Comments on: Michelle Rhee Featured on TIME Magazine Cover

By: ChipperB

ChipperB — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 17:57:18 +0000

There is a lot of corruption in the DC school system.

By: DJPhoenix

DJPhoenix — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 06:43:22 +0000

I started and ran a charter school between 2001 and 2005 which provided students with rigorous instruction, close academic monitoring, highly trained teachers, numerous supports,and enrichments (i.e. technology and foreign language classes in kindergarten through 12th grade, access to quality math, reading and science labs and resource-rich classrooms)and did so with an allotment of $5,000 per pupil and a whole lot of soliciting pro-bono services and donations of supplies and materials. My school was voted the top school in the region where there are numerous quality schools – public and private. Oh, what I could have done with $14,000 per student, even today. Research has proven time and again that it is not how much money you spend on students that solely makes the difference, success in schooling also has as much to do with the utilization of funds in ways that promote achievement and school success, and a range of other leadership factors. I find it hard to believe that DC children are being funded to the tune of $14,000 per pupil, but the community is seeing less than half of the results. What's up with that?

By: DJPhoenix

DJPhoenix — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 06:28:16 +0000

Remember that our parents or people around us always said get a good education, so that you can get a good job or start a successfull business, and take care of your family. Many chose not to listen, and decided upon another route — perhaps dropping out, or not advancing themselves as far as possible. Many people who did not listen to the encouragement to do better now work in lower- income jobs in lower income communities with bad schools. There is nothing wrong with this actually; it does not mean that a person does not want the best for their children. They just did not envision earlier that it would take more money and social capital to achieve these goals. However, don't blame the president and his wife for doing the work to earn more and to provide more options to their children. Of course they will not send their children to DC public schools; they are the worse in the nation, albeit the media claims that Rhee is making such a big difference. It would potentially be dangerous for the Obama children at this time and we already know that the quality of education provided there would be lower, which is why so many DC families without sufficient money to send their children elsewhere are angry and are having difficulty getting their kids out, though they are trying desperately to leave. I am an educational administrator who has seen Teach For America and various new principal and superintendent prep programs come and go. Always, their graduates are merited with special powers not provided to other educators, yet in the end you are left with a lot of media hype and no significant change in student outcomes. I also know the history of DC public schools. Rhee, I am afraid to say is a fad. She has brought some good people with her who actually know education and like any new district administrator has had some traction. I wish her well, however, superintendents in large urban districts generally do not stay long enough to follow the change process through (usually 5 – 7 years). A new superintendent will come in with new ideas and policies and the district will be off in that direction. It will take a mighty-will to fix the broken DC system. No outsider will be able to do it really — particularly one with limited knowledge of education or the community that he or she is dealing with. The people have to decide that they want a quality education for DC schools and begin to work for it, in collaboration with the district leader, the Mayor, etc. Parents will need to take the lead(like in Milwaukee, Chicago, and San Diego). Rhee can use the support — any superintendent can. The Mayor of DC is in charge of the schools there. He has little excuse for sending his children to private schools, except that he has every right to do what is best for his children — who plays with their children's future. Because he is committed to improve DC schools, does not mean that they are at a place at this time where he would send his children.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:29:49 +0000

Chicago politics prevail.

By: Surabol

Surabol — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 23:33:15 +0000

She can start by getting rid of tenure. Then allow parents to choose the school, not the limiting them to their district. Incompetent teachers has got be weeded out, although the union tends to protect the bad apples.

She apparently supports merit based pay, so she's on the right track.

By: OpenYourEyes

OpenYourEyes — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 10:15:27 +0000

Now she is going to fix all American schools?

I just see another hwang woo suk.

By: Knickerbocker

Knickerbocker — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:06:40 +0000

#9: Whether or not the family is paying the full amount is irrelevant. That's what taxpayers are collectively paying on their behalf. That's what it's costing us. And that's what, in my opinion, they're entitled to have and spend in tuition at whatever school they want, public or private.

Mind you, I'm not complaining about how much they pay. I'm complaining about how little they get for all that money and how they have no choice but to feed a broken system with not just their money but their kids' future.

But in fact, I was wrong. The cost to the DC taxpayer per student this year is $24,606. (Total budget in 2007-2008 was $1.216 billion. Divide this by the 49,422 students and you have cost per student.)

The average private school tuition in DC is $14K.

You do the math.

By: JoeC

JoeC — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 04:48:39 +0000

Where does that 13K a year figure come from? I thought public schools through high school were tuition free. If you are talking about the cost to the average tax payer, maybe? But I don’t think many of the families “without their [the Obamas] means” pay enough in taxes to cover the cost of their one or more kids.

By: Knickerbocker

Knickerbocker — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:35:36 +0000

I don't even have an issue with the Obamas sending their kids to private school. My issue is that people without their means are forced to spend $13K a year of their money to support a failed system AND send their kids into it. Why can't other kids get the same opportunity the Obamas' kids get?

By: King Baeksu

King Baeksu — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:30:42 +0000

But all we really want to know is: Does she like mad-cow, I mean, U.S. beef?