The evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that Respondent failed to timely correct specified performance deficiencies; therefore, Petitioner should not terminate Respondent`s teaching contract.

The issues for determination at the final hearing were: 1) whether the Respondent should be dismissed from employment due to incompetency; and 2) whether the conflict in the statute cited in the Notice of Charges dated November 18, 1982, and the Notice of Hearing dated June 18, 1983, constitute inadequate notice to the Respondent Muina of the charges against him. At the final hearing, Marsha Gams, a learning disability teacher at Carol City Junior High School, Rosetta Vickers, Director of Exceptional Student Education, Dade County School Board, Carol Cortes, principal at Carol City Junior High School, Karen Layland, department chairperson of the Exceptional Education Department at Carol City Junior High School and Desmond Patrick Gray, Jr., Executive Director of Personnel, Dade County School Board, testified for the Petitioner School Board. Petitioner's Exhibits 1-13 were offered and admitted into evidence. Yvonne Perez, Bargaining Agent Representative, United Teachers of Dade, Alexander Muina and Desmond Patrick Gray, Jr., testified for the Respondent. Respondent's Exhibits 1-5 were offered and admitted into evidence. Subsequent to the hearing, the Respondent requested via telephone conference call, that Respondent's Exhibit 6, the published contract between the Dade County Public Schools and the United Teachers of Dade, be admitted into evidence as a late-filed exhibit. The contract was admitted over Petitioner's objection. Proposed Recommended Orders containing findings of fact have been submitted by the parties and considered in the preparation of this Recommended Order. When the parties' findings of fact were consistent with the weight of the credible evidence introduced at final hearing, they were adopted and are reflected in this Recommended Order. To the extent that the findings were not consistent with the weight of the credible evidence, they have been either rejected, or when possible, modified to conform to the evidence. Additionally, proposed findings which were subordinate, cumulative, immaterial or unnecessary have not been adopted. On July 11, 1983, the Petitioner filed objections to the Respondent's Proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Penalty. Certain of the Petitioner's objections were subsequently stipulated to by the Respondent and are not in issue in this proceeding.Respondent's dismissal from teaching varying exceptionalities should be upheld.

No wrongdoing on part of teacher whose summer employment and two weeks of preplanning for the school board overlapped but who fulfilled both jobs.

Affirm suspension and dismiss Respondent from teaching for misconduct, incompetency and gross insubordination.

Termination of employment and revocation of teaching certificate due to deteriorated ability to carry out teaching responsibilities, possibly organic.

By an Amended Specific Notice of Charges filed December 22, 1983, and assigned Case No. 83-3067, Petitioner, School Board of Dade County (School Board) alleged that Respondent, Carolyn T. Smith, was incompetent, and subject to dismissal pursuant to Section 231.36(4)(c), Fla. Stat., by reason of her repeated failure to perform duties prescribed by law and her repeated failure to communicate with and relate to the students in her classroom to such an extent that they were deprived of a minimal educational experience. By Administrative Complaint filed January 10, 1984, and assigned Case No. 84-0149, Petitioner, Ralph D. Turlington, as Commissioner of Education (the State), seeks to revoke, suspend or take other disciplinary action against Respondent's teaching certificate predicated upon allegations that Respondent was incompetent to teach or perform her duties as an employee of the public school system, was guilty of conduct which seriously reduced her effectiveness as an employee of the School Board, and failed to make reasonable effort to protect the students under her charge from conditions that were harmful to their learning, or to their safety and health. At the parties' request these cases were consolidated.Teacher's employment terminated and certificate revoked for two years upon showing of incompetence and failure to fulfill terms of her contract.

The issue presented is whether Respondent committed the acts alleged in the Specific Notice of Charges dated May 8, 1989, and, if so, whether Respondent should be dismissed from employment with Petitioner.Teacher dismissed as employee for incompetence. Teacher lacked communication and instructional skills necessary to satisfactorily perform in classroom.

The central issue in this case is whether the Respondents are guilty of the violations alleged in the Specific Notice of Charges filed against each Respondent; and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Respondent guilty of misconduct as he fa8iled to follow school policy which resulted in inadequate supervision for students.

Poor performance by teacher deprived students of opportunity to learn and thus constituted incompetency.

The issues presented are (1) Whether or not despondent should be dismissed from her employment with Petitioner, School Board of Dade County based upon grounds of incompetence and (2) should disciplinary action be taken relative to her teaching certificate.Respondent found to be incompetent & incapable of teaching. Teaching certificate suspended 3 years.