RHEE-SULTS: A LITTLE RED MEAT FOR THOSE senti-MENTAL Rhee/Kaya supporters... ENJOY!! Fight Back!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:10:18, Rhee shook things up. And she made things worse.

That's the issue. Despite virtually unlimited money, unchecked power and rampant cheating, NOTHING has changed in DCPS.

Read the report. It's sobering.

I'm no Rhee apologist, but that is not strictly true. There are procedural administrative changes that have definitely improved. Students do get their books on time, facilities are better maintained, there is PS/PK availability (which is not solely the result of the Mayor). When you say nothing has changed, completely ignoring some objectively positive changes, it damages your credibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:18, Rhee shook things up. And she made things worse.

That's the issue. Despite virtually unlimited money, unchecked power and rampant cheating, NOTHING has changed in DCPS.

Read the report. It's sobering.

I'm no Rhee apologist, but that is not strictly true. There are procedural administrative changes that have definitely improved. Students do get their books on time, facilities are better maintained, there is PS/PK availability (which is not solely the result of the Mayor). When you say nothing has changed, completely ignoring some objectively positive changes, it damages your credibility.

PS/PK predated Michelle Rhee, though she supported and expanded it. You can talk all you want about cleaning house, but DCPS remains as administratively bloated as ever. The biggest difference is the rise in 6 figure salaried staff

I agree with this poster that change for change sake is generally a bad idea. My biggest gripe is the excessive focus on standardized testing which has a pernicious effect on both teaching and learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As someone who doesn't have a particular dog in this race, I think there's pretty obviously some motivated thinking and cherry picking going on here. If the results were truly as bad as they claim, they wouldn't have to be so selective in their comparisons. It's possible that this executive summary just looks biased and there is intellectual rigor at the next level, but where there's smoke...

The final paragraph is particularly rich, where they hold up affluent MoCo as the model and point to its high test scores as proof, while simultaneously trying to make the point that test scores aren't how you should measure success and that the problem with DC NY and Chicago is SES, not teachers. WTF?

For someone who doesn't have a particular dog in this fight, I find it amazing that you claim to have read the report so carefully and conclude that it's cherry picked and may lack intellectual "rigor."

Seems like strange behavior for someone so disengaged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:18, Rhee shook things up. And she made things worse.

That's the issue. Despite virtually unlimited money, unchecked power and rampant cheating, NOTHING has changed in DCPS.

Read the report. It's sobering.

I'm no Rhee apologist, but that is not strictly true. There are procedural administrative changes that have definitely improved. Students do get their books on time, facilities are better maintained, there is PS/PK availability (which is not solely the result of the Mayor). When you say nothing has changed, completely ignoring some objectively positive changes, it damages your credibility.

PS/PK predated Michelle Rhee, though she supported and expanded it. You can talk all you want about cleaning house, but DCPS remains as administratively bloated as ever. The biggest difference is the rise in 6 figure salaried staff

I agree with this poster that change for change sake is generally a bad idea. My biggest gripe is the excessive focus on standardized testing which has a pernicious effect on both teaching and learning.

I'm not talking about cleaning house. I'm talking about objective criticism and personal credibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:18, Rhee shook things up. And she made things worse.

That's the issue. Despite virtually unlimited money, unchecked power and rampant cheating, NOTHING has changed in DCPS.

Read the report. It's sobering.

I'm no Rhee apologist, but that is not strictly true. There are procedural administrative changes that have definitely improved. Students do get their books on time, facilities are better maintained, there is PS/PK availability (which is not solely the result of the Mayor). When you say nothing has changed, completely ignoring some objectively positive changes, it damages your credibility.

PS/PK predated Michelle Rhee, though she supported and expanded it. You can talk all you want about cleaning house, but DCPS remains as administratively bloated as ever. The biggest difference is the rise in 6 figure salaried staff

I agree with this poster that change for change sake is generally a bad idea. My biggest gripe is the excessive focus on standardized testing which has a pernicious effect on both teaching and learning.

I'm not talking about cleaning house. I'm talking about objective criticism and personal credibility.

So Rhee made the trains run on time? bravo for getting books and supplies on the first day of school, but that wasn't the big transormative change she envisioned or promised ad nauseum. By the "NOTHING has changed" comment from PP I'd argue a lot has changed, and not much of it demonstrably better in DCPS as a whole.

I sort of get the "objective criticism" because most people will harp on flaws and overlook positives in criticizing such a polarizing figure, but you've lost me on "personal credibility"

[Anonymous]

"personal credibility" on an anonymous internet listserve.

Hee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

As someone who doesn't have a particular dog in this race, I think there's pretty obviously some motivated thinking and cherry picking going on here. If the results were truly as bad as they claim, they wouldn't have to be so selective in their comparisons. It's possible that this executive summary just looks biased and there is intellectual rigor at the next level, but where there's smoke...

The final paragraph is particularly rich, where they hold up affluent MoCo as the model and point to its high test scores as proof, while simultaneously trying to make the point that test scores aren't how you should measure success and that the problem with DC NY and Chicago is SES, not teachers. WTF?

