[SOUND]. >> So, I'm thrilled to be here today. And when I was looking at my briefing
sheet and I saw that the title of the series is A
View from the Top. I thought, well, I guess I've been on the
top of an organization before, so I can give some insights on that. But I thought what would be interesting is
that I've also sorta been trampled. And on the ground with people's feet on my
head, [NOISE] looking up. So I maybe I can give a little perspective
from that vantage point as well. You do not want to hear me give a big long
speech, and I am not gonna do that. I'm gonna reserved most of the time, for,
for a Q and A. But in thinking about leadership I, I was
sorta reflecting. And I thought okay, what, what would I
want to share with young people who are in undergrad or graduate school today. And there are three things through my
experiences in DC and now with Students First that I think could
be helpful. Not in telling you specifically what you
should do or not do, but just to give you a sense of
perspective. So three things. Very simple. The first, this is, actually, this is a lesson that I learned,
when I was the chancellor. And it was one that came to me from a, a
mentor and hero of mine, Joel Klein. So, Joel is, used to be the the Chancellor
of the New York City school system. And long before I was working in DC, the
mayor of D.C. and the council members were trying to
figure out. Whether they wanted to move to a mayoral
control model or not. So they took a trip to New York. They met with Joel Klein and Mike
Bloomberg. They toured the schools. They sorta saw what was going on there. And at the end of that visit Adrian Fenty
said to Joel Kline, okay I want somebody like you to come and
run the schools in D.C.. Can you give me a recommendation? And Joel actually ended up recommending me
for the job. And because of that he always felt this
incredible sense of guilt. And so he would call me and kinda you
know, check up on me all the time. So I remember one evening in the height of sorta my first 100 days when things were
really getting a little tough. I was driving home one night. It's raining outside. It's like 11 o'clock at night and my phone
rings. And I look at it and I see that it's from Joel Klein, so I pull
over to the side of the road. Answer the phone and I said, yes sir. And he said how are you doing Michelle? I said, I'm, I'm doing okay. It's a little tough right now, you know,
but I'm hanging in there. And he's like, he's like, that's good. He said, I, I'm calling to give you some
advice. And I said, okay, I am ready. And he said there are two things that I
wanna communicate to you tonight. I said okay, I'm, I'm ready, let's go. He said the first one, he said, do you
have a boyfriend? >> [LAUGH] >> And I said no, cuz at the time I did
not. And he said okay, so my first piece of
advice is go out and get one. >> [LAUGH]
>> And I said, okay. I did not think that I would ever be
getting love life advice from Joel Klein. So I was sorta hesitatingly you know,
sorta said, oh, okay sir. And he said, here's what you need to
understand. He said, this job is one of the loneliest
jobs you can possibly have. He said, everyday is just an absolute
grind. He said, I would never be able to do what
I do everyday if I didn't have my wife at home. Because at the end of every tough day I
get in to bed and she goes, baby don't worry about it. She's like, you're not the crazy one. They're the crazy ones. You are okay. >> [LAUGH] >> He said, if I didn't have that
grounding me everyday, I would not be able to wake up every
morning and go to work. He said, so my first piece of advice is go
and find a boyfriend. I said, okay. I actually meanwhile did do that and
happily. So I listened to that piece. And then, the second thing he said, he
sorta got really quiet and serious. And he said. So here's my second thing. He said, you have to lead from the front. And he said it with such conviction and
confidence that I said, okay, I got it. And I hung up the phone, and I pulled back
onto the road. And I'm thinking. I have no idea what that means, right? But I didn't wanna, I didn't wanna ask him any questions cuz I
didn't wanna seem like I was stupid. So, you know, I'd get back on the road. And it actually wasn't until several
months later that I had sorta lived through a lot of the turmoil
of, of the, of being the chancellor. That I actually realized what he meant. Right? Because when you are a leader, sometimes
you've gotta be out in front. You can see things that, that other people
can't see at the time. And if you get mired in the, the muck, if
you sorta get you know, pulled into every single argument on one
side or another. You're actually not gonna be able to move
your organization as far as you can, as fast as you can. So when he gave me that piece of advice, I was actually in the middle of our school
closure process. Which was incredibly painful. You know, we had 144 schools, we were
closing 23 of them. It was 15% of the schools. And if you ever wanna quickly become the
most unpopular person in a city all you have to do is tell somebody
that you are closing a school. Much less 23 schools. So I was in the middle of this and it was, it was this tremendous amount of
opposition push back. And the interesting this was, about a year
after we closed the schools and we went through that process. I was in one of the schools that had been
consolidated. And I was trying to check out you know,
what the situation was. A women came up to me. She said, hey, hey, hey look at me, you
recognize me. She said I was the one last year that was
always screaming at you about closing schools. I said, oh yeah, I know who you are. >> [LAUGH]
>> I could never forget that face. She's like you know what? I just wanted to let you know you were
right. She said I didn't, I didn't, we couldn't
see it at the time. Because it was such an emotional and
sentimental process for us and we were just angry at you and you
know, this whole process. She's like, but now I get it. Cuz we're in this school, and this school has a lot more resources, our
kids are getting a better education. So I'm good. >> [LAUGH]
>> And she walks away. >> [LAUGH]. >> And I'm thinking, where's the
Washington Post when this kinda stuff happens, right? But what I realize is this, we were, we
were able to, because we made the incredibly tough
decision to close those schools. We were able to create a new reality for
the children in Washington DC. Because of that decision, we were able to
provide an art music, an art teacher, a music teacher, a PE teacher, a
librarian, a nurse. And a social worker or a guidance counselor at every single
