Dear Editor,

As the chairman of the Glenavon Local School Board, news of a possible grade discontinuance or closure unfortunately does not put me on unfamiliar ground. In fact since joining the board this will be the third time our community has faced the challenge of defending is viability. For the most part the story is the same but once again the faces of the messenger have changed.

You see the communities first threat came from the original Regina East School Division but that motion was defeated by the boards vote. From there with the promises of a stronger organization and huge money saving that we were told would directly reflect back in the schools and the students….welcome the new Aspen Grove School Division. At no fault of their own the new division board spent most of its time and energy setting out the direction, policies and procedures that would define the new entity. How much was spent with the name change, building renovation, administration and the miscellaneous items will probably never be known. At the end of their reign once again came the attempt to close schools and again it was defeated in a vote by the board. Even before those votes were cast came the word of the provincial mandate to amalgamate even further; so before the dust had cleared and the ink had dried from the enormous task of the creating the Aspen Grove Division … welcome the Prairie Valley School Division. The mandate to Centralize was complete for now and the reality of board’s members that had never even set foot in your school or had any personal knowledge would be determining their fate.

First of all let me say that I fully understand the days of a school every seven miles or so is for the most part unrealistic due to the low enrollments. Given that, it is frustrating that the main reason for the attack on rural and now urban schools does not revolve around quality of education issues but simply money. For those of you whom have never had the threat of losing your children’s school hanging over your heads let me explain. Each and every time our school has come up for review we have been presented with a façade of reasons why it is in the best interest of the students.

1) The class sizes are too small and that reflects a low pupil to teacher ratio.

2) That along with the lower numbers there is a significant concern about the lack of friends, pier groups and the negative affects those factors can have on the students.

3) That with the limited teaching, course instruction outside core strength areas is common and offering students options it not possible especially in the high school curriculum.

4) That we cannot offer the special needs programs as they can in the large schools.

5) That we are compromising a quality education just because of the lack of willingness to change.

6) And finally that bussing the kids further can be done without much problem.

Don’t believe it! Most of those statements are based on personal beliefs of someone somewhere and when asked cannot be proven with any relevant scientific evidence to back it up. I personally spent 15 years in the city and graduated in a classroom of thirty and it amazes me when I’m told how the large classes are in the better interest of students. Let me think, have the teacher present the curriculum to 15 or 30? Our staff currently is arguably one of the strongest ever and their dedication and flexibility from the administrator on down is commendable. Today they operate a distance education program that is on the leading edge of technology. They are professional and trained in the same place the rest of the teachers are, rural, urban, small school or large. They realize the limitation but please don’t suggest a lack of quality. I was in consultation with employees of the Prairie Valley School Division on several occasions during the hiring stage last year. I was assured strong replacements were coming, and you were right, thank you. Less than a year later we are told we are not viable, some reasons partially being the inability of teachers. Unlike the past when there were common small town rivalries the students today have friends from several neighboring communities and in many instances play on the same sports teams. How much time they spend with friends is often determined by the willingness of the parents not the lack of participants. Role models abound in the small schools and the intermingling of students of all ages is evident on a daily basis. Most farm children live far more centralized lives and from our experience most have little problems with the interpersonal skills. Certainly we cannot offer a wide variety of choices/options in the high school end; however with advances in technology along with our recently renovated computer lab, we are able to offer courses on line or through correspondence. All the students have the opportunity to receive the core requirements necessary allowing them the tools to move on toward secondary education. In fact recently when asked, the parents here overwhelmingly supported staying in our own School as opposed to having more opportunities in the high school curriculum. And finally bussing has an undeniable effect on the children and in my opinion there should be a maximum timeline legislated. If the minister of education and the other governing bodies involved in this process were subject to the bus routes some of the children have today my guess is that it would quickly become a major concern. And keep it in mind that the students do it because they have to not because they chose to for work.

This time around there are 11 schools under review because they fail to meet the standards of the new criteria in one area or another. But don’t over analyze the birth and development of this new criteria because although some of the numbers may be different my bet is that it was conceived the same way and for the same reasons as the previous boards. We need this much money, where and how do we get it! Same financial situation, same action plan, close schools and bus kids. Understanding that the educational funding is student based, along with fewer students comes less funding. Same operating cost, less money to operate. Those numbers are realistic and create a formidable foe to school boards throughout the educational system whether it is rural or urban. Certainly common sense tells us that more closures are inevitable but my bet is that most will close because of the lack of funding not because of poor quality of education being delivered or done in the best interest of the student. Bussing kids further is tough on kids but a trump card financially for boards is that the government covers I believe about 90% of the bussing cost. We as taxpayers still pay but on the boards budget it can be viewed as a huge savings.

It is ironic that the positive side to small schools is rarely portrayed. Our drop out rate is 0%. We have not had a major incident ever and the minor suspensions over the past 3 years can be listed on one hand. Very few students fall through the cracks of the system and the personal touch our teachers give undeniably adds to the experience and development of the students. Yes there are some negative aspects but show me any system anywhere that does not. If there were any information out there that indicates small enrolment schools are detrimental for students please forward it to me as our community would be very interested to have it. Although the process our students and parents have been through has been challenging one positive point has been the adoption of the 4 day school week. Reluctant at first we passed at the first opportunity and watched from the sidelines for a year before coming aboard. Along and inline with the old Scenic Valley statistics we were given at the time of the presentation our parent support for the 4 day school week is very high.

It will be interesting to watch this all unfold and without question the battle grounds have been set in regards to the schools being targeted. At this point we can only hope for rational and honest educated decisions from the board. Odd how the potential closure of the city schools was in the media daily, then defeated. I don’t pretend to know the details of that situation but can say that I would bet in most instances children would have been forced to travel several blocks further, not several miles as in the cases of this board’s proposal.

I am hopeful that in the future school viability will be determined by more than just dollars and that the Quality of Education and the impact on students carry a heavy weight at the board table. That the boards be given the information, time and opportunity to focus on other means of reducing costs such as reviewing administration cost, overhead, sharing teachers or any other area which presents possible savings. That we explore further the potential opportunities distance education has to offer and use that as a possible alternative to bussing the kids further from their homes. That a school’s viability also includes the condition of the school and its future projected capital expenditures. And finally, that our Governments recognize the possible need of further financial support for the education systems and the students whom are our future. Honestly is that not one of the highest priorities we should have?

If anyone has any comments please feel free to call me at 429-2188.

Glenn Loffler
Chairman, Glenavon Local School Board