A One-Day Suspension? What Exactly Are We Teaching Kids Here?

A One-Day Suspension? What Exactly Are We Teaching Kids Here?

According to a recent article by CBC journalist Akshay Kulkarni, a teacher on British Columbia’s Central Coast received a one-day teaching certificate suspension following multiple incidents of misconduct. These included showing Grade 8 and 9 students inappropriate videos—one described as having sexual connotations and another depicting abusive, demeaning behavior—along with making a sarcastic racist remark toward a First Nations student and belittling a colleague.

Let’s be clear: this is not a misunderstanding, and it’s not a one-off lapse in judgment. The findings outlined in the consent agreement point to a pattern of behavior that should raise serious concerns about classroom safety, professionalism, and accountability.

And yet—the disciplinary outcome from the regulator?

One day.

What does this teach students? What message are we sending to young people who are already navigating a world filled with confusion about respect, boundaries, and accountability? That authority figures can cross lines—again and again—and face little more than a symbolic consequence?

Because that’s what this feels like: symbolic. Procedural. A checkbox ticked.

Not meaningful accountability.

Not justice.

Not protection.

We are constantly telling kids to be kind, to be inclusive, to understand the real harm behind racism and power imbalances. Yet when those very principles are violated by someone in a position of authority, the response feels detached from the seriousness of the harm.

This isn’t just about one teacher. It’s about a system that appears more concerned with process than with outcomes—more focused on minimal compliance than meaningful accountability.

Let’s be honest: this goes beyond needing a simple course on communication. The issue here is repeated poor judgment, harmful conduct, and a failure to create a safe and respectful environment for students.

And safety—emotional, cultural, psychological—is not optional in education.

So yes, stronger responses should absolutely be on the table.

That means real accountability measures. Not just short suspensions, but actions that reflect the seriousness of the behavior. Meaningful restorative work, direct engagement with affected communities, and a clear demonstration that this kind of conduct is incompatible with the role of an educator.

Because “you can’t take a joke” is not an acceptable defense when the impact is harm.

And if someone repeatedly demonstrates that they cannot uphold the responsibility that comes with teaching, then we need to ask the harder question:

Should they still be in that role at all?

This isn’t about outrage for the sake of it. It’s about standards. It’s about trust. It’s about the students who sit in those classrooms, absorbing not just lessons—but behavior, tone, and values.

If we lower the bar for those who lead, we lower it for everyone.

And that’s something that should never be taken lightly.

Not in 2026. Not ever.