investigations

The College investigates and considers complaints about members that relate to alleged professional misconduct, incompetence or incapacity. If the Investigation Committee concludes that a complaint does not relate to one of those three matters or is frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process, it does not proceed with the complaint.

Approximately four out of five complaints are not referred to the Discipline Committee but are dismissed or resolved by other means. Examples of cases considered by the Investigation Committee and not referred to a hearing are provided here.

Case #1

Complaint: Telling student to attend classes, emotional abuse, assigning excessive homework and awarding a failing mark
Outcome: No investigation

A former Grade 9 student complained that the member pulled the student aside and said that if the student didn’t attend classes, the student would fail; alleged that the medical condition suffered by the student was “more of a mental thing”; assigned six projects during exam week; yelled at the student, just before exams started, that failure to complete the six projects would result in failure; and gave the student an undeserved failing grade.

A panel of the Investigation Committee instructed staff not to investigate the complaint because none of the allegations related to professional misconduct, incompetence or incapacity and commented that, whilst the remarks about the student’s medical condition may have been insensitive, they did not constitute professional misconduct.

Case #2

Complaint: Allowing student to build inappropriate model, criticizing student, failing to consult student’s IEP
Outcome: No investigation

A Grade 8 student’s parent complained because the student’s science teacher had allowed the student to build a model guillotine for a science fair, which the parent considered to be inappropriate.

The parent also alleged that the member failed to accommodate the student’s learning disability by requesting that the student construct the model, failed to respond to a parental note or communicate at any time with the parent, and failed to consult the student’s Individual Education Plan.

The complaint was considered at an early stage by a panel of the Investigation Committee, which instructed staff not to investigate it. The panel advised the parent that its role was to decide issues of professional misconduct, incompetence or incapacity and that the matters identified were clearly within the school board’s purview.

Case #3

Complaint: Failing to provide adequate playground supervision or contact CAS
Outcome: Not referred (dismissed)

The parent of a Grade 2 student complained that the child’s principal had failed to provide adequate playground supervision and was reluctant to contact the CAS after the student had been sexually assaulted by classmates.

The parent also alleged that the member would not permit the student to identify the supervisor to whom the student had reported the sexual assault; refused to transfer the other students involved in the assault to another class; and did not follow board policy concerning suspension/expulsion of students committing sexual assaults.

After a full investigation, the Investigation Committee panel reviewing the complaint refused to refer it to a hearing because the information secured in the investigation indicated that the principal managed the situation appropriately.

Case #4

Complaint: Emotional and psychological abuse, falsely accusing student of theft and threatening with criminal charges, failing to contact parent when police called, racial profiling
Outcome: Written caution (for one allegation)

A Grade 9 student’s parent wrote to complain that the student’s vice-principal had emotionally and psychologically abused the student by falsely accusing the student of stealing a camera and threatening arrest if the student did not confess to the theft.

The parent also alleged that the member violated the student’s rights by not contacting the parent when police were called and then permitting the officers to “interrogate” the student, which the parent alleged to be racial profiling of the child.

A panel of the Investigation Committee considered the complaint and concluded that there was no information to support all but one of the allegations. In respect to the alleged failure to contact the parent when police were called, the member admitted an error in judgment and the panel cautioned the member to always be mindful of and adhere to board protocols.