This commentary was written by an employee of the Néw York City Department of Education who specializes in data analysis. He/she requires anonymity.
An opinion piece in the New York Daily News by Robert Pondiscio wondered, “Is Eva Moskowitz the Michael Jordan of education reform, or is she Mark McGwire?” To give some context- New York State recently released the results of the 2013-14 grades 3-8 exams in English and in Math. Success Academy schools, of which Eva Moskowitz is the $475,244 a year CEO, did relatively well on these exams.
How well? Well, that depends on how you break down the numbers. Looking at the mean scale scores of general education students at K-8 schools in New York City- Success Academy schools average out at #79 in English and #12 in Math. This way of measuring Success Academy is most transparent- it includes the data on all their schools and, given their very low number of the highest-need special education students, most compares like to like. It also avoids the number tricks Success Academy has played in the past, such as focusing on the test results of one of the exams for one of their grades at one of their schools.
OK, so Success Academy may not be doing quite as well as they claim, but there is no doubt that their results are pretty good. To return to the question asked by the Daily News and echoed by many others, “how does Success Academy get their results?”
Well, the same data set that provided the test results suggests an answer. The only Success Academy school that has fully grown to grades 3-8 tested 116 3rd graders and only 32 8th graders. Three other Success Academy schools have grown to 6th grade. One tested 121 3rd graders and only 55 6th graders, another 106 3rd graders and only 68 6th graders, and the last 83 3rd graders and only 54 6th graders. Of course, this data set represents a snapshot from a single year.
Longitudinal analyses have found extremely high rates of attrition within student cohorts and students with disabilities and English Language Learners are over-represented among the students who disappear from Success Academy rosters.
Eva is no Michael Jordan. Her numbers are gimmicks, obtained by removing low scoring students from her schools. The high-scoring students remain and the low-scoring students are gone, along with their potentially disruptive effects on classrooms and the school as a whole. Eva is more like Lance Armstrong. They both win through artificial means. Lance through blood transfusions and EPO. Eva through attrition of students and obsessive test prep. According to the Daily News, while “suppressing the truth” Lance engaged in “an endless behind-the-scenes campaign to bully and intimidate people into silence. Some of it bordered on gangsterism.” Eva employs similar tactics to bully employees at the New York City Department of Education and to take space from special needs students to expand her schools.
There is another aspect of this whole sorry story that makes the Lance/Eva analogy so apt. In Lance’s case the world cycling governing body was complicit, or at the very least turned a blind eye, to the cheating. In Eva’s case education reformers, op ed writers, and think tanks refuse to acknowledge that throwing out students with low test scores and ending up with high test scores as a result is not a model for bettering education. They blindly insist that charter school chains that disappear low scoring students from their rosters show public schools how it can be done.
Every city and state seems to have one of these cheating charter chains- from Achievement First in Providence (over 50% attrition) and Achievement First in New Haven (over 50% attrition), to Uncommon Schools in Newark (38% attrition), to BASIS in Arizona (over 60% attrition), to McKeel Schools in Florida (“McKeel Charter School System has no control over which students are admitted to its three schools, its superintendent said, but it does control who gets to stay”), to the Noble Network in Chicago (up to 36% attrition), to Harmony Charters in Texas (40% attrition), to DSST in Denver (38% attrition), to KIPP in San Francisco (up to 45% attrition) and KIPP in Tennessee (18% attrition in a single year!).[1] What happens to all the children left behind, or should we say “kicked to the side of the road?” by these “high performing” charter chains?
No sport can be built on a foundation of rampant cheating. No education system can be built on school models that are based on number games.
[1] Refer to the linked studies for the particulars on each charter chain, as the grade-levels and time-span differ in each analysis.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Bravo for these patiently researched and easily-readable exposes of how Eva M manipulates test scores to make her charter schools look better than they are. Forcing out the kids with lower scores is the ugly secret and achilles heel of the privatized charter schools. Keep exposing them until the truth gets a higher profile that turns their fake castles into rubble.
Ira,
The problem with this cross section is that it doesn’t tell us how many third graders there were in the school five years ago.
“The only Success Academy school that has fully grown to grades 3-8 tested 116 3rd graders and only 32 8th graders. ”
The school is Harlem Success Academy 1 (HSA1), which was established in 2007.
Last year, Gary Rubenstein reported the following info about HSA1 on his “Miracle Schools” website:
“HSA1
2007 with 83 kinder, 77 1st. Now, 2013, tested 47 6th graders and 35 7th graders.”
So that’s a 58% rate of attrition since 2007, when those 32 8th graders entered 1st grade at HSA1 and started as a cohort of 77 students.
http://miracleschools.wikispaces.com/Success+Academies%2C+New+York
Probably around 9000-10000 kids are enrolled or were formerly enrolled in a Success school. If they are actively counseling kids out, they are doing an incredible job of identifying families who won’t file complaints or even talk to reporters about it off the record.
A more plausible explanation is that their more vulnerable students leave for the reasons vulnerable students leave district schools: a change in circumstances. The big difference is that kids who leave Success schools aren’t replaced, an abhorrent practice that must be put to a stop by their authorizer.
“A more plausible explanation is that their more vulnerable students leave for the reasons vulnerable students leave district schools: a change in circumstances.”
Another plausible explanation might be that they (or their parents) aren’t happy there.
Absolutely true, although to their credit Success is crystal clear up front about requirements with respect to behavior, homework, parent involvement, and the weird schedule. So I tend to think there is a lot of self-selection prior to the lotteries.
Tim,
Replacing students does put some restrictions on what is taught in each grade. A school can not responsibly accept transfer students in sixth grade unless all the students have had a reasonably similar education up until that point.
Montessori schools, for example, seem very hesitant to accept transfers from non-Montessori schools. Here is Arbor Montessori school’s policy:
Toddler and Primary Transfers
Arbor accepts transfer students from other non-Montessori schools up until age 4.4 years. We accept transfer students from accredited Montessori schools at any age in the Toddler and Primary program.
Elementary Transfers
Because Montessori pedagogy is sequential (materials and the curriculum build upon each other), children who have not attended a Montessori Primary program would not be able to successfully participate in a Montessori Elementary program. Therefore, Arbor only accepts transfer Elementary students from accredited Montessori schools.
Adolescent Program Transfers
We accept transfer student from Montessori and non-Montessori schools for enrollment in 7th grade.
“A school can not responsibly accept transfer students in sixth grade unless all the students have had a reasonably similar education up until that point.”
That’s an argument, but I suspect it would lead to the conclusion that most, if not the overwhelming majority of, schools irresponsibly accept transfer students. If I move to another city and I want to enroll my kids in the 6th grade, and they’ve passed the 5th grade, and they fit the new town’s age-range for the 6th grade, they’re in like Flynn, I’d have to think.
FLERP!,
As long as each school has roughly the same curriculum, transfers make perfect sense. The Montessori school I used as an example is happy to accept transfers from other Montessori schools, just not ones with a different curriculum. I think that most public schools are interchangeable so transfers are not much of an issue, even across states. Some magnet programs, however, don’t allow transfers precisely because they offer unique programs.
I guess that’s arguably a downside to school choice, to the extent choice results in the proliferation of unique programs that provide unique educational experiences that don’t transfer well to other schools. Perhaps it risks creating a “lock-in” effect that ultimately limits choice, i.e., the ability to leave a school that isn’t meeting your needs.
(I’m sure an economist would have a more elegant way of expressing my last thought than I used. I assume there’s a term for the phenomenon.)
FLERP!,
Lock-in sounds good to me. That is definitely an issue, but relaxing the geographic admission system would mean that students would not necessarily have to change schools if the family moves within the city.
