AlbertaParentsUnion
Although I don't agree with everything the Alberta Parents Union writes, does or stands for, I post the emails I receive from them because I think they deserve to be heard.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) just read our emails, they could have had a 7 month head-start.
Back in August, we told you that the Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) was using some fuzzy math when it comes to education funding.
The ATA were claiming, as they often do, that Alberta spends the lowest amount of money per student on education out of all the provinces.
We pointed out that they were wrong for a number of reasons, including the fact that the figures they were using were incredibly misleading.
Well, now, 7 months later, the CBC have written a fact-check of the ATA’s claims on the exact same grounds as we already did!
(We’ll forgive them for being 7 months late in reporting this - they do only have a billion dollars of taxpayer funding for their reporting, after all.)
This development is all the more surprising because, as you probably well know, the CBC usually just repeats the ATA’s claims without question.
How bad must the ATA’s claims have to have been to warrant a CBC fact-check?
Let's take a look!
“Trickier than you might expect”
The central disagreement is around the data being used to calculate the per-student funding.
In the CBC’s fact-check, reporter Robson Fletcher explains how the ATA claims they are simply using Statistics Canada (StatCan) data.
However, StatCan themselves actively went to the public broadcaster to say that the ATA was twisting StatCan’s numbers to make their argument:
“But Statistics Canada, itself, urges caution when interpreting its data in this way.
That's because precisely calculating per-student funding for public schools across every province in a consistent and comparable manner is a [sic] trickier than you might expect.”
We thought that seemed familiar, so we went back to our email titled “The Watchdog That Didn’t Bark” and here’s what we wrote in August:
“But what StatCan don't do is simply divide one set of numbers by the other, to give the 'average amount of money spent per student' in each province.
And it's important to understand that StatCan don't do this, because they know that there are many differences and variables across all the provinces.”
Indeed, as the CBC summarizes the statistical nerds’ own warnings:
“But officials with StatsCan told CBC News it's actually impossible with the available public-facing data to precisely calculate per-student funding for public schools and make truly accurate comparisons between provinces.”
We were a little more blunt, but said essentially the same thing:
“There are probably dozens more reasons why merging these two datasets makes no sense, and any 'average' resulting from doing so is complete nonsense.”
Apples to Apples
The basic reason the ATA - or anyone else - cannot simply divide one StatCan table by another, is that the result will not be comparing apples to apples.
The CBC explained the ATA’s error like this:
”StatsCan says it uses a 'consolidated spending' approach to look at a 'holistic version' of education expenditures, including those at the school board level as well as 'direct expenditures by provinces and territories.' (The ATA, by contrast, used a dataset that includes just school board expenditures.)”
We explained the same thing with more words, but less jargon, like this:
“For example, in some provinces, the government pays for more things directly, and pays for fewer things via school boards, whereas in other provinces, the school boards are left to make more of the purchases.
In other provinces, including Alberta, there are simply fewer students going to schools managed by school boards and more students going to charter schools and other alternative types of schools.
Alberta is the only province with charter schools.
Charter schools are not governed by school boards, so their funding is transferred directly to the school rather than to a school board, meaning that funding doesn't show up in one of the datasets.”
ATA “Mistakes” Are Ideological
A hint as to why the ATA can't be trusted to handle these numbers carefully lies in a quote from the CBC story:
“The [StatCan] methodology, which includes private-school spending, also aligns with international standards, and StatsCan reports its results to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.”
This is because much of the rest of the world has choice in education, so private-school spending has to be included to make them match.
The ATA is setting out to prove that public schools are underfunded, and deliberately designing calculations that will result in that answer, even if they make no sense.
Thankfully, the media are now finally paying attention, and the ATA’s claims are being at least somewhat tested on this one point.
But, imagine if we could challenge the ATA on every single one of their claims?
Imagine if we could push back on each and every misleading statement they make about Alberta’s education system.
Well - there’s no need to imagine.
That’s exactly what the Alberta Parents’ Union is trying to do.
We’re trying to build a movement of thousands of parents that can get the truth about our education system out there far and wide.
So, tell your friends to sign up for the Alberta Parents’ Union and get tomorrow’s news today!
The more members and supporters we have, the wider we can spread our message.
“Don't tell me where your priorities are.
Show me where you spend your money and I'll tell you what they are.”
Provincial budgets don't merely determine how much tax you will pay, how much will be borrowed for your children to pay, and what services those children will receive.
They are also an attempt to align those numbers to the values of Albertans.
So, how did the government do in this year's budget?
Well, we’re letting you tell us, but first we’ll give you the simple goods on what’s in the budget and what has changed.
Then we have some questions for you, and we will be sharing your answers with the government to let them know how you feel they did in reflecting your values.
Prioritizing Choice in Education
First, we evidently get to break some news we have seen nowhere else.
The Weighted Moving Average - the funding formula we opposed for undermining choice in education - is dead.
This is a giant win for our organization, as we raised this issue in early August and have seen action in less than one full budget cycle!
We told you again in October to contact the relevant decision-makers and let them know we expected to see a new model that gave preference to schools attracting families, rather than schools driving families away.
That is precisely what we have in this budget.
The funding model is being adjusted to provide funding based on a two-year enrollment average instead of three, starting this Fall.
Of the funding, 30% will be based on the current year’s enrollment and 70% will be based on projections of the following year’s enrollment.
That means the money will follow the child, much more faithfully than before, and growing schools will receive extra funding in anticipation of that growth.
Under the old Weighted Moving Average, shrinking schools received extra per student funding, instead.
We are pleased to see schools better incentivized to grow by meeting families’ needs, rather than an attempt to cushion the blow for schools rejected by families.
We are so proud of the advocacy you all did to see this day come, when Alberta returns to its stated principles of supporting choice in education.
One could be surprised that the Alberta Teachers’ Association, after complaining about the funding formula for years, hasn’t trumpeted this as a win.
But we mentioned that arguing for money to follow the child has always been an awkward and inconsistent position for them.
We anticipate that the teacher union will, eventually, attack this solution to the problems they decried for years.
We stand ready to oppose those arguments on the same, consistent ground we always have: that parents know what their kids need better than politicians, so parents should be empowered to make the decisions about their kids’ education.
In that vein, we must mention before moving on that this budget also prioritizes capital funding to provide more seats at schools where families languish on waiting lists.
Education Property Tax Increase
Homeowners will be seeing an increase on their property taxes, and, of course, renters will see that passed along as a rent increase.
