I’m down. KIPP, a local high-achieving charter school, is stealing away my favorite fourth-graders. See, I teach fifth grade and our local KIPP starts in fifth-grade. So I got to watch these little bright minds rise, first in my GATE class last year, then in my ELD class this year. I’ve looked forward for two years to the day they’ll be mine, only to have them snatched away to become quasi-robotic automatons of academic achievement. Great for them, terrible for the grade they leave behind. Now who is going to set the pace in my class next year? Now who is going to show the class what achievement really looks like? This frustration is inclining me to spill a little venom onto the page.
---
Dear KIPP,
I’m writing to you from a public elementary school in your district. We’ve got one thing in common: we share the extremes, you the highest-performing school in the district, we the lowest. You might remember me, I came and visited your school last year. I learned some great lessons from your school, simple learnings that have made light-years of improvement at my school. Sadly though, the last year has taught me an even greater lesson: KIPP, you’re hurting public education.
It’s hard for me to say this. As a Teach For America teacher, I feel espirit-de-corps-bound to laud you as a great example of what’s right with “The Movement.” But as a public school teacher, I feel an even greater onus to label you the worst thing for public education since Plessy vs. Ferguson. KIPP, you are re-segregating our schools, a sliver at a time. Sorting out families, students and teachers not by race but by predilection for success, always taking from among the best and always leaving the dregs.
At first I thought that your self-selective academies were tolerable because they held up models that real public schools could emulate. Now I realize that your academies are unreplicable so long as you exist. The things that make you successful, such as supportive families, curricular options, extended days, a superior staff of young, life-less teachers ---gosh, did we really need a whole new line of schools to prove those are they keys to achievement--- are currently out of reach for us but they are not impossibly distant. However, KIPP, your academies are only pushing them farther and farther away.
We can change the union contracts. We can acquire curricula that meet the needs of our students. We too can create a culture of achievement among students and staff. But we cannot do this when you siphon off our most invested families, most participative students, and most dedicated teachers.
Certainly, you take only a handful. But a handful is all we need. Elementary schools are not big places. A few families can be the powerful organizers for a whole community of parents. A few students can be the champions of a whole grade. A small group of teachers can change the tenor of an entire staff. Yet, there is no motivation for great families, students and teachers to endure and reform awful schools when they can abandon them wholesale for the comfortably successful world of KIPP.
KIPP, you hire only staff that are willing to meet the needs of your academy. We must change our school only as we can convince the staff their needs permit it. We can never muster the raw investment of time and energy required to meet the needs of our students without the dedication of young teachers. We cannot attract and retain young teachers when your alternative exists. Only two-thirds into my “last year,” I have already begun to receive a barrage of recruiting emails and letters from “achievement” schools like yours. And on the harder days, they are difficult to resist. Why fight against the tide here when I could surf on the waves of your self-selected staff and student body?
Our dream in Teach For America is that “One day all children will have an equal opportunity to get an excellent education.” You bring that dream only so far as “more.” Thanks to you, more children, those fortunate enough to have parents who will attend your meetings and lucky enough to be selected in your lottery, now have that opportunity. But you leave behind the schools they would have attended, the schools they would have helped to change. These schools serve, in total, many times the number in your academies. Serving the few, you leave behind the “all.” You offer us in return only a vague fantasy, made more real, famed and lauded, for you and made more unreachable for us, by the yearly thefts of our best and brightest.
You’ve been taking our students to show us what is possible with a few of them. Now give them back so we can achieve it with the rest.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
Interesting. I could see how that would be frustrating.
Can you clarify your perception of the DEGREE of selection bias - the hlghly motivated? I've always thought it was there but just a little, not a lot.
KIPP's CEO is married to TFA'S CEO, so I suspect they'd push back at your view that KIPP somehow contravenes TFA's mission. Would they be right to say something like "KIPP generates huge gains over baseline for our students - and value-add gains implicitly take into account any 'creaming' effects, mild or otherwise? We do cream good teachers pretty openly - but many of them say they would simply refuse to keep working in the typical urban schools, so it's a net gain for society...."
