At Large

5 To Be Elected

John Allen: I suppose it depends on what you consider a "core academic" priority. The "three R's" for sure, but phys.ed, art, history, geography, and civics are vital as well, I think. The province sets the curriculum and school divisions are mandated to follow the model they have developed. Do St. Albert Public schools do that well? I think so.

Kim Armstrong: No response.

Darcy Dalke: I believe core academics, reading, writing, and math, must be at the heart of every school board budget. Right now, I don’t think that priority is clearly reflected. We need to invest more in classroom teachers, early literacy support, and clear academic benchmarks. That’s how we help every student succeed, no matter their background.

Sheila Glebe: The most effective budgeting decisions are ones that keep the bulk of education dollars in the classroom where core academics are taught. The more teachers and classroom support staff a school division can fund, the greater the supports are for academics. Though I have not yet served as a trustee for St Albert public schools, a look at their four year plan and budget, which are posted on the website, indicates that the bulk of funding is going into classrooms. Some funds go toward professional development which is key to ensuring that teachers are prepared for the complex needs of every classroom when addressing academics. If I could change anything, it would be to increase provincial funding so that it at least keeps pace with funding in the rest of Canada.

Stanley Haroun: No response.

Natalie Joly: No response.

Lee Ann Lagacé: Yes. The funding is allocated through a process that includes all principles and ensures support for all core academics.

Sheyanne Levall-Crouse: No response.

Ellen Snaith: No response.

Suzanne Sparling: No. The current budget doesn’t reflect parents’ priorities: a focus on core academics. Over time, funds have shifted toward administrative growth and initiatives that don’t directly support literacy, numeracy, science, and social studies. Classrooms are under-resourced, while administrative bloat and ideological programs consume significant funding. I would prioritize essential learning, reduce unnecessary administrative costs, and focus funding on what directly benefits students. Getting back to basics ensures children gain the skills they need to thrive academically and in life.

At Large

5 To Be Elected

John Allen: To an extent, yes, it's valuable. I think we overfund charter schools a bit, and shouldn't fund private schools. If there are problems (and there are definitely problems!) in our public school system, the solution is not to fully fund unsupervised individual schools all over the province at the expense of the broader public school system.

Kim Armstrong: No response.

Darcy Dalke: Yes, I believe funding should follow the student. Families deserve the freedom to choose the education that fits their child best and when students attend other schools, those schools help carry the weight of the public system. If we cut funding to those alternatives, we risk increasing class sizes and stretching resources even thinner in public schools. This isn’t about undermining public education, it’s about recognizing that choice and flexibility can strengthen the system as a whole. Accountability means making sure every student gets the support they need, wherever they learn.

Sheila Glebe: I believe money must follow the student to allow schools and districts to fund programs appropriately.

Stanley Haroun: No response.

Natalie Joly: No response.

Lee Ann Lagacé: Public funds through taxpayers monies should support public education. Divisions can accommodate parental choice where the enrolments can build programming that is not subsidized from other educational funds. I do not believe the growth in private schools has affected accountability one way or the other. Public education focusses on exemplary outcomes within the available resources.

Sheyanne Levall-Crouse: No response.

Ellen Snaith: No response.

Suzanne Sparling: It is essential for accountability. Funding following the student encourages competition, keeps schools responsive, and ensures alignment with family values. Without alternatives, public schools risk operating without checks, ignoring parent concerns. Allowing choice—public, private, charter, or alternative programs—empowers families and keeps schools focused on student success. Accountability begins with putting students first.

At Large

5 To Be Elected

John Allen: Both, actually. School board decision-making authority has been consistently reduced by successive governments, which has been, broadly speaking, a mistake, in my opinion. The more local the choices, the better those choices reflect the community. At the same time, I respect the government's role in curriculum development, in school construction, and in funding for additional services (mental health services, for example) that are needed in our schools.

Kim Armstrong: No response.

Darcy Dalke: I believe school boards should absolutely have the authority to make local decisions, they’re closest to the students, families, and teachers they serve. But with that authority comes responsibility. When boards fail to listen to parents or meet student needs, it’s understandable that the government steps in. That’s not ideal, but it’s a signal that trust has been broken. We need local leadership that earns that trust back, by being transparent, responsive, and focused on what matters most: student success.

Sheila Glebe: Local decisions can mean school or district level. When a system is working properly, all education stakeholders work together to created a shared vision and administrative procedures that guide decision making. If there is disagreement with regard to a decision, it's important to have processes in place to discuss and resolve those disagreements.

Stanley Haroun: No response.

Natalie Joly: No response.

Lee Ann Lagacé: Provincial bodies do not see the nuances and needs that local decision-makers can address.

Sheyanne Levall-Crouse: No response.

Ellen Snaith: No response.

Suzanne Sparling: Decisions should be made locally. Centralized policies take a one-size-fits-all approach that rarely meets community needs. Local leaders understand the unique priorities, challenges, and values of their communities and can make responsible, accountable decisions that best serve families and students.

At Large

5 To Be Elected

John Allen: Our school board trustees attend at almost every parent council meeting in our schools. The Board hosts community engagement events and policy engagement events at least twice per year. Our monthly board meeting is public, and streamed live, our letters to city council and the Minister of Education are published on the website, the policy manual is available on the website, every policy is under review over the course of each Board's term, we have a student advisory panel that meets with trustees twice per school year, our budget and audit reports are publicly available. If there are other ways we can be transparent, please let me know.

Kim Armstrong: No response.

Darcy Dalke: No, I don’t believe the current board is transparent enough with parents and taxpayers. At the last board meeting I attended, three policies were passed with little discussion and it felt like decisions were being made by a small group with their own interests in mind. That’s not how public education should work, and it’s certainly not happening here the way it should. If elected, I’ll advocate to bring parents back to the table, through better-scheduled meetings, regular surveys, clear email correspondence, and timely social media updates. Families deserve to know what’s happening, why it matters, and how they can be part of the conversation.

Sheila Glebe: The St Albert Public School board is bound by provincial requirements to post four year plans and budgets that reflect consultation with the school community. The best way to maintain transparency is by continuing to engage parents, teachers, students and the community at large in meaningful discussions. If there are concerns regarding transparency, it's important that those concerns be heard and addressed.

Stanley Haroun: No response.

Natalie Joly: No response.

Lee Ann Lagacé: I have been the lead in creating the division's financial statements for 24 years. They are transparent. Our secretary treasurer can account for every dime spent. I invite any parents or taxpayers for reach out if they have any questions about the divisions' expenditures.

Sheyanne Levall-Crouse: No response.

Ellen Snaith: No response.

Suzanne Sparling: No, I don’t believe the school board is currently as transparent as it should be. Parents and taxpayers deserve to know what’s happening in their schools and how decisions are being made. If elected, I would push for greater transparency by improving communication directly with families—through email or text updates after board meetings—so parents know what issues were discussed, how I voted, and why. Open, honest communication builds trust, and that’s exactly what our community deserves.

At Large

5 To Be Elected

John Allen: I don't like any policy that either REQUIRES disclosure or REQUIRES non-disclosure. The question becomes "what are these presumed secrets that are under mandate to disclose." That's a slippery slope, and I don't like where that could go.

Kim Armstrong: No response.

Darcy Dalke: Yes, I can commit to that. We should never be holding secrets from parents by policy. At the end of the day, teachers are there to teach, they’re not a child’s parent, therapist, or doctor. If a student is showing signs of trauma or distress, staff should be trained to recognize it and respond appropriately by involving a social worker, counselor, or police if needed. Everyone needs boundaries, and those boundaries should be clear. Parents deserve to be part of the support system, not kept in the dark by blanket policies. Trust and safety come from transparency, not secrecy.

Sheila Glebe: I am not aware of any policies that require secrets to be kept from parents. I would certainly take a policy like that very seriously.

Stanley Haroun: No response.

Natalie Joly: No response.

Lee Ann Lagacé: No. Sometimes kids need space and time to work through who they are and how they want others to see them. I have learned that even the most accepting parents need to give their children grace and just know and love them and trust they will come to you when they are ready.

Sheyanne Levall-Crouse: No response.

Ellen Snaith: No response.

Suzanne Sparling: Yes. Parents are the primary caregivers and must be fully informed about matters affecting their children’s education, wellbeing, and development. Policies that require secrecy, except in rare cases where a child’s immediate safety is at risk, undermine trust and create unnecessary barriers between families and schools. Current policies, such as those related to SOGI or Anti-Racism, while intended to promote inclusion, can inadvertently restrict open discussion and prevent parents from understanding critical aspects of their child’s experience. I believe that education should support students through honesty, compassion, and collaboration with families. Policies must prioritize the wellbeing and success of students over ideology, ensuring that educators are free to teach truthfully, parents remain informed, and children receive appropriate guidance and care. If elected, I will advocate for policies that eliminate secrecy, promote transparency, and encourage trust and communication between schools and families. Open dialogue is essential for addressing sensitive topics and fostering partnerships that truly support student growth and mental health. Students thrive when parents and educators work together, with honesty, respect, and shared accountability guiding every decision.

