Vanishing Students, Rising Scores:

High-Scoring Middle School Charters

Show Significant Student Attrition

Introduction and Findings:

Charter school advocates are quick to point out successes in charter schools, particularly high rates of
proficiency among charter school students. But they do not talk much about attrition rates in charter
schools, and how attrition may affect those rates of academic success.

In this report, we examine the changes in the size of student ELA testing cohorts for thirteen middle
school charters.1 Of the eight schools for whom we have four years of testing data, one school lost
nearly 40 percent of its students; two others more than 30 percent; the average for the group of eight is
an attrition rate of 23 percent, or nearly one student in four, even as cohorts in neighborhood public
schools generally rose.

The evidence is clear that most high performing charter middle schools in New York City also have
high rates of attrition in their testing cohorts, demonstrating a remarkable correlation between high
attrition rates and rising academic proficiency.

Who Disappears?

Students may disappear from the testing cohort for many reasons, and we cannot tell from the available
data which students leave, or where they go. Students may leave the school altogether as families
move, or because parents disagree with the academic approach that a charter school offers. Critics,
including some former charter school parents, sometimes charge that children who have special needs
or disciplinary issues are either “counseled out” or otherwise discouraged from re-enrolling. In one
case, East New York Prep, the administration was charged with expelling low-scoring students before
the administration of state achievement tests.

It is also possible that academically-troubled charter students are staying in the school, but being held
back, thus moving into another testing cohort.

Proficiency rises as the number of students declines

While it is possible that the students who dropped out of the school or the testing cohort each year are
academic high achievers, the correlation between rising proficiency and student attrition suggests
otherwise.

To understand the potential connection between proficiency and attrition, consider a school that has 75
students on a particular grade level, and a passing rate of 66 percent. In that example, 25 students are
not passing. If 20 of these leave the school or are held back, then in the next year the passing rate
would jump from 66 percent to 91 percent, even if not a single additional student passed the test.

The attrition pattern appears to be the same for the remaining five of the thirteen schools we reviewed,
even if they are too new to have testing cohorts that span all grades. For example, at one of the five
1
We considered all charter schools that have been designated as middle schools on the New York City Progress Reports.
schools, Kings Collegiate, 30 % of the 2008 fifth graders disappeared from the cohort by the time
students reached sixth grade in 2009.

Appendixes One, Two, and Three provide details on the attrition and proficiency of the schools we
reviewed, in addition to citywide aggregates.
 A Closer Look at Four High Attrition Schools

Let’s take a closer look at attrition in the four schools that lose more than 25% of their students from
the testing cohort between their first year in the school (grade 5, 2006) and their last year (grade 8,
2009).

The chart below lists the schools, their total attrition, and the proficiency percentage points gained
across years:

ELA Cohort Attrition

Grade 5 to 8
(2006-2009)

ELA Cohort Proficiency

ELA Cohort
Attrition Percentage
School Attrition
(number Points Gained
(% Change)
change)
Williamsburg Collegiate 72 to 44 -39% +35
Harlem Village Academy 57 to 39 -32% +43
Leadership Village 59 to 41 -31% +24
KIPP STARR 82 to 61 -26% +27

The charts below aggregate and graph the data in the chart above.

Percent Proficient
2006 5th Grade Cohort
100
90
% Proficient

80
70
60
50
40
5th 6th 7th 8th
Grade Level

On the following pages we will:

• compare the attrition of these schools with the attrition of schools in their neighborhood, as
well as with specific neighborhood schools identified as similar by the DOE2

• consider the relationship between declining cohorts and rising levels of proficiency.

2
Throughout this report neighborhood schools are defined as those within the Community School District. “Similar
schools within the neighborhood” are all those that are both within the CSD and have been identified as similar for
accountability purposes by the New York City Department of Education (see school Progress Reports at schools.nyc.gov)
 Comparative Attrition

•
•
•

Williamsburg Academy has 39% attrition: Meanwhile the neighborhood schools as a whole (CSD 14)
and the similar school within the neighborhood (K582) have cohorts that do not decline. Overall, they
grow.

William s burg Colle giate Dis trict 14 14K582

Char te r 1,600 105
2006 Cohort 1,550 95
85
1,500 85
75
# of students

65 1,450
75
55 1,400
65
45 1,350
55
35 1,300
6th 7th 8th
5th 6th 7th 8th 5th 6th 7th 8th
Gr ade Le ve l
Grade Leve l Grade Le vel
Harlem Village Academy has 32% attrition. It is in District 5 where the neighborhood schools as a
whole and the similar school within the neighborhood (M317)3 have cohorts that do not decline.
Overall they grow.

Harlem Village Academ y

2006 Cohort Dis tr ict 5 2006 cohort M317
60 110

# of Students
55
# of students

1400 90

# of students
50 1250 70
45 50
1100
40 30
35 950 6th 7th 8th
30 800 Grade Level
5th 6th 7th 8th 5th 6th 7th 8th

Grade Level Grade Le ve l

KIPP S.T.A.R. has 26% attrition. Like Harlem Village, it is in District 5, where neighborhood
schools as a whole as well as the similar school within the neighborhood (again, M317) have cohorts
that do not decline. Overall they grow.

KIPP S T A R Charte r District 5 2006 cohort M317

2006 cohort 110
95
# of Students

90
1400
# of students

85
# of students

70
1250
75 50
65 1100
30
55 950 6th 7th 8th
45 800 Grade Level
5th 6th 7th 8th 5th 6th 7th 8th
Grade Le ve l Grade Leve l

Leadership Village has 31% attrition. Meanwhile the cohorts of the neighborhood schools (CSD4)
do not decline4.

3
A second “similar school” is M367, a new school which does not have a three-year cohort. Its first group of students
declined from 81 to 77 students (a 5% decline) between 7th and 8th grade.
4
(The DoE has not identified any similar schools in Community School District 4)
 Leadership Village Academy District 4
2006 cohort 1,300
65 1,275
1,250

# of students
60
# of students
55 1,225
1,200
50 1,175
45 1,150
40 1,125
35 1,100
5th 6th 7th 8th 5th 6th 7th 8th
Grade Level Grade Level
 Rising Proficiency

As students disappear, the high-attrition schools record ever higher percentages of proficient students.
This same pattern plays out in all 13 schools. Schools with more than 20% attrition see their percent of
proficient students rise to over 90%. That rate drops 21 points for charters with less than 20%
attrition.5

Here are graphs of our four schools with testing cohort attrition of more than 25%. Both attrition and
percent proficient are able to be graphed together because the values in each scale are similar.

Williamsburg Collegiate

no. of students pct. proficient William sburg Collegiate

of students # proficient %
95
85
95
75 85
65 75
65
55 55
45 45
35
35 5th 6th 7th 8th
5th 6th 7th 8th
Grade Level

Harlem Village Acadam y

no. of student pct. proficient

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
5th 6th 7th 8th
Grade Level

5
Opportunity Charter, with a rate of 15% proficiency in 2009 has been eliminated from this average because its population
of about 50% special education students makes it unlike the other schools. Its inclusion would lower the proficiency rate.
 KIPP S T A R Leade rs hip Village

no. of students pct. Proficient no. of students pct. Proficient

95 95
85
85
75
75
65
65
55
55 45
45 35
5th 6th 7th 8th 5th 6th 7th 8th
Grade Level Grade Level

LEFT OR LEFT BACK?

Clearly, testing cohorts are shrinking as proficiency rates rise. A question remains, however, as to
whether students are leaving the school altogether, or being retained in earlier grades.

If students are being left back, then their entrance into the cohort of the lower grade should be reflected
in the size of that cohort. We find, however, that those cohorts as well are generally shrinking.

NOTES ON THIS REPORT

We reviewed the 15 charter schools the New York City Department of Education (DOE) identifies as
middle schools on its Progress Reports. We excluded two of these schools from our analysis because
they were new and therefore have only one year of data (we needed at least two years of data to follow
a cohort). The two schools we eliminated are Bedford Stuyvesant Collegiate and St. Hope Leadership
Academy.

We used the DOE’s data set for ELA test results for the 2006 through 2009 school years to determine
cohort size and proficiency rates. We also examined the Math data which showed cohort attrition that
was highly consistent with the ELA attrition.
Some schools have as many eight cohorts with more than one year of data between 2006 and 2009. In
this report we examined the cohort of students who were in the school’s highest grade level (usually 8th
grade) in 2009. Rates of attrition from the schools’ other testing cohorts is highly consistent with the
attrition found in the cohort we examined.

Appendix One shows ELA attrition and proficiency in all thirteen schools for the cohort that we
reviewed.

Appendix Two repeats the information in Appendix One and adds the next cohort.

Appendix Three shows the citywide aggregates for both cohort size and proficiency rates for the
fifth grade (2006) to 8th grade (2009) ELA testing cohort.

All data can be found on the website of the New York City Department of Education at
schools.nyc.gov.