The video of a teacher at Success Academy humiliating a first-grade student for failing to write the correct answer went viral. Scores of blogs around the world posted the video.
How did reformers react to the dilemma of their superstar?
Derrell Bradford defended Eva and agreed with her that the event was an insignificant anomaly. He is a member of her board and leader of NYCan. Before that, he led NJ4Kids on behalf of two billionaires. He agreed with Eva that her critics are “haters” who are jealous of her success.
Bradford wrote on Campbell Brown’s blog (Brown is also a member of the Success Academy board)
“So for all the Success haters out there I have some advice. If you want Success, or other “no excuses” schools to go away because you think your own brand of education is superior, because you don’t respect that other parents like it and seek it out, you don’t value the structure, or you want your kid to be a grass-fed open-range child, then you just have to, counterintuitively, do one thing: open more charter schools.”
But another reformer broke ranks. RiShawn Biddle wrote in his blog that it was no longer possible to defend Eva.
He reviews the numerous examples of the harsh disciplinary methods of SA, then concludes:
“The most-damning evidence that Dial’s misbehavior is no anomaly became clear last October when Moskowitz released the school discipline record of one of the operators former students, the son of Fatima Geidi, a parent interviewed by Merrow for his report on Success, as part of the operator’s crisis management campaign against the piece. By doing this, Moskowitz likely violate the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, the federal law that governs the privacy of student records, which bars Success from releasing discipline records without the permission of families. Even worse, by citing the discipline record of Geidi’s son, Moskowitz betrayed the school reform movement’s mission of nurturing and protecting the lives and futures of children. She used the life of a child who may be in need of real help as ammunition against a negative media report.
“But again, this is nothing new. Over the past five months, Moskowitz has shown that she will always choose to preserve the institution she founded over being a champion for children and their families. In that time, she has shown that she is more-willing to protect the teachers and school leaders that work for Success than be defenders of the young lives who sit in its classrooms. And over and over again, like a traditionalist superintendent in a failing district, Moskowitz has demonstrated that she will explain away any incident as an “anomaly” instead of acknowledging that there may be some deep-seated issues within the institution and its model of educational practice.
“At a certain point, either Moskowitz or Success Academy’s star-studded board, must acknowledge that when the institution has several incidents of educational malpractice, they are no longer anomalies. They represent the norm for the institution itself. Success Academy no longer merits a defense, especially from school reformers who, like Born-Again Christians, know better and should no longer tolerate its malpractice.”
Biddle is a reformer with principles.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
A reformer with principles, now that is an anomaly. Success Academy has gone the way of classic organizational theory, its mission now is not to provide an exceptional learning environment for kids but it’s mission is survival. Like UTLA in Los Angeles and LAUSD, the mission of an organization over time is survival no matter how shitty the job they are doing is
LikeLike
————————
CAMPBELL BROWN, 2012:
“I don’t think it’s fair that we cannot guarantee every childin this country a great education and that, in New York City, in some cases, your child is at risk in some part because of the policies the union endorses.”
————————-
FROM …
So Campbell says the union enables abusive teachers to remain in their jobs abusing students. Mind you, she’s referring to ALLEGED abusers who are ACCUSED of abuse.
When it comes to unionized teachers, according to Brown, there’s no benefit of a doubt, or right to a hearing to defend oneself That teacher has to go.
However, fast-forward four years, and at SUCCESS ACADEMY, we have Charlotte Dial, a teacher who — as seen in the recent video — is a PROVEN abuser. The aide who videotaped here said this was not a one-off “momentary lapse”, but Ms. Dial’s daily routine with her students. According to the aide, the fact this hat this behavior was NOT an “anomaly” is precisely why the aide secretly videotaped Ms. Dial.
So you would think that Campbell — that heroic defender and protector of children “at risk” — would be all over this, demanding that Ms. Dial be fired forthwith, so as to send a message to other Success Academy teachers, and all teachers that this is not acceptable.
If you thought that, you’d be wrong.
Instead, she gives Ms. Dial the benefit of a doubt, and instead attacks the New York Times for not including the entirety of an interview with parents praising Ms. Dial … as if anything that these parents says refutes the video, or what the aide says.
I’m a little puzzled …
Exactly WHAT is the parents’ argument here?
“Well, Ms. Dial never abused MY child, so we should all give her a pass and leave her alone.”
Huh?
From TWITTER:
——————————
CAMPBELL BROWN, 2012: “Inexplicably @nytimes @katetaylor didn’t include this in @SuccessCharters piece. What parents said to reporter.”
—————————–
Seriously now? THAT is what Brown leads with as her response to the video The fact that the New York Times didn’t include the entirety of what parents said in support of Ms. Dial.
If those parents refuse to see the truth of what’s in that video, that doesn’t mean Ms. Dial is innocent of the abuse contained in that video. That just means those parents are idiots.
What about Ms. Brown’s public crusade to get rid of teacher show who abuse children? What about her mission to protect children?
What the-Hell happened to that?
Those who respond to Ms. Brown’s comment on TWITTER let her have it:
————-
Liz Ballard @lizballard09 Feb 14
@campbell_brown @nytimes @Katetaylor @SuccessCharters
“I thought you wanted to get abusers out of the classroom,
instead u enable the abuse.”
Lindamarie @Linda1746 Feb 15
@lizballard09 @campbell_brown @nytimes @Katetaylor @SuccessCharters
“She’s only after teachers in a union.” #hypocrite #tips4brown @FatimaFarax
Ashley Daigneault @ashleydano Feb 12
@campbell_brown @nytimes @Katetaylor @SuccessCharters
“Your response should be nothing more than ‘THIS (what’s shown
on the video, JACK) IS UNACCEPTABLE.’ The end.”
B Didier @Bev_Didier Feb 12
@campbell_brown “This child abuse isn’t about the parents. It’s about the
children. Just stop the abuse.” @nytimes @Katetaylor @SuccessCharters
Rick Gerwin @rjgerwin Feb 12
@campbell_brown @jonathanchait @nytimes @Katetaylor @SuccessCharters
“The Axis of Evil responds… ”
——————————-
Furthermore, the notion that every article must contain the entirety of the research or transcribed interviews that went into that article is preposterous. NOTE: the article DID mention that some Success Academy parents defended and supported Ms. Dial … just not the full unedited statements of those parents.
Ms. Brown and Success Academy defenders are trying to divert attention away from the video, and instead focus on how not every word those parents said was included in the article.
Success Academy presented the audio of parents defending Ms. Dial as if it was some sort of damning indictment of The New York Times, and Brown does so as well in her TWITTER comment above.
However, Amy Virshup, The Times editor overseeing Taylor’s coverage, pointed out the absurdity of Ms. Brown’s logic.
amyvirshup:
“Any interview gets excerpted for a story, as @campbell_brown should know.”
amyvirshup on Twitter
LikeLike
I think we need to stop using the word “reformers” to describe these people. They have abandoned any notions of reform — which used to mean educating the students who were failed by public schools. Now they only want to educate the students who succeeded in public schools!
The chutzpah of anyone defending Ms. Moskowitz by saying “open your own charter schools” for the 99% of the at-risk kids whom Eva Moskowitz does not want to educate” is pretty disgusting. I don’t really know how they look themselves in the mirror, but I suppose when you value money over children’s lives — especially the children you deem not worthy — you write things like that.
