Va. Code » Title 22.1. Education » Chapter 15. Teachers, Officers and Employees » Article 2. Terms of Employment Generally
Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-305 (2026)

Nonrenewal of contract of probationary teacher

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Before a division superintendent recommends to the school board nonrenewal of the contract of a teacher who has not achieved continuing contract status, the division superintendent shall consider, among other things, the performance evaluations for such teacher required by § 22.1-303 and shall notify the teacher of the proposed recommendation. Upon written request of the teacher within five working days after receipt of such notice, the division superintendent or his designee shall orally provide the specific reasons, if any, for such recommendation, along with supporting documentation, including such performance evaluations, to the teacher and, if requested by the teacher, to his or her representative. Within 10 days after receiving such reasons, the teacher may request, by notification in writing to the division superintendent, a conference before the division superintendent. Upon such request, the division superintendent shall set a date for the conference, which shall be within 30 days of the request, and shall give the teacher at least 15 days' notice of the time and place of the conference.

B. The conference shall be before the division superintendent or his designee. No such designee shall have recommended to the division superintendent the nonrenewal of the teacher's contract. The teacher and the person or persons who recommended the nonrenewal of the teacher's contract to the division superintendent, or a representative of either or both, shall be allowed to participate in the conference, but no such representative shall be an attorney.

C. If the conference is before a designee of the division superintendent, the designee shall communicate his recommendations to the division superintendent and to the teacher.

D. The division superintendent shall notify the teacher, in writing, of his intention with respect to the recommendation within 10 days after the conference.

E. In any case in which a teacher requests reasons for the recommendation as provided in this section, written notice of nonrenewal of the contract by the school board must be given either within 10 days after the time for requesting a conference has expired and the teacher has not made a timely request for a conference or, if a conference is requested, within 30 days after the division superintendent notifies the teacher of his intention with respect to the recommendation and the provisions of § 22.1-304 requiring such notice on or before June 15 shall not be applicable.

F. The conference shall be confidential and no written or oral communication of such conference shall be made to anyone other than the school board, in executive session, and employees of the school division having an interest therein; however, both the teacher and the division superintendent, upon request, may provide the reasons for the nonrenewal to a potential employer of the teacher.

G. The provisions of this section shall be inapplicable when a decrease in enrollment or the abolition of a particular subject or reduction in the number of classes offered in a particular subject causes a reduction in the number of teachers; however, a statement to that effect shall be placed in the personnel file of each teacher whose contract is nonrenewed for any such reason.

H. The intent of this section is to provide an opportunity for a probationary teacher to discuss the reasons for nonrenewal with the division superintendent or his designee, and the provisions of this section are meant to be procedural only. Nothing contained herein shall be taken to require cause, as defined in § 22.1-307, for the nonrenewal of the contract of a teacher who has not achieved continuing contract status nor shall the failure of the school board or the division superintendent to comply with any time requirement herein constitute a basis for continued employment of the teacher.

Code 1950, § 22-217.4:1; 1979, c. 98; 1980, c. 559; 1999, cc. 1030, 1037; 2013, cc. 588, 650.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2023 · leading case: Scruggs v. Keen, 900 F. Supp. 821 (W.D. Va. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Scruggs v. Keen, 900 F. Supp. 821 (W.D. Va. 1995). · cites it 4× “As the superintendent was required to do under state law, see Va.Code Ann. § 22.1-305 (Michie 1993), he sent plaintiff a written notice of his decision to recommend nonrenewal.”
Sch. Bd. of Norfolk v. Giannoutsos, 380 S.E.2d 647 (Va. 1989). “Except as provided in § 22.1-305, written notice of nonrenewal of the contract must be given by the school board on or before April fifteenth of each year.”
Dennis v. Cnty. Sch. Bd. of Rappahannock Co., 582 F. Supp. 536 (W.D. Va. 1984). “Except as provided in § 22.1-305, written notice of nonrenewal of the contract must be given by the school board on or before April fifteenth of each year.”
Flinn v. Fairfax Cnty. Sch. Bd., 87 Va. Cir. 262 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2013). · cites it 12× “Plaintiff, in her complaint, alleges that she was informed that her contract with FCPS could not be renewed under Virginia Code § 22.1-305, as FCPS interpreted Virginia Code § 22.”
Ashanti v. City of Richmond Sch. Bd. d/b/a Richmond Pub. Schs. (E.D. Va. 2023). · cites it 3× “Va. Code § 22.1-305(H). the non-moving party fails to sufficiently establish the existence of an essential element to its claim on which it bears the ultimate burden of proof, the Court should enter summary judgment against that party.”
Thurston v. Roanoke City Sch. Bd., 26 F. Supp. 2d 882 (W.D. Va. 1998). · cites it 4× “1-304 states: Except as provided in § 22.1-305, written notice of nonrenewal of the contract must be given by the school board on or before April 15 of each year.”
Jones v. Virginia Emp. Comm'n, 6 Va. Cir. 290 (Spotsylvania Cir. Ct. 1986). · cites it 2× “The petitioner made no effort to retain his job, but, more importantly, failed to follow the statutory provisions specifically for contract negotiations for non-tenured educators according to Code Section 22.1-305. Therefore, this court finds that the facts as presented by the…”
Lewis v. Amherst Cnty Sch. (4th Cir. 1998). “See Va. Code § 22.1-305 (Michie 1997). Contrary to Lewis' suggestion, this provision does not create a con- stitutionally protected property interest in continued employment, but rather, merely provides the procedures by which a probationary employee's employment may be…”
Stone v. Bedford Cnty. Sch. Bd., 9 Va. Cir. 460 (Bedford Cir. Ct. 1981). “Except as provided in § 22.1-305, written notice of nonrenewal of the contract must be given by the school board on or before April fifteenth *464 of each year.”
Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-305(B): 1 case
Scruggs v. Keen, 900 F. Supp. 821 (W.D. Va. 1995). “As the superintendent was required to do under state law, see Va.Code Ann. § 22.1-305 (Michie 1993), he sent plaintiff a written notice of his decision to recommend nonrenewal.”
Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-305(H): 3 cases
Ashanti v. City of Richmond Sch. Bd. d/b/a Richmond Pub. Schs. (E.D. Va. 2023). “Va. Code § 22.1-305(H). the non-moving party fails to sufficiently establish the existence of an essential element to its claim on which it bears the ultimate burden of proof, the Court should enter summary judgment against that party.”
Flinn v. Fairfax Cnty. Sch. Bd., 87 Va. Cir. 262 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2013). “Plaintiff, in her complaint, alleges that she was informed that her contract with FCPS could not be renewed under Virginia Code § 22.1-305, as FCPS interpreted Virginia Code § 22.”
Thurston v. Roanoke City Sch. Bd., 26 F. Supp. 2d 882 (W.D. Va. 1998). “1-304 states: Except as provided in § 22.1-305, written notice of nonrenewal of the contract must be given by the school board on or before April 15 of each year.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.