EarlyChildhood Intervention in Rural Newfoundland: ACommunity Based Approach
by
Robert GerardTarrant.B.A.• B.Ed .
A thesissubmitted tothe School of GraduateStudies inpartialfulfilmentofthe requirements
for the degree Masterof Education
FacultyofEducation MemorialUniversityof Newfoundland
May 2000
TableofCont ents Chapter One
i. Introduction .4
ii Backgroundto theStudy 5
iii Purpose of the Stud} 6
iv. Definitionsof KeyTerms.. . 6
Significance .. .. . 7
vi. ResearchQuestions.... . 8
vii. Limitatio ns 9
Cha pt er Two: LiteratureReview
I. Definitions andScopeofEarlyChildhoodDevelcpment.. 11 ii Componentsofa SuccessfulEarlyChildhoodDevelopmentProgram 1J
iii. Justi ficationForEarly InterventionPrograms 15
iv. Trends in Early Childhood DevelopmentinCanada 17
v. Conclusions.... .. jI
Chapte r Three: 1\1cthodolo~' i. DesignoftheStudy..
ii. CollectionofData...
Iii. DataAnalysis . iv. Conclusions .
.
.).). 35
... ...36 ...38 Cha pter Four: CaseStud~'Introduction
BriefHistoricaland GeographicalBackground ofLawr enceSa) 39 Significanceof Education inLawren ceBay.. . .40 iii EstablishmentoftheFamilyResource Centr e... . ..41
iv.. Establishment of aPre-schoolProgram... . 42
Cha pterFive: Case Study:TheFamil~'Resource CentreExperience
j. Experience of schoolstaff.... . .45
ii Experienceof parenrs..; . .47
iii Parental Involvement... .. 5I
iv. Experienceofchildcare worker... . 53
ChapterSix: CaseStudy:ThePre-SchoolExperie nce
Experienceofschoolstaff... . 60
ii. Experience of parents. . 63
iii Connectionbetween the familyresourc ecentreand pre-school 66 experience.
ChapterSeven: The Benefitsand Shortcomingsof Earl)'InterventionProgr am s in RuralCommunities
Benefits...
Shortcomings...
iii Conclusion...
. 72
. 77
...81
ChapterEighl: Summaryand Conclusion s
I SummaryofFamilyResourceCentreInterventionProgram... . 82 il SummaryofPre-School Program Intervention Program... . 86
iii. Conclusions 88
IV. Recomme ndationsForFurtherSrudy.. . 93
References ...
AppendixA...
AppendixB.... Appendix
c... .
...95
.. 98
. 104
.. 109
Chapter One Introduction
Therehasbeen a great deal of attentiongiventotherestru cturin gofthe educatio n systeminNewfoun dlandover thepastfive toten years.The ProvincialGovernmenthas implemented a numberofrecommendations fromtheWiUiams'RoyalCommission Report (1992);howeverthemajor focus hasbeen ongovernanceand making thesystem more cost effici ent. Thishasresultedinalackof attentionto many of the practicalissues directlyimpa cting onstudent performan ceintheclassroom.Infact.onecould arguethe lackofaction onsuch reconune ndati ons as a fulldayKindergarten program andthe reduc tion in thenumberof daysfor teacherinservice havehadadetrimentaleffecton oureduc ationsystem.
Fortun ately.manyschools throughouttheprovinc ehavebeen able toadaptto these changesandcontin ue toimplement newinnovation sdespit ethe lackofsupport and direction from the provincialDepartment of Education.Onesuch innovationisearly intervention programsfor children ages 0 to 6 years.Manyschoo ls in rural areashave established pre-sch oolprogram sandFamilyResourceCentrestohelpprepare children fortheir entry into primaryschool.For themostpart these initiativeshavebeen spearheadedbyprimaryteacherswhosee the benefitsof these early intervention programs.Inmost schools the pre-schoolprogramisrunbyparentvolunteers while FamilyResour ce Centres arerun byfederallyfundedfacilitators.
Unfortunately,reduction inexpenditures foreducatio n and adecliningenrolment will forcetheclosureof manyruralschools.Thiswillalsomean thelossof many
comm unity based earlyintervention programs.At a timewhen the worldis realizing the enormousbenefits ofsuchprogramswe are about toeliminatetheseinitiative swiththe imminentclosureof nwnerous ruralschools throughoutthe province.Inorderto ensure governments andschoolboardsmake infonned decisionswhendecidingto closerural schoo ls thebenefits ofsuch programs need to be documentedand placed intoa theoretic al.fmancialandsocialcontex t.
Ba ckg r ound To theStudy
Inrural areas opportunitiesfor children to participatein enriching pre-schoolor nursery schoo l programsare limited orcompletely non-existent.Therefore.the opportu nitiesfor pre-scho olchildrentosoci alize withotherchildrentheirage is severely limned.Therearealsofew outlets for parents to gettogetherto discusschild developmentissuesand receive adviceand training from childcare specialists .Overthe past five years this has been recogni zedasa seriousdeficiencyin rural areas and attempts havebeen made bycommunity leaders to addressthis concern
Onthe Burin Peninsulamostsmallschoo lshaveimpleme ntedpre-sc hoo lor kinder-startprograms;all schoolshave been involvedin the Significant Other Reading Teach er (SO RT)Program and manysmall schoolshavesetup Family Resource Centres.
Presentl y.federal fundinghas not beenapprovedforthe SORT Programand the Family Resource Centres are being reviewed.with the intent to closecentres having low enrollme nts.Theloss of these twoprograms will certainlyhave anegative impact onthe co mm unities affected.
To date therehas been no researchcompletedon theBurin Peninsulato measure
the benefits.ifany,of thetwo early intervention programs tobe discussedin thisstudy.
Therefor e.thereisno bodyof evidence availableto justifytheirexistenceotherthan complimentary wordsof praisefromparents and teacherswhohavebeen invol ved in the programs.Itis essentialthat thisphenomenonbeexaminedimmediatelysothat federal agenc ies.tea chers,parents andschoo l boardmembersmakeinformeddecisions on the futu reoftheseprograms.
The Purpose of the Study
Thepurpose of this study istoexpl oreanddescribethe experiencesofparents.
teachers.and childcareworkers whohavebeen involvedin thetwo earlyInterve ntio n programsdiscussedabove.This study willfocusononecommuni ty on thesouthcoastof Ne wfoundland. Thiscomm unity has beeninvolved in twointerventionprograms over thepastfouryear s.Theseprogramshave receivednational recognitionand havebecome panof aCanadianvideo series(Comm unityActionforRuralChildcar e)onearly childhooded ucation inruralareas.Bydocumentingthe experiences ofparticipantsin thiscomm unity wecan provideamodelthatmaybe usefulto othe rruralareasstruggling to establishear lyinterventionprograms.
Definitionof KeyTerms
l]Earl yInterventionProgr am s:Inthis study early interve ntionprograms inclu deany program thatisimplement ed toenhancechildhooddevelopment from infancyto six years of age.There isalsoa paren t ed ucationorinformatio ncomponent attachedtoeach ofthese programs.
2) FamilyResourceCentre:Thisis a federall yfundedprogramthathas a coordinator
sharedbetw eenthree communities.Thecoordinatoror facilitator as she likes to call herself,isa trainedearlychildhood development specialist.TheFamily Resource Centre,or DropinCentreas itismore commonlycalled.islocatedinthe primary section of MarianElementary Schooland iswellstocked with books.toys.acomputer.an supplies.imagination centre andindoorslides.Itis open threedaysa weekand parents arerequiredtoaccomp any children from infancytoage six.
3)Pre-School Program:Thisis a schoolsponso red program.Itis organized bythe Kindergartenteacherwho trainsparentvolunteers.All fouryear oldpre-kindergarten childrenattend thisprogram which isrunoutof thekindergarten classro om and Family ResourceCentre.These children attend the program one daya week fromOctobe r until May 31.
~)Pre-school Coordinator:Thisis aparent whovolunteers toattend allpre-scho ol sessions. Theyhelp planactivities and taketheroleoftheteacher in the pre-school program.
Significance of the Study
Researchspecific to issue son ruraleducation inNewfoundland and Labrador is verylimited.Tomyknowledgetherehasbeenonly onestudyconductedon the effectivenessof earlyintervention programs in rural areas. This makesit difficult for decision makersandindividualsinterested inestablishing theseprogram sto weighthe benefitsof such innovation s.This studyis a significant pieceof researchbecause it providesasourceofdata thatpresentlyisverylimited.