LikeLike
^^That comment was directed toward Mr. Bradford’s defense. RiShawn Biddle is one of the few real reformers who actually believes in better schools for all students, not just the tiny percentage that the faux reformers like Eva Moskowitz deem worthy of remaining in her schools.
LikeLike
I tend to call them rephormers – the ph is for “phony”.
LikeLike
Dienne, you know it is a fake reformer when they quote the 11,000 as if that means something. It would anywhere else, but in NYC that is 1% of all public school students. It’s like Eva Moskowitz going into every failing school with 100 kids and finding one — one — to educate. And despite that, she STILL needs to suspend a good number of those little 5 year olds to get them to leave.
LikeLike
“I think we need to stop using the word “reformers” to describe these people.”
Completely agree. Think how it sounds, from the outside, when we use the word “reformers” interchangeably with “the bad people.” It easily appears that teachers are against change and progress. Many people would see this kind of statement and think: Why would teachers be against “reform?” Must be because they are scared of change.
Please stop calling them reformers. It’s not a war against reform, it’s a war against greed and ignorance.
“In order to divide and confuse the people, the destroyers call themselves builders and accuse the true builders of being destructive.”
-Paulo Freire
Do not, in our defense, accuse these people of reforming or “building” — the very image they are trying to create.
LikeLike
Ed Detective,
Suggest some other names for those who want to privatize public schools and drive out experienced teachers
LikeLike
“privatizers”? “public school haters”? What was the name that the segregationists in the South called themselves when they insisted it was fine for parents to “choose” their all-white school because other parents could choose other schools?
LikeLike
Bradford and Moskowitz are corporate bullies, backed by big money, to attack our public schools and children, which should never have had to defend themselves from the likes of these criminals. Never in the history of our nation have individuals such as Moskowitz, demonstrated such vile and hostile actions against one of our foundations of democracy.
The scare tactics they use are based in shock therapy, and in essence a form of tiered threats, supported by the wealth of the billionaires…the pens of governors who have been bought, state leaders who tally their “accomplishments” by the money in their coffers, rather than being true champions of the people…against the righteous defenders who call them out for their malpractice.
The issue for Ms Moskowitz was for her to never have to answer to accountability, never about using proven ethical methods of education, or bettering the lives of children…
…for Ms Moskowitz, it has always been about the “selected exploitation” of our cherished public education system in a democratic society, and preserving her criminal enterprise from a distance, allowing her offenses to be both waived off and swept under the rug.
With billions of dollars at stake…people such as Bradford will defend these unethical practices and proliferators…their policy is the destruction of our public schools now, and the lack of concern for the future of our children and our nation.
Common criminals in an uncommon enterprise.
Criminals!
LikeLike
“Privatizers” will often work, it speaks immediately of their motives and their methods. “Enemies of public education” is similar, it is both more descriptive and more evocative in the right kind of way. “Billionaire Boy’s Club,” as you’ve aptly used, is another one that suggests the truth: that these ideas are pushed by elites who are basically just messing around.
“Rephormers” suggests they are fake reformers… posing as reformers.
If reform must be used, putting it in quotes: “reform,” seems important.
Or simply refer to their individual names/group names.
Those are simply my suggestions, I’m sure there are others.
I’ve made it a habit to think from an enemy’s point of view as well as an “uninformed” point of view. I don’t think it is sending the right message to call them reformers, because it could easily be interpreted that we are against reforming, rebuilding, restructuring — however you want to call it — anything to do with changing or challenging the status quo. If we are against “reform,” it is easily seen that we just want things to stay the same. The “regulars” here understand what you mean by “reformers,” but a lot of outsiders don’t.
I hope I’m not being too picky, but I believe it’s pretty important to get this one right. We are basically talking about what to label the different “sides” of this fight, and what messages those labels will send.
LikeLike
Ed, of course you are right. That’s why the subtitle of “Reign of Error” is “The Hoax if the Privatization Movement and the Danger to Our Public Schools.”
The P word should replace the R word.
LikeLike
I’m torn on the whole thing. I understand that the charge is this is systemic and what Moskowitz says about her schools gives that credibility. She boasts that the schools are run on a system, that there’s very little discretion or subjective decision-making by employees and that’s why they’re successful at raising test scores and replicating the system anywhere and everywhere. It’s one of her main arguments to the powerful people she speaks to (Congress, governors, funders, etc). She didn’t create a one-off. She “transformed” education- made a system. She says this system “works” and that’s why it’s a model for all public schools.
I am uncomfortable with the focus on the one teacher- ONE film clip- because these things turn into “viral” pile-ons and that always feels unfair to me. I don’t think they really made the case that this is systemic with the video. The text of the story added some meat to that, but the video itself isn’t “proof” of anything other than a really bad day for that teacher. Maybe that means she shouldn’t be teaching- I don’t know.
LikeLike
Chiara, in effect you are calling the aide who secretly filmed this ongoing abuse a liar. She stated she filmed what made her uncomfortable and what she believed constituted abuse.
No excuses means just that. Why does Eva’s mantra apply only to young children of color and her and her employees?
After the exposes and undoubted proof of habitually high suspensions of 5 year olds, the ‘got to go’ list, the smearing of a child’s name publicly with his suspension record, and on and on and you still have doubts?
What more proof do you need that this is systemic abuse sanctioned by Eva’s methods?
Piling on to stop abuse is hardly unwarranted. We are talking about vulnerable poor children of color who are already under an enormous callous systemic racism living poverty in an uncaring city, not political ideologies over Sunday brunch. We need to stop this not overlook it out of a misplaced empathy for the perpetrators.
LikeLike
I think we can tell a lot from this one video. It seems evident to me that this sort of treatment of children is, at the very least, systemic in Ms. Dial’s class. First, the fact that the TA was ready to film just when the incident happened – I don’t believe that was a coincidence. And second, the reaction (or lack thereof) of the other children. They were hardly surprised – this appears to be the regular MO in this classroom.
Further, the fact that Ms. Dial was promoted to being a model teacher strongly suggest that this sort of treatment is systemic in the school. It’s really hard to believe that Ms. Dial’s superiors promoted her without knowing about this sort of behavior. It strongly suggests that she was promoted specifically because this is the kind of “teaching” SA encourages.
LikeLike
Dienne: given other info, I am inclined to agree with you.
For example, an excerpt from a recent (2-12-2016) SLATE piece:
[start]
According to reporter Kate Taylor, an assistant teacher who was concerned by Dial’s “daily harsh treatment of the children” filmed the scene surreptitiously. Success Academy’s founder, Eva Moskowitz, as well as some of the parents whose children attend the school insisted that Dial’s behavior was anomalous. “But interviews with 20 current and former Success teachers suggest that while Ms. Dial’s behavior might be extreme, much of it is not uncommon within the network,” Taylor writes. She quotes a former Success Academy assistant principal: “It’s this culture of, ‘If you’ve made them cry, you’ve succeeded in getting your point across.’”
[end]
Link: http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/02/12/success_academy_undercover_video_shows_no_excuses_discipline_at_its_ugliest.html
*Kate Taylor is with the NYTIMES. A link to her article is provided in the above linked piece.
That said, while I share Chiara’s concerns about piling on, I do not think the teacher had a bad day. Based on my own experiences as a TA with many teachers in many classrooms, I would say she was acting in a practiced and deliberate manner. IMHO, Ms. Dial gives every appearance of being on automatic pilot, just doing what she usually does in her usual way.
