Gary Rubinstein: Success Academy Finally Reports Scores on Regents Algebra Exam, and They Are Unimpressive

17 Comments Post your own or leave a trackback: Trackback URL

1. Chiara says:

   May 27, 2018 at 1:58 pm

   “As I wrote about in a post called ‘Who Survives Success’ the original two cohorts of Success Academy when they were Kindergarteners and 1st graders were 72% free lunch. These 16 students who took the Algebra II Regents, I think it is a fair assumption that these are from the 17 students who are about to become the first graduating seniors. 7 out of 16 qualify as economically disadvantaged, which is just 44%.”\

   That’s actually a lower economically disavantaged number than my ordinary rural Ohio public school. And no one brags at my school about creating “miracles”, nor is my school feted in the US Congress or the subject of thousands of worshipful media pieces.

   Gary does very good work but if he has free time he should put this all together. Start with the attrition and cohort and then put Success into an existing public school category so there can be an apples to apples comparison.

   Ed reformers defend Success by pointing to magnet schools or schools where kids test in. Which would be fine if ed reformers sold Success as a selective or magnet school.

   But they don’t. They sell it as a model for all public schools.

   Success can be a magnet school. Maybe NYC needed more magnet schools. But that wasn’t good enough for ed reform, because it doesn’t fit their preferred POLITICAL narrative. So they insist on pretending it’s a general population public school, when it’s clearly not.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • KrazyTA says:

     May 27, 2018 at 3:28 pm

     Chiara: you point out—

     [start]

     Ed reformers defend Success by pointing to magnet schools or schools where kids test in. Which would be fine if ed reformers sold Success as a selective or magnet school.

     But they don’t. They sell it as a model for all public schools.

     [end]

     If I may, the key word is “sell.” Whether the comparisons and promises are accurate, fair, ethical and sustainable is completely beside the point as far as they are concerned.

     To riff off a remark attributed to the late Vince Lombardi but probably first voiced by the late UCLA coach Red Saunders:

     “Selling isn’t everything. It’s the only thing.”

     For Eva M and the crowd she runs with, “truthful hyperbole” in the service of swelling bank accounts, egos and fame Trumps what they consider any petty concerns about morality and decency.

     Thank you for your comments.

     😎

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Chiara says:

       May 27, 2018 at 7:36 pm

       It’s weird. Why not just say “we created a version of a magnet school and look how great our kids are doing compared to how they were doing in the general public system”?

       Why not just take credit for the actual success instead of insisting it’s something it’s not?

       It’s disrespectful to the kids who stick it out at Success- with that much attrition those kids are really surviving a heck of a “creaming” process. Why not just congratulate them on their hard work and drop the nonsense about it’s how it’s comparable to a general public school? It isn’t even fair TO THEM that they’re being used to promote this narrative than “anyone” can do it when clearly these kids are achieving something notable.

       LikeLike

     • Chiara says:

       May 27, 2018 at 7:40 pm

       NYC is a huge public school system. We couldn’t have a magnet like Success where I live because all the better performing students would go there and the public school would be the safety net school.

       Their ideas don’t even make sense as far as “systems”- NYC isn’t an average public school system- it’s HUGE. That city can absorb a whole bunch of magnets without destroying the public system. Not everywhere can do that. MOST places can’t do that.

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       May 27, 2018 at 8:31 pm

       KTA,

       Exactly right.

       I would not mind if Success Academy marketed itself as a selective school for gifted students. But the lie is claiming that it is a model for all public schools.

       LikeLike

     • Máté Wierdl says:

       May 28, 2018 at 5:08 am

       “I would not mind if Success Academy marketed itself as a selective school for gifted students. ”

       But then they wouldn’t get taxpayers’ support and space in public buildings, would they?

       This is no way to nurture gifted students, though.

       [video src="http://wd369.csi.hu/apu/sa_math.mp4" /]

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       May 28, 2018 at 8:49 am

       BASIS. Is a charter that is for the academically advanced. It gets public money.

       LikeLike

     • Máté Wierdl says:

       May 28, 2018 at 5:09 am

       http://wd369.csi.hu/apu/sa_math.mp4

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       May 28, 2018 at 8:49 am

       Robots. Teacher and student robots.

       LikeLike

2. jake jacobs says:

   May 27, 2018 at 2:25 pm

   Sorry to see these students getting so much scrutiny on their mediocre math performance. When 16 kids have these articles written about them it can be counterproductive because labeling kids from “snapshots” and high-pressure lead to stress.

   Whose idea was it to make the testing so high stakes? Sounds like it hurts the kids.

   I love the comment on Gary’s blog that says he understated the students excellence in ELA, linking to an Eva Moskowitz piece about how focused on literature they are.

   Question. I know it’s only 16 kids but is it typical of public school kids who ace the 3-8th grade math tests to drop off so sharply on the Regents?

   And what happened with the Algebra I Regents? Did they not take them or did they just get a free pass on having to post the scores?

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Reteach 4 America says:

     May 27, 2018 at 8:07 pm

     I tried to post the following response to that comment on Gary’s blog but it didn’t go through:

     Mr. Ronan and Ms. Moskowitz both have a gift for overstatement, as in her claim that, “Most public schools exhibit a pervasive disregard for text quality and content, and it is a missed opportunity.”

     As usual, Moskowitz demonstrates her inclination to compete against and trash public schools, as well as her penchant to overuse hyperbole. How does she know what “most public schools” do?

     In my experience working in a lot of different schools and classrooms, most in low income urban areas, the selection of high quality texts is a very important matter and the majority of books she mentioned have long been in use there.

     Moskowitz also wrote, “while we have a strong phonics program in kindergarten and first grade, we also devote ample time to reading books with powerful illustrations and intriguing stories that can support robust analytical discussion. For example, Caps for Sale—a favorite among our kindergartners even though few can read it on their own….”

     When I taught Kindergarten, I used rich literature with sophisticated vocabulary and I seamlessly incorporated the use of comprehension asides, such as synonyms and gestures, to help kids understand new words, rather than dumbing down language. I also used many informational texts, as well as a lot of environmental print, and I taught my students phonological awareness through games, rhymes and meaningful daily literacy activities, including journaling, as well as regularly decoding and encoding messages for the purpose of communication. My kids were never drilled in phonics or sight words, but they learned that, too, and most COULD read Caps for Sale on their own, even though I didn’t push kids who were not ready to read. I’ve worked with many teachers who have taught emergent literacy skills effectively this way, too.

     Moskowitz has no clue what goes on in “most public schools.” She’s just a braggart with marketing success and the ability to get rid of students who’ve “got to go” because they’re too challenging and bring down test scores; she’s not a trained educator with any degree of expertise in child development, learning and teaching. She’s cut from the same cloth as all the other imposters who’ve managed to slink their way into positions of authority in education and rake in the big bucks, such as many minimally trained TFAers and Broadies with little to no relevant experience for their jobs, much like fellow NY con-artist DJT, as well as most in his Cabinet, including the Secretary of Miseducation, Betsy DeVos.

     One should always take whatever these charlatans say with a heaping spoonful of salt and just pay attention to the people who have made a concerted effort to develop expertise in education, such as the esteemed Gary Rubinstein –who actually does know what he’s talking about.

     LikeLike

     Reply
3. zamanskym says:

   May 27, 2018 at 4:54 pm

   This also means that only 15 out of the 16 survivors are actually graduating and only 13 out of the 16 with a NY State Regents Diploma which could call in to question some of the college acceptances.

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. Chiara says:

   May 27, 2018 at 8:06 pm

   You know what would be really interesting to study? What happens to the students who didn’t “survive” Success?

   Where did they go? Let’s look at the receiving public schools and maybe give them some of the plaudits and near-worshipful attention Moskowitz receives.

   Because those schools are as necessary to Success as Success itself is.

   With all the full time ed reformers we have on the payroll one would think that study would be done. I wonder why we never get a study like that?

   They say they’re transforming “systems”, that this is about “every student”. The students Moskowitiz washes out should be as important as the students who survive, then.

   Where did they go? How did they do when they left Success and went back into the broader system? How did their receiving schools handle their re-entry?

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. zamanskym says:

   May 28, 2018 at 8:28 am

   There have been some comments about how it would all be alright if SA advertised itself as a magnet school — this would certainly NOT be any better.

   While I do believe in community schools I also believe in magnet programs around the edges so I do think it’s important to have some test and audition schools.

   The BIG difference is that once you’re in a test school or audition school, they by and largekeep you. Success Academy casts its net, takes a bunch of kids in and then gets rid of what it doesn’t want both damaging the kids and then throwing them to the street with nowhere to go.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • dianeravitch says:

     May 28, 2018 at 8:47 am

     This is true. But the bigger fraud is the claim that the Success model is right for all public schools. You say it is not even a good model for magnet schools.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Máté Wierdl says:

       May 28, 2018 at 10:02 am

       Under no circumstance can I see the “Success Academy style” teaching justified. As we saw on the video, kids are required to memorize critical thinking: “Repeat to each other, what Johhny says always work”.

       On the other hand, there is a market for the harsh SA style. I think we have all met parents who say “Kids need discipline. It should be mandatory for all boys to go to military school.” These parents have a very solid base, no matter where we go, which country, which neighborhood, which level of society.

       Many math teachers develop a military style teaching of math. This is how they want to break down kids’ natural resistance to learning stuff which make no sense to them. Soldiers are afraid of going to battle, nevertheless they do it because they learned to obey orders. The same way, kids will learn crazy formulas despite their fear of math. Some people call this successful teaching. It certainly has results: formulas forever baked into brain cells.

       Here is a different way of making people do the right thing.

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       May 28, 2018 at 11:20 am

       Robotic teacher, student automatons

       LikeLike