In today’s climate of belt-tightening, one area of education that is especially affected is that of pre-school care.

Is that part of the educational landscape though?

It certainly is – there’s a pre-school curriculum, six areas of learning, shedloads of guidance and, more to the point, when children get to P1, you can tell from 100 paces those who have had access to the best possible pre-school care and nurture.

For working parents of infants and young children, the choreography for this well-organised process begins when the child is a few months old – the time when first-time parents especially start their search for the right kind of care at the right cost. ‘Right cost’, that’s the first hurdle.

We all know that rearing a child is a huge financial outlay and at this age, long before the “Mummy, can I have...” era starts, statistics for early years back up the grim anecdotal findings.

For instance, the average cost of sending a child under two years old to a nursery for just 25 hours per week is now £7,212 for 2022 – up slightly from last year.

Doubling that up to full-time, and costs rise to just over £14,000 per annum, and that’s before you count the add-ons such as trips, extra activities, meals, nappies and in some cases, even wet wipes.

With increased energy costs knocking on the door, heaven knows what this could rise to, but in the meantime, in real terms, the going rate locally seems to be anything between £600 and £1,000 per month; effectively the same as a mortgage and rates combined.

Of course, there are schemes for those working families to claim some kind of payment towards the care of their young charges, but it’s still a nightmare scenario.

One parent I know has to pay almost £1,000 per month just to hold a place for her son as he’s just a little young for starting playgroup, and a second spoke of the skeleton service they can only afford.  

A third parent I spoke to found what he thought was a perfect playgroup for his daughter, but the centre’s over-reliance on chicken nuggets and fatty, salty foods was a real no-no for his family.

This meant they had no option but to search for Plan B, which turned out to be more expensive, but that was their path, and everyone has their own.

As far as financial assistance is concerned, for two-year-olds, the Sure Start scheme may be available for those who have been unable to access the 12.5 free pre-school hours per week, but that brings us to another problem – that of finding somewhere in the first place.

That’s where the small army of grannies, great aunts and trusted neighbours come in, filling the gaps as best they can.

Of course, it goes without saying there’s no shortage of love being handed out to children being looked after this way, but is the curriculum being addressed?

This segues into the next point: reliable family networks often have another issue, that of not being registered.

For some parents, irrespective of costs, approved, registered and inspected childcare establishments offer a different kind of peace of mind, or as one parent put it to me, “Knowing there’s a set of external eyes on their processes, infrastructure and staff focuses the minds of the carers”.

However, as you can expect, such red tape and adherence to guidelines comes at a cost, and that is handed on to the customer – the parents.

Against that, good and mostly more expensive pre-school child-care can address the curriculum and include structured stimuli such as music, movement, numeracy, sport, art and crafts and many other activities that really do benefit your child.

At the end of the day, different funding applies at different stages of your child’s development, but the Holy Grail of all of this is to get children ready for Primary 1, by whatever method of playgroup, nursery unit, nursery school or whatever.

In Primary 1, children, like their pre-school counterparts, follow areas of learning and for me as an educationalist, it’s clear to see Year 1 and 2 pupils who have had such positive experiences in their brief early lives, flourish.

Obviously, there’s a bit of pot luck about it all, and of course it’s taken as read that a very large part of how children develop in school is dependent on their age, innate ability and family and peer influences.

The science of how children learn is a different debate, and this article is touching loosely on some of the issues facing parents.

To this extent, using very broad brushstrokes and huge dollops of common sense, the ideal is to have a child who at P1, also known as the foundation stage, who is settled and ready to learn as well as being socially mature enough to work with others, accept instruction, praise and correction.

For what it’s worth, this is part of the DNA of schools, and especially early years teachers who seat pupils at tables of children who are around the same stages of development and age.

At their age- and ability-appropriate tables, the young children enjoy everything from structured play, formal and informal learning and taking part in all the routines that help make the child socialise and become well-rounded, ready for the next year group.

It’s no surprise that teachers who teach this age group, often get a real buzz from seeing the rapid development of their children, and as someone who has taught this age group, believe you me, it is rapid – one school term can make a huge difference.

One parting thought, though. Why has the government not intervened more to help working parents?

Why is that a well-trained professional couple who have two or more pre-school children find it cheaper and less hassle for one parent not to work for those years?

There’s a disconnect somewhere, but it doesn’t seem a good use of human resources to have a well-trained professional sitting at home to look after the kids, and to be realistic, it’s usually a woman who does so.

Is there a case of passive institutionalised misogyny? Food for thought.