It almost never happens that BASIS responds to its critics. The charter chain isn’t shy about promoting itself, but it rarely answers people who question its assertions. Back in 2014, I received a response when I posted about BASIS’ high national high school ranking. Julia Toews, then the Head of BASIS Tucson North, thought my analysis was unfair, so I gave her space to respond in a guest post right here on The Range. And once when a national publication published an op ed using misleading BASIS enrollment figures to make its point, BASIS made sure to point out, correctly, that the figures were misleading. That’s about it so far as I’ve seen, and I follow stories about BASIS pretty carefully.
So this came as a surprise. A few days ago the Washington Post published an op ed which took a look at BASIS’ student population and found that it enrolls significantly more White and Asian students than the general Arizona population, its schools tend to be placed in high income areas and it has high attrition rates, all of which means that its students tend to be higher academic achievers than the average Arizona student population. I posted about the op ed, but more important, it was summarized in the Yellow Sheet, a publication of the Arizona Capitol Times which is mainly read by a Who’s-Who of Arizona because of its high subscription cost. The next day, the Yellow Sheet ran a response from BASIS. I’m guessing the reason for this special occasion was, BASIS wasn’t about to let anyone say bad things about it to Arizona’s most powerful citizens without a rebuttal.
I’m going to discuss BASIS’ response in another post. This post is already running long and my discussion of what BASIS wrote will be even longer. What I want to do here is describe what my criticism of BASIS is, and what it isn’t.
When I take BASIS to task, it’s not about the quality of education BASIS provides, which is strong and rigorous. It’s only tangentially about the schools’ academically selective enrollment. My criticism is primarily a response to the use of BASIS by the “education reform”/privatization movement as a weapon against what privatization proponents refer to as “failing government schools.” For years, this crowd has been using BASIS as the poster child for all that’s wonderful about charter schools and all that’s terrible about all those other institutions run by school districts. BASIS charters are open enrollment, they say, which is true. Because anyone can apply, they claim that means the schools aren’t selective, leaving the impression that the schools are filled with a cross section of Arizona students who the schools mold into academic world beaters. Ergo, BASIS, and by association charter schools in general, are doing a better job than those “failing government schools.”
If BASIS students were genuinely a cross section of Arizona, their achievement would be genuinely remarkable. But they aren’t, and BASIS knows it. True, the law requires charters to have an open enrollment policy, but students at BASIS aren’t representative of Arizona’s population. As the Washington Post op ed indicates, a number of factors shape BASIS student bodies into academically talented and conscientious collections of young people. These students thrive in BASIS’ rigorous academic environment, but similar students do well at any school offering them challenging course work. BASIS has schools full of academically successful students for the same reasons that highly selective private schools and public schools with entrance exams have academically successful students. When you start with a talented group of kids and give them challenging work, they’re going to do well.
If BASIS admitted its schools are filled with academically select groups of students, I wouldn’t have much to write about. But the BASIS folks refuse to make that admission. They continue to foster the myth that they take everyday students and do a significantly better job of educating them than those “failing government schools.” As long as they continue to pretend they’re performing academic miracles, people like me are going to continue to show that, in fact, they don’t walk on water.
This article appears in Mar 30 – Apr 5, 2017.
There is no selective enrollment. None. End of story.
Students must work hard, perform, otherwise it’s not for them.
Quit hating achievers.
I praise the achievers and doers. This is what makes America great. What do you have against people wanting their children to have the best educational opportunity available? I hope all children have vouchers to allow them to go where they can get a quality education for their money. We need to educate the people that will create the future and not be slaves to mediocrity.
BASIS achieves its success rates by getting rid of students who don’t perform well. It’s a neat trick. Looks very impressive.
“students at BASIS aren’t representative of Arizona’s population” – you mean it’s not 50% children of illegal immigrants?
Here is the BASIS response…
Education is our passport to the future, for tomorrow belongs to those who prepare for it today.
Malcolm X
A few days ago, on a blog maintained by the Network for Public Education one of the most virulent anti-school choice institutions in the country a blogger attacked BASIS.ed and BASIS Charter Schools with a series of half-truths, false implications, innuendo, and outright lies. Ordinarily, BASIS.ed and BASIS Charter Schools would not dignify such a blog with a response, but in this case the post was picked up by The Washington Post, and we felt compelled to correct the narrative.
