The Education Manifesto By MICHELLE RHEE and ADRIAN FENTY

[MineralMan]

Michelle Rhee and Adrian Fenty on what they learned while pushing to reform D.C.'s failing public schools.

Washington Post, 10/30/10

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303362404575580221511231074.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

{snip}
During our nearly four years in office we pressed forward an aggressive educational reform agenda. We were determined to turn around D.C.'s public schools and to put children above the political fray, no matter what the ramifications might be for ourselves or other public officials. As both of us embark on the next stages of our careers, we believe it is important to explain what we did in Washington, to share the lessons of our experience, and to offer some thoughts on what the rest of the country might learn from our successes and our mistakes.

{snip}

Nonetheless, year after year, our schools have been run for the benefit of the adults in the system, not for the benefit of the kids.

{snip}

That D.C.'s teachers finally endorsed this revolutionary new contract shows that they, too, are ready for change. When we were negotiating with the union, we heard one thing over and over again from the leadership: "Our members are never going to accept this." In truth, when the union finally allowed them to vote, the teachers passed it overwhelmingly, by 80% to 20%. Given the chance to be treated as professionals and to be rewarded for their achievements, they grabbed it.


Read more at the link


=============================

I posted this to start a discussion here on DU about what was said in this essay in the Washington Post. I hope it's a productive discussion. It's a long article, and well worth reading.

[MineralMan]

1. Sadly, I have to leave for a while. I'll be back later this evening.

I'll catch up to the discussion then.

[Hannah Bell]

2. I'll start by stating the obvious: Fenty & Rhee, the residents voted your asses out.

[MineralMan]

4. And what about the article in the Post?

What do you think about that? What points do you agree with, and what points do you not?

I found it very interesting that the actual vote of the teachers on this contract was 80% to 20%. What does that mean? It sounds like they overwhelmingly accepted it. Does that mean that all teachers are not in sync with your ideas?

[Hannah Bell]

7. It means weingarten pushed through a trojan horse. which if you kept up on this issue, you'd

already know.

[MineralMan]

8. Could the teachers not read their new contract, then?

Was that not allowed? Or, did they vote overwhelmingly for it for some other reason? I'm not seeing any details in your replies, so I have to keep asking questions. Fill me in, please.

[Hannah Bell]

11. because it promised them a big raise & the leadership told them the rest didn't matter. duh.

[woo me with science]

16. Hold on, Hannah.

Are you saying that these teachers flushed kids down the drain for self-interest/a higher paycheck?

Haven't you been saying all along that the teachers who make up the teachers' unions would never allow other interests to come before those of the children?

Are you now saying that it is possible that competing priorities of teachers might possibly, in some situations, get in the way of what is best for kids?

[Hannah Bell]

33. no. i',m saying the members trusted their leadership to tell them if the contract

had problems.

but since the leadership is collaborating with the ed deform agenda, that was a mistake.

[MineralMan]

47. Dude...you're either pro-union or you are not.

There is a union that these teachers belong to. I assume they elected their own leadership. I thought you were pro-labor. This is very confusing, you know.

[MineralMan]

19. Hannah...these are educated people, with college degrees and

additional graduate work. They are entrusted with the education of our children on a day-to-day basis. Are you saying that they can't read a contract and reason out what that contract means to them? Are you truly telling me that they are just dupes? I'm sorry, but that is really offensive. I thought teachers were intelligent, educated people. In fact, I know them to be just that. But you're saying they aren't smart enough to read their contract? I'm sorry, but there is a disconnect here, somewhere. Can you explain?

[Hannah Bell]

34. blah, blah, blah. your straw has nothing to do with anything i said.

you can continue talking to the voices in your head since you find them so deafening.

[sandnsea]

3. My favorite quote

"We closed dozens of low-performing schools, streamlined the bloated central office bureaucracy, and replaced two-thirds of our principals."

That's it in a nutshell. That and paying teachers who go above and beyond would make massive difference in almost every school district.

[MineralMan]

5. That all sounds like good work to me.

I've always felt that bureaucracy was a major element in the current problems with many schools. Not all, of course, but many.

