Professional Misconduct and the Rights of Equity-Deserving Students in Catholic Schools

It is no secret that we are currently living in a time of political and philosophical polarization. Flag protocols, library resources, and student dress code policies all once considered benign have become the flashpoints in ongoing conflicts related to accessibility, inclusion, diversity, and equity (AIDE). This context has a direct impact on the classroom, leaving many teachers to wonder where their professional obligations rest, especially as they face publicly debated topics. Some of the public conversations, and political movements within Canada and beyond, address the limitation of freedoms of many groups, perhaps most notably 2SLGBTQIA+ identified people. This context necessitates a review of the professional role of teachers and their legal and professional duties as they relate to equity-deserving students.  

Legal Context  

First and foremost, the law protects a student’s right to an education without discrimination. Teachers have a legal and moral obligation to uphold their students’ rights under Part 1 of the Ontario Human Rights Code. This code includes protections on the following enumerated grounds:  

The Ontario College of Teachers’ (OCT) Ethical Standards for the Teaching Profession reminds teachers to engage with each student, regardless of identity, with care, respect, trust, and integrity. There is no exception, regardless of the publicly-funded school system. In fact, in November 2020, the Ontario College of Teachers Act was amended to include ‘hatred’ under the professional misconduct regulation, and defined hatred as;  

“Making remarks or engaging in behaviours that expose any person or class of persons to hatred on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination under Part I of the Human Rights Code.” 

The Supreme Court of Canada has affirmed and reaffirmed that expectations for teacher behaviour are higher than the general public in three foundational cases: Ross v. New Brunswick, R. v. Audet, and the Toronto (City) Board of Education v. OSSTF District 15. In summary, the decisions of the justices in each case affirm that:  

• The broader community sees you as a teacher regardless of where they encounter you, so your conduct will be judged as if you are in the classroom.  
• As a teacher, you have been entrusted with the care of your students. You must provide that care as a parent would. 
• Teachers hold an extremely important position in society. You must maintain a higher standard of conduct.  

These expectations are in place in the classroom, outside of the classroom, in person, and online. Your behaviour across your relationships (in person and online) can be under scrutiny given this legal context.  

All teachers in Ontario operate under the jurisdiction of the OCT. The OCT investigates and considers cases “on the balance of probabilities” to determine if professional misconduct has occurred. In OCT investigations, members found to have engaged in racism, homophobia, transphobia, and other forms of discrimination have been found guilty of professional misconduct and have been subject to discipline. To illustrate, the quotations that follow are taken from recent OCT decisions in professional misconduct cases related to discrimination. 

OCT Findings 

Homophobia, transphobia

Teachers are expected to be inclusive and respectful towards students. Expressing homophobic and transphobic beliefs in class is discriminatory and offensive, particularly toward homosexual and transgender students. The Member’s conduct therefore amounts to verbal abuse of a student. (OCT Case, 2022). 

Sexism, Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation

The Panel found that the Member psychologically or emotionally abused students, contrary to subsection 1(7.2) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. When the Member delivered a speech to students ,the member shared personal views that there was ‘proper masculine behaviour’ and that men should work in gender-appropriate occupations, stand at the head of the household and protect their future wives. The Member’s comments made both male and female students feel upset and invalidated. The Member’s intolerance degraded students, their future aspirations and their gender identities. It disregarded the realities of students who identified as being part of the LGBTQ+ community and disrespected them and their lived experiences. Given the negative impact that the Member’s comments had on students’ psychological or emotional well=being, the Panel finds that the Member’s conduct was psychologically or emotionally abusive (OCT Case, 2022). 

Racism 

Using racial slurs and making derogatory comments when addressing students is offensive and suggests that people of colour are intellectually and culturally inferior and unworthy. Such comments amount to verbal abuse of students. Given the power that teachers hold in a classroom and the fact that such power can maintain and perpetuate a colonial culture and oppressive approaches, the Member’s conduct would reasonably have had adverse psychological or emotional impacts on students, particularly those of colour (OCT Case, 2022). 

Ableism 

It has also been shown that the Member failed to modify their teaching to meet the needs of students with an IEP, for example in the case of Student 1. According to testimony, the Member had a professional responsibility to adapt their teaching to an individual student’s needs and the accommodations in their IEP. The Panel thus finds that the Member did not meet the standard of practice for assessments and curriculum compliance (OCT Case, 2022). 

In the cases above, the OCT ordered: 

• Suspension of members’ teaching certificates 
• The members take remedial courses related to the discriminatory items in their case 
• The judgement be posted on their individual OCT page 

Finally, all teachers have a duty of care toward their students, which includes duties to report under the Child, Youth, and Family Services Act. If you suspect that a child is at risk of harm, you are personally responsible for reporting this to your local Children’s’ Aid Society (CAS). For example, should you believe that a student who is 2SLGBTQIA+ is experiencing abuse from one of their caregivers because of their gender identity, sexual orientation, or any other reason, then the onus is on you to report this to your local CAS. Neglecting to report when a child may be at risk or has been harmed could lead to allegations of professional misconduct. 

What does this mean for me as a Catholic teacher?  

Some Catholic teachers suggest that their personal interpretations of the Catholic faith are examples of denominational rights and/or personal freedom of thought, belief, and opinion protected by section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is important to take a moment to clarify these rights.  

Catholic denominational rights under the law are not held by individual teachers. Rather, denominational rights in Ontario are held by the Roman Catholic supporters in a district represented by the local Roman Catholic District School Board. This allows Catholic school boards to preferentially hire Catholic staff, use religious iconography, and maintain the Catholicity of the schools. Individuals within schools may have different views on what it means to be Catholic, but it is the school board’s responsibility to determine how its staff will exemplify Catholic values within their school community. Your personal understanding of Catholicism may differ from that of your employer and your local diocese. However, as a teacher, you have an obligation to follow the direction of your employer, who holds the constitutionally protected denominational rights, which includes the right to manage and control the schools to protect and preserve the Catholicity of the system. Once again, it is the school board that determines how Catholicity will be maintained in the system and not the teachers. On the other hand, in exercising these denominational rights, the school board must ensure that it is also complying with the Ontario Human Rights Code.  

It is no secret that we live in a world of varied opinions. Likewise, teachers are teachers 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and the legal obligations outlined above are in place at all times. If you have questions about your role as a teacher responsive to students in your care, you can review the resources listed and/or reach out to your local unit president.  

OECTA’s resources  

Click HERE to access the following resources:  

• 2LSGBTQIA+ and Coming Out 
• AIDE and Catholicism: A Backgrounder 
• Your Professional Boundaries: Understanding the Impact of the N-Word in Catholic Schools 

Click HERE to access:  

• Series: Safer Spaces? Braver Spaces? – Our Collective Responsibility 

Click HERE to access:  

• Teaching in the 21st Century Text and Video Resources