At Large

5 To Be Elected

John Allen: I think parents should have the right to opt their kids out of discussions/lessons that are counter to their faith or cultural practices, yes. Do I think it's reasonable for our teachers to notify parents that these subjects will be covered in an upcoming lesson, yes.

Kim Armstrong: No response.

Darcy Dalke: Yes, I believe parents should be informed before sensitive topics like abortion, sexual assault, marriage, or family planning are covered in school, just as they are for discussions around sexual or religious identity. These are deeply personal issues, and families deserve the opportunity to prepare, support, or opt out if needed. Transparency builds trust, and trust is essential when schools are addressing topics that touch on values, trauma, or personal beliefs. I support age-appropriate education, but it must be paired with clear communication and respect for parental involvement.

Sheila Glebe: I'm not aware that any of these topics are covered in the health curriculum at this time. New regulations do mean that any health classes covering sexual health education, require parental consent for a student to participate.

Stanley Haroun: No response.

Natalie Joly: No response.

Lee Ann Lagacé: Identification about the specific topics in any curriculum should be available to all parents at the start of a school year. Should the parent have any questions or concerns, they can then address these, including requesting their children be removed from those specific issues beforehand.

Sheyanne Levall-Crouse: No response.

Ellen Snaith: No response.

Suzanne Sparling: Absolutely. Parents should always be informed before sensitive topics are taught. These subjects are deeply personal and connected to family values. Schools should partner with parents, providing advance notice and access to materials, so families can guide children consistently. Transparency builds trust, protects wellbeing, and ensures guidance at home aligns with school instruction.

At Large

5 To Be Elected

John Allen: Transparent, yes. Non-complex ideas only? Not necessarily, no. If you want your kids to be critical thinkers, questioning thinkers, then there ought to be abstractions and "unanswerables" in their learning.

Kim Armstrong: No response.

Darcy Dalke: Yes, program and course development at the school board level must be transparent and focused on clearly defined knowledge outcomes. That should already be happening, but in many cases, it’s not. Families deserve to know what their children are learning and why it matters. I’ll advocate for clear curriculum goals, open communication, and consistent updates so parents, teachers, and students are all on the same page.

Sheila Glebe: Yes. Clearly defined knowledge outcomes are stated in the Alberta curriculum and it is each teacher's professional responsibility to ensure that these outcomes are articulated and achieved. School boards ensure that the necessary resources are in place to achieve those outcomes.

Stanley Haroun: No response.

Natalie Joly: No response.

Lee Ann Lagacé: Locally developed courses come to the Board from the schools with the knowledge outcomes included within the course development package.

Sheyanne Levall-Crouse: No response.

Ellen Snaith: No response.

Suzanne Sparling: Yes. Curriculum development must be transparent and focused on knowledge-based outcomes. Education should emphasize academic excellence and critical thinking, not ideology. Parents and taxpayers have a right to know what’s taught and why. Locally elected boards should ensure programs reflect community values, with clear objectives, measurable outcomes, and meaningful input. Transparency and accountability maintain trust and improve student success.

At Large

5 To Be Elected

John Allen: Yes, and no. Where progress is measurable objectively, a percentage grade is appropriate. Where subjective judgement is required, that grading is more complex, and a descriptive analysis of your child's progress can be more useful.

Kim Armstrong: No response.

Darcy Dalke: If we don’t know what we’re striving for, how will we get there? Clear goals and honest feedback are essential for learning. That’s why I support letter grades, percentages, and well-defined curriculum outcomes, especially as students get older. Descriptive grading can be helpful in early years, but it must be consistent and paired with clear benchmarks. Families deserve transparency, and students deserve feedback they can act on.

Sheila Glebe: I have had experience with both descriptive and letter or percentage grades. Descriptive outcomes are Patti beneficial at the primary level where the goals is to master the basics. Descriptive grading clearly defines where students have mastered outcomes and areas where more work is needed. This allows parents and teachers to best provide additional practice in areas where a student has not yet achieved mastery. Older students are better able to relate to letter and number grades because they can see for themselves where they may be struggling. For example, it led a student consistently achieves 55% on grammar and punctuation in essays, they can take responsibility for mastering those skills by asking for help and getting more practice.

Stanley Haroun: No response.

Natalie Joly: No response.

Lee Ann Lagacé: Grades k-6 should be descriptive grading. An example about why I feel this way is a student that may experience test anxiety. They might fail the test, and still demonstrate that they have sufficiently learnt the concept.

Sheyanne Levall-Crouse: No response.

Ellen Snaith: No response.

