Critical Professional Development: A Necessary Risk?

Abstract

Amy Yarborough, a veteran teacher and curriculum resource leader in a rural district in Virginia, facilitates a professional learning community focused on social justice and equity-oriented instructional practices. When allegations of teaching critical race theory are reported via the state’s email tip line and community social media groups, Amy is asked to present her professional learning community materials to the local school board. In the midst of stakeholder protests and media scrutiny, Amy must decide how to explain her professional decisions. Current and future educational leaders interested in issues related to race and equity will consider the roles of policy and the public in influencing teachers’ lessons.

Keywords

social justice critical pedagogy critical race theory professional learning community policy

Currently, teachers and school leaders around the United States are navigating new policies related to the teaching of critical race theory (CRT) in schools. These anticritical policies may take the form of state law passed through the general assembly (e.g., North Dakota [H.R. Rep. No. 1508, 2021], Oklahoma [H.B. 1775 §§ 24-15, 2021], South Carolina [General Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Ratified Version, 2021]) or via state school board statutes (e.g., Florida [Required Instruction Planning and Reporting, 2021], Alabama (The Alabama State Board of Education, 2021), Utah [Educational Equity in School, 2021]). This case uses the term policy to include laws, statutes, rules, and policies.

Sometimes, CRT is specifically prohibited in anticritical policies (e.g., Idaho (H.R. Rep. No. 377, 2021], North Dakota (H.R. Rep. No.1508, 2021]). CRT is “a movement that gradually emerged in the 1980’s following the wake of failed civil rights gains to illuminate the endemic nature of racism in the United States legal system” (Gottesman, 2016, p. 117). Early CRT scholars (e.g., Bell, 1992; Crenshaw, 1991) worked to highlight and explore how current legal frameworks (such as liberal theory of individual rights) could not address the pervasiveness of racial power in outcomes. In other words, why was the expansion of individual civil liberties not producing better social or legal outcomes for people of color? CRT scholars would argue this was the case because the legislation was not addressing the ways in which the social construction of race and racism mattered within these systems.

CRT is not a monolithic doctrine but rather a theoretical framework that has evolved over time and been applied in various scholarly fields. In the 1990s, scholars such as Ladson-Billings and Tate (1995) introduced CRT into the academic field of education to understand issues of systemic racism in curriculum, teaching practices and educational institutions. Although there are some conceptual differences between prominent CRT scholars in education (Gottesman, 2016), all CRT scholarship rests on the axiom that race is not biological but a social construction that creates and maintains oppression through legal, economic, and other social systems. Key tenets that are often utilized by CRT scholars in education include racial realism (Bell, 1992), interest convergence (Bell, 1980), intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1991), counter narratives/storytelling and the unique perspective of people of color (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). Since its introduction into the field of education, the application of CRT within education has been neither monolithic in the academy (Gottesman, 2016) nor pervasive within K-12 schools (Cornish et al., 2021).

Currently, while the policies may not always specifically name CRT, they prohibit ideas related to anti-racist and abolitionist teaching (Love, 2019), critical pedagogy (Freire, 1970/2000), multicultural education (Banks, 2009), culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2002), or another concept within educational practice that seeks to address inequity (see Teaching Notes). And frequently, they reinforce misunderstandings or nefarious and false applications of them (Gallagher et al., 2021; Gross, 2021). Antiracist and abolitionist teaching, critical pedagogy, multicultural education, and culturally responsive teaching are all related but unique constructs within scholarship and educational practice.

Importantly, critical pedagogy and multicultural education originally developed completely independent of CRT frameworks (Gottesman, 2016). However, policies are muddying the frameworks, and this approach can be costly for school districts. For example, states may withhold funding [e.g., Alabama (The Alabama State Board of Education, 2021), South Carolina (General Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Ratified Version, 2021)] or fine districts [e.g., Tennessee (Prohibited Concepts in Instruction, 2021)].

It is likely that nearly all teachers, educational leaders, and students will be impacted by these anticritical policies soon because over 40 states either have anticritical legislation or are considering such policies (Schwartz, 2022). Therefore, teachers and educational leaders must decide how, if, and when to engage in teaching and learning that challenges systemic inequities and meets the need for education that is equitable and socially just.

