Bethlehem College has been asked to apologise to students after "unreasonable decisions" by the school's board. Photo: Sun Media via LDR
An ombudsman's investigation into complaints about the exclusion and expulsion of students at Tauranga's Bethlehem College has found the board's decision-making process was "unreasonable".
Chief Ombudsman Peter Boshier's findings released this week relate to complaints about disciplinary action against five students in the first half of 2020.
He found that the school's record-keeping was "inadequate" and the board's "decision-making process was unreasonable".
Photo:
The state integrated Christian college said they had taken "full responsibility" for the issues identified by the ombudsman and apologised to the students and their families.
Two investigations were conducted by Boshier; the first relates to the decision of the school board to exclude a student on the basis of 'gross misconduct' following the decision of the principal to suspend the student due to 'continual disobedience'.
The second concerned the decision of the board to expel a group of students from Bethlehem College on the basis of 'gross misconduct'.
Exclusion is the formal removal of a student under 16 from a school and the requirement they are enrolled elsewhere. Expulsion is the formal removal of a student over 16 with optional enrolment elsewhere.
Ministry of Education guidelines enable principals to suspend a student if they are satisfied, on reasonable grounds, that there has been gross misconduct, continual disobedience or there is a risk of serious harm if the student continues to attend school.
The school's board must then meet within a seven-day period to consider the suspension.
With the first investigation the primary issues of concern included disobedience/disrespect, and the student's conduct towards other students.
The student had been previously disciplined for cannabis use and vaping, but this was not a "significant factor" in the exclusion decision, according to the Ombudsman's report.
"In March 2020, the student was issued a warning and the need for a behaviour support plan was noted, but not followed-up by the college."
Leading up to the student's exclusion in July, around a dozen "disciplinary type" incidents were reported on their pastoral record, with three of these incidents involving conduct towards other students.
A report about an incident in July triggered the student's suspension on the basis of 'continual disobedience'. However, the board went on to exclude the student on the basis of 'gross misconduct'.
The Ministry of Education defined gross misconduct as misconduct that is 'striking and reprehensible to a high degree'.
Boshier identified "significant gaps" in the information about the student's alleged misbehaviour in the documentation provided by the board.
"The decision to exclude the student on a different ground than which they had been suspended was not explained.
"The Ombudsman therefore surmised that the board had likely intended to expel the student on the basis of continual disobedience."
The Ministry of Education guidelines state "the decision to exclude a student is only to be made in circumstances that justify the most serious response".
It highlights that exclusion should be proportionate to the behaviour in question.
The ombudsman considered that the decision of the board to exclude the student was "disproportionate" to the nature of the allegations.
"Information from the student's teachers indicated their behaviour in class had improved since being disciplined earlier in the year for cannabis use," said the decision.
The ombudsman found it hard to square these reports with the board's position that the student had been "continually disrespectful and defiant" towards teachers.
"The pastoral record showed only three specific incidents that could be construed as relevant leading up to the suspension, involving conduct towards fellow students, none of which the school had regarded as serious when they occurred."
The ombudsman recommended the board formally apologise to the student and their parents, offer to re-enrol them at Bethlehem College, attach a copy of his opinion to the student's exclusion record and review its record-keeping policies regarding disciplinary matters.
The second investigation involving a group of students was centred on incidents relating to truancy, alcohol and other unspecified matters.
The ombudsman focused his investigation on the decision by the board to exclude/expel the students, and the documentation of its decision-making.
According to the decision the omission of the board to keep adequate records was seen as a "fundamental flaw" of its decision-making process.
"There were no records to confirm that the board had undertaken an independent review of the principal's suspension decision or adequately considered the circumstances.
"Given the clear expectation that school boards clearly and comprehensively document their decision-making in this area, the Ombudsman regarded this as a significant failure.
"There was also nothing to confirm that the Board was presented with all the information required to make a decision on the exclusion/expulsion of the students.
"This meant that the Board was not in a position to make an informed decision based on the relevant factors," the decision concluded.
The ombudsman also recommended the board formally apologise to the students and their families and attach a copy of his decision and the apology to their exclusion/expulsion records.
He also recommended the board publish information about the investigations and his findings in the college newsletter. As well as state that parents may complain to the Ombudsman if they have complaints about the board.
Bethlehem College board chair Paul Shakes confirmed the ombudsman's findings related to disciplinary action against five students in the first half of 2020.
Shakes told Local Democracy Reporting the investigation, and their own internal review, identified some "necessary improvements" in their disciplinary process.
"We have taken full responsibility for the issues the ombudsman identified, and we have already accepted and implemented all his recommendations," he said.
"This included apologising to the students and their families. We have also made other changes to ensure our policies, procedures and professional development are more robust moving forward.
"We take our obligations to all students very seriously and all disciplinary action requires consideration of the student/s involved, including the impact on their educational outcomes and wellbeing, as well as the safety and wellbeing of our other students."
These findings are the latest issue that have put the composite school in the spotlight in recent months after an alleged bullying incident in June.
A group of students were taking part in the International Day of Silence against bullying when they were allegedly targeted by other students from the college.
In response to the allegations Shakes said the school immediately began an in-depth investigation into the claims, and reviewed CCTV footage as well as interviewing students.
The school was also under fire after it was revealed it had included a belief in its Statement of Special Character that marriage was between a man and a woman.
At the time, Shakes said: "As part of implementing our school's Christian special character, we strive to provide a loving and caring environment for all students, and we take seriously our duty to provide every child entrusted to us with the greatest level of care and protection.
"We think our Christian beliefs actually support and enhance the health and wellbeing of our students. As our most recent Education Review Office report notes, our special Christian character 'contributes to a strong sense of wellbeing and belonging for students'."
It has since removed the point on marriage from the statement after the Ministry of Education asked it to.
Local Democracy Reporting is Public Interest Journalism funded through NZ On Air
