and a LOT of volunteer work. If it weren't for them, my boys wouldn't have had as good a start in their early years at school as a lot of other kids. The program was (sort of) designed for underprivileged kids (not specifically poverty stricken - most likely financially strapped) and at that time, I was both.

Whether the school board funds such a thing, or if the community wants another Pre-K school, in my experience, if you want it, make it work (properly, that is.) Headstart did (and is still thriving). Learn from the good examples they've provided.

For me I see lots of people that would really like to stay at home with their children during those all so important pre-school years.
I know lots of parents that complain about daycares that when one child gets sick, they all get sick.
As far as public funding for this goes, I am wondering is this people trying to save money or have far too many parents lost or never had proper parenting skills?
For the ones that elect to stay home and parent, I wonder how fair this is to them? Shouldn't they be given some sort of tax break for doing so or are we trying to create an even more entrenched socialism driven society?
The state, and not the individual themselves, will look after you from cradle to grave.

Some will complain how fair is this that the rich kids - and not all kids can access this and other services - but let's face it, it happens all of the time.

Children from wealthier homes will inevitably have access to things such as private tutors, better healthcare, better food, better opportunities than children from homes that are not as well off economically. It is just a fact of life.
For example poorer children might see something on television - a ballet - whereas richer families have the opportunity of attending and getting a "true" feel for the entire performance.
Or people with more money might supplement their children's learning with private after school instructiuon.
It is just the way things are.

Truthdefender speaks like someone who has advantage/aka money. (re: seeing ballet on tv vs. live, access, etc.) I wonder if one would be so flip about that reality if it were his/her child that was the disadvantaged one financially. But I digress....

As for the comment about wondering if people are just for pre-k in the hopes of trying to save some money. This is not really possible in many cases. When my son goes to school, he will still need care before and after school, and at lunch time. Based on our family's employment situations, that means we will still need a daycare for him. The savings for childcare are less than $50/month for a school aged child versus a child who requires full time care. There really is negligible savings. There is however, the additional hassle of trying to get him back and forth for school (be it pre-k or whatever).

Would I give it all to stay home with him full time, yes, in a heartbeat. The reality for my family is that it is an impossibility.

Also, as another thought, how much of this is the Teachers Union empire, looking for more work/employment - building government employment opportunities? Especially with normal school enrollments dropping.

My02 wrote:Would I give it all to stay home with him full time, yes, in a heartbeat. The reality for my family is that it is an impossibility.

Look’s like Harper’s Family Tax Cut won`t do you any good either.
http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/bre ... story.html

On some level, this is a good thing. I've seen many kids in the playground (sans parents) my preschool age daughters age...that look like they need someone in their life who cared.
We looked into preschool because my daughter is a very social creature and besides the Family Start Center, there was nowhere to take her for that. The parent has to call and request it. Clearly. Then two ladies come out to interview. One for the mom, the other for the child (to assess their level of need). We "failed" the interview and received a letter stating she didn't need preschool.

I worked full time up until I had my second child. We realized that our daycare bill was going from $200 a month (subsidized, one child) to $1000 (not subsidized, two children). We've had to make huge changes and budget every month, cutting corners and I've even had to learn how to fix holes in knees and sew a little and cook meals instead of eating out (were down to once a month with a coupon).

Ashamed to say that money was the deciding factor. In the end though, the sacrifices have been worth it.

mom wrote: We've had to make huge changes and budget every month, cutting corners and I've even had to learn how to fix holes in knees and sew a little and cook meals instead of eating out (were down to once a month with a coupon).
Ashamed to say that money was the deciding factor. In the end though, the sacrifices have been worth it.

Add three more kids and a half acre of garden and you've described my life! lol And there's NOTHING to be ashamed of.