Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Why don't you folks respond to my premise. I think the selection was cronyism. Even cronies can do good things in the jobs they get, but sometimes you want the best. I would certainly pick BFF for somethings just becasue he/she is my BFF, but when results are most important, I go based on someone who can get the job done and has a proven track record. I would not want a trainee doing surgery on me, do you?
|
Your premise was that the nominee was unqualified because he failed to improve Chicago's public schools. You had absolutely no real reason to think that he had failed to improve Chicago's public schools because you could produce absolutely no real data even comparing meaningful changes in school quality during his watch. All you could do was repeatedly assert that you wouldn't send your kids to a Chicago public school.
We all get your premise, and have been waiting and waiting for you to provide some sort of objective basis for it. Instead you just offer up tangential information about standard deviations and means, as if those things actually conclusively measure the quality of the person running the show.
Even if schools had improved dramatically on his watch, that wouldn't be conclusive proof that he was a
good leader. School systems are complex beasts.