Rocketship Education is a non-profit network of elementary schools that serve communities with low income who has hardships in accessing significant schools. The firm network was founded in 2006 by John Danner and Preston Smith. The primary goal of the corporation is to reduce the gap between the opportunities for the rich and the poor students by the introduction of affordable school model that empowers the success of students from the poor communities. The network uses a unique approach whereby a student is connected with his personalized content; this method proves to be the best method of instruction in the system. Rocketship Education also includes parents in their student’s education, therefore, becoming the advocate of their children and the community. Including other stakeholders such as community organizations, districts, and other elementary schools, the network works for the achievement of one of life’s most important endeavor, education.
A recent activity where NPR covered the Rocketship Education charter schools has been read and commented on by many people. Read a post in response to the article published by NPR https://washingtonmonthly.com/2016/06/27/nprs-deeply-unbalanced-profile-of-rocketship-charter-schools/. The article solely discussed the challenges the network has faced without giving more explanation. The piece also acknowledges the system as the most applauded for its achievement in innovation and quality learning. However, the critic of the section comes in where it states that the challenges and the practices in the network are not only done in Rocketship Education but also in other charter networks as well. The methods such as high pressure, long studying hours, discipline and unique class protocols are also seen in other charter schools including KIPP and Success Academy. The schools are well known for high scores in tests and attract the most loyal parents in the community.
The most crucial strategy Rocketship Education undertook was the early adoption of new tech models of administration and expansion. Kamenetz, the writer of the article, defends the pieces by saying that it supported the happy parents in the school and the unhappy parent who is no longer part of the school. The article refers to the network as a company, which is in this case, a company that is meant for profits. The writer, Kamenetz, and editors of the article may not be concerned about the outcome of the material, but in reality, the report could be the start of a takedown of the network rather than a piece meant for common journalism purpose.