edbizbuzz

If the DC City Council wants to signal that it intends to keep Chancellor Rhee accountable, it will reject the nomination of Dr. Hess and Prof. Wong. If it does not seize this moment, the Council is less likely to get the information it needs before the Chancellor acts, and will continue to be confronted with fait accompli. This may seem like a trivial decision. I say it is strategic.

Continue reading "Rhee-Visiting the District of Columbia Public Schools (IV)" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 6:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

The history of business turnarounds shows there are limits to what can be gained from downsizing and reorganizing the system - improvements in productivity are necessary. A workforce motivated by fear of loosing their jobs won’t get you there. What’s called for is loyalty to the leadership, agreement with the vision it articulates, and confidence in the plans it describes. The only way leaders can gain such loyalty is to hold themselves to the standards they apply to everyone else.

This Chancellor is going to have a hard time gaining loyalty from DC’s teachers, and she can’t replace them all.

Continue reading "Rhee-Visiting the District of Columbia Public Schools (III)" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 10:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

My case against the Chancellor is not simply a matter of policy differences. Even taking the takeover model she and the mayor have adopted as a given, the campaign she has implemented to put it place on the ground is flawed. At the end of May 2008, her takeover formula is obvious: Break the will of institutions within the school system; demolish as much of the old culture as possible; take all the political flack up front; and prepare the ground for a new approach in the 2008-2009 school year.

Continue reading "Rhee-Visiting the District of Columbia Public Schools (II)" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 9:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The District of Columbia Public Schools are not the focus of edbizbuzz, but I do monitor events and plan to report periodically. Chancellor Michelle Rhee is friendlier to markets and business techniques than the typical superintendent - and the first superintendent to emerge from the community of nonprofit “education entrepreneurs.” She is also a leading example of urban school reform based on mayoral takeover.

Continue reading "Rhee-Visiting the District of Columbia Public Schools (I)" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 9:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Yesterday, I described the bill on DC central office terminations passed by the City Council on December 18. It has one more session, now scheduled for January, where it is likely to be voted into law.

My analysis:

Continue reading "It's Not Over 'Til...: Making Sense of the Districts New Central Office Firings Law" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 2:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The “biz” in edbizbuzz stands for “business” in the broad sense of a “market,” rather than the narrow sense of “vendors.” I tend to pick stories for what they tell us about classes of actors in the school improvement market: for and nonprofit providers as “sellers”, school districts and charter schools as “buyers”, state education agencies and the U.S. Department of Education as “regulators,” along with the executive, legislative and judicial branches; the full range of “investors," from angels to Wall Street; and of course the environmental “surround” of interest groups, philanthropy, media and evaluators that influence market activities.

For example, I’ve written a good deal about SES providers - to explore the issue of “value – results at a price.” Evaluations indicate that the services tend to be quite expensive yet tend to offer improvements in student performance with little educational significance. The series on K12’s IPO was intended to explore the calculations of investors. I’ve started this week to write about the Edvance review of the Texas preschool program - to expand on the issue of Scientifically Based Research and the practical implications of evaluation in an emerging industry like school improvement. I’ve taken the same approach to interest groups, philanthropy and the media.

If this reads like an apologia for what follows, it is. I never intended to get into the District of Columbia Public Schools reorganization mess to the extent I have. I was really drawn into the issue by a Washington Post article on the Chancellor’s public comments about the central office that I found odd to the point of bizarre. I came away with three theories: the Chancellor was quoted out of context by the reporter, was in need of better PR coaching, or made the remarks quite deliberately. I honestly thought it was the first, and was blown away as it became clear that the third theory was on the money.

Continue reading "It's Not Over 'Til...: The Continuing Saga of Plans to Fire DC’s Central Office" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 9:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Why is edbizbuzz "picking on" District of Columbia Mayor Adrian Fenty and Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee's in their efforts to reorganize that city's troubled system? There are plenty of other dysfunctional urban districts, what's so special about their problematic approach to management? Why should a blogspace devoted to the emerging school improvement industry spend so much time on what's happening in one school district? What’s the relationship between Rhee and the industry?

Continue reading "Why DC Mayor Fenty's and Chancellor Rhee’s Approach Schools Reorganization Matters to the School Improvement Providers" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 5:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

Yesterday, I provided provisions of the District of Columbia Code relevant to the present debate over the status of employees in the DC Public Schools central office. Today, my analysis. It may be somewhat unexpected.

Continue reading "Firing the District of Columbia's Central Office - Or Turning it Into a Political Fiefdom?" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 1:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

According to the Center on Education Policy's report released December 6th, Making Mid-Course Corrections: School Restructuring in Maryland is not working.

In 2006, 233 schools were in some stage of improvement under NCLB, roughly 16 percent of the state's 1,444 total. Seventy-three, or 5 percent were planning or implementing restructuring - 58 under the jurisdiction of Baltimore City Public Schools. All of the schools in implementation were in Baltimore City or Prince Georges County Public Schools.

