March 31, 2026

NEW POLL: Canadians Want K-12 System to Reverse Several Policies

A new SecondStreet.org report shows Canadians are dissatisfied with the K-12 school system and want change.

 

CALGARY, AB: Think tank SecondStreet.org released new poll results today that show a majority of Canadians (53%) believe the K-12 system has gone in the wrong direction over the past 20 years; up from 32% in 2020. The poll shows Canadians support reversing many reforms implemented over the past two decades.

 “The poll shows Canadians seem to want to go back to the way things were in the K-12 system twenty years ago,” said SecondStreet.org Research Director Bacchus Barua. “People think schools should get rid of no-fail policies and empower teachers to remove unruly students from classrooms. Canadians also support going back to how reading and math used to be taught.”

 This policy brief builds on past public opinion research, including polling in 2024 by SecondStreet.org that showed Canadians were particularly concerned about a lack of accountability and discipline in public schools.

 The poll was conducted for SecondStreet.org by Leger between February 27 and March 1, 2026 among 1,659 Canadian adults. Highlights from the poll include:

  • 53% of respondents believe the public school system has gone in the “wrong direction” over the past 20 years. Only about one-in-four (23%) indicated “right direction”, while the rest didn’t have an opinion;
  • 72% support a return to more traditional responses to student misconduct, such as sending misbehaving students to the principal’s office, suspensions, etc.;
  • 74% believe teachers should have the discretion to reduce a student’s mark on an assignment if it is handed in late (a practice some schools and boards don’t allow);
  • 77% believe existing “no fail” policies, which move students up a grade regardless of performance, should be abandoned;
  • 56% of respondents believe schools should get back to basics and use traditional methods to teach core subjects; and
  • 56% support the introduction of public charter schools in their province (modelled on the Albertan approach). These are government-funded schools that are run by non-profits. They do not charge tuition and have shown to deliver higher test scores.

 

“A majority of Canadians also like the idea of their province giving parents more choices by copying Alberta’s public charter school model,” said SecondStreet.org President Colin Craig. “These are non-profit schools that don’t charge tuition as they’re funded by the government. Although they cover the provincial curriculum, they often differ from public schools in terms of how they teach and what they focus on. Considering students perform better in these schools, they’re definitely worth a look.”

 

To see SecondStreet.org’s policy brief and the poll results – click here.

Share this Story

Help spread the message and make real change by sharing this story with your network.

Facebook
X
Email

Related Stories

March 31, 2026
A new SecondStreet.org report shows Canadians are dissatisfied with the K-12 school system and want change.
March 19, 2026
Groups attacking the new health reforms in Alberta don't have the right idea, writes SecondStreet.org's Bacchus Barua.
March 18, 2026
One year after Debbie Fewster’s tragic cardiac waiting list death brought to light,  government records show no policy change, no one held accountable.

Join 20,000+ Canadians in our movement for a better Canada.

Name(Required)
Select Your Interests(Required)
Consent(Required)

Prevention – reduce demand in the first place

If Canadians lived healthier lives, we could reduce demand for emergency services, orthopaedic surgeries, primary care and more. 

For instance, if you visit the Canadian Cancer Society’s website, you’ll read that “about four in ten” cancer cases are preventable. The Heart and Stroke Foundation notes that “almost 80 percent of premature heart disease and stroke can be prevented through healthy behaviours.” A similar number of Diabetes cases are also preventable. 

Many joint replacements and visits to ERs and walk-in clinics could also be avoided through healthy living. 

To be sure, not all health problems can be avoided through healthy living – everyday the system treats Canadians with genetic conditions, helps those injured in unavoidable accidents and more.  

But there is an opportunity to reduce pressure on the health care system through Canadians shifting to healthier lifestyles – better diets, more exercise, etc. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this column. 

Partner with non-profits and for-profit clinics

European countries will partner with anyone who can help patients. 

It doesn’t matter if it’s a non-profit, a government entity or a private clinic. What matters is that patients receive quality treatment, in a timely manner and for a competitive price.  

In Canada, governments often delivery services using government-run hospitals instead of seeing if non-profit or private clinics could deliver the services more effectively. 

When governments have partnered with non-profit and private clinics, the results have often been quite good – Saskatchewan, Ontario and British Columbia are just a few examples of where partnerships have worked well. 

Canada should pursue more of these partnerships to reduce wait times and increase the volume of services provided to patients.  

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see the links above. 

Make cross border care more accessible

In Canada, citizens pay high taxes each year and we’re promised universal health care services in return. The problem is, wait times are often extremely long in our health system – sometimes patients have to wait years to see a specialist or receive surgery. 

If patients don’t want to wait long periods, they often have to reach into their own pocket and pay for treatment outside the province or country. 

Throughout the European Union, we also find universal health care systems. But a key difference is that EU patients have the right to go to other EU countries, pay for surgery and then be reimbursed by their home government. Reimbursements cover up to what the patient’s home government would have spent to provide the treatment locally. 

If Canada copied this approach, a patient waiting a year to get their hip operation could instead receive treatment next week in one of thousands of surgical clinics throughout the developed world. 

Governments benefit too as the patient is now back on their feet and avoiding complications that sometimes come with long wait times – meaning the government doesn’t have to treat those complications on top of the initial health problem. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or this shorter video. 

Legalize access to non-government providers

Canada is the only country in the world that puts up barriers, or outright bans patients from paying for health services locally. 

For instance, a patient in Toronto cannot pay for a hip operation at a private clinic in Toronto. Their only option is to wait for the government to eventually provide treatment or leave the province and pay elsewhere. 

Countries with better-performing universal health care systems do not have such bans. They allow patients a choice – use the public system or pay privately for treatment. Sweden, France, Australia and more – they all allow choice. 

Why? One reason is that allowing choice means some patients will decide to pay privately. This takes pressure off the public system. For instance, in Sweden, 87% of patients use the public system, but 13% purchase private health insurance. 

Ultimately, more choice improves access for patients. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or watch this short clip on this topic. 

Shift to funding services for patients, not bureaucracies

In Canada, most hospitals receive a cheque from the government each year and are then asked to do their best to help patients. This approach is known as “block funding”. 

Under this model, a patient walking in the door represents a drain on the hospital’s budget. Over the course of a year, hospital administrators have to make sure the budget stretches out so services are rationed. This is why you might have to wait until next year or the year after for a hip operation, knee operation, etc. 

In better-performing universal health systems, they take the opposite approach – hospitals receive money from the government each time they help a patient. If a hospital completes a knee operation, it might receive, say, $10,000. If it completes a knee operation on another patient, it receives another $10,000. 

This model incentivizes hospitals to help more patients – to help more patients with knee operations, cataract surgery, etc. This approach also incentivizes hospitals to spend money on expenses that help patients (e.g. more doctors, nurses, equipment, etc.) rather than using the money on expenses that don’t help patients (e.g. more admin staff). 

To learn more about this policy option, please watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this post by MEI.