This studysho uld:
contrib uteto ourunders tan din gof therole of earlyinterve ntion programs inrural areas;
provide anunderstandin g of thetyp es ofrelationshipsthatexistbetweenparents.
children,teach ers,childcare workers andgovernme ntagenciesinvolvedin early interventionprogram s ;
ident ify factors that contributeto a smoothtransitio n for childre n fro m pre-school toprimary schoo l;
outlin estrengthsandweakne ssesinthe two earlyinterventi onprogr amstobe discussed inthisthesis;
contributeto aknowledge base thatcould lead to a modelfor earlyintervention programsthat willmeet thenee ds of childre nand parentsinrural areas;
ide ntify themerits of the two earlyinterventio n pro gram s outline dabove.This shouldbe helpfu lfor schoolboardsor governme ntagencieswhohave todecide whetherornottoretain fundingforsuch program s.
Research Questions
Thisstudywillattempt to answer the followingresearchquestio ns:
Why doparentsandteachers feelearly interve ntionprogramsbetterprepare childre n for schoo l?
2. How doparentsperceivetheirroleinthese earlyinterventionprograms? How are these rolesdetermined? Areparents comfortablewiththese roles?Would parents like toplayamoreactive role?
Howdoestheschooladministrationand teachersdefine theirrole in early interventionprograms?Are administratorsandteacherscomfortable with this role?Wouldtheylike to playa moreactiveroleinthese programs?Ifso.how? Do teachers,parentsandchild careworkersfeelthat government agencies providing funding for these programsshouldbemore involvedin the administrationofthe programs?Ifso,inwhatcapacity?
According to educatorsand childcareworkers,areearlyintervention programs morebeneficialto certaingroupsthan other?If so,do characteristics such as gender. age,socio-ecc normc status, doubleor singleparent families,or the number ofsiblings influencethe overallbenefitsof these programs?
6. If earlyinterventionprograms areso helpful, why doso manyparentsdecidenOI toparticipate?What are theviewsof participantsand non-participant s on this issue?
Limitations
Thestudyoutlinedinthisproposal isbasicallyacase studyto beconductedatone school. Marian Elementary,51. Lawrence.Thereforeithasthe followinglimitationsasa researchstudy:
Ithaslimited generalizability.Mostparticipants will not be randomlyselected.
The natureof the studydoesnot emphasize sophistica tedsampling techniques
10
Therefore,the resultsmaynot beenough to makebroad reachinggeneralizations outsidethe actualresearch site.
lt haslimitedtransferability.In manyqualitativeresearchprojectsitisdifficultto replicatethe studyoutside theresearch site.Inthis casetheresearchfocuses on theexperiencesand perceptions ofparticipantsinvolvedintwo early intervention programs.Itmaybe difficult tofind sitesoutside that have similarprogramsso a replicationofthis study maybeimpossible.
The fact that participants for this studycome primarilyfrom onecommunity may create asituationwhere parents who havebeeninterviewedmaydiscussinterview questionswithinfonnantspriortotheirbeing.This could influence the types of responses elicitedinsubsequent interviews orresultintheinformant providing responses that maybeperceivedasthe informationthe researcher islooking for.
nottheir own heartfeltviewsonthetopic.
\I
Chapter Two Literature Review
Theliteratureonearlyintervention programs yieldedsomeveryinteresting observa nonsintheareaof early childhood development programs.Although mostofthe literatureusesthetermsearlychildhood development or earlych.ildhoodcare and development programs,l will beusingthetermearly interventionprogramswhen referringtothe FamilyResource Centre and the pre-schoolprograminmy research..
However.throughout theliteraturereviewI will usetheterms early childhood development(ECD) orearlychildhoodcare and development(ECCD).
Theliterature on early childhood developmentprograms canbe placedintothree distinct categories:I)definitionsandscopeofearlychildhood developmentprograms.2) componentsofsuccessfulearlychildhood development programs.and 3) justificationfor the existence of early childhooddevelopmentprograms.
Definitions andScopeorEarlyChildhoodDevelopment Definitionsforearlychildhood development encompasseverybranchofthis area ofstudy.Forexample.theamclepublishedbytheConsultativeGroupon Early Childhood Development (1995),Overview ofEarly ChildhoodCare andDevelopment. breaksdownthe phrase.Early ChildhoodCare and Developmentinto three partsand attempts todefine eachcomponentseparately.Early childhoodisdefined astheperiod of a child'slifefrom conception toageeight Carewas chosenin recogmr ionof the fact thai youngchildren need care and nurturing.Development isdefined astheprocess of changeinwhich the childcomes tomastermoreandmore complexlevelsofmoving.
12
thinking.feeling and interactingwith peopleandobjectsintheenvironment(pp 1-2)
Landers (1990) defineschild developmentas,...theunfoldingof behavioursfrom
immaturetomature;from patterns of behaviourthat aresimple tothosethat arecomplex:
and the evolutionof a human being from dependency toautonomousadulthood" (p.3).
Theseareasmallsampleof the defmitions that exist forearlychildhood development;
howevertheyaretypicalofthe types ofdefinitionsusedbymost earlychildhood developmentscholars.
Thescopeof early childhood developmentdiscussedin theliteratureincludestwo dimensions.the chronologicalage afthechildren involvedand the socio-economic.
cultural. and educational statusof parentsinvolvedinearly childhood development programs.Mostscholars feel children from birth to age eightfitintothe ECD developmentalstage.Therationalefor choosing the firsteight yearsofa child'slife coincides withthefactthat"...children belowthe ageofeight learnbest when theyhave objects they can manipulate;whentheyhavechancesto explore the worldaroundthem;
when they canexperiment and learn fromtrial-and-errorwithin asafe andstimulating environment."(Consultative GrouponEarlyChildhood Development1995,p.I) Some scholars believesixyears of age is amoreappropriate stageof developmentand usethistime frame becausetheentry of the child into primaryschool isa more reasonabletransition period in early childhood development. According toShaeffer (1996) whoseresearchfocusesprimarily on the firstthree yearsofa child'sdevelopment,
"Duringthefirst two years criticalbrainstructuresdevelopthat affectchildren'sability
tolearn,"(p.3)Landers (1991),Halpern and Myers (1989),andEvans(1994) all
Il
support Shaeffer'sviews and feel more ECDprograms need tobe implementedfor childrenages 0 to 3years of age.Althoughthe scope of involvementfor children is recognizedat 0 to 8years of age,mostprograms are gearedtoward childreninthe first fouryears ofdevelopment.
Thesecond dimensioninthescope of involvementin ECD programs isthe socio- economic.cultural.andeducationalstatusof parents.Mostscholars believeallparents couldbenefitfrom involvementinECDprograms,butthose oflow socio-economic statuswithlittle or no educationcouldparticularlybenefitfrominvolvementinECD programsthat have astrong parenting educationcomponent.infact,theliterature places considerable emphasison parent traininginaneffective
Ecn
program.Itwouldappear that all parents needtoget involvedinparenting education programsin order fortheir child to receivethefull benefitfrom ECDprograms.Thisleadsusinto the discussion of what comprise sa successfulECDprogram.Compon entsofa SuccessfulEar lyChild hood Develo pm entPr ogr am Theliterature onear lychildhoo d developmentrevealsa number of components that shouldbeprese ntin order for anEC Dprogram to be successful. Thefirst component is parental involvement.Obviously,parentshave totake theinitiative to ensure that their childrenparticipate in these programs.However,the most successfu l programsalso includeaparen ting education programtoteachskillsthat can be usedto enric h the learning environme ntfor their children andlearn about the imponance of good healthand nutrition in the developmentof their child.TheConsultive Group on Early Childhood Developmen t(199 5)ParentEducationandParenting.stressestheneed for
14
parent support.Itstatesthat,"parentin g educatio nteachesparents and non-parental caregivershow to provide childrenwiththe kinds of parenting they requireto maximize their potential physically,socially,emotionally,and cogninvely"(p.1).This view is supportedbya StatisticsCanada(1998) studyon23,000childrenacrossCanada.The findings reveal that parenting stylematters more than familyincomeinmaintaining the healthand welfareofCanadianchildren . Thisstudy goes on to saythat theFederal Governmentshouldinvestmoremoneyinto parentingprograms.Thisview supports the literatureonECDasitpert ains to the importance of parent educationprograms.
