tavis: good evening. tonight, a conversation with michelle rhee, a former chancellor of the d.c. public school sister. she is the ceo of students first, a nonprofit to address concerns of u.s. schools servants -- u.s. schoolchildren. many of her ideas were at the center of the documentary "waiting for superman." we are glad you could join us. >> all i know is his name is james, and he needs extra help with his reading. >> i am james. >> yes. >> to everyone making a difference -- >> thank you. >> you help us all live better. >> nationwide insurance supports tavis smiley.

with every question and every answer, nationwide insurance is proud to join tavis in working to improve financial literacy and remove obstacles to economic empowerment, one conversation at a time. >> nationwide is on your side >> and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. [captioning made possible by kcet public television] captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- tavis: michelle rhee served as chancellor of the d.c. public school system from 2007 through 2010. she is now founder and ceo of students first. she joins us from washington. thank you for your time. >> thanks for having me. tavis: let me start first with

the news of the week, the story everybody saw on the front page yesterday of "usa today" that talked about whether test scores actually stored in the sea under your leadership. the raised a question as to whether or not those test score gains were in effect real. put another way, unusually high erasures, we are told, were taking place in the district. so maybe these test-score gains were not so real. would you mind commenting on that first? >> we put in place, when i was in the district of columbia, very strict testing security protocols. part of what we ensured was when we got data back about erasure rates, irregularities, that we hired investigation companies to come in so the district would not have to be involved in that.

the third party did come in. when you look at the article, the vast majority is about one school in particular that the test investigation company came back and said, "we did the investigation and there is no need for further inquiries." i think we followed all the right protocols. we brought an external expert in to do the investigation. what i think is the really unfortunate piece is that oftentimes when the academic achievement rates of a district like d.c. go up, people assume it cannot be because the kids are actually attaining higher student achievement, but because of something like cheating, which in this case was not the case. tavis: are you suggesting this story is lacking in integrity in "usa today"? >> absolutely. if you look at the story

overall, i think it absolutely lacks credibility. again, focused on for the most part one school. and all of the schools we were asked to investigate, we brought a third party investigator in. this is unusual. most districts just take the investigation on. the district does it themselves. we took the extra precaution of bringing a third party in to do it, because we wanted to meet a higher bar. what that investigation company found, we actually followed all the protocols, did everything they asked. it was piloting a school which in particular has become -- the investigation company came back and said they found nothing in their investigation. tavis: obviously, no righteous chancellor would condone any school cheating. nobody condones these erasures. let me just ask what kind of pressure the school

administrators and teachers and principals -- what kind of pressure are the under, given we rely so heavily on these test scores to meet the number? there must be extreme pressure for people to feel they have to cheat. for what purpose? >> i certainly do think there is pressure on our school administrators and our teachers to ensure there are high levels of student achievement growth going on. we want educators to feel that pressure, right? when i was a chancellor, i felt that every day, knowing the education of 45,000 kids depended on how well i ran the school district. but i do not think the pressure is so intense you are talking about professionals who for the most part have a tremendous amount of integrity -- that you would begin to question that they would take this in genuine -- would take disingenuine

actions because it up pressure. if we found any improprieties in the testing, that cheating were going on, we would be swift with the consequences. i think they felt pressure not to cheat. tavis: i was on a plane flying to washington and happened to be on the same flight as former mayor adrian fanti -- fenty. it reminded me that when he first asked you to take on this assignment you told him then that you were going to be a political liability. did you think you were going to be the kind of liability politically that you turned out to be? >> yes. that is exactly what i told him that. i said, "you do not want me for this job. for the kinds of things that we would have to do to turn this district around, it will cause a tremendous political opposition and headaches."

he said that as long as we knew that what we were doing was going to increase the quality of schooling kids were getting, he had no problem taking the heat on all those things. i did know that the changes that we made when absolutely cause a lot of room for. there is no way that you can take a dysfunctional system like the one we had in washington, d.c. -- when we inherited the school district, 8% of eighth graders were on grade level in mathematics. you do not take a system that is that broken and radically change it quickly and not have a lot of push back. tavis: i was about to ask a question and preface it with what i heard. i don't want to do that. as you look back on your time as chancellor, what mistakes do you call up to? >> i am far from perfect.

