Eladio Conchas Guzman v. New Jersey Department of Education, State Board of Examiners, 10/31/25 (#513-25)

513-25
OAL Dkt. No. EDU 05969-24
Agency Dkt. No. 57-3/24
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
Eladio Conchas Guzman,
Petitioner,
v.
New Jersey Department of Education, State
Board of Examiners,
Respondent.
The record of this matter, the Initial Decision of the Office of Administrative Law (OAL),
and the exceptions filed by the State Board of Examiners (Board) pursuant to N.J.A.C. 1:1-18.4
have been reviewed and considered. Petitioner did not file a reply to the Board’s exceptions.
Petitioner appeals the Board’s decision denying his application for a Teacher of World
Language: Spanish Certificate of Eligibility. The Board determined that petitioner was short 29
credits in Spanish. Petitioner then requested that the Board consider his alternate education and
experience, pursuant to N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-4.12(b). 	Specifically, petitioner presented information
showing that his native language is Spanish and that he earned a degree in philosophy from the
Franciscan Institute of Philosophy (Franciscan Institute) in Mexico. After reviewing petitioner’s
request, the Board credited petitioner with an additional 17 credits. However, the Board found
that petitioner did not demonstrate an 	adequate one-to-one relationship between his
experience and the remaining 12 required credits at the advanced level.

2
Following cross-motions for summary decision, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found
that petitioner had shown, by a preponderance of the evidence, a one-to-one correspondence
between his educational and professional experience and the required 12 credits, which the
Board represented during the proceedings must be in “any coursework on Spanish literature,
Spanish poetry, Spanish drama, Spanish theater, Spanish culture, even Spanish history or
politics.” Initial Decision, at 6. The ALJ found that the course descriptions provided by petitioner
included content on Spanish literature, art, culture, history, music, philosophy, and more. The
ALJ posited that if the courses had had different names – such as “The History of Spanish and
Latin American Music” instead of just “Music” – they would meet the Board’s definition of an
advanced-level Spanish course and, therefore, that the classes corresponded one-to-one to the
required credits.
In its exceptions, the Board argues that it has already credited petitioner with 17 credits
based on his education in Mexico, but he still remains 12 credits short. According to the Board,
petitioner did not offer any evidence of having learned advanced Spanish, including Spanish
literature, poetry, or theater. The Board also contends that the ALJ applied the incorrect standard
of review.
As a threshold matter, a discussion of the applicable standard of review for petitions of
appeal that are filed under N.J.A.C. 6A:3 is necessary. 	When there is a challenge to a
determination made by an office within the Department of Education, the Commissioner is not
mandated to give deference to his staff, but instead determines whether the finding was legally
appropriate. In certain instances, the Department of Education has limited the scope of review
of a subordinate office or division by regulation. However, a decision by the Board denying an

3
application for a certificate is not entitled to the arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable standard
of review that is afforded to appeals filed under N.J.A.C. 6A:4, challenging a decision of the Board
revoking or suspending a certificate. These are two different types of decisions and two different
types of proceedings, and the regulatory provisions pertaining to each should not be conflated.
See Jessica Walder v. New Jersey Department of Education, State Board of Examiners,
Commissioner Decision No. 503-14, decided December 29, 2014; Jaroslaw Nimczyk v. New Jersey
State Board of Examiners, Commissioner Decision No. 98-22, decided May 16, 2022; Melody
Travisano v. New Jersey State Board of Examiners, Commissioner Decision No. 190-22, decided
August 8, 2022; Wayne Ernst v. New Jersey State Board of Examiners, Commissioner Decision No.
311-22, decided November 16, 2022; Stephanie Florio v. New Jersey State Board of Examiners,
Commissioner Decision No. 336-22, decided December 14, 2022; and Jamie Sebastian v. New
Jersey Department of Education, State Board of Examiners, Commissioner Decision No. 94-23,
decided March 30, 2023 (all finding that the Commissioner does not give deference to a decision
of the State Board of Examiners denying a request for issuance of a certificate).
Here, the ALJ correctly noted that the Board’s denial of petitioner’s application must be
consistent with the applicable statutes and regulations. However, in its exceptions, the Board
argued that the ALJ had applied the incorrect standard, referring to N.J.A.C. 6A:4-4.1(a) and
contending that its decision should not be overturned unless the petitioner proves that the Board
acted in a manner that was arbitrary, capricious or contrary to law.1 The petition of appeal in
this matter relates to the Board’s denial of an application for a certificate, not the Board’s
1 The Board’s Motion to Dismiss also referenced N.J.A.C. 6A:4-4.1(a) and the incorrect standard of review
that applies in this matter.

