The Trouble with Lazy Criticism in Education

In today’s polarized political climate, it’s all too easy to dismiss those we disagree with by slapping on a convenient label like “extremist” or “radical” rather than thoughtfully considering their positions. This lazy criticism circumvents meaningful debate and divides us further. This lazy criticism shuts down meaningful discourse and divides us further. Lazy criticism is a problem in education as well.

We fail to understand nuances when we dismiss an education idea as simply “extreme” without examining it deeply. We don’t ask questions, review evidence, or reflect on our biases. No progress is made towards compromises that serve students best.

For instance, expressing an opinion on issues such as gender affirmation charter schools. or excessive suspension as “extreme” stops thoughtful analysis of potential benefits and drawbacks. Instead, sincere dialogue is needed to understand the reasoning and facts behind such ideas.

True discourse requires empathy, critical thinking, and open exchange of views. If we instantly reject education proposals as extreme, we lose opportunities to find common ground.

Next time you feel tempted to dismiss an education opinion as extreme, pause. Make an effort to grasp the rationale and evidence behind it. Ask sincere questions, avoid condescension, and be open to changing your mind. More complexity may emerge than expected.

With open and respectful discussion of education issues, we can gain perspective, find solutions, and reconnect across divides. But it begins by dropping lazy criticism and engaging in substantive arguments based on facts rather than labels. The future of our students depends on thoughtful, civil discourse.

Overcoming System Obstacles to Academic Integration

In an earlier blog, I discussed some significant obstacles in schools that make it difficult to increase teacher collaboration among academic and CTE teachers to bring more relevance and rigor to instruction. These obstacles include diploma requirements, teacher certification, teacher security, and teacher evaluation.

This blog provides suggestions to school leaders on strategies to help to overcome these institutional system barriers. The first of these are several state initiatives that will likely require lobbying for State Education Department policies to allow greater flexibility.

States should allow more opportunities for integration through crossover credit. Often there are academics immersed within Career and Technical education courses. When this occurs, students can earn a single course credit but can be used to meet two credits in graduation requirements by checking off both a Career and Technical course and an academic course. States can establish the conditions under which these credits can be awarded, which provides great flexibility for students.
Another Initiative states can provide is to designate individual courses that can be assigned to multiple teacher certification areas and/or diploma requirements. As more and more technology is introduced in education, there becomes a greater overlap of courses. An example is computer graphic design, which can be used to satisfy art requirements or a CTE program.
The state should provide more alternative routes for certification. instead of the traditional model of students going on to for your college and earning an education or teaching certificate, individuals changing careers should have opportunities to earn teaching credentials based on their work experience. This is an opportunity to bring more diverse teachers with real-world experience and increase the pool of potential teachers. Teachers with industry experience often see more opportunities in instruction to bring relevance to their teaching and, depending on experience, could hold certificates in Academic areas and CTE.
More and more states are considering moving away from the traditional Carnegie unit diploma requirement, where courses are based upon a time requirement and perhaps end-of-course assessments. This competency-based approach awards achievement based on actual skills developed, often including student performances. A competency-based approach provides greater opportunity for students to achieve the diploma requirements through more integrated project-based learning.

Following are local initiatives school leaders can embrace within existing requirements and the structure of the school.

Schools have great latitude to name the courses that they are using creatively. Oftentimes a creative name can be used to designate a course to fit within an academic credential or a Career and Technical education credential and avoid violating certification and teaching requirements.
Many high schools have early college options in which students take college-level courses while in high school, particularly in P-Tech program, which is an early college technical program between high schools and college. It is often convenient to have college professors teaching a high school course where there is greater flexibility in teaching the course and not requiring a traditional High School teacher certification
Often a struggle in a school schedule is matching the available teaching staff with the courses individuals need to complete a particular program. School leaders should not be limited by existing staff and their certification limits. There are opportunities to hire part-time teachers that may come in for a course or two that can provide a particular course that a student needs or includes an integration element.
An important model for integration is to provide consulting teachers who work part-time with Career and Technical Education teachers to strengthen the academics within that curriculum. Schools are familiar with using special education consultant teachers to assist other teachers. The same can be done with academic teachers on a part-time basis or a teacher working across many CTE teachers.
Another option that often gets in the way is the teacher evaluation structure. Often these teacher evaluations are based on more of performance and student test scores. This makes teachers reluctant to work outside of their discipline. It’s important to examine your evaluation criteria to ensure it is not inhibiting teachers from working together to benefit student achievement.
When school leaders confront the situation of not having a certified teacher for a particular instructional situation, it may be necessary to help an existing teacher who wishes to assume that responsibility to earn that additional certification, and schools can provide some additional support for that teacher and pay tuition to earn the necessary credits.
Technology is rapidly changing the workforce, which is an opportunity for schools to consider Innovative or alternative CTE programs. School staff may have an academic teacher with a hobby interest in an area of technology, such as drones or geospace, which could become new CTE programs. if states allow the creation of innovative and alternative CTE programs, this may be an opportunity to build a new CTE program around an academic program that is fully integrated.
Schools should also examine their master schedule to determine whether the existing structure makes it difficult for teachers to collaborate. For example, creating more teacher planning time may allow more collaboration. Also, an option is to adjust the length of instructional classes to provide more opportunities for teachers to work together, or you may provide teachers the opportunity to make adjustments of students to devote time in different classes based upon the nature of the work and the student projects
States provide minimum diploma requirements, but many schools offer diploma requirements beyond those minimum requirements. This may be an opportunity to bring in more career programs or use programs differently that integrate academics and CTE to meet these new diploma requirements.
Even if the state has not moved to a competency-based system, there may be opportunities within the state requirements for Innovation. Within the school district, the school could create its own competency programs or performance option to use those projects to satisfy diploma requirements which could be credited in both academic areas and CTE.

