Critical Theory in Education – Clarity of Purpose Is Progressives’ One Virtue

by James C. Sherlock

Did you read the over 100 comments beneath The Left Is Lying: CRT Is Peddling Hate in Our Schools earlier today in this space?

Quite a dogfight.

Do you notice how the left tries to pretend that applied critical theory in education, which incorporates CRT but is about much more, is about only the teaching of history?

The organizing principle, dogma really, of the critical theorists creating Virginia educational policy at VDOE is that American society is oppressive and must be dismantled through the K-12 public schools.

That is one reason why those same policies deny the exercise by parents of their roles, obligations and rights at every turn. Parents form the very American society that the left wants to dismantle.

We should stop the diversions and deal with what the left writes clearly that it is attempting.
I will quote below from Critical Theory and Education by Tabitha Dell’Angelo.

Tabitha Dell’Angelo is an Associate Professor and Coordinator of the Urban Education Master’s Program at The College of New Jersey. Her research interests include social justice in education, cultural identity development, stress tolerance, and coping strategies for teachers.  

So I will jump to the conclusion that she is a fan of that of which she writes.

“In the application of Critical Theory proper, offshoots have been born that seek to shed light on how various aspects of culture function. In that regard, there are various “cross-pollinations” between critical theory and other theoretical arenas. These include education and pedagogy, contemporary feminism, and critical race theory, among others.

In this section, we will offer an explanation of some of these areas and how they fit into the larger tradition of Critical Theory more generally.

Each of these theories is legitimately linked to Marx’s original conception of Critical Theory as they each seek to analyze and create change within various aspects of culture where oppression exists. In terms of Critical Theory in Education, Marx would evaluate the ways in which education, curriculum, and classroom interactions are socially constructed and to what degree these interactions are based on what the participants truly believe is right. Though much of his philosophy is tinged with a kind of determinism, an idea that societal structure can define and limit human thought, a central tenant of Critical Theory, is the belief that change is possible, no matter how great the obstacles to that change.

As Paulo Freire (1970) spells out in Pedagogy of the Oppressed 

“if the examination of oppression is conducted without hope for change, it is a sterile enterprise, inculcating hopelessness in students, which, in turn, can only further discourage individuals from seeking emancipation and change.”

In his eyes, the only reason to spend time and energy understanding oppression is so that it can be ultimately dismantled.

Critical theories of education recognize that (a) educational systems are at least complicit in oppression (though many would go farther and state that these systems are the most powerful mechanism for the reproduction of social inequality), and (b) there must be a corresponding plan for emancipatory action through education. The mechanisms of oppression and the opportunities to create change exist simultaneously in two important aspects of education — the nature of curriculum and the pedagogies teachers enact. ”

That, whether you agree with them not, is the progressive left’s agenda in introducing critical theory into Virginia schools.

It is that “society is oppressive and must be dismantled,” and they are offering “a corresponding plan for emancipatory action through education.”

Please don’t disrupt the progressives clarity of purpose.

It is their one virtue.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

34 responses to “Critical Theory in Education – Clarity of Purpose Is Progressives’ One Virtue”

  1. Ms. Dell’Angelo actually wrote the following phrase: “…a central tenant of Critical Theory is the belief…”?

    Tenant? And she’s a college professor?

    A central tenet of WayneS Theory is the belief that illiterate people should be prevented from becoming college professors.

    1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      She did indeed. It passed the spell checker. She likely had no editor. So I’m going to give her a pass on that one. The rest is at least clear if destructive.

      1. Okay. Perhaps “illiterate” was a bit harsh.

        And just because I think someone is misguided and foolish does not mean I should ignore the fact that people in power might take them seriously.

        1. Matt Adams Avatar
          Matt Adams

          You can’t read it plainly, you have to contextualize it. When in doubt ask them what they mean, as words don’t have any meaning.

    2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      The College of New Jersey is a real school and one with a good reputation and a long heritage. The Elementary and Early Childhood Urban Education program is led by Ms. Dell’Angelo. So take her writing as at least informed about what the left is trying to accomplish and how.

    3. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Autocorrect.

      Just got a fundraiser email from Hillary Clinton titled “Donald Trump is still here”.

      I’ll bet the ol’ girl just don’t see the irony.

    4. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Tenet, like George.
      BTW, I have a copy of his email to George Bush.

      It says, “Attack Iraq! WMD is a slamduqk.”

  2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “That is one reason why those same policies deny the exercise by parents of their roles, obligations and rights at every turn. Parents form the very American society that the left wants to dismantle.”