4
suspension or revocation of a certificate. Therefore, the standard of review that governs appeals
filed under N.J.A.C. 6A:4 does not apply to this case, and the appropriate standard of review of
the Board’s decision is whether the decision is consistent with the applicable statutory and
regulatory provisions, as stated by the ALJ.
Upon review, and applying the correct standard of review, the Commissioner finds that
this matter must be remanded to the Board for further proceedings.
Pursuant to N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-9.1(a)(1)(iii), a candidate must complete “at least 30 credits in
a coherent sequence of courses appropriate to the subject area . . ., of which 12 semester-hour
credits must be at the advanced level of study, including junior-, senior-, or graduate-level study.”
The decision of the Board that is the subject of this appeal indicates that the Board “found there
was insufficient evidence of written language, literature, and historical study of Spanish at the
upper level.”
The record includes a determination by Scholaro, Inc., which provides credential
evaluation services for international students, that petitioner earned the equivalent of 26.5
credits at the Franciscan Institute. 2 The Board’s decision reflects that it awarded petitioner the
equivalent of 17 credits for his experience as a native Spanish speaker and education at the
Franciscan Institute. However, there is no indication in the Board’s decision, or anywhere else in
the record, as to which courses at the Franciscan Institute were credited, or how many credits
were awarded based on petitioner’s experience in his native language.
2 The Scholaro documents reflect “US units” for petitioner’s coursework at the Franciscan Institute, rather
than “credits.” The ALJ accepted a unit as the equivalent of a credit, and the Commissioner is inclined to
agree with that analysis. If the Board did not deem a unit to provide a one-to-one correspondence to a
credit, there is no explanation in its decision as to why, or how it performed an alternative calculation.

5
Furthermore, there was no testimony or certification from the Board at the OAL to explain
why not all of the courses at the Franciscan Institute were credited to petitioner. The Board’s
decision appears to be based solely on the titles of the courses, rather than the more detailed
course descriptions that – as the ALJ noted – contain significant evidence that petitioner’s
coursework did include Spanish literature, art, culture, and other areas that the Board
represented is necessary.3
While the Commissioner acknowledges the Board’s argument that credits cannot be
double counted, without any information as to which courses have already been credited by the
Board, the Commissioner cannot determine whether there are sufficient remaining credits
among petitioner’s other coursework to satisfy the requirements.
Accordingly, this matter is remanded to the Board for further proceedings consistent with
this decision.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: 	October 31, 2025
Date of Mailing: 	November 3, 2025
3 The Commissioner notes that it is not clear from the record whether petitioner had provided the Board
with the course descriptions at the time it made its decision. Nonetheless, the course descriptions are
available now, and should be part of the Board’s consideration on remand.

New Jersey Is An Equal Opportunity Employer
State of New Jersey
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
INITIAL DECISION GRANTING
PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY DECISION
OAL DOCKET # EDU 05969-24
AGENCY REF. NO.: 57-3/24
ELADIO CONCHAS GUZMAN,
Petitioner
v.
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,
STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS,
Respondent
_________________________________________
Eladio Conchas Guzman, petitioner, pro se
Sadia Ahsanuddin, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent (Matthew Platkin, Attorney
General of New Jersey, attorney)
Record Closed: February 27, 2025 	Decided: August 15, 2025
BEFORE WILLIAM J. COURTNEY, ALJ:

