Oh, come on, people! Focus. You are not contributing to the discussion by leveling personal attacks on Don Graham or each other. Perhaps we can have an Ad Hominem Forum?

I know it is my glass-half-full nature to think this discussion could be turned into something useful, but here goes: So which mayoral candidate(s) support the Chancellor's policies and which don't? Have any made any statements regarding the boundary change study/report?

The carpet-baggers (Rhee, Williams, etc.) have done more for this city than the born-and-breds who tie anchors to our ankles with their talk of helping people and skimming off the top. Not sure where Henderson falls within this, but being from DC should disqualify you from government.

We shoot so low. Rhee was problematic but Henderson is not in par with the best school superintendents around. We need actual expertise and experience, not a TFA/ Rhee-form true believer tied in with the corporations. DC has such an inferiority complex.

Anonymous wrote:I would rather have Kaya Henderson than some carpet-bagger from another city out to make a name for him/herself, a la Rhee, who will stay for 2.3 years, destroy schools and programs already in place, and then move on to the nonprofit/lecture circuit to enrich him/herself. At least Kaya is in it for the long-haul, knows the system and doesn't seem particularly interested in highlighting herself and her own career at the expense of the kids.

Whether you like or dislike Kaya - and I have mixed feelings - this is a very fair point.

Anonymous wrote:
Your double-down is disgusting.

The value of fairness is not dependent upon the object.

Everything in life is a choice. You chose not to adopt that starving kid from Ethiopia I see on TV all the time. I have no idea what motivates a man of means, such as yourself, to so wantonly disregard the plight of the starving kid from Ethiopia. I guess your priorities were a new XBox and dessert at [14th St. Restaurant].

I think you're a racist, misogynistic scumbag. What's that? I have no evidence. Well, the onus is on you to come out front and declare your love of different races and women. You would have done that if you weren't truly a racist scumbag.

There is absolutely nothing better than unhinged posters in the morning. A better analogy would be that if I had adopted an Ethiopian child and also had adopted a child that was receiving monthly stipends from which I could benefit and chose to find a new hime for the Ethiopian. Then, I wrote an op-ed about DC's adoption laws supporting policies that would benefit parents who adopted children that had monthly stipends (but didn't disclose my own status as such a parent).

As for your suggestion that I am a "racist, misogynistic scumbag", join the club. You are not the first to make the accusation.

I would rather have Kaya Henderson than some carpet-bagger from another city out to make a name for him/herself, a la Rhee, who will stay for 2.3 years, destroy schools and programs already in place, and then move on to the nonprofit/lecture circuit to enrich him/herself. At least Kaya is in it for the long-haul, knows the system and doesn't seem particularly interested in highlighting herself and her own career at the expense of the kids.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, that is a remarkably unfair description of Graham. There is plenty to fault with your commentary.

You assume he's acting in a way to protect his Kaplan empire. You imply his stance on education reform follows from his financial interest. It is more likely that his financial interest follows from his beliefs in education reform.

Your statement that when "push came to shove" seems to suggest that Graham was faced with a choice between keeping Kaplan or the Post, and he chose to keep Kaplan. I have not come across one iota of evidence, let alone even a suggestion, that he was faced with such a dilemma. Don't ascribe sinister behavior because you disagree with his stance.

This is reckless and other people think you're better than this. I'm relatively new here, so I'll withhold an uniformed opinion.

Fairness with regard to the Graham family is not actually a priority for me. Regardless, Graham had a choice whether to keep both the Post and Kaplan or to keep one or the other. He chose to keep Kaplan. I have no idea what motivates him to be a supporter of for-profit education, but it is not hard to believe that it is financial reward. There is nothing wrong with that, but you seem to believe that it would be wrong to make such a suggestion. If there is any unfairness going on, I believe it is the provision of a platform for Graham to comment on education matters in DC without disclosing his conflict of interest.

Your double-down is disgusting.

The value of fairness is not dependent upon the object.

Everything in life is a choice. You chose not to adopt that starving kid from Ethiopia I see on TV all the time. I have no idea what motivates a man of means, such as yourself, to so wantonly disregard the plight of the starving kid from Ethiopia. I guess your priorities were a new XBox and dessert at [14th St. Restaurant].

I think you're a racist, misogynistic scumbag. What's that? I have no evidence. Well, the onus is on you to come out front and declare your love of different races and women. You would have done that if you weren't truly a racist scumbag.

Does anyone really care what Don Graham has to say about Kaya or DCPS?

