Learning the lesson

As the bad news in education piles up, there are the signs -- finally -- that the public is ready to revolt

It was a sickening piece of news. This was the first year that Massachusetts required that prospective teachers take a test of basic skills -- of literacy and rudimentary knowledge in a subject area. Forty-four percent failed and, had the guidelines set by an independent panel been followed, an incredible 59 percent would have failed. Some of the sample responses -- these from people who are to replace the rapidly retiring Baby Boomers -- demonstrated such a poor grasp of language that they would have been disturbing to see from a high-school freshman.

But in a perverse way, the test results are also a sign of hope. It is tests like these (and Massachusetts has more bad news in store, for teachers and students alike) that are bringing a much needed dose of honesty -- and focused outrage -- to the education debate. It is a historic moment. Finally, the tired and dysfunctional schools debate, with Democrats beholden to the unions and Republicans intent on destroying the public system in the name of saving it, is crumbling. Just last week, Senator John Kerry set the tone for a possible presidential run with a brave and ambitious speech at Northeastern University that included recommendations -- including an end to teacher tenure -- which would have been unimaginable from a Democrat only a few years ago.

In a sense, the question of building good schools has always boiled down to a straightforward question: how best to attract bright teachers, train them, and give them the environment they need to prosper? Yet we have wandered far from this.

The mass of failures this week is an indictment of a system that focuses more on the theory of teaching than ensuring that the teachers have something to teach. Over time, many of the schools of education have devolved into places where mediocre minds are made, into another reason why a bright student wouldn't consider a career in teaching. This must be depressing for the thousands of good and dedicated teachers who are so often overshadowed by their second-rate peers.

"The schools of education," said John Silber with typical candor, "are the greatest problem facing education reform."

There is also a fundamental problem with the way the profession has organized itself. Traditionally, teachers unions have behaved like trade unions: insisting on equal treatment for all of their members, effectively stifling talented teachers while protecting the incompetent. This is why, of 4600 teachers in the Boston system, only 10 -- 0.25 percent -- were recommended for dismissal last year. Meanwhile, students have been languishing.

The public (and teachers) would be far better served if teachers unions functioned more like the kind of professional body that unites doctors or lawyers: maintaining standards among members and kicking out those who don't meet the bar. This, now, appears to be the direction that the two large teachers unions are moving in, with their talk of "new unionism." (This year's firings, though absurdly low in number, actually represent progress: last year, before a new agreement, no teachers were dismissed.) But the unions are still more a part of the problem than the solution.

The same Soviet-style thinking that has gripped the teachers unions for so long is also what reformers like Boston schools chief Thomas Payzant battles with systemwide. Everywhere, he has found a culture that would hobble any organization: no clear lines of individual responsibility, no clear goals, no clear tests for whether they are being met. The news this week that students all over Boston performed better this year on the Stanford 9 achievement test is a small but important sign that Payzant is at last making progress and allowing good teachers to teach better.

In the end, though, saving the schools will depend on whether we can attract and inspire a new generation of teachers. Imagine an exciting time, now a real possibility, when across the nation reforms are not incremental but revolutionary, when the schools are finally beginning to work again. Imagine that all teachers are beginning to be paid what they deserve -- and earning what they're paid. Imagine that parents are beginning to assume more responsibility for their children. Leaders like Kerry could then devote their energies to inspiring young people to teach. To be a teacher, he could tell them, is to sew the very fabric of the nation. To be a teacher, he could say, is among the greatest and most satisfying of personal challenges. It is, he could remind them, the noblest of callings. Who could refuse?

What do you think? Send an e-mail to letters[a]phx.com.