Journal of Educational Administration and Foundations
volume 24 issue 1 2014 jeaf.ca
Legal Literacy in Teacher Education Programs: Conceptualizing Relevance and Constructing Padagogy David C. Young, Wendy L. Kraglund-Gauthier, and Andrew Foran
7
School Board Liability in Cases of Teacher Misconduct William T. Smale, Barbara Gustafson, and Tatiana Gounko
21
Connecting to the World Beyond the School: Social Contexts that Influence School Leaders’ School-Community Collaboration Catherine M. Hands
41
Administration, Policy, and Education: Mobilizing the Firm Scott Eacott
58
i
© Journal of Educational Administration and Foundations, 2014 Inquiries Dr. Paul Newton and Dr. Bonnie Stelmach, Editors
JEAF c/o the Department of Educational Administration University of Saskatchewan 28 Campus Drive Saskatoon SK S7N 0X1 Canada
or by e-mail to
[email protected]
Submissions are only accepted through the JEAF website at jeaf.ca Journal of Educational Administration and Foundations Since 1986, the Journal of Educational Administration and Foundations (JEAF) has been devoted to scholarly and critical works in the fields of educational administration, the philosophy of education, the sociology of education, the history of education, comparative education, and contemporary issues in education. It is a forum for articles addressing the administration of schools and higher education institutions, and the education of adult learners. Its uniqueness lies in its concern to foster work which integrates two or more of these areas of study. The Journal accepts contributions from scholars, policy makers, graduate students, and researchers in education and related fields. JEAF is a double-blind, peer-reviewed scholarly journal.
Department of College of Education Educational Administration www.usask.ca/education/eadm
ii
Young, Kraglund-Gauthier, & Foran (2014)
Legal Literacy in Teacher Education Programs: Conceptualizing Relevance and Constructing Pedagogy Dr. David C. Younga, Wendy L. Kraglund-Gauthierb, Dr. Andrew Forana
St. Francis Xavier Universitya, University of South Australiab
Abstract Civil and criminal suits involving teachers exact a tremendous toll, both professionally and personally. Arguably, the best defence to potential litigation is knowing and understanding one’s legal rights and responsibilities. The literature suggests that at present, teachers’ legal literacy is insufficient. As a result, teacher education programs need to provide pre-service teacher candidates with a sound theoretical and practical background in education law. Typically, this is achieved through stand-alone courses, or by addressing legal issues as part of a broader survey course. In either case, one of the key elements instructors must address is how they will disseminate the material. This mixed-method study draws on several components: an anonymous survey (n=38), individual interviews with pre-service teacher education students (n=5), current research, and the authors’ experiences teaching education law. The authors argue that case studies are a cogent teaching tool to help pre-service teachers appreciate how law affects public education. teacher education; legal literacy; educational law
Introduction In the past 20 years, increased interactions between law and education have resulted in a burgeoning of scholarly inquiry (Delaney, 2009/2010; MacKay, Sutherland, & Pochini, 2013). Ironically, in a parallel fashion, increased litigation involving teachers now occurs. This growth in legal proceedings appears to have been exacerbated since the passage of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982. Our analysis of trial, provincial appellate, and Supreme Court of Canada cases suggests that teachers run astray of the law for a myriad of reasons. For instance, teachers presume incorrectly that they understand the law. In fact, they often believe that simple common sense is all that is required to guide their behaviour in and out of the classroom. Yet, the prevalence of litigation involving teachers reveals a disconnection between theory (as a pre-service
teacher) and practice (as an in-service teacher). The law is complex and multi-faceted; it can be bewildering even to those with formal legal training. Teachers need not be lawyers, but they do need some understanding of certain aspects and areas of the law, and the implications for professional practice and off-duty conduct. Teacher educators might argue that increased legal literacy would prevent—or at least reduce—teacher entanglements with the law. Yet, despite efforts to incorporate legal curriculum in Bachelor of Education (BEd) programs, we see publicized cases where lack of legal knowledge is a factor. For example, in Myers v. Peel County Board of Education (1981), inadequate teacher supervision resulted in severe injury to a student participating in a physical education class. In Kempling v. British Columbia College of Teachers (2005), an off-duty educator criticized homosexuality in a public 7