The Province has estimated Calgarians will pay $239 more, on average, this year.
Edmontonians will pay an average of $93 more, and those outside the two major metros will pay less, in accordance with lower average land values.
Depending on your municipality, you are likely seeing a property tax increase already, but this is a provincial “requisition” for education funding.
Traditionally, the Province’s revenue target has been that 33% of the education budget will be paid for through property taxes.
That may already be a surprise, if you (like many taxpayers) thought property taxes paid for the entirety of the education budget.
If so, you might be particularly surprised to learn that the actual proportion of the education budget covered by property taxes has been a mere 28.5%.
This year’s property tax increase is projected to bring in 31.6% of what Alberta will spend on education.
In future years, the Province says it wants to return to the historical 33% target, but not go beyond that.
Funding Priorities
Finally, we’ll review the funding priorities which have driven this round of increases.
Alberta will spend $54 million in the next school year, and $348 million in the next two years, to attempt to catch up to enrollment growth pressures.
A whopping $1.6 billion is earmarked, just in the next school year, for students with specialized learning needs.
The Province anticipates this funding will result in 4,000 new teachers and classroom support staff over the next three years.
With rising maintenance costs, Alberta is spending another $389 million over the next three years to address those needs - they mentioned, in particular, the rising cost of insurance and utilities.
We Want to Hear from You
So, what do you think?
Does this education budget reflect your values?
Here are some questions we'd love to know your thoughts on, but also feel free to let us know anything else on your mind:
Q1: Do you support or oppose the Government of Alberta ending the old Weighted Moving Average funding model?
Q2: Alberta Education will now be spending roughly $12,000 per student per year. Does that seem too low, too high, or about right to you?
Q3: What are your thoughts on the Education Property Tax Increase? Should property taxes have covered the full amount? Are property taxes even the right way to do this? Maybe all taxes should be higher, or lower?
Q4: Given this level of funding and taxation, do you think the priorities set in Budget 2025 reflect your values?
Q5: What changes would you make to the education budget to better reflect your own values?
Read the latest newsletter, the Alberta Parents Union to get their take on the Myths of Charter Schools.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you’re running a grab-and-go sandwich shop, and you make all the sandwiches before the lunch rush, which one should you definitely make more of?
The one the most people ask for after you’re all out, right?
In schooling, the option the most families are asking for after all the existing seats are filled are charter schools.
Here at the Alberta Parents’ Union, we support the full range of choices in education.
We want parents to be empowered to have real choices - motivated to meet their children’s needs - between public, separate, francophone, alternative program, charter, independent, and home education.
We’re even pushing for new options to be further defined - like learning pods!
But the grab-and-go sandwich shop analogy still holds.
If you want to know what Alberta needs more of, most desperately, look at what we have the most families asking for after we have no more seats.
Clearly, it's charter schools.
Some public and separate schools might have 110%, even 130%, utilization rates, but most charter schools have two or more times the number of students waiting to get in than they have seats for.
Of course, supplying more seats in these schools would also help relieve pressure on these families’ second and third choices.
Any attempt to add more seats at charter schools, though, will be met by myths like this one from Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) Executive Staff Officer, Dr. Lisa Everitt:
Myth: “While charter schools are not as exclusive as private schools, they can refuse some students access.”
The Charter Schools Handbook - the government’s rules for charter applicants - is unequivocal that charter schools may not refuse access except for lack of capacity.
Even then, selection must be open and fair (considering such priorities as geography, keeping siblings together, and first-come-first-serve).
Any family denied a placement may request a review.
The ATA uses waiting lists as an argument that some students are refused access.
In fact, they are a powerful argument for capital funding to build and expand charter schools, which the ATA actually opposes.
The fact is that real opportunities for kids hang in the balance, and this level of chicanery coming from ATA officials is not funny - it’s offensive.
In the same paragraph, Everitt claims:
Myth: “Given that charter schools are not publicly accountable, what happens to the infrastructure if a charter school is dissolved?”
She doesn’t mean accountability to parents, who typically make up the board and always control the funding by choosing to enroll their child in the charter - a level of accountability elected school boards don’t provide.
She also doesn’t mean the multiple levels of Provincial regulation that she concedes have been tight.
She means a tiny fraction of the public has no opportunity to vote, every four years, for the charter school board.
We recently addressed at length the rather strained claim that public and separate school board elections provide meaningful accountability.
But let’s focus on that not-so-innocent question - since she immediately implies it could be a method for for-profit companies to hoover up taxpayer money.
First, Alberta law unambiguously requires charters to be non-profit.
Further, the same disposition of property regulation applies to charters as any other school.
Finally, in their application, charters must include “a description of the process by which the charter school may be dissolved, including … the disposition of real and personal property and financial, school and student records.”
So, if charters actually have extra layers of accountability in both of the areas Dr. Everitt objects to, why does the ATA consider them an existential threat?
The fact is that, unlike the government-monopoly system the ATA would prefer, the extra layers of accountability are difficult for the ATA to control.
The fact is that, for parents, having the choice between public, separate, charter, francophone, alternative, independent, and home education is a dream.
The fact is that, for a union wishing to maintain centralized control of the education system, it’s a nightmare.
The fact is that the ATA needs to get their facts straight.
And they’re not the only ones.
The President of the Alberta Federation of Labour, Gil McGowan, once charged:
Myth: “UCP paves the way for nutbar religious charter schools … that doesn’t follow the curriculum.”
The fact is that all charter schools must follow the Alberta curriculum and exceed it, with some unique emphasis that delivers more than the Alberta curriculum by itself.
Strangely, since religious, denominational schools (separate schools) are required by the Alberta Act itself, charter schools cannot be religious.
As our friend, Brett Fawcett wrote for Cardus:
“This prohibition is not founded on evidence, reason, or jurisprudence but is rooted in American charter-school laws - alien to Alberta and illogical to retain.”
Alien, illogical, and unnoticed, it would seem.
One final myth stands out:
Myth: “Charter schools defund public schools.”
Leaving for others the argument over the definition of a public school, let’s start by recognizing that taxes defund families.
Why would giving those families a choice defund public schools?
The money doesn’t belong to one institution, or even to the government.
It belongs to taxpayers.
Taxpayers are told that money is going toward the education of students.
Since charter schools outperform all other types of school on Provincial Achievement Tests, and since families have responded by choosing charter schools faster than they can be built, doesn’t accountability to the taxpayer require the money to follow the child to charter schools?
