Disagreement over teaching methodology led to teacher to consider quitting
This edition of You Make the Call features a contract teacher whose teaching methods were at odds with the director of her school.
Shivani Ruparell was hired by Arbrae Academy, a girls’ school in Halifax, in June 2010 to be a science and biology teacher for the 2010/11 school year. The position was part-time and her contract was only for the one school year.
However, before the school year began, Ruparell suffered an injury that require surgery and rehabilitation, and she wasn’t able to report to work until Oct. 12, one-and-a-half months after her position’s duties officially started.
During the fall term, the senior school director told Ruparell there were some issues with her teaching methodology and class structure – which featured letting students get more involved in their learning and have them seek out information on their own with her guidance. The director provided some guidance and input that addressed student and parent concerns, instructing Ruparell to devote more time to direct learning. There were no discussions of performance issues or formal discipline.
During the school’s holiday break in December, Ruparell began questioning the “push back” she was getting because of her teaching methodology. She strongly believed in her methodology and felt if she couldn’t continue using it, she might try to get released from her contract.
Ruparell met with the school’s headmaster on Jan. 4, 2011, following the break, discussed her concerns and said it was possible that she might want to be released if she couldn’t continue using her teaching style. They met again on Jan. 7 to discuss matters and their options. According to Ruparell, they concluded the meeting by agreeing to give the matter some thought over the weekend and to decide what to do the following Monday, Jan. 10.
Shortly after the meeting, Ruparell told colleagues that she thought she had just resigned but she had until Monday before giving a final decision.
Before they could meet, Ruparell received an email on Jan. 10 from the headmaster indicating he accepted her resignation. The headmaster claimed she had resigned her position on Jan. 7 and they had agreed that he would take the weekend to decide if he would accept the resignation. He felt it was in the best interest of the students to accept Ruparell’s resignation. He claimed that Ruparell only tried to revoke her resignation after the school hired a replacement teacher.
You Make the Call
Did Ruparell resign her position?
OR
Did the school act too fast in accepting her resignation?
If you said the school acted too fast, you’re right. The court noted that an employee’s resignation must be “clear and unequivocal” to be accepted. It found this was not the case here. Though Ruparell made it clear to the headmaster that she was seriously considering resigning and she mentioned to others that it might be happening, her communications with others indicated she thought she still had the weekend to make a final decision.
“The court has no hesitancy in concluding that Ms. Ruparell was considering various options, and resigning her position was one that she was very seriously considering,” said the court. “I further have no hesitancy in concluding that she conveyed this to (the headmaster) during the Jan. 7 meeting, but giving serious consideration to resigning, reserving the weekend to give further consideration, does not constitute an unequivocal resignation.”