OAL DKT. NO.: EDU 05969-24
2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Petitioner Eladio Conchas Guzman appeals a denial of a Teacher of World
Language: Spanish Certification of Eligibility. Respondent, the New Jersey Department
of Education, State Board of Examiners (the Board), denied the Certification for multiple
deficiencies, some of which have since been met. 	However, the Board asserts that
Guzman is still short 12 semester-hour credits in Spanish at the advanced level. Guzman
concedes that he does not have the credits but argues that he should be granted the
Certification on an “alternate route” theory. 	The matter is before this tribunal on cross-
motions for summary decision and oral arguments were heard on February 27, 2025.
The 	issue 	is 	whether 	there 	is 	a 	one-to-one 	correspondence 	between 	Guzman’s
educational background and life experience and the needed 12 semester-hour credits in
Spanish at the advanced level.
FACTUAL DISCUSSION
The following facts have been stipulated to by the parties and I therefore FIND
them as FACT. 	In 2023, Guzman applied for a Teacher of World Language: Spanish
Certificate of Eligibility. 	On December 8, 2023, the Board considered his application,
determined that there were three requirements for certification that he had not met, and
denied his certification. First, he had not demonstrated linguistic competency through a
Department-approved, nationally recognized test of oral language proficiency. 	N.J.A.C.
6A:9B-10.5(a)(1). Second, he had not passed the appropriate State test of subject matter
knowledge. 	N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-8.3(a)(4). 	And finally, he only had one of the required 30
semester-hour credits in Spanish, of which 12 had to be at an advanced level of study.
N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-9.1(a)(1)(iii). 	During the pendency of the appeal, the Board received
Guzman’s passing scores for Praxis: Spanish #5195 and the Oral Proficiency Interview
and determined that Guzman met the first two requirements. N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-8.3(a)(4), -
10.5(a)(1). (Exh. C, D).
Regarding the lacking 29 semester-hour credits, Guzman conceded that he had
not completed any explicitly titled “Spanish” classes at the advanced or graduate level but

OAL DKT. NO.: EDU 05969-24
3
requested that the Board consider that he was born and raised in Mexico, his native
language is Spanish, and that he earned a bachelor’s degree in philosophy from the
Franciscan Institute of Philosophy in Mexico. I FIND Guzman’s educational background
to be extensive and quite impressive. (Exh. E1, E2). He studied in Mexico, France, and
Italy, and has the U.S. equivalent of three bachelor’s degrees, two master’s degrees, and
one doctorate degree in the areas of philosophy and theology. 	His native language is
Spanish, he is fluent in English, and has studied French, Italian, and German. Currently,
Guzman teaches AP Spanish at Mary Help of Christians Academy in North Haledon, N.J.,
and is a member of the American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese.
(Pet. Exh. 10, 17).
The Board accepted Guzman’s experience to compensate for 17 of the 29 credits
but determined that he had not adequately provided a one-to-one relationship between
his experience and the remaining required 12 semester-hour credits in Spanish at an
advanced level. (Exh. A).
LEGAL ANALYSIS
Pursuant to N.J.A.C. 1:1-12.5(b), a summary decision “may be rendered if the
papers and discovery which have been filed, together with the affidavits, if any, show that
there is no genuine issue as to any material fact challenged and that the moving party is
entitled to prevail as a matter of law.” 	This rule is substantially similar to the summary
judgment rule embodied in the New Jersey Court Rules, R. 4:46-2. 	See Judson v.
Peoples Bank & Trust Co. of Westfield, 17 N.J. 67, 74 (1954). 	In connection therewith,
all inferences of doubt are drawn against the movant and in favor of the party against
whom the motion is directed. Id. at 75. On a motion for summary judgment, a judge must
“consider whether the competent evidential materials presented, when viewed in the light
most favorable to the non-moving party, are sufficient to permit a rational fact finder to
resolve the alleged disputed issue in favor of the non-moving party.” Brill v. Guardian Life
Insurance Co., 142 N.J. 520, 540 (1995).
Here, both parties agree that Guzman is a native Spanish speaker born and raised
in Mexico. 	The Board does not dispute Guzman’s educational background, that he is

