Sections:

Article

KIPP is the way the white and powerful want the poor of color to be educated — A Question for Obama: Why Does KIPP Not Look Like Sidwell?

[Editor's Note: We're printing the following as it ran yesterday on New York's Ed Notes. As most readers know, KIPP is the new favorite of the charter school modeling mafia. KIPP is also directly related to Teach for America. Sidwell Friends is the private school Barack and Michelle Obama chose for their two daughters (over the local public schools or charter schools) when they moved to Washington, D.C. two years ago. Value added is being covered more and more here and elsewhere among serious critics of corporate education reform].

"The achievement gap has left the stadium, ladies and gentlemen, while growth models have taken the stage. Now that the urban school systems have been blown up, thus clearing the way for the corporate charterites, the canyon between test scores of the rich and poor is no longer of interest. Indeed, the achievement gap has become a "mindless measure," to use the words of Jay Mathews....." (Jim Horn)

"KIPP is the way the white and powerful want the poor of color to be educated..." (Ira Socol)

This stuff is so good, I've delayed leaving for the beach to get it out there. Jim Horn put up a scathing piece the other day, including videos, at Schools Matter and followed up today. He delves into the shifting vocabulary from closing the achievement gap to the current quality teaching/value added craze and explains it this way:

"...this new value-added universe is not even interested in those troublesome group comparisons any longer that are based on the poverty chasm. Unless, of course, the reformers need to shut down your neighborhood school and turn it into a corporate-styled testing madrasah, i. e., charter school. Then your percentile ranking becomes a crucial tool in deciding who is in that bottom five percent that just keeps replenishing itself as the last group is scraped off to become charterized..." (Jim Horn).

Jim nails exactly what the Tweed yokels [in New York City] are trying to pull off with their road show explaining the test score gap. Oh my God. This stuff is getting me hot. Screw the beach. Here is a section from Jim's Sept. 1 post:

"Below is an open online letter from Ira Socol to the President. I have ventured to add a few comments and a couple of video clips.

Dear President Obama,

I wanted to discuss the things you believe are "innovative in education," just so I might assure you that in this field - in the field of America's future - your administration is doing irreparable harm.

"Students at both KIPP and Achievement First schools follow a system for classroom behavior invented by Levin and Feinberg called Slant, which instructs them to sit up, listen, ask questions, nod and track the speaker with their eyes." Yes, the first thing KIPP teaches is Calvinist church behaviour. "They all called out at once, “Nodding!"' Yes. Stare at your master. Sit still. Nod to demonstrate your compliance. Speak in unison according to the script.

Mr. President, this is not innovation. We know this formula. It drove the colonialist education systems of Wales and Ireland in the 18th and 19th centuries. It was the hallmark of British Colonial Schools from Lagos to Cape Town to Delhi. It was the path followed by the U.S. government'sIndian Schools.

Read the entire piece at Schools Matter: Why Does KIPP Not Look Like Sidwell?

In today's excellent follow-up responding to Jay Mathews, including this:

Jay and the the new generation of reformers doing the same thing as the last generation (when will they become the status quo?) would rather look at test score growth over time, especially when big achievement gap closing claims by your favorite politicians do not materialize. Focusing on individual gains makes the disparity between the haves and the have-nots much easier to ignore, since this new value-added universe is not even interested in those troublesome group comparisons any longer that are based on the poverty chasm. Unless, of course, the reformers need to shut down your neighborhood school and turn it into a corporate-styled testing madrasah, i. e., charter school. Then your percentile ranking becomes a crucial tool in deciding who is in that bottom five percent that just keeps replenishing itself as the last group is scraped off to become charterized.

The New Status Quo

I love the "when will they become the status quo" line? We have been having fun with this idea here in NY by referring to BloomKlein in just that way. As a matter of fact, we have been forming a group to do street theater called "The Status Quo Players." Even thinking of tee-shirts. How's this? STATUS and QUO shirts with an arrow pointing to the left saying "I'm with QUO"? Here is the intro to Jim's piece today:

"Irrepressible" Bloggers vs. the Borg

Jay Mathews is the insider's insider on corporate education reform issues, serving as the media mouthpiece for the psychological sterilization movement of KIPP and the KIPP knock-offs. The Elder himself, Bill Gates, carries a supply of Jay's KIPP book to hand out to anyone interested in the Oligarchs' choice of a final solution to educating the poor and the brown of urban America.

