"What It Means to Me?" Teachers and Students Define "No Excuses"

• In Event: Beyond Test Scores: The Civic Implications of No-Excuses Charter Schools

Abstract

The proposed presentation is part of a larger mixed-methods study on civic education in a “no excuse” charter school network. The purpose of this presentation is to examine the ways in which three “no excuse” charter schools aimed to prepare students for democratic citizenship and how the teachers and students within these schools conceptualized the “no excuse” approach. I analyzed how the students and teachers within the “no excuse” environment defined and critiqued the no excuse model using Critical Race Theory as the theoretical framework.

The following research questions are addressed in this paper:
• How do social studies teachers in “no excuse” schools conceptualize the “no excuse” approach? How do teachers feel this approach supports, or hinders, educating students for democratic citizenship?
• How do students enrolled in these teachers classes define and critique “no excuse” as an approach to life and education?

In answering the first research question on teachers’ conceptualization of the “no excuse” approach, teachers supported the “no excuse” model in theory. They expressed that students from low-income backgrounds needed to receive explicit messages on the importance of accountability. This was stressed most by Mr. Ali, the only teacher who had formerly taught in a “failing” traditional public school. Perceiving that the goal of school was to prepare students for adult life, teachers expressed that the world would interact with them in a “no excuse” fashion. Although the “no excuse” model required that teachers did not accept late work, allow heads on the desk, or tolerate disrespect; in practice teachers were much more compassionate. Though teachers supported the “no excuse” model, they often made provisions to protect students from the harsh consequences associated with the Education First network.

Teachers’ agreed that the “no excuse” model somewhat hindered their ability to prepare students as democratic citizens. The anti-democratic nature of the model caused difficulty in helping students realize that their voice, opinions, and desires matter. Additionally, the emphasis on high-stakes tests also limited teachers’ ability to prepare students for citizenship in ways that did not relate to passing state mandated accountability tests.

Responding to the second research question on how students’ perceive the “no excuse” approach, it seemed that students had not thought much about critiquing the idea. When asked to define the term “no excuses” they all mimicked the definition provided through the Education First network. Initially, most students said that they agreed with the concept. However, when I probed students for a deeper understanding they all agreed that there are legitimate reasons that hinder students’ academic performance; particularly if their families are poor.

Research in “no excuse” schools is limited and the available research assumes that teachers and students are, and therefore must feel, oppressed and disenfranchised. This research is important because it offers an intimate glimpse at the ways in which the teachers and students who work in learn in the “no excuse” context experience the model. This work uses CRT to allow the teachers and Black students in “no excuse” schools to speak for themselves.

Author

• Adrianne Rochelle Pinkney, Emory University