STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 76-920

)

PINKIE RUTH PRICE, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Hearings were pursuant to notice in the above-styled cause on September 2, and September 3, 1976 in the offices of the Orange County School Board, Orlando, Florida before Stephen F. Dean, assigned Hearing Officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings. The issue involved in this cause was whether Pinkie Price should be removed from continuing contract with the School Board because of poor performance as a teacher in the Early Childhood Learning Program.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: James W. Markel, Esquire

Tom Jarrell, Esquire Post Office Box 1991 Orlando, Florida 32802

For Respondent: Howard W. Cooper, Esquire

Post Office Box 1064

Winter Garden, Florida 32787 FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Pinkie Price is a teacher in the Early Childhood Learning Program with a continuing contract. Her duties involve the teaching of the pre-school age children of migrant laborers in Orange County.

   
   

2. The Early Childhood Learning Program is designed to expose the pre- school age children of migrant workers to certain educational subjects in order to prepare them for entry into the K through 12 program within the public schools. Among the subjects taught in the Early Childhood Learning Program are mathematics, social studies, languages skills, and manual skills. The Early Childhood Learning program is not a day-care program, but a concentrated educational program designed to overcome the educational deficits of children, who because of their parent's transient work are not exposed to proper pre- school learning experiences.

   
   

3. Pinkie Price has twenty (20) years experience in elementary and pre- school education and has received certification in both areas. She has taught in the Early Childhood Learning Program for three (3) school years.

4. The Early Childhood Learning Program has incorporated many new approaches to teaching pre-school children which include many innovative teaching methods using various audio visual teaching aids. The classrooms used in the program are large mobile home type structures which are equipped with various teaching aids. Pinkie Price's classroom is located close to a migrant camp on property leased by the Orange County School Board and adjacent to a private day-care center.

   
   

5. The alleged reasons for Pinkie Price's poor performance rating are that she has failed to understand the goals of the Early Childhood Learning Program, failed to understand the teaching methodology used, and failed to properly plan and implement the education program developed by state and local authorities.

   
   

6. Pinkie Price did plan her teaching activities, and she did attempt to teach or expose the children to the material. The testimony would indicate that she had a problem adapting to the teaching methods which Joan Zeigler desired to be used in the Early Childhood Learning Program. This resulted in observation reports which reflected adversely on Price's ability to teach the material and maintain order in the classroom. However, the chain of command under which she worked and to whom she was directly responsible was unclear. Further, it is clear that while Zeigler attempted to modify Price's approach to teaching in the program, that Zeigler never established specific performance objectives for Price to attain. The same comments are applicable to Price's failure to keep proper attendance records. Initially Mrs. Zeigler tried to avoid offending Mrs. Price and to praise her good points and make "suggestions" on Price's bad points. When the situation became critical, Mrs. Price's supervisors began keeping records to support administrative action against her assuming that Mrs. Price was incapable of changing her methods or implementing the program developed by local and state authorities.

   
   

7. Her principal, Mr. Harbalis, was reluctant to discipline her when she was teaching in the elementary education program immediately following integration of faculties in Orange County because of the fear that such an action might have been taken as being racially motivated. Rather than dealing directly with the situation, Mrs. Price was transferred to the Early Childhood Learning Program which was just being implemented. In her first year in the Early Childhood Learning Program, there were few firm guidelines regarding the goals and objectives within the program. During this initial year, Mrs. Price's shortcomings in teaching and administrative procedures were observed but not corrected. Subsequently, as guidelines were developed, concrete performance objectives were not given to Mrs. Price.

   
   

8. Many of the directions which she received from her supervisors were contradictory or confusing. For example, the directions for evaluation of children which she received (Exhibit 15 did not have the hand-written explanation of how the form was to be completed which was contained on forms provided to other instructors within the program. Similarly, the test scores for her children were initially rejected and she was told to retest her children. When her second test results were questioned, Mrs. Zeigler retested the children and obtained almost exactly the same results Mrs. Price had obtained from the children on the first test. In fact, only one student changed more than a letter grade on the Zeigler retest and that student improved from an E to a C. Further, the distribution of test scores from all of the classes for Early Childhood Learning students are such that the scores of Mrs. Price's students cannot impune her ability as a teacher.