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, that is a remarkably unfair description of Graham. There is plenty to fault with your commentary.

You assume he's acting in a way to protect his Kaplan empire. You imply his stance on education reform follows from his financial interest. It is more likely that his financial interest follows from his beliefs in education reform.

Your statement that when "push came to shove" seems to suggest that Graham was faced with a choice between keeping Kaplan or the Post, and he chose to keep Kaplan. I have not come across one iota of evidence, let alone even a suggestion, that he was faced with such a dilemma. Don't ascribe sinister behavior because you disagree with his stance.

This is reckless and other people think you're better than this. I'm relatively new here, so I'll withhold an uniformed opinion.

Fairness with regard to the Graham family is not actually a priority for me. Regardless, Graham had a choice whether to keep both the Post and Kaplan or to keep one or the other. He chose to keep Kaplan. I have no idea what motivates him to be a supporter of for-profit education, but it is not hard to believe that it is financial reward. There is nothing wrong with that, but you seem to believe that it would be wrong to make such a suggestion. If there is any unfairness going on, I believe it is the provision of a platform for Graham to comment on education matters in DC without disclosing his conflict of interest.

Jeff, that is a remarkably unfair description of Graham. There is plenty to fault with your commentary.

You assume he's acting in a way to protect his Kaplan empire. You imply his stance on education reform follows from his financial interest. It is more likely that his financial interest follows from his beliefs in education reform.

Your statement that when "push came to shove" seems to suggest that Graham was faced with a choice between keeping Kaplan or the Post, and he chose to keep Kaplan. I have not come across one iota of evidence, let alone even a suggestion, that he was faced with such a dilemma. Don't ascribe sinister behavior because you disagree with his stance.

This is reckless and other people think you're better than this. I'm relatively new here, so I'll withhold an uniformed opinion.

Anonymous wrote:I have not done all my research yet, but it is kind of funny that his slam on Catania is that he is "micromanaging." That is not a bad thing when compared to the stupidity of Wall Street types who think they can fix education with "innovation" and "tech" and "disruption" - as if an iPad is a magic wand or something. I would take a micromanaging mayor with positive relationships with all stakeholders over a for-profit bozo any day of the week.

Speaking of "for-profit bozos". keep in mind that for the last several years Graham made more money from Kaplan -- one of the largest for-profit education companies -- than he did from the Post. When push came to shove, he sold the Post and kept Kaplan.

One last thought. Graham suggests that no strong leader would work for Catania. Rhee was a strong leader and wouldn't work for Gray. Remember?

Folks, if you don't believe money--test companies, tech companies --is at the bottom of this school reform stuff now, you simply aren't paying attention.

I have not done all my research yet, but it is kind of funny that his slam on Catania is that he is "micromanaging." That is not a bad thing when compared to the stupidity of Wall Street types who think they can fix education with "innovation" and "tech" and "disruption" - as if an iPad is a magic wand or something. I would take a micromanaging mayor with positive relationships with all stakeholders over a for-profit bozo any day of the week.

Here is Don Graham opining in today's Post that Henderson is the best thing that ever happened to DC education

http://m.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kaya-henderson-deserves-support-from-dcs-elected-leaders/2014/02/24/f5f5f472-9d8e-11e3-9ba6-800d1192d08b_story.html

This sounds like the Ed reform/ industrial educational complex are desperate to keep themselves in power by keeping their people in school leadership

Sounds like Don Graham stares at test data, squints, ignores alternative explanations and declares success while Catania visits over 100 if the actual schools, talks to educators, students and parents and sees the reality behind the numbers. Including the fact that the curriculum narrowed to nothing but English and math to achieve an uptick in scores. That's not really education, sorry. And no mention of demographic changes here. Has he notices that the acheivement gap has grown hugely in the last few years?

He talks about the excellent schools leadership in other states nearby DC and then seems to think that DC had better keep what it's got because we can't hope to attract any better.

This piece argues that we need to stay the course that we have been following without acknowledging that Henderson/gray/DME Smith are in fact ready to enact HUGE changes in the way DCPS interacts with charter schools ( by seeking chartering authority for DCPS, by seeking proximity preference for charter school lotteries and by feeding DCPS schools into charter middle schools) and in the way students are assigned to schools around the city ( through boundary changes, feeder changes and possibly weighted lotteries to ensure socio economic integration where possible ).

We need to be judging Henderson and her handlers not just on their past performance but also what they have in store for the future. Do we want what they are selling?