News, data and conversation
about schools in New York City.
WNYC’s participation is supported by

Harlem Schools See High Student Turnover

8 Comments
Respond

Oct. 2, 2012, 8:56 p.m.

Principal Pamela Price Haynes has worked at P.S. 161 in Harlem for 28 years. Every morning and afternoon, she can see how charter schools have changed the face of the neighborhood when she watches the crowds of students wearing gray, navy or khaki uniforms coming and going to their schools.

But Price has another observation about the impact of charters.

“People who work in public education, public schools, feel that we are the dumping ground,” she said.

This blunt view is shared by many teachers and principals in the city’s district schools. They’re frustrated that charter schools – which are also public but have more autonomy – have higher than average test scores, which they attribute to strict rules that make it possible to push out students with behavioral problems and low grades.

P.S. 161 Principal Pamela Price Haynes

This perception has shadowed the charters for years, even though studies have found they make academic gains with the same type of students who attend traditional public schools and kids who applied but didn’t get into charters.

But there’s been little research on the students who leave charters. WNYC obtained three years’ worth of discharge data from the city’s Department of Education. We found no exodus from the charters. In fact, the charters had lower attrition rates, on average, than the regular public schools. Attrition in charter elementary schools for 2010-11 was 10.8 percent citywide, compared to 14.3 percent in district schools. Middle school attrition was lower in both categories and more comparable, at around 10 percent.

What we found in the three districts of Harlem, however, are several charters and district schools where annual turnover can be as high as one out of five students. There are lots of possible reasons. Poverty is one. Experts say high attrition is common in poor communities because families move around often. But the churn in Harlem also seems to be related to the booming market of school choice.

At P.S. 161, which has more than 900 students in grades K through eight, the attrition rate for elementary students was 16 percent in 2010-11, according to the Department of Education. Some kids leave for charters but others transfer in from charters. In one fifth grade class of 25 students, four hands shot up when a teacher asked if any one ever attended a city charter school. A boy and a girl who went to Harlem Link charter both recall lots of rules.

“I was being bad, my Mommy had to come up to the school,” said the girl. “They kept on saying I was playing around too much and couldn’t stop talking.”

“I would play on the rug and then they would say I have to go to my seat and put my head down,” said the boy.

Harlem Link said these students were not kicked out and their families agreed. The girl’s mother, who asked that we not use their names, said her child did well at Harlem Link. But she found the rules “petty,” noting that she was called at work because her daughter’s belt wasn’t all black, as required.

Harlem Link is familiar with complaints about its rules. The school, which shares a public school building on West 112th Street with a few other schools, takes its uniform policy very seriously. Teachers keep daily charts of student behavior and families sign contracts pledging to review these reports. Children are also reminded to keep their voices low. Infractions can earn a child deductions, which can add up to detentions. These policies create a culture of high standards, said principal Steve Evangelista, who presides over breakfast and calls everyone to order with the gentle sound of a chime.

“By this time I should see every scholar tracking me,” he announced one morning as the children passed their trays to garbage cans and prepared line up for first period. Evangelista spotted three boys who continued talking and pulled them aside. They would have to skip recess as punishment.

Photos: Inside P.S. 161 and Harlem Link Charter School

Charles Taylor, whose son was among the three, said he appreciates the elementary school’s no nonsense approach.

“It’s important for children to learn that they must conduct themselves in an orderly and respectful fashion in a school environment,” he said. “That’s really a tough lesson for kids to learn but it’s a necessary one.”

Another parent, Angela Dupree, agreed and said she’s grateful for options like Harlem Link.

“I am very happy because it gives us the opportunity to shop around,” she said, noting that another daughter graduated Harlem Link last year and is now in junior high. “Like, I couldn’t believe some of the schools that she could possibly get into and she actually got accepted to the majority of junior high schools she wanted.”

But Dupree isn’t done shopping. She is thinking of moving her younger daughter out of Harlem Link, because she had to repeat kindergarten. She also thinks the uniform policy is too strict.

“I said that to my husband last night, I’m going to have to start choosing a school just like I choose what type of sneakers I should buy,” she said.

Evangelista acknowledges the school has lost some students because their families didn’t like its culture, and preferred to go elsewhere. There are now 25 charter schools in Harlem, alone.

“It’s a community where there has never been this kind of choice and you’re talking about unprecedented choice for any community in the United States,” he said.

Margaret Ryan and Steve Evangelista co-founded Harlem Link charter school in 2005.

Evangelista believes this level of choice has contributed to the school’s attrition rate, which was over 20 percent in recent years. That’s higher than the citywide average but similar to regular schools in parts of Harlem.

“Last year we had a fourth grader who was here for kindergarten, first grade, gone for second and third grade, came back for fourth and left after fourth because of dissatisfaction,” he said. “Nothing’s never good enough. Which is a great attitude but the trauma of moving a child is sometimes lost on families.”

Experts agree there’s a downside to all this mobility.

“It creates discontinuity in students’ schooling, and their exposure to curriculum and a steady stream of continuous instruction and continuity of care in the schools,” said James Kemple, executive director for the Research Alliance for New York City Schools at New York University.

While there’s no hard evidence that children with poor grades and attention problems are being counseled out of charters, Evangelista concedes there’s a grain of truth to the perception that kids leave charters because they’re more demanding. He and his wife, Margaret Ryan, are former New York City public school teachers who opened their school in 2005 so they could focus on good teaching. The school struggled academically for a few years but improved after they tightened some of the rules. At Harlem Link, a child can be held back a year for missing more than 15 days of school.

“The fact is [the fact is the fact] that a parent can leave Harlem Link if we’re pushing back that their child has already missed 10 days by October,” said Ryan. “They can can go to neighboring zoned school and not hear pushback on attendance. The same with uniforms.”

Ryan and Evangelista said their school works with families to explain its policies and keep pupils on track, and that fewer students are leaving now when they’re held back a grade.

Still, grade retention is one reason why several teachers at the district schools in Harlem say they receive students from charters. A supervisor at a Harlem middle school who did not want to be identified said most of these students are low-performing, and “kids seem to get the message: you can’t handle this go to a public school.”

The teachers union also notes that charter schools don’t always replace students who leave mid-year, which means they’re less likely to receive new students who might be far behind academically or struggling in other ways. This is one commonly held theory why some of the charters have higher test scores. Charters also tend to have longer school days, which some families love but others find exhausting.

Teachers and principals at district schools also believe some charters do have different populations. A a report by the New York City Charter School Center found charters serve a smaller percentage of Hispanic students, overall, than the city’s district schools and far fewer students who are still learning English (less than 6 percent in charters, compared to 15 percent citywide). This could have something to do with where the charters are located. They also serve fewer of the neediest special education pupils.

At P.S. 161, which has many Hispanic students, Principal Price notes that nearly a third of her pupils are still learning English. The charters in Harlem don’t have such high concentrations.

But in other ways, P.S. 161 doesn’t look all that different from a charter. It’s putting more focus this year on student behavior in hallways and classrooms. Students are also given yellow warning cards for misbehavior – just as they are in Harlem Link. And while the school has long had a uniform policy, it’s doing more this year to encourage its students to wear them.

Price said these rules were not established in response to the competition from charters. Instead, she noted that these management techniques are common at all kinds of schools. She said she wanted to establish a more respectful environment now that her school has expanded to include middle grades. But there’s a different emphasis at P.S. 161 than in a charter, said assistant principal Leslie Ellman.

“Classes with 100 percent uniforms are being celebrated on the loudspeaker,” she explained. “It’s a really different approach to focus on the positive rather than the negative. Instead of coming up with how many ways are we going to punish everybody for not following the rule, it’s like how many ways can we celebrate everyone who is so everyone wants to.”

Ellman and her colleagues believe this makes their school more welcoming than charters. But while enrollment is strong, and test scores have improved, they haven’t convinced everyone that their brand of public education is just as good.

William McKinley, whose son transferred into P.S. 161 last year from a charter run by the Success network, said he wished he could have stayed because the curriculum was so challenging. But there were family problems and a change of residence.

William McKinley and his son have tried both district and charter schools

“I wish charter schools was available when I was in school,” he said, adding “no offense” to a guidance counselor who had come outside during dismissal to talk to him about his child’s homework.

McKinley hasn’t given up, though. This fall he plans to fill out applications so his son can enter the lotteries for a charter middle school.

