FACULTY OF EDUCATION
Educational Administration: Structure and Process
Instructor: Darryl M. Hunter
Office: Room 387, Education (Wednesdays 6:30 9:15 pm)
Telephone: (306)7876053/(306)7872494 Home: (306) 5221567
Location: Room 314, Education Building
This course will consist of a study of administration in Canadian education focusing on
constitutional, governmental, legal, administratorteacher, and teacherstudent components of the
Saskatchewan education systems. The course will revolve around roles and responsibilities within
administrative agencies and structures , while also looking at the procedures and processes that
dynamically resolve conflict and sustain organizational efforts within these systems.
Course Objectives –
The student will:
Demonstrate a working knowledge of the formal political, administrative and fiscal structures that
govern Canadian education;
1.Demonstrate a working knowledge of the legal responsibilities and rights of members of the
various educational constituencies;
2.Demonstrate a critical awareness of the arguments underpinning significant issues of educational
policy in Saskatchewan and Canada and, in particular, those related to questions of educational
3.Demonstrate a working knowledge of the reference style approved by the American Psychological
4.Demonstrate communication and research skills appropriate to the teaching profession.
January 27, 2010
One might assume that a course in “Educational Administration” would focus on the role of the
more highly visible administrators in the public schools (i.e., Principals, Superintendents, Directors
of Education). Although that might interest some, EADM 310 is not a course for aspiring principals.
Rather, it focuses on the professional, ethical and legal responsibilities of teachers in Canadian
public schools. Unlike many courses, EADM 310 does not develop subject area knowledge or
classroom teaching skills. Its purpose is to provide you with the background you will need to make
informed decisions in the wider context of your professional life. As such, EADM 310 addresses non
pedagogical issues. For example, we will examine questions related to the finance and governance
of public education. Other public policy issues such as equity, gender, the administration of
aboriginal education, and provisions for exceptional students are explored. Approximately half of
the classtime will focus on legal issues as they concern the roles and responsibilities of teachers.
Finally we will address the more pragmatic, but nonetheless vital, concerns of beginning teachers—
getting a job and keeping it—the three C’s: Certificates, Contracts and Collective Agreements.
In class, the emphasis is developing an indepth understanding of weekly readings and legal
thinking through small group discussion and problemsolving, simulation exercises, notetaking and
direct lectures. A guest speaker is another feature. A dozen Power Point lectures and all course
materials will be posted on Share Point, a webbased medium for sharing materials (to which you
may subscribe for free) (http://www.slideshare.net/category/education). Look for the Education sub
domain and search EADM. Hard copy assignments are welcomed, but students are encouraged to
electronically submit all assignments by midnight on the deadline to the instructor's email address,
keeping a backup. Similarly, students will be able to complete and electronically submit the final
exam (from the exam location) with a laptop, either as an email attachment or directly with a USB
key. The course will be delivered in English, but students may interact with or submit assignments
to the instructor in French.
The course is based on a number of “core” readings, which are closely associated with topics
described in this outline. Students are, of course, expected to have completed these readings in
preparation for each class. Most readings will be from the assigned texts.
The texts for the class, which should be available in the Campus Bookstore, are as follows:
Young, J. & Levin, B. & Wallin, D. (2007). Understanding Canadian Schools: An Introduction to
January 27, 2010
Educational Administration (4th ed.). Scarborough: Thompson Nelson. (This is a relatively
new edition, so a used copy may be hard to find).
Chomos, J. & Walker, K. (2008). A Guide to Saskatchewan School Law. Saskatoon: Saskatchewan
Educational Leadership Unit.
