Tag Archive for 'Washington'

Hurry-Up. Offend.

Published by Robert Pondiscio on October 14, 2009 in No category. 1 Comment

Veteran eduscribe Richard Whitmire argues in a Wash Post op-ed that DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee has “no choice but to play hardball” with teachers, unions and politicians.  

Running a hurry-up education offense is the only way Rhee can maintain a viable-sized school district that has dwindled to a mere 44,000 students, while the city’s charter school population is expected to grow to 28,000 this year….In the District, charters continue to attract more new students than Rhee’s schools. If Rhee can’t stanch or reverse that trend, her district slumps into irrelevancy, a fact of life that her union opponents seem incapable of grasping. If Rhee falters, the layoffs will continue.

I get the math, but not the logic.  If DC schools face an “existential threat” from charters (which Rhee supports), doesn’t it make more sense to make allies, not enemies of teachers unions?   The pitch is simple:  work with me or we’re both out of jobs.

You Are a Highly Skilled Teacher If….

Published by Robert Pondiscio on August 23, 2009 in Education News and accountability. 21 Comments

…you never have more than five instances of “inappropriate or off-task behavior” by students within a half-hour of class time.

…you respond to students’ correct answers by “probing for higher-level understanding” of the idea being discussed at least three times every half hour.

…you lose no more than three minutes of teaching time to poor organization or planning.

Who says so?  Why, Michelle Rhee says so.

One, Two, Three All Eyes on Rhee

Published by Robert Pondiscio on June 15, 2009 in Education News. 2 Comments

Fame can backfire.  Money doesn’t always talk.  Politics matter.  Beware of unintended consequences.  The Washington Post’s Bill Turque sums up the lessons learned by Washington, DC’s lightning rod Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee.   “Two years into the job, Rhee has lost none of her zeal,” Turque reports.  “But those who know her well say she’s found that converting conviction into sustainable change requires more patience, indulgence and attentiveness to politics than may come naturally to her.”

Turque’s piece opens with Rhee being called on the carpet by D.C. Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray over her decision to pose for the cover of TIME Magazine holding a broom.  “What does it get you, to constantly bash those you’re trying to get to help you? he asked her (a question also asked by this blog).  Turque’s piece describes how Rhee’s “rising celebrity alienated key constituencies at home” including teachers and parents.   He also reports that Rhee “expected to be hailed as a hero last summer by the Washington Teachers’ Union” for her proposal to raise pay into the stratosphere for those willing to forego tenure.  And although he notes Rhee has earned points for more tactful recent management of her relationship with the City Council and other constituencies, she still sounds unrepentant:

If I go down at the end of the day because I didn’t play the political game right, that’s okay with me,” she tells the Post. “At least when you’re making decisions that you believe are in the best interests of kids, you may not win in the end, but at least you can operate with a good conscience.”

“By major measures of progress, the jury on Rhee remains out,” Turque concludes.  “It will take at least three sets of annual standardized test scores to assess whether her changes are making a difference in classrooms, experts say. The second set is due this summer.”

At Teacher Beat, guest blogger Liana Heitin focuses on Rhee’s status as an outsider to DC and education politics, concluding “it’s possible she will continue to remain ‘outside’ as long as she stays pinned to a self-imposed agenda, resists collaborating with stakeholders, refuses to sugarcoat the dismal realities of the system, and aims recruitment efforts at a ‘new breed’ of idealists who are willing to sacrifice their personal lives to make a splash themselves.”  Finally, the Post’s Jay Mathews says Turque nails the list of Rhee’s “lessons learned” and invites readers to add on their own.  The comments predictably fall into two categories:  “You go, girl!”  or simply ”You, go.”

Update:  Eduflack, engaging in expectation management, predicts a downturn in DC test scores this summer.

“A Great Free Education!”

Published by Robert Pondiscio on April 9, 2009 in Education News. 0 Comments

The Washington Post takes note of a radio ad campaign aimed at “stemming the decline in public confidence” in DC schools:

“Did you know,” the announcer intones on the ads, which aired last month on WPGC (95.5 FM) and are scheduled to run again next month, “that the only school in D.C. to earn a national ribbon for excellence last year was a D.C. public school? Go public and get a great free education!”

The ribbon of excellence bit refers to Key Elementary, which as one commenter on the Post’s piece notes, is not a demographically typical DC school, with only 9% eligible for free lunch, and 16% Latino and African American compared to a 92% average for District schools.

 ”It ain’t bragging if you can do it,” the great Dizzy Dean once quipped.  But the bragging is supposed to come after the doing it. I want to see Washington, DC’s schools go from worst to first as much as anybody, but claims about a “great free public education” are a tad premature.   If you’re providing a great free public education, you won’t need a radio campaign to spread the word. 

PR 101:  Underpromise and overdeliver.  If there’s a problem, tell people how you’re addressing it, not that there’s no problem.

Brinksmanship in DC Schools?

Published by Robert Pondiscio on November 16, 2008 in Education News. 2 Comments

Washington, DC Mayor Adrian M. Fenty and Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee have drafted a plan to dramatically expand their effort to remove ineffective teachers from DC schools by seeking federal legislation declaring the school system in a state of emergency–a move that would eliminate the need to bargain with the Washington Teachers’ Union, reports the Washington Post, which obtained a copy of the plan under the Freedom of Information Act

If adopted, the measures would essentially allow the District to begin building a new school system. Such an effort would be similar to one underway in New Orleans, where a state takeover after Hurricane Katrina placed most of the city’s 78 public schools in a special Recovery School District. About half of the district’s schools are charters, and it has no union contract.

The Post’s report notes the plan was drawn up in a statement for a news conference in September where “Rhee and Fenty were scheduled to present a series of steps they could take under existing regulations to rid the system of teachers deemed ineffective.”  The news conference was cancelled and the statement never made public.  But that doesn’t appear to mean Rhee and Fenty are having second thoughts. “The Mayor and the Chancellor will continue to keep these and all ideas on the table,” a spokesperson tells the paper. 

“The moves could force a major confrontation with the union and its parent organization, the American Federation of Teachers, which has denounced the changes in New Orleans,” the Post notes.

My hunch is that Rhee and Fenty are using the threat of a state of emergency to force the teacher’s union to let its members vote on their plan to give teachers hefty salary hikes in exchange for waiving tenure. 

Update:  Eduflack is also on this and takes the long view.  “At the end of the day, once Rhee has gotten all of the change and reform she’s seeking, she actually has to work with those left standing to deliver on her promise to boost student achievement and close the achievement gap,” he writes.  “That means parents and families.  It means teachers and principals.  And it certainly means the Washington Teachers Union.  Rhee’s ultimate success will be determined by the effectiveness of the teachers and the union that supports them.  And there is no working around that, no matter how hard you try.”

Public or Private?

Published by Robert Pondiscio on November 10, 2008 in Education Leadership. 2 Comments

Everyone and their brother is weighing in on where the future First Daughters should go to school once their dad moves to Washington to start his new job.  Jay Mathews of the Washington Post wisely avoids grandstanding, noting that school choice is very personal.  He assumes the Obama girls will find their way to Georgetown Day School, “because of its similarity to their current school, its historic role as the city’s first racially integrated school and the presence of Obama senior legal adviser Eric H. Holder Jr. on its board of trustees.”  However he notes there is a viable public school, Strong John Thomson, a stone’s throw from the White House.

Meet the principal, Gladys Camp, and you understand why Thomson parents think the Obamas ought to check it out. Dr. Camp, as everyone calls her, is a legend. In the past two years, she has won awards from the National Association of Elementary School Principals and this newspaper as the best school leader in the city….Sixty-nine percent of Thomson’s 355 students are from low-income families. Forty percent are Hispanic, 34 percent black, 22 percent Asian American and 5 percent white. That demographic mix often means remedial instruction and little enrichment, but parents say the school offers a feast of music, art and foreign languages as good as what they would find in a private school. 

The last President to send his kids to public school?  Jimmy Carter.  “Thomson is close to capacity,” writes Uncle Jay, “but Camp said she would have room after the holidays for a fifth-grader and a second-grader transferring from the Midwest.”

