What Critical Race Theory Is and Is Not

School counselors have been central to the student experience, to recovery efforts and to supporting students through the pandemic, expanding on their work as architects of school culture, student support and social justice advocates.  With so much focus on the work schools need to do toward recovery from the pandemic, much of the effort goes through both the roles and profession of school counseling.  The recent rise and focus on critical race theory (CRT) has school counselors questioning their roles with this topic and how to continue equity work in schools. Recently, Pennsylvania became one of 22 states with legislation introduced to ban CRT.

To frame this discussion, we need to fully understand what CRT is and is not. “Critical race theory” is used to describe an academic movement and collection of scholarly research. Through the lens of legal research scholars like Derrick Bell and Kimberle’ Crenshaw, tenets of what would become CRT were developed and expanded into other sectors including education, most notably with the works of Gloria Ladson-Billings. Opponents have characterized CRT as racist; according to one local news article, “CRT teaches students that all White people are inherently racist and participate in race-based societal oppression, regardless of their actions or beliefs.”

The mischaracterization and defenses of CRT point to the clear need for understanding the scholarly works. Much like race and racism, CRT is not one thing. Today, schools are more segregated than when Martin Luther King, Jr., was alive. Segregated buildings were deemed less safe during the pandemic, including inadequate heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems. Much of the scholarly research attributed to CRT discusses strategies to remedy disparate outcomes rather than changing individuals’ beliefs. Race in America, as viewed through this country’s laws and institutions, is not one simple biological case, but a series of laws, policies and practices based on evolving definitions of biological preferences. Through this lens we see the definition of “white” evolve along with the definitions of race in the historical record. The tenets of CRT examine aspects that promoted or deterred racial progress through the systems and key power holders in the United States.

In summer 2020, when calls arose to examine, understand, challenge and transform forms of systemic oppression, journalist Christopher Rufo crafted an attack on a perceived culture war by targeting critical race theory. As reported in a 2021 New Yorker article, Rufo said:
 

We’ve needed new language for these issues. “Political correctness” is a dated term and, more importantly, doesn’t apply anymore. It’s not that elites are enforcing a set of manners and cultural limits, they’re seeking to reengineer the foundation of human psychology and social institutions through the new politics of race. It’s much more invasive than mere “correctness,” which is a mechanism of social control, but not the heart of what’s happening. The other frames are wrong, too: “cancel culture” is a vacuous term and doesn’t translate into a political program; “woke” is a good epithet, but it’s too broad, too terminal, too easily brushed aside. “Critical race theory” is the perfect villain.

Through a series of Fox News interviews and New York Post articles, Rufo attacked not only CRT in schools, but also “equity,” “social justice,” “diversity and inclusion” and “culturally responsive teaching.” The articles and appearances were source material for later local journalistic writing and school board initiatives, and established common language in bills or policies introduced or passed in nearly two dozen states. The attacks draw on many stark historic parallels and also again sought to narrow the definition of race from biology, bias, character and now (again) curricula.

The toll of the attacks on CRT are becoming clearer. Teaching of critical race theory, social justice or underrepresented aspects of our history is not a zero-sum game: student outcomes and experience are not diminished with an increase in cultural awareness. From such teachings, students have demonstrated increased relational, communication and collaboration skills, which are necessary in our increasingly connected and global society. Studies have demonstrated benefits including increased student motivation, engagement and academic achievement, while longitudinal studies reflect students' reported deep self-exploration and a sense of justice helping in their identity development, as well as a further sense of agency. There are no noted negative impacts of CRT instruction on students in the literature. 

As noted by District Administration (2021), all of our students benefit from conversations through the lens of CRT, and are damaged by not having the safe and supportive settings of schools to stage and model them. School districts across the nation have been inundated by public records requests regarding CRT and seen growing resistance, including potential fines and death threats. According to NBC New Report, the clamor over CRT has pushed many educators away from schools, particularly, and concerningly, educators of color.

School counselors' roles are in many ways interwoven with CRT, which is not a curriculum as much as a lens for practice. The scholarship and research of many tenets of CRT and other social justice models are part of the role, identity and training of school counselors, unlike our guidance counselor predecessors. Our role, expertise and training makes school counselors uniquely positioned to lead and guide conversations about equity. The lens of CRT means examining ourselves and our practice, and recognizing that all of our students are influenced by a range of systems and opportunities that can be enhanced with the right intentional strategies. Comprehensive school counseling programs build systemic engagement with stakeholders to guide practice and program, in order to reduce disparate impacts of education systems on students – this is systemic change. 

School counselors, like other educators, can speak out on issues of public concern. Although public employees may be limited when the speech is part of their official duties, school counselors' professional roles and identity are defined as social justice advocates. Further defining our positions, we know that “school counselors engage in self-reflection, develop knowledge and skills, and advocate for the equitable treatment of all students through action to address broader issues of systemic and institutional racism.” Clearly, our training, roles and applications of social justice models, including critical race theory, are wholly different from other education professions. Because many of the attacks on CRT have not tied directly to the theory but rather to broader school climate, equity and civic practices, I encourage other state associations to further clarify school counselors’ positionality with CRT in a statement, like PSCA has done, so as not to have school counselors’ practice be mischaracterized. Historically, similar K–12 statues were found to be unconstitutional because they appeared to be “enacted and enforced for narrowly political, partisan, and racist reasons,” language tools and framing from professional associations would be beneficial for frontline educators.

The uncertainty and peril felt in education and the school counseling profession has grown during the pandemic, while framing educational equity for students as falsely tipping scales in a zero-sum game is nothing new. All students can have equitable outcomes. Throughout the pandemic, while our schools were stretched beyond their walls, school communities came together. Wellness and recovery plans during this time of crisis focused on school connectedness and community. We were able to make it through a school year of pandemic not through outrage, but by bravely centering equity in education in ways not seen before. If the struggle, sacrifice and gains made through the pandemic were real, then these attacks on CRT and equity in schools must be fully and vigorously rebuffed. If school counselors are leaders of educational equity and stewards of students’ lifelong outcomes, then our collective voice and resolve not only benefits our students' future, but also helps build a more perfect education system less encumbered by divisive movements of the past. Like critical race theory, school counseling is much more than a narrowly defined practice or theory. The comprehensive part of our school counseling model and practice is building deep networks of relationships, through our roles, extensive training and support, to open endless possibilities for all our students, regardless of the challenges that we or our students face.

Contact Stephen Sharp, PSCA assistant chair, at stephen_sharp@hempfieldsd.org.