Leo Casey, director of the Albert Shanker Institute in Washington, D.C., has pulled together New York state data on the Success Academy charter chain in New York City.
When the New York Times revealed the existence of a “Got to Go” list of students, Moskowitz replied that this was an “anomaly.”
When the New York Times published a video of a teacher chastising and humbling a first-grader for not answering a question correctly, Moskowitz said this was an “anomaly.”
Critics have often said that Moskowitz gets good test results by pushing out students who might pull down scores and by not replacing them with new students (“backfilling”). Casey reviews the data. Tables are in the link.
Casey writes:
The general pattern is unmistakable. In the early grades, student enrollment in Success Academy Charter Schools increases: Whatever losses the schools may suffer through student attrition are more than compensated for by the enrollment of new students. After Grade 2, however, the enrollment numbers begin to decline and do so continuously through the later grades. There are only small variations in this essential pattern among the different Success Academy Charter Schools.
In New York State, high stakes standardized exams begin at the end of Grade 3.
Success Academy Charter Schools has made a conscious decision to not fill seats opened up by student attrition in the upper grades of its schools. And this is a deliberate, network-wide practice, as evidenced by Success Academy’s own website. When one compares the grades in each Success Academy Charter School, as listed on its website, with the grades in each school, as listed on the website of the New York City Charter School Center, one finds that the Charter School Center lists all the grades currently being provided under the school’s charter, while Success Academy lists many fewer grades – only those in which it is willing to enroll students.
In effect, the Success Academy website has the equivalent of a “do not apply” sign posted for each unlisted grade.
Moskowitz has forcefully defended the policy of not accepting new students beyond grade 3, saying it would disrupt the culture SA created.
Moskowitz also insists that her schools should not have to accept students from district schools who have received what she considers to be an inadequate education. Even if one accepted her questionable characterization of education in district schools, it is worth noting that she is insisting on a “one way” street: district schools should have to enroll the students who leave Success Academy Charter Schools, but Success Academy schools should not have to enroll students who leave district schools.
Casey notes that while few other charter operators are willing to criticize SA, the leader of Democracy Prep has called her out for refusing to fill empty seats in the upper grades as students are winnowed out.
Recent developments may well put Moskowitz’s defense of Success Academy’s discipline and enrollment policies to the test. The authorizer of the Success Academy charter schools, the SUNY Charter School Institute, has announced that it is launching an investigation into the disciplinary practices at Success Academy. And the U.S. Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights, responding to a complaint by the New York City Public Advocate, the Legal Aid Society, and a group of former and current Success Academy parents, will investigate claims that Success Academy schools illegally discriminate against students with special needs. The reaction to last week’s video publication by the New York Times can only increase the scrutiny of Success Academy Charter Schools.
Most national studies find that charters do not outperform public schools, yet their foundational claim is based on the assertion that they get higher scores. If the veil is ripped away from practices that produce higher scores–by selective winnowing of students–this would be a major blow to the charters’ drive to expand. Casey predicts that a major political battle over the future of public schools and charter schools is in the making.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
This analysis and the investigation by the authorizer are welcome signs that Eva’s scam is finally going to be stopped. But rest assured: she’ll go down fighting, denying reality until the bitter end.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And I fear that SUNY’s loyalty to the governor and his reform groups are going to make any investigation a waste of time. We need to work to get reformers out of colleges if anything is going to get better. At Brooklyn College Fellows and TFA are contacting students two or three times a week.
LikeLike
They are going to sugar coat anything they find because if they find her guilty, they, too, are culpable in this farce that masquerades as being “all for the kids.”
LikeLike
SUNY has known about Success Academy’s high attrition for years. They laughed off the empty seats in their charter schools when public school parents gave them data. The only thing SUNY cared about was test scores and because high test scores require high attrition rates, they had to look the other way.
I don’t know if this public shaming will change SUNY. Maybe some press attention will but I won’t hold my breath.
Scott Stringer was supposed to be auditing these schools — what did he find? It is baffling that the study has taken so long and it seems that politics is more important than children.
LikeLike
And why does the massive accrual of statistical evidence apparently lead only to the dissemination of funding for the massive accrual of yet more statistical evidence? When is enough information enough?
LikeLike
I don’t know why she didn’t just sell Success as a kind of magnet charter that selects in a different way than magnet public schools.
Cities seem to have plenty of selective public schools- cities have the populations to support that kind of thing and still sustain a strong general school system. Had she promoted the school that way – as opening up a selective school to more low income kids, one that selects on “grit” or something- it would have been really hard for people to criticize it.
All of her troubles stem from her insistence that this is a model for a public system, and if she was running a selective charter she wouldn’t get national attention for “solving” public schools anymore than people who run selective public schools do. She actually may damage the reputation and future of her own schools by insisting on being compared to non-selective public schools to make a political and ideological point.
LikeLike
I’m no expert, but I don’t think NY charter law allows a magnet charter school.
Besides, it would be the same game but damaging different kids.
She knows no more about educating lower needs kids than higher.
It’s still all rigid rules and test prep but her PR would sucker those families in rather than going to good public alternatives.
LikeLike
“Breaking down barriers between the haves and have-nots in our schools will require bold, new action. It’s time for New Yorkers to come together and demand great schools for ALL our kids — not just the select few.”
“Right now, 143,000 students are trapped in failing schools. These ads draw attention to this crisis, and call for bold action now,” said Jeremiah Kittredge, CEO of Families for Excellent Schools.”
Oops! This is the problem. Success Academy’s sister organization — Families for Excellent Schools — has been spending many tens of thousands of dollars organizing their “Don’t Steal Possible” rallies (attended by all Success Academy charter school students and a few other charter schools). The rallies were focused on ALL the students in those failing schools. Success Academy and FES have been justifying their existence for years based on caring about ALL the students trapped in failing public schools and not just the 10% of them that they deem worthy of a charter school education. NYC has always had magnet schools where those students could learn, and if Families for Excellent Schools wanted MORE magnet schools, they just had to lobby for them! We already know they do good work.
Of course FES didn’t want more magnet schools since that would just mean there were fewer of the motivated parents and students for them to educate in Success Academy schools. As it is, Success Academy had to drop priority for at-risk kids in their lottery when they realized that they would have too many of those children from the failing schools who they had found far too difficult to teach.
Honesty and truth got lost on the way to a power grab. It’s pretty sad since I suspect Ms. Moskowitz started with the right motives. But when it turned out that she had to get rid of too many of those at-risk kids to keep her schools the way she wanted them, she should have acknowledged it instead of spending so much time and effort pretending that she could educate any child. Instead of doing some good, she chose dishonesty.
LikeLike
Yes, Eva is replicating the model that selective schools use, where admission and performance are judged by test scores. Their broader purpose for many decades, however, was to desegregate urban school districts and race was another admissions criteria. That changed about 6 years ago in Chicago, when the desegregation decree was lifted, and socio-economic factors were employed. SA doesn’t have this kind of goal in mind.
LikeLike
Well, it flips it a little, right, because it’s the test scores after entry and limiting the enrollment of those who haven’t proven “merit” in later grades? It’s closer to a merit award in a college, where one must keep a GPA to keep the scholarship.
She probably could have sold that as a different approach to “selective” in a large city like NY, because large cities (perhaps) have sufficient students to allow that kind of fragmenting into “sectors” without destroying the general public system.
Maybe there was a need for a different kind of selective public school focused on low income kids. She could have made that argument and she’s clout-heavy enough she probably would have gotten any funding/support she wants anyway. Of course, that would have put some dings in the political narrative she wants.
LikeLike
Testing is the root of all Eva’s objectionable practices. If test scores, aka “performance,” were not used to rate charter schools, SA might not need to use harsh discipline, weeding out,and not accepting students with disabilities. This does not excuse it, but imagine a system where joy in learning, intellectual stimulation, creativity and social and emotional well being of students were the measure of a school’s Success.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, this. Even though they were sold as means to educate the most difficult students with innovated strategies, New York State charters are judged primarily by their testing scores. To be renewed, they must exceed the testing results of the district schools. It’s such a limited measure, as you point out, Annette. But, Sucksess Academy, using its signature boot-camp teaching techniques, goes far beyond what’s necessary to achieve better results than the struggling district schools.
Good for Casey, showing the enrollment patterns. Those numbers are, while somewhat difficult to collate, are easily discovered through the NYSED data too. The pattern is not unique to Sucksess either, but a feature of many charters.
