Nova Scotia’s School Code of Conduct Policy is overdue for an update. Six years overdue, to be exact, writes the Auditor General’s report from June, Preventing and Addressing Violence in Nova Scotia Public Schools. The report contained several recommendations related to updating the code of conduct, all of which the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, or EECD, agreed to, including:
- “Review the categories of unacceptable behaviours.”
- “Provide guidance on how to manage unacceptable behaviours at different grade levels including age-appropriate consequences.”
- “Provide guidance to educators if unacceptable behaviours of a student escalate.”
- “Establish how the Provincial School Code of Conduct Policy will be communicated with students and parents/guardians on a regular basis.”
- “Review what policies are needed to support the Provincial School Code of Conduct.”
- “Provide guidance to staff in schools on how incidents of inappropriate parent/guardian behaviours should be responded to and how they will be followed up on.”
A week after the report was released, deputy minister of education Elwin LeRoux confirmed a draft of the updated code of conduct policy would be shared by the end of September. At an announcement in early October, minister of education Becky Druhan told reporters that a draft of a new policy would be shared in the coming weeks.
On Thursday, Oct. 24, all seven of the province’s regional centres for education (RCEs) and the Conseil scolaire acadien provincial (CSAP) shared a working draft of the policy with school staff, families and school communities—for consultation here. They also shared a working draft of the province’s Guide to Unacceptable Behaviours and Responses that’s integral to the new code of conduct policy. The online portal to comment anonymously on both closes Nov 17.
The Coast asked the EECD how these responses will be used and when a new policy can be expected. The department responded that “once this online consultation—as well as in-person engagement sessions, school visits and focus groups happening concurrently—is complete, the responses will be compiled and reviewed so that the feedback can be incorporated into the new policy. Our goal remains to have a new policy in place in early 2025.”
So, does the draft of the new code of conduct policy fulfill the recommendations made by the Auditor General’s report? Yes, with room for improvement.
“Review the categories of unacceptable behaviours”
Yes.
The draft differentiates between “unacceptable behaviours” and “school violence,” which the old policy did not do. The draft defines unacceptable behaviour as that which “threatens the safety and endangers the physical and/or mental well-being of others, damages property, or significantly disrupts the learning of others.”
It lists 17 types: discriminatory behaviour, bullying (including cyberbullying), illegal activity, inappropriate language, interruption of the learning environment, misuse of networks or online resources, not following directions/expectations/noncompliance, physical aggression, physical violence, sexual misconduct, smoking/vaping or other nicotine products, unapproved mobile device use, use or possession of alcohol/non-prescribed drugs or drug paraphernalia, vandalism, verbal abuse, threatening behaviour and weapons possession or use.
“Unapproved mobile device use” is new to this draft.
The draft defines school violence as “any unacceptable behaviour occurring in a school setting that causes or has the potential to cause physical, emotional, or psychological harm to another individual.”
It lists six types: bullying (including cyberbullying), discriminatory behaviour, physical violence, verbal abuse or threatening behaviour, weapons possession or use and sexual misconduct.
The draft refers to the second working document up for review, the working Guide for Responding to Unacceptable Behaviours, for definitions and responses to each behaviour type.
“Provide guidance on how to manage unacceptable behaviours at different grade levels, including age-appropriate consequences.”
Yes, mostly.
The drafted Provincial School Code of Conduct Policy says “responses to unacceptable behaviour will be culturally and linguistically responsive and will be determined with consideration to students’ capacity—including their age/stage of development.”
The drafted Guide to Unacceptable Behaviours and Responses separates responses to unacceptable behaviours into two age categories: Grades Primary to 6, and Grades 7 to 12.
It includes an “Incident Decision-Making Matrix” specific to both age categories. This rates the impact of the incident “on student, staff, or facility safety and well-being” as well as “frequency of incident recurrence,” from “severe” to “no-impact.” This rating is then multiplied by an “Incident Severity Rating,” which considers “intentionality, evidence of neurotypical processing, age/stage of development and frequency” and gives a rating from 1 to 5.
