Dick Jones

Navigating the Challenge of Critical Thinking

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

Sample Rubric – Changing Thinking to Observable Behavior

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.

Sparking Deeper Thinking in CTE Classrooms with Generative AI

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.

CTE and Academic Integration: Where and When

My work in writing and editing the book Synergizing Success: Academic and Career Integration for CTE reinforced the importance of academic and CTE collaboration. This type of instructional integration creates more engaging student learning and better prepares the students for a changing technological world. This all sounds nice, but it feels like extra work for teachers. Further, where and when is there a time during school instruction for this “extra” integration? This blog describes the points where and when integration fits in teaching and can be inserted in small steps. This description will assist teachers in reflecting on and adapting their teaching and learning for student benefit. These steps are how to integrate academics and CTE.

An academic integration framework begins by clarifying the process of teaching, and a simple framework for teaching and learning for any subject is represented in the following model. Successful learning is a cycle of defining WHAT, HOW, HOW WELL, and HOW IMPROVE. These functions are defined as Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment, and Revision. This could be considered a cyclical process. However, it is more complex because the Curriculum should define Assessment and sometimes vice versa, as in the case of industry certifications. Also, the Revision modifies all three.

Integration Teaching Components

The potential individual integration tasks within teaching and learning can be defined in the following seven components.

Discover Common Ground
- Identify potential student projects directly related to the skills and concepts overlapping both academic knowledge and technical skills.
Design Performance Learning
- Define student performances that will provide evidence of acquiring technical skills and applying academic knowledge.
- Develop shared instructional principles that allow students to extend their content knowledge while strengthening critical thinking and technical skills.
Align Standards
- Ensure that the instruction aligns with both academic standards and industry-specific technical standards. This can be achieved by mapping course objectives to relevant state and national standards.
Facilitate Student Learning
- Utilize the Backward Design framework, which facilitates student activities and prepares students for academic assessments and real-world technical applications.
- Support students in acquiring any foundation knowledge and skills that will enable the completion of performance tasks.
- Encourage students to exercise sound reasoning and analytical thinking by engaging them in tasks that require judgment and explanation based on evidence.
- Design job tasks that involve identifying problems, analyzing data, and developing solutions, thereby fostering critical thinking in real-world contexts.
Use Authentic Assessments
- Develop formative assessments that measure students’ progress towards these integrated outcomes.
- Develop summative assessments that demonstrate competency in expected technical skills and application of academic performance.
- Implement both formative assessments to monitor ongoing progress and summative assessments for accountability. These should be designed to evaluate both academic understanding and technical proficiency.
Track Student Progress
- Establish systems for providing frequent and meaningful feedback to students, helping them understand their progress in both academic and technical domains.
- Develop tools for presenting acquired skills and levels of proficiency to employers and further education.
Adapt and Improve
- Collect feedback from students, educators, and industry partners to refine the instructional framework continuously.
- Allow for adaptation of integrated instruction to meet students’ diverse needs and the workforce’s evolving demands.

Summary

The multiple components describe the small steps teachers can take to integrate academic and CTE integration over time. Generative AI is an additional tool for teachers to revise Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment, and Revision. I have been developing prompts to use in identified ways integrate and shared these on the NYS Trade and Technical Teachers Association website.

Small Steps Moving Toward Big Collaboration

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.

Deeper Student Learning Using CTE Advisory Committees

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.

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.

Current CTE Writing Project

I am excited about my current writing project in CTE. ACTE has agreed to publish a book on Models of Academic Integration in CTE.

This book is needed because the integration of connecting academic concepts in Career and Technical Education (CTE) programs is losing momentum. There was a burst of activity when Common Core was introduced in many states a decade ago; however, the politics of common core dwarfed the significance of this effort. Now, most states have settled in with their own version of academic standards, even though much of this work is duplicated in CTE standards. The July 1, 2019, introduction of Perkins V CTE legislation stressed the importance of academic standards. While connecting CTE students’ accountability included academic achievement, most students will meet these benchmarks with little effort from CTE instructors. CTE Academic integration is not just important because it is established in regulation; it is important for student success. The message from industry leaders is clear that they desire employees with technical expertise and professional skills such as critical thinking, analytical skills, problem-solving, and communication (writing and speaking). CTE must continue to embed these skills in CTE projects and student work.