But, unfortunately, by requiring teachers to join and pay dues to the Alberta Teachers’ Association, Alberta requires taxpayers and parents to fund arguments against our own interest.
The Alberta Parents’ Union has never accepted tax money, and never will.
We also have never forced anyone to join, and never will.
But if you would like to join the side arguing for more freedom for you and Alberta families, instead of an ever-growing empire at your expense, you can do so today!
Children are our most important resource, which is why education is such an important topic and should be of concern to all. That is why I believe the Alberta Parents Union is a voice that deserves to be heard and considered. What the Alberta Parents Union espouses is but one perspective and those with differing perspectives are welcomed and encouraged to post them on this platform.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From time to time, we have countered some school choice myths.
Since it’s a school trustee election year, we want to counter a school choice myth related to school trustees, specifically.
Opponents of school choice often argue that public schools are more accountable than charter schools, independent schools (private schools), learning pods (as we have promoted them), or home education (funded or unfunded).
They argue elected school boards provide a level of accountability that isn’t present in these schools without elections defined by geography (since most of these other schools do hold elections for their own boards).
There’s a few problems with this idea, though.
First, non-school-board options are accountable to parents and taxpayers.
In fact, they’re even more directly accountable to parents, the real experts in what the kids need, for these reasons:
- Parents need to feel heard by the school to choose to send their kid there
- These schools are typically designed for more parental involvement
- These schools depend on parents choosing them, and are incentivized to listen and act
- If school refuses to listen and act, families can just as easily leave as they came
- Crucially, school leaders outside of school boards are keenly aware of these incentives
Second, school boards don’t exactly have a strong track record of being accountable to parents or taxpayers.
For one, provincial name and pronoun legislation was necessary because the vast majority of school boards had a policy of keeping name and pronouns changes secret from parents - against the will of taxpayers and, especially, parents.
Parents and taxpayers demanded schools have rules (that they actually enforced) around cellphones and other personal electronic devices.
School boards not only did not institute those rules, or make it easier for schools to do so, they often blamed parents and claimed we opposed such rules.
From 2020 through 2022, school boards ignored both the expertise of the Chief Medical Officer of Health and of parents in their own kids, instituting inexplicable policies.
In the early days of the Alberta Parents’ Union, we warned you that the Calgary Board of Education was sending teen moms from the sheltered programming at the Louise Dean School campus into a dangerous school.
For this, one trustee called us racist (I don’t have to tell you race never entered into our analysis), even after a stabbing had just occurred at the dangerous school.
Despite the most democratic pressure they had likely ever received, thanks to all of you, only one CBE trustee voted not to expose their most vulnerable students to danger.
The Province gave us a partial win and addressed some concerns with the Calgary Board of Education.
However, the real solution to better school board accountability - like always - rests with voters at election time.
Perhaps most directly, we have been raising the alarm about school boards not even pretending to give full representation to parents and taxpayers - namely, by not holding by-elections to fill vacancies.
A few weeks ago, we told you about how the Calgary Catholic School Division refused to hold a by-election when democratic oversight would be maximized, only to be forced by the Education Act to hold one when it would be minimized.
In fact, it’s questionable how much democratic oversight the administration of Calgary Catholic School Division allows - possibly reducing its value even further.
Many school board policies are actually exempt from oversight by the board of trustees (although, the trustees themselves could reverse those exemptions).
Calgary Catholic’s Administrative Procedure 415 (AP 415) prohibits direct communication between school division staff (including teachers) and school board trustees.
It is not simply binding on staff not to approach trustees, but also means a trustee cannot approach staff.
Obviously, many staff are also parents.
Even worse, the administration has interpreted their School Council Handbook to prohibit direct contact between any parents and trustees because it says those conversations need to flow through the chief superintendent.
The “trustee contact phone number” provided to parents is a member of the administration - the only metro school board with this practice.
Calgary Catholic is also the only metro school board not to stream their trustee meetings for the public to watch.
And the Calgary Catholic School Division certainly requires oversight.
Parents deserve an explanation for all kinds of things that have been happening at Calgary Catholic.
They deserve answers for how the superintendent could resign and then be rehired with no explanation.
And they certainly deserve an explanation for how the Division could receive a $5 million boost from the Province a year ago for increased enrollment, cut programming, and still take $21.5 million from reserves to balance their budget.
But, it’s not just Calgary Catholic that needs more oversight!
You may remember us raising the alarm about Elk Island Public Schools, where administration actually coerced a trustee into resigning with a plainly false reading of the Local Authorities Election Act (and, of course, the rest of the board into not replacing him).
Elk Island does stream their meetings, but deletes the videos after 24 hours.
They hired a consulting firm to search for their superintendent, despite ultimately promoting from within, and will not disclose the cost of the consulting firm.
Elk Island also promised parents, “There has been no discussion at either the administrative or board level about closing Andrew School.”
Just seven months later - April 20th and 25th, 2023 - the first public meetings were held to discuss the closure of the school.
On May 4th, the Andrew School closure was final.
We have already seen school divisions wield their Code of Conduct to remove trustees entirely, and some are looking to make it even easier to do so.
The Lethbridge School Division has proposed a new Trustee Code of Conduct that makes it much easier to remove school trustees for social media posts.
The new Code of Conduct also prohibits a trustee from seeking out information they need to govern from anyone but the superintendent.
Indeed, a functional relationship between board and superintendent should supply all the information the board needs to govern.
But requiring this would make a dysfunctional relationship a Code of Conduct violation on the trustee’s part - while the board’s only employee, the superintendent, can avoid accountability.
With only nine months until the next election, we expect to see this kind of Code of Conduct update from many lame-duck school boards.
So, electing trustees through geographically defined elections - when trustees allow those elections to happen - hasn’t seemed to ensure accountability.
So, what’s the solution?
Obviously, introducing more school choice is the big solution.
Choice and competition is a rising tide that lifts all boats.
Each new choice made available and chosen by a family is a lifeline from, all too often, an oppressive feeling of hopelessness for that family’s kids and their futures.
But for a great many families, electing better school boards would also be cause for rejoicing.
(And don't forget, all voters are eligible to participate in school board elections for their area, even if your family has exercised your choice of a non-school-board option.)
So, as always, the Alberta Parents’ Union is fighting for more school choice.
We hope debunking this myth has helped you answer a surprisingly ill-informed objection to choice in education.