LikeLike
The only reason NY State charters are judged by their test scores is because the SUNY Charter Institute is accommodating the billionaires who fund Success Academy which has made top test scores — and nothing else — their ultimate goal. Ever since Pedro Noguera resigned from the SUNY Charter Institute, there has not been anyone who was concerned with at-risk students anymore. That’s why when Eva Moskowitz needed to change her charter because it gave priority to at-risk kids zoned for failing public schools and she didn’t want that (!!!) the SUNY Charter Institute was delighted to accommodate her!! Can you imagine the conversation: “You gave me a charter for a school that gave priority for kids zoned for failing public schools but I don’t want to serve them so can I drop that? Of course! Anything you wish! Oversight – bah humbug! And by the way, Ms. Moskowitz, we will NEVER look closely at your attrition or your suspension rates, so feel free to suspend as many of those rotten at-risk kids you need to suspend and if you can find a better way of getting them out of there without suspending them, that’s even better!”
I blame the SUNY Charter Institute. Their ability to look the other way rivals Sgt. Schulz from “Hogan’s Heroes” — “I see nothing, nothing!”
LikeLike
It’s not just SUNY CSI that’s the problem. The Board of Regents/NYSED authorized charters schools are also judged narrowly by test scores, and even so, it’s a rare occurence when one is closed for any reason. However, no network has so dominated the charter school landscape as much as Eva’s Sucksess chain.
I am wondering, though, if she will eventually be a victim of her own success. The larger the network grows, the more stories about her abusive system will emerge.
I also wonder what’s going on with her efforts to start Success high schools. There is one open, apparently, serving 8-10 grades right now, but it was not approved as a stand-alone charter school, as far as I can tell. It also lacks the words “charter school” in its name, which by law it must include. NYC Public School Parent, do you have any information about that high school and Eva’s efforts to open more?
LikeLike
As far as I understand, the SA High School is simply supposed to serve the SA students who move up from their middle schools. It isn’t supposed to be a “stand alone” at all, as far as I know (and I claim no knowledge beyond what I recall reading when it opened). The same is true with their middle schools, which are only for the students moving up from their elementary schools. The reason their first (and only) high school serves grades 8-10 is that 10th grade is the oldest cohort of students who began first grade at Harlem Success Academy 1 many years ago. Due to attrition over the years, there aren’t many students in 9th or 10th grade and it’s a testament to the large donations that Success Academy is very likely able to offer quite a lot for a high school serving so few students. At some point — perhaps in a year or two — the 9th grade would have more students as the students at HSA 2, 3 and the other early schools age all age into high school so it would include 9th graders from more than one elementary/middle school.
Oddly, a few months ago I read that Eva Moskowitz wanted to expand Success Academy Upper West into 10th grade. That made no sense to me since I thought the idea was for the students at all the SA middle schools to combine into high school. But unlike the students in high school now — from when the schools served primarily at-risk kids — the students at Upper West are quite an affluent bunch. I found it revealing that it seemed this group of far more affluent (and far more white) students would remain “separate but equal” and not attend the same high school with the students from Harlem Success Academy 1 (which is in the same community school district as Upper West). However, I don’t know if she was given space for such expansion.
I have no doubt that Success Academy would allow new students in their high school for 9th grade IF they could give priority to the students in District 2 Manhattan (one of the wealthiest NYC school districts) and not to at-risk students in the lottery. Maybe that is why they wanted to expand Upper West middle school into high school. Upper West — despite being located in District 3 — sends it students to a new middle school in District 2. If they get permission to expand into a high school separate from the one that the Harlem Success Academy 1 students attend, will District 2 students have priority? If so, that will more than likely keep the number of at-risk kids down. I would certainly be impressed if Ms. Moskowitz redeems herself from all this bad press and says that her high schools will give priority to at-risk students who come from failing middle schools. Let’s see what happens.
LikeLike
How is this apology credible when the Obama Administration and the larger ed reform “movement” of which they are a part have denied this was happening for 7 years?
“In one of his first major speeches as acting U.S. secretary of education, John King apologized to teachers for the role that the federal government has played in creating a climate in which teachers feel “attacked and unfairly blamed.”
King is not even the responsible party. He wasn’t running the US Department of Education when this was done. Whatever he did in NY is irrelevant to the bad working relationship the US Dept of Education has with teachers and/or public schools.
