Archives for category: Harlem Success Academy

 

The senior class at Success Academy’s Liberal Arts High School has 17 members.

When they started in kindergarten, there were 73 students.

By the end of eighth grade, there were 32 students.

Four years later, there were 17, all of whom were admitted to college.

Gary Rubinstein wrote recently that we can’t be sure of the real attrition rate because some of the original 73 might have been excluded and replaced; unlike real public schools, Success Academy does not admit new students after third grade.

So impressed was SA’s board chairman, billionaire Dan Loeb, by the “success” of the high school with 17 graduating seniors that he gave Eva Moskowitz $15 million to add more high schools.

But one of our regular readers, who signs in as New York City Public School Parent, says the media should look to the public schools to find schools that consistently achieve success for far greater numbers of students who are poor, African American and/or Hispanic:

Seventeen students? Success Academy has been careful to expand only within NYC, where there are 1.1 million students in public schools. I looked up the most recent data and 5,400 African-American and Latino students in NYC graduated with ADVANCED Regents diplomas. Another 26,000 African-American and Latino students graduated with Regents diplomas. Seventeen students is 1/3 of 1% of the African-American and Latino students who graduate from NYC public schools with the ADVANCED Regents diploma. And when Success Academy graduates 10x as many students, it will still be only 3% of the total number of African-American and Latino Students who graduate with the most advanced diplomas in public schools.

There is an underlying assumption to many of the fawning profiles of Moskowitz in which (white) reporters continue under the (racist) assumption that finding an African-American or Latino student who can perform at grade level — let alone above — is such a rare and unusual occurrence that this charter sending 17 of those students to college is working miracles. All of the public school bashing news articles focus only on the 10% or 20% of the lowest performing schools and pretend that the other 80 or 90% of schools where students do graduate and do perform well do not exist! They focus on the 50% of students who struggle and ignore the fact that in a school system that is larger than many states, there are many tens of thousands who do well.

The press wrongly believes that because there is a relative dearth of African-American and Latino students in the big specialized high schools,that means they are only in failing schools. That is far from true. Those students are thriving in public high schools all over NYC — from Townsend Harris to Bard to Beacon to Medgar Evers and many, many more. I have no idea how many dozens more but the number of high schools that graduate African-American and Latino students who go on to excellent colleges is not small.

It’s a shame that Medgar Evers College Prep High School — where 100 African-American and Latino students graduated with Advanced Regents diplomas in 2017 (and even more with regular Regents diplomas) — is invisible to reporters in their rush to promote the “miracle” of 17 students graduating from a charter and going to college.

It’s a shame that Bronx Center for Science and Mathematics – whose students are significantly more economically disadvantaged than at Success Academy — is invisible to reporters who marvel at 17 Success Academy students graduating and going to college and ignore public high schools with far fewer resources where 100 students are graduating with almost all of them going to college.

 

Gary Rubinstein was taken aback when he saw an article in Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid “The New York Post” claiming that the girls’ chess team at Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy had defeated the chess powerhouse at Stuyvesant High School, one of the city’s elite high schools. (Murdoch has personally donated millions of dollars to Success Academy.)

Gary checked the tournament report and found that no student from SA had defeated either of the Stuyvesant contestants at the tournament. The highly-ranked Stuy team sent two players to the tournament, whose combined score was less than the combined scores of the three-person SA team.

What was so disturbing was that SA twisted this narrative into a “glorious victory” for SA. Even Chalkbeat posted a link to the fake news.

Well, what’s the point of having a public relations team if they can’t turn every piece of news into a triumph over a public school with a daunting reputation? Nothing yet from the PR team about SA’s high school graduation rate of 17% (if you start with the 100 students who entered kindergarten at SA). Or, how the carefully culled 32 graduates of 8th grade turned into 17 high school graduates. That’s a graduation rate of 53%, below the grad rate of the city public schools.

 

Eva Moskowitz just received a gift of $15 million from billionaire Dan Loeb, chair of the board of Eva’s Success Academy. Just last year, Loeb received negative public attention for comments widely regarded as racist after he chastised the leading Democrat in the State Senate—who is African American, saying she did more damage to children of color than anyone who ever wore a hood because of her criticism of charter schools.

Many people denounced Loeb’s remarks and called on him to resign, but Eva stood by him. Her forbearance was rewarded with his $15 million to her high school, which just graduated 17 students (of a class that started in kindergarten as 100). Loeb said he hoped that Eva could make her model “scalable.”

How a school with a shedding/dropout/attrition rate of 83% becomes “scalable” is mysterious.

The charter chain plans to open eight new high schools by 2033.

Here is the curious math.

Only 17 students were members of Success Academy’s first graduating class. All 17 are going to college. These are the students that survived the original 100 that enrolled in kindergarten.

That is many many millions of dollars invested to produce 17 graduates who are college bound.

Of the 32 students who graduated from eighth grade at Success charters, nine attended other high schools before going to Success Academy’s High School of the Liberal Arts. Five left before graduating.

Honestly, I don’t understand the math. I can’t figure out how this adds up to 17 graduates, but maybe someone else will and can explain it in a comment.

PS:

Eliza Shapiro explained the math of SA graduation rate to me.

“Basically 32 kids started their 8th grade year together at Success
9 left after 8th grade to go to other high schools and never enrolled/matriculated/entered SA HS
5 other kids enrolled at SA HS and left between the start of their freshman year to the present
That’s all I know! :)”

17 graduated. One may have been held back. Unaccounted for.

 

 

Gary Rubinstein wishes the Wall Street Journal would stop writing puff pieces about Success Academy. He wishes the reporter Leslie Brody would ask questions. 

Given that Success Academy is the darling of Wall Street, that’s not likely to happen.

The most important question, I think, is why anyone thinks Success Academy is a model for public schools when it picks its students, gets rid of those it doesn’t want, and doesn’t accept new enrollments after third grade? What public school operates like this, with a strict winnowing process and high attrition rates as the norm? It’s a business plan, not a model for public schools, which are required by law to accept all students, without regard to their disability or language skills or likely test scores. While it is true that some public schools admit students on the basis of test scores, they do not present themselves as models for the nation or as typical. Even if a student is rejected by a school with selective admissions, the district is required to find a school for the student. Not so the charters. If a student doesn’t make the cut, they are bounced out.

Success Academy improbably claims that its attrition rate is no worse than nearby district schools, but only 17 of the 73 who started in SA survive to graduate.

Gary writes:

”Part of their ‘success’ depends on their decision to not ‘backfill’ when students leave the school. This is quite an advantage for a school seeking to keep its test scores up. What would happen if all schools had this luxury?

“Reformers are known for saying that every child should have the opportunity to a great education regardless of zip code. By not backfilling beyond 3rd grade, Success Academy denies the right to transfer into this school for kids over 10 years old, which is definitely discriminatory. Also this means that any child who moves to New York after 3rd grade and didn’t have the opportunity to ever apply for the Success Academy lottery will never attend a Success Academy.”

He also notes the high teacher turnover, which Success Academy is known for:

“The second article is about some of the problems Success Academy had had in their high schools. According to the article, there was a student protest where 100 out of the 345 students participated. Then later in the article it says about the principal:

Mr. Malone also has had to grapple with high staff turnover. He said almost one third of about 50 teachers last year left, in some cases due to the exhausting nature of the job.

“So a school with 345 students had 50 teachers? If these two numbers are accurate, that is quite the 7 to 1 student teacher ratio.”

 

Mercedes Schneider received an email from Eva Moskowitz, founder of the Success Academy charter chain in New York City, announcing that she has “reinvented” the high school; the graduates of her new high school will be prepared to enroll in selective colleges, succeed in college and graduate from college.

Mercedes reviewed a post from Gary Rubinstein, in which he reported that the attrition rate in Eva’s K-8 schools is about 80%. The only students allowed to enter one of her two new high schools are those who completed the eighth grade at one of her SA charters. She accepts no new students after third grade.

Both of the new high schools are co-located in public schools that didn’t want them.

It is hard to know if Eva’s new high school will do what she promises because it has not yet graduated a single student. There are 17 students in the class of 2018. We won’t know about their success in college until they enter and complete college.

I am reminded of the Common Core, which made all sorts of pie-in-the-sky claims about preparing every single student for success in college or careers, closing achievement gaps, producing dramatically higher test scores, higher graduation rates, less college remediation, etc. all based on wishful thinking, not a scintilla of evidence.

Maybe I was reminded of Common Core because I spent the day re-reading Mercedes excellent history of the Common Core, called “Common Core Dilemma.” It is most definitely written from a teacher’s perspective.

 

Warning to parents in the Hudson Valley, New York.

Eva Moskowitz is opening a no-excuses Charter School in your neighborhood.

https://thehudsonvalleysuccessacademy.com/

Protect your children against harsh discipline.

Defend your public schools against raids on their funding.

 

 

 

Supporters of Eva Moskowitz would have us believe that she has created a national model for the education of poor black students. Her proof: Her schools have very high test scores.

But, as Gary Rubinstein points out in this post, very few of the students who start in Eva’s charter chain actually persist. The attrition rate is high. Since Eva adds and subtracts students until the third grade, the actual attrition rate may be even higher than what is reported.

He writes:

“Something that I think has not been reported widely enough is the attrition rate for Success Academy students. Success Academy opened in 2006 with 83 Kindergarteners and 73 first graders. Eleven years later there are now 17 twelfth graders set to be the first graduating class. So we know for sure that at least 56 out of the initial 73 students, which is 77%, have left Success Academy before graduating. But it is likely more than 77% attrition because Success Academy allows ‘backfilling’ in the early grades. We don’t know how many of those 17 students currently in twelfth grade were among the 73 original first graders in 2006 and likely we will never know. But even assuming that all 17 were among the original students, that is still 80% attrition. Even over an 11 year period, that amounts to about 10% attrition per year for that cohort.”

For a chain that claims to be “public,” Success Academy is very secretive about its data.

 

In this post, Leonie Haimson calls on the charter committee at the State University of New York to reject Eva Moskowitz’s request to enlarge her charter school in Cobble Hill, Brooklyn.

If she expands, she will cause overcrowding and larger class sizes, Says Haimson. Cobble Hill is a mainly white, middle-class-affluent neighborhood, which is the target for expansion of a chain that prides itself on educating poor black and Hispanic students.

Success Academy has a bad habit of getting their foot in the door, then encroaching on their neighbors, eventually making a grab for the entire school. sA redefines the meaning of the term “the camel’s nose inside the tent.” Before you know it, the entire camel is inside, and everyone else is pushed out.

John Merrow overheard a conversation in which someone compared Eva Moskowitz to Benito Mussolini. He made the trains run on time—the saying of his defenders—and she gets results: high test scores.

Moskowitz and Mussolini

Merrow used to cover “reformers” like Michelle Rhee and Eva Moskowitz sympathetically. He seems to have had a conversion experience, not unlike my own. His last show about Rhee marked a turning point. He became disillusioned.

He is not happy with the uncritical puff pieces found in many publications about the education model created by Eva Moskowitz. He was especially disappointed by Chalkbeat editor and CEO Elizabeth Green’s adulatory article. He wonders why she didn’t ask the tough questions about Eva’s harsh disciplinary regime.

He writes:

“How did Il Duce get the trains to run on time? Could he have ordered them to do whatever was necessary to stay on schedule? Perhaps he issued a directive: ‘If people are still trying to get on the train, but it’s time to leave–just leave.’ He might have added, ‘If a flock of sheep, or some school children, are on the tracks, don’t slow down but toot your horn and plow on through so you can stay on schedule.’ Perhaps there was a third fiat: ‘If a train is so crowded that it cannot get up to full speed, just toss some passengers off the moving train and get back up to speed.’

