Educator Misconduct State Board Annual Report
Reports of educator misconduct spiked in 2014 as state education officials investigated allegations of data manipulation at eight schools.
Content
2014 Educator Conduct Report
OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
1 | Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction .................................................................................... 3
The Office of Professional Conduct .................................................................. 3
Referral Data .................................................................................... 4
Referrals: 2005 - 2014 ....................................................................................... 4
2014 Referrals:
By Applicants v. Licensed Educators ......................................................... 5
By Non-Application Referral Sources ......................................................... 6
Investigation Data .......................................................................... 7
Investigations: 2005 - 2014 ................................................................................ 7
2014 Investigations:
By Applicants v. Licensed Educators ......................................................... 8
By Referral Source ..................................................................................... 9
By Offense Type ........................................................................................ 9
A Closer Look: Conduct Unbecoming Investigations ....................................... 10
Case Disposition Data .................................................................. 12
Case Dispositions: 2005 - 2014 ....................................................................... 12
2014 Case Dispositions:
By Decision Maker ................................................................................... 13
By Type of Action ..................................................................................... 13
By State Superintendent .......................................................................... 14
By Advising Board Member Committee ................................................... 14
By State Board ......................................................................................... 15
Appeals ......................................................................................... 16
Active Appeals: 2011-2014 .............................................................................. 16
2 | Page
INTRODUCTION
The Office of Professional Conduct
On behalf of the State Board of Education, the Office of Professional Conduct (Office)
administers the ethical standards for the teaching profession pursuant to Revised
Code §3319.31 and §3319.311. The Office investigates allegations of educator
misconduct involving criminal or ethical violations and if warranted initiates disciplinary
action against an educator’s credentials. The Office has jurisdiction to investigate
allegations of misconduct by any person who holds or has applied for a license issued
by the State Board of Education.
Each year, the Office compiles data regarding the allegations it receives, the cases it
investigates, and the disciplinary actions the State Board of Education imposes. Since
2005, the Office has collected and provided this data to the State Board of Education,
members of the teaching profession, and other stakeholders. The data in this report
provides a summary of the Office’s work in 2014, as well as providing historical
information regarding referrals, investigations and disciplinary actions.
3 | Page
REFERRAL DATA
Referrals: 2005-2014
Educators in Ohio are nationally recognized, highly qualified and exemplify the
high ethical standards embodied in the Licensure Code of Professional Conduct
for Ohio Educators. With approximately 300,000 licensed educators1, the Office
receives a relatively small number of educator misconduct referrals each year.
Yearly Referrals
8246
4770
2005
5896
8089
8252
8554
8068
8231
9087
6201
Referrals
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Educator misconduct referrals fluctuate from year to year. After increased
fingerprint background checks and mandated school district reporting laws were
enacted in 2007, the number of yearly referrals rose significantly from 2007 to
2008. Yearly referrals were fairly consistent from 2008 through 2013, with the
referrals only fluctuating from 1.9% to 5.7% per year. In 2014, the Office received
856 more referrals than the previous year. This represents a 10.4% increase in
educator misconduct referrals. This is the biggest yearly increase in referrals
since 2008.
1
Educators include teachers, principals, superintendents, and other persons serving schools (e.g., school nurses,
coaches, substitute teachers, treasurers, etc.).
4 | Page
Percentage Changes in Yearly Referrals
Yearly
Referrals
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Increase/
Decrease
n/a
23.6%
5.2%
32.9%
-1.9%
2.0%
3.7%
-5.7%
2.0%
10.4%
2014 Referrals: By Applicants v. Licensed Educators
The Office receives allegations of educator misconduct from various sources.
Every licensure application that indicates a possible criminal conviction is
reviewed by the Office. In addition, the Office receives referrals from criminal
background checks, children services agencies, school districts, citizens, and
other external agencies. In 2014, the Office received the majority of referrals
through the licensure application process. Out of 9087 referrals received, 7316
referrals were related to applications for licensure.
2013 Referrals
Applicants
7316
81%
81% of referrals involved
individuals submitting an
application for licensure
Licensed
Educators
1771
19%
19% of referrals alleged
misconduct by educators
already holding a license
5 | Page
2014 Referrals: Non-Application Referral Sources
By analyzing the 1771 referrals the Office received involving licensed educators
in 2014, the majority of the referrals were submitted through children services
agencies, the Office’s participation in the rap back program 2, school districts, and
citizens. The Office received 15% of non-application referrals from media
reports, external agencies, NASDTEC 3 reports, internal ODE offices, and
prosecutors. In 2014, the number of internal referrals increased dramatically from
the year before. In 2013, the Office only received 15 internal referrals compared
to 164 internal referrals in 2014. This increase reflects the internal referrals
related to allegations of data manipulation by eight districts.
