District terminates teacher's contract after she slapped a student who spit in her face

A school district board of trustees proposed the termination of a teacher's contract after she slapped a student. The teacher requested a hearing regarding the proposed termination of her contract.

At the hearing, the teacher argued that she should not be subject to termination because she was acting in self-defense. The facts introduced at hearing showed that the student was in ninth grade. The student was being disruptive, having fun, talking to friends and goofing off. The student did not realize the teacher was behind him and he turned around and spat on her face. The teacher reacted by slapping the student two times.

The district argued that the teacher should be terminated because her conduct violated three provisions of the Educator's Code of Ethics:

• Standard 3.2: "The educator shall not intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly treat a student or minor in a manner that adversely affects or endangers the learning, physical health or mental health, or safety of the student or minor."
• Standard 3.5: "The educator shall not intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly engage in physical mistreatment, neglect or abuse of a student or minor."
• Standard 3.9: "The educator shall maintain appropriate professional educator-student relationships and boundaries based on a reasonably prudent educator standard."

The district also argued that the teacher failed to act in accordance with its standards of professional conduct.

The teacher argued that she should not be terminated because Texas law states that a teacher cannot be terminated for reasonable use of force when the teacher believes the force is necessary for self-defense or to maintain discipline. She argued that her actions were self-defense because she was afraid of the student at the time she slapped him.

The commissioner of education determined that the teacher slapping the student on the face was not justified and not objectively reasonable. None of the witnesses claimed that the student was acting in any manner that would suggest he would harm or hurt the teacher. Furthermore, no evidence was presented that the student posed any potential threat to the teacher even after he accidentally spat on her and was slapped by her. In fact, the student did not respond and left the classroom on his own.

While the teacher argued that she should have immunity from disciplinary action based on her objective view that she was fearful of what the student may do to her, there was no evidence that suggested that the student posed any threat to her. Therefore, any fear she had was not reasonable under the facts presented.

The commissioner of education issued a recommendation that the teacher's contract be terminated.