The New York Times Magazine has a long article about Eva Moskowitz and her chain of charter schools in New York City. The charter chain was originally called Harlem Success Academy, but Moskowitz dropped the word “Harlem” when she decided to open new schools in gentrifying neighborhoods and wanted to attract white and middle-class families.
I spent a lot of time on the phone with the author, Daniel Bergner. When he asked why I was critical of Moskowitz, I said that what she does to get high test scores is not a model for public education or even for other charters. The high scores of her students is due to intensive test prep and attrition. She gets her initial group of students by holding a lottery, which in itself is a selection process because the least functional families don’t apply. She enrolls small proportions of students with disabilities and English language learners as compared to the neighborhood public school. And as time goes by, many students leave.
The only Success Academy school that has fully grown to grades 3-8 tested 116 3rd graders but only 32 8th graders. Three other Success Academy schools have grown to 6th grade. One tested 121 3rd graders but only 55 6th graders, another 106 3rd graders but only 68 6th graders, and the last 83 3rd graders but only 54 6th graders. Why the shrinking student body? When students left the school, they were not replaced by other incoming students. When the eighth grade students who scored well on the state test took the admissions test for the specialized high schools like Stuyvesant and Bronx Science, not one of them passed the test.
I also told Bergner that Success Academy charters have among the highest rates of teacher turnover every year, which would not happen if teachers enjoyed the work. Helen Zelon wrote in “City Limits”: “In Harlem Success Academies 1-4, the only schools for which the state posted turnover data, more than half of all teachers left the schools ahead of the 2013-14 school year. In one school, three out of four teachers departed.” I also told Bergner about a website called Glass Door, where many former teachers at SA charters expressed their candid views about an “oppressive” work climate at the school. As more of these negative reviews were posted, a new crop of favorable reviews were added, echoing the chain’s happy talk but not shedding light on why teachers don’t last long there.
Bergner argued every issue with me. He reiterated Success Academy’s talking points. He said that public schools lose as many students every year as SA charters; I replied that public schools don’t close their enrollment to new students. Again, defending SA, he said that closing new enrollments made sense because Moskowitz was “trying to build a culture,” and the culture would be disrupted by accepting new students after a certain grade. I responded that public schools might want to “build a culture” too, but they are not allowed to refuse new students who want to enroll in fourth grade or fifth grade or sixth grade or even in the middle of the year.
He did not think it mattered that none of her successful eighth grade students was able to pass the test for the specialized high schools, and he didn’t mention it in the article. Nor was he interested in teacher turnover or anything else that might reflect negatively on SA charters.
Subsequently I heard from his editor, who called to check the accuracy of the quotes by me. I had to change some of the language he attributed to me; for example, he quoted me defending “large government-run institutions,” when what I said was “public schools.” He was using SA’s framing of my views. I asked whether Bergner had included my main point about attrition, and the editor said no. I explained it to her and sent her supporting documentation.
This is the paragraph that appeared in Bergner’s article, which understates the significance of selective attrition while not mentioning SA’s policy of not accepting new students after a certain grade:
“On the topic of scores, the U.F.T. and Ravitch insist that Moskowitz’s numbers don’t hold up under scrutiny. Success Academy (like all charters), they say, possesses a demographic advantage over regular public schools, by serving somewhat fewer students with special needs, by teaching fewer students from the city’s most severely dysfunctional families and by using suspensions to push out underperforming students (an accusation that Success Academy vehemently denies). These are a few of the myriad factors that Mulgrew and Ravitch stress. But even taking these differences into account probably doesn’t come close to explaining away Success Academy’s results.”
This minimizes the stark differences in demographics when comparing her schools to neighborhood public schools. The Success Academy charters in Harlem have half as many English language learners as the Harlem public schools. The Harlem Success Academy 4 school, which has 500 students, has zero students with the highest special needs as compared to an average of 14.1% in Harlem public schools. This disparity is not accurately described as “somewhat fewer.” It is a very large disparity. Attrition rates are high, which would not be happening if the school was meeting the needs of students. As I wrote earlier this year:
“Moskowitz said [on the Morning Joe show on MSNBC], referring to the students in her schools, “we’ve had these children since kindergarten.” But she forgot to mention all the students who have left the school since kindergarten. Or the fact that Harlem Success Academy 4 suspends students at a rate 300 percent higher than the average in the district. Last year’s seventh grade class at Harlem Success Academy 1 had a 52.1 percent attrition rate since 2006-07. That’s more than half of the kindergarten students gone before they even graduate from middle school. Last year’s sixth grade class had a 45.2 percent attrition rate since 2006-07. That’s almost half of the kindergarten class gone and two more years left in middle school. In just four years Harlem Success Academy 4 has lost over 21 percent of its students. The pattern of students leaving is not random. Students with low test scores, English Language Learners, and special education students are most likely to disappear from the school’s roster. Large numbers of students disappear beginning in 3rd grade, but not in the earlier grades. No natural pattern of student mobility can explain the sudden disappearance of students at the grade when state testing just happens to begin.”
I have no personal grudge against Eva Moskowitz. On the few occasions when we have appeared together, we have had very cordial conversation. What I deeply oppose–and this is what I stressed to Bergner and he deliberately ignored–is that Success Academy is not a model for public education. No one expects that Bronx Science is a model because it does not have open doors; it admits only those who meets its standards, and they are high. Eva Moskowitz pretends that her schools get superior results with exactly the same population because of her superior methods, when in reality the success of her schools is built on a deliberate policy of winnowing out low-performing and nonconformist students.
Why did Bergner insist on obscuring this crucial difference between SA charter schools and public schools? Public schools can’t remove students with low scores. They can’t refuse to enroll students with severe disabilities and students who can’t read English. They can’t close their enrollment after a certain grade. Unless they have a stated policy of selective admissions, they must accept everyone who seeks to enroll, even if they arrive in February or March. Their doors must be open to all, without a lottery. It is not honest to pretend that public schools can imitate Moskowitz’s practice of selective attrition. And it is not honest to overlook that difference.
Thank you Diane! Facts are stubborn things…
However, Patty, we’re now in the Through the Looking Glass World of so-called education reform, where people take their cues from Ronald Reagan’s immortal malapropism that “Facts are stupid things.”
Here’s my original post about “Glass Door”
and the comments about Success Academy
from a couple weeks back:
Enjoy (it’s long):
==========================================
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, and 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.”
———————————————————————————-
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
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Wow! Either the New York Times reporter is very very lazy to ignore all this, or he read the Glassdoor reviews and just doesn’t care.
“Either the New York Times reporter is very very lazy to ignore all this, or he read the Glassdoor reviews and just doesn’t care.”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
The latter… In journalism, it’s called the “check it, then lose it,” approach to writing an article.
… as in “check it” to see if a certain human source or data / evidence supports or contradicts the thesis or pre-determined bias you hold… then “lose it” or leave it out of your piece if it contradicts the message you’ve already decided to convey with the article.
