partly because she did not share the Board's views on the school's future, a school Governor said yesterday.

Speaking on condition of anonymity as lawyers advised Governors not to talk, the person moved to clear up "false allegations'' which have left many parents "generally concerned''.

"Sighle Fitzgerald is a good teacher,'' the Board member said. "When you first meet her she instils a lot of confidence in parents. That's why we hired her. I've been informed her training is at the junior to primary school level and is very traditional Montessori.

"The Board is looking at taking the school, in the future to a planned strategy going to the secondary school level in areas of broader-based appreciation. This did not sit too well with her. We want to bring in somebody who will meet the objectives and goals of the Board.'' Mrs. Fitzgerald is currently on contract to the Academy, a non-profit organisation allowing children between the ages of 2 and 12 to learn and develop at their own pace.

She was notified that her contract would not be renewed last Thursday and a Supreme Court injunction was granted on Tuesday preventing the Board from hiring a new principal. Submissions were made by Mrs. Fitzgerald's lawyer, Mr.

Jeffrey Elkinson.

A petition demanding the reinstatement of Mrs. Fitzgerald and her husband, John, for the 1992-1993 year was circulated among parents this week.

The member said the decision not to renew the contract was a Board option.

"She has never been fired. There's nothing on file from the Board to indicate that. She has a letter from when we first hired her which says in principle, the contract will be renewed subsequent to the Board's approval, immigration and other things.

"It's been documented that she's quit twice before and we can't rely on somebody who on September 1 might say `here's a resignation unless I get more money'.'' The member said a meeting held at Christ Church in Warwick between parents, teachers and other Board members on Wednesday night was "...emotional anyway''. "Parents wanted to be reassured by the Board and we couldn't because we had been told not to speak,'' he said.

The member said inaccurate information about the Board was presented with parents led to believe it was using American consultants and paying them, both of which are false.

"I think in one or two accusations, people knew better. The meeting was designed to be confrontational and you can't do anything in a confrontational atmosphere.

"(It) was very unfortunate. I think it has hurt the school. If you are a parent, you've got to have confidence in the Board. It's responsible for the day to day running of the school.

"PTAs and Boards traditionally have had some problems working together. The Board runs the school and put it together and is responsible for making sure it works well. Parents have the choice of taking their children out.''