JEAF 24(1) forum and consequently was sanctioned by the British Columbia College of Teachers. Cases such as these can be avoided if teachers learn first to interpret policy that shapes professional practice and then adhere to the relevant rules and regulations. Our stance in fostering legal literacy is as follows: It is incumbent upon pre-service teacher education programs to disseminate legal and educational information. They must create spaces to analyze policy so as to equip beginning teachers with the knowledge to deal with the complex issues that emerge in the planning and practice of teaching. The amount of legal literacy teaching and learning varies widely across the country, which points to a lack of agreed-upon standards. Our concern is the disparate student outcomes of such learning. The complexity of the tensions in legal dilemmas (teacher to teacher, teacher to student, teacher to school authorities, and teacher to the community) have not been adequately addressed to allow for in-service educators to practise legal literacy. The educative response taken by our BEd program at St. Francis Xavier University was to use application, synthesis, and critical analysis as learning vehicles through which individuals can explore their own orientations and understandings as emerging professionals. It is our contention that a case-study approach is an effective means for pre-service teachers to tie together theory and practice into pedagogical praxis. By employing more student-centred approaches, including the case-study method, educators can take legal principles—which are often sterile and difficult to contextualize— into the classroom. This approach humanizes the tensions and dilemmas inherent to their practice. In this article, we discuss current literature and offer our rationale for what we believe to be best practices, based on our BEd program experience using case studies as a tool to teach and learn legal literacy as pre-service teachers. We have supported this rationale with research data collected from pre-service BEd students, including survey questionnaire responses and interview responses. Legal literacy is an important consideration for pre-service teachers as 8
they prepare to enter the field of teaching—a terrain fraught with potential legal landmines.
Teacher Training and Legal Literacy Most teacher training programs in Canada provide their pre-service students with some exposure to education law. To a large degree, this is accomplished through stand-alone courses that examine the inextricable link between law and education, or through broader survey-type courses, sometimes termed “infusion” courses, where law is examined as part of a larger picture (Dunklee & Shoop, 1986). In either case, the overall aim of such courses is to provide students with some degree of legal literacy (Delaney, 2009/2010). For example, St. Francis Xavier University incorporates professional literacy through the anchor of professionalism, which is introduced to students over the two years of the BEd degree program. The program uses Canadian legislation to examine ethics, contracts, political and community influence, and, finally, the weight of law (Foran & Orr, 2009). Although educators do not need to be lawyers, it is important for teacher candidates to understand what they can and cannot do as part of their job description. As professionals, teachers must conduct themselves within certain legal boundaries, because, as Manos (2007) pointed out, “ignorance of the law is never an excuse for improper or unlawful behaviour, but that ignorance can have extremely harmful repercussions for an educational employee—loss of licence, livelihood, and even liberty” (p. x). Thus, as Reglin (1990) noted, “teachers must have a strong working knowledge, beyond common sense, of education law” (p. 17). We too contend that a beginning teacher must have a progressive, rich, informative, and graduated legal experience before moving their practice into the field as an inservice teacher. As Dunklee and Shoop (1986) pointed out about the American situation, education litigation has increased to the point where it has gained public favour. The situation appears to be somewhat similar in the Canadian context. In fact, since the adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982, it can be argued
Young, Kraglund-Gauthier, & Foran (2014) that litigation in the area of public education has increased (Sussel, 1995). The many criminal and civil suits involving teachers and school boards have taken several different forms, and have addressed issues including, but not limited to, the following: negligence, sexual misconduct, corporal punishment, and cyber-bullying. At this juncture, it is important to recognize that lawsuits are often messy, and exact a great toll on all parties involved. In fact, even if found innocent of an offence, the mere fact of having been charged can continue to hang around a teacher’s neck like the proverbial albatross. Therefore, litigation is a most serious issue, and at the risk of sounding hyperbolic, teachers would be well-advised to act within acceptable legal boundaries at all times. In examining the literature surrounding administrator knowledge of school law in Canada, Findlay (2007) noted that most educational leaders possess an inadequate degree of legal literacy. Furthermore, most educators do not feel confident in their ability to enact legally-sound decisions. This is indeed troubling, but does mirror similar studies conducted elsewhere (see Reglin, 1990), which point to a continual lack of legal understanding among teachers. Although it appears that the issue of pre-service teachers’ legal literacy has not been investigated, it seems likely that those enrolled in teacher-training programs are not well versed in legal matters, just like their in-serviced counterparts. In fact, when conducting classes dealing with law, many of the students we have encountered in our BEd program admit that the material they are being exposed to is nothing they have encountered in their teaching practica. At the same time, we often hear our students express disbelief and shock regarding the legal battles that practicing teachers have become embroiled in, with an often accompanying qualifier that something like this could never happen to them.
