DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act (the “Act”) and Ontario Regulation 437/97
AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against Bertin Métolé Zohoun, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Jean-Luc Bernard, OCT, Chair Monique Lapalme Arseneault Vicki Shannon, OCT
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS Christine Lonsdale and Alexandre Blanchard, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, for the Ontario College of Teachers
– and –
BERTIN MÉTOLÉ ZOHOUN (CERTIFICATE #533697) Jean-Michel Corbeil, Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP, for Bertin Métolé Zohoun
Renée Kopp, Jones Harley LLP, Independent Legal Counsel
Heard: October 16, 2014
DECISION AND ORDER
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) on October 16, 2014 at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing, dated January 15, 2014, was served on Bertin Métolé Zohoun (“the Member”) requesting his attendance before the College’s Discipline Committee on February 4, 2014, to set a date for a hearing. The hearing was subsequently set for October 16, 2014.
The Member was not in attendance at the hearing.
ALLEGATIONS
The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing (Exhibit 1), dated January 15, 2014, are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Bertin Métolé Zohoun is guilty of professional misconduct and/or is incompetent as defined in subsections 30(2) and 30(3) of the Act, in that:
a) he failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
b) he failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically subsection 264(1) thereof or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);
c) he displayed in his professional responsibilities a lack of knowledge, skill or judgement and/or a disregard for the welfare of students of a nature or extent that demonstrates that he is either unfit to carry out his professional responsibilities or that his Certificate should be made subject to terms, conditions or limitations.
At the hearing on October 16, 2014, Counsel for the College announced that the College was withdrawing the misconduct allegations, specifically those of contravening subsections 1(5) and 1(15) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 of the Act, as set out in paragraphs a) and b) of the aforementioned Notice of Hearing. The Committee agreed to the withdrawal of the misconduct allegations against the Member.
AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
Counsel for the College advised the Committee that an agreement had been reached on the facts and introduced an Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea (“the Agreement”) (Exhibit 2).
Bertin Métolé Zohoun is a member of the College. A copy of the information concerning the registered member of the Ontario College of Teachers is attached as Appendix A.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the Conseil scolaire de district catholique des Aurores boréales as a teacher. During the 2010-2011 school year, the Member was assigned to École catholique Franco-Terrace; during the 2011-2012 school year, he was assigned to École catholique Val-des-Bois.
On April 15, 2011, the Member received an unsatisfactory performance appraisal (refer to Appendix B for the summative report of this appraisal).
The Principal of École Catholique Franco-Terrace determined that the Member’s performance was unsatisfactory, citing the need for improvement in the areas of Commitment to Pupils and Pupil Learning, Professional Knowledge, teaching methodology and classroom management strategies. The Member’s unsatisfactory performance included:
(a) failing to demonstrate commitment to the well-being and development of all pupils;
(b) failing to provide an environment for learning that encourages pupils to be problem solvers, decision-makers, life-long learners and contributing members of a changing society;
(c) failing to use his professional knowledge and understanding of pupils, curriculum, legislation, teaching practices and classroom management strategies to promote the learning and achievement of his pupils;
(d) failing to communicate effectively with pupils, parents and colleagues;
(e) failing to conduct ongoing assessment of his pupils' progress, evaluate their achievement and report results to pupils and parents regularly;
(f) failing to work with professionals, parents and members of the community to enhance pupil learning, pupil achievement and school programs.
On February 21, 2012, the Member received a second unsatisfactory performance appraisal (refer to Appendix C for the summative report of this appraisal). The Principal of École catholique Val-des-Bois found that in spite of the training sessions and professional learning activities in which the Member had participated, he failed to demonstrate sufficient improvement in his teaching strategies and classroom management.
On June 14, 2012, the Member received a third unsatisfactory performance appraisal (refer to Appendix D for the summative report of this appraisal). The Principal of École catholique Val-des-Bois found that the Member’s classroom management was still inadequate. During the classroom observation, the Member was late for all of his classes as well as for the supervisory duties for which he was scheduled. In spite of the training sessions and professional learning activities in which the Member had participated, he failed to demonstrate sufficient improvement in his teaching strategies and classroom management.
Following these unsatisfactory appraisals, the Member continued to take steps to improve his performance by means of a variety of training courses. In June 2012, he obtained the Additional Basic Qualification “Senior Division, Mathematics.” In August 2013, he obtained the Additional Qualification “Special Education, Part I” (refer to Appendices E and F for the course syllabuses).
During the 2012-2013 school year, the Member had a teaching position at École Providence in the Conseil des écoles fransaskoises, in Vonda, Saskatchewan.
To date, the Member’s subsequent performance appraisals have been satisfactory:
(a) Appraisals by Principal Diane Popovitch, dated November 13, 2012 and February 26, 2013 (refer to Appendix G for a copy of Ms. Popovitch’s report dated November 13, 2012, and to Appendix H for a copy of her report dated February 26, 2013);
(b) Appraisals by Assistant SuperintendentTom Michaud, dated November 16, 2012 and May 13, 2013 (refer to Appendix I for a copy of Mr. Michaud’s report);
(c) Appraisal by Deputy Director of Education Robert Lessard, dated April 30, 2014 (refer to Appendix J for a copy of Mr. Lessard’s report).
GUILTY PLEA
In this document, the Member submitted a guilty plea to the allegation of incompetence as defined in subsection 30(3) of the Education Act, Statutes of Ontario, 1996, chapter 12.
Specifically, the Member did not contest that he displayed in his professional responsibilities a lack of knowledge, skill or judgement and/or a disregard for the welfare of students of a nature or extent that demonstrates that he is either unfit to carry out his professional responsibilities or that his Certificate should be made subject to terms, conditions or limitations.
The Member stated that:
(a) he fully understood the nature of the allegations of incompetence against him;
(b) he understood that, by signing this document, he was agreeing to the submission to the Discipline Committee of the evidence as set out in the Guilty Plea;
(c) he understood that by pleading guilty to these allegations, he was waiving his right to require that the College prove the case against him and his right to a hearing;
(d) he understood that any agreement as to penalty between the College and the Member was not binding on the Discipline Committee; and
(e) he understood and acknowledged that he was executing this agreement voluntarily, unequivocally and with the benefit of legal counsel.
The Member provided a Guilty Plea pursuant to Rule 3.02 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee under protection of the Evidence Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E. 23, for the purpose of this proceeding under the College of Teachers Act, S.O. 1996, c. 12, and for no other purpose. The Member’s Guilty Plea does not constitute an admission by the Member as to the facts or findings in any other civil, criminal or administrative proceeding.
In light of the aforementioned facts and the Guilty Plea submitted by the Member pursuant to this document, the College and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee find that the Member’s actions constitute incompetence.
SUBMISSION BY COUNSEL FOR THE COLLEGE
Counsel for the College submitted that the Member had undergone three unsatisfactory performance appraisals (Exhibit 2, Tabs B, C and D). She stated that the College was withdrawing the allegations of professional misconduct set out in paragraphs a) and b) of the Notice of Hearing.
She further submitted that the Member had been employed as a teacher with the Conseil des écoles fransaskoises in Saskatchewan since the 2012-2013 school year.
SUBMISSION BY COUNSEL FOR THE MEMBER
Counsel for the Member attested that the information submitted by the College was accurate.
DECISION
In the matter of Bertin Métolé Zohoun, based on the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and the submissions made by counsel, the Committee recognizes that the facts produced support the case for incompetence as defined by subsection 30(3) of the Act and find that the Member displayed in his professional responsibilities a lack of knowledge, skill or judgement and/or a disregard for the welfare of students of a nature or extent that demonstrates that he is either unfit to carry out his professional responsibilities or that his Certificate should be made subject to terms, conditions or limitations.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Member admitted the truth of the facts in paragraphs 1 to 9 of the Agreement by signing the Agreement on October 15, 2014. He hereby acknowledges that the facts are evidence of his incompetence and does not contest this allegation against him.
The Committee agreed that the Member’s Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and his admission represent incompetence as pleaded by the Member.
During the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 school years, the Member’s teaching performance was appraised three times. His performance was found to be unsatisfactory in the following domains: Commitment to Pupils and Pupil Learning, Professional Knowledge, Teaching Practice, Leadership and Community and Ongoing Professional Learning.
