Teaching thinking from an early age: microbiology as a “gym” for critical thinking

There is a curious paradox in our time: never have we had so much access to information, and yet it seems increasingly difficult to make good decisions. Between news, short videos, viral “truths”, and opinions that sound like facts, the mind spends a great deal of time reacting and very little time thinking.

This is precisely where the central idea of the article Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: The Need to Begin Teaching Critical and Systems Thinking Early in Life comes in: if we want healthier, more sustainable, and more resilient communities, we need to start cultivating critical thinking and systems thinking from early childhood — not as an optional extra, but as a foundation.

And the best part, at least for us in the EduBiota universe, is this: microbiology may be one of the most effective ways to do it.

Why talk about critical thinking on a microbiology blog?

Because the microbial world is everywhere — in food, water, on our skin, in the air — and yet, at the same time, it is “invisible”. That makes it a perfect context for learning to ask the right questions:

• How do we know this?

• What evidence is there?

• What might be misleading us?

• What consequences might arise from an apparently small choice?

The article describes a simple chain that helps bring order to the process: good information → understanding → options → decision → action. When one link fails — for example, because the information is doubtful or because we accept an explanation without checking it — the quality of the decision that follows is likely to decline.

Thinking critically does not mean “being contrary”. It means being responsible about what we believe — and about what we do next.

Systems thinking: the “map” for avoiding the mistake of solving one problem and creating three more

Many of today’s challenges are not linear. We change one thing and effects appear elsewhere: in health, the environment, the economy, social relationships, and wellbeing. The article highlights the importance of teaching systems thinking: the ability to see relationships, interdependencies, and chains of effects, including unintended consequences.

In microbiology, this is almost unavoidable: just think about antibiotics (individual health vs. antimicrobial resistance), hygiene (protection vs. “over-sterilisation”), or ecosystems (nutrients, microorganisms, balance). Everything is connected.

“Starting early” does not mean “making things complicated early”

The article argues that biases and habits of thought accumulate with age. For that reason, it makes sense to start early, using developmentally appropriate strategies.

The point is not to ask 7-year-olds to discuss epistemology. It is to teach, gradually, parts of critical thinking through concrete and meaningful situations. The text suggests an age-based progression, from simpler elements (observation, patterns, “why” questions) to more complex ones (analysing systems, comparing explanations, evaluating claims).

The practical idea we loved: short stories to train the brain to think

The article presents the International Microbiology Literacy Initiative (IMiLI) and a teaching proposal with great potential: using storytelling (dialogue-based stories) to teach components of critical thinking through everyday situations linked to microbiology.

These stories (MicroChats) are designed for classroom use, but they can also inspire activities in science clubs, workshops, museums, or even family conversations. There is even a proposed gallery — the Critical Thinking MicroChat Gallery — specifically intended to train these “mental muscles” in a light, concrete, and discussion-friendly way.

Stories help because they:

• capture attention;

• make science feel lived and real;

• facilitate discussion and transfer to other contexts.

So what are the actual “building blocks” of critical thinking that we can train?

The article lists several elements that can be taught through stories and guided discussion. Some examples — very much in the spirit of EduBiota — include:

• checking before believing (due diligence);

• distinguishing correlation from causation;

• recognising bias and misinformation;

• carrying out cost–benefit analysis;

• identifying limiting factors;

• comparing against good practice (benchmarking);

• considering other points of view;

• thinking in terms of interdependencies (thinking outside the “box”).

One point strongly emphasised in the text is the importance of not “outsourcing thinking” to ready-made answers, whether from social media or automated tools. The focus is on maintaining autonomy: asking, testing, comparing, revising.

How this could come to life in EduBiota (and in schools)

Here are a few ideas in the EduBiota editorial spirit: simple, replicable, and full of room for curiosity.

The golden base question: “How do you know?”

Choose an everyday microbial topic (for example: mould, fermentation, antibiotics, “antibacterial products”) and always train students to ask:

• What exactly are we claiming?

• What evidence supports it?

• What would be a good way to test it?

• What alternative explanations are there?

A 10-minute MicroChat: story + 3 questions

A quick classroom structure:

• A story built around a dilemma (e.g. “antibacterial spray every day?”).

• Three discussion questions:

  • What is the decision to be made?

  • What information is missing?

  • What consequences might appear in other “parts of the system”?

“Evidence detectives” against common myths

Bring in a typical statement (e.g. “antibiotics cure colds”, “probiotics solve everything”, “more cleaning = more health”) and ask students to:

• classify it: fact / opinion / advertising / assumption;

• say what evidence they would accept;

• choose credible sources and justify why.

From the invisible to the observable: situated learning

The article suggests experiments and visits (wastewater treatment plants, composting sites, bakeries, food production settings, local ecosystems) as ways of making microbiology real — and, by doing so, making critical thinking more natural.

In the end, this is what it comes down to: microbial literacy as literacy for living better

The article’s final message is hard to ignore: we need citizens who are capable of thinking well, resisting manipulation, and making decisions with positive impact — and that starts early.

Because it is so closely tied to everyday life and because it compels us to think in systems, microbiology can be an excellent “laboratory” for this kind of learning. It is not just about knowing what microorganisms are. It is about training mental habits: asking questions, checking, connecting the dots, anticipating consequences, and revising conclusions.

erhaps this is one of the greatest contributions of microbiology to education: helping us shape students who do not simply memorise answers, but learn to ask better questions. And that training begins early, through small routines, meaningful contexts, and a willingness to look more closely at the invisible. On this, I recently wrote in Teaching Critical and Systems Thinking Early (Amorim, 2026).