Category: CTE

The term “critical thinking” is widely used in education, especially in Career and Technical Education (CTE), and is a long-standing element of the Career Ready Practices; the standard is as follows:

Utilize critical thinking to make sense of problems and persevere in solving them.

Educators, policymakers, and curriculum developers frequently promote critical thinking as a goal, yet there’s little agreement on what it actually looks like in practice—or how students develop it and how success is measured.

Critical thinking is associated with higher-order cognitive skills such as reasoning, analyzing, evaluating, and problem-solving. In a workforce increasingly shaped by automation, employers value these skills because they can’t easily be replaced by machines.

Despite its prominence, the term is not clearly defined across educational settings. Some treat it as the ability to question assumptions or form logical arguments, while others view it as the process of decision-making under complex conditions. Consistently, the goal in CTE is to perform a technical task in a standard way, quickly and safely. This seems counter to thinking critically. Therefore, one aspect of critical thinking in CTE to knowing when to use it.

Critical thinking is not a single skill that can be taught in isolation. It develops through rich, sustained student projects that encourage inquiry, problem-solving, and reflection. When classrooms still rely on rote tasks or rigid procedures, they leave students little room to practice or grow these skills authentically. Without intentional instructional design—such as open-ended problems, collaborative projects, or performance-based assessments—students may not get meaningful opportunities to develop critical thinking.

Perhaps the biggest issue is that critical thinking is hard to measure. Unlike technical skills that can be assessed through checklists or performance tests, critical thinking requires evaluating a student’s thought process, decision-making, and ability to justify choices. Most standardized tests do not capture this well. As a result, success is often judged anecdotally or through vague descriptors like “shows improvement” or “thinks critically,” without specific evidence.

While critical thinking is a powerful educational goal, its popularity outpaces clarity. Without clear definitions, instructional strategies, and assessment tools, it’s challenging to ensure that students are truly developing and demonstrating this essential skill, especially in hands-on, fast-paced CTE environments where critical thinking matters most. The following list defines critical thinking with several specific adjectives — consider it the specific details of critical thinking. These can be used to revise lessons and create assessment rubrics.

Process-Oriented – Follows clear steps to solve real-world problems
Productive – Stays focused and gets things done
Precise – Pays close attention to details and aims for accuracy
Persistent – Keeps trying, even when the task is hard
Prepared – Plans ahead and is ready to work
Perceptive – Notices important details and makes connections
Probing – Asks good questions and looks deeper into the problem
Preventative – Thinks ahead to avoid problems
Precautious – Stays alert to risks and acts safely
Pioneering – Tries new ideas and isn’t afraid to explore
Persuasive – Shares ideas clearly and explains them with confidence

To effectively teach and assess critical thinking, especially in Career and Technical Education (CTE), it’s essential to translate abstract traits like “perceptive” or “productive” into observable behaviors that students can demonstrate—and instructors can measure.

Here’s is an example of critical thinking traits in student behaviors and tie them to rubric criteria for feedback and evaluation:

Example: Perceptive Thinking

Observable Behaviors:

• Observes and interprets details that impact decision-making (e.g., signs of wear on a part, irregular measurements)
• Connects technical data to project goals
• Justifies choices with evidence or reasoning

Level	Description
4 – Advanced	Accurately interprets relevant details and justifies decisions with strong reasoning
3 – Proficient	Notices key details and explains decisions with logical support
2 – Developing	Observes some details but reasoning is weak or unclear
1 – Beginning	Misses important details or struggles to explain choices

Click the image on the right to download a sample rubric for Cosmetology. You can easily revise this for your CTE program in and Generative AI app.

Summary:

The blog explores the widespread use of the term critical thinking in education—particularly in Career and Technical Education (CTE)—and highlights the challenges of defining, teaching, and assessing it effectively. While critical thinking is valued for its role in problem-solving and adaptability in today’s workforce, it often lacks clear implementation in classroom practice. The article emphasizes that critical thinking must be intentionally developed through inquiry-based learning and meaningful projects, not rote tasks. To bring clarity, the blog introduces a student-friendly framework of 11 “P” traits—such as Perceptive, Persistent, and Process-Oriented—that represent observable thinking behaviors. These traits can be used to revise lessons and develop practical rubrics for giving feedback and measuring student growth in real-world CTE environments.

