Alberta’s Homophobia and Transphobia in Education: Classrooms of Censorship and Controversy
- Brent Saccucci
- Oct 27
- 8 min read
Note to the Reader: This piece is part of a three-part series analyzing the legislative policy and curriculum reform efforts from the Alberta United Conservative Party (UCP) that amended the Education Act (formerly Bill 27).
Part 1 will lay out the current socio-political landscape, outlining the central aspects of the legislation, why it matters, and importantly – questions to consider as we see these policies enacted in schools and communities (or when discussing with a colleague or friend).
Parts 2 & 3 will lay out tangible strategies for social change in response to the legislation and policies analyzed below (including Bill 29, the Fairness & Safety in Sport Act) and predict what could be coming next in Alberta’s school censorship debates. They will provide readers practical strategies to resist the rise of homophobia and transphobia. This video essay will also serve as a teaching tool to help readers explore how oppression and power can be dismantled by combatting apathy.
*Please note: The current legislation in Alberta on queer and trans issues in education is rapidly changing. As of now, the information below is current, if there are edits needed to be made, please contact us.
Part 1 – Where we are now in Alberta
Over the past year, Alberta has intensified a systematic campaign to police and oppress gender diversity in schools under the guise of “fairness” and “parental oversight” discourse. Under Premier Danielle Smith’s United Conservative Party (UCP) government, Alberta has passed the Amended Education Act (2024) (including Ministerial Order #030/2025), that together impose restrictions on trans youth across our education system. Here I will describe what each legislation will look like in practice, what questions they raise, and why it matters that all of us ask these questions of one another when discussing these new laws (even – and especially if – you aren’t a queer/trans person!):
Bill 27 – Education Amendment Act (2024)
What it mandates:
Parental notification and consent when a student changes their pronouns or preferred name when ‘related to gender’. For students under 16, consent from parents is required; for those aged 16–17, notification to parents is mandatory.
“Opt-in” sex education: Parents must explicitly approve their child staying in the classroom when material deals primarily and explicitly with gender identity, sexual orientation, or sexuality. All materials and external presenters for these topics must also be approved by the Minister of Education.
Why it matters:
This policy matters because policies that require parental consent for a student to use a preferred name or pronouns can effectively "out" them to their families, placing them at risk of rejection, harassment, and abuse (Egale Canada, n.d.). Especially in parts of the province that have fewer resources for support, and simply fewer trans folks, the dynamics of forcibly outing a young person are especially fraught.
Bill 27 forces a choice between being misgendered daily at school, which is linked to increased rates of depression and self-harm, or being outed to potentially unsupportive parents (Trans PULSE Project, 2012). Trans PULSE explains:
When teachers are forced to "out" students and censor cultural perspectives, we have to ask: When is it permissible to break the law? Why do we relate what is lagal to what is ethical, and how does this relationship affect teachers' interpretation of our duty to act in loco parentis [in the absence of the parent]?
Similar questions can be asked in answering the question of why the impacts of Bill 27 on sex education are significant. Sex education in K-12 schools has been radically reframed in this bill as “opt-in,” making it so that all students do not receive sex ed without explicit parental consent the default (CTV News, 2025). While this is framed as a move toward parental rights, it is an obvious move to constrict equity-based educational practices and entrench conservative neo-traditionalism around sex and identity. The conservative focus on control extends beyond just students themselves. It also enforces state power over which materials or presenters—even trusted community partners like TeachingSexualHealth.ca, developed by Alberta Health Services (AHS) and the Ministry of Education—can enter classrooms to support gender and sexuality education (CBC, 2025).
In addition to these mechanisms of control, the shift from an opt-out to an opt-in model creates significant barriers for students to learn about consent, healthy relationships, and the diversity that makes up our province. Research indicates that comprehensive sexuality education is a key public health intervention that can lead to delayed sexual activity, reduced sexual risk-taking, and increased use of contraception and condoms among youth (Action Canada for Sexual Health & Rights, 2020). By making these lessons optional, many students who need the information most—due to lack of parental discussion or a fear of stigma—may be left out. This not only adversely affects our queer and trans students, but can leave all students vulnerable to sexually transmitted infections (STIs), gender-based violence, and unplanned pregnancies (Global News, 2019; CBC News, 2024).
As a teacher and teacher educator myself, I have seen how policy can create a chilling effect in many classrooms across the province. Teachers may avoid discussing topics related to gender identity and sexual orientation, even in passing, for fear of violating the rules or facing disciplinary action. This can make the school environment feel unsafe for 2SQT+ students and sends a message that these topics are taboo or ‘inappropriate ‘(Global News, 2024). Experts in sexual health education at the Centre for Sexuality in Calgary warn that this approach undermines decades of work in building an inclusive and health-focused sex education curriculum and sends a message to youth that these topics are off-limits, furthering discrimination, fear, and sex illiteracy (Active History, 2024). When these policies impact a student's sense of safety and well-being, we compromise their ability to engage with any health-related curriculum, including topics on healthy relationships and consent.
