Singling Out Students Who “Got to Go”—An American Institution
A couple of weeks ago, I watched in horror as a school resource officer flung a teenager halfway across a room in the name of school discipline. The horrific event sparked a plethora of conversations that were already at peak levels since Secretary of Education Arne Duncan held a press conference on reducing what we have dubbed the effects of the school to prison pipeline. Yet, I was keenly aware of the special privileges charter schools have gotten across the country to instill zero tolerance policies in the name of a good education. From the students arrested in Mississippi for having the wrong uniform to the student arrested for a clock that the authorities knew wasn’t a bomb, our schools have increasingly used harsh discipline measures to silence children of color into obedience. After reading the report on a Success Academy school that creates lists of students who they need to not so secretly expel in the form of “Got To Go” lists, I saw what so many before me had seen.
American society generally applauds independence and creativity, and tolerates disruption in the name of speaking truth to power. But, apparently, it depends on who is doing the disrupting.
The report poked another hole in the rhetoric of Success Academy CEO Eva Moskowitz, who, as I’ve reported here and here, already has questionable practices in the name of educating children of color. Her repudiation of the principal in question and the ensuing press releases and conferences emphasize the point that she’s less interested in educating children than creating a wedge between the framework she’s created for her network and the reality that is education within New York City schools. The circus distracts from the militaristic pedagogy placed on students in tandem with the threatening of charter school parents. With Moskowitz winning so many public relations battles until recently, she’s had an unparalleled legislative red carpet rolled out for her.
In that sense, the “Got to Go” list comes across to the general public as a special privilege that Moskowitz gets away with that traditional public schools can’t.
I’m curious about the acrimony surrounding the Got To Go lists, though. Are we angry about them because Moskowitz hypocritically positions herself as a savior for black kids? Or is it because she can get away with it?
While the former speaks to the need to assure that all students, regardless of background, should have a chance to succeed academically and socio-emotionally, the latter speaks to an American problem of schooling children of color. Moskowitz’ vision for schooling children, specifically of color, is akin to one dominant narrative about educating children of color: obedience is at a premium.
For many, public education is one of the last safety nets America has left. The idea that we
