Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Disciplinary Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State education board asks staff to rewrite proposed rule on investigation 'flag' after due-process concerns
Summary
Public commenters and board members raised due-process concerns about proposed language that would place an internal "investigation" flag on an educator's licensure record; staff will redraft wording and return to the board for further review.
The State Board of Education engaged in extended discussion on amendments to disciplinary regulations that would let the Maryland Department of Education place an internal banner indicating an educator is under investigation.
The proposed amendments to the Code of Maryland Regulations (referred to in the meeting as COMAR 13.08.12.06) drew public comment from Jamie Sapia, who identified herself as joining remotely from the Maryland State Education Association and said she was speaking on behalf of MSCA. "This flag absolutely violates fundamental aspects of due process," Sapia said, adding that a flag could stigmatize teachers who have not been found culpable and could affect future hiring prospects.
MSDE staff explained the agency's position and how the change would operate in practice. Kelly, an MSDE licensure official who led the staff presentation, said the department would place an internal investigation banner only when MSDE itself is conducting an investigation of an applicant or license holder who is not employed by a Maryland public school. "We're not talking about employment," Kelly said. "We are focused on licensure. ... It is absolutely our obligation as a state agency to investigate, and we should not be giving someone a license that has a cause for denial."
Board members and other attendees pressed staff on timing, scope and safeguards. Several board members echoed concerns that placing an internal banner before adjudication could have unintended consequences for educators who are later cleared. One board member asked whether language could explicitly limit sharing and remove any employment consequences until a final determination; another asked for separate language to address nonpublic schools, which sometimes lack the same due-process procedures as public LEAs.
Rather than move to publish the current draft, the board asked MSDE staff to redraft the specific sections that create the investigation banner and return with clearer, more narrowly focused language that distinguishes the department's investigations from local LEA investigations and that addresses due-process concerns. MSDE staff agreed to circulate possible wording and invited board members to submit suggested language.
Next steps include staff revisions and another review by the board at a future meeting. No formal regulatory vote was taken on the draft at this meeting.
