DOCKET NO. 126-LH-0708

SWEENY INDEPENDENT§BEFORE KYLE FRAZIER,

SCHOOL DISTRICT§

§TEXAS EDUCATION AGENCY

§

V.§CERTIFIED INDEPENDENT

§

JAMES ALBRITTON§HEARING EXAMINER

RECOMMENDATION OF CERTIFIED HEARING EXAMINER

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Mr. Albritton, James Albritton ("Mr. Albritton"), appeals the recommendation of Petitioner, SweenyIndependentSchool District ("Sweeny ISD"), to terminate his employment as a teacher.

The following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are based on the testimony heard and the exhibits presented during the administrative hearing conducted on August 21 & 22, 2008. Mr. Albritton was represented by Jefferson K. Brim, III with Brim, Arnett, Robinett, Hanner & Conners, P.C. Sweeny ISD was represented by Marquette M. Maresh with Walsh, Anderson, Brown, Schulze & Aldridge, P.C. Kyle Frazier is a certified hearing examiner appointed by the Texas Education Agency ("TEA") to hear this matter and submit this Recommendation.

The issues presented in this case are whether Sweeny ISD has “good cause” to terminate Mr. Albritton’s term contract and whether Sweeny ISD properly discharged him in accordance with Chapter 21 of the Texas Education Code (the “Code”), taking into consideration the immunity provisions of Section 22.0512 of the Code.

FINDINGS OF FACT

After due consideration of the evidence and matters officially noticed, in my capacity as the Certified Hearing Examiner, I make the following Findings of Fact (citations to evidence are not exhaustive but are intended to indicate some of the basis for the particular Finding of Fact):

A. Background information on Mr. Albritton

  1. Mr. Albritton is currently employed by Sweeny ISD for the 2008-2009 school year under a one-year term contract dated April 22, 2008. (Exhibit 15; Joint Stipulation of Facts).
  2. Mr. Albritton began work as a teacher for Sweeny ISD in August, 1995 after a 22 year career as a pilot in the U.S. Air Force.

2751\Recommendation of Certified Hearing ExaminerPage 1

  1. During the 2007-2008 school year, Mr. Albritton served as a classroom teacher assigned to Sweeny ISD’s Disciplinary Alternative Education Program (DAEP). (Joint Stipulation of Facts). Mr. Albritton’s military background was a factor in his assignment to this position.
  2. As a result of an incident that occurred in the DAEP classroom on April 25, 2008, Sweeny ISD suspended Mr. Albritton with pay on April 29, 2008. (Joint Stipulation of Facts; Exhibit 19).
  3. During the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 school years, Sweeny ISD had a duly enacted policy - DFBA (Legal) - permitting the Board of Trustees to terminate an employee’s term contract at any time for good cause as determined by the Board. (Exhibit 34).
  4. On June 17, 2008, Sweeny ISD Superintendent Randy Miksch recommended to the Board of Trustees that Mr. Albritton’s term employment contract be proposed for termination. (Joint Stipulation of Facts; Exhibit 16). This was the first time in the Superintendent’s career that he ever recommended the termination of an employee. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 257, l. 18- 20).
  5. The Sweeny ISD Board of Trustees voted to propose the termination of Mr. Albritton’s employment contract with the District on June 17, 2008. (Joint Stipulation of Facts; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 258, l. 17 - 25; Exhibit 17).
  6. On June 20, 2008, Mr. Albritton received written notice that Sweeny ISD’s Board of Trustees voted to propose the termination of his term employment contract based on alleged inappropriate and/or unprofessional actions set forth in a June 18, 2008 letter from Superintendent Miksch to Mr. Albritton. (Joint Stipulation of Facts; Exhibit 18).
  7. On July 3, 2008, Mr. Albritton, by and through his attorney, made a proper written request to the Texas Education Agency seeking a hearing on the proposed termination of his employment from Sweeny ISD. (Joint Stipulation of Facts).
  8. As a classroom teacher, Mr. Albritton is responsible for keeping his students safe. (Exhibit 42, p. 11, l. 7 - 9; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 36, l. 13 - 19). This basic premise is reflected in the Code of Ethics and Standard Practices for Educators, which acknowledges that educators serve in a position of public trust. (19 Tex. Admin. Code § 247.2; Exhibit 31).
  9. As a classroom teacher, Mr. Albritton is also expected to serve as a role model for his students. (Exhibit 32 p. SISD 143; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 282, l. 18 - 25; p. 283, l. 1 - 12).