That is how I see it…
😎
LikeLike
I disagree, the teacher in the video appears to be following a script and expected behavior from students is evidenced in the way they are sitting and their body language gives off tension. The teacher sounds robotic and has no emotion or relaxation in her demeanor. Who can or wants to learn in that type of atmosphere
LikeLike
Well, perhaps the very brave aide should have filmed this teacher daily for a month. Would that convince the non-believers? Maybe St. Eva should install cameras with sound in all of her classrooms to prove that her schools are like a week at Disneyland.
Liza Minelli said something about herself that was very telling in “which side you’re on.” If someone said Liza was talented, the reply was “Well of course, her mother is Judy Garland.” If someone said Liza was a no-talent who couldn’t cut it, the reply was “Well of course, her mother is Judy Garland.” She could not win either way. The Eva lovers and the Eva haters come from their own viewpoints and will believe whatever proves their argument. Personally, I can’t stand Eva. While I wish not harm to come to any child in her school, I sincerely hope that more and continued evidence will come out that proves what a horrible “system” she runs for her “scholars.” System–now that is a word used to describe a whole host of horrors. Scholars, remember folks, rhymes with dollars. I wonder when she takes a dump if she calls it roses.
LikeLike
I’m not quite clear on what I’m supposed to be jealous of here. The oversized ego? The greedy oversized salary? The attitude that children are nothing more than a test score and that test score defines future success in life like animal entrails or chicken bones? The attitude that she alone has solved the education in inner cities problems by weeding out all the children who need the most help?
I could go on. I won’t. I am not jealous. I am angry, appalled, sickened, disgusted, and moved to take action in the name of the innocent children they abuse.
Eva can have her peculiar idea of success and quality of life. Me, I find her definitions nauseating and dangerous. No, I am not jealous.
LikeLike
Let’s not forget that Derrell now lead Corps Knowledge which is solely there to defend TFA from legitimate criticism.” I have to give it to this man – he’s lead about 50 “ed thinktanks” of the month in just a few short years and has managed to convince some ignorant politicians that he knows something about education. Not sure if it’s because he’s a great actor or a die hard wannabe associate of the rich. Still the “haters” phrase look a little ridiculous coming out of the mouth of a man his age. Hopefully he’ll eventually get his dream job of being a gopher to some gazillionaire and leave education alone.
LikeLike
Forgot to add that Bradford’s use of the phrase “brand of education” is exactly what is wrong with the reform philosophy.
LikeLike
Rishawn Biddle and Diane Ravitch, bedfellows?
http://dropoutnation.net/2012/12/18/one-more-time-diane-ravitch-doesnt-deserve-to-be-taken-seriously/
If Eva Moskowitz could make that happen, there really might not be any limits to her powers.
LikeLike
Interesting that Rishawn doesn’t allow any comments on his blog. Diane, on the other hand, allows you, Raj, Virginia and all sorts of other hecklers in her living room. Hmm….
LikeLike
Tim,
I am well aware that RiShawn Biddle doesn’t like me. I posted his article without any negative comment about him. I try to deal with issues, not personal attacks. Funny that you had to dig back nearly four years for your snide comment. Shame on you.
LikeLike
dianeravitch: perhaps a blast from the past will help clarify things—
“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. ” [Eleanor Roosevelt]
And since she was going in descending order, I will add:
“And rheephorm minds diss with the sneer, jeer and smear.”
😎
LikeLike
Tim, back when Mr. Biddle criticized Diane Ravitch he also thought Eva Moskowitz was a credible spokesperson for reform and someone who was good for education. He changed his mind as more evidence of Ms. Moskowitz’ practices came to light. I find it ironic that you and the rest of the fake reform movement still desperately defend her. Faux reformers like you are “shocked, shocked” that a network where some schools suspend over 20% of their 5 and 6 year old children would ever have a model teacher who would treat a child this way. It’s an anomaly!
Funny how the teachers and principals who do this are always the teacher and principals that were previously honored by Eva Moskowitz because they were the ideal Success Academy educators! It’s never the newbie teachers who are caught trying to make young children who aren’t “good enough” feel that patently Success Academy “misery”. It’s their most celebrated ones!
I know that Families for Excellent Schools believes all those suspensions of young children are needed — after all, those children tend to be extremely violent when they are in Success Academy classroom, I hear.
Good for you, Tim, standing up for Ms. Moskowitz. Those kids don’t belong in her schools anyway, right? As Derrell Bradford makes clear, it is the public school supporters who should figure out how to teach them because the fake “reformers” who you and he admire so much certainly don’t want to.
LikeLike
Out of curiosity I read the 2012 post by Biddle. He called Dr. Ravitch a “Camille Paglia wannabe”. That’s just . . . weird, very very weird.
LikeLike
Diane,
Yes, Biddle has become a vocal proponent of restorative justice and ending school suspensions–not just for minor infractions and things like “willful defiance,” but for almost anything at all. He is thus eager to find fault with schools that have adopted a “no excuses” model.
The problem with restorative justice is that lots of suspensions are given not for “willful defiance” or unmatched socks, but as a punishment for causing actual physical or psychological harm to other children. Children deserve dozens of second chances–after all, children who attack other children are usually victims themselves. However, we know that the outcomes for kids who are bullied and attacked aren’t good, either. As adults we enjoy the basic right of expecting protection and justice when we are attacked, as well as the right not to forgive our attackers, let alone be required to be an active participant in their rehabilitation. Children should enjoy the same basic rights, regardless of the age of their attacker.
Restorative justice is much more likely to work in socioeconomically well-off and non-diverse schools like PS 321, PS 199, PS 87, etc. where most families are intact and kids are rarely exposed to violence, drug or alcohol abuse, pornography, and criminal activity. People who live in such privilege might scoff at the possibility of two six-year-old boys cornering a first-grade girl in the classroom, proposing that she perform a sex act, and exposing themselves to her. They might think it’s inconceivable that children in a K-2 school could systematically and brutally bully other students. They can’t imagine that kids in kindergarten would punch other kindergarteners in the face.
http://www.riverdalepress.com/stories/Culture-of-bullying-neglect-cited-at-PS-207,59207
I think restorative justice fans would sing a much different tune if there were an actual risk that these sorts of things were going to happen to their child.
LikeLike
Tim, the little girl in the video didn’t punch anyone in the face. She did not throw a chair or shout obscenities at the teacher. She was quiet and obedient. She didn’t give the right answer and she was humiliated. Do you think that is good teaching? Would you want your child to be treated like that?
LikeLike
No, this isn’t good teaching. I would be livid if it happened to one of my kids.
Do you think the top-down pressure to employ restorative justice is working well? Any advice for the family of the child who was sexually assaulted at PS 207 and who has to re-live the experience every day when she sees her attackers?
LikeLike
Tim,
Don’t change the subject.
LikeLike
A discussion of the failures of restorative justice is completely on-topic.
Charter schools in New York City educate a student population that is 94% black and Latino and 80% high-poverty and zoned for traditional public schools like PS 207: http://www.riverdalepress.com/stories/Culture-of-bullying-neglect-cited-at-PS-207,59207
District schools have had restorative justice imposed upon them via a top-down edict, with no local input whatsoever. And the gaslighting, to use everyone’s favorite expression! Tweed gaslights principals: you have all the resources you need to not suspend anyone. Principals gaslight teachers: your kids aren’t that bad, and if you need someone to help you, it must mean your classroom management skills are crap. Everyone gaslights parents: these programs work great! The lower suspension rates prove it.
