Panel Consideration Meeting - Removal with Consent Order - Alexander Mclean

Definitions

Any reference in this outcome to:

• ‘GTC Scotland’ means the General Teaching Council for Scotland;
• the ‘Panel’ means the Fitness to Teach Panel considering the case;
• the ‘Rules’ (and any related expression) means the GTC Scotland Fitness to Teach Rules 2017 or refers to a provision (or provisions) within them;
• the ‘Register’ means the GTC Scotland Register of teachers; and
• ‘COPAC’ means the GTC Scotland Code of Professionalism and Conduct 2012.

Notification of Meeting

The Panel had before it a copy of the Notice of Panel Consideration, dated 4 October 2024. The Panel was satisfied that the Teacher had been provided with the Notice of Panel Consideration (NOPC) in accordance with Rules 1.6 and 2.3.1. Accordingly, the Panel proceeded to consider the case.

Preliminary Matters

There were no preliminary matters.

Allegation(s)

1. On 9 November 2023 at Hamilton Sheriff Court, the Teacher was convicted of the following offence:
   
   On 7th February 2022 at (redacted address) the Teacher did assault Pupil A, born (redacted date), and did strike her on the body
   
   And the Teacher was Admonished and Dismissed by the court.

In light of the above, it is alleged that the Teacher’s fitness to teach is impaired and he is unfit to teach, as a result of breaching parts 1.2, 1.3, 1.6 and 2.3 of GTC Scotland’s Code of Professionalism and Conduct.

Information Available to the Panel

1. Final Investigation Report, dated 13 September 2024, with appendices including:
   • Referral form from employer, dated 5 May 2023
   • Notice of investigation response from Teacher, dated 15 June 20232
   • Note of interview with Alex McLean, dated 26 October 2022
   • Record of fact-finding interview with Jacqueline Finnegan, dated 11 November 2022
   • Handwritten statement of Pupil A, taken by Fiona Mullen, dated 8 February 2022
   • Email from Debra Lindsay to Aileen Lambie, dated 1 July 2022
   • Email from Sergeant Lorna Hinshelwood to Eilidh Duffy, date unknown
   • Email from Sergeant Lorna Hinshelwood to Eilidh Duffy, dated 9 December 2022
   • Email from Margaret Wilson to Eilidh Duffy, dated 19 December 2022
   • Email from Sergeant Lorna Hinshelwood to Eilidh Duffy, dated 8 March 2023
   • Letter from Andrew Iles of Cartys Solicitors to the Teacher, dated 27 October 2022
   • Statement from Pupil A taken by Police Scotland, dated 29 March 2023
   • Statement from Joyce Ramsay, taken by Police Scotland, dated 29 March 2023
   • Statement from PC Hollie Hodgeson-Collins, dated 29 March 2023
   • Statement from PC Christina McGhee, dated 29 March 2023
   • Statement from PC Steven Frame, dated 29 March 2023
   • Email from Local Authority regarding update on Teacher’s case, dated 22 May 2024
   • Extract of conviction from Hamilton Sheriff Court, dated 1 February 2024

Teacher’s Response

On 2 September 2024, GTC Scotland emailed the Teacher to ask if the Teacher had any response to the allegations against him. The Teacher responded that he has no interest in teaching again or being contacted by anyone from GTC Scotland.

The Teacher’s response to the Notice was contained in an email dated 4 October 2024, in which he stated;

Remove me from the teaching Register as I have no desire to ever teach again. This will be my final correspondence with you and the GTCS and further communications will be ignored

Summary of Evidence and Submissions

The Panel was provided with the full extract conviction report from Hamilton Sheriff Court dated 1 February 2024 confirming the Teacher’s conviction for assault by striking Pupil A on the body on 7 February 2022.

The conviction (after trial) arose from a private tutoring session with Pupil A at her home on 7 February 2022. Pupil A had a disappointing result from a prelim exam at school. The Teacher had said that when he found out about the result, he ‘…could have skelped her up her arse’. In the tutoring session, the Teacher stuck Pupil A on the body when she provided a wrong answer. The Panel noted that the extract conviction was conclusive proof of the fact of the Teacher’s conviction in terms of Rule 1.7.18 which states that:

Subject to Rule 1.7.19, where a teacher has been convicted of a criminal offence (and provided that such conviction is neither pending appeal nor been successfully appealed):

(a) An extract conviction, or copy of the certificate of conviction certified by a competence officer of the relevant court, will be conclusive proof of the conviction; and
(b) Any findings in fact upon which the conviction is based will be admissible as evidence of those facts”