If you’re a Career and Technical Education (CTE) teacher, you’ve probably asked yourself: How do I get students thinking more critically, without sacrificing hands-on skills or piling on more work? The answer may be closer than you think—and powered by Generative AI.

I have been exploring Generative AI ideas from the book Synergizing Success. I have posted several blogs on the NYS Trade, Technical, Teachers Association. These ideas offer a groundbreaking approach to making academic integration more practical, more manageable, and more impactful for CTE teachers. The key? Using Generative AI to generate ideas, plan integrated instruction, and engage students in deeper, more analytical thinking.

Why Deeper Thinking Matters in CTE

Technical proficiency is critical—but so is the ability to analyze, explain, justify, and adapt. Whether a student is learning carpentry, cosmetology, auto repair, or healthcare, critical thinking and academic knowledge turn good technicians into problem-solvers and future leaders.

How Generative AI Can Help

Generative AI tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, or Claude can serve CTE teachers in three powerful ways:

• Creation – Generate lesson plans, projects, assessments, and ideas.
• Support – Simplify planning, solve instructional problems, and streamline grading.
• Empowerment – Strengthen your own professional growth and teaching strategies.

Here’s a sample of AI prompts from the paper that can help CTE teachers introduce deeper thinking and academic rigor:

Sample AI Prompts for Deeper Thinking in CTE

1. Designing Rigorous Instruction

• How can I use problem-solving and critical thinking strategies to enhance academic rigor in my [CTE field] lesson plans?
• Create a lesson where students apply physics concepts while repairing automotive brake systems.
• How can I scaffold instruction so students apply algebra during a carpentry measurement project?

2. Bridging Academic and Technical Skills

• Suggest interdisciplinary projects that combine CTE skills with English and math standards.
• What are examples of real-world CTE problems that require both technical skills and academic knowledge?

3. Enhancing Student Engagement

• If my subject were taught like an escape room challenge, what puzzles would students solve to demonstrate mastery?
• How could I transform my class into a real-world work simulation for a week?

4. Encouraging Reflection and Self-Assessment

• Create a journal prompt for students to reflect on how they applied math skills in a construction project.
• Design a checklist to assess if students are applying academic skills effectively during technical labs.

5. Improving Assessments and Feedback

• Generate a rubric that measures both critical thinking and technical skill mastery.
• What strategies can I use to give individualized feedback efficiently in a hands-on classroom?

6. Planning for Improvement

• What’s one small change I could make tomorrow in my [CTE program] to improve academic integration?
• Generate a student survey to evaluate the effectiveness of academic integration in my course.

Final Thought

Using AI isn’t about replacing your professional judgment—it’s about enhancing it. Whether you’re creating projects, aligning with standards, or tracking student growth, Generative AI gives CTE teachers a flexible tool for bringing academic rigor and deeper thinking into technical classrooms, without losing the hands-on heart of CTE.

If you’re ready to deepen student thinking in your program, try using one of these prompts this week. One small step could open up a whole new level of learning.

You may access a downloadable version of these AI prompts.

High school leaders visiting a school with career academies or team teaching cannot help but be impressed with student engagement and enthusiasm for their projects. While this level of collaboration is impressive, the reaction is often that the level of collaboration might work in that school but certainly not with their school. Visiting principals reflects on how most high school teachers are comfortable with their subject and see little need to reach out to work with others. High levels of integration among academic and CTE teachers take time and must be a gradual process rather than a large-scale change. It is more effective to work gradually to elevate high levels of integration. The various models in the recently published Synergizing for Success: Academic and Career Integration for CTE give school leaders options to consider that might be easier and more effective to implement in their schools.

There are also small steps leaders can take to build a greater understanding of the instructional strengths of other teachers and the importance of academic and technical courses in preparing students for career readiness. This blog offers some small steps as suggestions for working toward integration.