OAL DKT. NO.: EDU 05969-24
4
currently teaching AP Spanish at a private school, or that he is a member of the American
Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese. 	Therefore, there are no genuine
issues of any material fact and a decision on the law is appropriate. Brill, 142 N.J. 540.
The legal issue presented is whether Guzman’s experience and education are sufficient
to establish eligibility for a Teacher of World Language: Spanish Certification of Eligibility
under an “alternate route” theory.
The Board of Examiners is responsible for the issuance and revocation of
appropriate certificates to teach or to administer. N.J.S.A. 18A:6-38. Candidates seeking
an instructional certificate must pass the appropriate State tests in their desired subject
matter. 	N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-9.1(a)(2). 	They must also either have an undergraduate or
graduate degree in the subject matter or have completed “at least 30 credits in a coherent
sequence of courses appropriate to the subject area,” of which “12 semester-hour credits
must be at the advanced level of study” at the junior, senior, or graduate level. N.J.A.C.
6A:9B-9.1(a)(1)(i)-(iii). 	In addition to meeting these requirements, candidates for World
Language 	Certificates 	of 	Eligibility 	must 	“[p]ossess 	linguistic 	competency 	in 	the
designated world language as demonstrated on a Department-approved, nationally
recognized test of oral language proficiency” and “[c]omplete a minimum of three
semester-hour credits in second language acquisition theory and related methodologies
offered by an accredited college or university within 12 months of initial assignment.”
N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-10.5(a)(1)-(2).
Candidates who are denied certification may appeal the denial by providing
“evidence of an alternative education and/or experience that the candidate considers
equivalent to any area(s) of deficiency.” 	N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-4.12(b). 	The Board may not
waive any requirements, but it may accept such alternate experience if it “determines that
the 	experience 	establishes 	a 	one-to-one 	correspondence 	with 	the 	statutory
requirements.” Hutchinson v. N.J. St. Bd. of Examiners, EDU 16373-12, Initial Decision
(Apr. 5, 2013), adopted, Comm’r (May 15, 2013), http://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections.oal/.
The burden is on the candidate to demonstrate by a preponderance of the credible
evidence 	that 	there 	is 	a 	“one-to-one 	correspondence 	of 	the 	experience/alternate
education to the licensing deficiencies.” Ibid.

OAL DKT. NO.: EDU 05969-24
5
“When there is a challenge to a finding by the Board of Examiners denying a request for
the issuance of a certificate, the Commissioner is not legally mandated to give deference
to his staff but instead determines if the finding was legally appropriate.” Walder v. N.J.
Dep’t of Educ., St. Bd. of Examiners, EDU 8530-14, Final Decision, Comm’r (Dec. 29,
2014), http://njlaw.edu/collections.oal/ at 3.1 This review by the Commissioner is “not akin
to the appellate review of a final agency decision that is entitled to an arbitrary, capricious
or unreasonable standard of review.” 	Ibid. 	When the scope of review of a subordinate
office or division is limited, “it has done so by regulation, i.e. appeals filed under N.J.A.C.
6A:4 challenging a decision of the State Board of Examiners revoking/suspending a
certificate or 	a decision of the School Ethics 	Commission.” 	Ibid. 	Therefore, the
appropriate standard for a denial of a Certificate of Eligibility is not whether it was arbitrary
and capricious but rather “whether the decision is consistent with the applicable statutory
and regulatory provisions.” 	Ibid. 	This standard has been applied consistently by the
Commissioner.2
Here, Guzman must show by a preponderance of the credible evidence that his
alternate experience and education provides a one-to-one correspondence to the
licensing deficiencies and that the Board’s denial of his Certificate of Eligibility was not
consistent with the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions.
There is no articulated test or standard for determining when a candidate’s
alternate experience and education provide a one-to-one correspondence to licensing
deficiencies. 	But by way of example, journalism courses and years of newspaper
experience are not a substitute for advanced English courses. Travisano v. N.J. Dep’t of
Educ., St. Bd. of Examiners, EDU 03126-22, Initial Decision (June 22, 2022) adopted,
1 “Prior decisions of the Commissioner have utilized the arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable terminology
to indicate that a finding of a subordinate office was appropriate; but those decisions did not establish that
the Commissioner was legally required to give deference to staff decisions that are the subject of contested
cases before the agency head.” Walder, EDU 8530-14 at n. 1.
2 For examples of the Commissioner applying this standard, see: Brady v. N.J. Dep’t of Educ., St. Bd. of
Examiners, EDU 05372-24, Final Decision, Comm’r (Jan. 30, 2025), http://njlaw.edu/collections.oal/;
Harriman v. N.J. Dep’t of Educ., St. Bd. of Examiners, EDU 02542-21, Initial Decision (Jan. 29, 2024),
adopted, Comm’r (March 8, 2024), http://njlaw.edu/collections.oal/; Ernst v. N.J. Dep’t of Educ., St. Bd. of
Examiners, EDU 05270-22, Initial Decision (Sep. 30, 2022) adopted, Comm’r (Nov. 14, 2022),
http://njlaw.edu/collections.oal/; 	Nimczyk v. Dep’t of Educ., St. Bd. of Examiners, EDU 15422-19, Final
Decision, Comm’r (May 16, 2022), http://njlaw.edu/collections.oal/.

