Antisemitism in Ontario’s K-12 Schools
- Mark Sandler
- Jul 30
- 12 min read
Updated: Aug 10
Spotlighting a Growing Crisis and the Urgent Need for Action
Based on growing concerns that Jewish students in K-12 schools are experiencing widespread antisemitism, particularly in the aftermath of October 7, 2023, Deborah Lyons, the Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism at the time, commissioned Professor Robert Brym to survey the situation in Ontario, where most Jewish children in Canada reside.
The Brym Report, recently released, examines the prevalence, nature, and impact of antisemitic incidents in elementary and secondary schools across the province. This piece summarizes the findings of the report and underscores the urgent need for intervention.
It is intended to identify key recommendations for needed change and mobilize our community organizations and allies through specific calls to action directed to the Ontario government, and our public institutions.
For readers ready to take immediate action, click here to go directly to the Call to Action section.
What the Brym Report Reveals
The report’s findings come as no surprise – indeed, they validate the experience of too many Jewish educators, families, students, and community advocates. The findings should be deeply disturbing – if not shocking – to those previously unfamiliar with the antisemitism faced by K-12 Jewish students in Ontario.
The report establishes the disconnect between the education system’s statutory and moral obligation to ensure that all students feel respected, included and valued, and its treatment, in far too many instances, of young Jewish students.
The survey identified 781 antisemitic incidents in Ontario K-12 schools over a period of 16 months (October 2023 to January 2025) experienced by at least 10% of Ontario’s approximately 30,000 Jewish school-age children. Nearly 48% of the incidents took place in the 78 days between October 7, 2023 and the start of the school break in December 2023.
Key Findings from the Report
The report’s key findings include the following:
1. More than 40% of antisemitic incidents involved Nazi salutes, assertions that Hitler should have finished the job, and similar conduct. Fewer than 60% of antisemitic incidents referred to Israel or the Israel-Hamas war.
In relation to the 40.4% of incidents that did not refer to Israel or the war (at least explicitly):
9.2% involved Holocaust denial, minimalization of the significance of the Holocaust, or saying that Jews use the Holocaust to legitimize their deplorable actions
7.4% involved assertions of excessive Jewish wealth, political power or media control
23.8% involved blanket condemnation of Jews, statements like, “Hitler should have finished the job,” “F*** you Jews,” “Jews are vermin,” and “Jews are cheap.”
Respondents describe incidents including a 13-year-old Jewish girl in Waterloo surrounded on multiple days by five boys repeatedly shouting “Sieg Heil!” accompanied by the Nazi salute. Or a six-year old in Ottawa whose teacher told her that she is only half human because one of her parents is Jewish.
In relation to the 59.6% of incidents that referred to Israel:
29.6% involved extreme negative statements about Israel – for example, that it has no right to exist as a Jewish state, that it is fundamentally a racist state, that it is committing genocide in Gaza, and that Zionism is equal to Nazism.
14.2% involved a child being called a “baby killer,” told to “pick a side” in the Israel-Hamas war, or otherwise treated as if they are personally responsible for what is happening in the Gaza war. One illustration involved a grade 9 boy in York Region accused by a classmate of being a “terrorist, rapist and baby killer.”
15.7% involved a teacher or a school-sanctioned activity expressing a point of view that made a child feel unwelcome or excluded because the child is Jewish. Illustrations included teachers wearing shirts with a Middle East map that effectively omits Israel’s existence, accompanied by the slogan, “From the river to the sea.” A six-year old Jewish child wearing an Israeli map pendant was told by the teacher it was a map of Palestine.
2. Nearly one in six antisemitic incidents were initiated or approved by a teacher or involved a school-sanctioned activity.
3. Just over two-thirds of antisemitic incidents occurred in English public schools and nearly one-fifth were directed against Jewish private schools. 14% of incidents occurred in French, Catholic, and non-Jewish private schools.