school in the city. For the first time in the history, that anybody could ever remember, we
equalized the resources. So that having an art teacher wasn't
dependent on whether you, you know, were at one of the schools that
had wealthier parents. And they could hold an auction to hire the
teacher, etc. We equalized the playing field for all of the kids as it pertained to the
kinds of curriculum that they should have. And had we got caught up in all of the
sorta emotion and, and the sorta opposition and whatnot. We would not have been able to follow
through on that decision. And we could not have provided the kids
with those additional resources. So that's my first message is sometimes,
you gotta lead from the front. My second, observation. [COUGH] And, and, you could, you could
either take my advice or not on this one. But I believe very strongly that in order
to be an effective leader, you have to be okay with not being liked. And I'm like really really good at this
one. >> [LAUGH]
>> So you can, you can, you can, you can take my
advice. I, I remember very clearly about halfway
through my second year as chancellor. A columnist for the Washington Post wrote
a piece. And it was sorta you know, I like Michelle
Rhee. She is doing, you know, good things and
making hard decisions. I just wish. She would be a little nicer. So I read the piece and I'm pissed off. So I call the guy and I'm like what are
you doing? And he's like, no you don't understand. He's like I, I want you to be here for the
long haul, I think you are good for the system. He said, but in order for you to be here,
people got to like you a little bit more. You could be a little friendlier and
nicer. And I look and you know so I said to him I
said look you have to figure out what you think the most important characteristics
of a schools chancellor are. And quite frankly if its sorta personality
driven then you know and you want warm and fuzzy. Then I am not your girl. And you should actually be advocating for
my ouster. But if you like what is going on in the
schools, if you believe sincerely that the right decisions are being made in
the interests of kids. Then you should not be saying Michelle
really needs to change her personality. You should be advocating that we kinda
leave the personalities aside and focus on the policies of what's actually
happening in the schools. So, I say this because you know, when I was in my first year as a
chancellor my mother came to town. So, when your mom comes to town, yo, you got a whole different perspective
on things. So, my mom happened to come at a time
where people were very, very angry at me. And so she comes into town, it was all on
the school closure stuff. And she, you know, opens up the Washington
Post. There's a two-page spread on, you know,
all the different schools that I'm closing, like, can point it all over the
city. She turns on the TV, there are people,
like, you know, throwing things at me at a meeting, and
that sorta thing. She [LAUGH] she, over the weekend said,
they're. Yeah, there's some really loud people down the block who are picketing
about something. And I said, yeah, they're picketing me. She's like, oh my gosh. I can't believe this is going on. So anyways, one night at the end of a long night of community meetings that I
was having. I come home, I'm in the kitchen, I'm making myself a peanut better an jelly
sandwich. My mother sorta creeps into the kitchen,
and she says are you okay? And I say yeah I'm fine I'm good. And she looks at me, she goes you know, when you were little you never used to
care what people thought about you. She's like, and so I always thought that you were going to
grow up to be really antisocial. But I see now that this is serving you
well. >> [LAUGH]
>> And I said yes, it was. Because the bottom line is that if you are
concerned in too strong a way with being liked. With whether or not you're popular, with
what your polling numbers look like, etc. Then you're gonna make a different set of
decisions. And the bottom line is that no really
significant change comes without some pretty significant pushback
and opposition as well. And at the end of the day, if the decisions that you're making are
the ones that you believe are right. And you, you, you, you, you, you have the
confidence of that. Then you have to be okay getting that
opposition, getting the criticism and, at the end of
the day, not being liked so much. So that's my second piece of advice. My third is actually about my boss at the
time when I was in D.C., Adrian Fenty. Who was the mayor of D.C. and he's the
person that I reported to. And in my opinion, he is the person
without whom none of what we did in DC could have happened. He was an extraordinarily unique
politician. In that when he hired me he said, all I
want you to do is make the schools better. Make the schools a place where we wanna
send our own children every day. In terms of politics and the pushback and
what, I'll handle that. But we're not gonna worry about it. Because at the end of the day, we're gonna
make every decision within what we believe is in the best interests of kids. He said that on Day 1 to me. And of all the crazy things that happened
to me in DC, actually, none of that was particularly
surprising. The one thing that I would say was
surprising to me is the fact that that man never wavered one time. In fact, this is a quick story. His primary election, was in September of
2010. And in August, we had just implemented a
new teacher evaluation system. Where for the first time, we were
evaluating teachers based in part on whether or not their student achievement
levels had grown in the school. And so we had identified a couple hundred
people who were, who were categorized as ineffective. And based on the, the framework and the
structure that we had set out. We said that those people who had been
rated as ineffective after their first year were subject to termination. But this is weeks away from his primary
election. So I call the man and I say, okay mayor,
so here's where we are and reminded him about
the new evaluation system. I said, you know the decision is whether
we actually move forward with this
terminations or not. Because at the end of the day I am very
sensitive to the fact that you've got a race coming up. I don't want to do anything to jeopardize
your ability to, to you know, run the city effectively,
etc. And he said let me ask you a question. He said, if we take this action, will that
ensure that kids in D.C. have better teachers in, come
fall? And I said yes. He said then we gotta do it. I said, really? He said, absolutely. Because every other political calculus
that we make [NOISE] we don't know what the outcome is gonna be. Right?
