PoppaRex,
I would agree with you that if a child is interested in CBT (and most of them are), it makes sense to include it in the curriculum. Then the question becomes:
-- for what purpose? (Eg, to learn what subject)
-- which programs? (For, just like all schools -- or even all classrooms -- are not created equal, not all programs are created equal)
I use a lot of informal CBT with my dd in the form of YouTube, on the theory that a moving picture is worth 10,000 words. So, when we read something offline that she doesn't have the context for, we often look up a photo or video of it so she can get a greater sense of what we're talking about. And, most of her "music appreciation" has come from YouTube, both in the form of examples of specific instruments being played and, at her insistance, how they are made. Now, my dd is young; doubtless, when she is your ds's age, she will be looking up videos and a dizzying plethora of informational websites. Now, this isn't even vaguely structured or "correlated to state standards", but I think it's part of that ability "to chase rabbit holes" when learning occurs outside of the context of formal schooling. It's like that old encyclopedia commercial -- "Look it up, dear" -- has come to its own in a big way. We use formal CBT, too, but just wanted to provide a different perspective.
PS -- There is TONS of research on CBT. Most of the major CBT providers have published reports on their effectiveness, though typically in the classroom setting, where it is easier to have a control group, standardized delivery, etc., etc.
