Chancellor Henderson's Future

[Anonymous]

She seems driven to divide high income and low income families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why everyone assumes she's driven strictly by $$, prestige and/or influence. Probably some combination of the three come into play, but unless you know her personally you don't really know what motivates her. Maybe she just likes being DC Chancellor. Rhee might have stayed had her incoming boss not run on a platform of replacing her. I also believe Rhee may have stayed in the DC spotlight a la "Our Town" if not for her husband's political career.

I do know her and she is not really driven by money. She is really committed to DC. I know she does her best and this is not an easy district given the high income and very low income students. Just dealing with parents is a huge headache before you even get to running the schools.

Personally, if someone thinks "dealing with parents is a huge headache" then he or she should not be running a school district. They are your customers, and should be your allies in education. The attitude that parents are a nuisance shows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why everyone assumes she's driven strictly by $$, prestige and/or influence. Probably some combination of the three come into play, but unless you know her personally you don't really know what motivates her. Maybe she just likes being DC Chancellor. Rhee might have stayed had her incoming boss not run on a platform of replacing her. I also believe Rhee may have stayed in the DC spotlight a la "Our Town" if not for her husband's political career.

I do know her and she is not really driven by money. She is really committed to DC. I know she does her best and this is not an easy district given the high income and very low income students. Just dealing with parents is a huge headache before you even get to running the schools.

Personally, if someone thinks "dealing with parents is a huge headache" then he or she should not be running a school district. They are your customers, and should be your allies in education. The attitude that parents are a nuisance shows.

I don't think PP was implying that she thinks dealing with parents is a nuisance. I think PP was implying that when you have disjointed voices coming at you from all directions, and in this case I am guessing most of the voices are privileged in a district where the real severe needs are otherwise, it's a delicate an difficult balance. And that listening part doesn't even get into the meat of her job, which is to churn out actual results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why everyone assumes she's driven strictly by $$, prestige and/or influence. Probably some combination of the three come into play, but unless you know her personally you don't really know what motivates her. Maybe she just likes being DC Chancellor. Rhee might have stayed had her incoming boss not run on a platform of replacing her. I also believe Rhee may have stayed in the DC spotlight a la "Our Town" if not for her husband's political career.

I do know her and she is not really driven by money. She is really committed to DC. I know she does her best and this is not an easy district given the high income and very low income students. Just dealing with parents is a huge headache before you even get to running the schools.

Personally, if someone thinks "dealing with parents is a huge headache" then he or she should not be running a school district. They are your customers, and should be your allies in education. The attitude that parents are a nuisance shows.

I don't think PP was implying that she thinks dealing with parents is a nuisance. I think PP was implying that when you have disjointed voices coming at you from all directions, and in this case I am guessing most of the voices are privileged in a district where the real severe needs are otherwise, it's a delicate an difficult balance. And that listening part doesn't even get into the meat of her job, which is to churn out actual results.

Thank you PP. That's exactly what I was suggesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why everyone assumes she's driven strictly by $$, prestige and/or influence. Probably some combination of the three come into play, but unless you know her personally you don't really know what motivates her. Maybe she just likes being DC Chancellor. Rhee might have stayed had her incoming boss not run on a platform of replacing her. I also believe Rhee may have stayed in the DC spotlight a la "Our Town" if not for her husband's political career.

I do know her and she is not really driven by money. She is really committed to DC. I know she does her best and this is not an easy district given the high income and very low income students. Just dealing with parents is a huge headache before you even get to running the schools.

Personally, if someone thinks "dealing with parents is a huge headache" then he or she should not be running a school district. They are your customers, and should be your allies in education. The attitude that parents are a nuisance shows.

I don't think PP was implying that she thinks dealing with parents is a nuisance. I think PP was implying that when you have disjointed voices coming at you from all directions, and in this case I am guessing most of the voices are privileged in a district where the real severe needs are otherwise, it's a delicate an difficult balance. And that listening part doesn't even get into the meat of her job, which is to churn out actual results.

Thank you PP. That's exactly what I was suggesting.

So it is only parents she perceives to be privileged that she perceives as a nuisance? That is exactly what many parents in the system (or on the verge of leaving the system) believe. Too many voices are presumed to be privileged and are immediately ignored as irrevelant and annoying by DCPS. Yet those voices often speak to issues that could help the system as a whole. Sometimes the assumptions of privilege are totally wrong. Bottom line is that there are difficult parents in all parts of the city and kids with needs all over the city. Public policy leaders are expected to deal with the "disjointed voices coming at you from all directions," treat all with respect, and serve all those they are supposed to serve with no excuses. It is what the Chancellor demands of her principals and teachers. It is fair to expect it of her.

