STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

STATE OF FLORIDA, ) PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES COUNCIL, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 77-731

)

RAPHU WILLIAMS, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly- designated Hearing Officer, James E. Bradwell, held a public hearing in this cause on June 29, 1977, in Miami, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Ronald C. LaFace, Esquire

101 East College Avenue Tallahassee, Florida

For Respondent: Elizabeth J. DuFresne, Esquire

1809 Brickell Avenue, Suite 208 Miami, Florida

On March 25, 1977, the Professional Practices Council (herein sometimes called the Council or the Petitioner) by its Executive Committee Chairman, Thomas E. Benner, Jr., filed a petition for the suspension of the teacher's certificate of Raphu Williams (Respondent). The Petitioner seeks to suspend the teacher's certificate of the Respondent, Raphu Williams, based on its probable cause determination on March 7, 1977 based on conduct which will be set forth hereinafter in detail. The Respondent, by and through counsel, filed an Answer denying that he engaged in acts of conduct unprofessional or unethical that would warrant suspension of his teacher's certificate. At the outset, Respondent's counsel objected to the Petitioner's procedure of proceeding administratively while there is a contractual procedure for dismissal hearings from the school board. Based on the authority vested in the Petitioner, pursuant to Chapter 231, Florida Statutes, the undersigned denied Respondent's Motion to Continue this administrative hearing based on the above grounds.

Specifically, the petition for the suspension of the Respondent's teacher's certificate alleges that Respondent administered illegal and inappropriate corporal punishment to at least one student by shoving, pushing and throwing a student in an effort to evict the student from his classroom in violation of Section 232.27, Florida Statutes, and Section 6B-5.07(1) and (4), Rules of the State Board of Education; and that Respondent used abusive, inappropriate, profane and threatening language and gestures with students, fellow professionals, other school employees, and members of the public and otherwise

failed to efficiently perform his duties as a teacher and to effectively communicate with and relate to the students in the classroom in violation of Section 231.09(2), (3), (4) and (6), Florida Statutes, and Section 6B- 1.02(2)(c), (d), and (e); 6B-1.04(2)(c); 6B-5.10(3), (4), and (8); 6B-

5.05(1)(a); 6B-5.06, Rules of the State Board of Education, to wit:

1. Told students to sit their asses down;

   
   

2. Balled up his fist in a menacing manner at a student;

   
   

3. Used words, such as "God damn" and "mother fucker" in the presence of students;

   
   

4. Told a fellow professional that he would crush him like an eggshell;

   
   

5. Told a fellow professional that when they got to court, he was going to make him look foolish and ruin him professionally;

   
   

6. Asked a fellow professional what his favorite flower was so he could arrange to have some ready in the event that he was hurt;

   
   

7. Was overheard telling a member of the public that he was going to kill a particular student or send him to the hospital;

   
   

8. Told a supervisor that he was king in his classroom and that he didn't give a damn if Johnny Jones, Mr. Turner, or Mr. Whigham came in there; that he'd been teaching for more years than the supervisor was old and the supervisor couldn't tell him anything; that he could retire any time he wanted to but the white man owed this money to him and he was going to pay him;

   
   

9. Told a student that just because she was black didn't mean she had to look bad;

   
   

10. Repeatedly slept in his classroom when he was supposed to have been performing professional services;

    
    

11. Refused to follow reasonable requests to prepare adequate lesson plans and told a supervisor that if she wanted to see his lesson plans, she would have to look in his head and that he didn't have to write lesson plans for her or anybody else;

    
    

12. Failed in consistently following established procedures for disciplining students under his supervision;

    
    

13. Has been tardy for work in the morning or for the beginning of classes during the school day to the extent that students have been left unsupervised;

    
    

14. After being awakened by a supervisor in his classroom, remarked that there is only so much that can be done with these students.

The Petitioner concludes that each of the above matters alleged constitutes conduct which seriously reduces the Respondent's effectiveness as a school board employee for which conduct the penalty is suspension of his teacher's certificate, pursuant to Section 231.28, Florida Statutes.