At the same time KIPP is becoming the urban model for corporate ed reform, the movement is in the process of pivoting from the the phony campaign under Bush ostensibly to close the black-white achievement gap, with the same high expectations for all, thus avoiding "the soft bigotry of low expectations," blah-blah, to a new phony campaign of assuring that poor children have the same access to high quality teachers and schools because education is now the "civil rights issue of our generation." Blah, blah, blah. While the pivot leaves in place the high-stakes standardized testing that declared 30-40 percent of public schools failures and charter targets under the last 9 years of NCLB, the pivot demands a shift in what is measured by the tests and how it is measured. The achievement gap has left the stadium, ladies and gentlemen, while growth models have taken the stage. Now that the urban school systems have been blown up, thus clearing the way for the corporate charterites

The focus now is on "a year's worth of individual student growth" for a year's worth of teaching (much more on this later, with a feature on the Wizard of Oz, Bill Sanders). In short, the new target of corporate ed reform is to blow up, or disrupt, the teaching profession by measuring effective teaching on how much test score growth a teacher can oversee. And as the new CEO-led KIPP chain gangs are to replace urban public schools, so then an endless stream of non-union white missionary temps are being prepared to replace the professionals who now staff the urban schools. Test score gains, or lack thereof, will be used to justify the firing of professionals and the use of temps from TFA and the TFA knock-offs that Arne fondly calls alternative teacher certification programs.

So Jay defends KIPP - of course. Discipline is exaggerated. Ira Socol left comments on Mathews' blog, to which Mathews responded. Here are a few excerpts but head over to the piece when you are through here to read it all.

So yes Jay, I have been in KIPP schools...I have been in KIPP schools (3) and - personally - I have found them terrifying.

But more than that Jay, I have some really extensive experience in the types of communities KIPP seeks to serve. I know these kids, and I know what they could do if they were offered the kind of educational opportunities available at Sidwell (or Cranbrook, or St. Ann's or etc).

And I know one more thing. Barack and Michelle would never send their daughters to a KIPP school, nor tolerate KIPP-style education in any school their daughters attended. As I've said, KIPP is the way the white and powerful want the poor of color to be educated. But they aren't suggesting it because that's a path to equality. They are suggesting it for just the opposite reason - they don't want the competition for their own children.

What concerned me? An absolute lack of tolerance for mental, learning, and behavioural diversity, in classroom after classroom, corridor after corridor. Of course I come from a Special Education background, so this was far more disturbing than it might be to others. I also found the brutality of teacher-student, and especially in Indianapolis, administrator-student communication fairly shocking. If you would send your grandchildren there, you're a different kind of parent than I am.

In Chicago I saw a young teacher working one-on-one with a series of students who needed reading help. A few things stood out. The students who came to him were all, quite obviously, struggling with different aspects of the reading process. One had essentially no phonological awareness, one was really struggling with the symbols (he could not, as an example, associate the lower case letters with the equivalent upper case letters), a third read fluently but with almost zero comprehension.

The teacher, very clearly untrained in any of this, repeated the same efforts with all the kids. He was clearly operating from a script. And as his efforts inevitably failed, he became angry with the students, repeatedly blaming them for "not trying hard enough." The child with no phonological awareness was called "lazy" repeatedly. KIPP only phenomenon? Of course not, but I saw similar scenes throughout all the buildings.

in KIPP classrooms I have seen teachers encourage children to humiliate others. And this is done with the "pack" using the same words, as if scripted. You may see that as positive, I see it as hazing, and perhaps a significant reason for KIPP's rather stunning attrition rate. http://epicpolicy.org/newsletter/2010/06/new-kipp-study-underestimates-attrition-effects-0 A rate the KIPP Foundation seems to go to great lengths to obscure.

