What could a new Mayor mean for schools - DCPS and charters?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change unless DC somehow elects a mayor who is more conservative than Bowser who is willing to challenge the status quo.

I think that you may have found yourself in the wrong city if you think that DC will ever become conservative. I certainly don't believe conservatism is required for a leader to create better schools. Fenty did more than any other mayor to push forward our schools and make change and he was far from conservative.

PP here. You've misread what I wrote. I said "more conservative than Bowser." Not "a conservative." Fenty is precisely the kind of person I was talking about. He was "more conservative than Bowser" (not to mention everyone on the city council). We need someone who will stand up to the status quo, and raise standards and introduce a measure of accountability. You don't get that when you vote for extremely liberal Democrats. That's like voting for extremely conservative Republicans and expecting them to raise taxes on the rich. It's simply not in the cards.

I disagree that Fenty was more conservative than Bowser. He went to Oberlin. Bowser is in the pockets of every developer she ever met.

Ok, well, you're just totally wrong. It was Adrian Fenty who put Michelle Rhee in charge of schools. It sounds Michelle Rhee was before your time. The short version is that Michelle Rhee did more to improve schools in DC than anyone else in our lifetime and she did it by doing the exact opposite of what Bowser and the rest of our city council does today re: schools. Michelle Rhee was a parent's dream and a liberal politician's nightmare.

The only candidate that’s declared so far is Lewis-George. Is she more or less conservative and what might that mean for schools?

Lewis-George is about as left wing as they come. She will keep schools as is. She will adamantly oppose raising academic standards or flunking kids or creating admissions standards for some schools. People like her see all that as racist because it will disproportionately hurt black kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change unless DC somehow elects a mayor who is more conservative than Bowser who is willing to challenge the status quo.

I think that you may have found yourself in the wrong city if you think that DC will ever become conservative. I certainly don't believe conservatism is required for a leader to create better schools. Fenty did more than any other mayor to push forward our schools and make change and he was far from conservative.

PP here. You've misread what I wrote. I said "more conservative than Bowser." Not "a conservative." Fenty is precisely the kind of person I was talking about. He was "more conservative than Bowser" (not to mention everyone on the city council). We need someone who will stand up to the status quo, and raise standards and introduce a measure of accountability. You don't get that when you vote for extremely liberal Democrats. That's like voting for extremely conservative Republicans and expecting them to raise taxes on the rich. It's simply not in the cards.

I disagree that Fenty was more conservative than Bowser. He went to Oberlin. Bowser is in the pockets of every developer she ever met.

Ok, well, you're just totally wrong. It was Adrian Fenty who put Michelle Rhee in charge of schools. It sounds Michelle Rhee was before your time. The short version is that Michelle Rhee did more to improve schools in DC than anyone else in our lifetime and she did it by doing the exact opposite of what Bowser and the rest of our city council does today re: schools. Michelle Rhee was a parent's dream and a liberal politician's nightmare.

The only candidate that’s declared so far is Lewis-George. Is she more or less conservative and what might that mean for schools?

Lewis-George is about as left wing as they come. She will keep schools as is. She will adamantly oppose raising academic standards or flunking kids or creating admissions standards for some schools. People like her see all that as racist because it will disproportionately hurt black kids.

This is the dumbest list of right wing trope I've heard in a long time. Have you ever actually listened to her views on education?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change unless DC somehow elects a mayor who is more conservative than Bowser who is willing to challenge the status quo.

I think that you may have found yourself in the wrong city if you think that DC will ever become conservative. I certainly don't believe conservatism is required for a leader to create better schools. Fenty did more than any other mayor to push forward our schools and make change and he was far from conservative.

PP here. You've misread what I wrote. I said "more conservative than Bowser." Not "a conservative." Fenty is precisely the kind of person I was talking about. He was "more conservative than Bowser" (not to mention everyone on the city council). We need someone who will stand up to the status quo, and raise standards and introduce a measure of accountability. You don't get that when you vote for extremely liberal Democrats. That's like voting for extremely conservative Republicans and expecting them to raise taxes on the rich. It's simply not in the cards.

I disagree that Fenty was more conservative than Bowser. He went to Oberlin. Bowser is in the pockets of every developer she ever met.

Ok, well, you're just totally wrong. It was Adrian Fenty who put Michelle Rhee in charge of schools. It sounds Michelle Rhee was before your time. The short version is that Michelle Rhee did more to improve schools in DC than anyone else in our lifetime and she did it by doing the exact opposite of what Bowser and the rest of our city council does today re: schools. Michelle Rhee was a parent's dream and a liberal politician's nightmare.

The only candidate that’s declared so far is Lewis-George. Is she more or less conservative and what might that mean for schools?