I thought that they did lotteries to get their children. In NYC they are always showing parents jumping up and down on the news like they just won a million dollars when their kid gets into a charter school.
“One day all children will have an equal opportunity to get an excellent education.”
That's a rather self-defeating goal if you think about it.
People don't understand how important having the kind of parents that would even think to sign you up for a charter school are... middle class white america can't fathom how many of these "underachieving" kids don't have that. of course a child that gets any level of reinforcement or motivation from home is going to do better... the school day is only so long.
we have a similar "problem" with the charter schools in chicago... if they're better it's because institutions are picking and choosing where (and more pointedly in whom) to invest resources in. There's a callous disregard for the remainder of the kids/schools....
"Thanks to you, more children, those fortunate enough to have parents who will attend your meetings and lucky enough to be selected in your lottery, now have that opportunity. But you leave behind the schools they would have attended, the schools they would have helped to change."
That's the spirit! Bring EVERYONE down to the lowest common denominator. DESTROY every single child's chance to achieve greatness by destroying the opportunities some might have. It just isn't FAIR that SOME children have opportunities that other children don't, is it?
Here's a hint from someone not entrenched in the educrat establishment:
LIFE'S NOT FAIR, BUCKO.
"Equality for all" is one short step from "mediocrity for all".
Selection bias : I concur very much with the anonymous blogger who recognized the immense variance in quality between parents who sign their kids up for charter schools and parents to whom it would never occur to do so. From the very start, then, KIPP is "self-selective." Students coming from families saavy enough to get their kids into KIPP are generally the least in need of its services. For an admittedly anecdotal example, KIPP took 4 students from my school last year, 3 were in the GATE (gifted/advanced) program. KIPP is taking 6 this year, 5 are in the GATE program. Solve the problem - run a lottery of ALL 4th grade students, require that the absentee parents make an effort to NOT get their kid into KIPP.
Gains over baseline: We, TFA, are not about bringing up a "talented tenth." Or at least, we're not supposed to be. No amount of gains in a handful of students is equivalent to equity for all. One doctor is not worth nine drop outs. I'm in this business to serve the lowest of the low, not the highest of the low.
Teacher recruitment: How will we ever know who would stay and who would go when there is the third option? Most educators I've talked to estimate that about 5 teachers could revitalize an average sized elementary school. One average sized elementary KIPP, then, represents 5 schools-worth of revitalization. Let's assume even 40% of those teachers quit? Then a KIPP is "only" worth three. If I were the Sup't, I'd make that trade. One KIPP, operating under its seemingly unique circumstances, is not going to fix our district, but three regular elementary schools, achieving less but still well, would certainly do it. The problem, though, is clustering 5 lifeless, smart, good teachers into a single school.
Equality for all is mediocrity: True, TFA's motto is an "equal opportunity." But I'm a little more about an equitable opportunity. I'm as meritocratic as they come, I just believe in a level playing field.
Mr AB,
The KIPP school you're talking about (if I read the clues a-right) isn't actually part of our district. If you search API/AYP results they from their own district. Moreover, roughly 40% of its students are drawn from other districts. Just enough that the district is obligated to provide services, but not so much that they'd have to address the learning issues that abound in our communities.
As I recall, you teach in San Jose which must mean you're talking about KIPP Heartwood in Alum Rock. I did a story for the Christian Science Monitor on their principal's drive to recruit students in the first year. With a few exceptions, these were kids doing poorly in school with older siblings who'd done poorly in school. The parents cared about their kids but that caring hadn't translated into school success so far. The principal walked around the neighborhoods as kids were walking home from school asking children what grade they were in, then asking to meet the parents. (She happens to be a very petite, unthreatening woman.) She met with parents in their homes. When she signed up students, she asked parents to introduce her to other parents with kids entering fifth grade. In short, it's not that these parents were actively seeking a new school.
After the first year, the school's success has attracted savvy parents but their kids can't get in unless they win the lottery.