I could go on but I'm getting giddy. Read more here:

"Irrepressible" Bloggers vs. the Borg

--

Have a good day

Norm



Comments:

September 11, 2010 at 1:00 AM

By: Paul A. Moore

KIPP Method Goes Primetime

Have you heard the news Chicago!? Michelle Rhee is going on Oprah.

Now the whole nation gets the chance to be entertained with Chancellor Rhee's minstrel show. She does Al Jolson proud! She doesn't blacken her face but she does Black dialect as part of her routine and tells a story of bloodying Black children in a perverse attempt at classroom management. As a 28-year teaching veteran at an inner-city public school, I was horrified at Rhee's story but seems like it was a big hit at this year's DCPS opening of school meeting.

The new white Teach For America missionary teachers just hooted when Rhee described placing masking tape over her 8-year-old student's mouths in inner-city Baltimore. The new hires seemed to accept this as a proper way to treat the kids. Hey, they're Black right! One wonders how many of these Ivy Leaguers will try Rhee's method on their charges this year. After all the Chancellor never told them she had probably committed a crime. Guess that would have killed the frivolity they were all sharing.

Then in the story of a field trip she botched in her few days of teaching Rhee launches into her imitation of Black speech. "Lawwwd Ms.Rhee whatchu gonna do!!!!??" Rhee boomed, drawing a big laugh. "Lawwwd Ms. Rhee whatchu gonna do!!!!??"

But a transcription doesn't do Michelle's racist comedy justice. You got to listen to it here in case she's ashamed to perform it again for Oprah.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2010/08/13/VI2010081305444.html

September 11, 2010 at 9:12 AM

By: Carla N.B.

Respond to Paul Moore statement about Michele Rhee

I don't know who you are, but I was on the Oprah show and saw Ms. Rhee and unfortunately for you it was not the performance that you expected. I also listened to the transcripts that what you refer to as racist comedy. Are you serious???! Ms. Rhee has gone through a lot of trying to reform the sad situation with the public school system in Washington D.C. and I applaud all of her efforts. Your commentary here shows absolutely nothing!!! I have gone through so much nonsense with my children in the Chicago public school system that it makes me so relieved to know that there are human beings in America that actually care and willing to fight tooth & nail to get this matter right!!!

September 11, 2010 at 12:06 PM

By: Lela

Fighting tooth & nail to get the matter right

Carla perhaps you should do a bit more research on Michelle Rhee to really get to know what kind of leader she truly is. People like Michelle Rhee really know how to sell themselves to the naive public. Most of these young reformers fall into the do as I say and not as I do category. Here is what Michelle Rhee fights for:

http://thatsrightnate.com/?s=michelle+rhee

September 11, 2010 at 3:30 PM

By: Paul A. Moore

Here's Your Michelle Rhee

Sexual Misconduct Suit Filed Against D.C. Public School Chancellor Michelle Rhee and Former Teacher

Alleged long-term sexual relationship with teenage plaintiff resulted in pregnancy

WASHINGTON, Sept. 10 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A law suit filed this week in the District Court for the District of Columbia alleges that former District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS) teacher, Robert Weismiller engaged in a sexual relationship for several months during the 2008 to 2009 school year with Ayanna Blue, a student at Shadd Transition Academy, a school for students who have been diagnosed as "emotionally disturbed."

The suit alleges DCPS officials and staff, including Chancellor Michelle Rhee, acknowledged being aware of the 58-year-old teacher having sex with the then-18 year-old student but did nothing to protect Blue at the time. Weismiller was not even reprimanded or terminated for his actions after school officials conducted an internal investigation.

The suit also documents the plaintiff's struggle to maintain her emotional stability and her inability to financially care for the child. DCPS conducted an investigation months after allegations surfaced and still did not find Weismiller liable for any misconduct despite concrete evidence showing his culpability.

According to the school system, he was eventually terminated in October of 2009 as part of a system-wide reduction in force. Additionally, Rhee didn't bring attention to this tragedy until there was media scrutiny earlier this year over her comments about having to fire irresponsible teachers, including ones "who had sex with students" in a Fast Company profile.