So if we don't make this decision does that
mean I'm gonna win the election? Can't, we can't tell. And that's not really at the end of the
day what matters. It's not why we're here. We're here to make sure that the kids are
getting a great education. And if you can tell me that by removing
these people and bringing in other ones, that kids are gonna get a, a good
education, then I'm okay with that. So it was exactly the answer that I wanted
to hear. It was not so much the answer that other
people wanted to hear. So we made the decision and you know the
city goes nuts, right? And it, I started getting calls from
people, all throughout the city. People who were supporters of the Mayor
and mine saying, are you insane? This is political suicide. You can't fire a bunch of people weeks
before the election. And it was amazing to me how despite the
fact that he was being told that his political career was
potentially gonna end with this decision. The ease and the confidence with which he
made it, because he knew that, at, at the end of the day, it was the right
policy decision to make. I wish I could say the same for
politicians across this county, and elected officials across this country. We live in a state where there is, to say a lack of political courage is an
understatement. We live in a state where not too many
months ago, when it was found that in an L.A. USD in
Los Angeles, there was a teacher who had been a sexual predator,
kind of molesting kids and et cetera. A state assemblyman from L.A. introduced a
piece of legislation and all it would have done is made it easier
for school districts to fire people were
sexual predators. That's a pretty low bar in my opinion, that bill didn't even make it out of
committee. Couldn't even go to the floor of the
legislature for a vote, because the status quo people, and, you know, folks who
wanted to defend, you know, the adult interests etc said to the politicians,
don't vote for this, etc, etc. Couldn't even get a bill like that out of
committee. Couple of weeks ago, we had a similar
situation where a legislator introduced a bill around
teacher evaluation in the state. It was a very very low key bill. It just said three things. One that parents and the community should
have input into the evaluation. Two, that we should evaluate teachers and
put them into four different performance bands as opposed to
just satisfactory or unsatisfactory. And that for veteran teachers, we would
move the timeframe. So instead of a evaluating them once every
five years, we could evaluate them once every three
years. The committee vote of nine committee
members, six of them abstained. Abstained. Which is, to me, I was like, look, if you
don't like the bill for whatever reason, then vote against it. But what are, what's abstaining all about? So, our, our, we had a bunch of students
first members at the, at the capitol. And they were asking one of the people who
had, and saying you know, why don't you take a
stance on this? I mean, what do you believe about it? Whether it's right or wrong, you'll agree
[UNKNOWN]. But you, you have to take a stand. And the guy said well, here's the thing
I've heard from people, constituents in my community on both
sides. And so, no matter what happens, there's gonna be one group of people
that's unhappy. And so I don't want to be in the middle of
that. But that's your job, right? Your job is to hear from both sides. What the pros and cons of something like
this. And then to make a decision that you
believe is in the public interest. Right, that is gonna serve your
constituents best. Whether or not people get angry at you,
that can't play into the calculus. Hardly the profiles of courage that you
would like to see from your elected officials. So at the end of the day my, my third
point, and potential one of my most important is you
have to as a leader you have to have the courage of your convictions. You have to know what it is you believe is
right and then you have to be willing to stake
everything, essentially, on it. Whether it's your job or your staying in
office. So many of these politicians like, well,
here's the thing, if I take this vote, then these people are not gonna like me. These people are not gonna vote for me next time and the world is a better
place if I remain in office. And what I would argue is the world is
only a better place if you're in office. If you're actually making the decisions
that you think are right for your constituents. If not and you're just, you know, trying
to determine which way the political winds are blowing that's actually not moving us
forward in the right direction. So having the courage of your convictions
is my third. But at the end of the day here's what I
believe in. Take questions and you can ask me anything
you want. Here's why I feel these three lessons, as
it pertains to this incredibly important
field of education, is so important because public education is supposed to be
the great equalizer in this country. It is supposed to be the thing that
ensures it doesn't matter if you're black or white, rich or poor. We have a public education system so that every single kid can have an equal
shot in life, right? You work hard you do the right thing you
can live the American dream. Unfortunately, that is not the reality for
the, for a huge percentage of kids in our
country today. In fact, In America today, America, is towards the bottom
internationally on social mobility. Which means that if you are a child who is
born into poverty in this country, the likelihood that you will ever escape
poverty is slim to none. Why? Because if you live in a poor community,
with not a lot of resources, the likelihood is very high that you
attend a failing school. And that you will not gain the skills and
knowledge that you need to be able to go onto higher education, get a high paying
job, et cetera. So we are essentially saying to poor kids
now, you don't have a shot in life. Because of the circumstance of your birth. That in my opinion is the most terrifying
dynamic that we have going on in this country today. It goes against every single ideal that we
stand for as a nation. We're supposed to be the land of equal
opportunity, where anybody can pull themselves up by
their bootstraps. If you have the, the, the wherewithal the,
the, the, the will, right, you can do this. But if we are ensuring that essentially we
are keeping poor kids trapped in failing schools, where they're not getting
the education they deserve. And then they can't live that life. What does that say about us as a nation? I would argue that it is everything that
we don't wanna say. It goes, it, again it goes against
everything we stand for, and that is why if we are to focus on one
issue in a, in a collective, and bipartisan way in
this country, it has to be this topic. Every single person in this room plays a
role in this. Unless you stand up for kids, then we can't expect that anything,
anything is ever going to change. Okay, that is the end of my remarks, and I
then I will take questions. [APPLAUSE]. >> Okay, I think we have two people with
mics, so I will just go back and forth. Over there's the first. >> So thank you for coming. My name's Jamal. I'm a second year MBA student. I wanna challenge you a little bit on the, the notion, the idea of being friendly
versus being tough. We spend a lot of time here studying the
interpersonal intricacies and making tough decisions and something that
I've come to learn is that there is a lot of middle ground sometimes and I wonder,
