Utah teachers could be disciplined for ‘immoral’ behavior under newly proposed list of dos, don’ts

A conservative member of Utah’s state school board is proposing a 36-page policy update for what teachers can and can’t do.

Christina Boggess, who represents District 8 covering western Salt Lake County, has drafted a long list that she wants included in the state’s rules as behaviors that would be “immoral, unprofessional, incompetent, unethical or noncompliant” for educators. She is also recommending stricter penalties for those who break the rules and a lower threshold for a “conviction” in disciplinary cases.

Overall, her rewrite would mean a much more prescriptive approach by the Utah State Board of Education on the possible violations that could lead to a teacher losing their license.

“Being licensed is a privilege, not a right,” Boggess writes in her proposal.

Some educator and parent groups are sounding the alarms.

“This only serves to undermine trust and collaboration,” said Sara Jones with the Utah Education Association, the state’s largest teachers union, during public comment at the board’s monthly meeting Thursday.

Jones and others were also upset about the process around the proposed changes. Boggess’s suggested overhaul of the standards was published Tuesday, two days ahead of the meeting’s start, and it wasn’t previously reviewed by a committee.

“Anything that is as broad and sweeping as some of the proposed changes should have public input,” Jones said.

The proposal was originally supposed to be debated Thursday, but got bumped to Friday afternoon’s agenda. At about 5:45 p.m. Friday, though, the board adjourned before addressing it, suggesting the item may be moved to October’s agenda.

A public post by a member of the group Utah Parents for Teachers on Facebook raised similar concerns: “She has made up definitions, and is changing the consequences. … We need to contact our state board members and tell them VOTE NO!”

In Utah, a state panel overseen by the school board is responsible for investigating and responding to allegations of teacher misconduct.

The Utah Professional Practices Advisory Commission, or UPPAC, hears cases against teachers accused of a range of violations, including sexual improprieties, fraud with taxpayer funds or drug and alcohol use on school grounds. The 11-member group then recommends a punishment to the board, including suspension or revocation of a teaching license.

Boggess wants UPPAC to have a more detailed list of prohibited conduct.

Her additions include updates specifically to what is considered a “boundary violation” by an educator. Currently, the rules on that include things like making inappropriate jokes, giving gifts to students or touching outside of a high-five, “side hug” or pat on the back.

Under Boggess’s recommendations, that would be expanded to also include a teacher:

• Providing their phone number, email or social media account information to a student without an educational purpose.

• Discussing their personal life with a student.

• Using profanity in front of a student.

• Any touching that is “uninvited, immoral, unethical, unprofessional or in contravention of a student’s stated desire.”

She has also introduced an entirely new section on “educator standards.” That part alone is 16 pages long.

The original rule is 13 pages total.

Boggess wants to adds that teachers need to “exhibit good moral character” and also preview all class content and materials before use.

As for what teachers cannot do, her list includes:

• Making any fraudulent statements.

• Harassing students, parents, patrons, employees or school board members.

• Using school computers to “access information that may be detrimental to students or inconsistent with an educator’s role model responsibility.”

• Participating in any kind of consensual sexual activity on school grounds.

• Attending any school activities, including those after-hours, while under the influence of alcohol.

• Leaving students unattended during class “unless another educator or authorized and background-checked adult is present.”

• Possessing “pornographic or indecent material at school,” which would include books banned under state law.

• Advertising or recommending students access mental health services, “including referring students for an evaluation [or] diagnosing student specifically with gender dysphoria.”

The post from Utah Parents for Teachers asserted that many of those are vague and undefined.

“Who gets to decide what is classified as immoral? Is assigning homework on Canvas [an online program] going to be considered immoral?” the post from one member asked.

Increasing penalties

The existing rules for teacher discipline were part of this month’s school board agenda because a committee recommended some minor updates.

That mainly included clarifying the definition for a “recent graduate.” As the rules stand, teachers are currently prohibited from starting a relationship with a recent graduate who has been graduated less than a year or within a year of the graduate turning 18 years old, whichever is longer.

The committee’s recommended update is to change that to a more universal rule to ban educators from initiating relationships with any students within six months of them graduating or exiting high school.

Boggess includes that change in her proposal, but leaves little else of what was there before, including the previously outlined penalties for teachers found to have violated a rule.

In her version, she fully removes the lowest level of response from UPPAC, called a “letter of education.” Teachers can be given that kind of letter if their conduct was found inappropriate but minor; it instructs them on why it was wrong and asks them to change their behavior moving forward.

The letter is a permanent addition to their employment record and isn’t considered formal disciplinary action.

Instead, under her changes, the lowest response to “minor” infractions would be a letter of warning, which is a formal, direct action and part of an educator’s personnel file.

For “moderate” violations, a teacher would get an official reprimand. “Serious” or “critical” problems could lead to a suspension of their license. A revocation would be for acts considered “egregious.”

Each of those levels is broken down with examples (those existed previously but were far less detailed). State law, for example, has long required that a teacher’s license be automatically revoked upon a criminal conviction for sex with a minor. “Egregious” could also include providing alcohol to a minor, or under Boggess’s addition, anything that is “harmful” to the public education system.

A suspension — which can range from six months to ten years — depends on the violation and can be upgraded depending on if a teacher has been previously disciplined. Specifically, Boggess suggests adding a new cause for license suspension if a teacher “invites, suggests or encourages a student to reconsider or change the student’s sexual orientation or gender identity.”

Boggess also wants the decisions for discipline by UPPAC based a “preponderance of evidence.” That phrase is often used in court for civil cases and means the claims against a teacher are more likely true than not.

Currently, the rules state that UPPAC is supposed to make a recommendation that is “supported by the evidence,” a less strict standard.

Boggess also adds the word “conviction” into the rules, in place of the previous “determination.”

Previous rule changes prompted by legal settlements

Jones, with the Utah Education Association, noted Thursday during public comment that the existing rules for teacher conduct were last reviewed and updated in 2019 in a “careful and thoughtful and deliberate process” as the result of a pair of legal settlements against the state school board.

She cautioned against major policy changes in light of that.

One settlement was the result of a lawsuit filed by a teacher who had his license permanently revoked for allegedly grooming a female student. The other was from a teacher who had his license temporarily suspended for allegedly harassing colleagues and excessively disciplining a student with special needs. Neither was criminally charged.

The teachers had accused UPPAC of recommending harsher-than-necessary and often inconsistent discipline. Both ended up with shortened suspensions as part of the settlements.

“There was some merit to some of their points,” said Ben Rasmussen at the time; he continues to serve as UPPAC’s executive secretary and director of law and professional practices for the board. “We felt it would be in everyone’s best interest to settle and look at how we can improve the process.”

The updated rules included new provisions for social media, for instance, which weren’t included before. And many teachers have supported and said they feel comfortable with those prior changes.

Overall, teachers who violate professional standards account for less than 1% of the more than 30,000 licensed educators in Utah. Since 1992, the state board has revoked or suspended more than 300 licenses total.

Violence against students and boundary violations, according to the latest data from UPPAC, are the top violations by teachers.