I did not write the following post. It was written by a high-level official at the New York City Department of Education who–for obvious reasons–requires anonymity. The story he tells is instructive. It is about how “reformers” claim victory by manipulating statistics. This is not an accusation directed at the de Blasio administration, but at their predecessors who regularly boasted that the new small high schools got better graduation rates that the large schools they replaced. The Gates Foundation bought this lie and has lauded its “success” in New York City.
Reformers Caught Lying. Again. This Time About Graduation Stats.
High school graduations are upon us. This is the time of year when parents, students, families, educators and communities celebrate the accomplishments of our high school seniors. It is a time to honor the work the graduates have done and to collectively share their hopes and dreams for the future.
At the same time, certain players in the world of education attempt to co-opt this time of year to propagandize for their favored reform policies. The latest example of this is a story about Frank McCourt High School, a small high school in New York City that “will send 97 percent of its first graduating class to college.” The story goes on to note that this school, along with 3 others, replaced a larger high school “which suffered from dismal academic and attendance records.” The reader is asked to believe one little and one big lie.
Let’s first take a look at the little lie. Does this school, in fact, have a 97% graduation/college going rate? The truth is that, on any reasonable calculation, it does not. According to the New York State data the cohort started with 100 freshmen. By sophomore year only 88 students remained. By junior year only 80. And by senior year only 69. Of these 69 survivors 67 are graduating. Seems more like a twisted version of the Hunger Games than a school for all students. One wonders: Where did the other 33 students go? Why does the media publicize such meaningless numbers without giving the full story? By now this trick should be well-known. A school that removes large numbers of students from its cohort should not be celebrated for its test scores or graduation rate. It is an artifact of arithmetic. If a school kicks out students with low test scores, it will have high test scores among the surviving students. If a school culls the students not on track to graduate it will have a high graduation rate among the surviving students.
Let’s move on to the big lie. Does this school, in fact, show that the reform strategy of closing large schools and replacing them with other smaller schools works? The full range of data show that it does not, as a number of facts pop-out.
There are 4 high schools co-located in the building that used to house Brandeis High School. One school, Innovation Diploma Plus (a “second-chance” school), had a 50.8% graduation rate last year. Another school, the Global Learning Collaborative, had a 52.7% graduation rate last year. Yet another school, the Urban Assembly School for Green Careers had a 39.8% graduation rate last year. We have already examined the claimed 97% graduation rate of the Frank McCourt High School, which also happens to screen its students before admissions.
The schools with the lower graduation rates retain almost all of their students. Unlike the school that boasts of its 97% graduation rate, the other three schools stay committed to all their students. Why do reformers refuse to evaluate schools based on their sticking with all their students? We know the answer. It is because charter schools and “miracle” schools will then be publicly exposed as largely frauds. So the metrics used to evaluate schools are deliberately constructed in ways that do not capture cohort retention in order to keep the myth alive. And the media agrees to overlook the tremendously high attrition rates at charter schools and other so-called “miracle” schools.
It may come as little surprise that the school with the lowest graduation rate has over 22% more English Language Learners, over 14% more students entering high school already overage, and over 40% more Black/Hispanic students than the school with the highest graduation rate.[i] This sheds some light on another reformer strategy. They like to tout free-market principles as they destroy community schools and create choice systems where students end up sorted into schools based on demographic characteristics and prior academic performance. This is not a solution. It does not improve education for all students. All it does is stick students in different containers, isolated from one another, thereby perpetuating a system of haves and have-nots. It is shocking that the reformers, who proclaim education the civil rights issue of our time, would support such an inequitable approach.
The total enrollment of all the high schools in the Brandeis High School building is 1,350 students. The shuttered school, Brandeis High School, had over 2,000 students. Where did the missing 600 students go? We know the answer. The missing 600 students were the more challenging students and students who did not get accepted to one of the small choice-in high schools. These students were deliberately sent to a specific group of, usually large, high schools that were then labeled “failures” too and shuttered. The Gates Foundation, an organization that has yet to meet a free-market education reform strategy it doesn’t like, has admitted that the national small school initiative was largely a failure. Despite this, MDRC, a research group in New York City, continues to publish Gates Foundation funded reports claiming that the small schools in New York City work.[ii]
It is now clear what New York City was doing during the Bloomberg era. Given the humungous size of the district they were able to play a shell game with students by passing the buck. Instead of figuring out how to reach the most challenging students and helping them succeed, the students were passed from school to school. This inevitably led to a domino effect of school closures. A shell game like this can be played in a district with almost 500 high schools, over two and half times as many as the next largest school district. Since there is a very long chain of dominos the “bad apple” students can be isolated into a specific group of schools making the remaining schools, which don’t accept those students, look good. But, as smaller districts have found out, it is not a workable long-term strategy when there is not an endless supply of schools to be used as sacrificial lambs.
Sooner or later the lies about numbers that reformers tell will catch up to them. Educators need to continue to advocate for approaches that are equitable and genuinely seek to improve the educational experience of all students. This includes developing curricula personalized for different students and improving wraparound services that extend beyond school walls. Ultimately, when the accounting fraud that is behind so many education reform initiatives collapses upon itself
[i] Frank McCourt has 55% Black/Hispanic students, 1% ELL students, 20.4% IEP students and .7% overage students. Global Learning has 90.3% Black/Hispanic students, 14.7% ELL students, 23% IEP students and 8.5% overage students. Green Careers has 95.6% Black/Hispanic students, 23.6% ELL students, 23.8 IEP students, and 15.15% overage students.
[ii] It is worth noting that the combined graduation rate of the 4 schools in the Brandies Building is 58.5% which is lower than the city-wide average of 72%.