when you reflect upon your time in D.C, do you ever think that had you moderated
your personality, your toughness, you might of been more effective? I mean, for example, you, you've fired
friends while on TV. And I know you've, you said you regret
that in hindsight, but if that's indicative. Of kind of your general disposition, do you feel like you ever did a disservice
to students by being tough to a fault? >> So, here's what, what I said is you,
you, you, you have to be okay, with not being liked, I didn't say you
gotta be an a-hole, right? And here's, and there's a difference
between those two things. So I would go out all the time, out into
the community. and, and, you know, one of the things that
I would often do, sort of, is speak to large crowds of folks, or I
would do living room meetings where, you know, a constituent could invite me in
to meet with, you know, 12 or 15 of their neighbours. And oftentimes after those kinds of
meetings, people would say, wow you're nothing like we thought you
were gonna be like. You're actually kinda funny and charming,
look, so I can win people over. And I, you know, I tried to do plenty of
that. But at the end of the day the question is,
what is more important, what was more important to me. Being liked and being popular or doing the
right thing for kids? And, I remember, I don't know if any of
you saw the movie Waiting for Superman. But there's a scene in that movie where
I'm in a, I'm in a community meeting where people
are, like, going nuts. And apparently I have this look on my
face, this sort of serene look. And so people ask me all the time, like,
what were you thinking? Because, you know, people are yelling at
you and calling you every name in the book and,
like, you look so calm. So I was trying to literally think back
to, like, what was my mindset? Right? And, at the end of the day, I actually
know what was going through my head. Which was, we are living in a city where 8% of the eighth graders are
operating on grade level in mathematics. 8%. 92% of our kids do not have the skills and knowledge necessary to be productive
members of society. And, we have to do something radical to
change that. You may not like it, you can scream at me
all you want. But I am not gonna let this continue on my
watch. So I'm good with, but, you know, be, if
you can go out there and, and, and win people over, absolutely you should
try. But if that becomes your goal. Right?
That becomes the outcome that you're seeking. That's what I think is problematic. >> So.
>> Yes? >> Thanks for coming to Stanford. The question I ask is, how do you take
your values and translate them into school financing? And I'm thinking about, you're in
Sacramento the state treasurer invests a ton of money through
banks, is there an opportunity for social impact bonds or some other
financing mechanism that would have a groomer rationality let's say then the
budgeting process in, in the capital. >> Cuz let's be clear the current
budgeting process is the least rational process around. So here's, here's, here's the, the bottom
line. Should we bring some, some reason and
ration to how we spend money in schools? Absolutely 100%. It is much more difficult than you think
it would be for a number of reasons. First, is, what is widely sort of known
and touted and talked about in this country. And in fact if you go to any school
district board meeting around this time, which is budgeting time. What you're gonna hear anywhere across the
country is what we need in order to fix the system is more money. But then actually the data doesn't bear
that out. Right?
The data shows that over the last two to three decades in this country, we have
more than doubled, and almost tripled the amount of money that we
are spending per kid in public education. That's controlling for inflation. And yet the results have remained pretty
much stagnant. We, we are spending more money per kid
than almost any other OECD nation out there. And yet, again, the results are not where
we would want them to be. I can tell you, from having led a school
system where we were spending more money per kid than any, almost any
other jurisdiction in the entire nation, that people still were saying, we need
more money, we need more money. And when I looked at the budget we were
spending, we had a one billion dollar budget when I
got to DC, and of that 403 million of it was going into
the classroom and the schools. That means the majority was being sucked
out by this bureaucratic bloated bureaucracy we had no
idea there's no accountability, etc. And so when you talk to people in
California today, you'll hear some similar things. Like if you go out, any, to any score any
superintendent, and ask them, how much money do we spend in
California per kid. You will get an answer of somewhere
between 5500 and $6500. That's what people will tell you. Actually that is not correct. In this state we are spending about $9500,
per kid per year on education. Those people actually are not wrong,
because there is a whole lot of money that they never see in the
schools cuz it gets lopped off the top and put towards our unfunded pension
liabilities et cetera. In fact, unfunded pension liabilities are
a huge problem across the country. There's just a, a piece of research that
showed that just funding unfunded pension liabilities in a place
like Pennsylv, in Philadelphia right now, is costing that district between 2 and
$3,000 per kid per year. We gotta fix that problem. Because until we fix that we can't say
there's not enough mon, it's just where the money is going. So what we believe in is advocating for transparency as it pertains to the, to the
dollars. Now this is an interesting one cuz I was
just in Ohio the other day and we were advocating for transparency of
dollars. And what we found was that there was a
school district in the state of Ohio, that was spending more money per kid on
their cheerleading program than on their literacy programs. I kid you not. And I thought, this is actually a good
data point. Because I can't tell you that in that
community those people wouldn't say, yes, cheerleading is so important. I grew up in Ohio, so I know, people like
their cheerleading. The community might have said, yes, we, we
value cheerleading more highly than literacy, in which case, then, okay, so be
it. But I would be that there would be a whole
lot of people who'd say, wait a second, this is crazy and we ought
to change that. But until you have the data to show where
the dollars are going and what kind of return on, on investment
you're getting for those dollars, they're, it's gonna be very difficult to
advocate for the changes that we need. And it's, and I think it's always gonna
devolve down into let's just you know, let's just ask for more money. I'm not against more money. Let me be clear. I'm just saying [LAUGH] that you, you have to use the dollars that you have
right now well, before in, increased dollars we're gonna
have a significant return on investment. >> Hi thanks so much for being here with
us [COUGH] I had a question on there there are many areas on ed reform many different
angles that you could you could attack the issue with and I'm wondering
where where are you seeing the most. Like where, where are you most excited
about it? Is it like federal, federal level, state
level, district level, or is it charters or other kind of groups like your
own that you're currently leading, thanks? >> So I would say this. One of the, the challenges that we face in
education reform, is that everybody is looking for the
silver bullet solution. Right.
