Few of us attended one of Michelle Rhee’s “teacher town hall” meetings in Los Angeles, Birmingham, and Philadelphia. Fortunately, the meeting in Los Angeles was videotaped and released.
Gary Rubinstein, ex-TFA and current math teacher at Stuyvesant High School, watched the videotape closely and analyzed the exchanges. He shows how carefully stage-managed the event was, and his commentary is both sharp and fair.
The one bright shining moment in the “town hall” occurred near the end, when a young student stood up and broke all the rules. She spoke for two minutes, she didn’t get cut off, she had her say.
Gary’s analysis is priceless. Please read it.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
After reading this entry please visit the Phila Public School Notebook (theNotebook.org) and read today’s headlines to see what corporate reform is actually achieving: staff leveling in Phila leads to even more teacher layoffs and more multi-grade classrooms; a child is sent home from school with asthma on a day when the school has no nurse and dies at the hospital where she was rushed by her father; Governor Corbett responds negatively to a request from community groups to release $45 million he has been holding back from the school district pending union concessions; and an anonymous donor’s gift, which enables the libraries at Philly’s two prestige schools, Central High and Masterman, to open finally, is lauded by district officials while the libraries in the other public district schools remain shuttered.
Thank you Michelle Rhee.
Diane:
Gary’s analysis seems a bit one-sided.
Click to access 1001455-impact-teacher-experience.pdf
I would be interested in research that suggests a different set of findings.
Diane:
Let me amend my last comment. The link seemed to drop me in the middle of the comments, which are definitely more one-sided. I have no problem with Gary’s analysis. He has a POV.
At the same time, the rules governing this Town Hall meeting do not seem unreasonable. It is not presented as a debate or an audience driven discussion. Perhaps Gary could suggest a modification in the rules such as each questioner would have 30 seconds to react to the comments made by the panel members.
Bernie, I lecture often. I don’t set time limits on questioners. I love Q&A. At Berkeley, the organizers insisted on written questions–I didn’t– because they knew the audience and didn’t want people making speeches. In Philadelphia, the Free Library did not permit Q&A but that was not my wish. In all my other appearances–about a dozen so far this fall–I have no guards, I take all questions. I put no restrictions on what people may ask. That’s what free speech looks like.
Diane:
I genuinely applaud your openness and I wish this meeting had had similar levels of interaction. However, as far as I can tell, the rules for this meeting – though restrictive – do not limit free speech in any meaningful way given the nature of the venue. Hannah’s comments seem to be prove that perception.
Bernie:
How’s does Hannah’s comments prove the perception that free speech was not limited? Hannah was just one guest there. Was anyone else allowed to respond to what the panelists said? Was anyone in the audience allowed to say, you did not answer my question? Of course free speech was quite limited in that panel.
mathcs:
What on earth is your definition of democratic? They may well have not held the debate as promised but for heaven’s sake it was a panel with questions from the audience. What could reasonably be expected? It was no different than many a Presidential debate.
You and I may have designed it differently, but they certainly allowed contrary views to be stated.
What is STARK about the Rhee tape is the EXACTING CONTROL exercised over the discussion, as if it was a government meeting in a very controlled environment…
Further, I was struck by how FEW people were in the audience, especially when compared to your own book signings and discussions, including at the Memorial Auditorium in Sacramento, or Memorial Chapel at Stanford… I think THIS is a key indicator of just how TOXIC Rhee has become…
Further, Rhee demonstrates her utter lack of teaching talent — rather, she is a stunning example of intolerance, and yes, even bigotry…
This video was EXCRUCIATING to watch, especially knowing so much of the underside, not all that publicly known, of Rhee’s past…
It was a thing to behold…
Bernie1815:
The research is in Diane’s book, Reign of Error, especially Ch. 12 and Ch. 14.
I’m going to move over two of my “one-sided”
comments 😉 from Gary’s blog to here:
As it pertains to teachers in general,
or myself in particular, I get outraged
when someone lies about us/me.
In fact, I am the one shouting this out at
at the recent Michelle Rhee event:
ME: “I’m passionate when teachers are
being lied about! You’re damn
right I am! Yes, I am!… Yes, I am!”
(It’s at approximately 00:40:30… in response
to moderator Genethia Hayes saying to me, “I
understand that you’re passionate.” )
CONTEXT:
Again, that’s what I shouted at the folks
on stage Michelle Rhee’s STUDENTS
FIRST Town Hall on Thursday,
September 5, 2013—those folks being
Moderator Genethia Hayes, Rhee,
paid union-buster Steve Perry, and
sell-out former D.C. teacher union
President George Parker.