September 11, 2010 at 3:35 PM

By: Carla N.B.

To Lela

The point in my statement is that America has a SERIOUS issue with education. What kind of person should be taking a stand and doing something about it? I guess your suggestions is not her? Then who? Because I'm sure anybody that jump into the fight is going to be trampled on one way or another. It seems to be a trend that when someone decides to do something about a situation they end up being the wrong person. It is a sad situation of what her husband was involved in, but how long must we put up with the bull. I don't defend any adult in the matter of education because it is all about the children and what WE as adults are going to do about there well being! Here in Chicago, children are KILLING each other almost every single day.

I clicked this link because I saw "KIPP Methods Goes Prime Time" thinking I would be able to read further about the KIPP method. I found it interesting as described in the movie. Only to find negativity about someone else.

September 12, 2010 at 2:13 AM

By: Jay Rehak

False Prophets

The problem with the "Michelle Rhee's" of the world has nothing to do with their efforts, but with the premise from which they begin. These self-proclaimed reformers begin by ignoring or minimizing the greatest impediment to learning. Anyone with half an eye open should recognize that the greatest hindrance to learning is poverty. Period. Those who do not understand this or do not want to understand this are not only misguided but also perform a disservice to children in poverty.

Until we as a society value every child enough to provide quality meals, quality housing, and quality standards of living, we will continue to have a population of students who are perforce going to underperform their counterparts who do have adequate food, shelter, and clothing.

The reason New Trier High School students, for example, do well as a group, year after year, is the result not only of the school they attend, but also the homes they return to each night. Imagine the advantage students who go home to numerous computers and more than adequate housing have over those who lack basic necessities.

The Michelle Rhee's of the world would have us believe such issues are unimportant. This is sophistry. The terrible truth is, where a child spends her/his time out of school is more important for her/his education than the time spent in school. Every legitimate study on learning recognizes this.

As an educator, I try my best to serve all of the children I teach, but I recognize that my students come to school each day from a wide variety of circumstances.

Any person who would lead a school system in this country should recognize and publicly acknowledge, first and foremost, the issues children in his/her district face on a daily basis. To somehow proclaim such realities as "unimportant" or "irrelevant" to learning is an insult to everyone who works and learns in schools.

September 12, 2010 at 9:09 AM

By: bob

Poverty

Poverty The Excuse.

If poverty was the only reason for academic failure I would not be writing this

response. I grew up in a single parent home because my mother was a widow.

She worked all her life and never finished High school. One of my earliest

recollections was killing a rat with a stick in our closet one cold night.

I only bring up these personal, and painful, memories to point out that

next to my family the most important influence in my early life were my teachers.

Looking back now the discipline, skill, and attitude of these wonderful

people, combined with the structure provided by ferocious school policies,

went a long way to cure the curse of poverty.

Nobody cared how poor are parents were or how unique our domestic situation was

They only cared about their students thus me. It is very PC to blame poverty for all

the ills of society but to some extent that is also a cop out.

One does not have to be rich or attend New Trier to have clean clothes and a clean body.

I can personally report that a kitchen sink will provide wash water almost as good as a bath tub.

The dining room table is sufficient space to write spelling words.

If we as a society are ever going to put a dent in poverty those of us who see it every

day have to provide our students a roadmap out.

September 12, 2010 at 5:52 PM

By: A teacher who agrees.

poverty?

Poverty does trump the other variables, sorry to say. I attended a very elite liberal arts college, but had a very hard time making it there. My family background provided verbal encouragement but little else. Parents thought college important for future, but could barely keep the utilities on from month-to-month. It took my brothers until they were well in their 30's to get B.A.degrees from state-supported schools. My peers from more affluent homes attended "Ivy League" schools, performed better than I did academically while there, and are most probably not teachers (lawyers, doctors, MBA, etc.). All the studies on test scores correlate "income" with high performance on standardized tests too. Bracey is a good source for this phenomenon. Money gets you tutoring on the AP exam so you can get a 4 and get early admission to Yale. $ lets you take off a year or two, and experience the world, become fluent in another culture and language(the European and Asian ones seem to lead to the best careers or career-starters like Georgetown's School of Foreign Service) It sucks to be poor. Please don't romanticize or valorize it.I am cognizant of my background and plauged by it. Meritocracy rules in the U.S. Those few (like our current U.S. President)who are able to excel (beyond the meager accomplishments of a first-generation college grad who became a CPS teacher)through its ranks will have something of a future. It takes alot more than being clean and copying spelling words at a card table to make the grade today, and it always has.

