Michelle Rhee, former chancellor of D.C.'s public schools, told an audience at the Manhattan Institute on Wednesday that ?her appointment?[as D.C. schools chancellor]?three years ago was met with nearly identical opposition to that being faced by incoming New York City Schools Chancellor Cathie Black,? reports the New York Post. ?People were [effectively] rioting in the street, saying, ?How can somebody who's never run a school, who's never run a school district, do this job?,'? Rhee said. ?And I think what I showed is that you don't necessarily have to have been a superintendent before.? Hmm. Maybe that's what she showed. But maybe not. Because?whatever one thinks of the work she did in D.C., Michelle Rhee was essentially fired by the city's voters. So perhaps she isn't the best example of?non-principals and non-superintendents being qualified to run major metropolitan school districts.
Rhee deserves much praise. But she is, frankly, something of a zealot: She may occasionally express regret that she didn't do more to assuage the concerns of Washington's parents, or that she didn't bother to massage the city's political egos (instead, she pinched them), but the truth is that she doesn't regret these things at all. Michelle Rhee believes that she is completely right and that her opponents are completely wrong. She possesses the unshakable conviction that we are in a ?crisis,? and that because the situation is so dire, so urgent, so critical the usual checks and balances can and should be discarded. Such?thoughts are worrisome when held by?any leader in any field. Again, there is much to admire about Rhee, but not this.
?Liam Julian, Bernard Lee Schwartz Policy Fellow