Methodology In this research, we employed a mixed methods approach to collect and analyze data. Our collection methods were an online questionnaire and follow-up interviews. According to Creswell (2003), a “mixed method research provides more comprehensive evidence for
studying a research problem than either qualitative or quantitative approaches alone” (p. 9).
Participants
Participants were pre-service education students enrolled in the St. Francis Xavier University Bachelor of Education program, who were graduating from year two. This subject pool was selected based on convenience sampling (Patton, 2002), and came both from the 2010–2011 and 2011–2012 academic terms. All students were enrolled in the required final year course “Current Issues in Public Education” (CIPE), spread across four course sections. All students had the same opportunity to participate in the study, which we conducted after the course was finished and all course work submitted. From the combined potential of 234 participants, 38 (16.2%) responded to the invitation to participate, and then accessed the online questionnaire. Five participants volunteered for the follow-up individual interview. Questionnaire. The majority of respondents (n=24) indicated they were enrolled in the Secondary Education program focus (see Figure 1 below). Individual interviews. Five participants volunteered for the follow-up individual interview, all from the 2011–2012 academic year. One was a recent graduate from the elementary stream of the pre-service education program, one from the middle school stream, and three from the secondary stream.
Data Collection
We collected data via a questionnaire and individual interviews. The questionnaire was designed to gather univariate descriptive statistics, or a quantitative description of trends, attitudes, or opinions (Creswell, 2003). Although we acknowledge that information provided from interviews is filtered through the views of the participants (Creswell, 2003), interviewing participants in this study allowed them to clarify their questionnaire responses.
Questionnaire
The questionnaire was administered electronically using FluidSurveys and remained active for three weeks during May 2011 and May 2012. No questions were mandatory, nor 9
JEAF 24(1) 40
Number of Participants
35 30
24
25 20 15
10
10
4
5 0
0 Elementary Stream (Primary to Grade 8)
Middle Years Stream (Elementary)
Middle Years Stream (Secondary)
Secondary Stream (Grades 5 to 12)
Figure 1. Breakdown of respondents, based on enrolment in specific pre-service teacher education program stream (n = 38)
were identifying data collected from respondents’ electronic connection to the survey site. The 14 questions focused on respondents’ attitudes towards legal cases, educational law, and legal implications in practice. Topic questions were related to the core curricular components of the course “Current Issues in Public Education.” The survey included closed questions requiring either a Yes, No, or Unsure response, multiple-choice single response scales, and 5–point Likert-scale questions for which potential responses ranged from 1 (Not At All) to 5 (Very Well) or 5 (Very Relevant). No scale items were reverse-scored. Open-ended questions provided opportunities for respondents to share comments and provide examples.
Individual Interviews
After completing the survey, respondents were asked to volunteer for a short interview designed to clarify whether pre-service teachers can identify the topics of importance and which areas they are learning the most about. All five pre-service teacher participants interviewed were asked the same set of open-ended questions to allow for more in-depth discussion of their legal impressions. Interviews were conducted in-person, or via Skype or telephone and the same researcher who conducted the interview also recorded and transcribed the participant’s interview.
Measurement
Responses from 2010–2011 were combined with those from 2011–2012, as the course content and method of delivery had not changed 10
considerably during the two academic years. Data were analyzed to identify themes, to gauge legal literacy in pre-service teachers, and to identify effective practices for increasing pre-service teachers’ legal literacy. Quantitative data. After we closed the online survey to responses, the data were downloaded and exported to a spreadsheet for analysis of central tendency (mean = , and mode) and variability (range and standard deviation = ). A composite score was calculated for each of the sub-division questions by averaging respondents’ answers across the items in each sub-dimension. The higher the composite score, the higher the perceived importance or impact of the particular item being surveyed. Qualitative data. Using a narrative research methodology developed by Clandinin and Connelly (2000), the qualitative comments from the questionnaire responses and the interview transcripts were read and re-read for themes. For example, when students raised areas of concern, we flagged this data; then we looked at the data that we considered “innocent pitfalls” (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), and at perceptions of law and where those perceptions interacted with action. Our findings are presented below.