Here’s something or rather someone that the writer left out of his piece.
I don’t have time to find the links, but back in fall 2011, I distinctly recall a 20-something Success Academy teacher—recently promoted to assistant principal—who was trotted out as a “show pony” of sorts in multiple venues. These included:
— NBC’s teacher-bashing, pro-privatization EDUCATION NATION week of specials;
— Steve Brill’s book CLASS WARFARE,
and
— the pro-charter propaganda doc THE LOTTERY.
Her name was/is Jessica Reid. Ms. Reid was Eva’s (and others’) prototype of the selfless, young go-getter charter teacher who needed no union to protect her—and she was contrasted with those lazy, half-assed, unionized veteran teachers. My recollection is that this thin blonde beauty came off a little stiff and unconvincing—methought the lady doth protested too much—but, like Campbell Brown, attractive and telegenic for the purposes of corporate reformers.
Well, Ms. Reid’s involvement in pro-charter, anti-union propaganda kind of blew up in the corporate reformers’ faces when Ms. Reid announced that she was quitting SUCCESS ACADEMY, claiming that working for Eva was ruining her marriage, and driving her to a nervous breakdown.
Woops! Maybe she needed a union more than she thought.
I have to go teach in the morning, so I don’t have time to dig up the links. I think she ended up teaching in the NYC’s traditional and unionized public schools, where she became—horror of horrors!!!—a teachers’ union member… but I’m not sure.
UPDATE:
My memory served me well… Yes, Ms. Reid DID go to work for the traditional public schools. Here’s an excerpt from an article in THE NATION:
http://www.thenation.com/article/162695/can-teachers-alone-overcome-poverty-steven-brill-thinks-so#
— – – – – – – – – –
“One of (Steve Brill’s) CLASS WARFARE’s stars, a charter school assistant principal named Jessica Reid, unexpectedly quits her job at Eva Moskowitz’s Harlem Success Academy in the middle of the school year; the charter chain’s rigorous demands pushed the 28-year-old Reid, a dedicated and charismatic educator, to the brink of a nervous breakdown and divorce.
“ ‘This wasn’t a sustainable life, in terms of my health and my marriage,’ she tells Brill, who concludes that he agrees (at least in part) with education historian and charter school critic Diane Ravitch. You can’t staff a national public school system of 3.2 million teachers, Ravitch tells Brill, with Ivy Leaguers willing to run themselves ragged for two years.
“Most of these folks won’t MOVE ON TO JOBS AT THE TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, AS THE UNCOMMONLY COMMITTED JESSICA REID DID, but will simply leave the classroom altogether and head to politics, business or law, where they’ll be paid more to do prestigious work, often with shorter, less pressure-filled hours.”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Eva’s loss was the public schools’—and their students’—gain.
Follow up to the NYT article:
Sent from my iPad
>
It’s a good thing journalists are objective. I’d hate to see what Bergner’s article would look like otherwise.
Dienne: TAGO!
😎
This is but another example of how big media is part of the controlling groups in this nation. Has the NYT become more like the yellow journalist publications that gave us the Spanish American War? I still have the ” turn of the century blues”.
Diane-Submit your response as an op-ed immediately ad also send this column to the Public Editor immediately!
Agree
Yes, the readers of the NYTs need to see what you wrote.
Definitely
I’d like to know who is going to pay the rent at her new Milion dollar digs. Is it the taxpayers? Why also does she get near a half million dollar salary few so many fewer kids than Superintendent Farina?
Why do the politicians allow her nonsense? (Rhetorical question, I know.)
Danny’s been hitting those bottles of Charter Skool-Aid.
I gave up expecting anything of merit on education from “the paper of record,” about a decade ago when they dropped Richard Rothstein as a frequent contributor on education issues. No matter what sort of nonsense might appear from other education writers, I knew I could count on RR to write profound analyses grounded in high-quality research and facts. When I wrote to the NYT to complain about their having dropped Rothstein, I got an absolutely oleaginous pro forma response that tried to convince me that there was nothing to worry about. I already knew that there was in fact PLENTY to be concerned with, but that ridiculous reply cinched it for me, and 10+ years of almost universally bad reportage from The Grey Lady on education has not assuaged my worst fears.
Diane,
Thank you for your response to the frustrating Times piece. Why do you think Times’ journalists consistently present such a partial narrative in favor of reform? As an institution, with regards to education issues, the NYTs have let the “ball” drop big time!
Here is a copy of the comment I posted on the Times blog page when it came out a few days ago:
While the article mentions the issue of high student attrition at Success Academies, it fails to explain the full significance.
As an experienced, and dedicated, public school teacher, I can tell you that what infuriates me about Eva Moskowitz is that she is not doing anything that public schools can’t do if we are allowed to remove anywhere from 30% to 60% of our lowest performing, most difficult students!
Every year, in the high poverty, North Philadelphia, public school, where I teach, 30 to 55 percent of my students score proficient or above on the Pennsylvania state assessments. If, like Eva Moskowitz, I could remove substantial numbers of my most challenging students, I too could boast an 80% plus proficiency rate on the high stakes tests. The best charter schools have an array of self selecting systems that, in effect, allow them to skim the best students from public schools while removing those who are unable to align themselves with the academic program. This has the benefit of creating a haven for those students who come to school ready to learn, but it provides little or no support to those with the greatest social, emotional, and academic needs. These students aggregate in chronically underfunded and over crowded public schools that are essentially set up to fail.
How is this a solution?
How are Eva’s schools any better than the many high achieving academically selective urban, and PUBLIC, “Magnet” schools?
How do you justify her half million annual salary?
Jonathan, NYT is Gates-funded, and he is “encouraging” the media in private meetings with them to promote ed reform “success.” NPR (also Gates funded) just published fluff on the New Orleans charters.
I wrote about all of the above in this post:
In honor of this puff piece, I have rewritten (with VERY SMALL alterations the Dustin Hoffman classic move, The Graduate, to become the new improved movie — THE TFA GRADUATE. Enjoy…
Movie Pitch — The TFA Graduate by Terry A. Ward
tagline: This is Benjamin. He’s a little worried about the future of public education.
Synopsis: Benjamin Braddock, a recent Ivy League graduate returns home and is unsure about his future. He meets a family friend, Eva Moskowitz, and soon enters the exciting world as a TFA teacher in a charter school..
Sample dialogue 1:
A friend of Braddock’s father counsels young Benjamin on his future:
Mr. Duncan: I just want to say two words to you. Just two words.
Benjamin: Yes, sir.
Mr. Duncan: Are you listening?
Benjamin: Yes, I am.
Mr. Duncan: Charter schools.
Benjamin: Exactly how do you mean?
Sample dialogue 2:
Mrs. Moskowitz has Benjamin alone and is trying to get him to commit to her school system:
Benjamin: I mean, you didn’t really think I’d do something like that.
Mrs. Moskowitz: Like what?
Benjamin: What do you think?