I feel terrible for the five and six and seven year olds who are capable of acts of violence. I feel worse for their victims, whose rights and needs under a restorative justice system are seemingly completely subordinate to those of their assailants.
It is very easy to insist that other people’s kids’ schools use restorative justice, especially when you have the means to send your own kids to schools with minimal numbers of at-risk kids.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tim,
I am glad you are so concerned about the five-and six-year-old children who are violent. Were they violent before they entered Eva’s schools or did they become violent because of the high-pressure tactics and rigid conformity imposed by the schools?
I understand the bait-and-switch you are trying to pull. “Let’s not talk about the video that went viral, let’s talk about those terrible public schools that can’t discipline wild and unruly five-year-olds who sexually assault their classmates.”
No, Tim, that is not the subject. The subject is Success Academy charter schools and other “no-excuses” charter schools that treat children harshly and then are surprised when some of them act out. We are talking about a teacher who humiliated a little girl who did not give the right answer, even when the child in question was well-behaved, orderly, and doing her best to please her teacher. We are talking about a pattern of adult behavior and whether it is anomalous or expected. We are discussing a video that went viral around the world, and you would rather talk about a discipline problem at PS 207 in the Bronx. I understand that you prefer to change the subject.
LikeLike
You want to ignore the reality that many traditional public schools in New York City are chaotic and yes, even dangerous places. You want to force families who are zoned for such schools to have no other option. You have no solution for these schools other than to keep them separate, give them more funding (aka jobs, almost always for people who don’t live in the affected community), and give them more time, even as the architect of the Abbott decisions that led to NJ’s “A” school-funding equity rating from NPE has admitted this approach is just well-intentioned running in place.
To repeat: the report on conditions at PS 207 and other dysfunctional DOE schools is central to the story, not a distraction. People should know where kids will have to go to school once you and RiShawn Biddle close down all the charters.
LikeLike
Tim,
Bullying is not confined to low income neighborhoods. My governor is a classic example of a bully preying on those whom he considers to be weak.
LikeLike
Tim says: “Restorative justice is much more likely to work in socioeconomically well-off and non-diverse schools like PS 321, PS 199, PS 87, etc. where most families are intact and kids are rarely exposed to violence, drug or alcohol abuse, pornography, and criminal activity. ”
I think Tim reflects the view of Eva Moskowitz. That explains why her suspension rates in the Success Academy schools with fewer at-risk kids and a majority of those “socioeconomically well-off” students are very low. Those children — as Tim explains to us — apparently are suitable for “restorative justice” because after all, you don’t want to do anything that would make their parents withdraw from them from the school.
On the other hand, people like Tim and Eva Moskowitz think that if you are a 6 year old who IS exposed to violence, drug, and alcohol abuse, it is BETTER to send you back home where you can experience more of it! Brilliant! Tim wouldn’t want to have some other alternative where the students could remain in the school and be helped. Better to return those 6 year olds to their home environment to be exposed to it more.
And these people are paid educators?? More like paid charlatans.
LikeLike
Tim, I have advice for the parent who said her child was sexually assaulted at PS 207 and you claim the principal and teachers laughed it off and didn’t care.
How about if the parents write a letter documenting exactly what happened? Send it to the teacher and principal and make sure you cc: the superintendent of the District where the school is located, and Carmen Farina. If they are documenting complaints that 6 year old children are sexually assaulting other 6 year old children and the school is ignoring it, then they next march into the police station and file a criminal report.
I would support wholeheartedly the removal of a principal who gets a report from a parent that their child was sexually assaulted and blows it off as you are claiming happened at PS 207.
LikeLike
“…Restorative justice is much more likely to work in socioeconomically well-off and non-diverse schools… ”
BALONEY. (x1000)
Punishing violent students MAKES THEM MORE LIKELY TO BE VIOLENT.
That does not mean you leave a violent or even a heavily disruptive student in the classroom and allow them to attack others and ruin their educational experience.
It means you approach the violent/disruptive students in a way that will help everyone involved, including those problematic students — rather than simply removing, abandoning, and further contributing to the damage of problematic students.
Justice must be for all, and it cannot simply be vengeance.
LikeLike
Well when you put it that way — don’t let violent trouble-making kids stay, but for God’s sake don’t take them away willy-nilly — then it all makes sense!
Can you understand how public school parents like me might be frustrated by the Orwellian doublespeak that surrounds restorative justice?
Let’s use a real-world example: at PS 207 in a working-class section of the Bronx, two first-grade boys sexually propositioned a female classmate and then exposed themselves to her. There is no disputing whether it happened; the boys have admitted it occurred. They each received a single day of out-of-school suspension and were returned to the same class; it was the female victim who was reassigned to a different teacher. It is a very small K-2 school and the victim likely sees or has contact with her assailants every school day.
How is “restorative justice” supposed to function in a case like this? What if anything was done correctly? What should have been done differently?
LikeLike
“I feel terrible for the five and six and seven year olds who are capable of acts of violence. I feel worse for their victims, whose rights and needs under a restorative justice system are seemingly completely subordinate to those of their assailants.”
I feel terrible for people who are gullible enough to accept without question unethical school leaders claiming that 20% of the five and six and seven year olds in their school are committing these “acts of violence”. All these young children have parents committed to their education, just like those affluent kids at PS 321 do, but of course, since most of them are African-American and Latino, some people believe they need to be suspended and stay home, while more affluent kids deserve “restorative justice”.
Sadly, what these charter school folks are saying is that they have absolutely given up on so many low-income children by the time they are six. They may not remain on school premises but must be banished out of sight so that they can be someone else’s problem.
LikeLike
“To repeat: the report on conditions at PS 207 and other dysfunctional DOE schools is central to the story, not a distraction. People should know where kids will have to go to school once you and RiShawn Biddle close down all the charters.”
RiShawn Biddle doesn’t want to “close down all the charters”. He just wants them to quit lying about why the so-called richest and top performing charter school finds that 20% of the children in some of their low-income schools are violent. They aren’t. But as we saw in the video, if you don’t perform, the model teacher will punish and humiliate you and eventually some kids will act out. Nice! If they were doing that to affluent kids the school would have been shut down years ago. But I guess they can get away with it because people like Tim don’t question why so many 5 year old children in a single school would be violent if they are children whose families are poor.
This is what the faux reformers are now reduced to. They realize that their “special sauce” has been revealed to be a big lie. They only want the strivers, but since that’s illegal, they will hound and humiliate you until you act out enough for them to label you an incorrigible violent 6 year old.
The entire world saw exactly how it is done by the MODEL teacher! She trains other teacher how to rip papers up and tell students how much they ruin the learning of the rest of the class. And sends the child out of the circle to the humiliation seat for the low-performers that is (laughably) called the “calm down” chair because they hope it will give the kids the idea that they are supposed to act out so they can be labeled violent by people like Tim!
Kick those 6 year olds to the curb if they can’t learn or if your humiliation tactics cause them to act out. That’s the charter school way! PS 207 suspended a child for exposing himself to another child. Success Academy suspends kids after humiliating them for their inability to sit still or get the right answer fast enough so that they eventually act out.
No difference at all, according to Tim. Because all those kids are unworthy of a Success Academy education.
LikeLike
“Well when you put it that way — don’t let violent trouble-making kids stay, but for God’s sake don’t take them away willy-nilly — then it all makes sense!
