Professional Standards Comm'n v. Adams

Evidence supported the Professional Standards Commission's conclusion that high school principal had violated Standard 10 of the Code of Ethics for Educators when she failed to timely or appropriately act on information that a 15-year-old female student and two male students had oral sex with each other, a video of those acts was recorded on a cell phone, and the video was shared with several other students.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

We granted the Professional Standards Commission’s “PSC” application for discretionary review of a superior court order reversing the revocation of Priscilla Adams’ teaching certificate and remanding for imposition of a 90-day suspension. Because the superior court judge overstepped his authority in substituting its punishment for that imposed by the PSC, we must reverse. The facts, as found by an administrative law judge “ALJ”, show that on Friday, March 21, 2008, a 15-year-old Mundy’s Mill High School female student and two Mundy’s Mill High School male students had oral sex with each other. A video of those acts was recorded on a cell phone. On Monday, March 24, 2008, one of the boys brought the cell phone to school and showed the video to several students. At the time of the incident, Adams served as principal of Mundy’s Mill High School. Assistant Principal Shakira Rice learned about the video and immediately informed Adams about it. Rice took it upon herself to investigate and observe some of the video. Later that same day, she reported her findings to Adams, who took no action. Rice once again reminded Adams about the video on Tuesday, March 25, 2008, but again Adams did not ask any questions about the matter or provide any direction to Rice.

No action was taken until Thursday, March 27, when Adams called the female student’s parents to school for a meeting. During the meeting, Rice showed the parents the video. Adams did not ask any questions about the video, did not view the video herself, and told the female student’s parents that she had not seen the video. Adams also told the female student’s parents that other students were taunting their daughter. After the meeting, Rice returned the cell phone to the male student. Adams did not question Rice about who had custody of the cell phone or ask whether it had been confiscated.

Professional Standards Comm'n v. Adams

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report