The gray area, or, questions to consider:
What constitutes a ‘change’ in pronouns and preferred name by a student – a declaration to friends/peers, to a teacher, on a written assignment, etc.
How are we to know when a change is ‘related to gender’? If Michael goes by Mik and Michaela goes by Mick, which is a nickname, and which is related to gender identity (which we can’t know)?
If students are by default opted-out of Sex Ed, where do they go? Do they stay in the school? Who is supervising them and creating alternative lessons and assessments for them?
Ministerial Order #034/2025 Standards for the Selection, Availability, and Access of School Library Materials
What it mandates:
Last in the legislation and educational policy I will cover, this ministerial order tasked school libraries with emptying their shelves of nearly 200 titles labelled “sexually explicit.” While officials stopped short of calling it a ban, the chilling effect is clear (Global News, 2025; CTV News, 2025c).
The mandate was to come into effect October 1, 2025 but is currently under review after international media coverage by major global outlets, such as The New York Times, ignited intense public backlash (Isai/New York Times, 2025). Contributing to the backlash was one of Canada’s most influential public voices, Margaret Atwood (author of A Handmaid’s Tale), who took to several social media platforms, including “X”, writing a satirical story critiquing Alberta Education:
These public outcries forced Alberta government officials to pause the mandate pending further consultation with school boards (Greenberg/The National Post, 2025).
Why it matters:
Robin Stevenson, Canadian author of “Pride Puppy” – a pre-school alphabet book about a family searching for their puppy at a pride parade – had her book banned from Maryland USA’s Montgomery County Public Schools in 2023. This move was spearheaded by a group of parents arguing that it went against their religious freedoms. Stevenson contested the ban in court where most recently, the court sided with the parents with a temporary injunction. What is alarming about the Alberta context is that what began as a citizen-led ban in the US is now facilitated by a provincial government and its policies. As Stevenson states, “To have it coming from a provincial government, banning books kind of en masse, is hugely concerning” (CBC, 2025).
As a high school English teacher myself, seeing the removal of classic works of fiction like Brave New World, 1984, and The Handmaid’s Tale is more than disheartening – it is harmful to our students, the aims of public education, and intellectual freedom.
The gray area, or questions to consider:
This ministerial order bans books from the library shelves deemed ‘sexually explicit’, but the rubric for gauging which books are too ‘explicit’ and which aren’t is vague. Important to note, the examples the Alberta government has used to guide schools in implementation of the ban has only included queer and trans books. Furthermore, the new legislation goes beyond school libraries to state that “To ensure transparency and consistency, the Minister of Education must approve any learning and teaching resources that deal primarily and explicitly with gender identity, sexual orientation or human sexuality before they are used in classrooms, unless they are specifically for religious instruction” (Alberta Teachers’ Association, 2025).
If all sexually explicit content is to be removed, why is Romeo and Juliet – an explicitly sexual play – still required and taught in high school English Language Arts?
Why is the Bible (which includes sexual content) exempt from this? What is the “hidden curriculum” of this ministerial order – what is it publicly saying vs. what is it really trying to do? (Jackson, 1986).
How does removing books further the (mis)information and media (il)literacy that fuels political polarization and violence against queer and trans people (Mihailidis & Viotty, 2017)?
Not just book bans: Where do we stand now in education?
This all comes amidst the rising distrust in teachers and schools expressed by the Alberta government, giving messaging to Albertans that teachers are “indoctrinating” children. The government’s theocratic policies come amidst several months of impasse between the government and the Alberta Teacher’s Association (ATA) – where as of today, 90% of teachers in the province voted to enact a province-wide strike which as of today, has been nearly three weeks of teacher and student activism pushing for more equitable schools (ATA News, 2025). As President of the ATA Jason Schilling states, “Solidarity has always been our foundation — we have proven that — but now, it must become our fuel. Our collective strength comes from connection, coordinated action and mutual support. We must have courageous conversations about what’s at stake. The stand we take is not just about salaries or class size; it is about the very soul of public education” (2025).
We have not seen a strike of Alberta teachers since 2002. It is a last attempt at justice, fueled by our desperation that the government has put us in. We do not want to leave our students or our schools – but we cannot act in good faith anymore as a public arm of this government. This orchestrated tightening of censorship and attack disrupts the affordances for our Two-Spirit, Queer and Trans students—not only their capacity to play or read, but to simply exist in public pedagogical space with dignity.
This post was authored by Brent Saccucci - CIFRS Fellow
Comments