|
HearingsThree-member panels of the Discipline Committee conduct public hearings into cases of alleged incompetence or professional misconduct. The panels are a mix of elected and appointed Council members. If found guilty of professional misconduct or incompetence, a member's certificate may be revoked, suspended or limited. In cases of professional misconduct only, the committee may also reprimand, admonish or counsel the member, impose a fine, publish its order in Professionally Speaking, or order the member to pay costs. Panels of the Discipline Committee have ordered summaries of these recent disciplinary cases to be published in Professionally Speaking. Member: Sean P. Connors A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on October 21, 2008 into allegations of professional misconduct against Sean P. Connors for using inappropriate force against students. Connors, certified to teach in December 1998, was an occasional teacher with the conseil scolaire de district catholique Franco-Nord. He did not attend the hearing but was represented by counsel. The panel heard evidence that, to get a student’s attention, Connors kicked the student’s backpack while he was wearing it. In a separate incident, Connors kicked the leg of another student’s desk and slammed his hands on the desktop. The kick caused a metal bar attached to the desk to hit the student accidentally. Initial charges of assault were dropped and Connors continued to work another two years without incident. Having considered the evidence, an agreed statement of facts, a plea of guilt and a joint submission on penalty, the panel reprimanded Connors for professional misconduct. The panel also ordered Connors to take a course on professional boundaries within 10 months of the date of the order and provide proof of its successful completion to the College Registrar within 30 days of the course ending. In its written decision, the panel said that Connors’s actions constituted inappropriate physical contact with students that was unacceptable and unbecoming to a College member. Connors’s poor classroom management, based on physical interventions, also contravened the standards of the profession, the panel said. The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. Member: Scott Thomas Wells A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on December 2, 2008 into allegations of professional misconduct against Scott Thomas Wells related to grooming a female student for his sexual gratification. Wells, who was certified to teach in June 1982 and taught secondary school for the Hamilton Catholic DSB, did not attend the hearing but was represented by counsel. According to evidence, Wells groomed the student over several years, beginning in his Grade 9 religion class and continuing through his OAC course in Canadian literature. Over that time, Wells lunched with the girl and her friends, engaging in conversations that became increasingly sexual, including a discussion about oral sex. He arranged for the student to babysit his two daughters and indicated his growing personal interest in her while driving her home and back. Following her Grade 12 graduation ceremony, the girl lost her virginity to Wells after he invited her to his home on the pretext of having her babysit. Thereafter, Wells arranged several meetings at a hotel for sex, saying he was teaching the student how to drive. He eventually left his wife, married the student and later divorced her. Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and submissions of counsel, the panel found Wells guilty of professional misconduct and directed the Registrar to revoke his Certificates of Qualification and Registration. The Discipline Committee panel called Wells’s conduct “reprehensible.” “The member abused the authority and trust vested in him in his role as a teacher for his own sexual gratification, without regard to the well-being of the student,” the panel said. “Revocation is the appropriate penalty for misconduct of this severity.” The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. Member: Sherwood John Hinze A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on November 27, 2008 into allegations of professional misconduct against Sherwood John Hinze for grooming a female student for a sexual relationship. Hinze, a secondary school teacher, was certified to teach in September 2001. He did not attend the hearing nor was he represented by counsel. The panel heard evidence that Hinze, while serving as staff advisor to his school’s newspaper, engaged in inappropriate telephone and electronic communications with the student, travelled to and from school with her, joined her at a restaurant for a meal and had sex with her. As well, he permitted her to visit him at his home on nights and weekends and stay overnight. Hinze resigned his position with the board in January 2008. Having considered the evidence, and based on the plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found Hinze guilty of professional misconduct and directed the Registrar to revoke his Certificates of Qualification and Registration. “The member, by his actions, groomed the student for a sexual relationship; he continues this inappropriate behaviour,” the panel said in its written decision. “The committee finds the member’s conduct is reprehensible and unbecoming a member of the profession. Revocation is the appropriate penalty for misconduct of this severity.” The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. Member: Not identified A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on November 12, 2008 into allegations of professional misconduct against a member for inadequate supervision of students and for inappropriate remarks and behaviour toward students and a school administrator. The member, who taught as an occasional teacher for the Dufferin-Peel Catholic DSB, attended the hearing and was represented by counsel. The panel heard evidence that the member made inappropriate and mean-spirited remarks to and about students and failed to supervise students adequately when she was busy speaking on a cell phone. The member also yelled at the principal when advised of her bus-duty obligations, pushed students out of her way and disciplined a Grade 7 boy by having him sit coatless on the steps outside a portable classroom in February, despite the cold weather. Having considered the evidence, an agreed statement of facts, a plea of no contest, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel admonished the member for professional misconduct and directed that the admonishment appear