i made mistakes all the time. there are certainly some things that we wished we would have had more time to try to crack open. for example, one thing we were not as good at was communicating directly with teachers. we wanted to ensure that teachers were held accountable for the jobs there were doing every day. we wanted to ensure that the most highly effective teachers were recognized and rewarded and valued, but also that teachers who were not effective or either quickly being professionally developed or were finding another profession to move into. as we were going through that process, we heard a lot in the media at that we were trying to move current teachers out and that sort of things. we did not do a good enough job of saying to the vast majority of our teachers who were working very hard, "you are the kind of

professional we want to keep in our schools because of the great things you are doing for kids." we could have done a better job of communicating with our effective teachers. that is one example of mistakes we made around the way. tavis: you do not have regrets about the programs and policies to instituted? >> in terms of the actual policies, we feel very confident that the policies we pursued were ones that were going to result in higher gains in student achievement, or even if they had not been proven to do so yet we thought had very high potential. for example, one of the things we did in partnership with a professor from harvard university is we put in place a program that rewards students for doing well in school. middle school students, we actually paid them for having higher attendance, better behavior, and better academic

results. that was not something that had been widely done anywhere across the country. we did not know for certain whether it was going to work. we did know that what we had done in the past as a district had not worked and had resulted in very low achievement rates. we knew that although we might not have any silver bullets we needed to think outside the box and try new and innovative solutions. work: i know roland frye's very well at harvard. do you think that is something we ought to try at this -- try in this country, compensating students for their work? >> i definitely think it is something we have to think about as a nation. when we started this initiative in d.c., one of the things we heard from people, and i got a lot of e-mails and letters from people. i remember one person saying it

is a sad day when you have to pay children to do what they are supposed to be doing anyway. i said yesterday was a bad day, when we had 8% of our grade levels -- of our eighth graders on level in mathematics and were not trying to think about different solutions to try to overcome those significantly poorer results. the bottom line is if you look out in the suburbs, in fairfax county, in montgomery county, our neighbors in d.c., kids get rewards and incentives all the time. you bring home a great report card and get a shiny red convertible on your 15th birthday. you get taken out to dinner. we really felt like the situation that many of our children faced is that they had all of the incentives to do the wrong things out on the streets. what we wanted to do was counterbalance that with incentives to do the right thing in school. tavis: you have talked about

compensating students as a way to radically alter education. let me ask you about compensation for teachers. on "60 minutes," there was a report about paying teachers. if you pay them well, teachers are more interested in coming into certain environments and wrestling with the kind of students you were trying to help in washington. that is a long way of asking what you think about the fact that part of this problem has to do with a lack of respect where the money is concerned for teachers. >> i think the bottom line is that most teachers do not come into the profession because of compensation. they do not do this for the money, obviously. that is not what drives the vast majority of effective educators. that said, it is important to build a culture amongst the teaching profession where we are recognizing and rewarding the coming in to

school every day with our most challenged population and knocking it out of the park. they deserve to feel valued as a part of our school districts, as a part of our community, as a part of our country. i do not think compensation is the only way we can do that, but it certainly can help. tavis: i want to talk about students first. what are you doing with your organization? i read your goal for this year, part of your goals for this year, are to have a million members and to raise $1 billion. you are a bad sister if you can raise a billion dollars in one year. if you kim, i want to figure out how you did it. >> you do not want to hang out with me now before i raise the millions? tavis: i would love to hang out with you, but we could use some of that money at p.b.s..

