LETTERS

School Administrator, Feb, 1999

Athletics vs. Academics

Your comprehensive coverage of interscholastic athletics (November 1998) was outstanding and very timely. It should be required reading for all superintendents, principals, athletic directors and coaches at the high school level, in addition to staffs of each of our high school athletic associations.

I have observed that many administrators, both at the superintendent and principal levels, have so many things on their plate that something has to go or at least be delegated to others. As you look at the priorities and rate them, athletics usually are moved down the ladder and probably for good reasons. The flip side is that nothing gets administrators in trouble quicker than athletics.

RONNIE CARTER

Executive Director,

Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association,

Hermitage, Tenn.

Too much emphasis is placed on athletics in our public schools. Too many parents view our athletic programs in terms of potential college scholarships, and too many parents view university attendance as a means to continue sports participation.

In a way, we public school administrators perpetuate the myth of college scholarships as a means of financial aid with our silence and with the subtle ways we seem to overvalue athletes and sports participation.

The athletic programs in our high school enrich the total educational program and are a source of pride for our larger community. Keeping perspective on how all the programs fit together without overemphasizing one is the key. Ensuring the accomplishments of our state-ranked math team receive equal billing with our state-ranked football team is not easy, but worth the effort.

BRENT J. MCARDLE

Superintendent,

Lexington School District,

Lexington, Ill.

The Eligibility Challenge

I enjoyed Kimberly Reeves' article ("Athletic Eligibility: Right or Privilege," November 1998). I am sure the author had many examples at her disposal of how the system has failed. In Iowa, if a student transfers without a like move by parents, the student is ineligible for 90 days. If it sounds simple and straightforward, it isn't.

We had a senior football player who became unhappy with the summer baseball coach (who is also the football coach) so he decided to transfer to a neighboring school district. It is a long story, but the bottom line is he was ruled ineligible by the Iowa High School Athletic Association and then by the state department of education. At each level he got an injunction from a judge to allow him to play. He played the whole season as the starting running back.

JOHN R. KELLEY

Superintendent,

Fairfield Community Schools,

Fairfield, Iowa

Sensible Peer Evaluation

I read Libby Gil's article ("Principals Evaluating Peers," October 1998) with interest, especially her discussion of the two-year assessment cycle. The process as reported appears workable, but it sure puts a load on the superintendent. Yet I have known other superintendents who also want their principals reporting to them and it makes sense.

TOM GIUGNI

Retired Executive Director,

Association of California School Administrators,

Sacramento, Calif.

Positive Principal Portrayals

Just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed Jeffery Glanz's article ("Autocrats, Bureaucrats and Buffoons: Images of Principals," October 1998). I long have been annoyed by the misrepresentation of my profession. Were I not proud to be a principal, perhaps the feeling would be different.

The principal played by Olympia Dukakis in Mr. Holland's Opus is one example of a positively portrayed administrator. I wish I could think of others.

GARY D. HARMS

Principal,

McCook Central High School,

Salem, S.D.

Not Fit for Evaluation

I enjoyed reading the several articles about evaluating the performance of principals (October 1998). I believe most of the authors affirmed the Standards for School Leaders crafted by the 29 states and 12 national leadership associations that are members of the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium.

However, I would caution readers about some of the advice offered by Larry Lashaway ("Instruments for Evaluation"). The School Leaders Licensure Assessment, created by ISLLC and the Educational Testing Service, is not an evaluation tool for practitioners, and there could be dangerous legal implications if used for that purpose. This assessment was specifically designed for the initial licensure of beginning principals. It is not predictive. It is not validated for anything other than licensure.

At some point, ISLLC may consider developing an evaluative instrument linked to the standards, but at this point, it is simply an idea in early germination. I do like Lashaway's notion of adapting the standards to fit leadership priorities in a local district and will keep that idea in mind when we begin to develop an evaluation instrument.

NEIL J. SHIPMAN

Director,

Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium,

Council of Chief State School Officers,

Washington, D.C.

Wellspring of Information

I found the October 1998 issue so practical that I am sharing it with others in my small, rural district located in south central Michigan.