Parenting Articles

Parenting Articles

Preschool Education: Children Preparation


in  Parenting Articles |  February 13th, 2011 at 7:05 am

 School is about to begin and you are wondering where and when to send yourchild to school. Depending on your child, the average age to start school is at age 5. If your child is 4, but very bright and smart for his age, he may be able to go to school at his age of 4. The first thing to look for is the school. I would personally suggest a private school, these days public schools are getting worse and worse, but that is just my opinion. Make sure that the school is a clean and sfae environment. Speak with teachers or presidents at the school so you can begin to get a feeling for the school. Also when checking out the schools, make sure to find out about the transportation as well.Parents are the first teachers in their children's lives. Children learn more in the early years at home - and more quickly too - than at any other time in their lives. Education begins at birth. What you do with your child in those early years lays the foundation for all that follows. It is particularly important to talk, to ask and answer questions, to encourage careful observation of the world around you, to encourage imagination and thinking.Helpful activities for you and your child to do together and talk about include:


Sitting together and looking at books/listening to stories.


Visiting places together - the park, supermarket, station, bank, library, post office, launderette.


Singing rhymes and songs together.


Collecting things like postcards, pebbles, shells, buttons.


Making a scrapbook.


Playing games together - picture lotto, snakes and ladders, colour or picture dominoes, large jigsaw puzzles, ludo and similar board games, I-Spy, skipping games, singing games, ball games.


Cooking simple things - cheese straws, pastry, small cakes.


Playing with children is very important. By playing with adults children will be more confident and able to talk to the other adults they will meet in school. By playing with other children they learn to share, to take turns and to mix.


Children are more likely to settle quickly in school if they know some of their class mates. Going to a pre-school group, family centre or day nursery, will help prepare your child socially and educationally for school.


Many schools run induction programmes with visits to the school including those potentially daunting areas - the hall, the playground, the toilets! Make the most of these opportunities. Sometimes there is a useful booklet to tell you both about starting school; sometimes there is a video or a book made by an older pupil. Some schools lend activity packs and toys to their pre-school intake. Ask about your school's induction programme and find out what your school can do for you and you for it.


by Beth Costanzo | Share Article | Email Article | Print Article

Effective Communication in Preschool Parent-Teacher Conferences


in  Parenting Articles |  February 13th, 2011 at 7:07 am


Effective Communication in Preschool Parent-Teacher Conferences



Feb 12, 2011 Lynne Thompson

Body language is a universal form of non-verbal communication - Lars Ploughmann
Body language is a universal form of non-verbal communication - Lars Ploughmann
Body language is as important as verbal communication when conducting parent-teacher conferences, and preschool parents are often emotional.


Sometimes a parent sees behavior at home that she considers a problem, that is either not seen or not a problem in school.

The teacher as an expert on behavior problems

The mother may complain to the teacher about the behavior, citing tantrums, hitting and defiance when asked to put away his toys at home. Ideally, this would be an ongoing conversation. In previous conversations, the teacher may have said she does not see these tendencies at school. However, the mother may see the teacher as an expert and be judging her as glossing over problems or generally not knowing what she am talking about.

Resentment may begin to surface. This can lead to defensiveness at conferences. It is essential for this not to become obvious, so the teacher needs to take a deep breath, smile and act in a welcoming yet authoritative manner. Body language is key.

Child Care Chestnut Hill Quality Preschool NAEYC accredited
Early Childhood Education Info On Early Childhood Education. Expert Tips And Advice Online!

The value of a friendly smile

First, try to smile. If you can, convey mostly good news, so it is not difficult to be happy. Find positive things to say about the child, particularly if you can counter the mother's experiences: if she is complaining about aggression, cite cases where he is caring and considerate; if she is complaining about tantrums, describe a time when he used problem-solving skills; if she says he is rude, recall an occasion when he was polite. This way, the smile will not feel false. In all probability, the mother will express her concerns again, which makes it harder to remain upbeat. However, the friendly smile may help as she might open up about a number of frustrations she was experiencing at home, which are not directly related to the child's behavior, but might indicate she is near breaking point herself..

Active listening

However, by engaging in eye contact, making ‘listening responses’ and letting her know that you hear what she was saying even though it is different from your own experience with the child may enable her to feel comfortable sharing her difficulties. Body language is difficult to adjust, but by creating a comfortable environment with adult-size furniture, the parent will feel much more welcome in the classroom. Teachers may be familiar with sitting on low chairs, but parents are not necessarily!