Purpose

The purpose of this case is to foster a discussion around the affordances and constraints of engaging in critically oriented teaching in light of anticritical and anti-CRT policies. These policies contain language that educational leaders may find challenging to interpret, and they are in direct opposition to the core principles many educational leaders aspire to align their professional practices. For example, the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (National Policy Board for Educational Administration [NPBEA], 2015) has more than 10 substandards directly related to equity and/or social justice. State-level professional standards for educational leaders and classroom teachers typically have a diversity component. In addition, teacher educators who train educational leaders and classroom teachers are guided by national standards that align with social justice tenets (Association of Teacher Educators, 2008). Stakeholders at all levels are aligning professional practice with equitable, socially just philosophies, and they are required to make decisions about how to engage in that work within the current context of policies that appear to prohibit it.

The threat of anticritical policies is also at the national level. In the fall of 2020, former President Trump authorized Executive Order 13950 (2020), which prohibited using federal funds to support divisive concepts or training, such as “assigning fault, blame, or bias to a race or sex . . . by virtue of his or her race or sex, members of any race are inherently racist or are inherently included to oppress others.” While this executive order is no longer in effect, its language is embedded into all existing and proposed anticritical policies. In addition, the Stop CRT Act was introduced to the United States Congress in May 2021 (Stop CRT Act, 2021–2022). Even though neither of these federal policies is currently in place, they reflect the national tensions around curriculum that challenge systemic racism or construct an authentic view of the United States as operating with a set of systems that are inherently biased.

Tensions around anticritical teaching make operating within healthy communities of practice challenging. In a community of practice, participants of all experiences and knowledge levels operate together to engage in shared work (Lave & Wenger, 1991). However, ideological divisions about equity and social justice have fostered hostile education environments in which all stakeholders may be at odds with one another. Misunderstandings or misapplications of the critical teaching concepts are exacerbating these tensions causing stakeholders to lack common understandings from which to build dialogue and deeper understanding. In this hypothetical case study, readers will consider how one curriculum resource leader (CRL) faces opposition from parents and the school board when she facilitates an ongoing professional learning community (PLC) focused on equity and social justice. This conflict reflects the experiences of many educators around the United States in this tense climate of anticritical policies (e.g., Barbaro, 2021; Bernstein, 2021).

Teaching Case Narrative

Pike County

Pike County is a small, rural, and mountainous county located in the southwest region of Virginia. Starting as a coal-mining community, Pike County has grown into a tight-knit community with regular community events, such as the annual county fair. Visitors enjoy hiking, fishing, parks, and scenic drives. There are approximately 15,000 people across 6,000 households, and the median household income is approximately $30,000. Sixty percent of the population are aged 18 to 64, and only 10% of individuals have completed a Bachelor’s degree or higher. There are four Title One schools: two elementary schools, one middle school, and one high school. The demographics of the student population in the schools mirror the county: approximately 98% White, 1% Hispanic or Latino, 0.5% Black, 0.3% American Indian and Alaska Native, and 0.2% Asian descent.

The mission of the school district is to provide a safe environment for students and to support academic and social growth within a diverse society. The school board and administration promote this mission through two main priorities. First, they emphasize the importance of hiring highly trained leaders to support teachers (e.g., CRL). Second, the school board supports funding to promote and provide professional learning opportunities, which leaders across the district help to organize and implement. All staff are expected to complete the state-mandated cultural competency training that is a requirement for licensure (Teachers and Other Licensed School Board Employees (TOLSBE), 2019, 2021]. Furthermore, all staff are evaluated on their cultural competency via their annual evaluation metrics. Many of the teachers and staff across the school district are originally from Pike County or neighboring counties, and there is fairly consistent participation by parents during PTA meetings and school events. Communication between teachers and parents is high, and parents generally support decisions made by administration and school leaders.

