One of the first charters to open in Missouri was the Gordon Parks charter school In Kansas City.
Its idealistic founders believed that the purpose of the charter was to take the kids who were far behind their peers and try to help them.
The state of Missouri just canceled the charter.
Gordon Parks Elementary School will die because its test scores were too low.
This charter tried to do what charters are supposed to do: to take the kids with the greatest needs.
And now it has been punished for doing what the original visionaries of the charter movement wanted, a decade before passage of No Child Left Behind.
Who will want these children? Not another charter school. They have learned their lesson. Take the kids with the best scores; counsel out or exclude the others.
NCLB killed this good charter. And so did the state board of Missouri, which values test scores more than children.
For shame, Missouri.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
For shame indeed! Unfortunately, the testing accountability mania has finally reached the hinterlands. And as a rural poverty district teacher it is guaranteed to hit and hurt us quite soon. I’ve been trying to help tell the Show Me State folks about these insanities but too many have been “good soldiers” obeying orders and “going along to get along”.
“The charter school, in 13 years of serving children from the highest levels of poverty, had struggled throughout its history to get off the floor in state performance tests.” No Shiite Sherlock, the tests are designed to keep the poorest on the floor. It’s inherently in the makeup of the test to have “winners” and “losers”-how sick!
““They’ve had 13 years to help these children and unfortunately it’s not happening,” said Sarah Potter, spokeswoman for the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education [DESE]. “They are well below the state average. They are below the Kansas City school district. We were really forced to do this.”” OH MY “WE WERE REALLY FOECED TO DO THIS”. Bovine excrement, Ms. Potter. Basing your decisions on MAP now EOC tests belies “being forced”. A more holistic on-site inspection* could have yielded quite different results. DESE could have listened to the authorizing university and kept it open. The question becomes “What charter chain will not come in and scoop up the building and grounds?”
*”Curry said it frustrates him that board members who chose to shut down the school have never seen it. There is a reason the school has garnered so much support over the years, he said.
‘The community knows it’s different here,’ he said. ‘The state board doesn’t understand the poverty of our children.’
The state could no longer look past the test performance, Potter said.
‘We believe all children can learn,’ she said. ‘Unfortunately, these students would be better off in a better school system.'” Ms. Potter, how do you sleep at night spouting such insane equine excrement. By multiple teeth brushings??
Watch out the rest of Missouri, they’re coming for you, these zombie educrat deformers such as Ms. Potter.
As I learned to say from my Kansas City Missouri 8th graders some eight years ago, “Why they be hatin?”
This is EXACTLY what I was trying to confront. This movement is NOT about helping the kids with the most need. It doesn’t even recognize that some children have that take more time and a different approach to testing and learning. Have they abandoned the idea of multiple intelligences? I just don’t know where all of this is headed, but it is not going to “bring up” the scores by using charter schools. There must be a way to help these students without trying to use testing in the linguistic and mathematical intelligences as the ONLY barometer of success. It feels like some people are definitely being shoved aside. I don’t like it. In a climate of believing that people without money feel “entitled” to government intervention, this whole private school movement makes me shudder. The only people I find to have a sense of entitlement are those who hoard their money as if they are the sole reason for their success. Are we really going to allow our society to go back to pre-Civil Rights divisions and segregation? It seems like “take America back” really does mean to take it back to a time where equal opportunity was not viewed as necessary or even moral. I am not all about being regressive. Yet, this IS regressive.
A perfect illustration of how the original ends and ideals of charter schools have been perverted and weaponized by those whose real agenda is to destroy educational democracy.
Call me a conspiracy theorist (who, me?), but I think the people closing this school know that it’s successful on its own terms. They know that test scores are, as Duane politely put it, bovine excrement. They know that what goes on at schools like this original charter and so many public schools is so much more than test-score raising, and that’s exactly why this school (and all the others) need to be closed. It’s not being closed because it’s a failure (we’ve seen far too many charter schools that really are failing and never get closed), but because it’s a success. We certainly don’t want “those kids” to have the same opportunites as our nice, well-behaved, middle-class little snowflakes get because then how will our little snowflakes ever compete?
