Julie Witkowski v. New Jersey Department of Education, State Board of Examiners, 6/30/2022, (#146-22)

146-22
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
Julie Witkowski,
Petitioner,
v.
New Jersey State Board of Examiners,
Respondent.
Synopsis
Pro-se petitioner appealed the determination of the respondent New Jersey State Board of
Examiners (SBE) that she had not met the requirements for issuance of a Teacher of Art Certificate
of Eligibility (CE) because she failed to attain the required grade point average (GPA) mandated by
N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-8.3(b). Petitioner did not dispute the fact that she fell short of the required 2.75
GPA required by regulations but argued that an exception should be made because of difficult
personal circumstances she faced in college. The SBE filed a motion for summary decision.
The ALJ found, inter alia, that: an applicant for a certificate to teach Art must meet the requirements set
forth in N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-8.3(b); pursuant to the plain language of the regulations, an applicant who graduates
prior to September 1, 2016, must have a cumulative GPA of 2.75; petitioner only attained a 2.74 cumulative
GPA; the regulations do not allow for any exceptions to this requirement; petitioner did not dispute the facts
herein, but argued that she struggled for two semesters in college because of having been on her own for the
first time; petitioner has the burden of demonstrating by a preponderance of the credible evidence that she
is entitled to the certification she seeks; petitioner did not deny that she failed to meet the minimum GPA
requirement; the decision by the Board in this matter was consistent with the applicable statutory and
regulatory provisions; and unfortunately there are no exceptions allowed to the applicable licensing
requirements. The ALJ concluded that the petitioner failed to meet her burden in this matter; accordingly,
the SBE’s decision denying petitioner the CE that she sought was upheld.
Upon review, the Commissioner concurred with the ALJ that the petitioner did not satisfy the
requirements necessary to qualify for a CE and the Board’s decision to deny petitioner’s
application was correct. Accordingly, the Board’s motion for summary decision was granted, and
the petition of appeal was dismissed.
This synopsis is not part of the Commissioner’s decision. It has been prepared for the convenience of the reader. It
has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Commissioner.

OAL Dkt. No. EDU 00812-22
Agency Dkt. No. 247-12/21
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
Julie Witkowski,
Petitioner,
v.
New Jersey Department of Education,
State Board of Examiners,
Respondent.
The record of this matter and the Initial Decision of the Office of Administrative Law
(OAL) have been reviewed and considered. The parties did not file exceptions.
Petitioner challenged the State Board of Examiners’ (Board) decision denying her
application for a Teacher of Art Certificate of Eligibility (CE). Following the Board’s motion for
summary decision, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) determined that petitioner did not
satisfy the requirements necessary to obtain a CE because she had not attained the required
grade point average (GPA) mandated by N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-8.3(b).
Upon review, the Commissioner concurs with the ALJ that the petitioner did not satisfy
the requirements necessary to qualify for a CE. N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-8.3(b) requires a GPA of at least
2.75, which petitioner did not achieve, and N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-4.12(c) prohibits the Board from
waiving any GPA requirement. Therefore, the Board’s decision to deny petitioner’s application
was consistent with the applicable regulatory provisions.
146-22

2
Accordingly, the Board’s motion for summary decision is granted, and the petition of
appeal is hereby dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.1
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision:
Date of Mailing:
1 This decision may be appealed to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:6-9.1.
Under N.J.Ct.R. 2:4-1(b), a notice of appeal must be filed with the Appellate Division within 45 days from the date
of mailing of this decision.
June 30, 2022
July 1, 2022

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer
State of New Jersey
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
INITIAL DECISION
OAL DKT. NO. EDU 00812-22
AGENCY DKT. NO. 247-12/21
JULIE WITKOWSKI,
Petitioner,
v.
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION, STATE BOARD OF
EXAMINERS,
Respondent.
_____________________________________
Julie Witkowski, petitioner pro se
Michal Czarnecki, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent (Matthew J. Platkin,
Acting Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney)
Record Closed: April 5, 2022 	Decided: May 18, 2022
BEFORE EDWARD J. DELANOY, JR., Deputy Director and ALAJ:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Petitioner Julie Witkowski challenges the State Board of Examiners’ decision
denying her application for a Teacher of Art Certificate of Eligibility. 	The denial was
issued because Witkowski failed to meet the regulatory requirements for issuance of this