Can you understand how public school parents like me might be frustrated by the Orwellian doublespeak that surrounds restorative justice?”
Tim, there are other ways to solve problems than simply banning problematic students. And students who immediately threaten others’ safety can still be removed from the situation while we also practice “restorative justice.”
LikeLike
Luckily, parents can solve the problem themselves, by leaving the school and sending their kids to a safer, more orderly one. There are a lot of great options where I live for under $60,000 per year. Parents can also move to another city. If that’s not an option, they should pipe down and lose the entitled attitude, because their kids are no more important than any other kid at their school, and the people who matter in this world have their own problems to deal with.
LikeLike
Wow, cynical much, FLERP?
The only option is to keep quiet and let the bullies take over public schools, or pay nearly $50,000 for a private school?
Or, maybe Tim’s option is better? If your child is high-performing and perfectly behaved, let’s fund a charter school just for kids like yours and kick out all the kids who don’t fit — back to that dangerous public school for that 6 year old with all the other losers who aren’t worthy. Hopefully your kid won’t be one of the ones who struggle. And if you are affluent enough, just pay for tutoring and I’m sure the charter school will let your kid stay. If you are too poor, well tough luck.
There are public schools all over Brooklyn where parents did not keep quiet. They demanded change and money and resources to help make sure their child’s school was safe.
It’s a sad comment about how much the right wing has taken over the debate that the only solutions are about how much you can get for your own kid. And if 40 kids are getting educations and only 10 kids have to suffer humiliation and punishment for their sin of not being smart enough, well that’s the price that we as a society are apparently willing to pay.
Better than charter schools with high attrition rates and lots of donations get to expand and take over public space than we spend one penny more on reducing class sizes in falling schools or expanding pre-k or after school or any of the other wasteful expenditures that the pro-charter folks like Eva Moskowitz are opposed so desperately. After all, she tells us again and again that she has proved that she can educate all kids in those failing schools for less money and turn them all into scholars. So remember that’s why she is so strongly opposed to reducing class size because those kids don’t need it. They just need to win a lottery for a Success Academy spot where they can be suspended and humiliated so they can leave. Then they DESERVE those underfunded failing schools, right FLERP?
At least, that is the choice you seem to be offering, FLERP.
LikeLike
I wondered how ed reformers would align the “choice!” talking point with the other priority they promote, which is the ability to replicate these schools. One of the selling points for the charter chains is they operate the same way everywhere- that’s “scale”. They’re NOT unique little “boutique” schools- they can be plunked down anywhere and they’ll “perform”.
They have solved that contradiction by saying more “choice” will solve it- just create more schools so everyone can have everything they want in a school. The problem is that approach won’t work at all outside a huge urban/suburban area – it requires a big diverse population, a certain geography, and a nearly endless supply of young college educated people so they can burn thru employees. If we did this here we would have to locate these schools about 20 miles apart, they’d all have 100 kids and be teetering on insolvency and the whole staff would be long term subs 🙂
LikeLike
I have to say though, although I don’t like broad brush with a limited example, there’s a kind of justice to Moskowitz getting the same treatment she gives others.
The most zealous ed reformers have energetically promoted the idea that all public schools are failing in order to promote their preferred system and none of them defend public schools. It must be tough to have that boomerang.
If charter schools got the treatment that public schools get from ed reform politicians all of CharterWorld would rise up in outrage, yet there’s never a peep when someone like Jeb Bush launches a diatribe against every public school in the country.
Pot, meet kettle 🙂
LikeLike
As far as repeating the public school “failure” narrative, people like Bush or Eva are either brainwashed or Machiavellian liars. I tend to believe the second term.
LikeLike
And for those who still see charters as a viable way to improve education, the quote regarding the CEO of the charter chain “she has shown that she will always choose to preserve the institution she founded over being a champion for children and their families”
points out fatal flaw of privatized public schools – they are a private corporation first, and a public service second.
We’re getting close to the anniversary of the Sewol ferry disaster, where Korea’s privatized public transport system killed all those children. That is the only thing privatization will succeed at – disaster.
LikeLike
Chris in Florida
February 19, 2016 at 11:07 am
Chiara, in effect you are calling the aide who secretly filmed this ongoing abuse a liar. She stated she filmed what made her uncomfortable and what she believed constituted abuse.”
Oh, I’m not calling her a liar. I reject the idea that I have to make a decision based on whether she’s telling the truth- that’s a judgment call I won’t make. I said I don’t have enough information to make a decision based on what I was given, even if I accept all of it as true. I don’t know yet.
I actually find Moskowitz’s own claims about her “system” more persuasive- what Moskowitz is saying is that her “system” works because she’s limited the agency and subjective decisions by employees. That’s why she can scale it. They all do the same things at the same time. That’s a “system” claim. Is this part of the “secret sauce”?
The question is whether this is a bad employee or if it’s systemic. The teacher who says it’s abuse goes toward “systemic”. I can accept her claim as honest and still not know.
LikeLike
I know from all your past postings that you are far more likely to believe someone with prestige like Moscowitz and not a mere worker like the unnamed teacher aide who,filmed the abuse. Fair enough. We move in different circles. I side with the trembling child.
And whether or not you make a decision really doesn’t matter to them unless you become their advocate, does it? As Imsaud earlier, this is not an ivory tower academic discussion, it is the lives of vulnerable children being abused and exploited for personal gain and fame. Nothing makes that OK to me. Your mileage may differ.
LikeLike
retired teacher
February 19, 2016 at 11:24 am
As far as repeating the public school “failure” narrative, people like Bush or Eva are either brainwashed or Machiavellian liars. I tend to believe the second term.”
It really stuck out to me when Clinton made the comments about charter schools. The cries of outrage! How unfair! Retract! How dare you!
Jeb Bush has built a career around bashing public schools and there’s never the slightest objection. “Government schools” is A-OK with ed reform but “corporate charters” inspires 500 outraged editorials.
Ed reformers in Ohio spend a good part of their time claiming every garbage for-profit charter in this state is “an isolated instance” while simultaneously arguing that all the public schools suck. Not a real self-aware bunch, I reckon!
LikeLike
Just as we here in Florida pay for Florida’s mismanagement of charters, you are on the hook for Ohio’s missteps from Kasich, the “moderate.”http://www.ohio.com/news/local/charter-schools-misspend-millions-of-ohio-tax-dollars-as-efforts-to-police-them-are-privatized-1.596318
LikeLike
God, I hate that “no excuses” philosophy. I taught for 20 years in an urban public school district. I accepted excuses all the time. Some of these acceptable excuses involved taking care of younger siblings till Mom got off work, dealing with a family member with severe illness, witnessing a gang fight or hearing the sound of gunfire, the fear of deportation, homelessness, abuse, a divorce, an arrest, a death. Of course, there were many unacceptable excuses too.
When it comes to excuses, any teacher worth her salt listens, questions, verifies, seeks help from other adults (the nurse, guidance counselor, family) then has a discussion with the child (not in front of the class — shaming and breach of privacy are unethical). Giving a child a second (or third, or fourth) chance to catch up and make up work always worked well for me.
LikeLike
Middle school teacher: exercising independent judgment? Treating those under your care with respect and consideration? Taking whatever time and effort is needed to do the right thing? Regarding patience as a virtue not a sin?
You are obviously completely out of step with self-styled “education reform.”