September 12, 2010 at 8:45 PM

By: Carla N.B.

Poverty maybe a factor but does not trump other variables

If poverty is the link, why is it that children from other countries that don't have half the resources here in America, can do much better than our American children? Last time I checked the library was free. Being rich doesn't solve the problem either (ie George W. Bush).

September 12, 2010 at 9:02 PM

By: Bob

poverty

Stop feeling sorry for yourself. Poverty is not an excuse for a persons\rplight. As much as I disliked his morals former President\rClinton got by on his brains not wealth. The clothes and table example were\rJust a way of saying that today ambition, work ethic, and a strong family\rcan make the difference between success and failure.\r Many of the professions you mentioned with such awe are overrated.\rA lot of them are miserable and far to many suffer from overrated expectations\rassociated with wealth.\r \r

September 13, 2010 at 12:11 AM

By: Jay Rehak

Missing the Point with "success stories"

Those who believe "poverty is an excuse" and provide individual success stories absolutely miss the point. We are talking about the evaluation of a group of students. The collective test scores of groups of students. Of course there are individuals who beat "rats with sticks" at home and still do well in school. But clearly, those people are not at an advantage in school as compared to those students who do not live in such difficult circumstances.

Yes, New Trier has a poverty rate of 3% so, it is true that not everyone who attends New Trier has it made. That is not the point. The point is individual bootstrap success stories means it can be done, not that it is easy to be done.

This does not mean poverty is an excuse. Poverty is a reason. A profoundly deep reason that children do not perform well. Anyone who believes family income is irrelevant to school success are fooling themselves. IF family income is irrelevant to learning, why is it that most people strive to provide their children with adequate learning tools such as computers at home, and additional materials when possible.

Resources do make a difference. Those who claim home life and available resources do not factor into student success should ask themselves this question: If they had children, would they provide their children with the best resources for learning, or would they prefer to have their children learn in squalor.

Again, all legitimate studies on learning have confirmed this. It's called the "Volvo Effect". Beyond studies, again, I ask those who believe poverty to be irrelevant to learning to ask themselves how they would like to have their own children equipped at school and at home. The answer should be obvious.

September 13, 2010 at 12:53 PM

By: Margaret Wilson

Poverty?????????????????

I agree that poverty plays a major role in how well students do at school. When I was teaching in the inner city, many of the students came to school hungry and missed time from school because they had to care for younger brothers and sisters or translate for their parents. It is hard to learn when your thinking about food and it is hard to learn when you're not at school! I think those that argue that poverty doesn't play a role have never been there. In today's economy, many more people than ever before (or at least since the depression) are struggling. I know my pension check is usually gone by the end of the second week (if that long) and then you are trying to find money for expenses. It affects us as adults (fighting with friends over money because it is a sensitive topic, etc) so children of course are affected. I don't need a study to tell me that it plays a major role.

September 13, 2010 at 5:49 PM

By: Bob

Poverty the end

Just a couple of points to the last two post’s then I am done.

If Poverty is such a hindrance to entire groups of people why doesn’t the board

Use it as a criteria for admission to selective enrollment schools so that smart

Kids of little wealth can see how the other half lives?

Poverty is a relative term .Poverty in America is vastly different from that in

Sweden , or Uganda. American poverty is so bad only the rich can afford a

computer .That is utter nonsense computers are cheap .As an IB project a couple

of years ago a student and I built a brand new computer on the Library counter for $ 72.00

It had all the bells and whistles .Every second hand store has loads of good monitors

for $10.00.Anybody in America who wants a computer can afford one.