B. Background information on C.S.

  1. A 14 year old male student, C.S., was assigned to the DAEP in February 2008 of his eighth grade year for persistent misconduct. (Exhibit 4). DAEP is an alternative setting for students who engage in persistent misconduct or serious misbehaviors. (Tex. Educ. Code § 37.006; Exhibit 33, p. SISD 172).
  2. C.S. is identified as having an emotional disturbance for which he receives special education services. (Exhibit 4; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 42, l. 20 - 25; p. 43, l. 1 - 2; Hearing Trans. #2 p. 19, l. 25 - p. 20, l. 1).
  3. While C.S. attended elementary school in Sweeny ISD he would sometimes flee the school or physically act out towards anyone who would try to stop him. (Hearing Trans. #1, p. 39, l. 10 - 12).
  4. Mr. Albritton had prior knowledge that C.S. had been violent; he knew C.S. had kicked and hit adult personnel in elementary school, that he had stabbed a student in the back with a fork, and that he had hit Mrs. Albritton (a teacher’s aide on the elementary campus) in the chest with his fist. (Hearing Trans. #2, p. 22, l. 9-12).
  5. As a junior high student, C.S. did not exhibit the same physical behaviors he had exhibited in elementary school. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 40, l. 18 - 22). While in DAEP, C.S. was not physically aggressive or violent. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 164, l. 10 - 23) While C.S. has occasionally threatened other students, he has not physically harmed any other student or teacher while in junior high school. (Exhibit 46; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 41, l. 7 - 25).
  6. Prior to April 25, 2008, C.S. never struck at Mr. Albritton and Mr. Albritton never felt that C.S. wanted to strike at him. (Hearing Trans. #2, p. 28, l. 13-18).
  7. Prior to April 25, 2008, C.S. did on occasion get angry at Mr. Albritton and his anger would be manifested by an angered look - crumpled brow, squinted eyes, gritted teeth, and hands at his side in a fist. (Hearing Trans. #2, p. 28, l. 19 - p. 29, l. 2).
  8. In junior high, C.S.’s emotional disturbance manifested itself in refusal to do his work, finding a way to get out of doing work, being verbally disruptive, or fleeing the classroom. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 41, l. 1 - 6; p. 43, l. 3 - 12).
  9. More specifically, Sweeny ISD documented at least ten instances between November 7, 2007 and April 9, 2007 of conduct code violations and/or refusals to work by C.S. that were reported by teachers and/or administrators. The most common of these misbehaviors by C.S. was his refusal to do the work he was assigned and at least on one prior occasion a refusal to stand up when instructed to do so by Mr. Albritton. (Exhibit 46).
  10. During the 2007-2008 school year, two Behavior Intervention Plans (BIP) were created to address C.S.’s behavior issues. (Exhibit 1 & 2). A BIP is a plan for an individual student that outlines the student’s behaviors that need improvement or modification and provides specific techniques and strategies for addressing and changing the behaviors. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 43, l. 23 - 25; p. 44, l. 1 - 11).
  11. One BIP, dated December 5, 2007, was developed to address C.S.’s verbally aggressive conversations or outbursts or insubordination, completion of assignments, and impulsive outbursts and defiance. (Exhibit 1, p. SISD 003; Hearing Trans. #1, p. 46, l. 22 - 25; p. 47, l. 1 - 9). It was developed in conjunction with a Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) dated December 6, 2007, which noted the following behaviors as a concern: disruptive classroom behavior/refusal to work, disrespectful or inappropriate language, horseplay, and tardiness. (Exhibit 3, p. SISD 009; Hearing Trans. #1, p. 54, l. 1 - 6). Violence or physically aggressive behavior was not a behavioral concern noted in either the December 5th BIP or the December 6th FBA. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 54, l. 14 - 16).
  12. The December 6, 2007, FBA lists several reinforcers or consequences that might be effective with C.S., such as verbal praise, reward system, office referrals, or citations from the police. (Exhibit 3, p. SISD 011). Use of physical force, dumping a student from his chair, or choking a student are not included on the list of effective reinforcers or consequences.
  13. The December 5, 2007, BIP identified seven primary strategies to use when C.S. displayed those undesirable behaviors: (1) wait until the student is calm before imposing negative consequences, (2) do not engage in conversation with the student if he is exhibiting an outburst; use short statements or directives; (3) have the student complete a restitution sequence such as apologizing; (4) process incidents by helping the student verbalize the issue; (5) implement behavior charts or contracts and a preplanned consequence for unacceptable incidents of behavior; (6) implement logical consequences that are reasonable, enforceable, and immediate; and (7) limit suspensions and removals from class. (Exhibit 1, p. SISD 003). These strategies were generally successful with C.S. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 50, l. 6 - 10).
