Hearst Principal Leaving/Washington Post

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure Kaya regrets saying ain't, too.

Now let's hear her apologize.

It could be a teaching moment.

Do you think you'll do it?

Why on Earth would she regret it? Surely you don't think the small subset of completely unhinged anti-reform loonbags on this site are somehow representative of the general public, do you? Man, you guys really are gibbering nut-pies.

unhinged anti-reform loonbags against the chancellor saying ain't

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course Kaya is in over her head!!! She is not qualified to run a school system.

Neither was Rhee

Not the pp but just wanted to say that this is so true! But I gave Rhee a chance to prove herself (and she failed). I'm going to wait a bit before deciding on Henderson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I agree completely. "Personal pique" indeed, as if there is no other reason a principal would voluntarily leave such a screwed-up school system.

Kerlina had to know that he'd get some reaction like this, but was courageous, and perhaps desperate, enough to try to help other principals and teachers on his way out.

And to the poster deriding focus on Kaya's ain't - you seem to be in somewhat of a frenzy about it, as if it's odd for people to be upset about a school leader using bad grammar in a public statement. I know perfectly well she doesn't usually talk that way and had a choice not to in this case. Why did she say ain't? As a way of belittling the whole topic, as if losing Kerlina or any principal is of little importance to her.

You nailed it, pp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A DCPS principal once told me that the reason so many ED students are mainstreamed (and difficult to transfer) is because DCPS does not have the number of speciality schools needed to accommodate them.

Right, and the reason DCPS doesn't have the number of specialty schools needed to accommodate them is that it's one of the poorest populations of schoolchildren in the country. Most of the "behavioral disorders" that get kids classified as SN are simply manifestations of poverty. Less poverty in DC means a more functional DCPS.

Wrong. The reason DCPS doesn't have the number of specialized facilities to educate children with SN is because it's a dysfunctional mess. DC is spending MILLIONS educating a handful of SN students at private schools, because there doesn't seem to be an understanding that if you want high quality SN education, you're going to have to pay more for it. There's no good reason not to build those kinds of schools in DC (except for the lack of talent and bureaucratic mess). Meanwhile, if your parents are not educated and/or wealthy, your SN child gets shuttled into the nightmare of DCPS SpEd.

Wrong.

Okay, not wrong, but you're falling into the chicken-egg trap. DCPS is a dysfunctional mess because it's swamped with the poorest of the poor, most of whom come from really shitty home situations. The reason they don't "build those kinds of schools in DC" is that the start-up costs would be massive. You say the only reason they don't is because "lack of talent and bureaucratic mess". In fact, the reason they don't is that they'd need to defund pretty much all maintenance and building modernization efforts for the forseeable future.

Not sure what the answer is--maybe the stealth-segregation agenda of the charter school movement. (What percentage of the successful charter schools are SN needs kids anyway, I wonder?)

Interesting point here, and I'll certainly concede that the effects of poverty exacerbate any kind of special needs. So, the hurdle to clear - systematically - is huge.

Having said that, have you dealt with OSSE "up close and personal"? They really had some dedicated people in Nyankori and Lewis. I don't know the back story on why they left, but if it was that they tired of being Sisyphus I would believe it. The entrenched low-level of competence in DCPS and OSSE with respect to special education is dis-spiriting. And when they do get good people in at the mid-level positions, those people end up leaving very quickly.

In the meantime, they can announce all day long that they intend to bring SN kids back into the system, but what has actually been built to accommodate these students? Where is the capacity and the competence? The answers are: not much and thinly-stretched. And the savvy education lawyers and consultants know that. So, for the parents who have the money to afford one of them (many of whom live in Ward 3), they can still get DCPS to pay for private special education school. There's a reason that on a ward-by-ward measure of SpEd outplacements, Ward 3 by FAR leads the pack at well over 40%. The next closest ward is somewhere in the 20th percentile.

