Today, I received an email pointing me to a letter in the Waterbury Republican. I haven't seen the letter; I'm not sure if it is online. However, the email summarizes it and asks me for my thoughts. I thought I would publish them here.

In the Waterbury Republican today (11-10-07) is a letter to the editor on page 6A that makes a good point. It was written by Donna Hudson of Harwinton. She says that Avery D isn't in trouble for calling school administrators a foul name. Instead, she's in trouble for inciting a campaign to harass them and disrupt school. It further says the newspaper reporters failed to thoroughly research the incident. What do you think?

I replied:

Donna is partially right. I do believe that Avery was punished for encouraging parents to contact members of the school admininistration concerning the way facilities at the school are used. Most significantly, it was an embarrassment to Superintendent Schwartz who had already been criticized for the way the school administration was handling facitilities.

Yet to encourage citizens of a town to speak with the school administrators about how school facilities should be used should not be considered harassment and disruption, it should be considered civic duty.

Likewise, Donna is correct about newspaper reporters failing to thoroughly research the incident. If they had, they would be up in arms and writing good investigative reporting pieces in the local papers about the principal of the school, testifying under oath that she instructed school officials to place false information in students records.

If that was properly investigated and reported on, people would be wondering about what is in their children's records, and calling for a full investigation, possible criminal proceedings and the immediate removal of those involved.