It is not a matter of different curriculum, as declared by this “teaching economist” who seems to think that, since he teaches college and has children, he’s an expert in K12 education. First, he failed to mention that Arbor is a private school. Second, he did not say anything about student groupings. This school serves children in mixed age groups at the following designated levels, which are pretty typical in most Montessori schools:
Toddler:
Ages 18 months to 3 years
Primary:
Preschool through kindergarten
Ages 2.5 to 6
Lower Elementary:
First through third grade
Ages 6 to 9
Upper Elementary:
Fourth through sixth grade
Ages 9 to 12
Adolescent Program:
Seventh and eighth grades
Ages 12 to 14
It’s not the curriculum that differs significantly from other schools. Kids in Montessori study pretty much the same subjects at the same ages as when students in other schools study them –and a lot of other kinds of schools use Montessori materials with those same ages, too. It’s primarily the mixed age student groupings, prescribed hands-on materials and the concomitant pedagogy that differ most from other kinds of schools.
ECE,
Of course it is a private school. I am not sure why that is relevant to my point that responsibly allowing transfers into a school requires some degree of uniformity between the school the student is leaving and the school the student is transferring into. I am surprised that this is even slightly controversial.
TE, here is the summary of the NYS charter school law:
2850. Short title; purpose. 1. This article shall be known and may
be cited as the “New York charter schools act of nineteen hundred ninety-eight”.
2. The purpose of this article is to authorize a system of charter
schools to provide opportunities for teachers, parents, and community members to establish and maintain schools that operate independently of existing schools and school districts in order to accomplish the following objectives:
(a) Improve student learning and achievement;
(b) Increase learning opportunities for all students, with special
emphasis on expanded learning experiences for students who are at-risk of academic failure;
(c) Encourage the use of different and innovative teaching methods;
(d) Create new professional opportunities for teachers, school
administrators and other school personnel;
(e) Provide parents and students with expanded choices in the types of educational opportunities that are available within the public school system; and
(f) Provide schools with a method to change from rule-based to
performance-based accountability systems by holding the schools established under this article accountable for meeting measurable student achievement results.
http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/LAWSSEAF.cgi?QUERYTYPE=LAWS+&QUERYDATA=%40SLEDN0T2A56+&LIST=LAW+&BROWSER=EXPLORER+&TOKEN=12661339+&TARGET=VIEW
Operating a K-12 network of ostensibly public charter schools with an emphasis on serving students at risk of failure but limiting the final access point to seven- and eight-year-old children runs very much against the spirit, and, if you look more closely at some of the specific provisions, possibly the letter of the state law.
Tim,
My point was a more general one, that unrestricted transfers across schools or districts requires that students have similar educational experiences across all those schools, requiring some level of uniformity across schools in case a student wants to transfer from one to the other. This uniformity is not costless. I participated in a series of meetings that resulted in basic economics courses transferring seamlessly across all public community and four year colleges in my state. We all have to teach the same core material in roughly the same way. It makes things easier and cheaper for the student, but no school can really have a truly heterodox economics department.
TE, knowing what you now know about the NYS charter school law, do you feel it is appropriate for a NYS charter school to even entertain that particular cost-benefit analysis?
Tim,
I would think that the cost benefit calculation is better made at the state level. I would be disappointed if the state demanded uniformity across schools. As I see it the ability of choice schools to be different from each other is the major advantage of that kind of school.
Your mischaracterization of curriculum and your failure to mention that Arbor is a private school (which has much more freedom to determine when students may enter than public schools), both revealed your inability to accurately describe your own examples.
Your harping on about the private school classification now also completely overlooks the fact that BEING A PRIVATE SCHOOL WAS NOT EVEN LISTED amongst the things that I described which distinguish Arbor and other Montessori schools from different kinds of schools.
These are just more examples of your ineptitude at telling genuine educators about P-12 education. You are not a competent P-12 expert so stop making self-proclaimed declarations about P-12 education as if they are facts.
All your typical questions are puerile attempts to teach others who know a lot more than you about P-12 education. The kinds of questions you should be asking could be in deference to genuine P-12 educators who have actual expertise in this field that you can learn from, but you are not here to learn; you are only here to proselytize. Meanwhile, when you pass along misconceptions and fallacies as if they are truths, experts have every right to call you out on them.
ECE,
Any thoughts about the point I was making? I would think it to be non controversial: successful transfer from one school to another requires that the two schools are relatively similar in educational approach. I take this to be why Arbor Montessori readily accepts students comming from other Montessori schools, but greatly limits transfers from other kinds of schools.
“No excuses” charter schools implement draconian discipline and pedagogical strategies with poor children of color, who they see as wild animals that need to be tamed, which is racial profiling, especially for African American boys who they suspend, expel and counsel out at particularly high rates. These practices are used for skimming the easiest to manage kids. They are also methods of control and manipulation, which include the policies of setting specific entrance points and not backfilling when slots become available, as well as constant test prep, all in order to gain higher test scores and garner accolades, not because they have some kind of unique educational program.
As the Success Academy Mole put it, “What I find most disturbing is that we claim that the test scores are a result of our excellent curriculum…no mention of test prep. If we have faith in the curriculum, why not allow us to teach it and skip the test prep?”
Hello TeachingEconomist:
If you would actually read the whole essay instead of spouting nonsense you would see that your “problem” was directly addressed by the writer. I hope you don’t actually teach anyone, as your pseudonym suggests you might, since you seen unable to even read.
Signed,
A Real Educator
Very interesting — the 50% attrition rate is the first time I have seen Success Academy in Providence called out on something like this. I’d like to know more.
Achievement First’s Providence Mayoral Academy just opened in 2013 and I can’t find their stats on InfoWorks. Is the 50% attrition rate for the chain overall?
If you check under “Blog Topics” on this site, you’ll see Harlem Success Academy as one of the choices. You might find what you want there.
Did Robert Pondiscio actually read his last paragraph?
“Is Eva Moskowitz the Michael Jordan of education reform, or is she Mark McGwire? I have no idea, and you don’t either. But something extraordinary is happening in Harlem. And it’s time to sit up, take notice, and figure out exactly what the hell it is and how it’s being done.”
There are so many mixed messages here. But it is interesting to see the incredible mental flexibility on display when an educrat enabler of the charterite/privatizer movement [see below] hedges his bets by simultaneously urging caution and wild optimism, while at the same time circling the wagons to keep everyone out and then inviting everyone onto the $tudent $ucce$$ bandwagon.
Whoopee! And a jellyfish is a vertebrate.
Go figure…
😎
P.S. *He must be objective. At the very bottom of the article: “Pondiscio is a senior fellow at the Fordham Institute and senior advisor at Democracy Prep Public Schools.”*
“He must be objective.” Tongue firmly implanted in cheek, no doubt, since his “credentials” indicate he’s playing for the same team as Eva.
Do you know who actually grades the state tests taken by charter schools? Are they scored by other charter school teachers or teachers within Success Academy itself? Do they send the tests out to public school teachers? I think we need to know exactly who scores the tests taken by students in Eva M’s charter schools and an outside auditor needs to be brought in to verify that nothing untoward is taking place. If she isn’t hiding anything, then let’s all have a look.
Lily,
I have asked who scores the charter school tests and have thus far not gotten a straight answer.
I read that SA teachers grade their tests, but now I can’t find the source. I think it can be inferred, based on what the SA Mole said, that unlike neighborhood public school teachers, they have seen the tests, which could in itself be an advantage:
“…We have people whose job it is to put together custom test prep packets based on state guidance. Much more aligned to common core and closer to the test than the published books I’ve seen.”… “Also many practice tests and quizzes that copy format of the test.”
Unlike public school teachers, charter school teachers grade the exams of their own students.
Additionally, as was reported on this blog, Success Academies receive study guides from the test publisher that public schools do not.
These are all matters of public record.
As for the sports analogy, Lance Armstrong is a better comparison to Moskowitz than Mark McGwire, since Armstrong’s implausible “success” was based on a large network of cheating, lies and bullying, with the media and commercial interests complicit in his fraud for years.
Lies, cheating, bullying and complicit media and commercial interests all invested in them: sounds familiar, doesn’t it?
“But something extraordinary is happening in Harlem. And it’s time to sit up, take notice, and figure out exactly what the hell it is and how it’s being done.”
