The power to exclude students from school indefinitely, at a principal’s total discretion, comes from a little-known provision of Ontario’s Education Act, Section 265 (1)(m). It offers principals a broad, unspecified authority to bar “detrimental” individuals from the school or classroom. There’s no limit on how long a student can be excluded, and no stipulated requirement for schools to provide alternative support. (In Layla’s case, the PDSB had offered to cover child care costs for the period of exclusion.)
A student who is excluded under the provision is granted none of the contingencies or reprieves that accompany a suspension or expulsion. If a student in Ontario is suspended or expelled, they can find a clear roadmap for what should happen next: the process, from an appeal to an action plan to a hearing, is laid out in the Education Act. School boards are mandated to offer educational programs for both suspended and expelled students, and a student who is expelled must also be offered non-academic support, like counselling. If a student is suspended, the discipline is time-limited, and if they’re expelled, it’s the school’s duty to help find them an alternative plan.
Why is this allowed?
This is a really great article for an underreported problem. (The system, not the kids!) Thanks for posting!
At least in America the community colleges don’t look into what your principal ever said. As long as you pay up they don’t care.
I don’t know about for-profit institutions, but if you’re going to one of those you’re taking your chances as it is.
It’s pretty much the same thing here in Canada. Community Colleges here (if we even call them that, but we have the equivalent) don’t care about grades or your track record in high school as long as you pay. This is also why we have an influx of “international students” coming here as they just enroll in whatever community college and say there here for the education when in rerality there here for the easy PR status.
Intersting