Mrs. Moskowitz: Well, I don’t know. Teach?
Benjamin: For god’s sake, Mrs. Moskowitz. Here we are. You got me into your office. You give me a tour. You… put on a Powerpoint presentation. Now you start telling me the state education agencies won’t ever be visiting.
Mrs. Robinson: So?
Benjamin: Mrs. Moskowitz, you’re trying to recruit me.
Mrs. Moskowitz: [laughs] Huh?
Benjamin: Aren’t you?
Isn’t it also a poor model in tbat Kindergaryem students are in an all-academic environment for a corporate-length workday with rare gym, no play and little recess? How can a sedentary program that ignores cognitive, physical and social developmental needs be a model for educating a strong nation?
I read her book and she brags about her blockrooms solely for kindergartners, which sounds great, right? Except the kids aren’t allowed to just play with the blocks. First they have to plan out what they’re going to build, then they have to meet with their “teams” to discuss it and count out the number and kinds of blocks they’re going to need, then they build and then they have to give a report on their building activity.
Now that will make them love learning!
Here’s something or rather someone that the writer left out of his piece.
I don’t have time to find the links, but back in fall 2011, I distinctly recall a 20-something Success Academy teacher—recently promoted to assistant principal—who was trotted out as a “show pony” of sorts in multiple venues. These included:
— NBC’s teacher-bashing, pro-privatization EDUCATION NATION week of specials;
— Steve Brill’s book CLASS WARFARE,
and
— the pro-charter propaganda doc THE LOTTERY.
Her name was/is Jessica Reid. Ms. Reid was Eva’s (and others’) prototype of the selfless, young go-getter charter teacher who needed no union to protect her—and she was contrasted with those lazy, half-assed, unionized veteran teachers. My recollection is that this thin blonde beauty came off a little stiff and unconvincing—methought the lady doth protested too much—but, like Campbell Brown, attractive and telegenic for the purposes of corporate reformers.
Well, Ms. Reid’s involvement in pro-charter, anti-union propaganda kind of blew up in the corporate reformers’ faces when Ms. Reid announced that she was quitting SUCCESS ACADEMY, claiming that working for Eva was ruining her marriage, and driving her to a nervous breakdown.
Woops! Maybe she needed a union more than she thought.
I have to go teach in the morning, so I don’t have time to dig up the links. I think she ended up teaching in the NYC’s traditional and unionized public schools, where she became—horror of horrors!!!—a teachers’ union member… but I’m not sure.
UPDATE:
My memory served me well… Yes, Ms. Reid DID go to work for the traditional public schools. Here’s an excerpt from an article in THE NATION:
http://www.thenation.com/article/162695/can-teachers-alone-overcome-poverty-steven-brill-thinks-so#
— – – – – – – – – –
“One of (Steve Brill’s) CLASS WARFARE’s stars, a charter school assistant principal named Jessica Reid, unexpectedly quits her job at Eva Moskowitz’s Harlem Success Academy in the middle of the school year; the charter chain’s rigorous demands pushed the 28-year-old Reid, a dedicated and charismatic educator, to the brink of a nervous breakdown and divorce.
“ ‘This wasn’t a sustainable life, in terms of my health and my marriage,’ she tells Brill, who concludes that he agrees (at least in part) with education historian and charter school critic Diane Ravitch. You can’t staff a national public school system of 3.2 million teachers, Ravitch tells Brill, with Ivy Leaguers willing to run themselves ragged for two years.
“Most of these folks won’t MOVE ON TO JOBS AT THE TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, AS THE UNCOMMONLY COMMITTED JESSICA REID DID, but will simply leave the classroom altogether and head to politics, business or law, where they’ll be paid more to do prestigious work, often with shorter, less pressure-filled hours.”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Eva’s loss was the public schools’—and their students’—gain.
No surprise.
Back in 1982, The New York Times Magazine published a piece by Christopher Jones about his supposed visit to Kampuchea and his sighting of Pol Pot. Alexander Cockburn, writing Press Clips for the Village Voice, uncovered the fraud, when he noticed Jones plagiarized Andre Malreux’s The Royal Way.
http://tinyurl.com/kgesjpg
Also, in March 1983, NYT Magazine published an article on the “new scholarship” regarding the Vietnam War. The quality of the article and new scholarship was foreshadowed by the magazine cover which showed Douglas Pike in front of a blackboard where the word “ideological” was misspelled as “Idelogical.”
As was noted at the time, “So now, not even a decade after the Americans left Vietnam, we have am alliance of old mass-murderers, new scholars, neo-conservatives, neo-liberals, ex-radicals, and no doubt neo-leftists proclaiming that the US was morally justified in its intervention in Vietnam, militarily victorious in its conduct of the war and, stayed from triumph only stabs in the back administered, according to taste, by the press, the protesters, the Congress or indeed the President.”
On Sept 1 the NY Daily News published this letter: Juan Gonzalez’s piece on Eva Moscowitz was spot on. It is obscene that this operator of a handful of charter schools is paid more than double what the head of NYC’s 1.1 million student system is paid. When will Americans wake up to the fact that charter schools are mainly part of a campaign to privatize education, turn students into widgets, and make over teachers into assembly line robots? Enough already. — Edd Doerr, Silver Spring, MD (arlinc.org(“
A great article from “With a Brooklyn Accent,” just caused a lightbulb of sorts to pop over my head. (SEE BELOW)
Apparently, working at Eva’s Charter Network is sort of like living in East Berlin after World War II, and the Charter World in general like those countries then behind the Iron Curtain. Given the job opportunities in the public system—sort of like an open border / the absence of a “Berlin Wall”—the charter school teachers readily defect to work for the public school system, where, thanks to union protections, they thankfully can work in a harmonious environment where they are treated as professionals, with respect, dignity, and are free from bullying and abuse.
That’s why Eva’s one-time PR “show pony” Jessica Reid defected to work at a unionized public school and —horror of horrors!!!—join the local teachers’ union when Eva drove Ms. Reid to the brink of a nervous breakdown, and almost destroyed Jessica’s marriage:
http://www.thenation.com/article/162695/can-teachers-alone-overcome-poverty-steven-brill-thinks-so#
(That’s not the article I’m referring to… it’s BELOW)
This explains Eva’s dictate that no current teachers shall not now, nor ever will receive a letter of recommendation—from an administrator, or fellow teacher (writing one being a fireable offense)— in pursuit of a teaching job outside the Success Academy network (“company policy” according to what one of her former teachers posted on Glass Door)
The “no letters of rec policy is Eva’s version of the “Berlin Wall”, or a closed border.
That explains why Eva, Michelle Rhee, Steve Perry, Geoffrey Canada, and the other charterization/privatization creeps are seeking the total annihilation of unionized schools. Once they have achieved this, Eva (and the others) can then snarl at her abused workforce, “Hey, there’s no more public schools with unions anymore for you to escape to, so you’re all stuck here and have to put up with this hell-hole environment whether you like it or not… either that or leave the teaching profession altogether.”