a million members. a billion dollars. i want to ask whether that suggests the real crisis for education is money. you have heard the argument that what is wrong in the education system is not going to be fixed by pouring more money at it, but you are trying to raise a billion dollars in the first year of your work for what purpose? >> i actually agree with the people who say money is not going to solve all the problems in public education. if you look at the data over the last three decades, we have more than doubled the amount of money we are spending in public education on schooling for our kids, and the results have at best stayed the same, and in some cases have gotten worse. some money is not the solution to the problem. if you look at washington, d.c., we were spending more money per pupil than almost any urban jurisdiction in the country, and our results were at the bottom. what we are talking about as an

advocacy organization is using money in a different way, not just funneling it into the school systems. if you look at the education agenda over the last three decades in this country, it has largely been driven by special interest groups. you have textbook manufacturers, teachers' unions, testing companies. these are powerful groups that have a tremendous amount of influence. so the problem is that when you in education have all these interest groups out there, but there is no national, organized interest groups with the same half as the teachers' union, advocating on behalf of kids, you end up with laws, policies, and regulations that are skewed towards, for example, the teachers' unions, because they have millions of dollars and millions of people. the use those effectively on the political front.

when you look at the two national teachers' unions, they have a budget of over $2 billion a year and spend $500 million of that on political activities. we are trying to raise a billion dollars, which would mean $200 million a year over the next five years. that is just a portion of what we know teachers' unions are spending on these issues. >> where is this money going to come from? when you point out the other budgets, i am a rocket scientist. but something tells me that if i were to look at your books for where this money came, there is corn to be some anti-union money coming in your direction. is that a fight you are trying to set up? >> a large percentage of our members are teachers. we are a membership organization. people pay membership dues. they contribute to the

organization. that is where the vast amount of our dollar so far have come from. our average contribution is $64. teachers are a lot of the voice that we want to bring to the forefront, effective teachers in school buildings every day. they know that although they are working hard that there are policies and rules that need to be changed. they know that things are not working well for kids right now in the vast majority of urban schools across the country. they want to be a part of an effort to make these changes. that is why i think so many teachers signed up to be a part of students' first. tavis: given that this debate is underway about no child left behind this fall, any thoughts about that law that is the law of the land at the moment? >> i think no child left behind was an incredibly important law for this country. what it did was bring accountability to our system, to

say no longer can you have failing schools that are not succeeding in insuring that our kids are getting an excellent education, with absolutely no ramifications. now we are going to have some accountability to that system. furthermore, we are going to look at sub group data. you have to ensure that for english-language learners, african american students, low socio-economic students, that every group of children are increasing their learning every year and their academic standing. i think those are important things. as we go into reauthorization conversations, it is going to be important that people do not just scratched this and start over. i think there are things that need to be tweaked and changed. but overall the accountability system is an important one. i hope we are looking at modifying the existing law as opposed to scratching it and

starting over again. tavis: since you are so prominently featured in "waiting for superman," there are two issues i raised in the studio with davis guggenheim when the documentary came out. i want to reprise with you to get your thoughts. your thoughts about race to the top, the obama program. we had a debate that night with jeffrey and davis. it was about whether or not education in this country ought to be a race or is a right. your thoughts about the obama answer to the problem. the president gave a big speech yesterday about education. what about the administration answer to the problem, race to the top? >> you are absolutely right that education is a right, a high-

quality education. it has to be the right of every child in this country. it should not be a question as to whether some kids get it and some kids don't. i do think what the obama administration is trying to do was the right idea, meaning instead of continuing to funnel out federal dollars without a lot of accountability, which obviously has proven not to be particularly effective, to say we are going to use the carrot approach. we are going to put dollars up there to say if states can change their regulations, their laws, their policies, to ensure we can have more competition, to ensure we are rewarding high- performing teachers and closing down low-performing schools -- we are going to in sent -- incent you to do that. i do not think anybody can quarrel with the fact that we saw more legislative movement on

education reform because of race to the top than we had for the two decades before then. tavis: i raised this issue because it concerns me. the government can mandate through this program that kids have to be tested. all across the country, 50 states, we have people anxious and energized about testing these kids. if they do not meet the test, they get held back. that seems to be the answer on the back end. on the front end, where the problems exist, these kids are not given the same resources. they do not all start at the same place. yet they are all expected to end up passing these tests when the game ends. i do not need to make a political, although with students first you are going to be political going forward. i am not the first person to raise this issue. this country, for all the things we guarantee americans -- we do

not guarantee every child in this country, by the constitution, a right to an equal high-quality education. whether you are or changing the constitution or not, i will set that aside. the question is, if they have to be tested at the end, how do we mandate that all have the same resources at the beginning? how does that happen? >> you are right. if you want to start that amendment, i will be your first backer. i think that what is happening to a huge number of children in this country, and in particular poor minority children in urban centers, is a crime. they are not getting the education they deserve. you see parents across the country who are incredibly frustrated because of what they are seeing happen in the school district. you see teachers themselves who are incredibly frustrated with the system itself. should that be the right of every child in our nation?

