dispute resolution

The College uses Dispute Resolution (DR) to facilitate the resolution of suitable complaints regarding members of the profession. DR is voluntary and without prejudice to the parties. The results of the DR process are similar to those that would be expected following a full investigation and/or contested hearing.

The members in the cases reported here have consented to the publication of a summary of the complaint and its resolution.

Member: Not identified
Decision: Caution by the Investigation Committee

Following notification by an employer, the Registrar initiated a complaint against a member of the College. The Registrar alleged that, while employed as an elementary teacher, the member draped a skipping rope across the lap of a primary student to encourage him to remain in his seat.

On February 23, 2007, the Investigation Committee ratified a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the member and the College, in which the member agreed to be cautioned, in writing, by the Investigation Committee.

The member also agreed to notify the Registrar of any additional complaints against her of a similar nature made to her employer.

Member: Not identified
Decision: Caution by the Investigation Committee

Following notification by an employer, the Registrar initiated a complaint against a member of the College. The Registrar alleged that the member, an occasional elementary teacher, placed her hand on the back of a male intermediate student's head and directed his head to his desktop. The member's actions were preceded by the student refusing to stop disrupting the class and put his head down.

On March 22, 2007, the Investigation Committee ratified an MOA between the member and the College, in which the member:

• admitted the above-described conduct
• agreed to be cautioned, in writing, by the Investigation Committee
• agreed to complete a course of instruction, pre-approved by the Registrar, regarding appropriate classroom management strategies
• agreed to provide the Registrar with a written report prepared by the course practitioner indicating her successful completion of the course.

Member: Derek Robert Burke
Registration number: 196144
Decision: Resignation/cancellation

Following notification by the Near North DSB (the board), the Registrar initiated a complaint against Derek Robert Burke. The Registrar alleged that the member, by means of a computer system, communicated with a 14-year-old male student for the purpose of facilitating the commission of the criminal offence of sexual exploitation.

The member pleaded guilty to the criminal charge and was sentenced to three months to be served at his home under supervision, followed by three years' probation. The board terminated the member's employment.

On April 26, 2007, the Investigation Committee ratified an MOA between the member and the College, in which the member:

• admitted the above-described conduct
• agreed to resign his membership in the College
• agreed that the Registrar would cancel his Certificates of Qualification and Registration
• agreed that he will not, at any time in the future, apply to the College for Certificates of Qualification and Registration
• agreed to a notation on the public register
• agreed to publication of his name with a summary of the complaint and its resolution in Professionally Speaking, on the College web site and in such other manner as the Registrar deems appropriate
• agreed to placement of a copy of the Investigation Committee's decision and the MOA in a publicly accessible area of the College
• agreed that the College would provide notice of cancellation of his certificates to those organizations routinely notified of such action.

Member: Lorne Harding Cook
Registration number: 319166
Decision: Resignation/cancellation

Following receipt of a media article, the Registrar initiated a complaint against Lorne Harding Cook, who was formerly employed as the Head of Science by Upper Canada College.

The Registrar alleged that the member touched the penises of two 14-year-old male students while conducting mock kidney-transplant operations.

On October 12, 2006, the court found the member guilty of sexually assaulting one of the male students. The court found that, although the member's motivation was not sexual in nature, he did technically commit the criminal offence of sexual assault.

On April 26, 2007, the Investigation Committee ratified an MOA between the member and the College, in which the member:

• admitted the above-described conduct
• agreed to resign his membership in the College
• agreed that the Registrar would cancel his Certificates of Qualification and Registration
• agreed to a notation on the public register
• agreed to the publication of his name, with a summary of the complaint and its resolution, in Professionally Speaking, on the College web site and in such other manner as the Registrar deems appropriate
• agreed to placement of a copy of the Investigation Committee's decision and the MOA in a publicly accessible area of the College
• agreed that the College would provide notice of cancellation of his certificates to those organizations routinely notified of such action.

Member: Not identified
Decision: Caution by the Investigation Committee

Following notification by an employer, the Registrar initiated a complaint against a member of the College. The Registrar alleged that the member:

• placed a piece of tape on the top of a male intermediate student's hands
• picked up a roll of tape and pulled on the end of the roll, suggesting she might put it over another male intermediate student's mouth.

On May 25, 2007, the Investigation Committee ratified an MOA between the member and the College, in which the member:

• admitted the above-described conduct
• agreed to be cautioned, in writing, by the Investigation Committee
• agreed to provide the Registrar with a written report, prepared by a course practitioner, indicating her successful completion of a course of instruction regarding professional interaction and communication with students
• agreed to notify the Registrar of any additional complaints against her of a similar nature made to her employer.

Member: Not identified
Decision: Caution by the Investigation Committee

Following notification by an employer, the Registrar initiated a complaint against a member of the College. The Registrar alleged that the member lied to the parent of a student with special needs regarding the existence of a class trip.

As a result of the incident, the board placed a letter of reprimand on the member's file.

On May 25, 2007, the Investigation Committee ratified an MOA between the member and the College, in which the member:

• admitted the above-described conduct
• agreed to be cautioned, in writing, by the Investigation Committee
• agreed to complete a course of instruction, pre-approved by the Registrar, regarding appropriate and effective communication
• agreed to provide the Registrar with a written report, prepared by the course practitioner, indicating her successful completion of the course.

Members: Not identified
Decision: Caution by the Investigation Committee

Following notification by employers, the Registrar initiated several complaints alleging that members of the College failed to appropriately supervise students under their care. In such cases, allegations included:

• leaving students unsupervised in a classroom or schoolyard
• failing to supervise students during school trips
• locking the door of a classroom, as the member departed, with students still inside
• allowing students to participate in dangerous activities without taking appropriate precautions
• leaving students in the care of individuals who were not qualified to supervise them
• allowing individuals who had specifically been designated as unsafe to interact with students.

The Investigation Committee ratified several MOAs between members and the College, in which the members:

• admitted the conduct
• agreed to be cautioned, in writing, by the Investigation Committee
• agreed to complete a course of instruction, pre-approved by the Registrar, regarding appropriate and effective supervision of students
• agreed to provide the Registrar with a written report, prepared by the course practitioner, indicating successful completion of the course
• agreed to notify the Registrar of any additional complaints of a similar nature made to the employer.

When the Discipline Committee finds a member guilty of professional misconduct the member's name is routinely published in Professionally Speaking. If a similar matter is disposed of by the Investigation Committee or Dispute Resolution (DR) at the investigation stage, and the result is a caution, the name of the member is not published. The College monitors compliance with all agreements reached through DR.