Interrogating the Civic Outcomes of College and Career Readiness in the Common Core and NAEP

• In Event: 72.023 - Social Justice Standards: Does the Common Core Allow Room for Critical Pedagogy?

Abstract

The six-paragraph introduction to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for English Language Arts/Literacy names “college and career readiness” as primary goals for public education six times, and the words ‘college’ and ‘career’ appear dozens of times more throughout the 66-page document. In comparison, the word ‘citizenship’ appears exactly once. This semantic choice is a telling indication of the lack of attention being paid to civic learning and development in the current landscape of public education. What can educators do if they want to prepare their students to become powerful civic actors while adhering to standards-aligned instruction?

Drawing upon theoretical frameworks of conscientization (Freire, 1970), critical literacy (Freire & Macedo, 1987; Morrell, 2008) and critical civic consciousness (Watts & Flanagan, 2007), this paper examines the possibilities (and barriers) that exist for teachers to enact a critical civic pedagogy within the context of the CCSS and the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

We use critical discourse analysis (Fairclough, 1995) to analyze the ways that citizenship is constructed and defined within these policy documents, focusing on the characteristics of the people and instructional practices that are included and excluded in this definition. By reading these policy documents with an eye toward civic outcomes, we interrogate the disconnects between this language, the tenets of problem-posing education, and the development of critical consciousness.

Particularly considering the civic opportunity gaps (Kahne & Middaugh, 2008) that significantly limit civic learning experiences for youth of color in the United States, we critique the narrow ways in which CCSS defines citizenship and review empirically-proven strategies that educators are using to work within these restrictive policies toward liberatory ends.

Authors

• Antero Garcia, Stanford University

• Nicole Mirra, Rutgers University