STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ) EDUCATION PRACTICES COMMISSION, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
vs. ) CASE NO. 83-1850
)
WILHELMENA S. WEBBER, )
)
Respondent. )
)
RECOMMENDED ORDER
This case was heard by R.L. Caleen, Jr., Hearing Officer with the Division of Administrative hearing, on October 18, 19, and 20, 1983, in West Palm Beach, Florida.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner: J. David Holder, Esquire
128 Salem Court
Post Office Box 1694 Tallahassee, Florida 32402-2648
For Respondent: William M. Holland, Esquire
605 Clematis Street Post Office Box 2648
West Palm Beach, Florida 33402-2648 ISSUES
Whether respondent's Florida teaching certificate should be revoked, or otherwise disciplined on charges that, as Principal of West Riviera Elementary School, she: violated Sections 231.085 and 232.27(1), Florida Statutes, by permitting, condoning, and participating in excessive and unreasonable use of corporal punishment; violated Section 231.28 by committing acts of gross immorality and moral turpitude and engaging in conduct which seriously reduced her effectiveness as an employee of the Palm Beach County School District; violated provisions of Rules 6B-1.06 and 6B-1.01, Florida Administrative Code.
BACKGROUND
On May 11, 1983, Ralph D. Turlington, Commissioner of Education, ("Department") filed an Administrative Complaint seeking to suspend, revoke or take other disciplinary action against the Florida teaching certificate of Wilhelmena S. Webber ("Respondent"). The Administrative Complaint, alleged that Respondent permitted, condoned and participated in excessive and unreasonable use of corporal punishment at West Riviera Elementary School, where she served as Principal, during the 1979-1980, 1980-1981 and 1981-1982 school years; that she knowingly misrepresented facts concerning the administration of corporal
punishment at West Riviera Elementary School in her memorandum to the North Area Superintendent on March 31, 1982; that she used excessive and unreasonable force in administering corporal punishment; that she made derogatory, insulting and embarrassing comments about members of the faculty and staff; that she openly reprimanded and berated teachers in the presence of students and other school personnel; that she reprimanded teachers over the public address system; that she threatened faculty and staff with dismissal, denial of tenure or other punishment; that she directed two students to be taken out of school and transported to a hospital where she had been admitted for the purpose of braiding her hair; that she repeatedly used profanity in addressing student, faculty and staff; that she repeatedly made inappropriate, improper and unprofessional comments to students, faculty and staff; that she directed on of her teachers to alter the grades of a student from "unsatisfactory" to "satisfactory" although the student's work did not merit such a grade; and that she was dismissed from her employment in the Palm Beach County School District on January 24, 1983, based upon substantially similar allegations of misconduct.
On June 6, 1983, she requested a hearing and denied the charges contained in the Administrative Complaint. This case was then referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings for assignment of a hearing officer. Hearing was set for October
18-20. 1983.
At hearing, the Department called 25 witnesses and offered 9 exhibits, all of which were received in evidence. Respondent called 12 witnesses and offered
13 exhibits, which were also received in evidence.
The parties submitted post-hearing proposed findings of fact. To the extent those proposed finding are not incorporated in this recommended order, they are rejected as unsupported by the necessary quantum of evidence, or as unnecessary to resolution of the issues.
Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the following facts are determined:
FINDINGS OF FACT
Respondent holds Florida teaching certificate 066623, covering the areas of Elementary Education, Junior College, Reading, Early Childhood Education and Administration and Supervision. She has earned a bachelor's and master's degree, and a doctorate.
Until her suspension in August, 1982, she served as Principal of West Riviera Elementary School ("West Riviera") in the Palm Beach County School District. On January 24, 1983, a final order was entered by the Palm Beach County School Board dismissing her from her employment and cancelling her continuing contract with the district.
During Respondent's tenure as Principal at West Riviera, (1973-1982) it was her policy to maintain and rigorously enforce strict discipline, or as she put it, "law and order." Her approach to maintaining "law and order" is illustrated by the following events. When Marie Rusch joined West Riviera as a substitute Kindergarten teacher in October of 1979, Respondent explained that she wanted Ms. Rusch to maintain law and order in the school: "I don't care if these children learn nothing, I want law and order." Ms. Rusch was surprised by Respondent's attitude, particularly with regard to kindergarten children. This was Ms. Rusch's first opportunity to teach in a public school. During a
conference in 1973 with Nancy Pullam, (another kindergarten teacher) regarding student behavior, Respondent gave Ms. Pullam two or more rulers taped together with masking tape and told "her beat them and they will learn."