So, I, on a monthly basis, I'll get calls from
governors across the country saying okay, Michelle, I'm gonna take education on. Tell me the one thing that I should do. >> And usually, I refuse to answer that
question. Because I say, there is no one thing that
you can do that is going to change education in your state. It is much too simplistic a, a mindset to
go in to this with. So, take Students First, for example, my,
my new organization. We focus on three areas. We don't think, think they're the only
three areas. They're just the ones that we focus on. It's principal and teacher equality. We focus on empowering parents with
information and choices. And we focus on fiscal accountability and
responsibility. Within those three areas, there are 37
different policies on our agenda. And our belief is that you have to have
all 37 in place, in order to create the kind of environment that's gonna be
ripe for real reform to take place. But what people wanna do is just choose
one. So somebody will say, well I'm gonna pass
the parent trigger. Or, I believe in vouchers. And then they believe that, you know, you
implement a voucher program and then all of a sudden, everything's gonna
change cuz the market is gonna rule. It just doesn't work that way. So, part of, I think, we have to focus on
is understanding that, how the, the, the system became the way
that it is was very sort of, a complex mix of issues all sort of coming
together. And how we're gonna solve this problem is
also a complex mix of lots of different things happening. It's not just about one issue or one
policy. Yes. >> Hi.
I'm Jenny. Thanks for being here. I appreciate your talking about leading
from the front and be willing to take risks to not always be
popular. Another part of leadership that I am
trying to think about is how do you make sure that you're as inclusive as you can
be and really build a cohesive movement. So I'm wondering if you could talk about
how you think about balancing those two thing, things. And whether there's maybe been a time in
your leadership where you've decided to slow down or back off from one of your goals in order
to bring more people along with you. >> Yeah. That's a great question. And, and something that to tell you the
truth. We weren't able to do particularly
effectively in D.C. so, but this is the lesson that I learned from
that. What, when I was in D.C. we were implementing all of these
incredibly aggressive reforms. We were out in the community a ton. I mean, I, every single night we held
chancellors policy forums. I had office hours, I was doing living
room visits. I did you know, teacher talks twice a
week. I mean, we were out there trying to engage
the community in what, in, in our reform efforts getting their
feedback, etc, etc. At the end of the day, it didn't work. We were not able to create an environment
where people felt that they were part of what we were creating. And so, it's interesting because people
say to me, well this is, that, that shows that you,
know, you can't bring people along. I'm like, no it doesn't. What it shows is that I wasn't successful
at it. But just because I couldn't do something,
I would never say that therefore, it can't be done, right? So what I would hope is that the next
superintendent who comes along, whether it's in D.C. or somewhere else,
would be able to look at what we did. The things that we did well and the things
that we didn't do particularly well. And then, learn from those things and build off of them to try to chart a new
course. Like that's what I think the most
important thing was. So striking that balance I do think is
important and it was unfortunately something that we were never able to like,
do exactly the way that we wanted to do. I think that had we been able to stay for
another term for four more years I do believe strongly that
that dynamic would have changed. Because for us, because what we were doing
was so dramatic and we were doing it in such
short order. We were getting that kind of immediate you
know, opposition and, and pushback that, that often you do when
you have significant change. What we weren't able to stay there for was
people realizing wait, okay, it's not so bad. Like yes we have a new teacher evaluation
system, but now I'm getting paid a whole lot more
money because I'm effective in the classroom, you know the sky didn't
fall, etc. So you know, but those things have to be
in place for some time before people can come around to
it. And I think that's just a virtue of you
know, also sort of leadership in knowing that,
that consistency is important too. And I think that one of the most fortunate
things about my experience in D.C. is that the woman who was deputy was able
to continue on and she is now the chancellor in DC. So there was a tremendous amount of
consistency within the policies that we were pushing. But the dynamics are different, and I think that she's, she's, she's doing a
great job of that now. [SOUND]
Yes? >> Hi, my name is Katie, I'm a first year
MBA. So I wanted to ask you about some of the
erasure scandals that have been happening nationally. Over the last few years as you know as
there's been increased accountability linked with high stakes
testing that's also been tied with teacher cheating administrative teaching in New
York, DC, Texas and across the country. I'm wondering as a leader how you kind of,
where within this cycle you see the real cause beyond simply blaming the
individuals involved. >> Yeah. So, I'd say this. That, I believe very strongly that the
vast majority of educators in this country would never, ever compromise
their personal or professional integrity, and cheat on a
test. Cuz they know that, that's cheating kids,
and they would never do that. Does that mean that there aren't a small
number of people out there who are gonna make the wrong
decision? No, you're always gonna have that
circumstance. And I think that because of that you need
to be very clear with folks about the fact that cheating is unacceptable, you have to have very strong test security
measures in place. And then when it does happen, and find that this happens, then you have to
have consequences for those folks. So, that's, that's generally what I feel. I think that the, where this debate is
going or where the conversation is going around the
cheating stuff is just weird to me. Because what you're hearing a lot is, well because there's cheating this shows
that we should not have high stakes test. Because when you put these high stakes,
you're making teachers cheat. That, that is so demeaning to the teachers
across this country that I know. You're, you're implying that because
you're putting, you know, because there's pressure that they're
