Not Sage Enough

The independent review of the Ontario College of Teachers discipline and investigations process has been released.  The review was prompted by the discovery of several irregularities (to say the least) of how bad teachers were disciplined by their regulatory governing body.  It was discovered, for instance, that the chair of one such committee was a teacher who wrote porn prose aimed at the teen market or how teachers who had been convicted of sexual assault in a court of law did not have their teaching certificates taken away until years later—that sort of thing.  The public outcry was understandable.

Justice LeSage’s thorough review  looked at how the discipline and investigations process worked (or didn’t) and made recommendations for improvement.  The lack of transparency was paramount, however, some of his recommendations just don’t go far enough.

SQE was invited to provide input and comment at the time the review was carried out.  A quick online search found that the majority of College members were past union executives either at the provincial or local level.  You can’t suck and blow at the same time—the very people responsible for disciplining bad teachers are the same people who offer union protection.

Rather than comment on process, we wrote a simple letter to the Justice stating that the fundamental problem was the huge conflict of interest that exists as long as the teacher federations are in control of the College.  You can read our press release here, which pretty much summarizes what we outlined in our original letter.  LeSage wrote in his report:

        “There has been cynicism expressed to us about the relationship of the teacher unions with Council.  This is exacerbated, when as we are told, prior to each Council meeting, the elected members of Council meet with their respective unions to consider and be informed on the upcoming Council agenda. Those optics do nothing to enhance the independence of the Discipline, Investigation and Fitness to Practise Committee that I have been asked to review. Whilst I recognize that cases before the Investigation Committee and/or Discipline Committee would not be on the Council meeting agenda, the perception of impartial independent adjudication, which is vital at both the Investigation Committee and the Discipline Committee is compromised.”

 In fact, LeSage pointed the root of the problem in his account of the history of the College in the report.  Since the Royal Commission on Learning initially proposed the formation of the College it was always warned that the federations should not have control. It operated that way until shortly after the current government was elected and the College was essentially handed over to the federations, likely as payback. Moira MacDonald at the Sun writes more on this today as well.  

 Originally SQE had proposed that only two federation members be allowed to serve. LeSage recommended that teachers who serve on the College should resign any union post while they serve the college. We don’t think this is enough.  In light of LeSage’s findings, we now propose that no past or current union executive serve on the College.  Until this very serious conflict of interest problem is corrected, no procedural overhaul, no matter how ingenious or rigorous, is likely to lead to increased effectiveness or public confidence.

Comments