ALL ABOARD THE E-TRAIN… Embarking and Embracing a Journey of Essential Educator Ethics
The wheels of the train go round and round…
“All black, well stacked, goin’ down the track clickety clack” = the train looked good on the visual roll-by inspection.
“Highball it out of here” = proceed at maximum permissible speed
“Let’s pull the pin and roll” = uncouple so we can get out of here
The fall season is bringing upon us a series of ethical workshops, classes, and the creation of other resources, and the perfect time to warehouse everything at the main rail terminal! Take an excursion below to learn more about “staying on track” with research on the responsibilities and “regs” for serving as an educator.
Can you name the exact title of your Code of Conduct? What agency enforces it? Do educators have a Code of Ethics? Are school teachers fiduciaries or model exemplars? What does allof this mean?
First, let’s take a pretest of your knowledge and experience on the subject of school ethics. Which of the following statements has the least validity?
Moral professionalism involves being well informed about students, education, and content, confronting parents of underachieving students, cooperating with colleagues to observe school policies, and criticizing unsatisfactory policies and proposing constructive improvement.
Teachers, attorneys, doctors, nurses, counselors, therapists, and the clergy have “fiduciary” duties: own the highest legal duties of good faith and trust and are bound ethically to act in another party’s best interest.
Although not always defined in exact terms of school law or policies, professional ethics are “standards that assist practitioners within situation and systemic contexts in choosing the best course-of-action.”
A code of ethics outlines a set of principles that affect decision making, while a code of conduct delineates specific behaviors that are required or prohibited and governs actions.
The primary goal of professional ethics training is to emphasize the “minimum standards of acceptable behavior” and focus on specific illegal and unethical actions that may result in disciplinary actions.
After a thorough exploration of the materials below, you should feel confident in responding to this question. (If you need help, scroll down to answer at the end of this blog-post.)
Classes and Conferences on Ethics, Oh My!
I am looking forward to sharing insights on ethical issues and especially the seeming “conundrums” or conflicts in the myriad of snap judgments of daily decision-making, both in and outside of our classrooms. Upcoming opportunities are on the ethics e-train schedule.
Currently, we are completing the sixth series of our 25-hour PDE-approved Act 45/PIL online course for school/system leaders, career and technical center directors, and other administrators. Sponsored by my colleague Thomas W. Bailey (check out his website here), the next class “PA Educators: Your Ethical Codes & School Law” begins on October 22 for four consecutive Tuesdays from 4:30 to 7:30 p.m.
Thomas Bailey and I were also invited to present this Act 45/PIL course for the Northeastern Intermediate Unit #19 as a two-day workshop on November 19 and December 16, 2024. Visit http://www.iu19.org or click here to register.
I am venturing out of the Western PA to Eagleville, PA (near Valley Forge) to provide a 70-minute in-service, a school ethics “refresh” for the faculty at Methacton School District on October 14, 2024. Click here to download a copy of the slide summary with all links active.
Finally, I am happy to report that I was invited back to the PDE SAS Institute to do two sessions: “Planning School Ethics Training, Part I – Definitions, Codes, and the Commission” and Planning School Ethics Training, Part II – Model Code of Ethics for Educators. My proposal to present the session “CATCH THE E-TRAIN – Codes, Case Studies, and the Challenges of Ethical Decision-Making” was not approved for the 2025 PMEA Annual Conference in Kalahari Resort (Poconos). However, a facsimile of similar slides from past NAfME/PMEA workshops and webinars on educator ethics is available here.
Supplemental Resources for the Study of Codes, Case Studies, and the Challenges of Daily Decision-Making in Education
And now, the grand daddy of school ethics destinations…
Especially for Pennsylvania educators, pre-service students, and newcomers to the Commonwealth (citing the PA Professional Practices and Standards Commission website)
A code of ethics sets a higher threshold than regulatory codes of conduct or even a nonprofit organization’s bylaws and compliance rules enforced by the government. A code of conduct, such as the Pennsylvania “Code of Professional Practices and Conduct” of the PSPC, provides absolutes for employment, licensure, and/or civil/criminal sanctions. In contrast, the Model Code of Ethics for Educators document serves more as a general compass to help steer professionals towards sound judgment in their daily decision-making. What is unique about a true code of ethics vs. a code of conduct is that the principles are not defined in exact terms of law or policies, nor do they necessarily model family morals or values on which we as individual educators have been raised. The proposed standards are not about definite issues of right/wrong or black/white, but shades of grey. They are more open-ended, offering opportunities to discuss recommendations for consideration from a set of possible choices based on the circumstances of each ethical dilemma or resolution.
– excerpt from “The Ethical Music Educator,” Winter 2020 issue of PMEA News
Teachers are ethical professionals. Our moral aspirations, the “codes” and “standards” we subscribe to, and our professionalism are important to us, our students, our programs, and our communities. Essentially, these are the beliefs for which we stand, the values and behavior we model in our day-to-day decision-making to “make a difference” in the lives of our students, and the overall integrity of the profession. Therefore, the answer to the PRETEST above is #5. (#1-4 are TRUE!) But, as stated in #5, the goal of meaningful ethics training is NOT to emphasize the minimum standards of acceptable behavior or to focus on specific illegal and unethical actions that may result in disciplinary actions.