Physical contact

People are often 'reserved' or 'touchy-feely'. For the reserved, it does not come naturally to touch the parent beyond a handshake. However, occasionally, it may be appropriate to touch people on the shoulder if you know them well or are trying to comfort them.but his mom chastised him for it and told him not to touch people.

Take a visual inventory

As parents arrive for conferences, it may be possible to determine if they are harried and irritable. Courtesy is never misplaced, so begin by smiling and thanking them for taking the time to meet with you and explain the purpose of the conference. Ask if everything is well and try employing encouraging tactics. Ask for concrete examples of the behavior she has been complaining about.

Objective observer

As an objective observer, it may be possible to see two or three things that could have been done differently but refrain from saying so, or being 'preachy'. There are things we would all do differently if the scenario was repeated. Do not offer advice unless the parent asks for it.

Reflecting emotions

By letting the parent know that the teacher is listening to her concerns and takes them seriously, even though the behaviors are not repeated in the classroom, she may relax more and voice her frustrations. The more the teacher reflects her emotions back to her, the more detail may provided, suggesting possible solutions.

It is usually easy to move from this kind of emotional exchange onto the factual discussion of the child's progress, especially if there are positives to report.

Model and rephrase

Sometimes, the behavior the parent is complaining about surfaces during the conference. It is necessary to tread carefully and not be tempted to give advice. The best way to proceed, is to reword any request in terms that reflect 'school language' and routines. For example, a child who refuses to put away toys may be told “It’s clean up time. Let’s show your sister where the toys go!” and even start to sing or play the 'clean-up song' used in class. This demonstrates that parents and teachers are allies in the upbringing of the child. The teacher is able to demonstrate that by rewording a ‘request’ and keeping calm, the child complies with the adult's wishes. Do not give the child an opportunity to say no, but instead gave him a chance to show his knowledge about where the toys belonged. This also demonstrates to the parent language that the child is familiar with and that a routine may be something this particular child needs.


Read more at Suite101: Effective Communication in Preschool Parent-Teacher Conferences


by Beth Costanzo | Share Article | Email Article | Print Article

Guilting Parents Out Child Care


in  Parenting Articles |  February 12th, 2011 at 7:27 am



In the crass world of Canadian right-wing politics, there is a surefire way to diffuse voters' earnest desire for affordable, high quality child care and early learning options: play the guilt card.

Human Resources Minister Diane Finley did it just last week in response to a federal Liberal promise to revive the national child-care program Paul Martin said he would implement before losing grip of his fledgling minority government five years ago.

Finley reportedly said: "It's the Liberals who wanted to ensure that parents are forced to have other people raise their children. We do not believe in that."

Her comments caused a firestorm, revealing the left-right framing divide on this issue.

Liberal MP Bob Rae responded in outrage: "For decades we've realized that women are working, men are working and the second thing we've realized is that there's a great benefit to children from working and playing with others and learning with others. The notion somehow that child care is some form of alien abduction is just completely preposterous."

NDP MP Olivia Chow did too: "Finley insulted all teachers, all early childhood educators, child-care workers, organizers of parents' resource centres and even babysitters. She is trying to inflict guilt on all working parents -- a truly shameful, divisive behaviour."

Child care expert Martha Friendly spoke for working parents when she noted Finley's remarks are out of sync with modern day reality.


"I'm stunned to hear a government official say this in the 21st century," said Friendly, who is executive director of the Childcare Resource and Research Unit. "The view that women who work 'give their kids to someone else to be raised' is an astonishing one. I'm sure that hardworking mothers and fathers who are employed believe they're raising their own children and are just hoping for some support to help them do so."

So why do Conservatives deploy a frame that seems at odds with the majority of working families today? And how do they get away with it?

Within the neoliberal frame, Conservatives equate the problem of child care with parents' responsibility to figure it out themselves. In the process, Conservatives tap into parents' anxieties about leaving their children in other people's hands while they work. It comes out as child care = bad parenting and it reinforces the conservative value of individual responsibility (none of this 'it takes a village to raise a child' stuff for conservatives).

