Madam, – Recently, hours on radio/television and pages in the print media were devoted to reporting on the error made by the Leaving Certificate superintendent in Drogheda. The reaction was excessive and some of the reporting was disappointing, to say the least. It was followed by an investigation by the State Examination Commission (SEC). I wish to address the role that school principals and deputy principals had in handling this matter.
1. The SEC, not the school, employs the superintendent, yet the SEC on its website and in a letter to superintendents directed superintendents to inform the principal if they were unavailable on Saturday. Question: Does one not contact the employer if one is unavailable for work? When the alternative paper arrived, a letter for principals instructed them on how to proceed and included the sentence, “Your assistance in providing for the smooth-running of this rescheduled examination session is greatly appreciated”.
2. It was reported in the newspapers that management bodies indicated that schools would be open on Saturday. I have yet to meet a principal/deputy principal whose board of management contacted them before Saturday or assisted on Saturday. Presumption: principals/deputy principals will be available on Saturday.
3. Schools were informed that superintendents, examination aides and caretakers would be paid for attending on Saturday. Presumption: principals/deputy principals will be available on Saturday and their pivotal input can be taken for granted.
Of course they were available, but it is one more example of matters being dumped on principals/deputy principals without consultation or even the courtesy of a request. More and more items are being piled on to the workload of principals/deputy principals.
Why are more than 120 school leaders retiring this year? Is it surprising that only a handful of people are applying for these positions? How many re-advertisements have appeared in the papers this spring?
– Yours, etc,