But the Alberta Parents’ Union is also trying to provide all parents, grandparents, teachers, and taxpayers with more information about how school boards should run.
But we also think more voters would participate in school board elections, if it weren’t just labour unions surveying candidates and informing their members.
That’s why we’ve been looking for your feedback into our truly transparent, accountable, and democratic survey of candidates for school board trustee.
That’s one of the reasons we started the Alberta Parents’ Union!
Alberta Shows School Choice Helps Poor Families
The Alberta Parents’ Union brought your voice to an international audience!
We've told you before that Alberta is a world leader in school choice.
Recently, our Executive Director was able to sit on a panel at the International School Choice and Reform Conference (ISCRC) to explain why that matters.
We had the privilege of providing our local insights into Alberta’s educational landscape to support and talk about Dr. Merrifield’s research into how education policy impacts poorer families in Canada.
Dr. Merrifield is one of the founding fathers of school choice research and is also one of the founders of the ISCRC
He was the professor who inspired Corey DeAngelis (probably the most famous advocate for school choice alive today) to take up the cause.
Dr. Merrifield’s research showed that a “free” public school assigned to your family, based on where you live, simply moves the true cost back a step.
The cost of a “free” public school education is now a house in a neighbourhood assigned to a given public school.
Dr. Merrifield shows that this means richer families will buy up the housing around the best schools, while poorer families will be left in the neighbourhoods assigned to worse schools.
He demonstrates that flight to neighbourhoods with better schools (demonstrated by the flight happening disproportionately as children reach compulsory schooling age) is sufficient to explain families sorting to live in cohorts with similar family incomes.
The worse this sorting gets, particularly in large cities, the more negative outcomes other than schooling - crime, social disorder, additional poverty, and (perversely) higher prices for many goods and services - accumulate in neighbourhoods with concentrated poverty.
Conversely, as richer families (who tend to be families with greater economic and political influence) are geographically shielded from this decay in social welfare, they are less apt to work towards and advocate for improvements.
Thus, residentially assigning schools hurts poorer families the most - whether or not they have kids in school!
Dr. Merrifield shows that stronger school choice - which does not depend on geographically assigning families to schools - results in fewer neighbourhoods characterized by concentrated poverty.
Applying his model to the nine most populated Canadian metro areas, Ontario’s population centres (which have the least choice in education) jump out.
Ottawa tops the list with almost twice as much concentrated poverty as Edmonton (the highest concentration in Alberta).
Surprisingly, Vancouver actually showed the lowest overall income segregation.
British Columbia has the highest level of school choice in Canada other than Alberta, lacking only charter schools to match us.
Calgary had the second-lowest concentration of poverty among Canadian metros.
Anyone familiar with the vast array of schools in Calgary that are not assigned based on residential address would expect, then, to see Alberta’s largest city do well on this measure.
Alberta and British Columbia also benefit, of course, from making home education more accessible by reimbursing some of the costs.
Our Executive Director offered his thoughts as to how Edmonton Public School Board has been comparatively successful in keeping competition from schools of choice out of the capital city, accounting for its comparatively high levels of poverty concentration.
Two of Edmonton’s charter schools, also, are focused on serving low-income families - which, while admirable, is unlikely to attract higher-income families to their neighbourhoods.
This brings us to the last insight we will share for today from this study:
School choice only for poorer families will not alleviate the poverty concentration that hurts all poorer families!
Dr. Merrifield showed this with reference to Milwaukee, Wisconsin - which has a voucher system, but only for poorer families.
Poorer families with access to vouchers can escape the worse schools in the neighbourhoods they can afford, but not the other social ills resulting from the flight of richer families with no access to vouchers.
Without school choice for them, rich families still have to pay the premium for housing near the best schooling, leading to flight.
Thus, paradoxically, to help all poorer families - with or without kids in school - escape the effects of concentrated poverty (crime, social disorder, additional poverty, higher prices for many goods and services) you cannot concentrate your school choice efforts on poorer families alone.
Aside from participating in this cutting-edge research process, we benefited from learning from other organizations doing similar work and talking strategies to notch more policy wins.
We also loved the opportunity to let international leaders know about Alberta’s success story!
In turn, we learned in depth about successful school choice and reform policies around the world, including Ireland, Portugal, and Spain.
And, of course, eleven American states now have universal eligibility (no longer limited to just poorer families or just children assigned to failing schools) school choice.
Just five years ago, no American state had a universal eligibility school choice program.
So, this is a story of, whether they realize it or not, America following Alberta, not the other way around.
What it does mean, though, is that Alberta is losing our edge over many American states in attracting and retaining families with school-aged children.
Flight to more attractive geography for your kids’ education doesn’t just happen within metro areas, of course.
Alberta has seen large numbers of families moving here from Ontario and citing K-12 education as the reason.
We don’t see families leaving Alberta for those reasons yet.
But now Florida, Arizona, Iowa, Utah, and others are attracting families citing K-12 education as the reason for their move.
Alberta must regain our edge, or the social decay from families of means taking flight to better options will afflict us all.
Even those who don’t care about education for its own sake will be made to care, at that point.
So, we know we have a lot of work to do, but we are proud of what we've built already.
Our grassroots activism was the envy of many people trying to build what we have, in all corners of the world.
We are grateful to you, our supporters, for helping build this organization that can provoke international envy.
We understand that things like this don't just happen.
It takes a mom who doesn't want to become a full-time advocate herself, but needs someone in her corner to fight for better for her kids.
It takes a grandparent who can see us losing our edge and who is desperate to stop it.
It takes a taxpayer and teacher who is tired of exclusively funding people advocating against his voice, no matter how much he cries out.
So thank you, if you have joined our merry band of reformers!
The Calgary Catholic School Division is holding a by-election to fill two trustee vacancies on January 31st.
One of the vacancies - in Wards 11/12 - was caused by the death of Cathie Williams in July 2024.
But, the earlier vacancy - in Wards 4/7 - dates back to December 14th, 2022 - more than two years ago.
How? Why?
Well, let us explain...
This Calgary Catholic School Division by-election exposes an absurdity in the Education Act that applies province-wide, and which our Alberta Parents’ Union has been working to fix through our “Parents Deserve School Trustee By-elections” campaign.
In this situation, simply put, the Education Act does not require a by-election if the school board has only one vacancy, whereas it does require a by-election if the school board has two vacancies.
Normally, school boards are allowed to hold a by-election if they want, but they don't have to.
On the surface, that seems to kind of make sense.