Good for you!
😎
LikeLike
KrazyTA: Thank you for your kind words! Your comment made my day.
LikeLike
Middle school teacher: the feeling is mutual.
Hit a bit of a rough patch these last few days and then I read your comments.
Reminded me of Eleanor Roosevelt’s wise counsel:
“It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness.”
Thank you for lighting your candle and sharing it with us.
😎
LikeLike
Derrell Bradford said:
“So for all the Success haters out there I have some advice. If you want Success, or other “no excuses” schools to go away because you think your own brand of education is superior, because you don’t respect that other parents like it and seek it out, you don’t value the structure, or you want your kid to be a grass-fed open-range child, then you just have to, counterintuitively, do one thing: open more charter schools.”
(really?)
But…
I do like his analogy comparing critics of Eva to supporters for an open range, grass fed model of education.
Yes I want my child to be a grass fed open range child, as opposed to the alternative, which is a the corporate model of a force fed, cage bound child, who, like his poultry counterpart, really becomes not much more than a product.
The range fed approach emphasizes a qualitative and humane approach to things, Eva and the “reform” movement really do reflect the standardized, quantitative corporate approach to all production, whether poultry, or people.
LikeLike
Notice how Derrell Bradford and the rest of the fake reformers have missed the point. Those families who are suing Success Academy DID seek out their school. Mr. Bradford seems to support charter schools finding certain children more “superior” than others and therefore choosing to educate only those children. Since it is illegal for them to just tell the family that their child is not up to snuff, Mr. Bradford is apparently fine with charter schools using whatever means necessary to insure that parents of those “inferior” children choose a different school once the inferiority of their child is demonstrated. Why do you think Success Academy insists that children who win lotteries for 1st or 2nd grade (to replace those disappearing children) be tested? Easier to winnow out those “inferior” kids by telling their parents that they are being held back and why don’t they stay at their own school?
Why do so many children — especially those who are at-risk and African-American and Hispanic – leave Success Academy? That is the $1,000,000 question that the fake reformers are terrified that someone will actually investigate. And if Mr. Bradford really cared about kids and not promoting his own career, he would have been asking that question years ago.
LikeLike
Wasn’t Ms Dial the teacher who wrote or speak sometime ago about how testing made children feel good or something along those lines. I think you may have done a blog post about a month or so ago?
LikeLike
I think you might be referring to this post by Bailey Reimer: http://catalyst-chicago.org/2016/01/how-bailey-reimers-kindergartners-came-to-love-testing/
LikeLike
What part of laws re child abuse do the parents and E. M. not understand? Why is Derrell saying that if parents want her to abuse their child, she may do it? Does he not see how illogical this is?
I, for one, do not mind if there are “no excuses” charters that repeatedly suspend students against federal guidelines, but do not brag about results when you do not allow just anyone in your school. Do not brag about your results when the only kids you keep might do as well or better in a public school. Do not commit abuse in your school, abuse with which no public school teacher can get away without being sued and fired? And do not expect me to pay taxes for your school.
If emotional abuse is a strategy, may all teachers in the state now adopt this method as one of the transferable charter strategies? Ask Cuomo. Is he now going to defend public school teachers when a parent complains because a teacher raised his/her voice in class?
And I bet that some of the 98 teachers now placed at the L. A. BOE are accused of these behaviors. Can they be returned to the classroom now? Or maybe we can change CA law.
LikeLike
I think anyone familiar with Mr. Biddle knows that a) he has absolutely no patience for people and practices that are actively harming young students of color – especially African American boys and b) he does not hesitate to be direct about it (This has come at a cost to him professionally in the past).
I may not agree with a lot of his conclusions, but I have to admit that he comes by his passion honestly and there is no honest denying that a lot of our urban schools and school systems ill serve children of color and actively participate in the school to prison pipeline via zero tolerance policies. Mr. Biddle’s criticisms of that have also led him to question the no excuses charter model and especially what is being learned about Ms. Moskowitz’s network. It is a shame that Mr. Bradford, who likes to tell the story of his “choice” experience via the opportunity he got to attend one of Maryland’s top prep schools (which bears no resemblance to a Success Academy), cannot see the same connections between the worst abuses of minority children in our public schools and the extreme behavioral control of many high profile charters.
LikeLike
Oh my God. “So for all the Success haters out there I have some advice. If you want Success, or other “no excuses” schools to go away because you think your own brand of education is superior, because you don’t respect that other parents like it and seek it out, you don’t value the structure, or you want your kid to be a grass-fed open-range child, then you just have to, counterintuitively, do one thing: open more charter schools.”
So, when you break your leg, and it pains you, the one thing you must do, counterintuitively, is… break your other leg.
…when your house burns down, and it pains you, what you must to, counterintuitively, is rebuild it, and set it on fire so it may burn again. Rinse and repeat.
…when the most horrible things happen to you in life, counterintuitively, you must ensure that they happen again.
I can’t even wrap my head around their way of thinking.
LikeLike
“If you don’t like charter schools that weed out all the low-performing kids, open your own charter school to teach their rejects.” The pro-Success Academy defenders’ view of education in a nutshell.
LikeLike
And in Biddle’s non-defense of Eva, he still manages to take a punch at public education. He has not principles either.
“…And over and over again, like a traditionalist superintendent in a failing district, Moskowitz has demonstrated that she will explain away any incident as an “anomaly” instead of acknowledging that there may be some deep-seated issues within the institution and its model of educational practice.”
Can they never just state the truth, that Eva is a money hungry horrible person without a soul?
LikeLike
https://dmaxmj.wordpress.com/2016/02/21/evas-video-can-you-really-dismantle-a-position-against-crap-like-that/
That reformers continue to focus on and defend the wonder of a selective market option for some-baffling. That’s not public education.
LikeLike
The basic “creaming” strategy that Eva employs is this:
STEP 1) Make a list of suspension-worthy infractions that is ridiculously long, arbitrary and all-inclusive, a list that includes minor, trivial transgressions as “not being in a ready-to-learn” position.
(In the COMMENT’s section to the John Merrow article on the SUCCESS ACADEMY infractions list, a military veteran wrote in and said,
“I was a military officer, 1967-69 and we did not experience disciplinary processes as asinine as these. In my book manuscript, I produce a memorandum of the policies of Democracy Prep (charter chain), which are even worse.
“Utterly shameful.” )
STEP 2) Identify various undesirable students who are in undesirable categories … in other words, kids who won’t score as high on standardized tests, no matter how many hundreds of hours of mindless test prep to which they are subjected, or kids who are expensive to educate, if mandatory guidelines for Special Ed. are followed—
a) undesirable because they’re Special Ed, i.e. have innate disabilities that require expensive, time-consuming, and labor-intensive intervention — mandated smaller class sized; teachers with advanced certification; regular I.E.P meetings with an I.E.P. team composed of teacher, social worker, adminstrator, psychologists, etc.
b) undesirable because they come from challenging backgrounds — homeless kids, foster care, etc. — and have no parents that can fulfill Success Academy’s demanding parental involvement;
c) undesirable act out through no fault of their own — an innate inability to sit still in the same position for long periods of time due to ADD, ADHID, etc.
d) undesirable because they are brand new to English, and there’s no one in the home who speaks English.
… the list goes. Indeed, the SUCCESS ACADEMY HANDBOOK (BELOW) says:
“Please keep in mind that the list of unacceptable conduct and consequences is not exhaustive. Teachers and staff can supplement this Code of Conduct with their own rules for classes and events.”
