Jan Resseger read Rebecca Mead’s article about Success Academy charter schools and wondered: Can a no-excuses tightly-disciplined school be considered progressive?
“Mead’s subtitle names a contradiction at the center of Moskowitz’s educational theory: “Inside Eva Moskowitz’s Quest to Combine Rigid Discipline with a Progressive Curriculum.” Even as Moskowitz defends the rigid and punitive discipline for which her schools are famous (In Mead’s piece, Moskowitz is quoted as defending the suspension of young children out of school as an important way of impressing a lesson on children and their parents.), Moskowitz claims John Dewey, the father of progressive education, as a guide to what happens in her schools. Moskowitz describes her curriculum as an example of progressivism—“circle time on the classroom rug; interdisciplinary projects that encompass math, science, social studies, and literacy.” The question that underlies Mead’s analysis is whether it is possible to run a progressive school with no-excuses discipline.
“While on one level Mead entertains Moskowitz’s rhetoric about progressivism, Mead seems puzzled by the circle time on the classroom rug: “In the second-grade classroom in Queens, the gridded rug seemed less like a magic carpet than like a chessboard at the start of a game. Within each square there was a large colored spot the size of a chair cushion. The children sat in rows, facing forward, each within his or her assigned square, with their legs crossed and their hands clasped or folded in their laps. Success students can expect to be called to answer a teacher’s question at any moment, not just when they raise their hand, and must keep their eyes trained on the speaker at all times, a practice known as ‘tracking.’ Staring off into space, or avoiding eye contact is not acceptable.”
“Like students at progressive schools (and all kinds of public schools, actually), students in Success Academies go on field trips. And Mead visits a room where Kindergardeners are taken to play with blocks: “The school has dedicated a special classroom to the activity, and shelves were filled with an enviable supply of blocks. The walls of the room were decorated with pictures of architectural structures that the students might seek to emulate, from the Empire State Building to the Taj Mahal. There was also a list of rules: always walk; carry two small blocks or hug one large block; speak in a whisper.” Unlike free-play at progressive early childhood centers—with dolls, and blocks, and easels and paint, and clay or PlayDoh—block time at the school Mead visits is a specific activity provided by the school in a “block” room to which the entire class of children is led for an assigned period.”
What makes a school “progressive?”
Why is Eva Moskowitz eager to be called “progressive”?
Can “progressive” pedagogy flourish in an atmosphere of authoritarian discipline?

Here is Steve Nelson’s very eloquent response to the first time this was raised:
“As a progressive educator, I find the proposition offensive. John Dewey is rolling over in his grave at being included in the same sentence (paragraph, article, universe) as Evil Moskowitz. First of all, the allusion to progressive as “permissive” is inaccurate and a typically dismissive idea of progressive education. As dienne77 writes, progressive is utterly incompatible with repressive and punitive. A few “hands-on” classes and catch phrases in the curriculum do not make progressive. Dewey didn’t suggest democracy as a subject. He suggested democracy as a lived idea in a school. Students have a voice, they have dignity, they practice the democratic processes that lead to engaged, informed citizenship. Progressive education honors individuality and eccentricity. Uniforms and uniformity suppress real learning. Progressive education means students are loved and supported in whatever way they develop. Humiliating a child is inconceivable in a progressive school. I could write a book about it. Oh, I did that already.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
great connection: “…progressive is utterly incompatible with repressive…”
LikeLike
“Can ‘progressive’ pedagogy flourish in an atmosphere of authoritarian discipline?”
NO! 1000x NO!
And I’m a former U.S. Marine (1965 – 1968) and combat vet that knows exactly what authoritarian discipline is like.
I’m also a former public school teacher (30 years). Progressive pedagogy often requires interaction, both social and academic, between students that are not allowed in a boot camp environment.
I would not wish authoritarian discipline on any child, especially a grade school child in K through 5. Parents that send their young children into this environment are, in my opinion, misguided parents.
Authoritarian discipline is child abuse. Only bullies enjoy influencing authoritarian discipline on young children.
When I joined the Marines, I was 18 years old and it was my decision as a legal adult. My parents did not force me to go. In fact, they didn’t want me to go. Children do not have that power over their young lives.
LikeLike
Thank you, Lloyd. AMEN.
LikeLike
A no excuses charter school may be able to offer a variety of subjects for which students are held accountable in an authoritarian way, but the school could hardly call itself progressive. In a progressive setting students have a valued voice, and the methodology is more constructivist with students frequently working in collaborative groups on various projects. The methodology at Success Academy is more teacher driven, with harsh discipline, and the instruction is more didactic as in the old British Latin schools.
LikeLike
I don’t know but this seems like a real flaw in the Success school system:
“This year, a Success high school, on Thirty-third Street, will produce the network’s first graduating class: seventeen students. This pioneering class originated with a cohort of seventy-three first graders.”
Where did all those students go? To public schools, right? They were a bad fit or they washed out of Success boot camp.
They better hope Success isn’t the only game in town or there will be A LOT of NYC school children who have nowhere to go to school.
And what about those Success drop outs? Will they then be the second tier public school students who politicians ignore in favor of the successful strivers who made the
grade? Who will advocate for them?
LikeLike
For every DEFORM all we have to do is take the opposite meaning. Example: Success Academy = UNSUCCESS Academy.
LikeLike
Resseger’s critique of Mead’s piece is spot-on. As I said at his comment thread, he probed all the squishy points of Mead’s hypothetical [rigid teacher-driven vs progressive], & drew the inevitable conclusions.
Frankly I found the Mead article’s revelation of Moskowitz’s claim to progressive-ed ideals to be pathetic– & it made me angry. Yes, field-trips, & midsch cross-curric hands-on projects are great, but hardly progressive if run via director’s rigid rules. That’s the pathetic part. What makes me angry is that SA’s steady bleeding of pubsch funds means ordinary pubschs, already budgeted to the bone, have even less budget to even think about such ventures.
LikeLike
Many so-called reformers have appropriated ideas from the progressive tradition but have repurposed the concepts to market their wares to parents and funders.
Eva is marketing field trips and hands-on projects as if newly discovered and also a palliative for the abusive policies that are the hallmarks of her schools.
LikeLike
They’ve also done this simultaneously appropriated the language of social justice for purposes of mis-direction, depending on the audience.
Thus, increasing segregation is marketed as “the civil rights movement of our time” to naive young charter school teachers, while the Wall Street interests looking to get their claws into the kids and schools are far more “honest,” when talking about market share and the like…
LikeLike
Preparing students for standardized tests as opposed to preparing them for life in a democratic society is hardly progressive. The content at $ucceggs Academy is test prep: identify the author’s central idea instead of coming up with your own idea after reading the author’s work, structured activities instead of freedom to explore, and so on. It’s prison rigidity packaged as progressivism to appeal in a blue state. Nonsense.
LikeLike
Right on.
LikeLike
Looking at the last sentence ‘”progressive” pedagogy”‘ brings to mind a new classification for the DSM: “Progressive” Pathology–individuals (& corporations, because, as we all know, they are “people”) who insist/delude themselves that they are “progressives,”(&, ergo, run “progressive” programs, e.g. schools, &, in reality, are not.
LikeLike