Why go through all the time and expense of holding a by-election if you don't have to?
But - as with many government rules - the more you think about it, and the more you consider the possible implications of the rule, the less it makes sense.
Let's go back to the Calgary Catholic School Division.
Ironically, the vacancy in December 2022 was what (at least, in part) triggered us to launch this campaign to change the rules in the first place.
The vacancy occurred only a little bit more than a year after the election and, at the time, the Calgary Catholic School Division chose not to hold a by-election, leaving parents in Wards 4 and 7 without representation for almost three years!
Yet now, with just nine months until the next general election, because the number of vacancies rose from one to two - however different in length the vacancies are - the Education Act now requires a by-election, where before it did not.
There is simply no rational way to justify not holding a by-election then, and holding one now.
If anyone objects that a vacancy of two trustees is qualitatively different than missing only one - on a board with seven trustees at a full roster - we agree!
But, that is all the more reason to require a by-election at the first vacancy, not at the second - the board with seven trustees has been missing two since July last year already!
In fact, this highlights another reason why it would have been wiser for the school board to voluntarily hold the one by-election in 2023 - if only to avoid the absurd Education Act requirement to hold two by-elections in a general election year!
This Education Act requirement is especially inexplicable since it does not match the requirements of the other municipal governments.
At a minimum, the rules for municipal and school board by-elections should be brought into alignment, so that by-elections are required if there is a substantial period of time left until the next general election, and left as optional if they arise close to the next general election.
*****
Importantly, we shouldn't hold any of this against the school trustee candidates running for the vacant seats.
Parents need serious trustees to bring real accountability to administration, and we applaud anyone who runs understanding the task before them.
This also doesn’t mean we won’t be engaging with the Calgary Catholic by-election ourselves.
We are using this by-election as a dry-run of our project to survey all trustee candidates all across the province in the general election in October.
Our email next week will reveal the survey answers of the by-election candidates (and those who have not answered, which may be, itself, revealing).
We’ll be looking for your help - whether you live in Calgary or not - in telling us if we’re on the right track with our methods in this survey and in the questions we asked, or if you have changes to suggest.
For all of us, this serves as a useful exercise to consider what we want to see from our trustee candidates.
We share news of school boards behaving badly, not because we revel in them, but because it sharpens our thinking about what good decisions from school boards would look like.
When the Province leaves it to school boards to leave parents unrepresented for years, but then requires them to pull money out of classro
As we close out our second year at the Alberta Parents’ Union, it’s remarkable to reflect on just how far we’ve come in such a short time.
We have quickly grown our small organization into a powerful movement that is driving meaningful change in the Alberta education system.
Together, we’ve challenged entrenched interests, pushed for common-sense reforms, and proven that parents can make a difference when we stand united.
The accomplishments we’re about to share with you are not just milestones - they are proof that with determination and support from people like you, even a small organization can achieve big things.
As we reflect on 2024, we’re proud of what we’ve accomplished together.
Delivering Real Change
Recognizing Parents’ Rights In Education
From the beginning, we called for measures to ensure transparency and accountability in Alberta’s education system. Thanks to your support, parents have more of a say in classrooms. We raised concerns about the use of outside resources in classrooms. The government responded with regulations, and now one of our proposed amendments to Bill 27 was adopted.
Cellphone-Free Classrooms
Less distracting and bullying-prone learning environments are now a reality in Alberta schools, ensuring students can focus on their education.
A Fairer Funding Model
With the government’s announcement that Budget 2024 will be the final one using the Weighted Moving Average, we’ve successfully advocated for a fairer and more transparent funding model for Alberta’s schools.
Accelerated School Construction
The Alberta School Construction Accelerator Program was launched this year, ensuring that charter and independent schools receive the same consideration as public schools. This achievement was made possible by land ownership reforms we supported - reforms that the Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) and their allies strongly opposed.
Preserving Early Learning Assessments
Despite opposition - again - from the ATA, we successfully advocated for early learning assessments to ensure children get the support they need during their most formative years.
Amplifying Parents' Voices
Raising Awareness and Driving Action
We raised public awareness about the disconnect between the Alberta School Councils’ Association and the parents they claim to represent. We also played a crucial role in building public pressure for school trustee by-elections, resulting in several being held this year.
Empowering School Board Candidates
Through surveys and training initiatives, we’ve prepared parents to advocate for their children by running for school board positions. These efforts are laying the groundwork for long-term change.
A National Voice for Parents
Our work reached audiences far and wide, with appearances on all sorts of media, from CBC and Maclean’s Magazine to Bridge City News, and everything in between. We amplified our message and ensured parents’ perspectives were front and center in the public debate.
Standing Firm Against Harmful Policies
Opposing Harmful Ideologies
We challenged the ATA’s monopolistic influence, fought against ineffective teaching methods (like Fountas and Pinnell and Building Thinking Classrooms), and opposed the appointment of anti-parent advocates to positions of influence.
Promoting a Better Curriculum
We continued to advocate for a content-rich, history-based, and sequential social studies curriculum that equips students with the knowledge they need to succeed.
Even our critics, including the ATA, have acknowledged our effectiveness by naming us as a unique threat to their outdated approach to education.
With your continued help, we will build on this year’s successes, ensuring that Alberta’s education system remains one that respects parents, values choice, and delivers excellence for students.
Being a father of 4 and grandfather of 9 parental rights is a topic near and dear to me and which is why some of my posts, such as the one below *** are from Alberta Parents Union.
**************************************************************************************
Including parents in their children’s education is not only the right thing to do, it’s also common sense.
And, it is popular!
So popular, in fact, that quite a few school board candidates in quite a few school districts beat incumbents at the last school board elections by promising to include parents more.
Parental involvement is also now being debated provincially, with Bill 27 proposing to require schools to disclose to parents if their children are using a name or pronouns different from those supplied by the parents.
Now, you probably wouldn’t know it from the media attention this issue has received, but this policy is actually the status quo at many school divisions across Alberta.
Many of those school trustees who got elected on involving parents more in their children’s education followed through on that promise and implemented similar these policies at the school board level.
And, contrary to the gloom and doom predictions of the opposition to Bill 27, there has been no crisis of hostility between parents and their children or parents and schools in the school divisions where this has been adopted.
Quite the opposite, in fact, as research and common sense show that parents trust schools more when schools give parents more information.
Unfortunately, Bill 27 is still necessary, because the majority of school divisions, including the largest ones with the most students, have not yet adopted common sense disclosure policies.
All four school divisions in the big cities, and some others that foolishly follow their lead, prohibit disclosure of names or pronouns to parents and remove any discretion from teachers and principals to do so.
Worse, they do this through broad policies that prohibit the disclosure of any information that could be related to a child’s gender identity.
That’s an incredibly broad definition and, combined with a lack of discretion being allowed, has led to some truly absurd policy results that (almost) no one must have intended.
For example, in one case, a 14-year-old boy was taken off school premises in a private vehicle to the home of an adult “facilitator” who was not a staff member of the school and did not have children attending the school.
In another, a 13-year-old girl was taken from a rural school to a Calgary hotel for a conference on “diversity, equality, and human rights”, where she was taught how to perform sex acts.
Again, all without their parents knowing anything about any of this.
At a similar conference, a 13-year-old boy was given 153 condoms, a giant spaceship in the shape of a male body part that encouraged him to “explore”, and a 50-page flip book that depicted sexual relations, and was told his mother would never know he missed most of his classes to attend.
He was not told anything about sexually transmitted infections - rather, his mother had to deliver that information, when she first learned of the excursion, by finding the illicit materials in his room.
How is this possible?
Well, one reason is that parents - and grandparents, educators, and taxpayers who support the parents’ role - do not pay enough attention to school board elections.
These are policies adopted by school boards who have been captured by an ideology, despite the ideology being widely believed to be nonsense by the electorate.
The Alberta government’s policies on gender identity policies in schools were introduced to the Legislature on October 31st as Bill 27.
In short, we got both a little more and a little less than we were promised when the ideas were first introduced in January.
The Alberta Teachers’ Association and their front group, the Alberta School Councils Association, oppose the Bill.
They claim to speak for parents, yet in opposing the Bill they prove, again, that they fundamentally distrust parents.
Bill 27 includes parents more in their children’s education by including us more in the decisions that schools have been excluding parents from.
Here at the Alberta Parents’ Union, we think that’s a good thing.
If you’re already familiar with Bill 27, you can become a member of the Alberta Parents’ Union now, by clicking here.
Otherwise, read on as we explore what Bill 27 says, giving special attention to what is different from the January 31st announcement.
Rights In Emergencies
During the COVID-19 era, parents were prevented from having a say in their children’s education.
Schools were closed and COVID restrictions dramatically affected education, often against parents’ wishes.
Bill 27 enshrines a right to education (in-person or online), even in an emergency.
It also requires schools to seek a parent’s consent to other emergency health measures, like masking, for students younger than 16.
While this wasn’t part of the January 31st announcement, it is consistent with the communications parents have been giving to and receiving from this government.
Shifting expectations away from schools abandoning their most basic deal with parents - that they will be open and provide an education - is certainly a pro-parent policy.
Names And Pronouns
Exactly as announced in January, Bill 27 will require schools to inform parents if students begin to use a new name or pronouns in school.
For students age 15 and under, parents must also consent to this change.
You wouldn’t know it from the media attention this issue has received, but this is actually the current status quo policy at many school divisions.
And contrary to the gloom and doom predictions of some, there is no crisis emerging in the school divisions that have already adopted this policy.
Still, this Bill is necessary, because other school divisions, including the largest ones with the most students, have policies prohibiting disclosure of names or pronouns to parents and removing any discretion from teachers and principals to do so.
The lack of any discretion that is permitted in existing school policies is already leading to a large number of absurd policy results (and we’ll have more to say on this issue shortly), but the goal should be to reduce these kinds of unintended outcomes, not exacerbate them.
Notice And Consent
Also, as announced in January, parents will be given notice and the opportunity to affirmatively consent before their children are given formal instruction on sexual orientation, gender identity, or human sexuality.
Changing this notice and consent regime from an opt-out to an opt-in empowers parents and incentivizes schools to be more forthcoming with the content they intend to teach.
If the participation rate in these classes falls, as opponents of Bill 27 fear, that would be an indication that schools have not been honest with parents about what content they are teaching.
Encouraging schools to trust parents is bound to also help parents trust schools in return, and public schools should be worthy of the public trust.
Unfortunately, contrary to what was indicated in January, the opt-in notice only applies to lessons “primarily and explicitly” about sexual orientation, gender identity, or human sexuality.
This loophole is how the ATA’s “Prism Toolkit” is able to be used in K-12 classrooms.
The toolkit’s lesson plans are supposedly “primarily and explicitly” about math or social studies, but are written and actually compiled for their sexual content.
We are concerned that, if Prism Toolkit lessons can be used in K-12 classes without parental consent, this portion of this law will not deliver on its promise of parental inclusion in any substantial way.
Approval Of Resources
There’s also been a similar loophole introduced to the portion of the law that requires supplementary resources on sexual orientation, gender identity, or human sexuality to be approved by Alberta Education.
Approval will only be required when the material is “primarily and explicitly” about one of those topics.
While the rest of this portion of the Bill reflects what we were promised in January, we said then that we prefer disclosure to parents over approval by the Education Ministry.
We believe parents are better than politicians and families are better than functionaries at knowing what is age-appropriate for children.
Ministry approval also opens up the possibility that Catholic or independent schools that prefer more traditional materials on these topics could face roadblocks, especially with a different Education Minister.
We also believe disclosure to parents should be broader than simply the topics of sexual orientation, gender identity, or human sexuality.
We believe it shouldn’t be nearly so daunting, and sometimes impossible, for parents to find out what their child is learning, no matter the topic.
Alliances Are Exempt
Minister Nicolaides clarified immediately after the January 31st announcement that Gay Straight Alliances and Queer Straight Alliances would be exempt from the requirements of what we now know as Bill 27.
Yet, his rationale then was that GSAs and QSAs have no formal instruction or curriculum.
If GSAs and QSAs have no formal instruction, it is left for parents to wonder why Bill 27 exempts formal instruction in GSAs and QSAs from all its requirements.
What You Can Do
As always, we encourage you to speak up and have your voice heard.
If you have an opinion on this legislation, you can provide feedback to Premier Smith at premier@gov.ab.ca and Minister Nicolaides at education.minister@gov.ab.ca.
We suggest thanking them for following through with many of their promises from January 31st, but emphasize that the “primarily and explicitly” loophole must be closed, so that all formal classroom instruction on sexual orientation, gender identity, or human sexuality requires affirmative parental consent.
Still, overall, we're thrilled to see the Government of Alberta correct a series of provincial and school board policies that drifted into absurdity, without parent input.
