Review of Journeys: Are @KIPP charter schools pathological?

Jim Horn et al. will soon publish a new book entitled Work Hard, Be Hard: Journeys Through “No Excuses” Teaching. The following is a review based on the advance copy that I received.

jkh_mfa_3-12-11__3Jim Horn et al. have collected important perspectives from current and former Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) teachers in a new book entitled Work Hard, Be Hard: Journeys Through “No Excuses” Teaching. The KIPP corporate charter school chain of schools has received hundreds of millions of dollars in corporate, local, foundation, state and federal dollars since its inception in 1994. The KIPP charter chain was started by Mike Feinberg (See Frank Convo with KIPP’s Mike Feinberg: Do you call BS?) and Dave Levin, Teach For America alums. They have found ready allies in the corporate education reform movement— whose policies are focused on private control of public schools.

Since the KIPP charter chain is privately controlled, they have also restricted access and only allowed a select few outside research projects to enter their schools. Horn wrote in Journeys that he requested access to KIPP schools to expand his sample and was rejected by the charter chain. Sadly, this is not an isolated example of KIPP refusing to cooperate with researchers. I personally experienced the restrictive nature of KIPP schools towards outside researchers. A few years ago, KIPP Austin relayed in conversations with a UT-Austin research team that they were having problems with BlackBE HARD K font blue sized student attrition. A colleague and myself set up a research design that protected their anonymity and we expressed our intent to publish the work in a peer reviewed journal. Then the KIPP program was featured on Oprah as an ideal location for Black students and the Austin campus of the KIPP charter chain backed out of the research project. That sequestering experience inspired a peer reviewed research study independent of KIPP Austin published by the Berkeley Review of Education examining the attrition of Black students out of KIPP and other charter schools. We found that charters in Texas often had double and triple the attrition rates of traditional urban public school districts. In fact, Cloaking Inequity, my education policy and social justice blog, was first begun to address the KIPP public relations machine that respond to the black student attrition study. In their press releases, KIPP largely avoided the attrition findings in the Texas’ Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) data that confirmed Black student attrition issue that KIPP Austin had first raised in conversations.

I suspect KIPP and their supporters will respond to Journeys with a few predictable assertions. First they will likely argue that the KIPP network is vast and varied— and the interviews with the nearly 30 KIPP teachers are example of just a few bad apple teachers and/or schools. I might have been convinced by this argument several years ago before one of my former students joined Teach For America and was assigned to KIPP in a large, urban Texas city. Two years later, the student wrote a blog post on Cloaking Inequity entitled Tell-All From A TFA and KIPP Teacher: Unprepared, Isolation, Shame, and Burnout which described issues eerily similar to those documented in Journeys. Things were so bad at KIPP during her TFA teaching stint that she experienced a mental breakdown. I honestly thought this was an isolated incident until I read Journeys. A KIPP teacher stated in the book that on her campus:

I’ve seen about four teachers have complete nervous breakdowns…After two years you are considered a veteran teacher at KIPP. I mean you become physically ill. Your body breaks down— you can’t take it anymore.

Another argument KIPP and their supporters will likely make is that KIPP is no different from traditional public schools and/or all organization suffer from disfunction. But the question at issue is not another’s house, but your own. Is the KIPP culture as described by the current and former teachers pathological? In Journeys, a KIPP teacher was asked about the charter chain’s conception of “team and family.” She characterized the charter chain as being “part of a very abusive dysfunctional family.” A dysfunctional family that “requires a totalizing submissiveness to a domineering and non-negotiable system.” For example, KIPP campuses have labeled kids by pinning demeaning messages on their clothes like scarlet letters. One KIPP teacher stated that at the campus, “those who resisted the rules or were slackers wore a large sign pinned to their clothes labeled miscreant.” At another campus, students who were out of favor were labelled with the words “bench” or “porch.” There were many other forms of racialized and psychological solitary confinement that Journeys identified across various campuses.

So instead of a few bad apple schools, I think the old saying that “one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch” is probably more appropriate.