gonna do the wrong thing. There's pressure every day in a teacher's
life. Forget, forget tests for a moment. Because, teachers know that the future of
their kids, their students rests in their hands. So, they feel that pressure every single
day. And they're not gonna make crazy decisions
in, you know, because, just because of, they, they feel that pressure. So I, I feel like that's, that's part of the problem that's going on
in the education debates these days, is it is becoming sort of these very
polarized extremes, that because you're seeing some of this happen that we
should get rid of standardized tests. No. You should put the right security measures
in place. so, that I, I feel that at the end of the
day, here's the thing. There are people out there who are sort of
very anti-testing right now, and I actually understand exactly where these
people are coming from. Because I can tell you as a parent, I have
two kids. And last year, when my younger daughter
was in fourth grade, she started coming home in late April and
I, I'd say, well, where's your homework? And she'd say, I don't have any homework
anymore. In fact, we're hardly going to school
anymore. We're only going on field trips cuz the
TCAP is over. That's the state test where we live. And, I, I thought, oh my gosh, this kid is
saying this to me, right? If I was just a normal parent, who didn't
know anything about education reform, I would hate that test. I would, and, and you didn't even have to
tell me anything about it, I'd be like why are we creating an
environment where we're communicating either directly or indirectly to kids that
after the test is over learning stops, cause that somehow all important. So I get the, the, the feelings of the
sort of anti testing because when you have experiences like that, that makes you
not wanna like the test. At the, on the other side of the equation
though, we have to have standardized consistent ways of measuring
whether or not children are learning. Whether that their learning, their able to
do you know, what, what they should do for that grade level. So should we have and, and standardized tests though they are not
perfect are one way to do that. So do we need them, yes. Should they be the end all be all, the thing that we all go to school around
every, absolutely not. So what we need is a balance in the
equation, just around with the cheating staff, etc. You need, you need balance, you need
reason, you need rationale, when you are talking
about the policies. Because where people are on the extremes,
it makes absolutely no sense. yes. >> Hi Michelle, I'm Amber. I'm a second year MBA. I'm a graduate of D.C. public schools and
a former TFA Corps member Houston 2008. I particularly like your idea of public
education as a great equalizer. One might argue, though, by virtue of us being here at Stanford,
that we are the winners in that equation. So, my question to you is, how do you get
people involved in the public education debate and, I guess, the
movement, particularly considering most people that leave here might not go in the
education sector. Or if we end up in banking, finance,
consulting, what, what might have you, it's easier to say that's a very difficult
problem to solve, I'm gonna put my kids into public, or
private school and forget the issue. >> Yeah. So that's a great question, and, and one
that, that vexes me every day. Because take, take, for example, business
folks. Right? The vast majority of business people that
I run into on a daily basis say to me, you know, Michelle, God bless you. You know, god speed, keep doing the work
that you're doing. I mean, it's just amazing. And I say, great, do you think you could
sit on my board? Or help me in the, oh, no. >> [LAUGH]. >> Right? so, and, and, and literally, if I had a
dollar for every person who told me this, like Students First would be set for a
long time. And it's, and it's frustrating, but at the
same time, it's understandable, right? If you have a CEO of a Fortune 500 company who takes a stand on education and then
the unions or whoever like, come after it, why are you supporting Students First, why
are you taking a stand on this issue? Let's boycott the company, their stock
price is going. Then they're not actually fulfilling their
fiduciary responsibilities to their organization. So, while they may think that education is
important, it's not worth it for them to take it on, cuz they have other
stuff to worry about day to day, right? So that, I think, makes a whole lot of
sense to me, and you can't begrudge people for that. But that said, I think that part of the, the, the dynamic that we need to create is
getting people, not just business people, parents who have their whether they have
their kids in public school or not to understand that this is an issue
that is going to impact all of us in the long run, right. Because how you get people involved in a
movement, typically, is if it impacts their day to
day life, right. I mean, people are busy every day. Come out to a meeting, come to the
Capitol, write a letter. Ugh, I have 52 million things to do, I, I
can't fit that in. Unless you say, your kid is not going to
be able to go to this school. Then I will clear my calendar to make
things happen. And part of what we haven't been able to
do for vast majority of Americans is show them how, whether getting involved in
public education and this fight or not is gonna impact their
livelihood, their day-to-day life, right? It seems too far removed right now, and that's what we've gotta kind of
connect to dots on. a, just a quick thing. This is, so for employers and business
people. 50% of of employers in a recent survey
said they could not find people in their applicant, in their
candidate pool, who had the skills and knowledge that they needed to fill
mission-critical jobs. In this economy, with this kind of an
unemployment rate, you have people who have jobs, and they're saying
they can't find people to fill them. That is crazy. That means we are not, we don't have an
education system that produces kids with the skills to fill the
jobs that are available. And this disconnect is only gonna widen as
time goes on. So if we are creating a world in this
country where you know, we might have the Facebooks and the Googles
and whatever, but all the coders and the engineers, half of them are being
employed by people in in India and China because that's, that's who has the
skills. That is a huge problem for our country at
large. And so connecting those dots is one of the
things that I think we have to do in order to crack this open and really get a broader swath of people
involved in this effort. >> [COUGH]
Oh. Oh, I'll go back first and then you after
that. >> Sorry.
