STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
JOHN WINN, )
AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION,1 )
)
Petitioner, )
)
vs. ) Case No. 05-2337PL
)
ACETA M. CARTER, )
)
Respondent. )
________________________________ )
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Notice was provided and on September 27, 2005, and October 10, 2005, a formal hearing was held in this case. Authority for conducting the hearing is set forth in Sections
120.569 and 120.57(1), Florida Statutes (2005). The hearing was conducted by video-teleconferencing between sites in Tallahassee, Florida, and Jacksonville, Florida. The hearing was conducted by Charles C. Adams, Administrative Law Judge.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner: Ron Weaver, Esquire
Post Office Box 5675 Douglasville, Georgia 30154-0012
For Respondent: Reginald Luster, Esquire
255 Liberty Street, Suite A Jacksonville, Florida 32202
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE
Should discipline be imposed on Respondent's Florida Educator's Certificate No. 766501, based upon the allegations
in the Administrative Complaint, Case No. 023-0064-R, before the State of Florida, Education Practices Commission?
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
On May 24, 2004, Jim Horne, then Commissioner of Education, executed the Administrative Complaint. In reply, Respondent selected an option to negotiate the dispute, followed by a request for formal hearing if the case did not settle. Settlement was not achieved. Therefore, underlying allegations in the Administrative Complaint were left to be resolved through a formal hearing in accordance with Sections 120.57(1) and 1012.796(6), Florida Statutes (2005).
On June 29, 2005, the case was received by the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) in the person of Robert S. Cohen, Chief Judge. In turn the case was assigned as Case No. 05-2337PL, with the undersigned serving as Administrative Law Judge to conduct proceedings necessary to resolve the dispute.
After two continuances the hearing commenced on September 27, 2005, and was concluded on October 10, 2005.
The material allegations that support the Administrative Complaint state:
During the 2001-2002 school year the Respondent falsified documents that she was required to produce in connection with her professional activities, in that she plagiarized the work of a fellow educator on her Teacher Induction Program portfolio.
For this alleged conduct Respondent is accused of violating various statutory and rules provisions which will be discussed in the Conclusions of Law.
At hearing Petitioner presented the testimony of Monica Ruth McAleer, Karen Lynette Patterson, Ursyln Vanessa Austin, and James Young. Petitioner's Exhibits numbered 1 through 11 were admitted. Respondent presented Sharletta Stephens as her witness. Respondent's Exhibits numbered 1 through 4 were admitted.
When the hearing commenced counsel for the parties stipulated to the facts found in paragraph 1 to the Administrative Complaint.
A hearing transcript was prepared. The last installment of that hearing transcript was filed October 24, 2005.
Petitioner filed a Proposed Recommended Order which has been considered in preparing the Recommended Order.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Stipulated Facts
Respondent holds Florida Educator's Certificate
No. 766501, covering the area of Elementary Education, which is (was) valid through June 30, 2003.
Additional Facts
Respondent was an employee of the Duval County School District (the District) in the 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 school
years. She was assigned to Pine Estates Elementary School No.
250 (Pine Estates). Her principal was James Young. The basis for her employment was as an annual contract teacher, in which the principal would determine at the end of each school year whether to retain the Respondent as a member of the faculty.
As a beginning teacher, Respondent was required to undergo a professional orientation program referred to as a Professional Education Competence Program, also referred to as the Teacher Induction Program (TIP). The manual describing the TIP details referred to the length of the program and Respondent's obligation to complete the program where it stated:
All program participants must complete the Induction Program within one year from date of hire.
Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 2. The manual was provided to participants in the TIP. The start date for Respondent associated with her commencement of the TIP was August 9, 2000.
The TIP required certain documentation for program completion. Among the requirements for documentation was the need for Respondent to "create a portfolio in which evidence of demonstration of mastery of the competencies are included as required for program completion." Petitioner's Exhibit
numbered 2. Reference to competencies concerns 16 measurements of the teacher's abilities. They are in turn:
Write and speak in a logical and understandable style, using appropriate grammar and sentence structure, and demonstrate a command of standard English, enunciation, clarity of oral directions, and pace and precision in speaking.