On the surface, you'd think it would be a difficult frame to sell because it sounds so, well, 1950s. Even for those mothers who really truly wish they could stay home with their children, most can't afford such a luxury. Most Canadian households need two income earners to make it anymore. In Canada, 84 per cent of mothers with children aged 6-15 are in the paid workforce; 69 per cent of mothers with children under two work. The revolution of women flooding the workplace quietly unfolded over the past generation but our child care options haven't evolved to reflect it.

Guilt can be a strong emotion, especially since many parents wish they could spend more time at home with their children.

The Harper Conservatives diffuse the very real need for quality child care options by deploying their favourite code word: choice.

"We believe that [parents] should have the choice as to whether they care for their children at home or whether they use daycare or whether someone close them, a family member or neighbour, looks after that," Finley said in the House of Commons in an attempt to quell the firestorm.

The Harper Conservatives' utilization of the word "choice" is consciously misleading and a cynical use of a term that, for progressives, means creating new quality, regulated, affordable not-for-profit child care spaces that parents can trust (and, really, aren't our kids worth it?).

Among his more cynical moves, one of the first things Harper did when he was elected five years ago was to cancel the national child care program and offer, instead, a $100 monthly "universal child care benefit". The great unkept secret is that this bonus -- in focus group sessions conducted by Environics Research last week in Toronto, I listened to one mother refer to it has her "baby bonus" -- does nothing to create new child-care spaces. And at $100, it falls far short of the actual daily cost to parents opting for child care.

Derek Leebosh, from Environics Research, observes the Conservatives' use of the word 'choice' is interesting, since it's usually associated with the abortion rights movement. In practice, the Conservatives' use of "choice" is neoliberal code for "if you want children that's your problem and it'll cost you".

In the absence of a true range of child care options they can trust, those families who receive their "baby bonus" are relieved to get any kind of help. Does this suggest Canadian parents are easily bought off? Actually, it's more complicated than that.

Canadians are regularly bombarded with a rich lexicon of neoliberal catch phrases to make them feel badly about needing quality child-care options.

As Martha Friendly, Laurel Rothman and Katherine Scott make clear in this op-ed, theNational Post weighed into the child care debate by recycling familiar phrases that are emotionally loaded: non-profit, regulated child care becomes "institutionalized daycare". Working mothers become selfish parents "pushing babies out of the nest", "farming children out to strangers at a tender age". Advocates for better child care options are castigated as "forcing" parents to use "a massive coast-to-coast daycare program".

Who says we don't have Tea Party antics here in Canada?

The Conservative frame on child care helps tap into another conservative and very American value: small government within a free private market system. They're happy to let the market fill the gap with unregulated, private, for-profit child-care businesses.

Their "choice" code word also triggers simmering discontent with government in general. That discontent is troubling for progressives, because it's not only extreme conservatives who take a dim view of government efficiency and service provision. Many biconceptuals (social progressive, fiscally conservative) share this view.

Years of Conservative messaging that government is wasteful and ineffectual (Toronto Mayor Rob Ford swept to power with his 'gravy train' metaphor) triggers deep emotions.Toronto Star readers articulated it this way in these comments:

"State daycare: Canada cannot afford to get in the business of raising children -- if we truly want to help working...... democracyinjeopardy"

"Why?: Why am I paying my tax dollars to subsidize the keeping of other people's children? It sure as hell...... Steve_YYZ"

"Canada should not be providing child care services: Nor should Canada be paying people's child care expenses. They are not essential services. Uncle Cool"

"Twenty years ago when my kids were small I was interested in a daycare program. Now my kids are adults and like millions of other taxpayers I have no further need of such services. I've also had 20 years to watch what happens when bureaucrats try to run anything. Forget it Mike. I don't want the TTC approach to service or operational management implemented in child care centres. I was quite pleased with the wonderful "unregulated" caregiver to whose home we brought them every day when they were pre-schoolers. Yes, we shopped around and met some that we didn't feel were a good fit so we chose not to do business with them. But we also had issues about some of the staff at the regulated daycare they attend before and after school. One option is not inherently better than the other so best to have all the options in place and let people choose. Besides we can't afford another grand national scheme."

Under the conservative child-care frame, early learning opportunities for our children quickly dissolve into an us against them war of words, overshadowing more progressive Canadian values such as social responsibility, fairness, and caring. Also, eclipsing parents' real need for quality child care.

Through it all, progressives struggle to speak to Canadians' diminished faith in their own governments.

