National Review, March 25, 1996

Public school educators commonly complain that, like Rodney Dangerfield, they "get no respect." But instead of blaming the tax-paying public at large, they should look to their colleagues and the liberal lawyers and teachers' unions who go to the mat to protect mediocrity. The latest effort to further dumb down standards in public schools was recently on display in a Federal District Court in San Francisco, where a group of minority educators is suing the state over the California Basic Educational Skills Test (CBEST).

This test requires educators to demonstrate a minimum eighth to tenth grade-level proficiency in reading, writing and mathematics before they are allowed to teach. The sin of the CBEST is that minorities fail it at a disproportionate rate. Of first-time test-takers, 88 per cent of whites pass, compared to 38 per cent of African Americans, 49 percent of Latinos, and 53 per cent of Asians. (The numbers improve dramatically for repeat test-takers.) This prompted Public Advocates, Inc., a San Francisco public interest law firm, to file the nation's largest employment-discrimination lawsuit.

Applying what Shelby Steele calls "automated racism," the plaintiffs employ circular reasoning to assert that any gap in pass rates is proof of the test's cultural bias. "It has a Eurocentric viewpoint," asserts John T. Affeldt, the lead attorney for Public Advocates, which stands to rake in more than $2 million if they prevail. Affeldt cites a strong correlation between race and test performance, but he provides only one example of a biased question. When CBEST supporters suggest the obvious -- that the gaps reflect a decrepit public-education system and the relaxed admissions and grading standards at many universities and colleges -- they are labeled racist. The lead attorney defending CBEST, Lawrence Ashe Jr., recent teacher test results to a thermometer that registers 105 degrees.

"The plaintiffs are giving the state two options: Declare 105 degrees to be the new normal temperature or throw the thermometer out," says Ashe. "We want to treat the fever as quickly and safely as possible." CBEST has three sections: math, reading and a writing section. Our future teachers must answer approximately 70 per cent of the questions correctly -- a standard which Affeldt asserts is unreasonably high! -- and write two essays. Test-takers get up to four hours to complete the test and can repeat it up to six times a year. The scores on the test are cumulative; it can be passed piecemeal, one section at a time.

Nor are we talking mindbenders. All geometry and most algebra questions already have been stricken from the test. A sample math question: "Amy drinks 1.5 cups of milk three times a day. At this rate, how many cups of milk will she drink in a week?" The answers are given in multiple choice format. At stake is the integrity of the teaching profession, the education of our children, yields different results for different racial groups will be allowed to stand.

 Unbelievably, the California Teachers' Association (CTA) filed a brief in favor of the plaintiffs. Mary Bergan, president of the California Federation of Teachers, (CFT) claims her union has always supported CBEST and calls the CTA's position "unfortunate." The CFT hasn't gotten involved in this case, however, because "we were concerned about sending a message to minority applicants that we are quite anxious to bring into the profession," says Bergan. Those most damaged by this case are teachers who have worked hard to meet the standards, especially minorities, who are now undermined by a group of yahoos arguing that they shouldn't be expected to meet the same standards as whites.

These teachers have borrowed a page straight from the racist's playbook. The notion that minorities can't perform at the same level as whites is something many people have labored long and hard to dispel. Clearly, the children in California's public schools need more instruction in the basics. Performing only a little worse than first-time CBEST takers, more than 70 per cent of the state's high-school sophomores demonstrated "limited . . . little or no mathematical thinking" on a recent achievement test. Perhaps the students should sue. This is the message their so-called role models are sending.

 Finally there is the precedent this case could set. The plaintiffs argued and the judge has agreed that CBEST is not a general certification test, but an employment test. This ruling made CBEST subject to the disparate-impact doctrine, which declares that if minorities fail in disproportionate numbers, the test must be biased against them. Imagine if this logic is applied to other areas. Some minorities fail the second-year medical board test, which is required of all medical students, at rates far disproportionate to whites.

Should we do away with this test? How about pilots? Lawyers? Accountants? Not to say that the logic is any more acceptable when applied to teachers. If the plaintiffs in this case prevail, it will be a serious blow to public education. Arguments in the case won't be wrapped up until June and a decision isn't expected until late summer. For our children's sake, let's hope sanity prevails.

Michael Lynch is a public policy fellow at the Pacific Research Institute, a San Francisco-based think tank.