Teachers described KIPP schools as being purposefully emotionally explosive and “militant.” One teacher relayed that,

Students are managed largely through bullying, screaming and personal insults. At my previous [traditional public] school teachers did not raise their voice ONCE during the course of the year. At [the KIPP school where this teacher worked] screaming and yelling is ubiquitous.

Why does KIPP encourage and/or allow these practices? Horn writes, school leaders relayed that “because of cultural differences, black students are accustomed to being screamed at…because that’s how their parents speak to them.” A KIPP teacher characterized the worst offender at her school as a “screamer, swearer and humiliator.” In fact, I personally experienced a similar form of symbolic violence from a KIPP supporter when Jonathan Alter interrupted my comments on MSNBC about KIPP in my peer reviewed research during a taping of the Melissa Harris Perry Show. He yelled on national TV that he would not “allow” me to “diss” KIPP.

UnknownKIPP might also argue that they are the beneficiaries of widespread support in communities across the nation. It is very clear that KIPP benefits from powerful influential and wealthy supporters in government, the media, and foundations. Their no excuses approach to educating poor children has resonated with the elites in society and they have showered the corporate charter chain with resources for decades. So it may be surprising to some to read the counternarrative from KIPP teachers that is quite different than what you typically read in the newspapers, see in documentaries like Waiting for Superman, and generally experience in the public discourse. I proffer that the KIPP teachers’ counternarratives in Journeys should be required reading for all of KIPPs influential supporters. Why? Mutua (2008) explained the importance of counternarratives in society:

In their broadest formulation, counternarratives are stories/narratives that splinter widely accepted truths about people, cultures, and institutions as well as the value of those institutions and the knowledge produced by and within those cultural institutions. The term counternarrative itself clearly highlights its essence in expressing skepticism of narratives that claim the authority of knowledge of human experience or narratives that make grand claims about what is to be taken as truth.

So what is the counternarrative that the current and former KIPP teachers expressed in Journeys? There is a saying that I often heard in Austin that if you visit a KIPP school you would become KIPPnotized— essentially very impressed by their approach. One of the KIPP teachers spoke to being initially impressed during her recruitment and then later discovering that KIPP was “hell.”

There was so much about it that was so good and promising in the beginning, and I got hooked into that from the minute I saw the news piece on them… but the dirty little secrets are what you don’t know until you are in their trenches.

The KIPP teachers in Journeys detail a variety of working condition issues that created high levels of turnover specific to the KIPP model in their schools— too many to discuss here. One teacher compared her experience teaching in KIPP and a public school. She said she wouldn’t recommend teaching in KIPP and stated “I wouldn’t wish it on anyone who wanted to be a teacher for the long-term…It’s exhausting. It’s demoralizing.” You might be wondering: If the working conditions are as bad as the current and former KIPP teachers say they were, how could the charter chain campuses stay open? Journeys explained,

Without a constant infusion of new teachers to replace all those who burn out… KIPP would have to shut its doors… The role of Teach For America and programs based on Teach For America’s hyper-abbreviated preparation are crucial, then, for the continued survival of… KIPP.

One teacher reported that 40% of the teachers on that campus were TFA teachers. The national number for the percentage of teachers are unknown in KIPP, but what is known is that about one third of all TFA teachers teach in charter schools. Of note, the debate about TFA’s effectiveness rages in the public discourse. A KIPP teacher and TFA trainer weighed in on KIPP’s use of novice TFA teachers by stating, “You cannot teach someone to be a great teacher in 20 days.”

In summary, Journeys is shocking— but expected considering what is known about KIPP’s “no excuses” culture. What makes this piece unique is the unprecedented interviews with current and former KIPP teachers across many schools and years in the charter chain. While many claim that KIPP is beyond reproach and is the shining star of charter schools, I submit that we should instead be asking whether KIPP can actually reform their reform based on the counternarratives provided by the KIPP teachers, or whether their approach is simply a pathological and abusive approach that the elites would never prescribe or allow for their own kids— except of course if they sent them away to military school.

For all of Cloaking Inequity’s post on KIPP click here.

Please Facebook Like, Tweet, etc below and/or reblog to share this discussion with others.