Read, comprehend, and interpret professional and other written material.
Compute, think logically, and solve problems.
Recognize signs of students' difficulty with the reading and computation process and apply appropriate measures to improve students' reading and computation performance.
Recognize patterns of physical, social, emotional, and intellectual development in students, including exceptional students in the regular classroom.
Recognize and demonstrate awareness of the educational needs of students who have limited proficiency in English and employ appropriate teaching strategies.
Use and integrate appropriate technology in teaching and learning processes and in managing, evaluating, and improving instruction.
Use assessment and other diagnostic strategies to assist the continuous development and acquisition of knowledge and understanding of the learner.
Use teaching and learning strategies that include consideration of each student's learning styles, needs and background.
Demonstrate the ability to maintain a positive collaborative relationship with students' families to increase achievement.
Recognize signs of tendency towards violence and severe emotional distress in students and apply techniques of crisis intervention.
Recognize signs of alcohol and drug abuse in students and know how to appropriately work with such students and seek assistance designed to prevent future abuse.
Recognize the physical and behavioral indicators of child abuse and neglect and know rights and responsibilities regarding reporting.
Demonstrate the ability to maintain a positive environment in the classroom while achieving order and discipline.
Demonstrate the ability to grade student performance effectively.
Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the value of, and strategies for, promoting parental involvement in education.
The 16 competencies were broken down into subcategories (indicators) for each competency. In preparing the necessary portfolio to demonstrate competencies for the TIP, these directions were given to Respondent and other beginning teachers:
minimum of two (2) indicators must be marked for each competency.
All documentation must be developed by the participant during participation in the TIP.
Initial and date the demonstration of each completed indicator by principals/designee.
Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 2. Under Special Notes by way of additional instructions to Respondent and other teachers participating in the TIP, it was stated:
Principals may require more than the minimum indicators. Verify selected indicators reflect the intent and language of the competency. Exhibits alone do not indicate mastery of competencies. [Emphasis supplied].
Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 2.
Upon the expiration of the period for completing the TIP, in association with the portfolio as part of the overall Professional Development Plan for Respondent and other beginning teachers, a form would be executed explaining the success or lack of success by Respondent and her contemporaries in caring out the expectations within the TIP. In particular this related to the portfolio where the form set out:
TEACHER INDUCTION PROGRAM: OFFICIAL STATEMENT OF COMPLETION
ALL COMPETENCIES LISTED COMPETENCIES LISTED
ABOVE HAVE BEEN BELOW HAVE NOT BEEN
SATISFACTORILY SATISFACTORILY
DEMONSTRATED. DEMONSTRATED
_____________________ Number(s)
______________________ _____________________
Principal/s Signature Principal's Signature
______________________ _____________________
Date Date
I have reviewed all Portfolio Documents, Competency Exhibits and completed Professional Development Plan regarding
_______________________, a TIP participant in the Duval County School District, and am providing this form as verification that he/she ______HAS _______ HAS NOT successfully demonstrated all requirements for completion of the Florida TIP including pre/post-planning activities.
_____________________________________________________________ Principal/Date School Name/Number
Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 2. The Professional Development Plan as part of the TIP is also referred to as an Action Plan.
On September 15, 2000, Principal Young, gave Respondent a memorandum referring to her obligation under the TIP, to include involvement with the preparation of the portfolio. In pertinent part the memorandum stated:
New hires are entered into the program (TIP) as a category 1 participant until the receipt of the required documentation (professional certificate, portfolio, etc.) Unless otherwise notified your responsible to complete the entire program. TIP participants have 180 days from the date of hire to complete the TIP program.
Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 4.
According to Monica McAleer, who was the Coordinator of Professional Development for the District during Respondent's employment, the TIP is a support program for beginning teachers which provides workshops, a cadre from the
District, and mentors within the respective schools to assist the new teacher in demonstrating the necessary competence to obtain a Professional Teaching Certificate.
