Why 'No Excuses' Charter Leaders Ignore the Racial Justice Critiques Against Them

Charter school leaders often feel confused when they become the focus of criticism from equity and racial justice activists. These (often white) people identify as part of the solution here, not part of the problem. Not only do they know that black lives matter, but they have dedicated their lives to building schools to help black students and families have better opportunities in life. Not only have they dedicated their lives to this, but they have actual data! ACT data, graduation data, college acceptance data. Data that shows they’ve been successful! No matter what their former students or teachers say - these charter leaders find comfort in the data that proves their schools have been a force for good in the communities they serve.?

And yet former students, families, and teachers continue to speak out about classroom procedures, school policies, discipline systems, and white savior mindsets that traumatize many black and brown people associated with these schools, perpetuate the school to prison pipeline, and generally work to suppress the individualism and creativity of people of color.

When confronted with these criticisms the charter leaders tend to get defensive. They point to ‘bad apples’, emphasize their college acceptance data, remind people that fighting for equity is their life’s work, point to a few concrete examples of listening and responding to critics, and then emphasize that their schools are ‘schools of choice’ and that no one has to go there if they don’t like their model.?

The activists traumatized by the schools say: “Ok, but you really do need to get better.” The leaders say “We’re trying.” The activists reply, “Really?!? It doesn’t seem like it to us. You’re really not getting what we’re saying.” And the leaders say, “Calm down and look at our data. The practices that produce that data, by definition, cannot be problematic. Actually, we like to call them the ‘best’.”?

To understand the disconnect here, it’s important to examine the two organizing principles at the core of the no excuses charter movement.?

1. College is the Goal: College is the most effective pathway to opportunity for students from low income communities. If we can help get students to college we will have done them a powerful service and they will have a much, much better chance at excelling in life.?
2. Scale is a Moral Imperative: Inequity and low expectations in public education are so pervasive and systemic that whatever approach we use must be replicable at scale. It is not enough to help students in one building. All students should be able to choose a school like ours. If we can do a better job of getting students to college than district schools, it is actually unethical to not grow our network as quickly as possible.?

These ideological assumptions make sense. When they began to emerge around 20 years ago they brought clarity and purpose to a new generation of highly educated and capable education reformers.?

Charter models built on these assumptions may have even been a necessary phase in the progress towards a more just and effective education system. But we need to absorb the lessons we’ve learned from the past 20 years about the unintended consequences of schools built on these narrow assumptions and embrace the idea that this approach should be just that: a phase. The practices that define these schools are not ‘best practices’, they are just scalable practices that are relatively more effective at achieving the narrow goal of more college acceptances.?

Also, it turns out that both of these assumptions are problematic when they are used as organizing principles.?

A narrow focus on college means a narrow focus on state tests, ACT scores, AP classes, and other paper credentials. These are all standardized systems for success with clear standards and guidance on how to do well. Because of this standardization it makes sense to pursue excellence in these areas with directive, compliance driven, ‘we know best’, ‘be gritty and do what you’re told’, instructional strategies. Everything else in the system, from dress code to hallway lines, to silent lunch, to discipline policies, to family engagement, must fall in line with this directive approach.?

Standardized goals lead to standardized practices. Standardized practices, by definition, really do dehumanize the people they are applied to. An individual, whether they are a student, a teacher, or a parent, is only an input into the system. Comply with the system and you will do well on the test. We know this because we know what is on the test. It literally does not matter who you are, do what we say and the system will achieve the result. Or, put another way, Any child can succeed!?

The issue with scale is also problematic. The need to grow quickly muffles the ability to meaningfully reflect on instructional practice. Charter networks learn a lot when they scale but what they are learning is how to scale, not how to improve learning communities. Young teachers are recruited for their ability to be trained quickly on the standardized systems. Like the students, they are expected to do what they are told, how they are told. This leads to burnout and turnover, which leads to a focus on recruiting more young and inexperienced teachers, which forces the standardized guidance to increasingly simplify the teaching profession to a set of ‘champion’ techniques that can be procedurally taught and reinforced.?