She cheats, one way – attrition, selection, field trips to Albany and across the bridge – or another. Bank (or hedge) on it.
I am attaching a video of an interview I did with a former Success Charter parent who tells the story of her son’s 12 days at one of Eva’s charter schools. The video includes letters from Eva herself:
How can it be that not one child from Success Academy’s graduating eighth grade class this past June qualified for a Specialized High School spot? not one student scored high enough on the entry exam, yet Eva M continues to toot how well her students do on the state exams. If her students were excelling so brilliantly, why is it not translating to the specialized high school testing as well? Something seems terribly amiss here. Also, this same eighth grade graduating class began with 73 children in early elementary and by graduation day in June 2014, the entire grade had dwindled down to 32 students.
AF Providence info is here http://www.golocalprov.com/news/aa1
Why not just add the cohort info in and report the whole picture? I have no idea why we’re collecting all this data if there’s no rules or standards on how it is used. It’s going to be all but useless to non-experts, because it’s always a more complicated picture than what’s presented.
Seems like they’re doing quite well if the measure is test scores, broadly, and the measure is obviously test scores despite these ridiculous denials that we’re measuring anything or ranking anyone. We all know we’re ranking and I’m sure the children taking the tests know the adults are ranking, because so much importance is given to the scores by adults. They’re not dummies. I believe they have figured this out!
We measure, and we measure on test scores, and test scores can be presented many different ways. Is that about the size of it? Let’s just admit that.
Chiara,
If I may correct your statement: “We PRETEND TO measure, and we SUPPOSEDLY measure on test scores, and test scores can be presented many different ways.
Right, and I’m familiar with your thinking on testing, but my point is we are ranking schools by test scores. Because we’re ranking schools on test scores we are ALSO ranking the students within the schools on test scores.
We should be honest about that. That’s what we carefully and deliberately decided to do: evaluate the success of children and their schools on their test scores beginning in 3rd grade.
It is ludicrous and insulting to think children don’t know this. Of course they do. They’re in it every day.
Some of them watched their teachers do a perp walk in Atlanta based on cheating on these tests that are supposedly not the be-all and end-all and simply used for “assessment” and to find out “where they are”. One of the teachers involved is in cheating on these tests is facing years and years in prison.
We should tell them test scores are HUGELY important, because quite obviously they are. We should stop lying to them. They know anyway. How could they not?
Chiara,
I think the importance of tests vs other ways we rank students in schools depends a great deal on the state. I was recently in Texas taking a tour of UT Austin. The admission meeting was very tense. The top seven percent of each high school class (measured at the end of the junior year) is given automatic admission to UT Austin. Finish one person out, and your chances of getting into that state flagship university goes way way down. Teacher assigned grades in high school are the important way students are ranked in Texas.
It looks like the “linked studies” is missing a link. Should there also have been a link to the longitudinal analysis. Can these be provided?
The most fascinating aspect of the data-driven culture of education now, is that so many people promoting it suffer from innumeracy.
I’m always amazed at the charters with 100% passing rates, and 100% acceptance into four-year colleges until I find that the 100% actually consists of the 30% who made it from start to finish. It’s a good thing Arne Duncan doesn’t fritter away his time with cursory research or he’d have little or nothing to talk about.
If Eva Moskowitz is the Lance Armstrong of education, she had better keep a watchful eye on those cojones of hers . . .
Previously on this blog, Diane posted a message from a Success Academy teacher, who wrote,
“…We have people whose job it is to put together custom test prep packets based on state guidance. Much more aligned to common core and closer to the test than the published books I’ve seen.”
and
“Also many practice tests and quizzes that copy format of the test.”
We haven’t heard neighborhood public school teachers say this, because they didn’t have access to the tests, or political connections to “state guidance,” while SA teachers do AND they are the ones who grade the tests.
This sounds pretty hinky to me.
Test prep on steroids. Bet she’ll never admit it, though. The A-Rod of education?
A-Rod actually has talent.
I admired Robert Pondiscio when he ran the Core Knowledge blog, but I’m disappointed by him now. Yes, he raises doubts about Moscowitz’s results, but faintly. An intellectually honest piece would put the two-pronged skimming strategy (having to apply weeds out the really dysfunctional families; tough rules weed out the behavior and academic problem children) front and center. You cannot escape the conclusion that these practices play a huge role in the results, yet, unless you read the piece very carefully, this fact does not stand out. Only those of us who’ve been in the classroom can fully appreciate the giant impact of these practices, so in a truly fair piece, this would be spelled out for a lay readership. Pondiscio, who taught in the Bronx, knows this. It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that his intellectual integrity has been compromised by the foundation that currently pays his salary.
Why would you assume the goal was to write an intellectually honest article?
Hey Ponderosa,
Sorry you’re disappointed. Did my best to point to the rests and ask–earnestly and honestly–for deep dive scrutiny while neither privileging critics nor cheerleaders. I’m well aware of the criticisms (attrition, creaming, self-selection, test prep, etc) and offer no position on them other that to suggest that even in the aggregate that wouldn’t seem to account for 73% of 4th graders scoring a 4 on a test that, based on what I’ve seen seemed challenging. The ELA tests results, while less extraordinary strike me as even more difficult to replicate based on what I know, or think I know, about language development. Saying, in effect, “I don’t know what’s going on, but I sure want to find out” strikes me as being fair–appropriately impressed and appropriately skeptical in equal measure. Your mileage may vary.
Good to see you here,
Robert Pondiscio
Hi Robert,
Thanks for your response. I still think your “I don’t know what’s going on” seems a bit disingenuous. We DO know what’s going on; it’s just what you say, “attrition, creaming, self-selection, test prep, etc.” My problem with your piece is that it seems to be trying to brush these aside and hint at a golden Something Else that is the real secret sauce for high achievement. You and I have enough classroom experience to try to hypothesize what this Something Else might be (if it exists at all). Does Success have a Core Knowledge-type curriculum? What are your hypotheses?
Not brushing them aside even a little. Not sure any other way to state what seems to me to be obvious: none of the standard explanations—creaming, attrition, test prep–gets you to 73% of 4th graders scoring level 4 in math. If I had a hypothesis, I’d offer it. If I knew how to get those numbers, I’d be doing it. Golden something? Secret sauce? Your words, not mine. (And your inference, not mine) When I don’t know the answer, I ask a question.
Incidentally, check out Matt DiCarlo’s excellent piece on Shanker Blog. What I said was simple enough: there ought to be a deep dive into this performance. DiCarlo was first into the pool. Hope many more follow.
Robert — why is it “obvious” that the combined effect of the standard explanations you list — “creaming, attrition, [and] test prep” — doesn’t get you to 73% of 4th graders scoring level 4 in math? It seems to me that Moskowitz is a hands-on manager who understood that the state exam scores offered a huge opportunity to demonstrate the value of her schools. I assume she was very focused on the recent curriculum changes. While the DOE schools were floundering through their test-prep months with little to no official guidance on curriculum, Moskowitz was probably all over the Common Core like white on rice. In that context, even a little bit of “creaming” and attrition might make a big difference. I don’t know this to be the case, but it would make sense to me.
It’s “obvious” to me because if I had to, at gunpoint, find 500 3rd graders whom I could reliably get to score a 4 on the next year’s math test, I wouldn’t know where to begin to find them.
There was an interesting Mathematica study a few weeks ago that looked into KIPP’s math scores across 19 schools compared to peer district schools and (I’m summarizing) found backfilling could account for at most one-third of the total gains. They also found that the incoming students were virtually identical in terms of ability (no evidence of creaming) and that students exited in the same numbers, with low-achieving, high-mobility kids leaving both in roughly equal numbers (no evidence of counseling out) The authors were quite clear they could not determine the effect of motivated parents signing up for KIPP vs. choosing something else.