This legislation is important.
It is a win for parents and children.
And, it could be even better with your help.
We don’t expect busy parents to read every Bill and understand how best to advocate for greater parental voice.
That’s why we’re here.
Our goal is to represent you, and advocate for your views.
Alberta Parents Union is urgently calling on Alberta to teach math teachers to teach math!
That may seem like a silly request, but read on to find out which math-like-substance is being sold to teachers as “teaching math” now.
It's a perennial struggle in parent advocacy.
Parents want to know the basics are being covered in every subject, with time-tested, evidence-based approaches, so we can see our kids are learning.
Whenever we win once, though, the next fad - with the same fundamental flaws - comes packaged in new terms.
First it was “discovery math”.
Now it’s “Building Thinking Classrooms”.
Peter Liljedahl, a professor of math education at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, British Columbia, has seen his “Thinking Classrooms” pervade Alberta.
For him, a teacher demonstrating how to work a problem before the students work it themselves is “mimicking” rather than “thinking”.
Practicing math facts like reciting “2+2=4” and multiplication tables is deemed “memorizing” rather than “thinking”.
And on it goes.
The problem is that memorizing math facts and seeing demonstrations of new concepts are the evidence-based methods for kids to learn math.
These are also the methods parents know from experience are effective.
Liljedahl sells his program as research-based (and, believe us, “sells” is the right verb).
But education experts have investigated and Liljedahl does not have any research at all showing that his program improves math performance.
The approaches he characterizes as not “thinking” are actually shown to improve math performance.
Explicit instruction helps students work examples for themselves before reaching the point of frustration.
Memorizing math facts is crucial because working memory is limited.
Moving operations into long-term memory to be retrieved while solving problems increases the amount of calculation kids can do before working memory is overloaded.
Nevertheless, the Alberta Teachers’ Association's Math Council Spring Symposium in 2023 was devoted to promoting “Building Thinking Classrooms”.
Schools and school divisions all over the province are paying to teach teachers this warmed-over “discovery math”.
Alberta Education is spending provincial grants to sell it too.
That's taxpayer money that we are always being told is too scarce, and lots of it, being spent to promote a program without evidence it works.
Worse, your money is being spent to disparage and discourage methods that we do know work!
If our scores on the world's report card (PISA) are any indication, we can't afford another slip.
In 2012, only 15.1% of Alberta 15-year-olds lacked the baseline math skills to participate in society.
In 2022, 21.4% of Alberta 15-year-olds lacked the baseline math skills to participate in society.
As with other “discovery”-style approaches, the kids who manage to get the basics down - on their own or through parents or tutors - may even flourish in a “thinking classroom”.
But the kids who fall behind stay behind more than with proven approaches.
Parents opposed the so-called “experts” and banished “discovery math” to the dustbin of discarded fads where it belongs.
The same fundamental errors animate this newest fad.
Teachers shouldn't be taught, with our money, to ignore our concerns.
Alberta kids can't afford to spin their wheels while “experts” make money off the latest fad.
Raising children is first and foremost a parental responsibility. Though I don't agree with everything the Alberta Parents Union stands for, I do appreciate their communicating what they perceive to be of importance and interest to parents.
JOIN THE CAMPAIGN TO STAND UP FOR PARENTAL RIGHTS
Premier Danielle Smith has announced that amendments to the Alberta Bill of Rights are coming with the beginning of the new session, and she has asked for feedback on what those changes should be.The Premier has already promised to add enhanced rights regarding property, medical decisions, and firearms.
She has stated that these rights should be enshrined in Alberta’s Bill of Rights because they, in particular, have been targeted by governments recently and need reaffirmation as fundamental rights of Albertans.
By that same standard, we believe it is fair to say that governments at every level have recently shown extreme disrespect for parental rights, and recognition and clarification of these rights is therefore necessary and overdue.
That’s why we think it’s vital for the government to include language in their proposal that would strengthen the rights of parents when it comes to their child’s education.
And this email is meant to inform and equip you to give her feedback.
As informed as many of you are, you’re probably already aware that, “the right of parents to make informed decisions respecting the education of their children” is already in the Alberta Bill of Rights - Section 1(g).
If you did already realize that, congratulations, you are better informed than a great number of academics, politicians, and activists.
We discussed their denials in a previous email - now available on our website - entitled “Yes, Parental Rights Exist!”
But even if the Alberta Bill of Rights said no such thing, parental rights pre-exist government.
Governments were established to protect these fundamental rights and to establish justice - the preservation of other rights - when they come into conflict.
But because governments themselves often threaten these fundamental rights, parental rights are essential to protect children from the overreaching state.
Families, under the authority of parents, also protect children from other predators lying in wait against their life, liberty, property, or future enjoyment of these.
Thus, parents’ rights are how you protect children's rights.
Other responsible adults are necessary as a safety-net for children whose family is not that first line of defense.
But when they usurp that fundamental role instead of back-stopping it, disorder only deepens.
This is why the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, when enshrining language rights in education, recognizes parents of language minorities as the defenders of those rights.
Likewise, among the over 2,500 court decisions mentioning parental rights are a number seeing that Section 2 of the Charter means parents have the constitutional right to determine all aspects of their children’s education, including choosing a religious education.
By our count, there are 90 different Canadian laws that either mention parental rights explicitly or use an equivalent phrase.
These add to the weight of seeing parents as the first and most reliable defenders of children’s rights and futures.
You may have heard about efforts already being made by a group with twenty-two points they would like to see included.
The rest of their points are outside the scope of our mandate here at the Alberta Parents’ Union, but point number four reads as follows:
“Freedom of parents to make decisions concerning the health, education, welfare and upbringing of their children”
While that may, at first, seem too broad to protect only a parents’ right to direct their child’s education, we have seen attempts to assert that squarely educational matters, addressed in schools, are actually about the child’s health, welfare, social-emotional development, or some other broader category of their upbringing.
So the breadth is likely essential to protect even core educational oversight.
Furthermore, our friends at The Irreplaceable Parent Project (TIPP) included the following language in the proposed revisions:
The Government of Alberta, on behalf of its citizens, acknowledges that the freedom of parents to raise their children is sui generis - independent from legislation, not flowing from it – as it precedes government. It is a government’s duty to respect that familial boundary until children reach the age of majority. Parents have an obligation to provide for the basic health, education and welfare of their child as they exercise parental custody and authority. The state shall not target parents nor interfere with parental freedoms on the basis of religious or social standing, nor on the basis of fiscal status provided that parents are demonstrably providing for the necessities of their children.