In public forums, many question “college for all” goals for student achievement. This is an opportunity for the growth of CTE, not as an alternative to academic college prep but as a joint venture to develop student ability to apply cognitive skills and knowledge in real-world CTE projects. Many successful models build connections with academic subjects, such as career academies, team teaching, and high-level CTE courses. No single model will serve every school setting. There is a need for a comprehensive reference for school and CTE leaders to display the various models for CTE integration.

This publication will describe why CTE Academic integration is essential and existing models for connecting CTE and Academics. It will offer case studies as suggestions for school leaders to implement academic integration in their school setting. The target audience for this publication is school administrators and Career and Technical Education Leaders. CTE directors, high school principals, and district curriculum and instruction leaders can better support CTE instruction by understanding the many options and models for connecting academic concepts with CTE instruction.

We are partnering with several education practitioners familiar with each model to share their perspectives, experience, and suggestions for administrators to support each model successfully.

If you would like to learn more or have suggestions on content for this publication, don’t hesitate to contact me. The goal is to have this complete by the end of the year,

Finding Ways for Both Career/Tech and Academics

I am currently working on a national project to explore ways to expand the integration of academic standards and instruction with Career and Technical instruction. Academic subjects of Math, Science, English, and Social Studies are separate subjects with separately certified teachers. CTE as well exists as separate subjects with unique teacher certifications. In state regulation, these are separate parts of secondary schools possessing their own curriculum. In practice, there is often instructional overlap. For example, as math teachers seek context for using geometry, they assign students technical problems or when Automotive teachers stress measuring with precision. Yet, states set graduation requirements based on earning credit in separate subjects. There are no graduation requirements for simply identifying problems, researching knowledge, and applying skills to design and implement solutions. This tradition of defining learning and teaching in specialties conveys a message that school and particularly academic courses, are not relevant to the real world.

Most educators believe there is a benefit in students acquiring foundation knowledge and engaging in real-world projects that develop technical skills and apply academic knowledge. The challenge is finding room for both in the time-based schools. Policy decisions often come down to either/or. For example, is it more important for a student to take that fourth credit of science or spend time learning graphic design skills in which a student shows interest and talent? Changing the status quo is also problematic, as no superintendent or politician wants to shift the balance of currently employed teachers.

I recall my own experience in high school experience many years ago with this either/or choice. I attended a small rural high school with a liberal arts university in the town. The population included many farm and rural students and the children of college faculty with expectations of attending college after high school. I took the most advanced academic subjects in high school, but as a “farm kid,” I also took agriculture courses. My career goal at the time was college and veterinary work so my course choice for both made sense. As I approached my senior year in high school, schedule conflicts did not allow me to enroll in Physics and the 4th-level course in Agriculture. Rather than having to choose, my teachers and the Principal found a creative solution. I was enrolled in both simultaneously. Each day, I decided which class to attend based on the work, making sure to take each graded test. I relied on friends and my brother who was in the agriculture class, to keep up with the content. I passed both courses and earned two credits from one class period. I am sure the school violated state regulations because I did not attend the total number of hours to earn the credits. However, this creative solution worked for me, and educators were willing to break the rules.

There are many different models of academic integration that can enable students to acquire academic knowledge and technical skills. Integration can take many form, such as co-teaching, parallel courses, consulting teachers, and newly combined courses. State policy need to encourage more local creative solutions for students to acquire both, meet student needs, and not be forced to choose. This may mean changing current regulations and traditions.

The committee I am on is attempting to raise awareness of needs and offer ideas and support to make academic courses more relevant and Career and Technical courses rigorous in applying knowledge. Contact me if you are interested in learning more about this work on Academic CTE Integration.