100%. part of the problem in talking about the resources is you look at places like washington, d.c., or newark, new jersey. they are spending $20,000 per child. that is a lot of money. the problem with those places is not are the resources there. it is a question of how the resources are being spent. that, i think, is what we need accountability around, making sure taxpayer dollars are being spent on the things that are going to matter the most for kids. tavis: i want to close by asking after you -- after what you have already been through, why do you remain hopeful about the idea that we can't ever get our arms around this crisis? >> i believe in the children of this country. you cannot walk into any school anywhere in washington, d.c. and

talk to any kid for more than 10 minutes and not believe that child has the ability to succeed at the same high levels that any kid anywhere else does, as long as we are creating the right system and have high expectations, and put the dollars in the classroom with the child. i have absolutely no doubt in the children of our country. i have the utmost confidence in their abilities. that is one of the things that drives me. i believe in america. the bottom line is americans are competitive by nature. we want to beat the pants off of china. i have to believe that at some point, if we continue to talk about education and continue to bring these issues to light, the american public is going to wake up and say we want to be number one in the world. we want to have the best education system for our kids.

this is the ideal this country was founded on, the idea that every kid, regardless of their race, socioeconomic status, and zip code can live the american dream if they work hard and do the right thing. that is not the reality we have today, but i believe it is possible because i believe it is who we are as americans. tavis: i appreciate your time tonight. >> for more information on today's show, visit tavis smiley at pbs.org tavis: join me next time for more on the debate over u.s. intervention in libya. that is next time. we will see you then. >> all i know is his name is james, and he needs extra help

with his reading. >> i am james. >> yes. >> to everyone making a difference -- >> thank you. >> you help us all live better. >> nationwide insurance supports tavis smiley. with every question and every answer, nationwide insurance is proud to join tavis in working to improve financial literacy and remove obstacles to economic empowerment, one conversation at a time. nationwide is on your side. >> and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> be more. >> be more.

isn't that great? where did you get it from? i got it from a charity shop just down the road. very period, isn't it? i would think that's, what? mid 1950s, something like that? it's got the maker's name there, "thorens," who were quite a well-known maker at the time. "riviera" is the style. and you press, presumably, the red button, is it? - yeah. - and there we are. and it goes in the black button to stop. and it's nice that it's got its original case, and it just winds up from the back. how much did you pay for it? i think i paid a pound for it. - well, you can't lose at that price, can you? - no no. i would think in a shop specializing in items of this period, from the, you know, 50s, 60s, you might well pay £40 or 50 for it. - 'kay. - now you gonna show us how it works? okay, um... ( winding )

what is it? is it a mascot or what? no, no, no, it, um-- i didn't even know i was going to have to sound this horn at all. i was with the army commandos. we came in on the beaches near to edstrom. and there was a bit of thing went on about whether or not the radio sets we had would work well in a built-up area. they were perfectly all right for open country. and, so, i understand that the french commander, um, commandant philip kieffer, uh, produced the horn and-- and said "well, find someone to sound this." and the adjutant came, pointed at me and said "if you can sound a hunting horn, you can sound this." and when i tried it, i found that it was a little different from a straightforward english hunting horn. we thought it gave us a little more puff with this. um, and when we finally came

and bashed our way through and came to the-- the german gun battery and were ready to go, uh, i found the radios were working quite well. so, i thought, well, i won't have to sound it. - and what happened? - well... my commanding officer, colonel dawson, he said "okay, sound the bloody thing just for the hell of it." - ( laughing ) - and-- and so i sounded the tally-ho... twice, just for the hell of it. well, just for the hell of it, could i ask you to give us a blast now? well, i can't reach the high notes, i don't think i can make the tally-ho. but, um, i'll have a go. ( horn sounding )