Letters to the Editor 04/06/2011

To the Editor:

The decision to eliminate the principal position at the elementary school has troubled me greatly on two levels, one, as a father of two children who attend Sisters Elementary School and second as an educator. As a father I worry how this decision will affect the quality of education that my children will receive, as an educator I question the practicality of this decision. 

In the district where I work the principal works 50-60 hours a week; I, as a lead teacher, also work 50-60 hours a week. How then is a lead teacher, who will now be asked to do both jobs, do so effectively? I looked up the job description of an elementary principal and listed below are just a FEW of their responsibilities.

"Provide instructional leadership to the school community and staff.

Develop, plan, and implement school site programs and activities in accordance with goals and objectives; recommend and administer policies and procedures; confer with staff on curriculum, instructional, personnel, and school related matters.

Coordinate school activities with related departments and outside agencies and organizations.

Select and appoint personnel to improve site positions; provide or coordinate staff training; serve and evaluate classroom instructors; work with personnel to correct performance deficiencies; implement discipline procedures.

Develop and administer the school's budget; direct the forecast of funds needed for staffing, equipment, materials, and supplies; monitor and approve expenditures.

Develop the master schedule of course offerings; comply with accreditation guidelines and state requirements; adjust schedule to meet school, students, and staff needs.

Maintain a safe and orderly school environment; coordinate the safety of students participating in all extra-curricular and after school activities, including inter-scholastic athletics field trips."

This list isn't even half of the responsibilities listed for an elementary principal. In my opinion there is no way one person can do both of these jobs effectively.

I am not naive to the fact that cuts have to be made, however, if cuts have to be made to survive should we really start by cutting off the head?

Chris Frye

•••

To the Editor:

As I read and hear of the money struggles faced by America's school systems, I, as a taxpayer, ask myself how we can afford to continue shunting busloads of our high school athletes to all sorts of games, all under the guise of education.

I realize the benefits of physical education, but if it's basketball versus a career, I'll take the career!

If every taxpayer would read Thomas Friedman's latest book, "The World is Flat," I'm sure they would get a frightening picture of how America is no longer even in the mainstream of world jobs, much less a leader as we once were. India and China have already surpassed us vastly - not only in numbers but in quality of education - to fill the world's needs for skilled labor in a highly technical world job market.

Many thoughts presented themselves as I read Friedman's statistics. For example, why not community funding for those schools who insist on shipping their kids around the state to win ball games - not taking it out of education budgets; why not concentrate high school education on subjects useful to a work career - not a lot of non-substantive subjects which serve no career purpose.

That alone would enable our young people to finish high school in three years, college similarly, and enable them to have a fighting chance at the world's job market - a market they are already losing by the time they finish our education system.

India and China have already studied this out and are years ahead of us. It doesn't take a genius to read this book and learn for yourselves; it's scary to me! America's large corporations must have read it, as they relocate and hire skilled labor in India and China, not the USA!

Russell Williams