Morgan Loew, a reporter for CBS in Phoenix, investigated the BASIS charter schools, which have regularly been ranked by U.S News as one of the best high schools in the nation.
Parents at the school are very happy with their children’s progress.
Critics say that the attrition rate is so high that the school ends up with only the best students.
BASIS officials dispute that claim.
Statistics tell a different story.
But statistics from the U.S. Department of Education show a large drop-off in student enrollment from middle school to high school.
During the 2012 to 2013 school year, BASIS Scottsdale had 144 students in the sixth grade, but only 32 in the 12th grade. Other BASIS schools show a similar pattern.
“Those nine to 20 to 50 12th graders at some of our newer schools didn’t start with classes of 100 kids. They started with classes of 20 kids or 30 kids,” said Peter Bezanson, the CEO of BASIS schools.
He said the schools are gaining enrollment in the lower grades, which should translate into larger graduating classes. Bezanson argues that actual drop-off is roughly 10 percent per grade, except between the eighth and ninth grades, where the attrition rate is 25 percent.
“We don’t like that. We’re working to, we want to keep all those kids,” Bezanson said.
But critics say there is a problem with the way political leaders and policymakers view BASIS and compare it to other schools.
“You can’t compare it to the other schools around,” said Amanda Potterton, a PhD student at Arizona State University. She has studied BASIS and the makeup of its student body. She said BASIS has few students who live in poverty and few students with special needs.
“The data show the ones who stay are going to perform well on tests no matter where they go to school,” Potterton said.
She and others argue that the school system’s ranking is inflated because it teaches only the brightest, most motivated students, while traditional schools teach students from a variety of backgrounds and with a variety of problems.
“I don’t think we should be touting a school that graduates a couple of handfuls of kids as somehow superior to these schools that graduate hundreds of kids with many different challenges,” Erfle said.
But there is a large demand for seats at BASIS desks. There is currently a 7,000-student waiting list for this fall.
Meanwhile, BASIS has expanded to other states, including Texas. It plans to open a private school in Brooklyn.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Who says there is a waiting list of 7,000 students? What does one need to do to be on the list?
LikeLike
Well, if the past is any predictor of the present we can be assured that that 7,000 includes many multiples of the same individuals, others who may have attempted but decided not to attend even if given the chance and many others whose names should have been purged from the list.
LikeLike
I think the parents who are waiting in line for a seat in one of these BASIS schools could easily be listed as racists and/or segregationists who don’t want their children anywhere close to “those kids”—-the ones who need the help the most but are being forced out.
I wonder how these alleged racist-segregationist parents must feel when their children have to go back to that horrible transparent, non-profit, democratic public school where “those kids” are too. They must be livid with anger that their children have to be in the same classroom with “those kids”.
LikeLike
I don’t know if you know this, but BASIS charter schools have an extremely diverse population of students and teachers. The school is huge on anti-bullying and acceptance of all races/religions, so anyone who is a segregationist/racist is on the wrong list. Also, the schools don’t really make money. They are public-charter so get a little government funding and have to do many fundraisers to do what they can and they really care about the students’ success.
LikeLike
Jordyn,
The owners of BASIS make tens of millions of dollars each year by selling supplies and services to the schools. Read “Reign of Error,” p. 172, where I quote the Arizona Republic. The Olga and Michael Block created a for-profit corporation to run the nonprofit charter chain. The nonprofit created by the Blocks signed a 10-year contract with the for-profit created by the Blocks. Out of $13.9 million in total spending, the AZ Republic said, $9.8 million went to the Blocks. The state may audit the nonprofit but not the for-profit.
LikeLike
I agree with the diverse population…Have you had experience with a child that has been bullied at BASIS? By “huge” anti-bullying” what exactly do you mean? My child was bullied terribly and the school did nothing!
LikeLike
I agree with the diverse population…Have you had experience with a child that has been bullied at BASIS? By “huge” anti-bullying” what exactly do you mean? My child was bullied terribly and the school did nothing!
LikeLike
BASIS has a huge bullying problem and the administration does nothing to help the students being bullied. Furthermore, BASIS is a for profit school. BASIS schools are tax-exempt but the company, BASIS Ed., who owns the schools, is for profit. There is zero transparency from BASIS on how they spend their money.