Prioritizing Social Justice

Amy Yarborough, a White, cis-gender woman, is a CRL who lives and works in Pike County, Virginia. Amy taught in intermediate grades 4 to 6 for 10 years, and she is currently in her fifth year as a CRL who supports the two elementary schools in her district. Over her career, Amy continually pursues professional development. She earned a K-12 reading specialist license early in her career. Recently, Amy completed an Educational Specialist (EdS) degree at a large, regional university. Amy is warmly received by her administrators and colleagues and has strong personal and professional relationships with them. In her role as CRL, she has occasionally had professional disagreements with her colleagues, but all issues were speedily resolved with no lingering animosity. In addition, Amy has a strong support system in place via her network of EdS cohort members; they stay in touch via a social media group and the occasional virtual coffee meeting.

Through her EdS program, Amy learned about equity and social justice in education. In particular, she was drawn to the work of Freire (1970/2000) and the notion that learning should be action-oriented toward both illuminating and removing social inequities. Now, Amy is committed to enacting this critical pedagogy (e.g., challenging the status quo, supporting equitable distribution of representation and agency). However, she is also aware of community tensions related to teaching about issues that could be considered CRT. Her local newspaper featured a story on the dangers of CRT in schools, and the issue of teaching about race and social justice seems to be regularly surfacing in conversations. Moreover, she has seen students of color experience racism in her assigned schools. Yet, when Amy talks to teachers about these experiences, not everyone can identify the problems, and there are few solutions generated for how to stop these experiences. Also, she has noticed that with the rise of CRT commentary in the media, some teachers she supports have expressed interest in learning more. Thus, Amy has set a goal to prioritize the equity and culturally responsive aspects of the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (NPBEA, 2015).

PLC

Amy has facilitated a topic-oriented PLC each year and invites teachers at her elementary schools to participate. The PLC meets virtually twice a month after school for an hour. Given Amy’s professional goal to focus on student-centered, equity-oriented instruction and the interest of some teachers at both schools, she decided to focus this year’s PLC on supporting teachers with learning more about cultural competency. This focus will satisfy Virginia’s requirement for cultural competency training (TOLSBE, 2019, 2021). Amy decided to help teachers implement Learning for Justice Standards (Learning for Justice, 2018a), inclusive standards designed to help teachers ensure equitable teaching, in their classrooms as a way to develop cultural competency via instruction. In the first session, Amy followed the Facilitator Guide (Learning for Justice, 2018b) and asked the group to share their commitments. Every participant committed to teaching one lesson that prioritized social justice and integrated their chosen discipline, with ideas ranging from history lessons on Black history to interactive read alouds that centered on experiences with racism. With enthusiasm, the teachers all agreed to develop and teach their lessons before their next meeting.

On the morning of the next PLC meeting, Amy waits for Mr. Jones, one of her administrators, in the school conference room. Each week they have a check-in meeting to discuss how Amy’s teacher supports are aligning with the school improvement plan and to discuss any emerging issues. Mr. Jones, typically prompt, comes in a few minutes late and offers a terse greeting. Amy quickly dismisses this, greets Mr. Jones amicably, and shares their brief agenda for the day. He quickly reviews it, sets it to the side, and explains that they have a more pressing issue to discuss: there has been a report of divisive teaching at their school. A parent has reported a complaint through Virginia’s email tip line that a fourth grade teacher taught a lesson on CRT the previous school day. Mr. Jones has been asked by a school board representative to investigate the issue and report back his findings.

Amy is perplexed. She has read about the email tip line in the local news, and her EdS cohort social media group has been speculating about ramifications in schools. Yet, Amy finds it hard to believe that any of the teachers she supports would teach a lesson on CRT, so she asks to see a copy of the tip. The complaint reads:

My son was traumatized when Ms. Smith told him that white people erased black people from history books. He wanted to know how he could erase someone else, and he was freaked out that he would make black people disappear. Ms. Smith and her liberal agenda need to go!

Amy instantly realizes that this report is referring to one of the lessons planned by a teacher in her PLC. Ms. Smith planned to lead a read aloud using Carter Reads the Newspaper (Hopkinson, 2019), a biographical picture book about the founder of Black History Month. Amy relaxes and tells Mr. Jones, “I know what this is about! I think there’s been a misunderstanding. This really shouldn’t be a big deal. Ms. Smith planned a read aloud to help students learn about Black History Month and its founder, Carter Woodson.” Mr. Jones replied, “Not a big deal? Please look at this and tell me if you still think it’s not a big deal.” He slid over a printed stack of social media posts from the PTA Facebook group. There were over 50 comments, and nearly all were angry and calling for responses ranging from banning books to homeschooling their children to firing Ms. Smith. Amy was dumbfounded as she reread the comments and complaint.