Do you have anything to add to this collection? ALL ABOARD! The conductor would appreciate feedback! Please feel free to make a comment to this blog (see link next to the title).
Implementing the NEW PDE Chapter 49 “PE” Competencies – “The WHO, WHAT, WHY, & HOW!”
Blogger’s Note: We will return to Part II of “Bookends” next month to explore:
Stage 3: Inservice/Growing Years
Stage 4: Veteran/Sustaining Years
Stage 5: Next Chapter/Living the Dream
Instead, our November blog will share methods, modes, media, and other materials to provide meaningful professional development on ETHICS for EDUCATORS in the Commonwealth, resources from my upcoming presentation to school administrators at the Pennsylvania Department of Education’s SAS Institute – Successful Leadership – Shaping Your School’s Story to be held in the Hershey Lodge and Convention Center on December 11-13, 2023. Click below for my handouts.
Interested in joining us at the Hershey Lodge on December 11-13, 2023? Please click herefor more information or to register.
A Summary of My SAS Institute Ethics Session
To paraphrase the wisdom of one of my favorite recent visionaries and online workshop presenters, Simon Sinek, “Every organization should begin with “the WHY!” According to SmartInsights, Sinek’s Golden Circle theory explains “how leaders can inspire cooperation, trust and change in a business based on his research into how the most successful organizations think, act and communicate if they start with why.” On his website, he declares his own WHY: “We are here to inspire people to do the things that inspire them so that, together, each of us can change our world for the better.” I love his mission!
“Your WHY is your purpose, cause, or belief. WHY does your company exist? WHY do you get out of bed every morning? And WHY should anyone care about the work you do?” – Simon Sinek
So… lets ask the questions that define our own golden circle, my session, and this article:
WHY should we be so concerned about professional development in ethics for PA educators? (Why should you even be reading this blogpost?)
HOW should we train our staff?
WHAT should be introduced and reinforced over the long term?
And, I will add one additional question: WHO is responsible for all of this?
Well, the quick response to that last query is EVERYONE in the profession. However, this blog is particularly geared to school system leaders, career and technical center directors, and administrators charged with the responsibility of continuing education/professional development and induction programs for their PA educators.
The “WHY!”
Quick. Calling on all PA teachers! Without looking on the Internet, can you identify the exact title of your “code of conduct” (1)? Do you know the PA agency responsible for writing this code and adjudicating its rules (2)? Can you name the “code of ethics” recently adopted by PDE and the Board of Education which provides school staff comprehensive guidance in professional decision-making based on context (3)?
Hints? How about a few acronyms?
CPPC
PSPC
MCEE?
Don’t you think “we” should at least be familiar with the commission that grants us the license to teach in PA as well as the document that “governs” our behavior, violations of which could remove us from our job or revoke our certificate?
Of course, six years ago, even I didn’t know we had a PA “code of conduct!” (I started teaching in the public schools in 1978 and it wasn’t written until 1992!) After retiring from full-time teaching in 2013, I was asked to present my first ethics workshop back in 2017 for a Pennsylvania Music Educators Association (PMEA) Regional In-Service Program. Already scheduling me for two other sessions, the organizer came to me, “Could you add a presentation on educator ethics?” My first reaction was, WHY? Why would this be necessary? I promised him I would do a little research before getting back to him… and found these (now updated) statistics. Here’s the WHY in a nutshell!
HORRIBLE! These are the number of PA educators by year who had misconduct complaints filed against them. Sure, a majority of their cases were not always fully prosecuted nor did they all result in a “guilty” verdict or plea, as this glimpse of educator disciplinary resolutions for 2016 (out of 672) for comparison shows (statistics from PDE):
But, if you can read the above graphic, that means that in 2016, 156 educators surrendered their license or had their certificate suspended or revoked! Obviously, no matter how you interpret the stats, this is a SERIOUS PROBLEM! And it may be due to a lack of training or understanding of the regulations and principles of ethical decision-making!
Why is this topic crucial for all pre-service, “rookie,” AND experienced professional educators? It is essential… not so much to serve as a reminder of the penalties for ethical infractions or spotlighting the occurrences you read or hear about in the news… but, because ETHICS are what we all stand for, the values we exhibit in our day-to-day decision-making, the integrity of the profession, and our “making a difference” in the lives of the students.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it.
(Oliver Wendell Holmes)
The “WHAT!”
My colleague Thomas W. Bailey, a retired social studies teacher who reinstated his law license, and I set ourselves the goal of creating continuing education courses to provide REAL ethics training for PA educators. Thomas applied to the Pennsylvania Department of Education and received approval for a four-hour online Act 48 continuing education course for all PA educators (earning credits in PERMS) and a 25-hour online Act 45 PIL continuing education course for school system leaders, career and technical center directors, and other administrators responsible for planning the professional development of their school staff. The dates for our next two series of classes with open for enrollment in January 2024 are:
“Chapter 49 requires instruction in professional ethics to be integrated in educator preparation, induction, and continuing professional development programs as follows.
Continuing professional development programs must integrate the professional ethics competencies no later than the 2023-24 academic year.