The secondcompone ntof a successfulECDprogramisthe close connection betwe en theschooland pre-sc hoolprograms.Helping preparechildren forschoo l isone ofthe most important factorsthat influencea parents'decisiontoinvolve children in an ECD program.Anadage used byShaeffer (1996)sununarizesnicelytheviewsof parentsand educatorsalike.Hestates, "Before youcanbuild ahouse.itisnecessary to laythefoundati onstonestosupporttheentirestructure"(Shaeffer, 1996,p.2).Halpern and Myers (1985) and Myers and Landers(1989)addressed thisissue and concluded that it is important for the childto developthesocial,emotionalandintellectual skillsduring their involvementinECDprograms.butschoolsmust also bereadytoreceivethese children.Schoolsmustbe aware of thesechildren' slevelof development,haveadequate resourcestosupport them,have a highlytrained staffand maintain a close connection withparentsto ensure thateach individ ualchildcontinuesto growto hisor her full potential.
Athirdcomponent whichispanof most successfulEC D programs isthemulti-
IS
facetedapproachwhichincludesinformationandeducationthat includes childrenand parentsusingavarietyof resources.lnfonnation on nutrition,child rearingpractices.
healthconcerns.pre-natal andpost-natal care.learningstyles. andcommunityissues
shouldall be panandparcel of acomprehensive early childhooddevelopmentprogram
Thiscanbeaccomplished throughtheuseofmassmediatelevisionorradio,throughthe distributionof pamphlets,and throughsmall groupinstruction ordiscussion groups.
A fourthcomponentofa successfulECD programasrevealedin the literatureis anemphasison a non-formalstructure fortheseprograms.Thisissueisaddressed directly byMyersandLanders(1989).They suggestthatitisnecessaryto moveaway from ahighlystructuredand directive curriculum for children andawayfroman overemphasison learningle ttersand numbersto a greateremphasison learningconcepts Someearlypre-schoolprograms employedverystructured cwriculumsandusedprimal)' and elementaryteaching techniquestoteach pre-schoolchildren(Evans.1994).Inrecent yearsmore emphasis has beenputintoaninteractive.participativeapproachwiththe promo tionof imagination andcreativity(Myers&Landers.1989)
Justifica tionForEarlyInterventionPrograms Thefanalsectionofthisliteraturereviewdealswith argumentsput forth bya numbe rofscholars tojustifytheexistence of earlychildhoo d devel opmentprograms.the intent beingtoconvinceparents.governmentsandnon-governmentalagenciesof the benefitsofECDprograms.Thefollowin glistby landers(1990)summarizesmostofthe argumentsinsupportof ECDprograms:
I) Scientificargument:Research demonstratesthattheearlyyearsarecritical tothe
16 child'ssocial, emotional.and cognitive development.
2) Human rights argument:Children have arightto develop to their full potential 3) The moral argument: The transmission of moral and social values that will guide
the future of our children beginsinthe earliest months of life.
4) Thesocial equity argument:Stressful conditions that inhibit development can affectthe poor morethan the rich, reinforcingsocial inequalities 5) Economic argument:Social benefits through increased productivityand cost
savings associatedwith enhancedearly child development.
6) Birthspacingand populationargument: The link betweenfertilityrates and education level suggeststhat efforts to improve the education of girls and women will have a strong intergenerational effect on fertility.
7) The progranunatic argument:The effectiveness of health, nutrition,education and income generating programs can be improved through integration with child developmentprograms,thus taking advantage of interactiveeffectsamong these variables.(p.2)
Shaeffer(1996) makes his case for the existence:of ECD programs by listing the benefits ofsuch programs.Hislist is similar to Landers'arguments for ECD programs.
However,he does see a few additional benefits.He believes ECD programscan cause reductions in gender inequality,increase socialmobility and increase benefitsto the community and family unit through improved parental education programs.
Halpern and Myers (1985)used the results of longitudinal studies completed in the
17
United Statestopresent evidenceofthelong-termbenefits of ECDprograms.They foundthat children whoparticipatedinsuccessful ECDprograms scoredone half toone standard deviationpoint higher than students who didnot participateinECD programs Thesestudentsshowedevidenceofpositive effectson adjustmenttothedemand s of formalschoo ling.Inearlyand lateadole scence,thereis strongevide ncetosuggestthai participationinwell implementedearly childhood educationprograms can have significantlong-term effects on progressthroughtheir school career,asmeasuredby promotion. needfor special education,andhighschoolcompletion.Finally.children involve d insuccessfulECD program s werefound tohaveless self-re po rted delinqu ent behaviours.fewercontactswiththelaw,andfewer arrests.
The abundance ofdatasupporting ECDprograms stresses the importanceof early childhood developmentprograms. Ifoneaccepts theargumentsputforthinECD literatur e.itwouldbedifficulttodisputetheneedforan infusion offinancialresources worldwide.
Trends in EarlyChildhood Development in Canada InCanada most of the studies dealingwithchildcare havebeenpart ofanoverall plan(0improvethelevel ofchild povertyinthecountry.Therefore childcare hasnot been studied in isolati onbut ratheraspartof an integrated efforttobring togetherall agencies that deal withchildrenwho maybeatrisk becauseof theireconomic circumstances.Nevertheless providing quality childcarethatis affordable to everyone is viewedas a criticalcomponentinaddressingtheissue ofchild poverty .
Thereare four themes :"\'.ui.emerge from studiesconductedonchildcareinCanada:
18
I) Linksbetweenpoverty and cbildcere,2)parenting programs,3) schoolreadinessand 4) developingacomprehensive childcaremodel.Each of thesetopicshighlightthe importance of childcare andthe need to take immediateaction to improve the quality of childcare presentlybeing offeredinCanada.
A nwnberof studies have examinedthe connectionbetweenpovertyand childcare inCanada. The researchsuggests that oneinfive Canadianchildrenlivesin poverty (NationalCouncilof Welfare,1999).Thisis a very disturbingtrend andone whichhas recentlysparkedagreatdeal ofcontroversy.The Canadian parliament made a unanimousresolutionin1989 that it wouldeliminate child poverty in Canada bythe year :woo.Since thistime,thelevel ofchildpovertyhas increasedwithlittlehope for improvementinthe near future.
One factor which is contributingto this problemis thelack of inexpensivequality childcare.Thiscreatesasituation in whichparentswho maybe able to find workare not able toparticipate inthe workforcebecause they cannot affordto payto have their childrenin daycare or thisserviceisnot available.Thisisparticularlytroublesomefor single parentfamilieswhomakeupsixty-eight percentof those familiesthat fall below thepovertyline.Ofteninsingleparentfamiliesthe mother is theheadof this household andshe haslowlevels of educationandlittle job experience which meansshe canonly acquirelow paying jobs.Having to manageahousehold andlookfor workis very difficult andreducesthe likelihood of finding work.They certainly wouldnot have the sameopportunity as a mother in a two parenthome.Graph2-E(National Councilon WelfareL999,p.L5) clearly indicatesthe difficultysinglemothershave seeking
19 employmentas compared todualpartner families.
Emplo yment Rates of Mothers Youngest Child Under 16
4O % P .c:.:..-- - - -- - -- -
20%
1 - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -1 l....sq,IeMocha's +Mocta1wishPcuas-ADMocba1I
1m 1912 ISlIS 1911 1991 1993
Graph2-E
1997
One can begin topicture how the lack of access to affordabledaycare can make life:difficultfor a single: motherstruggling to makea better life for her family.In fact,if shedid geta minimumwage jobshe wouldhave:very little leftover after shepaidfor childcare.Thismight expla inwhyitisdifficult for many single parent families tobreak outofthe povertycycle.
Boththefederaland provincialgovernments have recognized thisproblembut havenottakenactionto rectifyit-For exampleinthe Strategic Social Plan(1996) for
20
theProvinceofNewfoundlandit states;"familiesintheprovince have difficultyfinding andmaintaining highquality childcare."Thisis notsurprisingconsideringthefactthat
Percent Non-Profit
"2,558 23%.~
3,884 68%
7,381 S7%
8.102 57%
103,186 81%
135,ll3 82"/0
11.827 89%
4.823 98%
55,621 40%
31,902 63'1.
1,112 89%
832 74%
366,451 73%
11,757 123 215 100,349
9,~9;:, .
617 266.102"
Newfoundland hasthe fewestlicensed child-carespacesperchildofanyprovincein Canada.and doesnothaveany formof licensedcareforchildrenunderthe age of two.
(See Table4-0NationalCouncilof Welfare1999~p.57)
~~~~~
BritishColumbia Northwest Territories
National Yukon
"'-"",
..
.
§~~~New Bn.ulS\1Iid:
~;" .