Want to know about Cloaking Inequity’s freshly pressed conversations about educational policy? Click the “Follow blog by email” button on the home page.

Twitter: @ProfessorJVH

Click here for Vitae.

Mutua, K. (2008) “Counternarrative.” The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Ed. Lisa M. Given. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Privatization vs. Community-Based Reform Keynote at Minnesota

My parents are visiting this week. We have had several vigorous discussions— you can probably imagine the cloth that I am cut from. I was talking to my father about social change, he is less optimistic that our society will do better on many issues. My mother took the tact that you can create social change in the space you occupy. I truly believe we can impact and change the world that we live in.Jack Kerouac genius Honestly, one of the questions I often get is how I balance all the competing demands in my life to prosecute public intellectualism for social change. I don’t think there is one simple answer to that question. I have a variety of strategies that I try to implement to add time to my life. Some of them are:

  • Living as close to work as possible to avoid spending my life in my car
  • Using technology tools to save time
  • Multitasking when I am able
  • Have a religious day of rest each week to give my brain a break so I don’t burn out
  • Collaborating with the “Crazy ones” “the misfits” “the rebels” “the trouble makers” “round heads” whenever and whereever possible.
  • Utilizing the bountiful energy that my fourth grade teacher couldn’t handle.

These are just a few of my strategies. I’ll tell you a few more next time we see each other.

2015-09-23 18.19.21
Flight connection in Phoenix

Probably one of the most tiring and taxing parts of my life is travel. However, I believe changing the world requires me to be crazy enough to travel extensively. In total I have travelled 392,892 miles to 125 locations over the past four years (I use a really cool app called TripIt to keep track of my travel, I highly recommend it). I’d estimate about 70% of that travel has been work related.

Which brings me to the visit last week to Minnesota for the Institute for Advanced Study’s Thursdays at 4 lecture.

In the spring I was contacted by Roozbeh Shirazi, Assistant Professor of Organization Leadership, Policy, and Development and Mary Vavrus, Associate Professor of Communication Studies Department at the University of Minnesota. They were interested in a Thursdays at 4 lecture focusing on “education reform, media treatments of it, and your take on community-based responses to corporate ed reform.”

The talk was cosponsored by the 2014-15 Institute for Advantage Study’s Private for the Public Good? Collaborative, the Department of Organizational Leadership, Policy, and Development, the Department of Communication Studies, the College of Education and Human Development, and the Department of Chicano and Latino Studies.

Here is the abstract of the talk entitled: “Education Reform: What instead? Community-Based Education Policy as the Alternative to Top-Down, Private Control”

NOW is the time to discuss community-based reform efforts designed to improve student achievement and school success as an alternative to the decades-long era of increasing private control in education. The top-down nature of school reform in urban communities has prompted educators, students, parents, and citizens alike to question the ways in which we hold public schools accountable for student learning and performance. Given increased support for testing and standardization, policies incentivizing the expansion of school vouchers and charters, assessment of students and teachers linked to test scores, and a federal role in education of historic proportions, this lecture will discuss the aristocratic reformers privatization and efforts and then consider community-based reforms within current school reform discourse and the education policy landscape. We also discuss new notions of community organizing for school improvement via social media and other platforms to create a personal social justice media ecology.

Check out the lecture below on YouTube. I began with the education privatization context that I first discussed in my Cambridge Forum lecture, then discussed community based reform and concluded with how to create a social justice media ecology.

p.s. I began my visit to Minnesota by stopping by an SEIU rally. Naomi Scheman, Professor of Philosophy and Gender, Women, & Sexuality Studies, asked me to stop by. She wrote via email,

One of the things I’ve especially appreciated about the drive so far has been the emphasis on broader issues concerning the erosion of the “public” in public higher education as well as more broadly, as well as the opportunities for us to work (especially with the legislature) in solidarity with unionized K-12 teachers–so your work on the privatization of public education is clearly relevant to the themes of our campaign.

Here are a photos from the rally and few others from the visit. If you click on one of the photos, you can quickly scroll through them.