I only ate before school if I found enough empty pop bottles on the way .

At two cents deposit six bottles were enough to get me a 12 oz Pepsi and two

pretzel sticks from the store. We did not eat breakfast. Lunch was always the same

two pieces of bread and one piece of American cheese. My teachers knew this and let

me distribute the milk to classrooms. If a kid was absent I got to drink the unopened

milk when it came back to the milk room. I was hungry every day.

Today we have, thankfully, provisions for poor kids to eat a free breakfast

And a free lunch .Why would any kid go hungry today?

Finally I will stick to my guns and say Poverty is no excuse. We as teachers must

Not patronize the plight of our kids we must make them stand on their own two feet

academically.

September 13, 2010 at 9:38 PM

By: Margaret Wilson

To Bob

I don't think poverty should be an excuse either but for some children the food that they get. All I think we are trying to say is that there is much more for a child born and raised in poverty to overcome. Some can and some can't. Just one small example, in homes of the middle to upper class, most children are read to from a very younger age. Homework help is available either by the parent or the parent finds someone else to help (i.e. a tutor or a special program). Children are taken to the zoo, museums, plays, etc. In low income homes, the parent works and often is not there to read to the child or help with homework and they can not afford additional help. Often the children do not get out of the neighborhood because entrance fees are too high as is the price of gas and bus fares.

All I am saying is that it plays a major role

is how difficult it is for a child.

September 16, 2010 at 12:12 AM

By: Jay Rehak

Ignoring the implications of poverty

Bob,

While I laud your own rise from poverty to academic achievement, I find it puzzling that you don't realize that what you achieved was despite your difficult economic circumstances, not because of them.

As Margaret Wilson and I are trying to point out, children who live in poverty have a much more difficult road to success than their contemporaries who have fewer barriers to academic success. Again, I'd like to ask you to move beyond the Reagan-esque notion that an argument can be won through personal anecdote. Look at the studies on poverty and its implication on learning. EVERY legitimate study regarding the impact of poverty on learning reports very similar findings. Economic constraints on children hinder learning. As Margaret Wilson points out, if you're truly an educator, you don't need a study to tell you this.

September 16, 2010 at 3:38 AM

By: Sarah Loftus

What type of Poverty?

Poverty comes with many different faces. Economic poverty definitely makes a difference in a child’s life experience, but the poverty that most seriously affects our students is poverty of parenting and nurturing. Unfortunately this happens in both the most affluent suburbs and in the poorest inner cities and rural communities. Yes, children who have all the newest bells and whistles have an advantage, but it doesn’t guarantee anything. Children who see books for the first time when they enter kindergarten (yes, it’s true and much more prevalent than most will admit) have already missed some of their most important formative learning time.

Jay states that society must ‘provide quality meals, quality housing, and quality standards of living’; the more society (aka government) ‘provides’ the more people become dependant and personal responsibility is slowly whittled away.

Lao Tzu: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

But schools can’t be the only teachers. It starts at birth (and even before) and lasts a lifetime.

Not to be sound too Reagan-esque but I’ve taught students from extremely depressed neighborhoods. Some students come to school prepared to learn, they have their supplies and if they don’t bring their own supplies they take care of the supplies provided, and they show respect for themselves and others. When they go home they have family and friends who encourage them and nurture them. Although they are economically poor, they are truly rich and if the nurturing continues with their teachers they will be one the way to being happy and well educated adults.

However, other children arrive to school barely awake, they rely on the school for all books and supplies and meals. School is school and doesn’t exist once they leave the building. No one asks how he or she is doing in school; no one helps with homework. These children are true victims of poverty and neglect, and are not necessarily from only economically deprived areas.

Perhaps those ‘studies’ should broaden their approach because the term ‘poverty’ is way too simplistic.

September 16, 2010 at 1:20 PM

By: Bob

education

Educator

I am not sure what the studies would show but I am in my

42th year as a Teacher and Librarian with CPS.