More schools are entering the restructuring process, few are coming out the other side. In the fall of 2004. 46 schools were in restructuring implementation. Over the next three school years, 36 schools entered the implementation phase. Twelve more raised student achievement enough to get out of the "in needs of improvement" dog house. Another sixteen in the restructuring planning phase made AYP and avoided implementation in the next year. Today, 64 schools are in implementation restructuring.

The report doesn't show exactly which schools have entered and exited over time, so it is hard to say precisely how many have been in some kind of restructuring status for how long. Somewhere between 34 and 44 have been in restructuring implementation since the fall of 2004, between 53 and 63 since the the fall of 2005. Any way you slice the data, restructuring is starting to look like a black hole.

The policy question is whether the implementation of restructuring under NCLB will de facto constititute a terminal status for failing schools, or become a real way station to school improvement. The Maryland experience suggests the former.

Schools doing the best job of leaving children behind are being permitted to keep on keeping on. Does the CEP study tell us why this is happening or how to change course?

Continue reading "Digging a Deeper Hole: School Restructuring Isn't Working in Maryland" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 8:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From the email I've received over the course of my ongoing critique of Chancellor Rhee's approach to school reform, and Mayor Fenty's apparent support, many edbizbuzz readers have the impression that I'm opposed to her objectives and belong to the same camp as those who oppose her because her objectives are contrary to their self-interest.

Nothing could be further from the truth, and nothing in my writing at RAND, for the Center on Reinventing Public Education, or articles written as an entirely independent observer would indicate that I'm a great fan of central office activities or teachers unions approach to working conditions that impinge on what was once considered management prerogative. (See more by clicking on "About the Author" at the upper right hand corner of this page. Listen to several years of weekly editorials from SIIW • The Podcast here. )

Indeed there is only one area of policy I can think of where I disagree with Rhee and Fenty fundamentally.

Continue reading "Why I'm a Critic of DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 11:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBacks (0)

Vaishali Honawar 's November 29 story in edweek.org on the New York City public schools lifted my heart. This is the way to remove teachers - or any other school district employee who can't or won't perform. (See my scenario 4 for DC schools here.)

The Teacher Performance Unit, made up of five lawyers and headed by a former prosecutor, will help principals prepare cases to fire tenured teachers who fail repeatedly to raise student test scores and are also found lacking during principals’ observations.... The plan also includes peer-intervention and other help for struggling teachers. Only if a teacher continues to fail to show improvement despite those interventions will the process for removing a teacher begin, district officials say.

Due process is central to America values, and following the rules demonstrates leaderships' commitment to principle rather than people. Public employment is an entitlement under the law for very sound historical reasons, but it carries serious responsibilities. Incompetents need to be removed. Principals and supervisors have too much on their plate to do it alone - districts need units with specific responsibility, power and accountability to perform the function.

I'm a graduate of George Washington University Law School licensed to practice law in the District of Columbia, and would gladly put my money where my mouth has been on this point if DC were to follow New York's example. I doubt the Mayor or Chancellor would welcome this pugnacious critic. Still, if asked, I would gladly serve. It's that important to me that government do things right.

Posted by Dean Millot at 12:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

An administration as ready to import business “best practice” to public education as District of Columbia Mayor Adrian Fenty’s must be aware of Harvard Business School professor John Kotter’s seminal work on corporate turn-arounds. After examining hundreds of failed attempts – and the handful of successes, Kotter described the results of his research to a lay audience in “Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail” in the March-April 1995 issue of Harvard Business Review, and the next year in a book with the same title.

I remember three observations of relevance to the Mayor and DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee:

• Organizational improvement requires a “picture of the future that is relatively easy to communicate and appeals to customers, stockholders, and employees” – but especially to the workforce.

• The road to change begins by building a guiding coalition of people with independent influence inside the system and the capacity to make something tangible happen.

• Leaders must actively plan for short-term wins designed to expand their coalition of supporters inside the organization.

These are not lessons guiding DC school reform today. Mayor Fenty has allowed Chancellor Rhee to go with a message promising nothing but blood, sweat and tears, employing fear as the great motivator. The Chancellor has apparently rejected the idea of building a coalition of stakeholders inside the system. And with the restructuring announcement of November 28, I can’t see any possibility of delivering a meaningful short-term win in the one area that truly matters – student and school performance.

Continue reading "Can A Change Strategy Alienate Every Stakeholder, Reduce the Chance for Quick Wins in Student Performance, But Still Succeed?" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 6:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Listening to John Merrow’s November 19 report on DC Schools’ Chancellor Michelle Rhee on the PBS radio version of The News Hour took my breath away. Yes, her audacity has refreshing features. But it's also frightening.

In the space of a few minutes Merrow shows Rhee:

• Removing principals within days of arriving on the scene – she actually gives one the news for subsequent broadcast to a national audience.

• Declaring war on her own central office.

• Arguing for the right to fire staff and teachers at her sole discretion.

• Dismissing the idea of any compassion for employees, in the name of student performance.

The Chancellor is a bit short on a concrete strategy towards this end, but the report suggests it is the k-12 equivalent of “march or die” – perform or step aside.