  14. During the two and half months that C.S. was in the DAEP program with Mr. Albritton, one preplanned consequence that Mr. Albritton developed for students who did not behave was that the student would lose his chair privileges for a short period of time (not more than five minutes).
  15. The December 5, 2007, BIP contained a crisis plan to use if C.S. became physically dangerous. (Exhibit 1, p. SISD 005 - 006). Should a crisis arise, the December 5th BIP provided techniques to use and techniques to avoid. The plan included using a calm, consistent, and matter-of-fact affect. It also provided that correction should occur in private when possible. The crisis plan stated that angry confrontations, arguments, and power struggles should be avoided. Likewise, the educator should avoid embarrassing C.S. or setting up the need to defend himself or save face. (Exhibit 1, p. SISD 006; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 49, 18 - 25; p. 50, l. 1 - 2). The crisis plan noted that in such a crisis situation “…restraint may be necessary.” (Exhibit 1, pg. 5).
  16. Even though a crisis plan was in place, there was never a situation where C.S. became physically aggressive or that required action under the crisis plan. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 49, l. 11 - 13).
  17. A second BIP, dated February 7, 2008, was developed to address C.S.’s noncompliance with the Student Code of Conduct and off task behaviors such as not following teacher directives or completing assignments. (Exhibit 2, p. SISD 007). This BIP was issued immediately preceding C.S.’s assignment to DAEP. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 51, l. 16 - 18).
  18. The February 7th BIP also included intervention steps and reinforcers to address C.S.’s behavior. (Exhibit 2). It included techniques such as verbal reminders, private discussion about the behavior, apology, office referral, contact parent, verbal praise, special activities, and positive notes home. It also directed that regular disciplinary procedures be used with the student, rather than special education procedures. (Exhibit 2).
  19. The Manifestation Determination Review that was conducted prior to C.S.’s placement in DAEP lists a pattern of habitual misconduct that C.S. engaged in such as work refusal, off task, does not comply with teacher request, and willful disobedience. (Exhibit 4, p. SISD 012). These were typical behaviors that C.S. subsequently engaged in while in DAEP. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 56, l. 7 - 21). However, as Mr. Albritton acknowledges, the pattern of habitual misconduct identified in the Manifestation Determination Review does not include violence or physically aggressive behavior. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 55, l. 23 - 25; p. 56, l. 1 - 3; Hearing Trans. #2 p. 67, l. 5 - 10).
  20. Neither of the two BIPs were developed to address violence or physically aggressive behavior by C.S. (Exhibit 1 & 2).
  21. C.S. was referred to DAEP on February 8, 2008.
  22. After C.S. began attending DAEP on February 11, 2008, he refused to do work for Mr. Albritton “…almost daily.” (Hearing Trans. #2, p. 17, l. 23). Mr. Albritton spent approximately 85% of his time in the DAEP classroom dealing with C.S. (Hearing Trans. #2, p. 25, l. 2-4)
  23. During the time that C.S. was assigned to DAEP, Mr. Albritton was aware that C.S. was identified as having an emotional disturbance for which C.S. received special education services (Exhibit 42, p. 16, l. 16 - 17, p. 29, l. 1 - 4) and that a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) existed to address C.S.’s conduct. (Exhibit 41, p. SISD 270; Hearing Trans. #2, p. 18, l. 13 - 15).
  24. By serving in a position of public trust as a classroom teacher, Mr. Albritton must comply with the Code of Ethics and Standard Practices for Educators and the corresponding provisions of 19 Tex. Admin. Code § 247.2. (Exhibit 31).
  25. During the 2007-2008 school year, Sweeny ISD had a duly enacted policy setting out standards of conduct expected of District employees, being policy DH (exhibit). (Exhibit 31). Standard 3.2 of DH (exhibit) prohibits a teacher from knowingly treating a student in a manner that adversely affects the student’s learning, physical health, mental health, or safety. Similarly, Standard 3.5 of that same policy dictates that an educator shall not engage in physical mistreatment of a student. (Exhibit 31).