Generally speaking, progressives in Canada have taken several approaches to framing the issue, but all avoid the elephant in the room: the best quality early learning programs the world over are run by governments. For progressives, Canadians' diminished sense of what government is capable of -- fanned and fueled by conservatives -- makes child care harder to sell. Though not impossible.

This poll, for instance, shows Canadian parents prefer child care to their $100 cheque by a ratio of two to one.

poll in 2006, when the national child-care program was axed, showed 50 per cent of Canadians wanted a national child-care program while only 35 per cent wanted the Conservatives' baby bonus cheque.

Other research shows parents who rely on child care worry greatly about quality. They want their children to be safe and to receive good early learning opportunities. Progressives have responded to this and attempted to broaden the idea of child care to include early learning. They draw on reams of neurological and psychological research that shows children who have access to quality early learning in the first seven years of life emerge better equipped to handle life as students and, later, as adults. In this frame, early learning = superior education.

While the conclusion speaks to parents' quality concerns, it fails to hit the same emotional hot button as the conservative guilt tactics and ineffective/nanny state government frame. In fact, some parents take exception to the notion that their child could possibly receive a better education outside the home. For parents who have no option but to work, they hope for the best early learning opportunities for their children but that isn't a primary motivator.

Sometimes, progressives lock themselves in the conservative "choice" frame by arguing the federal government should give Canadians "real choice". While the intention is to argue for the creation of more child-care and early learning programs for parents to choose from, by repeating the "choice" frame progressives inadvertently reinforce the conservative frame. (George Lakoff: Negating the frame activates the frame).

What, then, to do? Canadians believe we are more caring and sharing than many other societies (especially the U.S.) and we hold the strong progressive value of social responsibility (people shouldn't get left behind). But, above all, we are a pragmatic people. If there is work to be done, then by golly we will do it.

The main thing is that, unlike the 1950s when apparently father knew best, it now takes two income earners for most households to make it these days. Most Canadian households have to work. Many can't even afford to take the first full year off work to be with baby. By steadying the progressive frame on this lens -- early learning and child care as a practical necessity -- we come closer to speaking to parents' fears, as well as to their hopes for something better than Sesame Street to feed their child's growing brain.

For progressives, it's not about choice (walk away from the conservative frame). It's about social responsibility -- to work to help keep the household afloat and contribute to a healthy national economy as well as to ensure our children are in safe hands, getting the best possible care and learning while they're at it.

Yes, many parents would prefer to stay at home until their children are older. I'd like to live on a farm, grow my own food and embrace my inner hermit but life has a way of delivering a multitude of reality checks. If you have children, you probably have to get out there and work to provide for them.

Parting thoughts: In my own research into parents' perception of early learning and child care, I learned ...

Parents struggle to find care for their pre-school children and they worry about the quality of that care.

Cost/affordability, is an important factor in a parent's selection of early learning and care.

Many parents struggle to find flexible care hours and are open to more options.

While parents would like to see more flexible, affordable, high quality early learning and care options, there is no culture of expectation -- many accept the burden of responsibility lies at the feet of parents.

Parents are receptive to a progressive early learning and care system but they have trouble envisioning and understanding the nuts and bolts of such a radically new system. In reality parents want a system that helps them manage, but they like to think that it's about what's best for the child.

And, when it comes to ensuring our public health and safety, Canadians expect our governments to regulate businesses (even child care businesses) to make sure profit doesn't come before our collective well-being.

This blog was originally posted on, a blog about issue framing in Canada.




by Beth Costanzo | Share Article | Email Article | Print Article

Govenor Deal, don't Cut Pre-k


in  Parenting Articles |  February 10th, 2011 at 6:56 am


Gov. Deal, don’t cut pre-K

WASHINGTON — For nearly two decades, Georgia was hailed as an educational innovator because of its merit-based college scholarships and its pre-kindergarten classes. Funded with lottery proceeds, the HOPE scholarship and the pre-K program help former Gov. Zell Miller lay claim to a game-changing legacy. Georgia was the first state to offer free kindergarten to all 4-year-olds.

And the state’s pre-K classes have been more than a cheap babysitting service. In 2009, a study by the National Institute for Early Education Research concluded that Georgia’s pre-K program was well run, meeting 8 of 10 benchmarks for quality. Its high ratio of teachers to children and its small class sizes were among the features that earned high marks.