It’s also worth noting I work in Harlem and see no evidence that Success out competes other charters for the brightest students. and as best I can tell, there is not a reputation in the community that Success (like Collegiate, Dalton or Brearley among well-heeled Manhattan parents, for comparison) is where you apply your kid is exceptionally bright.
None of this (I wish this went without saying) is intended to either imply that Success has “cracked the code” or imply that they are getting these numbers improperly. I taught 5th grade in a low-performing South Bronx public school for 5 years. I make no claims to being either an exceptionally good or exceptionally poor teacher. I did see greater gains on average in math than ELA. Even by the debased standards of the tests and scoring in those years (2002-2007) I don’t think I got more than a a dozen out out the roughly 125 kids I worked with to that level. Again, if I knew how to get more kids to 4, I’d have done it.
So that’s why it’s sees obvious to me the standard explanations might account for some boost in scores, but by no means all. And the case for those factors is stronger in the later grades, much less so than in fourth, where they only have one year of state tests by which to judge most likely to score 4s.
Lastly, I think it’s relatively safe to say that most of the participants in this forum have a strong anti-Eva bias. I don’t. I relegated myself to the sidelines of the bellicose edu-wars a long time ago. My purpose is not to prove she is up to no good. I simply want understand how she achieved results that I would not begin to know how to replicate. Once I know that, then I can responsibly judge whether her techniques are right and appropriate for the schools and students I work with. That’s the role charters are supposed to serve, and it’s a role I still take seriously.
Thanks for the reasonably kind and measured exchange.
Robert
“It’s ‘obvious’ to me because if I had to, at gunpoint, find 500 3rd graders whom I could reliably get to score a 4 on the next year’s math test, I wouldn’t know where to begin to find them.”
Come on down to Tribeca!
Researchers at Mathematica etc. really need to look at the educational levels of parents who enroll their children in charters like KIPP and Success Academy. California provides that demographic data on parents and the parents of KIPP students often have higher educational levels than the parents of kids in neighborhood schools –and there is plenty of evidence that parent educational level is as strong a predictor of student achievement as family income.
http://school-ratings.com/school_details/19647330121699.html
Robert –
It is true that there is an anti-Eva bias on this blog, but it’s not gratuitous – she has earned it. She and the schools she runs are privileged above the regular public schools. The kids in those schools where SA is co-located have lost access to playgrounds,libraries, cafeterias and private spaces for counseling and special education. Teachers don’t like unfairness – it’s why many of us got into the profession, you know, like the MacArthur Foundation – “a more just, verdant and peaceful world”.
Perhaps it’s money that gives her the edge. Her schools are better resourced than the ones she pushes, literally, aside. Cash can buy smaller classes, more grown-ups in a class, better food for breakfast and lunch, wrap around services such as eye glasses for kids who need them, filters like counselors to minimize the impact of the bad stuff that happens to kids living in the chaotic atmosphere of poverty. Perhaps her schools are an argument for more money for low SES kids?
Finally, I don’t know that getting kids to a level 4 on an exam is a good focus for kids, teachers, schools or school systems. More, I’d want to know that what goes on at SA works well for most kids, not just a few.
I think having access to more money is a part of it, but it’s also about power and influence, since Moskowitz is a politician with political connections.
So, if I was going to look under the hood to make sure everything was kosher, I would start by examining those “custom test prep packets based on state guidance” that the SA teacher described here early last fall. I would find out what kind of “state guidance” teachers in neighborhood schools received as well, and when both got that.
I’d find out what kind of access teachers in these charters have to the tests, too, and who scores them, compared to teachers at neighborhood schools, because the SA teacher was clearly very familiar with the tests while neighborhood school teachers are not.
I would also look at those parent educational levels.
Something is not right when kids score so high on the state tests but not high enough on the tests to get into selective enrollment high schools.
At the very least, the article should have mentioned that there was a 58% rate of attrition for the 77 student cohort that those 32 8th graders began with when they started 1st grade at Harlem Success Academy 1, Eva’s first school.
The author could have also pointed out that Eva’s schools do not backfill when spaces open up, despite the claims of long waiting lists and obviously large expenditures on marketing for “entry” grades. That is just as important a method for manipulating test scores as high rates of attrition due to counseling out, expulsion, etc.
And why was there was no mention of the fact that NONE of these very same 8th graders were accepted to ANY of the selective enrollment high schools in NY this year?
Maybe those “little test-taking machines” have been conditioned to take only certain kinds of tests…
“Maybe those “little test-taking machines” have been conditioned to take only certain kinds of tests…”
That’s my assumption. When you prep nonstop for the NY State exams, it doesn’t leave much time to prep for the SHSAT. And if I were an eighth-grader (or a parent of one) who was gunning for Stuy or Bronx Science, I wouldn’t waste all my time prepping for the state tests.
to finish your thought CT,
. . . that will serve to make the adults of the schools look like brilliant superstar educators.
It’s a feature not a bug, they plan to expel a certain number of students so that they can keep the funding for educating them for the whole year. (Note that the ones expelled are mostly boys and the charter schools claim that their militaristic and punitive methodology is the only one suitable for black boys.)
It’s sort of like an educational Ferguson.
I really think so, too. It’s inexcusable to be racially profiling children, let alone Kindergartners, like the four little black boys who were targeted and segregated in the back of the class the first week of school, as mentioned by the parent in the video above about her child’s experiences at SA.
The taxpayer is paying double for educating these expelled children, since the charter keeps the money for the year while not having to educate the child, who is sent to the public school to be educated, also at taxpayer expense. I wonder how many thousands of dollars that represents — legally stolen for the taxpayers — for shame. How do these people live with themselves? It’s predation pure and simple.
Every time that legislators wanted pass laws where a pro-rata amount of money follows the child as he/she moves from a charter school to a traditional public school—i.e. a pro-rata amount of what the charter school would utilize the educate the child if he/she stayed for the remainder of the school year MOVES WITH THE CHILD to the traditional public school—Eva has fought this tooth-and-nail, utilizing all her allies’ influence in the process.
Eva only wants a selectively-creamed subset of most cooperative, easiest-to-education kids, but ALL THE MONEY from any kid that stays for even a day at her school, then is kicked out later.
Not only does Eva Moscowitz cheat when it comes to attrition,she cheats in her admissions policy. A friend of mine has two children one in gifted classes the other in Special Ed. The child in Gifted classes received an invitation to Eva Moscowitz’ school. this leads me to the conclusion that she sends out invitations to all the children in gifted classes, so her school does not even work through a lottery system at the beginning.
Dear Diane,
I have been thinking about you and wanted to check in and see how you were feeling?
I also wanted to let you know that Uncommon Newark has a much higher attrition rate than 38%. Bruce Baker documented it previously and I did an analysis a few weeks ago looking at both KIPP and Uncommon in Newark and found attrition rates as high as 57 percent between 5th and 12th grades and attrition rates for males, particularly Black males, as high as 74% at Uncommon.
You can see that analysis here: http://danley.rutgers.edu/2014/08/11/guest-post-where-will-all-the-boys-go/
This is particularly problematic as those chains will educating the majority of students in Camden in the next few years under the Urban Hope program. As my article points out, these chains also don’t reflect the demographics of Camden so students who are LEP, have special needs, or qualify for free lunch as well as male students are likely to be pushed out and end up concentrated in the few remaining public schools in Camden.
Hugs,
Julia
They named this new public school privatization lobbying group “GRAB” :
“The Center for Education Reform is launching a Grassroots Advisory Board, known as GRAB, to accelerate the pace of policy change. Members include Will Cain, an analyst for Glenn Beck’s “The Blaze;” Katie Duffy, the CEO of Democracy Preparatory School; and Colleen Dippel, the founder of the school choice advocacy group Families Empowered. “They’ve proven to be trusted advisors over time to me personally,” CER President Kara Kerwin said. “Now we’re taking their lessons to the streets in our greater campaign for education reform.” More: http://bit.ly/1mrrfwu
Taking it to the streets, they are.