-- Joanne Jacobs
Joanne wrote,
"With a few exceptions, these were kids doing poorly in school with older siblings who'd done poorly in school."
I have a problem with this claim, Joanne. Look closely at the proficiency rates of the schools with enrollments effected by KIPP. Look at an elementary school with about 1/3 of their kids proficient, stable across grade levels, until 5th grade, where the number drops down to around 20%. Look at the pattern repeat itself at three other schools. Stable proficiency rates until 5th grade (now 6th), where the numbers take a huge hit, because, presumably, those kids now attend KIPP. I do not want to disparage the success of that school -- 900 is a great API -- but let's not say they are working with the same students as the surrounding community.
We need to see with clear eyes on this one. My school has many students who have younger siblings at KIPP, and every one that I am aware of is proficieny in L.A. and Math, enrolled in the highest level courses we offer in both these subjects. Every one. I have also heard the claim from our maybe a half dozen students that when home visits are paid by representatives of KIPP, the message is delievered that you need A's or B's to go there.
I'm not a terribly big fan of charter schools, but I'd probably care a lot less if there did not exist these claims that those schools were playing on the same field as the rest of us. They recruit door-to-door, have unparalleled powers of explusion, and can demonstrate they work with traditionally hard to educate populations without coming face-to-face with any of the issues that traditionally make certain groups difficult to educate.
I've been teaching for eleven years, all in an urban public school in Cleveland. I believe in public education and have worked hard to make changes in the way we work with underserved kids. We recently received millions of dollars from the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation to transform our large school into smaller learning communities. Sure, we can point out the inevitable ramifications of such a change, but where did our money go? Good question. Union squabbles, teacher resistance, and a lack of community engagement forced millions of dollars to go to frivolous spending-not a cent going to kids. Why say this? I sought out KIPP after seeing some of their schools and meeting kids and teachers. I saw in their program things that will take lightyears to implement in Cleveland. The simple things that KIPP makes a part of their day would never fly in my school. Work extra hours? No way. Hire effective leaders? Good luck. Violence and teacher assault mount while teachers blame kids and parents and society. At any time, 50 or more kids in various wings are roaming the halls during class time. A shooting recently occurred next door to the board office last week! I'll say it: I'm tired. I've fought hard enough. I want to go where things are happening now. I applaud those noble teachers willing to endure for thirty years. I'm not one of them.
My thought is that you may be one who has a difficult time motivating students & building positive relationships with their families. Otherwise, my guess would be that you wouldn't need to depend on higher-achieving students to do so. And if you look more closely, I'm SURE that you'll be able to find success stories and growth in other students who are not top level for which to point out as motivation. They actually make the best examples of hard work and dedication.
Teaching is one of the most difficult professions to commit to, and EVERY school has its unique challenges. If you really want the stronger students to stick around, do some recruiting of your own. Talk with the families about all the great things they can expect from your classroom the following year and why they should remain. If they choose to go elsewhere, be happy for them and the opportunities & growth they will see. Be thankful that there are options where there didn't used to be. Also, I know for a fact that many KIPP schools consistently have incoming 5th grade classes where 80% of students are reading 2 or more grade levels behind. ALL parents, even those you never see, would be thrilled to see their babies grow and succeed in ways they have not before, but that doesn't mean that they know how to get them there. KIPP not only trains students in pushing themselves to new levels, but parents as well who may not have known how to push their kids further.
All the best in finding more creative ways to foster growth, motivation, achievement, & character.
How ridiculously selfish are you? To cry that some of your school's most gifted children will miss out on learning in your classroom and instead will work their butts off for the next eight years trying to be the best student they can be.
Now, as a former corps member, I would be lying if I said that I was a better teacher at the start of my 1st/2nd/3rd year than the average KIPP teacher. In teaching fourth grade, you may only be seeing small glimps of the achievement gap, but in eighth grade they were a glaring reality to my students. They were, on average, three years behind in reading and math, and seem to be permanently stuck in fifth grade. If I had a choice, all my students would be in a KIPP environment, burning the midnight oil until 5pm so that they could have the chance to raise their skills.