OAL DKT. NO.: EDU 05969-24
6
Comm’r (Aug. 22, 2022), http://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections.oal/. 	A Thermodynamics
course offered under a physics label does not count towards a chemistry Certificate of
Eligibility even when the course at issue is substantially similar to a Thermodynamics
course offered under a chemistry label. Ernst v. N.J. Dep’t of Educ., St. Bd. of Examiners,
EDU 05270-22, Initial Decision (Sep. 30, 2022) adopted, Comm’r (Nov. 14, 2022),
http://njlaw.edu/collections.oal/. And Shakespeare, Drama and Poetry, and Vocal Skills
do not count towards advanced credits in theater when they are offered in English or
music departments. Neuhoff v. N.J. Dep’t of Educ., St. Bd of Examiners, EDU 11780-17,
Initial 	Decision 	(Mar. 	6, 	2018), 	adopted, 	Comm’r 	(Apr. 	13, 	2018)
http://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections.oal/.
Here, the Board is seeking evidence of “any coursework on Spanish literature,
Spanish poetry, Spanish drama, Spanish theater, Spanish culture, even Spanish history
or politics” because this content is “a necessary component of Spanish classes at the
advanced level.” (Resp. Br. at 14). The crux of Guzman’s argument is that his education
meets these requirements because for the last half-century, the study of philosophy has
centered on “the analysis of language and its role in shaping our understanding of reality
(which is the practical approach of Philosophy as Philosophy of Modern Languages after
Philosophy underwent a ‘linguistic turn’ in the 20th century).” (Pet. Br. at 3).
I FIND that Guzman has shown, by a preponderance of the evidence, a one-to-
one correspondence between his educational and professional experience and the
aforementioned coursework sought by the Board and I therefore CONCLUDE that he
meets the “alternative education and/or experience” standard in N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-4.12(b).
Hutchinson, EDU 16373-12.
Guzman provided an extensive and detailed description of the classes he took at
the Franciscan Institute of Philosophy. (Pet. Exh. 8). Introduction to Philosophy analyzed
Latin American literature and its “profound philosophical concerns” by reading authors
such as Arenas, Borges, Cortázar, Fuentes, Garcia Márquez and more. 	(Pet. Exh. 8 at
2). Sacred Art studied the “art of Spain and Latin America.” (Id. at 3). Scientific Research
Methodology I focused on “literary and media texts while analyzing essential philosophical
features and themes of Spanish-speaking cultures.” 	(Ibid.). 	History of the Franciscan

