229 Teachers RIFed, see DC Wire for full story

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps the issue people have with Rhee is that she is not personable. She seems like a stranger coming in and dumping out an entire group of teachers without figuring out which ones are actually good apples.

I have to think that her strategy is to literally start from scratch and build up. Her move is risky, but I believe that if in 5 or 10 years, the systems starts running and starts providing education to all DC students, and not just those in the NW, that she will have made the right decision. Sometimes you have to break your arm again, to reset it and have it heal correctly. I'm not saying her strategy is the best, but I am saying that I understand where she is coming from.

This is not about people loosing jobs and it's not just about current students. It's about the long-term success of the DCPS. I think DCPS got into this mess in the first place by hiring adults who were primarily looking out for themselves.

I do find Rhee to be harsh, but I also believe that she has signed on to try to fix a nightmare of a problem and I don't think I could do a better job. I hope that her plan works, not for her sake, but the sake of all DCPS.

I do not have children in DCPS, but I am a resident of DC and I see awful DC government service all the time. I grew up in a different part of the country and cannot believe the terrible service, attitude, and lack of work ethic that DC public servants have in general. I cannot imagine seeing those very same people running the DC school system. That's why her mass firings don't really bother me. I have seen entire offices of DC government that should be fired. I remember trying to get some paper work taken care of in one office and four people stood there trying to figure out what the Temp could do. So this is where I am coming from.

As you state, you do not have or have had a child in DCPS, so the impact of this rash decision six weeks into the school year would not affect or bother you. I could care less if Rhee was personable, I prefer someone who is a good leader and manager. A good manager would not have waited six weeks into the school year to determine that she had more employees than funds. A good leader knows that her team members willingly follow because they believe and trust their leader, not because the tembers are obliged to follow. It seems that most of those who believe in Rhee really have no stake in her success or failure. That would be people like you. And now it is people like me, as I am now a charter supporter.

[Anonymous]

11:01 Said, "I have to think that her strategy is to literally start from scratch and build up."

I would agree. In other words, we have to destroy the village to save it.

And if I didn't have children in the system, I suppose I could sit back and agree.

I am a DCPS parent and I would like to point out that their are children (two of them mine) in the buildings that she is burning.

Michelle Rhee is hurting children right now in Washington, DC.

I might also add that despite the fact that much of DCPS needed work, there have always been pockets of excellence in the system. Rhee and her team have failed to notice what worked in the system, because she is so focus on her TFA/New Leaders for New Schools/under 40 set.

She has made things much, much worse at the school where my children attend.

[Anonymous]

I understand both of your points. I wrote that previous post I suppose somewhat in favor of Rhee. It's not that I don't care, because I do not have a child in DCPS, it's that I don't know enough about each school, its teachers, and the budget to really criticise her that harshly. I am only speaking from the things I do know and that's why I highlighted where I was coming from and from what information I was forming an opinion so that people can give weight accordingly. Obviously a person who deals with DCPS on a more personal level can give better insight. But at the same time, sometimes, people can miss the big picture.

I guess there are two points here, which is her overall strategy and her recent budget cut layoffs. I read her explanations for her cuts, which was to make the cuts once she knew what the exact enrollment was at each school, which is why she made them after the school year began. It seems that she makes decisons on a very efficient and practical style, but lacks the finesse to deal with the people side of her job. So, I do think being personable is important, whcih may not be the best word. If she had been more concerned about the manner in which she fired teachers, then perhaps there would be more understanding in the community. Perhaps she is not being transparent enough.

When I look at the numbers for each of the cutoffs at each school, it doesn't look that bad. But when you start hearing about individual stories, yes it is a shame that really good teachers were fired. As the same time, DCPS cannot run at a deficit. Where would you make the cuts?

Is the problem here that she made the layoffs, or is it the manner and timing? Do the good teachers who lost their jobs feel that other teachers should have been cut instead?

[Anonymous]

I would have not hired 900 teachers in June to let 300 go in October. Losing teachers (in any manner) 6 weeks into school is highly disruptive and at best, shows Rhee is a very poor manager. I'm not sure how you could possibily describe this scenario as "efficient."

I tend to side with the City Council, there wasn't really a budget cut at all.

If you're really looking to save though, I would definitely cut Ms. Rhee's driver (40K plus benefits) and lop 10% off of the Chancellors overgrown salary. That would save one teaching position. How about the nice young women with great raitings who was on the front page of the Metro section holding her infant? She looked to be a good teacher to hang onto.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I understand both of your points. I wrote that previous post I suppose somewhat in favor of Rhee. It's not that I don't care, because I do not have a child in DCPS, it's that I don't know enough about each school, its teachers, and the budget to really criticise her that harshly. I am only speaking from the things I do know and that's why I highlighted where I was coming from and from what information I was forming an opinion so that people can give weight accordingly. Obviously a person who deals with DCPS on a more personal level can give better insight. But at the same time, sometimes, people can miss the big picture.

