Now, the teacher, whose name has been suppressed, has been found to have committed a serious breach by the Teachers Disciplinary Tribunal.
Wrong grades entered
According to the tribunal’s recently released decision, the school at which the teacher was employed conducted a review of assessment data in June 2020.
It showed the teacher had given all students in his Year 10 class a 4A grade across three modules.
When asked about it, he then entered new grades for the class, ranging from 5A to 5E.
“The Deputy Junior Principal noted that these grades seemed high in comparison to the standard academic ability of that year 10 class,” the tribunal decision said.
At a later meeting with the Complaints Assessment Committee (CAC), when his conduct was being investigated, the teacher said there had been a rush to have marks entered and reports through by the end of the term.
“He said he did not know why he decided to give all the Year 10 students one mark but suggested it may have been done automatically,” the decision said.
“He accepted that his conduct was not good practice,” the decision said.
However, the same month the teacher issued the entire class the same grade, he had also awarded three Year 12 students an achieved grade for work they had not completed or submitted.
The students found they had been awarded the grade when checking other results online.
At the CAC meeting, the teacher said he thought the grades would only be recorded on school reports, rather than the NCEA system.
“He said that this action was based on his faith that the students would get the work done. He admitted he was not thinking straight at the time and should not have assumed the students would complete the work,” the decision said.
In another incident, he awarded a Year 12 geography student a merit grade for an unnamed piece of work belonging to another student.
“The piece of work did not belong to that student, and that student had in fact not submitted any work for that particular Achievement Standard,” the decision said.
The teacher told the school he had mistaken it as belonging to that student.
He said for reasons he “simply did not understand”, he marked the work believing it to be that student’s based on his previous diligence and submitted work.
Markbook entries for the Year 12 class, also from June 2020, showed the teacher had improved three students’ assessment grades from merit to excellence, on the basis that their work had been resubmitted.
He had overwritten the original grade in the first column of the markbook, when he should have entered it into a second column after the work had been resubmitted.
However, the teacher was unable to provide evidence of resubmitted work to justify an improved grade for the three students.
The decision did not state what happened to the students’ grades
‘No malice or cunning involved’
In May 2021, the teacher undertook a voluntary impairment assessment, which found he was suffering anxiety and insomnia.
The assessment showed he could not concentrate and manage his required work due to anxiety, leading to poor judgment.
The tribunal heard it had been the man’s dream to be a teacher, and he had been working at the college for several years before the incidents.
“He had other jobs before teaching because he wanted to be more mature before he took up the profession,” the decision said.
He told the tribunal he believed that he was good at his job and had once been awarded teacher of the year.
However, after going through a marital separation, he said he was not often allowed to see his children.
“He tried to be stoic but spiralled into anxiety and depression,” the decision said.
“His relationship with his children had become strained. At around this time, the Covid-19 pandemic began, and the country entered lockdown. He went into ‘hermit mode’. He was not coping well.
The conduct occurred when he wanted to reach the holidays to readjust and reset.
“This was when he made the entries in question. He had never had issues with deadlines before. There was no malice or cunning involved. He didn’t want to manipulate the results.”
The teacher was “super regretful” for his actions and was now working at another school, which was aware of the tribunal’s charge.
The tribunal found he committed a serious breach of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
It censured the teacher and ordered an annotation of the register for a period of two years.
It also set out conditions for his practising certificate, including undergoing professional mentoring for 12 months, and that he could not take on a leadership role for a period.
“At first blush, this had the hallmarks of a serious breach of a teacher’s fundamental responsibilities because it appeared to be deliberate dishonesty by a teacher in relation to an essential aspect of teaching practice. For those reasons, the behaviour troubled us,” the decision stated.
“However, we were impressed with the respondent’s acceptance of responsibility and the insight he showed.
“We were also impressed with his candour, and his explanation of his personal circumstances was valuable in providing proper context to his actions.
“Ultimately, for these reasons, we did not consider that cancellation or suspension was required.”
Brianna McIlraith is a Queenstown-based reporter for Open Justice covering courts in the lower South Island. She has been a journalist since 2018 and has had a strong interest in business and financial journalism.