Onurio
Seventy-sevenpercentofallchildcarespacesbeing offeredin the provinceare commercial(NationalCouncilof Welfare,1999).Thistrendiswell belowthe national
21
average for commercialspaces which is twenty-seven percent.
The fact that non-profit, regulated childcare is not readilyaccessible or affordable inNewfoundland is aseriousimpediment to improving child povertyin thisprovincefor tworeasons.First of allitdoesnot encouragefamiliesliving below the povertyline to seek employment oreducational opportunitiesthatwill improve their lotinlife.
Secondly,theshortage of non-profit childcarecould havea negative impact on the developmentof thechild.Researchhas proven again and again that regulationmakesan important differencetothe qualityofchildcare.Non-profit childcare programshave lower staff turnover.better staff training and satisfaction,better ratios of children to caregiversandsmaller groupsizes(NationalCouncilof Welfare.1999).These areall factorsthat benefit thechildrenwhoparticipate in theseprograms.Theyare particularly importantforpoor children becauseit helpspreparethemfor entry into theschool system.
The issue ofschool readinesshasbecomeincreasinglyimportant forofficials studyingchildcarein this country.Both provincialand federal governmentsare interested in the impact quality childcare can have on the success ofchildren when they enterschool. This is obviousinthe following exert from the Strategic Social Plan(1996) for Newfoundland.
What happensbeforechildrenenter kindergartenprofoundlyeffects thesuccess theywill achieve inschool.Appropriate interventionduringthisstagecan ensure thatchildren who are disadvantaged in some way,are at risk of failure,receive the experiencesnecessaryfor intellectual growth,socialskills developmentand healthyself image(p.44)
inorder totrulyunderstandtheimpactofearly interventionprogramsonschool
22
readinessone needs tounderstandwhat learningreadinessencompasses.Marangello (1991) examinesthis issue andidentified threeapproachestolearning readiness.
Thepossession of certain academicskills, such asbeingabletoidentifynumbers and letters:
.., Itisrepresentedby general cognitiveabilities suchasmemoryand the ability to manipulate objects;
Itisa broaderdevelopmentaldefinitionthat includesallaspectsofthe childcare experience andcapacities.For exampleemotional maturityandsocialskills are as importantas academic and cognitive skills.(p.28)
Marangello believesthe third approachisthebest approach for assessingreadinessfor school.
Doheny(1997) also looks at theissue ofschool readinessandcomes upwithher own components for learning readinessprior to children enteringkindergarten.Herlist is similar to Marangello'sbutshe emphasisesfive factors ratherthan three.Doherty'slist of leaming readiness componentsinclude:
Physical well being and appropriatemotordevelopment;
2. Emotional health and a positiveapproach to new experiences;
J. Socialknowledgeandcompetence;
~. Language skills:
General knowledgeandcognitiveskills.(p.29)
Despite the differencesinfactorsassociatedwith learningreadinessmost scholars believequality childcare positivelyimpactsuponthe rateof successfor childrenwho
23
enter kindergarten. Arecentarticleinthe Applied ResearchBulletin (1998)highlights someof the benefits of havingagood startinschool."Agood startinschool increases thelikelihoodthat children will feelgood about themselves.highschool,find and retain employment.beinterestedinlife-longlearningand becomeacaring.contributing member of society"(p.28).
This studyalsostated that lack ofreadiness forschool maymakeitdifficult for a childto adj ust to school,tosucceedacademically and tobeacceptedbypeers.
Anotherstudyconducted bytheNationalLongitudinal Survey ofChildren and Youth(1997)lookedatschool readinessina wholedifferentlightThey found that school readiness is linked[0income,parents'education and parenting style
Results frommePeabodyPicture Vocabulary Test (PPVT)indicatemattwenty- live percentofchildrenfrom lower income households faceddevelopmental delays comparedto sixteen percentinmiddleincome householdsand ninepercent in upperincome families.
Parents'education levelshave asignificant impact onschoolreadiness.The test results suggest that children'sschoolreadiness increases with theirparents educational attainmentlevels.
Parentingstyle isanother importantfactor.Based againon the PPVTresults.
sixty-nine percent ofchildren whoseparentshad average or highscoresona positiveinteraction scalewerewithinthe normal developmental range compared to forty-seven percent ofchildren whoseparents had thelowestpositiveparenting scores.(pp.12-13)
Theresults fromthisstudyclearly indicatehowthese factorscancontributeto poor readinessskillsfor children comingtoschool.
These studies demonstratehowimportant quality childcereis inpreparing childrenfor kindergarten.The experiencesof childrenfrom birth toage fiveare
24
extremely important andresearchinCanada and other parts of the world has shown how itcan affect manyaspectsof a child'5lifeweninto adulthood.
Eventhoughquality childcareissignificantina child' sdevelopment,parents.
whoaretheprim ary caregiverswill ultimatelydetermin ethefate ofthei r child.Services suchas fami ly resource centresareestablished to offer programmingtoparentswith the intent of improvingparenting skills.This isaccomplishedbyprovidingspecifictraining toparents on avarietyofchildcare issuesand throughasharing ofpositiveparenting strategiesbythose who participat eintheprograms.Mostscholars believethatmost success fulearlychildhood developm entprogram sare thosewithaparenttrainin g component attached.
Prestonand MiIler (1995) suggested thatparentin g education program s inthe ear ly yearsare impo rtantingivingthemthe skills theyneedto beco me better caregivers.
In this study theyidentified four reason s why parentingprogramsare soimportant: Itenhancesthe capacity of parents;
Itenhances familyrelatio nships;
Theparenthelpingparentapproachoffersaverynecessary support toparents who mayfeel isolated because of their geographical separation from other family members;
4. Ithelp sparents address the issueofinformationoverload.New parents tendtobe bombardedwithinformat ionabout parentingand theadvice theyreceiveat resource centreprogramshelpthem son throughthisdata.(p.2) This studysuggests howparentin gprogram s can benefitthe family unitas awhole,
25
particularlyinthe early stages of parenthoodwhen thestresses associatedwiththisnew shiftinlifestyle can becomeunbearable.Thesupport provided throughparenting programshelp make thistransitionmuch easier for everyone.
InmostpartsofCanada parenting programsaredeliveredthroughprogrammingat familyresourcecentres andarefacilitatedbytrained earlychildhoodeducators.The range ofservicesofferedvary fromcentre to centreand are determined bythelevelof fundingprovided.Kyleand Kellerman (1998) provide thefollowing definition of family resourceprograms:
Familyresourceprogramsaremulti-service.non-profit, community based programsthat promote socialsupport, cooperation, collective responsibilityand citizenship through offering a mixofeducation, information.activities.material support andother resourcestofamilymembersand groupsof familiesacrossa number of serviceareas.(p.I)
Onecan see from thisratheridealistic definitionthatfamily resource programshaveafar reaching:mission.Obviously.mostcentresarenot equipped tomeetthismandate.
However.Kyleand Kellerman(1998)have identified eleven components that havebeen associated withsuccessfulfamily resourceprograms:
Parentand caregivereducationandsupport;
Familypreservation servicessuchas counselling,outreachand home visits;
3. Childcare and children'sprograms;
4. Health education and care;
Material support and nutritionprograms such aslunchprogramsand pre-natal care;
6. Housing:Assistance in helpingfamilies locate subsidized housing;
26
7. Youth programs suchas drop-incentresand recreation programs:
8. Literacyprogramsfor adults,Englishas asecond languageand homework havens;
Employmentsupportandcommunityeconomic developmentin the areasof life skills and pre-employmenttraining;
10 Other adult educationandrecreation programs:
11. Community educationand leadershipdevelopment.(pp.3-4)
Theseelevencomponents presentuswitha model which wouldprovide the best possible trainingandsupport forparentsand caregivers.These goalscan beaccomplished throughthe familyresourceprogramsaslong as adequatefunding isprovidedtoupgrade existingprograms toincludeall these components.
Providingquality parentingprograms has becomea priority in some provinces, particularlyin theAtlantic region whereunemploymentrates aregenerallyhigherand literacyrateslower thanother partsof country.The provinceof PrinceEdward Island hastaken the leadinthis area ofstudy and hascreated a training programcalled learning and ReadingPartners Aduh LearningSystem.Thisisacomprehensive training manual forparentsusingan adultlearningapproach.Itfocuses onavarietyoffactors that affect child developmentsuchas nutrition,learningstyles.developmental stages.and language development.This study was led byMaitlandMclsaacan advocateof qualityparenting programsand receivedfinancialsupport from the CanadianChildcare Federation Mclsaac and histeam ofresearcherscreated a resource that can beusedthroughoutthe country to train parentsandcaregivers.