Educator preparation and induction programs must integrate the professional ethics competencies no later than the 2024-25 academic year.“
Our Act 45 and Act 48 courses cover the following subjects, definitions, and applications of these terms:
Fiduciary
Ethical Equilibrium
Personal Morality
Regulations of Law
Professional Ethics
Professional Dispositions
Moral Professionalism
Differences Between Moral and Ethical Standards (with Examples)
Codes of Conduct (Examples)
Codes of Ethics (Examples)
Differences Between a Code of Conduct and a Code of Ethics
PA Professional Standards and Practices Commission
Paths of Educator Discipline in PA (Local and State)
Loudermill Hearings
State Discipline System (from Misconduct Complaint to Appeals)
PA Code of Professional Practice and Conduct
The Educator Discipline Act
National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification
In my SAS presentation, I review several different modes of case study analysis, from simple to comprehensive, modeling small group interactive peer review, encouraging healthy discussions of diverse opinions in an “open,” non-threatening environment. The following approaches could be adapted to your setting of in-service programs or inductions:
MOCK JURY
Degree of Misconduct, scenarios for learning the PA Code of Professional Practice and Conduct (CPPC): For more details, revisit the application of my misconduct rubric and explanation in the blog “Ethical Scenarios” here.
In collegiate sessions, I have used color-coded popsicle sticks and handouts of different hypothetical case studies for “the jury” to evaluate the behavior and “find the relevant code” in the CPPC.
VOICES IN MY HEAD
Random Bad Attitudes for review of the standards in the Model Code of Ethics for Educators: I doubt (or sincerely hope) you would not hear too many of these directly from the school staff, but comments like, “Don’t ask for permission, beg for forgiveness” are NOT ethical precepts! Let’s dissect these bad boys!
SEARCH FOR THE STANDARDS
Hybrid Approach for using “the negative voices” and researching appropriate provisions in both the CPPC and MCEE: Select a single bad attitude and break off into two or three teams, each focused on corroborating related ethical principles in CPPC, MCEE, and even the PA Educator Discipline Act (EDA).
What possible issues/concerns might this scenario raise?
How could this situation conflict with school policy, CPPC, EDA, MCEE, or case law?
In this situation, what are some potential negative consequences for the educator’s students, fellow educators, and the school community-at-large?
What responses/actions will result in a more positive outcome and/or what proactive measures might be considered?
A single hypothetical scenario would first be presented to the full group, and then the educators would break off into 4-6 smaller groups to review these questions. Individuals may or may not all agree. A group leader is usually appointed to record their responses and then upon reconvening, report back to “the whole.” Here is a sample case study (painful reading; fictitious but based on actual past incidents):
The moderator may promote further discussion (sample answers below) and even pose additional questions like the following:
What if the relationship was always of mutual consent?
What if the teacher never taught the student while she was enrolled in his school?
What if the relationship did not start until after the student graduated?
What if his student was over the age of 18 during the time of the relationship?
It deserves mention here that this final training mode, representing perhaps the highest degree of scaffolding of the learning for the ethics training of your staff, proposes the establishment of a permanent school district Professional Learning Community (PLC) or ethics committee. We know from our past experiences in providing continuing professional development of educators that promote free, open, healthy sharing of potential professional decision-making conflicts or ethical “conundrums” – “what would you do” scenarios – will foster lasting long-term benefits. Danielson Framework for Teaching (Domain 4) and CSDE reinforce this philosophy of peer collaboration.
“Teachers must engage in district-facilitated conversations that focus on ethical and professional dilemmas and their professional responsibility to students, the larger school/district educational community, and to families.”
My educator ethics mentor and “hero” Troy Hutchings, Senior Policy Advisor to the National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification, admitted that in his early years of teaching, he felt a little reticent about going to his principal for advice in handling a situation of a student developing a “romantic crush” on him. To paraphrase his remarks during his webinar, “I was concerned that my supervisor might think I was encouraging the girl… Who could I turn to?” Sharing these anecdotes and talking informally with other faculty members will go far in building teamwork, mentor-mentee relationships, and intra-building trust in allowing more peer review towards enhanced educator decision-making.
If you need a resource on PLCs, my colleague (PA Principal of the Year to be honored at the upcoming 2023 SAS Institute) Dr. Tim Wagner recommended the handbook Learning by Doing by Richard DuFour, Rebecca DuFour, Robert Eaker, Thomas W. Many, and Mike Mattos (Solution Tree Press, 2016).
The authors’ summary of reasons to implement a PLC in your school building(s) are to:
Improve staff’s individual and collective practice
Build on staff’s “shared knowledge and experiences”
Build clarity and understanding in the use of a common vocabulary
Develop a library of accessible tools, templates, and protocols (i.e., ethical scenarios)
Promote non-threatening, thought-provoking discussion on ethical decision-making
Wrapping It Up with More Resources
Every school setting is different, and your application of these staff ethics training ideas will be unique. Hopefully I have given any interested PA school system leader, CTC director, professional development or building administrator, or department chair some “food for thought.” For example, if you wanted to set up a PLC to meet regularly to discuss ethical issues, many of you may need to involve your teacher’s professional association and/or review their contract… or perhaps on-your-own implement a rotation of educators to experience these case study discussions during pre-scheduled inservice or induction days.