For reference purposes, you should also download a PDF copy of the Education Act (1995) from:
<http://www.qp.gov.sk.ca/index.cfm?fuseaction=publications.details&p=487>. You should also
download PDF copies of the following Regulations (same source, just scroll down and click on the
# E0.1 Reg 1 E0.1 Reg 1 Education Regulations, 1986
# E0.1 Reg 11 E0.1 Reg 11 Independent Schools Regulations
# E0.1 Reg 15 E0.1 Reg 15 Homebased Education Program Regulations
# E0.2 Reg 11 E0.2 Reg 11 Teacher Certification and Classification Regulations, 2002
I wouldn’t recommend printing all of these. The PDF files are searchable using Adobe Reader. Any
additional reading will be provided as handouts in class.
1. Book/Article Critique – 15% (Maximum length: 5 pages/APA)*
Select a book or article from the reference list found at the end of the Young, Levin &
Wallin text. Write a brief critique which outlines the strengths and weaknesses of the
arguments found in the work. (Note: the book or article must be attached).
Due Date: February 3, 2010
2. Legal Brief15% (Maximum Length: 5 pages/APA)
Select a legal report that documents a case relevant to your field of study or teaching
level and write a “case brief” describing the facts of the case, the legal arguments and
the judge(s)’ reasons for decision. (Note: the case report must be attached),
Due Date: February 24, 2010
3. Indicators Application15% (Maximum length: 5 pages/APA)
* The requirement for the use of the A.P.A. format is neither arbitrary, nor simple “nit
picking:” it is, rather, a matter of fairness. Some students will spend a considerable amount of
time mastering this format; they cannot be left with the feeling that this was time wasted, as
it would be if this were not a “real” requirement. Most students will experience difficulty
limiting their written submissions to the specified maximum length (e.g., 5 pages for each),
given A.P.A.’s requirements for wide margins and doublespacing. It is simply unfair to allow
some students to include additional text by using formats that permit narrow margins and
reduced spacing. Given the above, submissions will not be accepted in any format other than
10 to 12 point (depending on font) A.P.A.
January 27, 2010
Choose four indicators from the 2008 Saskatchewan Education Indicators Report
(Ministry website) and write a short paper that: a) describes the relevant trend for each
indicator in terms of daytoday school life b) identifies potential causes for the trend c)
explains what the implications are for your role as a teacher and d) discusses potential
ways in which you may address/adapt to/resist the issues presented in each indicator.
The paper will provide a suitable introduction and conclusion which together draw
connections or interrelationships among the indicators (Note: the four indicators must
Due Date: March 10, 2010
4. Policy Analysis 30% (maximum length: 20 pages/APA)
The paper will address one major public policy issue in Saskatchewan, describe the key sub
issues involved, explain/critique the issue in terms of the prevailing lines of argument/beliefs/
points of view/assumptions at play, and describe the central organizations/interests/powers
which have a stake in the issue. Your analysis will reference at least three “contradictory”
articles found in a Saskatchewan or Canadian newspaper, professional ‘position paper’ or
‘pronouncement” or “policy statement”, or periodical during the 200620010 interval. For
example, ‘gender equity’, ‘teacher professionalism’, ‘student achievement’, ‘property taxes’,
‘accountability’, and ‘aboriginal education’ are some current “hot issues” in Saskatchewan.
Due Date: March 31, 2010
C. Final Exam – 25% (Maximum length: 3 hours/word processed or handwritten)
Examination Date: Tentative April 19
The Final Examination is openbook and will consist of two multifaceted scenarios, from which
you will choose one. Each scenario raises multiple dilemmas for the classroom teacher, to
which you will apply your course knowledge, understanding of administrative structures and
processes, and good judgment. Each scenario raises several legal, administrative, and
relationship issues; asks for a critical appraisal of conflicts that often arise in schools; and
demands an understanding of the roles and responsibilities of various individuals and agencies
in Saskatchewan schools.