Findings According to Creswell (2003) a qualitative case study sample size is not number dependent; rather, a case study is dependent on participant engagement. In this research, we focused on one course over two years because
Young, Kraglund-Gauthier, & Foran (2014) this enabled us to reach students nearing the culmination of their degree program. Although perhaps not generalizable, this gave us an intimate snapshot of what beginning teachers thought about the law and its influence on professional practice. The following findings are derived from all available data.
Concern about the Law
Questionnaire respondents were asked to indicate their degree of concern about the law and its impact on educators both before their pre-service teacher education program and after the program. As indicated in Figure 2 below, 19 of 38 (50.0%) questionnaire respondents had a moderate degree of concern about the law and its impact upon educators before Very low (1) Low (2) Medium (3) High (4) Very high (5) their teacher-training program. 2, 5% 6, 16%
2, 5% 9, 24%
19, 50%
Figure 2. Degree of concern about the law and its impact upon educators, prior to beginning the preservice teacher-training program (n=38)
When questionnaire respondents rated their current level of legal literacy, that is, after they had completed their pre-service teacher education program, a change in personal opinion was evident.
As Figure 3 shows, more respondents were moderately concerned about legal issues after the completion of the program than prior to the beginning of the program. Very low (1)
Low (2)
Medium (3)
High (4)
Very high (5)
0, 0% 10, 26%
5, 13%
23, 61%
Figure 3. Degree of concern about the law and its impact upon educators, after completing the preservice teacher training program (n=38)
Further data analysis reveals that the particular education stream (elementary, middle school, secondary) in which pre-service teachers are enrolled informs their overall degree of concern about the law and its impact on educators. Table 1 below displays the means and standard deviations of questionnaire respondents’ overall level of concern about legal issues, broken down by program stream. Means and standard deviations of questionnaire respondents’ degree of concern about legal issues before enrolment in preservice teacher training program and after the program, based on program of study. Overall, more questionnaire respondents enrolled in the secondary stream were either moderately concerned (11 of 19), or highly and very highly concerned (6 of 8) about legal issues
Table 1. Means and standard deviations of questionnaire respondents’ degree of concern about legal issues before enrolment in pre-service teacher training program and after the program, based on program of study.
11
JEAF 24(1) prior to their pre-service teacher education program than were the remaining respondents. Furthermore, respondents enrolled in the elementary stream of the pre-service teacher education program were consistently less concerned about the law and its impact on educators. Interview participants’ comments about their concern with legal literacy before entering the BEd program also revealed a range, from being something that was “pretty limited … [and] really wasn’t a concern” to being something that was of interest “because it affects so much of our lives and the way we do the things we do.” Four interview participants commented specifically on their lack of knowledge pertaining to educational issues, while Marco1, a secondary stream pre-service teacher, mentioned cursory knowledge about the “common ones like reporting suspected child abuse, not being able to discipline a child physically, or not being able to say things like the Holocaust didn’t exist or be discriminatory about race or sexual preferences.” Gary’s response reflected the influence of popular media on individuals’ perceptions of legal issues: “I am a victim of the CSI–Law and Order schooling. I had ideas, but they weren’t necessarily true in terms of the Canadian legal system. I had a lot of assumptions, but they were not necessarily right.” Questionnaire respondents were also asked to indicate whether their degree of concern
about the law and its impact on educators had changed since the completion of their program. Table 2 below displays the responses, based on program stream. Of the seven respondents who indicated no change, four previously had indicated a moderate level of concern about legal issues and the other three respondents had indicated a high or a very high level of concern. Eleven of the 28 respondents (39.3%) who indicated that their degree of concern changed after the completion of their pre-service teacher education program had reported having a very low or low level of concern prior to their enrolment. One questionnaire respondent was confident of his level of legal literacy, declaring, “with an understanding of the risks, I can now conduct myself to avoid putting myself in situations where I am legally vulnerable.” Interview participants also recognized a change in their level of legal literacy. Bonnie, a middle school pre-service teacher, noted she had “a broader knowledge in a lot of areas … [and] a better sense of the limitations in classrooms and the potential impacts that a teacher’s actions can have—even if they weren’t intended.” Four other respondents had similar comments. Echoing Gary, Marco, and Bonnie, Ellen, a secondary stream participant, felt she knew “what to look for and where to go to find out more information” after completion of the BEd pre-service teacher education program.
