Kate Taylor of the New York Times got a rare look inside a Success Academy charter school and reported on a stressful, competitive, joyless environment. The photograph that accompanies the story is worth a thousand–or more–words. Little children, walking in straight lines, not a smile in sight. OOPS! THE TIMES REMOVED THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT WAS POSTED WITH THE ORIGINAL STORY. IT SHOWED TWO ROWS OF CHILDREN IN UNIFORMS, LOOKING DEPRESSED AND GLUM. IN THE WHOLE GROUP, THERE WAS NOT A SINGLE HAPPY FACE. WHEN THE STORY APPEARED IN PRINT, THE PHOTOGRAPH WAS GONE, REPLACED BY CHEERFUL CLASSROOM SCENES.
Its founder, Eva Moskowitz, now has 43 schools in her chain; with Governor Cuomo’s help, she will soon have 100. The goal of her schools is high test scores, and she gets them. Whatever it takes, including humiliating children in front of their peers. That works. Not every one can deal with the stress. Not even teachers. Teacher turnover is high.
In a rare look inside the network, including visits to several schools and interviews with dozens of current and former employees, The New York Times chronicled a system driven by the relentless pursuit of better results, one that can be exhilarating for teachers and students who keep up with its demands and agonizing for those who do not.
Rules are explicit and expectations precise. Students must sit with hands clasped and eyes following the speaker; reading passages must be neatly annotated with a main idea.
Incentives are offered, such as candy for good behavior, and Nerf guns and basketballs for high scores on practice tests. For those deemed not trying hard enough, there is “effort academy,” which is part detention, part study hall.
For teachers, who are not unionized and usually just out of college, 11-hour days are the norm, and each one is under constant monitoring, by principals who make frequent visits, and by databases that record quiz scores. Teachers who do well can expect quick promotions, with some becoming principals while still in their 20s. Teachers who struggle can expect coaching or, if that does not help, possible demotion.
Nothing matters but test scores on the state test. Two successive cohorts of eighth-grade students have applied for entry to New York City’s selective high schools, like Bronx Science and Stuyvesant, and not one was able to pass the admissions test despite years of test prep.
Jasmine Araujo, 25, who joined Success through the Teach for America program, quit after half a year as a special-education teacher at Success Academy Harlem 3. She now teaches at a charter school in New Orleans. “I would cry almost every night thinking about the way I was treating these kids, and thinking that that’s not the kind of teacher I wanted to be,” Ms. Araujo said.
If test scores matter more to you than anything else, this is the place to send your child.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
This is bullying brought to you by the state. Very sad indeed for children.
Candy as a reward!! Jolly Ranchers and other candies as rewards were outlawed in Texas over a decade ago! It’s CLEAR this woman knows nothing about children or about education! Wow. So glad she was exposed. She’s always arrogantly mouthing off in op-eds to the Wall Street Journal!
Isn’t food as a reward illegal under the Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act?
Wow. I’m amazed the NYT published anything slightly critical, given its love-on for Eva. Still a puff piece. Yes, they’re getting high scores; are they learning?
And the principal pal directive to the teacher: “reset your carpet expectations”. Wow…let’s micromanage their every movement.
Delete pal, going too fast
I remember back a few decades when the U. S. was supposed to emulate the “great” Japanese schools and they, the Japanese found out to their sorrow that by pushing their children to the limit by the time the children had finished high school they had learned two things:
1. To hate school and learning
2. How to pass tests. They had never really learned what was shown on their tests, the “facts” never stuck.
How tragic that that has been forgotten or never learned here in the U. S and it has been said, that experience is a dear teacher but a fool can only learn in no other way – or words to that effect.
Too, back when this whole thing started, we laughed when our superintendent said that pretty soon they would have courses on how to pass tests. Well, that has happened. On Frontline they had a program on the companies that proved they could raise test scores and indeed they could BUT they could never prove that children learned more by passing the tests.
Again, MUST we learn from experience?
Gorden, when I evaluated Japanese schools in the late 60s and early ’70, I was appalled by the high suicide rates of the children pushed this way. Eva’s nightmare programs need to follow-up on the damaged kids who choose suicide.
In the context of K-12 education, the ability to pass tests does not have much bearing on significant learning or teaching. No matter the grade level or the content of the test, the performance of students on standardized tests does not change that much. Why not?
The tests are measuring test-taking skills and out-of-school advantages more than any thing else. They are not designed to be “instructionally sensitive.” The variations in test scores that can be attributed to specific teachers is small, and that is because the tests are so “dumb.”
The tests may meet the “technical” criteria for test design but they do not meet criteria for measuring significant learning. There is also the problem, underreported, of the testing companies using tests and testing windows in schools to get some free field testing items for tests. Students answer the questions, but the student’s score ion those items is not count. The score is used for item analysis and to create a large “bank” of ready-to-use items for future tests. So, in effect the students (and teachers) are subsidizing the testing giants with no reimbursement for their time, effort, and considerable anxiety.
Testing experts make much of the concept of “test integrity.” This concept means little more than the results from tests are predictable and the tests must be protected from cheaters. The tests are simply assumed to have “integrity” if they pass muster on criteria derived from measurement theory. Thinking about educational significance is truncated to exclude everything that cannot be measured with ease and at low cost to the producer of the test.
For a chilling case of the power of Pearson to suppress information about the misleading use and interpretation of standardized state tests, and control academic studies of testing in a Texas university read the saga at http://www.texasobserver.org/walter-stroup-standardized-testing-pearson/
“but they do not meet criteria for measuring significant learning.”
And they never will meet that “criteria” as standardized tests are not measuring devices.
Damn near all educators have soaked up the “measuring” nonsense so much so in fact that it seems perfectly normal to talk of “measuring” the teaching and learning process as if talking about the sky being blue on a clear, cloudless day.
Until we give up using the language of the edudeformers and those who promote educational malpractice we will continue to lose the rhetorical fight.
Thank you for the link. I remember reading about Walter Stroup and feeling disgusted at yet another example of the willful attempt to destroy the credibility of someone who actually has something important to say. I wonder what has happened to him. This article needs to go viral; we all need the reminder both of his pedagogy and the attempt to discredit him.
Nicely reported. Did anyone read Eva’s Wall Street Journal Op Ed Saturday, in which she said that bad kids should be suspended or expelled — none of this social justice stuff for her!
How is it possible that we could have descended into this madness?
More than 22,000 applications for 3,000 seats. Maybe these parents have a different idea of what’s best for their child. Maybe their zoned schools are just that bad. Maybe word of mouth is powerful and they have friends or neighbors who are thrilled with the schools.
I thought for sure that a piece of this length and detail would turn up a first-hand account of counseling out. Perhaps the request for current and former Success parents to contact the city desk will shed more light on this important issue.
As a regular contributor to this blog you have persistently decried the practice of test prep in lieu of rich and varied curricula. A very fair stance in my view. With that in mind how can you be so supportive of the regimented, militaristic, authoritarian, test-prep centric approach of the Moskowitz Test Taking Academies?
I’ve been equally insistent that people are in denial about the conditions at a large number of traditional district schools in New York City serving students living in concentrated, segregated poverty. I’ve also pointed out that these kids are exactly where the district system wants them.
What Success does may not be my cup of tea–although I will say they are seemingly far more committed to movement and “specials” than the traditional NYC DOE schools I’m aware of and send my own kids to–but I have options. If I didn’t have options and lived in the districts from which Success and other charters draw most of their applicants, I would apply to as many lotteries as I could.
That fact that many urban public schools are a mess is a shared chain of responsibility, and not the fault of the district alone, or the teacher alone for that matter. The state and federal government share responsibility. They are the ones that decide how we fund public education and allocate funds for education. Funding is part of the problem, and management is another problem. Issues of equity in funding are ignored by almost every state. States and city governments have a short memory when they play the blame game. It is easier for them to blame teachers for all the woes of society than make an honest attempt to solve systemic problems.
The infrastructure in the US is falling apart, and that includes many aging public schools.
The US needs new railroads, bridges, airports, etc., but the obstructions in the Congress have managed to lower taxes and block funding to replace aging infrastructure. The US has more accidents on hits railroads than any country on the planet. The only reason we don’t hear about it is because most Americans do not travel by rail. With a big body count, the people might wake up to the need for updating our aging infrastructure.
Tim when half the students end up leaving you should be asking what the parents of those students have learned about the secrets of Success. Also this quote from the article connects directly to counseling out “Students who frequently got in trouble sometimes left the network, former staff members said, because their parents got frustrated with the repeated suspensions or with being called in constantly to sit with their children at school.” You should also read the dozen articles Juan Gonzalez has written in the Daily News about counseling out. Obviously you are not really interested in facts just some sort of strange rhetoric.
I’d really like to see independent verification of those numbers on the waiting list. Often, those waiting lists are never purged of kids who go to other charters or whatever, so many of those names aren’t actually waiting to get into Success Academy.
Where is NYSUT/UFT demanding federal/state investigations into possible abuse? Refusing to let kids go the bathroom? Forcing kids to sit in urine soaked clothes? Making kids with poor kids stand and shaming them? Where is the New York County DA? This is sick stuff and our tax dollars are paying for it. There should be arrests; today!!
There’s a substantial group of parents here who would be more than happy to exclude kids who don’t or won’t follow rules. It’s the complaint I hear most often- “good” kids are being negatively affected by “bad” kids. I would bet 25% of the parents here would like schools to suspend/punish MORE, not less.
However, we’re a public school district so those parents have to compromise and strike a balance with the less restrictive, less discipline-focused parents, because public schools have to attempt to serve all children.
Ultimately I think that compromise process benefits kids- it reduces the risk of extremes in discipline or lack of discipline. It pushes toward the middle, where most of the parents are.
How many children in your district live below the Federal poverty line? Do the disciplinary issues include very young elementary school students throwing desks and chairs at their classmates, or using very NC-17 language on a regular basis?
Our district is 50% free and reduced lunch. I don’t know how many are below the federal poverty line. It’s predominately working class people- manufacturing.
The parents who want the kids excluded or suspended are the parents of the good students, and that group are (generally, although not always) higher income.
My kids have been telling me about discipline problems for 20 years. I have 3 who went thru the system and one who is a 6th grader. It spans the whole spectrum, from cussing at teachers to hitting other students to walking out of class. My eldest son found it very distracting but my youngest is an easier-going person so he doesn’t complain as much. I’m on a community school committee so I know the school really struggles with trying to serve everyone, while maintaining order. It isn’t easy and it isn’t perfect but I do think it’s better for a public school to compromise rather than serve one small group.
I would also say, Tim, that I think my eldest son learned to be more tolerant as a result of having to deal with what he considered “distractions” (other people).
He’s great but he tends to be too rigid. He’s 27 now and he has had to learn to deal with “distractions” because that’s how life is.It ISN’T all about him and his need for order or quiet. Other people have to be considered. Other people have needs and rights too.