9. Likewise, Mrs. Price was improperly held accountable for the lack of participation of the parents of her students, particularly in light of the basic reasons for the Early Childhood Learning Program. She cannot be criticized for failing to use the recreational and mimeograph facilities of a private day-care center located adjacent to her classroom, or the lack of proper maintenance support provided by the Orange County School System to her classroom and adjacent play area.

   
   

10. The record in this case clearly indicates a calculated attempt to document Mrs. Price's shortcomings, which in this instance resulted in negative rather than positive supervision and leadership. No evidence was presented that Mrs. Price was ever required to present lesson plans to her supervisor for approval or that Mrs. Price was required to submit corrected attendance rosters, or that Mrs. Price was required to present a particular block of lessons to her supervisor for a critique and approval of her use of teaching aids, coverage of the material, and correct teaching methods.

    
    

11. The failure of Mrs. Price to meet the criteria for teaching in the Early Childhood Learning Program in the manner her supervisors desired was not only the result of Mrs. Price's approach to the program but also the result of the nature of the supervision which she received.

    
    

12. Considering the innovative nature of the Early Childhood Learning Program and the teaching methods utilized within the program, Mrs. Price's adherence to the methods of instruction to which she had become use to over twenty years experience in teaching cannot be too harshly criticized in light of the nature of the supervision which she received. Mrs. Price is a poised and articulate black woman, fifty-nine years of age, who has spent twenty years in elementary and pre-school education, most of which as a tenured teacher. With firm, direct, and consistent supervision, Mrs. Price is capable of making a positive contribution to the Early Childhood Learning Program.

    
    

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

    
    

13. Section 231.36(4), Florida Statutes, provides that a teacher under continuing contract may be dismissed or returned to annual contract status at the discretion of the school board upon a written recommendation submitted before April 1 of any school year, giving good and sufficient reasons there for.

    
    

14. The "good and sufficient reasons" asserted for removing Pinkie Price from continuing contract were poor performance evaluations as a teacher in the Early Childhood Learning Program. While the evidence indicates that Pinkie Price did not meet in some respects the performance criteria established by the program, the nature and extent of these criteria at best was poorly communicated to her. Pinkie Price cannot be penalized for failing to achieve goals and objectives which have not been clearly defined and communicated to her.

    
    

15. In the instant case the goals and objectives of the program were well defined; however, the specific goals and objectives for Pinkie Price, that is, to prepare attendance records properly, to maintain control, and master the teaching methods used in the program were not defined or in many instances even communicated to her. The statement of such objectives would in most instances be unnecessary, but in this case the teacher was dealing with a new program which was highly innovative.

    
    

16. Certainly, gross inefficiency of performance is a good and sufficient reason for removing a person from continuing contract; however, in this

    instance, the facts do not support a finding that Pinkie Price was so inefficient that cause existed for removal from continuing contract because the efficiency reports rendered on Mrs. Price were based upon observations and conclusions which the facts do not substantiate, as pointed out above.

    
    

17. If the facts do not support the findings on the efficiency reports, then the efficiency reports cannot support the action being recommended in this case.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing, the Hearing Officer finds that the deficiencies exhibited as a teacher by Mrs. Price do not constitute good cause for removal from continuing contract in the absence of firm, positive, and consistent supervision designed to bring to Mrs. Price's attention the deficiencies in her teaching methods and the changes which she must make. The Hearing Officer therefore recommends that no action be taken until Mrs. Price has been given at least a full year of positive guidance designed to improve her teaching methods.

DONE and ORDERED this 20th day of January, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida.

STEPHEN F. DEAN, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

(904) 488-9675

COPIES FURNISHED:

James W. Markel, Esquire Tom Jarrell, Esquire Post Office Box 1991 Orlando, Florida 32802

Howard W. Cooper, Esquire Post Office Box 1064

Winter Garden, Florida 32787

Docket for Case No: 76-000920

Orders for Case No: 76-000920