1

Learning Task 2

Natasha Chaykowski & Tayler VanRootselaar

Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary

EDUC 525: Ethics and Law in Education

Professor Rhiannon Jones & Teaching Assistant Kashif Raza

October 29th, 2021

Ethical values are what one determines right or wrong connecting to human beliefs.

Anytime race is being brought to terms in a negative light, there are ethical values being

threatened and the situation always escalates. Especially when dealing with other adults abusing

their privilege and who should have a better understanding of the harm it causes. If we were

being represented as the teacher in scenario 1, and the students had expressed their feelings

toward the principal to us, first and foremost our inner values would help us determine what the

principal did was unorthodox. The way we were raised and the decisions we have made in the

past form our character into what it is today, which will affect how we initially view the

situation. With virtue ethics we could argue that the principal’s initial response to the students

was a “sum total of the individual’s character, not a particular calculation in a particular set of

circumstances” (Ethics PowerPoint, 2021), meaning she might not have weighed the

consequences of her actions before speaking and didn’t practice Practical Wisdom. Whether or

not we as the teacher agree with the principal or not, we must keep in mind what the ethical

approach would be while trying to remain unbiased. As the teacher we may be faced with a

Deontological approach where we will be dealing with consequences for our actions. The

principal could be a close friend of ours, however, we must ask ourselves “what is right?” and

“who do we owe the duty to?” (Ethics PowerPoint, 2021).

The students are our number one priority in this case because not only are they

vulnerable, but their ethical rights are being exposed. As teachers we are responsible for our

students and as adults, we need to make sure the other adults within the school are treating the

students with respect. In this case, we would carefully confront the principal face to face about

using the N-word. We would inform her about the meaning behind the word, why it is used,

where it comes from, and how inappropriate and unprofessional it is to use this word, especially

with the hard “-er.” Not only is it inappropriate and unprofessional within the work environment,

but equally so outside of work as well. If she was unsure why she wasn’t allowed to say the

word, but the students of colour were, she needs to be educated before moving forward. Not to

mention if she was unsure about information on a separate topic, she probably would not

approach students to get their opinions in a similar matter as she did in this case. However,

considering that the principal has a position of authority over both the teachers and students it is

crucial to approach this matter in a delicate way to ensure the principal does not get offended and

result to immediate defensive language/actions. Depending on how the principal reacts, that will

determine the next steps and further questioning. In our eyes, she was in the wrong for saying the

word, especially to the students in a school environment.

First, if the principal realized she made a mistake by saying the N-word and apologized

for her actions to the students, student’s families, and school, there should be some forgiveness

and lenience given, especially if she is willing to educate herself further on the topic.

Unfortunately, when dealing with race, as a teacher we still should report the incident no matter

what because blatant racism poses a safety issue to all students. The principal is the face of the

school, therefore, many teachers, students, parents, and even the surrounding community will

have a certain judgement toward that school now. When someone enters the education

profession, they are made well aware of the image they need to uphold both inside and outside of

the schools. As the principal she must follow the Alberta Teaching Quality Standard and her

actions clearly go against it. The TQS states that “Alberta teachers provide inclusive learning

environments in which diversity is respected and members of the school community are

welcomed, cared for, respected and safe” (Alberta Education, 2018). The principal’s attitude

towards the situation did not reflect the TQS and therefore, there needs to be consequences to her

actions. When receiving this information from the students, it is a teacher’s right to “protect

against discrimination on the basis of prejudice as to race, colour, physical characteristics, place

of origin, place of residence, and have the responsibility to refrain from practising these forms of

discrimination in their professional duties.” (TATA, 2018b). Like we mentioned before, the

principal may not understand where this word comes from because it is rooted through a certain

community. It is the principal’s duty to be educated on the topic and actively work towards not

discriminating her students. Furthermore, she should be striving to create an anti-racist

environment for all her students to feel safe while at school. We do not know what our students’

home lives are like so as educators we should be ensuring that students at least have a safe place

when they come to school.

Moving forward with the scenario, we would also question why the students were

suspended and the principal was not? Usually in authoritative positions, where discipline is part

of the job description, they would still have to act in a professional manner to give punishments.

She could have stepped in and asked the students “We do not use that kind of language in this

school, how is it you can say words like that, and others can’t?” If the principal went about the

situation in this professional manner, it was her place to give consequences to the students for

violating what she thought was affecting the learning environment. We could compare this to a

similar situation, if she were to catch students cussing using the f-word for example, she

probably would not approach the students by saying “We do not say ‘f-word’”. Instead, she

would address the students by saying something along the lines of “We do not say cuss words

while we are at school. These are not nice words to be using”. So, by comparison the principal

should have known it was inappropriate to say the real N-word to her students rather than asking

her question using professional language. Her thoughts are protected under section 2 of the

Declaration of Rights and Responsibilities for Teachers, “Standards of pupil behaviour necessary

for maintaining an optimal learning environment and have the responsibility to use reasonable

methods to achieve such standards.” (TATA, 2018b). However, her methods are not deemed

reasonable under the circumstances.

Unfortunately, she did not use her professionalism which now leaves her with

consequences to face. We compared this scenario with the Ross v New Brunswick case study, the

consequences of the principal would be the same, if not worse. Ross was “no longer employed

by the School Board” (1996). Why we suggest the consequences should be worsened for the

principal in our scenario is because of the environment the incident took place in. Ross was off

school grounds when making racist remarks, whereas this principal was talking with students on

school property. At the very least the principal should be required to take anti-racism classes and

courses on diversity equity and inclusion (DE&I) before she should be allowed to resume her

role as the school’s principal. In any case we need to ensure that the students are taken care of

first and foremost because they are vulnerable, so we need to ensure their safety in every way we

can. Principals are the main face of a school and therefore should be held to the highest standard

when it comes to how they treat their students and staff. By not punishing the principal for her

misconduct it sets a precedent that the principal can do whatever she pleases without

consequences, which will not look good to the community and parents.

References

(2021). Ethics PowerPoint slides. University of Calgary: Desire2Learn. Retrieved from https://

d2l.ucalgary.ca/d2l/le/content/400446/viewContent/4965069/View

Alberta Education. (2018). Teaching quality standard. Alberta Government. Retrieved from

https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/4596e0e5-bcad-4e93-a1fb-dad8e2b800d6/resource/

75e96af5-8fad-4807-b99a-f12e26d15d9f/download/edc-alberta-education-teaching-quality-

standard-2018-01-17.pdf

The Alberta Teachers Association. (2018a). Code of professional conduct. Retrieved https://

www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/Teachers-as-Professionals/

IM-4E%20Code%20of%20Professional%20Conduct.pdf

The Alberta Teachers Association. (2018b). Declaration of rights and responsibilities for

teachers. Retrieved https://www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/

Teachers-as-Professionals/IM-5E%20Declaration%20of%20Rights.pdf

Ross v. New Brunswick School District No. 15, 1996 CanLII 237 (SCC), [1996] 1 SCR 825

https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1996/1996canlii237/1996canlii237.html