Today the judge asked for arguments from both sides. Since the last hearing, the school side has translated and submitted their 3 defense documents in Japanese.
– one document was a general proficiency chart for all teachers
– one was a proficiency chart marked low in almost all categories–it does not list the teacher’s name or lesson observed
– one was a list produced because the teacher had asked for a Handbook/list of procedures specific to St. Mary’s in 10/2006
Since it is unclear that the documents specifically showed that the teacher had deserved to be dismissed, the plaintiff is waiting for more arguments before responding.
Furthermore, the school has yet to show that there is a regular, high turnover of the 110 teachers due to the 1-year contract nature of the teaching job at St. Mary’s (they had originally wanted to use this as the sole reason teachers should not expect to work past 1-year at the school).
Click at the top of the page for the next court date!