01 : 758 (NET)
Dr. Tom Skinner
2022-2023 (Term 1)
School Administration and the Law
Course Outline
Course Overview
01:758, School Administration and the Law, was a mandatory course that I completed in the fall of 2022. The purpose of the course was to establish and clarify the legal obligations of educators within the context of Canadian schools. School administrators would find this topic particularly informative when considering the possible legal implications for actions, or lack of action, taken by the school in different contexts. Learning on this topic was carried out through the study and exploration of several different legal cases across Canada involving the education system, including issues related to bullying, teacher neglect, rights of students with special needs, school obligations, school safety, etc. Assignments included two case law research papers, providing responses to case law presentations by classmates, completing a 10-minute case law presentation for the entire class, and small group facilitations.
This was a particularly useful course because it explored a wide variety of issues and the legal interpretations of what schools are and are not responsible for when working with students. In many ways, it was the scariest course I took in the program. By reviewing my own practices and the possible things that could “go wrong,” it made me question whether or not I was doing enough to protect my students and myself as a classroom teacher. However, in most cases, it was reassuring to see that the legal system often made reasonable legal judgements. In essence, if schools had taken the proper steps to ensure the protection and safety of their students and staff, the courts erred on the side of schools and school divisions. However, in cases where there was clearly an oversight made in part by the school, judgements rightfully supported those that were harmed or damaged because of the school’s neglect. In many ways, very clear implications and considerations for educators were made through the dozens of court cases studied in this course – and it was probably the most practical and informative throughout the graduate program. While the course was aimed for those in educational administration, it is a course that anyone working in the field of education would find beneficial and insightful.
Artifact 1
QUICK LAW PRESENTATION: COLLEGE OF EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS VS JENNY NG-NAKATANI, 2019 ONCECE 17
This response to the case between the College of Early Educators and Jenny Ng-Nakatani in Toronto was a presentation made to my class in November 2022. I was asked to provide a brief overview of what happened, explain why Jenny Ng-Nakatani was brought before the disciplinary panel, review the legal terms that were under scrutiny, offer a critical analysis of the case, and discuss the implications it would have on the education system as a whole. It was a relatively straight forward assignment, but by having every student in class review a different case, we received a well-rounded view of the legal system and all of the legal considerations we should take as educators.
This particular case shocked me. In essence, Ms. Ng-Nakatani failed to recognize that one of the young students in her care did not come inside with the rest of the class after recess and that the child was left outside for 30 minutes when the temperature was 38°C with the humidex. No harm came to the child and Ms. Ng-Nakatani had no history of disciplinary action in her 10 years of employment. As a result of her neglect, she had her teaching certificate suspended for 6 months, was charged $1000, and would only receive her recertification after completing a lengthy mentorship program. While there is no doubt that Ms. Ng-Nakatani made a mistake, and there was potential for significantly more damaging consequences for the child, it was a surprisingly steep penalty for someone with no disciplinary record. Further to this, it is an error that could so easily be made by any educator in the midst of a busy workday – and likely has been made countless times before. I believed it was essential to include this assignment in my portfolio because of how significant the implications are for such a seemingly small, relatively commonplace error. It reminds me that every consideration for the safety of the students in my care should be taken at all times.
Artifact 2
CASE LAW ANALYSIS: JACKSON V. SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 53 (OKANAGAN SIMILKAMEEN), 2013 BCSC 203 (CANLII)
The final assignment of this course was to examine a case study of our choosing. This examination needed to include the nature of the problem, an explanation of its importance, a definition of key legal terms, a review of key court statements, a critical assessment of the verdict, and a review of the implications for education. The particular case I chose to examine involved a student who was assaulted in high school, resulting in a significant brain injury. The student who carried out the assault did not have a lengthy record of violence and was suspended. Five years later, the victim took the school division to court, claiming it had failed to protect him from the perpetrator. The judge ultimately ruled that there was not enough evidence to suggest that the school failed to carry out its duty of care to protect the assaulted student, and the case was dismissed. The implications of this case for education are the importance of keeping and maintaining clear documentation of all school incidents, while also ensuring that disciplinary action is appropriate when considering the severity of an incident.
I included this case law study because there are a couple of implications for school leaders worth considering in this case. While school principals today are often less inclined to suspend students than they may have been 15-20 years ago, it is important to consider student safety and the message that is given to the entire school community when a suspension for violence is carried out. Balancing the need for restitution when a student has made an error with the safety of other students is key. However, what would the verdict have been if it turned out the perpetrator had a history of violence and the school had not suspended him? Would the school have been found guilty of negligence then? This is an important question for educators to ask. School administrators, in particular, should reflect on cases like this one and ask themselves: what did the school do right and what mistakes could have been made? In this case, the school was not taken to court until five years after the incident occurred. Many incidents that appear settled today may come back to haunt a school leader later. This case emphasizes the importance of documentation and ensuring that every decision is made with the safety of students at its centre. While this is an important aspect to consider as a school administrator, it is equally as important to consider as a classroom teacher. The actions of all educators could one day be challenged by a student or parent, so clear justification and documentation is always critical.