Based upon my observation of the witnesses and their demeanor while testifying, the arguments of counsel, and the entire record compiled herein, I make the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Respondent, Raphu Williams, presently holds Florida Teacher's Certificate Number 3436, Life Graduate State, Rank 3, and is employed in the public schools of Dade County, Florida. By way of background, Respondent was a teacher employed in the public schools during 1937 through 1942 and from 1961 to the present time. He attended Tuskegee Institute, where he received a Bachelor of Science degree. Respondent is presently certified in the fields of Auto Mechanics, Industrial Arts, Business Administration, and Guidance and Counselling. During his educational pursuit, he attended Boston University, Pittsburgh State, FAMU, Harvard, Suffolk Law School, and the University of Miami. When Respondent was re-employed as a teacher during 1961, he taught at Mays for approximately five years and returned to Booker T. Washington High School, where he was employed through school year 1970. At the end of the 1970 school year, he was transferred to Riviera Junior High School, where he remained until 1975. Throughout his career, he always taught "trainable" students.

   This, according to Respondent, is a student classification based on students whose IQ's range from 55 down to 30. During the 1975-76 school year, he served as an itinerant teacher receiving assignments from his supervisor, Mrs. Wylamere Marshall.

   
   

2. Pauline A. Young, an educational specialist for Dade County for approximately eight years, met Respondent while he was employed at Riviera Junior High School. Miss Young was called upon to observe the vocational unit as a liaison from the area office; and in her opinion, Respondent's performance was inadequate. This opinion rested upon her observation that when she visited the Respondent's classroom, he was asleep. She observed the Respondent asleep on two occasions. On the first occasion, she awakened him and the second time, she browsed around his room for several minutes; and he never knew that she was there. She testified that the students were "just milling round the room -- doing nothing in particular". She testified that when she awakened the Respondent on the first occasion, he acknowledged the fact that he was asleep, and Respondent said "What can you expect? They can only do so much". The Respondent was then teaching trainable mentally-retarded students. While observing Respondent's class, Miss Young requested that Respondent show her his lesson plans, whereupon he responded that he had no lesson plans, his plans were in his head and that he had no plans for Mr. Jones, Mr. Whigham, or Mr. Turner. Respondent advised Miss Young that the "white man owed him this salary and that he was going to continue to stay on even though he made more money on other jobs and, in fact, did not need this job". Miss Young further testified that when Respondent was presented with new reading techniques, he resisted change. Respecting Respondent's classroom contact with students, Miss Young observed that Respondent opened the class by calling the class roll and thereafter, he had no structured format to conduct his class. Miss Young observed Respondent criticizing a student, Darlene Mickens' dress complaining that "she should not wear tennis shoes because she was black and further that because she was black, she need not look bad". In Miss Young's opinion, the student was neat and appropriately dressed. Finally, she testified that she never observed Respondent doing anything productive during her observation of him during his classes.

   
   

3. Dora Whitaker Wright, an instructor employed by the Dade County School Board for approximately 21 years and presently the Assistant Principal and

   teacher at Richmond Heights in charge of guidance, testified that she has known the Respondent for approximately two years. During this period, she visited Respondent's classroom to observe on one occasion, and she also noted that his classroom was unsupervised on approximately three occasions. She further testified that the Respondent failed to report for duty when scheduled. On the three occasions in which Respondent left his class unsupervised, she remained with the students for approximately 15 minutes on the first occasion; approximately 20 minutes on the second occasion; and on the third occasion, the students were left unsupervised and roamed the halls without a pass. She examined Respondent's lesson plans and noted that they contained little, if any, guidance in which to advise emergency substitute teachers or administrators what the teacher (Respondent) was teaching his students. She, thereafter, gave the Respondent sample lesson plans that were submitted by other instructors as a guide to prepare his lesson plans. When Mrs. Wright advised Respondent that he would be held accountable for the return of the classroom books, he rebelled in front of students complaining that it was not his responsibility to account for books given to students. He also contested Mrs. Wright's authority stating that he, like Mrs. Wright, had a Master's degree and had taught as much as she. He further remarked that he had more teaching experience than anyone presently teaching in that school. Among other things, Mrs. Wright's duties include the proper classification and testing of "trainable students" and to ascertain that the instructors are utilizing proper teaching methods. When she discussed the "core" lesson plans systems with Respondent and the teaching guidelines that were published and approved by the school district, the Respondent objected to the use of such plans. Additionally, she testified that he refused to accept the textbooks for each student based on his position that he would not be held accountable for the textbooks under any circumstances. She testified that the School Board, although desirous of giving each student an individual textbook, instructional level, lacked the funds for such an expenditure. Respondent threatened to hurt a student (Lorenzo Richardson) if he was not removed from his class. When cautioned that the supervisor would be visiting his classroom on various days, Mrs. Wright testified that the Respondent rebelled, stating that "he would teach things the way he wanted". Respondent advised Mrs. Wright that he was hit with a soda can while he was laying his head down on his desk. She testified that during her observance of the Respondent, she noticed him playing checkers with students and offered them one dollar if they beat him in a game of checkers.