27
Onecannot under estimate thesignificantroleparentsplayincreatinga stimulatinglearningenvironm entforchildren.Thereforeitonlystands toreasonthat more effortmustbedirectedtoward providin gsupport andtrainingtothem.This isthe only way to significantlyimprove thequality ofcare givento ourchildren.
Thetrendinmost provincesinCanadaisto developacomprehens ivechildc are strategy.Thiswillincludenotonly theprovision foravailabilityof adequatedaycare services forchildren.but alsoattempts toaddresses everyfactorthatinfluences the qualityofchildcare.Theprovinceof Quebecisleadingtherest of thecountry and has alreadydevelopedacomprehensiveFamilyPolicyand theestablishme ntofa new minim)'responsibleforchildrenandfamilyservices. Sinceitwasintroducedin1997It hasmade sweepingchanges tothedeliveryoffamilyservicesthroughouttheprovince.
Therearethreemajorcomponents10Ibis policy:I}childcare:2}unified financial supporttofamilies:and3)ch ildcareassistance for those seeking quality chitdcare.
Thenewchildcareservicesarc intendedtobenon-profit,community-based and parent-contro lled afterafiveyear transitionperiod.Theplan isthatallchildcare willbe providedbyEarlyChildhood Centreswtuch arcnew organizationsthat incorporatemany of theexistingnon-profitchildhoo deducationcentres.This boldendeavour will virtu allyeliminatecommercialchildcare centres.The governmentencouragesmany of thesecentresto converttonon-profitcentres.Itisobvious thenewministrybeli evesa regulatednon-profit model isthebestone fordeliveringchildcare.Theliterature would certainlysupport this view.
The secondcomponent,unifiedfamilysupport, isanattempt toaddresstheissue
28
of child poverty.The followingexcerpt from theNational Councilof Welfare(1999) study describe sthisnew program:
Quebec replacedseveral family support programs such asthebabybonus.welfare and family allowancewithone unifiedfamilyallowance.Familieswithchildren nowget aunifiedallowancefrom the provincialgovernment and child tax from the federalgovernment. Poorfamilieswithearnedincome as opposed to income fromgovernmentprogramsmayalsoqualifyfor benefitsfrom theParentalWage Assistance Program.Benefitsarebased on earningsfrom theprevious year and can beashighas $3,784 a year dependingonfamilysize andcircwns tances.(p.9)
Thisisprobablyoneof thebestfamily supportservicesin thecountry anditgoesalong wayin providingadditionalfinancialsupport tothosewho needit most
The most popularcomponentof theQuebecFamilyPolicyis the plan toprovide childcare forfivedollar s aday,toanyonerequestingit for all children under the ageof six bythe year 2001.Provisionshavealso been madeto provide thisservic efora reduce dcost to lowincomefamilieswho wish to use theservice. Thiswillcertainly eliminate affordabilityasareasonfor parentsnot being able to availofqualitycbildcare inQuebec.Ano ther panof this supportforworkin gparentsistheincrease d maternal or patem al leavesandaprovision which does not allowa loss of benefitsfor thosewho decidetotake parentalleave.TheNationalCouncil of Welfare(1999) provide sa brief synopsis of thesebenefits:
Quebec now provides eighteen weeksofunpaid leaveformothers and thirty-four weeksof unpaid leave forthe mother,father oradoptive parents.Workerson maternityor parental leavehave the right to returnto the same jobwithanysalary increase sorrights that would have beenreceived if theyhad beenat work .(p.40)
Thispolicyenco urages parent sto spend moretime at homewith theirbabies during the
2 .
early stages ofdevelopment when nunuringandclose contact withparentsis critical.
ThecomprehensiveFamilyPolicyadoptedbyQuebec iswithout a doubt thebest in thecountry.The governme nt hasplacedthefamilyat the centerof policyinitiati ves and has committed thenecessaryresourcestoestablish and maintain this system.
Otherprovinceshavenot beenable[0developacomprehensive plan for early childhood development.Insteadtheyhaveexamined variousmodels fordeliveryin isolation.For example.inNewfoundland theissueofchildcarcwasaddressedinthe StrategicSocialPlan(1996).Theyrecommendedan increaseinthenumber ofRon - profitch ildcareseats availableandstressed theimportance of earlyintervention programs. Sincethereleaseofthisreportin1996very littlehas been done torectify deficienciesinthesystem.The only progresshas been a policy statementwhich sets limitson thenumberofchildren thatcanbeaccommodatedina homeday caresetting
InOntarioanumberofdifferent childcare modelshavebeenexamined.Onesuch modelisschoolbasedcfuldcare.This is atrend whichiscatchingon fastinOntario.
.AccordingtoYoung (1994)fifty-sevenpercentofthenewchildcarespacesin the
provi ncesince1985 have beenschool-based.This seems likea logicalplace for cbildceresincethesefacilitieshaveavariety ofservices including agym.music room, computerlab and library.Inaddition tothis,the childrencanleavetheir classroomsand enter daycarewithoutleavingthe building.This strategyalsohelpsorientchildreninto formal schooling. Ontariohasawellestablishedjunior kindergartenprogram anditalso usesthefamilyresource centremodelextensivelyespeciallyin ruralareas.
BritishColumbia hasasecretariatofthe child which coordinates andregulates
30
issuesrelatedto childcarein theprovince.Thisissimilartothe ministryof the childin Quebec.howevertheprogramsbeingofferedare not as comprehensive.There are a varietyof childcare models deployedinthisprovince including many of thosementioned earlier.One interestinginitiative isthe RuralChildcare Project.Vaughn(1997) describesthisprogramasone in whichflexiblechildcare services are providedto seasonal workerswho are employedinorchards.Inorderto accommodate theschedules oftheseworkersa shift systemisused forchildcare workersso that childcareis available throughout the working day .The governmentalso providesasubsidy for this service whichmakesitmoreaffordableandenablesmotherstowork.Thisallowsthesefamilies todoubletheirannual incomes. Withoutthistypeof assistancechildren wouldprobably bein theorchards with their parentsputting them atrisk of injury.British Columbiais movingtowardsacomprehens ive childcareprogram and isclosertoachievingthis goat than mostotherprovinces withthe exception of Quebec.
Insummary,governmentofficials are beginningtorealize the significanceof providingchildren with qualitychildcareinthiscountry.Mostprovincesaremaking an effonto addressthisissue,butthereseems to beno clear directionin manyregions.
Tremendousprogresshas beenmadein Quebec with the introductionof it' snewFamily Policy in 1997.Thisisa bold initiative but onewhichisan investmentinthechild and family.Other provinces are lookingat the Quebec Familypolicy veryclosely toseeifit iseffective.Thismay be the directiontaken byothersinthe future.Probablya more logicalstrategy might beto administerthis type of programat the federallevel. Thiswill maintain consistenc yacrossthe country and make childcare mucheasierto regulate.
II
Conclusions
Thereis a substantial bodyof literaturethat supports theimplementationand maintenance ofquality EarlyChildhood Developmentprograms.On aninternational scaletheseprogramshavebeen recognized as strategiesforimprovingthe qualityof childhood developmentpriorto their enteringschool.especiallyinthirdworldcountries where high rates ofpovertyand lowliteracy levels amongparentsimpede child development for many children.
Onthe otherendofthe spectrum. inrichcountriessuchasthe UnitedStates longitudinalstudieshave indicatedthepositive benefitsofquality earlyintervention programs.Such benefitsinclude;higher gradesinschool,a decreased likelin esstoneed specialeducatio nservices.lesslikelyto get involvedincrimeand morelikely to finda good joband become productivemembers ofsociety.Ifoneacce pts the conclusionsof these AmericanstudiesfCD programscanmake atremendous contributionto society as a whole.
InCanadaa tremendo us amount ofresearchhasbeendoneand mostprovinces are inthe process ofdeveloping policiesfortheimplementationand regulation of fCD programs.Todate,little progresshasbeenmade atthe implementationstage in most provinceswiththe exceptionofQuebec.Quebechasdeveloped a Ministry ofthe Child which has made somesignificant progress onchildcareissues.AlthoughfCD literature in Canada supportsthismode l thereare no immediate plans forother provincesto adopt this approachindealingwithchildcare issues.
