I definitely saw some positive things while I was there. For example, I liked that each student was greeted personally by the principal when they walked in, and the morning meeting was full of energy, which seemed like an empowering way to start the morning. Also, in the hallways, there was a picture of each student and excerpts of their writing from the beginning of the year until now, and I have to say, their most recent work is pretty impressive for kinder and first-graders.
But honestly, what I saw reminded me more of the military than an elementary school. The students wore uniforms--which I have no problem with--but they also had to sit a certain way in the cafeteria and in class. All of the chanting during morning meeting struck me as a little cult-ish. And I couldn't help but notice that all 6 of the teachers I observed were teaching in the exact. same. way. Which was not a bad way, necessarily, but I got the impression that there was a very specific teaching method that all of the teachers had to adhere to. I saw a lot of energy from the teachers, but not a lot of warmth. Basically, everything felt a little...robotic. It was definitely not the "Peabody way" and I could never see myself teaching the way I think I would be expected to at this school, even if it seems to be working for them.
So... I'm wondering, are all charter schools like this? (I told my FM about it, and she said she's heard KIPP schools are the same way.) Has anyone else been to a charter school and had a similar (or different) experience?
Well, as some of you know, I actually was set to teach first grade at a KIPP school next year until I found out in February that KIPP Nashville would no longer be opening their new elementary. Obviously, I was/am sold on many aspects of that particular charter school; as a whole, I witnessed KIPP Nashville doing big things for the community in North Nashville. That being said, though, I definitely was not sold on all of the intricacies. I understand what you are saying about it seeming a bit military-esque. Uniforms and behavior are much more strict, students are addressed in different ways (like “scholars,” as you mentioned), students memorize many chants, and classrooms and hallways are silent most of the time. Another thing that I thought was too intense is that students are told how their MAP scores predict their future ACT scores, and what schools they will (or will not) get into with those scores. Fifth graders are already exposed to that kind of pressure!
ReplyDeleteHowever, there are many aspects that outweigh the severity of some of the characteristics. For example, teachers are personally connected to every family—all students have home visits at the beginning of the year and students can call their teachers on a work cell phone any time before 8 p.m to get the extra help that they may need. Additionally the results are undeniable! Students were making huge gains, and there was a community between teachers and students at the schools in KIPP Nashville unlike any I had seen before. I did, however, spend a whole day at a KIPP school in Atlanta in the fall and did not feel the same community aspect, but rather only experienced a severe and extreme atmosphere. So, it is important to note that even schools of the same national charter (like KIPP or LEAD, for example) don’t always feel the same.
So, my advice as someone that has spent a lot of time exploring the idea of charter schools is to spend a whole day (if not more!) at the school you are considering. Also, ask many many questions!! Charter schools often do things differently, use words or phrases that are specific to their school, and operate within a different mindset than the schools and teachers we have seen in MNPS. They know that—so just ask them what they’re doing and why to make sure that the school does have a good balance of intensity and community. Not all of them do!
Ilana, I agree with much of what you are saying you have noticed and feel about charter schools. I can appreciate the sentiment of leveling the playing field and giving typically under-performing students access to tools to help improve their scores, but the structures many charter schools use to reach their academic goals seem unappealing to me as a teacher. I agree with Mary- Lloyd, the academic gains are notable, and I also agree that this type of structure is really a necessary support for some students with varying backgrounds. However, having had the experiences I have had both in my practicums and at Peabody, I'm not sure I would be able to adapt my teaching philosophy to fit the model that is common in charter schools all over the country.
ReplyDeleteThe New York Times actually had a really interesting and great front-page article this week on Success Academy Charter Schools (a huge network in New York) that looked at exactly what you are talking about: are the gains worth the militaristic structure? Many charter schools have high turnover rates, and I think it has something to do with this aspect of a very different type of teaching. I think the conversation, both here on this blog and nationally, about charter schools is very interesting!
This is very different than the charter schools from back home. We don’t have many charter schools near me, and the charter schools we do have are not part of a “chain” like YES Prep or KIPP. The charter schools near me are alternative schools meant for students who had difficulty with the “traditional school setting.” These schools have websites that talk about how they involve multiple dimensions of learning for each subject and the high school emphasizes “learning expeditions” where students see and apply the content they have learned in the classroom to real life situations. However, most people don’t think very highly of the charter schools in Kenosha, and usually parents send their kids there if they were kicked out of or failing in their zoned public school.
ReplyDeleteWhen I came here and heard a lot of talk about charter schools turning their students around, I was a little surprised. I shouldn’t have based all charter schools based off of the three near me, but the wide variety in charter schools means they are going to have a wide variety of outcomes. Some may be great and really support their students, while others may not be so great and let their students down. Because charter schools have a little more freedom than school districts, and many create very specific rules that should be followed in all classes, it would be really important to check out that specific school (even if it is part of a chain) before agreeing to teach at a charter school.
I actually interviewed with two charter schools at the mock interview and found out a little bit more about their background. Before the interview, I had no particular opinion on charter schools (except that I knew many people in MNPS hated them). But after the interview, I realized that there are some I would consider (like LEAD if I did more research on it) and others I would never contemplate (like REpublic).
ReplyDeleteThe interviewer from REpublic tried to draw me in by saying that their school had a 100% graduation-to-college rate. That meant that every single student that graduated from their school got into college. Too good to be true? Yes and no. He also mentioned (pretty quietly) that they retain students until they are college-ready. He said that he had no problem keeping students in 5th grade for 4 years if that's what they needed...4 YEARS! In my mind, that's not supporting the student where they are; that's shoving them into your own particular mold. On top of that, I found out after the interview that many charter schools kick out students who decrease their scores. For example, if a student were struggling and unable to meet grade-level expectations (even with retention), they would send them elsewhere to receive "more help".
He also tried to draw me into the school by saying that I would get to design their ELL curriculum. The interviewer praised the work they do but said that they struggled with supporting their ELLs as much as they needed. I respected that at first but then heard about the retention situation. Of course their ELLs turn out decent by graduation--they repeat 5th grade until they learn English! I have an incredibly hard time condoning that...learning another language is not an impairment; it's a valuable asset! And the REpublic system is treating it like a flaw. Anyway, I'm off my soap box now. I just think that there are some places you have to watch out for. Many charter schools talk about their wonderful test scores but you have to dig a little bit deeper to see what they are truly doing differently and if their procedures are something you agree with.