Banking on Test Scores

Published by Robert Pondiscio on October 22, 2008 in Education Practice. 0 Comments

With both presidential candidates supporting merit pay for teachers, it’s likely that the issue will affect teachers nationwide, USA Today’s Greg Toppo observes this morning in a piece that offers a round-up of pay-for-performance plans nationwide. 

“At least eight states are moving away from a traditional pay model, which increases salaries based on seniority and advanced degrees,” Toppo writes. ”Many of the pay packages are funded by private foundations. In dozens of districts, test scores already have earned teachers more money.”

The most controversial plan is Washington, DC’s which could see high-performing teachers with limited experience earn over $100,000 if they give up tenure.  George Parker, president of the Washington Teachers Union tells USA Today, “A lot of our younger teachers say, ‘Bring it on.’ ” Older teachers, he says, are more concerned with due process. 

Hiring and Firing

Published by Robert Pondiscio on September 30, 2008 in Education Practice. 0 Comments

Jay Mathews, the dean of education reporters, takes a strong stand on teacher retention, arguing that giving principals the unfettered power to hire and fire teachers is “crucial” to closing the achievement gap.

This is a difficult choice and a hard time for D.C. teachers. They are fine people who have chosen a tough profession and put their hearts into their work. Many fear being judged by principals who were not skillful teachers themselves and have little clue as to what helps kids learn and what doesn’t. But I don’t see any way the city’s children are going to get the instruction they deserve — the imaginative, fun-loving, firm teaching found at schools like KEY — unless principals are given the power to hire and fire teachers based on demonstrated skill and improved learning in class.

Mathews cites the example of the KIPP DC:KEY Academy, where principal Sarah Hayes dismissed two teachers who were not cutting it, despite efforts to improve.  “If KEY were a traditional school, Hayes’s only reasonable option would have been to mentor the teachers, note her dissatisfaction on their evaluations and recommend that they not be kept after a two-year probation,” he writes.  “That is the way it goes in most school systems. Staffing rules, tenure agreements and low expectations tend to favor weak teachers unless they do something awful.”

Two Out of Three Ain’t Bad…

Published by Robert Pondiscio on September 30, 2008 in Assessment and Testing and Education Theory. 3 Comments

In a two-week trial of a cash incentive program for students at a Washington middle school attendance and punctuality have improved. Grades have not.  The Washington Post’s Bill Turque takes a look inside a school that is aggressively implementing the controversial concept.

The Northwest Washington school’s 307 students are among the roughly 3,000 middle-schoolers eligible to earn as much as $100 every two weeks — to a maximum of $1,500 for the academic year — for showing up on time, not disrupting class and getting high grades. Students have been buzzing about the pilot program, called Capital Gains, since they learned in late August that their school had been selected.

The program, as you might have guessed, is the brainchild of incentives guru Roland Fryer.  Every two weeks, students are evaluated on 10-point scales according to a series of performance indicators. “All schools in the program are required to review behavior and attendance, which means showing up on time for every class,” the Post reports.  “Individual schools can choose other criteria, including grades, homework, class participation and adherence to the dress code. Each point is worth $2.” 

For the first two pay periods, beginning Oct. 17, checks will be distributed by school staff. Later, they will be deposited directly into student-owned savings accounts at SunTrust Bank. Students will be able to access the money with or without their parents, and no one can withdraw money without the child, officials said.

Last week, it was announced the Fryer will lead a new education research center at Harvard University, which will monitor efforts to close achievement gaps.  Incentive programs, not surprisingly, will be the first idea under Fryer’s shiny new $44 million microscope.

Update:  I’m still agnostic on incentives, but a reader at Eduwonkette nicely summarizes the ick factor that many educators feel about it.  “The soul-crushing aspect of Fryer’s theoretical framework is that it lets the curriculum and the teacher and the school entirely off the hook,” observes Citizen X. ”It’s a much more cynical view on students living in poverty. They don’t care, they are only motivated by material objects that they don’t have, they have to be bribed into “learning” (or at least learning to get a better score on a bubble sheet).”