Is it true that graduates of these schools are not able to pass the entrance exams to New York’s selective high schools?
So far. The entrance exams to Bronx HS of Science and Stuyvesant are probably too hard to “game” – unlike the Pearson exams which they “score” in-house.
“the Pearson exams which they ‘score’ in-house”
Makes me think. The SA teachers already have 11 hour days. Maybe they could out-source the scoring to the Atlanta teachers who will have lots of time on their hands as they serve their sentences?
Can you imagine? Some teachers can’t even score their OWN exams.
“The entrance exams to Bronx HS of Science and Stuyvesant are probably too hard to ‘game'”
That’s definitely one I haven’t heard on this site before.
Yes it is, see the blog item about not one of Success Academy’s students doing so.
You know, it would be one thing if this was just one charter chain that uses these extreme methods, but every public school in the country is being coerced into “learning” from these “innovative” charters by ed reform “movement” members who are in state and federal government.
This is the example we’re all ordered to follow to meet the ed reform freaking obsession with test scores.
No thanks. I don’t think my public school should adopt this template, no matter how hard it’s pushed by Obama or Kasich. I object. I disagree. In fact, I think many charter schools in Ohio could “learn” from my son’s public school.
If you can cherry pick compliant, students with a minimal amount dysfunction in their lives and you can counsel out or suspend anyone that cannot sail on your tight ship, you too can have a money making “Stepford” school. This is not a model for public education; it’s fantasy island for some, and a nightmare for many! http://www.thenation.com/article/181752/secret-eva-moskowitzs-success
I’m sure that when Governor Cuomo’s own children were being humiliated in class and wetting their pants during tests, he was just fine with their misery. Luckily, he had a few extra bucks to buy some extra pants for them to take to school. I’m sure that when his kids had sore necks, he encouraged them with the rewards of Nerf guns and candy. At least his children’s teachers had commands shouted to them in their headphones and they were held accountable. Those teachers were doing their jobs, by golly! Working 11 hour days drilling those kids at taking tests, teaching them the “plan of attack.”. No wonder why he’s in favor of this type of educational system! His own children are products of it!
Look at the kids faces in the photos. They look as depressed as the members of the Moreland Commission in that infamous photo op.
Look what a quick Wiki search unturned:
Coriolis effect (atmospheric dynamics) (classical mechanics) (force)
Cotton effect (atomic, molecular, and optical physics) (polarization)
Cotton–Mouton effect (magnetism) (optics)
Crabtree effect (biochemistry)
Cross-race effect (face recognition)
Cuomo effect (political corruption) (education deform)
Cytopathic effect (microbiology terms)
De Haas–van Alphen effect (condensed matter) (magnetism) (quantum physics)
Decoy effect (consumer behavior) (decision theory) (economic theories)
Delay (audio effect) (audio effects) (effects units) (musical techniques)
Dellinger effect (radio communications)
Does Ms Moskowitz admit that she is wholly dependent on a back-up public school system so she can run her academies of choice?
Because obviously she is. The public schools she derides make her “schools of choice” possible. Obviously the 50% who leave are going somewhere.
This is also curious: Success Academies got a federal grant to expand. Would Duncan’s merry band of “movement” ed reformers reward a public school for disciplinary practices like this?
Why are charters special snowflakes? I thought we were moving away from zero tolerance? That just applies to public schools?
It’s obvious these people know nothing about children, education and school law, but they also have no common sense.
Putting children’s test scores alongside their names on charts posted in public for all to see is a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), yet these boot camps are putting them on the walls in school hallways and publishing them in weekly newsletters? I think that’s a lawsuit just waiting to happen. (When I was a struggling young student dealing with a very chaotic home life, before FERPA, public shaming in school destroyed my self-confidence and humiliation did nothing to help me learn, so I really hope someone sues and wins.)
Candy in school was outlawed in many areas decades ago for health reasons. And giving kids Nerf guns is just over the top craziness, especially at boot camps in neighborhoods where, legal or not, guns are very much a reality, not a plaything.
No one deserves shaming more than those who permit these travesties to occur.
The real question is – are test scores the be all abad end all of the education process within the United States? What is real learning? Are students more prepared for the real world because they are able to answer questions correctly within a book? Shouldn’t students be prepared for real world life problems as well? How is just preparing students to answer mathematics questions really helping them in the real world. We need to focus more on the holistic education of children in the United States. Cultivate more of the person instead of just the question-answerer.
Because they are non-union and receive huge financial support from multi-million and billionaires, these schools are able to offer their students many more hours of instruction. This is how they have both “enrichments” and also an entire school-day of ELA and math. Are there charters pursuing other approaches (perhaps more in line with what’s on offer at the best private schools) that have these same advantages?
Let’s extend the call for CHOICE to those who pay the taxes that end up flowing to Eva’s bank account. Let tax payers in New York City have the CHOICE to check either public or charter or share with both, and then let’s see if Eva keeps her schools and they continue to grow.
I’m curious about why folks here think there are 22,000 applications for 3,000 seats. There are obviously aspects of the program that make it more attractive for these parents than the alternatives they have. Do you see anything of value, or do you think these parents are misguided?
I think parents are most interested in the structure and culture. Maybe these students (almost all black and Latino and from low SES families) need more structure at school and consistent consequences for misbehavior. Indulgence of misbehavior in some schools not only disrupts learning for everyone else, I believe it is at least part of the reason for the “school to prison pipeline”.
Finally, re selective high schools admissions, they are notoriously stacked against minority kids (4% of kids at Stuyvesant are black or Latino). There were 27 SA grads who took the test, so the 12% passing rate for B&L students on the SHSAT would predict that 3 of them would have passed. That none did is hardly enough data to draw conclusions about the program. It will be interesting to see how they do this year.
But who has vetted that list? Parents apply to multiple schools for several siblings. Is each application for each child to each school counted as one application or several? Does it include applicants for grades in which no kids will be admitted? Are names removed from the list regularly or does the name of anyone who ever applied remain on list for an indeterminate period?
Fair questions, but NYC’s parental satisfaction survey data places every Success Academy school above 90% satisfaction, so I’m inclined to think there’s something to it.
John — 94% of NYC parents state they are happy with their public school. So this is not unique to SA schools.
Constance,
All of their schools were in the top 7% of rankings on that survey. SA Bronx #2 was the 6th highest ranked of all city schools.
If the parents are treated like animals to be controlled I bet the surveys are closely monitored and reported. Heck they even score their own tests. It’s all about Eva.
Parents submit these surveys by mail or fill them out online at the NYC DOE web site. They are mailed surveys with access codes by DOE.
Sure and how do you verify who filled them out, when and where?
Linda,
I’m not one for conspiracy theories. How do you think that works? Does Eva take the forms out of their mailboxes?
My response would be effective marketing. SA has received a ton of high quality press prior to the piece linked in the post.
Also, you’d think with all of these applicants that they could backfill seats when the kids leave for any reason. But they don’t.
John, what is your response to not backfilling when demand appears not to be a problem?
Steve K,
I disagree re marketing. That seems like too convenient a rationalization. I don’t think parents make decisions for their kids based on television ads or newspaper stories as compared to what they hear from friends, relatives, and neighbors who are in the schools.
Why don’t they backfill? It’s harder than not backfilling and they seem to have enough revenue to allow them not to.
As for why charters are allowed to not backfill, I think there is something to be said for it being harder to assimilate students later in the year or in later grades because of the cultural differences and advancement/retention policies. For example, my district pretty much does not retain any kids, and test scores go down as students progress in grades. So, kids are getting further and further behind.
No question though that not backfilling contributes *some* artificial raising of their scores when compared to traditional public schools.
John,
First, if all schools were allowed to avoid backfilling, then kids could never change schools. Ever. It would be educational serfdom.
And yes, high test scores are more likely when they don’t backfill after 4th grade. Because what are the testing grades? 3rd-8th!
Backfilling is something my school HAS to do. We have no choice. I get kids added to my classes (I teach upperclassmen in high school) routinely. They usually come from less well-off areas and are behind grade level. Many come from charters that drop them just before 11th grade state testing. And we have to take them! We can’t say, “Sorry but they are unfamiliar with their school culture and they’re too far behind.”
Seriously, you can’t deny that this exclusive charter privilege doesn’t help them with test scores and creating a culture of their choice.
If SA can, through attrition, unload many of their less desirable students by 4th grade, they are then guaranteed the most committed families. That’s a significant advantage.
Second, marketing is a big part of this but most of it is done for free. Glorious news stories. Feature films. Yes, I’m sure that word of mouth is part of it, but really, it’s more about segregating the most committed families from the less committed families. This provides for a different and safer environment.
SteveK,
I acknowledged that not backfilling is definitely easier and raises scores.
But, charters were meant to try something different, and avoiding social promotion and holding the line on behavior are one aspect of that. If they backfill, that impact gets diluted.
My understanding is the charters in New Orleans backfill, as will charters in Camden. It will be interesting to see the impact on the results.
Re marketing, I’m still skeptical. There are enough students at Success Academies in these neighborhoods for everyone to know plenty of other families with children at the schools.
John,
Last year, 32 SA students took the exam for admission to elite high schools. Not one passed. This year, not one passed. I don’t know how many took the test.
As I posted elsewhere, 27 took the test. All were black and Latino, and those demographic groups pass the test 12% of the time. So, 3 of the 27 could have been expected to pass, but did not.
I haven’t seen this year’s numbers.
John, of the 15 top scoring schools for math, 7 were SA. They are leaps and bounds ahead of almost everyone else regardless of demographics.
Except on the elite school tests they are not even average. Not even average for a demographic that tends not to score well (Black & Latino). You don’t find that surprising?
LH,
It surprises me a bit, but when we’re talking about 3 predicted students, that’s not a lot to go on.
I also don’t jump to the conclusion that the reason is that SA kids are so narrowly focused on NYS tests that they don’t do well on another, similar test. That seems pretty nonsensical. Remember, admission to these schools is 100% determined by score on a Pearson-developed test.
Also, as far as I know, NYC DOE does not disaggregate SHSAT scores by socio-economic status (does anyone know differently?)
Or, has anyone seen data on which schools passers come from? Or comparisons between SA schools and comparable neighborhood schools?
So it could well be that the small numbers of blacks and Latinos that do pass are from high-SES families.
That seems like a more logical explanation to me, but I’d be happy to look at any data.
-jpr
I read (and reread) the Success Academy story in today’s New York Times (we subscribe to the print edition; I had a doctor’s appointment and time to read) and was amazed at how many times Eva Moskowitz simply repeats, rehashes and retreads her nasty tempered talking points. She’s an accomplished polemicist, but beyond that not an educator — basically a corporate bureaucrat with enough clout to have gotten away with all this nonsense. For her to claim, as she does (over and over and over) that he fascist version of democratic public education is what is NECESSARY for poor and working class children is so offensive the steam comes out of my ears. The for her to get away with reducing “learning” to those awful test scores — and working her young teacher indentured servants like chattel — just shows how ignorant many people are about children, schools, and all that stuff.