For “the keys to the car” to build your own local ethics professional development programs, we encourage you to sign-up for one of our classes here. For our PIL series, Thomas Bailey shares the native files of his PowerPoint presentations so that they can be turned around and taught to other educators, and then even students who are studying their own discipline code or online anti-bullying school policies. Here is an image of our PIL brochure which will be offered beginning on January 3, 2024.
I also suggest perusing Thomas Bailey’s free videos on this topic, slide #61 (page 31) from the handouts to my SAS Institute presentation (above), and these links to other blogs on paulfox.blog.
NOW YOU HAVE IT… the entire toolkit and rationale… the “who, what, how, and why” of educator ethics training and satisfying the new PDE Chapter 49 “PE” competencies.
Free Five-Part Series on PA Educator Ethics Updates
Since the NAfME and PMEA conferences in April, we have been busy creating additional opportunities for professional development in PA educator ethics training. My colleague Thomas Bailey and I have been preparing a Zoom meeting/video series for interested Pennsylvania school system leaders, administrators, department heads, educators, and PA Act 45 or 48 continuing education providers.
Please see the schedule below. The first seminar was recorded.
Session 1: William Penn vs. PDE – May 30, 2023 @ 4:30 p.m. Click here to view the video.
Session 2: Model Code of Ethics for Educators – June 6, 2023 @ 4:30 p.m.
Session 3: PA Code of Professional Practice and Conduct – June 13, 2023 @ 4:30 p.m.
Session 4: PA Professional Standards & Practices Commission – June 20 @ 4:30 p.m.
To join the Zoom meetings and participate “live” in the upcoming question-and-answer sessions with our speakers, go to this link and scroll down to the bottom of the page. After completion, the YouTube URL for each seminar will also be posted here.
An intriguing follow-up resource is to visit Thomas Bailey’s website, especially the informative educator blog he has published including analysis of the William Penn vs. PDE hearings on equitable school funding in the PA Commonwealth Court (first session above) and other “ethical conundrums” and issues in the news.
I am also happy to report that we are expanding our PIL Act 45 professional development class offerings and Thomas has reapplied for PDE approval of a revised version of our Act 48 workshop on “PA Educators – Your Ethical Codes and School Law.” Click below to download a copy of our trifold brochure on the PIL course and summer in-service programs.
Finally, to all of my music educator friends in the Commonwealth, I hope you have registered for the PMEA Summer Conference, being held in the Red Lion Hotel Harrisburg/Hershey on July 17-19, 2023. This event is in conjunction with the annual PMEA Board of Directors meeting on July 17 and the PMEA “Day of Service” assisting the Harrisburg Symphony and the Whitaker Center for Science and the Arts on July 19. In addition, I am looking forward hearing a performance of the Yankee Brass Band:
Since 1987, the Yankee Brass Band has both entertained audiences throughout New England and championed the cause of “historically informed performance” within the field of American band music. 2023 marks our 36th season. Using rare and authentic period instruments, and outfitted in appropriate uniforms, the Yankee Brass Band presents the music of the “Golden Age of Bands” played in much the same manner as in the mid to late 19th century.
The workshops, clinicians, and details for registration are posted on the PMEA website here.
Photo by Associated Press: Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court
Reviews of Court Cases on PA Education Regulations & School Staff Misconducts
Special thanks to guest blogger Thomas W. Bailey, current attorney-at-law and retired social studies teacher, who provides Act 48 courses of continuing education in professional decision-making, analyzing educator ethics, the law, PA Code of Professional Practices and Conduct, and discussion and interpretation of sample fact scenarios based upon classroom dilemmas.
Previously, this blog site (category = ethics) has offered numerous articles on defining issues of morality, ethics, regulations, professional aspirations, codes of conduct and codes of ethics, teacher-student relationships and boundaries, confidentiality, mandatory reporting, and reviews by “mock juries” of educator misconduct case studies. For my PMEA music education colleagues, PCMEA members, and education majors and newcomers to the profession throughout the Commonwealth, one area that still needs to be addressed is a discussion on Pennsylvania case law. One essential question is applicable to ALL pre- and in-service educators across the country: Have you informed yourself about the structure of YOUR state’s three branches of government, laws governing school staff responsibilities, prohibitions, and discipline, specific codes of conduct and/or ethics, and the judicial review process and case law?
“Ignorantia juris non excusat.”(Ignorance of the law excuses not.)
Thomas Bailey has provided an outstanding resource for learning more about PA regulations, court decisions, and putting into practice the values of ethical decision making. Below is a glimpse of his court case blog. Please visit his website for more detailed information and to sign-up for online classes: https://twbaileylaw.com/.
PA Commonwealth Court Case – Music Teacher Charged with Immorality
A male high school instrumental instructor and band director, M.T., began a romantic relationship with a 10th grade female band student (Student) in 2001 while employed for a Pennsylvania school district (District). M.T. continued the relationship with the Student to include sexual acts during her junior and senior years. The Student testified several sexual acts occurred within the District’s band room and band room office ending in 2004 with her graduation. M.T. continued to contact the Student when she attended college. Her parents complained to the District of continual communication by M.T. while their daughter was in college. In July, 2004 the District gave a written reprimand to M.T. to cease contact with the Student. M.T. continued contacting the Student after the reprimand.