January 27, 2010
Session 1 (Jan 6): Educational Administration for the PreService Teacher
1. Why do I have to take Educational Administration? I want to be a teacher not an administrator
1.1. to expand notions of professionalism;
1.2. to know your responsibilities and those of others in the educational community;
1.3. to know your rights and those of others in the educational community;
1.4. to avoid being misled or manipulated;
1.5. People’s Court
Session 2 (Jan13): Basic Structures and Roles in Saskatchewan Education 1
Chomos & Walker: §§1.3.4, 68; 14.3
Young, Levin & Wallin: pp. 119; 2360; 101118
[The Education Act (1995) (E0.2 of R.S.S., as amended), §§ 85, 180]
1. Constitutional Considerations
1.4. Educational implications of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms
2.4.1. fundamental freedoms
2.4.2. equality rights
2.4.3. minority language education rights
2. The Provincial Level
2.1. Review—B.N.A. Act
2.2. Saskatchewan Act
2.3. Education Act Ministry of Education
3. The Division Level
3.1. Trustees/Board Members
3.1.1. Senior Administrators
Session 3 (Jan 20): Basic Structures and Roles in Saskatchewan Education 2
Chomos & Walker: §§4; 3.6; 14.8.1
Young, Levin & Wallin: pp. 179190; 263266; 273297
[The Education Act (1995) (E0.2 of R.S.S., as amended), § 175]
1. School level administrators
1.3. department heads
2. Classroom Level
2.1. Teachers’ legally defined roles and responsibilities
January 27, 2010
2.2. Teaching Assistants and parent volunteers (roles & responsibilities)
2.3. Teachers’ Federations
3. The evolving role of the “community” in the governance of Canadian public schools
Session 4 (Jan 27): Who pays for public education? Who should pay? Who cares?
Chomos & Walker: §§9; 11.1.5; 12.1.5
Young, Levin & Wallin: pp. 145173
[The Education Act (1995) (E0.2 of R.S.S., as amended), §§ 141146]
1. Equality of educational opportunity. What’s fair?
1.1 Equality of access
1.2 Equality of treatment
1.3 Equality of results
1.4 Horizontal and vertical equity
1.5 Money as a proxy for equality
2. How much do we pay for publiclyfunded education in Canada?
3. How is public education paid for?
3.1 The Federal level
3.1.1 Aboriginal education
3.1.4 Transfer payments
3.1.5 Earmarked funding
22.214.171.124 minority language education
126.96.36.199 vocational education
3.2 The provincial level—the foundation grant system (a primer)
3.3 The school division level—property taxes/the mill rate
4. Who should pay? What’s fair?
4.1 Is education a private good or a public good?
4.2 How do we determine ability to pay?
5. Who cares?
5.1 How is education funding changing?
5.2 Does funding really have anything to do with you as a teacher?
Session 5 (Feb 3): The three C’s: Certificates, Contracts and Collective Agreements
Chomos & Walker: §§3.13.5, 3.7; 5
Young, Levin & Wallin: pp. 190210; 291297
[The Education Act (1995) (E0.2 of R.S.S., as amended), §§ 198230; 234276]
[The Teacher Certification and Classification Regulations (Chapter E0.1 Reg. 2, as amended)]
1. Certification becoming “qualified”
1.1 Certification in Saskatchewan
January 27, 2010
1.2 and elsewhere in Canada
2. Contracts getting a job
2.1 Getting hired
2.2 Staying hired:
2.2.1 Tenure and the myths of tenure
2.2.2. Transfers within a school division
2.2.3 Supervision & personnel evaluation
3. Collective Agreements the conditions of employment
3.1 In Saskatchewan
3.1.1 Provincial level bargaining
3.1.2 Local bargaining
3.2 and elsewhere in Canada
4. Teacher Attrition avoiding becoming a statistic
5. Sanctions and Remedies
Session 6 (Feb 10): Equity Issues in Education 1: Administration of Aboriginal
Education; Gender and Administration
Chomos & Walker: §13
Young, Levin & Wallin: Review pp. 5160.