2014 Non-Application Referrals
By Referral Source
School Districts
400
Rap Back Reports
Citizen Reports
235
Children Services
Media
25
NASDTEC
30
External Agency
350
37
Internal Referrals
Prosecutor Reports
526
0
4
164
100
200
300
400
500
600
2
Pursuant to Ohio Revised Code §3319.316, the Department of Education is required to participate in the retained
applicant fingerprint database program (commonly referred to as “rap back”). The rap back program is implemented by
the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation (BCI&I). BCI&I provides daily notifications to the Office of
any license holder’s recent arrest or conviction. In turn, the Office informs the respective employing school so it can
contact BCI&I for further information and make necessary employment-related decisions.
3
The National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (NASDTEC) maintains a database of
disciplinary actions imposed against educators by other states. When an out-of-state disciplinary action is added to the
NASDTEC database, the educator’s information is cross-referenced to ODE’s educator database to determine if the
educator is licensed in Ohio and whether the Office needs to initiate an investigation.
6 | Page
INVESTIGATIONS
Investigations: 2005-2014
The Office evaluates each referral it receives to determine whether a more indepth investigation is warranted. These evaluations are based upon statutory
provisions, licensure eligibility requirements, past disciplinary decisions imposed
by the State Board, and ethical standards detailed in the Licensure Code of
Professional Conduct for Ohio Educators. With fewer than 1000 referrals
investigated yearly, less than one percent of the approximately 300,000 licensed
educators in Ohio are involved in the investigation process each year.
Yearly Referrals v. Yearly Investigations
8246
4770
786
2005
5896
8089
8252
8554
8068
8231
9087
6201
Received
Investigated
619
2006
655
2007
895
2008
959
2009
931
2010
983
2011
959
2012
711
2013
997
2014
In 2014, the Office opened 997 cases for investigation. The number of
investigations increased this year by 248 cases or 40.2%. This increase is due
to the Office starting its review of data manipulation allegations by eight school
districts and a rise in the number of application referrals and educator
misconduct referrals submitted by school districts.
7 | Page
2014 Investigations: By Applicants v. Licensed Educators
Comparing investigations involving applicants for licensure versus licensed
educators, the majority of cases the Office investigated in 2014 involved licensed
educators. In 2014, the Office investigated 703 licensed educators and 294
applicants for licensure.
2014 Investigations
Applicants
294
29%
Licensed
Educators
703
71%
71% of investigations
involved licensed
educators
29% of investigations
involved applicants
8 | Page
2014 Investigations: By Referral Source
Of the 997 cases investigated by the Office in 2014, school district reports led to
33.4% of the Office’s investigations. Referrals involving applications accounted
for 29.5% of investigations, while rap back referrals resulted in 9.5% of
investigations and internal referrals resulted in 11.0% of investigations. The
remaining 16.6% of investigations originated from citizen reports, media reports,
external agency referrals, NASDTEC reports, and prosecutor reports.
2014 Investigations
By Referral Source
School Districts
Applications
Rap Back Reports
Citizen Reports
Children Services
Media
23
External Agency
NASDTEC
5
Prosecutor Reports
2
Internal Referrals
0
37
63
294
95
333
35
110
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2014 Investigations: By Offense Type
The Office investigates allegations involving criminal convictions, achievement
test violations, contract termination violations, and allegations of conduct
unbecoming to the teaching profession. Conduct unbecoming allegations can
include child abuse and neglect, inappropriate use of school technology,
unprofessional relationships with students, or any other conduct that negatively
reflects on the teaching profession.
9 | Page
In 2014, the Office investigated allegations involving 893 criminal convictions and
1085 conduct unbecoming accusations. 4 Nineteen investigations involved
allegations of early termination of teaching contracts in violation of R.C. 3119.15.
Forty-nine investigations in 2014 involved educators violating testing protocols
and/or assisting students to cheat on assessment tests in violation of R.C.
3319.151.
2014 Investigations
By Offense Type
Conduct Unbecoming
96
Criminal-Drug Offenses
Criminal-Misc. Offenses
39
Criminal-Sex Offenses
Criminal-Theft Offenses
Criminal-Traffic Offenses
Criminal-Violent Offenses
19
Broken Contract
Testing Violations
1085
0
49
289
138
128
203
200
400
600
800
1000
A Closer Look: Conduct Unbecoming Investigations
In 2013, the Office began tracking conduct unbecoming investigations by
category. The 21 categories align with the conduct standards listed in the
Licensure Code of Professional Conduct for Ohio Educators. For example, the
Office tracks the number of case investigations involving child abuse and neglect,
academic fraud, unprofessional relationships with students, misuse of school
resources, inappropriate use of technology, and falsification of licensure
applications. The increased numbers in the conduct unbecoming categories from
2013 to 2014 is directly related to the 40.2% increase in the number of
investigations opened in 2014.
4
When case investigations are evaluated by type of offense involved, some cases had more than one type of
offense/conduct due to multiple convictions or misconduct allegations. Therefore, the total number of offenses for 2014
exceeds the number of case investigations opened for the year.
