Michelle Rhee has a messaging problem
We have been hearing Republican party officials saying lately that they lost the presidential election last year because they didn't tell their story very well. They had a "messaging" problem. A number of other folks, however, dismiss that explanation and believe that Governor Romney lost the election not because people didn't understand his proposals but because they did. The problem was not the style of the communication but the content.
Analogous to that perception, Lynne Varner writes today that people reject Michelle Rhee's message because they don't like her style. I don't think that's the case. I think people just disagree with her. Lots of people. Lots and lots of people. Lots and lots of people with far better credentials in education than hers.
Analogous to that perception, Lynne Varner writes today that people reject Michelle Rhee's message because they don't like her style. I don't think that's the case. I think people just disagree with her. Lots of people. Lots and lots of people. Lots and lots of people with far better credentials in education than hers.
Comments
Strange I know a couple of other people with this problem as well. They refuse to admit it as well.
-Ted
Her methods don't work, yet it's amazing to see her sell them to a willing audience after priming them with a little hate beforehand. B
The "bad teacher" epidemic is to Rhee what the infamous Chicago welfare queen with 3 Cadillacs and 7 Social Security numbers was to Reagan: A completely made-up lie. Yet, it satisfied the urge to scapegoat and hate, while distracting from the real liars and thieves. Rhee is being a good soldier. WSDWG
Oakland Teachers Picket Rhee
WSDWG
A friend
In Massachusetts, the Dukakis-Kerry don't-rock-the-boat cowards in the Massachusetts Teacher's Association caved to Stand On Children and agreed to having test scores in their evaluations last year.
Across the country, union "leaders", with hundreds of millions in annual dues cower before the Rhee-ality of baloney. IF you wanted to destroy public education by turning $600,000,000,000 a year into into a bunch of 7-11 fiefs with grovelling employees, could you wish for better "opponents" than union "leaders" who snivel if you threaten to take away their quarterly meetings with The Big People, and the "leaders" learn how some baloney right wing lie is the latest grown up "compromise"?
RheesWinning
People at the district office really are not concerned about our kids. example: child scores mid 90s on AL test. Next year same child retakes test scores in the 30s. In my opinion district should red flag this child as something is wrong soemwhere. but no. call into district says this happens all the time and there is nothing we can do about it. the district people do not care about the kids they care about the system.
I think this is the kind of thing Rhee is trying to change.
Not a Rhee fan but not a Rhee hater either. A realist.
The system sucks.
it is all about maintaining jobs for adults not educating kids.
-Rheedy or not I am out
- she fired a lot of teachers in D.C. (and principals, one on camera). She ended up hiring more teachers, then had to lay half off because whoops! she didn't have the money to pay them.
- she fired half the administration. While this "leaning" of administration could be a good thing, I have to wonder who she kept and why. For example, I think SPS is very heavy with data/testing folks and very light on maintenance even as we know that MAP is not a good test and that our buildings are falling apart.
- she wants to get rid of teacher seniority. I can see some adjusting but not necessarily getting rid of it. (Rheedy, your example is not part of what she wants to change. If that librarian is "old but good" then yes, if she got cut back to half-time, in a union she has a right to advocate for full-time work. And your example of AL has nothing to do with what she is advocating.)
What else? She calls herself a Dem but aligns herself with big business and big foundations whose ed reform agenda includes charters, vouchers and a huge pushback of the teachers union. These are things I cannot support.
I'll have a thread today about Rhee after I listen to Dora Taylor on KUOW this morning but I have found out quite an interesting item about her visit.
Her ideas don't have credibility because she doesn't have credibility. It's hard to believe someone who tells different stories to different audiences.
The anti-union claim of "only caring about the adult teachers" is perhaps the most ignorant, yet oft-repeated lie circulated throughout and envious, ignorant public many of whom are jealous of teachers, believing they have it easy and are overpaid for the supposed "8 months of the year" they work.
