DEAR EDITOR:

In reading Friday's article "Investigator finds no calendar coercion" about the Cobb school board, you have to wonder about the unanswered questions: Is it possible that the investigation conducted did not talk to every teacher in the school and ensure every teacher they talked to that they would have complete anonymity? What was the motivation of those that supported the balanced calendar? Was the "pressure" to support the balanced calendar an inadvertent pressure that individual teachers felt but did not want to express? What would the results of the survey have been if the survey was anonymous? One can only wonder.

From the start of this controversy it was clear to me that no principal would coerce any teacher to vote one way or the other and so I would have been shocked to find out otherwise as this would be beyond unethical. What would not have surprised me, though, is if teachers felt an indirect pressure to vote one way or the other, similar to the private business world when your boss might ask you, "What do you think about a pending change?" when you know, like it or not, your boss aligns themselves opposite of you.

I like to see a difference of opinion on the school board and a reduction in rubber-stamping mentality, but more than that I would like to see our school board consider the basics as they move forward with change. The balanced calendar might create more rest for the teachers and students, which is great if this means that they will have more focus to teach and learn, but the questions here remain: at what cost and what gain? In today's economy these costs should be measured so as we move forward I would like to see this.

My final thought is to ask the board to move on from the pettiness of personal attacks and move on to what you were elected to do - ensure our children receive the best education possible.

Joan Krall
Acworth