When the school decentralization law was passed, all the parties made many compromises. As a result, Republicans and Democrats, school supervisors, the majority of black and Puerto Rican legislators and the UFT supported the bill. Now, less than a year after its passage, there is a concerted effort to reopen one of the basic compromises in the law: the question of whether the Board of Examiners shall continue to license professional personnel on the basis of civil service-type examinations.
While we agree there is a need for a greater racial balance on our school staff, we do not agree with the frequently-heard criticism that, since over 55% of the students in the schools are black and Puerto Rican and only I 0% of the professional staff comes from these minority groups, the present selection system is discriminatory. This argument is so obviously false that it is surprising to find it repeated so often by people in high places. Teachers are not recruited from student ranks but from the adult population, of which only 20% are minority groups. Furthermore, teachers are selected not from the entire adult population, but from those who have graduated from college. It may very well be that the black and Puerto Rican percentages employed by the Board of Education are considerably higher than the percentage of minority group college graduates in New York City. This would show that the civil service system now provides an avenue of non-discriminatory, social mobility for present minority groups, as it has in the past-and should be retained. The discrepancy between the ethnic balance of the student population and that of the professional staff is nothing new in New York. The children of each new generation of immigrants to our city are educated by a previous generation of immigrants.
Another argument voiced frequently is that written and objective examinations cannot predict that a given applicant will be a good teacher. Since teaching involves a complex combination of performance skills, this point is technically correct, but the test can predict which applicants will not be good teachers by reason of inadequate competence in their fields. Knowledge of mathematics does not guarantee that a given individual will be a good math teacher, but ignorance of mathematics (which can be determined by testing) guarantees failure. Prospective teachers should continue to be tested in those areas where tests are appropriate.
The State Certification System is Inadequate
The most widely favored alternative to testing by the Board of Examiners is to accept all teachers who have New York State Certification. Unfortunately, however, our state certification system is inadequate. Teachers are certified by the State Education Department whenever the college the student attended states that the student has completed a course of study which substantially meets the state requirements. The weaknesses of this procedure are clear. Colleges have an interest in securing positions for their own. Also, we know that of all colleges, teacher training institutions are the weakest in adherence to standards. Other professional schools maintain higher standards. If New York State requires doctors, lawyers and dentists to pass examinations in addition to graduating from their colleges, the same requirement should be applicable to teachers whose college programs are (unfortunately) considerably less rigorous. One of the most serious problems our schools face, after all, is the inadequate preparation with which new teachers come to the classroom despite their years in teacher training institutions. Those who have followed the newspaper accounts of student unrest at universities must also conclude that in some case college graduation these days is the result of a negotiated settlement rather than proof of academic attainment.
I am not, in saying this, defending in every detail the past practices and procedures of the Board of Examiners. Many of the criticisms of the Board of Examiners are well taken and should impel this body to devise better tests. The shortcomings of the Examiners and their tests notwithstanding, it is important to recognize the harsh fact that, at the present time, the only alternative is selection of professional personnel by threat and confrontation. Dr. Scribner's appointment of an acting principal to Benjamin Franklin High School was not because of higher qualifications but because the appointment would remove the threats of school disorder, disruption and violence.
The examination system should be retained. Employment in our schools must be based on tested competence and on freedom from discrimination. Open enrollment in our City University will provide an ever-growing number of minority applicants. The career ladder educational program for paraprofessionals will provide an additional source, as will the joint UFT-Board of Education national recruitment program, which will bring many new teachers to New York from southern universities and the University of Puerto Rico. The civil service system must not be destroyed; it must be made a vehicle of upward mobility as effective for our new minorities as it was for those before.
A state which requires written examinations of hairdressers, lawyers, real estate salesmen, insurance agents, policemen, doctors, clerks and automobile drivers can do away with examinations for teachers only on grounds of crass political expediency.
If we are truly interested in teacher quality, we must see to it that standards are maintained through a fair and objective examination system-and we must provide new teachers with a meaningful on-the- job internship during their probationary period.