#173-TTC-487
DOCKET NO 173-TTC-487
TEXAS EDUCATION AGENCY,
DIVISION OF TEACHER
RECORDS
--
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
BEFORE THE STATE
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
THE STATE OF TEXAS
Statement of the Case
Respondent Donald W. Parker has requested the removal of a reprimand placed on the face of his certificate.
On December 19, 1988, a hearing was held before
Margaret O. Thompson, the Hearing Officer appointed by the
State Commissioner of Education. Petitioner Texas Education
Agency, Division of Teacher Certification, was represented by Mr. Derrell A. Coleman of Austin. Petitioner opposed removal of the reprimand from the face of the certificate.
Respondent was represented by Mr. Mark Robinett of Austin.
Janis Herd is the substitute Hearing Officer.
On January 25, 1990, a Proposal for Decision was issued recommending that the Commissioner enter an order dismissing the subject appeal. Exceptions and replies were timely filed and considered. Petitioner's exceptions are overruled.
Findings of Fact
After due consideration of the evidence and matters officially noticed, in my capacity as State Commissioner of
Education, I make the following Findings of Fact:
1. Respondent Donald W. Parker holds Texas Teacher
Certificate No. XXX-XX-XXXX. (Record).
2. During the fall semester of the 1986-87 school year, Respondent, who was Superintendent of Three Way ISD, instructed a principal not to count as absent four students who had each been absent four days because bad weather pre- vented the school bus from picking them up. This action was approved by the Board of Trustees. (Settlement Agreement;
Tr. 12-14, 34-35; Board Resolution of January 12, 1989).
3. Respondent intended to circumvent local policy by not reporting the weather-related absences of the four stu- dents. (Tr. 13, 35).
4. Respondent's action increased the district's average daily attendance from 128.95 to 130.15, resulting in the district's receipt of $168 in state funds to which it was not entitled. (Settlement Agreement; Tr. 14).
5. On April 21, 1987, the Division of Teacher Certifi- cation filed a Petition for Review with the State Commis- sioner of Education, seeking revocation of Respondent's

Superintendent's Endorsement due to the falsified attendance report. (Petition for Review).
6. A Settlement Agreement was signed on July 7, 1987, by Respondent, his attorney, and the attorney representing the Division of Teacher Certification. Respondent agreed to accept a formal reprimand by the Commissioner on the face of his certificate, and waived his right to hearing on the matter. (Settlement Agreement).
7. On July 28, 1987, the Commissioner of Education issued an order placing a reprimand on Respondent's Texas
Teacher Certificate. (Order of Reprimand).
Discussion
Respondent's request that the reprimand be removed from the face of his certificate should be denied for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. The Commis- sioner of Education will not remove a reprimand from the face of a certificate.
Although Tex. Educ. Code +13.046(c) authorizes the Com- missioner to reinstate a suspended or cancelled certificate and provides an appeal to district court, the statute pro- hibits appeal of a reprimand. Tex. Educ. Code +13.046(e) explicitly states: "A reprimand shall not be appealable."
Identical language is found at 19 TAC +141.321(e).
Reprimands are reserved for circumstances where the
Commissioner deems suspension or cancellation of a certifi- cate too harsh a penalty. While a reprimand is certainly a serious sanction, it is not as severe as suspension or revo- cation, and the legislature has not seen fit to provide a right of appeal from it to either the Commissioner or the courts.
In this case Respondent agreed to accept a public reprimand, in return for which Petitioner agreed not to pur- sue the more severe penalty of revocation of Respondent's
Superintendent's Endorsement. That agreement shall stand.
Conclusions of Law
After due consideration of the record, matters offi- cially noticed, and the foregoing Findings of Fact, in my capacity as State Commissioner of Education, I make the following Conclusions of Law:
1. No appeal lies from an order of reprimand, pursuant to Tex. Educ. Code +13.046(e) and 19 TAC +141.321(e).
2. Respondent has failed to state a claim for which relief can be granted, and the appeal should be dismissed.
3. Respondent's request for removal of the reprimand from his certificate should be denied.
O R D E R
After due consideration of the record, matters officially noticed, and the foregoing Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law, in my capacity as State Commissioner of
Education, it is hereby
ORDERED that Petitioner's appeal be, and is hereby, dismissed.
FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's request for removal of the reprimand from his certificate be, and is hereby,
DENIED.

SIGNED AND ISSUED this ____ day of ____________, 1990.
___________________________________
W. N. KIRBY
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION