Kate Taylor in the New York Times describes education legislation that was rushed through in the closing days of the legislative session in Albany. Quietly slipped in was a provision allowing charter schools to switch to a different authorizer that would be enable them to evade state regulations about certified teachers. The primary beneficiary is Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy charter chain, which is expanding rapidly and can’t find enough certified teachers, in part because of the expansion but also because of high teacher turnover in the chain.
In the fraught final hours of the legislative session on Friday, the Republicans in the State Senate agreed to give Mayor Bill de Blasio control of the New York City schools for one more year, but in return they demanded two provisions related to charter schools.
One made it easier for the schools to switch between charter-granting organizations. The second gave the charter schools committee of the State University of New York’s board of trustees — one of the two entities that can currently grant charters — the power “to promulgate regulations with respect to governance, structure and operations” of the schools it oversees.
The broadness of the language at first left something of a mystery as to what the provision was intended to accomplish and who might have wanted it.
A few days later, the mystery cleared up a bit.
Families for Excellent Schools, a charter school advocacy group that is closely tied to Eva S. Moskowitz, the founder of the Success Academy charter school network, sent an email to the leaders of several charter networks on Tuesday calling the provisions “a massive victory.” In particular, it said in the email, the SUNY-related bit of legislation meant that SUNY would be able to waive current requirements that limit the number of uncertified teachers that charter schools can employ.
In fact, the Senate had pushed for a provision that would have done that directly, by giving teachers at charter schools three years to become certified, but the Assembly, which is controlled by the Democrats, rejected it. After that explicit provision on teacher certification was taken out, the broader language appeared.
The three-year allowance had been a top priority for Ms. Moskowitz, who faces difficulty hiring enough teachers as she rapidly expands the number of Success Academy schools. Currently, under the state’s charter school law, a charter school cannot have more than 15 uncertified teachers. Success hires mostly young teachers. Many of them are uncertified when they begin and attend a master’s program managed by Success while they are teaching.
Apparently SA likes to take uncertified teachers and mold them, rather than certified teachers who may have their own ideas.
Stefan Friedman, a spokesman for Success Academy, expressed support for the idea of giving charters flexibility on the certification rules. “To continue to deliver the strongest academic results for children, as well as exceptional chess, debate and art programs, schools must hire the most highly qualified teachers available and give them extensive training and support,” he said in a statement.
Success Academy claims it is creating a national model for inner-city education. No excuses and uncertified teachers.
This among many things our nation will pay an horrendous price down the road but long term thinking seems so be in short supply from our politicians these days.
From Kate Taylor’s NY Times article:
“The chair of the SUNY committee, Joseph Belluck, said in an interview that he had not learned about the provision until after it passed, and that the committee was still analyzing the law to try to figure out what it meant.”
“Families for Excellent Schools, a charter school advocacy group that is closely tied to Eva S. Moskowitz, the founder of the Success Academy charter school network, sent an email to the leaders of several charter networks on Tuesday calling the provisions “a massive victory.”
How can it be a “massive victory” when SUNY didn’t even know about the provision and has had no time to consider what changes it will cause? It can only be a “massive victory” if SUNY is in the pocket of rich charter school chains and Families for Excellent Schools.
Oversight agencies are supposed to provide oversight, not change whatever regulations the richest charter networks tell them to change.
FES’s e-mail is very incriminating and proves that SUNY does not act as an independent oversight agency at all. Instead, FES controls it and knows exactly what it will do. A “massive victory” for charters indeed, but at least FES has made it clear that SUNY is their underling, not their overseer.
We’ve returned to the doublespeak world of the novel 1984, where things mean their opposite. How can hiring inexperienced uncertified teachers be an advance for quality? http://www.arthurcamins.com
What you said.
Thank you for your comments.
😎
Apparently SA likes to take uncertified teachers and mold them, rather than certified teachers who may have their own ideas.
This is not just a SA or New York thing. I have been looking into the participants in several recently formed coalitions of charter schools and “teacher residency” programs. The applicants they do not want is anyone with an undergraduate degree that included courses in education or teachers who have been certified to teach. Many of the emerging programs want total control over on-the-job training, a token connection to a university program who takes some money, signs off on a master’s degree, but has no faculty teaching in the teacher prep program, no say in the courses, etc. The newbies are placed in schools with a”high quality” mentor and in the course of a year, become the lead teacher, meaning the mentor leaves for visits to other classes or self-selected “professional development.” The people who enter some of these programs need not have any undergraduate degree. They can test in with high scores on tests of content (e.g., math, ELA), and they can become certified through tests (Pearson), and earn a master’s degree while being paid a stipend for on-the-job training.
These ideas about minimal teacher prep, with skills in raising test scores learned on-the-job, have been promulgated by McKinsey & Co. and USDE in the so called RESPECT project–“Recognizing Educational Success, Professional Excellence And Collaborative Teaching”
The new and expanded version of the teacher-as-a-skilled-producer-of-test scores can be seen at OpportunityCulture.org, a project from Public Impact.org. The so-called Opportunity Culture for teaching “extends the reach of excellent teachers and their TEAMS (of rank amateurs,paraprofessionals in training, merely good teachers) to earn more and reach more students, for more pay, within recurring budgets.” An “excellent teacher” is defined as a person who “typically makes 1 & 1/2 years of progress each year with their students.”
I am waiting for civil rights leaders to stand up for poor, minority children that deserve authentic, well prepared teachers, not a robot with a scripted bunch of prompts. This would never be accepted in Scarsdale; this is why we call it separate and unequal.