   
   

4. Helen Gentile, the curriculum secretary, who is responsible for calling substitutes, maintaining inventory records, ordering materials and maintaining emergency lesson plans, testified that she received two complaints from substitute teachers regarding the failure of Respondent to provide adequate emergency lesson plans. She examined the Respondent's lesson plans and the only thing contained therein was "personal philosophies of what Respondent noted about each student, with no direction for course structure for students". She recalled Respondent being tardy on at least three occasions and that he failed to call to advise that he would be late. She testified that from time to time, it was necessary that she call upon instructors to cover for classes during the "free period" but that when she would ask Respondent to do this, he yelled at her, stating that it was not his responsibility to cover classes. She did, however, testify that after Respondent shouted to her, he later apologized.

   
   

5. Zackery Lee Hagen, a 14-year-old student of Respondent for approximately two years, testified that he was struck by a desk that was pushed by Respondent. Hagan recalled incidents in which the Respondent slept in class and recalled one instance in which he awakened the Respondent by banking on his desk. He also recalled the Respondent using profanity, such as "damn" in class.

   Hagen testified that his reading skill level had improved under the Respondent's teaching.

   
   

6. Jane Boyer, secretary to the principal, Lonnie Coleman, testified that the Respondent failed to follow the established policy of the School Board. Specifically, she testified that he would not timely call to advise of his absence which created hardships in locating substitute teachers. She recalled instances in which students were locked out of their classrooms and were sitting in the hall approximately eight to ten times. On the other hand, she testified that when Respondent wanted requests, he wanted an answer the very instant in which the request was made. Mrs. Boyer observed the Respondent using profanity on at least two occasions. On one occasion, she recalled the Respondent using profanity while escorting a student to Mr. Coleman's office, and the second occasion occurred during a telephone conversation with a parent. She testified that the Respondent, on the second occasion, was talking to a neighbor of a parent and wanted the neighbor to summon the student home "before he killed him". She testified that the Respondent indicated to her that the student had struck the Respondent with a book, whereupon the Respondent called the student a "little bastard".

   
   

7. Cynthia Grace, a 13-year-old student of Respondent, also recalled instances in which the Respondent used profane language when the class was unruly. Students, Charles Gardner and Oscar Bryant, also recalled the Respondent using profanity during his teaching. Gardner also confirmed earlier testimony that the Respondent was asleep when he was struck on the head by a coca-cola can.

   
   

8. Mitchell Watson, a student, also recalled an instance in which the Respondent fell asleep in class. He testified that the Respondent observed a fight between two students and made no attempt to control the situation or to halt the fight.

   
   

9. Clarence H. Gilliard, an instructor and department chairman for special education at Richmond Heights, explained his difficulty in receiving emergency lesson plans and Respondent's failure to accept responsibility for textbooks.

   He also testified that the Respondent continuously balked when requested to follow established procedures set forth by the school board.

   
   

10. Donald Helip, an Assistant Principal at Richmond Heights Junior High School, was called upon to try to resolve the differences which Respondent was having in following procedures. He testified that in so doing, he observed the Respondent's classroom; and on several occasions, the students were left unsupervised. When he cautioned Respondent regarding this problem, the Respondent balked. He testified that after repeated requests, Respondent ultimately turned in emergency lesson plans which were inadequate inasmuch as they only contained "philosophical statements", as opposed to directives that substitute teachers could follow during the Respondent's absence. He recalled one instance in which the Respondent reported late for work and his students had to be reassigned to another instructor. Immediately thereafter, he passed the teacher's lounge and the Respondent was there talking to another instructor.

    Mr. Helip counselled the Respondent about this problem whereupon the Respondent advised that "he was new and a nice guy and that he should not be used by the system". He further cautioned Mr. Helip that he should not "cross him or if he did, he would be crushed". Mr. Helip perceived these remarks as a threat.

