Chancellor Henderson's Future

[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.

NP, the parents are not her customers. The students are her customers. Just like if a parent may pay for his child's legal defense, the parent is not the client. The child is the client.

[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.

NP, the parents are not her customers. The students are her customers. Just like if a parent may pay for his child's legal defense, the parent is not the client. The child is the client.

Totally agree. I can't imagine anywhere else in the country where public school parents are more entitled.

[Anonymous]

I can think of a few school systems better organized than dcps.

[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.

NP, the parents are not her customers. The students are her customers. Just like if a parent may pay for his child's legal defense, the parent is not the client. The child is the client.

I agree that "customer" might be an imperfect word. But the Chancellor stated this week that the greatest measure of her success is not increasing test scores but increasing enrollment. She touted how people are choosing to attend DCPS schools. Students aren't choosing to attend DCPS. Parents are choosing to enroll their children. If DCPS treats parents with contempt or doesn't provide what the parents feel is an adequate education, parents won't continue to enroll their children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can think of a few school systems better organized than dcps.

Put DC parents in those districts and watch the chancellors leave in droves.

[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.

NP, the parents are not her customers. The students are her customers. Just like if a parent may pay for his child's legal defense, the parent is not the client. The child is the client.

I agree that "customer" might be an imperfect word. But the Chancellor stated this week that the greatest measure of her success is not increasing test scores but increasing enrollment. She touted how people are choosing to attend DCPS schools. Students aren't choosing to attend DCPS. Parents are choosing to enroll their children. If DCPS treats parents with contempt or doesn't provide what the parents feel is an adequate education, parents won't continue to enroll their children.

You guys love being dramatic. Treat parents with contempt? Even if a few words are twisted so you don't feel special, how is that being "treated" with contempt?

[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.

NP, the parents are not her customers. The students are her customers. Just like if a parent may pay for his child's legal defense, the parent is not the client. The child is the client.

I agree that "customer" might be an imperfect word. But the Chancellor stated this week that the greatest measure of her success is not increasing test scores but increasing enrollment. She touted how people are choosing to attend DCPS schools. Students aren't choosing to attend DCPS. Parents are choosing to enroll their children. If DCPS treats parents with contempt or doesn't provide what the parents feel is an adequate education, parents won't continue to enroll their children.

You guys love being dramatic. Treat parents with contempt? Even if a few words are twisted so you don't feel special, how is that being "treated" with contempt?

Perhaps it comes in a variety of products: face, feet, skin tanner, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I am the PP who knows Kaya. If that is what you got from my post, I did not articulate it well. I am also the PP who's mom quit. Just listening to the parents on the blog would make me quit. You guys are a bunch of privileged pains in the ass.

[Anonymous]

@ 22:55: your the one whose mom left after THIRTY-THREE years raking in a DCPS salary? Like she gave up a lot potential years before she retired? When did she start, 18 years old?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:@ 22:55: your the one whose mom left after THIRTY-THREE years raking in a DCPS salary? Like she gave up a lot potential years before she retired? When did she start, 18 years old?

First of all, I'm 46 years old so she did not start at 18 years old. She just retired 2 years ago at 68. She was a stay at home mom before starting community college then going to a 4 year school. She had been a foster kid so understood the needs of disadvantaged kids. Cared deeply about them. Secondly, she was in Anne Arundel County. Lastly, DCPS teachers just started making a decent salary. She was a great teacher. She was not just living on the dole getting up at 4 am to grade papers. What an ass you are. Teaching is hard. Education is hard.