Frontline doc about Rhee and cheating

[Anonymous]

Correct- Henderson does not seem to suffer from Rhee's psychopathology. but she has continued Rhee's terrible reforms and has the same CYA attitude that anyone in her position would have who wants to keep her job.

[Anonymous]

I don't think anyone can really say if Rhee would have done a good job or not. She came in, began to do some housecleaning, only to have the entire system rise up and rebel against her, and so she left.

As I see it, the culture of corruption and dysfunction wanted to remain in place, it outnumbered her, undermined her at every turn, and ultimately ran her out of town. And, given the testimonials from so many DCPS teachers about the money not reaching the classroom, there's not any way anyone can deny that those kinds of deep, systemic problems exist throughout the system, particularly at its highest levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone can really say if Rhee would have done a good job or not. She came in, began to do some housecleaning, only to have the entire system rise up and rebel against her, and so she left.

As I see it, the culture of corruption and dysfunction wanted to remain in place, it outnumbered her, undermined her at every turn, and ultimately ran her out of town. And, given the testimonials from so many DCPS teachers about the money not reaching the classroom, there's not any way anyone can deny that those kinds of deep, systemic problems exist throughout the system, particularly at its highest levels.

I disagree entirely. The "system" did not rebel against her. She devised a new system -- making huge changes while she was here - new union contract, IMPACT, closed schools, new hires and fires, etc, etc.

Her new system stayed intact with Henderson and Gray and continues today. She spent tons of money on central office staff and consultants. With her unprecedented power under mayoral control for the first time in DC history , she could have sent money straight to the classrooms and chose not to. She cleaned out the "highest levels" - getting control to "fire at will" at central office and using the authority she already had to fire over half the principals. The achievement gap has widened since she came.

It's very easy to say that Rhee was a failure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there any evidence that Rhee ever actually asked anyone to change test results? And as for the "rewards", that goes to the "who knew what, and when" question. From reading any of the articles, it's not clear that she would have known what was going on with the cheating scandal when the rewards were given. Is there a concrete timeline that can establish it conclusively?

She knew. Let's just say that when I worked in the Education system, we were not allowed to move forward with a real investigation.

[Anonymous]

^ Mismanagement is how DCPS has been run for decades. Say what you want about Rhee but the problems did not arrive with her, they were already there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone can really say if Rhee would have done a good job or not. She came in, began to do some housecleaning, only to have the entire system rise up and rebel against her, and so she left.

As I see it, the culture of corruption and dysfunction wanted to remain in place, it outnumbered her, undermined her at every turn, and ultimately ran her out of town. And, given the testimonials from so many DCPS teachers about the money not reaching the classroom, there's not any way anyone can deny that those kinds of deep, systemic problems exist throughout the system, particularly at its highest levels.

This statement is just bizarre. Who longs for a culture of dysfunction? I know many great teachers and staff members who once supported Rhee, only to realize that her policies were misguided and short-sighted. They didn't stop supporting her because they wanted corruption and dysfunction. They stopped supporting her because while her policies may have been "bold," they weren't effective.

[Anonymous]

Many problems were already there when Rhee arrived. She made new problems and didn't solve the old ones.

She was a terrible failure and spent unecessary millions doing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone can really say if Rhee would have done a good job or not. She came in, began to do some housecleaning, only to have the entire system rise up and rebel against her, and so she left.

As I see it, the culture of corruption and dysfunction wanted to remain in place, it outnumbered her, undermined her at every turn, and ultimately ran her out of town. And, given the testimonials from so many DCPS teachers about the money not reaching the classroom, there's not any way anyone can deny that those kinds of deep, systemic problems exist throughout the system, particularly at its highest levels.

This statement is just bizarre. Who longs for a culture of dysfunction? I know many great teachers and staff members who once supported Rhee, only to realize that her policies were misguided and short-sighted. They didn't stop supporting her because they wanted corruption and dysfunction. They stopped supporting her because while her policies may have been "bold," they weren't effective.

You are terribly naive if you think there aren't people who are milking the system - crony contracts, nepotism, no-show jobs and so on. Why do you think it is that DC spends more per student than any other school district, yet so little actually makes it to the classroom? It is that establishment who will resist anyone who threatens that status quo, it is they who resist anyone who might make waves like Rhee. It's been that way for decades.

