According to the consent resolution agreement published by the BC Commissioner for Teacher Regulation, secondary school teacher Todd Erin Graham engaged in multiple forms of misconduct over the 2022–23 school year.
These included racially and culturally demeaning comments to an Indigenous student, public disparagement of a diverse learner, inappropriate physical contact with female students, unsolicited commentary about girls’ bodies, and sexually suggestive framing about physical proximity during a fitness class. His conduct spanned multiple students, involved identity-based harm, and occurred across more than one instructional context.
In response, Graham received a single day of suspension, a requirement to complete an online course on professional boundaries, and a formal admission that his conduct constituted professional misconduct under the Teachers Act. The summary also notes that Graham has already completed two prior courses: Four Seasons of Reconciliation and San’Yas Indigenous Cultural Safety Training, assigned after the first reported incident.
What does this outcome say?
The Teacher Regulation Branch’s disciplinary outcome communicates a troubling message: that even where clear and repeated harm occurs—where multiple students feel unsafe, uncomfortable, or disrespected—the consequences can remain so minimal as to feel purely symbolic. A single day’s suspension does not meaningfully reflect the seriousness of the conduct described. It does not adequately account for the compounded nature of the harm, the cultural and gender dynamics involved, or the professional power imbalance that defines all educator-student relationships.
When a teacher tells 15-year-old girls that he might “have to grab them,” insists that he is “not a pedophile,” and then touches students while making comments about their bodies during physical activity, the line into misconduct is not blurry. It is clear. That clarity is further reinforced by racialised comments directed at Indigenous students, which the agreement explicitly acknowledges as harmful and inconsistent with the standards of truth, reconciliation, and healing.
-
Reconciliation demands that we put collective punishment aside
Collective punishment in residential schools did more than punish children—it shattered the bonds between parents and children. For many parents who survived, the fear, shame, and trauma they endured complicated their ability to nurture trust in their own parenting. Emotional disconnection and disrupted…
This is a pattern, not an aberration
Families across the province continue to raise concerns that the disciplinary process for teachers lacks teeth—especially when the misconduct involves marginalised students. There is a long-standing perception, backed by repeated case summaries, that regulatory outcomes are guided more by concern for the teacher’s career trajectory than the students’ wellbeing.
While the Teachers Act process could serve as an alternative to costly litigation, outcomes like this one suggest that the cost has merely been redistributed: emotional labour for students, reputational risk for families who speak out, and lifelong impacts on young people’s sense of safety and bodily autonomy.
What accountability should look like
Accountability in a school setting should never be reduced to course completion and paper-thin consequences. It should include real suspension periods with reflection and restitution, transparent communication to the school community, and formal acknowledgment of the specific student identities harmed. When identity-based harm occurs—especially involving Indigenous youth or gender-based boundary violations—it should trigger a heightened standard of institutional response, not a diluted one.
It is possible to believe in rehabilitation and still insist on meaningful consequences. It is possible to uphold professional dignity while also protecting student dignity. And it is possible—essential, even—for public systems to align their discipline decisions with their stated commitments to equity, trauma-informed practice, and reconciliation.
British Columbia deserves better. Our students deserve better. And the profession deserves a regulatory system that affirms its highest standards—not just on paper, but in practice.
