D.C. teacher firings prompted by bad math

[Anonymous]

My thoughts on the Rhee "controversy": This whole Rhee tempest is pretty amusing. So long as gentrification continues apace DCPS is going to continue to improve--regardless of DCPS policies. And Rhee will be continue to be perceived as a hero so long as schools continue to improve--regardless of whether she should or should not get credit.

Ironically, it's possible that Rhee's policies might actually hinder DCPS improvement, but it's irrelevant. Any missteps she makes will be masked by the gentrification effect. The Rhee detractors are in for a looong period of frustration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My thoughts on the Rhee "controversy": This whole Rhee tempest is pretty amusing. So long as gentrification continues apace DCPS is going to continue to improve--regardless of DCPS policies. And Rhee will be continue to be perceived as a hero so long as schools continue to improve--regardless of whether she should or should not get credit.

Ironically, it's possible that Rhee's policies might actually hinder DCPS improvement, but it's irrelevant. Any missteps she makes will be masked by the gentrification effect. The Rhee detractors are in for a looong period of frustration.

Didn't you just post this EXACT same comment in another thread? Do you love the sound of your own voice that much?

[Anonymous]

Didn't you just post this EXACT same comment in another thread? Do you love the sound of your own voice that much?

Yep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Didn't you just post this EXACT same comment in another thread? Do you love the sound of your own voice that much?

Yep.

Lovely. Another trollish personality in the forum is just what we needed.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Lovely. Another trollish personality in the forum is just what we needed.

I think she was just unsure which thread was most appropriate and tried to cover all bases. No harm, no foul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thanks Jeff. Remember, Fenty told the Washington Post editorial folks about Rhee before the council, even though the law requires the mayor run the appointment by the council. Also, Fenty was opposed to taking over the schools but flip-flopped after he won the primary and became mayor elect apparent. WTF? As for Rhee, besides her dishonesty, she is pretty much using New York City as a model, I do not know of one original thing she's done. Fenty seems chastened by his unpopularity, supplicant in public appearances in ways he was not after his election.

That's an act. IF he gets reelected it will be Fenty as usual.

[Anonymous]

Some pps have rightly pointed out that it was not Rhee who made the budget mistake. Good point. However, I just saw reported in the Examiner that the DCPS CFO who made the mistake was her candidate for the position. Apparently she urged Gandhi to hire him and Gandhi had been reluctant to do so. It will be interesting to see how this plays out and who is going to take the blame.

[Anonymous]

For a point-by-point explanation of why the Rhee-haters are wrong about this, just as they're wrong about quite literally everything:

-- Fact No. 1: Ms. Rhee does not control school finances.

-- Fact No. 2: Last August, Noah Wepman, the chief financial officer assigned to schools, told Ms. Rhee the schools faced a shortfall of $21 million. Ms. Rhee had no choice but to respond in some way; in September she opted for the layoffs rather than the cuts to summer school that some D.C. Council members preferred but which she believed would be more harmful to students. [Always nice to see folks like Gray putting the interests of universal job security before DCPS students; after all, students don't vote].

-- Fact No. 3: In February and March, George Dines, who replaced Mr. Wepman as the chief financial officer's deputy for schools, provided Ms. Rhee with information that the system was spending less than forecast on teacher salaries this year, generating what appears to be a $34 million surplus. Whether this should have been obvious to the CFO before the September layoffs would be a useful question for the council to ask and for Mr. Gandhi to answer. It is clearly not a question that is properly posed to Ms. Rhee.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/14/AR2010041404720.html

[Anonymous]

I guess this shows why getting your news from the far-right Examiner is not always the best idea.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I guess this shows why getting your news from the far-right Examiner is not always the best idea.

Well, relying on a Washington Post editorial is little different than relying on a Rhee press release.

As Washington Post Columnist Bill Turque wrote, that is an Editorial Board "whose support for the chancellor has been steadfast, protective and, at times, adoring." And, that means "that DCPS has a guaranteed soft landing spot for uncomfortable or inconvenient disclosures--kind of a print version of the Larry King Show."

But, I have some other "facts" for you:

-- Fact No. 1: It is impossible to have any disagreement whatsoever about Rhee's administration without being labeled a "hater"

-- Fact No. 2: Wepman told Rhee about the $20 million budget shortfall before the Council budget cuts. Rhee didn't inform the Council.

-- Fact No. 3: Even knowing about the budget shortfall, Rhee hired nearly twice the number of teachers normally hired over the summer.

-- Fact No. 4: Rhee found out about the surplus in February, but didn't inform the Council until April. So, keeping budget miscalculations to herself appears to be a pattern for Ms. Rhee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For a point-by-point explanation of why the Rhee-haters are wrong about this, just as they're wrong about quite literally everything:

--
Do you think you can participate in an adult conversation or debate without placing labels on people who disagree with you.

[jsteele]

Opps....

Twitter from @mikedebonis

"BREAKING: Gandhi tells Rhee that surplus 'does not exist.' More TK"

No surplus means no money for merit pay. No merit pay means no teachers contract.

[Anonymous]

Wow, no surplus? They all look like fools.

[jsteele]

From:

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2010/04/15/gandhi-tells-rhee-that-34m-surplus-does-not-exist/

There was a surplus but it was more than off-set by overspending by the central office. Also:

"In fact, Gandhi asserts that there not only is no surplus, but Rhee did not consult with the CFO's office prior to announcing a contract agreement. In other words, Gandhi says that Rhee signed a deal she didn't know how to pay for."

The Washington Post Editorial Board is going to have to be awful creative this time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a point-by-point explanation of why the Rhee-haters are wrong about this, just as they're wrong about quite literally everything:

--
Do you think you can participate in an adult conversation or debate without placing labels on people who disagree with you.

Yep, it is interesting how a person with legitimate criticisms of the school chancellor is dismissed with the label "Rhee hater." Someone asked on another thread why there is so much vitriol directed at Rhee. It doesn't help to dismiss your opponents as some kind of freakish "haters" who have no grounds for criticism.