OAL DKT. NO.: EDU 05969-24
7
Friars I and II looked at how the Franciscan order “shaped New Spain and the early
Mexican 	republic” 	and 	the 	process 	of 	Spanish 	appropriation 	through 	“literature,
philosophy and cultural phenomena during the colonial period, the age of independence,
the Mexican revolution, and contemporary Mexico.” 	(Id. at 4, 5). 	History of Mexican
Philosophy examined the “different Spanish traditions of thought that inspired and
influenced the birth of Mexican philosophy.” 	(Ibid.). 	Guzman’s various Music classes
studied music from Spain and Latin America including flamenco, classical guitar, Spanish
opera, and ballets (id. at 4, 6, 8, 10, 13) with an “emphasis on cultural and ethnic
interaction and exchange in the context of Latin American history, politics, and society.”
(Id. at 8). 	History of Medieval Philosophy was about the “most influential Spanish and
Latin American philosophers and literary figures between the 16th and 17th century.” (Id.
at 4). Metaphysics examined Latin American philosophy and literature through a variety
of Latin American authors. (Id. at 5). Missiology laid out the history of “Spanish missions
to the Natives of colonial Latin America, particularly Mexico.” 	(Id. at 6). 	Philosophy of
Religion I analyzed the history of Christianity in Latin American. 	(Ibid.). 	Philosophical
Ethics studied the “historical and ethical states through which Latin American society has
passed.” 	(Id. 	at 	8). 	Philosophy 	of 	Communication 	studied 	“Spanish-speaking
philosophers” and literature. (Ibid.). 	There were also classes such as the Philosophy of
Language, the History of Latin American Philosophy, and many, many more. 	(Id. at 1-
18). 	Additionally, while getting a bachelor’s in theology Guzman took 4 credits of
“Language Fundamentals.” (Exh. E2 at 8-9).
Had any of these classes had a different name, such as “The History of Spanish
and Latin American Music” instead of just “Music,” they would meet the Board’s definition
of an advanced-level Spanish course. Prioritizing substance over form, I FIND that these
classes correspond one-to-one to 12 advanced-level credits of “any coursework” on
Spanish literature, poetry, culture, history, or politics. (See Resp. Br. at 14).
The College Board authorized Guzman’s Spanish Language and Culture class at
Mary Help Christians Academy as an AP level class because it “meets the expectations
colleges and universities have for AP Spanish Language and Culture.” 	(Pet. Exh. 10).
This professional acknowledgment that Guzman has the ability to teach Spanish courses
at the advanced level gives great weight to his argument. 	I FIND that Guzman’s

OAL DKT. NO.: EDU 05969-24
8
experience teaching AP Spanish Language and Culture goes toward fulfilling the
alternative experience standard. N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-4.12(b).
The Commissioner and the OAL do not owe the Board’s decision any deference.
Walder, EDU 8530-14. 	The Board’s denial must be more than just not arbitrary and
capricious—it must be consistent with the statutes and regulations. 	Ibid. 	The Board
determined that Guzman meets most of the applicable regulatory requirements. 	He is
more than linguistically competent in Spanish and has passed all the required tests.
N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-9.1(a)(2), -10.5(a)(1). The only regulatory requirement that Guzman does
not meet is the 12 semester-hour credits at the advanced level of study. 	6A:9B-
9.1(a)(1)(iii). 	If these were the only regulations at issue, the Board’s denial would be
consistent with them and affirmation of the denial would be appropriate. 	However, the
regulations mandate that candidates be given an alternate route to certification when they
have 	equivalent 	education 	or 	life 	experience. 	N.J.A.C. 	6A:9B-4.12(b). 	The
Commissioner may not often grant Certificates of Eligibility via the alternate route
provision as evidenced by Travisano, EDU 03126-22; Ernst, EDU 05270-22; and Neuhoff,
EDU 11780-17. 	But had the drafters of the regulations intended for the Board to grant
certification to only those with advanced degrees in the exact subject they teach, they
would not have provided for the alternative education or experience provision in N.J.A.C.
6A:9B-4.12(b) or even the “coherent sequence of courses appropriate to the subject area”
language in N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-9.1(a)(1)(iii).
Guzman has shown by a preponderance of evidence that his undergraduate
degree contained at least 12, if not more, advanced-level credits in Spanish literature,
poetry, culture, history, and politics. Adding this to his professional experience of actually
teaching college-level Spanish courses, I 	CONCLUDE that Guzman has shown, by a
preponderance of evidence, that he meets the alternate route to certification articulated
by in N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-4.12(b). 	Therefore, the Board’s denial of a Teacher of World
Language: Spanish Certification of Eligibility is not consistent with the applicable statutes
and regulations and should be reversed.

