so if rhee is sending her older kid to deal

[Anonymous]

Is it because the chaos at oyster is not going to be fixed anytime soon? or is it a realization that the k-8 model is not ideal for those middle years? Is an overhaul needed?

[Anonymous]

It means she is choosing the better, more established program. It means she is going where the pickins are good. It means she has zero faith in the principal she annointed - especially since sixth grade ( which her child would be entering) has always existed in oyster - so it would give Monica a whole other year to get seventh and eight in shape . This will be monicas third year, and rhee has no confidence she can get seventh and eighth (Two years that's it) in shape? It means bilingual Ed was never actually a real value of hers - but sticking her kids in oyster made political sense as she didn't have to say that she was choosing NW over SE - she could say she was choosing a specialty program that happens to be in NW.

[Anonymous]

she lives in NW, tho, I think in West Boundaries...

[Anonymous]

sorry, brightwood

[Anonymous]

Sure she does--but as a school chancellor her choice of where to send her kids is political. It seems she and her cronies all put their kids in NW schools, --even ones they are not in boundary for (I am not referencing Oyster which her husband is in boundary for). If you lived in SE or a school the politicoes are not rushing towards, you might feel like that was a vote of no-confidence. Oyster was a perfect solution for her b/cause it is a specialty program that everyone wants to get in --NOT just one of the 'good' upper NW schools. It has diversity and a language program you can't find elsewhere. She could make the case for it. Moving her kids to a typical, 'safe' NW Middle School is picking sides. I mean, why not take a gamble (even in NW?) how bout' Hardy?
Finally, she dismantled Oyster by appointing an unequipped principal at a critical juncture (two years after the school had won a National Blue Ribbon under the prior prinicipal). Doesn't she owe it to the school/ program she has meddled with so heavily as a professional, to stay the course as a parent?

[Anonymous]

What about what she owes to her own child?

[Anonymous]

It's kida like a pilot parachuting out before a plane crash, leaving the passengers on board...'me first'...

[Anonymous]

kinda, sorry the full moon is messing with me today

[Anonymous]

Look, I can't stand Rhee. I saw what she did to my dd's schools and at a minimum I think she is a novice at managing the perceptions people have of her actions -- and that's being charitable and assuming she has good intentions but is lousy at pursuing them.

That said, we don't know what the situation is with her child. Maybe Spanish immersion is not something that works for her kid. Pps may be right in that she is abandoning a troubled situation but it also could be that the only reason was that it wasn't working for her kid.

[Anonymous]

Spanish immersion - which she declared after less than a year was not taught properly at oyster hence her rational for a principal replacemt - - is something I would assume she thought about whether was right forbher girls before popping them on later grades and taking someone elses spot. Actually Oysters elementary school two way immersion was tried and true - the midlle school model has yet to be fully developed - though we are talking ONLY two grades and a new principal who has had two years to add on to the two years of planning and implementation previosuly dedicated to the middle school expansion.

[Anonymous]

sixth grade isn't a bed of roses either...some teachers are just coasting, doing the minimum...not all of them, of course, but...

[Anonymous]

Why isn't the Wash Post covering any of the principal issues here, particularly after it (rightly) created a headline of Rhee firing her kids' principal three years ago? Why is it a story that test scores in science rose on the DC CAS LAST YEAR (old news, really)? Why are any stories that depict the truth of many schools low morale not existent? Why does the Oyster principal continue to keep her job when prinicpals whose parents/teachers feel they're on the RIGHT TRACK are potentially losing theirs? Something doesn't add up.

[Anonymous]

What adds up is the nepotism.

[Anonymous]

Look the fact is dcps is one of the worse (if not the worst) school systems in the nation. Either it is the teachers or principals responsable for educating these kids that are not doing their job. That said, all I hear are complaints when teachers and principals are fired.

How does one improve a system without getting rid of those not acheiving results?

Maybe a few teachers that perhaps should not have get let go, but really it is better than risking the education of 20-30 kids a school year (class size per teacher).

[Anonymous]

It could be none of the above. It could be that her daughter wants to go there! Many Oyster students are ready for something bigger by Sixth or Seventh Grade. Even if they love the program and their teachers. We saw this with our child and DC's classmates. Deal gets rave reviews from everyone we know who went there. If she's musical or athletic, Deal has more to offer, the economies of scale and all that. So a vote for Deal isn't necessary a vote against Oyster since the schools are so different in so many ways.