[Hannah Bell]

6. Funny if it was such a success that the residents VOTED THEIR ASSES OUT.

[MineralMan]

9. What is incorrect in the article? You're not offering much

information, but are just making broad statements. Yes, they lost an election. What happens next? Is the contract all those teachers signed null and void? Will things go back to how they were? It's not at all clear what you're trying to say.

[woo me with science]

17. Can we be sure that the results of elections always reflect the best policies for people?

Because if that is true, we may be facing some disturbing considerations on Tuesday.

I think the article alludes pretty clearly to some of the political factors in play here, including the role of the teachers' union in this election. I also would not be surprised if at least a substantial minority of the families of kids in these districts are so stressed and disadvantaged that voting has not been a part of their life awareness or experience.

Why do you think test scores went up so dramatically?

To me, even the physical transformation of the schools is a cue that something important happened during Rhee's tenure. When you move so quickly from a graffiti-filled, chaotic building to a neat and ordered place where kids are engaged, you are creating an environment that puts a value and a priority on learning. Why weren't the schools able to accomplish this before, if they were already doing the best they could?

Hannah, you can exclaim repeatedly, with cussing, that Rhee was kicked out of DC schools, but you can't deny the fact that she is being invited and welcomed with open arms into other districts. You also have been saying all along that we need to trust teachers, because they are the ones with the experience and expertise to know what is best for the kids. Well, the teachers in this case voted for reform 80 percent to 20 percent.

It would be nice if we could move beyond the "us" and "them" mentality and the tendency to throw everything out because we disagree with some of it. What worked here? What didn't? This doesn't have to be a battle of camps, but an exploration of all the options available in order to talk about what's really best for kids.

[Hannah Bell]

43. no. for example, teachers voted randi weingarten in; to "defend their interests". lol.

and they voted for the suck-ass dc contract which is already resulting in mass firings.

uninformed democracy is no different from feudalism.

[Blue_Tires]

10. I knew little about Michelle Rhee until a few weeks ago...

But something just rubs me the wrong way about her...Her personality style just seems so unfit for an education professional -- Her interviews and comments seem so abrasive, combative, and self-serving...

IMO, I'm a romantic and believe one of the core values of being a good educator of children is humility, and her self-promoting nature is the antithesis of that...


I do have one question: Why did she step down when Fenty lost the primary?? Was the new administration going to be THAT different and difficult to work with?? IF she was truly committed, why not keep her ground and make the new mayor fire her (costing him political points in the process?) I know the movie is out and her celebrity (and cash-earning) potential is high right now, but she just seemed to break camp at the first sign of adversity in my observation...

[EFerrari]

20. Someone should post the keynote where she tells about taping her students' mouths shut

because that was such a charming anecdote. :sarcasm:.

http://scholasticadministrator.typepad.com/thisweekineducation/2010/09/audio-michelle-rhees-masking-tape-story.html

Thank goodness MineralMan is giving us an opportunity to rehash this debate!

[MineralMan]

31. I'm always interested in discussion.

This article just appeared today. It seemed a good starting point for a discussion. I guess most folks are busy today with other things, though. The gathering in DC, and upcoming election, and things like that. I'm really glad you're here to contribute. Now, can you offer any comment on what was in that article? I'm interested in anything you might have to say about it.

And, while we're on the subject, are you an educator? An administrator? What's your level of expertise in the field of education? I may have missed that in other threads. That information would help me to assess your comments, I think.

[sandnsea]

37. That is totally unacceptable

Just as unacceptable as the teachers at DU who say kids can't learn if they're poor.

[Hannah Bell]

45. why do you keep repeating that misrepresentation? & you've been called on it before.

since you see fit to keep repeating an absolute falsehood, & you know full well it's a falsehood, i think we can safely ignore anything else you might have to say on this topic.

[sabrina 1]

12. She was basically run out of town. She gives herself a glowing

report of course, but that report is not shared by others. Murdoch's WSJ is a good place for it though.

Her main goal has been to break the unions. Even at that she failed. She talks about others only focusing on adults, and then does it herself, the bad guys are, to her, the teachers and the unions. Just like the previous administration although they weren't as blatant about it.

What kind of teaching methods were implemented eg? She says little about actual education, probably because she doesn't know much about that particular subject.