My eldest son, now a successful computer engineer in San Francisco (at age 25) got a real public school public education in Chicago’s public schools from kindergarten through his graduation from Whitney Young in 2007. He worked hard the whole time. When he was a junior in high school he wanted to get some ACT prep because he felt bad that he had “only” scored 35 on the ACT. He felt bad because three of his classmates had scored “36” and therefore were written up in the Chicago Sun-Times for “perfect scores.” I wouldn’t approve ACT test prep, but let him take the ACT a second time (and paid for it). But I also told him to do the math (which he was capable of, having studied both statistics and calculus in high school). He scored another 35 and finally realized that those “top” scores were all roughly the same, and how narrowly the ACT was measuring “learning.”
We had to talk about these things regularly, because there is always a danger that “bright” kids will clump together and denigrate those with “lower” scores.
Now his younger brothers (Sam, in 8th grade; Josh, in 4th grade) are following the same formula Danny followed. I told them the best way to get “high” scores was to read The New York Times (and maybe the Chicago Tribune) every day, ask questions, read lots of books (for fun) every day, to relax, to Opt Out of almost all the tests Chicago Public Schools has been foisting on our children. They’ve been opting out since the DIBELS debacle when they were little, and are doing fine. It just enrages me that Eva can get away with peddling those fascist programs thanks mostly to the money behind the “charter school movement” at the expense of the joy learning should be for children.
How do we “teach” and “measure” wonder? There has to be freedom, not some New Age version of the Hitler Youth, which is what the Hedge Fund fans of Success schools are pushing. Those poor kids are miserable — even the ones who are doing “well”. And their teachers are doing nasty things to them.
My children have all attended real public school, with really good unionized teachers (whom they joined on the picket line during the Chicago Teachers Strike of 2012). They also understand the racism and nastiness of the drill and kill versions of teaching and “learning” that are pushed in “Success” (here in Chicago, we have a few charters like Eva’s)….
Well, today’s election day here, so I’ve already taken too much time out from an interesting day to rage against this monster and her monstrosities…
The HSA academies receive lots of extra funding from private donors, and offer a more full curriculum, including the music, art and PE classes that are getting cut from many public school programs. Moskowitz also plays on parents’ fears about violence in schools by expelling any child that acts out. Its no wonder 22,000 apply for 3000 seats. The real question is why more aren’t.
What you see as a “stricter culture and structure,” many would see as discriminatory detention policies that target black and Hispanic children. Around 50% of the kids who start out at HSA don’t wind up staying to graduate–where do you think they are going?
Ms. Moskowitz is running a test prep sweat shop for kids who can behave well enough and tolerate enough punishment to survive–that anyone could promote these “schools” as a viable alternative for children speaks more to their financial motives than their educational beliefs.
The reason there are so many applicants is because families want their kids to be in calm environments without high needs kids around. They believe it is best that their child be put into an exclusive environment segregated from kids with ADD, ongoing neglect, abuse or trauma issues.
Just like buying from Walmart means ignoring support for sweatshop labor, most people think about themselves before others and kick out the ladder behind them.
Amerigus,
Yes, and here we get to the meat of what I find most hypocritical about the anti-reform dialog.
What you’re saying is that they want what every parent wants for their children, and what parents who can afford it move to the suburbs or pay private school tuition to get.
So, these parents who can’t afford that need to “take one for the team” to “save” public education, but all that flee those schools can watch from the sidelines and do everything they can to take away any other options.
This reminds me of nothing more than the laws in this country that make the rich richer. Too many here are willing to sacrifice low income families and kids in order to protect schools and the adults who work in them.
As long as it’s not their kids or kids that look like them.
Then, when someone who had the means to escape this decides to donate money to a school that they see doing better by these kids, we have to attack their motives because acknowledging that they have a purpose would expose this truth.
We have one of the most racially, economically, and academically segregated school systems in the world, we just do it geographically to assuage guilt. So yes, I agree 100% with your Walmart analogy; you’re just applying it to the wrong people.
You lost me here:
“Too many here are willing to sacrifice low income families and kids in order to protect schools and the adults who work in them.”
I see the anti-reform movement as championing low income schools because the testing is ruining their chances of attracting good teachers. I work in one so I know first hand, APPR brought with it a hiring crisis for teachers of high needs students.
No one was attacking the motives of someone who wants to donate to a school for high needs kids, they were attacking legislation that gives tax breaks to contributors to charter schools and religious schools, a big difference. If you’re talking about the Education tax credit, that was little more than a tax shelter for multimillionaires on a first come first serve basis that had no conceivable benefit to the taxpayer.
amerigus,
The majority of contributors on this blog believe that there is no such thing as a good charter school and would like to shut them all down.
Taking that option away from these parents would be denying them the same choice for what they perceive as a better schools that those who can afford it make all the time by considering school districts when deciding where to live or sending kids to private schools.
You suggested that “Just like buying from Walmart means ignoring support for sweatshop labor” these parents are only thinking of themselves, and presumably should stay in traditional public schools because of the negative impact their leaving has on them.
Why is it that low income parents are the ones that have to “save” public education while high incomes ones can just choose the schools they want for their kids? I think it’s hypocritical for people who don’t have kids in urban schools to point at those parents and suggest they are the ones that should “take one for the team”.
FYI, I have no problem with people championing low income schools of any type for any reason.
Re donations, I wasn’t referring to the tax credit. There are plenty of attacks on this blog against those who financially support charter schools, especially SA. Basically, they are saying that they are investing (and somehow getting a return) or they are anti-union, or pro-privatization.
So, if you donate to a traditional public school, you’re doing it for the kids, but if you donate to a charter with low-SES families, there must be an angle.
John, because charter schools cherry pick the most motivated families, it’s like a see saw. They better themselves at the expense of the public schools whose top performers get diluted.
I do not fault charter school parents for seeking advantages for their kids, I’m talking about the decisions we make as a society.
Inconveniently for your argument, the charter movement is built on hedge fund money with the aim of killing unions and privatizing education budgets. They created SA for this purpose. Moscowitz is killing her own argument by refusing to cater to high needs kids. She could have really filled a dire, growing need in this city.
I’m all for NY charter schools that follow the law. Charters were approved for the particular purpose of serving students “at risk of academic failure” – does anyone think they are fulfilling their purpose? My friend works in one Brooklyn that only admits 1s and 2s, in the true spirit of the NY Charter School Act. Anyone can make a gifted & talented school, no?
amerigus,
The data doesn’t support your argument. Most charter schools that start in later years get lower performing students than the district, not higher. In mine, for example, only 6% of incoming kids have ever passed a NYS test.
Most Success Academies are located in the lowest performing neighborhoods and draw from there. These kids *are* “at risk of academic failure”.
77% of SA students are economically disadvantaged, and almost all are black or Latino. 41% of black and Latino students in NYC graduate from high school, and 63% of economically disadvantaged students do.
You suggest that SA is rejecting high need students, but that isn’t true either. Yes, ELL and SE students are less likely to enter lotteries for their schools, but that isn’t the same as “rejecting”. In fact, there are some excellent charters that cater exclusively to ELL or SE students (in most states, charters are allowed to offer preferences based on disadvantage).
The charter movement is not “built on hedge fund money”. The vast majority of charter revenue comes from the funds for students whose parents choose the schools. The fact that some outsiders fund *some* charter schools does not change their purpose.
IMO, charters, including SA, do fill a “dire, growing need in this city”. Yes, maybe there is even a greater need to solve challenge for ELL, SE, and homeless students that charters under-address, but we can hardly say that anyone not in those categories isn’t at risk of academic failure in NYC. All children of color and economic disadvantage are.
John,
It is a matter of fact–not speculation–that Success charters have very few ELLs and no severely handicapped students. Its schools have smaller classes every year as students drop out or are pushed out. Eva admits this. She doesn’t “backfill.” She does not enroll the same demographic as public schools. Since she doesn’t take the high needs kids, the public schools get more of them while losing their top students.
Yes, most charters have fewer ELL and no severely handicapped students, and yes, most do not backfill. I agree that this makes their test scores not directly comparable, but that hardly means that they are taking “top” students.
I admit that they aren’t taking the lowest, but given the demographics, I think it’s clear that they are taking the next lowest tier of students and perhaps as high as the middle. But largely, students from affluent families and white and Asian students are staying in traditional public schools.
I imagine severely handicapped and high needs SE students are spread across demographics, but I understand the point that more ELL students are probably left in neighborhood schools that are predominantly non-white and low SES as a result of charters. We probably differ on the impact of lower needs SE as I think there is a lot of overclassification of students who are behind academically.
An Chicago Tribune investigation found that the expulsion rate in corporate Charters was 12 times higher than the public schools.
How are you going to justify that, John?
I see that expulsion rate as solid evidence, that the charters are getting rid of most or all of the most difficult to teach children, and it is highly arguable that being difficult to teach doesn’t mean you have a learning disability—what it means is the child probably comes from a severely dysfunctional home environment (in addition to poverty) and is acting out in ways that disrupt the learning environment, and it is clear that people like Eva Moskowitz considers that learning environment more important than life itself when it comes to boosting standardized test scores. Eva doesn’t care about nurturing children who are growing up in poverty and in dysfunction home environments. She only cares about the test score and that six figure income she’s taking home. And with the high turn over rate of teachers, the odds of a nurturing classroom environment in the rigid classrooms she creates is next to none.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-02-26/news/ct-chicago-schools-discipline-met-20140226_1_charter-schools-andrew-broy-district-run-schools
I don’t justify that, Lloyd. Any charter with high expulsion rates should be closed, and I’m glad the district published the data. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt that it’s accurate, but I do wonder how they determined it.
Lots of studies show minimal expulsions from charters. KIPP Mathematica study included all students who attended KIPP for at least one day as being KIPP students and still showed significant gains.
My school has never had to expel a student. It might happen someday, but we follow the same rules as district schools in NY.
The Chicago Tribune is one of America’s major newspapers and the report was published in that paper after some investigative reporting.
The Chicago Tribune is not noted for their support of public schools.
Have you taken PR classes in how to create spin from nothing and give life to myths? You must think there are a lot f easy to fool people out there.
You claim that even children who only spent one day in a KIPP charter had significant gains. Ha! Ha! Ha!
I wonder what your definition of significant is If you believe that clap trap, let me sell you some acreage on Pluto.
John, I was a teacher with students—in a public school in a barrio riddled with poverty and street gangs—-who made significant gains in writing skills and literacy that were measured based on the results of annual standardized tests. I was told that even the children who earned failing grades in my class exhibited gains on those annual tests.
