This education and care centre is for the children of teenage parents (all of whom were mothers at the time of interviews) who have returned to secondary school. All parents are low income. It is situated alongside a playcentre in the grounds of a primary school. Many local facilities, including a library, shopping centre, health services, and Plunket services are close by. The parents’ own secondary school is five minutes’ walk away.
The centre was built in 2000. Until then, parents of infants had “put their babies under their desks” or had their child “minded” in the whänau centre, or in a back room in the adjoining tavern. The centre is largely open plan, but divided by a kitchen area and tables and chairs, so that infants have their own space. The outside environment has a covered deck, native planting, and a
medium-size play area with large sandpit, climbing frame, and a good range of outdoor equipment. The centre is well resourced for all age groups, with babies and toddlers being the main age group. Space for adults is confined, with a small staff room and cupboard-sized office. However, comfortable soft chairs edge the area for babies and toddlers, and mothers often sit here to breastfeed their babies, or be with children.
The centre is organised into four age groupings (6–18 months, 18 months–3 years, 3–5 years, and a group of children who have outgrown the 18 months–3-years group but are too young for the 3–5-year group). Each staff member takes responsibility for the whole needs of individual children (e.g. nappy changing, bottle feeding, giving medicines), planning and assessment, preparing an individual education programme based on an emergent curriculum that incorporates planned and spontaneous experiences, and communicating with parents about the programmes. The groups of children intermix.
The parents do not usually stay during the day because they are at school themselves, except when they are settling their child in. However, two parents are rostered to come to the centre each day to bring the children’s lunch from their own school kitchen, and mothers who are breastfeeding their babies are telephoned to come when their baby needs to be breastfed. If a child is upset or has an accident, the parent can be telephoned; because the school is so close, she is able to come to the centre if necessary. Parents also come on centre trips. One parent is the elected parent representative for liaising between the staff and all parents on a daily basis. All parents are on the committee. Parents also fundraise for the centre. In the last year, the parents raised funding to hire a bus and pay for a trip to the zoo, hold two parties, and buy presents for all the children.
In 2003, one teacher and the teacher aide who were previously interviewed had left. One of the teachers had become a job-share teacher with another teacher. Four of the parents previously interviewed had left the centre. This meant that only one parent whose child was still at the centre could be interviewed for a second time. A second parent who had left to go to polytechnic in December 2002, but had been present during the course of the project, also came back for a second interview. Eight parents from 16 families responded to the survey in 2003.
Table 10 Interview participants in 2002 and 2003
Participants 2002 2003
Parents 5 mothers 2 mothers Teachers Head teacher
2 teachers Field-based trainee Teacher aide Head teacher 1 teacher (job-sharing) Field-based trainee 1 new teacher (job- sharing)
Professional development adviser
Parents’ aspirations and views about the centre
Each parent highlighted the importance of schooling for their child, reflecting perhaps the importance which they gave to schooling for themselves, and their own decisions to go back to school. One parent commented on her own experiences of leaving in Year 10 and “humbugging around with school”, an experience she did not want for her son. Three parents wanted their child to get higher qualifications if possible, one “in something major, like be a lawyer”. One wanted her child to “be clever and have a job she can be proud of”. One parent said she would like her child to go to a kura kaupapa Mäori, or if that was not possible, to a bilingual school, because of the importance of Mäori language and culture to her.
Two parents thought that nothing would stop their child getting the kind of education they would like for him/her. Two said that what the child was interested in was most important in deciding how far they went in education. Another said that “being a druggie” or “friends dropping out of school” could influence whether the child stayed at school.
Parents thought that the main value of the centre for them and their child was:
y the positive atmosphere and values and the sense of wellbeing that these engendered;
y the opportunity for children to play with other children and learn to share;
y the range of activities to support children’s learning; and
y the parents’ own learning from what happened at the centre.
Parents emphasised that it was important for their child to feel comfortable and like the centre. They identified that positive feelings were supported by the “atmosphere”, staff interactions, and good social values:
There’s a feeling when you walk through the door that it’s a nice place. Children are taught to show love instead of hit.
The relationship with staff is good.
The close contact that parents were able to have with the centre helped parents and children feel comfortable. For example, one mother thought her child was helped by the child’s knowledge that her mother would come back to breastfeed her when she needed her.
Parents regarded the interactions their child experienced with other children and adults, especially learning to play with others and share, as of prime value for their child. This was a main difference between the centre and home. There were some different routines and practices, especially around eating (seating arrangement at table at the centre) and sleeping (not having a set bedtime at home). One parent noticed her child “played up” at home, but not at the centre. Only one parent talked about interchange of activities between home and centre, for example singing centre songs at home, and the parent teaching staff her board games. While recognising that the centre sang waiata, had karakia before eating, and used some Mäori words, another parent said she would like more Mäori to be spoken at the centre. Only one other parent wanted her child to learn something else at the centre—how to write her own name.
Parents said their child learnt from the activities in the centre, commenting on “learning songs and keeping a tune”, “learning about painting and leaves, to draw and write, although not writing yet”, “going to the library and loving books”, and “experiencing different textures”. Some said that these activities or opportunities were not available at home, for example a parent liked the outside play area because she did not have outside play space at home. One parent also appreciated the reputation of the centre as being a “good crèche”. She thought the playground, the separation into age groups, and the good quality of the teachers contributed to this reputation.
Three parents spontaneously talked about their own learning from what happened at the centre. One said that some of the centre activities were things that she would not have thought of doing herself. Another described the centre as “an open parenting book” in providing helpful hints on how to deal with problems, such as her child being “beaten up” by an older cousin who lived in the home.
Parents regarded the main difference between home and the centre as the number of people with whom the child could interact, and some differences in activities in the two settings. Two parents talked about the ways in which their child liked to “mimic” them and to help with “home life skills”, such as cooking, doing the dishes, and washing—experiences that were not available at the centre. One parent said her son stayed up longer at home, while the centre had got him into a routine of sleeping.