InNewfo undland andLabradorthe governmenthas concentratedonissues
32
relatin gdirectlyto conune rc ialchildcare with littleattentionbeing giventoform alized early interv enti onprograms.Thisthesis attem pts to foc usonearlyinterventionprogram s and howtheyaffectthequalityofchildcareinruralareas.Examining thetwo early inte rven tionprogram sinthis stu dyshould add another dimensionwhich will help in the developme ntof a comprehens ivechi ldcaremodelinthisprovinc e.
3J
ChapterThree Methodo logy DesignoftheStudy
Thisresearch projectcollected datathat documentedtheexpe rienc esof parents.
teachers,schooladministrators andchildcareworkers that havebeeninvolvedwiththe two early interventionprogramsdiscussed earlier. Thisdatawas collec ted usingdirect observatio n, participantobservation, andin-depth face to face interview s.Inaddition to this,surveys were conductedwithparents of childreningradeone whowere the first children[0haveparticipatedinboth interventionprogram swhentheyfirst started.
Direct observation and participant observationsessions tookplace overa two monthperiodat theFamilyResourceCentre and in the kindergarte n classroom where the pre-sc hoolprogr amtook place .These observationsessions providedanopportunityfor me to wimessfirst hand the structureofboth earlyinterventionprogram sanddocument thelevel ofinvol vementby allstakeholdersinvolvedinthem
Icompletedthree participant observationsessionsatthe FamilyResourceCentre ondays whenschoo lwas closedforholidays . Duringthese sessions [ volunteered my timetotakethe childrentothe computerlabontwo occasionsand spe nt another session workingwithstudents at the computercentrewithin theFamilyResour ce Centre.Iwas fortuna teenough toattendoneobservationsessionwith thekindergartenteacherpresent
[conduct ed elevenin-depth interviewsat differe nt loc ation sthrough outthe schoolandwashopin gtointerviewmoreparents,but theywerereluctanttoparticipate.
Iwas alsonot able to interviewonechildcareworker atthe centre becau se shewenton
J4
sick leave . Nevertheless,l was fortunateinreceiving a greatdealofinfonnation and Insightfrom thoseI did interview.The longestinterviewIconducted was fifty minutes and theaveragelength of most interviewswasthirtyminutes.All participantsagreed to havetheir interviewstape recorded .
Parents at theFamilyResource Centre were very cooperative as theyagreed to take care of eachothers'children while I interviewed them. Thosewhowere interviewed werealsoveryinterestedinwhat I was doing and did whateverthey could to assistme.Infact, some participantscametome daysafter the interview and mentioned thingsthey had forgottenin the interview.
Interviews withschoolstaff wereheldafterschool hoursand during preparation period s.Onlytwo staff membersparticipatedinthestudy.Theywere theones whohad beenactivel yinvolvedinthese programsright fromthevery beginning.Otherteachers had little to dowith theseprogram s so theywerenot interviewed.
I wasnot able to arrangean interviewwith theregional coordinator forBrighter Futures,but I did interviewCarolGoth, the individual responsibl efor producingthe nationalvideo serieson childcarein rural areas.This wasvery informativeand it allowedmeto compare the programsherewithsimilar programsinother partsof the country
Finally,I conductedavery detailed interviewwith the childcare worker that presentlyworksat thecentre. She provideda lot of insightinto the program from a varietyof different perspective s.She alsogave mean overview of early childhood programsandservices that could be offeredat theFamilyResourceCentre.
35
The surveyswiththe grade one parents were conductedby telephoneinthe evenings andon weekends.Theyusuallyonly took about twentyminutestocomplete.
All parentsIcontacted were eager to participate.Thisgroup was chosen becausethey hadrecently completed bothprogramsand their children had completedthe kindergarten program.Iwanted to knowif theyfeltthesetwo interventionprogramsmade a difference for their children.
This studycan bedescribedasinductive.generative. constructive andsubjective.
Previous deductive studies have focussedon the economicbenefits of pre-school programsusing gainsinintelligent quotients(lQ>as a justificationfor earlyintervention programs.This study ismore practical;itexamines thisphenomenonthroughthelens of the experienceofparents,teachers school administratorsandchildcare workers.The study was conducted primarilyin thenaturalsetting where thetwoearly intervention programstakeplacewhichhelpedkeepall thoseinvolved inthestudymorefocussed.
Data Collection
A network sampling planwasusedtoidentifythe parents who participatedin the twoearlyinterventionprograms.Usually parentswhowere interviewed would recommend someone to me or they wouldask them to come andsee metoset up an interview.Thisprovidedanadequatecrosssectionof parents andgeneratedsufficient data to documentthe experiences of parentsinthesetwoprograms.The two staff members,childcareworker and national childcarevideo producerwere asked directly if theywouldliketoparticipate and interviewswerearrangedat their convenience.
Each individual participatingin theinterview componentof this study received a
36
letter outlining the purpose of the study,assurances that confidentiality and anonymity would be maintained. the name of the supervisor for this project alongwitha second contactperson. acknowledgement that participation was purely voluntary and that the participantcould withdraw at any time,a section granting consent to conduct a tape recorded interview and a time frame when tapesand transcripts from interviewswould be destroyed..
DataAnalysis
Allinterview tapes weretranscribed using Wordl'erfecr.The tapes werecarefully labelled and sorted into parent, teacher.school administrator and child care worker categories.Field notes from observation and participant-observation sessionswerealso converted into WordPerfectfiles.
After all informationwas compiledit wasput into a frameworkthat was meaningful and manageable. The method outlinedbyBurnard (1994) using WordPerfect was avery practical wayof "bringing together"the ideas and perceptions of the participants in this study.The cut and pastefunction of WordPerfect was alsoan excellent tool for cleaning up the text and removing any dross.
Once the meaning units were established, text was separatedsoitco uld easilybe skimmedwhengeneratinga list of categories.Twenty five categories emerged from the data.Oncethese catego ries were further compressed,a letterwasassignedtoeach one.
The text wasthenre-enalysedand lettersput in margins along side theappropriatetext.
The sort function of WordPerfect was used to reorganize all data accordingtothe catego ries chosen .For example ,one of the categorieswas labelledA:Parental
J7
Involvement,alltextthatdealtwithparentalinvolvement or all "A'5"wereput together.
Thismethodcouldbevalidatedbythe researcherifheorshe verifiedthese categories withtherespondents orbyaskinga colleague touseasample transcriptto develop his or her system of categories. The resho uld be a reasonab lematchbetwee n the two setsof categones.
Thenext stageinthisdata analysismethodwastoexplain whythepatterns or categoriesoutlinedaboveemergedfrom thedata.The patternofcategoriesfrom this studycanbe explained using sociologicalor psychological criteriasince the study dealt primarilywithsocialinteractions and hwnanexperiencesof a particular phenomenon.
.Anotheraspectof thisanalytical stagewasthe link betweenthefindingsinthe research and that of other literature onthe topic.Althoughitis advisable to move backandforth between the literatureand the data, it isnot advisableto overuse the findings of other researcherstoinfluence or guidetheresponses of participantsatany timethroughout the study. The literature should alsonotbeusedtovalidate categoriesof dataor fmdings unless it is a duplicationof anexistingstudyinsomeother area.Evenin this caseit should be usedcautiously.
InhisarticleBurnard (1994) restrictsthe use of thismethodto interview transcriptions.Iused thismethod withallcomputerized data.Itwas very easytomodify field notesandobservation jotnotestofitintothis sortingsystem. Even though this methodmayhave savedtimeandhelpedtokeepthe informationorganized ineasily manipulatedcomputer files,it wasimportantto keephardcopiesofdataand notletthe computer taketheplace of theresearcherin there-readingand re-analysing of data.
J8 Conclusions
The fact that this study was conductedintheschool where:I have:worked for the pastthree years madedata collectionvel)' easy.Arranging interviewswiththosewho volunteeredtoparticipate was not a problem and I mademyselfavailableat anytime that was convenientfor them.The type ofdata generatedinmyresearchworkedwellwith the analyticalprocedurediscussed earlier.Itallowed me to vel)'quicklypull together common themes from interviewsand observationsessions.
J9 ChapterFour
Case Study
Geographicaland Historical Background of Lawrence Bay LawrenceBayisa small fishingcommunity locatedon the SouthCoastof Newfoundland.Ithas a population of approximately eighteen hundredwhichhasbeen fairlystableover thepastfew years.LawrenceBayhasa new multi-specie sfishplant whichoperates most of theyearemployingasmany asthree hundredworkersatpeak production.Thefateofthisplant is dictatedbyfederal fisherie s'quotasand throughout muchaf theyearitoperateswitha significantlyreduced workforce.This puts great economicstrainon the workers and theirfamilies.Although economicuncertain tymay bearealityinLawrenceBaytoday,itwasnot alwaysthecase.