The Student subsequently broke off the relationship with M.T. in the Spring, 2005 and told her parents of their sexual relationship. The parents then contacted the District where M.T. was still employed.
In April, 2005, M.T. was suspended without pay by District based upon the parent complaint.
On November 7, 2007, the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) filed a Notice of Charges with the Professional Standards & Practices Commission (Commission) and served a copy to M.T. Charges from the Educator Discipline Act (EDA) included immorality, negligence, intemperance, cruelty, incompetence, sexual abuse or exploitation, and violations of the Code of Professional Practice and Conduct for Educators (Code of Practices). The violations of the Code of Practices included provisions prohibiting the acceptance of gifts by teachers and prohibiting sexual conduct between a teacher and student. PDE also claimed that M.T. posed an immediate threat to the health, safety, and welfare of students and sought immediate suspension of his certificates.
The Commission appointed a Hearing Officer (HO) who heard three days of testimony from the Student, M.T. and others. M.T. was represented by counsel.
The HO’s recommendation to the Commission include his Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law which determined PDE had met its burden of proof on all but two charges. The Hearing Officer’s recommendation did not find M.T. to have given a prohibited gift to Student and that he was not an immediate threat to students. M.T. filed many exceptions with the Commission. M.T. claimed the technical rules of admissibility of evidence apply during Commission hearings, that his alleged, immoral conduct was not testified to by third party witnesses and that PDE did not offer sufficient evidence of professional incompetence, among other exceptions. PDE asserted M.T. remained an imminent threat to students.
Upon review, the Commission denied M.T.’s exceptions, found him to be responsible on all charges except the gift and immediately revoked his teaching certificates.
Issues Before the Commonwealth Court
Do the technical rules of courtroom evidence apply during an EDA hearing?
What educator conduct constitutes immorality in a relationship with a student?
What educator conduct constitutes lack of professional competence for an educator engaged in a sexual relationship with a student?
Technical rules of evidence followed in courtroom litigation do not apply to a Commission Hearing Officer. The strict rules of evidence practiced in Pennsylvania Common Pleas Courts and US District Courts are not followed. All relevant evidence of reasonably probative value may be received.
Sexual intercourse with a student inside the band room office constituted educator immorality. “Immorality is conduct which offends the morals of the Commonwealth and is a bad example to the youth whose ideals a professional educator or charter school staff member has a duty to foster and elevate.” Third party testimony to the immoral acts was not necessary. Immorality with a student violated EDA Section 9c(1).
M.T.’s professional competence in teaching kids did not appear to suffer during the sexual relationship with the student. Incompetency is a continuing or persistent mental or intellectual inability or incapacity to perform the services expected of a professional educator or a charter school staff member. Absence evidence of failure to prepare for class or uphold assigned duties, the educator was not proven by the preponderance of evidence presented to be incompetent in his actions. PDE failed to carry its burden to prove this Charge.
Importance
Immorality of educator student sexual relationship defined in detail. Criteria for professional incompetence explained as well as PDE’s burden of proof before the Commission. PDE must prove elements by preponderance of the evidence: over 50% of the evidence produced exhibits culpability. 2-25-21
M.T. v. PA Department of Education 56 A3d 1 (Pa. Commonwealth Court 2010)
M.T. pro se
Attorney Nicole Werner for Pennsylvania Department of Education
Additional Court Case Summaries on the Thomas Bailey Blog Site
It behooves us to learn more about Pennsylvania case law. Read and share these additional analyses They will enlighten you and may foster additional discussion with colleagues. Feel free to post your own comments on Thomas Bailey’s website.
Slater v. PDE & Professional Standards Commission: If an educator is arrested for new criminal charges alleging conduct which appears to pose a threat to the welfare of students, will their certificate immediately be suspended pending outcome of the new charges?
Nichols v. ARIN Intermediate Unit 28: Can a school entity’s local policy restrain employees from wearing religious emblems as jewelry, but allow secular emblems to be worn?
Cleveland Board of Education v. James Loudermill: May a school district employee be dismissed without prior opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing or be forced to wait nine months later to determine if the dismissal was proper?
Horosko v. Mt. Pleasant Township SD:May a school entity terminate an educator if she does not “command respect and good will of the community” surrounding the school?
The final court judgment (Horosko v. Mt. Pleasant Township SD above) is one of the oldest, dating back to 1939, and may be considered the foundation and precedent for current PA school employee regulations and discipline, especially in the confirmation of the following quote from the PA Professional Standards and Practices Commission of the Pennsylvania Department of Education:
“Professional expectations do not always distinguish between teachers’ on or off-duty conduct. Accordingly, teachers must act in their private lives in a way that does not undermine their efficacy in the classroom, demean their employing school entity, or damage their position as a moral exemplars in the community.”
What you say or do, both inside and outside the classroom, can and will affect your teaching effectiveness, professional reputation, and school employment status! But, if it is ever needed, be sure to know and exercise your rights, obtain the advice of a competent attorney, and avail yourself of due process.
Teachers make as many as 1,500 decisions a day for their classes and students… that’s as many as four educational choices per minute for the average teacher given six hours of class time. Surprised? (Not if you are an educator!) Check out this corroborating research:
Of course it can be exhausting… and as fast as “things” happen, even mind-numbing at times!