But Miller’s educational legacy is now under assault, a victim of its success and flat-lining lottery proceeds. With legislators considering cuts to the HOPE scholarship, Gov. Nathan Deal has announced that he also wants to slash nearly $20 million from the pre-K program, a decision that will certainly affect the program’s quality.

Georgia faces a gaping budget shortfall, and Deal has to pare back state spending. But his proposal to cut pre-K is shortsighted and wrong-headed — exactly backwards. Deal is sacrificing the state’s future at a time when educational standards need to be raised, not lowered. President Obama has repeatedly emphasized higher academic attainment as a key to continued economic prosperity.

Experts in early childhood development have come to understand that the earliest years are critical to a child’s intellectual development. Children who get extra attention during those years — help with vocabulary, reading, colors, shapes, motor skills — are much more likely to do well throughout their academic careerse. If you want to assure a solid educational foundation, you should offer children a high-quality learning environment before first grade.

“We don’t need another study to tell us the importance of early childhood education,” Education Secretary Arne Duncan told me. “These are extraordinarily tough times, but I think where we cut quality or cut access, the long-term implications are huge. We need to think of education as an investment.”

For all the accolades it has received, Georgia’s pre-K program has never been as good as it should have been. To start, it has never been “universal” because its popularity exceeds the number of available slots. There’s always a waiting list. And its budget has not kept up with inflation. That means further cuts will likely do serious damage.

Because pre-K is so popular with parents (read, “voters”), Deal has said that he will protect the 84,000 pre-K slots that are  currently available. That means Bright from the Start, the state agency which operates pre-K, will likely have to cut teachresand raise class sizes.

And the agency won’t have the luxury to even consider strengthening teacher education — an area where Georgia’s pre-K program doesn’t earn high marks. Experts in early childhood education say that having highly-skilled pre-kindergarten teachers can affect students  — and their earnings — well into adulthood.

Given the importance of the pre-school years, it’s no surprise that state Sen. Fran Millar, R-Dunwoody, recommends that the state scrimp on college rather than pre-K. “If I could, I would put two-thirds of the money from the lottery into pre-k and one-third into the HOPE scholarship,” Millar, chairman of the Senate Education and Youth Committee, told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. “But I don’t think that’s going to happen.”

He’s right. The HOPE scholarship has become an enormously popular middle-class entitlement. Cutting it as sharply as Millar suggests would require an act of political hara-kiri (cq).

Instead, the Georgia Legislature should require means-testing for pre-K classes, so they benefit the students who need them most. Georgia’s upper-middle-class parents have the financial resources to provide high-quality child care, classes and trips to museums and puppet shows — even for toddlers.

But working class kids rarely get those perks at home.

Since Georgia’s future will depend on high educational attainment from thousands of toddlers living in working class homes, the state needs to make sure they, too, are “Bright from the Start.”

178 commentsAdd your comment


February 9th, 2011
12:22 pm

Isn’t it nice of good ole Cindy to worry bout us Georgians from up there in D.C……


February 9th, 2011
12:22 pm


February 9th, 2011
12:24 pm

Working class kids Cindy? Or kids parents who don’t work?

Rafe Hollister

February 9th, 2011
12:28 pm

I think money spent on early education trumps money wasted educating a bunch of smart axs teenagers that think they know everything anyway. Maybe we should eliminate the 12th grade as it seems to be more social than educational. Many of these kids that want to go to college are already qualified and could just move on, but hang back to party with their friends. Use the money saved by eliminating the 12th grade to return to more trade oriented program for those not wishing to attend college.

The days of a college education guaranteeing you a well paying job with a good company are over.

El Jefe

February 9th, 2011
12:31 pm

Back in the old days, Kindergarten was an option for children to acclimate to the learning process.

What does Pre-K do?

It appears it is another entitlement – subsidized day care for little ones. I guess it help but is it really needed?

0311/0317 -1811/1801

February 9th, 2011
12:32 pm


Guess what? My generation didn’t have it and we did just fine. Heck, I didn’t even go to kindergarten!

In times of sever budget crises, it should be one of the first things to go.

I also believe, it’s just a glorified, government baby-sitting service anyway despite your claims otherwise. I’m surprised you’re not pushing for some program right out of the birthing hospital !

0311/0317 -1811/1801

February 9th, 2011
12:33 pm

Excuse me: “severe”

Keep up the good fight!

February 9th, 2011
12:35 pm

Scout, if you are the example of a generation of Georgian doing just fine, we definitely need more education for our youth. Crikes!