LikeLike
A racist tirade. Really? There are alot of good points in this stream about education – and even the luxury of providing niche services (as I think most charter schools do) rather than a well rounded education.
Calling Basis parents racists is hilarious and bizarre. ARe you a part of this same conversation? Yes these students all live in very supported homes. Most are double working families. Likewise a significant (guessing 40-50%) are first generation students. A vast majority at Basis in AZ are “brown” or ethnic (80%). Go sling mud (and feel righteous) somewhere else.
Liberal and Conservative intolerance both ruin every dialogue. Same people – different pulpits to power, not to progress.
LikeLike
Again, most if not all of these parents are biased and/or racists, but most of them don’t know it, because they have always been that way. They were raised biased and this is their norm.
The other option is they are ignorant and don’t know what they are doing, but ignorance is not an excuse for being biased/racist.
The fact is that if the Untied States really wanted to improve its public K-12 education system, the world has roll models to learn from. For instance, the top ten countries listed on the International PISA test, and none of them offer publicly funded, private sector choices for biased and/or racist parents to pull their children out of the country’s public schools.
The top ten, not including cities like Hong Kong or Macao are:
Singapore, a city state
Taiwan
Japan
(4?). China, but only15 year olds in Shanghai are tested, and even China’s leaders have publicly said that if every 15 year old in the Country was tested, the scores would be a lot lower.
South Korea
Switzerland
Estonia
7, Canada
8 Netherlands
Denmark
Finland
http://www.businessinsider.com/pisa-worldwide-ranking-of-math-science-reading-skills-2016-12
Once again, none of these countries even the city states and cities do not offer publicly funded choice to move your children to private sector schools that are allowed to cherry pick students and ignore the laws that regulate the public schools — not one.
And in the two countries that did offer choice (past tense), Chili and Sweden, the result was segregation revealing bias/racist behavior among parents, and in the United States, in cities and states where choice is now offered through legislation not the ballot box, the same results have happened, segregation.
Choice leads to segregation and that is caused by bias/racism.
I do not want to pay out of my taxes for some other parent’s biased/racist choices; I’m not alone. Every time voters have been offered a choice to vote for publicly funded, private sector schools, the majority of voters voted no because most of the voters are not like those biased/racist parents who want everyone else to pay for the segregated schools they want their children to attend.
LikeLike
BASIS schools are just like Success Academy. They “accept” anyone who wins the lottery, although like Success Academy, they first make it very clear to parents “If you know you cannot commit to all that we ask of you this year, this is not the place for you.” (BASIS used to tell parents that students would have to pass something like 8 AP exams in order to graduate — that will scare away some kids!)
If you are a parent who still thinks your kid is right for the school, and enrolls him, it really comes down to the child. If your child is a great student, either brilliant or hard working or both, and learns without needing a terrific teacher to explain concepts to students who struggle with them (or you can pay a tutor to do this), you will probably be happy with the school. If you aren’t rich enough to hire tutors or your child struggles too much, well then, misery it is. That is why there are very few at-risk students in their schools.
BASIS recently opened a for-profit private school in Brooklyn, using as a marketing point the success of the charter schools in Arizona. But one significant problem is that in those smaller Arizona cities, there were no Stuys or Hunters or the many other fantastic free high schools for brilliant students that are in NYC. If BASIS can’t get the top-performing students — if parents are unwilling to pay tuition for BASIS when their child can get a free education at a top public school — then will BASIS really perform very well? Or will they simply be like other less selective private schools?
LikeLike
And kudos to the KPHO reporter actually doing some real reporting into retention rates at BASIS instead of just re-writing a press release touting their results with no context. It’s a shame that there seems to be no education reporter in all of NYC willing to look at the retention rates at individual Success Academy charter schools. Especially the retention rates of at-risk children in their schools that are primarily low-income.
I find it odd that even in the most recent IBO report last month, the attrition rates at individual charter schools were only reported in aggregate and not as individual schools. The IBO specifically dis-aggregated the state test performance of each charter school and ranked them and made a point of noting Success Academy’s high performance. But they chose NOT to dis-aggregate the attrition and retention rate of each charter and rank them and instead just bundled attrition rates of 53 charters (including some low-performing ones and some that kept most of their students) into one total. Why? But even that “total” was revealing, since it the aggregated attrition rate was a whopping 49.5%!!! But a breakdown by school would have been nice and very revealing. Perhaps if there had been a NYC education reporter as good as the KPHO reporter, someone would have asked that question.