Growth is ok, but the way we do it matters. Leaders that want to ignore the negative relationship between quality control and speed of scale are deceiving themselves. A school is not a set of systems and procedures, it is a community of human beings.

It is time for no excuses charter leaders to recognize that an evolution of this model is necessary. This does not mean just adding programmatic ornaments at the periphery of student experience or making concessions on student dress codes. Charters need to reimagine the organizational principles that shape their approach to education. Instead of college and scale we should focus on agency and structural reform.?

These new organizational principles could look something like this:?

• Increase Agency - Students and teachers can only reach their full potential through structures that support their agency and independence. This does not mean that people should be able to do whatever they want whenever they want or that academic rigor doesn’t matter. It does mean that the systems a school designs should be focused on liberating individual passion and creativity. This type of approach requires more planning, more nuanced feedback and coaching, and a more adaptive style of leadership. Yes, it is much harder to do this and requires more skilled and experienced teachers and leaders.?

But a school that is organized around a commitment to agency and independence is a more joyful place to work and learn. When done well, the academic performance on standardized assessments will improve. But this approach is not a secret technique to increase test scores, it is about embracing the fact that the role of school in society is about much, much more than preparing students for the college admissions process. School should prepare children with the power to create a better world.?

(Dr. Maria Montessori and Paulo Freire led the way for how to take this type of approach in high-stress communities. Now is the time to build on their work.)?

• Advocate for Systemic Change - One of the more controversial, but perhaps most important, impacts no excuses schools have had is that they have brought the attention of big money and political interests to schools in high-stress communities. It’s time that these relationships were leveraged to push for actual systemic change. Charter schools need to be on the front lines, not just advocating for their own narrow interests, but pushing for the big picture changes that matter. Let’s talk about universal early childhood education and school and district attendance zones. Let’s talk about the systems we have to recruit and prepare teachers. Let’s look at alternate academic models where teachers spend less time in whole class instruction and more time doing small group coaching and feedback.

If you are committed to all children getting an excellent education, please focus more political energy on reforms that will actually?lead to all children getting a better education - not just children in your schools. Fifteen years ago, your organizations needed to be self-interested and scrappy. The power dynamics have evolved since then. It’s time for your political priorities to evolve as well. Taking your model to scale is not the only way to improve education and, honestly, you know that approach will never address the systems level issues that inspired your work in the first place. It is time to think bigger about what is possible than you ever have before. But first you will need to stop thinking just about yourself.?

We do not need to burn the whole system to the ground necessarily. There is a lot of good that has come from these schools. Generally the adults assume more responsibility for student success and are less likely to scapegoat poverty than district schools. There is a lot to keep related to the strategic use of data. The emphasis on teacher development systems is progressive, even if the content of those interactions leaves much to be desired. Just promoting the basic fact that children from low-income communities are capable of academic excellence was a valuable contribution. We can keep some of what was created here but we also need to change much more than what most leaders may be comfortable with. Some of this is from a lack of clarity on what the alternative could look like. That is obviously a much longer conversation.?

But there are places we can look to for clarity here. I am not alone in seeing what is possible if we shift our organizing principles. I write all of this pulling from my 16 years of experience in education, but I am also pulling inspiration from the ideas of educators and writers who have molded my thinking. For any charter leaders or young educators who want a more clear idea of what a new phase in our movement could look like, I’ll close with some book recommendations. Any of these would be a great place to start if you’re looking to grow beyond TLAC.?

(People interested in more on the idea of 'how to take good ideas to scale' can also check out my article on this topic inspired by a conversation I had with former Secretary of Education John King. https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/how-do-you-take-good-ideas-scale-lessons-from-brief-former-minton/ )

Book Recommendations:

The Power of Their Ideas by Deborah Meier

Teacher Wars: A History of America’s Most Embattled Profession by Dana Goldstein

Multiplication is for White People by Lisa Delpit?

How to Build a Better Teacher by Elizabeth Green

For White Folks Who Teach in the Hood by Christopher Emdin

The Global Achievement Gap by Tony Wagner

Creating Innovators by Tony Wagner?

What School Could Be by Ted Dintersmith?

Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire

Pedagogy of Freedom by Paulo Freire

The Absorbent Mind by Maria Montessori?