How is allowing Arne Duncan to go off to the private sector before admitting this “holding people accountable”? The next appointee delivers the apology for the appointee who created the problem, only after Duncan has safely exited stage left to huge cheers? In what world is that “accountability”?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/john-king-is-trying-to-repair-the-obama-administrations-frayed-relationship-with-teachers/2016/02/19/a28b88de-d666-11e5-9823-02b905009f99_story.html
LikeLike
Is there ever going to be a recognition in ed reform that charter schools affect public schools, and there is not now and was never any guarantee that systemic change would be positive FOR existing public schools?
These are supposedly “systems” people. How can one call themselves a “systems” person when there’s an insane effort to deny that public schools in a given area ARE systems?
In NYC it’s “high performing charters” cherry picking in various ways and in Ohio it’s the opposite. We get the people who churn in and out of charters BACK in the public schools. Obviously that’s fine, that’s the role of public schools, but if Ohio public schools are getting kids back from cybercharters who lost two years that affects public schools! This can’t be denied. No amount of marketing and haranguing will change this fact. My public school superintendent believes she is picking up the risk for the charter system in Ohio because she is! Just a simple “yes, that might be an issue” is all it would take.
LikeLike
I think the “reformers” expect public schools to fail and go away, just like Commodore Computers and Kodak failed and went away. It’s a business mentality: failure is healthy.
LikeLike
ponderosa: I am going to be picky and rewrite your comments—
[start] I think the “reformers” expect public schools to die and be forgotten, just like Commodore Computers and Kodak failed and went away. It’s a business mentality: eliminating the competition is healthy.” [end]
Please excuse the impertinence.
😎
LikeLike
I don’t think they want public schools to go away.
They want public schools to be repository of all the unwanted students. That way, charters can educate only the least expensive and easiest to teach students. Privatize the cheapest part of education and pay schools top dollar. Socialize the expensive part of education and starve those schools.
That’s the American way! Just ask the Republicans.
LikeLike
Eva and her profiteers should buy a tobacco company, start making, selling, marketing cigarettes, and teach her young scholars to smoke – she’d make a lot of money. Just as well as the way she treats them; she cares not, so long as she profits. She doesn’t care the harm that her policies do to her scholars, rhymes with dollars.
LikeLike
How do I get Mr. Casey to look st DSST in Denver? Very similar scenario but no scandals about “got to go” and public humiliation. Still very high attrition.
From 2009-2015 graduation rate of 56.5% based on 972 starting, 549 graduating. This is the methodology the center on reinventing public education uses. The DSST data is from 7 years at the flagship Stapleton campus. DSST does no backfilling after grade 10. I am trying to find out where the 43.5% land. Not a piece of information DSST keeps. Have to wait for the District to get it for me
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hope you get that information! It sounds a lot like BASIS Charter Schools. If a school with high test scores also has high attrition rates, then something funny is always going on. Parents do anything to stay in good schools. They might (understandably) leave failing or mediocre schools, but if they are leaving good ones in droves, their children are being made to feel very unwelcome.
When will we start judging a charter school on how many students who enroll they keep, rather than how many students are on an unaudited mythical “wait list”. One is reality; the other reflects an expensive marketing campaign where signing up costs nothing.
Spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to advertise so you can get thousands of families to sign up for a lottery is a reflection of your high achievement in marketing. Spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to educate ALL those kids who win the lottery and have them choose to remain in your school is a reflection of your high achievement in teaching. How sad that some people don’t understand the difference.
LikeLike
On the subject of Success Academy and the recent scandals — particularly the abuse video, it’s interesting to see the reaction — or total lack of a reaction — from Campbell Brown and from her corporate reform propaganda website THE 74. Keep in mind that Campbell has been very open about her bias, saying she will refused to look at both sides of the issues in education.
Here’s the opening article of THE 74, where
Campbell Brown states its mission:
“I have learned that not every story has two sides.
And I will not allow for false equivalency when
a child’s future is being compromised, regardless
of the vitriol it provokes.”
How can someone purporting to be a journalist say
something so transparently idiotic as that?
Here’s that quote in context:
https://www.the74million.org/article/campbell-brown-journalism-advocacy-and-why-not-every-story-has-two-sides
Okay. That’s just great.
In Campbell’s mind, there’s only one side
that’s right — Campbell Brown’s, and the
school privatization billionaires who are
funding her … they’re “for the children”.
The other side — teacher unions, parents who
want to keep democratic governance of schools —
well they’re just wrong, wrong, wrong …
“they’re not for the children.”