Beth Fertig is a senior reporter at WNYC. Follow her on Twitter @bethfertig

8 Comments

Respond
Picture?type=square
Ruby Clinton October 3, 2012, 1:13 PM

This article pretends to disprove something that it does not. An analysis that shows a lower attrition rate does not mean that charters aren't resulting in concentration of lower performing kids at zoned schools, and Evangelista himself concedes as much. NYC zoned schools could have higher attrition but still be "dumping grounds" from charter schools. You'd have to analyze where students go when they leave, and the caliber of those students. If low performing students are leaving charters and winding up at zoned schools, and there is no similar increase in high performing students, you will in fact wind up with a "dumping ground" scenario.

Also, it's troubling that this article focuses on Harlem Link and does not note Evangelista's piece on GothamSchools noting this same phenomenon, although from the perspective of charters that backfill versus those that do not. Last, I have NEVER heard a single reputable source say that one reason for low percentages of ELL and SPED kids at charters "could have something to do with where the charters are located." Where is the proof of this? Especially confusing when your own example (Harlem Link vs 161) itself has a higher percentage of ELL students than charters located in the *same* area.

I am not against charters and I think some of them do really good work. But I think articles like this that really stretch to gloss over stark differences between the populations of some charters and the populations of some zoned schools ultimately do the system a great disservice. It may be the case that some parents prefer an environment of high discipline and some kids can't handle that. But refusing to own up to this kind of consequence of "school choice," and not assessing schools and teachers in a way that fairly acknowledges the challenges of a more transient, more difficult population is not going to work in the long run.

Add Reply
Picture?type=square
Leonie Haimson October 3, 2012, 2:54 PM

Whether or not the public schools or charters have higher average student attrition rates (and I don't know that we have accurate enough stats to make this judgement -- where did you get the data?); the reality is that most all the studies show that the students who leave charters are mostly their low achievers, and they go straight back into the public schools. The students who leave a particular public school mostly go right back into another public school.

Add Reply
Picture?type=square
Beth Fertig October 3, 2012, 3:08 PM

Thanks for your feedback. The DOE would not allow us to see where the individual kids from charters went when they transferred to district schools, for privacy reasons. We were only allowed to know how many kids left each charter and how many kids from charters were received by each district school over a 3 year period. Check out our map on the next article. That's why all we can demonstrate is that there's a lot of churn in Harlem, where attrition rates are higher than average for both charters and district schools. We also have no historical data from the DOE to compare to a decade ago, for example.

As for allegations that the kids who leave charters have lower test scores and behavior problems, we have heard many of those stories. But it's also something we cannot prove. The DOE would not give us the academic records of each child who transferred. However, we do know that a small percentage of kids left charters in the months leading up to the state exams. Most tend to leave in September or over the summer. And kindergarten and first grade are when kids are most likely to leave charters (untested grades). So we are limited to anecdotes and cannot offer any proof.

However, the charter leaders do acknowledge that their strict behavior and promotion policies can be a turn-off to some families. Does that mean low-performing kids are more likely to leave charters? Possibly, but we cannot prove it.

If schools want to share more data with us we welcome it!

2 Replies
Picture?type=square
Winnie Solder October 3, 2012, 9:41 PM

I am glad that the reporter took the time to speak to parents. Often I hear WNYC stories on education and they are told entirely from the perspective of Teachers, Administrators, and Union officials.

The more we speak to PARENTS, the more we get to the truth. There are reasons why families line up and enter lotteries for charter schools.

Getting the Entrenched Educational Establishment to face up to these reasons will be a long journey, but it is good to be starting that journey sooner rather than later.

Picture?type=square
Vicki Zunitch October 5, 2012, 1:33 AM

Good point, Winnie. I find many WNYC (and NY Times) stories about education not even worthy of the name "journalism" because they make no effort to talk to parents and students. They're usually just stenography - findout out what DOE is doing and giving them free publicity.

Add Reply
Picture?type=square
Winnie Solder October 3, 2012, 9:38 PM

I am glad that the reporter took the time to speak to parents. Often I hear WNYC stories on education and they are told entirely from the perspective of Teachers, Administrators, and Union officials.

The more we speak to PARENTS, the more we get to the truth. There are reasons why families line up and enter lotteries for charter schools.

Getting the Entrenched Educational Establishment to face up to these reasons will be a long journey, but it is good to be starting that journey sooner rather than later.

Add Reply
Picture?type=square
Caroline Grannan October 4, 2012, 1:55 PM

"Turnover" is not the same thing as the *attrition* that critics highlight at charter schools. The press needs to make the distinction to avoid bolstering the misleading propaganda coming from the charter/"reform" sector.

Low-income families tend to have unstable housing and thus to move often. That results in inevitable high mobility -- turnover -- at high-poverty schools, whether charters or public schools. That means many students leave and are replaced by new, incoming students.

The attrition that's criticized at "miracle" charters such as KIPP schools means that many students leave (whether voluntarily or not) AND ARE NOT REPLACED. A study by SRI International of the San Francisco Bay Area KIPP schools, released in 2008, found that 60 percent of the students at the schools left AND WERE NOT REPLACED. The study also found that the students who left were consistently the less successful students.

KIPP and the entire charter/"reform" sector have responded by misleadingly claiming that the same thing occurs at public schools. No, it does not. Again, students who leave public schools are replaced by incoming students (unless the district is experiencing an overall drop in enrollment). I did comparisons with high-poverty middle schools in the Bay Area, and their enrollment did not drop overall. (Note that here we're referring to middle schools, whose students are not old enough to drop out of school entirely; the dropout rates at high-poverty high schools are a different part of the story.)

Again, the press needs to make this clear or it is participating in misleading the public.

Add Reply
Picture?type=square
Leonie Haimson October 4, 2012, 5:42 PM

You should check out the Mathematica study of student attrition of KIPP schools nationally (including NYC) which shows that KIPP students who left early were more likely to be lower achieving compared to the KIPP students who stayed, and late arriving students tended to be higher achieving. The latter pattern differed in district public schools:

"Most notably, early transferees tended to have had lower grade 4
test scores than did students who stayed, and this is true for both KIPP and district comparison middle schools (Table II.2). At KIPP, on average, transferees scored 0.25 and 0.22 standard
deviations below the district-wide mean in math and reading at baseline (or the 40th and the 41st percentiles, respectively); students who stayed scored 0.02 below the mean (the 49th percentile) in both subjects...."

"As noted previously, the pattern of student attrition from KIPP schools (including the tendency of early transferees to be lower-achieving) closely resembles the pattern found in district schools and there are similar total proportions of late
arrivals at KIPP and district schools. However, we also observed some key ways in which KIPP’s late-entry pattern differs from that of nearby district schools. KIPP is more likely to accept students in grade 6 and less likely to enroll new students in later grades. Also, on average the students who enter KIPP after the normal intake grade differ from the late arrivals at nearby schools: KIPP’s late entrants tend to be higher achieving, less likely to be in special education, and less likely to be male
than are on-time entrants; at district schools, late entrants tend to have lower baseline test scores, a
higher proportion of them are special education students, and a similar proportion of them are male." - http://bit.ly/QJLOrg

As a result, the KIPP students shed their low-achieving students, they accepted replacements at a lower rate, and those who came later tended to be higher achieving on average.

District schools also shed low-achieving students but they went into other district schools. This pattern is likely to lead to very different results, meaning higher concentration of struggling students over time in our public schools.

Add Reply
Picture?type=square
Leonie Haimson October 5, 2012, 2:48 AM

Good critique of this story "that Missed the Real Story on Student Attrition at Charters" | Edwize http://shar.es/54phs

Add Reply
Picture?type=square
James Marion October 5, 2012, 8:55 PM

Schoolbook needs to do its research. The NYC DOE audit register freezes on Oct. 31 of any given school year. This means that the scores of any student on a school's register after this date will be attributable to that school. So to suggest that because students were not being discharged from charters shortly before testing season means students were not being "counseled out" would be an absurd claim. Equally absurd is to not examine whether the attrition is non-random and whether or not those student slots are backfilled. Please get a real researcher on your staff before drawing any conclusions with limited data. The issue is not how much attrition exists, but rather what type of attrition is taking place.

Add Reply
Add a Response
SchoolBook Bulletin Board
Welcome to SchoolBook

Schoolbook is a site dedicated to news, data and conversation about schools in New York City.

Have a News Tip?

Tell us what’s going on in your school. You can e-mail us with your tips or documents, or call 646-801-9698 and leave a voice message.

Contribute to Current & Future News Coverage

Join the Public Insight Network and help our journalists cover education in the city. Your stories and insights can help us create relevant and distinctive reporting. Join more than 100,000 people and become a trusted source.