What led up to this was:
1) a unionized teacher (a shill
that the organizers planted in
the audience) who began by
professing to “be in awe of” Rhee,
and then saying that her experience
indicates that “we need to
eradicate tenure and
unions… do you see a future
without them?”
(THAT was “the voice of teachers” that
Rhee allowed to be heard… Sweet Jesus!)
(from 00:36:20 – 00:38:35)
2) in response to that staged
performance, Rhee blathered
every union-bashing talking point
as regards to tenure…
(from 38:57 – 40:16)
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
RHEE: “The bottom line… effectively,
the way tenure operates, is that in
this country, you have a job for life
regardless of performance, and I don’t
believe that it is possible to sustain a
high-performing organization with
those kinds of policies in place.
“So that’s the bottom line. I feel
that in education, we have to look
at every policy through the lens of
” ‘Is it good and right for kids?’
“And the research is clear. There is
no correlation between tenure, and
(a teacher) being effective in the classroom…
so I’d rather focus on those things that
ensure that kids are getting a good
education…
“So for me, the whole tenure issue
is really… is… it’s, it’s… It’s more
about performance. Right? We
have to make sure that we have
the most high-quality teachers in
our classrooms, and as I’ve said
before, I think that if we have
somebody who is not performing,
they should not be able to have
the privilege of teaching our kids.”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
At this point—around 40:16—
I couldn’t freakin’ stand it anymore.
Lisa, a fellow teacher of mine, and
I had been sitting together,
listening to this with mounting rage.
When the applause started, she and I
seized the moment, and began objecting:
“It’s ‘due process”! It’s not ‘a job
for life’! The states with the strongest
job protections have the highest
achievement!!!”
It’s interesting if you freeze the frame
at this point. Rhee’s in a crowd that
is stacked with 90% of the folks there
in agreement with her—they had
contacted every astroturf teacher
group, parent group, etc… hoping
to fill the audience. Even still,
like the cowardly bully she is, Rhee
looks forward or away from Lisa and
me and smiles—in some attempt
to get the pro-Rhee folks to just
laugh away our objections—while
her two male compatriots try to stare
us down and into silence.
Not a chance of that happening.
Genethia Hayes tries to calm us, “I know
that you’re passionate.”
And that’s when I let loose:
ME: “I’m passionate when teachers are
being lied about! You’re damn
right I am! Yes, I am!”
HAYES: “Turn your music down.”
ME: “Yes, I am!”
HAYES: “… and let’s just try
to listen.”
As I detailed in this post, I was
allowed to speak near the end of the
event at:
01:21:00
Where I pointed out that the
states with the highest union
participation, and the strongest
job protections—”due proccess’
not, tenure/job for life—had
students with the highest academic
achievement, while those with
the weakest unions… or no unions,
just “associations” without any
power to collectively bargain, were
at the bottom.
Rhee pointed out that California
had strong unions and low achievement,
but., as you pointed out, I was not allowed to
follow up… and respond that California
is 48th in per-pupil funding, with
the largest class sizes in the nation,
and the highest number of students
who come from poverty, and from
homes where English is not the
spoken language…. and that in
middle-income, and higher-income
communities… if you broke out the
statistics for just those… we were
near the top in the nation.
Shortly after that, student Hannah
Nguyen spoke, and the clip of her
talking became a YouTube sensation
getting over 18,000 views so far.
As you’ve shown, this clip is at:
Because of also this, protestors in other
cities also disrupted these farces…
in Philadelphia, the moderator told
the teachers—who followed our lead—
“Shut the-hell up!” This all got
great play on the internet.
So, thanks to our activism, this phony
and expensive campaign of Rhee’s
backfired, causing damage to their
image, when they wanted to improve
it.
GST:
Chapter 12 talks about merit pay and Chapter 14 focuses on Teach for America. Neither chapter addresses the issue of the link between experience and effectiveness. Chapter 13 is more relevant but has 4 footnotes and none point to the same research base as the linked article references. Experience cannot be discounted but then nor should it be assumed to have a dominant role in personnel decisions – as Diane notes on page 130. I think that it is reasonable to argue that test scores should not play a dominant role in evaluating teachers, but that is not the same as arguing that they should play no role. It is also reasonable to argue for due process so long as it is a reasonable due process. The fear of firing more expensive older teachers to hire cheaper labor can always be addressed by requiring a “like for like” exchange for example.
The research suggests that having some experience is better than having no experience. Then, the improvement occurs to stagnate or slow. Should that be shocking?