10 | Page
1200
Conduct Unbecoming Investigations by Category
CONDUCT UNBECOMING CATEGORY
2013
2014
2
24
21
52
15
25
Bullying, Harassment and Intimidation
6
58
Children Services – Emotional Maltreatment
1
3
Children Services – Neglect
2
16
Children Services – Physical Abuse
22
71
Children Services – Sexual Abuse
12
16
Data Scrubbing
3
99
Disclosing Confidential Information
2
17
Failure to Supervise Students
17
54
Falsification of Licensure Application
51
60
9
6
73
218
Inappropriate Comments/Gestures
18
39
Inappropriate Relationship
34
42
License Violation
29
59
20
45
16
33
Other
10
96
Physical Altercation
26
52
389
1085
Academic Fraud
(grade changing; cheating on non-achievement tests)
Accurate Reporting/ Failure to Report
(falsifying records; not reporting child abuse)
Alcohol/Drug Use
(non-criminal misconduct)
Finding for Recovery
(issued by Auditor of State)
Inappropriate Behavior
(misconduct at school that does not fit other categories)
(NASDTEC referrals, fraudulent licenses)
Misuse of School Funds/Resources
(theft of funds, misuse of leave time, co-mingling funds)
Misuse of Technology
(emails, texting, on-line communications)
TOTAL
11 | Page
Case Dispositions
Case Dispositions: 2005-2014
The State Board of Education resolves case investigations pursuant to Ohio
Revised Code 3319.31. The State Board resolves cases by either imposing a
disciplinary action or determining that disciplinary action is not warranted.
Disciplinary decisions are based on statutory mandates, licensure eligibility
requirements, ethical standards in the Licensure Code of Professional Conduct
by Ohio Educators, and past disciplinary decisions by the State Board.
The State Board does not impose disciplinary action if an allegation of
misconduct is untrue, evidence is not sufficient to prove the misconduct, or the
proven conduct is a minor infraction that does not warrant disciplinary action. In
addition, the Office may place a case in an inactive status if an applicant has not
engaged with the Office and provided the information necessary to process an
application. While a case is in an inactive status, the Office does not issue a
license nor initiate disciplinary action.
In 2014, the State Board resolved 676 cases and imposed disciplinary action in
449, or 66.5%, of the cases. This was the second consecutive year that more
than 50% of case investigations resulted in disciplinary action.
Yearly Case Dispositions
No Discipline
Discipline
297 242
389 242
355 242
537 286
554 442
539 426
622 370
420 310
339 385
227 449
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
12 | Page
2014 Case Dispositions: By Decision Maker
The State Board exercises its authority to impose disciplinary action through
direct review of cases and by delegating authority to the State Superintendent of
Public Instruction and the Advising Board Member Committee 5. In 2014, the
State Superintendent, Advising Board Member Committee, and State Board
collectively resolved 676 cases. The State Superintendent resolved 329 cases,
the Advising Board Member Committee resolved 227 cases, and the State Board
resolved 120 cases.
2014 Dispositions
120
18%
227
33%
329
49%
State Superintendent
ABM Committee
SBOE
2014 Case Dispositions: By Type of Action
There are several types of disciplinary actions the State Board can impose to
address educator misconduct. The State Board can issue a letter of
admonishment, the least severe disciplinary action, or can limit, suspend, deny,
or revoke a license, the more severe disciplinary actions. A consent agreement is
a settlement agreement that addresses an educator’s misconduct through
rehabilitative efforts to give an educator the opportunity to remain in the teaching
profession through corrective action.
5
The Advising Board Member Committee consists of an appointed State Board Member and representatives from the
Ohio Department of Education’s senior leadership, the Office of Professional Conduct, and the Attorney General’s
Office. The Committee meets monthly to review and approve settlement terms for cases in lieu of the cases proceeding
to administrative disciplinary hearings.
13 | Page
2014 Case Dispositions
By Type of Action
No Disciplinary Action
227
Admonishment
72
Automatic Denial/Revocation
30
Consent Agreement
227
No Disciplinary Action
0
Admonishment
1
Suspension
7
Denial
8
Permanent Denial
21
Revocation
7
Permanent Revocation
76
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Resolved by State Superintendent
Resolved by ABM Committee
Resolved by SBOE
Case Dispositions by State Superintendent
Through delegation, the State Superintendent has the authority to resolve cases
by determining that no disciplinary action is warranted, issuing a letter of
admonishment, or automatically denying or revoking a license as mandated by
Revised Code 3319.31(C). In 2014, the State Superintendent resolved 329
cases. Disciplinary action was imposed in 102 cases with the remaining 227
cases resolved without any disciplinary action.