4. Nearly three-quarters of antisemitic incidents took place in the Toronto District School Board (39%), the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (19.8%) and the York Region District School Board (15.75). Nearly 82% of incidents took place in metropolitan Toronto (61%) and metropolitan Ottawa (21%), Ontario’s major Jewish population centres.
5. The most common emotional reactions to antisemitic incidents on the part of their victims included anger (31%), fear of returning to school or of being bullied (nearly 27%) and worrying about losing non-Jewish friends and being socially isolated (more than 27%).
6. Some children insisted that their parents not report an antisemitic incident, fearing it would become public and make them the target of increased harassment or bullying. Some removed clothing and jewelry with Jewish symbols and Hebrew lettering so they would not be identified as Jewish.
7. Forty-nine percent (49%) of antisemitic incidents reported to school authorities were not investigated. In another nearly 9% of cases, school authorities denied the incident was antisemitic or recommended that the victim be removed from the school permanently or attend school virtually.
Nearly 35% of respondents chose not to report antisemitic incidents involving their children, either out of concern expressed by their children that reporting would cause them to be harassed or targeted or based on the parents’ belief that reporting would fail to elicit meaningful action. The latter belief appears to be validated by the poor overall institutional response to reported incidents.
8. In under one-third of cases reported to school authorities, schools responded by providing counseling for the targeted child or the perpetrator, taking punitive action against the perpetrator, creating or modifying a program to promote ethnic, racial and religious tolerance of Jews, or reporting the incident to the police.
9. Because of antisemitic incidents experienced by their children, 16% of parents moved their children to another school or are considering doing so. Some moved their residences to enroll their children in different schools. Jewish private schools (at 39% of the total) are the most frequent choice of parents who have moved or are moving their children to new schools.
A Systemic Failure Requiring Government Action
The report concludes that Ontario school boards significantly underestimate the number of Jewish students in their care and the frequency of antisemitic incidents in K-12 schools. The Toronto District School Board typifies these issues.
First, the TDSB defines antisemitism primarily as religious hatred, although 11% of Jews in the Toronto area identified as Jewish by ethnicity, culture, or ancestry and also identified with no religion. The TDSB does not count incidents involving such students even if the incidents are clearly motivated by antisemitism.
Second, although the TDSB has adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which includes rhetoric and actions that deny Israel’s very right to exist as a Jewish state (as distinct from criticism of Israel, its government or conduct), the TDSB frequently fails to regard such incidents as antisemitic.
Third, as already described, incidents are unreported due to fear.
Calls to Action and the Role of the Province
The Office of the Special Envoy is to be commended for commissioning this critically important report. Much of the attention on antisemitism in the educational system has focussed – and understandably so – on universities and college campuses. Indeed, this was the prime focus of last year’s House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights report on antisemitism.
However, our member organizations that represent Jewish parents, teachers, educators and children have consistently identified toxic levels of systemic antisemitism in the K-12 space long before October 7, 2023 but alarmingly exacerbated by the Israel-Hamas conflict. As a result, ALCCA and our members also addressed this issue in written submissions to the Committee (e.g., Ottawa Against Antisemitism and End Jew Hatred, Jewish Educators and Family Association (JEFA), and Jewish Parents of Ottawa Students Association (JPOSA)).
The importance of addressing antisemitism and toxic educational environments in K-12 schools cannot be overstated. Such environments set the stage for their continuation at universities and colleges. Young children are even more emotionally vulnerable to being demonized, marginalized, or isolated – and to being indoctrinated with hate. Their families have more limited schooling options in attempting to avoid exposure to antisemitism – although to be clear, they should never be placed in a position where they are forced to consider such options due to the system’s failures.
Education predominantly falls within the jurisdiction of provincial governments. In response to the Brym Report, Ontario’s Minister of Education, Paul Calandra said this:
“I am deeply concerned, angry and frustrated with the findings of [the Brym Report.]