Also, regarding Success Academy itself, she describes herself as “a soldier in Eva’s army.”
( 01:36 – )
( 01:36 – )
CAMPBELL BROWN: ” … I’m a soldier in Eva’s Army. …
the accomplishments of Eva and the team that makes (the
SUCCESS ACADEMY schools) possible. It amazes me
that anyone would dare try to put a chokehold on the most
exciting, innovative things happening in public education
right now. … there is no compromise possible. …
” .. ”
“I’m sorry. Both sides do not have merit, and when
the lives of children are literally hanging in the balance,
you can’t play referee. If we want to do what he know
is right, what we know is truly right, then we have not
choice, and there is no compromise possible.”
From DAY ONE, she has portrayed herself as the heroic defender of students who are abused by unionized teachers, as evidence in the quote / article BELOW:
————————
CAMPBELL BROWN, 2012:
“I don’t think it’s fair that we cannot guarantee every child in 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.
Yeah, well, who’s the enabler NOW, Campbell?
Indeed, 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 that 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, or cultish Koolaid-drinkers.
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
This country is in big trouble! The emperor has NO CLOTHES ON.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And the Empress . . . Empress Eva.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Why are Eva’s schools like something out of Dickens? Well, you have to start from the top. “The fish rots from the head down,” as they say.
What does Eva really think?
Last April, Eva gave a very revealing video interview to the WALL STREET JOURNAL ‘s Mary Kissel, where Eva made sweeping, broad-brush generalizations about how her schools’ competitors — NYC’s traditional public schools — are all (or ALMOST all) are completely dysfunctional …. worthless, chaotic hell-holes where children learn nothing, or almost nothing.
Are NYC traditional public schools all that bad, or are most of them that bad?
I’m out here in L.A., so I wouldn’t know how true this is or is not. Perhaps some teachers and parents in NYC can chime in here with an answer to that question.
Anyway, here’s that video where Eva tells what she thinks to the WALL STREET JOURNAL, and shares why she runs her schools the way she does:
http://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-journal-dumbing-down-school-discipline/974426DF-274A-47BA-9980-491D224BDCF3.html
( 00:48 – )
EVA MOSKOWITZ:
“The problem is that we still don’t have order and civility in our (NYC traditional public) schools … I think people imagine that the schools are more orderly than they actually are. (NYC traditional public) are pretty bad. … You’ve got a tremendous amount of … CHAOS in our schools ..
” … ”
” First, (At SUCCESS ACADEMY) we believe in it (discipline). We believe in order. We believe in teaching kids to say ‘Please’ and ‘Thank you.’ We believe that students shouldn’t be cursing at their teachers, or throwing chairs at other students. I mean, you have to start from that … It is common sense, but you can’t teach children, and you can’t have a robust, joyful, nurturing, learning environment if you have disorder, and in far too many places, that’s exactly what you have. If you’ve ever gone into a New York City public school lunchroom, you can see a lot of surprising things that are not conducive to learning.”
——————————————
She’s laying down the gauntlet to both the U.S. Dept. of Ed, the U.S. Office of Civil Rights, and also to SUNY which — in theory, but not in practice — is supposed to oversee her schools.
She’s telling them all , “Don’t even think of interfering with the operations of my schools, or changing our discipline policies and procedures. Just give me the tax money money, butt the-Hell out, or I’ll call in Cuomo and Elia to kick your asses.”
In another article from Leo Casey, Casey says as much regarding the interview above:
http://www.shankerinstitute.org/blog/student-discipline-race-and-eva-moskowitz%E2%80%99s-success-academy-charter-schools
LEO CASEY: “In a revealing video interview that accompanied the Wall Street Journal op-ed, editorial board member Mary Kissel launches the conversation by declaring that the “Obama administration wants laxer discipline standards for minorities in public schools.” Moskowitz does not disagree. Under the cover of attacks on the policies and practices of New York City public schools, Moskowitz has delivered a shot across the bow of President Obama, retiring Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and incoming Acting Secretary John King. The message is, if you choose to enforce civil rights law when it comes to discipline in Success Academy charter schools, expect an all-out political war.”
LikeLike
Sadly, the beauty of the Success Academy system is that they treat the low-performing 5, 6 and 7 year old students with such disdain and humiliation and punishment that many of them DO act out.
