Ruben created all the animosity when he agreed to write his “TDR reports are useful” jive in the Post. Ruben says these reports are helpful and can make teachers better by pointing out short comings. Except that the TDRs have a 35% margin of error if two years of test score data is used, a 25% margin of error if 5 years of test score data is and a 12% margin of error if 10 years of test score data is used.
Unlike Ruben, I am less enamored of allowing myself to be publicly evaluated with a rating system that veers between a 12% and a 35% margin of error.
As I have said before, you can be sure Bloomberg wouldn’t trust a company that has a 12%-35% margin of error in its financial reportings. Obama wouldn’t trust a political poll with a 12% MOE (let alone 35%!). So why should the public be given teacher ratings with these kinds of margins of errors? Why should teachers be subject to public slandering with false, inaccurate data?
The powers that be don’t say. Neither do collaborators like Ruben Brosbe.
Dunno if Ruben is just a naive young man or if he is looking to cash in on some of that hedge fund and bankster largesse his E4E colleagues have cashed in on (must be nice to retire after two years teaching with a Whitney Tilson-paid consulting gig!).
Either way, as a ten year vet who wants to continue his career in teaching, I will stand up against people like Ruben Brosbe who actively look to destroy the teaching profession by giving a veneer of legitimacy to a teacher ranking system that is error-ridden jive.
There - got that down.
What is it with Gotham Schools and scrubbing?
They must not like me.
I guess if I was more like Ruben Brosbe, I could get published at GS and not have my comments scrubbed.
Heck, if I was more like Ruben, maybe I could get in on some of the hedge fundie and bankster ed deform largesse too.
Come to think of it, why don't we ALL sell out like Ruben and his Asshat4Educator pals and rake in the dough?
Oh, right - I like to sleep at night knowing I'm not evil.
Maybe you feel the same way.