Law Brief #
11/10/10
Rebecca Roy
CCSU ED 515
Dr. Heinen
Citation: Collins v. Faith School District No. 46-2, 574 N.W. 2d 889 (1998)
Topic: Finding a teacher incompetent to justify termination
Relief Sought: Reinstatement of employment
Issue(s): Can a school district terminate a teacher’s employment by finding him as incompetent based on a single act of misjudgment?
Facts: Richard Collins was employed as a fifth and forth grade teacher for twenty-nine years by the Faith School District. Collins held a valid teaching certification. Sexual education was provided to forth, fifth, and sixth grade boys by the nurse. After viewing a video the nurse asked the boys if they had any questions and there were none; the nurse attributed this to the fact that she was a female. As had been done in past years, the boys then went to Mr. Collins’ class where they were given the opportunity to ask a male teacher questions. Collins had been instructed to answer the questions as honestly as possible. One boy asked about male homosexual sex and Mr. Collins responded by explaining oral and anal sex. Parents brought complaints to the principal regarding the question and answer session with Mr. Collins and a hearing was held in front of the board of education following appropriate notice. (Note, Mr. Collins was allowed to continue teaching between filing of the complaints and the date of the hearing). The principal testified that Mr. Collins’ responses were “inappropriate and immoral” but that there was no evidence that the student had been harmed. The superintendent testified that the incident adversely affected Collins’ ability to perform his duties but agreed there was no evidence of an adverse impact on student learning. The Board voted to terminate Collins’ contract on the basis of incompetency.
Finding of Circuit Court: for the district
Finding of the Supreme Court of South Dakota:Finding of Circuit Court reversed and remand for reinstatement of Collins’ employment and payback for salary lost
Reasoning: Incompetence is described as a relative term meaning the “lack of ability or fitness to discharge a required duty” and it does not invoke subjective analysis of standards of morality or professionalism which vary individual to individual dependent on time, circumstances, or custom. Incompetency is habitual and on-going which Mr. Collins’ actions were not. Although there are incidences where a single action can justify a finding of incompetence, Mr. Collins actions did not rise to that level. There was no evidence by the superintendent that the teacher’s ability to perform his job was hindered nor was there any evidence that students were negatively affected. The Board also did not follow proper procedure- they did not suspend Mr. Collins after the incident prior to his hearing, rather, the Board allowed him to continue teaching.