I guess there are two points here, which is her overall strategy and her recent budget cut layoffs. I read her explanations for her cuts, which was to make the cuts once she knew what the exact enrollment was at each school, which is why she made them after the school year began. It seems that she makes decisons on a very efficient and practical style, but lacks the finesse to deal with the people side of her job. So, I do think being personable is important, whcih may not be the best word. If she had been more concerned about the manner in which she fired teachers, then perhaps there would be more understanding in the community. Perhaps she is not being transparent enough.

When I look at the numbers for each of the cutoffs at each school, it doesn't look that bad. But when you start hearing about individual stories, yes it is a shame that really good teachers were fired. As the same time, DCPS cannot run at a deficit. Where would you make the cuts?

Is the problem here that she made the layoffs, or is it the manner and timing? Do the good teachers who lost their jobs feel that other teachers should have been cut instead?

School began August 26, 2009. In Michelle Rhee's own words, she knew as early as August 6, 2009 the budget she had to work with. Therefore, regardless of which schools had an increase or decrease, Michelle Rhee knew that she would have to reduce her teaching staff, or so she states. The City Council states that cuts were made to summer school 2010. Ms. Rhee, if so managerially inclined, could have reduced her teacing staff prior to August 26, 2009. In the first to second week of school, she could have reassigned teachers to locations that required more or less staff. She not only failed parents who used teacher-student ratio as a measure, but Ms Rhee also failed future teachers to DCPS. What highly qualified teacher would take a chance on DC if they knew that six weeks into their contract it was subject to being void. The could have allowed those teachers the opportunity to seek opportunities else where and during the teaching hiring season. That is, if there is such a season. You may think her decisions are efficient, but I think her decisions have been nothing but inefficient.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
I guess there are two points here, which is her overall strategy and her recent budget cut layoffs. I read her explanations for her cuts, which was to make the cuts once she knew what the exact enrollment was at each school, which is why she made them after the school year began. It seems that she makes decisons on a very efficient and practical style, but lacks the finesse to deal with the people side of her job. So, I do think being personable is important, whcih may not be the best word. If she had been more concerned about the manner in which she fired teachers, then perhaps there would be more understanding in the community. Perhaps she is not being transparent enough.

Looked at in terms of management capabilities, the recent controversy involving teachers puts Rhee in a very poor light. Let's consider the facts:

1) As far back as May, Rhee and the Council were in a dispute about expected enrollment numbers. This dispute was at the root of the budget disagreement since the budget was tied to enrollment. At that time, Rhee was predicting enrollment would increase by about 3,000. Chairman Gray, on the other hand, said that the recent trend was for enrollment to decline. As it turned out, enrollment declined slightly from last year. So, Rhee's prediction was wrong while Gray's was right.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dc/2009/05/school_enrollment_figures_dont.html

2) Rhee spent the summer hiring about 900 new teachers.

3) In July, Mayor Fenty signed a budget that cut $20 million from the school budget. In justifying the recent RIFs, Rhee said the deficit was $44 million.

So, Rhee wrongly predicted enrollment, knew as far back as July (actually earlier) that her hoped-for budget would not be met, yet went on a hiring spree. Rhee then mismanaged the funds she did receive and more than doubled the shortfall. The hiring spree was clearly not justified by enrollment -- even a mythical 3000 increase would not justify those numbers -- and the budget argued against mass new hires. Therefore, Rhee's management must be questioned on the bases of hiring practices and budgetary management.

Because I don't believe Rhee is as incompetent as the above would make her seem, I do not believe that the hiring was based on either enrollment expectations or budgetary realities. Rather, the teachers were hired precisely to set up the events of early October. Rhee consciously created a "crisis" to justify mass firings. However, from all appearances, Rhee did not pull that off with the level of competence for which her supporters would have hoped. As Rhee's supporters would have it, the RIF's cleared out the "dead wood", yet much of that wood has subsequently been shown to have been very much alive. Therefore, the episode simply highlighted continue management short-comings with DCPS. Those short-comings are Rhee's responsibility.

There are several issues for which Rhee should answer:

1) why were her enrollment expectations so unrealistic? The school's Chancellor should have a better grasp on those numbers than the Council Chairman, yet the opposite is true;

2) why did Rhee engage in unjustified hiring of new teachers?

3) how did Rhee manage to double budget deficits?

4) a number of "mistakes" occurred during the RIFs. What is being done to rectify those problems and, possibly, avoid multiple lawsuits?

Note that at no point in this post have a mentioned or even alluded to Rhee's personality -- something for which I have no concern.

[Anonymous]

So, let's assume she hired the new teachers with the hopes of using the budget as an excuse to cut ineffective teachers. then can we conclude that she does not have the power to just cut whom she wants to and that's why she used the budget as an excuse?

By using the budget, she had to cut fairly across the board, such that schools that perhaps did have good teachers had to be cut if she wanted to justify the firing of the bad teachers by using the same budget excuse. I'm not saying this is a good practice, but the real problem here should be that she cannot get rid of bad teachers without being sued by the teacher's union.

