A government-directed lesson in critical thinking

Posted on May 7, 2026 by Ryan Dahlman

Jason Schilling ATA President 

Children need to be taught how to think, not what to think. 

This is how Education Minister Demetrios Nicolaides justified Bill 25, the kitchen sink-laden legislation that claims to remove politics and ideology from classrooms by addressing everything from the national anthem in schools to which flags can be displayed to who decides school names. 

Much has already been said and written about the many potential negative consequences of this legislation, such as a chilling effect on meaningful discussion of current events in schools; the devaluing of diversity through the removal of important language from the Education Act, like “welcoming,” “diversity” and “sense of belonging”; and a loss of autonomy for school boards. We’ve also expressed our concern about the lack of consultation with teachers. 

What strikes me most about this bill is the sheer irony of it. While suggesting that we need more critical thinking in classrooms, this legislation itself provides so many angles to develop and practice this very skill. 

When it comes to stimulating critical thinking, one of the techniques that teachers use with students is to pose open-ended questions that invite analysis rather than yes-no answers. Why don’t we walk through an example with Bill 25 as our discussion item? Here’s a simple questioning sequence: 

What problem is this policy trying to solve? 

How serious is that problem, really? 

What evidence supports the government’s claim? 

What evidence seems to be missing? 

Who benefits from this approach? 

What real problems remain unaddressed? 

Not all questions have clear-cut answers, but here are some factors to consider. 

The government would have you think that student indoctrination is rampant in schools. It’s not. Besides, there are several mechanisms in place to rein in overzealous teachers, such as the Code of Professional Conduct for Teachers and Teacher Leaders and the Teaching Quality Standard. 

An example that’s being used to justify this bill is a recording that went viral earlier this year. It shows a Fort Saskatchewan teacher adopting a caveman persona while playing the role of a right-wing radical demanding pipelines and ranting against Trudeau. What’s missing in this story is the fact that the teacher in question also conducted a lesson in which he adopted an opposite stereotype with just as much fervour. Ultimately, he was investigated and exonerated by his employing school board. 

Teachers are professionals. They already teach the prescribed curriculum in a balanced, thoughtful and age-appropriate way. 

On the question of who will benefit from this legislation, I can assure you that it won’t be the majority of students, their families, the public or teachers. 

Finally, the issues that remain unaddressed are the same as they’ve been for years: we need more teachers, smaller class sizes and better supports to help with classroom complexities. 

The real question 

Often, when constructing a question list to stimulate critical thinking, a teacher will start with a broad view of the issue and gradually get more focused. However, when I consider this bill, my inclination is to back away and contemplate the bigger picture. This is where critical thinking really kicks into gear, as there is no shortage of open-ended questions to ponder. Here’s a non-exhaustive list: 

Why is a government that proclaims to value freedom and decentralization taking control of school issues such as the playing of the national anthem, the display of flags, the naming of buildings and the sale of school property? 

Why would a government that is taking control of so many aspects of school life also be relinquishing its oversight over teaching resources that deal with gender and sexuality within the context of religious instruction? 

Whose interests do you think are being served? 

I could go on, but let’s fast-track to the real issue here, the huge, overarching, elephant-in-the-room question that is continually sucking the life out of Alberta, from Milk River to Fort Chip: Who is really governing this province?