Amen to that!
Did anyone notice how incriminating the Families for Excellent Schools’ e-mail was:
“Families for Excellent Schools, a charter school advocacy group that is closely tied to Eva S. Moskowitz, the founder of the Success Academy charter school network, sent an email to the leaders of several charter networks on Tuesday calling the provisions “a massive victory.” In particular, it said in the email, the SUNY-related bit of legislation meant that SUNY would be able to waive current requirements that limit the number of uncertified teachers that charter schools can employ.”
The legislation says SUNY “…WOULD BE ABLE…” to waive current requirements. If they wanted to. Given that SUNY has no information as to whether waiving the rules would be a good thing for students in charter schools or a bad thing, why is FES so confident that SUNY will waive the rules that it is announcing a “MASSIVE VICTORY”? Uh oh — they just embarrassed the SUNY Charter Institute board that likes to pretend they aren’t directly in the pockets of Success Academy.
Apparently, Families for Excellent Schools ALREADY knows that SUNY will waive any requirements that Eva Moskowitz tells them to waive.
If I were the SUNY Charter Institute, I would immediately announce that contrary to what FES is implying — that they are delighted to waive whatever rules a rich charter school network demands that they waive — they plan to do a real examination of what is going on in charter schools and act as a real oversight agency instead of simply doing whatever rich charter schools tell them to do.
If I were Kate Taylor, I would do a story about how little oversight SUNY actually does when it comes to the richest charter school chains and the methods – whether it be suspending 25% of the 5 and 6 year olds in some schools or got to go lists or attrition rates twice as high as other charter networks. How embarrassing that FES just announced that SUNY is in their pocket instead of acting as the oversight agency they are supposed to be.
NYC public school parent:
Good catch!
😎
Well, Eva S. Moskowitz is certainly certifiable. And she is a national model of sorts for the exploitation of inner-city children. I feel I’ve seen all of this before, in Dickens, or maybe Warner Bros.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/23/nyregion/late-deal-in-albany-could-allow-charter-schools-to-hire-more-uncertified-teachers.html?_r=0
Previously, New York State law allowed
a maximum of 15 uncertified teachers were
allowed to staff a charter school. Even those who
are allowed to teach without certification are only
allowed to do so for just one year. If not certified
after that one year, they cannot remain on staff.
If I’m reading this right, new laws pushed by
Eva and her ally “Families for Excellent Schools”
are now being passed. These laws would mean
that there’s no longer any such 15-teacher limit
on the number of uncertified teachers working
at one of Eva’s schools. 100% of the staff
can be be inexperienced amateurs.
The law also extends that 1-year-to-get-certified-or-leave
rule to 3 years. Since Eva’s business plan is
to churn and burn teachers in under three years,
this suits her just fine.
————————————————-
NY TIMES: (CAPS mine)
“Families for Excellent Schools, a charter school advocacy group that is closely tied to Eva S. Moskowitz, the founder of the Success Academy charter school network, sent an email to the leaders of several charter networks on Tuesday calling the provisions “A MASSIVE VICTORY.” In particular, it said in the email, the SUNY-related bit of legislation meant that SUNY would be able to waive current requirements that limit the number of uncertified teachers that charter schools can employ.
“In fact, the Senate had pushed for a provision that would have done that directly, by giving teachers at charter schools three years to become certified, but the Assembly, which is controlled by the Democrats, rejected it. After that explicit provision on teacher certification was taken out, the broader language appeared.
“The three-year allowance had been a top priority for Ms. Moskowitz, who faces difficulty hiring enough teachers as she rapidly expands the number of Success Academy schools. Currently, under the state’s charter school law, a charter school cannot have more than 15 uncertified teachers. Success hires mostly young teachers. Many of them are uncertified when they begin and attend a master’s program managed by Success while they are teaching.
“Stefan Friedman, a spokesman for Success Academy, expressed support for the idea of giving charters FLEXIBILITY on the certification rules.
” ‘To continue to deliver the strongest academic results for children, as well as exceptional chess, debate and art programs, schools must hire the most highly qualified teachers AVAILABLE and give them extensive training and support,’ he said in a statement.”
————————
That last quote is truly Orwellian.
So I guess, in Eva’s mind, uncertified amateurs with ZERO training or experience in the classroom do indeed qualify as being “the most highly qualified teachers AVAILABLE.”
By that logic, that means there’s no real qualifications whatsoever.
For example … if, let’s say, there were no trained or experienced police officers willing to police a certain city, then that would make those folks with ZERO experience in policing, but willing to put on a badge and carry a gun “the most highly qualified (pseudo-) police AVAILABLE” to be hired.
Again, the key word being “AVAILABLE”, I presume.
When there aren’t enough certified teachers — or teachers on their way to certification — available or willing (due Eva’s schools’ bad rep) to staff Eva’s schools, then the term “available” is just Eva-speak for those uncertified wanna-be teachers with ZERO training or experience in the classroom, the ones who desperately need a job… ANY job, and have no other options.
Hiring them in massive numbers is all about providing needed “FLEXIBILITY.”
Of course, Success Academy will compensate for these amateur teachers’ deficiencies by “giving them extensive training and support.”
Certain parents are not going to be happy about this. While this might fly under the radar or be okay with low-income, non-Enghish-speaking parents in neighborhoods like Harlem, I imagine this might be problematic in the more upscale neighborhoods like Cobble Hill where Success Academy has more recently expanded in the last couple of years.
“Oh no. My kid better not be taught by one of those uncertified teachers I just read about in The Times. That me fly in a Harlem Success Academy, but it’s NOT gonna happen here, not to MY kid!”
I can envision those more upscale parents demanding to know the qualifications, training and background of their kids’ teachers. These parents may not be swayed by the rationalizations and protestations of Eva or one of her administrators.
“So let me get this straight? My kid’s teacher has never taught a day in her life, and has never had even had one day education class, either at a university or elsewhere?”
“Well, yes, that’s true, but we’ll giving her the extra-special extensive training and support for which Success Academy is so renown.”
“Look, train her with SOMEBODY ELSE’S’s kid! My child is not going to some amateur educator’s guinea pig. I’m sorry, but that’s just not gonna happen.”
“Well, I understand. If you like, we can place her with the other teacher from the same grade.”
“What’s HER training and background?”
“In August, she’ll be joining us, as she’s coming straight out of Teacher for America’s Summer Institute.”
“OH, DON’T YOU GET ME STARTED ON ‘TEACH FOR AMERICA’ !!!”
“Well … ”
“Will you teach her to do that “rip-‘n-redo’ stuff that I saw on Youtube? She better not be doin’ any o’ that!”
—————–
A lesser known aspect of the infamous rip-‘n-redo video from last February is that the teacher, Charlotte Dial, had been teaching for years and was not certified. (Someone else checked New York State’s publicly available website, and she was nowhere to be found.) On top of that, this uncertified “rip-‘n-redo” specialist was then put in charge of training teachers for the entire Success Academy system. (You can’t make this up.)
For those not familiar, here’s the New York Times on this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/13/nyregion/success-academy-teacher-rips-up-student-paper.html
Here’s the video itself:
Here’s the COMMENTS dealing with Charlotte Dial’s certifcation status. It’s under this article:
https://dianeravitch.net/2016/02/16/evas-video-its-the-talk-of-the-nation/
———————
nycdoenuts
February 16, 2016 at 3:02 pm
Now that the initial news of the video itself is passing, is it a good time to start addressing the shocking realization that Ms. Dial was not certified to teach in New York State?
Isn’t THAT the real a takeaway here? (As she hails from Indiana, it may be a good time to point out that no one named Charlotte Dial is certified to teach in that state either).
That, to me, is shocking as I always just presumed charter teachers possessed the same professional qualifications as public school teachers. It raises three questions that I don’t think have ever been addressed (and probably should):
1) Are all charter school teachers not required to be licensed to teach?
2) Given the assertions from charters that they ‘perform’ better than public schools, what does this lack of certification from among their teaching corps say about the allegations of the need to improve teacher prep programs on every college campus across the country? If uncertified teachers are doing ‘so well’ then why invest so much money in teacher prep programs?
3) What it that say about charter schools that they do not even require their teachers to be certified? How does that mesh the claim of high standards and high achievement?
I think these are fair questions.
Reply
———————
Liz
February 16, 2016 at 4:14 pm
Charter school teachers are not required to hold a teaching certificate in Florida.
———————
Duane Swacker
February 16, 2016 at 4:28 pm
#1 In most states teacher certification laws don’t apply to charter and/or private schools.
#2 The vast majority of CHARTERS DO NOT PERFORM BETTER than community public schools, even with their skimming, counseling out, attrition rates, fewer and less costly IEP students and fewer ELLs.
#3 It doesn’t mesh with those claims because those claims are specious deceptive self-serving quarter truths at best.
———————
Paula
February 16, 2016 at 5:22 pm
Another inequity, if public school teachers are required to be certified and highly qualified, those privateers who claim charters are public schools(erroneously) are violating state and local laws. Many charter school teachers are uncertified, esp amg the TFA ranks.
—————————————————————-
The Times article also goes into how “rip-‘n-redo” was a widespread practice at Success Academy schools, not just a momentary lapse. This was confirmed by both current and past Success Academy teachers interviewed:
Charter schools can only hire more uncertified teachers if the SUNY Charter Institute allows them to do so.
I find it truly incriminating that FES has already crowed that it is a “massive victory”. Apparently, despite SUNY having no time whatsoever to consider this legislation, FES is already certain they will do whatever Success Academy wants them to do. Which is to allow more uncertified teachers.
Oops! I wonder if FES regrets publicly announcing that the SUNY Charter Institute is their lapdog.
“The chair of the SUNY committee, Joseph Belluck, said in an interview that he had not learned about the provision until after it passed…..”
Not to worry, Mr. Bullock. FES has already announced that you will do exactly what Success Academy wants you to do with their “massive victory” that is all about you needing to know nothing at all except how to follow the orders of Eva Moskowitz as you have done so well in the past.
Rip ‘n Redo?
Adult children teaching children. The intolerance is telling and unsettling.
Eva needs to finally grow up after all these years of exploitation and abuse.
Now why is certification, extensive training, and a supervised apprenticeship program so important for teachers — especially those like Charlotte Dial above?
Well, Success Academy downplayed the importance of what was on the video, and instead gave a 32 minute press conference, showing Eva’s full-blown paranoia and persecution complex. At that conference, they attacked the New York Times with a vengeance, accusing them of “Gotcha tactics’ and the rest.
Well, The Times responded more calmly. They had eight renown education experts review the video and respond. They did… with total full-throated condemnation:
https://dianeravitch.net/2016/02/13/ny-times-8-experts-censure-moskowitz-sa-methods/
Here’s The Times piece:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/02/13/nyregion/experts-on-success-academy-teacher-video.html?smid=tw-nytmetro&smtyp=cur&_r=1
————————————
“Model Behavior
“Teaching a young person through fear and intimidation never works. A young person may comply, but they will never truly learn. Yes, in this age of ‘testocracy,’ where tests tend to drive curriculum and instruction, teachers, parents and young people are under increased stress. However, young people respond to the stress that a teacher gives off. Your job, as a teacher, as a professional, is to model behavior, self-regulate and create an environment where learning is fostered out of curiosity and creativity, not control and compliance.”
Noel Scott Anderson, Ph.D.
Clinical professor and director of educational leadership at New York University
————————————
“Nurturing Environment
“Students’ mathematical thinking is something to be nurtured, not reprimanded. The Standards for Mathematical Practice in the Common Core State Standards call for students to be engaged in making sense of problems and persevering in solving them, and constructing viable arguments and critiquing the reasoning of others. The type of environment that fosters these dispositions is one that allows for students to make mistakes and supports them in learning from these mistakes within a community of learners.”
Joanna O. Masingila, Ph.D.
Professor of mathematics education and dean of the School of Education at Syracuse University
————————————
“Moment in Time”
“The video is a moment in time — we don’t know what happened before or after; however, the teacher’s angry tone of voice and hurtful words are not instructive, even to correct this child’s error. An atmosphere of fear is created as the child is banished from the circle with no dignified way to rejoin the group. As a seasoned educator and learning specialist, I think the teacher’s actions, words, and tone, as well as the misuse of the ‘calm down chair,’ fly in the face of sound educational philosophy. All of us as learners need to be respected as we take risks and make mistakes. Caring instructors can be clear and firm and need to model perseverance, self-control, risk-taking and kindness.”
Susan J. Schwartz
Learning specialist
————————————
“Sensitive Period
“Young children, like these first graders, are in a sensitive period of brain development, and they still learn best in the context of warm and connected relationships with trusted adults. If this teacher’s outburst is a one-time event, the students deserve an apology and a repair to the relationship. But if this style is a pattern, it likely qualifies as emotional abuse — which educators are mandated to report when they see it. Children are sometimes made to return day after day to an environment that can harm them and their vulnerable development deserves our extra protection.”
Diana Divecha, Ph.D.
Developmental psychologist in Berkeley, Calif.
————————————
” Fear of a Wrong Answer
“This type of teaching style has never been proven to be effective in helping students learn. We want children to become lifelong learners who develop a love of learning, not a fear of getting the wrong answer or being humiliated in front of their peers. In the Teacher Education Department at the Borough of Manhattan Community College, we encourage the development of intrinsic motivation and the creation of clear benchmarks of success, so that children take ownership of their own learning. Classroom activities are used to evaluate what students have mastered, so that the teacher knows if new strategies need to be implemented.”
Cara Kronen, Ph.D,
Assistant professor at Borough of Manhattan Community College
————————————
“Creating a Love of Learning
“Children develop along a continuum that is holistic and comprehensive. This teaching style cannot effectively or efficiently support all children in moving them to the next developmental level. Understanding how children develop and learn, not just the skills and content they need to learn, will support teachers in providing developmentally appropriate instructional techniques while maximizing teachable moments. Creating an atmosphere that develops a love of learning in a positive, nurturing and supportive environment optimizes learning opportunities for children. Teaching through fear and intimidation can diminish the enthusiasm, motivation and eagerness that is fundamental and foundational to learning.”
Carmen S. Brown, Ed.D.
Assistant professor of early childhood education at Hunter College, City University of New York
————————————
“Anger and Humiliation
“There are culturally diverse learning styles and children respond variously to diverse teaching styles. But within no community of learners should the participants, teachers or learners, use a sharp and angry tone of voice, humiliating and intimidating choice of words, or aggressive body language to communicate with each other. Instead of developing an intrinsic motivation for learning, a demeaning approach merely instills fear in children and shuts down their willingness to participate and learn. More so, young children grow up modeling the behaviors of the adults they observe. We don’t want children to think that it is okay to demean and intimidate other human beings.”
Amita Gupta, Ed.D.
Professor and chair of the department of teaching, learning and culture at the City College of New York
————————————
“Distressing Trend
“I find it highly unlikely that this video clip shows a momentary lapse in the teacher’s judgment. Rather, it speaks to a distressing trend toward equating academic success with test scores, organizing schools and children’s lives towards securing higher test scores, and claiming that the ends justify the means, in this case, authoritarian and punitive approaches. Meanwhile, other highly important outcomes that defy measurement on tests are ignored, such as the extent to which education ignites children’s imaginations and helps them to see themselves as members of a community of creative thinkers and problem-solvers. Children’s lives matter and they are living them now, not in the future.”
Maria Rivera Maulucci, Ph.D.
Associate professor of education at Barnard College
—————————
If the NBA announced that they were allowing the Golden State Warriors to choose a new set of refs for Game 7, and the head of Golden State sent an e-mail to the team announcing “a massive victory” before the game was even played, everyone would understand that the fix is in.
No doubt the e-mail from Families for Excellent Schools announcing this as a “massive victory” is the red flag that the fix is in. Apparently, FES believes that giving SUNY oversight guarantees they win whatever they want.
Looks like it, doesn’t it? Sadly.
FES is in the pocket of Eva “Moskowitch,” and SUNY is in the pocket of FES and Eva. 😟
I agree. There’s no real oversight by SUNY of the Success Academy chain whatsoever. Eva can get away with whatever she wants whenever she wants, and no one at SUNY utters a peep of protest. Eva declares “a victory” even before SUNY even weighs in on the advisability or efficacy of increasing the number of uncertified teachers at SA schools.
And so what if someone at SUNY did actually object? Eva would just go ahead and do whatever she wants anyway.
Legally, SUNY should have authority and exercise that authority over Success Academy now that Eva is attempting to foist a greater number and a greater percentage unqualified teachers on students, but the folks at SUNY really don’t or won’t exercise that authority.
This is in contrast to what charter school promoters claim.
Here’s a video from the California Charter Schools Association (CCSA) where they share “CHARTER SCHOOLS 101” — and my responses to the CCSA: (it’s also a video that several state Charter School associations use to promote charters, as they link to or embed it)
( 00:15 – 00:28)
( 00:15 – 00:28)
NARRATOR: ” … charter schools are held accountable by their authorizing body (i.e. SUNY, in this case) — usually a school board, the County Office of Education, or the State Board of Education.”
Right now, those bodies have no or at most, minimal powers of oversight, as in the case of SUNY’s alleged oversight of Success Academy is utterly toothless.
Someone pointed out SUNY how some Success Academy 5th grade classes start out with 80 students or so are whittled down to 25-30 by the time the kids graduate 8th grade, and SUNY responded by saying, “We really don’t care.” That was their same response to all the lawsuits from parents whose special ed students were barred from entry, or kicked out later.
( 00:07 – 00:15)
( 00:07 – 00:15)
NARRATOR: “But what IS a ‘charter school’ ?
“Charter schools are innovative PUBLIC schools designed by educators, parents, or civic leaders … ”
——
Oh NO, they’re NOT, you lying sacks o’ sh%#!
That is most certainly NOT what your CCSA lawyers argued in court last December in your attempts to crush the teachers trying to organize at the Alliance chain out in Los Angeles.
You argued that they are “private actors” exempt from any jurisdiction of either PERB or the court system,
———
( 00:15 – 00:28)
( 00:15 – 00:28)
NARRATOR: ” … charter schools are held accountable by their authorizing body, usually a school board, the County Office of Education, or the State Board of Education.”
——
Oh NO, they’re NOT, you lying sacks o’ sh%#!
That is most certainly NOT what your CCSA lawyers argued in court last December in your attempts to crush the teachers trying to organize at the Alliance chain.
In court, you argued, that when it comes to teachers unionizing, those same political bodies mentioned — local/County/State Boards of Ed. — have the same authority to protect or support charter teachers’ right to unionize as they do over that same right for fast food workers, or for retail clerks at Best Buy or Target. No right whasoever.
———
( 00:28 – 00:31)
( 00:28 – 00:31)
NARRATOR: ” …and (charters are held accountable) by the parents who choose to send their parents to those schools.”
——
Oh NO, they’re NOT, you lying sacks o’ sh%#!
Even if 100% of the parents vote, or sign petitions supporting the goals of their teachers to form a union, THOSE SAME PARENTS HAVE ZERO SAY INTO WHETHER OR NOT THAT UNION IS FORMED.
———
———
( 00:53 – 00:101)
( 00:53 – 00:101)
NARRATOR: ” … (charters) are places where adults work together to BUILD A PROFESSIONAL CULTURE, a place where TEACHERS and parents HAVE A STRONG VOICE IN SCHOOL DECISIONS.”
—————-
Ha!
If those teachers even attempt to exercise that “voice,” they are either fired, or, should they try to unionize to protect their right to exercise that voice, are met with union-busting tactics right out of the 1800’s.
If the charter operators deem it so, that school has the same “professional culture” or “strong teacher voice” as the kitchen workers at McDonald’s … NONE! — as is the case at Success Academy schools (based on the comments given to the New York Times, and on the Glassdoor website)… and there’s nothing that the workers/teachers can do about it … or so the CCSA argued in court last December.
The video also makes the false claim that charter don’t discriminate against Special Ed. students:
————————-
( 00:31 – 00:40)
( 00:31 – 00:40)
NARRATOR: “Charters are tuition-free public schools, who are open to all who want to enroll. They cannot discriminate based on DISABILITY, national origin, age, or gender.”
Oh yes, they can, as in this example.
Here’s NYC parent Jaye Bee Smalley telling her story about what happened after her child’s number was picked in the Success Academy lottery, effectively winning her child a seat n Eva’s wonderful charter chain organization.
Happy ending? Ehhh… not quite.
JAYBEE SMALLEY: “My name is Jaybee Smalley. I’m a parent, yes. I have two children with special needs. I have one child who I applied to the Harlem Success Academy through the lottery process to see if she could be… would be accepted.
“When she WAS accepted through the lottery, I reached out to them (Harlem Success Academy) before I attended any sort of a orientation to see if they would be able to accommodate her I.E.P. She has a 12-to-1-to-1 I.E.P. for a year-round program, with four different related services.
“They didn’t respond to me through email at all.. and finally, after the second meeting had come, I called them —- I had a very difficult time getting through to them —- Before I could get the words ’12-to-1-to-1′ out of my mouth, they immediately told me that they would absolutely not be able to accommodate that sort of child in their school.”
————————————
Regarding what Ms. Smalley says in the video, is Ms. Smalley:
A) lying?
B) delusional? (as she is recounting visual and auditory hallucinations that never happened, as they are nothing but her imaginary encounters with Success Academy administrators that she is describing);
C) telling the truth?
———————-
I’m voting for “C”.
Or perhaps Success Academy people will offer the “anomaly” defense. Like Charlotte Dial, the Success Academy person who dealt with Ms. Smalley was a rogue agent who, acting on her own and against Success Academy policy, treated Ms. Smalley and her children this way.
The problem is there are a lot of parents suing over this kind of treatment their their children received.
Here’s a story of one:
https://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2016/01/10/details-on-the-success-academy-got-to-go-list-lawsuit/
Here’s a scanned copy of that lawsuit itself:
Click to access sa_lawsuit.pdf
Here’s another such lawsuit:
https://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2016/02/14/moskowitzs-success-academy-is-being-sued-again/
Here’s a scanned copy of that lawsuit itself:
Click to access lawton-lawsuit.pdf
At the bottom of all of this, here’s the problem: to Eva and the charter school industry, Ms. Smalley’s daughter is a commodity, not a human being. Her daughter is “a thing”, if you will who is judged by the following criteria:
1) the revenue that her daughter bring in — the tax money that accompanies her attending SUCCESS ACADEMY;
2) the cost — the less the better — the funds that it will require to educate her; in this case the cost is higher than a non-Special Ed. student due to having a 12-to-1-to-1 ration (Student-to-Special Ed. teacher-to-classroom-aide), and other costs inherent in educating such a child… Hey, we ain’t paying for that!
3) Ms. Smalley’s child’s eventual ability or inability to generate high test scores (a form of profits, if you will, to these deranged charter-ites … Success Academy hiigh-up leader even bragged to New York magazine about turning these children in to “little test-taking machines” … as if this was a goal to which any school should aspire).
The message that Eva and the charter school industry gives Ms. Smalley & her child and other parents & their child:
“Your child is nothing! You, Ms. Smalley, are nothing! Get out of our sight, you nothings!”
So won’t parents give a rat’s rear when they realize none of St. Eva’s teachers are real? The point is, parents need to stop sending their kids to her schools. Period.
Had Charlotte “rip-‘n-redo” Dial actually attended a university-based education program, she would have had classes in child development, child psychology, wholistic classroom management and all the rest. She also would have had experienced teacher mentors, worked as an aide, and then done a student teaching apprenticeship supervised by veteran teachers.
With such a background, it’s highly likely that THIS never would have happened:
Erik Wemple, a columnist at the Washington Post and also a parent of a elementary school-age girl, talked to Wendell Jamieson of the New York Times, who pointed out something else about this video:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/02/12/success-academy-hammers-new-york-times-for-excellent-viral-story/
ERIK WEMPLE:
“(NYTimes Jamieson said,)
” ‘ It seems impossible to me that the one time she did it there was a video camera there,’ he says. Speaking of the students assembled in the classroom, Jamieson continued, ‘You can see a sort of — in their body language — an accepting that this is the way they are treated.’
“Even if it is an exception: ‘These are first graders. You can’t have a bad day like that with a 1st grader — I don’t care,’ says the Metro editor (Jamieson).
“As the father of an elementary school girl, the Erik Wemple Blog endorses the no-abusive-eruptions-ever school of pedagogy.
“Kiah Hufane, a Success Academy principal, said this at the press conference: ‘As a human, who does incredibly hard work, I do believe that what was published was a clip of a teacher at her absolute worst moment. Just think about that. This woman had her worst moment recorded and published for the world to see,’ she said.
“Much more video would be required to ascertain that Dial was having her ‘absolute worst moment.’ ”
Also, having teachers who aren’t really teachers – that is the charter school secret sauce? Its a money saver for sure. A master’s program via St. Eva? A real, true, masters degree is conferred? What a joke.
I’m as anti SA as the next educator but what’s interesting is that this isn’t so different than things were around 1990 when I got my start.
.
I was issued a TPD (temporary per diem) license to teach math based on my undergraduate degree – I had to show 24 math credits. I then took a 2 or 3 day boot camp and then found a job,
I was given a mentor during my first year and 1 period relief.
The deal was that I had to take 18 graduate ed credits within, I think 3 years and then a masters within I believe 5.
The masters didn’t have to be in Ed, it was in CS and I didn’t need any undergraduate ed credits.
I thought the point was how many uncertified teachers you could have. It seems that the law previously allowed 15 per school. Apparently because certain charter schools want to expand rapidly without hiring certified teachers, they want to be allowed to hire an unlimited number of them.
Even back in 1990, perhaps there were limits on the numbers of uncertified teachers in each school?
I don’t believe there were any limits on the number of TPD’s you could hire but it was a different time. In general, School openings were much fewer so a typical school wouldn’t have to hire that many teachers each year.
If you look at Title II of ESSA, you will see the total collapse of requirements for teaching tied to university programs, course credits, qualifications for persons engaged in teacher preparation, and more.
Do you know the bill number on the breezy-easy S.A. temp teacher legislation? Also, do you know how to find transcript of any discussion(s) on the floor plus the voting record showing how individual members voted on legislation that came before them?
I am trying to track and push for A.10058/S.07461 (Reduce testing/ increase their transparency), A.10057/S.07463 (Repeal State Takeover of Failing Schools) and A.10056/S.07462 (Immediately decouple teacher evaluations from test results/establish a committee to research and develop an alternate, research-based method for teacher evaluations). Once upon a time I thought I found those records accidentally, my feeling is that they would/should be public, but it isn’t proving to be easy.
This Third Way group wants to have a “national certification” and a portable pension. It sounds like they want to turn teachers into a migrant workforce. You go where you are needed, and the teachers are interchangeable. I am sure if they can figure out a way to get rid of teachers and have national “personalized learning,” they would prefer that. No responsibilities to humans at all!