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 00812-22
2
certificate as set forth in N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-8.3 and N.JA.C. 6A:8B-10.3(a)(1). The reason for the
denial was that she lacked the requisite cumulative grade point average (GPA) requirements
in the regulations.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
At its meeting on October 28, 2021, the State Board of Examiners (Board) voted
to deny Witkowski’s request for issuance of a Teacher of Art Certificate of Eligibility (CE)
pursuant to N.J.A.C. 6A:9B-8.3(b). 	Petitioner filed a pro se petition of appeal on
December 30, 2021. 	Respondent filed a motion to dismiss, consisting of a letter brief,
on January 6, 2022. 	The Department of Education, Office of Controversies and
Disputes, transmitted the matter to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL), where it was
filed on February 1, 2022, for determination as a contested case.
Respondent’s January 6, 2022, letter brief requested that if the matter were
transmitted to the OAL, the motion to dismiss be converted to a motion for summary
decision. Petitioner’s opposition to the motion for summary decision was filed on March
30, 2022, and respondent’s letter reply was filed on April 5, 2022. The record closed on
that date.
FACTUAL DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS
The facts of this matter are not in dispute, and accordingly, I FIND the following
FACTS: 	Witkowski graduated college with a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree with a
concentration in painting in 2014. 	Thereafter, Witkowski sought to obtain a CE as a
Teacher of Art. 	The required grade point average (GPA) to receive a CE is 2.75.
Witkowski achieved a GPA of 2.74. 	Because she has graduated college, there is no
opportunity for her to improve the 0.01 difference in the required GPA.
LEGAL ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION
An applicant for a certificate to teach Art must meet the requirements set for in N.J.A.C.
6A:9B-8.3(b). Pursuant to the plain language of these regulations, an applicant who graduates

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 00812-22
3
prior to September 1, 2016, must have a cumulative GPA of 2.75 and have received course or
experiences in certain areas. The petitioner had only a 2.74 cumulative GPA. The regulations do
not allow for any exceptions to this requirement. The petitioner does not dispute the facts herein.
She argues that she struggled for two semesters in college, because of having been on her own
for the first time. 	She was harassed by other students, which harassment involved not only
destruction of her projects, but also threats to her safety. 	The stress of dealing with these
situations heavily affected the results of her grades. Not knowing how to advocate for herself led
to a slip in grades. 	She is currently working at Edison High School, after having passed a
rigorous interview process. 	Pulling her out of the classroom would affect her students and hurt
the school district. Denial of the CE would permanently exclude her from her career and change
the course of her life.
Unfortunately, while I wholeheartedly understand the plight of petitioner, and wish there
were some remedy for her, she has not demonstrated that she met the requirements of the
regulations, or that there was anything improper about the Board’s decision. The decision by the
Board in this matter was consistent with the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. The
petitioner has the burden of demonstrating by a preponderance of the credible evidence that
she is entitled to the certification she seeks. 	Farrar v. State Bd. of Exam’rs, EDU 13763-08,
Initial 	Decision 	(April 	27, 	2010), 	aff’d, 	Comm’r 	(July 	26, 	2010),
<http://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections/oal/>. 	Moreover, an administrative agency’s interpretation
of its own regulations is entitled to substantial weight. Allen v. PFRS, 233 N.J. Super. 197, 207
(App. Div. 1989). 	There are no exceptions allowed to these requirements, and I am not
permitted to make an exception in this matter. Therefore, the petitioner has failed to meet this
burden.
I, therefore, CONCLUDE that the Board’s decision was consistent with applicable law
and thus, must be upheld.
ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that Witkowski’s request for issuance of a Teacher of Art
CE is DENIED and her petition is DISMISSED.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 00812-22
4
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.
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, ATTN: 	BUREAU OF CONTROVERSIES
AND DISPUTES, 100 Riverview Plaza, 4th Floor, PO Box 500, Trenton, New Jersey
08625-0500, marked “Attention: Exceptions.” A copy of any exceptions must be sent to
the judge and to the other parties.
May 18, 2022
DATE 	EDWARD J. DELANOY, JR., Deputy
Director and ALAJ
Date Received at Agency:
Date Mailed to Parties:
mph

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 00812-22
5
WITNESS LIST
For petitioner:
None
For respondent:
00812-2022None
EXHIBIT LIST
For petitioner:
None
For respondent:
Letter brief in support of motion to dismiss