Case Dispositions by Advising Board Member Committee
The State Board delegates its authority to review and approve settlement
agreements to the Advising Board Member Committee. The committee reviews
possible settlement terms for cases deemed appropriate for remedial action. The
focus of the settlement agreements, referred to as consent agreements, is to put
corrective measures in place to rehabilitate the applicant and/or educator and
14 | Page
prevent similar conduct if the applicant/educator remains in the teaching
profession. Cases that do not result in a settlement agreement typically advance
to an administrative hearing. Of the cases the Advising Board Member
Committee reviewed in 2014, 227 cases were resolved through consent
agreements.
Case Dispositions by State Board
The State Board reviews all cases proceeding through the administrative hearing
process and cases involving an educator voluntarily surrendering a license. 6 The
State Board can suspend, limit, deny, or revoke a license and determine whether
the applicant or license holder is eligible to re-apply for any license issued by the
State Board. After reviewing a case, the State Board may decide not to impose
any disciplinary action or may admonish the applicant or license holder for
engaging in conduct unbecoming to the teaching profession.
In 2014, the State Board resolved 120 cases and issued disciplinary action in
each case. In 97 cases, the State Board imposed the most severe disciplinary
action, permanent revocation and permanent denial. Of these 97 cases, 34 of the
cases involved either an educator voluntarily surrendering a license or an
applicant agreeing to the voluntary denial of a license. The State Board imposed
less severe disciplinary actions in 23 cases.
6
The State Board initiates the administrative hearing process through a written notice to notify the applicant or license
holder of its intended disciplinary action and his/her right to an administrative hearing. If the applicant or license holder
does not request an administrative hearing, the case may be reviewed by the State Board without an administrative
hearing being held.
15 | Page
Appeals
Active Appeals: 2011-2014
As with prior years, in 2014, courts consistently upheld disciplinary actions the
State Board imposed. Various courts of common pleas or courts of appeal
resolved eight out of seventeen State Board actions that an applicant or license
holder appealed. Courts affirmed the State Board’s disciplinary decisions in three
cases and dismissed four other cases. A court of appeals reversed the State
Board’s order in one case by modifying the disciplinary action imposed by the
State Board. Nine cases remain open pending appeal.
2014
Cases Appealed
Michelle Blain
Guselyn Bobb
Tinia Bradshaw
Jorethia Chuck
Todd Dolwick
Jeanette Duke
Carol Haskins
Nikki Highfield
Willena Jackson
Edwina McClendon Norris
Peter Schaal
Kimberly Wall
Thomas Weaver
Disposition of SBOE Action
Pending
Affirmed
Dismissed
Pending
Dismissed
Pending
Dismissed
Pending
Pending 7
Pending
Dismissed
Reversed/Modified (sanction) 8
Pending 9
Disposition Date
n/a
02/05/15
08/26/14
n/a
07/15/14
n/a
01/12/15
n/a
n/a
n/a
12/15/14
04/13/15
n/a
2013
Cases Appealed
Santiago Anguiano
Scott Ballard
Disposition of SBOE Action
Affirmed
Affirmed
Disposition Date
06/27/14
03/19/14
7
On January 16, 2015, the Summit County Common Pleas Court affirmed the State Board’s order. Ms. Jackson filed an
appeal in the Ninth District Court of Appeals. The appeal is still pending.
8
On August 19, 2014, the Shelby County Common Pleas Court reversed the State Board’s order suspending Ms. Wall’s
license and reinstated the hearing officer’s recommendation to admonish Ms. Wall. ODE filed an appeal on September
18, 2014 in the Third District Court of Appeals. On April 13, 2015, the Third District Court of Appeals upheld the decision
of the Shelby County Common Pleas Court.
9
On October 20, 2014, the Seneca County Common Pleas Court overturned the State Board’s decision. ODE filed an
appeal in the Third District Court of Appeals on November 17, 2014. The appeal is still pending.
16 | Page
2011
Cases Appealed
Jerome Johnson
Sherry Orth
10
Disposition of SBOE Action
Pending
Pending 10
Disposition Date
n/a
n/a
On February 15, 2012, the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas affirmed the State Board’s order to permanently
revoke Ms. Orth’s licenses. On September 28, 2012, the Tenth District Court of Appeals vacated the decision of the
Franklin County Court of Common Pleas and remanded the case to the State Board of Education for further
proceedings. On March 12, 2013, the State Board adopted a resolution suspending Ms. Orth’s license. Ms. Orth filed
an appeal of the State Board’s resolution with the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas on April 11, 2013. The
Franklin County Court of Common Pleas upheld the State Board’s revised order. Ms. Orth appealed to the Tenth
District Court of Appeals on January 6, 2014. On December 4, 2014, the Tenth District Court of Appeals affirmed the
State Board’s order suspending Ms. Orth’s license. The only issue currently pending before the Tenth District Court of
Appeals is Ms. Orth’s motion for attorney fees.