Another angle that this touches upon: replacing certified teachers with computers.
The pro-charter Richard Whitmire enthuses about how the Rocketship Charter Schools employ this model:
“Students rotating into Learning Labs meant employing fewer teachers,” Whitmire writes. “Thus a school such as Rocketship Mosaic could successfully serve 630 students with only 6 teachers plus aides.”
This is from an NPR piece today:
http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/06/24/477345746/high-test-scores-at-a-nationally-lauded-charter-network-but-at-what-cost
Meanwhile, permanently and professionally certified teachers (regardless of experience and/or year of certification) learned that they will now be required to register and re-register their existence, and professional development activities required to maintain certification, every five years in order to keep their license to teach. So for traditionally educated, trained and experienced educators-more rules. Temp agencies serving the most needy populations-fewer rules?
Also, bills that are meant to truly make education a more supportive, collaborative process are waiting:
(A.10058/S.07461) Reduce testing by directing the Board of Regents to establish a committee to shorten the length of standardized tests and find ways to increase their transparency. Additionally, tests would be given to students, parents, and teachers so that they can be used to improve the manner in which teachers teach and students learn.
(A.10057/S.07463) Repeal State Takeover of Failing Schools and put the school reform process back in the hands of local educators, parents, and other stakeholders who are in the best position to understand the specific needs of the school district.
(A.10056/S.07462) Immediately decouple teacher evaluations from test results, and direct the Board of Regents to establish a committee to research and develop an alternate, research-based method for teacher evaluations, which will ensure that students and teachers both have better experiences in the classroom.
Teachers also have to notify the state when they move within 30 days.
For the time being at least, California thankfully has more stringent requirements for teacher credentialing than most states, even in charter schools. However, some in the charter school industry here have questioned a credential’s value, as they believe that a credential is, in the words of one charter principal, “an unseemly low bar to obtain.”
In the 2009, there was a notoriously abusive principal of a KIPP School (in Fresno, California) named Chi Tschang, a former 2-year TFA teacher. Parents and staff complained to the Fresno Board of Eduction — the body that authorized KIPP Fresno — citing the abuse and corruption that was rampant in the school. In response, the school hired an outside teem to investigate these charges
Based on this audit, the Fresno BOE issued a “Notice to Cure and Correct”, which mandated numerous changes. For example, as a condition of remaining as principal, they insisted that Tschang enroll in Anger Management classes. He refused this demand, then resigned instead The school closed at the end of the year, as the KIPP leaders would have faced an intense, on-going scrutiny from the Fresno BOE, had the school continued in operation.
At one point, investigators confronted Tschang with the fact that some of his teachers — including himself — were teaching core subjects without a state credential, as required by law. Tschang responded by saying that he allowed this because he believed that a state-issued and state-mandated credential was of little educational value. He derisively said it was “such an unseemly low bar to obtain.”
Here’s a link to that page: (the entire “Notice” is a stunner, well worth reading in its entirety)
http://www.pdf-archive.com/2015/01/05/kipp-report-fresno/preview/page/32/
——————————————————–
NOTICE TO CURE AND CORRECT: (page 32)
“IV. CREDENTIALING Investigation Determined:
“The investigation determined the (KIPP Fresno) Charter School failed to assign teachers who hold appropriate California teaching credentials, permits, or other documents issued by the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, to teach core curriculum classes.
” .. ”
“II. … Mr. Tschang also stated that when interviewing a prospective teacher for a new position, he did not look at whether or not they were credentialed because it is ‘such an unseemly low bar’ to obtain.
“However, Mr. Tschang and Ms. Allen failed to meet this bar, which is required to teach classes at a California public school.”
——————————————————–
Here’s another money quote.
According to one teacher’s testimony, Tschang claimed that he never hires older or experienced teachers, as he had determined that only young and inexperienced teachers “could learn the KIPP way.” ( “the KIPP way” apparently includes extreme acts of discipline in violation of the law, if necessary … the end justifies the means. Read the entire “Notice to Cure and Correct.”)
In talking with his staff about this hiring policy of his, Tschang openly and perhaps unwittingly admitted to acts of blatant age discrimination. At the time, Tschang may or may not have known that his statements and actions were civil rights violations, actionable under Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, as well as grounds for a lawsuit from any older teacher whom he interviewed, but did not hire.
To blather away in this manner, this guy is either not that bright or he’s extremely arrogant, or both.
When interviewed by the auditors, Tschang hedged a little — oh, he’s open to hiring older teachers — but still maintained his claim about older teachers not being fit to work as teachers at his school. Again, that’s a violation of age discrimination laws.
http://www.pdf-archive.com/2015/01/05/kipp-report-fresno/preview/page/15/
————————————————————
NOTICE TO CURE AND CORRECT: (page 15)
“11. Several former employees reported that Mr. Tschang has issues with older teachers.
“Diana Gutierrez stated that Mr. Tschang, ‘recently made a remark that he was hiring just young and inexperienced teacher for next school year so they could learn the KIPP way.’
“Chris Frazer stated that when discussing a teaching position with Mr. Tschang at the school, Mr. Tschang said he didn’t hire older people because they tended not to work very hard. Mr. Frazer reported that Mr. Tschang went further and said that the school had a young culture and that Mr. Frazer would not fit in.
“In regard to these remarks, Mr. Tschang responded (during the audit interview) that he did not say that he hired only young teachers, but ‘it is true that we have a young staff culture filled with committed teachers who routinely work over 60 hours a week. Often, older teachers are not able or willing to maintain this kind of pace.”