LikeLike
NYC Parent, when you describe Stuy and other similar schools, you are describing schools that have admissions tests based on standardized tests. I thought you were opposed to using tests to determine whether students are admitted to a public school.
LikeLike
Joe Nathan, when did I say I was “opposed” to using tests to determine whether students are admitted to a public school? I have said no such thing, although I can certainly see an argument for using tests and other factors for admission and not just one standardized exam.
What I AM opposed to is the people who run schools pretending their school is something that it is not. It is called HONESTY. Does the principal at Stuy go around pretending that Stuy’s teachers are better than other schools because their standardized test scores are better and criticize other schools that don’t match those results? Does the Stuy principal claim she has some “magic sauce” and if only other schools copied her methods (and used her book about “joyous teaching”) their students would be able to achieve the test results the Stuy students do? In fact, that would be truly absurd and people would think less of that principal if she was making that kind of claim about the test scores proving some special sauce that was working.
Likewise if the Basis principal made claims that the sky high test scores of the 30 students who manage to make it to 12th grade graduation “proved” that Basis had a magic sauce to educate all students and if only every schools did what Basis did, it would solve the problems of at-risk kids in failing schools. I mean,THAT would be just as absurd.
But in fact, there ARE people who are making such claims about their schools and bragging and issuing press releases as to how high the test scores of the students at their schools are. And instead of looking closely and seeing if perhaps, like Basis, a high attrition rate has something to do with those claims, the press just pretends the school has a magic sauce and has solved the problems of educating at-risk students. And if any public school can’t match those results, well, that’s just because they don’t have that special “magic sauce”. Let me guess, Joe Nathan, you have no problems with a school making such claims at all, do you? And that is why we disagree so often – you don’t seem to place any value on honesty. But without honesty, the situation in public schools will not get better, and anyone who pretends it is okay to be dishonest because hey, a few kids benefit, is not really interested in those few kids who benefit, they have another agenda.
LikeLike
NY Parent – Sorry I misunderstood your view point about allowing Sty and other schools catering to great test takers.
One of the reasons that chartering has grown around the country is that there are many parents who want options for the youngsters that Sty and other elite magnet schools have no interest in serving.
As to how Sty describes itself:
“With our outstanding record of academic achievement and our commitment to excellence, we feel that Stuyvesant High School merits the national recognition it has continued to maintain.”
http://stuy.enschool.org/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=126631&type=d&pREC_ID=251657&hideMenu=1
Actually, what Stuy is committed to is disinterest in working with students who can not pass their admissions tests; and disinterest in serving a cross section of students in NYC.
LikeLike
Joe Nathan, again, where is the Stuy principal saying that she has developed some special sauce that all schools should follow if they want to match her results? No one is pretending that principals of other schools — even other schools for gifted kids — should be making visits to Stuy to try to see “what works” and model themselves after her. Everyone knows that Stuy gets good results because they take high scoring students. Just like everyone knows that BASIS gets good results because even before the lottery, they tell interested parents their child needs to take 6 AP exams, which obviously will discourage any student who isn’t already working above grade level. And even then, BASIS weeds out a high number of the students whose parents enroll despite that warning. Do you think there is any value whatsoever in principals from all the failing schools visiting BASIS to see what their “magic formula” is? Of course not, because we all know what the magic formula is.
Do you really find anything I just posted especially controversial?
LikeLike
“Bezanson argues that actual drop-off is roughly 10 percent per grade, except between the eighth and ninth grades, where the attrition rate is 25 percent.
Let’s start with 100 students in third grade and realize that there is no “back filling” occurring. So for fourth grade their will be 90 left, 5th grade 81, 6th grade 73, 7th grade 66, 8th grade 60, 9th grade 45, 10th grade 40, 11 grade 36, and 12th grade about 32 students left to graduate.
Hey maybe for once what a pro-privatizer says is true!
