麻豆精品

If you鈥檝e been around education long enough to remember Waiting for Superman and a broom-wielding Michelle Rhee scowling from the cover of Time magazine, you remember a time when to be an education reformer was to embrace conflict, even to feel ennobled by it. You were fighting for kids and against adult self-interest. 鈥淣o excuses鈥� was more than a label for a handful of renegade charter schools, it was a moral imperative. For generations, schools had failed children, particularly children of color. There must be no excuses made for these institutional failures, and none accepted.

The brand of reform that led with its chin could be arrogant and self-righteous, alienating as many as it attracted. But it鈥檚 sobering to contemplate the utter collapse of that combative mindset and the degree to which the conditions that led to its rise have fallen down a memory hole.

Steven Wilson, the founder and erstwhile CEO of the Ascend charter school network, gave a talk last month at the annual meeting of the Philanthropy Roundtable on 鈥淐ancel Culture: How to Protect Charter and Autonomous Schools.鈥� If you didn鈥檛 hear about it 鈥� and you did not 鈥� it鈥檚 because the fight has been drained from the reform movement. Those who founded and run such schools and built their pillars 鈥� academic achievement and high expectations for all students 鈥� are in a defensive crouch, stunned, seething or bending a knee to a new social justice orthodoxy that now frames their effort to advance racial justice as just the opposite: an attempt to impose white supremacy on Black and brown children.

Wilson began his talk by noting, correctly, the disappointing results of the classic education reform agenda. The standards, testing and accountability revolution has not produced commensurate improvements in student outcomes to justify the $4 trillion in additional money spent on public education over the last 30 years, or the degree of disruption that reform has wrought on American education. The one clear exception, he noted, are urban charter schools, particularly those that emerged from the 鈥渘o excuses鈥� movement. It cannot be denied: KIPP, Achievement First, Yes Prep, Uncommon Schools and similar networks of high-performing charter schools that sprang up in most major American cities in the last 25 years have launched to college tens of thousands of low-income kids of color who otherwise would not have had the opportunity had the ed reform era never occurred.

鈥淲hile we should be celebrating these path-breaking schools, they are under attack,鈥� said Wilson, noting that nearly every large charter network is the target of an Instagram site with anonymous postings portraying them as irredeemably racist. 鈥淚f we continue to be bullied into silence, then we will also be part of the machinery of white supremacy,鈥� reads one such post on the 鈥淏eing Black at KIPP鈥� Instagram site. 鈥淲e would have done nothing to prevent the traumatizing and terrorizing of a generation.鈥�

The response to these broadsides, from charter operators, as well as their supporters and advocates, has been tepid at best. KIPP, the largest of the major charter management organizations, sued for peace. 鈥淎s a white man, I did not do enough as we built KIPP to fully understand how systemic and interpersonal racism, and specifically anti-Blackness, impacts you and your families,鈥� founder David Levin wrote in a letter to the network鈥檚 alumni earlier this year. 鈥淚t is clear that I, and others, came up short in fully acknowledging the ways in which the school and organizational culture we built and how some of our practices perpetuated white supremacy and anti-Blackness,鈥� he concluded. But as Wilson observed, KIPP鈥檚 鈥渧ery purpose has been to advance racial justice.鈥�

It鈥檚 been a painful comeuppance for charter school leaders and political progressives, who believed they were squarely on the side of Black and brown students and families, and who spent the last few decades building and running institutions nearly unprecedented in American education: alternatives to poorly run neighborhood schools in some of the nation鈥檚 most impoverished urban communities, and a reliable pathway into college and the promise of lives of upward mobility. It is stunning, even incomprehensible, to learn that all this time they were actually racists, traumatizing and terrorizing Black and brown students, and imposing white supremacy on them.

It鈥檚 unsurprising that young alumni and staff, fresh from college campuses and steeped in the ideas and language of intersectionality and critical race theory, have brought revolutionary zeal to bear on behalf of students. What is harder to reckon with 鈥� and to forgive 鈥� is the silence of the broader charter school community, education reformers, philanthropists, politicians and other supporters who, as Wilson argued, should be celebrating and defending these schools and pushing back against those who would cancel them, nullify their contributions to social justice and even threaten their survival. 鈥淲e have to ask if charters will survive our broken and divided time, or if this once-in-decades achievement, one with the promise to remake American education, will atrophy and be forgotten,鈥� he said.

Wilson, as readers may recall, was fired from Ascend last year after publishing an essay arguing that 鈥渄emocratic education鈥� must strive to 鈥済rant all students the knowledge and faculties of mind that had once only been afforded the elite.鈥� His unforgivable sin was to defend the liberal arts tradition for all students, and to put a stake in the ground against anti-intellectualism, resisting the ideas codified in a diversity training workshop for New York City educators that academic values like 鈥渙bjectivity鈥� and 鈥渨orship of the written word鈥� represented 鈥渄amaging characteristics of white supremacy culture.鈥� If we want truly excellent schools, Wilson wrote in a June 2019 message to Ascend students and families, 鈥淚t鈥檚 time for intellectual passion to come out of the closet.鈥� It seems inconceivable that an educator could be fired over such anodyne views. But here we are.