September 16, 2010 at 2:22 PM

By: Margaret Wilson

To Sarah

Sarah, I agree with you that the worst form of poverty is when children are not given encouragement and support from the home and are not raised to believe that education is important. I don't want to keep repeating myself but for those who question the role of limited resources on education just think about us as adults. When I am worried about something or have to try to figure out where I am going to get money to pay for something that is a necessity (gas money, rent, etc), it is hard to focus on reading or other things. As an adult, I can tell myself to forget my concerns and do what I need to do but it is a lot harder for a child. Most are aware of the family's concerns (at least I know I was) about providing necessities, and you are going to carry these worries into the classroom. Going back to our education, think about Maslow's hierarchy of needs, the first is shelter, food, water, etc. Self-fulfillment and higher learning are much further down his chart and he stated from experience that these need to be satisfied in order (at least the first few levels). Yes, there will always be exceptions but again, thinking back to my early educational years, I remember being taught in English that for every grammar rule there is an exception and that it is the exceptions that prove the rule.

September 18, 2010 at 5:24 PM

By: Marian

Poverty

Bob, you made it because your mother had middle class values. Despite your father's death, your mother clearly continued to take care of you the best way she knew how. She gave you encourage, enrichment and modeled how to be a good citizen and person. Many students who live in poverty do not come from families who give them that foundation.

The Hart/Reisley study confirmed that children from upper and middle class families heard many more vocabulary words and had enriching experiences that contributed to their education before the arrived at school. Children who live in low socio-economic families do not bring these experiences/vocab to school with them. They must be taught these basic words/ideas/concepts at school. You arrived at school with much more than many students do because of the history of values in your family. That is why President Obama is such a success. His family history was rooted in healthy values by both of his parents despite his father's death.

September 22, 2010 at 9:04 AM

By: Pissed DC Parent

Chancellor Rhee and Masking Tape

I just listened to an audio of Chancellor Michelle Rhee admitting to abusing children when she was a teacher at an inner-city Baltimore school.

Chancellor Rhee tells her new Teach for America employees about how she used masking tape on the mouths of 35 children to keep them quiet.

She jovially elaborates on how their mouths were bleeding and the children were screaming and crying when the masking tape was yanked off.

That’s not the worst part. What’s more repulsive is that the Chancellor of DC Public Schools (DCPS)—Michelle Rhee—and her new Teach for America employees found the story hilarious.

Here’s the link to the audio from The Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2010/08/13/VI2010081305444.html

The irony is that Chancellor Rhee made false child abuse claims against 266 DC teachers in a national publication, when in fact she’s the one with the questionable judgment and past.

She would have never placed masking tape on the mouths of dogs or children from higher income households; she would have placed them in the “naughty corner,” including Fido. If this happened to one of her daughters she would have immediately fired the teacher.

September 22, 2010 at 5:01 PM

By: Bob

Tape

I heard the story she told and do not believe one word of it. If she did tape

little kids mouths shut that is a felony If they were bleeding that would be

Sure to bring angry parents ready to kill her to school.

September 22, 2010 at 8:48 PM

By: dear bob--

Rhee taped students' mouths while TFA

she said this herself! I beleive it. Even the way she talks about the students in her car sounds bad..no one stopped her--it took place. Why wold she lie about this?\rThere is something wrong with her if she did, but her voice and tone makes it true.

September 23, 2010 at 8:23 AM

By: Bob

Out To Lunch

I heard her say it and you may be correct. If she tried that in a South Side school

Now she would be taken out in handcuffs .The more I think about what she said

It sure sounds like the deranged drippings of a very hysterical mind. Keep her

away from my students.

Add your own comment (all fields are necessary)

Substance readers:

You must give your first name and last name under "Name" when you post a comment at substancenews.net. We are not operating a blog and do not allow anonymous or pseudonymous comments. Our readers deserve to know who is commenting, just as they deserve to know the source of our news reports and analysis.

Please respect this, and also provide us with an accurate e-mail address.

Thank you,

The Editors of Substance

Your Name

Your Email

What's your comment about?

Your Comment

Please answer this to prove you're not a robot:

2 + 5 =