17 | Page
Office of Professional Conduct
25 South Front Street Mailstop 104 | Columbus, Ohio 43215-4183
(614) 446-5638 | (877) 644-6338 | (614) 995-3752 (fax)
education.ohio.gov
18 | Page
OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
1 | Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction .................................................................................... 3
The Office of Professional Conduct .................................................................. 3
Referral Data .................................................................................... 4
Referrals: 2005 - 2014 ....................................................................................... 4
2014 Referrals:
By Applicants v. Licensed Educators ......................................................... 5
By Non-Application Referral Sources ......................................................... 6
Investigation Data .......................................................................... 7
Investigations: 2005 - 2014 ................................................................................ 7
2014 Investigations:
By Applicants v. Licensed Educators ......................................................... 8
By Referral Source ..................................................................................... 9
By Offense Type ........................................................................................ 9
A Closer Look: Conduct Unbecoming Investigations ....................................... 10
Case Disposition Data .................................................................. 12
Case Dispositions: 2005 - 2014 ....................................................................... 12
2014 Case Dispositions:
By Decision Maker ................................................................................... 13
By Type of Action ..................................................................................... 13
By State Superintendent .......................................................................... 14
By Advising Board Member Committee ................................................... 14
By State Board ......................................................................................... 15
Appeals ......................................................................................... 16
Active Appeals: 2011-2014 .............................................................................. 16
2 | Page
INTRODUCTION
The Office of Professional Conduct
On behalf of the State Board of Education, the Office of Professional Conduct (Office)
administers the ethical standards for the teaching profession pursuant to Revised
Code §3319.31 and §3319.311. The Office investigates allegations of educator
misconduct involving criminal or ethical violations and if warranted initiates disciplinary
action against an educator’s credentials. The Office has jurisdiction to investigate
allegations of misconduct by any person who holds or has applied for a license issued
by the State Board of Education.
Each year, the Office compiles data regarding the allegations it receives, the cases it
investigates, and the disciplinary actions the State Board of Education imposes. Since
2005, the Office has collected and provided this data to the State Board of Education,
members of the teaching profession, and other stakeholders. The data in this report
provides a summary of the Office’s work in 2014, as well as providing historical
information regarding referrals, investigations and disciplinary actions.
3 | Page
REFERRAL DATA
Referrals: 2005-2014
Educators in Ohio are nationally recognized, highly qualified and exemplify the
high ethical standards embodied in the Licensure Code of Professional Conduct
for Ohio Educators. With approximately 300,000 licensed educators1, the Office
receives a relatively small number of educator misconduct referrals each year.
Yearly Referrals
8246
4770
2005
5896
8089
8252
8554
8068
8231
9087
6201
Referrals
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Educator misconduct referrals fluctuate from year to year. After increased
fingerprint background checks and mandated school district reporting laws were
enacted in 2007, the number of yearly referrals rose significantly from 2007 to
2008. Yearly referrals were fairly consistent from 2008 through 2013, with the
referrals only fluctuating from 1.9% to 5.7% per year. In 2014, the Office received
856 more referrals than the previous year. This represents a 10.4% increase in
educator misconduct referrals. This is the biggest yearly increase in referrals
since 2008.
1
Educators include teachers, principals, superintendents, and other persons serving schools (e.g., school nurses,
coaches, substitute teachers, treasurers, etc.).
4 | Page
Percentage Changes in Yearly Referrals
Yearly
Referrals
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Increase/
Decrease
n/a
23.6%
5.2%
32.9%
-1.9%
2.0%
3.7%
-5.7%
2.0%
10.4%
2014 Referrals: By Applicants v. Licensed Educators
The Office receives allegations of educator misconduct from various sources.
Every licensure application that indicates a possible criminal conviction is
reviewed by the Office. In addition, the Office receives referrals from criminal
background checks, children services agencies, school districts, citizens, and
other external agencies. In 2014, the Office received the majority of referrals
through the licensure application process. Out of 9087 referrals received, 7316
referrals were related to applications for licensure.
2013 Referrals
Applicants
7316
81%
81% of referrals involved
individuals submitting an
application for licensure
Licensed
Educators
1771
19%
19% of referrals alleged
misconduct by educators
already holding a license
5 | Page
2014 Referrals: Non-Application Referral Sources
By analyzing the 1771 referrals the Office received involving licensed educators
in 2014, the majority of the referrals were submitted through children services
agencies, the Office’s participation in the rap back program 2, school districts, and
citizens. The Office received 15% of non-application referrals from media
reports, external agencies, NASDTEC 3 reports, internal ODE offices, and
prosecutors. In 2014, the number of internal referrals increased dramatically from
the year before. In 2013, the Office only received 15 internal referrals compared
to 164 internal referrals in 2014. This increase reflects the internal referrals
related to allegations of data manipulation by eight districts.