Thank you for reading Cloaking Inequity.

Please Facebook Like, Tweet, etc below and/or reblog to share this discussion with others.

Want to know about Cloaking Inequity’s freshly pressed conversations about educational policy? Click the “Follow blog by email” button on the home page.

Twitter: @ProfessorJVH

Click here for Vitae.

Explanation of the M&Ms:

A Message to Democrats (and Republicans too) about Education Reform

Because I am California bound, I had to cancel an engagement to speak with the Sun City Democrats about education reform. To make up for it, I taped a message to them and answered their questions. I pasted the YouTube response below. Here are the questions:

  1. We read, in the Austin Statesman, that one of the major problems for the Texas public school system is an influx of poor, uneducated, children who do not speak English. There is an old adage, when you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is to stop digging. Would not a halt to the immigration of these children mitigate the problem? If yes, would you advocate a halt?
  2. What measures are necessary to recruit the best teachers? What incentives are needed to keep them? What makes for an effective teacher?
  3. Can charter schools provide effective alternative educational models? In Texas these schools seem to approved and evaluated centrally. What models are used in other states and to what effect?
  4. How do we stop the spread of the voucher system and charter schools, including tax credits to corporations in Texas? How do studies that have been done on the performance of charter schools compare to the performance of public schools?
  5. What can be done to prevent the public schools from being infested with the corporate model?
  6. What changes do you advocate to have our public schools help our children to be more prepared for life in the 21st century?
  7. What are your thoughts on installing the International Baccalaureate Program into more of our public schools?
  8. What makes for an effective administrator? Every teacher I talk to is very frustrated by administrative requirements. They say they don’t have time to teach. What is being done to improve this situation?
  9. How do feel “No Child Left Behind” has impacted our public school system?

Policy Briefs discussed in the talk:

Domestic Voucher Brief

International Voucher Brief

Community-Based Accountability 

Please Facebook Like, Tweet, etc below and/or reblog to share this discussion with others.

Want to know about Cloaking Inequity’s freshly pressed conversations about educational policy? Click the “Follow blog by email” button in the upper left hand corner of this page.

Twitter: @ProfessorJVH

Click here for Vitae.

Please blame Siri for any typos.

Thoughts From a Former KIPP Teacher: Testing, Common Core, and Charters Are Myths

In the bid for a better education for all students in America, recent reform efforts have focused on increasing the expectations – standards and exams – for students.  What is not explicitly discussed are the negative ways that these standards and exams target students of low socio-economic status and minorities – we are enamored as a nation with the mantra that higher expectations equals greater success.  Many argue that the major reason students of color and of low-income have not excelled is because of a basic lack of belief in educators and persistent racism and prejudice in the schooling system.  But this is just one factor of many.  Raising expectations without identifying and ameliorating the larger causes of lower performance among students of color and low socioeconomic status fails to engage with the deeper inequality that exists in this nation.  However, focusing on standards as one of many means to bolster achievement in high poverty/high minority schools is a way to strive for equity.  Unfortunately, as Diane Ravitch has accurately pointed out, the implementation of the standardization movement over the last 20 years has fallen short.  The reasons for this are twofold.  Increased standardization – like scripted curriculum – and testing are bound to decrease engagement, among the engaged, and especially the disengaged.  Secondly, when tied to testing, even great standards fall short due to the pressure placed on teachers and students to perform. Systemic change and standardization, so far, have failed to alter the nature of academic success in this country, particularly for the students who typically “underperform.”

Screen Shot 2013-05-21 at 5.46.47 AM

The Myth of High Expectations?

Walk into any major charter school today, and even a large number of public schools, and you are bound to see a sign that proclaims “high expectations” for all students.  It may be a “no excuses” sign, a “never give up” sign, a chart of goals, school test scores, and so on.  There is nothing wrong, inherently, with raising the expectations for all students. Cohen (1996) accurately describes the belief that “systemic reform would reduce inequality in educational achievement if disadvantaged students were held to the same high standards as everybody else and if schools could be made to improve education across the board” (pp. 101). The problem lies in both what those expectations are and how much weight is placed on raising the bar.