on the College’s public register for six months. The panel also directed the Registrar to impose conditions on the member’s certificates, requiring her to successfully complete a course on appropriate student discipline techniques and boundaries, pre-approved by the Registrar, within 90 days. The panel ruled against publishing the member’s name because the act of professional misconduct was “relatively minor in nature.” The panel said the parties agreed the admonishment would appear on the public register for six months instead of three years as usual. It also said that there was no further proof of any further misconduct and that the admonishment and requirement to complete the course were sufficient penalty to deter the member from similar conduct in the future. The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. Member: Tom Goguen A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on November 27, 2008 into allegations of professional misconduct against Tom Goguen for sexually abusing a female student. Goguen was certified to teach in June 1992 and taught at the secondary school level for the Upper Grand DSB. He did not attend the hearing and was not represented by counsel. The panel heard evidence that Goguen admitted to having a sexual relationship with a student he coached on the school’s volleyball team. Goguen had sex with the student at his home and also phoned her and sent her sexually explicit cards and notes electronically. He admitted his behaviour to board officials and resigned in August 2007. Having considered the evidence and based on the plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found Goguen guilty of professional misconduct and directed the Registrar to revoke his Certificates of Qualification and Registration. “The member abused the authority and trust vested in him in his role as a teacher for his own sexual gratification, without regard to the well-being of the student,” the panel said. “The conduct … was unacceptable and in conflict with the duty of a teacher to protect, not abuse students.” College counsel argued that because there were no criminal proceedings against Goguen, publishing his name was necessary to protect the public and make it aware of the serious nature of his misconduct. The panel agreed. “As the member’s actions comprised the most serious breach of trust, publication with name, in these circumstances, is warranted and appropriate,” the panel said. The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. Member: Not identified A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on October 21, 2008 into allegations of professional misconduct against a member for repeatedly falling asleep in class and leaving students unsupervised. The member, who was certified to teach in August 1998 and worked for the Conseil scolaire de district du Centre-Sud-Ouest, attended the hearing and was represented by counsel. The panel heard evidence that, over a three-month period, the member was frequently absent from his physical education course, left students unsupervised on several occasions and for such long periods that they monitored his return, fell asleep on a gym mat during classes leaving students unsupervised, and arrived late and smelling of alcohol to a scheduled meeting with a parent. Having considered the evidence, an agreed statement of facts, a guilty plea, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel reprimanded the member for professional misconduct. The panel directed the Registrar to suspend the member’s Certificates of Qualification and Registration for three months unless he successfully completes, at his own expense within eight months, a course on school supervision and teacher accountability and a course on teaching and learning management. In its written decision, the panel said that it is inappropriate to fall asleep in class and leave students unsupervised repeatedly, regardless of excuses. “The teacher’s lack of judgment could have put the students involved at risk,” the panel said. The panel acknowledged that the member co-operated with the College by admitting that he had engaged in inappropriate conduct. Furthermore, the panel said it accepted most of the joint submissions on penalty because “these events represent an atypical period in [the member’s] career and the students did not suffer any serious consequences.” “These courses will help to fill in certain gaps in the member’s knowledge in terms of his interactions with students,” the panel said. “It is the opinion of the Committee that these courses, or suspension, if applicable, will serve the interests of the public and of the member.” The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. Member: Dwight Olivier Stewart-Ajamu A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on November 19, 2008 into allegations of professional misconduct against Dwight Olivier Stewart-Ajamu for falsifying documents to gain certification and employment and for sexually abusing a female student. Stewart-Ajamu was certified to teach in June 2004 and taught at the secondary level for the Dufferin-Peel Catholic DSB. He did not attend the hearing and was not represented by counsel. The panel heard evidence that Stewart-Ajamu – also known as Dwight Stewart – repeatedly lied in providing falsified information to the College, employers and students over the course of several years, and eventually sexually abused one student. The panel learned that Stewart pleaded guilty in May 2000 to defrauding the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton of more than $5,000. As a result, he received a 12-month conditional sentence, three years probation, and was ordered to perform 125 hours of community service and to pay $34,995.59 in restitution to the region. When applying for College membership, Stewart gave a false birthdate and provided a criminal-record check that stated he was born on October 31, 1963 in Ottawa when, in fact, he was born on October 30, 1962 in Kingston, Jamaica. He had altered his Jamaican birth registration form to indicate the later birth date. The copy of the passport page he submitted to the College with his application also showed the October 1963 birthdate. In February 2003 Stewart applied to the Dufferin-Peel Catholic DSB, saying he had never been found guilty or convicted of a Criminal Code offense. He applied again to the board in May 2004, and again lied about his previous conviction and his birthdate. While working for the board, Stewart told board staff and students that he held a doctorate and a law degree. He did not. He also lied about