As Ms. McAleer explained, in the event that a participant did not conclude the TIP within the normal time line, the principal in the school could request that the teacher be carried over in his or her employment and additional time be provided for the participant to finish the program.
The other component to demonstrating professional competence to move from the status of a Temporary Certificate to that of a Professional Teaching Certificate, would be observations by evaluators of performance by the beginning teacher in the classroom setting.
As Ms. McAleer established, the preparation of the portfolio is the responsibility of the participant. It must be the participant's work, not that of someone else. For example, in a newsletter addressed to parents of his or her student, created by the teacher preparing the portfolio, could be included as part of the portfolio to respond to competency one. This newsletter should not be that of another teacher, directed to parents of students not taught by the teacher who submitted the portfolio. As Ms. McAleer explained, the inclusion within the portfolio of material not developed by
the teacher preparing the portfolio, would be contrary to the District policy requiring the preparation of the portfolio as part of the TIP.
After assignment to her school, an initial orientation for Respondent and other teachers was provided by a member of the cadre from the District in one of several sessions within the system. The cadre member responsible for Respondent's orientation was Karen Lynette Patterson. The cadre works with the beginning teachers providing needed resources. The cadre conducts workshops on topics such as classroom management, instructional organization, instruction delivery, and so forth. The cadre observes the teacher in the classroom setting. The cadre would talk with the teacher about things necessary to include within the portfolio.
As Ms. McAleer described, the principal prepares a Professional Development Plan for the new teacher and arranges for an in-school mentor to assist the beginning teacher. The professional development facilitator or mentor within the school works with the new teachers and meets frequently with the new teacher. Mr. Young served in that capacity for Respondent. The principal determines whether the TIP is completed timely and reviews the documents in the portfolio to determine their adequacy. In this instance Mr. Young was both the mentor and principal for Respondent.
Ordinarily, once the period for completing the TIP has expired, the principal executes the forms that have been described, indicating whether the new teacher has or has not met all requirements for completing the TIP, again according to Ms. McAleer.
Ms. Patterson in her position as a cadre member from the District worked at the school level to promote the TIP. She worked immediately with professional development facilitators, the mentors assigned to the new teachers. Her job also involved direct observation of the new teachers.
Ms. Patterson's first meeting with the Respondent occurred at the August 2000 orientation provided to Respondent and other new teachers participating in the TIP.
Ms. Patterson emphasized the expectation within the TIP manual calling for the participants to develop their own documentation in relations to their portfolios. During the August 20000 orientation Respondent was told that the documents provided in the portfolio must be developed by Respondent.
On September 6, 2000, Ms. Patterson returned to Pine Estates and met with the new teachers again on the subject of the TIP. This was followed by a November 6, 2000, meeting with Respondent to discuss the opportunities for appeal, if Respondent felt that circumstances within the TIP were not in
her favor. At that time the requirements for materials to be placed in the portfolio were also discussed.
Respondent did not complete the TIP within the school year 2000-2001, and Ms. McAleer at the instigation of Mr. Young, was requested to give an extension for Respondent to complete the TIP. The reason for the request was that Respondent had gone on Family Medical Leave at the end of that school year, which affected her completion of the program.
After Respondent returned from her Family Medical Leave in August 2001, Ms. Patterson had a further opportunity to explain the requirements for the portfolio to Respondent. Respondent had been given 45 extra days to conclude the portfolio upon return from the leave. Respondent requested Ms. Patterson to get a copy of Respondent's previous incomplete portfolio and Ms. Patterson accommodated her in that respect. Again Ms. Patterson made certain that Respondent understood that the work to be placed in the portfolio that was being submitted in the future had to be developed by Respondent alone.
In August 2001, Ms. Patterson spoke with Mr. Young to discuss his interest in determining what was necessary for Respondent to complete the TIP.
During workshops Ms. Patterson described the opportunity for beginning teachers to obtain copies of the
portfolios of prior teachers who had completed the TIP, to use as examples when the present participant developed his or her portfolio.