Table 2. Questionnaire respondents’ change in degree of concern about the law and its impact upon educators since the completion of their program, based on program stream enrolment.
1
All participants’ names are pseudonyms.
12
Aggregate Totals
Young, Kraglund-Gauthier, & Foran (2014) 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
121
130
134
136
138
148 136
127
124
117
123
105
Figure 4. Respondents’ self-perceived level of legal literacy, categorized in terms of the 12 key topics covered in CIPE course content and calculated based on aggregate totals.
Bonnie further noted how she did not think, “there is any way to completely anticipate or prepare for the issues that could come up.” Gary made a similar observation, stating that he did not know if he felt more prepared after the education program, later commenting that “there is a lot of the gray areas being exposed between teacher–teacher, teacher–pupil, and teacher –administration. We need to be as prepared on all levels as much as possible.” Marco, Ellen, Emily, and Bonnie each commented on the general nature of the information provided in class, although Marco did not “think that was our professors’ intent … [for us] to know everything. I think they were trying to present us with the broad perspective, to give us an idea of how complex the law is and that it is something to have in the back of our minds, governing our thoughts and actions.” Some questionnaire respondents made similar comments, noting “you could always use more, to better protect yourself.” Another remarked “we did not talk about many of the things on the list,” referring to Question 7’s list of specific legal components contained in the CIPE course curriculum and discussed in the next section.
Legal Literacy Based on Specific Course Components
The ways legal issues could potentially affect a teacher’s life are a reminder of the com-
plexity of the teaching profession. This was a consistent theme in both questionnaire and individual interviews. Questionnaire respondents were asked to rate their self-perceived levels of legal literacy on a scale of 1 (Very low) to 5 (Very high) with reference to 12 core topics covered in the CIPE course. Figure 4 displays the results, based on aggregate totals across topics. Mean and standard deviation calculations on each topic reveal further details about questionnaire respondents’ perceived level of legal literacy, as do the same calculations based on program stream (See Table 3 below) It is noteworthy that elementary stream respondents had the lowest mean scores in nine of 12 topics, with the three exceptions being professional misconduct, negligence, and copyright. In each of these three topics, middle school respondents had the lowest means, by a slight margin.
Amount and Range of Legal Literacy Content in the Program
When questionnaire respondents were asked whether they felt the amount of legal literacy provided to them during their pre-service teacher training program was sufficient, slightly more than half (20 of 38, 52.6%) felt they had received enough, compared to seven respondents (18.4%) who felt they did not, 13
JEAF 24(1) Table 3. Comparison of total means and overall standard deviations, with means based on program stream.
and 11 (28.9%) who were unsure. Table 4 below displays the responses, based on program stream. Questionnaire respondents were then asked to comment on their responses to this question. Their annotative comments reveal a range of opinions related to the volume, depth, and breadth of legal literacy content. One respondent explained how there was “a lot of information presented,” and one respondent noted the volume of reading required, but also felt “the content was important to helping further understand different issues.” An elementary stream respondent felt the course
“more than covered everything and it should have been offered as an elective”; in contrast, a secondary stream respondent felt “more in- depth education would be useful.” An elementary stream respondent was “glad for the breadth of legal literacy offered,” but also commented that once in the field, “I will have lots more questions … that don’t feel as relevant now.” Two secondary stream respondents felt the course content would have been more useful earlier in the program, with one respondent commenting how pre-service teachers “should have a certain level of comprehension before [their] first practicum.”
Table 4. Questionnaire respondents’ assessment of sufficiency of the amount of legal literacy provided to them during their per-service teacher education program, based on program stream enrolment.