Lewis-George is about as left wing as they come. She will keep schools as is. She will adamantly oppose raising academic standards or flunking kids or creating admissions standards for some schools. People like her see all that as racist because it will disproportionately hurt black kids.

This is the dumbest list of right wing trope I've heard in a long time. Have you ever actually listened to her views on education?

oh please enlighten us. tell us what she's said about how she's going to raise academic standards and end social promotion and if kids can't read, then they flunk. oh wait, you can't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change unless DC somehow elects a mayor who is more conservative than Bowser who is willing to challenge the status quo.

I think that you may have found yourself in the wrong city if you think that DC will ever become conservative. I certainly don't believe conservatism is required for a leader to create better schools. Fenty did more than any other mayor to push forward our schools and make change and he was far from conservative.

PP here. You've misread what I wrote. I said "more conservative than Bowser." Not "a conservative." Fenty is precisely the kind of person I was talking about. He was "more conservative than Bowser" (not to mention everyone on the city council). We need someone who will stand up to the status quo, and raise standards and introduce a measure of accountability. You don't get that when you vote for extremely liberal Democrats. That's like voting for extremely conservative Republicans and expecting them to raise taxes on the rich. It's simply not in the cards.

I disagree that Fenty was more conservative than Bowser. He went to Oberlin. Bowser is in the pockets of every developer she ever met.

Ok, well, you're just totally wrong. It was Adrian Fenty who put Michelle Rhee in charge of schools. It sounds Michelle Rhee was before your time. The short version is that Michelle Rhee did more to improve schools in DC than anyone else in our lifetime and she did it by doing the exact opposite of what Bowser and the rest of our city council does today re: schools. Michelle Rhee was a parent's dream and a liberal politician's nightmare.

Michelle Rhee was a wrecking ball. She tore down plenty and left town leaving the rest of us to pick up the pieces.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rhee was a disaster. Performative. Unsustained, unsustainable clowning for national media.

Yes, as a DCPS parent during her reign I agree 100%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change unless DC somehow elects a mayor who is more conservative than Bowser who is willing to challenge the status quo.

I think that you may have found yourself in the wrong city if you think that DC will ever become conservative. I certainly don't believe conservatism is required for a leader to create better schools. Fenty did more than any other mayor to push forward our schools and make change and he was far from conservative.

PP here. You've misread what I wrote. I said "more conservative than Bowser." Not "a conservative." Fenty is precisely the kind of person I was talking about. He was "more conservative than Bowser" (not to mention everyone on the city council). We need someone who will stand up to the status quo, and raise standards and introduce a measure of accountability. You don't get that when you vote for extremely liberal Democrats. That's like voting for extremely conservative Republicans and expecting them to raise taxes on the rich. It's simply not in the cards.

I disagree that Fenty was more conservative than Bowser. He went to Oberlin. Bowser is in the pockets of every developer she ever met.

Ok, well, you're just totally wrong. It was Adrian Fenty who put Michelle Rhee in charge of schools. It sounds Michelle Rhee was before your time. The short version is that Michelle Rhee did more to improve schools in DC than anyone else in our lifetime and she did it by doing the exact opposite of what Bowser and the rest of our city council does today re: schools. Michelle Rhee was a parent's dream and a liberal politician's nightmare.

Michelle Rhee was a wrecking ball. She tore down plenty and left town leaving the rest of us to pick up the pieces.

Yes, it was so terrible about how she insisted on raising academic standards in public schools and being allowed to fire the worst of the worst teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change unless DC somehow elects a mayor who is more conservative than Bowser who is willing to challenge the status quo.

I think that you may have found yourself in the wrong city if you think that DC will ever become conservative. I certainly don't believe conservatism is required for a leader to create better schools. Fenty did more than any other mayor to push forward our schools and make change and he was far from conservative.

PP here. You've misread what I wrote. I said "more conservative than Bowser." Not "a conservative." Fenty is precisely the kind of person I was talking about. He was "more conservative than Bowser" (not to mention everyone on the city council). We need someone who will stand up to the status quo, and raise standards and introduce a measure of accountability. You don't get that when you vote for extremely liberal Democrats. That's like voting for extremely conservative Republicans and expecting them to raise taxes on the rich. It's simply not in the cards.

I disagree that Fenty was more conservative than Bowser. He went to Oberlin. Bowser is in the pockets of every developer she ever met.

Ok, well, you're just totally wrong. It was Adrian Fenty who put Michelle Rhee in charge of schools. It sounds Michelle Rhee was before your time. The short version is that Michelle Rhee did more to improve schools in DC than anyone else in our lifetime and she did it by doing the exact opposite of what Bowser and the rest of our city council does today re: schools. Michelle Rhee was a parent's dream and a liberal politician's nightmare.