STEP 3) Use the suspension-worthy infractions list created earlier — that ridiculously long and arbitrary list — so that you can easily target and justify the “counseling out” …
“It’s in our handbook right here, the one we gave you when your child first started here. That’s why we suspended your child. Both you and your child knew the rules. If you don’t like it, leave… and go to one of the public schools that are being starved of funding to fund this school.”
Again, the handbook even says the list is “not exhaustive”, and a teacher, on her own, can arbitrarily add to it as she wishes.
4) Keep suspending the until the parent just gives up in frustration, and removes the child from the school:
—————–
John Merrow actually got a copy of the Success Academy’s suspension-worthy list, and wrote about it here:
——————————————–
JOHN MERROW: “Below you will find, verbatim, the disciplinary code for Success Academies, taken from the Success Academies handbook, which is distributed to all parents and perhaps others. I discussed aspects of the rule book in my interview with Success Academies founder and CEO Eva Moskowitz.
(If you missed the NewsHour segment when it was broadcast on October 12th, you can find it here:
—————————————————
When you read this list, keep in mind that this list currently applies to Kindergartners — 5 & 6 year-olds (!!!) , or as young as 4 (!!!), if the child has a late birthday.)
Should Eva’s Pre-K program be approved and funded — even though Eva refuses sign any agreement that would include any outside oversight of the school or of lists like the one below — this will then apply to Pre-K students — 4 & 5 year-olds (!!!), or as young as 3 (!!!), if the child has a late birthday.
Without further ado, here’s the list: (thanks to John Merrow)
————————————————————————————–
————————————————————————————–
“1. DISCIPLINE:
“1. VIOLATIONS
“Anytime a scholar violates school or classroom rules or policies, it is considered a behavior infraction. Behavior infractions include, but are not limited to:
— Non-compliance with the school dress code
— Non-compliance with the school attendance policy
— Non-compliance with the code of conduct
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“1. VIOLENCE and AGGRESSION
“We must ensure that our scholars are safe at all times in our schools. Success Academy has a zero-tolerance approach when it comes to aggressive or violent conduct that puts the safety of our scholars or staff in jeopardy.
“In the classroom, we teach our scholars strategies to peacefully handle disagreements. We teach them that violence is never the solution. Scholars who engage in aggressive or violent conduct will be suspended. Scholars who hit because “he hit me first” will also be suspended.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“1. SUSPENSIONS and EXPULSION
“Scholars who repeatedly disregard directions, compromise the safety of others, or violate our policies may be suspended.
“A short-term suspension refers to the removal of a scholar from the school for disciplinary reasons for a period of five days or fewer. A long-term suspension refers to the removal of a scholar for disciplinary reasons for a period of more than five days. Expulsion refers to the permanent removal of scholar from school for disciplinary reasons.
“If your scholar is suspended, a member of the school leadership team will call to inform you. You will receive a suspension letter at pick up or within 24 hours. You should make arrangements with the school for mandatory alternative instruction for your scholar during his or her suspension.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“1. DISCIPLINARY POLICY and CODE OF CONDUCT
“In order to establish and maintain school culture, the following Code of Conduct contains a list of possible infractions and potential consequences. Please keep in mind that the list of unacceptable conduct and consequences is not exhaustive. Teachers and staff can supplement this Code of Conduct with their own rules for classes and events.
“In addition, violations of the Code of Conduct and resulting consequences are subject to the discretion of the Principal and may be adjusted accordingly. A scholar’s prior conduct and his or her disciplinary history may be factors in determining the appropriate consequence for an infraction.
“The Code of Conduct will be enforced at all times. Scholars must adhere to the Code of Conduct when at school on school grounds, participating in a school sponsored activity, and walking to or from, waiting for, or riding on public transportation to and from school or a school-sponsored activity. Serious misconduct outside of the school is considered a school disciplinary offense when the misconduct or the scholar’s continued presence at the school has or would have a significant detrimental effect on the school and/or has created or would create a risk of substantial disruption to the work of the school.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“CODE OF CONDUCT:
“LEVEL 1 INFRACTIONS
— Slouching / failing to be in “Ready to Succeed” position (SPORT or Magic 5 position)
— Calling out an answer
— Chewing gum or bringing candy to school
— Minor disrespectful behavior
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“RANGE OF SCHOOL RESPONSES, INTERVENTIONS, & CONSEQUENCES for LEVEL 1 INFRACTIONS
— Warning/reprimand by school staff
— Scholar is reminded of appropriate behavior and task at hand
— Scholar is reminded of what he/she is like at his/her best and of past good behavior
— Scholar is reminded of past poor decisions and provided with productive alternatives/choices that should be made
— Scholar is given a non-verbal warning
— Scholar is given a verbal warning
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
” LEVEL 2 INFRACTIONS
— Committing a Level 1 Infraction after intervention
— Verbally or physically dishonoring a fellow scholar (which includes, but is not limited to, teasing, name calling, being rude, mocking, etc.)
— Verbally or physically dishonoring faculty, staff, or other Success Academy community members (which includes, but is not limited to, being rude, disobeying instructions, etc.)
— Using school equipment (e.g. computers, faxes, phones) without permission
— Bringing electronic equipment to school of any kind without school authorization (which includes, but is not limited to, cell phones, Game Boys, iPods, headphones, pagers, radios, etc.)
— Unauthorized possession or use of a cell phone
— Failing to follow directions
— Failing to complete work
— Being off-task
— Arriving late to school/class and/or violating school attendance policy
— Violating the Dress Code
— Being unprepared for class (which includes, but is not limited to, failing to bring a pencil, not completing homework, etc.)
— Wearing clothing or other items that are unsafe or disruptive to the educational process
— Failure to obtain signatures for required assignments
— Disrupting class or educational process in any way at any time (which includes, but is not limited to, making excessive noise in a classroom, failing to participate, refusing to work with partners, etc.)
— Leaving the recess area during recess without permission from an authorized adult
— Being in an off-limits location without permission
— Failing to be in one’s assigned place on school premises
— Getting out of one’s seat without permission at any point during the school day
— Going to the bathroom without permission or at undesignated times
— Making noise in the hallways, in the auditorium, or any general building space without permission
— Inappropriate noise levels in lunchroom, gym, and during arrival and dismissal
— Engaging in unsafe behavior, failing to use recess equipment properly, or failing to follow directions during recess
— Excluding classmates in games/activities during recess
— Littering on school grounds
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“RANGE OF SCHOOL RESPONSES, INTERVENTIONS, & CONSEQUENCES for LEVEL 2 INFRACTIONS
— Scholar is reminded of appropriate behavior and task at hand
— Scholar is given a verbal warning
— Removal from classroom for ”Time Out” outside of the classroom (administrator’s office)
— Student-Teacher-Parent conference
— Student-Parent-Administrator Conference
— In-school disciplinary action (which includes, but is not limited to, exclusion from recess, communal lunch, enrichment activities, sports, school events, trips, or activities)
— Verbal or written apology to community
— In-school suspension (possibly immediate) in a buddy classroom
— Out-of-school suspension (possibly immediate)
— Other consequences/responses deemed appropriate by school (including, but not limited to, extended suspension for a fixed period or expulsion)
– – – – – – – – – – – –
“LEVEL 3 INFRACTIONS:
— Committing a Level 2 Infraction after intervention
— Dishonoring a fellow scholar using profanity, racial slurs, or any foul or discriminatory language
— Dishonoring a faculty, staff, or other Success Academy community member using profanity, racial slurs, or any foul/discriminatory language
— Disobeying or defying school staff or any school authority/personnel
— Using profane, obscene, lewd, abusive, or discriminatory language or gestures in any context (which includes, but is not limited to, slurs based upon race, ethnicity, color, national origin, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability)
— Posting or distributing inappropriate materials (which includes, but is not limited to, unauthorized materials, defamatory or libelous materials, or threatening materials)
— Violating the school’s Technology and Social Media Acceptable Use Policy (which includes, but is not limited to, using the Internet for purposes not related to school/educational purposes or which result in security/privacy violations)
— Forgery of any kind
— Lying or providing false or misleading information to school personnel
— Engaging in any academic dishonesty (which includes, but is not limited to, cheating, plagiarizing, copying another’s work, or colluding/fraudulent collaboration without expressed permission from a school authority)
— Tampering with school records or school documents/materials by any method
— Falsely activating a fire alarm or other disaster alarm
— Making threats of any kind
— Claiming to possess a weapon
— Misusing other people’s property
— Vandalizing school property or property belonging to staff, scholars, or others (which includes, but is not limited to, writing on desks, writing on school books, damaging property, etc.)