I would suggest that research be done with other professions to see if similar trends occur. Does a dentist improve much between years 10-15? Probably not. How about a mechanic? Probably not.
What’s being suggested is logical. However, Bernie, contrarian though you tend to be, there seems to be a considerable improvement from year 1-5. That would suggest that once a good teacher reaches five years experience, a district would want to keep that teacher. Problem is, that half the teachers leave before they peak and most TFAs don’t stick around long enough to peak.
So if there isn’t much difference between years 5 and 20 then seniority doesn’t matter. But there is a difference between year 2 and year 20.
I have been a public school teacher for 12 years. I had a cooperating teacher and supervising teacher when I student taught and my first three years in my school I was mentored by my department chair and an academic coach. All of these individuals had many years of classroom experience and training. Each year I know I grew stronger in my classroom management skills, lesson planning, and assessment strategies and teaching. In the years since I believe that my abilities have only improved with each new year’s edition of students, and my excitement for meeting their challenges and instilling the desire to learn has not waned. I have worked and cooperated with a wonderful staff of teachers and administrators, the vast majority of whom are professionals who are serious about teaching and always wanting to improve. Today I am department chair and a mentor in my building.
So, I haven’t any research, just experience, which teaches me that at least in my profession seniority is essential to retaining the best teachers in the classroom. There is a reason why enrollment in teachers’ colleges is down, why teachers’ college programs are shutting down, why young teachers are leaving the profession – they see that there is no respect for them, fewer opportunities to be creative and to find their special talents as teachers and, in the end, no security.
GST:
The value of research in this area helps determine whether your experiences are the norm or whether you were fortunate with your initial appointment or whether it says more about how you as an individual professional seized the opportunity you were given.
As Steve pointed out, the research shows that teachers continue to improve for their first five years. Is this your experience? If the research finding is valid, it suggests that any tenure-like decision should be made at this point. Do you agree?
Steve:
I share your interpretation of the data. I don’t see myself as a contrarian, more a skeptic and someone who like precision and data. Strong statements need strong data to support them – a variant of the Sagan standard.
I am not a supporter of TFA. In fact, I would argue that TFA simply serves to mask the underlying problems and really does not address it – just as did the Peace Corps – and as you correctly argue makes the situation worse by building in even more turnover. One of my big disappointments with Diane’s book is that she said so little about the pipeline for new teachers – but then she really couldn’t. When you get massive turnover in any occupation, it basically points to poor preparation. This turnover problem has been going on in US schools since the 1950s (see Ward Mason, The Beginning Teacher (1961) ) This is a key area where we can learn a lot from Finland’s experience. It would be interesting to see the link between experience and effectiveness for Finnish teachers.
Bernie, there is very little if any turnover among Finnish teachers. It is hard to become a teacher, it requires 5 years of education, and teachers are highly respected. There is no way to measure the “effectiveness” of Finnish teachers in relation to experience , because students don’t take standardized tests. Did you have another way to define “effectiveness”?
Diane:
I do not know anything about the internal HR processes in Finnish schools nor if there is any standard reporting to the Finnish DOE. I will look for what research the Finns have actually done. I imagine they have looked at teacher effectiveness issues associated with levels of success in their matriculation exam and at other choice points. As to turnover among Finnish teachers, I recall reading that there is an increasing turnover issue amongst male science and math teachers in Finland – granted it is probably lower than the system undermining level in many US school districts.
Bernie:
My experience is that professional educators strive to improve and adapt to their students and changing curriculum every year of their professional life, and that “improvement ” continues beyond the fifth year, or the sixth year, or whatever. Tenure I believe is properly granted after three years of observations and evaluations which prove the teacher’s worth, remembering that, as Diane points out, tenure for teachers simply means due process and an assurance of academic freedom.
“A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.” [Winston Churchill]
Each of the three events referenced by Gary Rubinstein were called a “Teacher Town Hall” by their organizers. Like so many of the catchy phrases of the “education reformers” this gives the impression that they were open, wide-ranging,democratic forums in which all points of view were not only allowed but encouraged. For example, click on the StudentsFirst link below for a recap of the Los Angeles event by “Cap Aguilar, Teacher” who is described more fully as “a 7th Grade Science Teacher in Lakeview Terrace, California.” Cap Aguilar asserts that “honest, straightforward conversations are rare” [never been to this blog, I assume] but that the Los Angeles “Teacher Town Hall” was “a real conversation about education.” His description of the event departs radically from that provided by Gary Rubinstein [see some of the comments on his blog] and others, including here on this blog. Note the stunning lack of mention [IMHO, a poster child for the phrase “lying by omission”] of the remarks by Hannah Nguyen.
