Home > Uncategorized > Success Academy’s “Got To Go” List Underscores Bogus Civil Rights Claims of Charters

Success Academy’s “Got To Go” List Underscores Bogus Civil Rights Claims of Charters

Anyone who follows the methods for-profit deregulated charter schools use to weed out low performing students could not be surprised to learn that the schools develop lists of students who need to be weeded out in order to keep their performance levels on standardized tests high. In case some politicians and “reformers” needed evidence, Kate Taylor of the NYTimes has found it and presented it in an article published on Thursday titled “At a Success Academy Charter School, Singling Out Students Who Have “Got To Go”. The response from the spokesperson for Success Academy was even more appalling than the fact that the for profit charter school kept the lists:

In a written response to questions, Success Academy’s spokeswoman, Ann Powell, said that the “Got to Go” list was a mistake and that the network quickly got wind of it and reprimanded Mr. Brown, the principal.

Ms. Powell said that Success schools did not push children out, and that what might look like an effort to nudge students out the door was actually an attempt to help parents find the right environment for their children. Some on the list required special education settings that Success could not offer them, she said.

There was no denial that a list was kept… and I can only surmise from the slap on the wrist the principal received that the “mistake” was that Mr. Brown allowed the staff members to let the parents know of the list’s existence. Worse, the notion that Success Academy could not offer special education services while receiving public school funding is absurd. The school pays no rent, overpays its CEO and other leadership, underpays its teachers, and receives millions of dollars that would otherwise fund public schools that are mandated to provide special education services.

Ms. Taylor’s article is thoroughly researched and full of anecdotes about parents whose children in grades K-3 were repeatedly suspended for minor infractions in an effort to get the parents to withdraw their children from school. The children in question had ADHD or special education needs that were costly.

A charter school that was truly interested in providing an equal educational opportunity for all children would bend over backwards to help children who require special services. A charter school that strives for profits would drive those same children out. It’s clear that Ms. Moskovitz’ civil rights claims lack credibility.

Advertisements
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: