NJ: In December, you said you were worried that Democrats wouldn't be tough enough on education reform. In light of Obama's agenda and his selection of Arne Duncan as his Education secretary, what's your perspective now?

Rhee: I'm feeling very confident and hopeful right now for a number of reasons. One, the president himself has been extraordinarily strong on this front. He has been very clear in all of his messaging and all of his speeches -- the fact that he's going to push a lot of important reforms, that he supports charter schools, that he is in favor of accountability and performance pay for teachers and school staff. So I think we're off to a great start. I think that Obama has been stronger than any other Democrat, and any, really, other president that I've seen on these issues, and he talks about them pretty consistently.

His pick of Secretary Duncan was very significant. I think that to have someone who used to run a large urban district, who has been part of the reform movement in very clear ways, and who is committed to ensuring that we have both the resources and the support necessary to do our jobs, is huge. The push that the secretary has right now towards national standards and national assessment is absolutely the right one.

NJ: Is the landscape ripe for the administration to put forward more rigorous national standards that it would encourage -- or require -- states to adopt?

Rhee: That's all a strategic question in terms of how the administration wants to move forward with it. Clearly, they will have an easier time if they go the route of making a compelling case for them and having people opt into them. I could also potentially see them saying, in a certain amount of time in the future that they would expect all states to adopt the common set of standards as well -- to give some sort of run-up time to that. I don't know at all right now what their strategy is.

From our perspective, we can say that we probably have the most streamlined and efficient system around in order for the District of Columbia public schools to adopt a new set of standards based on what the mayor's decision would be.... We could potentially adopt and start implementing a set of national standards probably before anybody else could be most of the way through their conversation about it. We're hoping that we can really be at the forefront of this with the secretary.

NJ: Do you think the Race to the Top Fund -- stimulus money that states and school districts can compete for by pushing innovative changes -- is an effective way to encourage reform?

Rhee: I think it's one way. I don't think that the administration at all believes that this is the end-all, be-all, this is the only way. But it certainly is something, particularly in this economic climate, that is going to be particularly helpful. Oftentimes -- and when you talk to school districts, you ask about why they're not being more aggressive on reforms -- money and financing is always a clear obstacle. And I think by putting this incentive out there and by making very clear what their hope and priority is, that it will definitely spark a lot of action, both at the local and the state level.

NJ: Duncan recently said that mayors should have more control over large urban school districts, lessening the power school boards currently have. I know this is a model Mayor Adrian Fenty adopted upon hiring you. Does this model translate to other cities, and why would they want to pursue it?

Rhee: If you look at some of the cities across the country that have seen the largest gains in education reform over the last few years, certainly the cities that have been under mayoral control have been up there. New York has seen great gains. Duncan was able to do a tremendous amount in Chicago, and Boston also. I think it's very promising -- the secretary was very clear in the meeting last week with the U.S. Conference of Mayors that he would not have been able to do what he did in Chicago were it not for Mayor [Richard] Daley. I've consistently said the same thing about Mayor Fenty here. His point was we have to take the day-to-day politics and the diffuse accountability out and we have to move toward models where there is one clear point of accountability where the reform efforts and strategies can really be implemented quickly and without having to go through a lot of bureaucracy. And that's the way he and Daley operated.

NJ: The omnibus spending bill Obama signed included a provision allowing the funding for the District's school voucher program to expire at the end of the 2010 school year unless Congress and the D.C. Council reauthorize it. Why is it important to continue this program?

Rhee: I think that the secretary and the administration have been clear that they would support the kids who currently have the vouchers continuing to get those. So I think that it will continue on. I know that there's a lot of contention right now about this issue. From our vantage point, I think that we're on the same page as the administration in believing that vouchers are not the answer. When you look at a system where the kids are only receiving $7,500 -- which is not enough money to pay for the full tuition in most of the private schools in the area -- and also having that voucher doesn't guarantee you admission into those schools. Also, they only serve about 1,700 kids right now. So that reform is not going to be the impetus or the wedge that is going to really turn this district around or change that. That said, the mayor and I both think that the tri-sector approach [public schools, charter schools and vouchers] in the city has worked well, that we give parents a really healthy set of options and we think it’s important to continue on.

NJ: Would you support the administration if it cut off the students who are currently in the program?

Rhee: We support the administration because, overall, their policies having to do with education and supporting public school districts has been strong, and we're absolutely in favor of these reforms that they're talking about -- again, having to do with national standards and pay-for-performance and charter schools, etc. And, again, I think that we are very much on the same page with the administration in believing that choice is important. The secretary said that he didn't want to disrupt the learning of the kids who are currently enrolled in the program, so I don't see that there's any difference in opinion on that.

NJ: Do you think it would be appropriate to get funds for the program from somewhere other than the federal government?

Rhee: Potentially, this is something that could be externally funded. I know that there are a lot of foundations and individuals across the country who really believe in this program, and certainly that would be an option for those folks to really support this if they choose to do that.

NJ: In March, Duncan was quoted by the Washington Post as saying that "D.C. has had more money than God for a long time, but the outcomes are still disastrous." How do you reconcile the notion that money doesn't necessarily fix schools with the administration's plans for nationwide reform, which depend largely on stimulus money?

Rhee: The secretary was absolutely right in the spirit of what he said, which was that D.C. is a perfect example of a place where we've shown that more money doesn't necessarily mean better outcomes.... I think that how you weigh that against the stimulus money is the fact that the money that is being put towards public education within the stimulus and the Race to the Top Fund is coming with very clear guidelines about how the money should be spent and on what kind of reforms. And there will be strict accountability around those dollars, and I think that makes a very big difference.

Copyright ©2009 by National Journal Group Inc. The Watergate 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 • fax 202-833-8069 NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.