What do educators rely on for guidance, a sort of internal “ethical compass” for making these decisions, many of which are snap judgments?
Educational background
Teacher “chops” (professional experience)
Peer and administrative support
Personal moral code (derived from one’s life experiences and upbringing)
Aspirations, values, and beliefs generally agreed upon by educational practitioners
State’s code of conduct and other regulations, statutes, policies, and case law
Professional ethics
Or all of the above?
At this juncture during my workshops on ethics, I usually quote Dr. Oliver Dreon, Assistant Professor and Coordinator of the Digital Learning Studio at Millersville University of Pennsylvania and one of the authors of the Educator Ethics and Conduct Tool Kit of the Pennsylvania Professional Standards and Practices Commission:
“From a decision-making standpoint, I tend to look at it from the perspective of Ethical Equilibrium (work by Troy Hutchings). Teachers weigh the moral (personal) dimensions with regulatory ones (the law) with the ethics of the profession… While focusing on consequences is important, I worry that teachers may interpret this to mean that as long as they don’t break the law, they can still be unprofessional and immoral.”
– Dr. Oliver Dreon
From college students participating in their first field observations to rookie teachers (and even veterans in the field), I recommend searching the term “ethics” on the website of your State Board of Education. In Pennsylvania, checkout the following:
Now enters probably the single most valuable document of our time, an all-encompassing philosophy for embracing the highest standards of what it means to be an ethical educator: the Model Code of Ethics for Educators (MCEE), developed under the leadership of the National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (NASDTEC). With the collaboration of numerous development partners including the American Federation of Teachers, National Education Association, National Association of Elementary School Principals, National Association of Secondary School Principals, Council of Chief State School Officers, and American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education – to name a few – MCEE is comprised of five core principles (like spokes in a wheel – all with equal emphasis), 18 sections, and 86 standards.
“The purpose of the Model Code of Ethics for Educators (MCEE) is to serve as a shared ethical guide for future and current educators faced with the complexities of P-12 education. The code establishes principles for ethical best practice, mindfulness, self-reflection and decision-making, setting the groundwork for self-regulation and self-accountability. The establishment of this professional code of ethics by educators for educators honors the public trust and upholds the dignity of the profession.”
Although pre- and in-service training on both are essential, the differences between a “code of conduct” and a “code of ethics” are vast. Codes of conduct like the Code of Professional Practice and Conduct for Pennsylvania teachers are specific mandates and prohibitions that govern educator actions. A code of ethics is a set of principles that guide professional decision making, not necessarily issues of “right or wrong” (more shades of grey) nor defined in exact terms of law or policies. Codes of ethics are more open-ended, a selection of possible choices, usually depended on the context or circumstances of the situation.
“The interpretability of The Model Code of Ethics for Educators allows for robust professional discussions and targeted applications that are unique to every schooling community.”
The music teacher and administrator colleagues with whom I have been privileged to work for more than 40 years are highly dedicated and competent visionaries who focus on “making a difference” in the lives of their students, modeling “moral professionalism” and the highest ethical standards for their classes, schools, and communities, in support of maintaining the overall integrity of the profession.
However, let’s unpack some of “the wisdom” of MCEE as it addresses the rare “nay-sayers” and entrenched teacher attitudes, failing to understand “the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do…” (Potter Stewart) or “doing the right thing when no one else is watching – even when doing the wrong thing is legal” (Aldo Leopold).
Here are sample negative responses, MCEE “exemplars,” and proposed assimilations for thoughtful and interactive peer discussion. Bring these to your next staff meeting or workshop, and apply them to a few mock scenarios (like these from my past blog ).
Principle I: Responsibility to the Profession
The professional educator is aware that trust in the profession depends upon a level of professional conduct and responsibility that may be higher than required by law. This entails holding one and other educators to the same ethical standards.
“I didn’t know it was wrong…”
Section I, A, 1: Acknowledging that lack of awareness, knowledge, or understanding of the Code is not, in itself, a defense to a charge of unethical conduct;
My comment: The old adage, “ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it.” – Oliver Wendell Holmes
“What’s the problem? I didn’t break the law!
MCEE Section I, A, 5: Refraining from professional or personal activity that may lead to reducing one’s effectiveness within the school community;
My comment: Any on or off-duty conduct or inappropriate language that undermines a teacher’s efficacy in the classroom, damages his/her position as a “moral exemplar” in the community, or demeans the employing school entity may result in loss of job, suspension or revocation of license, and/or other disciplinary sanctions.
MCEE Section I, B, 2: Maintaining fidelity to the Code by taking proactive steps when having reason to believe that another educator may be approaching or involved in an unethical compromising situation;
My comment: As a professional with “fiduciary” responsibilities, we must look out for the welfare of our students, proactively protecting them from harm by embracing all provisions of “mandatory reporting.”
“What’s in it for me?”
MCEE Section I, C, 3: Enhancing one’s professional effectiveness by staying current with ethical principles and decisions from relevant sources including professional organizations;
MCEE Section I, C, 4: Actively participating in educational and professional organizations and associations;
Principle II: Responsibility for Professional Competence
The professional educator is committed to the highest levels of professional and ethical practice, including demonstration of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions required for professional competence.