Amy responds, “Mr. Jones, I’m sure that Ms. Smith’s lesson was appropriate for her students. She was working on her cultural competency goals by teaching her read aloud lesson yesterday. Surely, we can explain to everyone this is part of her PLC work, and she’s not doing anything wrong.”

To Ms. Smith, this had been a lesson about poverty, race, and equity, not a lesson on radical indoctrination via CRT, as the responses indicated. Amy looks expectantly at Mr. Jones and waits for the professional reassurance to which she is accustomed. Instead, he just shrugs and says they should probably move on with the rest of her agenda.

The School Board

Over the next few days, Amy keeps thinking about the important work of the PLC and how it will help students and teachers in her rural community learn about the need for social justice and how to implement those precepts into required standards. She repeatedly tells herself, “It’s what we’re supposed to be doing!” She shared her situation in her EdS group. One colleague told her, “You’re being responsible by using established supports through Learning for Justice. You’re doing everything right.” Still, Amy wondered if that was true. She kept asking herself, “Why didn’t Mr. Jones respond when I told him the lesson was a product of the PLC?”

Still, Amy continues with her work supporting teachers at both elementary schools. Her PLC members reported success with their first lesson, and they had all agreed to try to plan another one. Their conversations generated meaningful dialogue about how their lessons were making traditionally marginalized perspectives and voices more present in the curriculum. Even with the lingering effects of her tense meeting with Mr. Jones, Amy is excited about the social justice work that is taking place in her district and tries to focus on her feelings of success.

At the following weekly check-in with Mr. Jones, Amy arrives promptly and is surprised to find Dr. Ackerman, the district superintendent, also present. Amy quickly glances at Mr. Jones, but he gives her no indication what this is about. After quick greetings, Dr. Ackerman explains that over the past week, there have been numerous tip line reports of CRT being taught in Pike County Schools and a concerning amount of coverage among local social media groups. Dr. Ackerman continues and looks directly at Amy, “After reviewing the reports and talking with teachers, it has become clear that all of the tips are stemming from teachers who are participating in a PLC that Ms. Yarborough is leading.” Amy feels stunned, and her emotions are quickly swinging from angry to anxious. Before she can respond, Dr. Ackerman continues,

“Due to the escalating and public nature of this case, the school board has called a special session on CRT. The members are asking that Ms. Yarborough provide a packet with all of her PLC materials to the school board by the end of the business day.”

The superintendent continued that Amy should be expected to present her materials and explain their use at the special meeting the following week.

A few days later, Amy found herself shaking her head in disbelief as she mentally walked through her talking points and materials while waiting for her meeting with the school board. It had been an emotional journey to prepare for the meeting; at times, Amy had even been crying and considering leaving education all together. “Is this worth it?,” she asked herself. She dedicated so much time and energy into supporting the students and teachers in her community, yet she was facing public scrutiny (i.e., social media posts, facing the school board, local news coverage) for engaging in work she believed was expected via the cultural competency requirement and was paramount to providing meaningful instruction.

Arriving early was part of Amy’s strategy to remain focused on her main goal of helping the school board understand that the PLC was focused on social justice and equity, both important components of meaningful education represented in the Learning for Justice Standards (Learning for Justice, 2018a). Amy valued the community of practice and the way that members learned from and with one another. The PLC was the lifeline for developing critical pedagogy in Pike County. Amy was fully committed to her community of teachers and their work on social justice and equity. “It’s not dangerous; it’s good teaching!” was the mantra Amy was repeating to herself as she entered the multipurpose building where the school board met. There, Amy walked into a frenzy of parents and community members holding signs protesting CRT and social justice in schools. In her distress, the message from one sign stood out—Social Justice Isn’t Justice! As she was trying to take it all in, a reporter jumped in front of her and asked, “Ms. Yarborough, how do you plan to defend your anti-American actions in front of the school board tonight?”

