## Facts

- Andra Barton, a certified Texas educator, served as principal of Old Union Elementary School in the Carroll Independent School District.
- After the school’s accountability rating declined due to low test performance among special education students, Barton led efforts in early 2008 to improve outcomes, including changes in instruction and testing practices affecting special education students.
- Special education services were governed by the IDEA and related state regulations, including requirements that a student’s education conform to an IEP and that IEP changes occur through required procedures involving an ARD committee that includes parents.
- A co-worker accused Barton of violations related to changes in special education students’ programs and parent notification; the district’s law firm investigated, found allegations true, and Barton resigned.
- SBEC initiated educator-discipline proceedings, alleging Barton altered students’ educational programs without proper procedures and failed to notify/consult parents, primarily framed as bypassing ARD/parental participation requirements.
- After a contested case hearing, the ALJ largely ruled for Barton on the core “improper IEP alteration” allegations but found she failed to provide written notice of program changes to affected parents and recommended a relatively light, non-inscribed reprimand.
- SBEC adopted the ALJ’s findings and imposed the reprimand; a Travis County district court affirmed on judicial review.

## Issues

1. Whether SBEC could uphold a disciplinary reprimand based solely on an ALJ finding that Barton failed to provide written notice of program/IEP changes when that specific written-notice violation was not pleaded as an independent ground in SBEC’s charging petition.

## Decision

- The court of appeals reversed the district court’s judgment affirming the agency action.
- The court held that disciplining Barton for a failure to provide written notice violated administrative due process because the written-notice theory was not properly pleaded and Barton lacked fair notice to defend against it.
- The court vacated the remaining sanction (the non-inscribed reprimand) because no properly pleaded violation remained to support discipline.

## Legal Principles

- In administrative license-discipline proceedings, the charging document must provide fair notice of the facts and legal theories on which the agency seeks sanctions.
- An agency may not impose discipline on a ground that is inconsistent with, or materially different from, the allegations in its pleadings, even under liberal construction of administrative pleadings.
- A final agency order exceeding the scope of the pleaded allegations and the issues fairly tried is invalid and must be set aside.

## Conclusion

The court set aside SBEC’s reprimand because it rested on an unpleaded “failure to give written notice” theory, depriving the educator of fair notice and an opportunity to defend against that specific alleged violation.


Barton v. State Bd. for Educator Certification, 382 S.W.3d 405 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2012, pet. denied)