Schools must be a safe place for every student to learn in a respectful and supportive environment. I expect school boards across the province to focus on student achievement and creating supportive classrooms, free of discrimination in any form, absent of divisive politics that leave students feeling unsafe, parents frustrated and angry, and teachers who simply want to teach but are unable to do so.
If boards are unable to succeed in their main mandate – student achievement – by delivering safe schools, then I will step in.”
Just a month ago, the Ontario government announced that it was appointing supervisors for four school boards, including the Toronto District School Board and the Ottawa-Carleton School Board, two of the boards identified in the report as the least responsive to rampant antisemitism at their schools. A fifth board had a supervisor appointed earlier this year, in April.
Although the government’s primary focus in appointing these supervisors was said to relate to financial mismanagement, it has also expressed concern about the failure of the four school boards to fulfill their core responsibilities to parents and students.
Ontario’s Minister of Education and Training has broad powers under the Education Act and its regulations to, among other things:
establish and ensure compliance with policies and guidelines respecting provincial priorities in education;
prescribe courses of study that shall be taught;
issue enforceable curriculum guidelines in the area of student achievement;
establish enforceable policies and guidelines respecting training of board members, directors of education, supervisory officers and superintendents;
select and approve for use learning materials;
provide or approve and review courses for teachers etc;
require boards to develop and implement an equity and inclusive education policy and implement changes to the policy as directed by the Minister.
Of course, the province can also introduce new legislation to address the issues identified by the Brym Report. Indeed, the province has introduced Bill 33, Supporting Children and Students Act, 2025 that would enable an investigation to be directed if the Minister has concerns about a matter of public interest. Matters of public interest include whether boards, board members and directors of education are carrying out their duties under this Act in an appropriate manner. The Act also provides that the Minister may give directions to a school board to address a matter of public interest if, in the Minister’s opinion, a board, board member or director of education has done or omitted to do something or is likely to do or omit to do something, that could affect a matter of public interest. Control of a board may be vested in the Minister if a board does not comply with a Minister’s direction.
In my view, it is imperative that the provincial government intervene to take appropriate action before classes resume in September. I do not have confidence that the Toronto District School Board and Ottawa-Carleton District School Board will bring about meaningful and timely change without such government intervention. My recommendations, many drawn from Professor Brym’s work, include the following:
Mandatory province-wide professional development/training for teachers, board members, directors of education, supervisory officers and superintendents on contemporary antisemitism led by mainstream experts in education and antisemitism
Clear province-wide codes of conduct for students and educators on antisemitism and other forms of hatred or discrimination
Such professional development/training and codes of conduct should utilize the IHRA definition of antisemitism as a tool/resource and ensure that all incidents of antisemitism are appropriately recognized in accordance with the Brym Report. The use of the IHRA definition does not immunize Israel or its government from criticism but instead recognizes that students should not be held collectively responsible for what transpires in the Middle East conflict, nor should students be demonized, marginalized or discriminated against for supporting the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state.
Policies, guidelines and, where appropriate, legislation, should ensure province-wide robust reporting mechanisms for complaints about antisemitic incidents, with whistleblower protections in place, and transparency and accountability respecting actions taken or not taken in relation to such complaints
A province-wide tool should be developed for data collection to better address hate incidents
Policies and guidelines should be developed province-wide to support true inclusiveness for all students and respect for their identities
Directors of education should be required to publicly report on a regular basis as to the increased actions taken to combat the rise of antisemitism, where applicable, at their schools
A dedicated full time staff member should be appointed for, at a minimum, school boards prominently featured in the Brym Report to lead the effort to combat antisemitism, and ensure that antisemitism is responded to appropriately
An illustration of the need for government intervention relates to the introduction of Anti-Palestinian Racism (APR), purportedly as part of anti-racism policies or strategies at several K-12 school boards, including TDSB. Properly understood, this isn’t about combatting discrimination against Palestinian students. I am in favour of any measures to study and address any existing anti-Palestinian discrimination or marginalization of Palestinian students.
