The Reminder is making its archives back to 2003 available on our website. Please note that, due to technical limitations, archive articles are presented without the usual formatting.
Dear Editor: As most residents of Creighton should, I have an opinion on the proposed move of high school to Creighton one-year-at-a-time. Where on earth did the idea come from? What is the mandate to do this? Whose idea is it that we would be better having a separate system now after all these years? And why is this coming to prominence after school board elections? Let me start by saying first of all, I do not have any children in school at this time, but it is for the future when I will, that I am speaking out here. I am not in favour of this proposal at all. For educated people to actually sit in front of the people of Creighton and say that the students and school will benefit from this is totally irresponsible. How can you possibly think that with 20 students in Grade 10 funding will be available for long-term quality teachers, books and materials and lab supplies? Not to mention how about Industrial Arts and Home Economics classes? Sure, with grants and short-term provincial funding you might get the building and supplies to start these programs. But I cannot see how 20 students per year (just a rough average for point reference) will add enough additional funding to the school to support at minimum six new teachers. Because, if you think the quality of education your children are to receive will be high with one teacher teaching all subjects, not a chance. To pay for this long term we had better be ready for at minimum, and I mean minimum, of a 10% increase to property school taxes within two years to cover the additional costs. This is not a small trivial decision to make. Sure there are some benefits to staying where the kids are, staying in their home town to complete their schooling. But ultimately the goal should be to provide the best possible education and the broadest possible course options to prepare students for post-secondary education. I firmly believe that this option will not provide that in the long term. I completed my high school in a small community in southern Saskatchewan. I know the problems that arise from learning classes from teachers, although very good, who are not specialized or fluent in the course they are presenting. It does come back to haunt the student down the road as it has me on different occasions. There are no perfect solutions that will appeal to everyone. All we can ever do is our absolute best and let the cards fall as they may. Hapnot Collegiate and Many Faces Educational Centre are not perfect, but they have probably the broadest course options of any school in the country. They have developed based on what post-secondary needs are in our secluded northern environment. If anything we should keep putting more resources there for the future. See 'School' P.# Con't from P.# I rode a school bus from 8:00 every morning until 8:50 from our rural home to school and twice in the six day school cycle climbed back on a bus at 9:00 a.m. for another 40 minutes to another community for Industrial Arts and Home Economics. I did this for eight years, no big deal. The trips for IA and HE helped give us options we would not have otherwise. So travelling from at farthest Denare Beach to Flin Flon is no big deal to get the full meal deal. Use some responsibility and do the right thing. Keep the high school as it is. Maybe you do not see it as perfect, but it is definitely way better than the only alternative presented so far. - Shane Connell, Creighton