OAL DKT. NO.: EDU 05969-24
9
CONCLUSION
Guzman has shown by a preponderance of credible evidence that his alternate
experience and education provides a one-to-one correspondence to the licensing
deficiencies and that the Board’s denial of his Certificate of Eligibility was not consistent
with the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. Therefore, with no material facts
in dispute, I CONCLUDE summary decision in Guzman’s favor and Order requiring that
the Board grant him a Teacher of World Language: Spanish Certification of Eligibility is
appropriate.
ORDER
For the reasons set forth above, IT IS on this 15 th day of August, 2025 ORDERED
that:
1. 	Respondent’s Motion for Summary Decision is DENIED.
2. 	Petitioner’s Motion for Summary Decision is GRANTED; and
3. 	The New Jersey Department of Education, State Board of Examiners grant Eladio
Conchas Guzman a Teacher of World Language: Spanish Certification of Eligibility.
TAKE NOTICE THAT this Order resolves all outstanding issues between the
parties.
I 	hereby 	FILE 	this 	initial 	decision 	with 	the 	COMMISSIONER 	OF 	THE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION for consideration.
This recommended decision may be adopted, modified, or rejected by the
COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, who by law is authorized
to make a final decision in this matter. 	If the Commissioner of the Department of
Education does not adopt, modify, or reject this decision within forty-five days and unless
such time limit is otherwise extended, this recommended decision shall become a final
decision in accordance with N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10.

OAL DKT. NO.: EDU 05969-24
10
Within thirteen days from the date on which this recommended decision was
mailed to the parties, any party may file written exceptions with the COMMISSIONER OF
THE 	DEPARTMENT 	OF 	EDUCATION. 	Exceptions 	may 	be 	filed 	by 	email 	to
ControversiesDisputesFilings@doe.nj.gov or by mail to Office of Controversies
and Disputes, 100 Riverview Plaza, 4th Floor, PO Box 500, Trenton, New Jersey
08625-0500. A copy of any exceptions must be sent to the judge and to the other parties.
August 15, 2025
DATE 	WILLIAM J. COURTNEY, ALJ
Date Received at Agency: 	________________________________
Date Mailed to Parties: 	________________________________
WJC/db

OAL DKT. NO.: EDU 05969-24
11
LIST OF MOVING PAPERS
Respondent’s Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Decision
Petitioner’s 	Brief 	Cross-Moving 	for 	Summary 	Decision 	and 	Opposing
Respondent’s
Motion for Decision
Joint Exhibits
Exhibit A 	January 19, 2024, decision denying application
Exhibit B 	Petitioner’s answers to interrogatories
Exhibit C 	Petitioner’s score on the Praxis: Spanish exam
Exhibit D 	Petitioner’s certificate of completion of the Oral Proficiency Interview
Exhibit E1 	Petitioner’s transcript from the Franciscan Institute of Philosophy
Exhibit E2 	Petitioner’s credential evaluation report
Petitioner’s Exhibits
Exhibit 5 	Petitioner’s staff page for Mary Help of Christians Academy
Exhibit 6 	Petitioner’s pro se appeal
Exhibit 7 	Credentials review summary
Exhibit 8 	Petitioner’s documentation of one-to-one experience
Exhibit 10 	Emails confirming AP designation for Petitioner’s current class