Alberta Schools Face Political Battle Over Education Policies

In Alberta, a significant political struggle is unfolding within the education system, as Premier Danielle Smith‘s government implements restrictions on student identities, educational content, and library materials. These changes have sparked concern among educators and advocates, who argue that the driving forces behind these policies are largely conservative activists rather than concerned parents. A report from the Parkland Institute, a non-partisan research organization at the University of Alberta, highlights the growing influence of groups like Action4Canada and Take Back Alberta in shaping education policy.

The report reveals a concerted effort to dictate what students are exposed to in schools, echoing similar movements in the United States that have targeted educational materials, sports participation, and even restroom access. This ideological battle is illustrated by the Project 2025 handbook, which has impacted policy decisions at various levels of government.

While the immediate effects of these policies are particularly harmful to LGBTQ2S+ youth, experts warn that the agenda extends beyond anti-trans legislation. According to Heather Ganshorn, the report’s author and a parent of two students in Alberta’s public schools, the underlying goal is to promote a broader social conservatism and push towards privatization in education. Ganshorn states, “It’s not just about transgender people. They want to take over politics. They want to take over education. They want to reclaim the family—it’s white Christian patriarchal supremacy.”

In May, the government proposed new library requirements aimed at banning books deemed inappropriate due to sexually explicit content. Education Minister Demetrios Nicolaides stated that the changes were in response to concerns from parents. However, an investigation by the Investigative Journalism Foundation uncovered that lists of targeted books were provided to government officials by conservative advocacy groups, including Parents for Choice in Education and Action4Canada. Among the flagged titles were three LGBTQ2S+ graphic novels aimed at young audiences. Although the policy has since been amended to only ban books with explicit visual depictions of sexual acts, many titles remain at risk.

Ganshorn emphasizes the troubling involvement of advocacy groups with no direct ties to education in shaping policy. She points out that John Hilton-O’Brien, the executive director of Parents for Choice in Education, does not have children in the school system. “Why do they care so much about education?” she asks, suggesting that their interest lies in using education as a means of socialization.

This trend mirrors sentiments expressed by conservative politicians, including former Parliament member Jason Kenney, who once stated that the education system is responsible for instilling identity politics in young Albertans. He argued that it was the duty of conservative leaders to counteract these influences.

In recent years, conservative groups have shifted their strategy from merely voicing complaints to actively influencing policy decisions. In a newsletter following the announcement of the book ban, Parents for Choice in Education claimed credit for the initiative. Similarly, Action4Canada has publicly thanked Nicolaides for engaging with their representatives to catalyze the book ban process.

Records obtained through freedom of information requests indicate that Alberta officials consulted a list of books derived from a website linked to the US-based group Moms for Liberty, which has been classified as an extremist-affiliated organization by the Southern Poverty Law Center. This group has a history of providing model legislation and lists of materials to eliminate from schools across the United States.

This situation parallels a recent controversy in Saskatchewan concerning a school pronoun policy, which mandates parental notification if a student wishes to change their name or pronouns. Premier Scott Moe claimed the policy was developed in response to feedback from concerned parents. However, when pressed for specifics, he could not provide evidence of parental complaints. Action4Canada also heralded its role in advancing this policy.

The group’s founder, Tanya Gaw, claimed that Action4Canada sent over 10,000 emails to government officials advocating for the policy. In a video, she declared, “There is no such thing as a trans child,” highlighting the extreme positions some advocates hold.

According to Hazel Woodrow, the education program manager for the Canadian Anti-Hate Network, Action4Canada is intertwined with numerous movements that exhibit hate-group tendencies, including anti-vaccine campaigns and anti-LGBTQ2S+ initiatives. This organization has engaged in protests against LGBTQ2S+ events and has made unfounded claims equating educational resources on consent with child exploitation.

The grassroots nature of Action4Canada’s operations involves members disseminating misinformation and raising concerns with government officials to enact specific policies. Woodrow describes this process as akin to a multi-level marketing scheme, where individuals are empowered to spread fear and misinformation about educational content.

Looking ahead, Ganshorn warns that the upcoming school board elections on October 20, 2023, will play a critical role in the future of Alberta’s education policies. Representatives from the UCP-aligned group Take Back Alberta are reportedly preparing training for candidates on anti-LGBTQ2S+ messaging.

Despite the seemingly fringe nature of these views, Ganshorn underscores the real threat they pose, citing the influence of similar movements in the United States and their capacity to reshape political landscapes. “People sort of go, ‘well, he’s on the fringe,’” she remarks, “but he took over the UCP.” The ramifications of this ideological battle extend beyond Alberta, reflecting a broader trend in educational policy across North America.

This article was produced in collaboration with Xtra Magazine.