C. April 25, 2008 Incident - Removal of Chair

  1. Ms. Ann Barr worked as a resource teacher for math in the DAEP classroom on an as needed basis. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 36, l. 6 - 8).
  2. On April 25, 2008, Ms. Barr worked with C.S. on least common multiples while sitting at a work station in the DAEP classroom. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 66, l. 9 - 14). The workstation consisted of a rectangular table with a one-tier bookshelf resting on the top of the table. (Exhibit 6 - 8; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 63, l. 14 - 22; p. 64, l. 22 - 25; p. 65, l. 1 - 4).
  3. On that day Ms. Barr encountered difficulties with getting C.S. to complete his school work. C.S.’s refusal to work was typical behavior. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 69, l. 6 - 9). More specifically, C.S. refused to write his name and the date on his paper and he refused to complete the work that was assigned.
  4. As she had on prior occasions, Ms. Barr asked Mr. Albritton for assistance in getting C.S. to complete his school work on April 25, 2008. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 50, l. 15 - 20; p. 69, l. 19 - 25; p. 70, l. 1 - 8). On previous occasions, Mr. Albritton would assist Ms. Barr with C.S. by offering positive encouragement to motivate C.S. to complete his work. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 50, l. 15 - 20; p. 70, l. 1 - 8).
  5. Something occurred earlier in the day on April 25, 2008 between C.S. and Mr. Albritton that upset C.S. and C.S. was angry with Mr. Albritton prior to this incident. (Exhibit 22).
  6. On April 25th, Mr. Albritton moved a chair for himself behind C.S. and began his assistance as he had in times past by first speaking with C.S. and asking him to do what he was asked by Ms. Barr. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 70, l. 22 - 25; p. 71, l. 1 - 11). After Mr. Albritton initially spoke with C.S., Ms. Barr resumed her lesson to see if she could get C.S. to work. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 71, l. 12 - 19).
  7. When C.S. did not respond to Ms. Barr, Mr. Albritton requested C.S. to write his name and date on his paper but C.S. did not do so. He just there in his chair and did not respond. (Hearing Trans. #2, p. 46, l. 6 - p. 47, l. 4).
  8. When C.S. still did not respond, Ms. Barr began to end the lesson and gathered her papers to leave. C.S. then indicated he had not heard Ms. Barr’s instruction. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 72, l. 8 - 9; l. 12 - 24; p. 73, l. 6 - 7).
  9. Mr. Albritton then stood up from his chair and told C.S. in a loud command voice “Do I need to say it for you so you can hear it?” (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 73, l. 7 - 8; 16 - 21). C.S. did not respond.
  10. Mr. Albritton then reminded C.S. in a more calm voice that he was going to lose his chair. (Hearing Trans. #2, p. 41, l. 20-25).
  11. Mr. Albritton then yelled at C.S. in a very loud command voice to “stand up” and “get out of your chair.” (Hearing Trans. #1, p. 78, l. 1-8; Hearing Trans. #2, p. 42, l. 3, p. 45, l. 12). Other students were present and heard Mr. Albritton yell at C.S. (Exhibit 9, l. 22 - 25). C.S. did not respond.
  12. Mr. Albritton then suddenly pulled C.S.’s chair out from under him with the intention of having C.S. fall on the floor. (Exhibit 20; Exhibit 42, p. 65, l. 22 - 25 & p. 66, l. 1; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 78, l. 11 - 14; Hearing Trans. #2 p. 47, l. 6 - 11).
  13. Because Mr. Albritton pulled the chair out from under C.S., C.S. fell to the floor and landed on his right side near Ms. Barr’s feet. (Hearing Trans. #1, p. 79, l. 8 - 9; l. 24 - 25; p. 80, l. 12 - 13).
  14. Even though C.S. had not worked on his lesson and did not follow the commands from Ms. Barr and Mr. Albritton, he was not disrupting the classroom environment. (Hearing Trans. #1, p. 74, l. 7 - 9). Prior to being dumped out of his chair by Mr. Albritton, C.S. was sitting quietly facing the wall. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 94, l. 7 - 12). C.S. was not doing anything that threatened the safety of Mr. Albritton, Ms. Barr, or the other students in the classroom. (Exhibit 42, p. 80, l. 9 - 15). He was simply refusing to do his work as directed.