KIPP is the full realization of TFA ideals... burn hard and you'll make a difference. I burned hard for 4 years, and I saw the difference by raising scores in after-school sessions and weekend classes. Thank god for charter schools that give parents a choice... since not every one of parents wants an inexperienced TFA teacher teaching their kids next year.
I am a public school teacher and after seeing a KIPP press piece on Oprah I immediately began reading up on this so-called great school. I agree that parental involvement has a direct correlation with student success, but I don't understand why that involvement can't take place in the public school setting. What's wrong with teachers calling home after hours to check on students, meeting with parents after school hours to discuss tips on how to help their child, or even visiting the parents in their homes? Shouldn't these things be done regardless of whether your district/school requires it?
In addition I would like to know more about the philosophy of the school. After reading their website info, I did not see much talk about higher level thinking skills. The video clip I watched showed kids regurgitating math facts. Are the kids taught to memorize or conceptualize? A monkey can rattle off math facts, and the CEO was so proud to say that repetition was one of the school's fundamental approaches. What about multi-step problem solving, cross-curricular investigations, or teaching children one-on-one in a small group setting - which some consider more effective than whole group teaching?
So far, I'm not convinced. In this time of standardized tests and "No Child Left Behind," test scores mean nothing. The success of a student cannot be measured by one state test, but rather by the merit of their achievements in college and society. All children are capable of these great achievements if the teacher takes the time to show them the path!
Very interesting commentary and thinking. I've volunteered with TFA (community support for them), helped the first KIPP students with voluntary support and encouragement in private high schools in Houston and I have been a volunteer reader to students in low income areas because parents there were afraid to/didn't care to volunteer at the schools when my children had too many parents signing up to read in the library. All were rewarding and I would recommend that children need more than families, good schools and good teachers to succeed. They need community arms, too. I volunteered at new KIPP schools starting in other cities that I had moved to. It is an awesome philosophy and program.
There are not any easy answers. Bright children should not be held back or limited in learning because teachers spend more time disciplining the bottom tier. I don't think it is fair to hold the top tier or even the upper 50% back to serve as examples. The answer has to come from elsewhere -- after school programs, etc.
The costs to society for illiteracy are enormous but the need for highly educated workers is a need, too. Can all tiers be served in the same system? Maybe vocational opportunities need to be implemented at an earlier stage to give a different level of training for those whose opportunities are limited -- for whatever reasons.
TFA brings vital energy into the system but barriers to change are often the unions and districts that can't/won't change.
In response to h.a. page's comments on the possibilities of vocational training in schools, I would like to say that when the bar is set low, children will fall behind. What kind of examples would teachers be setting if we didn't truly believe that students could rise to the challenges of high expectations? Each student's accomplishments are at different levels. Of course there are those students who will go onto college and there are others who will work in minimium wage jobs. Which ever is the case, I hope that they will look back and remember that one teacher who held them to the highest of standards and accepted nothing less. That is my wish for my students.
I teach at a KIPP school. Our students were far from being the best students at the schools they previously attended. We are first come, first serve. The kids I teach are amongst the poorest and least educated in the city.
I too teach at a KIPP school and I have no idea where people get the notion that we only take the best and brightest. We take students on a first come, first serve basis. Many come in at 2nd and third grade levels for reading and math. The dedication of teachers and their commitment to student success is what brings about academic success. To the person questioning conceptualization in our math classes, I invite you to my seventh grade math class in San Diego any day. You will not only see higher order thinking and conceptualization of algebra 1 and geometry and trigonometry subject matter, but you will hear them explain step by step while connecting the math to every day life. After all, they were the highest scoring sixth graders in San Diego Unified School Distict. These minority students are able to excel because of my high expectations, no excuses policy and the belief that they can succeed. 36% of my students scored in the 90 Percentile on their Stanford 10 test. Two years ago they were in the 50-70 Percentile. These results are possible through the extende day, tutoring, Saturday classes and all the other above and beyond practices of dedicated teachers. It can be done anywhere?
Post a Comment