I have never heard of any method that measures the gains a student makes in one day since every night that we sleep, our body dumps things that we learned or were exposed to during the day. What was learned in one day might not be there a week later, and studies have also proven that students lose a lot of what they gain each year over the summer break. Like taking three steps forward during the school year and then one step back during the summer.
This is an invalid claim that can not be substantiated. In fact, students who disrupt the learning environment enough to be suspended or face explosion are usually not engaged in the learnign process because they are acting out disrupting the learning internment. It’s hard to learn anything when yous aren’t part of the process and there is no way I will accept the clap trap that KIPP magically teaches these dysfunctional children a significant amoung of knowledge in one day when the child is not engaged in learning. If the child was engaged, then there would be no suspension or need for an expulsion.
“The D.C. Public Charter School Board has made it a priority to reduce expulsions and out-of-school suspensions in recent years. Expulsion rates for 2011-2012 were higher than national averages and far above those at the city’s traditional public schools.”
http://csgjusticecenter.org/youth/media-clips/suspensions-and-expulsions-down-in-d-c-charter-schools/
Lloyd,
I didn’t say anything about students getting gains in one day. Please re-read my post. Sorry you wasted so much energy countering something I didn’t say.
What I did say was that the KIPP Mathematica study considers any student who spent at least one day in a KIPP school as being part of the “treatment group”. This is a beyond fair way to account for attrition since it counts kids who were there for a day as if they were there the whole time.
Despite that, it still shows significant gains for KIPP middle schools. See http://www.kipp.org/mathematica.
I think what John is saying is that Kipp now counts all kids who attended their schools as their students when reporting test scores even if they only attended for one day. Kipp has announced such a policy. I am far from an expert on Kipp, but I did recently read an interview with one of the founders that did indicate they had made some changes based on data the showed some things weren’t working. I am being vague because I don’t remember many details. In any case, there is a real danger in charters skimming off a population from the public schools that drains the schools of resources needed to educate the needier students left behind. It is bogus to assume that all kids are walking around with the same dollar amount pinned to their backs necessary for providing them with an equitable education. Our tax dollars are pooled to provide an education for all. Are we creating another even more unequally served group by encouraging the proliferation of charters that do not serve the same population as the communities from which they draw?
John, I don’t know if anyone has put the numbers together, but my guess is that children with special needs are much more prevalent among poor and low income neighborhoods. In my affluent community while there were many students with significant needs, we had a reputation for providing good special ed services. I also know that many of the students who qualified for services in my community would not have been eligible in the low income community in which I taught. Their test scores would have placed them within the normal range. In addition, since we now have solid evidence of the negative impact of stress on the developing brain, it would be logical to conclude that children raised in an impoverished environment are more likely to have suffered cognitive assaults beyond the strictly health issues that they face.
John,
the data makes my argument. If we’re talking about charter schools that have an application to a lottery, the most high needs students are not entered by their parents. In my school, less than 1% of kids have passed state tests.
Locating a school in a low performing neighborhood means nothing if the lowest performing students are not enrolled in the school. Your slippery definition of these kids being “at risk of academic failure” just because they are in this neighborhood, while ignoring the kids with absentee parents or broken homes is exactly the fancy footwork StudentsFirst does, telling us that being black and poor makes kids fit a legal definition of “at risk” they are comfortable with.
This is cherry picking. If we were being honest, the kids MOST at risk are those without parents around, or who have been held over multiple years, or who have an incarcerated family member, or are in the middle of ongoing trauma or abuse.
No, “rejecting” is not the same as “walling off”, but that’s lame. Eva herself says it’s up to schools to recruit, and SA does not recruit highest needs kids. There are charters that cater to highest needs kids, but SA is not one of them.
It’s well documented who backs the charter movement and their associated PR fronts. I’m talking about the cash put into campaigns, advertising, lobbying, polling and PR, not funding school. And finally, I’d say your last statement is borderline racist. Being a child of color does not make you at risk of academic failure, nor does poverty.
It’s your dedication to education, your motivation and the family and community support that determines the risk.
amerigus,
My experience is that most of the children in charters have absentee parents and broken homes. I agree that they have fewer homeless students, fewer ELL, and fewer severe disabilities, but they also have many fewer affluent students and many more of color.
My statement is in no way racist. Pointing out the correlation between color and poverty and outcomes is not racist. I didn’t make any point about the causes of those outcomes.
Perhaps you think there is no correlation between poverty and “dedication to education, motivation, and family support”? Sorry, but if you are worried about shelter, food, and safety, those are going to take precedence.
Pointing out correlations between color and poverty and outcomes is not racist, but saying poverty and color equals at risk for academic failure is a race-based excuse for skirting the NY Charter School Act which requires charters to focus especially on students at risk for academic failure.
When I hear that, I say let’s recruit kids from the shelter system, court-involved kids, kids with ACS cases, kids who don’t speak English, kids with institutionalized family members, kids that have various impediments to learning and most obviously, kids who already have not been successful in regular ed settings for multiple years.
Charters hear this and say no, let’s get black or hispanic kids on public assistance, but let’s make sure they have a modicum of home-based support by requiring an application to the lottery that only savvier families would hear about and act on.
Don’t try to manipulate the conversation by averaging in affluent kids from Manhattan into the “public school” column, that is disingenuous. The charter moms chiming in here are not absentee parents. The thousands of charter parents bused up to Albany were present and accounted for.
There is no escaping the fact that charters turned the Charter law on it’s ear, shirking the call to focus on at-risk kids by using a snaky definition of “at-risk” relative to the kids in Stuyvesant instead of relative to the public school kids in the same neighborhood.
Public schools have had specialized schools for decades, but have limited them in order not to dilute the average school. Anyone can make a gifted and talented school and see kids soar ahead. Charters decided that instead of taking on the hard work of creating solutions to the dire problems in inner city neighborhoods, they would cater to the family that wanted to “escape” and make the problems in the leftover schools even more dire.
It’s just like lotteries as a solution for economic problems. They provide a benefit, but only for a few, by taking resources away from all the losers. I’m all for charters that do what charters promised they would do in order to get the law passed – to devise solutions that benefit the larger system by focusing on kids at risk of academic failure. When they left out the word “MOST” at risk, that was the loophole Success needed to flourish, claiming all kids in entire Bronx are at-risk.
See how charters don’t even hide it anymore:
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/12/10/are-charter-schools-cherry-picking-students/charters-can-do-whats-best-for-students-who-care
Americas,
Charters were never intended to serve the most at risk, so that’s not a loophole, it’s the law. Charters are first come, first serve or have lotteries, so they don’t typically reach homeless kids.
You may think that traditional public schools serve low income kids and kids of color well, but many parents disagree with you.
As far as I’m concerned, any child as likely as not to graduate is at academic risk, and that includes a *lot* more kids than the small number most at risk.
READERS DECIDE: Did provision (b) the requirement of “special emphasis” on kids at risk of academic failure mean charters today would have LESS kids high-need, multi issue kids than public schools?
Particularly the type with with absentee parents – the charters admit they want to avoid disruptive kids, so does the law sound like it allows for culling troublemakers or requires caring for them like publics do?
Your response “you may think that traditional public schools serve low income kids and kids of color well, but many parents disagree with you” sounds just like a paid charter lobbyist said on the radio. Which parents disagree, the parents whose kids won the lottery? Or hope to? No wonder!
My belief is charters are contributing to Bronx kids being less likely not to graduate, making your argument a self-serving prophesy. At least serve an equitable number of extremely needy, or hyperactive, troubled, disruptive kids, or for god’s sake stop comparing yourselves to public schools that have these kids and actually help them.
=-=-=-=-=-=-
NY CHARTER ACT: http://www.nyccharterschools.org/sites/default/files/resources/NYSCharterSchoolsActof1998_with2014amendments.pdf
S 2850 – Short title; purpose
1. This article shall be known and may be cited as the “New York charter schools act of nineteen hundred
ninety-eight.”
2. The purpose of this article is to authorize a system of charter schools to provide opportunities for
teachers, parents, and community members to establish and maintain schools that operate independently
of existing schools and school districts in order to accomplish the following objectives:
(a) Improve student learning and achievement;
(b) Increase learning opportunities for all students, with special emphasis on expanded learning experiences for students who are at-risk of academic failure;
(c) Encourage the use of different and innovative teaching methods;
(d) Create new professional opportunities for teachers, school administrators and other school personnel;
(e) Provide parents and students with expanded choices in the types of educational opportunities that are
available within the public school system; and
(f) Provide schools with a method to change from rule-based to performance-based accountability
systems by holding the schools established under this article accountable for meeting measurable student
achievement results.
What does SA stand for? It’s more like Slave Academy. No matter what good PR they make, and no matter how many students they can train students to become test-smart in PARCCs, it won’t change the fact that SA is NY version of Chinese-style keju or Japanese-style juku that puts young kids into +10-12 hours hellish boot-camp. Regarding that many of those are from low-income, working-class family, it’s far more excruciating than average Japanese students who are still able to have a decent life outside school despite shrinking family income.
No matter how much funding Eva receives from billionaires and Cuomo for further expansion of her branches, it won’t make significant change in educational status of NY.
They remain revolving-door school, as long as they keep test-smart students and kick out those who don’t. And those get kicked out of SA are still subject to ridiculous PARCC tests no matter which school district they go. Better performance in PARCC tests? Good for them. Overall improvement of NY education? Make no sense. Plus margins in SA are eventually offset with the rest.
Ken,
Every Success Academy school received a score of at least 9 out of 10 on the NYC parent satisfaction survey, which puts every one of them in the top 7% in this ranking.
Do you think these parents want a “hellish boot camp” for their children, or do you think maybe its your description that might be off? Seems like it’s one or the other.
John
Did you ever take a psychology class? So much for self-selected parents and their satisfaction with the schools they selected. Did they poll the parents of children that were unable to conform and were quietly “returned to sender” ?
Yes, but that same bias would apply to every public school in NY, so coming out of the top means something.
I agree their survey data would obviously include parents happy enough to still be there, and that those whose kids left might well be unhappy.
My point isn’t to point at them as perfect, but to point out that they must be doing something that many parents demand and many parents are very happy with.
On another note, we made the decision very early in the history of my charter school to outsource NYS exam grading since it would be reasonable for anyone to question our own ability to objectively grade exams. One has to wonder why SA wouldn’t do the same. Only reason I can think of to not do it is cost, but that doesn’t seem to be an issue there.
Seriously, John? That’s the only reason you can think of?
Sorry, should have said “the only legitimate reason”.
The only reason? Cost for outsourcing? I think She Who Shall Not Be Named Ever Again could provide an erasure or two.
Oops. I meant reason, not erasure. Maybe one day we’ll get an editing feature on this blog.
SA parents “choose” their school–that’s a different kind of motivation when it comes to parent satisfaction surveys.
mrobsmsu,
Not sure what your point is. “Of course parents are less happy with schools their children are forced to attend”?
Jon,
No. It is yours that is “off.”