“What’s the big deal about standards?”
Section II, A, 1: Incorporating into one’s practice state and national standards, including those specific to one’s discipline;
My comment: As professionals, we should volunteer to help write our school’s courses of study, content units, and learning goals for the subjects we teach, and take advantage of the National Core Arts Standards, the PMEA Model Curriculum Framework, and the state’s standards.
“Not another ‘flavor-of-the-month’ in-service program!”
Section II, A, 5: Reflecting upon and assessing one’s professional skills, content knowledge, and competency on an ongoing basis;
Section II, A, 6: Committing to ongoing professional development
My comment: Always “raising the bar,” being a member of a “profession” (like medical personnel, counselors, attorneys, etc.) requires the loftiest benchmarks of self-regulation and assessment, ongoing training, retooling, and self-improvement plans, revision and enforcement of “best practices,” and application of 21st Century learning skills.
“I needed to give him credit?”
MCEE Section II, B, 1: Appropriately recognizing others’ work by citing data or materials from published, unpublished, or electronic sources when disseminating information;
My comment: Especially during this period of online/virtual/remote education brought on by COVID-19, we must reference the owners of intellectual property (including sheet music) that we use and abide by all copyright regulations. In general, it is always “best practice” to cite research or authorship “giving credit where credit is due!”
“I’m just a music teacher! Don’t ask me to do anything else!”
MCEE Section II, C, 2: Working to engage the school community to close achievement, opportunity, and attainment gaps;
My comment: We teach “the whole child,” not a specialty or specific content area! I believe our ultimate mission is to facilitate our students’ capacity and desire to learn, inspire self-direction and self-confidence, and foster future success in life.
Principle III: Responsibility to Students
The professional educator has a primary obligation to treat students with dignity and respect. The professional educator promotes the health, safety, and well being of students by establishing and maintaining appropriate verbal, physical, emotional, and social boundaries.
“It’s just a gift…”
MCEE Section III, A, 5: Considering the implication of accepting gifts from or giving gifts to students;
My comment: It is not appropriate to give a gift to a student lacking an educational purpose. In some cases, this may be defined as a “sexual misconduct.” It begs the larger question: “Do you ensure that all of your interactions with students serve an educational purpose and occur in a setting consistent with that purpose?” Also from the PA Professional Standards and Practices Commission: “Teachers should refrain from accepting gifts or favors that might impair or appear to impair professional judgment.”
“You should never touch a student!”
MCEE Section III, A, 6: Engaging in physical contact with students only when there is a clearly defined purpose that benefits the student and continually keeps the safety and well-being of the student in mind;
My comment: We were told this warning in methods classes. However, as I mentioned in a previous blog here, this “rule” has little support in research or common “best practices.” It has been my experience that on occasion, most elementary instrumental teachers assist their students in acquiring the correct playing posture and hand positions by using some (limited) physical contact. Consoling an upset student with a pat on the shoulder is not out-of-line either. The factors that may contribute to the moment being judged “okay” vs. “inappropriate” boil down to:
MCEE Section III, A, 7: Avoiding multiple relationships with students which might impair objectivity and increase the risk of harm to student learning or well-being or decrease educator effectiveness;
My comment: You cannot be their “friend.” You are their teacher, an authority figure that is looking out for them and doing what is necessary (“fiduciary” responsibilities) for their health and welfare… perhaps at times things they do not want you to do. Crossing the teacher/student boundary with familiarity, informality, and being their “confidant” or “friend” are more than just unprofessional acts – they can foster a dual relationship where roles are less defined, an ambiguity that may lead to additional inappropriate actions and educator misconduct.
“He’s weird…” or “He’s not one of us!”
MCEE Section III, B, 2: Respecting the dignity, worth, and uniqueness of each individual student including, but not limited to, actual and perceived gender, gender expression, gender identity, civil status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, age, disability, race, ethnicity, socio-economic status, and culture;
My comment: Check your prejudices and personal biases at the door. Being a teacher is all about sensitivity and caring of all individuals – students, parents, staff, etc. Embracing today’s focus on reprogramming community attitudes on “diversity,” an educator daily models the values of empathy, compassion, acceptance, and appreciation, not just settling with the “lower bar” of tolerance, allowance, and compliance!
“Wait ’til you hear what happened in class today!”
MCEE Section III, C, 1: Respecting the privacy of students and the need to hold in confidence certain forms of student communications, documents, or information obtained in the course of practice;
My comments: Gossiping about and “carrying tales” home or in the teachers’ room are serious breaches of the care and trust as well as your fiduciary responsibilities assigned to you on behalf of your students. As for “regulations,” your indiscretion may be a violation of your students’ confidentiality rights (“a federal crime” according to Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, Grassley Amendment, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act). You are only permitted to share information about a student with another teacher, counselor, or administrator who is on a “needs-to-know” basis or is actively engaged in helping this student.
Principle IV: Responsibility to the School Community
The professional educator promotes positive relationships and effective interactions with members of the school community while maintaining professional boundaries.
“Don’t tell my parents!”