In view of the Member’s deficiencies such as classroom management and teaching strategies, as shown in the Agreement, it is clear that in 2010-2012, the teacher displayed incompetence.
Teaching practice indicates clearly that a teacher who receives three unsatisfactory performance appraisals does not fulfil the expectations for the profession.
JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY
The Ontario College of Teachers and the Member state in the Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 4) that the appropriate penalty and order to be imposed by the Committee is as follows:
(a) The Discipline Committee directs the Registrar to impose the following conditions or limitations on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification:
a) prior to accepting or continuing in any position requiring an Ontario Certificate of Qualification and Registration, the Member must notify the Registrar of the College (“Registrar”) of the starting date of this position within 10 days of said date, and of the name of his employer and the nature of his employment;
b) after providing the notice to the Registrar described above, the Member must make all reasonable efforts to have his employer carry out an appraisal of his performance within 18 months of the notice;
c) the Member must make all reasonable efforts to provide the Registrar with a satisfactory performance appraisal within 18 months of the date of his notice to the Registrar;
d) clauses a) to c) will not apply if the Member provides the Registrar, within 18 months of the ratification of this Agreement, with a satisfactory performance appraisal from the Conseil des écoles fransaskoises, in Saskatchewan, and if the Registrar confirms in writing that this appraisal is recognized as equivalent to a satisfactory appraisal from Ontario. It is understood that the Registrar has full discretion in his assessment of the equivalency of the appraisal submitted to him.
PENALTY AND ORDER
The Committee accepts the Joint Submission on Penalty and makes the following order as to penalty:
- The Discipline Committee directs the Registrar to impose the following conditions or limitations on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification:
a) Prior to accepting or continuing in any position requiring an Ontario Certificate of Qualification and Registration, the Member must notify the Registrar of the College (“Registrar”) of the starting date of this position within 10 days of said date, and of the name of his employer and the nature of his employment;
(b) After providing the notice to the Registrar described above, the Member must make all reasonable efforts to have his employer carry out an appraisal of his performance within 18 months of the notice;
(c) The Member must make all reasonable efforts to provide the Registrar with a satisfactory performance appraisal within 18 months of the date of his notice to the Registrar;
(d) Clauses a) to c) will not apply if the Member provides the Registrar, within 18 months of the ratification of this Agreement, with a satisfactory performance appraisal from the Conseil des écoles fransaskoises, in Saskatchewan, and if the Registrar confirms in writing that this appraisal is recognized as equivalent to a satisfactory appraisal from Ontario. It is understood that the Registrar has full discretion in his assessment of the equivalency of the appraisal submitted to him.
REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
The Committee accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty for the following reasons:
In the Committee’s estimation, the penalty is appropriate, because it addresses certain expectations relating to professional incompetence.
The fact that two parties have reached an agreement should indicate that an appropriate balance of interests has been achieved.
Based on the three unsatisfactory performance appraisals, the Committee accepts that between 2010 and 2012 the Member failed to demonstrate sufficient improvement in his teaching strategies and classroom management. Since that time, the Member has submitted four satisfactory performance appraisals conducted by the Conseil des écoles fransaskoises, which supports his determination to improve.
In the jurisprudence produced during this hearing, a penalty or order generally includes that a member must take one or more courses. The Committee notes that the Member, of his own free will in an attempt to improve his performance, has already taken two courses: an Additional Basic Qualification course, “Senior Division, Mathematics,” and an Additional Qualification course, “Special Education, Part I.”
The order which has been handed down requires that the Member undergo another performance appraisal conducted by his current employer or by a new employer in Ontario to fulfil the requirements of the College and of the teaching profession. This order addresses the need to fulfil the requirements relating to specific and general deterrents, and demonstrates sufficient commitment to improving his teaching strategies and classroom management. The Committee further finds that it serves and protects the public interest.
October 16, 2014
Jean-Luc Bernard, OCT Chair, Discipline Panel
Monique Lapalme Arseneault Member, Discipline Panel
Vicki Shannon, OCT Member, Discipline Panel