At BASIS.ed and in the BASIS Charter Schools, we pride ourselves on being somewhat counter-cultural. We love to question conventional wisdom most often in order to do something better than it was previously done. But we also pride ourselves on standing for intellectual discourse and the pursuit of truth. We understand that there are differences of opinion when it comes to education policy, pedagogy, school choice, and curricular innovation. We embrace our own view, and know that there are others.
In that light, we would have enthusiastically debated the blog posts author on key questions that must be addressed regarding school choice and related issues. Indeed, we look forward to someday sharing a debate stage with the leaders of NPE, who seem to be consistently mistaken on specific facts, and also seem to be against even those charter or independent schools which provide an objectively fantastic education for students who want what they offer. Sadly, however, the blogger chose to defame BASIS, make invalid arguments based on false premises, and failed to fact check with us.
BASIS Curriculum Schools, both charter and independent, will number more than 30 next year, and will serve more than 20,000 students across the globe. The vast majority of those students are in charter schools, receiving a world-class education for free, with no admission criteria or entry requirements. BASIS Curriculum Schools are considered by many to be among the highest performing schools in the United States. We are intensely proud of our students who have reached these amazing heights, and of our faculty who foster our students success.
It is in defense of these wonderful people our proud and energetic students and their families, and our intelligent and passionate teachers, that we respond to the NPE blogger; we owe it to them to correct the record.
Wed like to focus on the 5 Biggest Falsehoods from the blog post:
False Claim #1: BASIS Charter Schools cherry-pick students.
Post-it note encouragement: Than you for being utterly you.
BASIS Curriculum students are supported by and provide support to their fellow students, ceaselessly
There is cherry picking involved at BASIS Charter Schools, but it is not the type that the blogger alleges. BASIS Charter Schools do not pick their students (and cannot, by law). Rather, it is students and parents who pick us. Students and parents, in states with liberating charter laws, are able to choose between hundreds of different programs and curricula, cherry picking the best fit for their child.
In the states in which BASIS.ed operates charter schools, there are charter schools that offer classical education, charter schools that focus on the fine arts, charter schools that treat sports as co-curricular with academics, charter schools that have specific programs for children with autism, charter schools for adjudicated youth, charter schools built for homeless families, and on and on and on. To say that BASIS Charter Schools cannot or should not offer a specific type of programming (in our case, an academically accelerated, AP-infused, liberal arts academic program) that will be attractive to some families, but not attractive to all, is to attack and undermine the whole purpose of the school choice movement.
Additionally, the blogger implies that we ought to be ashamed of our student demographics, and makes factually incorrect statements regarding our English Language Learner (ELL), Special Education, and economically disadvantaged student populations. BASIS.ed is incredibly proud of the diversity of the student body at each BASIS Charter School. It is a fact that, along with the strength and acceleration of our academic program, our diversity is one of the key reasons that parents choose to send their children to our schools. It is something that we have repeatedly seen, heard, and been told over many years of managing excellent schools.
When you walk into a BASIS Charter School (and we invite the author to do so), you are immediately struck by the diversity of the student body and the way in which it is a mirror of the melting pot that is modern America.
Here are the numbers. Overall, we are about:
40% Caucasian (non-Hispanic);
25% Hispanic, African American, and mixed race; and
35% Asian/Indian.
Some other noteworthy facts, contrary to what the blogger claims:
We have free and reduced lunch qualifying student populations at all of our schools (ranging up to 20%).
We have English Language Learners (ELL) at our schools.
We have students with a wide range of special needs at our schools.
BASIS Charter Schools have no admissions testing. We test incoming students who are already admitted, to place them in the proper level for mathematics.
There is no mandatory donation. Indeed, fewer than 50% of our parents donate to the school each year, and the average donation is in the range of $700.
The $300 fee that the blogger mentions? It is a fully refundable book deposit that is waived for any family with economic hardship, and returned to all who return the textbooks in good condition.
Simply put, BASIS Charter Schools are for any student who wishes to attend and gets lucky enough to have their number picked in the enrollment lottery. We typically have 5,000 to 7,000 students on our waitlists for our charter schools in total, after the lotteries run, every year.
False Claim #2: BASIS Charter Schools have high attrition rates.
Our schools are for anyone who wants the academic program that we offer, but we are not for everyone. Like any school, we do have student attrition. Families move, students decide that they prefer a different kind of school, and students matriculate at natural break-points within our K-12 schools (5th to 6th or 8th to 9th grade).