2014 Non-Application Referrals
By Referral Source
School Districts
400
Rap Back Reports
Citizen Reports
235
Children Services
Media
25
NASDTEC
30
External Agency
350
37
Internal Referrals
Prosecutor Reports
526
0
4
164
100
200
300
400
500
600
2
Pursuant to Ohio Revised Code §3319.316, the Department of Education is required to participate in the retained
applicant fingerprint database program (commonly referred to as “rap back”). The rap back program is implemented by
the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation (BCI&I). BCI&I provides daily notifications to the Office of
any license holder’s recent arrest or conviction. In turn, the Office informs the respective employing school so it can
contact BCI&I for further information and make necessary employment-related decisions.
3
The National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (NASDTEC) maintains a database of
disciplinary actions imposed against educators by other states. When an out-of-state disciplinary action is added to the
NASDTEC database, the educator’s information is cross-referenced to ODE’s educator database to determine if the
educator is licensed in Ohio and whether the Office needs to initiate an investigation.
6 | Page
INVESTIGATIONS
Investigations: 2005-2014
The Office evaluates each referral it receives to determine whether a more indepth investigation is warranted. These evaluations are based upon statutory
provisions, licensure eligibility requirements, past disciplinary decisions imposed
by the State Board, and ethical standards detailed in the Licensure Code of
Professional Conduct for Ohio Educators. With fewer than 1000 referrals
investigated yearly, less than one percent of the approximately 300,000 licensed
educators in Ohio are involved in the investigation process each year.
Yearly Referrals v. Yearly Investigations
8246
4770
786
2005
5896
8089
8252
8554
8068
8231
9087
6201
Received
Investigated
619
2006
655
2007
895
2008
959
2009
931
2010
983
2011
959
2012
711
2013
997
2014
In 2014, the Office opened 997 cases for investigation. The number of
investigations increased this year by 248 cases or 40.2%. This increase is due
to the Office starting its review of data manipulation allegations by eight school
districts and a rise in the number of application referrals and educator
misconduct referrals submitted by school districts.
7 | Page
2014 Investigations: By Applicants v. Licensed Educators
Comparing investigations involving applicants for licensure versus licensed
educators, the majority of cases the Office investigated in 2014 involved licensed
educators. In 2014, the Office investigated 703 licensed educators and 294
applicants for licensure.
2014 Investigations
Applicants
294
29%
Licensed
Educators
703
71%
71% of investigations
involved licensed
educators
29% of investigations
involved applicants
8 | Page
2014 Investigations: By Referral Source
Of the 997 cases investigated by the Office in 2014, school district reports led to
33.4% of the Office’s investigations. Referrals involving applications accounted
for 29.5% of investigations, while rap back referrals resulted in 9.5% of
investigations and internal referrals resulted in 11.0% of investigations. The
remaining 16.6% of investigations originated from citizen reports, media reports,
external agency referrals, NASDTEC reports, and prosecutor reports.
2014 Investigations
By Referral Source
School Districts
Applications
Rap Back Reports
Citizen Reports
Children Services
Media
23
External Agency
NASDTEC
5
Prosecutor Reports
2
Internal Referrals
0
37
63
294
95
333
35
110
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2014 Investigations: By Offense Type
The Office investigates allegations involving criminal convictions, achievement
test violations, contract termination violations, and allegations of conduct
unbecoming to the teaching profession. Conduct unbecoming allegations can
include child abuse and neglect, inappropriate use of school technology,
unprofessional relationships with students, or any other conduct that negatively
reflects on the teaching profession.
9 | Page
In 2014, the Office investigated allegations involving 893 criminal convictions and
1085 conduct unbecoming accusations. 4 Nineteen investigations involved
allegations of early termination of teaching contracts in violation of R.C. 3119.15.
Forty-nine investigations in 2014 involved educators violating testing protocols
and/or assisting students to cheat on assessment tests in violation of R.C.
3319.151.
2014 Investigations
By Offense Type
Conduct Unbecoming
96
Criminal-Drug Offenses
Criminal-Misc. Offenses
39
Criminal-Sex Offenses
Criminal-Theft Offenses
Criminal-Traffic Offenses
Criminal-Violent Offenses
19
Broken Contract
Testing Violations
1085
0
49
289
138
128
203
200
400
600
800
1000
A Closer Look: Conduct Unbecoming Investigations
In 2013, the Office began tracking conduct unbecoming investigations by
category. The 21 categories align with the conduct standards listed in the
Licensure Code of Professional Conduct for Ohio Educators. For example, the
Office tracks the number of case investigations involving child abuse and neglect,
academic fraud, unprofessional relationships with students, misuse of school
resources, inappropriate use of technology, and falsification of licensure
applications. The increased numbers in the conduct unbecoming categories from
2013 to 2014 is directly related to the 40.2% increase in the number of
investigations opened in 2014.
4
When case investigations are evaluated by type of offense involved, some cases had more than one type of
offense/conduct due to multiple convictions or misconduct allegations. Therefore, the total number of offenses for 2014
exceeds the number of case investigations opened for the year.