Ms. Patterson worked with Respondent by going through the things that could be put in Respondent's portfolio, with the approval of the principal. However, as Ms. Patterson explained the decision on the sufficiency of the portfolio resides with the principal, not the cadre member. Ms. Patterson told Respondent, according to the nature of the requirements for the competency, what things might be used for her portfolio that were taken from the classroom experience. At the time Ms. Patterson was going over the requirements for the portfolio, Respondent had already chosen certain exhibits to be placed in the portfolio.
In the prior school year, on September 15, 2000, when Mr. Young met Respondent and other beginning teachers he provided them material concerning the TIP. The TIP manual was part of that material. He also showed them examples of what he considered to be an acceptable portfolio.
Mr. Young served as Respondent's mentor in relation to the TIP given the circumstances at his school and the lack of qualified teachers to serve in that capacity. As the mentor for Respondent, Mr. Young met with her and discussed the Professional Development Plan. Petitioner's Exhibit
numbered 5. That plan was ongoing at the end of November 2000, when it was executed by Respondent and Mr. Young as mentor and principal. More specifically, as mentor Mr. Young provided guidance to Respondent concerning the TIP.
Although Respondent did not complete the TIP within the 2000-2001 school year, Mr. Young brought her back as an annual contract teacher for the 2001-2002 school year, having arranged to extend the time for her compliance with the TIP. Her continuation as an annual contract teacher in the school 2001-2002 was contingent upon completing the TIP within the additional 45 days which commenced with that school year.
Mr. Young explained that contingency to the Respondent. This meant that the deadline for completing the TIP was mid October 2001.
Lillie Granger was staffing supervisor at Pine Estates. When the 45 days were up, Ms. Granger reminded
Mr. Young of the expiration of that deadline and the need to bring in a replacement teacher for Respondent. At that time Mr. Young decided against terminating Respondent's annual contract as a teacher at the school.
Over the period in the fall 2001, Mr. Young spoke several times with the Respondent about completing, among other items the portfolio. Mr. Young met six times with Respondent in the fall of 2001, concerning the TIP. One
written note provided to the Respondent by Mr. Young on October 22, 2001 stated: "I need to see your portfolio and plans from 8/7 thru 10/26." In a response that is shown on that same memorandum, Respondent refers to the plans but makes no mention of the portfolio. Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 7.
On November 13, 2001, Mr. Young prepared and provided to Respondent a notice of unsatisfactory evaluation for the school year 2001-2002. In this notification mention is made of the failure to complete the TIP and turn in the portfolio which is part of that program. Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 8. Mr. Young signed the notice and his signature was witnessed. The document indicates that Respondent was not comfortable with signing the document when it was provided to her on the aforementioned date. Notwithstanding the reluctance to sign the document, according to Mr. Young she appeared to read its contents and Mr. Young addressed each item within the document during the meeting.
Respondent's portfolio was not turned in until April 2002. Before that time Mr. Young had executed the form in relation to the TIP which is described as the Official Statement of Completion, in which as of December 4, 2001, it was noted that Respondent had not successfully demonstrated all requirements for completion of the TIP. Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 9.
In assisting Respondent with the preparation of her portfolio, Mr. Young provided Respondent completed portfolios from other teachers to use as a guide. It was Respondent's desire to use a completed portfolio as a guide. She took one completed portfolio and brought it back. She then chose a second one. The latter portfolio which Respondent chose to use was prepared by Ursyln Austin, a teacher who had finished the TIP. Respondent took Ms. Austin's portfolio, but never returned it to the office at Pine Estates where it had been obtained. By way of explanation, Respondent indicated that the portfolio went missing from some boxes when furniture and boxes were moved from one classroom she used to another.
The black binder introduced at hearing and its overall contents, Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 11, constitute the portfolio provided by Respondent to comply with the TIP. In Mr. Young's presence Respondent verified that every page within the binder was her portfolio. At that time Mr. Young told Respondent that he would get back with her concerning the submission. He had not reviewed the document. He suspected that some of the material within the portfolio was not prepared by Respondent. In view of his suspicion, the District office had been contacted before the conversation between Mr. Young and Respondent concerning the portfolio.