Watch “The Help” if you haven’t … think about how the U.S. was and how it changed to try to embrace ALL people. When did our society morph backwards? Or did it? Maybe there was a core of people who simply began to work together to undo those “liberal” changes. They got their tax breaks, they control Congress, corporations got to be classified as “people”, they started voicing their real attitudes, they became bolder, and they convinced people that they had to fight “the other” and it suddenly became justifiable to think only of certain people as being “deserving” of success, money, healthcare, security, and education. Here we are.
I have these talks with some friends of mine who are staunch republicans and support privatization and vouchers. They never have a good answer when I tell them what the results will be, because its the 800 pound elephant in the room. How will this help the most volatile, at-risk children? You know, the poor black kids no one wants to talk about?
I’m really surprised by this posting, Diane. Seems to me that this is an example of trying to have it both ways — i.e., legitimately attacking charters for NOT serving high-risk kids proportionate to those of traditional public schools, and then defending the poor performance of those charters that do. Charters that promise the moon despite the dismal experience by traditional schools who’ve unsuccessfully tried everything under the sun (despite their inadequate funding) to effectively serve these same populations should not be defended if the charter kids are no better off — and in the Kansas City case, they’re seemingly worse off — than they would have been in the regular schools. Unless they can produce those miracles, there’s no valid need or excuse for charter schools, right? And this charter is still another example of “choice” not being any panacea.
“. . . then defending the poor performance of those charters that do.”
What is the evidence of poor performance? If by poor performance you mean the invalid standardized test scores then you’ve got a lot to learn about what the teaching and learning process is really about.
“And this charter is still another example of “choice” not being any panacea.” Choice may or may not be panacea (and I lean heavily toward the “not” side) but any educational policy decisions that are based on the falsehoods (see the many charter obfuscations) that are the results of standardized testing will be inherently wrong and unjust.
I really hesitate to speak for Diane, but charters were originally an idea developed by teachers specifically to deal with the most challenging students. They were supposed to work in close conjunction with regular public schools and they were supposed to share the benefits of their findings with regular public schools. Most importantly, they were not supposed to be profit-making ventures by “edupreneurs” with absolutely no educational experience or credentials. If charters had stuck with that original mission, I don’t think Diane or most commenters here would have much if any problem with them.
That was then. This is now.
Duane Swacker, Joanna Best, Deb, Jon Awbrey, Dienne, and Zak: IMHO, comments like yours are one of the main reasons why Diane has gotten more than half a million new views in less than a month since the first anniversary of this blog.
Caring, thoughtful, hard-hitting. This is in one of the American traditions I am most proud of: “comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable.”
I would put a slightly different emphasis on the situation.
First, those who are shutting down this commendable charter consciously put distance between themselves and the people they are [literally] damaging. Why look into the faces of children who are being given a chance, dedicated staff and hopeful parents—when you are going to viciously stab them in the back? The haters [yes, Deb!] are concerned about people—THEMSELVES—so they don the Edubully Armor of Ignorance, cast self-protective spells of Educrat Unaccountability, invoke the mumbo-jumbo of the High Priests of Testing Intimidation, so as to protect THEMSELVES from feeling or experiencing any of the hurt and harm they are inflicting on others.
Second, test scores are not a substitute for sound ethical human judgment. This is in one of the worst traditions of humankind: “We were really forced to do this” [Sarah Potter, spokeswoman for the Missouri Department of Elementary and Second Education; click on the link provided by Diane].
No, you were’t forced to do this.
As some of the students I worked with used to say, “Don’t be a hater.”
And this blog, and its commenters, will continue to remind the Potters of the world that an increasing number of people are holding them responsible for their vile words and actions.
Again, thank you all for your comments.
🙂
I don’t know the details, but as a music teacher (formerly in KCMO), the fact that they cancelled that last performance breaks my heart. Three weeks away. Surely those children had put work into it. It would have created a good memory for the children. . .another widely overlooked aspect to educating children. We are providing the opportunities for memories that they will always have with them.
Creating memories.
I know when I taught in KCMO (East Elementary, K-8), I cried at night plenty. But I had great success, with kids in the Star and on KCUR with our Black Cowboy program for Black History Month. We created memories.
