A Porirua primary school teacher was censured after his “inappropriate” touching was revealed in a student’s TikTok video.
The conduct of Windley School teacher Jeremy Jarman was outlined in a recently made public Teachers Disciplinary Tribunal decision. He had been a teacher at the school since 1997.
Jarman’s conduct around students was thrown into question after multiple children, aged between 9 and 13, alleged he had made them feel “uncomfortable” by inappropriately touching them.
In its decision, the tribunal made it clear “there was no sexual or indecent motivation to the touching”, instead calling it a “misguided” attempt at taking a “fatherly approach” to teaching.
On various occasions between January 2019 and August 2021, the tribunal said Jarman had engaged in “inappropriate physical contact” with seven students.
During a rippa rugby game, where players rip flags off each other’s waists, Jarman had placed his hand on a girl’s bottom before saying: “Sorry, I thought you still had a flag attached”.
A number of other details were also listed in the tribunal’s decision. These included an occasion in the school library, where it was alleged he had kissed the top of a girl’s head.
While coaching basketball, he had guided three girls around the court with his hands on their waists – making them feel “uncomfortable”.
He also approached one of the girls while she was on the playground and poked the logo on her shirt, just above her breast area, asking what brand it was.
On one occasion, he placed his arms around a girl and “drew her close to him”. He also rubbed the same girl’s shoulders on different occasions.
Four girls had said that while sitting on a couch in his classroom, Jarman put his hand on their thighs and rubbed them.
The decision says one girl claimed he had placed his hand on her thigh while giving her a lift home from basketball practice. Nobody else was in the car.
Jarman’s conduct was first exposed after a student posted a video to TikTok, claiming he had “been touching girls in his class”.
After being made aware of the video, the school found the names of the girls referenced and reported Jarman to the police. Jarman was then placed on discretionary leave.
Police interviewed Jarman “but did not charge him on the basis that his conduct did not appear to involve any criminal offending”.
In September 2021, he signed a voluntary undertaking not to teach.
Teacher responds
In response to the claims, Jarman claimed the student who made the TikTok video was “challenging” and often “unhappy” with the teacher’s attempt to modify his “disruptive behaviour”.
“Mr Jarman explained that two or three days before he was placed on discretionary leave, he had sent this student to the principal’s office for swearing at him.”
Responding to the allegations of inappropriate touching, Jarman admitted he would regularly touch students on the knees, shoulders, and waist.
He claimed it was part of his teaching style and said: “At no point have my actions been anything other than trying to build safe, caring and effective relationships with my students.”
He denied touching the girl’s bottom during rippa rugby, drawing a girl close to him, or poking another above the breast.
Jarman said he had touched students’ knees on the couch, not their thighs.
He did not recall kissing a student on the head in the library but “admits to doing this to two other ‘unnamed’ students”.
Regarding touching the students’ waists during basketball practice, he said it “was a necessary coaching technique for students of that age”.
“In order to get them to stand in the correct position on the court.
“Mr Jarman also explained that he had undertaken research that suggested touch can help build relationships,” the tribunal said.
Jarman said he was “upset and embarrassed” that his conduct had made students uncomfortable “and that he did not realise this was the case at the time”.
Jarman was censured in April 2023 for his conduct, and annotation was recorded in the public register for a period of two years. The ruling was made public last week.
He was also ordered to undergo mentoring if he wanted to become a teacher again.
The tribunal said: “While his conduct was well intended, and at times he may have considered he was taking a ‘fatherly approach’, that was not his role. Mr Jarman’s role was to teach, guide and nurture.
“His intentions were misguided. We are satisfied that he is remorseful for his conduct, and he understands the impact his actions have had on his students.”
Both the school and Jarman did not seek name suppression.