LikeLike
I imagine BASIS would be happy to backfill a spot with a gifted student who is doing work far above grade level. And it would not surprise me if — as some comments to that article certainly imply — they tell students who win a spot for a later grade and don’t measure up that they would have to repeat a year to enroll.
LikeLike
Many people familiar with public schools know that a family might select an elementary for their youngster, a different one for middle school and a different for high school. There are a vast array of reasons that families do that.
I’d suggest that the appropriate way to assess attrition is what percentage enter and stay through 5th or 6th grade, or enter and stay through 8th or 9th, and that enter in 8th or 9th, and stay through 12th.
The variation is dependent on when the school starts being a middle or junior, or starts being a senior high. This applies to district or charter public schools.
LikeLike
Yes, I understand those things, Joe. There a myriad reasons why parents switch schools for their children, or even homeschool. And that is their right.
I just thought the numbers worked out in an interesting fashion considering the attrition rates that those two particular chains are known for and what Bezanson claims is the attrition rate.
LikeLike
Joe Nathan, I agree with you. Although I would say that the appropriate way to assess attrition is to see where the children who leave go. Are they moving to another city or state, or even a neighborhood significantly farther away from their home than the school they are leaving? Are they remaining put and choosing a private or parochial school for their child instead? Or are they leaving a higher performing school for a much lower performing school? And is there anything special about the much lower performing school that would make it more appealing than the high performing school (for example, leaving for an arts school like LaGuardia) or is a school of at-risk students with few resources that offers very little when compared to the school that the student left? Where the majority of students end up (and how many leave) can tell quite a bit about whether the school is truly trying to educate every child.
LikeLike
B ASIS began in Tucson and I knew some of the first students to go there. They were students who were in the gifted program at my suburban Tucson district. BASIS North (Tucson) is located in the Amphitheatre School District. Amphi has interesting boundaries, it stretches from some of the richest areas surrounding Tucson to some of Tucson’s poorest neighborhoods. The two northern (richer) high schools in Amphi recently added more AP classes while the southern HS was recently in danger of Turn Around. In an earlier post here about BASIS, I pointed out that Amphi and my district were tasked with and successful in meeting the needs of a wide range of students. BASIS parents replied that students who couldn’t “cut it” there should just go back to public school. That’s the safety net that Chiara often cites.
A change in State funding for small schools caused a BASIS spokesman to lament about losing funds. You see, they were gaming the law to show each school as a separate entity, not a district, even though they used the same for-profit services. I’ve always wondered why Charters get to keep their enrollments low and not backfill. Then they add to the cruelty and unfairness with taunts about their superiority.
LikeLike
If a school district wanted to be creative, they could just play a form of musical chairs with their students. The teachers would stay in the same school where they had always taught but the students would be moved.
For instance, students from high socioeconomic neighborhoods, the rich kids, would be bused to the schools in the low socioeconomic community and the kids who lived in poverty would be bused to the public schools where the rich kids had been taught the year before.
That way schools failing one year would suddenly become wildly successful and a year later be back to failing. That means every other year the successful schools would be failing and the failing schools would be successful.
That way not one school could be labeled a failure for two years in a row. And every school day the kids would get to wave at each other as their buses met in passing.
LikeLike
On another thread, I shared some thoughts on this topic. It was a bit rambling at times… but here it is:
I just read about the concept of “growth” in the Leaderman case, and some thoughts came to mind…
First, there’s the phenomenon of the “ceiling effect” when judging someone based on a growth model of data. This is a handicap where, in raising your “growth” data, you have nowhere or almost nowhere higher to go, or there a circumstances present that make it very difficult to go higher. This might be the case with Leaderman’s students. They scored massively high in two consecutive years, with a miniscule dip from one year to the next.
In Los Angeles, I’ve looked up the stats on two exemplary public schools in upscale neighborhoods: Wonderland Avenue up in Laurel Canyon, and Warner Avenue in Westwood.(the school where privatization puppet Ben Austin sends his kids, by the way.)
In their annual API score(maximum score 1000), these two schools consistently fluctuate between in a range between 980-995, but never 1000. They’re at the “ceiling.” Within that range, their scores go up or down 5-to-15 or so API points from year to year. It’s impossible for those schools to show much, if any “growth”. They’re at the ceiling, and that makes moving up the score almost impossible—you have nowhere to go but down. When their score dips slightly—say 990 down to 980—that would lead to them having a low “growth” score.
