Two recent articles on legal aspects of education history

Paul Axelrod of York University's Faculty of Education and Anthony Di Mascio, a doctoral student in history at the University of Ottawa, have recently published articles dealing with different legal aspects of education law in Ontario in the 20th and 19th centuries respectively.

Axelrod's "No Longer a ‘Last Resort’:The End of Corporal Punishment in the Schools of Toronto" appeared in the June 1910 issue (vol.91 no.2) of the Canadian Historical Review. Here's the abstract:

In 1971, following a protracted and tumultuous debate, the Toronto Board of Education formally abolished the use of corporal punishment in its schools – the first Ontario board to do so. Corporal punishment continued to be employed elsewhere in Ontario and throughout Canada well into the 1980s, and the use of physical discipline was prohibited in all Canadian schools only in 2004, following a ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada. Why did educators and legislators defend corporal punishment for so long, and why did the tide turn in the last part of the twentieth century? Concentrating on legal and political dynamics, this article explores the ways in which the Toronto Board of Education grappled with the issue of corporal punishment in the three decades before its abolition. It seeks to situate the story of Toronto's approach to school discipline on the broader social landscape on which the battle over corporal punishment was conducted. It concludes that the particular configuration of the Toronto Board of Education following trustee elections in 1969 strongly affected the shape and outcome of the corporal punishment debate. 

En 1971, après un long débat tumultueux, le Conseil scolaire de Toronto a officiellement aboli l'utilisation du châtiment corporel dans ses écoles, le premier conseil scolaire à prendre une telle décision. Le châtiment corporel est demeuré employé ailleurs en Ontario et au Canada jusqu'au milieu des années 1980. La correction physique n'a été interdite dans l'ensemble des écoles canadiennes qu'en 2004, à la suite d'une décision de la Cour suprême du Canada. Pourquoi les éducateurs et les législateurs ont-ils voulu conserver le châtiment corporel durant si longtemps, et pourquoi le vent a-t-il tourné au cours de la dernière partie du XX siècle? Le présent article est axé sur la dynamique légale et politique et examine comment le Conseil scolaire de Toronto s'est accommodé de cet épineux problème du châtiment corporel au cours des trois décennies qui ont précédé son abolition. L'auteur cherche à situer l'histoire de la méthode torontoise envers la discipline scolaire dans un contexte historique plus vaste où s'est déroulé la lutte ayant trait au châtiment corporel. Il en vient à la conclusion que la configuration particulière du Conseil scolaire de Toronto après l'élection des fiduciaires en 1969 a eu une importante influence sur la forme et le résultat du débat sur le châtiment corporel.

Di Mascio's focus in "Educational Discourse and the Making of Educational Legislation in Early Upper Canada," which appeared in the Februrary 2010 issue (vol.50 no.2) of History of Education Quarterly,  also deals with the 'high law' of legislation and the inter-relationship of public opinion and legal change. The abstract:

The article presents a re-examination into the history of education in Upper Canada during the late 18th- and early 19th-centuries, challenging academic discourse relating to the popular support and impetus behind its first waves of advocacy in the contemporary government administrations. The article focuses on the preparations leading up to and the consequences of the 1816 Common School Act. Questions are raised addressing the level of government enthusiasm for expanding the educational system of the region. Conclusions are offered defining the scope of the popular pressure which led to improvements in the educational system.