MCEE Section IV, A, 1: Communicating with parents/guardians in a timely and respectful manner that represents the students’ best interests;
My comment: I wish I had a nickel every time a student plead with me, “Don’t call my mom!” It is part of “moral professionalism,” your “code,” and good ethical standards to originate meaningful two-way dialogue, and if necessary, confront the parents of underachieving children. I also believe it goes on long way to nurture your relationships in the community if you notify parents when their kid has done something remarkable… “I caught him being good” or “The improvement has been extraordinary!”
“Did you hear what a staff member said about you… in front of the kids?”
MCEE Section IV, B, 1: Respecting colleagues as fellow professionals and maintaining civility when differences arise;
MCEE Section IV, B, 2: Resolving conflicts, whenever possible, privately and respectfully, and in accordance with district policy;
My comment: Before you bring up the matter with your supervisor or building administrator (which you have the right and even responsibility to do, especially if the students hear any improper speech first-hand or that the incidents rise to the level of bullying or aggressive behavior), first confirm the story. Talk to the unhappy team member one-on-one. Be calm and sensitive, but hold your ground: you must assert that his/her behavior/language is unacceptable and will not be tolerated in the future.
“Not another TEAM meeting?”
MCEE Section IV, B, 4: Collaborating with colleagues in a manner that supports academic achievement and related goals that promote the best interests of students;
My comment: We work together to insure that all educational goals are met. Open and interactive peer partnerships are helpful in the review, design, and application of new lessons, methods, media, and music.
“I was just teasing her…”
MCEE Section IV, B, 8: Working to ensure a workplace environment that is free from harassment.
My comment: Be extremely careful in the practice of any behavior or language of a kidding, sarcastic, cynical, or joking manner. It can be misinterpreted regardless of your intentions… and it can hurt someone’s feelings. And it is never appropriate or “professional” to “put down” another person.
“Don’t ask for permission… beg for forgiveness.”
MCEE Section IV, C, 3: Maintaining the highest professional standards of accuracy, honesty, and appropriate disclosure of information when representing the school or district within the community and in public communications;
My comment: Yes, I have heard this “view” a lot, advocates of whom will tell you to go ahead and stick your neck out to do something “for the good of the order,” and if needed later, “beg for forgiveness” if you decision is met with disapproval from administration. My advice? Less experienced teachers, run everything through your fellow colleagues (informally) and principal (formally). Don’t fall back on the lame “oops” and “beg for forgiveness.” I may have felt differently when I had three times as many years of experience under my belt than the supervisors who were assigned to “manage” me… but, even then, “venturing out without a paddle” usually did not serve the best interests of the students. There’s no reason to place “the teacher’s convenience” over the safety/welfare of the students. Besides, why not take advantage of the legal and political backup of your bosses if they are kept “in the loop?”
“He’s our preferred dealer and always takes care of us.”
MCEE Section IV, D, 4: Considering the implications of offering or accepting gifts and/or preferential treatment by vendors or an individual in a position of professional influence or power;
My comment: Formerly called “sweetheart deals” with music companies, you are on “shaky” ethical ground (and may also have “crossed the line” violating state laws/statutes) if you negotiate the rights of exclusive access to your school’s or booster’s purchasing. If you have any questions about your school’s policy on outside vendors, seek advice from your district’s business manager.
Principle V: Responsible and Ethical Use of Technology
The professional educator considers the impact of consuming, creating, distributing, and communicating information through all technologies. The ethical educator is vigilant to ensure appropriate boundaries of time, place, and role are maintained when using electronic communication.
“Isn’t use of social media forbidden?”
MCEE Section V, A, 1: Using social media responsibly, transparently, and primarily for purposes of teaching and learning per school and district policy. The professional educator considers the ramifications pf using social media and direct communications via technology on one’s interactions with students, colleagues, and the general public.
My comment: Professional educators’ use of a dedicated website or other social network application enables users to communicate with each other by posting information, comments, messages, images, etc. and “learn” together. However, using social media for sharing social interactions and personal relationships with your students, parents, and staff is unethical and dangerous. As they say, “a post (or snap) is forever.” Communicating digitally or electronically with students may lead to the blurring of appropriate teacher-student boundaries and create additional challenges to maintaining and protecting confidentiality.
The Final Word
In Pennsylvania (as well as the rest of the country), the statistics on school staff misconduct reports are rising alarmingly. Your own state’s “code of conduct” and the MCEE should help to clarify misunderstandings, but it has been my experience that the majority of educators do not receive regular collegiate, induction, or in-service training on educator ethics or moral professionalism. Luckily, we are fortunate to have access to many mock scenarios (see below) from state departments of education to review/discuss among ourselves common ethical conflicts and “conundrums” dealing with pedagogy, enforcement, resource allocation, relationships, and diversity. We all need to “refresh” our understanding of these issues from time to time and revisit “our codes” frequently to help “demagnetize” (and re-adjust) our decision-making compass.
Please peruse the ethics category of this blog-site for other articles and sample references below.
PKF
Resources
Website of Thomas W. Bailey, retired social studies teacher and attorney-at-law https://twbaileylaw.com/
American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education webinar presentation Beyond the Obvious: The Intersection of Educator Dispositions, Ethics, and Law by Troy Hutchings and David P. Thompson https://smackslide.com/slide/ethical-equilibrium-aacte-2evrqb
paulfox.blog 