Montessori was clear about the need for teachers to ensure that there are no barriers causing children to falter or achieve less than optimum outcomes. This should be first addressed through the prepared environment—making sure that the curriculum, books, and other materials reflect the cultures of every child in the classroom.

John McWhorter, linguistic scholar at Columbia University, argues that K – 12 teachers are, in fact, teaching a form of CRT—“CRT-lite” or “CRT Jr.” Although teachers are certainly not participating in legal analysis with third graders, this does not mean that they are not teaching about “concepts derived from CRT.” McWhorter argues that a “critical” approach to teaching about equity issues “has trickled down, in broad outline, into the philosophy of education-school pedagogy and administration” and that curriculum guidelines “apparently sanctioned by state departments of education” are evidence of this.

In a recent AMS webinar on CRT, Dr. Valaida Wise makes the important distinction that as a theoretical framework, CRT helps us think about and critically analyze systems; as such, it can help teachers think about the right questions to ask regarding potential or actual inequities that may be present in our classrooms. Our concern at the classroom level, therefore, is not the theoretical work of CRT, but that we have a culturally responsive pedagogy (CRP) in place. We will come back to this.

How should Montessorians answer questions related to CRT, and what is its importance to Montessori education? A good place to begin is with an understanding of the history and goals of CRT, together with a good working definition that clarifies what it is, and what it is not.