Michelle Rhee was recently invited to meet with the Los Angeles Times editorial board.
The interview occurred after John Merrow published his bombshell post about the mysterious memo, the one showing that Rhee was informed about the likelihood of widespread cheating and did nothing about it. Rhee forgot about the cheating memo or didn’t think it important.
In the same post on his blog, Merrow said that the public schools were worse off after the Rhee-Henderson years than when Rhee started, by every measure, like test scores, graduation fares, teacher turnover, truancy, enrollments, etc.
Nonetheless, the Los Angeles Times wanted to gain Rhee’s wisdom on teacher evaluation. Read the interview. It is clear that she doesn’t know the research, nor has she learned that the high valuation she placed on standardized testing (50% of a teacher’s rating) contributed to the cheating she ignored.
She has her narrative, and she is sticking to it. The Times needs to hear from other people, like David Berliner, who can explain what the research says.
This interview with one of the founding fathers of VAM says it all. He opposes the way his product is being used to denigrate teachers and schools. He also states that the opposition to the way VAM is being used is old news in the testing community, the large majority of whom agree with him, but no one listened to them then or now. http://www.minnpost.com/learning-curve/2012/06/student-testing-pioneer-angermeyr-skeptical-about-high-stakes-trends
The article you link from the LA Times, “Michelle Rhee and the unproven teacher evaluation” by Karen Klein says this:
“And as head of the Washington, D.C., schools, Rhee counted the scores at 50% — and that was before the Gates-funded study even came out. Well, you have to start somewhere, she said.
I suppose that’s true. But starting somewhere is a long way from making etched-in-stone decisions about teachers’ fates and how to bring about the best education possible in public-school classrooms. And that doesn’t just refer to Rhee. In response to President Obama’s demands of states that wanted Race to the Top funds, various states have imposed their own laws requiring test scores to count for up to 50% of evaluations. Though the president requires that the tests count for a “significant” portion, he never set a cap on what a reasonable portion would be. And what little evidence we have so far on scores suggests that they should be considered only as a trend over several years, not based on results from a year or two.”
So Michelle Rhee admits in the interview that she and the corporate reformers really don’t know what they are doing! They are not educators, they are business managers. She admits that they haven’t a clue on how to evaluate teachers.
Yet she, other corporate reformers, and our know nothing, lazy press have been bashing teachers for ten years for a corporate agenda whose primary goal is private profit.
Who is going to give justice to the thousands of teachers whose careers have been destroyed by their agenda? Who is to going to rescue this generation of students whose education is being degraded by the attack on and the underfunding of public schools based on the corporate reformers agenda? Who is going to make up all the instruction time lost in preparing for and giving tests year after year so teachers and schools can be “evaluated”?
Maryland is mandating that 50% of a teacher’s evaluation be based upon test scores. Maryland is also insisting that 20% must be based upon the state’s NCLB exam (MSA). According to a legislative report, if aryland was not to do this, not only would RTTT money be taken back, the federal Department of Education could withhold all Title 1 money.
I asked the man at the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) Mr. David Horvath, how did his office determine that 20% was the best percentage to use, as opposed to 25%, 16.7% etc. He said there was no support for any figure. He tried to push it off by writing that the Maryland branch of NEA originally proposed 30% of a teacher’s evaluation be based upon MSA.
Ed harris,there is no research or evidence to support any percentage of VAM.
Or any percentage of SGP (student growth percentiles which is what some states are using in place of VAM due to the total negative publicity-note not necessarily due to its complete uselessness).
Diane, I know there is no study/research/evidence. I wanted to see what response the Maryland State Department of Education would give me.
By his lack of a response, Mr. Volrath acknowledge that. (I apologize that I mixed his name up with an old high school classmate.)
Guess who controls the L-ATimes and is looking to purchase the Chicago News Tribune? Remember vanity publishing? Now we have vanity purchase of newspapers!
Tribune Co. owns The LA Times, The Chicago Tribune, The Baltimore Sun, The Hartford Courant, the Orlando Sentinel, and The Sun Sentinel, and the Spanish language newspaper Hoy. Supposedly the Koch brothers are about to make a bid, and the other interested parties include the usual suspects: Murdoch, Broad, Burkle, Buffett. Sigh…
Susan,
Correct.
The Koch Bros. are not looking for a business investment; rather, they are looking for a media outlook to combat the likes of Diane Ravitch and others.