D. April 25, 2008 Incident - Confrontation after Removal of Chair

  1. When C.S. landed on the floor, he was startled, surprised, and caught off guard. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 80, l. 1 - 2; l. 14 - 22; p. 82, l. 11 - 25; p. 83, l. 1 - 6). Even though he had his fist clenched by his side while on the floor, C.S. was not aggressive or violent. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 82, l. 11 - 25; p. 83, l. 1 - 6).
  2. After landing on the floor, C.S. quickly got up off the floor and stood up facing Mr. Albritton with his arms at his side and with his fists clenched. Mr. Albritton then placed his hands on C.S. shoulders to separate himself from C.S.
  3. C.S. told Mr. Albritton something like “don’t touch me” or “get your hands off me.” (Hearing Trans. #1, p. 173, l. 4-5; Exhibit 23).
  4. Mr. Albritton forcefully pushed C.S. into the table and arched C.S. far backwards so that C.S. could not move. (Exhibit 51;Resp. Ex. 52; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 84, l. 21 - 25; p. 85, l. 6 - 9; p. 89, l. 3 - 5; p. 137, l. 22 - 24; p. 140, l. 11 - 15; p. 141, l. 10 - 11).
  5. Mr. Albritton placed at least one hand on C.S.’s neck and applied pressure. Mr. Albritton was choking C.S. when he did this. (Exhibit 51; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 81, l. 9 - 11; l. 19 - 25; p. 83, l. 16 - 19; l. 22 - 25; p. 84, l. 1 - 2; p. 136, l. 13 - 14; p. 137, l. 22 - 24).
  6. While still holding C.S. by the neck, Mr. Albritton lifted C.S. into the air and held him aloft by his neck for a short period of time - probably less than ten seconds - so that C.S.’s feet did not touch the ground. (Exhibit 41, p. SISD 274, # 37; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 89, l. 16 - 21; p. 145, l. 23 - 25; p. 150, l. 17- 22; Hearing Trans. #2 p. 61, l. 23 - 25; p. 62, l. 1).
  7. While Mr. Albritton had C.S. raised off the ground by his neck, Mr. Albritton increased the pressure on C.S.’s neck until C.S. dropped his hands to his side. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 90, l. 14 - 20; p. 97, l. 18 - 24; Hearing Trans. #2, p. 61, l. 1 - 4; l. 14 - 17).
  8. Once Mr. Albritton released C.S., the child ducked under Mr. Albritton’s arms, said “F— you” to Mr. Albritton, and fled the DAEP classroom. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 93, l. 3 - 11).