Link: http://www.studentsfirst.org/blog/entry/perspective-of-a-teacher-los-angeles-teacher-town-hall
In fact, in order to set the record straight, I include links to commentary by Hannah Nguyen herself and others:
Link: http://inspireducation.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/michelle-rhees-teacher-town-hall-through-a-students-eyes/
Link: https://dianeravitch.net/2013/09/09/the-student-who-spoke-up-at-michelle-rhees-teacher-town-hall-tells-her-story/
Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/09/07/student-takes-on-michelle-rhee/
Let me repeat for the reality-challenged: eduproduct launches, damage-control pr events, public schmooze-fests that serve as therapeutic ‘ego-boosters’ for the League of the Extraordinarily Incompetent—
Are not examples of democracy in action.
“Teacher Town Halls” with the same edufraud line-up supplemented by, let’s say, Dr. Diane Ravitch [a real Ph.D.], Gary Rubinstein [a real math teacher with deep knowledge of TFA] and Dr. Mercedes Schneider [another real Ph.D., in math no less!] would have begun to have met the criteria for a genuine discussion. With no name-calling, with stupendously amazing things like facts and logic being introduced into the mix. And there is an all-star line-up ready to take their places if they were unable to attend.
Marx said it best: “A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.”
Yes, that one. Groucho. Who else?
🙂
KrazyT:
I do not understand your comment. Surely, the “Reformers” are entitled to set up any public forum they deem appropriate? I agree that having Diane on the same program would be interesting – but her presence of opponents does not make a session like this more or less democratic.
As for name calling, didn’t Gary refer to Rhee as “Superego”?
Bernie:
This came from a link on the Alabama Student’s First web site: “Education reformer Michelle Rhee will meet tonight with Alabama teachers in Birmingham as part of a series of town hall meetings for what she calls a “direct, honest discussion” with educators about ways to improve student achievement.”
This came from the teachertownhall.org web site: “We were thrilled to see each of our town halls packed with a capacity crowd, and we want to thank every teacher, parent, student and concerned citizen who showed up for a candid, lively and informative debate about the future of our schools.”
Where exactly was the direct honest discussion with educators part of her town hall, and where was the candid lively and informative debate? No Bernie, it was scripted from the beginning. It was most certainly not democratic!
Children of five, or in my case, six and seven, do understand. I’m there with you Krazy T.A. These folks remind me of propaganda used in military psyops campaigns. Unfortunately, for the rheeformers, effective propaganda must have at least a hint of truth or credibility. These folks are more like Baghdad Bob, reality clearly contradicts them. Tom Clancy had it right, fiction needs to make sense. The reality they wish for makes no sense.
“Perry claims that he has to spend 30% of his day chasing around a bad teacher and documenting in order to get rid of that teacher.”
Sounds more like stalking to me! Must be a piss poor administrator if it took that much effort to dig up enough “dirt” to get rid of the teacher.
“I actually can see myself being OK with something like them counting for up to 10%, as it could serve as a way to motivate the small fraction of hard-to-motivate teachers. . .”
He’s got that completely wrong. Start with crap, i.e., educational standards and standardized testing, and end with crap no matter how little the percentage. Oh, I’ll just have crap on 10% of my sandwich, can you make it to go?
Duane Swacker: your first sentence is a quote from Gary Rubinstein’s posting accessed by the link provided by Diane Ravitch.
So giving him the benefit of the doubt: when Dr. Steve Perry or a member of his HR staff make an indefensibly horrendous decision by hiring a “bad teacher” then he feels aggravated that he has to spend adequate time and effort generating sufficient documentation proving that his edubusiness is badly run at the upper managerial level? **I am assuming that the “bad teacher” didn’t self-hire and that hiring is a management, not employee, decision.**
Ok, I can understand his reluctance to provide irrefutable evidence of his own serious failings as an edupreneur. But look at the bright side: he can now justly claim membership and prominence in the League of the Extraordinarily Incompetent.
And if all else fails, he can always comfort himself with $tudent $ucce$$…
🙂
Duane Swacker: I just realized that one way to translate League of the Extraordinarily Incompetent into Spanish would be Liga de Incompetencia Extraordinaria [League of Extraordinary Incompetence], or LIE.
That would make him a member of a big LIE.
There is a 98% chance of satisfactory certainty [thank you, Señor Gates!] that I prefer the Spanish in this case.
🙂
TAGO!
de acuerdo