Debate and classroom discussion topics
Please review each article prior to use: grade-level applicability and curricular alignment might not be obvious from the headline alone.
More cans off city streets, more money in pockets
3 minute read Preview Friday, Jul. 3, 2026Anti-coal mining petition led by musician Corb Lund fails in Alberta
4 minute read Preview Sunday, Jul. 5, 2026Plan for 24 Sussex Drive makes sense
4 minute read Preview Friday, Jul. 3, 2026Governing by gimmick
5 minute read Preview Friday, Jul. 3, 2026A California farmer is giving away tons of nectarines that he’s not allowed to sell
6 minute read Preview Saturday, Jul. 4, 2026Downtown crackdown necessary
4 minute read Preview Thursday, Jul. 2, 2026Do online influencer posts count as news? Younger Canadians more likely to say yes
4 minute read Preview Updated: Yesterday at 9:35 AM CDTArtificial intelligence requires human-led thinking
4 minute read Tuesday, Jun. 30, 2026Picture this. A teacher creates an assignment using AI. There is a provocation generated by a prompt, followed by vague parameters and a generic rubric. The AI-generated emojis are left in, and the task and success criteria are not connected to the passion, interests or soul of the child.
Subsequently, the child responds using AI. The thinking and language are clearly not their own and there has been no transformative or profound educative experience to stir cognitive dissonance. The child has not been asked, or better yet invited, to engage in sophisticated thinking and work that matters to them. That matters to community.
When the child uses AI, it’s considered “cheating.”
So here we are. An opportunity lost because we are not thinking deeply about the impact of AI on our species.