“If tactics like that enabled Mussolini’s trains to stick to the schedule, then he and Eva Moskowitz have something in common, because the latter has a long history of discarding students who don’t meet her exacting standards. As Kate Taylor in the New York Times (also here). Juan Gonzalez in the New York Daily News (here), (here) and (here), and my colleagues and I on the PBS NewsHour have reported, Success Academies use a wide variety of questionable tactics to weed out students who are not performing–or do not seem likely to perform–well on bubble tests. Those tactics keep her trains running on time, I.E., scoring at the top of the charts on standardized tests.

“Elizabeth Green’s endorsement of Success Academies and their approach to education The Atlantic, headlined “How Charter Schools Won,” is particularly disappointing. Green mentions Taylor’s New York Times reporting but only in the context of Moskowitz’s attacks on her. Green ignores reporting done by Gonzalez, a two-time recipient of the George Polk Award. If she had contacted me, I could have introduced her to a Success Academy custodian who told us about regularly emptying student vomit from the wastebaskets. Although he declined to appear on television, I believe he would have gladly educated Green.

“The omissions in Green’s article (and, to be fair to Green, in most coverage of Moskowitz) are almost too numerous to mention: She does not tell her readers that Moskowitz drives away children–some as young as five–by excessive use of out-of-school suspensions. Banning kids from school for days at a time is an effective device for getting rid of children, particularly when the parents have jobs outside the home. And it’s easy to get suspended from Success Academy. On my blog I published Success Academies’ draconian list of offenses that can lead to suspension, about 65 of them in all. “Slouching/failing to be in ‘Ready to Succeed’ position” more than once, “Getting out of one’s seat without permission at any point during the school day,” and “Making noise in the hallways, in the auditorium, or any general building space without permission” can get a child an out-of-school suspension that can last as long as five days. The code includes a catch-all, vague offense that all of us are guilty of at times, “Being off-task.””

He has much more to say. I urge you to read it.

Mitchell Robinson teaches music education at Michigan State University. He read Elizabeth Green’s fawning article about Eva Zmoskowitz and her Success Academy charter chain, and he blew a gasket.

He is equally mad at Green and Moskowitz for reasons you will understand if you read his post.

Basucally, he is furious that two non-educators are touting a model that can never be “scaled up” because it depends on culling students.

He writes:

“I’m still trying to understand what’s so “innovative” about Ms. Moskowitz’s approach to teaching. Is it innovative for your “model teachers” to scream at little kids when they act like…little kids? Is it innovative to expel more students of color than your neighborhood public schools do? Is it innovative to be against “poor kids…get(ting) medical, nutritional and other services at school“? I’m struggling with how anyone, including Ms. Green, could consider Eva Moskowitz’s approach at Success Academy to be innovative–but then, I’ve only been teaching for 37 years, and attended a state university for my undergraduate degree in education.

“I am beyond tired—beyond exhausted, really—of persons who have never taught anyone anything lecturing the rest of us who have about what we are doing wrong, how stupid we are, how lazy we are, and how they know better than we do when it comes to everything about teaching and learning. How about this, Eva and Elizabeth?–instead of pontificating about things you are equally arrogant and ignorant of, why don’t you each go back to school, get an education degree, or two, or three, get certified, do an internship (for free–in fact, pay a bunch of money to do so), or two, or three, then see if you can find a job in a school. Then, teach.I don’t care what you teach; what grade level; what subject. But stick it out for at least a school year. Write your lesson plans. Grade your papers and projects. Go to all of those grade level meetings, and IEP meetings, and school board meetings, and budget negotiation meetings, and union meetings, and curriculum revision meetings, and curriculum re-revision meetings, and teacher evaluation meetings, and “special area” meetings, and state department of education meetings, and professional development in-services, and parent-teacher conferences, and open houses, and attend all those concerts, and football games, and dance recitals, and basketball games, and soccer matches, and lacrosse games, and honor band concerts, and school musicals, and tennis matches, and plays, and debates, and quiz bowl competitions, and marching band shows, and cheerleading competitions, and swim meets.Then do it all 10, or 20, or 30 more times, and let me know how you feel about someone who never did ANY of these things, even for a “few lessons“, telling you how stupid, and lazy you are, and how you’re being a “defender of the status quo” if you’re not really excited to immediately implement their “radical, disruptive” ideas about how to “save public education.”