perhaps we should be talking about Joel Klein, Bloomberg’s former charter school “advocate,” who is now working for Murdoch’s so-called education conglomerate–continuing to do his dirty deeds after closing highschools, leaving children double-upped with no place to go, causing more crime and destruction.
LikeLike
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Klein A Wikipedia post on Joel Klein who wrought so much damage in New York Schools. Do your own research–there’s much there.
LikeLike
The link is informative. The revolving door Bloomberg/Murdoch opened for Joel Klein, is cringe-worthy.
LikeLike
It seems like one person’s evidence of success is another’s evidence of failure. Like variable eyewitness testimony, perceptions are filtered through the lens of morals, values and self-interest. Some of us see the disruption of school closings, low retention of students in charter schools and high teacher and principal turnover as evidence of failure because we value equitable outcomes for all. We know that stability in children’s lives matters. Reformers see these results as evidence of success because their goal is to provide an escape hatch from poverty for the lucky survivors in which competitive advantage predominates. Disruption is their view is just the price of doing business. http://www.arthurcamins.com
LikeLike
Impressive article Arthur Camins! Thanks for sharing.
LikeLike
“Congratulations are Due”
We graduate
One hundred percent
Congratulate
We’re Heaven sent
The ones we weed
Don’t make the grade
They pay no heed
And haven’t paid!!
The one we serve
For graduation
Does sure deserve
Congratulation!
LikeLike
So their graduation rate would be around a 69 percent if they had to follow state public school protocol. Which is around the national average.
Sorry, I’ll risk sounding conceded and say until my plan becomes nationally adopted and implemented, education will remain status quo.
LikeLike
And that plan is????
LikeLike
A plan with remedial spelling included?
LikeLike
Here in Louisiana, one of our public education defenders and bloggers, Mike Deshotel, posted the piece linked below on the cooking of the graduation rate books.http://louisianaeducator.blogspot.com/2014/07/100-error-rate-on-student-transfers.html
LikeLike
Another piece of “evidence” used for privatization is the number of students that don’t “pass” part of all of community college entry placement tests and then have to take remedial classes before they can take “for credit” classes. Often the students don’t understand what they are taking when they take them.
Students that can afford the higher tuition at private colleges don’t need to deal with that. Not all English majors at private colleges would be able to pass the community college entry placement test for math. Not all math majors at private colleges would be able to pass the community college entry placement test for English.
Students are not equally proficient in all fields.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on aureliomontemayor and commented:
Let the facts fit the story you want to tell.
LikeLike
It’s a shame that the Gates Foundation and Bloomberg have done so much to discredit the small schools approach. The Gates Foundation jumped on this idea because it had demonstrated promise in the work of real reformers, Ted Sizer and Deborah Meier. Unfortunately the Gates obsession with scaling up led to widespread implementation divorced from the theoretical underpinnings of the small school concept. Add in the cynical motivations of the Bloomberg Administration and a once promising idea is in shambles. It’s too bad because so many of the things needed in our schools beginning with a real collaboration among faculty and staff, relationships with students and knowledge of their individual straights, challenges and passions are clearly enhanced by the small school environment.
LikeLike
“It’s a shame that the Gates Foundation and Bloomberg have done so much to discredit the small schools approach. ‘
It’s indeed a shame but not at all surprising.
Gates is not really after “true value” in the educational sense. He doesn’t even know what that is*. He’s after increased “$ value” for people like himself. (*his ignorance of true value is hardly limited to education, as anyone who has ever used Microsoft Windows knows)
The plan is to scale everything up (not down), automating the process as much as possible and eventually removing district and state independence and self-determination entirely.
That necessarily means actually “devaluing” teachers and the teaching profession in general, making them into “replaceable” (even out-source-able) parts. It’s the “Devalue Added Model.
The ultimate goal is “total online education”, for which a teacher either has become a mere “technology facilitator” (at best), relegated to the role of making sure the students can use the online software (which will almost certainly be produced and sold by companies like Microsoft and Pearson), or has been eliminated entirely.
It’s no accident that people like Gates have no qualms with larger class sizes because that is just one logical step along the way. And blaming teachers(and their unions) for everything that is wrong with education (like blaming factory workers and their unions for all the problems with American manufacturing) is also not surprising, given that the ultimate goal is eliminating them entirely (or at least greatly diminishing their role ).
Replacing certified teachers with unqualified TFA newbies and decimating the morale of professional teachers through endless testing and VAM ranking (and firing) are not part of a plan to save teaching but to replace it. As software developers like to say, “those are not bugs, but features.”
Gates has made no secret of his online learning “vision”.
What goes along with that should also come as no surprise.
LikeLike
Those who would promote an elitist education system love these types of stats–“Our graduation rate is 100%. All of the students who graduated actually graduated. We don’t worry about the dropout rate. They’re dropouts after all.” In my state, public high schools are graded on both dropout rate and graduation rate.
LikeLike
It’s getting to the point where statistics are almost useless because people tweak the data to meet their agenda. We have a charter school here in Camden, NJ that makes the claim that 100% of their students graduate and go on to college, year after year.. When you see that number, over and over, you have to start asking questions.
LikeLike
I love the way cohorts are used. They count if a school is being chastised and threatened. They don’t count if a school is being praised.
If you really want a “commonality”, Arne Duncan should proclaim one way or the other for determining graduation rates and then force school districts to stick to it. Then we will have a better idea of what is happening across the country, (of course this won’t work since every district and/or state has it’s own method of deciding graduation requirements).
Let’s face it, our country is too diverse to achieve a “common” comparison.
LikeLike