14
Young, Kraglund-Gauthier, & Foran (2014) In her interview, Ellen said she saw the CIPE course content as being “‘how not to get sued or fired’ advice, the idea of not being alone with a student, do not exchange any personal communications with a student; if someone tries to hug you, hands up in the air.” She also made reference to the challenges inherent in knowing the variances between school and school board policies, and provincial education mandates. The question concerning additional legal issues that should be addressed during a preservice teacher education program yielded few responses from questionnaire respondents. Dominating the 10 comments that were made were legal issues regarding teacher actions to deal with students with special needs and behavioural issues. For example, one elementary stream respondent would have liked more information on the obligations of implementing Individual Program Plans. A middle school stream respondent felt “teacher malpractice, bullying and violence, and negligence should be covered more.” A comparable comment was made by a secondary stream respondent, who then also commented that similar information was covered in an elective course on guidance. Another secondary stream student wanted “the question of privacy and our private lives [to] be addressed more thoroughly in order to prepare ourselves for the future lifestyle.” Each interview participant commented on other topics that they believed could have been covered during their CIPE classes. For example, Gary noted he would have liked to have more discussion on the “grey areas that are be-
Number of Respondents
Lecture 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0
ing uncovered, especially in the realm of social media such as Facebook and Twitter.” Emily stated she would have liked to know more about legal issues and support networks that function within Catholic school systems and private schools. Both Ellen and Emily thought that pre-service students also would benefit from an overview of different legal guidelines operating in other provinces of Canada and in other countries such as China and the United Kingdom. She noted how “it seems like the majority of our class has gone to other countries or other provinces to teach.”
Pedagogical Approaches to Teaching Legal Literacy to Pre-service Teacher Candidates
Questionnaire respondents and interview participants were asked to provide their opinion on the appropriateness of lectures and case study analyses the twopedagogical approaches currently used to teach legal literacy in a Bachelor of Education degree program. Questionnaire respondents responded by ranking each approach on effectiveness, from 1= Very low to 5= Very high. As evidenced in Figure 5 below, the most popular ranking for lectures was moderately effective, at 13, compared with both low and high rankings that tied at 8 responses for each, and very low and very high sitting at even less. A total of 33 respondents considered the case study analysis method to be highly or very highly effective, which together exceed the 13 moderately effective responses for the lecture method. After comparing the mean and standard deviation of all respondents’ ratings, lectures
Case Study 18 15
13 8
8 5
4 0 Very low (1)
5
0 Low (2)
Medium (3)
High (4)
Very high (5)
Figure 5. Comparison of effective pedagogical approaches to teaching legal literacy. Lecture versus Case Study Analysis in a pre-service teacher education program. Y-axis values are the number of respondents who selected the scale item (n=38).
15
JEAF 24(1) were considered to be moderately effective (m=3.05, SD=1.18) and case studies were considered to be highly effective (m=4.34, SD=0.71). The smaller standard deviation for the case study responses shows more agreement than is the case with the lecture method responses. Further analysis of means and standard deviations reveal less agreement among respondents by program stream about the effectiveness of lectures versus case studies (See Table 5 below). Respondents enrolled in the secondary stream rated lectures as being moderately effective (mean = 3.38; SD = 1.13), higher than respondents in the elementary or middle school streams. As well, secondary stream respondents also rated case study analysis higher than did elementary and middle school streams, but only slightly (mean = 4.38; SD = 0.71). Annotative comments from questionnaire respondents reveal comparable results. Reflecting questionnaire results, Emily, an elementary stream interview participant, and Gary, a secondary stream interview participant, found the case study approach to be more effective for generating discussions. For Gary, case study discussions are based on real scenarios versus hypothetical ones … a lot of times our discussion would veer off, into ‘what if this happened instead of this’… picture the offender as someone entirely different. … Our class had a lot of
big personalities who were passionate about this stuff. Similar to Emily, Gary appreciated the way case studies enabled his class to talk about “real scenarios [with] … a lot of open-ended discussion [and] … a chance to listen to different perspectives.” Emily wanted even more time spent in class discussions, with sufficient time set aside to connect the textbook reading with the case study analysis, and her peers’ perspectives. In addition, two secondary stream questionnaire respondents and Emily appreciated the opportunity to hear a guest lecturer from the provincial teacher’s union legal advisor, with one respondent noting how it “really put things into perspective.” Gary acknowledged how course instructors “are limited with the number of hours to teach CIPE,” and recommended using established program-specific professional development time to bring in guest speakers and have indepth conversations. In contrast, three interview participants— Marco, Ellen, and Bonnie—favoured lectures as the mode of delivery, while also acknowledging the benefits of group conversations to delve into deeper issues and hear differing perspectives. Marco’s comment reveals his critical thinking about the pedagogical aspects of teaching and learning, and synthesizes the argument effectively. For Marco: It really depends on personal learning style and the way the professor is able to deliver the information. Lectures are defi-
Table 5. Comparison of means and standard deviations of questionnaire respondents’ assessment of the effectiveness of lectures versus case study analyses, as pedagogical approaches to teaching legal literacy in a pre-service teacher education program.