Decision

The Panel considered all of the information available to it as described above. The Panel had a range of options open to it, as set out at Rule 2.3.2 (a) to (f). The Panel had regard to the factors set out in the GTC Scotland Panel Consideration Practice Statement.3

The Panel did not consider it appropriate to dispose of the case in accordance with Rule 2.3.2 (a). The Panel reached this conclusion for the following reasons:

• The matter amounts to Relevant Conduct and there is on the face of it, a real prospect of a finding that the Teacher’s fitness to teach is impaired. The Panel considered the following factors relevant in that the conduct alleged relates to:
  • Abuse of a teacher’s position of trust;
  • Behaviour of a violent, aggressive or threatening nature; and
  • Other serious activities which cause harm and affect public confidence (conviction for an assault on a pupil).

The Panel considered the relevant Parts of COPAC to be:

• Part 1 – Professionalism and maintaining trust in the profession, in particular 1.2, 1.3 and 1.6.
• Part 2 – Professional responsibilities towards Pupils, in particular 2.3.

The Panel considered the following additional factors to be relevant in their decision:

• The matter did not occur more than 5 years ago.
• The matter has not already been considered.
• The matter is not frivolous or vexatious.
• The allegation(s) have not been made anonymously or by a person who has failed to cooperate with the investigation.

The Panel did not consider it appropriate to dismiss the case on the basis of an insufficiency of evidence as provided for by Rule 2.3.2 (b). The allegation has not been admitted by the Teacher. However, the extract conviction is conclusive evidence. Furthermore, the Panel did not consider the referral to be malicious. Accordingly, the Panel went on to consider the Teacher’s current fitness to teach.

Fitness to Teach

The Panel carefully considered all of the available information and had regard to Part A of the GTC Scotland Fitness to Teach Conduct Cases – Indicative Outcomes Guidance in considering whether the Teacher’s fitness to teach is currently impaired.

The Panel determined that the Teacher has breached parts 1.2, 1.3, 1.6 and 2.3 of COPAC. The Teacher’s behaviour involves multiple breaches of COPAC, and his conduct fell well below that to be expected of a teacher.

The Teacher breached the trust put in him by fellow members of the profession and the public.

The Panel concluded that the Teacher has failed to demonstrate professionalism, in his responses to GTC Scotland. The Teacher provided responses that were at variance with his professional obligations towards his regulator. He was entitled to deny the facts which underlay his conviction but not to de dismissive or discourteous in response to the GTC Scotland enquiries. In his conduct in the tutoring session which lead to the conviction, the Teacher has failed to act as a role model. The Panel was satisfied that the allegations would amount to misconduct.

The Panel next considered the level of seriousness of the Teacher’s conduct. The Panel concluded that the Teacher’s conduct was serious. The conduct might be capable of being remedied with appropriate insight and action by the Teacher, but he has set his face against such positive restorative action. The conduct therefore has not been remediated and in light of the Teacher’s responses, there is a high likelihood of it being repeated in future.

For these reasons, the Panel concluded that the Teacher’s fitness to teach is currently impaired.The Teacher’s conviction for assault on a pupil in a tutoring session has the potential to erode the public’s trust and confidence in the profession. The Teacher has done nothing to address the natural concerns for pupil safety and the loss of standing of the profession that inevitably resulted from his conviction. On the contrary, the Teacher has declined to respond positively to GTC Scotland. There is no evidence that the Teacher has insight into the impact of his actions or of his criminal conviction on the safety of pupils, the trust and confidence that the public hold in the teaching profession and in the need to uphold standards for teachers in Scotland. He wishes to be removed from the Register. In the whole circumstances, the Panel concluded that the Teacher had fallen significantly short of the standards expected, was fundamentally incompatible with being a registered teacher, and that he was unfit to teach.

Disposal

As the Panel determined that the Teacher is unfit to teach, in accordance with the terms of Article 18(2)(b) of the Public Services Reform (General Teaching Council for Scotland) Order 2011, it could only direct that the Teacher be removed from the Register.

The Panel had regard to the Teacher’s position and decided to issue a consent order in accordance with Rule 2.7 offering the Teacher the opportunity to consent to removal from the Register. Should such consent be provided, the Panel considered that two years (the maximum period permitted) was an appropriate prohibition period before the Teacher would be able to apply for re-registration. The terms of the consent order are set out in the separate “Consent Order” document. Should the Teacher fail to provide his consent to the order within 28 days from the date of the decision notice, the case is to be referred on for hearing proceedings.