Respondent passed out 18" rulers to each member of the teaching staff at West Riviera and told them that she expected them to use the rulers in administering corporal punishment. Until on or about May 7, 1980, Respondent permitted teachers to administer corporal punishment in their classrooms, contrary to Palm Beach County School Board Policy 5.18(9). She permitted teachers to administer corporal punishment for any type of misbehavior until she changed that policy on or about March 12, 1982. At that time, she advised her faculty that corporal punishment was to be administered only for fighting and foul language.
Prior to March 12, 1982, Respondent failed to set any guidelines for the faculty at West Riviera concerning offenses or infractions for which corporal punishment was authorized. In her view, the only "offense" which did not warrant corporal punishment was the failure of a student to do his assigned classwork.
The only alternatives to corporal punishment utilized at West Riviera were suspension from school or deprivation of a fun activity (including depriving a student of physical education or use of the library). If a child would not accept paddling, it was Respondent's policy that the student be automatically suspended for a period of five days.
Respondent constantly emphasized her philosophy of strict law and order through her use of the expression "Your behind is mine," meaning that if a child misbehaved he or she would receive a paddling. Respondent repeatedly used this expression in addressing children, faculty and staff, both personally and over the school's public address system.
Respondent's manner of administering West Riviera created a fearful and military-like atmosphere. She often told teachers that she wanted it so quiet in faculty meetings, and in classrooms, that she could "hear a rat piss on cotton." When Marjorie Russo was hired to teach third grade, Respondent told her that corporal punishment used at West Riviera. Respondent told the faculty at the beginning of each school year that they each had a paddle, and she expected them to keep law and order. It they didn't, they would be "blackballed" in the county.
Respondent told substitute teachers that her primary concern was that they maintain law and order, that she didn't care whether the substitute taught the children anything. Dr. Howard Levarity, Assistant Principal at West Riviera, became concerned about the extent to which corporal punishment was utilized under Respondent's administration. He was so concerned that he tried to transfer to another school. He observed occasions when children were corporally punished without good reason. At West Riviera, teachers were given great latitude in administering corporal punishment so that "law and order" - as defined by respondent - could be maintained.
As a result of Respondent's policies regarding the use of corporal punishment, there were 3,246 separate instances in which students were administered corporal punishment during the 1979-1980 school year. A total of
451 students (78% of the school's students, ranging in number from 576 to 607) received corporal punishment during that school year. During the 1980-1981 school year, there were 1,176 instances in which corporal punishment was
administered to students. Out of a school population of 550 students, 290 (52.8%) received corporal punishment during that year. During the 1981-1982 school year, there were 560 separate instances of corporal punishment. Out of a school population of 537, 214 students (40.9%) received corporal punishment during that year. Although most of these punishments were not administered in Respondent's presence, their frequency was a direct result of her policy to encourage - even insist - that corporal punishment be applied to maintain law and order.
During the 1979-1980 school year, fourth grade student Greg Aronson was corporally punished 59 times. Greg's mother was never notified by the school that he received corporal punishment on 70 different occasions. Second grade student Sterling DeShields received corporal punishment on 45 occasions. Fourth grade student Robert Duguette received corporal punishment on 61 occasions. Fourth grade student Steve Geck received corporal punishment on 43 occasions. Sixth grade student Thomas Gradison received corporal punishment on
48 occasions, four of which occurred within a one hour period of time on October 25, 1979. In each instance, Thomas received the maximum of 5 strokes, for a total of 20 strokes within one hour. Fourth grade student Keith Griffin received corporal punishment on 52 occasions. Lucius Jackson, a fifth grade student, received corporal punishment on 44 occasions, three of which occurred during the morning of December 6, 1979. In each of his 44 paddling, Lucius received the maximum of 5 strokes. Fourth grade student Mark Nunnally received corporal punishment on 41 occasions. David Pender, a fourth grade student, received corporal punishment 58 occasions. Second grade student Cameron Walker received corporal punishment on 38 occasions, with Respondent administering 17 of the paddling. Fourth grade student Elinor Williams received 34 paddling. Kindergarten student Leonard Williams received 31 paddling, three of which occurred within one and one-half hours on the morning of September 18, 1979. (Petitioner's Exhibit 2)
During the 1980-1981 school year, Greg Aronson received another 8 paddling, but again his parents were never notified. Lucius Jackson was corporally punished on 55 occasions. Lucius received 4 paddling on February 11, 1981, totaling 20 strokes. Fourth grade student Rufus Mitchell was administered corporal punishment on 25 occasions, two of which were eight minutes apart on October 15, 1980. Rufus received the maximum of 5 strokes during each of these paddling. Fourth grade student Lendrick McGrady was paddled 30 times. Sixth grade student Mark Oats received corporal punishment on 30 occasions. Sixth grade student Kenneth Studstill received corporal punishment on 28 occasions. Sixth grade student Hurie Whitfield received corporal punishment on 26 occasions. (Petitioner's Exhibit 2)
Although Respondent admitted that corporal punishment was ineffective for Lucius Jackson, he was paddled 44 times during the 1979-1980 school year, 55 times during the 1980-1981 school year. Respondent witnessed each of the 4 paddling which Lucius received on May 8, 1981, near the end of that school year.