No matter how much money Cuomo and billionaires give Eva to convert the entire school district into SA–which is completely utopian, and unfeasible–to me, at least, it will never help students in the first place. SA will never turn into normal public school in the first place, as long as it is functioning as a cog of PARCC machine.
They’ve got to remain Slave Academy–or American version of juku or keju– in order to function in the reform narrative.
But, you’re not answering the question of why families choose them. Every single student is there by choice.
Because they’re not sophisticated people like we are, and they don’t understand what they’re choosing or what’s good for their children.
John,
Student life in SA is determined by test prep and score performance. That’s not what students at ordinary public school see in most countries.
If you don’t know what hellish boot camp looks like, I suggest you try sending your kids to prep schools in China or Japan for a week or two. In an environment where English is hardly spoken and understood! See how students in prep schools are grinding the books away to get into exclusive top-tier private junior high or senior high schools. It’s the world of insanity.
Parents making a choice. Because of money and PR machine feeding the gullible. Private worshipping practice. a.k.a. sociology of religious cult.
Flerp, I don’t know if you’re being sarcastic, but I guess that’s telling in and of itself.
Ken, it’s quite condescending to assume you know better what these children need than their own parents. Do you even recognize that calling them gullible is an insult?
I hope you get the opportunity to tell them in person sometime.
“Flerp, I don’t know if you’re being sarcastic, but I guess that’s telling in and of itself.”
Then I’ve done well!
Isn’t it the only response that would make sense, though?
The attrition rate at SA is very high, so up to half of the parent’s don’t fill out the parent satisfaction forms. Your vaunted parent satisfaction numbers, like the the waiting list numbers and the test scores, are all artfully finessed by Eva’s PR machine, and bogus.
John,
You are indeed the one making a condescending message. Your explanation just sounds like a talking orbit. I don’t see any substance in what you say. Done. Have a great day. Bye.
“Success did not allow a reporter to observe test preparations”
Could that be because, as SA teachers have reported, not only do they have access to the actual tests, which they score themselves, while public school teachers do not, but they also have test prep materials made for them which are very closely aligned with the tests? I think it’s very likely that no SA kids qualified for entrance to selective enrollment schools because SA didn’t have access to those tests for test prep and scoring.
Considering the political clout and economic supports which probably enabled SA to have access to the tests and make their own test-prep materials aligned to them, it’s probably just a matter of time before they gain access to selective enrollment tests and create test prep materials aligned with them as well.
Is it legal to post a student’s grades publicly?
No, it’s not legal and that info certainly does not belong in a newsletter. It’s a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). Parents should be advised of this and encouraged to file lawsuits
What Success Academy seems most to resemble is a cult. There is a monomaniacal leader whose belief system informs all activity. She cannot be questioned. Non-compliance is not tolerated, as can be seen by those who fear to be named lest long tentacles reach them now that they have left. Those within the cult are certain that it is the one true way to the light. Those on the outside cannot understand how the cult members can be so blind.
Christine:
Every time I read a post on this blog and think that’s the most brilliant thing I’ve read in years along comes someone the next day to top it. However, I think your “resembles a cult” comment might just stand the test of time.
Howard
Here we do get a look at what all children should have in their PUBLIC schools:
“Beginning teachers at Success are paid comparably with those in city public schools though instead of a pension, they get contributions to a retirement account. Unlike public schoolteachers, who often have to use their own money for basics like photocopies, Ms. Jones and her colleagues do not worry about supplies. The closets teem with notebooks, folders, pencils and pens. Each middle school student gets an iPad. Success Academy schools are also rich in the kind of extracurricular activities that have increasingly been cut from public schools, such as art, music, chess, theater, dance, basketball and swimming.”
We just need hedge funders to give us the money.
The SA budget for 2013 was $94 million ($72 million public; $22 million private).
That’s for 32 schools and a max of 3,000 K to 8 students. No expensive sports programs, limited SE enrollments, and cheap rent-a-teachers.
What’s your source for SA’s budget numbers?
The NYT article.
I wonder what the private donors get for their $22 million?
$24,000 per pupil in public tax dollars based on 3,000 students. ($31,333 per pupil
with private funds)
There are close to 10,000 students currently in Success schools.
http://m.nydailynews.com/opinion/staring-success-face-article-1.1919445
There are 3,000 total seats available in grades K-4 for the 2015-2016 school year.
But we all know that throwing money at the problem won’t fix it. So why does Evita need so much of it?
Christine Langhoff: quite so.
And let’s turn this around and hold the rheephormistas to their charter promises: if they can do more with less, then they ought to be returning money.
Instead we get “destructive innovations” like midyear dumps—get a lot more for doing a lot less with the more expensive and harder-to-deal-with students. And then dump their failures on the public schools that are being starved of resources and support.
$tudent $ucce$$.
Ain’t it grand?
😎
KrazyTA,
What reformists say is that more money *alone* won’t solve the issue. Clearly, Eva has a very differently structured school.
I think we absolutely need more money for urban schools, but I’m also confident that my local district couldn’t move results if they continue doing what they’re doing.
The article cites a combined budget of $94 million for 9,000 kids. That’s $10,444* per kid, all inclusive.
Traditional NYC district schools will spend $24,000 per student this year, ex charter school payments.
* something is missing or incorrect with the data the Times has obtained, because charters start with $13,750/child, but in any case, Success schools receive less per-pupil funding than district schools, even with the private money included.
Tim,
There were 6700 kids in 2013, which works out to 14030 per student if the revenue total is correct. The 9,000 number is current.
SA has supplied the blueprint for… test scores!
I’ve believed that gaming test scores is the ongoing and future goal of all schools. Test scores are the currency and SA claims effectiveness based solely on this metric. Their entire model is based on getting good test scores. Strict rules, practice tests, lessons that are structured like tests, more practice tests.
This is the real secret sauce. SA is a tribute to what can be achieved with single-minded dedication to test scores.
Could the real secret sauce just be found behind closed doors during their in-house “scoring” sessions?
Erasures can be easily detected today, so the massive test prep with test aligned materials are probably in order to reduce the number of erasures needed in case of scrutiny.
The failure of even one of their students to pass the selective enrollment test for the two years their students have taken it is a HUGE tip-off that their test scores are hinky. Probably one reason why they want more higher income white students in gentrifying areas, too.
Every “education miracle” can be linked to some form of cheating. End of story.
Last spring 96% of SA 4th graders passed the Pearson math test. That result should have set off alarm bells.
One would expect some allegation of cheating from an ex-teacher if it’s really going on, true? Has anyone seen anything like that?
Does you or anyone else know if ALL charter schools in NY have access to the tests and score their own, when public school teachers are not permitted to do any of that?
Teacher Ed,
My understanding is that all schools in NY (outside of NYC maybe?) have the option for Regional, Districtwide, or Schoolwide scoring.
Multiple choice answer sheets then go to scoring centers.
5% of schools are supposedly audited after scoring each year to ensure appropriate scoring.
Thank you for the info, John.
And sorry, everyone, for the glaring typo.
It would be great to know what the charters pick. Don’t forget the $11/hr temps that score tests in third party scoring centers where the qualifications for scoring tests are fogging a mirror. There, graders are given little time per test as strict production quotas are enforced. If you’ve even tried to decipher the handwriting of a stressed out 4th grader answering an essay question years beyond their grade level, you might see penmanship that takes longer than a minute and a half to discern, let alone extrapolate meaning for the very subjective purposes of scoring.
This is not education, this is training. We train animals. Children, we educate.
Interesting in light of Kate Taylor’s previous article, which could have come off Cuomo’s fax machine:
This makes one wonder if the NYT is taking a more sober look at charters (they completely ignored the issue of cherry-picking in this piece) or if, like fracking, Cuomo is the one souring on the issue. I guess it will depend on who ponies up at his fundraiser tomorrow…
Thank you Diane for adding the one detail that I felt was left out – how well does the supposed success of their students translate beyond those specific tests.
“Two successive cohorts of eighth-grade students have applied for entry to New York City’s selective high schools, like Bronx Science and Stuyvesant, and not one was able to pass the admissions test despite years of test prep.”
Here’s a link to support that http://goo.gl/3m8sfN
That link is to an article published last year. Has there been an article claiming that no Success student was offered at a placement at a SHSAT school in 2015?
It’s a wonderful kind of irony to have you all use a Pearson test as an indicator that Success Academy may not be all it’s cracked up to be.
Admission to selective high schools in NYC is 100% determined by score on a test developed by Pearson, and which only 12% of black and Latino students in the entire district pass. Last I checked 100% of the graduates from Success Academy so far were black or Latino.
Has anyone seen this years’ data yet?
What is the pass rate for white students?
And why are you harping on the pass rate for minorities? Is it a racially biased exam?
NY Teacher,
Re bias, I think the easy answer here is “Yes”. It’s not credible to think that only 19 black and Latino students were smart enough to join the freshman class of nearly 800 at Stuyvesant.
Here are some good articles:
http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2014/11/24/nyc-schools-blackhispanicasian.html
http://www.bkmag.com/2015/03/31/only-ten-black-students-were-offered-a-spot-at-stuyvesant-high-school-this-year-but-is-this-a-problem/
John,
I agree that it is a wonderful irony. But it also may suggest that SA gears itself very specifically for state tests to the exclusion of other things.
That’s the interesting part. If SA was providing a complete education, then wouldn’t they excel in all facets?
SteveK,
I agree it’s an interesting question, but I’ll wait to see more data rather than draw a conclusion based on 3 kids who “should” have gotten in who didn’t.
“I agree that it is a wonderful irony. But it also may suggest that SA gears itself very specifically for state tests to the exclusion of other things.”
Not having any firsthand knowledge of SA, I’ve always thought that to be the most straightforward explanation. People put a *lot* of time and resources into prepping for the selective high school admissions test in NYC. It would seem reasonable to conclude that students at a school that demands a lot of their time, and puts most of its emphasis on the state ELA and Math tests, would not be in the vanguard of prepping for the selective high school tests.
Flerp,
Yes, I think Eva has said as much. Charters get held accountable to narrow, but stringent criteria. I’d love to see the criteria broadened.
Also, one would think that SA will start prepping kids for the SHSAT, which I guess is wrong when done by a public school for black and Latino kids, but somehow OK when paid for out of pocket by white and Asian kids.
Bill de Blasio and many others believe the test is biased: http://www.wnyc.org/story/debate-about-specialized-high-schools-test-flares-during-application-season/
All tests are biased – toward those who are good test takers. DeBlasio provides no concrete example of bias in test items. Its just his response to the low percentages.
Nothing to establish cultural, ethnic, or racial bias in the actual test.
Not one concrete example of a culturally, ethnically, or racially biased test item. DeBlasio’s opinion is completely unsubstantiated. Sounds like he’ looking for an affirmative action entrance requirements.
Sound like the test is biased toward Asians at 52% acceptance.
