In the last while there have been a number of letters-to-the-editor pleading and begging for some transparency from the board of trustees of the Southeast Cornerstone School Division in regard to how they handled the demotion of Wade Oberg as principal of the Weyburn Comp School.
As the letter below from Rick Wanner states, the board seems content to hide behind certain aspects of the Education Act because it’s a “personnel” matter and therefore can’t be publicly discussed.
In spite of this being a “personnel” matter, there has been a very public discussion of what happened, mostly because of the total lack of any answers or transparency of any kind by the board. Their decision was bad enough that a very good, very talented educator, Warren Betker, resigned his seat on the board, and it apparently made no difference to them.
He specifically asked, as a trustee, for a recorded vote on this issue and none was given, which proves the total lack of transparency.
I’ve had discussions with former administrators and teachers (and there are many in Weyburn) and not a single one of them can accept or agree with the board’s decision.
Why? There are several reasons, the chief one being that the punishment does not fit the crime. The punishment is absolutely ludicrous and beyond defence, if the only incident being considered was the one at the volleyball tournament, especially considering his 25-plus years with a commendable and highly laudable record as an educator and administrator. You can’t hide behind the Education Act to justify a completely wrong decision on punishment.
Another reason I could point out is the lack of any protection to administrators. For teachers, their union, the Sask. Teachers Federation, will provide support and assistance, but not for administrators, so this administrator was basically thrown under the proverbial bus for one incident. Yes, he should’ve been disciplined for that, but there is no way that incident was enough to destroy his career. In short, while the school board feels they cannot offer any explanation publicly, they owe it to the taxpayers of the school division to be fair and to exercise justice, which was not done in this case.
