Discussion: Education Reform Loses A Tough Ally With Michelle Rhee Departure

TPM Article Topics
1

Discussion for article #226582

2

Boy, this is one of those weird situations where the tone of the headline has no relationship with the tone of the piece itself. I expected an anti-Rhee screed (ScRhee-d?) after reading the link header, but the article (opinion piece, actually) takes a very sympathetic view of MR’s career as a champion of education reform. I’m not sure that the piece moves the discussion forward very far, as it is so clearly slanted against anyone who isn’t on the side of the reformers, even as it identifies the false dichotomies that have defined the battle lines in this long war with no end in sight.

31 Likes
3

This is one of the worst pieces of propaganda I’ve seen on Talking Points Memo. Horrible piece. I have no idea why it is front-paged.

The completely facile and dishonest characterization of the criticism of Campbell effing Brown, rightwing operative and rightwing tool, destroys your credibility and should relieve any reader of the inclination to give your arguments any further hearing.

39 Likes
4

The fact she was and is a fraud is irrelevant?

30 Likes
5

Thank you for not delivering the reflexive anti-Rhee, pro-teacher union screed the first two commenters on this article expected. Parents in failing schools did not need her nor Campbell Brown to tell them that they and their kids are getting a raw deal, and teachers unions cannot consider themselves winners of some battle with Rhee’s departure. The larger problem is the failure of most state legislatures to value education over corporations, choosing short term benefits bought by tax relief over long term investment in schools. Good schools bring value in educated populaces, enhanced property values, and the commerce and quality of life they bring, which do not expire or move overseas when tax breaks end. They have the potential to raise everyone, and not just shareholders in hedge funds.

9 Likes
6

Yep, this article definitely doesn’t square up with the headline, and the whole thing is tilted. The level of vagueness is also odd – you have to already know Rhee’s career in some detail to begin to make sense of the article; the author makes no effort to lay out the what/when/where of what she did…but lots of trafficking in ‘why’ and the style of the ‘how’. Is that helpful? I don’t think so.

The overall framing of the article is, “Rhee is a mixed bag–some bad, lots of good.” OK, I can listen to that. But consider the specifics we’re offered in the article: broad-brush positive statements about Rhee (“tough ally,” “unflinching advocate”, “gave a voice to frustrated parents,” etc.) with one tangible example of stepping in the poop (firing someone on camera). No specific positive actions, only one specific negative action. Rhee’s critics, on the other hand, receive negative broad-brush statements (“intransigence”, “scorching the earth”) and have their own mis-steps pointed out in greater detail (anti-Rhee websites, a petty criticism of Campbell Brown, idiotic condemnation of parent advocates). Message: Whatever Rhee’s blemishes, her opponents are monsters. (Even Randi Weingarten’s polite statement is framed as, "Yeah, but here’s what she REALLY thinks!!)

So what’s the real upside to Rhee’s tenure as a wrecking ball in the world of education? Here the author really loses me: Rhee’s big accomplishment is moving “debate from ‘reform or not’ to ‘which reforms will we have.’” Really?? First, I don’t think this was ever in question–the cycles of American education policy mean that we’re ALWAYS due for ‘reform’ at one point or another. (Unfortunately, the current cycle is all about economic austerity, meaning that ‘reform’ is usually a stalking horse for downsizing.) Second, there HAVE to have been other people who had a far more positive impact than Rhee in promoting reforms. For example, I don’t love KIPP (edit: Teach for America! D’oh! She founded TfA; KIPP came from two TfA grads), but I have far more respect for Wendy Kopp. Or Ted Sizer and the Essential Schools movement – hugely compassionate, very inspirational. But again, the author is using this faint praise for Rhee as framing for getting in another dig at her opponents: “Are her most ardent opponents nimble enough to adjust their own tactics?” Yeah, I hope so. But let’s take a moment to hope that Rhee’s departure from education to greener pastures (literally! Extra fun irony) means she’s gone for good. The headline writer got it right, the author is doing a weird spin job.