Don’t let the system obstacles discourage increasing collaboration and connection to make instruction more rigorous and relevant. Administrators and teachers should work creatively to benefit students.

Obstacles to Greater CTE and Academic Integration

Preparing students for the future workforce requires technical skills and work habits. However, accelerating technological change requires future workers to adapt, which adds high-level thinking, problem-solving, and communication to instruction to the workplace agenda. Rather than significantly changing the CTE curriculum, a more efficient and localized solution is to increase collaboration among academic and CTE teachers. Academic teachers generally have more experience elevating student problem-solving and communication skills. More engaging and effective CTE lessons can be created when academic teachers work with technically knowledgeable CTE teachers to craft real-world student projects. Academic teachers benefit as well by creating more relevant and engaging instruction.

One of my current projects focuses on enhancing the integration of academics and increasing collaboration between academics and CTE teachers. This is not a new issue. One of my first statewide curriculum responsibilities was in the early 1980s. I was assigned responsibility for state curriculum work in Career and Technical Education. We funded state projects and participated in several multi-state curricular consortiums. It was apparent to many education leaders at that time that the onset of the computer age would have a significant influence on work and career preparation. This change would require not only new technical skills but additional thinking skills.

The topic of connecting academic skills with CTE was met with great skepticism in CTE, for the concern was that adding academics was the responsibility of other teachers, and time devoted to academic integration would diminish time in developing technical skills. As leaders further reflected on the importance of higher-level thinking skills, a shift occurred in Career and Technical Education curriculum. CTE curriculum began to bring higher-level thinking skills into the curriculum and included academic teachers in helping to develop the curriculum. Cross-reference curriculum maps were created to show the application of academic skills within Career and Technical Education. Many leaders now saw the advantages to students for having both academic and technical skills.

This change began over 40 years ago it would seem that education policy and practice would have a dramatic shift to build stronger connections between academic and CTE teachers. Over the last four decades, some state and federal policies have promoted a stronger connection. However, practices at the school level still discourage increased collaboration. There is a connection between academic skills and CTE on paper and written policy. State curriculum standards require students to acquire both academic credits for graduation and along with those seeking technical school credits. The federal accountability requirements in K-12 education and Career and Technical Education require students to achieve both achievements in technical skills and academic skills. However, in practice, most schools still have significant barriers” that isolate career and technical education teachers from academic teachers. Yes, there are examples of effective collaboration in schools that create career pathways and promote more project-based learning and relevant education. However, several significant obstacles still discourage increased collaboration. These obstacles are diploma requirements, teacher certification, teacher security, and teacher evaluation.

Diploma requirements in most states are still defined in courses grouped by subject areas and are based on a time requirement of a minimum number of hours of instruction. The diploma may require end-of-course tests for some subjects to earn a diploma. This traditional approach has been in place for over 100 years, and perpetuates a model of individual teachers teaching a separate subject in high schools. Diploma requirements based on separate subjects make it difficult to teach interdisciplinary courses, including content from several sources. Some states have created options for substituting graduation requirements from career and technical courses, such as using health science to meet a portion of the science requirement. While these options create flexibility for some students, it adds complexity and data-keeping for school officials. It is much easier to track each student satisfying the traditional course requirements. In addition, the State Boards of Education have increased the number of courses required to earn a diploma, making it more difficult for students to find time for CTE courses.

Teacher Certification is similar to the diploma obstacle. At the high school level, teachers earn certification in Individual subject areas. With certification, teachers feel an exclusive right to teach courses in their subject. Creating courses that include content from multiple subjects can create conflict. Teachers may feel that they are taking students away from their particular discipline. Labeling teachers and, more importantly, certifying a license to teach a particular course is one of the strong influences to isolating teachers and instructional subjects in secondary schools.

Teacher Security is another obstacle. Everyone wants stability in the school system to reassure there are learning opportunities for future families in the community. Having regulations of teachers’ tenure is a strong rationale for stability in school. However, these regulations are tied to subject areas and certification areas . This discourages teachers from taking on a teaching assignment that is outside of their certification area and may jeopardize their security. In addition school contacts include seniority regulations which provides that any layoffs of teachers will be focused on the least senior teachers. Teaching interdisciplinary course could be a threat to security. It is easier for everyone to keep doing things the same way.

Teacher Evaluation also supports the segmentation of the school system. Teacher evaluation systems, expanded under the Federal Race To the Top initiative, stimulated more school districts to rate teachers based on test student test performance and standardized criteria. These criteria or based upon the traditional perspective of a teacher lecturing in a classroom rather than facilitating learning of student projects in collaboration with other professionals. Most teacher evaluation efforts have been one more edict that has pushed the isolation of teachers into separate disciplines.

These four obstacles are significant and originate and well-meaning state law and policy and have support in local school district teacher contracts and the self-interest of many teachers. However, many schools are found ways to work through the rigidity of regulation to provide interdisciplinary, highly engaged activities for students that break down the barriers between academics and CTE. A second blog will dig deeper into how states and school districts leadership can make changes to reduce the impact of these obstacles for student benefit.