No officer or agency of the government, including any subdivisions, shall infringe on a parent’s freedoms except as demonstrably necessary on a case-by-case basis as provided by law, such steps to be narrowly tailored to meet a compelling government interest by the least restrictive means. Remedial provisions shall be provided for the intentional interference of parental freedoms by governments, organizations or individuals. Family is in the best interests of a child.
These are just some ideas to get you thinking about this important issue.
We encourage you to make your own points and argue your own convictions.
But we hope this email helps you think through some of the issues you want to raise.
The most important thing is just that you get involved in the campaign to stand up for parental rights.
You can give feedback to Premier Smith at: premier@gov.ab.ca
She explicitly asked for broader feedback into her upcoming gender identity policies and announced these changes to the Alberta Bill of Rights, also asking for feedback, all in the last two weeks.
Also, contact your own MLA!
They are the person most directly responsible to you.
They are the person you are empowered to remove at regularly scheduled elections or through recall.
You can find your MLA and their contact information using the “Who is my MLA?” tool on Elections Alberta’s website.
Alberta has long led the way on recognizing parental rights to choose the education of our children.
That fundamental right which pre-exists any government is enshrined in our existing Bill of Rights.
Not only that, but we have led the way in recognizing that right implies that money should follow the child to the education the parents choose.
Without that money following the child, the government truly is putting a thumb on the scale to coerce the choices they choose to allow our tax dollars to fund.
Premier Smith has even recognized that construction funding following the children is a logical extension of recognizing this fundamental freedom.
Now it's time to recognize that parents, not politicians, and families, not functionaries, protect children best from a dangerous world.
For Parents over Politicians,
-Jeff and the Alberta Parents’ Union Team
P.S. When governments chip away at parental rights, they do so with money they took from you by force.
The same goes for anti-parent activists they fund, and even the Alberta Teachers’ Association - which takes dues by the force of law from anyone who wants to teach in the public system and frequently uses them to oppose parents.
The Alberta Parents’ Union has never taken taxpayer money or forced anyone to fund our advocacy in any way.
We never will.
We rely on parents, grandparents, educators, and taxpayers like you who want to make sure there’s someone there to stand for parents’ rights.
He was hoping you wouldn’t notice...
Between the long weekend and getting ready for back-to-school, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tried to slip two Senate appointments by you.
In theory, federal politics should have nothing to do with education policy, given that's provincial jurisdiction.
So, we normally wouldn’t have anything to say about appointments to the Senate.
Kristopher Wells being appointed to the Red Chamber, though, is not something we can overlook.
For one thing, Wells does not agree that federal politics should have nothing to do with education policy.
He proudly lists that he is an “expert scientific consultant” to the Canadian Teachers’ Federation.
The Alberta Parents’ Union has, to the best of our knowledge, stood alone in raising the alarm for the last two years about how the Canadian Teachers’ Federation exists solely to demand unconstitutional federal overreach into the purely provincial jurisdiction of education.
And, to be clear, Wells has been focused on education policy first and foremost, as a quick scan of his biography would make clear.
So why would he agree to be appointed to the Senate, unless it was to continue that advocacy - on a federal level, where it does not belong?
Moreover, why would Justin Trudeau appoint someone with such a focus to the Senate, unless it was to continue his ambition to bring education under some form of federal jurisdiction?
And since Senate appointments are until age 75, Wells could conceivably continue Trudeau’s influence on this file well beyond the time Canadian voters reject Trudeau’s own ambitions.
The best place for decisions to be made about children’s education is at their own kitchen tables, not in the Legislature in Edmonton, and certainly not in the Red Chamber in Ottawa.
Parents and those who support us have another reason to be particularly concerned about this appointment, though.
On August 24, 2023, Wells said:
"Don’t be fooled. So called “parental rights” are a dog whistle for an explicit anti-2SLGBTQI+ agenda, which is focused on banning books, restricting access to inclusive curriculum, and targeting trans and nonbinary youth in schools. This is an organized hate movement."
There are plenty of other things Wells has said and done - some much more inflammatory, in fact - that we are confident this represents the views for which he was appointed to the Senate.
Obviously, anyone who supports parental rights should be concerned by the appointment of someone who dismisses and defames us as a hate movement.
Statements like these also reveal that Wells’ ignorance of the constitution is not limited to his visions of federal mandates of all his favourite things and federal bans of all his least favourite things in education.
Parental rights are explicitly invoked in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and are a constitutional value that Canadian courts have found relevant to a host of cases.
That’s why “parental rights”, or an equivalent phrase, are mentioned in over 2,500 Canadian court cases.
There are, at last count, 90 duly passed Canadian laws that enshrine parental rights.
You would think someone appointed to a law-making body should know that.
Finally, you know his charges are a misrepresentation of our movement, but just for fun, let’s take the “book banning” charge.
Wells supports students as young as five having access to sexually explicit material and calls attempts to limit that access “book banning”.
To avoid being censored ourselves by your email provider, we’ll have to leave you to search out those examples yourselves … carefully, without kids around.
But we could find no condemnation from him at all of Peel District School Board requiring a “cull” of books - not because they contained sexually explicit material, but because they supposedly lacked cultural relevance when viewed through an “equity lens”.
With just one librarian saying she sent over 2,000 of her school library’s nearly 6,500 to be buried, this is by far the most significant instance of book banning in Canada.
Wells does not limit himself from speaking on Peel District School Board’s decisions, though, as he praised their 2015 decision to not allow families to opt their children out of certain classes on sexual orientation and gender identity.
He crowed, “If you don’t like it, don’t use public education.”
The teacher unions he avidly supports, of course, seek to make sure families who “don’t like it” are trapped in the public education options they still have to pay for in taxes.
We may not be able to do anything about Kristopher Wells now getting to call himself a Senator, but we can call on the Government of Alberta to stop the funding of his unconstitutional ideological project via the Alberta Teachers’ Association sending off our tax dollars to the Canadian Teachers’ Federation.
Forcing Alberta taxpayers to fund an organization premised exclusively on asking Trudeau to tell us how to run our own education system is just wrong.
We think it’s well past time for the Alberta government to put a stop to this.
They should use their power - whether in legislation or their ongoing negotiations with the Alberta Teachers’ Association - to stop forcing Albertans to fund this blatant advocacy against our interests.