Michelle Rhee was a wrecking ball. She tore down plenty and left town leaving the rest of us to pick up the pieces.

Yes, it was so terrible about how she insisted on raising academic standards in public schools and being allowed to fire the worst of the worst teachers.

She didn't fire the worst. She went in like a wrecking ball, made things worse, failed to raised test scores (unless it involved "Erase to the Top" at schools like JO Wilson) and then she left. And what exactly is she doing now? Her nonprofit? What's happening with that? She is an abject failure and a sham.

[Anonymous]

John Merrow did a a series of pieces on this very theme:

https://themerrowreport.com/2017/11/11/the-d-c-school-reform-fiasco-a-complete-history/

Worth a read for those who still believe in the myth of Rhee/Henderson.

[Anonymous]

From her bio at DC.GOV:

Janeese is a proud graduate of DC Public Schools. She attended Cuno H. Rudolph Elementary School in her community, then enrolled in Alice Deal Middle School in Friendship Heights, and graduated high school from School Without Walls. As a high school student, she served as a member of her neighborhood’s DC Youth Advisory Council, a Student Representative on the DC School Board of Education, and as Youth Mayor for YMCA DC Youth & Government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change unless DC somehow elects a mayor who is more conservative than Bowser who is willing to challenge the status quo.

I think that you may have found yourself in the wrong city if you think that DC will ever become conservative. I certainly don't believe conservatism is required for a leader to create better schools. Fenty did more than any other mayor to push forward our schools and make change and he was far from conservative.

PP here. You've misread what I wrote. I said "more conservative than Bowser." Not "a conservative." Fenty is precisely the kind of person I was talking about. He was "more conservative than Bowser" (not to mention everyone on the city council). We need someone who will stand up to the status quo, and raise standards and introduce a measure of accountability. You don't get that when you vote for extremely liberal Democrats. That's like voting for extremely conservative Republicans and expecting them to raise taxes on the rich. It's simply not in the cards.

I disagree that Fenty was more conservative than Bowser. He went to Oberlin. Bowser is in the pockets of every developer she ever met.

Ok, well, you're just totally wrong. It was Adrian Fenty who put Michelle Rhee in charge of schools. It sounds Michelle Rhee was before your time. The short version is that Michelle Rhee did more to improve schools in DC than anyone else in our lifetime and she did it by doing the exact opposite of what Bowser and the rest of our city council does today re: schools. Michelle Rhee was a parent's dream and a liberal politician's nightmare.

Michelle Rhee was put into place while I was a DC citizen. I just don't think she was conservative. I think those terms (liberal and conservative) are not useful when talking about DC schools. Let's just make our points and not try to say which are which (L vs C).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change because people want to vote for left wing Democrats and they all believe the same things about schools, which are:

1. The primary purpose of schools is not to educate all students, but to fight inequality
2. Any system, whether it's tracking or gifted schools, that results in white kids tending to go to one place and black kids tending to go to another place, is inherently racist and must be avoided at all costs
3. No real plan to reduce racial disparities in academic achievement except to reduce standards by so much that no one can fail
4. A belief that social promotion is necessary because the social consequences of flunking kids, regardless of how little they learn, is devastating
5. The teachers union is your ally, its opinion is important and must be on board with any decision made

We get the schools we vote for.

Please tell me this is a joke.
If so it’s really uniformed. Mayor Bowser is largely for charters and not for DCPS. She has never liked the teachers union.
Teachers have been saying that they do not like being forced to pass kids and that rigor for upper grades is NOT racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change unless DC somehow elects a mayor who is more conservative than Bowser who is willing to challenge the status quo.

I think that you may have found yourself in the wrong city if you think that DC will ever become conservative. I certainly don't believe conservatism is required for a leader to create better schools. Fenty did more than any other mayor to push forward our schools and make change and he was far from conservative.

PP here. You've misread what I wrote. I said "more conservative than Bowser." Not "a conservative." Fenty is precisely the kind of person I was talking about. He was "more conservative than Bowser" (not to mention everyone on the city council). We need someone who will stand up to the status quo, and raise standards and introduce a measure of accountability. You don't get that when you vote for extremely liberal Democrats. That's like voting for extremely conservative Republicans and expecting them to raise taxes on the rich. It's simply not in the cards.

I disagree that Fenty was more conservative than Bowser. He went to Oberlin. Bowser is in the pockets of every developer she ever met.