NY Teacher,
I haven’t seen the test, but apparently the kids who do well on it do a lot of (paid) test prep. That alone would account for some of the racial correlation.
That said, the primary conclusion one can draw from the results is that NYC schools pretty uniformly fail to educate black and Latino students to their potential.
Do you really believe that it is the schools (or teachers) that fail to educate black and Hispanic teachers? Teachers cannot coerce learning by force or threat. When students are unwilling to attend, cooperate, and work hard – the blame cannot be placed in the lap of the teacher. When school environments are so chaotic that it negatively impacts the learning of even those who want to learn, the blame can only be placed upon a system that prevents administrators from removing thugs and out of control students from their buildings. What is your suggestion for better educating minority students, many of whom have rejected the opportunities offered. Many of whom have had the capacity for learning disabled by the stressors in their lives that no school can counteract.
NY Teacher,
Pretend for a moment that we wanted to do whatever was possible for these students. What would that look like?
-Longer school day so they didn’t go home to empty houses and so they could get help with homework?
-Longer school year because studies show they are disproportionately suffer summer learning loss?
-Emphasis on culture that they perhaps are not getting at home?
-Giving teachers cell phones that kids can call until 9PM to get homework help?
-wraparound services like healthcare?
-Focus on attendance and behavior so that teachers can focus on teaching and learning?
-Frequent use of data to see what students are grasping and what they are not?
-More flexibility to choose which teacher is in front of each classroom?
We have to educate the students that we have, not the ones that we wish we had. Communities of color don’t see education as a savior because it hasn’t been for them. Many dropped out of schools that they thought just didn’t care about them. Now, they are not the supportive partners that we wish they were.
I think everyone agrees that those children deserve more. Some believe in schools’ ability to deliver much of that and some don’t.
I don’t think you and John are really that far apart. You both recognize that there are some system problems that have allowed poor schools to exist in poor communities. Uneven staffing, mismanagement, under resourced,…public schools in already stressed and distressed communities are not given an equitable chance to serve their communities well. Some families who have the ability to seek better opportunities for their children are choosing charters even though there is credible evidence that there are major problems with charters in general. I think John is saying that some families have found a charter to be a better alternative than the traditional public schools in their neighborhoods. That is not to say that the choice is fantastic and wonderful, just better. I can sit in my suburban community and decry the abuses of charters, but my children had access to a first rate public school system. The challenges we faced were nothing compared to the challenges some children face particularly in some inner city schools. In other words, perhaps there is more agreement about problems than not; it is how to move forward without forgetting those who have the most immediate stake in good neighborhood schools. Am I missing the mark? I don’t see any easy answers, but I do see room for progress toward meeting mutually held ideals.
Do you think the results would be better if public schools had the limitless resources of Success Academy?
It would take more than the limitless resources of Success Academy. It would also require the same harsh and demanding, boot camp atmosphere that exists in those corporate charter schools.
But would the public schools be allowed to expel students at rates that were 12 times higher than the public schools today, because that is what the corporate Charters are doing to distill the student population down to one they can crush and pressure to score higher on standardized test scores as they literally squeeze the creativity, compassion and love of life out of those children turning them into sociopaths and psychopaths as adults.
My question is: what is worse—the heartless, harsh and demanding corporate charter school environment or living in poverty?
I’ve been through boot camp in the Marines and survived, and I can tell you if given a choice, I’d rather live in poverty. And I was born to a family living in poverty and grew up as my parents worked their way out of poverty into the lower middle class.
The poverty I knew as a child was a much better choice than the environment that Eva Moskowitz has created in her dehumanizing corproae Charters.
It depends. Certainly money doesn’t hurt, but as we’ve certainly seen it can corrupt. It really depends on how that money is used as well as how the culture of the school supports learning. It’s pretty clear that public resources are not equitably allocated, so that would be a start. I’m not sure how Moskowitz and others spend their money: how much actually goes into the classroom. I’m also very interested in the operating budget costs that SA does not have to cover. It is really disingenuous to say SA is only spending so much per student if the costs are not the same. I also get rather impatient with the idea that the “cost” of a student can just be peeled off a budget as that much less of a building needs to be heated. I’m sure people could come up with a lot more amusing examples. Let me be clear that I do not support the charter school concept and its clear role in the privatization of public education. We are setting dangerous precedents when we start to sell off our public goods to the highest bidder. That doesn’t stop me from understanding a parent’s desire to provide the best education they can whether we agree it is the best choice or not.
2old2teach,
All of NY’s charters are 501c3 not-for-profits. Do you consider that “sell[ing] off our public goods to the highest bidder”? I don’t support for-profit charters.
I don’t know, John. I am not a New Yorker. I really try to look at what is reported from different people across the country. If you have been following the news media as well as comments on this blog from people across the country, you know that non-profit status has been abused. Having non-profit status doesn’t automatically cause me to sigh with relief anymore. I almost long for the days when I thought nonprofit meant charitable. It was a kinder world vision although probably not realistic.
2old2teach,
Fair point. At least 501c3s have to fill out 990s, which is how we know what Eva makes.
NY Teacher – sounds like you are arguing for the very environment that Success provides: no chaos and children focused on learning and working hard.
NY Parent
I am arguing for classroom environments where teachers can spend 90+% of their time teaching. The same learning environments that you would find in the classrooms of Byram Hills, Great Neck, Scarsdale, or Niskayuna. I am in no way in favor of a militaristic, authoritarian, no excuses charter environment. Just reasonable levels of student behavior and cooperation. I taught in a very chaotic inner city school (Eastside HS, Paterson, NJ) and watched Joe Clarke transform the environment into one of orderliness, respect, and cooperation. It took extraordinary courage and leadership, along with nearly unlimited powers to do so. The battle of intensity v. duration eventually took its toll, its just that hard to overcome community environments rife with parental neglect, drug abuse, crime, generational poverty, and abject apathy.
John,
Public schools have addressed many of your ideals. The following have been routinely implemented in my struggling, upstate school district. And we have done this with countless unfunded mandates, a 2% property tax cap, state (GEA) defunding, loss of staff, and loss of programs.
After school programs extend the school day.
Summer programs extend the school year.
Homework help rooms and Saturday academic .
Morning and after school math and ELA help
AIS classes
Mentors and tutors.
The YES school to work program
Frequent use of data
IST teams
HS attendance policies
Alternate Learning Programs (off campus)
Credit Based Promotion at JHS
The ONE thing however that would help the most, we can’t do. Just look at any elite private school to find the answer. Just peer into any elementary classroom at Sidwell Friends, Laskeside School, or Phillips Exeter and simply count the heads. And that’s with the most privileged and advantage students on the planet.
The ONE thing we can’t do that would help the most is to have students attend class on a daily basis, well rested, well fed, and in a proper frame of mind for learning.
NY Teacher,
I’m glad to hear about those programs and think there should be more money for them. Do you think you are getting better results for those kids than the many schools who don’t do those programs?
Of course poverty and lives outside of school are the biggest influences on children, and anyone who says reformers ignore this is creating a straw man argument. But, as you point out, we do what we’re able to do.
I’m curious about your comments regarding Eastside and the “near unlimited powers” that Joe Clarke had to transform that school. What was he able to do that most principals are not? I’m a big fan of school-based leadership and accountability in exchange for flexibility, whether at a charter or a district school.
John – You posted:
“Pretend for a moment that we wanted to do whatever was possible for these students. What would that look like?
-Longer school day so they didn’t go home to empty houses and so they could get help with homework?
-Longer school year because studies show they are disproportionately suffer summer learning loss?
-Emphasis on culture that they perhaps are not getting at home?
-Giving teachers cell phones that kids can call until 9PM to get homework help?
-wraparound services like healthcare?
-Focus on attendance and behavior so that teachers can focus on teaching and learning?
-Frequent use of data to see what students are grasping and what they are not?
-More flexibility to choose which teacher is in front of each classroom?”
Diane – and others – have suggested wrap-around services for our public schools, which perhaps would mitigate the difficult living conditions our most disadvantaged kids find themselves in (through no fault of their own). But you can’t expect classroom teachers to do all that work; it’s simply not sustainable.
Longer day? I’d like research that shows it works – that kids can actually process more learning in a longer day.
Longer year? The old buildings in most of our urban areas lack simple amenities like air conditioning. The summer loss is because more well to do families continue to structure out of school learning environments like travel and summer camp, or, for older kids internships and summer work. Those kids gain more in comparison to their less well-off peers.
Emphasis on culture? You lost me there.
Teachers on cell phones until 9:00 PM? Obviously, you have never taught. Teachers spend upwards of six and a half hours with 25-35 of someone else’s kids (150 or more at the secondary level) each day, teaching. Then there is planning and grading and course work and professional development. Teachers are NOT martyrs. They have families of their own, children of their own, and a right to peace and quiet at home during non-work hours so thay can gird up for the next day.
Wrap around services and focus on attendance and behavior? Yes! but not from the classroom teacher.
Frequent use of data? A popular and ridiculous mantra – any decent teacher knows what each kid can do, and can find out at a more granular level easily.
More flexibilty in teaching assignments? As in when a teacher won’t answer a cell phone after 6:00 PM? Teachers know where their own strengths are – they need to be able to choose where to work.
Our public schools struggle to address the inequalities our society accepts. With rising poverty (51% of kids in public schools are below the federal poverty line!) it has become impossible for schools to juggle all this. It’s expensive, but we don’t seem to want to pay for it. Instead we pay for tests of dubious quality to mark some children and their schools as failures. We’re content to provide an escape valve for the few who can make a go of it at amateur hour charters based on the beliefs of a handful of powerful well-connected folks like Eva. Research on what kids actually need, from fields like child development and adolescent psychology are ignored. We locate the fault in the families of the kids instead. And then we heap ignominy on teachers who try to make a difference in “disposable”, under-funded schools.
I believe we can do better.
I’ve got an idea for a new Ap for teachers’ phones. When a student calls, they get an option list of the teacher’s design. It may include homework assignments, useful tips for completing assignments, reminders of the class calendar,…I’m sure teachers could come up with their own menu. Important to note that after a certain hour talking directly to the teacher would NOT be an option.
Computer access has allowed more affluent districts to require teachers to post all sorts of information online for immediate access, and teachers are “encouraged” to communicate with parents/families on a regular basis. In the rush to compete, teachers in less affluent communities may be expected to be available by cell phone well into the evening. I would need a lot of help adapting to such systems; I relied on the flexibility to change plans on the fly quite frequently with my special ed population. Grades were weighted more heavily as we progressed through a topic and were even weighted differently by student which changed as the student did. Having to post raw scores on a web site would have made it necessary to change my practice dramatically. I’m not sure I could have still treated the kids with the same individuality they deserved and I was mandated to provide. I am giving a very narrow vision of the possible challenges (grading) to be faced, but I know that these are issues that have not been addressed.
