To the editor:

Apparently, Mr. Bullard is so enamored with Bristol’s former high school principal that facts presented by Messrs. Byrnes and Hewett and Ms. MacDonald in their letters to the editor and comments at recent school committee meetings describing dismal proficiency levels in literacy and math achieved and the chronic absenteeism rates among students and teachers alike “are not useful for determining quality of instruction, effectiveness of school leadership, or how much students can learn.”

Before Ms. DiBiase was to find out whether her contract as high school principal would be renewed, Superintendent Riley hired her to be the district’s Director of Multi-Tiered Support Services. Some of us who concluded that our high school was failing in its principal mission of providing every student with an equal opportunity to excel in their education achievement believed this ought to be a significant factor for the school committee to consider in deciding whether to renew her contract. These same dismal proficiency levels and records of chronic absenteeism also gave rise for my asking whether Ms. DiBiase was the best qualified candidate for a newly created administrative position at the district level.

Most of what Mr. Bullard had to say in his above rebuttal letter to Byrnes, Hewett and MacDonald is best described as so much subjective bovine scatology and need not be addressed by me now.

I do have a question to ask Mr. Bullard, a Navy man, as am I. Bill, when the ship runs aground, who is always held ultimately responsible and usually relieved of command? It is the commanding officer, is it not?

How then is it “misleading” for anyone to cite objective facts that show the high school has been failing in its mission of providing a quality education to all its students? Is the principal not the “Captain” of her high school team of administrators, teachers, and students? If her school is failing, is she not therefore deserving of not having her contract renewed? And in another sense, was it really unreasonable or unfair for me to ask at a school committee meeting if Ms. DiBiase was best qualified for promotion to this district level staff position?

The last sentence of your letter does warrant a comment. You and your woke crowd of progressives, the new “modern democrats”, are all about "feelings". BCCC members strive more to determine what is true based on facts and objective analysis. You should give it a try.

Peter Hewett
Wendy Drive