February 9th, 2011
12:40 pm


As do you.


February 9th, 2011
12:45 pm

Ms. Tucker, excellent article.

The Crooked Deal is likely going to make Sonny Purdue look like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln all rolled into one.

Utterly misguided and of highly questionable ethics, this governor is already an embarrassment. Even by southern Republican standards.

But he knows his “base”.

Vilify the weak and glorify the wicked…

Keep up the good fight!

February 9th, 2011
12:49 pm

Georgian, sorry, your comment makes no sense. Besides I have not held myself out to be an example of Georgia’s education system doing just fine. I also dont believe that my beliefs are facts.

But let’s be precise. I believe Scout was educated in his very young years in a segregated system in the 1950’s or 1960s. That is representative of Georgia’s education doing fine? As for the religious hatred spewed against a religion or group. You got me. Yep, that is consistent with the education at that time for many. Many also rose above it because it was not just fine.


February 9th, 2011
12:50 pm


And Im sure you have validation to support your slander against Gov. Deal? You sir are the embarrassment with your jealousy of the governor. Southern Republican? Does that have the same derogatory meaning that Southern Democrat used to have?

Excellent article. The article hardly had substance and lacked in jouralistic style or appeal. Left much to be desired from the Copy and Paste Queen.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

February 9th, 2011
12:51 pm

Disagree. Cut it.


February 9th, 2011
12:52 pm



by Beth Costanzo | Share Article | Email Article | Print Article

The Budget VS. Education


in  Parenting Articles |  February 10th, 2011 at 8:48 am

 The budget vs education
by Martha Vance Brown
22 hrs ago | 123 views | 0 0 comments |  | 0 0 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Can North Carolina afford to ignore pre-school children, their ability to learn and become productive adults?

That’s a question legislators should ask themselves as the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Health and Human Services starts work on the 2012 budget.

Yes, the state faces a $3.7 billion shortfall between projected revenues and the current government service levels. And yes, cuts have to be made – but not at a cost to children, which translates into a long-term negative impact to our state’s future.

If there ever was a time for politics to be set aside, it is now. 

Smart Start and More at Four have been the target of questioning by Republicans for years, not surprising since Smart Start was an initiative of Democratic Gov. Jim Hunt in the 1990s and Democratic Gov. Mike Easley later started More at Four.

North Carolina’s future depends on today’s children, and Smart Start and More at Four provide the services that foster the health and well-being of those children. The John Locke Foundation has called Smart Start an “expensive baby-sitting program” and “government-sponsored nannies,” but that’s hogwash from an entity that hasn’t done its due diligence.

Smart Start funds a myriad of programs geared to ensuring that children start kindergarten prepared to learn. Those programs range from medical support to physical and emotional therapies for children who are behind their peers as infants and toddlers, to child care subsidy for low-income families, teen parenting skills, literacy classes and so much more.

Up to 90 percent of a person’s brain develops during the first three years of life. This is the time when we should provide the greatest support to children.

Numerous studies have proved that children who start kindergarten behind their peers are more likely to remain behind their peers. Unprepared children also are more likely to drop out of school, require welfare funding in adulthood, be unable to hold a well-paying job and become involved in crime. 

Bottom line? We can fund children’s support services now or we can pay a whole lot more later when the children become unprepared and jobless adults.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce offers an ominous warning about the future of American business if significant changes to early education aren’t made. 

“With current early childhood education resource levels, too many Kindergartners will continue to begin school ill-prepared, language skills and achievement scores in math and reading will likely remain at mediocre levels, costs for interventions during the K-12 years and after will continue to rise, high school graduation rates and post-secondary degree completion rates will likely remain unchanged, and businesses will lack the necessary workforce to fill the jobs of the future,” a Chamber report states.

If the Chamber says the status quo isn’t good enough, imagine its opinion of funding cuts to children’s services.

It is in our state’s best interest to maintain investments in the early education system. North Carolina’s prosperity depends on our ability to ensure that all children have the opportunity to develop intellectually, socially and emotionally. A child with a solid foundation becomes part of a solid community and contributes to our society

Martha Vance Brown is the executive director for the Richmond County Partnership for Children.

Read more: Richmond County Daily Journal - The budget vs education 


by Beth Costanzo | Share Article | Email Article | Print Article


FIRST « PREV   2  3  4  5  6   NEXT»  LAST