1. Administration of Aboriginal Education
2. Overt discrimination and systemic discrimination. Does it really matter?
3. Gender issues
3.1 In the classroom
3.2 In the profession
4. Sask. Ed.’s policy positions on gender discrimination
4.1 In the classroom
4.2 In the profession
Session 7 (Feb 24): Equity issues in education 2: Education for Exceptional Students
Chomos & Walker: §1.3.6
Young, Levin & Wallin: pp. 135138; 235243
[The Education Act (1995) (E0.2 of R.S.S., as amended), §§ 146; 178; 186187]
[The Education Regulations (Chapter E0.1 Reg. 1, as amended), §§ 4852]
1. Who are exceptional students?
2. What are the issues?
2.1. From the perspective of the student/parent
2.2. From the perspective of the school board
January 27, 2010
2.3. From the perspective of the teacher
3. Sask. Ed.’s policy position
4. Impact of judicial decisions (from Elwood to Eaton and beyond)
Session 8 (March 3) The Implications of Compulsory Attendance
Chomos & Walker: §§1.11.3; 2; 11; 12
Young, Levin & Wallin: pp. 112115; 128130
[The Education Act (1995) (E0.2 of R.S.S., as amended), §§ 156162; 165166; 182]
[The Independent Schools Regulations (Chapter E0.1 Reg. 11)]
[The Homebased Education Program Regulation (Chapter E0.1 Reg. 15)]
1. Whose right is education?
1.1 Private good or public good
1.2 Student’s right, parents’ right, or state’s right?
2. Dissentient (Separate) schools
2.1 In the Canadian context
2.2 In the Saskatchewan context
2.3 Denominational cause
3. Private/Independent schools
3.1 In the Canadian context
3.2 In the Saskatchewan context
4. Home schooling
4.1 In the Canadian context
4.2 In the Saskatchewan context
5. The nondenominational/multicultural public schools—the impact of judicial decisions
5.3 Elgin County
5.6 Islamic League
Session 9 (March 10): Teachers’ duties and powersin matters of discipline
Chomos & Walker: §1.4.2
Young, Levin & Wallin: pp. 119121; 130135; 228231
[The Education Act (1995) (E0.2 of R.S.S., as amended), §§ 150155; 175; 231]
1. Sources of Authority
1.1 statute, regulation
1.1.1 duties of teachers, students and administrators
January 27, 2010
1.2 common law:
1.2.1 in loco parentis
1.2.2 social utility
2. Limits on the Exercise of Authority
2.1 Assault criminal and civil
2.2 §43 of the Criminal Code
3. Law Reform Commission Recommendations
4. Impact of Judicial Decisions
4.1 R. v. Haberstock
4.2 R. v. Lauzon
Session 10 (March 17): Negligence and Educational Malpractice
Chomos & Walker: §§1.4.1, 188.8.131.52.5
Young, Levin & Wallin: pp. 103105; 121126; 137
[The Education Act (1995) (E0.2 of R.S.S., as amended), § 232]
1. The Questions of Negligence
1.1. The Legal Concept of “Negligence”
1.2. Duty of Care
1.3. Standard of Care
1.4. Significant Factors in Determining Breach of Standard of Care
1.5. Students’ Responsibility for Their Own Safety
1.5.1. Voluntary Assumption of Risk
1.5.2. Contributory Negligence
1.5.3. Vicarious Liability: The Question of “Who Pays?”
2. Educational Malpractice
2.1. Technical Legal Issues
2.2. Public Policy Issues
Session 11 (March 24): Teachers’ Roles and Responsibilities [Just when you think, “this is
not my problem. . .” or “they can’t do that to me!”].