On the other hand, a struggling inner-city school might start with an API score of 600 one year, that goes up to next year to 620, then 630 the year after. (When a school starts out this low, these gains are fairly easy to attain, much easier than at Wonderland or Warner.) In the “growth model” world, this school would have a high growth score, while Warner and Wonderland would be “outliers”, with a poor “growth” score.
Thus, the growth model is nonsense.
Here’s how “ceiling effect” works in sports. I’m not sure, but Ms. Leaderman—in regards to her students’ scores year-to-year—may be sort of in the position of former Lakers’ coach Phil Jackson was in the early 2000’s, when his teams won 70 or more games in multiple seasons.
Keep in mind that team winning over 70 games is a season is rare in NBA history.
The argument goes like this: If the team that Jackson coaches wins, for example, 74 games one year, then only 71 games the following year—again, both phenomenal achievements—he would then get an “ineffective’ rating on his team’s “growth.” Since the system is a bell curve, one could mandate that 7% of all coaches MUST be given an “ineffective” rating… no matter what. He might be in that group.
Conversely, a coach who went from, say, 11 wins one year, and then “grew” to 14 wins the next year would be awarded a “highly effective” growth score… even though he would be benefiting from the opposite phenomenon— the “floor effect”… the opposite of the”ceiling effect” hampering Jackson. Thanks to the “floor effect,” this coach had nowhere to go but up, and that fact made it a lot easier to do so than in Jackson’s case.
The variable in both of those cases is, of course, the players… the analogy in education being the students. The quality of the students a teacher receives–and more importantly, the quality of the parents… are they involved, college-educated, etc.? … is a big piece of this puzzle.
Let’s look at other variables in other jobs.
There are some jobs where the person performing it has total control over the outcomes.
For example, a mailman is given a square half-mile or so that he has deliver mail to every day. While there may be variables inhibiting his job performance—weather, dogs blocking access to the mailboxes, whatever—for the most part, that mail carrier is in almost 100% control of the conditions that would lead to him either performing his job well or poorly. If he fails to deliver mail to the entirety of his territory every day, there’s no one to blame but him.
Another example could be a gourmet “made-by-hand” cookie maker, who has the job of making sure that exactly 20 jumbo chocolate chips are in each of the jumbo chocolate chip cookies he or she makes by hand (this is making me hungry 😉 ). In this case, the worker is again in 100% control over producing the quality demanded of him—20 chips-per-cookie.
If the mail carrier or cookie maker doesn’t deliver the results demanded of him or her, he or she has no one to blame but himself or herself.
I could present endless such examples.
On the other hand, a teacher’s job is not like that. It’s more akin—but not exactly akin, mind you—to that of a dentist’s, or say, a personal fitness trainer’s. In those cases, no matter how talented or inspiring you are in your job, your student / dental patient / fitness client may lack the same dedication or innate ability to deliver optimum results. Not all students / dental patients / fitness clients are equal… a factor beyond the control of the teacher/dentist/fitness trainer.
Now what do I mean by innate ability? Let’s examine the dentist’s dilemma. Based on the chemical makeup of a person’s mouth and saliva, some people are more prone to get cavities—given the same foods consumed by the patient. Those patients are “special” ;-). They will have to be a lot more aggressive in their home care, diet, etc. to avoid cavities. In addition, their outcomes also dependent on how they are supported by the family members they live with.
Other patients, for the same reason, will be innately and significantly less prone to cavities, and thus, will have to work less hard, and not have to be as prudent in their diet… to achieve the same result.
That’s beyond the dentist’s control.
The other thing beyond the dentist’s control is the same thing that’s beyond the personal fitness trainer’s control. At each visit, the dentists can give the patient the best pep talk ever, demonstrate proper brushing and flossing technique, and provide him with free brushes, toothpaste, floss, ACT anti-plaque mouthwash, etc. as the patient walks out the door.