Based on the story about this student's family, my theory is that for those who don't have the money for a drawn-out fight, but are persistent fighting the system, the consolation prize is a spot in a prized Ward 3 school. If Central Office came down so hard in forcing this troublesome student back upon Hearst - even after he'd been established as a non-resident (and then OOB by who-knows-what shenanigans) - somebody must have been pushing a hot button.

[Anonymous]

Also, for the record, focusing on the chancellor's use of a colloquialism as evidence of her being unfit for her position is a nit-picky.

Didn't President Obama once refer to the 57 states?

If your argument is not over the usage of the word "ain't" but rather of the dismissive attitude about a serious and unfortunate and very revealing situation, that carries much more water to my way of thinking.

[Anonymous]

Still get past the fact that Kerlina chose to cut and run, not unlike Rhee, rather than stay long enough to ensure the rest of the children recover from the trauma of one (one of only 200 apparently) dangerous student who also needs help.

It sounds cynical, but maybe Rhee thought "how much harm could this guy do"? It's not like he was supposed to turn around Dunbar.

I respect that some people directly involved feel he was a loss, but the way he did it was hardly a profile in courage for the system overall.

If a principal can't hold their own with the Central Borg under Rhee (Kaya's only been in charge since November lest we forget) then DCPS is not the place for them. Amateurs need not apply. And central should not hire them.

[Anonymous]

Having dealt with the DC special education system, I can tell you their are profound problems. Too often coordinators are triaging so they exclude or try to avoid adding more kids. Principals cannot really deal with a problem kid unless they figure out how to expel them, but central is pushing back because these kids are bankrupting the system. I don't know what the answer is. I know other cities with equally poor kids don't have the range of issues related to special education that DC has so I suspect a dysfunctional system more than just poverty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Still get past the fact that Kerlina chose to cut and run, not unlike Rhee, rather than stay long enough to ensure the rest of the children recover from the trauma of one (one of only 200 apparently) dangerous student who also needs help.

It sounds cynical, but maybe Rhee thought "how much harm could this guy do"? It's not like he was supposed to turn around Dunbar.

I respect that some people directly involved feel he was a loss, but the way he did it was hardly a profile in courage for the system overall.

If a principal can't hold their own with the Central Borg under Rhee (Kaya's only been in charge since November lest we forget) then DCPS is not the place for them. Amateurs need not apply. And central should not hire them.

He didn't exactly cut and run. He quit at the end of a school year - the end of his 2nd year - and was reappointed. Central office was satisfied with him. He was not satisfied - as is the case with many principals and teachers. He had options and took them. If other DCPS employees had similar options the place would be a ghost town.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, for the record, focusing on the chancellor's use of a colloquialism as evidence of her being unfit for her position is a nit-picky.

Didn't President Obama once refer to the 57 states?

If your argument is not over the usage of the word "ain't" but rather of the dismissive attitude about a serious and unfortunate and very revealing situation, that carries much more water to my way of thinking.

Yes - the dismissive attitude is most important. However, a school leader should not use ain't -- it's just not funny and is a horrible example for the children

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Still get past the fact that Kerlina chose to cut and run, not unlike Rhee, rather than stay long enough to ensure the rest of the children recover from the trauma of one (one of only 200 apparently) dangerous student who also needs help.

It sounds cynical, but maybe Rhee thought "how much harm could this guy do"? It's not like he was supposed to turn around Dunbar.

I respect that some people directly involved feel he was a loss, but the way he did it was hardly a profile in courage for the system overall.

If a principal can't hold their own with the Central Borg under Rhee (Kaya's only been in charge since November lest we forget) then DCPS is not the place for them. Amateurs need not apply. And central should not hire them.

Keep in mind Rhee was known to fire principals in the middle of the year - obviously not concerned about the effect that would have on the schools.
What does "Amateurs need not apply" mean? Just how strong do you need to be to work in DCPS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, for the record, focusing on the chancellor's use of a colloquialism as evidence of her being unfit for her position is a nit-picky.

Didn't President Obama once refer to the 57 states?

If your argument is not over the usage of the word "ain't" but rather of the dismissive attitude about a serious and unfortunate and very revealing situation, that carries much more water to my way of thinking.