How many people are currently employed in ed reform lobbying, do you think? Ten thousand? Twenty thousand? It is a whole job category. It’s a sector within the charter school sector! 🙂
Some more Obama alums cash in:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/obama-alums-accused-selling-out
I think it’s time to admit none of these people work for us, and never did. Government work is just a brief resume builder that leads directly to big private sector bucks.
The verdict on charters and privatization is already in. Has been for a while.
Even doing a little homework on this blog alone re Success Academy and other charter stars would go a long way to determining whether they have secret sauces, cure-all potions, magic feathers, or silver bullets. *Hint: they don’t.*
Of course, that would require “grit” and “determination.”
Apparently they are in short supply on the ‘no excuses’ side of the ed debates. And for good reason. Not much $tudent $ucce$$ in being ethical, honest and fair with the facts…
😎
P.S. For one example out of many, see the video interview by Darren Marelli in this thread.
P.P.S. Solutions want you, presume I? [a la Yoda] See yesterday’s blog posting entitled “Mike Klonsky to Bill Gates: How to Solve the Problems of Malaria and Good Schools” and the comment by Rufus.
“Gates claims it’s easier to find cures for malaria and other diseases than to “fix” American education. Neither of those things are as difficult as Gates makes them sound. Just look in Bill and Melinda’s neighborhood. No malaria and great schools. Problem solved.”
“Neither of those things are as difficult as Gates makes them sound. Just look in Bill and Melinda’s neighborhood. No malaria and great schools. Problem solved.”
In terms of malaria, what does this mean? Move to a nice neighborhood in America and malaria has been solved? Seriously, what is this quote supposed to mean?
Let’s face it. America the Brave has become America the BULLY. Every single citizen from the oldest boomers to the youngest victims of CCSS have now been programmed with an attitude of “win at any costs”….. anything goes…..everyman for himself!
Bullying is so common people think it is normal. This is a broken country.
I thought Robert Pondiscio’s article was astonishingly skeptical, given who he’s working for. He didn’t give any kudos at all, but said put up or shut up.
Of course SA’s results are bogus. They are almost certainly starting with smart kids to begin with.
There are NO legitimate miracles in the K – 12 education world. None. Never.
Five hundred level 4’s in math out of 680 fourth grade test takers should qualify Eva Moskowitz as the Anne Sullivan of education reform. Except there are NO legitimate miracles in the K – 12 education world. None. Never. yes Rob, we really need to get to the bottom of this. This is a job for Scooby-Doo and Shaggy.
My guess would be an Eva’s brew of 3 parts cherry picking, 2 parts intensive test-prep, 2 parts access to the test, 4 parts creative scoring, and a dash of cookin’ the books. My ratios may be off, but I’d bet my 20 point HEDI score that it took all of those ingredients to produce such a miracle.
NY Teacher, Another important ingredient could be parents’ educational levels. For example, I recently discovered that KIPP schools in CA have many more parents who are high school grads and college educated than the neighborhood schools, including those with which they are co-located.
CA provides such demographic data on their test score website. but I could not find any info about demographics on the NYS or NYC sites where test scores are posted. Do you or anyone else happen to know if there is a NY website where such breakdowns for schools can be found?
NYT,
What is a HEDI score?
Thanks!
A HEDI score seems to be used as a means of gauging teacher (and administrator) performance, not students achievement.
HEDI has four category types: “Highly Effective”, “Effective”, “Developing” or “Ineffective” (thus the acronym, HEDI). Finally, the raw score is converted to a score on a scale of 0-60.
Thanks, Ellie.
I thought it might have stood for Highly Extraneous Dystopian Insanity
Or paraphrasing Wilson: “It requires an enormous suspension of rational thinking to believe that the best way to describe the complexity of any human achievement, any person’s skill in a complex field of human endeavour, is with a number [converted to a named category] that is determined by the [sum] of the number of rubric items they [received]. Yet so conditioned are we [to accept that bullshit] that it takes a few moments of strict logical reflection to appreciate the absurdity, [the dystopian inanity] of this.”
[my additions/changes]
SA schools must be investigated and audited. The new NYS Education Laws specifically permits the Comptroller’s office to audit charter schools.. Prior to the 2014 law, charters fought this power in the courts and actually won!! Let the investigations begin!!!
and there it is:
“Longitudinal analyses have found extremely high rates of attrition within student cohorts and students with disabilities and English Language Learners are over-represented among the students who disappear from Success Academy rosters.”
yeh, nclb. Fortunately those left behind in the regular public schools will be better served with TESOL, reaching IEP goals, and all served by a an actual curriculum focused on more than passing tests.
Let’s pretend for a moment that student scores on the NYS Math andELA Assessments truly determine which students are on track for college and career readiness. There is no research to prove this claim so we must pretend.
Let’s pretend for a moment that Success Academy ‘s unbelievable NYS Assessment results have been achieved through new breakthroughs in education!
Logically, since these are public schools and public schools share best practices, Success Academy should allow teams of educators to investigate all facets of their schools. What may result from these investigations?
1. All public schools will replicate the best practices such as two college educated adults in every classroom, every room updated with appropriate technology, complete hands-on science resources, every parent required to be involved in their child’s education, available educational opportunities beyond the school day. Success will share ALL their developed curriculum materials and test prep materials with all fellow public schools. According to educational law and, well just plain moral values, public schools will not counsel out disruptive students or students who require specialized learning plans, even when funding to implement these specialized plans is inadequate.
2. Through investigation, it will be determined there are best practices that all public schools should consider implementing . Unfortunately, funding for many of the changes can not be replicated in all public schools. More importantly, it will be determined that Success Academy should be added to the list is of successful public and private highly selective NYC schools.
Hey, why don’t we hear from the current and former instructors at Eva Moskowitz’ SUCCESS ACADEMY Network? Thankfully, we can actually do that, and hear the unvarnished truth that they have anonymously shared, thanks to the “Glass Door” website that provides employees an opportunity to share the good, the bad, and the ugly about the people for whom they work, and the workplace culture that they’ve experienced.
(Get it? The “glass door” gives transparency.)
Finally… FINALLY (!!!) in post-Michael-Winerip era, there is a free and independent entity that is beyond the control and clutches of Eva and her ruthless multi-million dollar PR leviathan. Indeed, Glass Door’s posted motto or promise is:
“Your trust is our top concern, so companies can’t alter or remove reviews.”
http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Success-Academy-Charter-Schools-Reviews-E381408_P2.htm?sort.sortType=OR&sort.ascending=true
I just cut’-n-pasted the first 24 teacher reviews from the site above (settle in, it’s a long read if you care to read it all.)
Often I found myself asking the question, “Did I just read what I THOUGHT I read?”
For example, “FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 11” said that Eva banned any administrators or even teachers from writing letters of reference for SUCCESS teachers—current or former—who wished to teach elsewhere. As this teacher put it put it:
“They will not give you reference letter; its against company policy.”
What is this? The Hotel California? “You can check out any time you like but you’ll never be able to work again as a teacher…. that is, if I, Eva Moskowitz, have anything to say about it.” It’s like… “If I can’t control you—i..e. you leave or I push you out—I won’t help you with continuing your teaching career elsewhere.”
In my two decades of teaching in the traditional public schools, I’ve never heard of a administrator acting like this.
Some of them are even “LEAD TEACHERS”—NO. 17 is both a “CURRENT TEACHER” and a “LEAD TEACHER.”
A common refrain is that the 60-80 hour weeks make it utterly impossible to have any kind of personal life or “work-life balance”, and how they “work you until you are sick” and don’t care about your well-being. Oh, the workload and lifestyle make it impossible to have a family or children. But hey, wait a sec. Eva was allowed enough time that have and raise her three kids. As Orwell put it in ANIMAL FARM… “All of us are equal, but some are more equal than others.” And she makes over $ 480,000 / year.
Perhaps my favorite comment came from a teacher comparing Eva’s personality and behavior to that of a Meryl Streep movie villain (from a few years back). “FORMER TEACHER NO. 14 compared working at SUCCESS ACADEMY to…
———————————————————————————————————
” ‘THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA’ — except not funny and you actually can damage hundreds of kids lives in the process.
“Any advice will fall on deaf ears because hers is a method that works well. Google ‘sick system’ and you will find SUCCESS, in its shiny, primary colored glory.”
————————————————————————————————
To jar your memory, here’s the trailer:
And the sad thing is… Eva would be flattered by this comparison, taking it as a compliment… “You’re damn right I’m like that, and if any o’ you teachers, parents, or kids got a problem with that, you can all go SUCK IT!” (not an actual quote… just a little humor)
The reviews have three criteria: PRO’s, CON’s, and ADVICE TO MANAGEMENT. I omitted the PRO’s as they were so trivial (i.e. healthy snacks and the printers work”)
I can just picture Eva in her posh Upper East Side digs reading this, and thinking, “What a bunch o’ lazy wimps and whiners! I don’t want them teaching at my schools, anyway. I wish there was a way to find out who those “CURRENT” teachers posting are, so I could fire all of ’em!”
—————————————————————————————————————–
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 1:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“The most miserable experience I’ve ever had. ”
CON’s:
“One personal day, horrible work-life balance,
— micromanagement of employees,
— no chance for professional or personal growth,
— dictator-like school.”
ADVICE to Management:
“I think it’s too far gone.”
Does NOT Recommend — Negative Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER (& LEAD TEACHER) NO. 2:
“Do your research before accepting a job here.”
1 * STAR (out of 5)
CON’s:
“Unethical treatment of students and teachers,
— competition at all costs,
— little support for students with disability,
— retains an average of less than 50% of students,
— retains an average of 30% of staff,
— leadership and staff are replaced with no communication or explanation,
— humiliation used as main motivational tool for both students and staff,
— students struggle with anxiety,
— very little emotional or social support
— students stay silent 80% of the day, silent hallways in upper grades,
— young students told to stop crying when dealing with personal trauma,
— no work-life balance,
— CEO is in constant conflict with city government which causes ongoing location uncertainty,
— network is rapidly opening new schools while neglecting to fix all of the other dysfunctional sites first.”
Does NOT Recommend — Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 3:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“Toxic Enviorment, Developmentally Inappropriate Abusive Culture of Fear ”
CON’s: “Worked for one of the highest performing schools in the network in the Bronx.
“— Entire school focused on remaining at top of network schools assessment wise while pushing students in completely developmentally inappropriate and emotionally ABUSIVE ways.
” — When I brought up that Eva and the network and research disagrees with practices at my location, I was told the network didn’t know what they were talking about, haven’t I seen our top assessment scores, and that my primary responsibility was to make sure my classroom assessment data was up.
” — Teachers openly MOCKED 6 year olds with learning disabilities telling them they would see them in the same grade again next year because they were neither smart nor hard working and hopefully would not be in their student again- in front of the entire classroom.
” — Left work every day feeling angry at the school until I left permanently.”
ADVICE to Management:
“Teacher culture needs to be totally reformed-
— experienced total lack of professionalism by newer teachers in front of children we were meant to be models for.”
Does NOT Recommend — Negative Outlook – No Opinion of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 4:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“The mission provides so much potential, but falls short in practice ”
CON’s:
“Employees are seen as dispensable and the environment is toxic.
— Leaders rule through fear and intimidation.
— At the network office, pay is low for the hours worked.
— Turnover is extremely high.
— The organization has grown too fast.
— There are other rewarding education organizations that treat their employees better.”
Does NOT Recommend — Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 5:
“Will not shape you into the the teacher that you want to be. ”
1 * STAR (out of 5)
CON’s:
“Lack of support.
— Militaristic style of teaching to the test.
— Students did not learn content.
— Teachers had no work-life balance.”
Does NOT Recommend — No Opinion of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 6:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“Great mission, terrible culture ”
CON’s:
“The leadership team is more interested in making political statements than about choosing the right growth strategy for the organization.”
Does NOT Recommend — Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 7:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“I was an Associate Teacher ”
CON’s:
“Everything.
— Extremely high turnover due to many reasons, just a few of which are listed here. — — Hours are insane,
— management doesn’t care about the employees,
— the style of teaching and discipline is horrifying,
— I didn’t like who I became after working here,
— there are unrealistic expectations of teachers (like I need to log every phone call I make to a parent!?),
— and the feedback is ALWAYS negative without any sense of “you can do it” or “we can do this together”,
— it’s “Get your f*cking sh*t together!”
ADVICE to Management:
“You’ll have a much happier staff if you recognize that employees are PEOPLE who want to have lives outside of work, don’t want to be micromanaged, and will see better results if you approach criticism in a more constructive way rather than beating up your teachers.”
Does NOT Recommend — Neutral Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER (& LEAD TEACHER) NO. 8:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“Overworked and unreasonable expectations on staff, micromanaging ”
CON’s:
” — 1. Micromanaging by leadership
“— 2. No autonomy in your classroom, it’s like they’re making all their teachers into replicas of the one model they’re looking for
“— 3. Overworked school day – I would arrive by 6:45 am and I felt like I was running behind already.
— I would work till 5:00 pm at school, then bolt out the door to get home to my family.
— I would tirelessly grade papers while on the subway, try to respond to the absurd amount of emails and constantly changing meetings, expectations, etc.
— I would work on school work for extra hours at night and it was never enough.
— If this had been my first teaching job out of college, I would have hated teaching.
— Luckily I had 6 years experience in a great school district in a different state.
“The stories I had to tell about this job made everyone in my life tell me to quit. There was so much stress and anxiety going into each week of the job.”
Does NOT Recommend — No Opinion of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CURRENT SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 9:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“Very low morale”
CON’s:
“All teachers are extremely overworked.
— 12-hour work days are the norm.
— Very, very little prep time during the day, as meetings are held during “prep” periods. — Management encourages bizarre competition between teachers, and as a result, morale is low.
” — Students are pushed out of the school if they exhibit any negative behaviors or if their data is low.
— In either case, management will meet with the family to tell them that this school is ‘just not the right fit for them’.
— If that doesn’t work, they will suspend the child ad nauseum or even push them down into a lower grade, so that their exhausted parents give in.
— It’s absurd that this school is publicly funded when it does not serve the population it purports to serve.
— It is honestly more a school for gifted students than a school working to close the achievement gap.
— I include this in my review because it contributes to the low morale of the school – your students who you love are constantly being kicked out.”
Does NOT Recommend — Negative Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 10:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
CON’s:
”
ADVICE to Management:
“Value your teachers more by making their workday more manageable.
— This will lead to teacher retention.
— 6:30am – 6:30pm is not sustainable, as the teacher turnover rate clearly attests.
” — Also, value the children who are told they don’t belong at our school.
“If we can’t help them, what are we doing in the education business?”
Does NOT Recommend — Negative Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 11:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“Not fulfilling, will not help you with career. ”
CON’s:
“I worked exceptionally hard and efficient, and they rewarded me by not hiring me after the internship ended saying “There was not enough work to be done”. There was not enough work to be done because I completed all the tasks. 1 month later surprisingly they found enough work again to open up the position.
” — They will not give you reference letter, its against company policy.
” — You spend days working on projects that they themselves do not want to work on. Some of which include creating thousands of addition and subtraction problems.
” — You’re supposed to work with the Math team however they are never in the office, and you are left alone to do meaningless tasks.
” — You get paid terribly, and not treated as part of the company or team.
” — They exclude interns from meetings, both company and team.
” — Terrible pay despite working you to the bone.”
ADVICE to Management:
“Recognize talent and hard work.
— Be honest about work performance instead of hiding behind HR.”
Does NOT Recommend — Positive Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 12:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“High Turnover, Poor Work Life Balance, Unprofessional Managers ”
CON’s:
“Unprofessional Directors and poor work-life balance. Focus on test scores and nothing else.
” — Staff usually stay less than one year.
” — There are so many HR/Recruiting positions available because the staff turnover is so high,
” — they are constantly searching for other candidates.”