16
Young, Kraglund-Gauthier, & Foran (2014) nitely helpful to present information such as rules, policy, and statutes because it is at a factual level, and not really open to discussion. The way we occasionally analyzed cases required higher-order thinking, in that we needed to know and synthesize the information from the text and the lecture, but we had to apply that knowledge to the case itself. Doing cases in groups was very effective because of the differing perspectives and stances.…The discussions illustrated just how different opinions and interpretations can lead to different actions and outcomes. Bonnie preferred the lectures “because we could focus on the person speaking in front of us and we all got the same message.…I like to sit and take it all in… [but she found] it easier to say things and ask questions in the small groups. It was a good opportunity to debate the issues and hear other perspectives.”
Making the Case for Legal Literacy in Pre-service Education Programs From the preceding discussion and research results, a case can be made for exposing pre-service teacher candidates to issues involving law and education. As Dunklee and Shoop (1986) argued, “the increasing spectre of litigation and the potential for legal liability must be addressed by teacher preparation programs” (p. 58). Certainly, the law is complex and ever-changing, but programs charged with preparing tomorrow’s educators must address the vital need for education law to be part of the curricula. Ultimately, “the knowledge of education law is more effective as a protector than as a healer and it is better to have a solid understanding of education law than it is to study the relevant statutes after the fact (Reglin, 1990, p. 17). As Sydor (2006) argued: When teacher education includes instruction about the legal context of schooling, teachers are better prepared to do their work. They have a better understanding of what is required of them from a legal perspective and are consequently less likely to misstep in their professional duties. Teachers who understand the boundaries of their roles with pupils, parents, col-
leagues and administrators are less likely to be intimidated by the actions of others and more likely to exercise their authority with reason and perspective. From a practical standpoint, the knowledge that teachers gain in the study of education law contributes to an efficient and orderly functioning of schools because they accept responsibility for their practice as professionals and not simply as employees. (p. 936) While ignorance of the law is not a legal defence, it is also wholly unacceptable for teacher training to minimize the importance of equipping teachers with legal literacy. From our collective experiences teaching education law to pre-service teacher candidates, it is clear that there are myriad pedagogical approaches that one can employ. And, at the same time, it is important to concede that the “one size fits all” approach does not lend itself to the teaching of educational law. As such, we have found that a lecture on a topic such as tort liability can be an effective medium for the transmission of knowledge. Under this banking model of education, the students become receptacles into which our knowledge is deposited. While many might lament the value or usefulness of the lecture format, what is clear is that in order to grapple with legal issues, one must first be equipped with foundational knowledge, or what Hirsch (1999) called intellectual capital. A lecture, or what we and many educators refer to as direct instruction, does allow a teacher to provide pupils with crucial information that they can ideally internalize and draw on when and where appropriate. In addition to formal lectures, small-group seminars in which a group of students can tackle and explore an issue such as the impact of the Youth Criminal Justice Act on teachers can be a powerful and effective mechanism for learning. And of course, as we argue in this paper, case studies are another method at one’s disposal for teaching education law. Regardless of the approach a teacher educator embraces, the law is a powerful force that shapes public education in this country. While the law is often maligned, it is also frequently misunderstood. “Many educators seem to practise the principles of law by hindsight rather than foresight, and they often learn 17
JEAF 24(1) the basics of education law through firsthand experience as defendants in actual litigation rather than as students involved in teacher training programs” (Dunklee & Shoop, 1986, p. 58). This is indeed regrettable, and perhaps points to a failure on the part of teacher education programs to instil within their students a solid understanding as well as a healthy appreciation of the law. As Gullatt and Tollett (1997) pointed out, “considering the tremendous influence teachers have over their students and the malleability of the young lives entrusted to their care, teachers have an amplified duty not only to know the law but also to abide by it” (p. 134). Thus, teacher training programs in Canada, including those that teach courses in education law, must seek innovative and engaging methods to ensure that future educators are equipped with legal literacy. A failure on the part of pre-service programs and instructors to achieve this outcome places our teacher candidates in a most precarious situation, since those who do not understand the law operate at their own peril (Gullatt & Tollett, 1997).
