Why I Identify as a Critical Theorist

I identify most strongly with critical theory because it aligns with my lived experience and fundamental beliefs about education’s purpose. Growing up on the Wind River Indian Reservation, I witnessed Glatthorn et al. (2019) describe as schools "reproducing the status quo—preserving race, class, and social stratifications" (p. 126). I’ve seen firsthand how schools often replicate inequality through underfunded programs, culturally disconnected curricula, and lowered expectations for marginalized students.  Critical theory's insistence on confronting systemic barriers rather than ignoring them resonates deeply with me, as I’ve seen in my own work how STEM opportunities are systematically withheld from certain communities, reinforcing the false notion that fields like aerospace "aren’t for us."

What draws me to critical theory is its rejection of deficit thinking and its focus on empowerment. Where traditionalist or empiricist approaches might view educational disparities as individual shortcomings, critical theory recognizes the systemic roots of inequality. It provides the necessary framework to confront structural oppression while affirming every student’s right to full participation.

In my work with STEM programs today, this perspective ensures I prioritize access and representation, helping students see themselves as capable contributors to fields that have historically excluded them. While I appreciate aspects of other philosophies, like the structure of linear thinking or the creativity of holistic approaches, only critical theory fully addresses the power dynamics I’ve witnessed firsthand. Education, at its best, shouldn’t just transmit knowledge but equip students to challenge and change inequitable systems. That’s why I claim this perspective above all others.

Reference
Glatthorn, A. A., Boschee, F., Whitehead, B. M., & Boschee, B. F. (2019). Curriculum leadership: Strategies for development and implementation (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.