Hi I'm my name is Alan Eindhoven and I'm a retired professor of public
management in this school. And my question is to ask for some clarification and your thoughts about
the unions. I read a lot about you know excessive
unfunded pension and liabilities, about inability to you know,
fire sexual predators and all kinds of awful stuff like that. On one hand, and then I have an argument
with my daughter who's been in the Department of Public Instruction in
North Carolina. And I say the unions is a big problem and she says well we don't have teacher's
unions in North Carolina. Yet we still has those problems. So, help us understand your thoughts on,
on that. >> Yeah well, I run into people every day
who say, the unions are the problems, if we just, if we didn't have the unions,
everything would be better. And the union is the root of all evil. I actually don't agree with that at all I
believe that unions are doing exactly what they are
supposed to be doing. Right, the job of the union, the purpose
of the union existing is to look out for the rights, privileges, and
pay of their members. And they are doing a bang-up job of that. >> [LAUGH] >> So you can't begrudge them the fact
that they're doing exactly what they were created to do. You can't hate on that. I don't actually think that unions doing
their job is the problem. I think the problem is that we have, to date, not had an organized national
interest group with the same heft as the teacher's union,
that's advocating on behalf of kids. Because if you had that, then you'd have
balance in the equation. Right? And, and, again, you'd have a powerful force that was out
there saying to politicians, if you're gonna vote for this, then, you
know, we'll support you, and if you don't, but in the absence of that counterforce,
you end up with a skewed landscape and a skewed environment towards the special
interest groups. And it's not just the teachers union, it's testing companies, it's textbook
manufacturers, you name it. There are a lot of adult interests out
there in education, who are just doing what they're supposed
to be doing. So, the, the, the environment becomes
skewed towards those special interests. When you don't have a, a balance in the
equation. So that is what I would say is the, is the
problem that we need to be solving for. Not how are we going to change the unions. So like I said, they're doing what they're
supposed to be doing. I will say this that, on some issues, I
don't think the union is, is serving their members particularly
well. And I'll take the pension issue as an
example. If we don't do something to solve the
pension problems, the systems are going to go bankrupt and
people who are relying on this in the long run are going to be screwed and
that is not good. If you actually look at polling of new
teachers. Right, so say your gonna create a new
pension system. And you grandfather everybody who has more
than five years of experience in, right? You can keep your current benefits as they
are. And you're just looking at people who have
not yet invested in the program. The vast majority of those people
actually, they don't, they're not interested, they, they would, they wouldn't, they don't prefer a defined
benefits program. They would prefer to have a portable, more
flexible pension system. so, if moving towards a more flexible
system, both solves the problem, and is what more
teachers prefer, new teachers prefer, then why wouldn't we
move towards that right? So the, that, that's the, the kind of
circumstances where I think that, that unions need to sort of be moving
along with us, because it's gonna better serve their members, and better serve sort
of the general school district operations. Because like I said, right now these pen-, unfunded pension liabilities, a huge
percentage of the dollars that are being used to try to fill these holes
are being taken out of the classroom. So that doesn't benefit their current
members. the, yes.
>> Hi, my name is Chen. So my expertise is in, isn't in education,
so please correct me if I'm wrong. But my understanding is that
socio-economic level and heritage educational level are probably
the biggest determinants of learning outcomes by a big margin, by a
really wide margin. So I was wondering, based on your
experiences, I wonder how much of our problems with the
education today are due to broken policy, and how much of it is because of, deeper,
more intractable social problems. >> Yep.