For someone who doesn't have a particular dog in this fight, I find it amazing that you claim to have read the report so carefully and conclude that it's cherry picked and may lack intellectual "rigor."

Seems like strange behavior for someone so disengaged.

Well I'm someone who tends to read most things critically. So I notice when something seems to be making a broad point by citing data that doesn't justify the point. For example, if you say "A study shows that Rhee's reforms broadly worsened the performance of DCPS schools," there should be more than "because the gap between reading scores for poverty level AA students and affluent whites increased by two points as compared to non-reform jurisdictions where it decreased four points." While that may be one metric worth considering, it's not the single one that makes the case. For example, its possible that while the test score gap between low SES blacks and affluent whites increased by 2 points, it did so because the low SES blacks' scores went up and average of 12 points and the whites' went up 14. It could be that in the "nonreform" districts the gap closed because both groups' scores went down but the whites' went down four more than the blacks'.

The first few pages had several examples of this type, while dismissing out of hand DCPS's standard for reading proficiency. From that I infer that performance probably improved as measured by the reading proficiency standard--if not they surely would have mentioned it. And while there may be a good reason why proficiency is a bad standard (i.e. the intellectual rigor I mentioned) it's not apparent from the executive summary.

I read closely precisely because I am not an expert in this. I don't know what the right answer is, but I do know when my leg is being pulled.

[Anonymous]

Leg-Pulled. Step back and view it broadly. Rhee was not healthy to the system. An opportunity was missed. It was going to shake no matter who Fenty appointed simply because he was awareded the victor in the political fight to manage the $$$ associated with education in DC. He succeeded in facilities management, and Allen Lew did a notable and historic job advancing our school buildings from neglected ruins to modern and green architectural wonders (in many cases). Our Mayor Fenty failed, however, by laying prostate for this Michelle Rhee character who decimated numerous careers of principals and teachers --many in the richness of maturity --in seeking "explosions", and attention. Soft terrorism on the DC public. What is just beginning to seep out is how badly she managed and how many accomplices she had -- including the (not so) venerable Washington Post Co., Kaplan Testing, Michael Bloomberg, former DC Teachers Union Rep George Parker, etc. etc... Splice and dice all you want. She not only failed us, she set us back years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Leg-Pulled. Step back and view it broadly. Rhee was not healthy to the system. An opportunity was missed. It was going to shake no matter who Fenty appointed simply because he was awareded the victor in the political fight to manage the $$$ associated with education in DC. He succeeded in facilities management, and Allen Lew did a notable and historic job advancing our school buildings from neglected ruins to modern and green architectural wonders (in many cases). Our Mayor Fenty failed, however, by laying prostate for this Michelle Rhee character who decimated numerous careers of principals and teachers --many in the richness of maturity --in seeking "explosions", and attention. Soft terrorism on the DC public. What is just beginning to seep out is how badly she managed and how many accomplices she had -- including the (not so) venerable Washington Post Co., Kaplan Testing, Michael Bloomberg, former DC Teachers Union Rep George Parker, etc. etc... Splice and dice all you want. She not only failed us, she set us back years.

I don't know what you're taling about. Even if I agreed with your big picture, that doesn't make the executive summary linked upthread anything other than motivated cherry picking.

[Anonymous]

Bottom line is that Rhee did more harm than good.

And the good she did wasn't worth the harm. Worse, the good could've been achieved without the turmoil.

Rhee had unprecedented freedom to do what she wanted with DCPS. I agree with the poster who said it was an opportunity missed. Only, if only, the person Mayor Fenty appointed had experience, wisdom, and character. Much, much more could've been accomplished in DC because you really do get more bees with honey. The students would be much better off today if only a better, wiser person had been given the job.

Let's not overlook that fact that students were actually progressing four years before Rhee arrived and immediately regressed afterwards. That says A LOT. In fact, it says EVERYTHING. Because student achievement--not a smaller central office or timely book deliveries--is the ultimate goal of school reform. If you don't accomplish that one thing, you've FAILED.

[Anonymous]

Rhee was exactly was the system needed. It would be AWESOME if she came back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rhee was exactly was the system needed. It would be AWESOME if she came back.

It would be awesome if she got perp walked like Beverly Hall

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry - did anyone read the Examiner article about Rhee being NOT good for DCPS?

Yes. And while I agree with the general tenor of the article (Rhee did not produce results) I do think she deserves some credit for shaking things up and putting tenured teachers on their toes.

Agreed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:18, Rhee shook things up. And she made things worse.

That's the issue. Despite virtually unlimited money, unchecked power and rampant cheating, NOTHING has changed in DCPS.

Read the report. It's sobering.

I'm no Rhee apologist, but that is not strictly true. There are procedural administrative changes that have definitely improved. Students do get their books on time, facilities are better maintained, there is PS/PK availability (which is not solely the result of the Mayor). When you say nothing has changed, completely ignoring some objectively positive changes, it damages your credibility.

Ah, but see, those are *good* things. And Rhee should not get credit for *good* things. Bad things are what Rhee is responsible for.

[Anonymous]

Analogy; housecleaner who cleans you out of house and home.