10 | Page
1200
Conduct Unbecoming Investigations by Category
CONDUCT UNBECOMING CATEGORY
2013
2014
2
24
21
52
15
25
Bullying, Harassment and Intimidation
6
58
Children Services – Emotional Maltreatment
1
3
Children Services – Neglect
2
16
Children Services – Physical Abuse
22
71
Children Services – Sexual Abuse
12
16
Data Scrubbing
3
99
Disclosing Confidential Information
2
17
Failure to Supervise Students
17
54
Falsification of Licensure Application
51
60
9
6
73
218
Inappropriate Comments/Gestures
18
39
Inappropriate Relationship
34
42
License Violation
29
59
20
45
16
33
Other
10
96
Physical Altercation
26
52
389
1085
Academic Fraud
(grade changing; cheating on non-achievement tests)
Accurate Reporting/ Failure to Report
(falsifying records; not reporting child abuse)
Alcohol/Drug Use
(non-criminal misconduct)
Finding for Recovery
(issued by Auditor of State)
Inappropriate Behavior
(misconduct at school that does not fit other categories)
(NASDTEC referrals, fraudulent licenses)
Misuse of School Funds/Resources
(theft of funds, misuse of leave time, co-mingling funds)
Misuse of Technology
(emails, texting, on-line communications)
TOTAL
11 | Page
Case Dispositions
Case Dispositions: 2005-2014
The State Board of Education resolves case investigations pursuant to Ohio
Revised Code 3319.31. The State Board resolves cases by either imposing a
disciplinary action or determining that disciplinary action is not warranted.
Disciplinary decisions are based on statutory mandates, licensure eligibility
requirements, ethical standards in the Licensure Code of Professional Conduct
by Ohio Educators, and past disciplinary decisions by the State Board.
The State Board does not impose disciplinary action if an allegation of
misconduct is untrue, evidence is not sufficient to prove the misconduct, or the
proven conduct is a minor infraction that does not warrant disciplinary action. In
addition, the Office may place a case in an inactive status if an applicant has not
engaged with the Office and provided the information necessary to process an
application. While a case is in an inactive status, the Office does not issue a
license nor initiate disciplinary action.
In 2014, the State Board resolved 676 cases and imposed disciplinary action in
449, or 66.5%, of the cases. This was the second consecutive year that more
than 50% of case investigations resulted in disciplinary action.
Yearly Case Dispositions
No Discipline
Discipline
297 242
389 242
355 242
537 286
554 442
539 426
622 370
420 310
339 385
227 449
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
12 | Page
2014 Case Dispositions: By Decision Maker
The State Board exercises its authority to impose disciplinary action through
direct review of cases and by delegating authority to the State Superintendent of
Public Instruction and the Advising Board Member Committee 5. In 2014, the
State Superintendent, Advising Board Member Committee, and State Board
collectively resolved 676 cases. The State Superintendent resolved 329 cases,
the Advising Board Member Committee resolved 227 cases, and the State Board
resolved 120 cases.
2014 Dispositions
120
18%
227
33%
329
49%
State Superintendent
ABM Committee
SBOE
2014 Case Dispositions: By Type of Action
There are several types of disciplinary actions the State Board can impose to
address educator misconduct. The State Board can issue a letter of
admonishment, the least severe disciplinary action, or can limit, suspend, deny,
or revoke a license, the more severe disciplinary actions. A consent agreement is
a settlement agreement that addresses an educator’s misconduct through
rehabilitative efforts to give an educator the opportunity to remain in the teaching
profession through corrective action.
5
The Advising Board Member Committee consists of an appointed State Board Member and representatives from the
Ohio Department of Education’s senior leadership, the Office of Professional Conduct, and the Attorney General’s
Office. The Committee meets monthly to review and approve settlement terms for cases in lieu of the cases proceeding
to administrative disciplinary hearings.
13 | Page
2014 Case Dispositions
By Type of Action
No Disciplinary Action
227
Admonishment
72
Automatic Denial/Revocation
30
Consent Agreement
227
No Disciplinary Action
0
Admonishment
1
Suspension
7
Denial
8
Permanent Denial
21
Revocation
7
Permanent Revocation
76
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Resolved by State Superintendent
Resolved by ABM Committee
Resolved by SBOE
Case Dispositions by State Superintendent
Through delegation, the State Superintendent has the authority to resolve cases
by determining that no disciplinary action is warranted, issuing a letter of
admonishment, or automatically denying or revoking a license as mandated by
Revised Code 3319.31(C). In 2014, the State Superintendent resolved 329
cases. Disciplinary action was imposed in 102 cases with the remaining 227
cases resolved without any disciplinary action.
