Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rhee is long gone, so there's no reason to protect her if she was behind the cheating... yet nobody's stepped forward with a smoking gun memo directing them to cheat.

Yep, sounds pretty lame to me. Really folks, you have to try a little harder if you want to get good at this rumor mill and conspiracy theory stuff.

Rhee's successor is still here, still in charge and still not doing anything to improve the schools, unless you count closing them as an improvement-- and I'm sure the charter movement is thrilled about that.

Regarding "try[ing] a little harder," I suggest stopping calling valid criticisms lame conspiracy theories and rumor mills.

Henderson was hired as chancellor by Gray who won as the anti-Rhee candidate so to speak. I do not see Henderson as carrying on Rhee's "cleaning house" activities since I am pretty sure Gray is not interested in her doing so. Henderson and Gray are only giving lip service to reform in my opinion.Therefore, to equate Henderson and Rhee is ludicrous.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rhee is long gone, so there's no reason to protect her if she was behind the cheating... yet nobody's stepped forward with a smoking gun memo directing them to cheat.

Yep, sounds pretty lame to me. Really folks, you have to try a little harder if you want to get good at this rumor mill and conspiracy theory stuff.

Rhee's successor is still here, still in charge and still not doing anything to improve the schools, unless you count closing them as an improvement-- and I'm sure the charter movement is thrilled about that.

Regarding "try[ing] a little harder," I suggest stopping calling valid criticisms lame conspiracy theories and rumor mills.

Henderson was hired as chancellor by Gray who won as the anti-Rhee candidate so to speak. I do not see Henderson as carrying on Rhee's "cleaning house" activities since I am pretty sure Gray is not interested in her doing so. Henderson and Gray are only giving lip service to reform in my opinion.Therefore, to equate Henderson and Rhee is ludicrous.

Anonymous wrote:Rhee is long gone, so there's no reason to protect her if she was behind the cheating... yet nobody's stepped forward with a smoking gun memo directing them to cheat.

Yep, sounds pretty lame to me. Really folks, you have to try a little harder if you want to get good at this rumor mill and conspiracy theory stuff.

Rhee's successor is still here, still in charge and still not doing anything to improve the schools, unless you count closing them as an improvement-- and I'm sure the charter movement is thrilled about that.

Regarding "try[ing] a little harder," I suggest stopping calling valid criticisms lame conspiracy theories and rumor mills.

Rhee is long gone, so there's no reason to protect her if she was behind the cheating... yet nobody's stepped forward with a smoking gun memo directing them to cheat.

Yep, sounds pretty lame to me. Really folks, you have to try a little harder if you want to get good at this rumor mill and conspiracy theory stuff.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is more plausible that any cheating that took place in DC, took place without Rhee's knowledge .I fault the cheaters and not Rhee. I also think Rhee had only just begun reform in DC. It will take years and years to undo the mess of DCPS. She made a good start despite push back with her every move.

I worked in the system then. Keep believing the above and I think that you will believe anything. We knew the cheating was going, but were not allowed to do anything about it.

I recall many allusions to knowledge or suspicions of cheating, but no means to actually make accusations. You'd have to be a fool, not a hero, to make a statement you couldn't prove with first-hand information.

At that point in DCPS history, to say that you didn't think certain kids at certain schools could have possibly improved so much in a year's time was to acknowledge you were a racist loser who thought that "poor black kids can't learn."

So many people in power were ready to believe in a miracle instead of obvious cheating. Why was that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is more plausible that any cheating that took place in DC, took place without Rhee's knowledge .I fault the cheaters and not Rhee. I also think Rhee had only just begun reform in DC. It will take years and years to undo the mess of DCPS. She made a good start despite push back with her every move.

Agree.

Agreed. It's tough reforming an entrenched system where all of the institutional forces are against you, a majority of the voters, and half of the parents.

Nice try at rewriting history.

Rhee had mayoral control of the schools for the first time ever. She had the total support of the Mayor to do whatever she wanted. So there was no "entrenched system" and all the "institutional forces" were all in her favor. Many of the voters and parents supported her until they saw what a mess she was making in their kids' schools.


There was incredible hope just a couple of years ago when the scores temporarily soared (ultimately cheating) and when the supposed deadwood had been removed (no improvement in student performance).

If any newbees doubt this, just check the record and talk to people -- it's all there. Now those who are trying to paint DCPS as always being hopeless are re-writing history -- to protect Rhee and Henderson (who cares about the kids?).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is more plausible that any cheating that took place in DC, took place without Rhee's knowledge .I fault the cheaters and not Rhee. I also think Rhee had only just begun reform in DC. It will take years and years to undo the mess of DCPS. She made a good start despite push back with her every move.