• Cross-Subject Observations – Ask teachers to spend one or two planning periods on another subject. Asks CTE teachers to observe academic teachers and vice versa. Give teachers 2 or 3 simple things to observe and then collectively summarize teacher observations. Examples of questions are: What are observed strategies to increase student engagement? How does the teacher make the instruction relevant to students? What are effective teaching strategies you could adopt
• Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) – Form PLCs that include subject and CTE teachers focused on common goals like improving literacy across the curriculum or integrating technology. The PLCs provide a structure for ongoing collaboration.
• Joint Professional Development – Identify relevant professional development opportunities that bring subject and CTE teachers together to learn new strategies for integrating academic and technical content.
• Employer Visitation Day – Identify several local employers to host short visits by small groups of teachers. Mix the groups with CTE and Academic areas. Ask employers to describe their business and the most essential skills for their employees. After visits, have teachers come together to share what they have learned and the lessons for the school’s programs.
• Part-time Academic Coaches -Hire an instructional coach or retired Math or English teacher to observe CTE instruction and offer suggestions on how the CTE teachers might reinforce literacy and math in everyday instruction.

These can be small steps to open deeper conversations about more formal integration models and practices to benefit students and their preparation. If you have additional suggestions that worked in your school, add those in the comments.

Every CTE teacher understands the importance of having an active advisory committee of local employers and community members. Developing relationships with these individuals and working regularly with them is critical to the success of CTE programs. Advisory committees can support programs with recommendations for off-site learning experiences, serve as judges for assessments, suggest state-of-the-art equipment, locate professional development opportunities for teachers to remain current, and also offer student work-based learning sites. To learn more about best practices working with Advisory Committees use the ACTE CTELearn course Leveraging Community Resources to Energize CTE.

However, it is the advice of advisory groups regarding curriculum planning that is essential. Employer expertise identifies the technical competencies and which ones are a priority to enable teachers to establish a curriculum. Any curriculum conversation also swings from technical skills to discussions of work habits, which employers call soft skills. Employers stress how important these behaviors are; teachers need to weave these into instruction on student projects and give feedback consistently. However, CTE instruction also needs to include the integration of academic knowledge and thinking. This is how to deepen student learning, not just to be able to perform a work task but to engage in problem-solving while doing the work. It may not seem obvious to CTE teachers and advisory committee members, but their input is valuable in helping CTE teachers integrate academic thinking.

The challenge to working with an advisory committee is asking the right questions to create productive conversations and yield information teachers can use in instruction. In many cases, CTE teachers may avoid conversations on academic integration, or if they do, the questions are too general or too detailed. Questions need to be specific and relatable to the employers’ experiences.

For example, asking, “Should CTE students have mathematics?” is a broad statement. Probably every committee member will respond yes, but that doesn’t give the teacher many directions on what to do instructionally. Do they need to give up technical time for students to take more math courses? Do they create math problems and tests? Definitely not! At the other extreme, giving employers a list of the dozens of required high school math standards is overwhelming and uncomfortable to employers. This is too much detail and too much education jargon and is very distant from the work employers are doing.

A better source of questions for this mathematics example is to use some of the Mathematical Practices from the Common Core Standards that define the broad concepts of Mathematics. For example, starting with the practice of “Attend to precision in measurement,” ask employers to explain situations where determining the correct precision is essential in their field. Consider starting with these broad mathematical concepts and ask employers to identify the importance in their work. Another set of conceptual statements is the Science and Engineering Practices. Consider how employers could provide instructional suggestions when you ask about work tasks that require What examples of the need to “Ask questions and define problems” or What ways workers “Analyze and Interpret data are. Questions like these will more likely lead to ideas to help CTE teachers apply mathematics and science in CTE instruction. These thinking processes will help make students more successful and are part of the process of connecting traditional academic content and CTE programs.

The following are several conceptual-level standards that can be excellent prompts for questions for CTE Advisory Committees when thinking about academic integration strategies. Start each phrase with, Share examples in your business where effective workers must……..?

• Ask questions and define problems
• Plan and carry out investigations
• Analyze and interpret data
• Attend to precision in measurement.
• Use mathematics and computational thinking
• Utilize critical thinking to make sense of problems
• Solve problems mathematically
• Reason abstractly and quantitatively.
• Construct explanations and design solutions
• Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others.
• Observe and describe patterns
• Communicate clearly and effectively and with reason.
• Demonstrate creativity and innovation.
• Use technology and digital media strategically and capably.

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.