Observing Rhee over the last several months reminds me of nothing so much as watching a dictator seize the reins of power. And as with all such stories, her rise depends on the public and its leaders being so disgusted with the prior state of affairs, and so lacking in the will to fix the problem earlier, that they readily give up cherished rights like due process, all the while forgeting to insist that Caesar define the standards of performance that will put her out in the cold she so willingly dispenses to others.

Quo vadis? Where can this lead?

Continue reading "DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee: Quo Vadis?" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 8:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

In October, Brenda Belton, director of charter schools in the DC Public Schools infamous central office, plead guilty to four counts of theft and tax evasion. Among other transgressions, Belton admitted in court that she steered $446,000 in no-bid school training contracts to friends and received kickbacks for her efforts.

Washington Post staff writers Theola Labbé and V. Dion Haynes report that DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee is considering contracts with nonprofit Charter Management Organizations (CMO) for schools in or approaching restructuring status.

Continue reading "Should DC Schools Chancellor Rhee Hire Friends or Put Work Out to Bid?" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 9:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Washington, DC is joined by Seattle, Washington in its leaders' efforts to do a better job of central control. In DC, Chancellor Michelle Rhee is trying to get hold of a bureaucracy that decades of leadership failures left untethered. In Seattle, Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson, is reversing her predecessors' deliberate plans to push decisionmaking authority to individual schools.

It’s no great secret that I prefer decentralization as a matter of public policy. It's also a better choice for the school improvement market.

Continue reading "District (De/Re)Centralization Influences the School Improvement Industry" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 7:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

What powers!

What emergency?

There's no "state of emergency," no need for dictatorial authority, and no relationship between the real predicament and the requested powers.

Continue reading "Don't Buy the "Emergency Powers" Argument for the District of Columbia Public Schools" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 1:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The fundamental problem the central office presents to those interested in school reform isn’t bureaucratic obstructionism, individual shortcomings, an excessive draw on resources, ineffective procedures, or its very existence in the structure of school districts.

The problem is that school boards and superintendents are asking it to do the wrong things.

Continue reading "The Central Office (V): Doing Things Wrong or Doing the Wrong Things?" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 8:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

So far this series has explained why two commonly cited reasons to mow down the central office bureaucracy don’t pack much punch.

Bureaucracies are not independent actors aimed at wrecking reform, and employees who have that effect can be let go if district leaders have the will to do so.

The bureaucracy may be seen as a source of funds for teaching and learning. Nevertheless, because central office budget cuts invariably take place in the context of an overall shortfall, classrooms rarely end up with more money at the end of the exercise.

What of the third argument? Surely the central office can be demonized for its lack of responsiveness to schools? Again, let’s not be hasty.

Continue reading "The Central Office (IV): Why Schools Don’t Get Support?" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 9:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

On examination, the first argument for mowing down the bureaucracy isn't all that powerful. The central office does not deliberately interfere with school improvement policies as an independent actor, and the individuals who do could be removed if district leaders made following procedures to do so a priority.

The second argument, that the central office draws more funds than are required for its activities, and cuts to its budget will go to the classroom, is equally marginal.

Continue reading "The Central Office (III): A Source of Money for the Classroom?" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 1:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

As the instrument of and transmission belt for policies made by every school district's elected and appointed leadership, the central office should be a force that accelerates school reform. Instead, it's been a drag.

Before deciding that "the central office" is responsible for the crisis in urban school reform, and cheering what at least one group of eduwonks calls District of Columbia Public Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee's "vow to mow down the bureaucracy," it's worth taking a closer look at its role in a district , where and how it's become dysfunctional, and the likely impact of proposed changes on teaching and learning.

In theory, the central office might interfere with school improvement in four ways:

• Obstructing reform efforts - actively or passively but, in either case, deliberately.

• Drawing more funds than are needed for its activities, and so “taking money from the classroom.”

• Following procedures that are too sluggish to support schools' real needs.

• Performing functions that make it harder to improve teaching and learning.

As a general rule, new school district leaders committed to reform emphasize the first three. Nevertheless, all but the last have a marginal impact on efforts to improve teaching and learning. And all, including the last, are well within the control of any school system’s leadership. They require hard work and will, but not extraordinary intelligence or even vast creativity. Finally, none require making an enemy of the bureaucratic class. Indeed, that approach only makes the new management's job that much harder.

Continue reading "The Central Office (II): Dysfunctionality's Cause or Symptom?" »

Posted by Dean Millot at 9:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

If you were an MBA candidate discussing the District of Columbia’s public schools as a case study at the Harvard Business School, would you propose that the Chancellor treat her central office as demoralized troops, or an enemy army? Would you deal with poor performance as a series of individual cases, or would you favor blanket indictments of the organization? If you believed that central office performance was universally poor, would you propose that she dress the troops down in a staff meeting behind closed doors, or in front of the camera for national television? If you found that improvements in efficiency made it necessary to reduce staff, would you want the Chancellor to show some compassion in front of the press or tell radio reporters “that’s not my problem?”

If Michelle Rhee were that student, I find it inconceivable that she would defend the choices she’s made as Chancellor. They are so obviously self-defeating.

Posted by Dean Millot at 11:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)