    Do you recall the gnashing of teeth by the right when LCPS sidelined a gym teacher for expressing that he knows better than parents when it comes to addressing their trans children and that he refuses to respect their wishes in this regard? Where was Conservative respect for the parents roles, obligations, and rights? In this case, the Conservatives expressly stated that parents had no roles or rights (unlike what I have read regarding so-called CRT) and that the gym teacher’s viewpoint rules the day… because… religion…🤷‍♂️

    1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      I am unfamiliar with the case. Anyone that suggested that parents have no rights is a moron and a danger to society.

      1. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        Tanner Cross v. LCPS. They chilled his speech when he spoke out at a School Board meeting in the capacity as a parent.

        It’s currently awaiting the VA Supreme Court as LCPS appealed the ruling to reinstate him.

      2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        That is indeed what Tanner Cross contended. I am glad that we agree on this point. THe thing to remember here is that trans children are at a very high risk for suicide. If a parent (and their doctor, btw) request that the child’s wish on the manner they should be addressed, how can a gym teacher state he refuses to honor that request? I think the school system was correct in sidelining any teacher that shows they will put their own beliefs above the safety of the children under their charge.

        1. Matt Adams Avatar
          Matt Adams

          “If a parent (and their doctor, btw) request that the child’s wish on the manner they should be addressed, how can a gym teacher state he refuses to honor that request?”

          A parent being the PCP for their child is unethical according to the AMA.

          https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/treating-self-or-family

          “I think the school system was correct in sidelining any teacher that shows they will put their own beliefs above the safety of the children under their charge.”

          Well unfortunately for you the Judiciary doesn’t concur.

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            You read what I wrote incorrectly… surprisingly (not). Try it this way “ If a parent (along with their doctor, btw) request…”. Hopefully that clears it up for you, Ace.

            It is interesting (although not surprising) that you think a teacher has every right to risk the safety and well-bring of children for any reason.

          2. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            No, you wrote it incorrectly. And should’ve have been as well as.

            “It is interesting (although not surprising) that you think a teacher has every right to risk the safety and well-bring of children for any reason.”

            Interesting, that you lack the qualifications to make such a statement as well as very much being for suppression of 1st Amendment rights.

          3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Sorry, I take the man at his word and I prefer not to wait until he harms a child in the name of his God. Remember, he specifically told us his priorities when he stated, “I’m a teacher but I serve God first…” (as in God comes before the child). If he were to stand up and say “I don’t care about any law or Constitutional protections, but any child I catch praying in class will be punished, regardless of what the parents say”, he should be removed from class before he does harm to that child. We shall see what the courts decide but I know what is right. Not surprising that you don’t.

          4. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            “We shall see what the courts decide but I know what is right. Not surprising that you don’t.”

            Clearly, you don’t know what is “right” as you’re okay with restricting free speech rights of a parent.

            Your confirmation bias, is again showing. How am I not surprised.

          5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Nope, of a teacher who is responsible for children. He outright threatened to put the children he is responsible for at risk because of his so-called religious beliefs. No right is absolute. Again, unsurprising that you can’t see the difference.

          6. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            He was speaking at a school board meeting on a topic they were debating. They used his protected speech at that venue to punish him. That’s is exactly what the Judge who ordered he be reinstated said.

            “He outright threatened to put the children he is responsible for at risk because of his so-called religious beliefs”

            He didn’t threaten anyone, your hyperbole is noted and laughed at.

            The only people that make statements that no right is absolute, only do so when they are violating people’s rights.

          7. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Any parent who is struggling with a child who is seriously at risk of suicide would not think it hyperbolic that any teacher who tells them he knows better and they can go stuff their request is actually putting their child at risk. This is what he did… publicly. Sad that you think teen suicide is a laughing matter.

          8. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            World record for the long jump, Eric.

            A teacher speaking out at a school board meeting equates to that teacher thinking “teen suicide is a laughing matter”? And you used the word “hyperbolic?

            I don’t agree with Cross’ position on pronouns, but it was not the subject of the lawsuit.

            If he violates the new regulation in a school setting he is gone. That is how such things work.

            Punishment as a result of non-threatening comments at a school board meeting on policies that are the subject to the school board’s authority is clearly not constitutional.

            Firing him for doing it at school is.

          9. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “A teacher speaking out at a school board meeting equates to that teacher thinking “teen suicide is a laughing matter”? And you used the word “hyperbolic?”

            I was responding to Adams saying he found my comments hyperbolic and funny. They are neither in this case. It is deadly serious.

          10. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Threat

            an expression of intention to inflict evil, injury, or damage

            No you’re speaking in hyperbolic statements for certain.

            “This is what he did… publicly. Sad that you think teen suicide is a laughing matter”

            Where did I laugh. I’ll tell ya straight up don’t put words in my mouth, as it’s a logical fallacy.

