The situation
You share a shift with a colleague the students like. Over the past few weeks you have noticed things that, taken separately, would look like nothing: you always find the same third-year secondary student alone in his classroom during break; he brought her a gift “for her good grades”; and another student remarks, laughing, that “sir messages her privately”. Yesterday you saw them leave the school together at the end of the day, talking as far as the corner. You have seen no physical contact and you are certain of nothing improper. Your colleague has fifteen years of service and a spotless reputation. You wonder whether you are seeing an excess of familiarity, or the beginning of something more serious.
◆ The comment on each course of action is generated by AI from this section’s legal framework, whose official texts are in Spanish. It orients you; always verify the article in the legal framework.
For whoever facilitates
Facilitator’s notes
First, a point worth settling: each of the behaviours observed is already regulated, with no need to prove any intention. The Código de Ética limits the teacher-student relationship to the academic and formative, and prohibits gifts, meetings outside school hours and school premises, and one-to-one digital communication with students (Arts. 10 and 13, Orden Departamental 22/2023). That framework exists because criminal law treats the relationship of authority and trust as an aggravating circumstance when the line is crossed: in sexual assault, abuse of authority or of trust weighs in (Art. 134, Ley 74-25), and sexual harassment in academic settings is aggravated (Art. 145, Ley 74-25). Option b is the correct institutional route: Ley 136-03 (the Code for the Protection of Children and Adolescents) requires action on knowledge “or suspicion” and protects anyone who reports in good faith (Art. 14, Ley 136-03), while refraining from reporting may be a criminal offence (Art. 327, Ley 74-25). Option a can be a legitimate collegial complement in the face of borderline practices, but it does not replace the report if the suspicion persists. Option c confuses prudence with silence: reporting is not accusing, it is asking the competent body to look. Option d loads the student with the responsibility of protecting herself alone. Question for the group: why do contact rules — group, public, documented — also protect the innocent teacher?
The team’s commentary
Two readings of this scenario
Español — The Spanish version is the reference text — the legal verification described in the audit report was carried out on it.
Audit report — the independent legal review of this material, with the errors we found and corrected (page in Spanish).
Comprehensive AI learning designed for educators, by educators. From awareness to mastery.