Divisive people like this only cause more harm to children in the end. Glad she's gone.

[The Philosopher]

13. I like

how the article talks about under-funded schools and then, when they say that they were finally given a great deal of power, they begin to talk about under-performing teachers. Notice that? It’s as if they want you to think that it’s the teacher’s fault that the money didn’t get to the school and that the government forced the schools to cut corners.

I also enjoy how the mantra “adults being served, not the children” is used to justify anything and everything. For example, they write that because the usual ‘last in, first out’ firing method doesn’t think of the children, they decided to let the principal handle this. Obviously this is a good thing, because it puts the children first. The problem is that it puts the principal in the position to fire for whatever reason. Not conservative enough a teacher? You’re out. Don’t kiss ass as much as the others? You’re out. You’re too expensive? You’re out. Challenge your bosses too much? Act as Devil’s advocate? You’re out! Luckily, there’s the Unions to protect the teachers from this.

And then we get to enjoy a whole paragraph about unions immediately after.

The entire piece is against teachers, not for children. They tell you, “We’re the good guys, you can trust us! We say things like, ‘the children are the future’ and ‘think of the children!’” And then they ask for power and find a scapegoat. “There are ineffective teachers, the schools are rundown, hardly anything is funded, etc.” Any rational and sane person would look at that list and say, “Where have the administrators been?”

We’ve seen over history that when you take away the funding of a school, they make drastic cuts. The arts are hit, the music programs, the language programs, etc. Then when everything can be cut, they begin unethical teaching practices. They begin moving kids around, they begin letting go others who would drag them down. They’re forced to teach to a test, rather than teach content, so that their scores go up and they can tell government officials, “Look, our scores have up! Give us more money and we’ll do even better!” Then with the money they start the job of making the school look better. A new building here, a new building there. A slew of new hires after a slew of firings. They want you to believe a new coat of paint means scholastic excellence. In the mean time, a new segregation policy saturates Education and we’re all cheering about how great it is for our children.

If you ignore her main points (give us absolute power, let us blame teachers, let us fire who we want), you begin to see the real problems of Education: not funding them properly, not holding the RIGHT PEOPLE responsible, forcing goals on them that tempts them to be unethical, and not giving the teachers the resources to combat educational segregation, so that everyone gets a quality education, not just those who make the school look good.

[leftstreet]

14. ...

Thanks for a very thoughtful post

Excellent points

[sabrina 1]

24. Good post. The gains they achieved were based on very shaky

ground. Short term gains in education mean very little over the longterm. There is eg, very little in her self-congratulatory screed about actual education. That could be because none of these people are educators. They are business people.

Pouring money into something fast WILL produce some results of course, but only by contrast to what was there before. And what were the longterm educational plans? 'Get rid of unions' is not an educational goal.

They were pretty much trounced by the people who actually count. The voters.

Why Michelle Rhee and Adrian Fenty Lost

When the results came in, Fenty was trounced in largely black districts. In Wards 7 and 8, his opponent, Vincent Gray, won 82 percent of the vote. In Northwest Washington, where white voters predominate, Fenty won 76 percent of the vote. Fenty decisively lost the black vote and decisively won the white vote. D.C. public schools are about 5 percent white, so it is a reasonable supposition that the anti-Fenty vote was fueled to a large degree by parents of children in the public schools. Gray won handily, 53 percent to 46 percent.

Journalists attributed Fenty's loss to the power of the teachers' union, but such an explanation implies that black voters, even in the privacy of the voting booth, lack the capacity to make an informed choice. When the Tea Party wins a race, journalists don't write about who controlled their vote, but about a voter revolt; they acknowledge that those who turned out to vote had made a conscious decision. Yet when black voters, by large margins, chose Vincent Gray over Adrian Fenty, journalists found it difficult to accept that the voters were acting on their own, not as puppets of the teachers' union.

What would those black people know about anything anyhow? Surely they were not thinking for themselves but were influenced by what used to be the boogy-man of the right, and is now the most fearsome monster to the left, Teachers Unions!

It's clear that people who don't know much about education were impressed with surface, short-term results but with no interest in any kind of real review over time of actual results. You can go into even the worst neighborhood, pour money into it and bring the media along, and things will look better temporarily. There is nothing unusual about that. But what happens when the cameras and the politicians move on?