    Finally, the Respondent advised Mr. Helip that he should advise what kind of flowers he liked so that he would receive them if he, in fact, got hurt. Mr. Helip also voiced his opinion that the Respondent was not an effective school

    board employee inasmuch as he (1) failed to report timely for work, (2) enjoyed a poor relationship with students, including sleeping while on duty, and (3) based upon his failure to follow established procedures.

    
    

11. Lonnie C. Coleman, the principal of Richmond Heights Junior High School for approximately three years, testified that the Respondent was assigned to his school as an itinerant school teacher (surplus) during the past school year. During October, he was assigned classes. Coleman testified that Respondent repeatedly balked at assignments and due to his repeated protests, he removed him from the class due to the number and magnitude of problems he encountered from Respondent. Specifically, he testified that the Respondent averaged two to three disciplinary referrals to him daily and Respondent continuously ejected students from his class because they did not have writing paper. He testified that when this problem increased, he had to issue a directive to Respondent that students were to be kept in class despite the fact that they did not have writing paper. He testified as to the inadequacy of the Respondent's emergency lesson plans which were submitted only due to repeated requests from his department head. He testified that when the Respondent was provided a sample lesson plan as a directive in preparing his plans, the Respondent refused and based on the repeated problems from Respondent, he requested and was granted permission to remove him from the classroom. He termed the Respondent's attendance as being "spotty" and recalled an instance in which the Respondent attended a meeting away from his assigned area without permission. Based thereon, in his opinion, the Respondent's effectiveness had been reduced and should not be permitted to remain an instructor in the Dade County School System. He denied that he and respondent had any personal problems or personality clashes and, in fact, testified that when he confronted the Respondent with procedural problems and afforded the Respondent an opportunity to correct such, the Respondent failed to take any corrective action.

    
    

12. Wylamere Marshall, area director and coordinator for the Guidance Division, testified that she offered Respondent a position in order that the could tap his resources as an employability skills teacher to work with special education students. Initially, she assigned the Respondent as an itinerant teacher and experienced problems with him reporting to duty as assigned. She indicated that the Respondent was generally irresponsible and repeatedly slept on the job. She testified that the Respondent requested and was, in fact, granted a transfer during 1975-76 to Richmond Heights Junior High School. She testified that some of the deficiencies in the Respondent's performance included his failure to plan or supervise class activities. He also permitted students to randomly select class assignments. She testified that although the Respondent had numerous shortcoming as a teacher-educator, she felt that he was an able administrator. As to her opinion of Respondent as a teacher, she testified that he was totally inefficient and was not an effective teacher in the educable mentally-retarded program (special education).

    
    

13. Bennie Pollock, a Social Studies teacher at Richmond Heights Junior High School during the school year 1975-76 and the beginning of the school year 1976-77 and presently employed as a bargaining agent representative for United Teachers of Dade, testified that he met Respondent during his tenure at Richmond Heights Junior High School. He testified that during the fall of 1976, while the Respondent was serving as a surplus teacher, he had a conversation with Lonnie Coleman regarding the Respondent. He had been approached by the United Teachers of Dade to accept a position which he ultimately accepted around October 13, 1976. He testified that Coleman told him "Bennie, I've got a problem, they want me to take Ralphu (Respondent) in another teacher's place,

    who had recently resigned (Diana Hunt). I don't want the man. I am going to do everything I can to get rid of him if they make me take him." Pollock responded "We have a contract; it's not a buffet table. There are ways of doing things." He testified that Coleman indicated to him that "We might have to clash on this", whereupon Mr. Pollock replied "Make sure you've got yourself right and do it because if, you know, I'll go by the contract 100 percent."

    
    

14. The Respondent expressed his opinion that he was not an administrator but was, rather, a teacher, a profession which motivates him. He recalled that one instructor, Diana Hunt, also had no teaching plans. He testified that, initially, he conducts an orientation in his class to determine the category in which students should be placed. He prefers individual assignments for each student, as opposed to the "core" system, wherein all students are taught around the "core". While he agreed that students are permitted to come in class a certain way, for example, wearing jeans, sneakers, etc., he wanted students to come to school looking and smelling clean before he could teach them. He also indicated that he wanted three or four instructional level texts for each student, whereas the county only gave one book to each student. He expressed his opinion that this thwarted growth and did nothing to stimulate students to read. He expressed the belief that he was being singled out because he was called in without exception to report his lateness. He recalled only one instance in which he was "tied up" and, therefore, called in late. He testified that during school year 1976-77, while assigned teaching duties, he was absent approximately four days. Respondent voiced the opinion that there was no difference in the emergency lesson plan submitted by him as compared to that of instructor Gilliard, who is also an instructor at Richmond Heights Junior High School (Respondent's Exhibit Nos. 2 and 3). Respondent was evaluated by Mr. Coleman for the school year 1975-76, at which time he received an average score of 3.8 out of a possible 5.0. See Respondent's Exhibit No. 1).

