What Would You Do?

By law, cases under investigation are confidential. For the education of members, the following accounts, based on facts from real cases, raise important questions about teacher conduct, such as what is appropriate and what is not. Details have been altered to respect confidentiality.

The College Registrar initiated a complaint against Luke. The allegations against him comprised a variety of behaviours and comments that he should have known to be unwelcome and inappropriate.

The allegations included:

• saying to a female student, "Don't worry you'll never date anyone ... that will teach you to listen";
• telling a student that he was going to turn around and while he wasn't looking, the student should punch another student;
• making negative comments regarding the sexual orientation of students in his class;
• frequently insulting a student about her clothing and her homework;
• dropping the contents of a student's notebook on the classroom floor and then telling him to clean it up; and
• slamming doors in students' faces when they arrived late for class.

The school board's investigation substantiated the allegations. Consequently, Luke was advised that he would be suspended.

The board issued a letter of discipline to Luke, encouraging him to go to counselling or use other resources to improve his performance and his interactions with students.

In his response to the College, Luke denied the allegations. He said that some of them were exaggerated and had been taken out of context.

If you were a member of the Investigation Committee panel, what would you have issued to this teacher?

• an admonishment in person (most severe)
• a written admonishment
• a written caution
• written advice
• a written reminder
• take no action (least severe)

The Outcome

The Investigation Committee panel reviewed the information gathered during the investigation and the submissions made by the member's counsel.

The panel decided to admonish Luke in writing. Even though he denied the allegations, the panel found that there was enough information provided by witnesses to support that the allegations should be addressed by the Investigation Committee.