It is to be hoped that by the end of the school day Friday, Seneca Valley School District teachers will have assured their students that the month-long strike that ends today, the lack of a new contract, and the possibility of a second strike later this school year won't erode the goal of providing the students with the best education possible.

To deliver a different message would demean the professionalism that the district's teachers — indeed, teachers everywhere — purport to exemplify. A different message also would hurt the teachers' standing in the eyes of even some people who have up to now supported their position in the contract stalemate.

Until the strike, which began Oct. 15, the teachers had worked under terms of a contract that expired on June 30, 2006. With tomorrow's resumption of classes, they will be working again under terms of that expired pact and will continue to do so until a new contract is worked out.

Salaries and health-care contributions continue to be the basis for the contract stalemate, which apparently is headed for nonbinding arbitration.

If the arbitration decision is rejected by either or both sides, the teachers will have a right to strike again, but not for longer than extending classes to June 30. Under state law, the initial strike must end today to allow classes to be completed by June 15.

If bad weather forces the cancellation of classes and the district is unable to provide 180 days of instruction by June 30, the district will lose approximately $70,000 in state subsidies for each class day that cannot be held.

Classes are not permitted beyond June 30, the final day of school districts' fiscal year.

Even if all students are assured that the district's labor situation won't compromise the quality of their education, there have been troubling statements in recent days that require reflection by district residents.

One of those statements, which was included in an article in Tuesday's edition of the Butler Eagle, indicated that "the disastrous labor dispute" could derail the district's mission to educate students.

That won't be the case if the district's teachers don't let it happen.

Those who have implied over the past weeks that better pay might translate to better education did in fact miss an important point:

A pay raise of 6 percent, compared to one of 4 percent, doesn't really make a teacher better or more skillful in imparting knowledge.

There also was the implication that the strike could influence teachers' decisions to remain working for the district. But that implication fails to acknowledge that many districts prefer hiring teachers who have just completed college, or who have been in the workforce for only a couple of years, because that produces a budget savings not possible with the hiring of a veteran instructor.

Therefore, at least for veteran teachers, there would be limitations in their ability to acquire another teaching position, if they were to decide to leave Seneca Valley.

The Seneca Valley strike has been an unfortunate episode in the district's history. And, it likely will negatively affect overall district morale and relationships well past an eventual contract settlement.

But the students weren't — and aren't — to blame for the contract impasse, and students shouldn't be targeted for retaliation if they or their parents openly expressed opposition to the teachers' bargaining stance and the strike.

Assurances of no retaliation should be among the first orders of business when students enter their classrooms tomorrow.