Finally, here’s that article to which I’m referring, where the author (Mark Naison?) talks about this key — though rarely discussed— reason that charter leaders are so obsessed with annihilating teacher unions, and running them down, and scapegoating them for all that’s wrong with education.
http://withabrooklynaccent.blogspot.com/2014/09/why-charter-school-leaders-are-behind.html
Here’s the text:
—————————-
“Thursday, September 4, 2014
“Why Charter School Leaders Are Behind
Attacks on Teachers Unions and Public Schools
“If you ever wonder why famous charter school leaders like Eva Moskowitz or Steve Perry don’t just run their schools quietly and let the results speak for themselves and instead devote much of their time attacking teachers, teachers unions and public schools, consider this.
“When the hiring freeze in NYC public schools was lifted a few months ago, a large number of charter school teachers applied for positions in NYC public schools, especially in high performing schools with principals known for treating their staffs well. These teachers couldn’t wait to get out of jobs with long hours, no due process or job security and abusive administrators for positions in well run public schools.
“The hiring freeze is back on so the exodus of charter school teachers has temporarily ended, but you can see why a strong public school system, buttressed by strong teachers unions, is threatening to charters. The best teachers want to teach in well run public schools and be protected by unions. That could be why Eva Moskowitz is a major force behind the lawsuits attacking teacher tenure in New York City and New York State.
“If public education remains strong in New York City, she will not be able to hold on to her best teachers.”
—————————————————-
Anyway, back to me.
In 2009, we had teacher layoffs out here in L.A. at the hands of some corporate reform whores serving on the LAUSD Board (thanks to UTLA botching several key elections, we lost control of the board for about 4 years.)
At that time, I remember attending a friend’s wedding where I was sat at the same table with someone on the board of a prominent charter school.
We then got into a lively chat about ed policy. She kept interrupting me when I distinguished between public schools and charter schools.
“Charter schools are public schools!” she angrily snarled.
In response, I said that the only thing “public” about them was the money, as charter schools were and are…
— not accountable to the “public” via a democratically-elected board,
— not transparent to the “public”, and
— refused to educate all the “public”—those children who are most expensive and difficult to educate—special ed., second-language learners, foster care, homeless, behavior problems, etc.
In essence, her alleged “public” school was nothing more than a “private” school using “public money,” and the parents were saving thousands of dollars they would have otherwise (and could have) shelled out to an actual private school. That tax money that went to her school was draining money from and damaging the public schools where I taught… blah-blah-blah… The difference between this set-up and vouchers is minimal.
Needless to say, these comments went over well with her…. NOT!
Anyway, I asked her how things were going with her school, and she said that thanks to the recent layoffs by the new anti-union school board (UTLA botched several elections, and for 4 years, we lost control of the LAUSD Board, but that’s another story). Those UTLA folks were now being forced out of desperation into working at charter schools like hers.
“We’re finally getting applications from credentialed teachers”, this woman gleefully reported.
(Though I didn’t ask it at the time, this comment begged the question, “Then what-the-hell kind of teachers applied before, or have been working at your school until now?”)
There was one traditional public school where four of the laid-off teachers working there (victims of 2009 RIF, or layoffs) all applied and took jobs at a nearby charter school. I ran into one of them while I was out Christmas shopping…about mid-December, if memory serves.
“So how’s Such-and-Such Charter School treating you guys?”
“We all quit just before Thanksgiving,” she abruptly replied.
“Really, why?”
” ‘Cause we were working in f—in’ sweatshop.”
“So they made you work hard?”
“No, the hard work wasn’t the problem. I normally work hard. I enjoy hard work. It was the toxic, fear-based, abusive environment. Nothing you did was good enough. You were constantly abused, run down, and bullied, and in front of others—parents, kids, fellow staff… I can only compare it to being in a relationship with a controlling, abusive husband or boyfriend. And not one of the abusers had any background of experience in education… apart from one with a 2-year stint at TFA.”
“What happened?”
“Well, one of us (the four) said she was going to resign on the Wednesday before Thanksgiving… so we all talked amongst each other and decided to do it together and join her that day. When we did, the Director couldn’t have cared less. No attempts to dissuade us or anything. No “Good luck elsewhere”. Just pack your sh– and go. We were just like lightbulbs that burnt out, and were soon replaced with new lightbulbs.”
On that score, LAUSD needed to start hiring again last spring, and—surprise, surprise—I’m meeting teachers who are refugees who defected from the Charter World… the opportunity to work in a unionized environment erasing the metaphorical “Berlin Wall” or close border (from earlier in this post). I sat next to one of them at this year’s first UTLA Area Meeting the week before last, and she told almost the same, word-for-word story as the teacher above did.
“I’m so glad to be outta there. It was Hell!”
Oh what the hell… I’m going to out that charter network that this teacher bitched about. She was describing her time working at Judy Burton’s “Alliance for College Ready Public Schools”
http://www.laalliance.org/
Bregner’s last book was on female sexual desire.Once again, we have a writer who knows nothing about education, teaching or public schools writing an influential article on education in “the paper of record”. This is in itself itself shameful. But to make matters absurd, this know-nothing writer on female sexual desire, has the audacity to shill for Eva Moskowitz and argue about education with Diane Ravitch. We could all get a good laugh about this situation, if it wasn’t so enraging and representative of the level of coverage provided by the main stream media..
Do you think Eva “The Mask” Moscowitz put on a great S&M routine to show ol Danny Boy what her “female sexual desire” looked like???
There is little more to write about the ‘the lady in red’. whatever. the whole god damn process is a pos. But who really cares? Yes, I know that WE care. Is there anyone else out there in the educational cosmos? Yes, I know about the growing resistance. Yet we have to tolerate this type of writing time, after, time. As I wrote in my original post: this situation is enraging. And who the hell is Daniel Bregner, anyway, except one more clever, glib, shill writer. Yom Kipour is coming.. Bregner has a a bunch of sins to cast away…if he can. Enough. Time to take a shower.
LOL Duane
Eva should not be let out of her golden cage, except to dance the tango with the ‘puff’ man’, Mr. Bregner..
Agree agree agree. Diane, your reply needs to be published in NYT. As a former Success Academy employee, I would add that the article said very little about what does go on in the classroom. From my experience I know that it is relentless test prep to the exclusion of areas not tested, ( art, music, social studies, e.g.) and the emotional and social development of the students. They become robots that must perform to support Eva’s ambition. In this however, she is not solely to blame. If TESTING were not the be all and end all, and the measure of “success,” then schools and especially charter schools whose existence depends upon this “success” would not have to push students this way. Moreover, the attrition rate may not be only students who were pushed out, but also parents who wanted a more complete, less prison-like education for their kids.
Annette,
Since you’re a former Success Academy employee, I have to ask you:
Is it true what “Former Success Teacher No. 11” said on the Glass Door website (ABOVE)…
… that Eva, S.A. administrators, and even fellow S.A. teachers “will not give you reference letter; it’s against company policy.”