Suzanne Sparling: I believe student progress should be communicated clearly and honestly. Descriptive grading often masks a student’s true achievement and can mislead both students and parents. Letter grades are fine up to Grade 4, but beyond that, percentage grades are the most accurate and meaningful. Percentages show exactly where a student stands—unlike a “B” that could represent a 64% or a 79%, which feels unfair and confusing. Honest, measurable feedback helps students set goals, motivates improvement, and keeps parents fully informed. Clear grading reflects real progress and fosters accountability and responsibility in learning.

At Large

5 To Be Elected

John Allen: I've participated in those negotiations. The province mandates the number of instructional hours that students will receive, and the school division provides that. I'm very much in favor of PD that helps our teachers and support staff learn more, and helps them to be better at the job. They are professionals, and ought to be treated as such.

Kim Armstrong: No response.

Darcy Dalke: I’m not currently part of the board, so I don’t have access to the full breakdown of professional development days. But I do believe they should be used wisely, focused on practical training that helps teachers support students more effectively. If elected, I’d want to review how those days are scheduled and whether they’re delivering real value in the classroom. We need to make sure PD time strengthens teaching, not just fills a calendar.

Sheila Glebe: Before answering this question, I would need to engage with education staff and parents to understand how they feel about professional development. Ideally, professional plans are tied to division wide achievement goals and outcomes. If professional development is tailored to district goals and those outcomes are achieved, that would suggest the professional development is working. It improved outcomes aren't achieved then professional development plans need to be reassessed.

Stanley Haroun: No response.

Natalie Joly: No response.

Lee Ann Lagacé: The number of days in a teacher's contract is also controlled by the Education Act. 205(2)b. I would be more interested in seeing a process when teachers choose their PD specific to what they need and complete a learning plan with those outcomes.

Sheyanne Levall-Crouse: No response.

Ellen Snaith: No response.

Suzanne Sparling: Yes, the number is appropriate. What matters most is that these days are practical, relevant, and directly benefit both teachers and students. The quality and focus of professional development is more important than simply increasing or decreasing the number of days.

At Large

5 To Be Elected

John Allen: As the current Board Chair, I am enjoined from expressing an opinion on the current labour negotiations between the Province and the ATA. I will say, however, that our board has a public record of advocacy for more funding for the classroom, less crowded classrooms, and more supports for our kids.

Kim Armstrong: No response.

Darcy Dalke: I support teachers, their work is essential, and they deserve fair compensation, manageable workloads, and respect. But I don’t support the politics behind the strike. Too often, these disputes become about power struggles between unions and governments, while students and families are caught in the middle. If elected, I’ll advocate for solutions that put students first and ensure teachers have what they need to succeed, without turning classrooms into battlegrounds. We need collaboration, not conflict.

Sheila Glebe: I support this strike in hopes that it leads to smaller class sizes and educational supports for students. Alberta is currently providing the lowest per student funding in Canada. Schools need resources. If this strike achieves more equitable funding, then it will have been worth it.

Stanley Haroun: No response.

Natalie Joly: No response.

Lee Ann Lagacé: Support. The negotiated salary is reasonable given taxpayers are also not likely seeing the full cost of inflation in their salaries. The entire middle class has taken a hit to their buying power. I support the strike because the complex needs in the classrooms and the enrolment sizes for the classrooms need to be addressed. Education and teachers have been asked to be patient, but this situation is affecting optimal learning environments for our students.

Sheyanne Levall-Crouse: No response.

Ellen Snaith: No response.

Suzanne Sparling: I oppose the impending teachers’ strike, and not because I don’t value teachers—I absolutely do. I spent 36 years in this profession, and I know how hard educators work and how important their role is. But this strike is clearly political, not purely about contracts. It’s impossible to ignore the pattern: high-profile politicians and party supporters show up at every rally, every overpass meetup, every protest, turning the issue into a media spectacle. Meanwhile, when Alberta was governed by the NDP from 2015 to 2019, teachers received zero meaningful wage increases, year after year, and there was no mass outrage or strikes. Yet now, with the same offer from the UCP, it’s suddenly “unacceptable” and “historic” enough to trigger a strike. This is not about fairness—it’s about optics and politics. The Alberta Teachers’ Association knows exactly how to stage these events, and the public should recognize that. I’ve seen enough over my career to say this clearly: students and families should not be used as pawns in political maneuvering. Strikes like this disrupt learning, stress families, and politicize classrooms. I support fair treatment of teachers, meaningful professional development, and open dialogue. But I cannot support a strike that is driven more by political theater than by genuine student or teacher needs. Schools must remain focused on learning, truth, and transparency—not political agendas.