[Anonymous]

I believe 100% that kaya wants nothing more than to screw over the privileged parents she feels are such a PITA. The fact that more families are trying to stsy in DCPS seems to fuel her desire to sticke it to them. Just look at the Wilson budget cuts. Kaya feels very good about those cuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe 100% that kaya wants nothing more than to screw over the privileged parents she feels are such a PITA. The fact that more families are trying to stsy in DCPS seems to fuel her desire to sticke it to them. Just look at the Wilson budget cuts. Kaya feels very good about those cuts.

We all know that property values in D.C. are too high -- she's doing her part to create excess supply, which will in turn drive down the market price of real estate. Granted, some of the middle class people she is trying to help would as a result be underwater on their mortgages, but I don't think she's taken the long view on her "screw the [ ] privileged families" strategy. And, of course, the decrease in tax base will hurt the truly needy families, too, but that's a long term result. In the meantime, maybe she's counting on a continual cycle of YUPPIES moving in to the City, and out again as they have families, to keep the tax base somewhat static during the time she is feeding the weighted education money to the needy.

[Anonymous]

Too much paranoia here.

Everyone feels like things are unfair to specifically them. Affluent/econ disadvantaged feel screwed. DCPS/charters feel like things are structurally unfair. Black/white feel they are getting a raw deal. Wilson/not Wilson feel they are getting the short end of the stick. Wards 3/6/5 all feel like they are getting hosed.

Pick a single constituency that can't make an argument that they, uniquely, are getting screwed by things and you get a gold star.

It's not to say that things are not unfair to anyone or everyone, but it's just that making that argument alone is simply banal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She seems driven to divide high income and low income families.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe 100% that kaya wants nothing more than to screw over the privileged parents she feels are such a PITA. The fact that more families are trying to stsy in DCPS seems to fuel her desire to sticke it to them. Just look at the Wilson budget cuts. Kaya feels very good about those cuts.

We all know that property values in D.C. are too high -- she's doing her part to create excess supply, which will in turn drive down the market price of real estate. Granted, some of the middle class people she is trying to help would as a result be underwater on their mortgages, but I don't think she's taken the long view on her "screw the [ ] privileged families" strategy. And, of course, the decrease in tax base will hurt the truly needy families, too, but that's a long term result. In the meantime, maybe she's counting on a continual cycle of YUPPIES moving in to the City, and out again as they have families, to keep the tax base somewhat static during the time she is feeding the weighted education money to the needy.

Tin foil hat territory. Families are staying in DC, not moving, in part, because schools and municipal services are getting better and businesses are increasingly catering to higher income populations. The "tax base" as you put it is supplemented by the Federal Government through myriad programs including Title I, Medicaid, TANF, SNAP, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Too much paranoia here.

Everyone feels like things are unfair to specifically them. Affluent/econ disadvantaged feel screwed. DCPS/charters feel like things are structurally unfair. Black/white feel they are getting a raw deal. Wilson/not Wilson feel they are getting the short end of the stick. Wards 3/6/5 all feel like they are getting hosed.

Pick a single constituency that can't make an argument that they, uniquely, are getting screwed by things and you get a gold star.

It's not to say that things are not unfair to anyone or everyone, but it's just that making that argument alone is simply banal.

The alternative explanation is that Kaya is an equal-opportunity Hoser. If Forrest Gump ran DCPS, it would be a similar degree of hose-osity, because, Forrest.

[Anonymous]

I can't imagine what it must be like to make allocation decisions - there are so many disparate stakeholders, someone is going to feel "hosed" as the PP above described. And there are enough conspiracy theories out there to justify everyone's position on why they are uniquely being hosed. But I can't seem to shake the idea though that, if you cut Wilson's budget (and I'm not sure she's all that gleeful about it, but who knows), you are threatening the one HS in DCPS that most parents are trying to get their kids into. Yes, other schools need more resources, but is this money really going to help? It doesn't seem that DCPS has done much so far, besides build pretty buildings. Until parents feel that their kid is just as well off, or better off, going to a DCPS HS besides Wilson, no amount of money is going to get them to come. I'd be curious to know how well Walls is faring this year - I imagine it's giving Wilson a run for it. A preview of her decision's impact?

[Anonymous]

BTW, I think that maybe sounded a little obnoxious - yes, additional resources for HS's other than Wilson is important - Ii would just hope that it's being used the right way, in a way that benefits STUDENTS, not all the consultants that get hired to figure out there is a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why everyone assumes she's driven strictly by $$, prestige and/or influence. Probably some combination of the three come into play, but unless you know her personally you don't really know what motivates her. Maybe she just likes being DC Chancellor. Rhee might have stayed had her incoming boss not run on a platform of replacing her. I also believe Rhee may have stayed in the DC spotlight a la "Our Town" if not for her husband's political career.

I do know her and she is not really driven by money. She is really committed to DC. I know she does her best and this is not an easy district given the high income and very low income students. Just dealing with parents is a huge headache before you even get to running the schools.

Personally, if someone thinks "dealing with parents is a huge headache" then he or she should not be running a school district. They are your customers, and should be your allies in education. The attitude that parents are a nuisance shows.

I don't think PP was implying that she thinks dealing with parents is a nuisance. I think PP was implying that when you have disjointed voices coming at you from all directions, and in this case I am guessing most of the voices are privileged in a district where the real severe needs are otherwise, it's a delicate an difficult balance. And that listening part doesn't even get into the meat of her job, which is to churn out actual results.

Thank you PP. That's exactly what I was suggesting.

So it is only parents she perceives to be privileged that she perceives as a nuisance? That is exactly what many parents in the system (or on the verge of leaving the system) believe. Too many voices are presumed to be privileged and are immediately ignored as irrevelant and annoying by DCPS. Yet those voices often speak to issues that could help the system as a whole. Sometimes the assumptions of privilege are totally wrong. Bottom line is that there are difficult parents in all parts of the city and kids with needs all over the city. Public policy leaders are expected to deal with the "disjointed voices coming at you from all directions," treat all with respect, and serve all those they are supposed to serve with no excuses. It is what the Chancellor demands of her principals and teachers. It is fair to expect it of her.

What? All parents are a pain in the ass. They all want something different and complain that they are not being heard when they don't get it. My mom retired after 33 years of teaching because of the parents. She loved the kids, but the parents were always interfering. They always think they know everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why everyone assumes she's driven strictly by $$, prestige and/or influence. Probably some combination of the three come into play, but unless you know her personally you don't really know what motivates her. Maybe she just likes being DC Chancellor. Rhee might have stayed had her incoming boss not run on a platform of replacing her. I also believe Rhee may have stayed in the DC spotlight a la "Our Town" if not for her husband's political career.

I do know her and she is not really driven by money. She is really committed to DC. I know she does her best and this is not an easy district given the high income and very low income students. Just dealing with parents is a huge headache before you even get to running the schools.

Personally, if someone thinks "dealing with parents is a huge headache" then he or she should not be running a school district. They are your customers, and should be your allies in education. The attitude that parents are a nuisance shows.

I don't think PP was implying that she thinks dealing with parents is a nuisance. I think PP was implying that when you have disjointed voices coming at you from all directions, and in this case I am guessing most of the voices are privileged in a district where the real severe needs are otherwise, it's a delicate an difficult balance. And that listening part doesn't even get into the meat of her job, which is to churn out actual results.

Thank you PP. That's exactly what I was suggesting.

So it is only parents she perceives to be privileged that she perceives as a nuisance? That is exactly what many parents in the system (or on the verge of leaving the system) believe. Too many voices are presumed to be privileged and are immediately ignored as irrevelant and annoying by DCPS. Yet those voices often speak to issues that could help the system as a whole. Sometimes the assumptions of privilege are totally wrong. Bottom line is that there are difficult parents in all parts of the city and kids with needs all over the city. Public policy leaders are expected to deal with the "disjointed voices coming at you from all directions," treat all with respect, and serve all those they are supposed to serve with no excuses. It is what the Chancellor demands of her principals and teachers. It is fair to expect it of her.

What? All parents are a pain in the ass. They all want something different and complain that they are not being heard when they don't get it. My mom retired after 33 years of teaching because of the parents. She loved the kids, but the parents were always interfering. They always think they know everything.

Even if YOU believe that ALL parents are a pain, the point is that the Chancellor seems to only define particular parents -- those she perceives as privileged -- as a pain. Not only do her actions make this more than clear, PP who "knows" the Chancellor admitted that this was true. That bias spills over to how she allows DCPS to serve the needs of kids. When it gets that bad, it is time to do what your mom did and leave.