Let us not follow Alberta’s education dept.

There has certainly been a flurry of discussion regarding the province’s recent public funding announcement.

Consequent to the proposed budget, numerous school divisions have outlined prospective plans to raise property taxes to maintain existing infrastructure.

This is perhaps an opportunistic moment to critically reflect on the foundational importance of public education, and to advance a timely advocacy to not follow the trajectories of our Albertan and American neighbours.

I have written extensively on the cruciality of public education as a fundamental pillar of our social democracy. If we yearn for an egalitarian society whereby all children and youth — regardless of culture, gender, sexual orientation, ability and socioeconomic upbringing — are represented and have the capacity to pursue meaningful lives, we need adequately funded public educational systems that function premised upon the principles of diversity, equity and inclusion.

How these tenets have become synonymized for “wokeness” sincerely dumbfounds me, as I would imagine we all desire a world rooted in compassion and inclusivity. And yet here we are in the 21st century debating such civics.

While our provincial educational systems are certainly not perfect, we should relish what we have established, safeguard the programs integral to supporting our most vulnerable and advocate for increasingly improved infrastructure. We do not need to look far to be reminded of other cynical potentialities.

There is no shortage of despondent updates from the American education model, as various states are presently resorting to hiring former military personnel to serve in teaching roles as working conditions have become so dismal.

There is a growing exodus from the profession as U.S. teachers are increasingly barred from facilitating educational discussion on the topics of climate change, gender diversity, sexual-orientation and anti-racism. As a stark example, to ensure “balanced” viewpoints, Florida teachers are now legislatively obligated to teach youth of the “vocational benefits” of slavery.

The U.S. Department of Education has been adamant in its message to muzzle teachers, regulate their practices and promote privatization initiatives through “school choice” alternatives.

Alberta is evidently following such currents. As the province is similarly affected by the growing global teacher shortage, Premier Danielle Smith has publicly expressed her interest in advancing “abbreviated” teacher-education models, which equates to reduced teacher competency standards.

Alberta Education Minister Demetrios Nicolaides, is similarly promoting Bill 25, legislation premised on “keeping politics and ideology out of the classroom.”

First, this is covert language for enhanced teacher regulation, impeding teachers’ ability to exercise professional knowledge and judgment to best support the contextual needs of their student bodies.

Second, such rhetoric is needlessly ambiguous and I am left curiously baffled by the announcement. Capitalism is an ideology. Socialism is an ideology. To discuss colonization is political. To not discuss colonization is political. What does “keeping politics and ideology out of the classroom” truly mean?

In Manitoba, we now find ourselves at a pivotal crossroads as to what future and opportunities our youth will be afforded.

Do we follow the Albertan and American trajectories, namely through increased privatization, reduced teacher competency standards and increased regulation/control over educators’ practices? Or do we follow models adjacent to Scandinavian decentralized educational systems, whereby teachers are highly trained, empowered through exercising grassroots autonomy and report better learning outcomes?

This debate is not particularly new, as renowned professor Henry Giroux has long advocated his position that we need teachers to societally serve as public intellectuals. How can we logically reconcile educational systems that impede teacher intellectualism? It is inherently oxymoronic to limit learning. Such anti-intellectualism manifests via book-banning, regulating and surveilling educator practice and publicly chastising teachers.

To reiterate one of my previously accentuated points, we are navigating a global teacher shortage as the United Nations is warning of a 44-million teacher deficit by 2030. The UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed, identified teachers as “the beating heart of education, the cornerstone of sustainable development and the guardians of our future.”

I stand in solidarity with my Albertan and American education colleagues, as their labour struggle is our collective societal struggle. If teachers are tasked with cultivating the academic growth and well-being of their pupils, they concurrently need intellectual freedom and adequate resources to ensure such outcomes.

Our future is so integrally dependent upon a sufficiently funded public education system that is conducive to teachers’ professional agency. In Manitoba, will we support the “guardians of our future?”

Jordan Laidlaw is a public school teacher and holds a PhD in educational administration.