Anticritical and Anti-CRT Legislation

Anti-CRT and anticritical legislation has been an increasingly heated topic among politicians, lawmakers, public school administration and staff, and the general public across the country. Virginia is no exception. In 2019, Virginia’s state superintendent of public instruction published a memo (Lane, 2019) focused on providing resources for teachers to consider as they engage their students in discussions surrounding racism, equity, and social justice. In November, 2021, there was a rising diverse response to CRT across the state, and many school board meetings became heated. The state superintendent published an addendum to his memo clarifying that there was no requirement to teach CRT or to use the resources he suggested. In January 2022, the newly elected governor of Virginia issued an executive order banning the teaching of CRT and divisive concepts in the classroom and HB787 was introduced (Public Elementary or Secondary School Student, 2022), proposing it to be unlawful to teach or conduct professional development on divisive concepts in public schools. While the future of this bill is not determined as of yet, this process is representative of what is happening in the majority of the states around the country.

Teaching Notes

With CRT at the forefront of conversation with the public, media, and lawmakers, educators like Amy may find themselves being asked to explain their critically oriented education practices within the context of the legal theory of CRT. This is a challenging task, especially when CRT is misunderstood by many in the public and media. Without a solid understanding of CRT and critical pedagogy, along with the support of administrators and the school board, educators may feel unprepared to address allegations of teaching CRT.

Participation in PLCs is one way educators can enact shared inquiry and reflective practice within a supportive group (see Stoll et al., 2006). Moreover, school leaders play a vital role in supporting teachers within their PLCs (see Stoll et al., 2006). However, when educators receive confusing and conflicting directives about CRT, or any issue, what should be an invigorating, collaborative practice may result in confusion, tension, and consequences for teachers and districts.

Educators who have been trained in critical pedagogy and/or teach through this lens are likely to design lessons that ask students to question systemic issues such as racial, gender, and economic inequities. Lessons related to equity and social justice have been abundant in research and practice for decades. For example, frank conversations with students about race have been used to support lessons on civics (e.g., Yoon, 2020), writing (e.g., Dyson, 1997), and reading comprehension (e.g., Wiseman, 2011). Even if the teacher is not purposefully teaching a lesson on CRT principles, they may be accused of teaching CRT.

Defining Additional Critically Oriented Concepts

The concepts below are presented in the order of how the ideas developed within the field of education. Each critically oriented concept contains components that are related to but distinct from CRT.

Critical Pedagogy

Freire (1970/2000) challenged the notion that learners are repositories for knowledge deposited through top-down experiences and emphasized the importance of learning as knowledge construction that can aid in individual and collective liberation.

Multicultural Education

Banks (2009) explains that multicultural education addresses how teachers incorporate different cultures into their content and consider diverse perspectives and equity from a social justice lens, both in their classrooms and school communities.

Culturally Responsive Teaching

Gay (2002) presents culturally responsive teaching and a way of teaching students through their strengths, cultures, and lived experiences. Such teaching may result in the need to face historically controversial issues head on in classrooms, as well as calling students to social action.

Antiracist and Abolitionist Teaching

Love (2019) extended ideas about culturally responsive teaching to a systemic reimagining about what education for freedom would look like for Black and Brown children.

In the following discussion questions and extension activities, readers are asked to analyze Amy’s complex case, situate themselves within this context, and consider how they can best prepare for potential criticisms of their own critical practices.

Discussion Questions

In your opinion, what should happen during the school board meeting? Which stakeholder(s) should decide the outcome?

Is it ethical to facilitate a PLC on an issue that is politically-charged and contentious? Why or why not?

When Amy was confronted by the superintendent, a main source that Dr. Ackerman provided was social media posts. What should be the role of social media when conducting inquiry into educators’ instructional decisions? How can being scrutinized on social media impact a teacher in the short-term and long-term?

Amy was upset and stressed after being confronted with the allegations of CRT. How did Amy utilize her EdS cohort for emotional support? What constructs should teachers have in place to provide emotional support during stressful times? What can school leaders do to help teachers develop these networks?