Ok, well, you're just totally wrong. It was Adrian Fenty who put Michelle Rhee in charge of schools. It sounds Michelle Rhee was before your time. The short version is that Michelle Rhee did more to improve schools in DC than anyone else in our lifetime and she did it by doing the exact opposite of what Bowser and the rest of our city council does today re: schools. Michelle Rhee was a parent's dream and a liberal politician's nightmare.

The only candidate that’s declared so far is Lewis-George. Is she more or less conservative and what might that mean for schools?

Lewis-George is about as left wing as they come. She will keep schools as is. She will adamantly oppose raising academic standards or flunking kids or creating admissions standards for some schools. People like her see all that as racist because it will disproportionately hurt black kids.

Untrue. She would agree to end mayoral control of schools. In which case educators and parents would have their power back. A school board isn’t a dream but it would be better. Of course she could be lying about her beliefs and give us the same old crap.

[Anonymous]

As a substitute teacher across many Charter schools, some need to close while others are just there to support behavioral kids. Classify them as to what they are and back them with funding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change unless DC somehow elects a mayor who is more conservative than Bowser who is willing to challenge the status quo.

I think that you may have found yourself in the wrong city if you think that DC will ever become conservative. I certainly don't believe conservatism is required for a leader to create better schools. Fenty did more than any other mayor to push forward our schools and make change and he was far from conservative.

PP here. You've misread what I wrote. I said "more conservative than Bowser." Not "a conservative." Fenty is precisely the kind of person I was talking about. He was "more conservative than Bowser" (not to mention everyone on the city council). We need someone who will stand up to the status quo, and raise standards and introduce a measure of accountability. You don't get that when you vote for extremely liberal Democrats. That's like voting for extremely conservative Republicans and expecting them to raise taxes on the rich. It's simply not in the cards.

I disagree that Fenty was more conservative than Bowser. He went to Oberlin. Bowser is in the pockets of every developer she ever met.

Ok, well, you're just totally wrong. It was Adrian Fenty who put Michelle Rhee in charge of schools. It sounds Michelle Rhee was before your time. The short version is that Michelle Rhee did more to improve schools in DC than anyone else in our lifetime and she did it by doing the exact opposite of what Bowser and the rest of our city council does today re: schools. Michelle Rhee was a parent's dream and a liberal politician's nightmare.

The only candidate that’s declared so far is Lewis-George. Is she more or less conservative and what might that mean for schools?

Lewis-George is about as left wing as they come. She will keep schools as is. She will adamantly oppose raising academic standards or flunking kids or creating admissions standards for some schools. People like her see all that as racist because it will disproportionately hurt black kids.

Untrue. She would agree to end mayoral control of schools. In which case educators and parents would have their power back. A school board isn’t a dream but it would be better. Of course she could be lying about her beliefs and give us the same old crap.

Why would a school board would be better? Power still would be functionally in the hands of a select few.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change unless DC somehow elects a mayor who is more conservative than Bowser who is willing to challenge the status quo.

I think that you may have found yourself in the wrong city if you think that DC will ever become conservative. I certainly don't believe conservatism is required for a leader to create better schools. Fenty did more than any other mayor to push forward our schools and make change and he was far from conservative.

PP here. You've misread what I wrote. I said "more conservative than Bowser." Not "a conservative." Fenty is precisely the kind of person I was talking about. He was "more conservative than Bowser" (not to mention everyone on the city council). We need someone who will stand up to the status quo, and raise standards and introduce a measure of accountability. You don't get that when you vote for extremely liberal Democrats. That's like voting for extremely conservative Republicans and expecting them to raise taxes on the rich. It's simply not in the cards.

I disagree that Fenty was more conservative than Bowser. He went to Oberlin. Bowser is in the pockets of every developer she ever met.

Ok, well, you're just totally wrong. It was Adrian Fenty who put Michelle Rhee in charge of schools. It sounds Michelle Rhee was before your time. The short version is that Michelle Rhee did more to improve schools in DC than anyone else in our lifetime and she did it by doing the exact opposite of what Bowser and the rest of our city council does today re: schools. Michelle Rhee was a parent's dream and a liberal politician's nightmare.

The only candidate that’s declared so far is Lewis-George. Is she more or less conservative and what might that mean for schools?

Lewis-George is about as left wing as they come. She will keep schools as is. She will adamantly oppose raising academic standards or flunking kids or creating admissions standards for some schools. People like her see all that as racist because it will disproportionately hurt black kids.

Untrue. She would agree to end mayoral control of schools. In which case educators and parents would have their power back. A school board isn’t a dream but it would be better. Of course she could be lying about her beliefs and give us the same old crap.

Why would a school board would be better? Power still would be functionally in the hands of a select few.

Focused attention by people elected to work on that one thing instead of general politicians that may (or frequently may not) understand the issues.

It works well in other parts of the country. Why not here?