If so, that’s pretty effed up.
Jack
Annette,
I respectfully disagree with your following statement:
———————————–
“(Success Academy students) become robots that must perform to support Eva’s ambition. In this however, she is not solely to blame. If TESTING were not the be all and end all, and the measure of ‘success,’ then schools and especially charter schools whose existence depends upon this ‘success’ would not have to push students this way.”
————————————–
No, no, no, no, NO!!! … to infinity! In an operation that is such a rigid, dictatorship like the one Eva runs, she most certainly, and is solely to blame for turning children into “robots”, or to quote another Success Academy higher up… turning them “into little test-taking machines”.
Read the Eva Moskowitz emails—for which NYC reporter Juan Gonzalez had to fight for months to get his hands on, even having to file of Freedom of Information Act request. Then witness for yourself how former NYC Chancellor Joel Klein is cowering in fear of Evan, and then jumping through each and every hoop she sets out… all the while acting like Eva’s little bitch-boy. Over and over and over, Klein gives into whatever Eva wants, whenever Eva wants it. It’s quite a nauseating read, Annette.
Eva could have used that same clout to end, or at least reduce this insane over-emphasis and misuse of students’ test scores.
For several years, Eva has had an opportunity to push for a more humane approach to testing and a reduction in required test prep, and she didn’t do squat, and probably ever will.
annette: thank you for the information.
And as for Daniel Bergner’s qualification to write about education, it is only necessary to ask the question: why is Michael Winerip no longer a major writer in the NYT about education?
Perhaps the answer lies in a short piece from 2012, NYT, in a piece he wrote entitled “In Lists of Best High Schools, Numbers Don’t Tell the Whole Story.” This is how it ends:
[start quote]
Mark Miller, director of editorial operations for Newsweek and The Daily Beast, says that as long as people understand the limits of the criteria, “the list serves a valid purpose.”
“We made a choice to rank the schools by how well they prepared children for college,” he said. “If not for the school, they might not have the opportunity to get into college.”
Mr. Miller noted that May was a record month for traffic at The Daily Beast, with 95 million views, thanks in good part to the list.
Given that magazines and newspapers are bleeding to death, this is the only plausible justification I can think of: Lists are cash cows.
I am not against schools with selective admissions. They are a vital part of the public system. My own mother, who grew up in an East Boston tenement, passed the test to get into Girls Latin School and then went on to Radcliffe.
My concern is that the lists are stacked. Schools with the greatest challenges can appear to be the biggest failures. At a time when public education is so data-driven, that kind of thinking can cost dedicated teachers and principals their jobs.
[end quote]
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/04/education/in-best-high-schools-lists-numbers-dont-tell-all.html?pagewanted=2&_r=3&emc=eta1
That last paragraph answers the question. Being qualified to make informed judgments is obviously a disqualification for being the sort of journalist the NYT needs on the education beat.
Oh me oh my…
😎
Krazy – Your mom and I have a lot in common. : )
All the lies paid to print. How pathetic.
Here’s Dr. Ravitch’s response of HuffPost:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-ravitch/charter-schools_1_b_5781474.html?utm_hp_ref=education&ir=Education
=========================
Success Academy,
‘The New York Times Magazine’
and Public Education
by
Diane Ravitch
Posted: 09/07/2014
8:05 pm EDT
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
The New York Times Magazine has a long article about Eva Moskowitz and her chain of charter schools in New York City. The charter chain was originally called Harlem Success Academy, but Moskowitz dropped the word “Harlem” when she decided to open new schools in gentrifying neighborhoods and wanted to attract white and middle-class families.
I spent a lot of time on the phone with the author, Daniel Bergner. When he asked why I was critical of Moskowitz, I said that what she does to get high test scores is not a model for public education or even for other charters. The high scores of her students is due to intensive test prep and attrition. She gets her initial group of students by holding a lottery, which in itself is a selection process because the least functional families don’t apply. She enrolls small proportions of students with disabilities and English language learners as compared to the neighborhood public school. And as time goes by, many students leave.
The only Success Academy school that has fully grown to grades 3-8 tested 116 third graders but only 32 eighth graders. Three other Success Academy schools have grown to sixth grade. One tested 121 third graders but only 55 sixth graders; another 106 third graders but only 68 six graders; and the last 83 third graders but only 54 sixth graders. Why the shrinking student body? When students left the school, they were not replaced by other incoming students. When the eighth grade students who scored well on the state test took the admissions test for the specialized high schools like Stuyvesant and Bronx Science, not one of them passed the test.
I also told Bergner that Success Academy charters have among the highest rates of teacher turnover every year, which would not happen if teachers enjoyed the work. Helen Zelon wrote in City Limits:
——————————————————
“In Harlem Success Academies 1-4, the only schools for which the state posted turnover data, more than half of all teachers left the schools ahead of the 2013-14 school year. In one school, three out of four teachers departed.”
——————————————————-
I also told Bergner about a website called Glass Door, where many former teachers at SA charters expressed their candid views about an “oppressive” work climate at the school. As more of these negative reviews were posted, a new crop of favorable reviews were added, echoing the chain’s happy talk, but not shedding light on why teachers don’t last long there.
Bergner argued every issue with me. He reiterated Success Academy’s talking points. He said that public schools lose as many students every year as SA charters; I replied that public schools don’t close their enrollment to new students. Again, defending SA, he said that closing new enrollments made sense because Moskowitz was “trying to build a culture,” and the culture would be disrupted by accepting new students after a certain grade. I responded that public schools might want to “build a culture” too, but they are not allowed to refuse new students who want to enroll in fourth grade or fifth grade or sixth grade, or even in the middle of the year.
He did not think it mattered that none of her successful eighth grade students was able to pass the test for the specialized high schools, and he didn’t mention it in the article. Nor was he interested in teacher turnover or anything else that might reflect negatively on SA charters.
Subsequently I heard from his editor, who called to check the accuracy of the quotes by me. I had to change some of the language he attributed to me; for example, he quoted me defending “large government-run institutions,” when what I said was “public schools.” He was using SA’s framing of my views. I asked whether Bergner had included my main point about attrition, and the editor said no. I explained it to her and sent her supporting documentation.
This is the paragraph that appeared in Bergner’s article, which understates the significance of selective attrition while not mentioning SA’s policy of not accepting new students after a certain grade:
———————————–
“On the topic of scores, the U.F.T. and Ravitch insist that Moskowitz’s numbers don’t hold up under scrutiny. Success Academy (like all charters), they say, possesses a demographic advantage over regular public schools, by serving somewhat fewer students with special needs, by teaching fewer students from the city’s most severely dysfunctional families and by using suspensions to push out underperforming students (an accusation that Success Academy vehemently denies). These are a few of the myriad factors that Mulgrew and Ravitch stress. But even taking these differences into account probably doesn’t come close to explaining away Success Academy’s results.”
—————————————
This minimizes the stark differences in demographics when comparing her schools to neighborhood public schools. The Success Academy charters in Harlem have half as many English language learners as the Harlem public schools. The Harlem Success Academy 4 school, which has 500 students, has zero students with the highest special needs as compared to an average of 14.1 percent in Harlem public schools. This disparity is not accurately described as “somewhat fewer.” It is a very large disparity. Attrition rates are high, which would not be happening if the school was meeting the needs of students. As I wrote earlier this year:
—————————————————–
“Moskowitz said [on the Morning Joe show on MSNBC], referring to the students in her schools, “we’ve had these children since kindergarten.” But she forgot to mention all the students who have left the school since kindergarten. Or the fact that Harlem Success Academy 4 suspends students at a rate 300 percent higher than the average in the district. Last year’s seventh grade class at Harlem Success Academy 1 had a 52.1 percent attrition rate since 2006-07. That’s more than half of the kindergarten students gone before they even graduate from middle school. Last year’s sixth grade class had a 45.2 percent attrition rate since 2006-07.
“That’s almost half of the kindergarten class gone and two more years left in middle school. In just four years Harlem Success Academy 4 has lost over 21 percent of its students. The pattern of students leaving is not random. Students with low test scores, English Language Learners, and special education students are most likely to disappear from the school’s roster. Large numbers of students disappear beginning in third grade, but not in the earlier grades. No natural pattern of student mobility can explain the sudden disappearance of students at the grade when state testing just happens to begin.”
—————————————————-
I have no personal grudge against Eva Moskowitz. On the few occasions when we have appeared together, we have had very cordial conversation. What I deeply oppose — and this is what I stressed to Bergner and he deliberately ignored — is that Success Academy is not a model for public education. No one expects that Bronx Science is a model because it does not have open doors; it admits only those who meets its standards, and they are high. Eva Moskowitz pretends that her schools get superior results with exactly the same population because of her superior methods, when in reality the success of her schools is built on a deliberate policy of winnowing out low-performing and nonconformist students.
Why did Bergner insist on obscuring this crucial difference between SA charter schools and public schools? Public schools can’t remove students with low scores. They can’t refuse to enroll students with severe disabilities and students who can’t read English. They can’t close their enrollment after a certain grade. Unless they have a stated policy of selective admissions, they must accept everyone who seeks to enroll, even if they arrive in February or March. Their doors must be open to all, without a lottery. It is not honest to pretend that public schools can imitate Moskowitz’s practice of selective attrition. And it is not honest to overlook that difference.
He really should stick to writing about sex , what women want , no less, as that other NYT writer should stick to restaurant reviews.http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/06/what_do_women_want_sex_according_to_daniel_bergner_s_new_book_on_female.html
The distortion is so scary that it’s surreal…
NY Times assigns sex writer to cover charter schools. How about that?
On the principle that it takes a whore to know a one, I guess.
TAGO!
DTAGO!
What’s the backstory about who’s behind Eva’s puff piece published in the NYT?
Boy would I love to know the answer to that question!
One gues about the backstory: she is running for mayor and this is her first campaign literature
If you’re ever looking for a career change, you could try your hand at horror novels. That’s one of the most frightening things I’ve read in a while, and I read a lot of truly frightening things (most of which, right here on this blog).
Fortunately, no one reads the NYT anymore — no one who has kids in public school, that is.
When I first read the piece, I was shocked and dismayed that there was no mention of Success’s no-backfill policy. The network does not admit new students after the very first day of third grade in any of its schools, despite having plenty of seats open up due to attrition. Now it’s clear: Success didn’t want that information to appear in the article.
I couldn’t care less about Success’s teacher attrition. I believe their student attrition is likely in line with the attrition rates at district schools serving comparable student populations. The evidence that Success is actively counseling kids out is extremely scarce, and having reviewed lots of their charter applications, I am confident that they are fulfilling their legal obligations with respect to outreach to ELL, special ed, and economically disadvantaged families (it’s not their fault that the law doesn’t require them to do much). The average Success applicant is zoned for a district school that the folks who complain the loudest about culture and test prep would never send their own kids to in a million years.
But Success’s failure to backfill is a different story. Try reading the NYS charter school law and adding the phrase “except for children who have passed the first day of third grade”:
“Improve student learning and achievement; except for children who have passed the first day of third grade
“Increase learning opportunities for all students, with special emphasis on expanded learning experiences for students who are at-risk of academic failure; except for children who have passed the first day of third grade
“Provide parents and students with expanded choices in the types of educational opportunities that are available within the public school system; except for children who have passed the first day of third grade”
Why doesn’t Success backfill? Forget their absurd justification that it’s about preserving a culture for the kids who are there. It’s about preserving test scores. If they had to fill seats with newcomers, some of them would not be proficient, and the network couldn’t peddle its (misleading) line that they score better than Scarsdale. The particularly sad thing is that they are definitely underestimating the kids who would come in via backfill, and they’re probably underestimating their own ability to teach them.
If you are a resident of New York State and you want to voice your concern about Success’s policy, I urge you to write to the three SUNY trustees who are responsible for granting charters and charter renewals: Joseph W. Belluck, Stephen J. Hunt, and John L. Murad, Jr.. cc Susan Miller Barker, Ralph Rossi II, Esq, Ron Miller, PhD, Natasha Howard, PhD, and Maureen Murphy. Write a letter saying that Success schools are violating the spirit and possibly the letter of the state charter school law by failing to allow new students to enter their schools after the first day of third grade, and justifying that policy by saying students after that milestone would not be smart enough to keep up. Mail (yes, sorry, it has to be snail mail) it to:
Charter Schools Institute
State University of New York
41 State Street, Suite 700
Albany, NY 12207
Tim,
Eva is well connected in Albany so these complaints will fall on deaf ears. I remember when charters were first started, many by teachers before KIPP came into the picture. You will find many of these schools are no longer in existence because the bigger charter chains wanted their space and got it. This is the new “spirit” of the charter industry.
It’s a fallacy that competition leads to improvements in business, and all you have to do is look at their cut throat “spirit” and hostile take-over practices to see reality. Businesses typically aim to either crush the competition or buy them out, and these practices are pervasive in privatized education as well.
Tim,
Bergner knew about the SA policy of not accepting new students after a certain grade (you say it is 3rd, I’m not sure). But he thought it was unimportant and didn’t mention it.
Where is the video of the mother who had her son in SA and was told he was not a good fit ? Would be good to put that back up on this thread. She had a very impactful personal story that involved the key issues with SA.
The impact of the Sprowal case has been blunted by the fact that it seems to be mostly isolated, and that Success somehow found her a placement at a respected special ed inclusion program in a zoned school her son would normally not be eligible to attend.