Yes - the dismissive attitude is most important. However, a school leader should not use ain't -- it's just not funny and is a horrible example for the children

So true. Will someone please think of the children? The children who read the Washington Post Metro section? Please, don't let them down.

You know what I think is interesting, as long as we're discussing respect and setting examples for the children? The number of posts I see here referring to the former and current chancellors as "Michelle and Kaya" and the principal as "Kerlina."

(np, by the way)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still get past the fact that Kerlina chose to cut and run, not unlike Rhee, rather than stay long enough to ensure the rest of the children recover from the trauma of one (one of only 200 apparently) dangerous student who also needs help.

It sounds cynical, but maybe Rhee thought "how much harm could this guy do"? It's not like he was supposed to turn around Dunbar.

I respect that some people directly involved feel he was a loss, but the way he did it was hardly a profile in courage for the system overall.

If a principal can't hold their own with the Central Borg under Rhee (Kaya's only been in charge since November lest we forget) then DCPS is not the place for them. Amateurs need not apply. And central should not hire them.

Keep in mind Rhee was known to fire principals in the middle of the year - obviously not concerned about the effect that would have on the schools.
What does "Amateurs need not apply" mean? Just how strong do you need to be to work in DCPS?

I think the more important part of the original post is the "cut and run" sentiment. Rhee took a ton of flack for throwing in the towel rather than fighting on to make the school system better; even as someone inclined to support her, I found those arguments compelling. Why should this guy get a pass on that? Obviously, he's free to do what he needs to do with his life. But it's tough for me to take his complaints--and commitment--seriously when he quits after two years at a school that is, relative to the whole of DCPS, a cakewalk. And then there's the fact that he decided to leave education completely; why not go to another school system if the issue was simply the difficulty of DCPS? Was he a burnout case waiting to happen when Rhee hired him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A DCPS principal once told me that the reason so many ED students are mainstreamed (and difficult to transfer) is because DCPS does not have the number of speciality schools needed to accommodate them.

Right, and the reason DCPS doesn't have the number of specialty schools needed to accommodate them is that it's one of the poorest populations of schoolchildren in the country. Most of the "behavioral disorders" that get kids classified as SN are simply manifestations of poverty. Less poverty in DC means a more functional DCPS.

Wrong. The reason DCPS doesn't have the number of specialized facilities to educate children with SN is because it's a dysfunctional mess. DC is spending MILLIONS educating a handful of SN students at private schools, because there doesn't seem to be an understanding that if you want high quality SN education, you're going to have to pay more for it. There's no good reason not to build those kinds of schools in DC (except for the lack of talent and bureaucratic mess). Meanwhile, if your parents are not educated and/or wealthy, your SN child gets shuttled into the nightmare of DCPS SpEd.

Wrong.

Okay, not wrong, but you're falling into the chicken-egg trap. DCPS is a dysfunctional mess because it's swamped with the poorest of the poor, most of whom come from really shitty home situations. The reason they don't "build those kinds of schools in DC" is that the start-up costs would be massive. You say the only reason they don't is because "lack of talent and bureaucratic mess". In fact, the reason they don't is that they'd need to defund pretty much all maintenance and building modernization efforts for the forseeable future.

Not sure what the answer is--maybe the stealth-segregation agenda of the charter school movement. (What percentage of the successful charter schools are SN needs kids anyway, I wonder?)

Interesting point here, and I'll certainly concede that the effects of poverty exacerbate any kind of special needs. So, the hurdle to clear - systematically - is huge.

Having said that, have you dealt with OSSE "up close and personal"? They really had some dedicated people in Nyankori and Lewis. I don't know the back story on why they left, but if it was that they tired of being Sisyphus I would believe it. The entrenched low-level of competence in DCPS and OSSE with respect to special education is dis-spiriting. And when they do get good people in at the mid-level positions, those people end up leaving very quickly.

