I can imagine that I was not the only charter school educator who cringed when I saw the headline recently “At Success Academy Charter School, Singling Out Pupils Who Have ‘Got to Go’”. According to the article, at one of the schools in the Success Academy network of charter schools in New York City, the principal and other staff were accused of developing a list of over 15 “unruly” elementary school students who they felt had to be counseled out or withdrawn from the school in order to maintain learning for the other students. Shortly after the article’s publication, the head of the Success Academy network, Eva Moskowitz, acknowledged that the list had existed but that the principal was reprimanded and that the list was “an anomaly” because her schools did not engage in such practices as the norm.
As a charter school leader, I’m particularly sensitive to these stories because they play into commonly-held beliefs by some that charter schools “lemon drop” by subtly or aggressively pushing out students who struggle academically or behaviorally (or “cherry pick” applicants by screening out students who show similar struggles in prior schools). Let me be clear: ANCS has not and will not take part in such practices. But “school discipline”—beyond simply what happened at Success Academy—is a flash point in public education in general at charter and traditional public schools alike.
In the wake of the Success Academy incident, Michael Petrilli of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute—an education think tank—wrote an op-ed that argued that school discipline policies tie the hands of school administrators at traditional public schools from dealing with the “serial disrupters” and that “parents understand this, and the desire for orderly schools with high expectations for student behavior is a major reason they search out high-quality charter schools.” Thankfully, others, like the Center on Reinventing Public Education, have offered more nuanced views on the topic and have provided proven strategies for students with significant behavioral needs and ways to maintain focused learning in classrooms for all students.
At ANCS, students may apply for enrollment through our lottery and we collect no information about their academic record prior to their enrollment. Our teachers work hard to support all students—those with high-abilities and those who struggle—and we have multiple teachers in most every classroom to effectively address the range of learners we have. Our use of the Conscious Discipline approach has, at its core, a focus on equipping students with the skills to regulate their emotions so that they can be centered on learning and not distracting themselves or others. Does this mean we are free at all times of disruptions caused by student behavior? Of course not—no school in the world can claim that. Does this mean students don’t have consequences for behavior that violates our guiding principles? Again, no—once we know that students have the skills to control their behavior, if they don’t use them, consequences are used. Are there times when a student’s behavioral needs might be so great that a more specialized setting is needed? Yes, and there are guidelines that dictate this process for students at all public schools.
Certainly suspending a student from school can at times can be warranted in the face of a dangerous behavior that gives administrators, teachers, and parents time to develop an appropriate intervention plan before the student returns to school. But pernicious disciplinary practices like the ones described at one Success Academy charter school usually do little to address the underlying issues. We have ways—and plenty of examples of their use across the country—of better serving students who struggle behaviorally so that they and their classmates can engage in meaningful learning.