In fact, for the average NYC DOE parent, the takeaway from Sprowal probably isn’t that charters counsel out, it’s that all these strict rules about zones can be bent if you know the right people. As this recent analysis shows, NYC DOE parents are desperate to be able to choose schools other than the ones they are zoned for: http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20140902/upper-west-side/map-these-are-most-popular-elementary-schools-new-york-city
I doubt highly that the Sprowal case is an isolated incident. She indicated that her son and at least 3 other students had been isolated in the classroom. The school’s response to these children seemed to be pretty organized, which to me suggested that this standard policy there.
Beth, Success has had close to 10,000 kids attend their schools. By my reckoning there have been two families willing to talk to reporters about having been counseled out. If the network made a routine practice out of counseling out appreciable numbers of kids, I simply think there’d be a lot more evidence of it. Some very well-connected journalists with an interest in the story have tried, including Juan Gonzalez, and they just haven’t turned up any other cases.
Tim,
Why do so many kids leave Success? If the schools are so great, why do most students leave?
Many students leave for the same reason that socioeconomically similar students leave district schools at a relatively high rate: a parent or caretaker gets a job in a different borough, or the family moves to a new apartment, and the family can’t get the kid to school on time. A relative who had been handling pick-ups moves or passes away. Or the entire family moves in with relatives in North Carolina or Georgia, where the cost of living is much lower and job prospects are brighter.
Yes, I’m sure that some families leave because they are tired of complying with the rules and regulations and the academic load, or because Success wants to make the kid repeat a grade while their local district school does not. The odd half-day Wednesday is also a huge challenge for working parents. This does not constitute counseling out, in my opinion, given how up front Success is about expectations.
You will argue, no doubt, that public schools are not afforded the ability to set high expectations. Perhaps that is a conversation worth having! And of course it goes without saying that Success families can’t afford the $3000/month housing payment it would require to secure a small one-bedroom apartment in the zone for PS 234, PS 41, or PS 6. Most of their families made the same calculation Karen Sprowal did–they are zoned for schools that none of us would ever in a million years send our own or a loved one’s kids to, and they’re smart enough to realize the zoned school isn’t going to be “fixed” in time for their kid (if ever).
By the way, last year PS 234, PS 41, and PS 6 had 0, 1, and 2 most-restrictive environment children on their register. Where is the outrage over that? Do they counsel out, or is an absence of special ed kids okay when it is created by high real estate prices and carefully drawn zone lines?
Tim,
Students leave public schools to go elsewhere and other students move in to take their place. Success Academy schools don’t replace those who leave. That is why the class shrinks yearly. Those who leave are mostly low scoring students. Why do you think most kids leave these schools that are so hard to get into?
I’m not sure how it wasn’t clear in my earlier posts, but let me state it again: Success should not receive a single new charter or a renewal of an existing charter until they comply with New York State law and backfill seats that are lost to attrition. I have written to the SUNY trustees who approve and renew charters to register this complaint. Have you? Coming from you, the message might actually reach them.
The Sprowal incident occurred exactly six years ago. Juan Gonzalez has searched far and wide for other counseled-out families and found one. Success was recommending a District 75 school for that family, a practice that high-performing NYC DOE schools, including PS 234, PS 6, and PS 41, do all the time.
It simply stands to reason that if counseling-out were a widespread and universal practice at Success schools, there’d be more evidence of it. If teachers are getting an influx of over-the-counter counseled-out students, they should get in touch with Juan Gonzalez or Beth Fertig (who set out to write a piece about counseling out and had to stop when she couldn’t find a single family it had actually happened to).
The moment he started arguing with you, you should have asked if this was a puff piece or was he willing to tell both sides of the story. The fact the NYTimes allowed these types of stories to appear in their paper makes me think how tabloid this paper has become.
Did you have a chance to read the comment section? It was wonderful because much of your points were brought up by in the majority of the comments.
I could tell by his responses to my question that he was going to write a favorable article. To everything I said, he said, “let me play the devil’s advocate.” Eventually, in one of my conversations with the editor, I offered to email documentation. The facts reported by DOE and State were in their hands but you can see that the writer thought the selection and attrition were not important.
“…let me play the devil’s advocate.”
And that he did. Quite literally. If Moskowitz sprouts horns and a tail I’ll be the first to yawn.
Nice one, Dienne.
I once read a full page ad that was ironically in the Economist and had this message, ” I want to be informed by the news not influenced by it”…. Maybe the journalists at the NY Times (and most publications around this nation) could learn something from that phrase!
NY Times coverage of education, charters and likes of Moskowitz, is very similar to Judith Miller’s “reporting” for the same paper in the lead up to the war in Iraq. Just as she was essentially a stenographer for a Bush/Cheney White House intent on selling war to the American public, facts be damned, so too is coverage of education dominated by the unquestioned assumptions and outright lies of the so called reformers, who need the legitimacy of the Times to control the narrative.
Michael Fiorillo: you nailed it!
Keep writing. I’ll keep reading.
😎
One of the ironies with yesterday’s New York Times was that a front page story in the main section exposed how various “independent” research groups and think tanks in D.C. had been bought up by foreign governments. Then the magazine provided two great examples (the Eva story puffing charters and the Bill story puffing Bill’s latest nonsense) of how the Times magazine has been bought up by corporate reform. I’m glad I only had the time to skim the propaganda in the magazine, since we were having fun with local Chicago politics.
It’s articles like the one in the NYTimes that make me think the mainstream media are beholden to those with $$$. The more “the newspaper of record” ignores facts the more it seems like repealing Citizens United won’t matter: the big newspapers will ignore facts that contradict the privatization narrative. If you get a chance, read this editorial from a Queens neighborhood newspaper that gets everything right:
I got this through Google’s public education feed.
Leave it to the “paper of record” to have a biased reporter with a conflict of interest write the article on charter schools.
The Grey Lady’s Wall Street bordello is up and running, and business is booming, thanks to Eva and her ilk.
How interesting that Eva Moskowitz oversees the education of ~9,500 students for $450-550K (depending on the year cited). That’s the enrollment size of some NJ districts, but on this side of the Hudson her salary as a superintendent couldn’t exceed $175K.
Unless she was in Newark.
When something is too good to be true, then it probably is!!! These charter schools should be investigated and audited by the NYC and NYS Comptroller’s office. I suspect we will see the same kind of cheating on standardized tests as we saw in Atlanta and Washington,D.C.
The NY Times article was indeed incredible, as are the test results by Success Academy. The article quoted one educator who said their test results were “incredible.” Incredible=unbelievable=fake????
I too spent a long time speaking with this alleged journalist, largely but by no means exclusively about what I have witnessed as a teacher “co-located” with Harlem Success 1. I gave examples of the poisonous atmosphere between the students of the two schools, the unnerving North Korean-like relationship between Harlem Success teachers (almost all white) and Harlem Success students (almost all African American.) I informed him that the corporate largesse showered on HSA created conditions that mocked the decision of Brown vs. Board of Education and much more. Needless to say, not a word of what I said made it into Bergner’s
advertisement for Eva Moskowitz and “reform.” None of what is happening to American schools and American kids could have happened without the full complicity of the media, the Times being one of the worst offenders. The New York Times shames itself once again with its work on this vital subject.