—————————
EPILOGUE: a year later, Tschang was hired by the Achievement First charter network on the East Coast, where he moved from principal to a position supervising multiple Achievement First schools. This was in spite of bad press and protests when the Notice to Cure and Correct came to light, but that’s another story.
Last month, at Achievement First’s Amistad Charter School, the all-black student body walked out in protest over the harsh discipline policies, cultural insensitivity, and other matters. It’s interesting to note that the principal of this school, the one who had to face this PR disaster, had been recently hired at just 28 years old — part of the Doogie-Howser-ization of school administration in the charter school sector:
https://dianeravitch.net/2016/06/01/rebellion-at-amistad-high-students-walk-out/
Remember this when the fad-driven ed reform chorus promotes the “Uberization” of public schools:
“Uber says that its drivers are as much its customers as its passengers are, and that its ride-hail platform is a path to personal freedom and financial independence. In 2013, the company told the Wall Street Journal that the “typical” Uber driver takes in more than $100,000 in annual gross fares. (Uber now disputes this characterization.)
More recently, Uber chief adviser and board member David Plouffe has touted the ride-hail platform as a pathway to a modest, more attainable American dream. But according to leaked internal price modeling data, and Uber’s own calculations provided to BuzzFeed News in response to that leak, drivers in some markets don’t take home much more than service workers at major chains like Walmart when it comes to net pay.”
That’s with what amounts to a 10- 20,000 dollar up-front investment by the driver for equipment. They’re buying a minimum wage job and paying 10- 20,000 up-front for it. They would literally be better off working at the Detroit McDonalds. They don’t need a car or drivers license or insurance to do that.
Uber is a rip-off for employees.
I sometimes think Our Leaders are innumerate. They seem to have no understanding of how money works for ordinary people. This is a bad investment for the driver.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/carolineodonovan/internal-uber-driver-pay-numbers?utm_term=.nt7noGR0WR#.ch1VWYaw6a
I’m a bit confused. How does SA offer a masters degree to its teachers? Does Eva have a relationship with Trump University????
Eva may have worked out a deal with the Board of Regents under its previous leadership to award Master’s degrees to its teachers. KIPP and other charters won the right to award Master’s degrees for their teachers in the same way. Imagine that: an MA for raising test scores!
cross posted at
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Late-Deal-in-Albany-Could-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Charter-School-Failure_Charter-Schools_Education_Legislation-160626-554.html#comment603886
see my comments there with links !
I guess we call the new cutting edge version of teacher training …
“Teach like a Robot” or “Teach TO a Robot” (no connection to Doug Lemov … yet!)
http://www.mitchellrobinson.net/2016/06/26/the-brave-new-world-of-student-teacher-high-stakes-evaluation-an-update/
Just when you thought teacher training and licensing couldn’t get any more bat-sh#%, looney-tunes insane, this new article says that, in the future, aspiring teachers — even those who graduated from any prestigious university ed. program and passed with flying colors, high GPA, etc. — will be denied certification if they fail to pass a computerized “avatar” teacher training exam.
What is a computerized “avatar” teacher training exam?
It looks something like this:
(not an actual exam, but this YouTube video shows how such an exam would look. I believe that “Relay School of Education” currently uses this to train and test teaches)
This test is kind of like a flight simulator, except the teacher who’s being tested faces a totally computer-generated classroom with cartoon kids — all of this projected onto onto a giant life-size screen.
The screen image shows cartoon kid “avatars” sitting in desks in a computerized re-creation of a classroom … and these Pixar-ish characters act out scenarios of misbehavior, or they ask the teacher for clarification or whatever. The teacher is then tested on how he or she responds to these cartoon characters or “avatars.”
In the back room, there are non-teacher “avatars” — actually unemployed actors — manipulating joysticks and pressing buttons while they portray the cartoon avatar children. They talk into microphones and act out pre-set cartoon kids’ behaviors/scenarios. The teacher being tested must handle all this appropriately, under pain of not obtaining a teaching credential or license.
This is no joke. ETS (Educational Testing Services) will administer this test, called the NOTE (“National Observational Teaching Examination”
——————————————————-
http://www.mitchellrobinson.net/2016/06/26/the-brave-new-world-of-student-teacher-high-stakes-evaluation-an-update/
ARTICLE (above):
“NOTE is a high-stakes student teacher evaluation test that requires pre-service teachers to ‘instruct’ avatars–yes, avatars!
“And if their ‘teaching’ of these cartoon characters isn’t deemed adequate, the student teacher is denied their certification or teaching license, in spite of the fact that the student teacher in question has just completed an accredited, rigorous 4 or 5 year teacher preparation program, regardless of the student teacher’s earned GPA or demonstrated capability to teach real, live children in hundreds of hours of field experiences in local school classrooms, or the intern’s exhibited knowledge, understanding or competence in their subject area.
“And, just to rub a little salt in the wound: the persons who are remotely-operating the avatars are not teachers themselves–they are unemployed actors who have been trained to manipulate the joy sticks and computer simulations that control the avatars’ voices and movements.
“The designers of the avatar system found that teachers thought too much about their responses to the interns’ teaching ‘moves’– the actors didn’t concern themselves with matters like content correctness or developmentally-appropriate responses; they just followed the provided script, and efficiently completed the task at hand.”
—————————————————
God save us all!
Seriously, the “avatar” kids look like escapees from a low-budget rip-off of “TOY STORY” or “SHREK”, only much, much creepier:
There’s a lot more of these on YouTube. (check the upcoming videos on the right-hand column.)