Tennessee Board of Education to formalize teacher discipline policy
For years, without any written guidelines, the Tennessee Board of Education has handed out a variety of penalties for a range of teacher misbehavior.
This lack of direction, and board turnover, has resulted in a haphazard approach to disciplinary issues.
“We do need to have a comprehensive process that allows board members to know we are making the absolute best decision for students,” said board member Lillian Hartgrove in an interview with The Tennessean.
The board acknowledged the issues during an October board meeting, and it affirmed support for a guideline on punishment during a policy audit conducted after a recent investigation by the USA TODAY NETWORK and The Tennessean showed flaws in the teacher background check system.
In the meeting, staff attorney Philip Cramer acknowledged the current board’s disagreement with past boards.
“Our recommendations come to you based on what we have seen has happened in the past and, obviously, you have had a difference of opinion — and you have in the past few instances," he said. "We are happy to come up with new recommendations for you.”
Tennessee to address problems in teacher background checks
Those recommendations will form the basis of a document that this state board believes will be able to guide them, and future members, on punishment for teachers found guilty of wrongdoing.
The details of that document are still unclear, but the board’s executive staff hopes to present a draft for first reading in April.
While there have been differences over various board decisions, state board executive director Sara Heyburn doesn’t believe those decisions were arbitrary. By creating a document for future boards, however, the state can then pass down a better record for decision-making.
“The more you have living documents, the better,” she said. “There are places where, frankly, we don’t have anything.”
“Of course there is a human part of this. I do believe people can redeem themselves, so if a teacher did some (offense) then they go through a process to be reinstated," Hartgrove said.
“But certainly any kind of abuse or sexual misconduct, we don’t want them in front of students. We should expect the best and brightest in our classrooms.”
Teacher who won back license faced sex abuse claims 20 years ago
Guidelines for decisions
Without a set policy on how to hand out suspensions and revocations for teachers, this state board has been hamstrung by the standards set by its predecessors.
In the case of James Aaron Swafford, the state board decided not to reinstate the man’s license after North Carolina education officials revoked his license over love letters to a 16-year-old student.
Swafford was able to overturn the decision through an administrative appeal.
During the process, Swafford's lawyer was able to present 20 examples of the state board allowing other teachers who committed similar acts with children to be reinstated or apply for reinstatement, after suspensions and training or a combination.
State board member Wendy Tucker said she respects the legal route Swafford took in regaining his license. But the state board can do more to ensure certain teachers stay out of the classroom, and steps have already been taken, she said.
“This board over the last year has been very critical (of the previous standards),” Tucker said.
The formal document will help create clear guidelines for teachers, she said, and, hopefully, tougher punishments than have been set in the past.
“This is developing a new precedent with a matrix that says ‘this is what it means to be a professional educator in Tennessee,' " Tucker said.
Heyburn and her staff will likely look at other states for guidance, and will reach out to states listed in the USA TODAY NETWORK investigation to research best practices. Tennessee, along with 13 other states, received an F grade for its system of performing background checks on teachers and issues with sharing misconduct information.
Heyburn said that before that reporting there was little guidance on where to look for best practices. She said her staff plans to reach out to some of those states that were ranked highly by USA TODAY NETWORK.
Greater onus on districts to share quality information
The board’s ability to levy punishments is only as good as the district’s reporting, according to board members Hartgrove and Tucker.
Board members have complained some revocation or suspension cases lacked detailed information from school districts and the state board doesn’t have an investigating body, said McKenzie Manning, state board spokeswoman.
In Swafford’s case, there was little information made available to the board of previous incidents involving him.
A Tennessean investigation found that despite saying the North Carolina incident was isolated, Swafford resigned a Tennessee teaching position at Warren County High School in the mid-1990s amid similar claims that he sent love letters and underwear to a 17-year-old girl. Swafford was also fired from South-Doyle High School in 2003 after he struck a student-athlete.
Manning acknowledged the board didn’t have any of this information when considering Swafford’s case.
The Tennessean also found school districts are inconsistent in maintaining personnel files, making it hard for schools in the state or elsewhere to examine teachers' backgrounds. In the Swafford case, at least two districts either could not find Swafford's file or had destroyed it.
There is no policy for how a school district should handle personnel records, but the Tennessee Department of Education advises district boards to work with their attorney to set specific legal guidelines on personnel matters.
The lack of information, in some cases, makes it hard for the state board to do its job, Tucker said.
“The actual flow of information can be improved,” she said. “Superintendents need to understand this isn’t about just their district, but it’s about a bigger picture.”
Staff reporter Dave Boucher contributed to this report.
Reach Jason Gonzales at 615-259-8047 and on Twitter @ByJasonGonzales.