Overall, from the 2015-16 to the 2016-17 school year, we had retention rates that average:
91% from K to 8th grade,
93% from 9th to 12th grade, and
65% from 8th to 9th grade.
While we are always working to improve our 8th to 9th grade retention, it is perfectly natural for 8th grade families to explore various high school options for their children at the conclusion of middle school, especially in the choice-rich environments within which BASIS Charter Schools exist.
False Claim #3: BASIS Charter Schools have expanded only to serve upper class families.
BASIS Charter Schools began as one school in central Tucson in 1998, serving a largely low- and middle-income student population. As we expanded to serve students throughout Arizona, and then into Texas and Washington, D.C., we have continued our mission to serve all students who want what we offer, regardless of race, ethnicity or economic condition. We have charter schools in Scottsdale, in Washington, D.C., in Prescott, in Flagstaff, in Goodyear, in Central Phoenix, in Mesa, and in many other communities that have wildly variant median household incomes.
Additionally, BASIS.ed is opening new BASIS Charter Schools that specifically target the lowest income areas in Arizona and, soon, in Louisiana. In a few months, BASIS Phoenix South will open, serving a largely Latino and African-American student population from the neighborhoods around 19th Avenue and Southern. In 2018 or 2019, we will open BASIS Tucson South, and in 2019, we plan to open BASIS Baton Rouge North.
It is disappointing that the blogger failed to mention any of these facts, and thus completely missed what is actually true about our expansion philosophy.
False Claim #4: BASIS Charter Schools have high administrative expenses.
The study cited by the blogger is entirely misleading. In Arizona, the breakdown of expenses outside of the classroom falls into three categories:
Administration,
Support Services, and
All Other Support Services and Operations.
Encouragement: You are prepared! Heres where analysts who havent done their homework have been misled: BASIS Charter Schools classify a large number of expenses in the Administration category. However, many other schools classify the same Administrative expenses to the other two categories, Support Services and All Other Support Services and Operations.
For example, the study cited by the blogger trumpets schools that have what appear at first glance to be extremely low Administrative expenses. But those same schools do not count building operations and maintenance in the Administrative category; they capture those costs in one of the other two categories.
Without full detail of what each district and charter school codes to each of the three categories, it is impossible to make an objective, legitimate comparison. Nonetheless, by summing these categories together we can more equitably compare BASIS charter schools to other districts.
Though the blogger did not mention it, the author of the study did exactly that in subsequent years! He wrote:
The question arises whether current funding formulas make it is possible for charter schools to have adequate, attractive facilities, be effectively managed and still be able to spend the bulk of their resources where it should be spent on classroom instruction.
The answer is: yes it can be done 190 charter schools of all sizes and types spend more in the classroom than on administration and facilities combined. Arizona Charter School Classroom Spending, Jim Hall, 2016.
Every single BASIS Charter School in Arizona falls into the category of the 190 efficiently run charter schools. It would have been helpful for the blogger to have noted this follow-up study, and we hope that she simply was not aware of the follow-up study.
But we will reiterate it here so there is no confusion: The study that the blogger cited was contradicted by the same researchers more-thorough follow-up study. The follow-up study counted BASIS Charter Schools among the schools that spend the least on administrative and building expense and the most on direct classroom expenses.
False Claim #5: BASIS Charter Schools are struggling financially.
This blogger ends the post with a quotation from another individual a former school administrator who looked at one of our audits, did not understand it, and jumped to false, and incorrect, conclusions.
The claim that BASIS Charter Schools are struggling financially is false. Over the past few years, BASIS Charter Schools have successfully refinanced a portfolio of our schools. This requires the expensing of debt issuance costs and other fees relating to the refinancing in the year the refinancing is signed. However, these issuance costs and other fees are actually being paid out over a 25-year period. BASIS Charter Schools continue to be cash flow positive. We have cleared all debt covenants and financial compliance metrics for charter renewals and new charter applications.
And, finally:
At BASIS.ed and BASIS Charter Schools, we are incredibly proud of our students and the work that they do every day, the curiosity that comes of deep study, the notion that knowledge is valuable, powerful, potent. Were proud of the communities were a part of, and the families who support their children our students. Were proud of the faculty, staff, and school leaders who make it possible to deliver unparalleled educational outcomes to thousands of students.
College pendantsThe blog post suggested that BASIS.ed and BASIS Charter Schools are building an empire. An empire? What they see as imperial, 20,000 students and their parents see as a journey to opportunity and choices in their future lives.