Conclusion In a society fraught with litigious confrontation, the classroom milieu is rife with potential civil and criminal malfeasance on the part of teachers—more so when ignorance is the fall-back stance of the responsible professional. As Wagner (2007) argues, it is important that educators are aware of how their activities both in and out of the classroom can lead to legal action. Teaching is arguably one of the most highly-regulated professions. Many preservice teachers are shocked and occasionally outraged that the governance of teaching is so stringently regulated: by laws, policies, codes of ethics and professional conduct, generalized guidelines and public opinion. In fact, we, as professors responsible for the teaching of education law, often remind our pre-service teachers that they will always be on the clock and that, in effect, they can never remove their teacher hats. Actions both in and out of the classroom, during school hours and during personal leisure time, can have serious ramifications, and 18
impact professional careers and private lives. But rather than create an atmosphere of fear and mistrust, and a belief that teachers and their innocent mistakes are targets for litigation, legal literacy education must be delivered so that the importance of the subject matter is clearly evident. Teachers admittedly do not possess sufficient legal literacy, a fact supported by the literature. Pre-service education programs are the ideal venues to expose future teachers to how law affects all facets of teaching. The case study method is one tool which has proven to be effective in teaching and learning, both in the literature and in our own professional experience. Pre-service teachers have responded in a positive manner, citing how the case study activities we have introduced served to bring to life the reality of the law and its impacts on educators, students, schools, and professional and personal lives. As educators, we are constantly searching for methods and materials that will hook our students and inculcate an appreciation for the importance and necessity of education law. Although we recognize and use a variety of approaches to teaching and learning in our pre-service teacher classrooms, we contend that case studies are a cogent vehicle through which to impart a foundation in education law—a solid foundation on which to build a prosperous career, one ideally free of legal entanglements.
References Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 2, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Creswell, J. (2003). Research design. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oakes, Sage.
Young, Kraglund-Gauthier, & Foran (2014) Delaney, J. G. (2009/2010). The value of educational law to practising educators. Education & Law Journal, 19(3), 119–138. Dunklee, D., & Shoop, R. (1986). Teacher preparation in a litigious society: Implications in times of reform. Journal of Teacher Education, 37(57), 57–60. doi: 10.1177/002248718603700511 Findlay, N. (2007). In-school administrator’s knowledge of education law. Educational & Law Journal, 17, 177–202. Foran, A. & Orr, J. (2009). Towards a professionalism partnership curriculum for teacher education: Building bridges between teachers’ unions and teacher education. Policy and Practice in Education, 15(1), 8–21. Gullatt, D. E., & Tollett, J. R. (1997). Educational law: A requisite course for preservice and inservice teacher education programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 48(2), 129– 135.
erations. Research in Rural Education, 7(1), 17–22. Sussel, T. A. (1995). Canada’s legal revolution: Public education, the Charter, and human rights. Toronto, Canada: Emond Montgomery. Sydor, S. (2006). Teacher education needs more law. A paper presented at the seventeenth annual conference of the Canadian Association for the Practical Study of Law in Education, Montreal, Quebec. Wagner, P. H. (2007, November 16). An evaluation of the legal literacy of educators and the implications for teacher preparation programs. Education Law Association 53rd Annual Conference, San Diego, CA. (ED499689) Retrieved from http://educationlaw.org/2007%20Conference/Papers/ A7Wagner.pdf Youth Criminal Justice Act, S.C. 2002. c. 1.
Hirsch, E. D. (1999). The schools we need and why we don’t have them. New York, NY: Anchor Books. Kempling v. British Columbia College of Teachers, BCCA 327 (2005) Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Manos, M. A. (2007). Knowing where to draw the line: Ethical and legal standards for best classroom practice. Toronto, Canada: Rowman & Littlefield. MacKay, A.W., Sutherland, L., & Pochini, K.D. (2013). Teachers and the law: Diverse roles and new challenges (3rd ed.). Toronto, Canada: Emond Montgomery. Myers v. Peel County Board of Education, 2 S.C.R. 21 (1981) Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage. Reglin, G. L. (1990). Public school educators’ knowledge of selected Supreme Court decisions affecting daily public school op19