— Stealing or knowingly possessing property belonging to another person without proper authorization
— Smoking
— Gambling
— Throwing any objects
— Engaging in inappropriate or unwanted physical contact
— Fighting or engaging in physically aggressive behavior of any kind (which includes, but is not limited to, play fighting, horsing around, shoving, pushing, or any unwanted or aggressive physical contact)
— Leaving class, school-related activity, or school premises without school authorization
— Repeatedly failing to attend class, school, or any school activity or event and/or repeatedly violating school attendance policy
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“RANGE OF SCHOOL RESPONSES, INTERVENTIONS, & CONSEQUENCES for LEVEL 3 INFRACTIONS
— Sent to principal/school administrator
— Loss of classroom/school privileges
— Additional assignments which require scholar to reflect on behavior in writing or orally (depending on grade)
— Call home to parents/guardians
— Removal from classroom or “Time Out” outside of the classroom (administrator’s office)
— Student-Parent-Administrator Conference
— In-School disciplinary action (which includes, but is not limited to, exclusion from recess, communal lunch, enrichment activities, sports, school events, trips, or activities)
— Verbal or written apology to community
— Staying after school or coming in on Saturdays
— In-school suspension (possibly immediate) in a buddy classroom
— Out-of-school suspension (possibly immediate)
— Other consequences/responses deemed appropriate by school (including, but not limited to, extended suspension for a fixed period)
— Expulsion
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“LEVEL 4 INFRACTIONS
— Committing a Level 3 Infraction after intervention
— Repeated in-school and/or out-of-school suspensions
— Exhibiting blatant and repeated disrespect for school code, policies, community, or culture
— Engaging in gang-related behavior (which includes, but is not limited to, wearing gang apparel, making gestures, or signs)
— Destroying or attempting to destroy school property
— Engaging in intimidation, bullying, harassment, coercion, or extortion or threatening violence, injury, or harm to others (empty or real) or stalking or seeking to coerce
— Engaging in behavior that creates a substantial risk of or results in injury/assault against any member of the school community
— Engaging in sexual, racial, or any other type of harassment
— Possessing, transferring, or using drugs, alcohol, or controlled substances
— Participating in an incident of group violence
— Possessing a weapon
— Charged with or convicted of a felony
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“RANGE OF SCHOOL RESPONSES, INTERVENTIONS, & CONSEQUENCES for LEVEL 4 INFRACTIONS
— Sent to principal/school administrator
— Loss of classroom/school privileges
— Additional assignments that require scholar to reflect on behavior in writing or orally (depending on grade)
— Call home to parents/guardians
— Removal from classroom or “Time Out” outside of the classroom (administrator’s office)
— Student-Parent-Administrator Conference
— In-school disciplinary action (which includes, but is not limited to, exclusion from recess, communal lunch, enrichment activities, sports, school events, trips, or activities)
— Verbal or written apology to community
— Staying after school or coming in on Saturdays
— In-school suspension (possibly immediate) in a buddy classroom
— Out-of-school suspension (possibly immediate)
— Other consequences/responses deemed appropriate by school (including, but not — limited to, extended suspension for a fixed period)
— Expulsion
————————————————————————————–
————————————————————————————–
The PDF of the relevant pages is here
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5mXKGS4xL6iVnlZMzIyWi05eHc/view
———-
Reply
LikeLike
The entire discipline discussion goes to public education being a right versus a privilege. Private schools have the advantage when it comes to this. Public schools think first of law suits; it would seem private schools must keep most parents happy, unless they depend on a parent with deep pockets and an unruly child.
Therefore, charters try to have it both ways. Kick problem kids back to the public school where top down discipline strategies are employed for basically political reasons. Actual behavior is often overlooked in favor of statistics. Actual solutions are eschewed because of expense.
The charter in which I assist works around discipline issues by either providing special education services or letting parents determine they want to leave. The minute a misbehaving student’s parents threaten to leave, papers for disenrollment are handed to them.
Re the unverified situation at P.S. 207: In public middle school I taught a resource student who was obviously mentally disturbed and possibly mentally challenged; I had recommended county mental health services to the parent. Before she had gone there, the student sexually harassed a another student, threatening and imitating to rape her. (Whether he could or would have is irrelevant.) The A.P. and I wanted to expel the student, particularly in light of the parent’s not having followed through for services. The principal disagreed and sent him to another school. The A. P. notified the other school of the situation. The student repeated the harassment at the new school. I do not know what that school did.
In the meantime, the special ed dept. was having to work in a district system that was demanding increasingly limited options for solving severe mental health problems. We had to follow the chain of LRE rather than determining the actual LRE. This was while Deasy was the superintendent, though there may be no cause/effect there.
What we have created in our cities are untenable, conflicting situations for which we as Americans have neither the political will nor the financial generosity to solve. Teachers are caught in the middle. Having witnessed this debacle first hand, students do not wish to be part of it. They flee the teaching profession for higher pay and forego the two months of forced unemployment. Without tenure, money, retirement or respect, there is no point. I received the first three and sometimes the fourth.
Unless charters are willing to take a percentage of these moderate to severe students and support the services the students need, there is no way they can be models for public education sites. The charter in which I assist had more than the percentage of students recommended and not just mild to moderate. This charter pays for special schools for two students and offers special ed services, counseling, etc. to the others. Necessarily, salaries are lower. And what everyone in this conversation has to understand is that parents apply to this charter because of the perception of violence at public middle-school campuses, not because of scores. The state association of charters threatened to shut us down because of low scores, even though they are higher than the public schools our students are abandoning.
There is not one thing that is not political about any of these issues. Politics is the relationship of one citizen to another. The U. S. citizens have just stuck their collective heads in the sand and tried to ignore the whole thing, esp. when it does not affect them personally.
Well-funded social, medical, and educational systems are needed to solve these problems. Disruption is a waste of time and money. Nothing is being solved. The best and the brightest are not in charge. The ones In charge are the glib and self-serving.
P. S. My choice for deformers, greedformers. That pretty much covers privatizers and the self-righteous.
LikeLike