Although student William Dinkins was administered corporal punishment in 1979-1980, 1980-1981, 1981-1982 school years, his mother was never notified of the punishment, contrary to Administrative Directive D-5.35(9) of the Palm Beach County School Board.
Respondent used excessive and unreasonable force on numerous occasions when she personally administered corporal punishment to elementary school students at West Riviera. Many times, she interrupted paddling which were being administered by teacher. She would take the paddle from the teacher and
administer the punishment herself, because the teacher, in her view, was not striking the child hard enough. On one occasion, Respondent interrupted teacher Vickie Culton and took over the paddling because Ms. Culton was not hitting the child hard enough. When the child pulled away, Respondent followed him around the room, striking him repeatedly. The child received more than the maximum 5 strokes allowable under school board policy. In paddling another kindergarten child named Theron, Respondent pushed his head against a wall, causing him to scream and cry to such an extent that teachers stuck their heads into the hall to see what was happening. On another occasion, Respondent took Theron into a bathroom and paddled him while his classmates and teacher listened in the adjacent classroom. Respondent had just paddled Theron in her office and brought him back to the classroom. Since he continued to scream and cry, she administered the second paddling in the bathroom.
Respondent interrupted Ms. Culton's paddling several times because Respondent felt she was not hitting the child hard enough. Teacher Joyce Wojtowicz had the same experience. On one occasion, she was paddling a third grade student named Carol, while Respondent observed a as a witness. Respondent interrupted the paddling and proceeded to give the girl a severe paddling, administering five strokes. In the meantime, another third grade student, Tammy was standing nearby watching. When Respondent finished paddling Carol, Tammy was shaking violently; terrified, she began to vomit. Ms. Wojtowicz was also shaken by the severity of the paddling. Respondent gave some tissue to Tammy, ordered her to clean up the vomit, and told her that she was not going to avoid paddling by throwing up. After cleaning up the vomit, Respondent paddled Tammy, giving her the maximum 5 strokes.
On another occasion, Ms. Wojtowicz overheard Respondent administering corporal punishment to a child in the school clinic. As Respondent hit the child with the paddle, Ms. Wojtowicz heard Respondent say, "Are you going to piss on my carpet?" As the child was given another stroke, Respondent said, "Are you going to pee on my floor?" As Ms. Wojtowicz walked out of the bathroom, she saw that Respondent was paddling a small kindergarten child. With each stroke, the child's feet went out from under him.
Another teacher, Leslie Smith, witnessed Respondent paddle a five year old kindergarten boy. Respondent hit the boy very hard on the first stroke causing him to fall on the floor, then struck him two or three times while he was on the floor. Another teacher, Marcie Ann Wolfe, sent a student with an emotional problem to the office for the purpose of having Respondent talk to him. Instead, the student returned with a disciplinary slip indicating that Respondent had paddled him. At that point, Ms. Wolfe resolved that she would no longer send students to the office for discipline.
Teacher Lynne McDowell witnessed Respondent administer corporal punishment to third grade student Craig Griffin. Craig had never been paddled at school before, and he resisted Ms. McDowell's attempt to paddle him in the office. Respondent intervened, took the paddle from Ms. McDowell, and administered the paddling to Craig, striking him wherever the blows fell -- on his legs and hands. Ms. McDowell observed Respondent administer a severe paddling to another student, Shawn, with the strokes landing so hard that it "rang my ears." If a child moved or fidgeted while Respondent was paddling them, she would start over.