Sometimes those most affected, know better. And they spoke loudly and clearly once they finally got a chance to speak.

These authoritarian, quick fixes are not too popular elsewhere either. It's not that people don't know what's needed, it's that they were not getting what they needed to improve their public schools.

Once I see the Union Bashing and the absence of any real discussion of educational methods, all I can say is, it's not impressive. There are models of educational successes but they seem to be absent here and I guess the voters realized that.

The Pro-privatization/charter lobby has taken a beating in NY also.

These electoral losses and the recent Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll suggest that the "reform" movement led by the Gates Foundation, the Broad Foundation, DFER, hedge-fund managers, and the Obama administration lacks a base of popular support.

In a democracy, bullying people rarely goes down very well even if you have bags of money to throw around.

NCLB, will be looked back on as one of the most failed systems in educational history. Makes you wonder why this administration, knowing it has already failed, decided rather than do some real reform to enhance an already failed system.

And then to blame everything, as Bush tried to do, on the Teacher's Union and Teachers themselves.

[MineralMan]

27. Is the Union not made up of the teachers?

How, then, do you explain the contract vote, where 80% of teachers approved the contract that include the changes you are decrying? Unless you can explain that in a satisfactory way, I'll have to assume that these teachers, all of whom are highly educated and who have the trust of the people to educate their students, knew what they were doing.

The teachers ARE the union, are they not? That's what unions are about, is it not? If you can show me that these teachers are too stupid to understand a contract of employment, then I'll have to accept that they're too stupid to teach children. What other explanation could there be?

[woo me with science]

32. How do you know they were merely short-term gains

that would not be sustained?

Seems to me it's a little early to be making a claim like that. Given a choice between NO gains and immediate, striking gains that may or may not be sustained, I'll certainly show more interest in giving the latter option a good test.

This sentence is incomprehensible to me: "Pouring money into something fast WILL produce some results of course, but only by contrast to what was there before." What, exactly, is the point you are making here? We are not supposed to compare results to what was there before? What are we supposed to compare them to?

I am particularly confused about your comment about "pouring money" here, since increasing funding is exactly what the supporters of teachers' unions very often point to when asked what will help schools.

How can you argue that the manifesto has nothing to say about education? Rhee reports strong and striking gains in student achievement. If this is not enough to make you want to give the reform a chance, exactly what type of results would you have her provide instead, in order to show success?

The visible transformation in the school environments suggests to me that some real changes were underway. It is not rocket science to compare graffiti and chaos to order and engagement and then predict that learning is more likely to happen (and be sustained) in the latter condition.

That's certainly what the early scores coming out of these schools suggested.

[etherealtruth]

15. From the Huffington Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mimi-carter/prek-access-and-quality-h_b_772793.html

"Rhee's last three years in DCPS have been notable and noteworthy. She has implemented controversial merit pay and teacher evaluation systems, and recruited aggressively for some of the best educational talent in the country. And as Education Trust's Kati Haycock says, "No matter what you think about the politics, DC Public Schools are having real results." Prior to 2007, less than a third of elementary students were performing math at grade-level; after two years close to half of DCPS elementary students are proficient in math and reading. Secondary students have achieved double-digit growth demonstrating tremendous progress."

I don't beleive the entire US education is broken ... I do think are inner cities are poorly served.

[woo me with science]

18. Yup.

What has been most disturbing to me about this debate is the polarization it brings. It seems like there is a push to choose sides about reform, as though there were two black and white extreme options only.

It is possible to be extremely wary of a creep toward corporate control of schools while also being extremely concerned about what's happening in our troubled districts. I care about our public schools. I also care about factors that may be preventing failing schools from making real improvements, and I am curious when I hear about reforms that seem actually to help kids.

[MineralMan]

22. The most interesting thing I learned from this essay in the

Washington Post is that the teachers seem to have a different opinion than those who claim to represent them. What am I to make of that, I wonder? Who should I be listening to, the people on the front lines of educating our children, or those who say they know best, but who disagree with the 80% of teachers who approved the current contract?