>> And I think, because of, kinda DC's unique situation in terms of
socioeconomic inequality, and also learning outcomes that you're, kind
of, uniquely positioned to speak to those. >> Yeah. So here's what I, I will say. When kids are living in abject poverty,
does it make it harder for them to come to school ready to learn
every day? Absolutely. Does it make it harder to teach them
effectively? Yes, unequivocally. Those are two realities. But, can we use poverty as an excuse for
why kids aren't performing at? No. I, I staunchly refuse to belive that
because if you look at the research, it is very clear. That of, of all of the in-school factors
that exist, the teacher quality is the factor that has the most impact on
student achievement levels. So if you look at a recent study that was
done by Raj Chetty from Harvard. It showed that if a kid has just one
highly effective teacher in their lifetime, in their 12-year
schooling experience. That it increases their lifetime earnings, their likelihood of graduating from high
school and going on to college, decreases the likelihood that they'll have
a teenage pregnancy. Just one, out of the 12 teachers that they
have, just one. Increases those things. We know, based on a research, that if you
have three highly effective teachers in a row, it can literally change a kid's
life trajectory. Four in a row and you could actually close
the achievement gap. So that's not saying that poverty doesn't
provide a a huge obstacle and barrier and challenge to our children
everyday. But what it does say is that there are
things that we can be doing within the schools everyday that can make
a significant difference in these kids' lives. And when I say these things often enough
people say well you're blaming the teachers. You're putting too much pressure. I am not blaming the teachers for
anything. These problems don't exist because
teachers are doing what they are. What I'm saying is, that if we look at the
situation that we're in now, and we look at the pot, potential solutions, I believe that teachers are the solution
to the problems that we face. If we know that three or four highly
effective teachers in the world can change a kids life trajectory, why shouldn't we? Be aspiring, as a nation, to make sure
that every single kid has a highly effective
teacher in front of them every single day. That's not anti-teacher, that's just,
that's just wanting to put every kid in a, in an environment where they are most
likely to be successful. And I, I, I think that, that being
controversial or whatever makes absolutely no sense to me. We have to know within every sector that
we're in but in particular in education, that what we
do matters. And I would say this, if you look any, at any place in history, over any time
period, any country or whatever. The most effective strategy that we know to break the cycle of inter-generational
poverty is not a social program. It's making sure that kids are getting the
education they deserve. >> Hi, Michelle. Thank you so much for joining us. So there's a two-part question. The first, the first part is and what lessons can the US learn from some of
the other education systems in the world? And the second question is on behalf of
the youth in the top team. And we like to close with the question
that we all get asked as we apply to the business school, which is what matters
most to you and why? >> That's a little heavy. >> [LAUGH]
>> So what lessons can we learn? I just finished reading a book that, it
hasn't come out yet, but it's gonna be out shortly,. That's called The Smartest Kids in the
World and How They Got That Way. And it's a book written by a, an American journalist who has been sort
of in the, she wrote a big piece about me when I was the chancellor, and
she got sort of inundated with all this, you know, well, why are you saying that
Michelle Rhee's doing x, y, or z? So she started hearing you know from
people who are saying, well we need to do what Finland is doing,
we need to do what South Korea is doing. And so she decided to go to Finland, South
Korea, and Poland to figure out what those systems
are doing. And I, the book is fascinating because it
actually tells us a lot about what we should and shouldn't be doing. We should not be trying to replicate a
situation like South Korea. Those people are crazy. Those are my people, so I can say this. [LAUGH] We're a little crazy. Koreans have no moderation. We're like, we're nuts, and, you know,
look, everything is focused on like nuts. Anyway, so we should not do that. But we also can't, can't continue to sort
of believe, you know what? If kids are poor, they face too many
challenges. There's nothing that we can do to overcome
the pa, you know, the challenges of poverty. And therefore we're gonna throw our hands
up. That's not the right answer either. Right? And so what I think she sort of called out
of the various countries that are doing quite well is that there is number one, a,
a very, very strong focus on teacher quality. And a lot of these countries do this on
the front end by not allowing any but the, buddy, but the highest achieving
people to actually become teachers and go into schools of education, right? And then holding them to a, to a high
standard throughout. So that's one piece. A, a ver, a, a curriculum that is very,
very sort of focused on having high standards for all
kids is another piece to it. And then having accountability on all
levels. So not just of teachers and of
administrators, but of students too. To say look, we're gonna hold you accountable if you're
not doing the right things. So I'd say those are some of the, the, the lessons that we've learned from,
from other countries. And again, if we, if we do things in
moderation, I think we can actually vastly improve
where we are as a nation. Your second question was what? >> What matters most to you, and why? >> What matters most to you and why. I would say that what matters most to me
is kids. I mean this is what, this is what makes me
get up in the morning. It makes me want to fight every day for
what is in their best interests, because so I, now that I run this
political advocacy organization, I have a lot more interaction with our
elected officials. Which is unfortunate in a lot of ways. [LAUGH] I was not too long ago talking to
one of them, who said you know Michelle I get it. You, you, your policies make, you know,
logical sense to me. And I'm not against them at all, he's like
but what you need to understand is, if I vote
for this bill in the way that you want. Me too.
You have to understand that I'm gonna go back home and then the, the
teachers or whoever are gonna be picketing in front of
my office and those are my constituents. And I have an obligation to serve them. And I said, you absolutely do. I said, but when you're talking about your
constituents, you need to think about all of your
constituents. And at the end of the day you also have an
obligation to serve the children of your district. And guess what? They don't vote, they don't contribute to
campaigns. And they don't organize rallies on your
office. So if you're just moving and turning
towards where the voices are loudest. Necessarily that means your gonna be
turning your backs to kids ,your back on kids. . And that is unacceptable. You have to be able to do this and this is
what I I believe I believe so strongly in what children are capable of
doing. I did it when I, throughout my entire term
as a chancellor in DC, I never made a substantial decision without talking to
kids and engaging them in the policies. Because despite what all the adults were
always saying and the arguments that we were having, the
kids were the ones who had the most insightful, rational, reasonable
conversations and debates. I kid you not, because they're always like
yeah, but, and then they're like, you know, go back
and forth but show them, like, you're right,
we're all right, but this is what. So they could actually do this in a way
that, that adults couldn't. The problem is we don't listen to them
enough in my opinion. And in the other thing that I believe very
strongly is there is nothing that is more worth
fighting for than the future of a young person so kids
without a doubt most importantly. Thank you. [NOISE]