I wrote my first and only rap song that I rapped in between Serbian verses about going to war (because I liked that song) with my band in Kansas City,after my first day in KCMO schools. It went like this:
Started out thinkin’ I was doin’ some good
Then I saw what really goes around the hood
The kids in rags
The free lunch food
But I’m helpin’ out, like I said I would.
Singin’ the songs of those good ‘ole days before Jimi saw that Purple haze, when rocket ships were just a dream and the threat of the gat was still obscene.
I say help me with this cause
I don’t see help in the stars
Go on off to your private schools
yer livin by your own dang rules.
————–
Now back in NC I’m still committed to helping out, like I said I would. Helping the children create memories, an important part of learning.
Joanna Best: you are literally speaking about something that the Sarah Potters of Educratlandia don’t understand.
It’s called the ‘joy of ‘learning’ and like “A thing of beauty is a joy forever” [John Keats].
Keep creating those memories that are a part of real learning.
🙂
How do we know the neighborhood school(s) these students attended before the charter moved in wasn’t also successful in its own terms? I have heard many charter proponents claim the benefit of a charter is the school can be shut down if it doesn’t produce “results”. While I think it wrong to shut any school for high stakes testing results, I wonder what promises this charter made while it marketed itself. If charters criticize traditional public schools and offer a better “choice” than they should be held to the promises they made. Maybe in the end this can be a good thing and reformers will see that schools alone cannot address the issues.
I see your point here for sure. It comes back to whether there is family support for learning, a safe environment for children, etc. KCMO has been plagued with problems for a very, very long time which, in my opinion from having worked there, stem from many sources. I suppose people are reacting because this was a group trying something. Many might argue they should have tried what they tried within the public school they already had in place, rather than opening a charter that still did not achieve the goals the state has set. I know two other charters in KCMO that are very good—but they are mostly white. The question is, what can you do when children eat two meals a day at school (provided by government), have no role models for speaking the King’s English or reading or writing or applying a sense of history etc. in the daily life, etc etc.
As you say, schools alone cannot address the issues. That is so true.
Exactly, no one wants to say what the problem is. And, properly funded, the schools COULD do what they are supposed to do, instead of resorting to the private or charter schools which are supposed to be “fixes” but wind up being escapes for those who want to pick those with whom their children must attend school.
Didn’t the charter know that the purpose of education was to maintain the subclass by only serving the elite? What Missouri is doing is immoral! Public Education is for all children, even those who do not learn fast enough to suit our elitist asses.
Once again, there is, of course, faulty reliance on “standardized” (not–neither valid nor reliable) tests. It’s bad enough we have such tragic natural catastrophes (the Moore tornado) killing children. We are rife with so-called “educators” killing children, as well.
You read the article and it is crystal clear why the test scores are low (never mind that half the schools have to be below the state average). They take the poorest students and give them a safe place to grow. This year they lost their highest students to a new charter. I would not be surprised if they have lost top students in the past as people dared to believe in a better life. They gave a start to people who didn’t have a chance. I guess the hedge funds didn’t like their “business model” or they wouldn’t have had to struggle to serve this community. The new charter must have some big backers to draw so many teachers away.
It is heartening to see this support for a charter school.
It is precisely this situation that I am worried about happening at my son’s new school.
My son has autism and just enrolled in a charter that is dedicated to serving children just like him. The school is almost 40% disabled students and has a mission of being a model school for autism inclusion and support. The school has amazing facilities and a full staff of therapists – much more than are offered by our local school. They really do focus on each individual child and use gold standard teaching methods for children with autism.
However – the school’s scores are in the toilet. Duh, right? They serve disabled kids! But the school district is breathing down their neck to raise their scores and I am genuinely worried that they will get shut down.
I hope that your child’s school is spared from this fate. On of the advantages of going beyond traditional zoned schools is that it allows schools to specialize in serving special populations.
We do that with special education districts to which school districts can choose to belong. Classes to meet the needs of member district students may be housed in any of the districts and there are services provided at separate facilities. So far, they have been fairly insulated from the RTTT idiocy although apparently many of our policy wonks need extensive educational training.