Third grade teacher Marjorie Russo observed Respondent paddle a kindergarten or first grade boy so hard that he came up off the floor. The little boy managed to get away from Respondent and tried to go under her desk.
Respondent kept hitting him while he was on the floor. In Ms. Russo's view, Respondent hit the child "ridiculously hard" for a boy that size.
Kindergarten teacher Mary Rudin witnessed Respondent administer corporal punishment to kindergarten student James J. Martin in her class and in the presence of other students. Ms. Rudin had asked James to make some circles on a piece of paper, but he refused. So, Ms. Rudin asked Respondent to come to her class in an effort to get James to cooperate. Respondent then asked James to perform the task; again he refused. At that point, Respondent administered five strokes to James. She sat him down and again requested that he perform the task. Once again he refused, and once again, she stood him up and gave him five more strokes. She then made a third request for him to perform the task; he responded, "I'll do it if you get away from me." This angered Respondent. She picked him up again and paddled him a third time. After the third paddling, James performed the task. He never returned to his class after that day because he was withdrawn from school by his parents. His father, James Martin, a teacher at Suncoast High School removed James because of the severity of the paddling. Photographs taken two days after the paddling show pronounced red marks from the to of his buttocks half way down his legs to hi knees. When Mr. Martin and his wife first observed the marks, they called their doctor, who agreed to see them that evening. The doctor was shocked by what he saw, and advised that he would have to report the case as an incident of child abuse. He recommended that Mr. Martin consult an attorney. Mr. Martin spoke to Respondent the following day. She apologized, explaining that she "lost her cool." Mr. Martin went to James' classroom to get his belongings; however, James would not go inside. He remained outside in the hallway, visibly shaken.
In addition to Mr. Martin, Barbara Wright and Betty Deurloo complained to the school about their children being subjected to excessive punishment.
Like Mr. Martin, Ms. Wright and Ms. Deurloo removed their children from West Riviera.
In Respondent's view, if a student constantly wet his pants, it was an offense warranting corporal punishment. Although Respondent testified that the only "offense" that did not justify corporal punishment was when a child refused to do his or her lesson, the testimony of Ms. Rudin and Mr. Martin indicates that Respondent did not follow her own guideline.
On numerous occasions, Respondent used profanity and made inappropriate, improper, and unprofessional remarks to students at West Riviera. After paddling a student named Lawrence in her office on April 14, 1982, Respondent told Lawrence to sit down. She pointed to a heater cord and threatened to tie him up with the heater cord if he didn't sit still.
Respondent told Leslie Smith's kindergarten class that if they didn't shut up she would "kick their butts through the ceiling and kill them all." Respondent referred to a female student in Ms. Wojtowicz's class named Carolyn as a "thug." Respondent told Janet Zendel's first grade students who were line up to go to the bathroom, "If you've got to piss, piss, but there's not going to be no line." Respondent asked one of Mary Rudin's kindergarten students, "What are you looking at me for? Do I have piss all over my face?" She used a loud and sarcastic tone of voice. On another occasion when a child apparently urinated in a stairwell, Respondent announced over the public address system at the school, in a loud, angry voice, "Someone peed in my stairwell. When I find out who it is, I am going to beat you bloody, bloody, bloody." Respondent repeated this several times, reiterating that when she found out who the offender was, she would beat them "bloody, bloody, bloody."
Respondent also used profanity in addressing members of the faculty and staff at West Riviera. She often told faculty members, "Get your shit together," and "I want it so quiet that I can hear a rat piss on cotton." Respondent commented to Jill Proce that she wanted Ms. Proce to take her paycheck and "buy some damn pants." During the first faculty meeting of the 1981-1982 school year, Respondent discussed the possibility of angry parents using profanity toward teachers. Respondent made a remark to the effect that teachers might even be called "mother fuckers." Respondent then defined the term mother fucker, and asked a faculty member, "How do you know I didn't fuck my mother?" Teacher Roma Smith heard Respondent use profane words such as fuck, shit, piss and mother fucker, in faculty meetings at West Riviera. After accusing teacher Mary Rudin of being insubordinate for not setting up tables in the hallway for registration, Respondent told Ms. Rudin, "do you see that doorway there? Don't let it hit you on the ass on your way out, if you don't like it here at West Riviera." At a preschool meeting before the commencement of the 1975-1976 school year Respondent presided over a faculty meeting wearing a T-shirt with a picture of excrement on it and the caption, "Get your shit together."