Looks like I'm going to have some research to do on my own. Independent research, not colored by people who post here. As soon as I finish my current project, which has a rapidly-approaching deadline, I believe I'll do just that.

[etherealtruth]

23. It saddens me that there is no real discussion here

Our education system like our society needs to keep evolving. I don't know what the answers are but I do know that the status quo is not the answer, particularly in our inner city and impoverished school districts.

I live in Metro Detroit and I do know that the Detroit School District has failed those children for several decades.

I returned to school for a second degree following a decade long stint as a "stay at home" mother. I will never forget sitting in a class room with a bright young woman that had graduated from an inner city school .... she was horrified by the fact that she graduated in the top 10% of her graduating class and did not have skills that came close to those of the people that had graduated from the suburban districts.

[MineralMan]

25. I had hoped that there would be some real discussion.

Instead, we have the same people saying the same things, and it seems that those things are contradicted by facts. So, it's very difficult to get a real discussion going, it seems. When 80% of the teachers in DC approved their contract, which contained many of the things the detractors are complaining about, there appears to be a serious disconnect between what the "leaders" are saying and what the teachers want.

So far, that has not been adequately explained. I hope I'll be able to dig out some of the truth in this matter in the next couple of weeks. It's not one of the areas I pay a great deal of attention to, but this Washington Post piece really has made me question what I'm hearing here on DU. So, I'll start digging into this as soon as I finish up my current project. I really need to focus on that for a few days, and the election is really, really important, so I'll be focusing on that in my spare time.

This will have to wait, at least for me.

[etherealtruth]

29. NPR had an interesting interview with Rhee

(it could have been All Things Considered). It's worth a listen .... she spoke amazingly well for the woman (portrayed here) as having blood, veins and flesh hanging from her teeth. She seemed to be solely motivated by the disservice the DC schools were doing the children of that district.

[MineralMan]

30. Thanks. I'll see if I can find it.

[Hannah Bell]

36. sure you did. funny thing, i never see you wanting to discuss anything except the ed deformers'

pr releases.

here. discuss this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9408889&mesg_id=9408889

[MineralMan]

21. If that is, indeed, true, I'm very confused here.

The schools improved. The teachers overwhelmingly approved their union contract. Which information am I supposed to believe? Those interesting facts, or the opinions of those who have some agenda I can't identify and who express opinions about what it all means?

I'm sorry, but facts are facts. Opinions are...well...not necessarily facts.

Education isn't one of my primary issues, but I believe I will go and find out some things about the DC schools during Ms. Rhee's tenure there. If they truly improved, and if the students are doing better, then I'm going to have to conclude that some people's opinions aren't necessarily what I should be listening to.

[etherealtruth]

26. I'm willing to listen to most "opinions"

... I am very leary about opinions that simply parrot the status quo. Our education system (and society) must constantly evolve to meet the needs of the populations it serves.

[MineralMan]

28. Well, it's been failing to do its job for some time, now, at least

in many places. Change is obviously needed. It's not my specialty, though, so I can't say what changes will produce the result we need. I have to leave that to professionals in that field. Trouble is, some are saying that they don't know what they're doing. My question is whether those who are saying that know what they're talking about.

I guess I need a credentials check or something. I'm going to stop listening to anyone on this subject unless they tell me why they have more expertise than those in the Obama Administration. So far, I've seen no such credentials being presented.

I guess I'm going to have to go and do my own research. Too bad, too. That's a lot of work. I wish there were people here I could depend on for accurate information. I think I'll start with the current cabinet, then work down from there. I trust President Obama to choose good people. I have to.

On the other hand, if others can demonstrate to me that they have the expertise to opine on this subject, I'll listen to them, too. Until then, I'm going to go with people who actually have demonstrable expertise. That's always served me well in the past in areas where I lack such expertise.

[The Philosopher]

40. Wow

You just cut out any appreciation for “discussion” right there. You’re a propagandist. Want a discussion, but only with someone in the Administration or have credentials you approve of? And don’t try to wiggle out of the accusation. You saying, “I’ll trust the Administration over anyone else,” IS saying you’ll only have a discussion with the Administration and their approved people. And it’s hilarious, because it proves that any statement you make on the board about education is false, because you won’t defend it.