    
    

15. Based upon the evidence adduced herein, including the conflicting testimony of the various witnesses, I find that there is sufficient substantial and competent evidence to conclude that the Respondent, on numerous occasions, failed to follow established guidelines and, therefore, ran afoul of the dictates of Chapters 232.27 and 231.09(2), (3), (4), and (6), Florida Statutes. Additionally, by striking the student with the desk, he ran afoul of Chapter 232.27, Florida Statutes, respecting corporal punishment, and he failed to follow Chapter 231.28, Florida Statutes, by his failure to follow State Board of Education Rules contained in Chapter 6B-5, which are entitled "Standards for Competent Professional Performance". Numerous witnesses testified that the Respondent was asleep in his classroom on various occasions. Chapter 231.28, Florida Statutes, provides that an educator's certificate may be revoked or suspended on several different grounds. The evidence here reveals that the Respondent repeatedly refused to follow written directives from administrators regarding corporal punishment, the filing of lesson plans, his use of abusive language during his classroom instruction, the use of threatening language to other instructors and/or administrators, and the striking of another student, apparently innocent, with a desk, and his eviction of students from his classroom constitute conduct from which sanctions should flow based on the department's rules. It is true that almost all of the student witnesses who testified indicated that their reading level had improved under the Respondent's instructions. They all consistently testified that he used abusive and profane language during class time and fell asleep during class periods. I have also considered the Respondent's contention that he is a victim of a disparity of treatment in that other teachers file similar lesson plans without criticism by administrators. However, in proving a case of disparity, it must be shown that other instructors were permitted to file plans and that they were not counselled

    and failed to take other corrective steps to remedy the stated deficiencies. In this regard, no such showing has been made and, therefore, the proof falls short. I shall, therefore, recommend that the Respondent be found guilty of unprofessional and unethical acts and conduct based upon testimony which revealed that he pushed and hit a student in an effort to evict a student from his classroom in violation of Subsection 232.27, Florida Statutes, and 6B5.07.1 and (4) of the Rules of the Board of Education. I shall further recommend that the Respondent be found guilty of using abusive, inappropriate, profane and threatening language, as set forth in detail above, in violation of Chapter 239.09(2), (3), (4) and (6), Florida Statutes, based on conduct set forth in detail above. In consideration of the Respondent's total dedication to the teaching profession and his educational pursuits, I shall only recommend that his teacher's certificate be suspended for a period of two years.

    
    

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

    
    

16. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties to this action. Chapter 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

    
    

17. The authority of the Council is derived from chapter 231, Florida Statutes.

    
    

18. The Respondent's act and conduct as set forth above in detail showing that he used abusive, inappropriate, profane and threatening language and gestures with students, fellow professionals, other school employees and members of the public, amounts to conduct violative of Section 231.09(2), (3), (4), and (6), Florida Statutes, and Section 6B-1.02(2)(c), (d), and (e); 6B-1.04(2)(c); 6B-5.10(3), (4), and (8); 6B-5.05(1)(a); 6B-5.06 of the State Board of Education Rules and Regulations.

    
    

19. The Respondent, by his acts and conduct in striking one student with a desk in an effort to evict another student from his classroom, amounts to conduct violative of Section 232.27, Florida Statutes, and Section 6B-5.07(1) and (4) of the State Board of Education Rules and Regulations.

RECOMMENDATION

Upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, I hereby recommend:

That the Respondent's teacher's certificate be suspended for a period of two years.

DONE and ENTERED this 22nd day of August, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida.

JAMES E. BRADWELL

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings

530 Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

COPIES FURNISHED:

Ronald C. LaFace, Esquire

101 E. College Avenue Tallahassee, Florida

Elizabeth J. DuFresne, Esquire 1809 Brickell Ave., Ste. 208 Miami, Florida

Honorable Ralph Turlington Commissioner of Education The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32304

Tom Benton

Professional Practices Council

319 West Madison Street Tallahassee, Florida

Docket for Case No: 77-000731

Orders for Case No: 77-000731