 |
| Me teaching at KIPP (the back of students heads have been cropped) |
Although Secretary of Education Arne Duncan praised KIPP schools as a “…proven strategy ready to go to scale,”
there are many – including myself – who are skeptical of the results purported
by KIPP.
The main critiques of
KIPP are as follows: high levels of attrition among students – particularly
low-performing black males – (Payne, Knowles 2009; Zehr 2011), high levels of
teacher attrition (Payne, Knowles 2009), and inflated test scores due to
attrition (Mathews, 2009). In
essence, the research suggests that the lowest performing KIPP students are
leaving KIPP between 5th and 8th grade, leaving behind
higher performing students to take tests that evaluate student
performance. Thus, test scores are
inflated. In one KIPP school in
California, only 25 percent of KIPP students remained from 5th grade
to 8th grade (Robelen, 2007).
KIPP argues that their attrition rates are comparable to
tradition public schools in a given district, but some research suggests that
is not entirely accurate (Zehr, 2011).
In addition to student attrition, KIPP suffers from high levels of
teacher attrition, anywhere from 18 to 49 percent from year to year. In other words, a good KIPP school
might lose 18 percent of teachers from year to year, and a bad one can lose
up to 49 percent (Payne, Knowles 2009).
Even for a low-income urban school, those numbers are high. And after working 2 years within the
organization, my experience validates these critiques.
The last popular critique against KIPP that I will mention
is not unique to KIPP; it encompasses the ‘No-Excuses’ charter schools movement
nationally (Payne, Knowles 2009).
Charter school founder and Harvard graduate Steven Wilson reported the
growing trend amongst “No-Excuses” charter schools to use direct instruction to
“dumb down” learning. According to
Wilson, many students in such schools are, “…generally taught as an
entire class using direct instruction . . . and pedagogies of inquiry and
discovery learning are used sparingly” (2008, p. 7). This is concerning since research has shown us that the most
effective form of pedagogy is tailored small group instruction (Miles &
Frank, 2008).
In part 3 of this series, I reflect on one organizational leadership practice that deserves further investigation.
Bean, Max. (2010). The No Excuses Charter
School Movement. Message
posted to: http://edcommentary.blogspot.com/p/no-excuses-charter-movement.html
Elmore,
Richard. “Self-Organizing Systems
Lecture.” Harvard Graduate School
of Education. Larsen Hall,
Cambridge, MA. October 31, 2011
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800
meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.
Mathews, J., 1945-. (2009). Work hard. be nice. : How two inspired
teachers created the most promising
schools in America (1st ed.). Chapel Hill, N.C.: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.
schools in America (1st ed.). Chapel Hill, N.C.: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.
Miles, K. H., & Frank, S.
(2008). The strategic school : Making the
most of people, time, and money. Thousand Oaks, CA :Reston, VA: Corwin
Press ;National Association of Secondary School Principals.
Payne, C., & Knowles, T.
(2009). Promise and Peril: Charter Schools, Urban School Reform, and the Obama
Administration. Harvard Educational
Review, 79(2), 227-239.
Robelen, E. W. (2007). KIPP
Student-Attrition Patterns Eyed. Education
Week, 26 (41), 1,.
Romi, S., Lewis, R., Roache, J.,
& Riley, P. (2011). The Impact of Teachers' Aggressive Management
Techniques on Students' Attitudes to Schoolwork. Journal Of Educational Research, 104(4), 231-240. doi:10.1080/00220671003719004
Upton Sahm, Charles (March 13,
2009). Why KIPP Schools Work.
Retrieved from: http://www.city-journal.org/2009/bc0313cs.html.
Wilson, S. (2008). Success at scale in charter
schooling. American Enterprise Institute Working Paper. Retrieved January 3,
2009, from www.aei.org/futureofeducation
No comments:
Post a Comment