Freedom of education (on the one hand, the creation of educational centers within the respect of democratic principles; and, on the other, the guarantee that parents can choose an education for their children in accordance with their religious, philosophical or pedagogical convictions) is guaranteed both in the treaties of the European Union and in the Western democracies around us , whose constitutions so reflect.

Of course, the Spanish Constitution is no exception (Article 27), and, furthermore, our schools have the capacity to establish a school-wide educational project that establishes the values, goals, and principles that guide their actions within their context. Legislatively, the autonomy of educational centers is also established in the Royal Decrees that establish the basic education curriculum in each autonomous community.

From freedom to indoctrination

However, neither fostering critical thinking nor freedom of education are excuses for indoctrination in schools (through their management structures, their management teams, or their teachers). Quite the opposite: fostering critical thinking is the best defense against indoctrination, and freedom of education is key to social diversity.

How, then, can we define this fine line? There’s a classic text from the 1980s by José Manuel Esteve: “The Concept of Education and its Nomological Network” (published in the book Theory of Education. I , edited by J.L. Castillejo). Its author proposes applying three criteria: use, form, and content. To these, we could add those of meaning and purpose. The following table compares these criteria to distinguish between the two terms:

For example, to educate would be to teach a historical fact by showing the (true) facts—based on reliable and diverse sources—and their different interpretations—according to different actors involved in those events—fostering one’s own interpretive judgment based on the critical analysis of the sources; while to indoctrinate would be to teach that historical fact from a single perspective, presenting it as an authentic and exclusive interpretation and disqualifying any other possible interpretation.

Detect indoctrination

At this point, we can conclude that indoctrination practices in a center are revealed in the following cases:

1) Ideological or political imposition:

• Students are forced or pressured to participate in demonstrations or political activities.
• Mandatory activism is promoted as part of the curriculum.
• Adherence to specific causes is required without the option to dissent.

2) Lack of plurality and critical thinking

• A single view of the facts is presented, omitting or disqualifying other perspectives.
• Disagreement is ridiculed, stigmatized, or penalized.
• Debate and questioning are not encouraged.
• Only the teacher’s ideology is considered “correct.”

3) Content manipulation

• Historical or scientific facts are distorted to fit a narrative.
• Relevant data is omitted.
• Biased or propagandistic teaching materials are used.

4) Ideological evaluation

• Grades depend on repeating imposed ideas, not on reasoning.
• Ideological obedience is rewarded more than argumentation.

5) Confusion between opinion and science

• Personal beliefs are presented as scientific facts or dogmas.
• Scientific theories are denied for ideological reasons without rational explanations.

6) Discriminatory language and treatment

• Ideologically charged language is used.
• Derogatory terms are used toward certain groups, ideas, or historical figures.

What can we do if we suspect indoctrination?

When indoctrination is detected in schools, we should all be on guard; especially the families involved should be made aware that such practices are not appropriate for a school with real educational potential.

And proactive attitudes can be taken towards this, which can be transformed into concrete actions:

• First, consult with other families and compare that perception to confirm or reject it.
• Also compare the curriculum being taught (see the Center’s Educational Project and assess its level of compliance, observe the textbooks) and, very specifically, whether the methodologies and evaluation methods used incur in these assumptions.
• If indoctrination practices are suspected, raise (with all due sensitivity) your concerns with the school’s family association, the management team, and teachers to open a respectful and diverse debate about the situation.
• Take it to the school’s School Council to open a free and pluralistic debate on the issue in the most legitimate representative body of the school, whose functions include approving its Educational Project.
• And, most importantly, foster critical thinking at home by encouraging family dialogue with children about what they’re learning and how it shapes their perception of emerging social issues, encouraging them to compare information, engage in critical reflection, and reason through arguments.

In the public sphere, schools are today the educational institution with the greatest potential. Never before in the history of the human species have they played such a decisive role in individual education, as they are universally recognized, meaning they are compulsory and free throughout childhood and adolescence.

That’s why some have called it the “most successful project in history .” Given the enormous responsibility of its educational mission, its action cannot be overshadowed by any indoctrination.

Author Bio: Javier M. Valle is Director of the Research Group on Supranational Educational Policies at the Autonomous University of Madrid