In NJ we saw a similar media/propaganda purchase of a Philadelphia newspaper!
Diane,
Every time I read something like this, I’m grateful for your sanity. I believe that it was Einstein who said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Rhee’s sticking to her narrative… and that flies in the face of the reality of what’s happening… therefore, according to Einstein, she’d be considered insane. Thank you for recognizing the outcome of NCLB and being the voice of reason. I’m grateful that you use your power for good. Thank you for being a VOICE for the teachers who have a hard time being heard!
Rhee, as so many of you have pointed out, is a liar and a fraud. The arrogance this woman portrays is both astounding and self incriminating. She portrays pretty much all the signs of a sociopath and has ZERO credibility.
I am starting to wonder if she is smart enough to realize that she is a paid puppet of the rich or if she honestly believes low test scores are SOLELY a result of a few crappy teachers. Never mind that there is ZERO evidence pointing that out and a huge mountain of evidence pointing out other factors such as poverty and everything that comes with it.
Does she honestly believe that leadership through fear, lies and intimidation ( scores come up or your fired) is a way to lead anybody much less any organization? What qualification does she have to be a leader? Back in my day, leaders had to have integrity above all else. Above my desk I have a carved wooden plaque that states so eloquently what Mrs. Rhee does not have.
“ Integrity – A steadfast adherence to a strict moral or ethical code. To be honest, upright, consistent and moral in ones actions and deeds.”
Leaders inspire, they motivate, they make you want to go the extra mile. Leaders are honest and forthright in their business. Leaders have integrity, honesty, principle, knowledge, honor and humility. Leaders are also compassionate and fair and listen to people because they realize that they have as much to learn as they are teaching.
Leaders don’t pad resumes ( Rhee, Deasy) with outright lies. That should have been the very first thing that was checked. 90th percentile scores! Really! You mean that this young inexperienced woman has single-handedly figured out how to completely close the achievement gap? Something that tens of thousands of teachers, university professors, and other educational specialist have struggled to do in the last 20, 30, 40 plus years. And exactly what evidence does she have? None! This cannot be over emphasized. She has zero evidence for the gains. Belief does not equal fact, no matter how strongly it is felt.
Carl Sagan once said, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”
Rhee and a few others have made some extraordinary claims – but if that is all they are and there is no ( non biased) evidence to back it up then it is nothing more than a good story.
It’s time to wake up people. You are currently in the process of being hoodwinked. This is not about improving learning. It is about shifting the money to the rich and using your child’s future to do it. Do your homework.
Ms. Rhee thinks that saying the same things over and over again makes them true. She can click her ruby slippers and chant, “There’s no truth like mine” as much as she wants, but she ain’t goin’ home! Unless, of course, she can channel her own hot air into the Wizard of Duncan’s balloon.
With any luck and much organized activism, the tornado will come swiftly and a house will fall on her . . . . Or maybe someone wil have the bravery to throw a bucket full of eraser shavings on her and she’ll melt . . . .
.
Love it! Thanks for the chuckle, Robert!
A little levity now and then can make us stronger.
Can’t you see her now, face to face with Randi Weingarten:
“I’ll get you my little pretty . . . . . and your little teachers’ union too!”
To which Weingarten would only reply,
“But Madam, I’m one of you! I’ve been deceiving the scarecrow, lion, and tin man for years, and they’ve been too stupid to notice it. Let’s you and I join forces, parade around as enemies, and just cooperate with each other behind dungeon doors. . .. Whaddya say?!”
Was the other 50% based just on principal evaluations? Anything else? If not, and 50% was based on student test scores and the other 50% was based on principal evaluations, knowing their own jobs were on the line since Rhee required they promise her a specific increase, some principals may have fudged and decided not to give positive evaluations for teachers whose test scores didn’t rise significantly. If that was ever the case, then the test scores may have actually carried a weight of up to 100%. Not hard to predict that could happen either.
Rhee trusted her gut instincts re the 50% VAMania. Gut instinct is not necessarily a bad thing, but…
How trustworthy are her gut instincts when she had masking tape put on the lips of dozens of children under her care and their lips bled when it came off?
How trustworthy are her gut instincts when she was certain enough to repeat in public [until a partial recantation a few years ago] that she had brought her students from the 13th to the 90th percentile during her brief teaching stint but can provide absolutely no hard evidence of this, not even a corroborating statement from the principal she said told her same?