Chomos & Walker: §§1.4.6; 14.1.2, 14.6.6, 14.6.8, 14.6.9
Young, Levin & Wallin: pp. 126128; 137140
[The Education Act (1995) (E0.2 of R.S.S., as amended), § 231]
1. Reporting Child Abuse
2. Dispensing medication
3. Relationships with students
4. STF Code of Ethics
5. Conduct unbecoming.... (Shewan & Shewan)
6. Changing hats (Caldwell)
7. Denominational Cause revisited
8. Academic freedom? (Jim McMurtry & Ajax High)
January 27, 2010
Session 12 (March 31): Teachers’ duties and powersin matters of suspected criminal
Chomos & Walker: §§1.4.7; 14.5.1
Review, Young, Levin & Wallin: pp. 125129; 130136
[The Education Act (1995) (E0.2 of R.S.S., as amended), § 193]
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
1.1 §2 Fundamental freedoms
Conscience, religion, thought, belief, opinion and expression, peaceful
assembly and association
1.2 §7 Life, liberty, security of the person and fundamental justice
1.3 §8 No unreasonable search or seizure
1.3.1 R. v. J.M.G. (1986)
1.3.2 R v. M.R.M. (1998)
1.4 §9 No arbitrary detention
1.5 §10 Rights on arrest
1.6 §11 Rights in criminal proceedings
1.7 §12 No cruel and unusual treatment or punishment
2. The Youth Criminal Justice Act
2.1 §32 Confidentiality
2.1.1 Peel Board v. W.B. et al (1987)
2.2.2 Faye G. & James M. v. Scarborough Board of Education (1994)
2.2 §54 Right to consult
2.2.1 R. v. M.H.
Session 13 (April 7): The media, public perceptions and “issues” in education
Young, Levin & Wallin: pp. 9293
1. Unsafe Schools
1.1 The perceptions
1.2 The reality
1.3 Should you be concerned?
1.4 Zero tolerance/zero thought/zero justice
2. The myth of Canada’s “failing” public schools
2.1 The perceptions
2.2 The reality
2.3 Should you be concerned?
January 27, 2010
GENERAL CRITERIA FOR GRADING
GENERAL CRITERIA COMMENTS
1. Research is evident. The student has reviewed the
literature that is relevant, current, and useful in
understanding the issue; not only books, but also journals,
monographs, research reports, and possibly nonprint
sources such as the internet, interviews, tapes, films,
microfiche, and microfilm have been used.
2. Sources of information are acknowledged in an acceptable
manner (APA). The names of authors consulted are
correctly cited in the text of the paper.
3. The paper says something substantive about the issue
that is of value to the reader. The writer has been selective
in the literature reviewed.
4. The writer's own input is evident. The ideas taken from
the literature are utilized to make observations, discuss
implications, develop generalizations, and draw
5. Clarity, simplicity, parsimony, and good English
characterize the paper. It can be easily read and
6. The paper has overall quality. The writer understands the
issues and displays an ability to organize, to analyze, to
synthesize, to evaluate ideas and to express thoughts
[ ] 91100 Exceptional paper in all respects, and in addition, contains original, creative
[ ] 8090 Excellent paper with respect to most or all criteria.
[ ] 7579 Very good paper. Meets some of the criteria very well, and the remaining criteria
[ ] 7074 Good paper. Meets all of the criteria adequately. This category constitutes the
norm for grading major papers; all grades are assigned relative to this norm.
[ ] 6569 A satisfactory paper, but some improvements are desirable. A paper deficient on
two of the criteria is assigned to this category.
[ ] 6064 Minimally acceptable paper. Lacks originality in that it imitates references too
closely, or is deficient on three of the criteria.
[ ] < 60 A paper that is deficient on most of the listed criteria, or that contains
plagiarism; does not meet the standards required.
January 27, 2010
Detailed, holistic rubrics for each assignment will be predistributed which operationalize the
above criteria in terms of each assignment's purpose.
All grades with comments will be returned to students within one week of their submission.
Comments will aim to facilitate further reflection and depth of thinking about pertinent
course issues rather than to provide proofreading services. Rubrics/final exams with grades
will be Canada Posted to each student before the end of April.
The University of Regina upholds standards through prescribed grade ranges and course averages.
If necessary, the instructor will generate a scale score to adjust final grades, either up or
down, to uphold that standard.
January 27, 2010