However, after that, it’s up to the patient to deliver and complete the “homework” which the dentist assigns to that patient. If he or she never or rarely brushes/flosses his teeth, never washes with ACT, or eats too many jumbo chocolate chip cookies (I’m getting hungry again 😉 ), is it the dentist’s fault when the patient comes back with cavities… resulting in fillings, root canals, and tooth extractions?
Would we have ratings for dentists, or pay those dentists based on such “data”? Of course not, but that’s what Campbell Brown and so-called “corporate refomers” want for public school teachers (but strangely, not for her own kids, who attend Heschel, a rich kids’ private school where none of the teachers are evaluated based on students’ test scores.)
“Your patients had more cavities, so we’re paying you less, and if you don’t improve, you’re fired… And you over there, your patients had less cavities, so we’re paying you more, and giving you a promotion.”
Does that make sense? I didn’t think so.
As for the personal fitness trainer, I’ve spoken to them and the qualities of their clients also vary wildly, and not just in their innate ability, but also in their mental determination and performance during 1-on-1 training. Some clients approach these sessions with a ferocity that matches the trainer’s. These clients always give more, or do more than is asked of them. This also is hopefully reinforced in the home environment—by their spouses, significant others, or family members… another factor beyond the control of the fitness trainer.
Could you imagine if the fitness club manager said that they were going to measure the beginning state of the client’s fitness—weight, muscle mass, heart rate, etc.—and then 9-10 months later, re-measure all of that, and the judge the trainer’s effectiveness on the “growth” or improvement in the client’s fitness? Some clients will improve. Some will not. But in the case of the latter, how much is it the fault of the fitness trainer? Should a trainer be punished or rewarded based on such a “growth” system?
Indeed, some clients will not progress or show “growth,” no matter how talented or inspiring the trainer is in the performance of his job. In the context of a training session, these clients don’t even want to break a sweat, and barely do a thing, instead content to complain to the trainer about their spouses or their jobs or their kids, or whatever. With the latter, they may as well stay at home, for all the good the training is doing…. another factor beyond the control of the fitness trainer.
Furthermore, it may be the case that no one in the client’s life outside of the gym—spouses, significant others, family members, etc.—is encouraging them, or reinforcing their efforts to get in shape, and stay in shape. Their family members a’re not doing so, and may NEVER have done so in their lives… and so they might not even want that client to excel in the first place. Misery loves company.
This leads to the next part… the homework.
A fitness trainer might train someone Monday-Wednesday-Friday, while giving his client the “homework” he should do on Tuesday-Thursday-Saturday-Sunday—i.e. 30-60 minutes cardio, 30-60 minutes weights… and most important, maintain a good diet… the real killer for some people’s efforts to get in shape.
If the client does little or none of the “homework,” then also gorges himself on Hostess Cupcakes, slabs of fatty ribs, baskets of seasoned curly fries, buckets of pasta with rich sauces, gallons of ice cream, etc. (Are you hungry yet? 😉 ), should the fitness trainer be held responsible for the poor results of the client?
Of course not.
To carry this analogy further, if fitness trainers were judged this way, this would lead to them avoiding certain potential clients, or even whole gyms. There’s a Gold’s Gym near my house with a predominantly gay clientele. For the most part—excuse the stereotype—the gay men are much more finicky about keeping their bodies fit. They work extremely hard in the gym and they watch what they eat. (Oh how I envy this attribute;-).) In this hypothetical scenario, all the trainers whose pay is merit-based are going to flock to work here. Many middle aged clients start out in poor shape, so for the trainer, you have the “floor effect” at work
Meanwhile, regarding another other gym with—excuse the stereotype again—hopelessly apathetic, overweight straight guys who can’t or won’t do the work, both at the gym and at home… no trainer being paid or fired on merit will want to go anywhere near that gym and train those folks. Evaluating the trainers who have these men as clients based on “merit”??? Would that be fair?
To carry that analogy further, some individuals—straight or gay— or groups are genetically pre-disposed to be overweight (Samoans for example) and have greater difficulty getting into shape, or staying in shape. No trainer who’s being paid based on merit will ever want to have those “special” folks as their clients.
That’s all I’ve got to say for now.
