For the sake of discussion, let's give APS Supt Winston Brooks the 70.1% graduation rate he claims. Forget about whether charter students should be included, or whether the semiannual recalculation of norms, which co-incidentally makes historical trends harder to quantify, signals something.
Did the graduation rate increase because of Winston Brooks or
in spite of Winston Brooks? It is scientifically nonsensical to suppose that because two thing exist simultaneously, one caused the other.
There are a number of people who will tell you that APS' success is because of Winston Brooks. Nearly to a man, they have a conflict of interest in coming to that conclusion. Board Members for example, have an interest in the success of the man they selected and continue to support.
His subordinate administrators are conflicted in their evaluation by the administrative "culture of fear of retribution and retaliation" found recently, by auditors from the Council of the Great City Schools.
No objective data has been offered, in support of the hypothesis that Winston Brooks is positive influence on the APS.
Why haven't we heard it from anybody other than another one of the good ol' boys?
No comments:
Post a Comment