The document had been found on his desk after his absence from
his office and he had been told that the Respondent left it there. But until the moment of their conversation there was no confirmation by Respondent that the document was hers.
The material in the portfolio which Mr. Young discovered, that he suspected as being prepared by another teacher was pertaining to Ms. Austin's work on her portfolio, with which Mr. Young was familiar.
In particular Mr. Young noted within the Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 11 under competency one, the apple or peach design relates to material that Mr. Young had seen, that Ms. Austin prepared. That item refers to the "5th grade." At the time Respondent was not a fifth grade teacher. Within the binder pertaining to competency three, were scores for approximately 20 students, and at that time Respondent had a very small class, inferred to be less than 20 students. Handwriting on that page had the appearance of Ms. Austin's handwriting. The spelling program referred to in the worksheet was a program used by fifth grade teachers. Under competency seven, it references the fifth grade; as with the earlier reference this was a grade that Respondent did not teach. The procedure noted in the page under competency seven for getting the attention of the class was one used by
Ms. Austin and her class, as Mr. Young recalls. Further
support for Mr. Young's suspicion came from the student work
behind competency eight, because he believed that it would not be within the ability for the grade level taught by the Respondent as of the September 2000 date reflected on the school work. Under competency ten reference was made to math problems for a department where a teacher taught but a single subject, and was the wrong subject in relation to Respondent's assignment at the time.
Having reviewed Respondent's portfolio, Mr. Young provided Respondent with a written assessment of the various competencies within the portfolio. That critique was dated April 22, 2002. Through it Mr. Young points out those portions of the portfolio that were perceived to come from another classroom teacher. In this communication he does not name the teacher, Ms. Austin. Petitioner's Exhibit numbered
In summary, the critique indicates that only three of the
16 competencies had been satisfied and the remaining parts of the portfolio did not meet requirements. Two days before that time Mr. Young had prepared another Official Statement of Completion on the Respondent's participation in the TIP, in which he indicates that Respondent had not completed the TIP. Respondent's Exhibit numbered 2.
A meeting was convened between Mr. Young and Respondent, together with Leroy Starling, an investigator for the District, and John Williams, the District Director for
Professional Standards. Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 11 was discussed in the meeting. Questions were asked about the pink pages within the document and little markings on contents of the exhibit. Respondent said, "I don't know what those indications, those markings on the pink paper mean." She then inquired if the other participants in the meeting were going to go through the "entire book." Mr. Young replied in the affirmative, at which point, Respondent said "Well I am leaving you to do what you gotta do and I will do what I gotta do. You will hear from my people." She then left the meeting.
Within Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 11, those materials contained in the black binder, is Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 3. The included exhibit, less than the whole, is constituted of those items which Ursyln Vanessa Austin identified as being found within the portfolio she submitted to comply with the TIP, later used by Respondent. Her understanding was that material contained in her portfolio must be in association with what she did in her classroom to demonstrate compliance with the competencies incumbent on her as a beginning teacher. For example, a copy of a parent newsletter in her portfolio had to be her newsletter used for the benefit of parents whose students were in her class.
In sequence, the items Ms. Austin established as coming from her portfolio were: the lead page that identifies the heading competency one, was used by Ms. Austin as part of her portfolio; the markings on the pink page which is competency one, constituted of the letters A-G, were placed by Ms. Austin to designate using those subcategories under competency number one lettered as A and G; the pink color of the paper was recognized by Ms. Austin as her choice of paper color; and the font for the print on the page was her choice.
Continuing, under competency two acknowledged by Respondent as hers, Ms. Austin identified that item as having been prepared and submitted with her portfolio. The letters B and D in the lower right-hand corner of competency two were placed by Ms. Austin in relation to subcategories which she had chosen. Likewise, Ms. Austin identified the pink page competency three as hers. Ms. Austin established that the pink page competency three with the letters A and D placed by her for her choice of subcategories, was in association with material provided with her portfolio. Similarly with competency four placed on pink paper, Ms. Austin had prepared the pink sheet competency four with the letters G and H (subcategories) and submitted that page with her portfolio. The same description holds true concerning competency five with the letters D and F for subcategories found on the pink
page competency five as prepared by Ms. Austin with the initials. For the remaining competencies six through sixteen on pink paper, some with initials, some with not, Ms. Austin identified those materials as being associated with her portfolio.
