Archives for category: KIPP Charter Schools

Sara Mosle reviewed
my book
in The Atlantic, which is unusual because it
won’t be published for another month. I have read Sara’s work over
the years and always found her thoughtful. She is now teaching in a
charter school. There are a few things I don’t agree with here,
starting with the claim that I was the “architect” of the corporate
reform movement. I had nothing to do with the writing of No Child
Left Behind or Race to the Top. At worst, I was a cheerleader for NCLB on
the sidelines, but that doesn’t make me the “architect.” And I publicly recanted my support three years ago.

I also question her implied suggestion that I am far too energetic for a
woman my age, that I blog too much, tweet too much, am too active
altogether. Maybe I should retire to a rocker and take up knitting.

You can’t really evaluate what she writes because no one except the
publisher and a few advance readers has actually read the book. But
clearly she was not happy about my criticism of charter schools.
She is fond of KIPP. It gets high test scores. I don’t like the
idea of charter chains, it is true. I think they destroy
communities and some get their high scores by excluding the most
needy students.

KIPP may be a wonderful chain, but it has yet to
accept the challenge of managing an entire district, leaving no
child behind. KIPP is one charter chain of 100-plus schools, but there are more than 6,000 charters, some good, some mediocre, some run by incompetents some run to take advantage of tax breaks. Typically, research concludes that charters get the same results when they enroll the same demographic. What, exactly, is the rationale for having a dual system, one that can push out kids it doesn’t want, the other required to take them all?

I was disappointed that Sara did not directly address
the central theme of the book, which is my criticism of
privatization and the danger it poses to the very survival of
public education. I think that deserved discussion.

Despite my reservations, I am grateful to have received a relatively even-handed review
from a knowledgeable journalist whose work I have respected over
the years.

Rafe Esquith teaches fifth grade at Hobart Elementary
School in Los Angeles and has achieved considerable fame for his
methods. Every year his students put on a play by Shakespeare.
Esquith is noted for emphasizing the arts and the love of learning.

He is also recognized as a model by the founders of the KIPP
charter chain. In
this post
, Andrea Gabor reviews Esquith’s latest
book–“Real Talk for Real Teachers”–and notes what KIPP learned
from Esquith, but more importantly, what it did not learn. Esquith
believes in teaching as a career, not a temporary way-station. He
believes that the journey is more important than the end result. He
knows he will not succeed with every single child. He looks askance
at KIPP’s behavioral techniques.

Gary Rubinstein has a well established reputation as a careful investigator of miracle schools. On many occasions, he has debunked miracle claims. See his wiki site here.

In this post, he takes a close look at the scores of Success Academy on the new Common Core tests.

I don’t think Gary would classify the Success Academy schools as “miracle schools,” because they don’t have the same demographic profile of nearby public schools, but their scores on the recent Common Core were nonetheless impressive.

Gary notes that some of the schools are K-3 and tested only third grade. Some of the newspapers printed misleading stories about the success of the school based only on one grade.

He also notes a high attrition rate among students and teachers.

But with all those caveats, Success Academy has succeeded in outpacing most of the city schools.

He speculates that this might set off a civil war among the charters because some of the others that boast of their success–notably, KIPP and Democracy Prep–got low scores and performed below the average for public schools.

He writes:

In general, these good test scores, I think, should make the ‘reformers’ more nervous than elated.  From my perspective, I don’t think that the scores are devastating to my cause.  I don’t think they really prove that there are super teachers out there who can get the ‘same kids’ to excel, even if it is just on standardized tests, since I’m not convinced they are truly the ‘same kids.’  But the ‘reformers’ should be very careful about this.  They already had Success as a big success story, as well as a bunch of others like KIPP and Democracy Prep.  Now they still have Success, but they have lost some of their schools they used to take credit for.  I’m not sure how they can reconcile their idea that test scores are an accurate measure of school quality with the fact that many of the schools they have been touting have lost their luster by that measure.

And what ‘excuse’ is there for these other schools.  Surely behind closed doors they are accusing Success of some kind of manipulation, either by extensive test prep or by booting even more kids than they do.  I wonder if this could start some kind of charter civil war.

 

Stephanie Simon reports that some of NYC’s most celebrated charter schools were outperformed by the city’s much maligned traditional public schools. KIPP and Democracy Prep had lower scores than the public schools with less funding. Only Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy charters aced the tests.

“Just 23 percent of charter students scored proficient in language arts, compared with 31 percent in public schools overall. That’s a greater gap than had shown up in last year’s exams.
In math, charter schools beat the public school average in each of the past two years — but not this year. On the new tests, just 31 percent of charter students scored proficient, the same as in public schools overall.”

Earlier this year, Secretary Duncan gave $9.1 million to Democracy Prep to expand its chain because it was so much better than public schools.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/new-york-fails-common-core-tests-95304.html#ixzz2bOOFxCK4

Enron may have gone bankrupt, and its employees may have lost their life savings, but it left some people very rich.

Here EduShyster tells the story of Texas billionaire John Arnold. He is one of the lucky few who managed to walk away from the Enron debacle with more than $3 billion. Some former Enron execs are doing time. Not Arnold. You know he must be smart because he got out before the roof fell in, and the bottom fell out.

And how does he spend his vast wealth?

He does what canny investors do: he pours millions into the struggle to privatize American public education. He has given millions to KIPP, StudentsFirst, and TFA. And he has a special interest in making sure that teachers don’t have pensions.