With NCLB and the current state of education, the expectations trickle down from high stakes exams.  This is not enough.  Not only do these exams maintain the competitive edge white middle and upper-class students have, but they reduce the quality of education students could conceivably receive with high expectations of success and rigor, great standards and great teachers.  I have seen the effects of this first hand working in KIPP schools, where students have learned quite well how to perform on exams, but have developed few of the critical thinking and problem solving skills and habits so desperately needed today.  Ravitch (2011) justifiably decries,

What was once an effort to improve the quality of education turned into an accounting strategy: Measure, then punish or reward.  No education experience was needed to administer such a program.  Anyone who loved data could do it.  The strategy produced fear and obedience among educators; it often generated higher test scores.  But it had nothing to do with education” (pp. 16).

This is the model in many charter schools today.  You can coach and train a teacher to effectively “plan backwards” from an exam.  They measure test questions (objectives) each day through exit tickets, effectively insuring that almost all students are prepared enough by the end of the year to be successful on the exam.  You need to be able to break down a test, teach minute skills or facts within a lesson – these may or may not be interconnected by the teacher lesson-to-lesson or unit-to-unit – interpret data for weak spots, reteach, and assess again. Is this the equitable education that low-income students and students of color deserve?

Screen Shot 2013-03-18 at 8.54.38 AM

Testing – What students learn from getting it right

Generally, there seems to be a grave fear of leaving high expectations alone, i.e. good standards, without all the tests to measure and compare.  Tests, as opposed to authentic assessments, by their very nature reduce the complexity and rigor of the standards, prize the correct answer and “quick thinking,” and diagnose learning and success through single measures.  They encourage both the teacher and the student to value beating the system instead of developing the person.  Teachers present, and students find, no reason to work through tough problems, as it will do them no good on the assessment at the end of the year.  This is the opposite of what most reformers proclaim to want out of these high expectations, new standards, and increased testing.  They frequently express a strong desire transform schools so that “exploration and production of knowledge, rigor in thinking and sustained intellectual effort” (Smith and O’Day, 1990, pp. 246), complex thinking and problem solving, and real world engaging curriculum are the norm. Instead the results of reform efforts like NCLB have driven change that focused primarily on ”improving test scores in reading and math…produc[ing] mountains of data, not educated citizens” and promoting “a cramped, mechanistic, profoundly anti-intellectual definition of education.  In the age of NCLB, knowledge is irrelevant” (Ravitch, 2011, pp. 8)

safe_image

Conclusion – The Common Core, Has Anything Changed?

The Common Core Standards were once a beacon of hope. Schools across the nation would have one, rigorous measure by which to challenge and compare students.  This new curriculum would engender a new sense of accomplishment in students, shaping them to be world competitors, and career and college ready.  So, what happened?  In my view, the CC have potential.  The standards are not perfect. (See Common Core: Same Exclusion, Different Century). However, they are a more complex set of standards that could, given the right environment, empower teachers to develop engaging, rigorous curriculum, and promote true learning and development in their students.  What’s the hitch?  Testing.  Most states have, or will, invest in heavy amounts of high stakes testing to “measure” the success of students.  Already, in New York, students have reported hating school, crying during exams, feigning illness, and high levels of stress.  School is not a place they want to be.  Parents of all stripes are beginning to protest.  The question is, can this country, or the states, figure out how to raise the bar effectively without a giveaway to testing companies? Can we invest in the resources to train teachers and then trust them to educate our kids will, using a set of agreed upon expectations?  The answer to this remains elusive…

Please Facebook Like, Tweet, etc below and/or reblog to share this discussion with others.

Want to know about Cloaking Inequity’s freshly pressed conversations about educational policy? Click the “Follow blog by email” button in the upper left hand corner of this page.

Please blame Siri for any typos.

Tell-All From A TFA and KIPP Teacher: Unprepared, Isolation, Shame, and Burnout

A few years ago a UT-Austin undergraduate student sat in my office and told me that she was joining Teach For America and was going to teach in KIPP school. The essence of TFA’s pitch to her?