How trustworthy are her gut instincts when she engaged in the nationwide public humiliation of a principal by eagerly firing him while a film crew recorded the whole incident?
How trustworthy are her gut instincts when she publicly claimed to be a “public school parent” when one of her children attends an elite private school—and then claims that her lie was meant to protect the child and not the Rhee public persona?
The above don’t add up to “trustworthy” but rather the opposite.
Michelle, just do the math.
🙂
The reformers have a very limited vocabulary about education. They say the same few words over and over. Maybe that is why they believe themselves.
Of course Rhee realizes she is a paid puppet of the rich – every time she sees her bank account.
She is so scary – I wonder what her mother thinks of her now. She is truly a psychopath. So many of the reformers are cruel and petty and uncaring. Is that how all really rich people are? Years ago when I was trying to decide where to send my son to school, because I wanted the best education for him and was willing to give up anything to pay for it, I looked into a certain private school. When I realized that many of the kids that went there were being raised by nannies, I made my decision not to send him there. I knew immediately that their families did not have the same values I did. Is that what money buys- a lack of true values?
“Is that what money buys- a lack of true values?”
Oh, the values are true-truly abhorrent!
One can’t or should not lump all “rich people” into the same category.
There are very moral rich people, as there are very immoral upper middle class, middel class, lower middle class, and poverty ridden people. Conversely, there are many bad rich people (Bloomberg, Gates, Murdoch, Broad, etc.) who only see things their prescriptivist way as a benefit for society and/or continue to want more for themselves, much like Paula Deen for many years could not stop scarffing down too much butter and cane sugar.
Either way, excess is excess, and it’s not good for anyone. Right now, 1% of our population controls and owns 35% to 40% of the nation’s wealth.
SIx members put together of the Walton family have wealth that totals more than that of the bottom income earning 120 million Americans. You read that correctly.
Having money may not necessarily define one’s capacity to be moral. Personally, I find anyone of any income level who is apathetic and ill informed about politics to be the worst enemy of the people. . . . and there are millions of such people right here in our own backyard.
I know.
I used to be one of them.
“very moral rich people” Isn’t that an example given after the definition of oxymoron? I guess it depends on your definition of “rich”.
“Either way, excess is excess, and it’s not good for anyone” You excoriate P. Dean and others for “scarfing down too much butter and refined sugar” but also say that those who “scarf down” too much money (the rich) can be “moral”? Isn’t one “rich” by definition one who has excess money and wealth, meaning that others then cannot partake of that wealth because it is horded? (By the way I’m a butter scarfer and if I die a year or two early because of it that is my problem and my problem only. Why would I put that synthetic crap margarine into my body?).
You should add “wealth envy” to your list of unhealthy practices, Duane. I myself am a follower of Emeril, Julia Child, and Linda Richman in my affection for “buttah,” but have switched to low-salt since my heart attack.
Duane, I love butter, but unfortunately do not tolerate dairy or glutens very well.
All I’m saying is that there do exist rich people who fight for the middle class as hard as I, a middle class person, fight for the middle class. That includes never touching Social Security and advocating for a single payer system of healthcare as they do in most any modern developed country with a large middle class.
Of course, one can debate what it means to be middle class. I know od plenty of working class people who vote against their own interest, not connecting the dots of how the GOP – and noe the Democrats – want to erode and destroy social safety nets all in the false name of individualism, bog bad government that no one wants or needs, and individual vs. collective responsibilities.
At this point in American Society, I would venture to say, if i could put my finger on the middle pulse of America, that once people start to earn over $60K a year, they start to forget about issues that surround them and focus mainly or only on themselves and their familes. But this is to their detriment.
Of course, $60K in an expensive metropolitan gentrifed region such as New York or San Francisco is not a lot of money, nor would it be middle class enough for a family of four, two adults and two kids with even small home ownership.
I don’t or can’t see rich, poor, or middle class as being a cause of gaining or losing morality, but I definitely see the capacity to think mainly or only of oneself and not connect dots and not keepeing oneself politically informed and not thinking as a collectivist to a reasaonable extent to be immoral and just plain stupid.
And in doing so, I guess my point was that one does not have to be rich, poor, or in between to have that sort of disconnect.
So enjoy the butter. Have some red wine with your meal if you consume it!
I am envious of those who can deal with glutens and dairy!
Margarine is indeed poison and should be outlawed . . .