An interesting approach. Do other students out of the mainstream like gifted and talented students have access to similar services?
Parents of truly gifted students are generally seeking programs beyond the public schools for enrichment although many schools do provide programs/support for gifted students. When it comes to truly academically gifted students, I have run across two students. There are many high achieving students, but they come from homes that have provided all the advantages and go to public schools that have competitive standards.
Generally that is the case here. There have been at least three students from my zoned high school who have taken graduate courses at the university over the last ten years, at the parents expense. Other than leaving the building, the accommodations for academically gifted are skipping grades and offering some AP courses. The relatively limited number of AP courses might be a sensible reaction to the proximity of the university, however.
What do you expect from a backward, red-neck state like Missouri. I can truthfully say this because i’m from Missouri and I left for more enlightened areas.
Although I do have a red neck (from working in the garden last weekend) I don’t consider myself and many others here in the Show Me State to be “rednecks” although there are plenty of them. But it’s okay if people think so as long as they stay away so that we can enjoy in peace the natural beauty that Missouri has to offer. There’s already too many FIBs coming into MO and breathing our air-ha ha!! (If you’re from Wisconsin you probably know what a FIB is.)
Here’s an update – a judge temporarily blocked the closure. This is a column from the KC Star. I suppose there are many possible interpretations. But since I don’t know the facts (other than what is reported below), I’ll not make an uninformed interpretation.
Questions of accountability and fairness remain after charter school’s reprieve
May 21
BY MARY SANCHEZ
The lofty promise that is Gordon Parks Elementary School has won a reprieve, at least temporarily.
Order Reprints
FRED BLOCHER
Fourth-grade teacher Elise Bush started taking down the decorations in her Gordon Parks Elementary School classroom on Tuesday.
Related News
Judge halts closing of Gordon Parks Elementary School
More News
Questions of accountability and fairness remain after charter school’s reprieve
Did a sweatshop worker die for your sneakers?
Commissioner opening shows vibrancy of Wyandotte politics
Missouri can shoulder some blame for reassessment mess
Are Hispanics inferior? A conservative scholar thinks so
Read more Mary Sanchez
A Hail Mary effort to save the school came through Tuesday when a judge granted an injunction against the state’s order that the school shut down Wednesday.
The decision by the State Board of Education last week was punitive, even cruel for its timing for the students. But the lessons, the unanswered questions floating in the aftermath are for adults.
Gordon Parks’ dilemma raises the question of how to fairly hold charter schools accountable, given that many of them seek to serve disadvantaged students who often enroll performing below grade level.
Poverty cannot become an excuse for underachievement. But its power to undermine can’t be ignored either.
The state did not fairly assess Gordon Parks. It’s a problem of process, one that can be addressed if the State Board of Education, charter schools and their sponsors can come to some new understandings. The state is now holding charter schools far more accountable than in the past, a welcome move, if done fairly.
Gordon Parks reached this point in a perfect storm of circumstances, some in its control, others less so.
Anyone who still naively believes that charter schools will easily rectify all that ails urban public education should study the history of Gordon Parks.
“There has to be some equity in how we look at these schools,” said Douglas Thaman, executive director of the Missouri Charter Public School Association. “You can’t compare a single school to a district.”
Yet that is the process now.
Charters operate with public tax dollars, but through a sponsoring charter. The University of Central Missouri is the sponsor for Gordon Parks and eight of the other charter schools among the 25 operating in Kansas City.
When that state board notes that a school like Gordon Parks is testing far below others in the Kansas City school district, here is what happens: The state compares the average scores of the entire district — combining those of outstanding, high-scoring schools like Lincoln College Prep along with its lower-performing schools — against the scores of one charter school.
It’s apples to oranges. Especially when the time-intense and costly interventions necessary for at-risk children are considered.
Nearly 82 percent of the children enrolled in Kansas City’s charter schools in 2011-2012 qualified for free or reduced lunch, Thaman said. At Gordon Parks, that disadvantaged population is even higher, 98 percent.
Also not taken into account by the state’s decision was a different set of more recent tests showing that Gordon Parks students were making headway from their scores of last year. Nor was the fact that the school was one year into a $1.5 million school improvement grant to help turn things around.
Under the law that allows charter schools, a charter that is in compliance with its contract cannot be shut down. But the state board can go after its sponsor, alleging problems in management. That is what happened with Gordon Parks, which some consider a loophole that should be looked at more closely.
“We feel we followed those duties and responsibilities, but DESE (Department of Elementary and Secondary Education) informed us that the test scores were the reason,” said Vici Hughes, director of the Midwest Center for Charter Schools and Urban Education within the University of Central Missouri.
A consultant hired by Gordon Parks’ board assessed the school in March, outlining far more problems than strengths. Yet he also wrote a detailed letter to state officials supporting renewal of its charter, noting improvements in test scores, as well as administrative and instructional changes.
“There are still challenges at GPES, but they are moving in the right direction,” the letter said and then went on to plead that the stability of the students also needed to be considered.
The school was struggling to rebuild after losing half of its staff more than a year ago to a new charter that opened.
The balance, of course, is determining how much leeway charters can have to get students up to grade level, much less make them proficient or advanced in their learning.
Gordon Parks is a special place. The warmth and loving embrace around its students and their families is palpable.
Five full-time special education teachers were at work, specializing in speech, hearing and a range of other needs that were not unusual at Gordon Parks. So many kindergartners were developmentally behind that a special program was designed to catch them up before they could take on work normally required of a 6-year-old.
Impressed by that commitment, Kansas Citians and major foundations embraced the school with funding. The school received a total of $7.5 million in community support.
Kansas City believed in Gordon Parks’ purpose. As volunteers and donors, people latched on to the hope that given the right supports, disadvantaged children can achieve at levels equal to or surpassing other children. That’s a virtue that is not open to measure.
Gordon Parks set out to upend generational poverty through education.
But maybe it is state leaders who need to understand that generational poverty is far different from situational poverty. It’s different from being temporarily at odds because of a job loss, a divorce, an illness or accident that might set a family’s finances ajar.
Generational poverty grinds into families. It undermines positive social connections and a focus on the long term that is the luxury of families who aren’t worried about when the lights might be shut off for nonpayment, when their belongings will land on the curb because the rent money is short again. In some families, a steady stream of undereducated adults ruthlessly cuts into the stability that should belong to every child.
These are the children who were the focus of Gordon Parks.
Back when charters were first introduced in Missouri in 1999, having such a lofty mission was enough. Oversight was slight.
That has evolved for good reason, with the public, the governor, charter schools and their sponsors welcoming more accountability.
What we need now is a measure of fairness, too.
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/05/21/4248473/questions-of-accountability-and.html#storylink=cpy
BIG REVEALS IN THE FIGHT TO SAVE GORDON PARKS SCHOOL
http://www.tonyskansascity.com/2013/07/tkc-breaking-and-exclusive-news-big.html
BIG REVEAL NUMBER 1, sworn testimony revealed state bureaucrats gunning to take down Gordon Parks actually held back favorable statistics about the school’s performance from the State Board of Education….more at link
BIG REVEAL NUMBER 2, a deposition shows a State Board of Education member confirmed he and a majority of the public governmental body met in a state government coffee room the day before their scheduled vaporizing of Gordon Parks and talked about – GORDON PARKS! No public notice, no invitation for Gordon Parks or its sponsor, the University of Central Missouri, to tell their side of the story…more at link
BIG REVEAL NUMBER 3, the judge took an interest and asked questions about the departures of Gordon Parks’ former school director and principal a couple of years ago for the shiny new Crossroads Academy downtown. The court was told Crossroads officials actually poached about 60 of the highest-scoring students from Gordon Parks,…more at link
Looks like the situation is now in the hands of a judge: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/07/25/4367797/fate-of-gordon-parks-elementary.html
A Missouri court decided to keep the school open.
http://themissouritimes.com/5733/gordon-parks-elementary-court-battle-could-indicate-future-legislative-involvement/
According to this story, the court appears to have ruled that the school should be compared with other schools serving similar populations.
I’d agree, and add that we need to use a variety of measures, not just standardized test scores to assess student progress.