To the editor:
I often check the web site of the Journal-World. Of course, the recent headline regarding the end of Stan Roth's teaching career caught my attention. The article contained much of what I would expect to read about the Stan Roth that I know and respect. It was the explanation of the events that led to his decision to retire earlier than he had planned that prompts me to write this letter.
I am not writing to defend Stan Roth. He does not need to be defended. Any professional educator would take great pride if the successes of his or her former students were at the level of the former students of Stan Roth. It was my privilege to have Stan Roth as a professional colleague for eight years. Not only was I very impressed with his passion for teaching, but also his willingness to spend many hours outside the normal school schedule to supplement the work in the classroom. Many weekend and vacation days were used for field experiences to enhance the educational opportunities for the students. He was willing to spend the time necessary to help students meet his high expectations.
I know that Stan Roth had many opportunities to teach and conduct research at the college and university level, but his desire was to work with the high school-age students. His loyalty to his students was matched by his loyalty to Lawrence High School and his colleagues. He was a willing contributor of his time and talents to the activity programs of the students and the school. He was one of many teachers at Lawrence High School who had high expectations for students and were loyal to the school and district.
It is very difficult for me to believe that Stan Roth would say or do anything that would justify denying him the opportunity to teach in the classroom for the one more year he had planned before retiring. It seems to me that his loyalty to the students and school district was not reciprocated by those responsible for the administration of the school and district.