I am still firmly in the late 20th century in some ways. My cell phone, which I purchased reluctantly when I had a long commute to and from school by car, is still only on for specific purposes. (I still find the associated costs outrageous.) I do not give the number out as a contact number. In fact, I have trouble remembering it myself. Computers and I are well acquainted but not best friends although you could not tell it from the amount of time I spend on it. That being said, I eagerly pick up new tools that are germane to my life outside the classroom, and I embraced those tech tools that made my life in school easier while I was still teaching.
Joe Clarke expelled the thugs and troublemakers. These were chronically disruptive and even dangerous students who did nothing but create havoc in he hallways, in the locker rooms, in the cafeteria, and in their classrooms. This was the same small percent (2% – 5%) of any inner city student population that makes teaching and learning nearly impossible for the rest. A group that produces an underlying level of stress in students and teachers that undermines learning environments on a permanent basis.
Did you get a chance to count those Lakeside heads?
Christine
Fabulous post! 1000% on target.
Especially this:
“Frequent use of data? A popular and ridiculous mantra – any decent teacher knows what each kid can do, and can find out at a more granular level easily.”
A mantra that those in control will not let go of. A mantra that has been more counterproductive than imaginable. And now the data and accountability mantras have been welded together to produce toxic policies that may take a generation to undo.
Christine,
“any decent teacher knows what each kid can do, and can find out at a more granular level easily.”
Perhaps true, but how often done? Please explain to me how something like biweekly assessments with missed item analysis is such an evil thing.
John – In response:
“Christine,
‘any decent teacher knows what each kid can do, and can find out at a more granular level easily.’ ”
Perhaps true, but how often done? Please explain to me how something like biweekly assessments with missed item analysis is such an evil thing.
Biweekly assessments with missed item analysis? Not nearly enough. Any teacher worth their salt is constantly figuring out which kiddos know what and how well. What really is a time-suck is having to justify what we know from daily interactions on a face to face basis by means of one of those instruments (of torture) you mention. Real time feedback in class allows a teacher to recalibrate instruction and shape it in response. Sure, we give periodic formal exams, but are seldom shocked, shocked! by those outcomes.
And, no I don’t mean in elementary classrooms only. I taught grades 6-12 in a poverty afflicted urban setting for all of my 36 year career.
It’s not ironic at all, and is in fact sound logic: by referring to SA’s inability to get it’s test-prep-bludgeoned students into the specialized high schools, the point is powerfully made that, even when measured according to her own debased standards, Moskowitz’s empire is built on sand.
quicksand
ANY teacher, ANYwhere who allows a student to wet him/herself in pursuit of a test score should be reported immediately for abuse.
I’ve been teaching for almost 30 years and this description makes me physically sick.
When I was a child, a teacher that taught only to the test would have been universally considered a terrible teacher. Sad, how we’ve lost that respect for the intangibles that make for great teachers.
Howard,
The intangibles are important, but not sufficient. When we have schools with 40% graduation rates and large amounts of illiteracy and innumeracy, it seems self-serving to say “yes, but think of all of the intangibles”. Many people hear this argument as a deflection.
But not ALL of us have lost that respect, or that sense of nurturing that underlies all good teaching.
Flerp,
Yup, exactly.
Here are some lovely descriptions of people who choose charter schools for their children that I’ve seen on this blog:
dupes, gullible, misinformed, “sold a bill of goods”, victims of a hoax, want segregation, etc.
These are rationalizations for avoiding the truth that these parents see something in charters that they want for their children, and as long as people write this off as such, they can continue to marginalize these parents and avoid change.
I find it racist and disgusting. If you’re happy with your traditional public school great! I love the one my kids go to. But, if you’re going to try to take away charters from poor parents because you think you know better than they do what their kids need, you are just rationalizing looking out for your own interests rather than theirs.
Oh, and how do you square those comments with saying out of the other side of the mouth that these parents are “more involved” and “self selecting”, and that’s why the schools perform better?
They are highly involved, misinformed, self-selected, gullible dupes who have been sold a bill of goods.
Did you forget that these parents also support segregation? Does that also make them elitists—my kids are better than yours, so I don’t want them near mine type of thinking?
You got me — I left that one out on the theory that it’s patently ridiculous in the case of Success Academy schools. I think the theory there would have to be that the parents are self-selecting, highly-involved dupes who do not support segregation, but who have been duped by people who do support segregation.
Flerp, not to mention duped into supporting privatization and the destruction of public education.
duped works for me
:o)
Obviously there is a racial component to susceptibility to being duped, right?
Glen Ford of the Black Agenda Report described how blacks were encouraged to accept vouchers and charter schools in: “Corporate Assault on Public Education”
Diane also addressed this matter here: “Saving Poor Kids from Failing Schools?” https://dianeravitch.net/2012/05/21/saving-poor-kids-from-failing-schools/
Elder Wise,
Yes, in this fairy tale, people created charter schools for privatization and to make money, and they did it in urban areas because they could get away with it there because nobody cares about those people anyway (oh yeah, and they’re easily duped into sending their children into charter school’s evil clutches).
Hogwash. A “creation tale” that exists solely to dismiss urban parents’ concern for their kids and rationalize away the demand for charters.
I go with Occam’s razor on this one. If just about everything posted on this blog can be explained as motivated by protecting the status quo (or maybe the status quo pre NCLB) in schools, then that is the most likely explanation.
Diane and Julian Vasquez Heilig previously described the astro-turf organization involved in getting blacks to accept vouchers and charter schools, too, the Black Alliance for Educational Options, initially funded by the right wing Bradley Foundation and also the Walton Foundation, Gates et al. now:
“Heilig on Black Alliance for Educational Options: Follow the Money”
Elder Wise,
Nobody who has met Howard Fuller or heard him speak could possibly think BAEO is an “astroturf organization”. Please at least look him up on Wikipedia, or better yet, read “No Struggle, No Progress”.
Charter lover John, who has a lot of lame excuses for not sending his own kids to his charter school, as I most definitely would if I thought the school I was running was so terrific, wants everyone here to take his skewed rants as truth.
His characterizations are nothing like what I got from watching the video. Watch for yourselves, everyone, and don’t believe this hypocrite’s ongoing propaganda!
John, did you read the NY Times article? The SA schools get higher test scores because they focus relentlessly on test scores, not education. They spend weeks and weeks test prepping.They get high scores by humiliating the children. This is not a model for education anywhere.
OK, so please show me the research that says relentless test preparation works.l
Also, what does that look like? Everyone likes to pretend that it is practice filling in bubbles on answer sheets or something else educationally worthless.
Is it reading a lot of passages to determine main idea and be able to answer questions about the texts? Is it practicing math word problems to be able to apply math skills to real world problems?
Please explain for me what this test prep looks like, why it is effective on tests, and why it is different than learning.
And, since they have 4 more weeks of school per year, maybe something they spend “weeks and weeks on” isn’t that different than my wife and I working with our kids on writing skills in response to test-like questions, etc.
There has never been a bubble test at Success. The test prep creeps into the curriculum around February of each year and peaks in the month before the tests, which is now. Essentially, the scholars’ normal classroom time (ie when they are not in science, at recess, at art, at chess, at dance) is spent practicing math word problems, passage analysis, and written response. Perhaps it is best described as having long tutoring sessions to prepare for the exams.
Is it stressful for some kids? Yes. Would I as a parent like them to spend more time pondering the universe (which the school actually does a wonderful job teaching prior to February and after the tests are completed)? Sure.
However, the honest truth is that every Success Academy parent that read the NY Times article already knows everything it contains. The article is dramatized, but it is true that the school really, really pushes and challenges the kids. Note that the article does understate all the great things that the teachers do for the children and how appreciative thousands of parents are for these schools (you can read the comments to that article to see some of the parents responding).
Please remember, we are choosing to send our kids to this environment. There isn’t anything happening in secret rooms, and parents are allowed to observe in the schools at any time. And before you ask – yes, my child was in a G&T program prior to attending SAUW and is otherwise eligible to attend a top Upper West gen-ed school; however the Success primary education has been hands down better than those options, even with the drawbacks. While most of you reading Diane’s blog may not agree with their methods, many parents do, and they want the right to choose that educational approach.
The school does a tremendous job of taking children that would otherwise fail the state tests and, through focus and practice and support and even some cajoling, they achieve passing grades. Why does this matter? These tests are used as an evaluation point for attending the best middle schools in the city. Pushing a child that is borderline failing into passing can literally open new doors to them and change their life. I also think it is hard to argue that the schools are not providing greater opportunity for many of the children growing up in less well off areas of NYC.
I’ve been reading this board for about a year, so I am prepared for the flames….
SA Upper West Side Parent,
Why do you think 50% of more of the teachers at SA schools leave every year?
John,
Go ahead and google PARCC test if you’re online. And get the samples and try some yourself. And then hand them to your kids or students–if you are teaching. Or go ask anyone who is actually teaching at SA and get the inside information to see how NY article is reflected or deflected from the reality teachers are facing out there.
You are living close to the ground zero. So you should have little difficulty than most people here to know what is going on. Stop snarling at people like a mad dog, and blast a load of non-sense just because you don’t agree with them. Go get the fact yourself.
John,
My child is in 3rd grade and test prep has started. Some of the hints they give are:
1) plug in every answer – in my working life (in a technical field) I never encountered a problem with four possible answers in front of me, that I could “plug in” to determine the answer. In fact, I usually had to figure out the question because I could start calculating the answers.
2) Don’t spend too much time on a problem – for me, this is very troublesome. Basically if it is too hard, move on the questions you can answer. That is good advice for a timed test, but in real life, I hope my child would spend a lot of time on the hard problems.
My concern with so much emphasis on standardized tests is that they don’t prepare one for real life problems. I have more of an issue with the time spent test prepping than I do with my child taking the actual test. Luckily, our school doesn’t do much test prep compared to other schools (but I would prefer zero time spent with test prep).
And if those tests were really able to show what they claim, no one would need to do any test prep. Test prep would not influence scores if test prep wasn’t a major factor being tested.
Diane – There is definitely a higher rate of teacher turnover and the teachers at our school do change frequently. However, the vast majority of them are teachers that are switching between Success Academies. This is partially driven by their rapid expansion, which leads the network to pull some teachers out of the existing schools to give the new schools a better jumpstart. There have been a couple of assistant teachers at SAUW that were let go mid-year, and the parents of children in those classes generally agreed with those dismissals. Yes the teachers are young, but they are teaching pursuant to well defined guidelines which are constantly being modified for what is working and what is not working. Also, lets keep in mind that we are talking about very basic math and reading skills that a lot of us could all teach at home if we had the time. I could understand greater concern with turnover for middle school instructors, but it has not been a problem in elementary.
There is no doubt that being a teacher for Success is very demanding; but so is running this blog and so is the job that each of us do every day. We put in those hours because we believe in what we are doing. I have generally found that the staff is highly motivated, somewhat idealistic, extremely cheerful, firm with discipline, quick to hug and genuinely care about each of the scholars.
John, I think yours is a fair question. Why do parents choose this kind of school? My guess is that while they may not believe their own children need stringent rules and harsh discipline, they do like feeling secure in the fact that other children will not be allowed to hit, bully, tease, or even distract their own child. Providing security and safety for children is something many schools could do better.
At the same time, why is this not the kind of school most high-SES parents would want? In Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell wrote that the children of upper-middle class parents are encouraged to make choices, to inquire, to (politely, one hopes) question authority, and that this eventually helps them to see themselves as smart and self-reliant leaders. Is there a risk that in being trained to obey rather than educated to inquire, students will not be prepared for high school and college — where they will be expected to debate, formulate opinions, ask questions, and think critically — or for participation in democratic citizenship?
In the article, Eva Moskowitz seems to suggest that the only two choices are order (her vision of order, which reflects the schoolhouse of a century ago) or chaos. But there are schools — public, private, parochial, and charter — that define success quite differently, and that are structured for inquiry, collaborative activity, deeper learning, and humane and responsive discipline. (If you like charter schools, see for example the new film “Most Likely to Succeed,” about High Tech High in San Diego.) If the choices are a militaristic order and chaos, then sure, parents will choose order. But what if those are not the only choices?
John-
I actually agree with you that we don’t need to focus so much on the parents who send their kids to charter schools. I wish they wouldn’t send students out of the public schools because I can see that it hurts the overall system. However, once the option is in place it makes sense for the parents. It reminds me of the economic theory “tragedy of the commons.” The most commonly sited example is the buffalo hunt during the expansion to the west in America, where pretty much an entire species was wiped out in a matter of years, almost completely by individual hunters or small groups of hunters. Each was making a rational, individually justifiable decision- they were hungry, they needed money, they needed furs, etc… But the widespread system led to some very negative externalities. This is why we need government over the free market. This is the main critique of the free market in general.
Basically every rational actor in a system will make the choice that most benefits them personally, based on the cost and their personal values/interest. A charter school can market to a wide variety of parents, and maybe even have certain qualities that the parents like (for example, a charter school in Boston focuses on music and art). I believe that it is not wrong for an individual parent to send their child to a charter school if they think it is right for their child.
But in districts where more and more charters open, the tragedy of the commons comes into play. The more parents who take kids out of public schools, the more damage is done to the actual public system- negatively effecting everyone who lives in the city. A good example is Philadelphia. This public district has lost so much funding, and a lot goes to charter schools (and lots lost from horrible financial decisions on a state level).
No individual parent is personally making a bad or morally wrong decision. But when a system is not put into place to curb the negative externalities, and support schools who lose funds/students, we can see real damage to the neighborhood/city/country as a whole. The fault is on the people in charge of the system.
GS,
Yes, but don’t you agree that the same thing has been happening for decades when those who can afford it move? Again, not blaming parents who did this (my own included), but pointing out that this system “works” for those that can afford it, and it’s a shame that we are now “protecting the public good” by trying to keep these parents from having options.
Also, I’ve discussed elsewhere that charters get less per student and that each student who goes to a charter leaves more money to spend per student on those remaining, not less.
And John, as you’ve been told elsewhere, your *analysis* that schools have more money when students leave for charters is unadulterated B.S.
Sharon,
Nobody yet has questioned the veracity of saving money per student when a student goes to a charter. Are you?
All anyone has done is rationalize why schools continue to spend money like they have thousands of more students than they do after those students leave for charters.
Yes, if a few hundred kids go to a charter, or if it’s the first year or two, it is not likely that the costs can be recouped. But most charters are in cities with thousands of kids in charters for years and they still say the same thing.
I absolutely detest any situation where the objective is to intimidate. I think that is the very essence of bullying. I used to teach with a man who was more concerned with having the highest test scores than he was with any other facet of the child. I couldnt stand to listen to his opinions because of these traits.
I went to a session delivered by an author and KIPP teacher. I felt like crying during the seminar. I can’t imagine being his student.
I would never put my child in that kind of classroom.
I was shocked at the amount of comments in favor of the harsh treatment of academically struggling students. Not all thse students are .discipline problems. My sweetest classes were made up of struggling students. To have them made to feel stupid and inadequate is heartbreaking. My students always tried their best, and while their progress was slow, they did make strides and many of them improved their levels one or two years but still didn’t “pass”. In the years when scores were percentiles instead of rubrics, many of my students went from single or low percentages the year before to either above 5o% which was passing to almost 50%. Some went to 70%. And it was done not being on some stringent curriculum calendar, but having the freedom to review and remediate while inspiring students to think creatively and opening them up to the love of reading. Math was taught using games and taking time with concepts.
The parents defending these actions most likely don’t have a struggling student. And these same parents would be the first one complaining to the principal if a public school teacher acted that way.
While I wish public school teachers had the same support for discipline problems charters are afforded, and have the same financial support for The Arts, I could never punish a struggling student. That child needs a nurturing environment.
2old2teach,
Fair point about not-for-profits. About the only thing it guarantees is filing 990s each year, which is how we know how much Eva makes. We have some pretty strong laws in NY about conflicts of interest, and the authorizers are good and getting better about questioning all financial relationships.
I know there are charters that exist to make money and some self-dealing operators, etc. and am more disgusted by that than most since they reflect badly on all of us.
Nonprofit means nothing in the charter industry.
It means exactly the same thing in the charter sector as it does for any other non-profit. In addition to the reporting requirements of the IRS, New York State charters are required by law to undergo annual independent financial audits. The state-by-state differences in regulations matter.
There are non-profits that are the real thing and you can use a site like Charity Navigator to help discover those that aren’t out to use the non-profit title as a shield for a covert operation to wealth and power.
For instance, the average administrative costs in non-profit, transparent, Democratic public education have held steady at about 10% of total public education revenue decade after decade and that administrative cost pretty much matches what honest and ethical charities allocate to their administration. Public education is not watched by Charity Navigator because it is a public institution, but what about corporate Charters—where to they stand?
I am aware that when the document goes before the Senate education committee, it could well be amended
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=32#.VSVVCvnF-no
We only evaluate organizations granted tax-exempt status under section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code and that file a Form 990. 501(c) (3) organizations are considered public charities and all donations to them are tax-exempt.
We do not evaluate 501(c) (4) organizations. In general, 501(c) (4) organizations are allowed to spend a substantial portion of their revenue on lobbying our government and not every donation to them is tax-deductible.
We do not evaluate private foundations. Private foundations, like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, receive the majority of their money from only one individual, family or corporation.
If a corporate Charter lists itself as a non-profit, it would be interesting to discover if they have been rated by Charity Navigator. org.
And there are 16 Charter schools that are ranked by Charity Navigator but hundreds that aren’t. The answer to the why would be interesting to know.
https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?keyword_list=Charter+schools&Submit2=Search&bay=search.results
Here’s the page for Green Dot Public Schools—I think you might find it interesting.
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12311#.VSVXA_nF-no
You always have enablers and rationalizes to justify illegalities and inequities John, you are that person. No matter how you explain or rationalize charters, they still are formed to make money for private concerns. The billionaires in the hedge funds who are driving this machines don’t give a hoot about parental choice or student achievement. Let’s call this what it is. If, after sucking all the monies out of education, the result is of some benefit to students, it’s purely unintentional on the de formers part. The difference in the public education model is that people are in it for educational purposes, not profit. The freedom for students, parents to decide where to go is good but with the increase in charters, the choices are limited to going to the well funded charter or the poor, test challenged public school. I support charter as long as they are funded by private monies.if these billionaires and businesses were so concerned about parental choice or students, why did they wait until public monies was allowed to fund charters before they became involved? Charters help these de formers to make money on the public dime and segregate and discriminate without any restrictions or oversight. Please don’t say that charters have restrictions because we all know they are not being held to those standards.
Paula,
It’s hard to express here how wrong you are. I’m not trying to justify anything illegal and certainly not justify inequities. I’m a volunteer for a charitable organization, as are most non-staff associated with charter schools. Our teachers are very talented, dedicated people, as are our staff. Our teachers are well paid, but our top administrator has decided to be considerably underpaid relative to what principals in traditional public schools generally get, despite his more complicated job description.
Most charter schools are like ours, not like the hypothetical one you describe, so yes, I’m going to defend these staff, volunteers, families and children against your baseless and mostly ignorant attacks.
The “well funded” charter is also a myth, as most of us have to make do on the per pupil tuition that we get, which is substantially less than the per pupil amount spent by our neighboring traditional schools. In our case, we also have to pay for our building out of our operating budget (traditional public schools do not).
There are very few people “making money” on charters nationwide. These include for-profit charters, some companies that provide services to charters, and some banks and individuals who loan money to charters for their buildings. I don’t defend any of this, but there are *far* more people making money off of traditional public schools.
As for segregation, this happens as a result of choice; it isn’t being forced on anyone and therefore shouldn’t be equated with the segregation ended by Brown. Discrimination? On what grounds?
As for being held to standards, authorizers in New York are quite strict and have closed down many charters for not providing a much better education than neighboring schools or for not being fiscally viable. On the contrary, every single school in my city is on the failing schools list. Some have been for a decade. That’s where the lack of accountability is, not with charters.
Charter kids are public school kids and deserve *more* than the portion of the public funds that we allocate for them, not less, and certainly don’t deserve to be completely unfunded as you suggest. Those with money choose schools by moving or paying private tuition. Those without are why charter schools exist. You may think yourself a political progressive, but taking away schools that are working for low income families in order to protect “public education” as you see it is not progressive.
If the denigration of poor children of color, massive test prep, profiteering etc. are not reasons enough to stop diverting public funds to minimally regulated charter schools, there’s more –and a well documented method for promoting choice WITHIN public school districts:
Choice Without Equity: Charter School Segregation and the Need for Civil Rights Standards
“The charter school movement has been a major political success, but it has been a civil rights failure. As the country continues moving steadily toward greater segregation and inequality of education for students of color in schools with lower achievement and graduation rates, the rapid growth of charter schools has been expanding a sector that is even more segregated than the public schools. The Civil Rights Project has been issuing annual reports on the spread of segregation in public schools and its impact on educational opportunity for 14 years. We know that choice programs can either offer quality educational options with racially and economically diverse schooling to children who otherwise have few opportunities, or choice programs can actually increase stratification and inequality depending on how they are designed. The charter effort, which has largely ignored the segregation issue, has been justified by claims about superior educational performance, which simply are not sustained by the research. Though there are some remarkable and diverse charter schools, most are neither. The lessons of what is needed to make choice work have usually been ignored in charter school policy. Magnet schools are the striking example of and offer a great deal of experience in how to create educationally successful and integrated choice options.”
The Civil Rights Project
http://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/choice-without-equity-2009-report