ADVICE to Management:
“Look at the Enrollment and Talent/HR Team and Teacher Dept turnover. Why do certain directors have extremely high turnover and are not being held accountable?”
Does NOT Recommend — Negative Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 13:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“High Turnover, Poor Management ”
CON’s:
” — 1. Poor Management: Management tends to fire those who voice opposition. Look at the turnover data for the Network office…team Ops, team Enrollment…etc.
” — 2. Mostly young, inexperienced staff. The poor management is directly reflective of inexperienced staff.
” — 3. Unrealistic work expectations with no additional compensation or concern for staff well being. In a “no excuses” environment, even being ill with cancer is no excuse for taking a day off.
” — 4. I cannot stress enough how poor the management of department directors and other senior staff is. My manager was the most unprofessional, unqualified person I had worked with in my career.
ADVICE to Management:
“Examine the high turnover rate and be honest about it. There are several directors whose turnover rates for their departments should be analyzed.”
Does NOT Recommend — Neutral Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 14:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“Abusive, panic-driven environment justified with high reward potential ”
CON’s:
“— Erosion of any work/life balance – actually highly, HIGHLY discouraged in culture
— Constant environment of panic maintained to encourage high effort and self-doubt
— Eva is abusive and no one is willing to admit it
— Recommended to young individuals who believe in giving 115% for “the cause,” and have not yet developed concept of “self-boundaries” or “self-care”
— Upon school visitations, their very strict classroom rules for students also border on abusive
— While building critical reading and writing skills in kids, also severely stamps down on self-expression or autonomy (punishments are plentiful, harsh, and unexplained)
— Absolute silence in hallways, even teachers are discouraged from speaking
— Teachers are kept in constant fear of surprise visits and sample collections for evaluation.”
ADVICE to Management:
“To management? Why bother? The network team waited weeks to “introduce me” to the Director, waiting for the right moment. WEEKS. I began to wonder if I should chew on a leaf in an office corner until she became accustomed to my scent. This is how afraid her staff members are, or at the least, this was the culture they tried to project.
“Her direct inferiors are constantly insulted, sent to run on impossible tasks, validated for their submission to her, or ridiculed/fired if not. I had extreme difficulty maintaining any hard boundaries — much less soft ones — during my time there. The literacy team is stressed out beyond belief; they put so much work into what they do but it is never good enough. It was incredible to watch.
‘THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA’ — except not funny and you actually can damage hundreds of kids lives in the process.
Any advice will fall on deaf ears because hers is a method that works well. Google “sick system” and you will find Success, in its shiny, primary colored glory.”
———-
“My advice goes out to the staff.
” — The high turnover occurs because those able to identify the system for what it is and recognize that when faced with self-respect/self-care vs. ‘the cause,’ they should choose to protect what’s left and move on.
” — In addition, once you step quietly back from the whole thing, you will learn that ‘the cause’ has gotten lost in politics, panic and upkeep. ‘The cause’ is potentially damaging to the students that attend the school.
” — If ‘the cause’ is yourself — meaning, you are a young, vibrant, 20-something year old who wants to feel that you’ve single-handedly changed the world — this is probably a better place for you than the ACTUAL NYC education system, which can be disheartening, without guidance or such ripe upward mobility. Here you’ve got micromanaging overhead, and if you ‘survive’ long enough, you can really take your experience everywhere.
“Dear prospective employee: In many aspects, teaching is like social work. Social Work institutions highly, highly encourage you to maintain self-boundaries and self-care. Otherwise you will burn out in a ruthless, demanding, draining career of unrequited love.
“The same way many social-work industries can take advantage of the big hearts and self-validating determination, so can ‘well-intended’ charter schools. Once you find yourself in a position where you have to negotiate your ‘non-negotiable’ (I highly recommend you walk in with one) on a consistent basis, consider stepping back for a long, long moment. Breathe. You will probably ride a cycle similar to breaking up from an unhealthy relationship, but I promise you your quality of life is not worth it.
“In any case, they can replace you so quickly. I think that is what scares everyone the most.”
Does NOT Recommend — Positive Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 15:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
CON’s:
“—Culture – the tone of the organization is driven top-down. Eva and her direct reports are unafraid to bully others and do not show appreciation for those working for them. That trickles down through the organization in a very significant way.
” — Highly-political / not-business minded – Though the organization is a non-profit there is ZERO business sense in making decisions which is sorely needed. Decisions are almost always motivated by political motives.
” — Physical work environment – the actual office is pretty terrible. They signed a 10 year lease on a space that they outgrew in about a year and a half. Some of us were in the former storage spaces with no actual desk phones or any natural light. Some people are in satellite offices with significantly longer commutes.
” — Extremely high turnover with no institutional memory – because people leave so often and the organization does not do a good job of standardizing procedures or capturing information there is a lot of reinventing the wheel that happens when someone comes into a job.”
ADVICE to Management:
“Listen to what your employees are telling you – both current and former – and actually try to take some steps to make a change!”
Does NOT Recommend — Neutral Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CURRENT SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 16:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“The worst—I repeat—The WORST teaching job I have ever had in my life! ”
CON’s:
” — Long hours (minimum 60 hours a week…if your lucky). They have no regard for work-life balance.
— Awful management-Management (Principals, Vice Principals, etc) are trained to run schools like factories and they do.
— Employees are treated like they are just another number not like human beings.
— They have no intrest in teacher retention.
— If you don’t believe me, Google the turnover rate for thier schools.
— Some are at 60%! Lastly, at time the expectations are unrealistic.”
ADVICE to Management:
“Learn how to manage people in a way that makes them want to work for your company for the rest of their lives. I have seen some of the most passionate teachers quit this job.
Does NOT Recommend — Neutral Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CURRENT SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER (& LEAD TEACHER) NO. 17:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“Too miserable to stay, no matter how much you are there “for the kids” ”
CON’s:
“— Arrogant young management
— ZERO personal AND ZERO sick days
— little prep time when accounting for extra meetings
— leadership talks to teachers like they are students
ADVICE to Management:
“I LOVE the mission of Success Charter Network. I love the kids there.
— But I simply cannot stay on board with the unprofessional tone of leadership and the unrealistic demands on us as teachers.
— Working 80 hour weeks and still not completing my ‘assignments’ at a high level tells me there is something wrong with the model. \
— I actually wish the work environment was better so I could stick around for the kids and their families. I am a well educated professional and a highly effective teacher that should not be talked down to by a 26 year old supervisor.
“Until major changes are made, I will look for another charter network… ”
Does NOT Recommend — Neutral Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 18:
1 * STAR (out of 5)
“Bad Work Environment”
CON’s:
“Working longer school years, longer school days (7 AM – 5 PM is mandated… and that includes a flexible prep time… some days you have all of your prep, other days you have none), with less pay.
“Couple this with no tenure, no unionized safety, no days off.
— There are no substitute teachers; if a teacher is absent, you lose your prep time to cover a class.
— And there is no compensation (of time or money) for this. As a result, the average worker sticks around till 8 PM. 7 AM-8 PM = a schedule that is not conducive to most people’s lifestyles.
— Clubs are practically mandated for certain teachers. No choice in this privatized industry.
“This job is not good for anybody who wants to do anything outside of Success. This includes having a family.”
ADVICE to Management:
“Consider changing your mentality towards teachers. Yes, students come first, but so do our personal lives. Make it more family friendly, and maybe there will be less of a teacher turnover in future years.”
Does NOT Recommend — Neutral Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CURRENT SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 19:
2 ** STARS (out of 5)
“Great Company…if you prefer ambiguity and lack of work/life balance ”
CON’s:
“Few standard operating procedures
— Unclear organizational structure
— Poor work/life balance
— Zero opportunities for mentorship and coaching due to youthful management, which leads to
— Young managerial staff with limited experience
ADVICE to Management:
“Stop reinventing the wheel.
— Develop basic policies and procedures.
— Hire competent, experienced staff.”