Case Dispositions by Advising Board Member Committee
The State Board delegates its authority to review and approve settlement
agreements to the Advising Board Member Committee. The committee reviews
possible settlement terms for cases deemed appropriate for remedial action. The
focus of the settlement agreements, referred to as consent agreements, is to put
corrective measures in place to rehabilitate the applicant and/or educator and
14 | Page
prevent similar conduct if the applicant/educator remains in the teaching
profession. Cases that do not result in a settlement agreement typically advance
to an administrative hearing. Of the cases the Advising Board Member
Committee reviewed in 2014, 227 cases were resolved through consent
agreements.
Case Dispositions by State Board
The State Board reviews all cases proceeding through the administrative hearing
process and cases involving an educator voluntarily surrendering a license. 6 The
State Board can suspend, limit, deny, or revoke a license and determine whether
the applicant or license holder is eligible to re-apply for any license issued by the
State Board. After reviewing a case, the State Board may decide not to impose
any disciplinary action or may admonish the applicant or license holder for
engaging in conduct unbecoming to the teaching profession.
In 2014, the State Board resolved 120 cases and issued disciplinary action in
each case. In 97 cases, the State Board imposed the most severe disciplinary
action, permanent revocation and permanent denial. Of these 97 cases, 34 of the
cases involved either an educator voluntarily surrendering a license or an
applicant agreeing to the voluntary denial of a license. The State Board imposed
less severe disciplinary actions in 23 cases.
6
The State Board initiates the administrative hearing process through a written notice to notify the applicant or license
holder of its intended disciplinary action and his/her right to an administrative hearing. If the applicant or license holder
does not request an administrative hearing, the case may be reviewed by the State Board without an administrative
hearing being held.
15 | Page
Appeals
Active Appeals: 2011-2014
As with prior years, in 2014, courts consistently upheld disciplinary actions the
State Board imposed. Various courts of common pleas or courts of appeal
resolved eight out of seventeen State Board actions that an applicant or license
holder appealed. Courts affirmed the State Board’s disciplinary decisions in three
cases and dismissed four other cases. A court of appeals reversed the State
Board’s order in one case by modifying the disciplinary action imposed by the
State Board. Nine cases remain open pending appeal.
2014
Cases Appealed
Michelle Blain
Guselyn Bobb
Tinia Bradshaw
Jorethia Chuck
Todd Dolwick
Jeanette Duke
Carol Haskins
Nikki Highfield
Willena Jackson
Edwina McClendon Norris
Peter Schaal
Kimberly Wall
Thomas Weaver
Disposition of SBOE Action
Pending
Affirmed
Dismissed
Pending
Dismissed
Pending
Dismissed
Pending
Pending 7
Pending
Dismissed
Reversed/Modified (sanction) 8
Pending 9
Disposition Date
n/a
02/05/15
08/26/14
n/a
07/15/14
n/a
01/12/15
n/a
n/a
n/a
12/15/14
04/13/15
n/a
2013
Cases Appealed
Santiago Anguiano
Scott Ballard
Disposition of SBOE Action
Affirmed
Affirmed
Disposition Date
06/27/14
03/19/14
7
On January 16, 2015, the Summit County Common Pleas Court affirmed the State Board’s order. Ms. Jackson filed an
appeal in the Ninth District Court of Appeals. The appeal is still pending.
8
On August 19, 2014, the Shelby County Common Pleas Court reversed the State Board’s order suspending Ms. Wall’s
license and reinstated the hearing officer’s recommendation to admonish Ms. Wall. ODE filed an appeal on September
18, 2014 in the Third District Court of Appeals. On April 13, 2015, the Third District Court of Appeals upheld the decision
of the Shelby County Common Pleas Court.
9
On October 20, 2014, the Seneca County Common Pleas Court overturned the State Board’s decision. ODE filed an
appeal in the Third District Court of Appeals on November 17, 2014. The appeal is still pending.
16 | Page
2011
Cases Appealed
Jerome Johnson
Sherry Orth
10
Disposition of SBOE Action
Pending
Pending 10
Disposition Date
n/a
n/a
On February 15, 2012, the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas affirmed the State Board’s order to permanently
revoke Ms. Orth’s licenses. On September 28, 2012, the Tenth District Court of Appeals vacated the decision of the
Franklin County Court of Common Pleas and remanded the case to the State Board of Education for further
proceedings. On March 12, 2013, the State Board adopted a resolution suspending Ms. Orth’s license. Ms. Orth filed
an appeal of the State Board’s resolution with the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas on April 11, 2013. The
Franklin County Court of Common Pleas upheld the State Board’s revised order. Ms. Orth appealed to the Tenth
District Court of Appeals on January 6, 2014. On December 4, 2014, the Tenth District Court of Appeals affirmed the
State Board’s order suspending Ms. Orth’s license. The only issue currently pending before the Tenth District Court of
Appeals is Ms. Orth’s motion for attorney fees.
17 | Page
Office of Professional Conduct
25 South Front Street Mailstop 104 | Columbus, Ohio 43215-4183
(614) 446-5638 | (877) 644-6338 | (614) 995-3752 (fax)
education.ohio.gov
18 | Page