Consequences, or responses, range depending on where an incident falls on the matrix, from no response, conferencing, loss of privileges, in-school suspensions, out-of-school suspensions and reintegration plans.
The consequences are the same for both age categories when responding to the most severe incidents: suspension of 10 or more days and a reintegration plan. In-school suspensions for Grades Primary to 6 begin at three to five days, whereas for students in Grades 7 to 12 they begin at five to 10 days.
Only the first two types of unacceptable behaviours—bullying and discriminatory behaviours—have their range of responses further articulated as potentially involving “conferencing with student or parent; restorative approaches; creating a plan for restitution; and coaching to develop new behaviours,” which are the same for both age groups. The remaining unacceptable behaviours are given definitions and consequences in terms of type of suspension only.
Sexual misconduct applies only to Grades 7 through 12. It’s defined in the guide as “any behaviour of a sexual nature or connotation that is deemed inappropriate or unacceptable at school or during any school-related activity,” and the consequences range from an in-school suspension to a suspension of 10 or more days out of school.
“Provide guidance to educators if unacceptable behaviours of a student escalate.”
Yes, sort of.
The incident decision-making matrices match age categories with each incident’s intention, frequency, severity and consequences. Severity ratings increase for “repeated offenses,” and severe incidents list as an impact “outside intervention required.”
This differs from the old policy that listed all possible responses to any incident without reference to severity or frequency.
The draft of the code of conduct policy says that “for students deemed to be not responsible for their behaviours, responsibility will shift to parents and the Student Planning Team to ensure that school remains a safe and inclusive space for all.”
“Establish how the Provincial School Code of Conduct Policy will be communicated with students and parents/guardians on a regular basis.”
Yes, with little detail.
The draft reads: “Consistent and clear communication has been identified as an area for improvement in the new Code of Conduct.” It then spends three out of 11 pages detailing the communication roles and responsibilities for each of the following groups: the EECD, RCEs/CSAP, administrators, teachers, support staff, student advisory councils, students and parents.
For example, the RCEs/CSAP must “communicate the Provincial School Code of Conduct Policy to schools on an annual basis,” and “ensure consistent implementation of [the code] in all schools, including reinforcement of the importance of reporting incidents by all staff.”
Administrators must “communicate the Provincial School Code of Conduct Policy to students, staff, parents, co-located staff employed by community partners and other members of the school community.” It doesn’t say how or how often.
Teachers must “communicate regularly and meaningfully with parents and guardians.”
Parents must “become familiar with” the code, and “encourage and assist their child in following” it.
“Review what policies are needed to support the Provincial School Code of Conduct.”
I guess?
The draft of the new policy reads that “each RCE/CSAP will provide a statistical report to the [minister of education] on behavioural incidents in schools within that RCE/CSAP over the past year. This report will also be published on the RCE/CSAP website.” It does not say how these reports will be analyzed or used.
Under “what other supporting documents would be helpful in implementing the Code of Conduct,” the drafted code of conduct policy lists only one: the draft Guide for Responding to Unacceptable Behaviours.
“Provide guidance to staff in schools on how incidents of inappropriate parent/guardian behaviours should be responded to and how they will be followed up on.”
No.
The draft policy asks the question, yes. “Should the code of conduct articulate expectations for others, [including] parents, community, staff?”
It responds: “this Code of Conduct applies to all primary to grade 12 students,” and is “complementary to Occupational Health and Safety Act, Violence in the Workplace Regulations, and policies in RCEs/CSAP and in schools.”
It reads that “all members of the school community are expected to act in ways that promote a safe, caring, positive and inclusive environment” including by “following laws, regulations and policies…treating everyone with dignity…and using positive language and supporting a productive learning environment.”
So, if/when this doesn’t happen, it’s unclear who should be responding and how.
This article appears in Oct 1 – Nov 6, 2024.