Like your statement that the schools approved. Did they? Or did the numbers go in Rhee’s favor? How did she do that? Many will segregate the students, ignore content for the tests, and push out the lower performing students. I know, I’ve graduated from that sort of school. The numbers were great, fantastic. But the kids weren’t learning. We were only achieving. These are the same practices in business when an unethical boss cooks the books to make the company look better in writing than it actually is. That’s how they get the promotions, that’s how they get more investors.

And you keep challenging Hannah about the teachers approving the contracts, asking her to tell you what their reasons were, but you don’t provide the reasons either. You just assume that A) the union representatives are doing the best job ever in the history of anything, and B) that everyone in the union is pro-union. Have you ever been in a union? Have you ever talked to union members? Those entering a profession that have one? Have you ever been involved in contract negotiations for a union? Not all contracts are negotiated well. My dad was a negotiator for his local when they did health insurance. He was pretty damned good at it, which is why when he worked everyone had great health insurance. But even he could fuck up. One year he left his own wife’s doctor off the list of approved doctors! When she pointed out what happened, the next day he went back and got it fixed. AFTER the agreements had been made.

Never mind that it may have been a tactic to keep the unions alive, in good respects, while they worked to kick Rhee out and put in someone who isn’t a destructive force in Education.

[Hannah Bell]

46. [phone]

[Blue_Tires]

38. Well, time will certainly prove whether or not Rhee's plan actually worked

or if it was just short-term window dressing (or worse, another inner-city social engineering experiment)

I agree some major changes have to be made, but her ballbreaking, scorched earth, no-prisoners management style doesn't seem to have earned her many friends, except among the anti-union crowd and corporate 'educators' who have seldom set foot inside a classroom or a disadvantaged neighborhood.

And I'm still curious why she blew town to cash in on the speech/interview circuit...Was she in it for the students and the community or just to grow her own political profile? We've seen the whole "Turn something completely upside-down, declare victory and leave" story before...

You might look in the archives of the Washington City Paper for your research...As an alt weekly, they are more entrenched in the community and a little more "spin-proof" than the big media outlets.

At least some D.C. residents will admit to missing Rhee...I don't know if anyone will admit to missing Fenty

[Hannah Bell]

44. couldn't get more compromised on this issue than the wapo: 70% of their profits come

from their for-profit education arm (kaplan, they of the scammer colleges), & melinda gates is on their board.

anything the wapo writes on this topic = propaganda.

[Hannah Bell]

35. that inner cities are poorly served doesn't mean rhee & fenty served them well.

[Dappleganger]

39. I am really pissed that Rhee got the boot...

because now she's down in my state of FL poking her nose in our schools' businesses. As if we don't have enough problems already.

Isn't there some school district overseas she could go meddle in??

[laughingliberal]

41. Unrec. That is all. nt

[jpgray]

42. It's both hilarious and tragic how easily people are taken by this shit.

It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that underperforming teachers will not produce a new generation of rocket scientists.

I wish they had actually asked some rocket scientists if they owed their careers largely (or at all) to the quality of their teachers. Studies have shown again and again that teacher quality is not, as Rhee argued in WaPo, "the single most important factor determining whether students succeed in school." Home life and community trump all else, everywhere, for everyone, every time. A recent one showed a mother's literacy level was the best predictor for student success, wealth and community are other classic determinants, and generally it takes only a few moments with Google to show that no evidence exists to support the idea that -teachers- are the crucial element.

Having better teachers would be, well, better. But you cannot make a rocket scientist by throwing teachers at a kid. Even if you air-dropped Eton atop poor urban kids, their peers, relatives and parents would still make up the most decisive influences in their lives, as in the life of any person. These influences will trump even the best or worst teachers in existence, as in our country's history these influences have consistently trumped unqualified, overworked, or nonexistent teachers.

If they cared about kids, they would work against poverty and its attendant evils. If I am right, and it is not about kids, what do you think it is about? To my mind, mayors and other local officials will take any opportunity to fire workers and close schools, purely to make up budget shortfalls and avoid levying further taxes. Those who advocate reforms such that they justify this will be promoted and receive exposure. Those that do not, well, won't.