Respondent used improper, inappropriate and unprofessional language in addressing faculty members at West Riviera. AT the end of Jill Proce's first day as a teacher at West Riviera, Respondent called Ms. Proce into her office, pulled her (Respondent's) pants up tight between her legs and told Ms. Proce, "This is the way you look with the lips of your vagina hanging out." Respondent asked Ms. Proce what she was trying to do to the fourth grade boys, if she was trying to give them some ideas. Respondent then proceeded to tell Ms. Proce that if Respondent was a parent and she walked into Ms. Proce's classroom, she would think that her child was being taught by a prostitute. Ms. Proce's pants were not too tight, and she was dressed appropriately for an elementary school teacher.
At the beginning of each year, Respondent issued handbooks to her teachers, with instructions that they had a paddle and respondent expected them to keep law and order. If they did not keep law and order, Respondent told them they could be "blackballed" in the county. After Respondent walked in Ms. McDowell's classroom one day and found the students noisy and disorganized, she told Ms. McDowell in a conference that Respondent had friends in high places; that if she did not shape up, she would have her blackballed in Palm Beach County and she would never teach there again. After buying new clothes in an effort to meet Respondent's criticisms regarding her attire, Ms. Proce approached Respondent one day and asked her if the clothes she was wearing were suitable. Respondent answered by saying that Ms. Proce wasn't there to suit her, she was there to suit her job, and if she didn't like it she could be blackballed of Palm Beach County. On another occasion, Respondent yelled at teacher Joyce Washington in front of Ms. Washington's class, accusing her of losing a student's medical form. Ms. Washington had not lost the student's medical form. Respondent told her if she could not get her act together, that she was going to lose her job, which she spelled out "J...O...B."
During the 1981-1982 school year, primary resource teacher Patsy McClain received a telephone call from Respondent, who at the time was admitted to the Palm Beach Gardens Hospital. Respondent asked Ms. McClain to bring two students to the hospital for the purpose of braiding Respondent's hair. After getting the Assistant Principal's permission, Ms. McClain selected two girls, Elinor Williams and Jamilia Dailey. After getting permission from their parents, she drove them to Palm Beach Gardens Hospital. The girls were taken
out of school in mid-morning and were gone approximately two hours. AT the hospital, they braided Respondent's hair.
In November 1980, Respondent approached teacher Joyce Washington during an open house at West Riviera and instructed Ms. Washington to change student Joshua Logan's grades to all "S's." Ms. Washington had previously prepared her report cards, and had issued several "U's," indicating unsatisfactory, to Joshua. Respondent told Ms. Washington to change his grades to "S's" and to give Joshua all "S's," indicating satisfactory, on his report card for the remainder of the year. The reason given was that she did not want any more hassles from the child's parents. Although in Ms. Washington's opinion Joshua's work did not warrant all "S's," she nevertheless gave the child "S's" for the remainder of the school year. When the other students in Ms. Washington's class learned of Joshua's new grades, their grades started going down.
Many teachers were frightened by Respondent and taught in an oppressive atmosphere of tension and intimidation. Jill Proce had begun to look for other employment in another county. Music could not be taught except at Christmas. Music books and instruments were removed from the classrooms. So were record players. Crayons were removed out of fear that students would get crayon marks on the floors. Joyce Washington intended to seek a transfer, but volunteered to leave West Riviera when an opening occurred elsewhere. Assistant Principal Levarity tried to get a transfer because of Respondent's heaving reliance on corporal punishment.
During the fall of 1979, Fran Gill, North Area Superintendent for the Palm Beach County School District, spoke to Respondent about administration of corporal punishment at West Riviera. Ms. Gill had been advised that teachers were administering corporal punishment to student sin the classroom, in violation of school board policy and administrative directive. During that meeting, Ms. Gill explained to Respondent that she must follow the school board's Administrative Directive D5.35 and gave Respondent a copy. Among other things, this directive required that the Principal or his/her administrative designee must, in ever case, determine the necessity for corporal punishment and, in ever case, designate the time, place and member of the instructional staff who will administer the punishment. In addition, the directive provided that no teacher may be required to administer corporal punishment.