33 Likes
7

What were you expecting from a flack from a charter school lobby?

TPM really dropped the ball letting this get through.

29 Likes
8

No mention on she decision to become chairman of her husband’s charter schools. The the privatization of public education using state funding for religious schools with figures of Charter Schools falling scores and the apparent rampant cheating in Charter Schools is not mentioned. Any of these could have been is very helpful in this blog post to understand why she was so frowned upon as an education reformer or a corporate shill which is what she is best know for.

14 Likes
9

So you actually know any ‘Parents in failing schools’ or you just copying the pro-ignorance lobby’s boilerplate?

9 Likes
10

What a strange article - the headline is pretty much the opposite of the content of the article, and the article itself is sort of a free-form - what? No context for who Michelle Rhee was/is, and a sometimes neutral, sometimes not, piece whose point is, what again? Was there an editor anywhere near this piece before someone hit the publish button?

11 Likes
11

This was very disappointing for TPM. It’s full of rightwing code words. I don’t know a single teacher – not even the bad ones – who ever alleged that improving teacher quality would fail to improve student learning. On the other hand, nothing from the Rhee-led educational “reform” movement seems to indicate they want to improve teacher quality by improving teachers. They just want to fire teachers to establish control.

28 Likes
12

“To agree with Michelle Rhee meant to agree with a certain approach to education policy, to accept that improving teacher quality can improve students’ educational outcomes, and that these things can be reliably measured. To disagree with her meant to stand up for the preexisting view of American education, a view that measures teacher quality by so-called “inputs”—whether teachers have advanced degrees or a bevy of years in the classroom—and throws up its hands at the notion that these could ever be expected to yield tangible results.”

Breathtaking dishonesty. No one but an ideologue could expect that to fly.

32 Likes
13

Time for Rhee, the grifter, to move on to the next mark.

15 Likes
14

Could somebody explain what “Boeing-grade rhetorical baggage” means?

5 Likes
15

There’s more than enough blame for the demise of US Public education to go around. No doubt the Union owns some of it and especially with their tenure track and keeping poor teachers or teachers that are not doing a good job on the job. But the fact of the matter is our schools are under funded in most every district except the rich white suburbs and the white suburbs owns and controls government these days…those Corp CEO’s and lobbyists don’t send their kids to urban and rural school districts. If they live in those districts, little Johnny and little Sally go to private schools!

We also continue to waste huge amounts of education dollars on athletics…and that should stop. Get the NCAA sports out of our schools and move them to the private club areas…just like they do across Europe, China, Japan, and beyond. Forcing the education system to also be the training ground for athletes is stupid and huge conflict of interest. We spend more money on football than we do on special education…and way more kids have special learning needs than play sports let alone just concussion ball!

9 Likes
16

Exactly!!!

Unless there’s something in the article relating to the headline that I didn’t get. A broader picture, something that has to be read between the lines.

2 Likes
17

Good riddance. Tax payer funded, compulsory public education for all is the foundation of our multicultural, secular society and this cretin’s life work was to ruin it.

17 Likes
18

I am so glad that a sizable amount of posters are on to the Game here.

Corporatization is into Mother’s Day and Veteran’s Day.

Why not get into education?

Just as ill-trained, ill-recruited cops are supposed to “solve” problems related to juvenile underemployment and hopelessness, so “education” is supposed to (with a single bound) handle the children of overworked, underpaid parents, deteriorating neighborhoods, persistent racism and a host of other social ills.

It is this social reality that is tailor made for the wrecking crews to whom the public (which has never seen a wedge issue it doesn’t like) seems to respond so much more readily than any who would point out that our problems are more “1,001 things” than “_______________ is failing”

17 Likes
19

Thank you so very much for your comment.

1 Like
20

This piece might be more convincing if the propagandist advocating educational reform were a better writer.

10 Likes