LikeLike
you said it well…
LikeLike
As a teacher at a highly performing school in an Arizona public school district, I had three students move into my AP classes last January from BASIS. These students appeared soon after the 100 day count, the time when public schools (including BASIS charters) tell the state their student enrollment for funding purposes. Beyond the high attrition rate mentioned in the article and comments, timing should also be questioned by the state auditor and legislature. Why are overwhelmed students disproportionately leaving after the 100th day? This allows BASIS to gain funding for the entire year and excludes these students from their AP and other standardized testing scores.
Secondly, when speaking with staff members from two different BASIS schools, a culture of stress and fear is placed on teachers for not only AP scores but also academic club competitions, which is then passed on to students. Emotional health and life balance of students is a very low priority, according to the staff and students to whom I’ve spoken.
Thirdly, it should not surprise anyone that BASIS test scores are high when they have a policy that requires 6 AP exams for graduation and pay for them only if the student maintains a passing average on them (3 or higher out of 5). Additionally, they require that the AP exams override the entire grade by a chart on p.23 of their handbook. http://basisschools.org/pdf/1516_BASIS_Charter_Handbook.pdf If they have an F average in the course, but score a 5 on the AP exam, they have a B+ on their transcript. Sixty to seventy percent of my students at a comprehensive high school earn 5’s on the AP Psychology exam, so I would think that many BASIS students are able to use this policy to their benefit. Conversely, students who are successful in class, earning an A for the entire year, will receive a C on their transcript if they score a 1 on the AP test.
Personally, I would quit before I let the 2-hour AP exam override 180 days of class participation, debates, projects, analyses, application, and research. I suppose this point bears out the core of the issue. What do we value in our schools – holistic student growth or nationally-ranked test scores?
LikeLike
I spoke with one of the AZ Basis teachers and got to know her very well. She lamented that the school touted themselves for EVERYONE, when it wasn’t the case. Those schools are for the FEW. The teachers aren’t supposed to care if the kids fail. They aren’t “smart” enough and the school will make sure they know that.
The children there are indoctrinated nonstop about how much better they are than everyone else. (I volunteered; I heard it plenty first hand.) Many parents I talked to were hoping their kids would leave and go back to public but the peer pressure to stay and show you had “it” was too much.
They tout that everyone will basically go to Ivy League…maybe in a class of 12…but what about a class of 100? Friends of mine had kids drop out of sports because they were 8th graders staying up well past midnight, trying to finish homework.
Kids in Kindergarten were crying because of how much work they have. The parents were stuck…all the other schools were full (as they had to decrease teacher size due to enrollment all going to Basis). I saw third graders staying after school to practice standardized testing (again, friends of mine).
Anyone who is considering BASIS should really consider their reasons why…is it for mom/dad or is it for the kids? Very few are Basis material…you’re robbing them of their childhood so that they can fulfill some parental dream of yours.
I feel sorry for almost every child I know when they tell me they’re getting sent there. Goodbye after-school fun, hello 3 hours of homework.
LikeLike
It was my understanding that VAM predicts students’ scores year to year. But does it take into account that the work may become more complex and that students may have reached their max one year and have more difficulty no matter who the teacher is the next year? This happens with early readers who show so much promise but top out in the third and cannot deal with fourth because, perhaps, of their inferior background knowledge. Others catch on and because of solid background knowledge take off scholastically. This is pretty evident by middle school when some students designated gifted in first grade suddenly are pretty average, if that.
Does anyone know how that phenomenon is supposedly handled in VAM?
LikeLike
BASIS schools are all about Advanced Placement courses and tests. BASIS touts the fact that the average grad takes 10 AP tests. And, as other have mentioned, the AP test score is paramount. It trumps what goes on in the classroom all year. But there’s more.
BASIS Tucson is a school that has tight ties to the very conservative Goldwater Institute.
The Goldwater Institute advocates all the kinds of economic policies that piled up deficits and debt and broke the economy. Incredibly, its directors make the claim that it “is staffed by the brightest minds” (snort, wink). Its ideas for education “reform” are more charter schools, merit pay, more testing, and vouchers. It wants to privatize public education. BASIS is aligned with it. Sadly, in a way, so are many public schools and educators with their embracement of AP.
The research on AP is quite clear. It is grossly overhyped.