doing research with a York University professor and presenting with the professor at many conferences. As a teacher, Stewart swore in class, threatened to kick a male student, and showed movies, during Black History Month, that were not approved by school administrators. Stewart threatened students, saying he would hit them or remember their misbehaviour when marking their tests. The classroom, he said, was his kingdom and he could do as he pleased. Stewart told students they did not have a voice and that no one had freedom of expression in his class. As a religion teacher, he was unable to recite the seven sacraments when asked to do so by his principal. During the 2004–05 school year, Stewart drove a 17-year-old female student to his home where he asked her to sit on his lap, kissed her neck and lips and threatened to kill himself if he could not have her. He then engaged in sexual touching and intercourse with the girl. As well, he asked the student personal questions about her boyfriends and her sexuality and tried to isolate her from her friends. A detective with Toronto Police Services, who had been assigned to investigate the sexual assault of a student, said Stewart drove the girl home two to three times a week after meetings of a school club. He brought the girl to his home and introduced her to his mother as a York University student. He lied about his age, promised students scholarships, admitted to faking a marriage certificate and said he changed his last name from Stewart to Ajamu to go back to his roots. The detective said Stewart coerced the student into having sex. “[She] didn’t know what to do to get out of the situation because he was her teacher,” the detective said. “She wanted to tell somebody but didn’t have the courage and was embarrassed.” In 2006 Stewart assumed protection of a student, claiming he was that student’s legal guardian. In June 2007 Stewart submitted false birthdate information to the Ottawa Catholic DSB. In the same month he pleaded guilty to forging a police record-check document, for which he received a suspended sentence with six months probation and was ordered to complete 40 hours of community service. Having considered the evidence, onus and standard of proof and submissions of College counsel, the panel found Stewart-Ajamu guilty of professional misconduct and directed the Registrar to revoke his Certificates of Qualification and Registration. “The committee finds that the member engaged in grooming behaviour designed to get close to [the student], coerce her into having sexual intercourse with him and shame her into not disclosing the incidents for several years,” the panel said in its written decision. The panel also accepted evidence that Stewart submitted falsified documents on many occasions, including when applying to the College. “The member has two criminal convictions, one for fraud and one for forgery,” the panel said. “[He] forged documents to gain employment, to hide his criminal record and to gain access to membership in the College. The member then used his professional membership to take advantage of and sexually abuse a student. This egregious misconduct requires that he receive the maximum penalty, revocation of his Certificates of Qualification and Registration.” The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. Member: Philip Bin Jianping Hu A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on February 5, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against Philip Bin Jianping Hu for using physical force to discipline students. Hu, who was certified to teach in June 2001 and worked as an occasional teacher with the Toronto DSB, attended the hearing and was represented by counsel. The panel heard evidence that Hu, in separate incidents occurring over four years, inappropriately used physical force to discipline students, despite repeated and documented warnings from the board. In 2005 the board directed him to enrol in a class on effective classroom management strategies before he would be accepted for further assignments. However, in 2007 Hu was reprimanded again for similar misconduct. Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel reprimanded Hu for professional misconduct. Further, the panel ordered Hu to successfully complete a course at his own expense on appropriate boundaries and boundary violation issues, pre-approved by the Registrar, within three months of the date of the order. “Given that [Hu] had taken a classroom management course and thereafter engaged in inappropriate physical contact with a student, the committee determined that publication with the name of the member strengthens the message to this member that this type of behaviour will not be tolerated,” the panel said in its written decision. In a minority report, one of the panel members said he didn’t think that having Hu take a course was sufficiently rehabilitative. “The member engaged in inappropriate student physical contact over several years on multiple occasions,” the panel member wrote. “These acts continued despite the various letters of warning and disciplinary actions from the member’s principals and board. As a result of discipline by the board, the member was directed to enrol in a course in which he would receive instruction on effective classroom management strategies. Despite these many warnings and the completion of the course of instruction, the member continued his unprofessional and inappropriate behaviour.” The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. Member: Annette Snow A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on January 28, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against Annette Snow for cheating during the administration of Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) testing. Snow, who was certified to teach in June 1975 and was a principal with the Toronto DSB before retiring in August 2006, attended the hearing and was represented by counsel. The panel heard evidence that Snow, contrary to EQAO guidelines, opened sealed student tests, permitted photocopying and encouraged teachers to “do what they could” to ensure good test scores during administration of the 2006 Grades 3 and 6 tests. During the administration of one Grade 3 test, Snow provided instructions, suggestions and help to students on how to answer questions to ensure that they gave correct answers, including providing an example of a “story web” on the blackboard. Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel reprimanded Snow for professional misconduct and directed the Registrar to suspend her Certificates of Qualification and Registration for 10 months. The panel also said that Snow would have to notify the Registrar and enrol in a course on professional ethics, pre-approved by the Registrar, at her own expense, before taking another position for which an Ontario College of Teachers certificate is required. Snow, a principal, was aware of and familiar with the EQAO guidelines, the panel said. As the principal of the school, Snow has the responsibility of leadership, the panel wrote. “This failure to discharge her responsibility with regard to the protocols and procedures under which EQAO tests are expected to be administered constitutes professional misconduct. “The member failed to supervise adequately staff under her professional supervision, engaged in conduct unbecoming a member and thereby failed to maintain the standards of the profession.” The length of the suspension reflects the seriousness of the misconduct and Snow’s role of leadership, responsibility and authority within her school, the panel said. As well, the reprimand by her peers serves as a specific deterrent to the member. The ethics course, should she choose to work again, would serve to remind Snow of professional ethics and would be rehabilitative, helping her to reflect on and understand the motivation for her misconduct so that it would not be repeated, the panel said. The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. Member: Jeremy Allen Houston A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on February 9, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against Jeremy Allen Houston related to criminal convictions for accessing and possessing child pornography. Houston, who was certified to teach in Ontario in October 1991 and was teaching in Saskatchewan at the time of the offences, did not attend the hearing and was not represented by counsel. The panel heard evidence that Houston was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment to be served in the community and three years probation after being convicted of accessing and possessing child pornography. He appealed, but the court upheld the conviction. Houston was convicted criminally for accessing a story called, “I Have Afternoon Delight with Eight-Year-Old Polish Girl” from the North American Man/Girl Love Association web site. He was also convicted of possessing six images of child pornography. Having considered the evidence, onus and standard of proof and submissions of College counsel, the panel found Houston guilty of professional misconduct and directed the Registrar to revoke his Certificates of Qualification and Registration. The panel noted that while there was no evidence that the incidents took place at school, Houston’s actions demonstrated “a complete disregard for children’s welfare, thereby putting his students at risk.” “While the member accessed and possessed small quantities of child pornography, his actions remain reprehensible,” the panel said in its written decision. “Anyone who accesses and possesses any amount of child pornography perpetuates the abuse of children and must be dealt with severely.” The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. Member: Shaen Alexander Harrison A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on February 24, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against Shaen Alexander Harrison related to a criminal conviction for the assault of a young male. Harrison, who was certified to teach in March 2003 and worked as an occasional teacher with the Greater Essex County DSB, did not attend the hearing but was represented by counsel. The panel heard evidence that Harrison pleaded guilty in 2008 to a criminal assault charge for sleeping with and putting his hands down the front of the pants of a 14-year-old boy. The Crown withdrew a second charge for an identical incident with another 14-year-old boy. As a result, Harrison was granted a conditional discharge and placed on six months’ probation. The court ordered him to remain at least 100 metres away from both of the boys and abstain from communicating with them directly or indirectly. Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found Harrison guilty of professional misconduct and directed the Registrar to revoke his Certificates of Qualification and Registration. In its written decision, the panel said it found Harrison’s conduct “reprehensible and unbecoming a member of the profession.” “[Harrison] acknowledged placing his hand down the front of the pants of two 14-year-old boys in his care,” the panel said. “The member subsequently pleaded guilty to and was criminally convicted of assault on one of these children. “The member abused the authority and trust vested in him without regard for the well-being of the children” and he “has forfeited the privilege of being a member of the teaching profession.” The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. Member: Not identified A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on February 10, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against a member for forging her principal’s signature on student report cards. The member, who was certified to teach in June 1966 and worked as a long-term occasional teacher for the Sudbury Catholic DSB, attended the hearing and was represented by counsel. The panel heard evidence that the member, in order to help a colleague, forged the principal’s signature on copies of year-end student report cards to place in the students’ Ontario Student Record files. Because the copies were made from electronic files and not printed from the office computer, they were marked with “Teacher’s Working Copy,” which the member then whited out. At no time did the member tell the principal that she had signed the principal’s signature on the report card, and during a subsequent investigation by the school board, the member admitted to signing the principal’s name without authorization. Having considered the evidence, an agreed statement of facts, a plea of no contest, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel reprimanded the member for professional misconduct. In its written decision, the panel said there was no record of any prior discipline during the member’s lengthy career and that this was an isolated incident of a relatively minor nature. “While the member made a poor decision in attempting to assist a colleague, there was no suggestion of benefit or gain to the member, and the member accepted responsibility for her actions,” the panel said. The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register. |