Notwithstanding Ms. Gill's directive to comply with Administrative Directive D5.35, Respondent continued to require teachers to administer corporal punishment to students in the classroom in order to maintain law and order at West Riviera. When Ms. Gill again became aware in May 1980 of Respondent's noncompliance with the directive, she called her and asked whether students were still being paddled in the classroom. Respondent indicated that she was still permitting students to be paddled in the classroom by teachers. This conversation occurred on May 6, 1980. ON May 8, 1980, Ms. Gill confirmed their conversation in a written memorandum to Respondent, emphasizing her prior verbal instructions.
In March of 1982, Ms. Gill again met with Respondent regarding concerns expressed to her by parents. Ms. Gill found that the directive was not being followed, and that the only change which had been made was that children were being brought to the office to be paddled. The teachers were still exercising their discretion as to whether or not corporal punishment would be administered, and parents were not being contacted beforehand. Ms. Gill expressed her concern to Respondent regarding her failure to follow the school
board's administrative directive. Respondent sent a letter to Ms. Gill, date March 12, 1982, in response to Ms. Gill's concerns. In her letter, Respondent states, "I held a faculty meeting this morning and explained to teachers that we will no longer paddle students for every misbehavior."
As a result of Respondent's failure to follow her specific instructions concerning adherence to school board policy and administrative directives relating to administration of corporal punishment, Ms. Gill prepared a list of fourteen specific questions for Respondent to answer regarding corporal punishment at West Riviera. Respondent received the written questions on March 18, 1982, and furnished her written responses on March 31, 1982. Respondent provided false answers to these questions. In response to question one, Respondent falsely stated that in each instance of inappropriate behavior the teacher brought the student to the office and conferred with the Principal or Assistant Principal prior to utilizing corporal punishment. In response to question three, Respondent falsely indicated that teachers were not required to paddle students. In response to question six, Respondent falsely indicated that whenever a student received corporal punishment for the first or second time, a copy of the student discipline referral slip was sent to their parents. In response to question seven, Respondent indicated that the alternatives to corporal punishment were in-house suspension or suspension from school, when in fact the alternatives utilized at West Riviera included depriving the student of attending physical education or utilizing the library. In response to question eleven, Respondent failed to indicate that alternative types of punishment included depriving the student of physical education or use of the library. In response to question thirteen concerning changes made in the administration of corporal punishment within the past three years, Respondent replied that she had complied with Ms. Gill's instructions on May 6, 1980, to refrain from allowing teachers to paddle students in their classroom. In fact, Respondent continued to permit teachers to determine whether corporal punishment was appropriate and to administer it at their discretion.
Although Respondent testified that failing to do one's school work did not warrant corporal punishment, Respondent administered three consecutive paddling to kindergarten student J.J. Martin for failing to do a handwriting lesson. Although Respondent changed her policy in March, 1982 by restricting the use of corporal punishment to cases of fighting or foul language, she later administered corporal punishment to one of Ms. Wolfe's students for misbehaving in her class. Ms. Wolfe had specifically requested that Respondent talk to the student, not paddle him.
Respondent admits that she did not follow Administrative Directive D5.35 prior to May 7, 1980. Yet Fran Gill had specifically directed her to comply with that directive and school board policy concerning corporal punishment in the Fall of 1979.
Respondent failed to prepare guidelines for administering corporal punishment at West Riviera which identified the types of punishable offenses, the conditions under which the punishment would be administered and the specific personnel on the school staff authorized to administer the punishment, contrary to Section 232.27(1), Florida Statutes.
Respondent ridiculed and humiliated children by paddling them in their classrooms in the presence of their classmates on several occasions, contrary to Administrative Directive D5.35(4). She used profane and abusive language with them.
In the professional opinion of Kenneth Schrimsher, Assistant Superintendent for Personnel Relations with the Palm Beach School Board, the number of incidents of corporal punishment administered at West Riviera during the 1979-1980 school year was excessive. In his view, Respondent's effectiveness as an employee of the school board has been seriously reduced. His opinion is credible and accepted as persuasive.
Despite the atmosphere of fear and intimidation that prevailed at West Riviera during Respondent's tenure, student achievement on standardized tests improved dramatically. When she arrived at West Riviera, it was among the five worst schools in the county, rated by test scores; when she left in 1982, it was among the top five, out of a total of more than 50 elementary schools.