Billionaires have a hard time understanding why anyone needs a pension. They don’t need pensions. Why should teachers get them?

Experienced journalist Natalie Hopkinson is alarmed by the popularity of the idea that black children need a different kind of education than white children.

She is especially concerned about the KIPP model:

“As it built into a national network, KIPP students’ test scores soared, attracting media attention, and then millions in corporate and public support. It seemed, they had perfected the “formula” for student success– at least for poor, black and brown kids anyways: Long hours, militaristic discipline, constant and scientific assessment, and teachers working around the clock. For many deep-pocketed reformers, these elements have become the gold standard for how “urban” students can and should learn. Public schools that do not show similar “results” are being privatized or closed.”

The KIPP model, she says, “is creating two permanent tracks of schooling: one for the wealthy and one for the black and brown, and poor. It also raises questions about what public schools should be for poor and black children. Are they organic, self-sustaining parts of the urban fabric? Are they charities? Are they for-profit companies?”

She worries about the creation of a class divide: “Wealthy and middle class schools are all about developing an independent voice and passions, exploring ideas and creativity. It treats children as individuals of innate value with powerful destinies to be realized. Many charters franchises (throw in the for-profit B.A.S.I.S.) often emphasize compliance, repetition, “drill and kill.” I am uncomfortable sending my child on that track. So how could I advocate it to other people’s children who happen to look like mine? Why should we allow such policies to be applied to the whole traditional neighborhood system?”

Policymakers and the media in Tennessee thought that charters would outperform public schools. They would “save minority kids from failing public schools.” Unfortunately, the charter schools are manufacturing “success” by pushing out low-performing children right before testing time.

True believers refuse to accept the plain facts but it is hard to hide the disappearing students.

But the media is catching on.

A reader helpfully forwarded the transcript:

“NASHVILLE, TN (WSMV) –

Leaders with Metro Nashville Public Schools have serious concerns about what is happening at some of the city’s most popular charter schools.

Students are leaving in large numbers at a particularly important time of the school year, and the consequences may have an impact on test scores.

Charter schools are literally built on the idea that they will outperform public, zoned schools. They are popular because they promise and deliver results, but some new numbers are raising big questions about charter schools.

One of the first things a visitor sees when stepping into Kipp Academy is a graph that shows how Kipp is outperforming Metro schools in every subject.

However, Kipp Academy is also one of the leaders in another stat that is not something to crow about.

When it comes to the net loss of students this year, charter schools are the top eight losers of students.

In fact, the only schools that have net losses of 10 to 33 percent are charter schools.

“We look at that attrition. We keep an eye on it, and we actually think about how we can bring that back in line with where we’ve been historically,” said Kipp Principal Randy Dowell.

Dowell said Kipp’s 18 percent attrition is unacceptable.

MNPS feels it’s unacceptable as well, because not only are they getting kids from charter schools, but they are also getting troubled kids and then getting them right before testing time.

“That’s also a frustration for the zoned-school principals. They are getting clearly challenging kids back in their schools just prior to accountability testing,” said MNPS Chief Operating Officer Fred Carr.

Nineteen of the last 20 children to leave Kipp Academy had multiple out-of-school suspensions. Eleven of the 19 are classified as special needs, and all of them took their TCAPs at Metro zoned schools, so their scores won’t count against Kipp.

“We won’t know how they perform until we receive results and we see. We would be happy to take their results, frankly. The goal is getting kids ready for college. The goal is not having shiny results for me or for anyone on the team,” Dowell said.

Kipp Academy has started new counseling groups to try to retain children. MNPS said it constantly sees charters being held up as the model, but feels these numbers prove the two different types of schools play by different rules.”

Copyright 2013 WSMV (Meredith Corporation). All rights reserved.

Tennessee charters have learned the secret to high test scores: push out low-performing students right before testing time.

That way, the charter keeps the money, and the public school gets the low score.

This is not a closely guarded secret, but it usually fools the media and the politicians.

Here is one journalist–Dennis Ferrier at WSMV–who was not fooled:

“When it comes to the net loss of students this year, charter schools are the top eight losers of students.

“In fact, the only schools that have net losses of 10 to 33 percent are charter schools.”

The KIPP school in Nashville has an attrition rate of 18%.

In a post today, a comment by a charter school teacher explains the high turnover in charter schools.

“Sadly, JUST like the teachers in KIPP, I got a job in a charter school WELL before realizing what this whole “school reform” movement was all about… didn’t know the difference between charter/public/private… and it’s only been over the course of several years, total exhaustion, and in the last few months of being enlightened about the “school reform” movement that I now understand what type of system I’m working in. Although I work with some wonderful people, I’ve seen the toxic result of the reform movement creeping in … always expecting more, doing more, giving more… . If you find ANY work/life balance, you “appear” lazy and you earn a reputation for “not doing your job” (because some of the expectations are through the roof. I’m sticking it out this year, but looking for either a public school position in a high SES neighborhood (where parents work with their kids and it doesn’t fall all on the teacher)… or a parochial school (where if I have to push kids so hard, at least I can pray with them too!) “

By now, we have all read the encomia heaped on KIPP, and we know that KIPP presumably has what Mayor Rahm Emanuel once referred to as the “secret sauce.” That is the extra ingredient that
magically turns ordinary kids into scholars bound for Harvard.

Gary Rubinstein, ex-TFA, went to visit a KIPP school. He didn’t see the magic. He saw young teachers struggling to control their classes.

Read it to see what goes on, and be sure to read the comments.