E. Review of Confrontation

  1. By Mr. Albritton’s own admission, he physically dominated C.S. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 73, l. 9 - 11).
  2. C.S. is not nearly as large as Mr. Albritton. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 72, l. 24 - 2). C.S. is approximately 5'5" tall and weighs 115 pounds whereas Mr. Albritton is approximately 5'8" and weighs 217 pounds. (Exhibit 10; Hearing Trans. #1 p. 198, l. 8 - 11; p. 222, l. 9 - 10; l. 18 - 19; Hearing Trans. #2 p. 54, l. 6 - 7; p. 72, l. 24).
  3. Mr. Albritton admits he did not feel that C.S. would overcome him, and he was confident he could physically dominate C.S. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 73, l. 2 - 8). As such, Mr. Albritton had no reason to be afraid of C.S. That is why he did not seek assistance from others. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 72, l. 22 - 25).
  4. C.S. did not attack Mr. Albritton or threaten Mr. Albritton in a dangerous or aggressive manner. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 98, l. 19 - 23). C.S. was trying to defend himself from Mr. Albritton’s assault. (Hearing. Trans. #1, p. 84, l. 10 - 14). Even Mr. Albritton acknowledges that C.S. would have felt the need to defend himself when he had his hands on his throat. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 88, l. 4 - 7). Mr. Albritton also acknowledges that when C.S. was struggling, he did not think C.S. was trying to hurt him, but rather that C.S. was trying to get away. (Exhibit 42, p. 83, l. 5 - 9; Hearing Trans. #2 p. 91, l. 20 - 25; p. 92, l. 1). The only time C.S. touched Mr. Albritton was when he was flailing and trying to catch something to get some support. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 98, l. 4 - 8; l. 17 - 18; p. 145, l. 8 - 12).
  5. Mr. Albritton admits that he lost his temper with C.S. during the incident on April 25, 2008. (Exhibit 42, p. 85, l. 7 - 8; Hearing Trans. #2 p. 103, l. 3 - 6). Mr. Albritton also admits that C.S. tried his patience, and he was angry at C.S. during the incident on April 25, 2008. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 62, l. 14 - 15; p. 102, l. 21 - 23).
  6. Mr. Albritton was extremely intent on C.S. during the struggle and was unaware of his surroundings, even to the extent that he did not acknowledge Ms. Barr when she stepped into his space and attempted to make eye contact. (Hearing Trans. #1 p. 87, l. 16; p. 88, l. 1 - 7). Mr. Albritton had no awareness of the other students in the room or Ms. Barr’s whereabouts. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 63, l. 8 - 13; p. 80, l. 1 - 9).
  7. Though Mr. Albritton claims to have feared for his own safety, (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 72, l. 20 - 21), C.S. was not a threat to Mr. Albritton. During the incident in question, C.S. did not attempt to nor did he strike Mr. Albritton or anyone else. (Exhibit 41, p. SISD 275, # 45). Other than allegedly standing in Mr. Albritton’s face, C.S. made no attempt to touch Mr. Albritton or engage in a physical confrontation. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 85, l. 20 - 22).
  8. Mr. Albritton had seen C.S. become angry prior to April 25, 2008. When C.S. would get angry, he would have an angered look, his brow would be crumpled, teeth gritted, jaws tightly closed, and his hands would be in a fist at his side. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 28, l. 19 - 25, p. 29, l. 1 - 2). According to Mr. Albritton, C.S. exhibited many of these same behaviors after Mr. Albritton dumped him out of his chair on April 25, 2008: C.S. had a grimace, his teeth were visible, and his fist was doubled up at his side. (Hearing Trans. #2, p. 54, l. 17 - 22). Yet, prior to April 25, 2008, there was never a time Mr. Albritton thought C.S. wanted to strike him – even when he exhibited the same indicators. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 28, l. 13 - 18).
  9. Prior to April 25, 2008, C.S. clenched his fists on two prior occasions in the DAEP classroom and Mr. Albritton did not feel threatened on those occasions. (Exhibit 42, p. 37, l. 2 - 19; Hearing Trans. #2 p. 84, l. 12 - 14).
  10. Despite Mr. Albritton’s purported fear for his own safety, he did not call out to Ms. Barr or the students to ask them for assistance or to tell them to go seek help. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 72, l. 3 - 9, l. 15 - 25). Likewise, Mr. Albritton did not take any actions to de-escalate the situation. He did not direct C.S. to calm down or move away. (Hearing Trans. #2 p. 82, l. 15 - 20).

F. Condition of C.S. after Incident