Maureen Sullivan was busy on the blogosphere the day after the selecion of Frank Romano for the next Hoboken Superintendent. Here is her post where she praises Michelle Rhee as a Chancellor of DC Schools. To date Michelle Rhee's performance has been at best mixed and that is putting it kindly. Is this the model replacement Maureen had in mind instead of someone famliar with NJ School Systems? Here is some background......
Maureen Sullivan - February 10, 2010 (from the blogosphere):
"From the moment the last super quit in June, I said the board should hire a headhunting firm that would find top candidates and even poach them from other districts or education-related firms. I envisioned a hunt that would find us the next Michelle Rhee, who is making fantastic changes in the DC schools. I would've been happy to overlook the lack of certification in a candidate who ran an operation like, say, Teach for America or KIPP. As I said last night, I wanted someone with executive experience. Romano has none, not even as a principal (he was a fill-in for a few months during a grade-changing scandal in Fort Lee.) Unfortunately, the rest of the board was content to hire the NJ School Boards Assn, which merely runs ads in the usual places and then hands over a box of resumes. When I suggested that we put an ad in the NY Times, in part to reach out-of-state candidates, I was shot down. Rose Markle sided with the machine against me.
We hired a person without any experience as a super and without tenure in another district and paid him as if we were poaching him from his dream job.
Though the process lasted for many months, it was a search in name only. We didn't actively search--we merely hired. I understand that the other board members think Romano is a swell candidate and that they have found a gem. I, however, was very troubled by the references I checked in Millburn, where he was seen as "destructive" and having "wreaked havoc." prefer Romano. That's fine. why bash? Can't others have differing views?"
- Maureen Sullivan
Note: Maureen has still not replied to my request to publish her rebuttal on addtional cuts above and beyond what Kids First has done. That is ok with me and I can assure my readers I did not lose any sleep over her Facebook unfriending. Offer still stands.
My comments:
From a good source of mine.....
1) First and foremost you cannot overlook state certification in New Jersey Public Schools. NJ State Education Law which requires certificaton and any Superintendent would at least have to get a certificate of eligibility, then the BOE would have to pay for a mentor because he/she was missing certification.
2) The Hoboken BOE ALL agreed on the requirements, it required certification.
Jack Raslowsky had no certification (but did have a certification of elligibility which required a tax payer funded mentor gor him) and no Public School experience and as many have noted it didn't work out too well. Public school finances come from various sources and demand higher accountability, mandates and guidelines. Just understanding the guidelines and mandates alone, can take years (as the Jack Raslowsky legacy has shown).
Hoboken students deserve someone with experience from one the top districts in the state. Whether this choice works out remains to be seen.
Michelle Rhee and Negative comments about her tenure to date:
Here are some comments from the Washington Post on Michelle Rhee's performance as "Chancellor of Schools". There are some positive comments as well but the number of negative comments on her performance in the DC School System far outweighs those. Usually her supporters seem to derive a benefit from her changes. Here is a small sampling of those negative observations and assessments from concerned educators and parents.......
Here is the link to the comments on an article that is now closed for addtional commentary on the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/13/AR2009061302073_Comments.html
TeacherDC Wrote:
Teachers received almost no Professional Development during the past 2 years...400% improvement? According to who? DCPS used to have the National Board Certification Program that Rhee abolished and many other training opportunities. Krhebiel has done nothing during the past 2 years. We don't even had textbooks adopted during the past 2 years..or standards...The Post is wrong.
Duonoir wrote:
I've read many of the comments on this page and find that there are two obvious camps. Those who support Rhee and those who do not. While sometimes we can agree to disagree, in this case, it is not possible.
Ms. Rhee has alienated most of the very people whom she needs to implement her changes. These people, for the most part, are not dead wood. They are hard working men and women who have been handed so many curricula over the past several years, they don't know their left from their right. They are teachers, administrators, secretaries, aids and social workers. They are people who are so stressed out that the last day of school couldn't come fast enough. They are people who are stressed out by an administration who would rather fire them than work with them.
We have all heard horror stories of how people have been treated. We know that anyone can sue anyone, but when you have almost 700 open lawsuits against a system, there is a problem. If only a smattering are won, they could bankrupt the system.
Since her arrival, I have seen great schools destroyed (Walls, Wilson) with her hires and fires. I've seen uniquely qualified teachers poorly evaluated and threatened with termination. This has got to stop.
This is one time I wish I were a teacher. If the teacher's "worked to the rule" Madame Rhee would be gone in a New York minute.
Yes, there's enough blame to go around. There has been dysfunction in the system for decades. But you don't send in a medical student to do the job of a board certified physician. Perhaps that's why Rhee hasn't been hired at some of the other school systems where she has applied. She is unqualified, that's why she holds the position of Chancellor.
I can only pray her boyfriend will find a job for her in Sacramento and take her off of our hands.
Natturner wrote:
When the end comes for Michelle Rhee her Time cover picture will stand as a small tragi-comic monument to the dangers of bureaucratic hubris. That end is coming up quickly now and Ms. Rhee can feel it.
In effect, the Chancellor said good-bye to the DCPS through Mr. Turque. Listen to her, "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 said. "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."
The destruction of America's public schools has always been a project of a force President Eisenhower identified as the "military-industrial complex" in his farewell address. Choppy waters ahead. George Vradenburg, a former AOL Time Warner executive and chairman of the D.C. Education Compact, venture capitalist Jonathan A. Silver, who sits on the executive committee of the influential Federal City Council, and Brig. Gen. Anthony J. Tata, the former deputy commanding general of the 10th Mountain Division in Afghanistan, will take it from here. Farewell Ms. Rhee.
Oknow1 wrote:
DCPS via Rhee suffers from the lack of skilled leadership. Let's face it, Rhee does not qualify to "run" a school, let alone a school system.
Frankly, I don't understand how the public does not see that glaring aspect. If DCPS had solid leadership it would not be in this state. Hiring a novice only exacerbates the situation. DCPS needs an educator with a skill set to lead transition that has a very strong sense of organizational management. Combine that with the political support Rhee has been given and DCPS could be on the right track.
Folks also need to understand the difference between proposing policies or "new ideas" and the challenge/reality of translating/executing them throughout the system. Everyone smiles at the great idea and the strong get tough talk, but no-one follows up on the "how do you get it done?" part. That's where leadership skills and experience take over.
On another note: I understand many eligible principals are retiring. I understand a notable number of recent Rhee hires are also leaving the system. They are either quitting or not being retained. Has anyone else heard this?
PLMichaelsArtist-at-Large wrote:
I have long felt that Ms. Rhee was a political choice to take on the considerable woes of the D.C. school system, and that probably her ethnicity and gender were assets in this regard. I can't imagine a Caucasion, African-American, Hispanic nor even a Native American man getting away with the harsh, single-minded kinds of choices Ms. Rhee has made based on so little experience: only a few years in the classroom, never a principal,no experience at the High School level, and little respect for the education professionals who have a very tough job, regardless of the qualities brought to the classroom.
As our inner city classrooms become ever more complex in reflecting the struggles of contemporary life, it is the easiest thing in the world to just blame the educators.....what do they know? (read heavy sarcasm).
True reform has to be visionary and holistic. This requires rather more complex thinking than has been exhibited so far.
For example, what about the school buildings themselves?
Do we really want our future citizens to spend 35+ hours a week in structures that too closely resemble warehouses, prisons or bomb shelters?
Why are we so anxious to have all of our children march to the beat of one drummer when we theoretically prize individuality? (Thus the popularity of charter schools, probably the most important recent development.)
Why have we done away with so much manufacturing when we know that many people (artisans, architects,carpenters, designers,farmers, mechanics, etc.) work best in hands-on occupations? Not every student is meant to be in the science,business, education or military sectors.
And what about the liberal arts? Talk about an area of education that has taken a major hit with so much energy and money given to technology. How do we expect our children to learn how think wisely and critically without the benefits of a well-rounded education that supports the cultural beings that we are?
And getting good educators and supporting them? It's not just hard dollars....scholars.... need time to think, reflect; where are the sabatticals and off-campus retreats that can help educators stay fresh and innovative?
Education is an enormously complex field, and for politicians and inexperienced administrators to treat it as any less shows enormous arrogance and ignorance.
Kronberg wrote:
Rhee supporters generally fall into two camps.
Those who believe the DCPS is terrible and ANY change must be positive support her because she has supposedly "shaken up" the district. Change for the sake of change does not generally result in improvement. Rhee's tenure has proven that the statement "it can't get any worse" is almost never true.
A second group of supporters are those who have personally or professionally benefited by her tenure. As the article pointed out, there are many in the private sector who have supported Rhee because they and their companies have personally profited from that support.
The bottom line in all of this is student achievement. Much can be forgiven if students are actually improving. Despite the rise in scores on DCPS's own tests, the performance of students on nationally, normed tests remains abysmal. It should be clear that Rhee's tenure has been an abject failure.
The editors of the WaPo are among the first group of Rhee's supporters, those who believe that change for the sake of change is worthwhile. Those with that attitude are easily convinced that flowery words can substitute for managerial competence and that a "vision" (whatever the heck that means) can substitute for detailed plans on how to improve academic success.
Rhee simply does not have the necessary skillset to be the superintendent of a large urban school district, and the DCPS is paying far too much for her to get a crash course now.
My final comment: The jury is still out on Michelle Rhee but her lack of experience is evident in these critical observations. These comments are meant to shed some light on the prospect of a "chancellor" type vs. a superintendent of schools familiar with NJ education. Sure Michelle Rhee has undoubtedly gotten rid of some dead weight but the many negative comments give pause to reconsider to her "scorched earth" reform tactics. She pulls in some big bucks too ($275K) for someone with no experience as a principal. Where have we heard that argument before? Hmm.
Keep in mind that I have voted for Maureen Sullivan twice (both in 2008 and 2009) and have generally agreed with her voting record up to the selection of the Superintendent of Schools. If she broke with Kids First over the Superintendent selection that is certainly her perogative but it is also my right to question her comments on selecting a chancellor type versus a qualified Superintendent with procedural experience in New Jersey. I do feel there is more to the split with Kids First then this one vote so I have repeatedly asked her for what additional cuts beyond what Kids First is doing that she proposes. She hasn't come back with anything but insults but at least I got to see the another side of Maureen Sullivan. Share your thoughts below....... ◦
