KIPP
September 25th, 2012 at 2:00 pm by David FarrarThe Herald reports:
A US charter school guru whose programme was considered a success in poor neighbourhoods has warned against giving contracts to businesses or groups which do not have a long, robust track record in education.
Seems fairly sensible. We know some charter schools do well, and some do not, so the trick is to emulate the ones that do well.
Knowledge is Power Programme (Kipp) co-founder Mike Feinberg, who is on a speaking tour in New Zealand, also backed the Government’s controversial decision to allow unqualified teachers in its proposed Partnership Schools.
Kipp schools were launched in poor American neighbourhoods in 1994, with a policy of longer school days and terms, and a strict code of behaviour for students.
Charter schools have had mixed success in the US, but Kipp schools have a good record in getting underprivileged children into university.
This is what Labour and the Greens are fighting against??
Knowledge is Power Programme:
*125 public charter schools (elementary, middle, high school) with 40,000 students across the US.
*85 per cent of students from low socio-economic backgrounds.
*90 per cent of Kipp students graduate to high school, 80 per cent continue to university.
*Classes run from 7.30am to 5pm weekdays, with 2 to 3 hours homework and extra classes on Saturdays and holidays.
*90 per cent funded by the state, with some private contributions.
*Teachers earn 10 per cent more than in state schools.
*Reported to have a high drop-out rate of students.
Impressive results.
Related posts:
- Herald on charter schools
- Coddington on charter schools
- The Economist on charter schools
- Another academic attacks charter schools
September 25th, 2012 at 2:12 pm
Well yes. Is it unreasonable to fight against schools with high drop-out rates?
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 2:16 pm
Is Mr Feinberg telling the truth about the success of KIPP?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/are-kipp-achievement-gains-inflated/2012/09/19/f8ceff90-01ef-11e2-b260-32f4a8db9b7e_story.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/07/AR2008110700861.html
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
The KIPP students appear to be higher achievers than their peers and in the main have motivated parents. As to the drop-out rate researchers have found it to be no worse than other schools who cater to the same demographic. In NZ the longer hours would certainly fit with working parents and cover the lack of academic support at home.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 2:24 pm
“Longer school days and terms” sounds like a good idea, provided it’s balanced with a reduction (or, for younger children, a complete absence) of what passes for homework.
When a child comes home from school they should be free to play, to let their imagination run free, to relax and unwind. Sitting at the kitchen table completing the same short answer / multi choice photocopied worksheets that mum and dad got handed when they were at school teaches them nothing, especially when feedback consists of ticks, crosses and perhaps a one line comment.
Self-directed study as practiced by older students is one thing; the tasks sent home with most younger children seem designed to test the rote retention of what has been taught in the classroom, and would be better conducted in the classroom, in more creative ways rather than absorbing the limited period of time many parents get to spend with their children.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 2:27 pm
Good links Hamnida, they both suggest there are real successes from KIPP.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 2:36 pm
When a child comes home from school they should be free to play, to let their imagination run free, to relax and unwind.
I susupect that much of the point of the model might be that in the sort of places these schools are in, being at school is more relaxing (i.e. safe) than being at home.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 3:35 pm
Don’t these two things contradict each other?
Of course as David has promised us that he never reports on statistics without investigating their methodology…
…I’m sure any confusion will soon be cleared up.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 4:03 pm
Fentex, go and read the articles Hamnida linked to, one of them gives more information about the reported high drop out rates. That will help you clear up your confusion.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 4:07 pm
@Fentex:
I read it as, “Of those who stick with the programme, 90 percent… graduate…” but hopefully DPF can/will clarify.
I see it as no different to the Gifted Kids programme (which I had a hand in establishing at Wainuiomata High School, so have some knowledge of). Lots of people (mainly parents) think little Johnny or Sally is gifted and put them up for the programme. Perhaps they are, but they also need determination, persistence and a willingness to work hard. So some don’t make it through, or make it through but don’t last.
Of those who do, the sucess rate is then very high. Which also answers Graeme Edgeler’s question:
Yes it is, if the school is aiming for excellence. Not everyone is excellent, and of those who are naturally so, a smaller percentage are also willing to apply themselves. If the unions and the Greens want to fight against that principle then they should be fighting against everything from Officer Cadet School to elite sporting academies. They may have high drop-out rates (or high entrance failure rates) but for those who make the grade they offer opportunity not found elsewhere.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 4:32 pm
Yes does seem odd
Vote:Reported to have a high drop-out rate of students – if that’s right how high is the drop out rate?
September 25th, 2012 at 4:37 pm
Steve Sailer summarises:
“Basically, KIPP is nonstop boot camp. This is an important point. What works best for poor people is order, discipline, shame, repetition, and all the other uncool stuff that liberals have worked for decades to remove from our societies. White liberals have done a great job of liberating themselves, at great expense to the poor.”
http://isteve.blogspot.co.nz/2009/03/kipp.html
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 4:40 pm
Mark, see Hamnida’s links.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 5:15 pm
If we’re going to look at links, this one might be worthwhile.The Stanford University study is the only (?) one made into the effectiveness of Charter Schools in the US.
http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MULTIPLE_CHOICE_CREDO.pdf
Evidently the results weren’t all that ‘flash’. A 17% success rate? Not exactly a glowing “report card” I’d say.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 5:40 pm
The reults are good for these schools and Mike talks positively of them, with juts one warning not to just take all comers. So with all the detail and the positive news the NZ Herald takes the this one warning and uses it to portray these schools negatively. “Charter guru opposes free for all” is the headline. This paper and the media in general attack the ACT Party at every turn. These partnership schools have a hard road ahead, it is not just Labour and teh Greens and teh unions but because it is ACT policy the media will campaign hard against it, you watch.
Partnership schools are not the answer, they are part of the answer, but in the end they are about giving poor children the same choice to opt out of state education as rich children have. They are about equality in that regard. Thanks the ACT Party for the innovation. John Banks is the Minister in charge but you will be waiting a long time before the media want to ask him anything about them. The last thing they want is to be helpful with this worthwhile project.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 5:41 pm
***but in the end they are about giving poor children the same choice to opt out of state education as rich children have. ***
Yeah, but the point of opting out of state education for many is to avoid poor children & the disruptive behaviour, crime/gang problems associated with them.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 8:44 pm
Bob R: I reckon it’s more about opting out of the state school system, and some of the things that brings, than opting out of the poor children. Presumably the new school will expect standards and do something about those who fail to meet them.
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 8:58 pm
I agree that is a factor, but avoidance of underclass problems is also a motivation. Why would people want their kids to go to a school with children of gang members, or that need police in attendance because of teen gangs?* Or worry their kids will get bullied for doing well academically? It’s the same with people paying more to live in nice suburbs where there is low crime.
* http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/6036438/Cops-in-schools-curb-youth-gang-problem
Vote:September 25th, 2012 at 9:05 pm
Another thing is getting into the “old boys network” – ensuring the kids make good connections, and are hanging out with people who expect to do well in the future.
Vote:September 26th, 2012 at 8:20 am
They have a good record for sure. Wonder if their teachers are qualified?
I remain highly sceptical of the Charter Schools programme proposed for NZ but time will tell I guess and the kids will be the guinea
Vote:pigs.
September 26th, 2012 at 11:04 am
Stanford University Research
http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/National_Release.pdf
Vote:September 26th, 2012 at 11:53 am
A search of that PDF for KIPP returns zero results Hamnida. What’s the relevance again?
Vote: