A former community college instructor on the Western Slope failed to show his constitutional rights were violated when the school chose not to renew his contract based on his performance, a federal judge has found.

Shawn Sigstedt, who began teaching biology at the Steamboat Springs campus of Colorado Mountain College in 2007, claimed the school had terminated him in June 2020 for “incompetence” without providing him the required process under the law. But U.S. District Court Judge William J. Martínez sided with the college, finding it had afforded Sigstedt “more than sufficient” leeway to present his case before and after the termination decision.

“Not only did Plaintiff have the opportunity to explain his side of the story, but he actually did explain his side of the story by submitting numerous documents that he believed showed that he was a competent teacher,” Martínez wrote in an Aug. 2 order.

The non-renewal of Sigstedt’s employment came after the school determined he had not fulfilled his performance improvement plan for the 2019-2020 school year. Sigstedt signed on to the performance plan — with the possibility of termination if he failed to complete it — following a series of concerns that made their way to campus leaders.

A fellow biology professor in Steamboat Springs wrote that she was “shocked by the lack of rigor” in Sigstedt’s classes, warning that his students were not receiving transfer credit and were unprepared for more advanced biology courses.

“I have struggled to understand why his section is dissecting coconuts, making Mobius strips and touring the botanical park rather than learning about inheritance, DNA replication and how to graph and interpret data as required by state guidelines,” the instructor wrote to the college in May 2019.

Sigstedt also received student evaluations, many of which were highly complimentary of him as an instructor. However, the comments also illustrated a common set of complaints.

“Shawn does not use Canvas, which is a school policy,” wrote one student, referring to the school’s learning management system. “It is finals week and I have no idea what grade I have in his class.”

“How are we supposed to know our grades if we don’t ever see them?” wrote another.

Sigstedt’s performance plan included four goals, among them the need to align his curriculum with learning outcomes, use Canvas in a timely manner, and avoid confrontational or intimidating behavior. Although the plan required Sigstedt to submit his course materials to the dean by a deadline, he did not. He also did not upload lecture content to Canvas.

In October 2019, assistant dean John Lawrence observed Sigstedt’s Biology 111 class. While he complimented many aspects of Sigstedt’s teaching, he was alarmed at the off-topic discussion, incorrect information from Sigstedt and a lack of preparation.

On May 19, 2020, Sigstedt received a letter from the college’s chief operating officer terminating his employment “for grounds of incompetence.” Sigstedt appealed to a peer review committee, which agreed with that finding after a nearly 90-minute hearing. The college’s president, Carrie Hauser, affirmed the outcome on June 30.

Sigstedt sued the college, alleging among other things that the school’s inadequate process deprived him of the property interest he held in his employment.

“Specifically, the Defendants denied Sigstedt of a meaningful opportunity to be heard by, for example, limiting the time of the hearing to approximately one hour; denying him the opportunity to call witnesses, and denying him the opportunity to confront adverse witnesses,” Sigstedt’s lawsuit claimed.

He also alleged the school fixated only on “how well he could upload materials” to Canvas.

Colorado Mountain College countered that it had given Sigstedt ample time to work on his performance plan and the school would have been within its rights to terminate him with no notice due to the shortcomings with his curriculum.

“Plaintiff’s pre-termination process lasted nearly a year, and included multiple in-person meetings, teleconferences, and e-mail exchanges evidencing the College’s extensive support,” wrote attorney Jacqueline R. Guesno for the school. “While Plaintiff had sufficient time to present his side of the story (at the appeal hearing), he also squandered the time he had by asking for more time to present evidence instead of actually presenting any evidence he had.”

Martínez, in evaluating Sigstedt’s due process claim, looked to two time periods: before the decision to terminate and after the decision to terminate. The pre-termination period required Sigstedt to be informed of the issues the college had with his performance, for the school to explain its evidence and for Sigstedt to be allowed to present his story.

All of that happened with the performance plan, the judge concluded. As for the post-termination period, which included the appeal hearing, Martínez noted Sigstedt could have questioned witnesses, but evidently chose not to.

“It is undisputed that the hearing was an adversarial proceeding at which Plaintiff was represented by counsel and had an opportunity to counter the College’s presentation with his own testimony and evidence,” Martínez wrote.

Having sided with the college on Sigstedt’s sole federal claim, Martínez declined to evaluate the remaining state law allegations — including for breach of contract — as is the custom of federal courts.

The attorney for Sigstedt did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The case is Sigstedt v. Colorado Mountain Local College District et al.