          11. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            The word was “threaten”- “to announce as intended or possible”. This is what he did. He threatened to put a child already at risk at further risk because of religion. As simple as that.

          12. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            That’s not what happened at all, now you’re just attempting mind reading.

        2. Matt Adams Avatar
          Matt Adams

          “If a parent (and their doctor, btw) request that the child’s wish on the manner they should be addressed, how can a gym teacher state he refuses to honor that request?”

          A parent being the PCP for their child is unethical according to the AMA.

          https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/treating-self-or-family

          “I think the school system was correct in sidelining any teacher that shows they will put their own beliefs above the safety of the children under their charge.”

          Well unfortunately for you the Judiciary doesn’t concur.

    2. Scott McPhail Avatar
      Scott McPhail

      “In this case, the Conservatives expressly stated that parents had no roles or rights (unlike what I have read regarding so-called CRT) and that the gym teacher’s viewpoint rules the day”

      A) “the Conservatives” . . do you mean conservatives or are you talking about the Tory Party? If “conservatives”, what conservatives?
      B) “expressly stated” Where did this amorphous group “expressly state” their opinion?
      C) ” stated that parents had no roles or rights” . . . I doubt it. Do you mean that school ADMINISTRATION had a problem a viewpoint and then transposed that problem into the mouths of parents?

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        Mr. Cross stated: “We condemn school policies like 8040 and [8350] because it will damage children [and] defile the holy image of God,”

        He went on to say: “I’m a teacher but I serve God first and I will not affirm that a biological boy can be a girl, and vice versa, because it’s against my religion,”

        Here is what policy 8040 states: “School staff shall, at the request of a student or parent/legal guardian, when using a name or pronoun to address the student, use the name and pronoun that correspond to their gender identity. The use of gender-neutral pronouns are appropriate.”

        The Conservatives who specifically support Mr. Tanner’s position and supposed right to override the wishes of parents include David LaRock, Parents Against Critical Race Theory, former state Sen. Dick Black, Alliance Defending Freedom, and any number of Conservative commenters to boot.

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          That’s all you’ve got? Those are the conservatives of whom you speak? A former state Senator? Really? That is the basis for your broad indictment of “conservatives”?

          My personal objection stated in this space to the VDOE rules on transgender children have nothing whatever to do with pronouns. I object to the written directions to “school personnel” deny information to a child’s parents.

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Those are examples, Mr. Sherlock, and are very representative of and leaders amongst Conservatives in Loudoun County. I believe that more than 100 Conservative commenters spoke that evening against this same policy. As far as removing parents from a role in their child’s education, I do not support that in any sense.

          2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            Read my response above after I read the judge’s decision. It was a freedom of speech case about Cross’s right to speak out before the policies were adopted. The injunction was given pending a trial.

            When the Board adopts the regulations and if/when Cross violates them in a school setting, it will be a different case with a very likely different outcome that Mr. Cross will not like.

    3. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      I looked it up.

      “Loudoun County Circuit Court Judge James Plowman ruled that teacher Tanner Cross was exercising his right to free speech when he told the board he could not abide by the proposal based on his religious beliefs. His order requires Cross’ immediate reinstatement until a full trial can be held.”

      That is what Cross sued over, his right not to be fired for speaking up. The ruling on that point should be applauded by all.

      If (when) the Fairfax County Board of Education formally adopts the policies, and if and when Cross then violates them, that is another cause of action with a likely different outcome.

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        Sorry, to me when it comes to the welfare of kids, a threat is as good as an action. I will repeat trans children are at a very high risk of suicide. This teacher is literally playing with kid’s lives. The court may find him within his rights but I find him misguided at best.

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          I saw no “threat” that Cross made. If he did that at the school board meeting, he should be fired. Don’t go for “implied” threat, though. You will lose my support. Mind reading is not admissible.

          I share your concern if Cross acts out at school. Fire him for that.

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            This is the threat, James: “I’m a teacher but I serve God first and I will not affirm that a biological boy can be a girl, and vice versa, because it’s against my religion”. It is not implied. He will not respect the wishes of any parents in the matter of their trans child if it does not align with his “religion” – that is that their identity is invalid. Again the policy being debated: “School staff shall, at the request of a student or parent/legal guardian, when using a name or pronoun to address the student, use the name and pronoun that correspond to their gender identity. The use of gender-neutral pronouns are appropriate.”

            I am not stretching things. Some 50% of trans and non-binary children have attempted suicide. The teacher says he won’t listen to parents when it comes to what is best for their trans child. If he can’t, he should not, therefore, be a teacher.

Leave a Reply