Other material within the Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 3, which upon Ms. Austin's identification became Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 3, followed the lead sheet for competency one. The welcome to the families for the 2000-2001 school year, was prepared by Ms. Austin and submitted with her portfolio. The logo on that document was used by Ms. Austin and the letter involved her "5th grade class." Behind competency three Ms. Austin identified the spelling for third period as submitted with her portfolio, as a form of a chart related to competency three. The document referred to as Rubric Endangered/Threatened Animals of our region was an item submitted with Ms. Austin's portfolio. Related to competency seven, the document Pine Estates Elementary grade five 2000- 2001 classroom procedures was submitted by Ms. Austin with her portfolio. She recalls the hand signals portrayed on the page as being the basis of communicating with her class. Behind competency eight, a story referred to as "Amazing Grace," dated September 18, 2000, was a paper done by Ms. Austin's student, with a post-it note at the bottom being written by
the Respondent commenting on the paper. The paper and post-it note were submitted by Ms. Austin with her portfolio. Behind competency ten is a newsletter which Ms. Austin sent out on December 14, 2000. It bears an extension number for the telephone which corresponds to the room number which
Ms. Austin had at the time. The topics in the newsletter are familiar to Ms. Austin as being material that was being discussed at the time. The letter was provided with
Ms. Austin's portfolio. Behind competency 12, the letter entitled "Dear DARE Student" and the pamphlet "Pressure to Smoke" were submitted with Ms. Austin's portfolio. At that time students were involved with a DARE program of the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office having to do with prevention of drug abuse. These materials were used in her class. Those items that have been mentioned in this paragraph were acknowledged by Respondent as being submitted with her portfolio.
Before Respondent placed Ms. Austin's portfolio material in Respondent's portfolio, Ms. Austin had a conversation with Respondent about Ms. Austin's portfolio. Respondent told Ms. Austin that she was looking at
Ms. Austin's portfolio as a basis for doing Respondent's portfolio. This conversation took place after Ms. Austin had submitted her portfolio to Mr. Young to gain his approval.
Ms. Austin never gave Respondent permission to take items from her portfolio and put them in Respondent's portfolio.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The DOAH has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter in accordance with Sections 120.569, 120.57(1) and 1012.796(6), Florida Statutes (2005).
Based upon the material allegations in the Administrative Complaint Respondent is charged with statutory and rules violations. They are as follows:
COUNT 1. The allegations of misconduct set forth herein are in violation of Section 1012.795(1)(f) Florida Statutes, in that Respondent, upon investigation, has been found guilty of personal conduct which seriously reduces her effectiveness as an employee of the school board.
COUNT 2. The allegations of misconduct set forth herein are in violation of Section 1012.795(1)(i), Florida Statutes, in that Respondent has violated the Principles of Professional Conduct for the Education Profession prescribed by State Board of Education rules.
COUNT 3. The allegations of misconduct set forth herein are in violation of Rule 6B- 1.006(5)(a), Florida Administrative Code, in that Respondent has intentionally distorted or misrepresented facts concerning an educational matter in direct or indirect public expression.
COUNT 4. The allegations of misconduct set forth herein are in violation of Rule 6B- 1.006(5)(a), Florida Administrative Code, in that Respondent has failed to maintain honesty in all professional dealings.
COUNT 5. The allegations of misconduct set forth herein are in violation of Rule 6B- 1.006(5)(g), Florida Administrative Code, in that Respondent has misrepresented her professional qualifications.
COUNT 6. The allegations of misconduct set forth herein are in violation of Rule 6B- 1.006(5)(h), Florida Administrative Code, in that Respondent has submitted fraudulent information on a document in connection with professional activities.