This communitywasonce a prosperousmining townwitha populationwellin excess of twothousand. From the early 1930'stothelate1970'sLawrenceBaywasthe siteofalargefluorsparmine.Thisemployed men[rom LawrenceBayandsurrounding communities.Throughout thisperiodthetownexperiencedfull employment. With prosperity came all themodemamenities such as water andsewer,a modem recreation centre.curlingclub,three schools.apubliclibrary,policestation.firehall. bank and numerousbusiness establishments.Byall accountsthiscommunitywas oneofthemost prosperous in Newfoundland throughoutmuchof thisperiod.
However,inthis mining townprosperityhadits'price asmany of
m e
men whoworked intheminedied of silicosisor miners'disease.Thisleftmany families in povertyasthe wivesandchildren werelefttoliveon meagre compensation packages or
40
forcedto goon welfar e.Eventuall y,a modem ventilatio nsystem wasinstalledinthe mineand more stringentsafety regulationswereenforcedwhichmadethe mine a safe placeto work.In1978Ale ANshut downthe mine during a worker s' strike.Itwas reactivatedinthe 1980 'sfor ashort timebutstill remain s idle today.
Inorder toreplace mining asthe main industryinthe townthefederal and provincia lgovernments built afishplantinthe1980's.The plant operated seasonallyfor afewyears beforeitwasclosed. This created a great dealofuncertaintyin thetownand manybad no option but to leavethe communityinsearch of work.Theconversion of thisplantinto a multi-species secondary processingfacilityin1997providedlawrence Baywitha stablesourceofemployme nt.
Significance of Education in Lawrence Bay
Through outall thehardship sand prosperitytheresident s of LawrenceBay have notlost sightof theimportan ceofeducatio nin thelife ofthe community.Thefirst schoolwas established in the late1870'sandover thenext one hundredyearsthe communityhad four schoo ls. The Ang lican populationhadtheirschool and therewere threeCatho licschools which consistedof an elementary school and aseparate boysand girlshigh schoo l. The Catho licschoolswereestablished and run bytheSistersofMercy.
These schools maintainedhigh academicstandards andgraduated manyprominent citizens.Theemphasison a holisticapproachwhichfocussed on the academic,spiritual, soci al. and emotionaldevelopment of thechild createdan education system thatwas seco nd tonon e inthe province.Nevertheless,duringthe"hayday"of theminemany youngpeople did notcompletetheireduca tionandchose insteadtoleave school and go
41
toworkinthe mine or findworkinotherparts ofCanada and theUnitedStales.
Throughoutthelate1960'sand 1970'senrolmentsbeganto decline.and the five schools were mergedintotwo separateschools;an elementaryschool(K to 6)and a high school(7to12).Inthe1998-99 schoolyear the local schoolboardclosedthe elementary school andattempted tomakea K to 12one tier systeminthe community but parents reached an agreementwiththe board toenabletwoseparateschools to co-exist under one roof Theyfeltthetwotiered system wasthebestdelivery systemforeducationinthe town andfought hardto see toitthatitwasmaintained.Duringthe consolidation processparentswere notwilling to move intothenewbuildingunlessitcontained a space for theFamilyResource Centre.Thisprovedthelevel ofcommitment for early childhood developmentprogramsinthe conununity.
Establishment of the Family ResourceCentre
The FamilyResource CentreinLawrenceBaywasestablishedin thefall of1995.
The principalat theelementary school wasthepersonresponsibleforinformingparents and community leaders about thetremendous benefits ofthisservice..He saw aneedfor this typeof programinorder topromoteliteracyandoffersupporttofamiliesinthe community.Inthe springof 1995heattendeda meetinghostedbyHealthandWelfare Canada whowere encouraginglocalgroups to organize andestablishResourceCentres Theyoffered federalSEEDmoneyto conununityorganizations topay for the costof childcare workersand provideda budget for the purchase ofresourcesneededinthe centres.Followingthismeeting a steeringcommittee wasformedforthe regionanda board ofdirectors was later formedtooverseethe establishmentofcentresinall major
42 townsthroughouttheregion.
Lawrence Bay was oneof thefirstcommunities tohavea centre.Thiswas a resultofthe work donebytheprincipal of the elementary schoolwhooffered himself to sit on the boar d of director s for BrighterFutures,the organizationinchar geof setting up familyresource centres. His positionon theboardprovidedhimwitha great deal of knowledge aboutearly interventionprograms which hetook backtohis schooland the community. According tothe principal.Mr.Smith there wastremendous supportfor this program right from thefirsttimeitwas discussedina public forum:
InLawrenceBaytheparentsand the kindergartenteacherand all the staffsupportedit...Therewas nevera question asto whetheror not we were going to gowiththis.Fromthetimetheyfoundoutwhat Brighter Futureswasthey certainlywereon boardand supportedit100%.(Mr.Smith.
personalcommunication,June 18,1999 )
ThislevelofsuppoItwas evident when thecentreopened inNovemberof1995as parents volunteered their timetohelp renovate the room andsetitup in sucha waythatit was readytomeettheneeds ofchildrenfrom0to6years of age.The spiritof cooperationbetween theparents. community and schoolenabled the FamilyResource Centretothrive as it began offeringservicestothe childrenand parents ofLawrence Bay.
Establ ishmentof the Pre-school Program
The pre-schoolprogram evolved at aboutthe same timeas the Family Resource Centre.Infact it wasestablishedto complement thefamilyresource centre and helpease the transitionfor children in theyear prior totheirenteringkindergarten.This pointwas madequite clear byMr.Smith.the school principal atLawrence Bay Elementaryinthe
43
following stateme nt:
Iguesspre-schoolwasa bitofaspin off from BrighterFutures.However.
it wasaschool initiative .Wethought a year prior to comingtoschoo l wherewe couldhavethem (pre-school chi ldren)inschoolon a regular basis we couldorient themtotheformaleducationthat they would be involvedwith.... so rtofdevelop some of the interestsinreadingand promot e socializa tion.
Eventhoughthe pre-schoolprogramwasintroducedthesameyear asthefamilyresource centre,the staff hadbeen lookingat thisidea for a fewyears.Inthe meantime,the kindergartenteacher was offeringapartial pre-school programin the year priortoit bein gfullyimplemented .Furthermore.both administrat or sat the school hadworked ina schoo lelsewhereinthedistrictwhereavel)'successfu l pre-scho olprogramhad existed for a nwn berofyears.Mrs.Adams,the kindergartenteacher ,indicated that they had been revi ewin gresear ch on the benefits of earlyintervention program sand lookin gat severalschools in the distri ctthathad partial pre-schoolprograms .Havingboth adminis trators with experienc e with pre- school pro gram scertainlymadeit much easierto initiatethisprogram since theywere already sold on the idea.
The schoo l principalwasthe drivingforcebehind thefamilyresourcecentre but it wasthekindergartenteache rwho assumedthe leadership rolein theinitiati on of thepre- schoo l pro gram.She was convincedof the benefits ofsuch a program from herprevious expe rience with kindergarten orientationand from readingsshe hadcollectedon the topic:
I did inyears before havethe kindergart enchildr enin appro xim ately threeor four timesand then we increasedit throughouttheyears to havingtheminnineorten times,which 1 found reallybeneficial.Sowe decided ifwe had them comeinnine or ten timeswhich wasgoodthen we figured a wholeyear wouldmakethe world of difference . (M.Adams,personal
44
communication.June22. 1999)
Thefirstmeetingwithparents ofpre-kindergartenchildrentodiscussthe possibility of implementing apre-schoolprogramwas heldinSeptember of 1995.Therewas tremendous support from allparents whoarrended thismeetingand theywere very enthusiastic aboutit.Mrs.Adamstoldparentsup fronttheywouldhave(0runthis program.Thiswas evidentinhercomments:
Lnfact when westarted the programwetold the parents that becauseI was afulltimeteacherI would not beableto dothe program as such.Inspare timeor ondifferent daysIwouldgetinmyself sothechildrenwould know mebut they would haveto carry the loadwithhelp from me.
The parentsfullyunderstoodthe situation and therewasno problemgettingvolunteers10 run Uteprogram.From theverybeginning there were a numberof parentswho acted as coordinatorsandall parentsagreed[0comeinonce a monthtohelp thecoordinators.
This system has workedwelloverthe past Wee years and new parentscontinueto come forward andvolunteer their servicesascoordinators.