We recruit a diverse group of leaders with a record of achievement who work to expand educational opportunity, starting by teaching for two years in a low-income community.

In 2013, The University of Texas at Austin sent more of our graduates to Teach For America than any other university. We’re #1!?! How can you not feel good about Teach For America after watching this expensive and very professional YouTube promotion video? (Happy Holidays!! btw)

Apparently, a half of a billion dollars buys some slick promotional material.

Also, how can you not fall in love with Teach For America when discussing their beliefs with their very intelligent and loquacious staff and lobbyist (Factoid: Did you know TFA has embedded paid ed policy staffers in the U.S. congress?).

A few weeks ago, after I spoke on a panel at the The National Hispanic Caucus of Hispanic State Legislators (NHCSL) conference in Orlando, I had a conversation with a Nevada State Senator about TFA and he told me:

You should visit the TFA classrooms. You will be really impressed.

Check out this Dog and Pony show featuring Spanky the Miniature Horse and Dally the Parson Russell Terrier

Back to that student that was in my office two years ago asking about TFA and KIPP. I’ll be honest, I advised her against it. But I asked her to keep in touch because I was very interested in hearing about her experience teaching for TFA and KIPP. Well, she was back in touch last week— midway through her second year. (It is anonymous to avoid retribution from you know who). Without further ado…

Graduating from college, I was energized and ready to take my place on the front line of education reform by becoming part of the Teach For America Corps.  Many entering corps members are captured by the convincing sales pitch of TFA recruiters on campus. While I did meet with one of these recruiters who reinforced my decision to join, I had also spent time in my undergraduate coursework studying parts of education reform, including charter schools and Teach For America. I knew the criticisms, but I thought I knew what I was getting into.  I was wrong about many things regarding Teach For America.

Here are 5 things I did not expect from my Teach For America experience:

Unpreparedness for the Classroom
The 5-week summer session at Rice University was a fast-paced, well-run training session, but it was not enough to prepare me to lead my own classroom in my first year.  While I learned valuable techniques and tools to become a teacher, it certainly did not equip me for creating systems in my classroom, writing unit plans, and creating valuable assessment. Five weeks was not enough to create the type of magic that Teach For America describes in its vision.  Training was like leading us to the top of a cliff before we had to jump off into the reality of our own classrooms. All I can say is the mountain was high and the fall was hard.

Lack of Focused Support
I imagined being a part of TFA would provide a network of resources. I didn’t imagine I would have to recreate 2 high school history curriculums on my own without any training. My “manager of teaching leadership and development” (MTLD), who is supposed to be my main support in my classroom, was a Teach for America alumni who had spent two years in the classroom before moving into his current position. How is a 2 year teacher (who taught middle school math, no less) going to give me the sort of advice I needed to teach high school history?

Isolation
I never thought I would feel so alone in a organization like TFA. I imagined being a part of the Corps would provide me with the support I needed, even though I would be an inexperienced first year teacher. During my first semester, I was visited two times by my TFA manager.  Afterward, we met for coffee, and he would ask questions about my vision for my students, but never offered the type of resources and support that I needed to make my teaching life more bearable. Looking back, I’m not even sure what a two-time visitor could have offered that would have really helped me.

Shame
Shame has a terrible place in this organization.  I never believed that shame would become a motivator in my Teach for America experience, but shame holds onto the necks of many Corps members.  Placing young college graduates in some of the toughest teaching situations with 5 weeks of training has negative repercussions on the mind, body, and soul of Corps members.  The message is “If only I were stronger, smarter and more capable, I could handle this. I would be able to save my students.”  Unfortunately, TFA intentionally or unintentionally preys on this shame to push Corps members to their limits to create “incredible” classrooms and “transformative” lesson plans. Would these things be good for our students? Of course.  Is shame a sustainable method for creating and keeping good teachers in the classroom? Absolutely not. It is defeating and draining.