As we noted above, we love rational debate and the exchange of ideas. We look forward to continued participation in the national dialogue on education, charter schools, school choice, and high-achieving curricula. However, we think that the NPE bloggers post cheapens debate by defaming the achievements of our students and staff, by spreading falsehoods, half-truths, and distortions merely to make a political point.
We value this generations children, and we are thankful when they succeed at our schools, or at any schools. We work very hard every day to make our schools succeed because we believe in the quote that begins this post. We know, with certainty, that those who prepare for tomorrow with education have an advantage. For those who want our help with that preparation we are here for you.
Sincerely,
Peter Bezanson
CEO of BASIS.ed
Also signed by:
Dr. Craig R. Barrett, PhD
Chairman of the Board, BASIS Schools, Inc.
Eva Sankey
Superintendent, BTX Schools, Inc.
DeAnna Rowe
Executive Director, BASIS Schools, Inc.
Here is a great article about finding that special school:
https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2017/04/05/study-finds-1-secret-to-successful-schools-that-costs-nothing/#comment-217569
David Safier:
Consider the collateral damage you are doing by allowing the content of your ideological opponents’ messaging, rather than sound assessment of the educational methods involved, to determine your strategy and talking points. For the sake narrowing your argument to focus on the characteristics of the population served rather than the validity of the educational methods used, you grant two entirely unsound points and reinforce the notion that they are valid in the minds of everyone who reads what you write on this topic, both those who agree with you and those who disagree with you:
1) that a school that delivers nothing but corporate-designed cram-curricula can be considered a great college preparatory program, and
2) that high scores on corporate-designed multiple choice tests are a valid indication of the soundness of instructional methods used.
In trying to score a few points for your political allies who want to stem the flow of public funds out of public district schools and into charters, you are degrading the quality of discourse about education, reinforcing unsound ideas about instructional methods in the minds of parents and community members who vote in elections, and increasing already daunting levels of ignorance in the community about what college preparatory programs should properly be.
What does that make you? Irresponsible.
What conclusion should we draw about education governance and policy making? Don’t know about you, but I’m increasingly of the opinion that democratic control doesn’t work. The politicized, ideologically driven discourse that is a natural outgrowth of democratic control will, over time, inevitably degrade instructional practices and ultimately harm students. Think what medical care would be like if we allowed standards and practices to be controlled by democratically elected representatives, most often people without MDs or experience in health care. Yet we allow methods and conditions in our schools to be determined by politicians and ideologues ignorant of sound teaching methods, not by educators.
Bulletin from the front lines teaching and raising and educating kids: these education governance practices don’t produce good results. They have turned our schools into battle grounds where whichever political faction can win an election with their propaganda calls the shots, ignorance rules, and the teachers and parents who know the actual effects of good and bad methods on real students do not have a voice.
As a parent of an every day average Basis Tucson North student, who’s ethnicity is Hispanic and happens to live 30 minutes away, trust me when I say Basis does not have academically select groups of students, nor does it get rid of students who do not perform well. Students who do not perform well, self-select out, it is that simple. My daughter has approximately 2 hours of homework each night. She strives to make the “90s” club, she works to uphold the community pillars expected of her. We had her sign a contract with us so she can remember why she chose to go to school there and she was on the waiting list for months before there was an opening. I drop her off every day, her grandfather picks her up every day. We see the population 1st hand and based on the Basis response, I’d say it’s pretty accurate. I’d say what you do have, is a group of students who want to be challenged and are willing to work to be some of the best and brightest. You have parents willing to endure long drives in the morning and again in the afternoon so their kids can excel. There’s a waiting list for a reason. There’s a lottery for a reason. There is no academic profiling or testing prior to starting at the school. There is nothing for Basis to defend. Not only is the curriculum strong, is the population diverse, but there’s a long list of extra curricular activities to participate in as well. Quite honestly, some of the public schools should stand up, notice and emulate the Basis model. Kudos to Basis!!
enrollment testing doesn’t care what color you are and no one else should. this argument for mediocrity is one of our country’s problems when trying to again be competitive and relevant worldwide. Quit the racist rants please
It is all they ever have pro am. Just look at the excuses for Susan Rice lying again. What they are saying is that it is OK to lie because she is black. That is an insult to honest blacks.
My daughter is a TUSD and Tucson High School graduate. She is currently pursuing a doctorate in Astronomy. The cream rises to the top.
Isn’t that sead .Beter are schools system and education from one communist country who was under Russia , then our own American .