45 Chapter Five
Case Study:The Family Resource Centre Experience Theopeningof thefamilyresourcecentrein1995wasbyall account sa turning pointin the waythecommunity perceivedtheimportanceofearly ch.ildhood intervention programs.For thefir sttimeparent sacknowledgedthe significanceofproviding programming for childr enageszero(0fivepriortotheir enteringschool. Thisinitiated a new wayof lookin gat time framesfored ucating achil d.Many parentsrealizedthe importance ofreading tochildrenbuttheyneverrealizedthat the most critical agesfor learni ng werefrom birth toage three.Therefore participation in earlyinterventi on programssuchasthe fami ly re source centrecould be very helpfulin the social, emotional and intell ectu aldevelopment of theirchild. Thisprompted manyparentsto taketheirchildCothe centreand availof thisservice.
In the caseofanynewparadigm,change does not happen overni ght,itisa gradual process.The factthatthefamilyresourc e centre was locat edat theschool meant there had tobesome uncertaintyfor schoo lstaff at theschool. Threeafternoonsaweek there wasagroup ofchildren and parents cominginto theschool and using a roominthe primary section.Howdid this affect theschoo l? Did the staff feel comforta ble withtheir prese nce?Would theypreferthecentre be located outside the school?
Experience of School Staff
Unl ike manynewinitiativ es that arethrustontoschoolsthis is a servi ce that the stafffelt was very worthwhile.Ther eforethey embraced itand lookedforw ard tothe benefit softhisprogram.Throughout thepast twoand a halfyears I have onlyheard one
46
staff memberquestionthe need for a family resourcecentreinthe school.All other schoo l personn elfirmlybelieve the school is the best location for thisservice .This view is summarized nicelybyMr.Smith, the principalwho also rationalizeswhythis centre should belocatedin theschool..
I think the schoolisthe ideal location for thesecentresandservi ces. I think the school isthe ideal placebecau seIthinkschoolshould be a lifelonglearning centre.I thinkthe more partnerships we can get involvedinthe better wewill be.
Sohere isa very valuablepartnershipwehavewiththese parentsand community leaders.We can offer theschool facilityso that the children can get use tocoming to theschool andtheysocializewithaUthechildren aroundthe school Thisview accuratelyrepresent sthe feelingsof moststaff members who realizethe importance ofthisprograminprom otingliteracy,school readiness skills, and socializatio nskills.The kindergartenteacher believesthatsomeoftheskills theylearnat thefamilyresourcecentre help prepare them forthe pre-schoolprogram.Furthermore, the principal and other staff membersfmd that parents who havebeenvery activeat the familyresour ce centre usuallygoon to becomevolunteersat the pre-schoolprogram and withotherschoo l-related activities
Altho ugh themainfocusfor staff member sisthe studentsfrom K to 6theydotry toinvolvechildren from the resourc ecentreincertainschool activities.Spans dayand the Halloween fair are two eventswhere children from the centre are alwaysinvited . Theyarealsoprovidedwith accessto thegym,music room andcomputer lab when these roomsareavailable.Theschool staff would like tobemoreinvolved with programming atthe centre;howeverworkcommi tments make it difficult to achievethisgoal.
Neverth eless,theydooffer adviceto the facilitat orwhenever it isrequested.
47
Thusfar the experience of schoolstaff has been verypositiveinregardto having thefamilyresource centre at theschool.Infact,it is aprogram that teachersfeel very proudof,especially sinceitwas part of a national videoseries onruralearlychildhood education.Their commitment to thisprogram was cenainlyevident over thepast yearas theyhelped lobbythe school board for space to establish a familyresourcecentreinthe new school building duringtheconsolidation process.
Experienceof Parents
Programsestablishedby BrighterFutures are intendedtoimprovethequalityof childcareinruralareas.This goal isaccomplishedbyoffering programsto enhance opportunities fortrainingandsupport forfamilies.InLawrenceBaythisgoalisbeing met andsurpassed. This isreflectedin the experiences ofmanyparentswho attend the familyresource centreor drop in centreas it is affectionatelynamed bymost patrons.
Althoughparents mayfeelcomfortable comingtothe centre now,this wasnot the case especially during their firstsession.The following three examples of parents accounts of their firstexperience demonstrate how someparentswere caught off guard'
The first dayIwalked in...it was a little bit overwhelming,inthe sensenotthe noiselevel butthe activity level.I didn'tknow what to expectbutIdidn'texpect quitethat intensity.(1.long,personalcommunication,June 26,1999) Brandon wasalittle shywhenhestarted outand I rememberthe first day.I went throughhelland back again because he didn'twant toplaywith other kids,he didn'twant tointeract,he was really shy.(T.Connors. personal communication.
May13,1999)
I was right shy.Iwouldn'tspeaktonobodyornothing.(J.Hickey,personal communication, MayII,1999)
Although thesefirstexperienceswith the dropincentre were notoverly pleasant,all
48
threeparents saw the benefits of theseprogramsand returnedregularly.Infact two of thethree parents wenton toassume leadership roleswithin thecentre and oneof them is amemb er ofthe board of directorsforBrighterFurures.
Comingtothecentremayhavebeen alittleunsettlingfor some parentsinitially but for oth ersit wasa pleasantexperi ence right from the very start.They saw immediate ly thetremendousbenefitsfortheirchild. Thisisevidentinthe follo wing excerptsfrom two parentintervie ws:
Itwasagre atopportunity forchildre n toget out andsocializewithothe rchildre n.
Itwas a great idea.( M.A.HaU,personal communication,April 30,1999 ) I foundthatitwasreallygoodforGillian .She started to minglewith the other kids and wherewe live ther e were no othe rkidsavailable for her toplay with.It wasreallysurprisi ngat firstbecausethere wassomuchtherethat 1didn'tknow abo ut.Itwas good.(P.Randall,personalcommunication,May20,1999 ) Once paren tsand childrenbecom efamiliarwitheach other andthe childcareworkerat the centre,the expe rience becamevery satisfyin g andenric hing.In fact anwnber of parentstho ught participatin ginthis programbroughtabout trem end ousper sonal chang es forthem.This was evide nt as sugges ted by one parent:
Iwas ashy person.1 wouldn 'tdaregoup toyouandsayhimyname isJenny.
Youwould haveto come up andapproac h mefirst.Itwasright up to Christmas before lstarted tomingle . Now I don't care I will talk toanyb ody.I'mon comm ittees andit don't bothe rme now.Itbroughtmeoutof my shell.(J.
Hickey.persona lcomm unicatio n,May I L 1999 )
Thisparen twent onto atten daprovincial conferenceinSt.John's in the spring of 1998 and brough tback a nwnber ofprograms whichshe demonstrated tothe paren tsatthe centre.She isalso on a planningcommittee forthe centre and ispresentlyone of the pre-schoo lcoordina tors. Notall parents whohave atten ded the drop-incentreover the
49
pastthree yearshave hadsuch apleasant experienceasMrs.Hickeybutall parentsadmit ithasbeenapositive experience. Thisbegsthe questionastowhyhasitbeen sucha positiveexperience.
Thisquestionhasbeenansweredindirecdybyall parentswho haveparticipated in tbisstudy.Mostparents believedthe socialnetworkitprovidedforthemwasvery helpful.Itgavethem anoppommitytomeetwithother parentsinalocation wherethe focus was on children.Thishelpedget them outof lhehousethree afternoonsa weekin anenvironment wheretheycouldrelax and discusschildrearing strategieswithother parentsandseek input intoproblemstheymayhavebeenhavingwiththeir children.
Furthermore,the childcareworkercould providethem withinformation onvarious parentingissuesandofferthemsuggestions.
Asecondfactorwhichmadetheexperience sorewarding for parentswasthe knowledge that theywereparticipating ina programthatwasveryhelpfulin the development of their child.Thiswasprobably themain reasonwhyparentsdecidedto participate in thisprogram in the firstplace.Mostparentswantwhatis best fortheir childrenandtheysaw the familyresource centreasapositiveinfluencein preparingtheir childfor formalschooling Thisviewpointisnicely summarizedbyone parent:
Tomethebiggest strengthisthat ilgets themintothe environmentofschool.
let'sfaceit,itpreparesthemforthestructuretheyare goingtohaveup until the timetheyaresixteenorseventeen.Itgetsthem intothe environment ata really earlyageanditingrains itinthem.(J.long.personal communication.June26.
1999)
Inaddition tothestructureat thecentre.the skinstheylearnedandthefact that itwas located atthe school madea bigdifference for parentswhoparticipated in the program.