Thank you for your explanation. Unfortunately, NYT subscribers won’t get the truth but only a magazine filled with two long, very biased articles about two of the leaders of the movement to end public education, Moskowitz and Bill Gates. Why were these two the only “personalities” featured in The Education Issue? Where were pieces about our views of public education? Such “reporting” is completely disingenuous , but even I was a little wowed by the SA data. I should know better. Your explanation, is enlightening and necessary. The teacher turnover information is critical, as is the point about no SA student being able to enroll at the special NYC high schools.
Jeannie Kaplan
All of the writers who are outraged by the Bergner puff piece should bombarding the NYT with letters (letters@nytimes.com and magazine@nytimes.com).
I think by assigning a the nations “first openly gay” restaurant critic (Bruni) and an expert on sexuality and fetishism (Bergner) to “puff” (i.e., bl*w?) Bill Gates and Eva Moskowitz, the NYT is trolling its readers.
Stay classy, Harold.
That’s no fun, FLERP!
puff job I should have said and left it at that.
Here’s another important data point: a total of 2,255 students from all Success Academy schools took the tests this year. That is a mere .002% of NYC’s 1.1 million public school students. So the “results” are hardly enough to be statistically significant or meaningful, especially given all the culling practices Diane describes above.
SA’s strategy is to go wide (keep opening schools), not deep (nurture the ones you have already opened). This not only allows them to poach more good testers, it also is quite profitable: The SA “network” that Eva heads gives loans to the new schools it opens, then charges the schools interest on the repayment. It’s atrocious that Cuomo, SUNY, elected officials, NYT and even DeBlasio continue to allow SA to pursue such a bad, unsustainable business model at the expense of a million other children whose schools are starved for basic funding.
I wish Daniel Bergner would do a long piece on Diane Ravitch, who needs no puffery and is all substance . . . . .
Good luck Robert, as is said ” that and a token will get you into the subway” Actually, Bregner would do well to stay miles away from the education world, and stick to pieces on sexual desire, which seems to be his real ‘calling’..
I read the Times magazine to learn the latest fashion in the world of teacher bashing, union busting, and similar nonsense. As we moved from “Grit” to “Building great teachers…” each iteration became more silly. This week’s issue, with both Gates and Moskowitz getting the star treatment, is just another example of their smug nonsense…
If we were not all of sold mental health, we could think that there is a ‘conspiracy’ against public school education, its teacher and unions. /But, nah, we are all to well integrated.
This struck me as well: “Even taking these differences into account probably doesn’t come close to explaining away Success Academy’s results.” Taking those differences into account easily explains a good portion of the results. I wonder what basis Bergner thinks he has for that statement.
However, it doesn’t explain 100% of the results. It’s a shame that people here can’t act like grown ups and professionals, and admit that there are things that the public schools could learn from some charters.
Bob shore, what can public schools learn from Eva? Kick out kids with low scores. That way, you get what is called peer effects, the value of all-motivated kids, no slackers. What shall we do with those who are kicked out? Ideas?
Public posting of names and scores (mentioned in the article as “painful for the children”) is a great way to humiliate low performers until they leave.
Much of what charters do in terms of how their school day is organized and the amount of time that teachers spend with their kids is not permissible under the UFT contract. Folks run away from that old saw about charters being laboratories for district schools once a longer day and eating lunch with your kids enter the picture.
The extra instructional time required by many charters is intentionally used to skew the self-selection of students to an even further advantage. The additional culling of super-self-selected students results in a sampling bias that completely contaminates the external validity of the so-called charter experiments. Advertising a charter as excessively rigorous is really one of the oldest tricks in the book for cherry picking a very specialized group.
NY Teacher, given the massive interest I see from my fellow NYC DOE public school parents in free or low-cost extended day and after-school programs that run until as late as 6:30 PM, meaning some kids are spending nearly 12 hours in school, I strongly disagree that the concept of an extended day is scaring off families from applying to charter schools. In fact, I would say it is the exact opposite–many charter schools do not have an integrated after-school program, and in fact the Success schools have a half-day every Wednesday, which must be a very difficult thing for working or single parents to juggle.
Good points Tim. After reading your reply, it seems as though charter schools are experiments where very little is controlled. so how in the world can anything be learned from their experimental practices?
If SA success is due to their teachers and practices, then why don’t they open up a school and take RANDOMLY assign neighborhood students and keep class sizes the same as public schools. Then, if they were successful, they may have an argument for their best practices.
Instead of fighting for more schools to grow their empire, they should fight to take over a neighborhood school and keep every student already enrolled and not be allowed to kick anyone out.
Companies that do quality/ethical pharmaceutical research,don’t remove the mice that don’t show a positive outcome in the middle of a study when given experimental drugs. It seems as though SA is touting their success without mentioning that they remove their bad students in the middle of the experiment.
concerned mom, your proposal would require a fairly dramatic reworking of the New York state charter school law, and in any case I can’t imagine the UFT would be willing to have all of the teachers in a zoned neighborhood school reassigned and the school handed over to a charter operator. The CREDO study of New York charters is a good reference to compare how charters and traditional schools are doing with educating similar students.
Maybe people should stop reading the NY Times and turn to the Daily News :).
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/gonzalez-success-charter-students-fail-top-city-schools-article-1.1833960
Most ordinary people can’t afford to read the NYT at two dollars a day or $300. a year — unless they can deduct the expense of a newspaper from their taxes. Remember their endorsement of Christine Quinn? She won only in the hyper wealthy upper East Side as I recall.
Another reason why people should read the DN – after you pay for internet service, it’s free. Here’s a quote from the link:
“The first Success graduating class, for example, had just 32 students. When they started first grade in August 2006, those pupils were among 73 enrolled at the school. That means less than half the original group reached the eighth grade. And just 22 of Friday’s grads will be moving on to the new Success Academy High School of the Liberal Arts, which is set to open this fall, while 10 opted for other high schools.
None of the 32 grads, however, will be attending any of the city’s eight elite public high schools, even though Harlem Success Academy 1 ranked in the top 1% on state math tests this year and in the top 5% in reading — a fact Moskowitz herself proudly highlighted….
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/gonzalez-success-charter-students-fail-top-city-schools-article-1.1833960#ixzz3CpLI7NCD
The article goes not to state that given the % of black/latino students who pass the entrance exam to the top schools, about 3 students from the graduating SA class should have gotten a spot.
Perhaps, SA should seek out the students in the neighborhood who got a spot at the top HS and find out what their best practices were and apply those practices to their own students.
Maybe taking over a school is too dramatic, but is RANDOMLY assigning students to a charter and not allowing charters to counsel anyone out too dramatic? Do you think Eva would be up for that?
Concerned Mom, that is not the charter business model