The way I read the available information about this case ~ including, critically, the newspaper coverage ~ it looks to me that this was a personal vendetta against the student teacher on the part of one or both of the two faculty members assigned to supervise her at her student-teaching assignment.

Perhaps the student-teacher is and was a truly flawed individual, unfit to be unleashed upon the student population, and the supervising teachers searched out, and found, whatever little hard evidence they could find to back up their instinctive abhorrence of this person.

On the other hand, it is also possible that only one of the two supervising teachers was opposed to this young lady's certification, but that she enjoyed sufficient seniority, influence, and determination to run roughshod over her colleague and others at the school, and was thus able to turn a completely unjustified hatred, an expression of her own bluenosed and borderline-psychotic personality disorder, into a matter of public policy.

Either is possible, as well as anything anywhere in-between, but I believe that the latter (or something like it) is much more likely than the former.

Let it be observed that the young lady is pictured at a Halloween party portraying a "drunken pirate." She is not much more likely to actually have been drunk than to have actually been a pirate. By the logic upon which her punishment is based, a person costumed for Halloween as Dracula or Frankenstein, or for that metter as The Devil, would be assumed to be "promoting" bloodsucking, mayhem and/or sin among the "underaged."