In the meantime, they can announce all day long that they intend to bring SN kids back into the system, but what has actually been built to accommodate these students? Where is the capacity and the competence? The answers are: not much and thinly-stretched. And the savvy education lawyers and consultants know that. So, for the parents who have the money to afford one of them (many of whom live in Ward 3), they can still get DCPS to pay for private special education school. There's a reason that on a ward-by-ward measure of SpEd outplacements, Ward 3 by FAR leads the pack at well over 40%. The next closest ward is somewhere in the 20th percentile.

Based on the story about this student's family, my theory is that for those who don't have the money for a drawn-out fight, but are persistent fighting the system, the consolation prize is a spot in a prized Ward 3 school. If Central Office came down so hard in forcing this troublesome student back upon Hearst - even after he'd been established as a non-resident (and then OOB by who-knows-what shenanigans) - somebody must have been pushing a hot button.

PP here: you make some good points, but I'd still argue that the situation is a bit like someone who's paying 15% on $50,000 in credit card debt (some from irresponsible spending, some from unavoidable contingencies). As you say, they can talk about "saving money" all they want, but the carrying costs are just too high. The super-poor kids prevent them from instituting an effective city-wide SN program, and the wealthy kids defund the general system. So long as most of the potential SN population is very poor, those SN's are going to be disruptive/behavioral. And so long as that's the case, middle-class SN kids are going to fight for (and get) private placements.

I'm not surprised there's a base level of incompentence; you completely nailed it when you said "when they do get good people in at the mid-level positions, those people end up leaving very quickly." Competent people can relatively quickly put two and two together. So long as the DCPS demographic profile remains the same, the fundamental problem is unaddressable. Short of a massive infusion of Federal cash--which, criminally, ain't something America's particularly interested in doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Having dealt with the DC special education system, I can tell you their are profound problems. Too often coordinators are triaging so they exclude or try to avoid adding more kids. Principals cannot really deal with a problem kid unless they figure out how to expel them, but central is pushing back because these kids are bankrupting the system. I don't know what the answer is. I know other cities with equally poor kids don't have the range of issues related to special education that DC has so I suspect a dysfunctional system more than just poverty.

Care to give an example of a city with a) "equally poor kids", that b) has no supporting state infrastructure that doesn't have special education issues? There isn't one. So the problems unique to poverty-related special education system can be spread out over the entire system. Don't discount DC's political isolation as a major factor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still get past the fact that Kerlina chose to cut and run, not unlike Rhee, rather than stay long enough to ensure the rest of the children recover from the trauma of one (one of only 200 apparently) dangerous student who also needs help.

It sounds cynical, but maybe Rhee thought "how much harm could this guy do"? It's not like he was supposed to turn around Dunbar.

I respect that some people directly involved feel he was a loss, but the way he did it was hardly a profile in courage for the system overall.

If a principal can't hold their own with the Central Borg under Rhee (Kaya's only been in charge since November lest we forget) then DCPS is not the place for them. Amateurs need not apply. And central should not hire them.

Keep in mind Rhee was known to fire principals in the middle of the year - obviously not concerned about the effect that would have on the schools.
What does "Amateurs need not apply" mean? Just how strong do you need to be to work in DCPS?

I think the more important part of the original post is the "cut and run" sentiment. Rhee took a ton of flack for throwing in the towel rather than fighting on to make the school system better; even as someone inclined to support her, I found those arguments compelling. Why should this guy get a pass on that? Obviously, he's free to do what he needs to do with his life. But it's tough for me to take his complaints--and commitment--seriously when he quits after two years at a school that is, relative to the whole of DCPS, a cakewalk. And then there's the fact that he decided to leave education completely; why not go to another school system if the issue was simply the difficulty of DCPS? Was he a burnout case waiting to happen when Rhee hired him?

I disagree completely. It's not like he gave up on DCPS and looked for something easier. Personally, I find it totally acceptable that he went down a completely new path - something (a death in the family? a difficult break-up? the day-to-day misery of DCPS?) caused him to re-assess himself and decide that we only get one chance at life and it's worth it to pursue a dream when you can. Good for him. Anyone who begrudges him that is probably jealous that they aren't reaching for their own stars.