I will not be nice to an ignoramus and cheat like Rhee, because she knows better than what she says. She is all about money and profit for people she believes are simply better than you and I.
Her plans and ideas are spoon fed to her from places like the Heritage Foundation, the Club for Growth, and various, extremely conservative and right-wing organizations, which eschew the teachings of Christ in favor of the money-grubbing sociopath Ayn Rand.
The question is not why some dislike and reject her. The question is why everyone doesn't.
WSDWG
-Rheedy
HERE.
Should we cut many 100k+ per year useless administrators, and shrink administration? Yes, we should.
But that problem has absolutely nothing to do with teachers unions, merit pay, standardized testing, or tenure, all of which Rhee blames for how districts and schools operate today.
Though her book feels rather hastily put together, with moments of false modesty, Rhee in person makes a compelling case for the principles she is fighting for. The heart of her philosophy rests on three policy pillars: Elevating the teaching profession, ensuring that families are given options in choosing the right schools for their kids and using tax dollars wisely.
“No matter what environment kids come from, they can thrive if they are in effective education environments,” Rhee asserts. She believes that cumbersome bureaucracy is often a roadblock to the success of a school or a student. “Children will either rise or fall to the expectations we set for them. It’s our job to create an environment where values are reinforced every day.”
=========================
Let's examine....
Three policy pillars:
(1) Elevating the teaching profession,
(2) ensuring that families are given options in choosing the right schools for their kids and
(3) using tax dollars wisely.
((only mom and apple pie might be less controversial))
Plus
cumbersome bureaucracy is often a roadblock to the success of a school or a student.
----
The above apparently are her justification for changes that unfortunately are rarely solutions as the changes Ms. Rhee proposes are NOT solutions.
Consider Common Core State Standards ... a huge expenditure to create a massive cumbersome bureaucracy ... yet Ms. Rhee fails to address CCSS because her big buck funders are all in favor of CCSS. Ms. Rhee is a great opportunist and is on message for big money interests.
Her actions are largely for the de-professionalization of teaching.
========
Children will either rise or fall to the expectations we set for them.
Complete BS.. Without adequate support in the form of sound instructional programs and providing effective interventions the raising expectations is a cruel hoax.
When Ms. Rhee started in WA DC measures showed DC as lower in Ed attainment than all 50 states .. and when she finished still lower than all 50 states.
It also seems Rhee failed to "Elevate the teaching profession"
Rhee identifies problems and then presents sham solutions so typical of Corporate backed Education Reformers. .... yup upon inspection this Ed Reform stuff always feels rather hastily put together. .... Rhee is just another agent of the oligarchy.
Want solutions? Read John Hattie.... evidence based solutions rather than Ed Reform BS.
Rhee loves to draw upon "research" a "Harvard study" even, to make the point that kids with higher quality teachers will earn more money in their lifetimes, are less likely to drop out of High School, and less likely to be teenage moms.
Gee, Ms. Rhee, you needed a Harvard Study to tell you that?
Now tell me about your "common sense" reforms again. Common sense does not seem to be something she naturally possesses. But, if I had my own driver, five-star hotel accommodations, and got 50k per speech, I wouldn't categorize myself as "common" and wouldn't expect to possess much commoners' senses either.
The ironic thing about Rhee is how her career path tracks that of GW Bush. Every time he crashed, burned and bankrupted another oil company, he always had daddy's rich friends to bail him out and start another company. Must be a "common" Ivy League thing.
Driven to distraction by too much big data
Commerce depends on trust, writes David Brooks. People and companies that behave well in tough times earn affection and self-respect that is extremely valuable, even if it is hard to capture in data.
Full article here:
http://seattletimes.com/html/opinion/2020388996_brookscolumndatatrustxml.html
--ms.q
You wondered about "having some percentage of the teacher evaluation based on the students improvement."
This method has been shown to be completely unreliable. The variation from year to year with most teachers fluctuates wildly because the sample sizes are just too small.
A teacher teaches "too few students" for this method to be valid.
WSDWG
-reader