Subject teachers to mandates

Exactly how teachers will demonstrate this level of expertise remains to be seen. Some states, according to an Associated Press report, will institute stronger job evaluations. Others will require teachers to serve on curriculum committees or to publish articles in their field of expertise. Still others will institute mandatory testing programs.

You can bet that the majority of these proposals – particularly the mandated testing – will be met with stringent opposition from powerful teachers’ unions.

But we hope that those unions will set aside their partisan concerns, and for the sake of our children, make every effort not only to comply with federal mandates but also to embrace them.

In Rhode Island, opposition on the part of public school teachers is likely to ring hollow with the public at large.

Why?

Because the investment that taxpayers are making toward public education is showing a decidedly poor return. Public schools throughout our state – with a few exceptions – have not fared well when it comes to national testing.

Take for example a recent report by The College Board, the national organization that administers Scholastic Aptitude Tests (SATs).

While SAT scores have climbed significantly in Massachusetts and Connecticut (by 10 and 8 points respectively) over the past year, Rhode Island scores have declined by a point.

Out of the six New England states, Rhode Island’s overall SAT marks rank it a less-than-impressive fifth. Perhaps even more alarming is the fact that SAT scores are rising in most areas of the country.

Rhode Island educators are always quick to go on the defensive – in defense of the poor grades. They will point to the fact that Rhode Island demographically is more urban than its neighbors, smaller in size and traditionally has a high percentage of students taking the SATs. All of these factors, it is suggested, contribute to the lower scores.

But these are excuses and to accept them is to do our children a disservice. If our educators have to work that much harder to give our students the same opportunities as their counterparts in other states, then they have to work harder. Neither the size of the state, nor its urban makeup, is going to change.

These federal mandates should be seen as a good thing for our education system – an opportunity to raise the expectations of the level of public education we deliver to our children. And the encouraging news is that they appear to work. We don’t have to look far for evidence.

For example, consider the Bay State. An aggressive teacher-testing program is in place, along with the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) that requires students to meet minimum standards before being promoted. There, the combined math and verbal SAT scores are up by 22 points over last year. Is this a coincidence? We doubt it.

We are not advocating teacher testing as a sure-fire remedy for our below-par SAT performance. But some reasonable testing program would represent a good start; so would the enactment of other proposed mandates, like requiring that teachers take part in curriculum committees.

The mandated testing of students – a system like the MCAS – should also be considered. If it is working in Massachusetts and producing higher SAT scores, why can’t it work here?

Regardless of how it gets done, our public school teachers will need to meet federal mandates sooner, rather than later.