The fact that Ms. Moskowitz sat down in an interview with John Merrow and explained that over 20% of the students in some of her (low-income) schools were given out of school suspensions at age 5 and 6 was because they doing violent things is probably technically true. One only has to watch their “model teacher” to see how every student who can’t come up with the right answer at age 6 is treated. Not just personally humiliated and ordered to leave the learning circle, but BLAMED for the poor performance of other students in the classroom! No wonder the other students reacted as if they agreed with every word the teacher was saying. Can you imagine how they treat those low performing students when they have already seen their own teacher bullying them for their lack of knowing the right answer?
The NY Times reports that the assistant teacher videotaped what she saw often in this model teacher’s classroom. Eva Moskowitz says it was a one-time thing that her model teacher did. Someone is lying.
It is certainly not surprising that 20% of the 5 and 6 year old students would act out when treated like this for not knowing the right answer.
LikeLike
NYC public school parent: your comments just above, and others on this thread—
You are outdoing yourself.
And that’s saying a lot.
Thank you for keeping it real.
Not rheeal.
😎
LikeLike
I’ll never believe this following photograph shows the way any school should operate:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22New+York+Times%22+Success+Academy&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiItdWI0YnLAhUC2SYKHVvfBi8Q_AUICigE&biw=799&bih=399#imgrc=GZxymZ8kMDHFEM%3A
Compare that to where Campbell Brown sends her own kids to the private school Heschel, and the kids don’t have to wear those hideous godawful uniforms:
https://www.google.com/search?q=heschel+school+new+york&biw=799&bih=399&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjvgITb0YnLAhXC4iYKHX_TAoYQ_AUICSgE&dpr=2#imgdii=B8kDNnJPhtLxYM%3A%3BB8kDNnJPhtLxYM%3A%3BggxwKt1X36Lx0M%3A&imgrc=B8kDNnJPhtLxYM%3A
https://www.google.com/search?q=heschel+school+new+york&biw=799&bih=399&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjvgITb0YnLAhXC4iYKHX_TAoYQ_AUICSgE&dpr=2#imgrc=B8kDNnJPhtLxYM%3A
Indeed, the Success Academy is reminiscent of the kids marching Pink Floyd’s ‘THE WALL’:
( 2:22 – )
( 2:22 – )
Watch the whole video to see kids getting fed into processors. It’s not like that at Heschel.
LikeLike
Does it seem to anyone else that in all of the pictures posted about charter schools, particularly SA, but also the charters in New Orleans and elsewhere, that the children are NEVER smiling?
LikeLike
It may seem that Eva’ s code is a much simpler and straight forward way to maintain order. It is hard work to collaborate on, and create, a truly accepting and respectful school environment conducive to learning. But there are other ways to maintain order in schools rather than through intimidation and humiliation. Contrary to Eva’s claims, it is not necessary to constantly instill fear in children. A school can and should have a social justice approach to discipline. All voices should be heard and respected and misbehaving children should not be dealt with in a punitive way. Indeed, many public schools have not mastered this and it would seem to the likes of Eva to be chaos but rest assured if any public school teacher or administrator were to attempt SA tactics they would be brought up on charges.
LikeLike
But the humiliation is not always to maintain order. It’s also an excellent means to get rid of low-scoring students to raise a charter school’s test scores.
That’s why Ms. Moskowitz has no interest in knowing whether there are less abusive means of discipline. Because the goal is not simply well-behaved students but high performing students. That’s why you will not see nearly as harsh tactics directed toward the affluent students at Upper West. Somehow I suspect the affluent and “gifted” 5 year old who squirms a bit or doesn’t keep hands folded at all times isn’t being shamed and punished the same way a struggling at-risk child is. (I once read a comment by an Upper West parent on a discussion board who claimed she was allowed to choose what day her son was to be suspended for some inappropriate behavior.)
LikeLike
Michele Hamilton: I would add to the comments by NYC public school parent—
The SA approach is tailored to the convenience and needs of a few adults at the expense of many other adults (staff and parents) and students.
When there is a happy coincidence between the SA approach and the needs of staff and students and parents, all is well. The systemic lack of fit between the SA approach that benefits a few at the top of the organization and the needs/requirements of many staff/students/parents—that doesn’t sell well, and those that point this out are called “haters.”
That’s the way I see it…
😎
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
———-
LikeLike