Facilitating professional development is the norm for educational leaders, yet as in this case, unanticipated outcomes can occur. How can educational leaders be proactive in tense social and political climates? What could you do in your educational setting to be proactive regarding your own professional development activities?

Put yourself in Amy’s position. Consider your school environment, relationship with administration, school board, and district/state policies. Would you have facilitated Amy’s PLC focused on social justice? Why or why not? How would you have responded to the anti-American allegations aimed at Amy?

Extension Activities

Anticritical and anti-CRT policies are widespread in the United States. Read the related ratified and proposed policies in your state, state school board, and local school board. What acts are prohibited by classroom teachers? What acts are prohibited by educational leaders? What are the consequences for violating the policies? What is your position on the educational value of anticritical and anti-CRT policies?

The role of the school board was powerful in Amy’s case; it was the final governing body of educational decisions in Pike County. Research how school boards are formed and the role of school boards in local schools. Define the roles and responsibilities of school boards and discuss them in relation to the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (NPBEA, 2015).

Engage in reflection focused on your personal and professional connections to critical pedagogy. Develop or enhance your educational philosophy statement to include your position statement, what critical lessons look like in your classroom, and how critical lessons can impact students’ knowledge and experiences.

Initiate conversations with your school and/or county administrators surrounding critical pedagogy and critical lessons. What supports are in place for educators and educational leaders? Who is knowledgeable about critical pedagogy and current legislation/policies and can serve as champions for educators and educational leaders who want to engage in critical work?

Read Gallagher et al. (2021) “Navigating Contentious Times in Rural Education [Introduction to Special Issue] (Full citation in reference list).” Do you agree that educators should work to “close” the controversy surrounding CRT in education? Why or why not?

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Amanda Monroe for her work as a graduate assistant on this manuscript.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Melissa Wrenn

Author Biographies

Melissa Wrenn, PhD, NBCT, is an assistant professor of elementary education at East Carolina University. Her research interests include classroom discourse, disciplinary literacy, and teacher education.

Kristen Gregory, PhD, is an assistant professor of elementary education at East Carolina University. Her research interests include professional development, disciplinary literacy, and teacher education.

Jennifer Gallagher, PhD, is an assistant professor of social studies education at East Carolina University. Her research interests include social justice education, inquiry-centered education and teacher education.

References

An Act, 70 OK H.B. 1775 §§ 24-15 (2021). http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20ENR/hB/HB1775%20ENR.PDF

The Alabama State Board of Education. (2021, August 12). Alabama state board of education resolution declaring the preservation of intellectual freedom and non-discrimination in Alabama public schools. https://www.alabamaachieves.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ALSBOE-Resolution-Declaring-the-Preservation-of-Intellectual-Freedom-and-Non-Discrimination-in-AL-Public-Schools.pdf

Association of Teacher Educators. (2008). Standards for teacher educators. https://ate1.org/standards-for-teacher-educators

Banks

J. A.

(2009). Multicultural education: Dimensions and paradigms. In Banks

J. A.

(Ed.), The Routledge international companion to multicultural education (pp. 9–32). Routledge.

Barbaro

(Host). (2021, November 16). The school board wars, part 1. [Audio podcast]. The New York Times: The Daily. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/16/podcasts/the-daily/school-boards-mask-mandates-crt-bucks-county.html

Bell

D. A.

(1980). Brown v. Board of Education and the interest-convergence dilemma. Harvard Law Review, 93(3), 518–533.

Bell

D. A.

(1992). Faces at the bottom of the well: The permanence of racism. Basic Books.

Bernstein

(2021, June 23). Protests erupt over teaching of critical race theory in schools. ABC4 News. https://abcnews4.com/news/nation-world/protests-erupt-over-teaching-of-critical-race-theory-in-schools

Cornish

Sirianni

Jarenwattananon

(2021, June 22). Academic who brought critical race theory to education says bills are misguided. In All Things Considered. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2021/06/22/1009182206/academic-who-brought-critical-race-theory-to-education-says-bills-are-misguided

10.

Crenshaw

(1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

11.

Delgado

Stefancic

(2017). Critical race theory: An introduction (3rd ed.). New York University Press.

12.