COUNT 7. The allegations of misconduct set forth herein are in violation of Rule 6B- 1.006(5)(i), Florida Administrative Code, in that Respondent has made a fraudulent statement or failed to disclose a material fact in her or another's application for a professional position.
In the event that any violations are found Petitioner, according to the Administrative Complaint, recommends that the Education Practices Commission impose penalties under authority set forth in Sections 1012.795(a) and 1012.796(7), Florida Statutes.
Petitioner bears the burden of proving the allegations in the Administrative Complaint by clear and convincing evidence. Ferris v. Turlington, 510 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 1987). The definition of clear and convincing evidence is found in the case Slomowitz v. Walker, 429 So. 2d 797 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983).
As part of the TIP Respondent was required to create a portfolio which would evidence mastery of the 16
competencies as required for program completion. Information necessary to demonstrate mastery of the competencies was established by including documentation in the portfolio developed by the Respondent during her participation in the overall TIP. In addition to written instructions to this effect, Respondent was reminded by school officials both within her school and the District, that the necessary documents would come from materials that she developed, not from some other teacher. Respondent disregarded these instructions and to some extent used the work developed by Ms. Austin in supporting Ms. Austin's portfolio to meet the requirement for demonstrating mastery of competencies. Proof of the facts to support these conclusions was by clear and convincing evidence. As a consequence Respondent is subject
to discipline under authority set forth in Counts 2 through 7. She violated Section 1012.795(1)(i), Florida Statutes, by violating the Principles of Professional Conduct for the education profession prescribed by the State Board of Education rules, in particular, in relation to Florida Administrative Code Rules 6B-1.006(4)(b), (5)(a), (5)(g), (5)(h), and (5)(i). For the violations found Respondent is subject to punishment in accordance with Sections 1012.795(1) and 1012.796(6), Florida Statutes.
No violation has been shown of Section 1012.795(1)(f), Florida Statutes, in that no proof was offered as to the consequences of the violations concerning the reduction of effectiveness as an employee of the District.
Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law reached, it is
RECOMMENDED:
That a final order be entered finding the Respondent in violation of those provisions within Counts 2 through 7, to the Administrative Complaint, dismissing Count 1, thereby addressing the prospect that Respondent may later apply for a teaching certificate, her prior certificate having ended June 30, 2003.
DONE AND ENTERED this 22nd day of November, 2005, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.
S
_________________________________
CHARLES C. ADAMS
Administrative Law Judge
Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building
1230 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060
(850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675
Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us
Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 22nd day of November, 2005.
ENDNOTE
1/ This case was originally filed by Jim Horne, as Commissioner of Education. He was replaced by John Winn, as Commissioner of Education. The correction to the style was agreed upon by counsel for the parties and the undersigned.
COPIES FURNISHED:
Ron Weaver, Esquire Post Office Box 5675
Douglasville, Georgia 30154-0012
Reginald Luster, Esquire
255 Liberty Street, Suite A Jacksonville, Florida 32202
Kathleen M. Richards, Executive Director Education Practices Commission Department of Education
325 West Gaines Street, Room 224E Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
Marian Lambeth, Program Specialist Bureau of Educator Standards Department of Education
325 West Gaines Street, Room 224E Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS
All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within
15 days from the date of this recommended order. Any exceptions to this recommended order should be filed with the agency that will issue the final order in this case.
| Issue Date | Document | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Feb. 28, 2006 | Agency Final Order | |
| Nov. 22, 2005 | Recommended Order | Respondent misrepresented herself in an official document pertaining to her teaching. |
ESTHER C. REEDY vs. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, 05-002337PL (2005)
MICHAEL J. PAPPAS vs COUNTY OF BAY, FLORIDA/SCHOOL BOARD, 05-002337PL (2005)
BROWARD COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD vs KATHLEEN FINNERTY, 05-002337PL (2005)
STEVE J. LONGARIELLO vs DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, 05-002337PL (2005)
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES COUNCIL vs. FANNIE B. MARSHALL, 05-002337PL (2005)
