Former teacher fac­ing dis­ci­pline hear­ing

Na­dia Char­land ac­cused of en­gag­ing in a sex­ual re­la­tion­ship with a stu­dent while with Con­seil sco­laire de dis­trict du Nord-est de l’on­tario


a former teacher with Con­seil sco­laire de dis­trict du Nord-est de l’on­tario is fac­ing dis­ci­plinary ac­tion fol­low­ing al­le­ga­tions she had a sex­ual and in­ap­pro­pri­ate re­la­tion­ship with a stu­dent.

the Nugget has learned the ac­tion against Na­dia Char­land con­cerns in­ci­dents al­leged to have oc­curred from 2009-2011. It has been re­ferred to the dis­ci­pline com­mit­tee of the on­tario Col­lege of teach­ers.

a hear­ing date has yet to be set as the col­lege is try­ing to con­tact Char­land and her coun­sel, it said.

Char­land is al­leged to have en­gaged in a sex­ual re­la­tion­ship and an in­ap­pro­pri­ate per­sonal re­la­tion­ship with a stu­dent from Nov. 1, 2009, to Nov. 1, 2011, ac­cord­ing to doc­u­ments ob­tained through the on­tario Col­lege of teach­ers.

the no­tice of hear­ing doesn’t iden­tify the stu­dent, school or what grade the stu­dent was in at the time of the al­leged in­ci­dent.

“the mem­ber was em­ployed by the Con­seil sco­laire pub­lic du Nord-est de l’on­tario as a teacher at ecole XXX in XXX. dur­ing the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 school years, Stu­dent one was in grades XXX and XXX at the school and the mem­ber was his teacher,” the no­tice states

“dur­ing the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years, Stu­dent one was at­tend­ing a school in Con­seil sco­laire catholique de dis­trict des grandes riv­ieres sys­tem (which ex­tends from hai­ley­bury to hearst) and he was un­der the age of 18 years.”

the no­tice al­leges Char­land is guilty of pro­fes­sional mis­con­duct as de­fined in the on­tario Col­lege of teach­ers act.

“She failed to main­tain the stan­dards of the pro­fes­sion, she abused a stu­dent psy­cho­log­i­cally or emo­tion­ally, she abused a stu­dent sex­u­ally and/or en­gaged in sex­ual abuse, she failed to com­ply with the ed­u­ca­tion act, she com­mit­ted acts that hav­ing re­gard to all the cir­cum­stances would rea­son­ably be re­garded by mem­bers as dis­grace­ful, dis­hon­ourable or un­pro­fes­sional and she en­gaged in con­duct un­be­com­ing a mem­ber.”

guy­laine Scherer, a spokes­woman for Con­seil sco­laire pub­lic du Nord-est de l’on­tario, re­fused com­ment.

the Nugget was un­able to con­tact Char­land.

Char­land’s teach­ing li­cence has been sus­pended for non-pay­ment of fees, ac­cord­ing to her pro­file with the on­tario Col­lege of teach­ers.

“She agreed not to teach in a pub­lic or pri­vate school in on­tario, or to hold or seek to hold a po­si­tion re­quir­ing that a cer­tifi­cate of qual­i­fi­ca­tion and regis­tra­tion be held, un­til the col­lege deals with the com­plaint filed against her. as of the present time, no con­clu­sion has been reached con­cern­ing the com­plaint against ms. Char­land.”

olivia yu, se­nior com­mu­ni­ca­tions of­fi­cer with the on­tario Col­lege of teach­ers, said there is no set time for the mat­ter to be re­solved.

“gen­er­ally speak­ing, there are a num­ber of rea­sons that can im­pact when a hear­ing is sched­uled, in­clud­ingth­en­ature­ofthe­case,thenum­ber of wit­nesses and fac­tors such as the avail­abil­ity of de­fence coun­sel, the de­fen­dant and wit­nesses, and panel mem­bers can de­ter­mine how long it takes to sched­ule the length of a hear­ing,” she said.

“other rea­sons could in­clude par­al­lel le­gal or med­i­cal is­sues. When there is a par­al­lel crim­i­nal in­ves­ti­ga­tion or Chil­dren’s aid So­ci­ety in­ves­ti­ga­tion, the col­lege will typ­i­cally wait un­til these in­ves­ti­ga­tions are com­pleted. un­less we are able to pro­ceed with­out com­pro­mise to the par­al­lel in­ves­ti­ga­tion. Crim­i­nal con­vic­tions may be­come al­le­ga­tions of pro­fes­sional mis­con­duct.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.