Dyson

A. H.

(1997). Writing superheroes: Contemporary childhood, popular culture, and classroom literacy. Teachers College Press.

13.

Educational Equity in School (Utah Admin. §§ 277-328-1 — 277-328-5). (2021). https://www.schools.utah.gov/file/f5573ff7-928f-4f1a-a0a2-982d811c9b05

14.

Executive Order. No. 13950 (3 C.F.R. 60683–60689) (2020). https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/FR-2020-09-28/2020-21534

15.

Freire

(2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Bloomsbury Publishing. (Original work published 1970)

16.

Gallagher

Blaisdell

Howard

Avent Harris

(2021). Navigating contentious times in rural education. Theory & Practice in Rural Education, 11(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3776/tpre.2021.v11n2p1-14

17.

Gay

(2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102053002003

18.

General Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Ratified Version (SC A.B. H.4100 § 1—H630). (2021). https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess124_2021-2022/appropriations2021/tap1b.htm

19.

Gottesman

(2016). The critical turn in education: From Marxist critique to poststructuralist feminism to critical theories of race. Routledge.

20.

Gross

(Host). (2021, June 24). Uncovering who is driving the fight against critical race theory in schools. Fresh Air. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2021/06/24/1009839021/uncovering-who-is-driving-the-fight-against-critical-race-theory-in-schools

21.

ID H.R. Rep. No. 377 (2021). https://legislature.idaho.gov/sessioninfo/billbookmark/?yr=2021&bn=H0377

22.

Ladson-Billings

Tate

W. F.

(1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97(1), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146819509700104

23.

Lane

(2019, February 22). Superintendent’s Memo #050-19: Resources to support student and community dialogues on racism [Letter to Division Superintendents]. https://wtop.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Superintendents-Memo-050-19.pdf

24.

Lave

Wenger

(1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

25.

Learning for Justice. (2018a). Social justice standards. Teaching Tolerance. https://www.learningforjustice.org/sites/default/files/2020-09/TT-Social-Justice-Standards-Anti-bias-framework-2020.pdf

26.

Learning for Justice. (2018b). The teaching tolerance social justice standards: A professional development facilitator guide. https://www.learningforjustice.org/sites/default/files/2021-10/LFJ-Facilitator-Guide-Social-Justice-Standards-Oct-2021-10052021.pdf

27.

Love

B. L.

(2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Beacon Press.

28.

National Policy Board for Educational Administration. (2015). Professional standards for educational leaders 2015. http://www.nysed.gov/common/nysed/files/professional-standards-for-educational-leaders_2015.pdf

29.

ND H.R. Rep. No.1508 (2021). https://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/67-2021/special-session/documents/21-1078-02000.pdf

30.

Prohibited Concepts in Instruction (Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 49-1-201, 49-6-1019). (2021). https://publications.tnsosfiles.com/rules_filings/11-08-21.pdf

31.

Public Elementary or Secondary School Student (VA H.B. 787) (2022). https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?ses=221&typ=bil&val=hb787

32.

Required Instruction Planning and Reporting (Florida Rule 6A-1.094124). (2021). https://www.flrules.org/gateway/ruleno.asp?id=6A-1.094124

33.

Schwartz

(2022, March 1). Map: Where critical race theory is under attack. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/map-where-critical-race-theory-is-under-attack/2021/06

34.

Stoll

Bolam

McMahon

Wallace

Thomas

(2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), 221–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-006-0001-8

35.

Stop CRT Act (117th Congress. H.R. 3179). (2021–2022). https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3179?r=85&s=1

36.

Teachers and Other Licensed School Board Employees; Cultural Competency (VA S.B. 1196). (2019). https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?211+sum+SB1196

37.

Teachers and Other Licensed School Board Employees; Cultural Competency (VA H.B. 1904) (2021). https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?211+sum+HB1904

38.

Wiseman

(2011). Interactive read alouds: Teachers and students constructing knowledge and literacy together. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38, 431–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-010-0426-9

39.

Yoon

H. S.

(2020). Critically literate citizenship: Moments and movements in second grade. Journal of Literacy Research, 52(3), 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X2093955

40.

Hopkinson

(2019). Carter reads the newspaper. Peachtree Publishing Company.