If we all agree that there are bad teachers in the DCPS system, what then would be the appropriate solution? How do you get around a teacher's union who according to Newsweek used to be run by Barbara Bullock who is now in prison for embezzling $4.6 million dollars?

Why do teachers get lifetime tenure? Lawyers don't get lifetime tenure after working two years at a firm. Rhee is proposing instead of tenure that they get paid based on performanc and that teachers should earn a six figure salary.

It's not that I am in love with Rhee, it's that I appreciate her future vision. I appreciate her intentions. She only gains if she succeeds and she trying to pull off an ambitious feat. But, thus far, it seems that she does not have the experience nor diplomacy to bring the community together to make this happen. I wonder who does? DCPS has had 7 people in teh past ten years.

It's not okay for a high school to have a 24% graduation rate. If a private corporation were failing 76% of the time, everyone would loose their jobs, even those who were good employees. Why are we not more angry about the fact that the 100% black schools in DCPS have these kinds of statistics?

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous]So, let's assume she hired the new teachers with the hopes of using the budget as an excuse to cut ineffective teachers. then can we conclude that she does not have the power to just cut whom she wants to and that's why she used the budget as an excuse?

By using the budget, she had to cut fairly across the board, such that schools that perhaps did have good teachers had to be cut if she wanted to justify the firing of the bad teachers by using the same budget excuse. I'm not saying this is a good practice, but the real problem here should be that she cannot get rid of bad teachers without being sued by the teacher's union.

If we all agree that there are bad teachers in the DCPS system, what then would be the appropriate solution? How do you get around a teacher's union who according to Newsweek used to be run by Barbara Bullock who is now in prison for embezzling $4.6 million dollars?

Why do teachers get lifetime tenure? Lawyers don't get lifetime tenure after working two years at a firm. Rhee is proposing instead of tenure that they get paid based on performanc and that teachers should earn a six figure salary.

It's not that I am in love with Rhee, it's that I appreciate her future vision. I appreciate her intentions. She only gains if she succeeds and she trying to pull off an ambitious feat. But, thus far, it seems that she does not have the experience nor diplomacy to bring the community together to make this happen. I wonder who does? DCPS has had 7 people in teh past ten years.

It's not okay for a high school to have a 24% graduation rate. If a private corporation were failing 76% of the time, everyone would loose their jobs, even those who were good employees. Why are we not more angry about the fact that the 100% black schools in DCPS have these kinds of statistics?
[/quote]

Principals already have the power to fire ineffective teachers. Tenure is simply how long a teacher has been in the system. DCPS teachers possess very few benefits associated with tenure. One of them is due process. The Chancellor apparently would like to have the power to dismiss teachers at will without due process.

Barbara Bullock is long gone and not relevant to any of what is going on today.

Test scores, graduation rates, and other similar indicators are not just reflections of what goes on in schools, but also what is happening in communities, of the state of mental health, drug and alcohol abuse, child neglect, lead poisoning, poor nutrition, etc. Instead of outrage directed at schools and the people who work in them, you need to take a look at what our city is doing to address all of the social issues which affect educational outcomes.

A school system is not a corporation. Students are not widgets. And teachers alone cannot and should not be held accountable for educational outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Points taken.

Then are you saying that DCPS does not have a problem with ineffective teachers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Points taken.

Then are you saying that DCPS does not have a problem with ineffective teachers?

I have a problem with the word ineffective. We have good teachers and lousy teachers. Even our best teachers might not be described as ineffective in some of our most challenging schools. It's difficult to be effective when students are throwing 20-lb books at your head.

I wish the people recruiting would stop hiring teachers who are themselves undereducated. One thing about the teachers at my son's private school is that they are all well educated people, not only because they have multiple degrees, but because they know their Shakespeare, Homer, and Virgil. We have many teachers in DCPS that are of the same quality as those that teach my son. Some of these teachers would not be considered to be "effective" according to Chancellor Rhee.

[Anonymous]

It is constantly stated that you cannot terminate the employment of a government employee, including a DCPS teacher. This is not an accurate statement. Every government employee, including a DCPS teacher can and have been terminated for poor performance. Such terminations have been the result of tenacious responsive supervisors. If the supervisor document performance and attitude issues an employer can successfully terminate an ineffective employee. It is time consuming and thus supervisors are reluctant to take the necessary time to document. However, as any HR person will tell you, it can be done. Document, document, document. Oh, and if you utilize reduction in force, poor performance may not be used as a barometer. This issue has already been litigated by theOffice of Employee Appeals. Therefore, why not get rid of poor performing teachers the correct way and save some litigation costs.

[Anonymous]

Well, it's always nice to do a little debating here and there. Whether you support her or not, it's good to see people who care about the public school system. It's just too bad that there are so many people that want DCPS to work for every child and yet we cannot find a way to do it.