Does NOT Recommend — Negative Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 20:
2 ** STARS (out of 5)
“Good schools, terrible work environment (unless you are a teacher). ”
CON’s:
“Toxic work environment
— culture of fear
— you could lost your job at anytime, work harder.
Does NOT Recommend — Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 21:
2 ** STARS (out of 5)
“Mission driven, but a cult of personality ”
CON’s:
“High turnover,
— low employee satisfaction,
— incredibly top-down,
— poor upper and middle management,
— over-promotion,
— young workforce that exudes professional immaturity,
— heavy test prep that no one speaks of outside of the organization,
— layers of mismanagement and heavily politicized environment,
— doesn’t care about teacher turnover.
“Teachers are not trusted to do their jobs,
— staff on all levels are micromanaged,
— scaling and expanding too quickly without an adequate strategy or plan in place.
“The CEO, while an incredibly dynamic and intelligent woman, is too heavily involved with the day-to-day instead of focusing on higher level strategy and management of the organization. The organization runs on a cult of personality that revolves around pleasing her, which makes me skeptical that they can truly scale this model of education.”
ADVICE to Management:
“Change your policies towards teachers:
— Try to retain them,
— give more flexible time-off/sick day policies,
— place more trust in their abilities and truly develop them.
— Improve internal communication skills,
— treat employees like they are human,
— stop micromanaging and empower employees to do their jobs well.
“When you are leader and you constantly complain about the incompetencies beneath you – well, the apple never falls far from the tree. The culture starts at the top.”
Does NOT Recommend — Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 22:
2 ** STARS (out of 5)
“Great benefits and salary, good mission, poor execution ”
CON’s:
“Not a lot of autonomy;
— conflicting feedback and management styles;
— too many managers;
— poor work/life balance;
— poor employee culture (encouraged to backbite and compete rather than collaborate)
ADVICE to Management:
“Streamline management of lower level employees:
— teachers do not need and suffer under 4 different managers, particularly when they have varying styles of management and conflicting advice;
— too frequent observations actually contributes more to stress than to accountability.”
Does NOT Recommend — Neutral Outlook – Approves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CURRENT SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 1:
2 ** STARS (out of 5)
“Very Low Morale.”
CON’s:
“Depressing environment.
— Unreasonable workload.
— Teachers have low morale and are stressed.
— No work/life balance.
— Uncertain how much school cares about kids (it’s more about the numbers).
ADVICE to Management:
“The turnover rate is high.
“There are people who want to quit, but can’t because they
— 1) care about the kids,
— 2) need the money,
— 3) signed a 2 year commitment contract,
or
— 4) can’t get a day off to go on another interview.
“Management should be worried about the long-term viability of this organization.
— No one can work at this pace for 10 years.
“Management should invest in retaining their employees instead of hiring new ones constantly.
— Intellectual capital cannot be replicated.
— The hours are terrible. 6:30 am- 7pm stresses everyone out, including the kids.
— One has to wake up four or five am depending on commute and try to get to sleep early for the next day.
“However, the work never ends so there is never enough time to get everything done. You never feel as if you’re doing your job well enough. Ever.”
Does NOT Recommend — Negative Outlook – No Opinion of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER (& LEAD TEACHER) NO. 23:
2 ** STARS (out of 5)
“Well-funded, high expectations, don’t value their employees ”
CON’s:
“I felt completely taken advantage of as a teacher.
— Way overworked (even relative to a prior career that was extremely demanding),
— felt very little respect from network.
— Didn’t care about my work-life balance, personal health, emotional well-being.
— Was assigned way more tasks than what I believe a teacher should be asked to do (which resulted in lower quality work in the classroom).
— Extremely micromanaged, which was forced upon me in my work, and forced upon students as well.
— Little creativity encouraged in learning.”
ADVICE to Management:
“It’s been noted that the network doesn’t care about employee turn over–but this school turned me off from teaching.
— Literally worked me until I was sick.
— Actually care about your employees well-being and sanity–work smarter, not harder. — Allow kids to be kids, and let the teachers teach.
Does NOT Recommend — Neutral Outlook – Disapproves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CURRENT SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER NO. 24:
2 ** STARS (out of 5)
“The Reality is Nothing Like the Image ”
CON’s:
“Employee happiness is on the bottom of the priority list.
— The model seems to be based on bringing in young, idealistic men and women ready to put up with anything and asking them to work around the clock and devote their lives to the job.
— Few last longer than a year, which weakens the culture…some people don’t bother learning colleagues’ names since turnover is so high.
“Vast majority of senior staff are not good managers.
— Just so many terrible management practices that make no sense.
— Management seems to have no respect for employees.
— We are kept in the dark about major issues affecting us,
— management does not solicit employee opinions,
— huge discrepancies in salary between the top tier and the rest.
“Huge focus on testing and test scores.
— The image of multi-disciplinary ‘whole-child’ curriculum just isn’t true in Grades 3 and up, when the students spend months on end preparing for the state tests.”
ADVICE to Management:
“Employee happiness might not seem like a pressing problem, but a model based on constant turnover undermines the organization.
— Some respect toward the employees goes a long way (and I don’t mean casual Friday or free snacks).
Does NOT Recommend — Approves of CEO
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Jack,
Thanks for adding these here. I had posted the link to Glassdoor last night on the “City Limits: Why Is Teacher Turnover So High in NYC Charter Schools?” page of this blog and, since it looks like you missed the following one, I’m adding it here. It’s from a current teacher and is at the top of the 7th page, from “Teaching is a Calling,” who gave SA 5 stars and fawning praise, but nevertheless wrote this:
“Advice to Management
Less focus on 100% one hundred percent of the time. Sitting in magic 5 for 15-20 minutes on the rug is not easy….I’ve tried it out and I was not comfortable. There must be some way of striking a happy medium. T&G/Private schools have demanding behavior codes w/o resorting to 100% all of the time.”
I tried to find out more about the 100% compliance requirement with “magic 5″ 100% of the time for 15-20 minutes sitting on a rug and I found this info, from the SA Family Handbook, indicating that “Slouching / failing to be in “Magic/5/Ready to Succeed” position is a “Level 1″ infraction, which becomes a Level 2 infraction if committed after intervention, and if repeated, then Level 3 and then Level 4. Ultimately, failure to comply can result in expulsion –See increasing consequences here:
http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2012/04/success-academy-family-handbook-only.html As a child development specialist, I think this requirement of young children is abuse.
The 50% attrition rates listed for Achievement First are egregiously incorrect. As of the end of the 2013-14 school year, the attrition rate at AF Providence Mayoral Academy Elementary was 3.2% and the average attrition rate across our New Haven schools was 6.5%. Achievement First is not a “cheating charter chain,” it is a non-profit network of 29 high-performing public charter schools, and it has never been cited for cheating inside or outside of the classroom. In fact, Achievement First has received the highest rating available from Charity Navigator, the nation’s leading independent non-profit evaluator.
I’ll never forget that interview where THE LOTTERY producer / directer Madeline Sackler was interviewed about her pro-charter documentary, and was asked where she got the idea for her doc. She said, “I was just out of college watching the news one day and saw a protest for more charter schools, and thought, ‘Wow this is interesting.’ I then learned more and decided to make the movie.’ ”
Unlike the interviewer, I then looked Ms. Sackler up on the net, and found out that her father Jonathan Sackler was the creator and head of the “Achievement First” charter chain, and also of the charter lobbying group CONN-CAN.
Wow, what a coincidence! She watched something on the news that she found interesting enough to make a film about, and that independent line of action also just happened to also promote the family business.
What are the odds of that happening?
She was also asked why she left out the huge, six-figure salaries of Eva Moskowitz, her dad, and of all the rest of the charter honchos from her documentary, and she said, ‘Well, that’s all public information. The public can find that out on their own.”
Huh? Yeah, Maddie… but why leave it out?
That’s when I realized that like most charter folks, Ms. Sackler wouldn’t know “The Truth” if it went down on her.