I worked in the system then. Keep believing the above and I think that you will believe anything. We knew the cheating was going, but were not allowed to do anything about it.

+1. It is my understanding that some of it also occurred in the Central Office.

Anonymous wrote:I think it is more plausible that any cheating that took place in DC, took place without Rhee's knowledge .I fault the cheaters and not Rhee. I also think Rhee had only just begun reform in DC. It will take years and years to undo the mess of DCPS. She made a good start despite push back with her every move.

I worked in the system then. Keep believing the above and I think that you will believe anything. We knew the cheating was going, but were not allowed to do anything about it.

Anonymous wrote:reposted from another thread and also applicable here, with additions (in parens):

I think I get it -- this recurrent theme of saying that DCPS is too entrenched for even Michelle Rhee to fix is a way of saying that it's hopeless -- so more parents will make the switch to charters.

So the job of DCPS now is to look (and be) bad to make charters look good (and be perceived as the only hope for engaged parents to get a decent free education for their kids in DC).

No, that's not what I'm saying. The expression "for even Michelle Rhee" suggests that Rhee was some kind of superwoman and the last hope of DCPS. On the contrary, what I and others have been saying is that she was not particularly competent at running the school system. Her predecessor, Dr. Janey, was on the right track. It's unfortunate that Fenty didn't keep him on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is more plausible that any cheating that took place in DC, took place without Rhee's knowledge .I fault the cheaters and not Rhee. I also think Rhee had only just begun reform in DC. It will take years and years to undo the mess of DCPS. She made a good start despite push back with her every move.

Agree.

Agreed. It's tough reforming an entrenched system where all of the institutional forces are against you, a majority of the voters, and half of the parents.

Anonymous wrote:I doubt it's about race, as Atlanta is a predominately black town with a black mayor, yes? Chances are, the police dept is predominately black, and the people I saw leading the charge against those educators are black.

Fortunately, the article doesn't suggest race was a factor either.

But, I have the following question: Wouldn't Beverly Hall be just as far removed from the actual cheating that took place in her schools as Rhee was? Wouldn't she be in her high-rise office on test day like Rhee? No one's suggested Hall was in the schools erasing and changing answers. Sure, her system received money for the high scores, but so did DC. So while she received whatever amount, I'm certain Rhee did as well. But because DC's cheating was swept under the rug, no one bothered to look into that.

You are wrong. The city is predominently black and the suburbs are predominently white. The city is predominately democrats and the state is dominated by rebublicans. When poor inner schools schools started outperforming rich suburban schools, the skepticism was howling in the white suburbs and with republicans. In the city and democratics defended the scores and limited scope investigations that found no issues were made. The white republican governor, not city officials, appointed 2 criminal prosecutors and gave them subpoena power and a budge for a long duration investigation. Because of the no snitches atmosphere of the city schools, it took them years before a witness confessed and agreed to wear a wire. I agree that the end result of finding out this was occurring was a good thing, but not saying race was involved is being naive. If the same thing happened to a white school district, I'd doubt a republican governor would budget millions of dollars for an investigation. If fact, he only agreed to do it once he decided he wasn't going to run for re-election.

I don't think it was the cheating itself which triggered the heavy punishments -- it was the edivence of coersion and intimidation to comply with this conspiracy. She was charged under RICO statutes just like a mobster. That's the charge -- not violating the sanctity of standardized tests.

There are some valid suspicions of DC test score merit during Rhee's tenure, but nothing directly implicating her in a conspiracy. As the superintendant she may have established the wrong incentives and disincentives for individual teachers and principals, implemented insufficient controls, and failed to adequeately investigate questionable results, but nothing to date suggests she orchestrated any direct and coordinated effort to manipulate test scores.

I'm no Rhee fan or supporter. It wouldn't surprise me if evidence of malfeasance came to light, but I suspect there won't be any case against her however much some of her critics may delight in it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conspiracy theories are soooooooooo boring.

Tell us -- is any interpretation other than the party line being fed to us by DCPS and the Washington Post considered to be a conspiracy theory that any sane person would dismiss?

I don't understand the immediate PPs post. But on a different note, OP should really warn people when linking to such an odious, hateful site.

Anonymous wrote:Conspiracy theories are soooooooooo boring.

Tell us -- is any interpretation other than the party line being fed to us by DCPS and the Washington Post considered to be a conspiracy theory that any sane person would dismiss?

reposted from another thread and also applicable here, with additions (in parens):

I think I get it -- this recurrent theme of saying that DCPS is too entrenched for even Michelle Rhee to fix is a way of saying that it's hopeless -- so more parents will make the switch to charters.

So the job of DCPS now is to look (and be) bad to make charters look good (and be perceived as the only hope for engaged parents to get a decent free education for their kids in DC).