[Anonymous]

I think Rhee was an egomaniac and naive about what it takes to change a system. Being a hardass is not that hard, it is pinpointing how to inspire the change that is much harder. I say this as a person that really wanted to believe in what she was doing. However corruption and test tampering certainly was happening prior to her tenure, and certainly there were all kinds of petty thieves stealing from the system. Remember that awful series of Washington Post articles about all the different types of money that had disapeared. Frankly it is a symptom of a wider level of corruption that was part of the housing crisis and what is happening in government. When everything is about a bonus the incentives are to cheat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: You are terribly naive if you think there aren't people who are milking the system - crony contracts, nepotism, no-show jobs and so on. Why do you think it is that DC spends more per student than any other school district, yet so little actually makes it to the classroom? It is that establishment who will resist anyone who threatens that status quo, it is they who resist anyone who might make waves like Rhee. It's been that way for decades.

Trust me - I'm not naive. Rhee did not lose popularity because a bunch of cronies wanted to bring back a dysfunctional system. She lost popularity because she tried to force people to execute a crappy plan. And, by and large, she got people to execute her plan, but few were happy about it. Working conditions became unbearable and learning didn't improve. If you dared to point out problems with her plan you were told in so many words that you have low expectations, and that perhaps you might want to find a job elsewhere. In fact, many great teachers have found jobs elsewhere, that's just one sad part of this whole mess. So, no, I'm not naive. If you think Rhee is gone because people are just afraid of "waves," then you, my friend, are naive.

[Anonymous]

She was supposed to be providing the strategic vision, and others were supposed to be providing the tactical implementation. Obviously the blame is not hers alone, because a great many others all across the system decided to cheat, take shortcuts or otherwise do a poor job of executing the plan.

It's like when the General says "take that hill at 0800" and instead, at the appointed time, half of the soldiers decide to go for a smoke break, go hide in a foxhole, whatever - and next thing you know, the enemy has instead crested the hill and takes out half of your best soldiers.

I view it as nothing short of a system-wide failure. MANY deserve blame.

[Anonymous]

Oh, and I supposed we are supposed to believe that the PP personally had these conversations with Rhee where she pointed out concrete, serious problems and was told to find a job elsewhere.

Geeze, this message board is worse than watching a soap opera (if it could get any worse).

[Anonymous]

I've been in DC for about 15 years, and in that time, DC has had about 6 superintendents. Rhee just seemed like all of the rest: they came in talking about "reforms", none of which had been empirically tested, and left after a few years for greener pastures.

There are programs that do work to raise achievement among children who are from low SES backgrounds. These programs, like KIPP or AVID in San Diego, generally keep kids in school longer ( longer days and longer years), and they teach kids study skills explicitly. Unfortunately that's expensive, so no one wants to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She was supposed to be providing the strategic vision, and others were supposed to be providing the tactical implementation. Obviously the blame is not hers alone, because a great many others all across the system decided to cheat, take shortcuts or otherwise do a poor job of executing the plan.

It's like when the General says "take that hill at 0800" and instead, at the appointed time, half of the soldiers decide to go for a smoke break, go hide in a foxhole, whatever - and next thing you know, the enemy has instead crested the hill and takes out half of your best soldiers.

I view it as nothing short of a system-wide failure. MANY deserve blame.

What if the general handpicked most of her key staff and still they proved to be incompetent. General's fault, right? for not being able to assemble a good staff.

What if a general asks her troops to do the impossible or they'll be shot at sunrise. Is it totally the troops' fault if they find a way to do the impossible by cheating?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've been in DC for about 15 years, and in that time, DC has had about 6 superintendents. Rhee just seemed like all of the rest: they came in talking about "reforms", none of which had been empirically tested, and left after a few years for greener pastures.

There are programs that do work to raise achievement among children who are from low SES backgrounds. These programs, like KIPP or AVID in San Diego, generally keep kids in school longer ( longer days and longer years), and they teach kids study skills explicitly. Unfortunately that's expensive, so no one wants to do it.

^This.