The best part is when Alter says, "No offense." Yeah, sure: why would Dr. Julian Vasquez Heilig take offense at having his peer-reviewed study called "cherry-picking" and "bogus" on national TV?
Alter is part of the great mass of pundits who continue to write about education without having the first clue about the topic. The fact is that Vasquez Helig's study shows quite clearly that there is significant and serious attrition at KIPP's schools in Texas. This comports with others' reporting and research - see here, here, and here for starters - that shows KIPP regularly "counsels out" students as part of their program.
KIPP responded to Helig's study aggressively; they know their "brand" is on the line when they are called out on this attrition. Vasquez Helig handles their objections quite deftly, thank you very much. It's fine that this is under debate - fine, that is, to everyone but Alter, who decides to lose his freakin' mind and not even address the study.
KIPP has refused to take Diane Ravitch's challenge and manage an entire school district, and attrition is the primary reason why. A true public school does not have the luxury of "counseling out" students; if a kid is failing, they must continue to work with the kid, no matter how unmotivated he or his parents may be. It is perfectly legitimate - indeed, it's critical - to question whether KIPP's methods are replicable, due to their high attrition rates, in public schools.
Alter says that "successful" charter schools are laboratories that develop "best practices" that all schools can benefit from. Well, KIPP may well run fine schools; but if the kids who can't cut it there wind up leaving, how does that help a real public school? Public schools don't have the luxury of indulging in attrition; they must serve all students. What can a school that has such high attrition teach a school that can't get rid of kids unless they are severe discipline problems?
This is a serious topic, and it deserves a serious conversation. Give Melissa Harris-Perry credit for telling Alter to pipe down and let KIPP critics like Vasquez Helig make their points. If Alter has a serious rebuttal, let him make it.
But fake indignation isn't helping anyone; it isn't fooling anyone, either.
KIPP responded to Helig's study aggressively; they know their "brand" is on the line when they are called out on this attrition. Vasquez Helig handles their objections quite deftly, thank you very much. It's fine that this is under debate - fine, that is, to everyone but Alter, who decides to lose his freakin' mind and not even address the study.
KIPP has refused to take Diane Ravitch's challenge and manage an entire school district, and attrition is the primary reason why. A true public school does not have the luxury of "counseling out" students; if a kid is failing, they must continue to work with the kid, no matter how unmotivated he or his parents may be. It is perfectly legitimate - indeed, it's critical - to question whether KIPP's methods are replicable, due to their high attrition rates, in public schools.
Alter says that "successful" charter schools are laboratories that develop "best practices" that all schools can benefit from. Well, KIPP may well run fine schools; but if the kids who can't cut it there wind up leaving, how does that help a real public school? Public schools don't have the luxury of indulging in attrition; they must serve all students. What can a school that has such high attrition teach a school that can't get rid of kids unless they are severe discipline problems?
This is a serious topic, and it deserves a serious conversation. Give Melissa Harris-Perry credit for telling Alter to pipe down and let KIPP critics like Vasquez Helig make their points. If Alter has a serious rebuttal, let him make it.
But fake indignation isn't helping anyone; it isn't fooling anyone, either.