Her methods also caused West Riviera to become one of the cleanest and best maintained elementary schools in the county.
The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this proceeding. Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Section 231.28, Florida Statutes, provides that the Education Practices Commission shall have authority to suspend, revoke or otherwise discipline an individual's teaching certificate provided it can be shown that such a person:
(c) has been guilty of gross immorality or an act involving moral turpitude;
(f) upon investigation, has been found guilty of personnel conduct which seriously reduces his effectiveness as an employee of the school board;
(h) has otherwise violated the provisions of law or rules of the State Board of Education, the penalty for which is revocation of the teaching certificate.
RULE 6B-1.06(2), F.A.C., provides that violation of any of the Principles of Professional conduct for the Education Profession in Florida shall subject the individual to revocation or suspension of the individual's teaching certificate. Among other things, the principles set forth in this rule require that certificate holders:
(3)(a) Shall make reasonable effort to protect the student from conditions harmful to learning or to health and safety.
(e) Shall not intentionally expose a student to unnecessary embarrassment or disparagement.
(h) Shall not exploit a professional relationship with a student for personal gain or advantage.
(4)(b) Shall not intentionally distort or misrepresent facts concerning an educational matter in direct or indirect public expression.
(5)(a) Shall maintain honesty in all
professional dealings.
Shall not intentionally make false or malicious statements about a colleague.
Shall not use coercive means or promise special treatment to influence professional activities.
Section 231.085 defines, generally, the duties of principals. Section 232.27(1) provides minimum criteria for the administration of corporal punishment in the various school districts. However, revocation of a teachers' certificate is not provided as a penalty for violation of either section.
Hence, their violation cannot, vel non, supply a basis for revocation under Section 231.28, Florida Statutes.
License revocation proceedings, such as this, are penal in nature.
The critical matters in issue "must be shown by evidence which is indubitably as 'substantial' as the consequences." Bowling v. Department of Insurance, 394 So.2d 165, 172 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
Measured by these standards, it is concluded that the Department has established that Respondent, by her complained of conduct, violated Section 231.28(1)(c), (f) and (h), Florida Statutes, and Rule 6B-1.06(3)(a), (e), (h), (4)(b), (5)(a), (d), (e), and (g), Florida Administrative Code.
Penalty. Respondent's violations were serious in nature and occurred, repeatedly, over a lengthy period of time. She was unable, or unwilling, to abide by limits placed on the use of corporal punishment. She resisted the directives of her supervisor and, when questioned, made false statements. She administered an elementary school where students and teachers, alike, operated in an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. In short, she failed to responsibly exercise the authority she held over teachers and students. Her lack of respect for their rights, and sensitivity to their feelings suggests that, by temperament, she is not qualified to serve as a school teacher or administrator.
Her actions were not, however, undertaken maliciously. She has otherwise capably served the Palm Beach County School District for many years. There is no evidence of prior disciplinary infractions or professional misconduct.
Taking these factors into account, revocation of her teaching certificate for a period of five (5) years, with opportunity for reapplication after that period, would be an appropriate penalty. Her forced absence from the school setting for an extended period-may enable her to eventually return as a capable and understanding teacher.
Based on the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED:
That Respondent's teaching certificate be revoked for five (5) years (with opportunity for reapplication) for violation of Section 231.28(1), Florida Statutes, and Rule 6B-1.06, Florida Administrative Code.
DONE and RECOMMENDED this 1st day of May, 1984, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.
R. L. CALEEN, JR. Hearing Officer
Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building
2009 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 488-9675
Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 1st day of May, 1984.
COPIES FURNISHED:
J. David Holder, Esquire
128 Salem Court
Post Office Box 1694 Tallahassee, Florida 32302
William M. Holland, Esquire 605 Clematis Street
Post Office Box 2648
West Palm Beach, Florida 33402-2648
Donald Griesheimer Executive Director
Education Practices Commission
125 Knott Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Ralph D. Turlington, Commissioner of Education
Department of Education The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
=================================================================
AGENCY FINAL ORDER
=================================================================
BEFORE THE EDUCATION PRACTICES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
RALPH D. TURLINGTON, as
Commissioner of Education Petitioner,
vs. CASE NO. 83-1850
WILHELMENA WEBBER,
Respondent.
/
Respondent, Wilhelmena Webber, holds Florida teaching certificate number 066623. Petitioner filed an Administrative Complaint seeking suspension, revocation, or other disciplinary action against the certificate.
Respondent requested a formal hearing and one was held before the Division of Administrative Hearings. A Recommended Order has been forwarded to the Panel pursuant to Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes; it is attached to and made a part of this Order.
An Administrator panel of the Education Practices Commission met on June 15, 1984, in Sarasota, Florida, to take final agency action. The Petitioner was represented by Haldane Taylor, Esquire. The Respondent was not present, but was represented by William M. Holland, Esquire. The panel has reviewed the entire record in the case.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The panel adopts the Findings of Fact of the Recommended Order. Respondent's Exceptions to the Findings are denied.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The panel adopts the Conclusions of Law of the Recommended Order, with the exception of all references to violation of State Board rules. Those rules were not effective until after the incidents. To this extent, Respondent's Exceptions to the Conclusions are granted. The panel additionally concludes that the Respondent is guilty of incompetence. See the discussion of penalty, below.
PENALTY
The panel views the actions of Respondent as most serious and deserving the most serious penalty this Commission can impose.
Respondent's emphasis on corporal punishment has far-reaching effects on the school system. While reactions to corporal punishment are different in different students, its use on an indiscriminate basis is certain to result in its use on the wrong student at the wrong time with resulting adverse lifetime effects, both in and out of the school system. Corporal punishment on the scale imposed by the Respondent is massive child abuse. The use of corporal punishment four times on one student in one hour is a prime example of Respondent's totally inappropriate judgement and her lack of understanding of the ability of corporal punishment to change or impose behavior. Fear of corporal punishment may itself cause students to wet their pants. When pants- wetting is punished corporally, the fear and the reprisal ordered by Respondent create a self-sustaining cycle.
The subject of corporal punishment dominated relations between the Respondent and her teachers. There was little time in discussions between Respondent and the faculty for more proper subjects.
Respondent's threats to "blackball" teachers who did not follow her dictates on corporal punishment created an atmosphere that limited the freedom to teach and created an atmosphere the faculty would want to escape.
Respondent had no understanding of the teaching and learning of her students. The restriction of the curriculum to "basics" was totally inappropriate and prevented the proper development of the students.
The panel noted that concern for the students under her care and concern for the operation of the school system as a whole would lead it to make the same decision made by the local Board--termination of her ability to affect students.
The certificate of Wilhelmena Webber is hereby PERMANENTLY REVOKED. DONE AND ORDERED in Tallahassee, Florida, this 22nd day of June, 1984.
WALTER SICKLES
Presiding Officer
COPIES FURNISHED:
Arthur Wallberg, Esquire Attorney General's Office
Marlene Greenfield, Administrator Professional Practices Services
Judith Brechner, General Counsel
R. L. Caleen, Jr., Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings 2009 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
J. David Holder, Esquire Post Office Box 1694 Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Richard Oftedal General Counsel
Palm Beach County Schools 3323 Belvedere Road
West Palm Beach, Florida 33402
Mr. Thomas J. Mills, Superintendent Palm Beach County Schools
3323 Belvedere Road
West Palm Beach, Florida 33402
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing Final Order in the matter of RDT v. Wilhelmena Webber has been furnished to William M. Holland, Esquire, P.
O. Box 2648, 605 Clemantis Street, West Palm Beach, Florida 33402, by U. S. Mail, this 27th day of June, 1984.
DONALD L. GRIESHEIMER, Clerk
| Issue Date | Proceedings |
|---|---|
| Jun. 28, 1984 | Final Order filed. |
| May 01, 1984 | Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED. |
| Issue Date | Document | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Jun. 27, 1984 | Agency Final Order | |
| May 01, 1984 | Recommended Order | Respondent repeatedly violated rules on corporal punishment, was insubordinate and acts reduced effectiveness. Recommend suspension. |
TOM GALLAGHER, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs HEIDI M. CARTON, 83-001850 (1983)
RICHARD CORCORAN, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs AARON T. HARRIS, 83-001850 (1983)
JIM HORNE, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs SAMUEL K. NEWSOM, 83-001850 (1983)
CHARLIE CRIST, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs ALLAM I. YAZBEK, 83-001850 (1983)
JIM HORNE, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs MICHAEL T. PETERSON, 83-001850 (1983)