However, proponents of APR have introduced it alongside a widely circulated definition that labels anyone who supports Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state or who fails to accept Palestinian narratives of Israel’s creation or current occupation of Palestine (including Israel’s recognized pre-1967 borders) as a racist. These same proponents reject the IHRA definition of antisemitism (which exempts criticism of Israel) while promoting a definition of APR that labels those who criticize Palestinian narratives as racist.
The TDSB decided to move ahead with APR, while failing to address or obscuring the definitional issues and the misuse of APR as a vehicle to promote a Palestinian political ideology, rather than addressing true discrimination. This speaks volumes about its current capacity to address antisemitism without any government intervention. Government must insist that school boards follow Ontario’s Human Rights Code. This means, among other things, that school board policies and strategies cannot include a doctrine that, by definition, violates the Code by marginalizing or demonizing Jewish students.
The government takeover of selected school boards in Ontario has, as a less desirable consequence, delayed mandatory Holocaust education in those schools. I urge the provincial government to recognize the importance of moving forward on this curriculum as soon as possible, particularly given the findings of Professor Brym’s most recent report, and the persistence of Holocaust denial and minimization and the use of Nazi symbols and ideology by young children.
Up to this point in this editorial, my focus has largely been on policy. But let’s face it. The issues raised are also fundamentally about the existing culture at school boards and schools. This requires attention to educational leadership, whether this involves trustees, directors of education, principals or vice-principals. Famously, it has been said that “culture eats strategy for breakfast,” meaning that well-articulated strategies (and policies) cannot succeed unless accompanied by a culture (and competencies) that support their implementation.
For example, one former school trustee points out that principals play a critically important role in the success or failure of individual schools. He proposes low-cost measures to address the uneven competencies of principals. These measures include intensive management training for prospective principals and vice-principals, provided by faculties of management, rather than faculties of education; removal of sub-standard principals, revising union rules to permit them to return to teaching; reducing transfers or relocation of effective leadership; and creating a group of experienced retired principals to support principals confronted with difficult conflicts and challenges that create poisoned environments within the school system.
These and other proposals should be considered in addressing the issues identified in the Brym Report and elsewhere.
Community Mobilization: A Call to Action
CIJA has called upon the community and its allies to demand urgent reforms from the Ontario government to address systemic antisemitism in public schools. I support this call to action informed by the recommendations set out above.
I also ask readers to:
Call upon the Ontario College of Teachers to publicly articulate what action it intends to take to systemically address teacher-initiated antisemitic incidents at K–12 schools. Contact the Ontario Colleges of Teachers
Call upon the Ontario Human Rights Commission to publicly articulate what action it intends to take to address the findings of Professor Brym’s report. Contact the Ontario Human Rights Commission.
Call upon the City of Toronto and the City of Ottawa to publicly articulate what action they intend to take to address the findings of Professor Brym’s report. Contact the City of Toronto | Contact the City of Ottawa
These actions are necessary not only to address the current crisis but to ensure that Jewish children in Ontario – indeed, all children – can learn in environments that are safe, inclusive, and free from hate.
About the Author
Mark Sandler, LL.B., LL.D. (honoris causa), ALCCA’s Chair, is widely recognized as one of Canada’s leading criminal lawyers and pro bono advocates. He has been involved in combatting antisemitism for over 40 years. He has lectured extensively on legal remedies to combat hate and has promoted respectful Muslim-Jewish, Sikh-Jewish and Black-Jewish dialogues. He has appeared before Parliamentary committees and in the Supreme Court of Canada on multiple occasions on issues relating to antisemitism and hate activities. He is a former member of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, a three-time elected Bencher of the Law Society of Ontario, and recipient of the criminal profession’s highest honour, the G. Arthur Martin Medal, for his contributions to the administration of criminal justice.