During the Bloomberg years, the Department of Education has had a public relations staff that declared major successes whenever a new idea is launched, without waiting to see how things worked out. It is always good to be willing to try new ideas, but it is even better to withhold judgment until they have had time to prove themselves. But that has not been the New York City way these past dozen years.
One such well-heralded school is called the New American Academy, which opened in 2010, founded by Shimon Waronker, an Orthodox Jew who had studied at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and graduated from Mayor Bloomberg’s prized Leadership Academy. The school received extensive, often fawning press coverage. The big idea was to have 60 students in the same classroom with four teachers. It would be a new model of schooling, somewhat like the “bullpens” where Mayor Bloomberg’s employees work, in open cubicles rather than individual offices. It would replace the 19th century Prussian model of one teacher in one classroom with a large roomful of youngsters and four teachers. Its founder predicted that he would have 50 such schools open by 2012.
The press was intrigued. The New York Times heralded the opening of the school with its bold new concept, though with a hint of skepticism characteristic of the reporter Sharon Otterman, who was unimpressed by the noise and disorder. Nonetheless, she made clear that this was one of the models that education officials were excited about. The New York Post wrote an admiring article. David Brooks, always fast to see a big story in the making, called it “the relationship school,” and described it in glowing terms as akin to “the networked collaborative of today.” He hedged a bit at the end of his article, saying that it was too soon to say if it would work, but he made clear his admiration for the boldness of the scheme and its leader.
Alas, too soon the praise. Rachel Monahan of the New York Daily News reports that only 2 of its 22 students who took the Common Core tests in reading and math managed to pass. The city halted its plans to expand the school to a middle school. Worse, “more than half of the first class, which started with 40 first-graders three years ago, are no longer enrolled or weren’t promoted to the fourth grade, city stats show.” Although the city withdrew its plan to expand this school, two similar prototypes have already been approved. Undaunted by the test scores and the attrition rate, teachers and parents say they are enthusiastic about the new school.
This is a bit off topic, but I am curious about folks opinions about Mayor Bloomberg and the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation each contributing a million dollars to support amendment 66 in Colorado. The story was reported in the NYT today.
I can’t find much info on the pros and cons except for the daisies and daffodils explanation given by the direct supporters of the amendment which makes it sound like the best thing since the Constitution itself. Something about “equalizing” funding between charter and district schools that sounds good on the surface, but if those two big players are involved, nothing good will come of it. What is Bloomberg’s interest in Colorado anyway? Is he planning to retire there once New York runs him out on a rail?
I hope someone from Colorado might comment.
The NYT article mentions that Amendment 66 would increase the states 4.6% flat tax rate with a two tier tax rate of 5% for those with taxable income below $75,000 and 5.9% for those above. It would require 43% of state tax revenue to schools (it is not clear if that is just K-12), require full time kindergarten standard in the state and reduce the reliance on local funding of schools.
Apparently the proponents of have far outspent the opponents. The major group opposing is reported to have raised only about 24,000, compared to the over 6 million reported by the supporters.
Daisies and daffodils?
Aw gee, Dienne, don’t be so negative. When it comes to so-called education reform, it’s all miracles, unicorns and ponies!
I suppose that it may be true that full time kindergarten might not necessary for the children of Colorado whose parents can not afford private kindergarten or live in a wealthy district. It could be just another pony. Perhaps unicorns could be saved for the day that Colorado funds pre-kindergarten programs.
This model is not new and innovating. It’s called the “open classroom” and I taught in a class like this 30 years ago. It was just awful. Way too much noise and far too many visual distractions –negatively impacting both students and teachers. I had headaches all the time just from the noise pollution alone. It was my absolute worst teaching experience.
I was just ready to say: this is nothing new and it is too noisy and distracting. These “innovations” are recycled attempts at change which actually helped usher in the assumption that schools needed to stop with “progressive changes” and get “back to the basics”.
I feel like we spent thousands of dollars trying on new ideas, being told swim or tank, only to have more changes thrown in our faces, often by heartless, cold, power-driven principals and administrators.
It seems to me that some of the things I was required to do were the results of some person writing a program with 3 years of classroom experience, acting as if writing new terms, acronyms, and jargon was making a substantive change. Then as you get older, the innovators, who don’t think it possible that you could have done this thing before, use the new terms for the same ideas, add a computer tool, tweak the pedagogy to fit the all powerful “domain” rubric, and pretend that they are special.
What a load of malarkey.
Yeah, I should have said that my teaching experiences in the “open classroom” were MORE than thirty years ago, because that occurred in the 70s/early 80s. My school did have cement block walls framing the building, too, with no insulation, so we had carpeting on the floor to reduce the noise. That did not help. I suggested carpeting the ceiling and walls, too, but that went nowhere. You literally could not hear yourself think, and children quickly learned to shout so they could be heard. It was just awful.
After teaching in there a couple years, the school added a new very different separate classroom and I got to teach alone in that room instead. It was a huge relief, but I always had to train the kids who moved up from the open classroom that they could whisper in my class and still be heard, because they had gotten so used to yelling when they talked in school.
ditto to deb
Had same experience in the 70s. No doors on the classrooms, push-back dividers to make even bigger spaces, teams of teachers (we had three with 90 kids, plus two teacher aides). It paralleled new school construction using concrete blocks, almost no windows, thin dividers rather than real walls that supposedly could be reconfigured. The noise was awful. Acoustics were non-existent. Sound from a film being shown in one classroom couldn’t be heard throughout that class, but next door it drown out whatever was going on there. Apparently there are no educational history classes at Harvard. Certainly the billionaires who attended private schools weren’t subjected to this so they think they’re coming up with new, groundbreaking innovation.
Oops! I meant to place my reply here. Sorry!
BTW, Joanne, excellent points about the HGSE! My opinion of Harvard has really plummeted over the past decade, based on the quality of their graduates, including Arne Duncan.
To clarify, Duncan didn’t go to HGSE, or grad school at all, or even major in education. I meant that I have lost respect for Harvard in general. A degree from there has become a free ticket to a high paying job in virtually any field, however unrelated to a graduate’s actual major. How ridiculous. They generate too many economists whose fingerprints are all over corporate “reform” policies, too, IMHO.
I was a student in one of these types of classrooms 30 yrs ago. Luckily I was adept and burying my face in a book and tuning out all the noise…
“Undaunted by the test scores and the attrition rate, teachers and parents say they are enthusiastic about the new school.”
naïveté or just plain stupidity?
Perhaps ideological blindness?
Or it could be that people have just fallen for corporate “reform” PR tactics, which are the same as those used by the Nazi Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, who said,
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”
High school senior English, 1968. Three teachers, nearly 90 kids. Only thing it prepared us for was those horrible freshman classes at university where 150 “students” were lectured at by a TA with a microphone.
Reblogged this on 21st Century Theater.
I also taught in an open school in the early 7os. It was awful. Just think of doing that now with so many more kids with ADD!! OMG
Please send me Diane your dates. Will she be coming to Cols. Ohio?
Thanks