A 2002 National Research Council study of AP courses and tests found them to be a “mile wide and an inch deep” and inconsistent with research-based principles of learning.
A 2004 study found that “the best predictor of both first- and second-year college grades” is unweighted high school grade point average, and a high school grade point average “weighted with a full bonus point for AP…is invariably the worst predictor of college performance.”
A 2005 study found AP students “…generally no more likely than non-AP students to return to school for a second year or to have higher first semester grades.” Moreover, the authors wrote that “close inspection of the [College Board] studies cited reveals that the existing evidence regarding the benefits of AP experience is questionable,” and “AP courses are not a necessary component of a rigorous curriculum.”
A 2006 MIT faculty report noted ““there is ‘a growing body of research’ that students who earn top AP scores and place out of institute introductory courses end up having ‘difficulty’ when taking the next course.”
The 2010 book “AP: A Critical Examination” noted that “Students see AP courses on their transcripts as the ticket ensuring entry into the college of their choice,” yet, “there is a shortage of evidence about the efficacy, cost, and value of these programs.” And this: AP has become “the juggernaut of American high school education,” but “ the research evidence on its value is minimal.”
BASIS may be ranked highly in the US News list (Jay Mathews ranks BASIS schools highly too). But that doesn’t mean that what BASIS stands for is good policy, or what it does makes sound educational sense. Nor does it mean it’s worth replicating.
And yet, sadly, public schools across the country continue to emphasize AP. Some even tout it as “innovative.” The school superintendents association in one state just gave its “superintendent of the year” award to an individual for what It cited as an increase in the “number of students enrolled in AP courses.” That same organization said it is focused on “evidence-based practices.”
You really have to wonder.
LikeLike
BASIS Mesa opened for the 2013-2014 school year. My son started there as a 5th grader. He is a straight A student at BASIS and has been since he started. Why are we thinking of moving him to the Chandler School District when he is obviously doing so well? We believe that there is more to school than teaching for AP exams. Our son has many outside interest that he no longer has time for. It’s a rush every night to get home, eat quickly and start working. All those after school clubs…well it’s great if you can afford them. Also, so many times, he has so much work, that staying until 4:45 when the club ends means he’ll be up late finishing homework and studying.
His classes consist of taking notes and then spitting them out on exams. There is no time in any of his core classes for any meaningful discussions about the subject matter. It’s a race to copy the notes and then study the notes to then take the weekly exams given in all core subjects. Two February’s have passed and not one teacher has made mention of Black History Month. Recently we had our very own Arizona astronaut launch into space; again no mention of this. His Language Arts class consists of weekly packets that are not gone over in class yet the kids are expected to complete them on their own at home and then take the unit exam at the end of the week.
What we have found at BASIS is that only the strongest survive. The kids who leave behind all their extra curricular activities and focus solely on their academics. Very smart kids are leaving the school so that they may have a better balance of school and life outside of school. We also have found that the BASIS kids have no idea of current affairs, what’s going on in the world now. They also do little to no community service.
Why are we thinking of taking our son out even though he is a top performer? Because life is short and there is more to life than studying 24/7. We want him to be well rounded. To understand about the world he is growing up in and to care enough about it to grow into a person who wants to make it a better place. It was great for him to go there for 5th and 6th grade because his other charter school could’t keep up with his level of advancement from year to year. He needed the advanced math and sciences. Now that he is going into the 7th grade the Chandler School District can accommodate his educational needs. He’ll be able to be in advanced, honors and AP classes. Even better, he will have a choice of what subjects he will take his AP’s in instead of being forced to take AP exams that are mandated by BASIS. If he stays on the path is on he will still graduate with as many AP classes as the students at BASIS but it will be in subjects he is interested in and at a pace that will allow him to also grow into a responsible person who understands that life is more about what you scored on a exam.
BASIS schools are a good idea in theory but I think they are leaving out the human touch. They have many dedicated teachers and administrators who truly care about the students, but whose hands are tied by the sheer volume of information they need to cover in a particular year. It’s the inch deep, mile wide approach to education that may look great on a transcript but may leave your child with great deficits in other aspects of their lives. Also, since many of the teachers have no actual teaching experience or background they lack what it takes to engage and motivate students and are not the best choice for teaching such advanced material.
LikeLike