Burnout
I never imagined not making it through 2 years of teaching, but there were so many occasions that I thought about quitting. I experienced anxiety attacks and mental breakdowns from the unrealistic expectations and workload. The immense amount of pressure that TFA places on Corps members, however, is not matched by a reciprocal amount of support and preparation.  What TFA lacks in support and preparation, they replace with “inspiration.” Will this “inspiration” and “vision” change the education system? Not without some backing, and I am afraid that TFA teachers do not last long. After my two years of experience, I have learned a lot about teaching and what works for my students, but I will not teach next year. I am burnt out. I am done.

As I enter my final semester, I have to be careful when I speak about Teach For America because TFA is more than one experience. For instance, not every Corps member has experienced a KIPP school with 3 principals in a year and a half.  There are many unique stories, so I have to analyze it in two parts. There is the effect of Teach For America on its members and the effect of Teach For America on the education system. Do I believe that young people are coming out of Teach For America with important skills and knowledge about education and the education system? Yes. Do I believe that Teach For America as an organization is solving the problem of educational inequality? No. Teach For America sets forth a plan that is creating more conversations about solutions but it is perpetuating many of the issues that already exist within the system. Teach For America is like when you shake a machine because you cannot make it work, and you think what the heck, maybe this will magically solve the problem.  Unfortunately, 5 weeks of training and throwing unprepared, young people into the classroom will not create a sustainable solution. Most of us are human and the pressure to create transformational change is too great without the proper training, resources, and preparation to do the job as it should be done.

As if on cue, Michael Zuckerman published a piece  last week in the Harvard Magazine with suggestions from Harvard TFA alums and scholars for the organization to reform its reform.

  • Many proposed that TFA extend the length of its commitment, noting that even the best teachers rarely hit their stride before year two.
  • In addition to lengthening the commitment, Katherine Merseth suggests that TFA expand the Institute from five weeks to six to nine months. She also advises them to increase support to new teachers once they are in the classroom, because new teachers learn the most from reflecting on these early teaching experiences.
  • Anthony Britt, who included constructive criticism in a column for the Guardian entitled “Teach for America isn’t perfect, but it has been a boost to education,” predicts that TFA will face issues until it clarifies its long-term plan—“especially with respect to charter schools”—and stops “having numerous corporate or controversial stakeholders and donors.”
  • Noam Hassenfeld, who wrote an article for the website PolicyMic entitled “This Former TFA Corps Member Thinks You Should Join City Year Instead,” argues for placing corps members as teaching assistants rather than teachers—“a meaningful educational experience that can only help and not hurt.” He also suggests a “Doctors Without Borders” model for TFA that would provide incentives, financial and otherwise, for teachers who have already demonstrated commitment to the profession—not novices fresh out of college—to take jobs in higher-needs districts.
  • Susan Moore Johnson, drawing on other research done with Morgaen Donaldson, thinks TFA should improve the way it matches corps members with teaching assignments.
  • Almost everyone agreed that TFA should focus less on simple growth in numbers and more on sending corps members to placements that most need them. “I do not understand why first-year corps members are placed at KIPP [Knowledge Is Power Program] schools, for example,” wrote Millicent Younger, alluding to KIPP’s desirability as a place to teach (its eight public charter schools in Newark and Camden alone report receiving over 3,000 teacher applications per year). “I feel that TFA should use its manpower as a way to put teachers in schools and districts that are struggling to find teachers, not to take higher-demand jobs.”

There is PLENTY of research and feedback out there for TFA. It is impossible for TFA to say that they are unaware of what is really happening in their organization.

YOU CAN HELP: Do you have documents or information about TFA? Are you a TFA teacher that wants to share your experience in a blog. It’s okay if it doesn’t read like TFA’s slick promotion materials. Send to jvh@austin.utexas.edu

For all of Cloaking Inequity’s posts on TFA go here.

p.s. Boycott FedEx for their Hypocrisy and Support of TFA

Please Facebook Like, Tweet, etc below and/or reblog to share this discussion with others.

Want to know about Cloaking Inequity’s freshly pressed conversations about educational policy? Click the “Follow blog by email” button in the upper left hand corner of this page.

Twitter: @ProfessorJVH

Click here for Vitae.

Please blame Siri for any typos.