His cancellation makes Wilson merely the most visible casualty of a moment and mindset that has been roiling charter schools for years, cowing their leaders into silence or abject self-abasement to appease the cancellers. In both his talk and a subsequent Q&A with Max Eden of the Manhattan Institute, Wilson said he was not at liberty to discuss his dismissal from Ascend, but he was outspoken on the danger of 鈥渟lipping into a kind of long-abhorred racial essentialism鈥� where children of different races are presumed to possess distinct capacities and academic achievement is scorned as 鈥渨hiteness.鈥�

鈥淭oday鈥檚 college graduates 鈥� and, now, charter school faculty 鈥� are idealistic, engaged and demand change. But liberal education鈥檚 traditional commitment 鈥� to reason, free speech and an encounter with diverse and at times uncomfortable ideas 鈥� are losing their authority,鈥� Wilson said. 鈥淭he staggering challenges the next generation will inherit can only be conquered by application of objective inquiry, technical expertise and international cooperation that transcends 鈥榠dentity.鈥� To even hint to children today that this monumental undertaking of their generation, this salvation, is 鈥榳hiteness鈥� 鈥� that is the ultimate disempowerment, the final exclusion.鈥�

If anything, Wilson understates the risk, to both liberal education and the charter schools that have made it available to a generation of low-income Black and brown families. Over the last several months I have spoken with dozens of charter leaders and education reform veterans. The self-censorship and seething Wilson described is very much in evidence. The risk to their mission is significant, even existential. One charter network leader told me his primary challenge at present is trying to serve parents 鈥渨ho are bought into the American Dream, hard work, education, character building and rigor鈥� while responding to the demands of 鈥渁 vocal group of staff who are far more progressive and privileged鈥� and who push back aggressively on the schools鈥� curriculum and culture. 鈥淭hey鈥檙e shocked by the level of specificity we expect from our students,鈥� he told me. 鈥淗owever, I really don’t know any other way to improve [students鈥橾 future lives other than a rigorous education.鈥�

What veteran charter school leaders have that young staffers and alumni lack is memory of the times before these schools and networks existed. 鈥淲e forget that when charters began, urban public schools were often chaotic, unruly and dangerous. The peer culture derogated academic achievement,鈥� Wilson said in his Philanthropy Roundtable speech. 鈥淭eachers struggled to maintain order. Students resented their schools鈥� diffidence.鈥� Yet even this feature of high-performing charter schools has been weaponized and given a sinister cast by antagonists. The recent much-praised podcast 鈥淣ice White Parents鈥� suggested that calling attention to 鈥渃haos and disruption鈥� in schools is a racist dog whistle. But the parents of charter school kids have not forgotten; it鈥檚 why they continue to swell charter school waiting lists. Indeed, parents are the overlooked constituency in all this. If high-performing charters were the hotbeds of oppression and racism their critics insist, families would stay away in droves. But parent satisfaction levels remain above 90 percent at every network I have contacted in the past several months. With few exceptions, parents at KIPP, Uncommon, Success Academy and other networks say they would enthusiastically recommend their child鈥檚 school to family and friends.

Also unremarked upon is the degree to which 鈥渘o excuses鈥� schools have adapted in response not just to external pressure, but feedback gleaned from students about their experiences. KIPP made significant changes to its curriculum and culture years ago, when faced with disappointing college persistence and graduation rates. Wilson鈥檚 own Ascend network won widespread attention and praise when it adopted restorative justice practices. This willingness, even eagerness, to adapt is not a repudiation of the 鈥渘o excuses鈥� model but an illustration of it. The loudest critics of 鈥渃arceral鈥� schooling are warring against ghosts, responding to a model that in many cases looks nothing like 20 years ago. Charter leadership is also increasingly diverse at both the network and building level, further blunting the critique that these schools perpetuate anti-Blackness.

When I attended Wilson鈥檚 talk via Zoom, I expected it would provoke a strong response, at least privately. People who take controversial stands in education policy and practice are often contacted afterward by friends and colleagues who say, 鈥淭hank you for speaking out. I just wish I could support you publicly.鈥� When I spoke with Wilson a week after his talk, I was surprised to learn that there had been no response at all. This suggests lack of awareness of the fragility of these schools and a failure to grasp the nature of the threat they face, or simply fear that to share Wilson鈥檚 concern is to share his fate. Or perhaps it鈥檚 battle fatigue. One prominent charter founder describes 鈥渜uite a few conversations鈥� with reform colleagues who 鈥渏ust want to get out of education entirely.鈥� Others attribute the muted response to a crisis of confidence. Urban charters have produced results that are far better than average for low-income kids but below the ambitions of their founders and early boosters. 鈥淚f our results really were spectacular,鈥� says one advocate, 鈥淚 don鈥檛 think we鈥檇 be so much on the defensive.”

Because the 鈥渘o excuses鈥� moment and mindset have receded from memory, fallen into disfavor or may be foreign to younger reformers, it is important to recall the principles upon which urban charter networks were founded and that fueled their rise. They emphasized order, urgency and student agency, and sought to inspire resilience and excellence 鈥� in personal conduct, academic effort and performance. These are universal virtues that remain worth fighting for; the effort to rebrand them as characteristics of a white supremacist culture are risible 鈥� and are seen as such by the schools鈥� parents 鈥� and must be firmly resisted and rejected. The focus on outcomes and achievement and relentless effort in their pursuit stood 鈥� it still stands 鈥� in sharp relief to the failure factories attended by the vast majority of America鈥檚 low-income children of color, where little is expected or offered. If those features of the 鈥渘o excuses鈥� tradition are cast as inherently racist, then a swift and unarrested decline into mediocrity or worse is a foregone conclusion, not just in urban charter schools, but in education at large. There will be no counterweight or models to point to as a credible alternative to continued school failure.

Steven Wilson was polite. I will be pointed: The fight has gone out of an education reform movement that has too little to show for itself. The reluctance of charter school proponents to defend the one thing it鈥檚 gotten right will be its death knell.

Robert Pondiscio is a senior fellow at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. He is the author of the new book 鈥淗ow the Other Half Learns鈥� (Avery, 2019).

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 麻豆精品鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.