Abandoned Stuff by Saskboy

At least the SaskParty has stepped up with an idea to keep rural schools from being closed by the NDP.

I sent this email to David Kirton on Friday after he mentioned that distance education may need to be developed more. It’s already developed, but sadly ignored by these school boards that have voted for school closures.

Hi David,
There’s no need to develop more technology in terms of distance education in Saskatchewan. We are leaders in that field, and in 1998 I took a distance education satellite calculus course in Limerick Highschool, taught out of Campbell in Regina. The teacher running the course then, is still doing it today, and the technology has only become better since 1998. I finished near the top of my class in my first university calculus course, so the quality of that type of education should not be in dispute.

[Saskboy]

Unfortunately I don’t see a plan from the Sask. Liberals to counteract the NDP dismantling of rural Sask., but I’ll ask if they are working on a plan.

A caller [Frances] to the John Gormley Live show had a fantastic idea, and suggested that instead of building more city schools for lots of money, you could use the same dollars to bus city kids into the country where they’d have a better learning environment with smaller class sizes. It makes much more sense than busing kids into the city schools which are already too crowded.

Saskatchewan School Boards Association executive director Bill Wells says Gantefoer’s plan is nearsighted, noting that falling student numbers are behind many of the closures.

Officials say it’s not only extremely costly to run a school with a few dozen students, it’s also difficult to offer the full range of courses available to students in other schools.

“To suggest that we should shortchange their education in the interests of some economic development that might occur in some community some time in the future means that they won’t be ready for the economy of the future in this province,” Wells said.

Ultimately, cash isn’t the answer to what’s ailing rural schools, Wells said.

Busing children to larger schools will mean they can have programming they would never receive in their hometowns, he said.

I think Well’s comments are both wrong, and creepy. What is the “economy of the future in this province”? Wells seems to think it means there will be no rural communities to support farmers, which will of course lead to some kind of feudal system where farmers are too poor to own their own land or product of their work. An economic system like that in modern times is spine chilling, and certainly not up to Canadian standards.

And by his same logic, busing urban-living children to SMALLER schools will mean they can have programming they would never receive in their hometowns, with better class sizes to boot. But of course children are better off being educated where their parents can be involved in the education system, which is exactly why busing kids is so detrimental to the health of children, families, and ultimately our province.