Last November, the Texas State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC), on which I was appointed to serve by Governor Rick Perry, narrowly approved a very controversial rule authorizing probationary certification to aspiring teachers who want to be licensed to teach using an alternative to the traditional certification route, typically through the colleges of education. Recently, the State Board of Education (SBOE), in effect, ratified the new rule by failing to veto it. There is nothing particularly revolutionary about this new rule; in fact, there are over sixty so-called alternative certification programs in Texas, and approximately 25% of the new teachers licensed in the state last year used an alternative route. What is deemed by its opponents as so radical about this new route, and what made it so controversial, is the fact that, unlike the other alternatives, it circumvents the traditional “gatekeepers” to the profession—the state education bureaucracy and the colleges of education–and gives the school district superintendents the flexibility and discretion to manage their human resources by determining who is qualified to teach in the classrooms under their jurisdiction.There has been much confusion and misrepresentation in reporting about the new rule itself. Basically, its provisions are as follows: If a prospective teacher who has a baccalaureate or advanced degree in an academic major other than education passes the appropriate certification exams and background checks and is hired by a school district to teach in the subject area of preparation in grades 8-12, the candidate will be granted a probationary certificate for a maximum of two years, at the end of which time the school district decides, based on the teacher’s performance, whether or not to recommend the issuance of full standard certification. The school district must provide evidence that the teacher has been provided intensive support during the probationary period through mentoring and pre-service training.

When this concept was proposed (unsuccessfully) as legislation in both the 2001 and 2003 regular sessions, it seemed pretty reasonable to me, and I have consistently supported it. But from the loud protests of the various constituencies who have a vested interest in the status quo, one might have thought that it was the ruination of public education in general and the noble calling of the teaching profession in particular. At the public hearing conducted by our Board on the proposed rule, there was testimony from fifty witnesses, the large majority in opposition, primarily representing the teachers’ unions and advocacy groups, colleges of education, and assorted education activists. While much of the opposition came from groups to which this new alternative represents a healthy competitive threat, it is instructive to note that significant support for the new rule came from organizations representing school boards and school administrators and personnel directors, who are, after all, the primary customers of SBEC and the teacher preparation system.

In the final analysis, I believe that public policy in teacher preparation should be guided by several priorities as follows, all of which should have as their primary objective the advancement of Texas student achievement:

*We should fully define “highly qualified teacher” for Texas not just in regulatory terms, but in terms of the qualities and performance that are expected, which will necessitate a re-evaluation of the strategic policy document, “Learner-Centered Schools for Texas: A Vision of Texas Educators”, adopted in 1997, as well as the transformation of educator employment terms from “contract” to “at will”, with enhanced compensation based on performance tied to student achievement.

*We should demand the transformation of educator preparation programs into customer-driven institutions by developing assessments of them that are grounded in output- and performance-based criteria, so that Texas becomes the model for value-added evaluation of such programs.

*We should emphasize regulatory rule making that allows for the maximum prudent flexibility for school district administrators to manage their human resources, and demand accountability for student achievement results.

It is my hope that this new rule will represent a truly new route to standard certification for many prospective teachers in Texas and a useful tool for districts to meet a portion of their personnel needs, and not be used simply as a “quick fix” for the widely reported teacher shortages, as some have suggested. To the extent that it is at variance with the existing top-down, compliance- and input-based system of certification governed by the traditional monopoly routes to teaching, it is a small step toward what some have called “competitive certification”, a concept I believe we should embrace and expand.

I hate to say “I told you so”, but I did. The battle over gay/lesbian “rights” has spilled into the public arena and the Presidential election because the American people will not allow four Massachusetts judges to throw out several thousand years of natural law, and they shouldn’t. This is not about equal rights nearly as much as it is about whether or not we can sustain a federal republic under the rule of law, or whether we will allow the critical issues involving who we are to be determined by judicial fiat. Lincoln said it as well as anyone in his first inaugural address, referring to the Supreme Court decision in the Dred Scot case: “…….the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions, the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.” President Bush didn’t start this war by endorsing a constitutional amendment on marriage, but by so doing he did introduce it into the appropriate arena—the court of public opinion in an election year—which hopefully will produce a solution by the people through democratic processes, as the Founders intended.

Well, I saw Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” on opening night, and one thing that should be said is that it was not oversold. It was at once probably the most compelling and repelling movie experience of my life. Entertaining it probably isn’t, in the sense that term is ordinarily used. I could see “Casablanca” fifteen more times; I probably won’t see this one again. Anti-Semitic? Only if you believe that the Gospels are. As Gibson has said, there were only Jews and Romans in the courtyard; no Norwegians were there. He has also said, which I believe to be true, that substantially all the criticism he has received is not mainly about him, but about the New Testament. Violent? To the extreme, but purposefully, and not gratuitously so, as with much exploitative violence in the movies today, which I will not watch. All in all, it is a great movie, and I recommend it to people of all faiths.

Natural disasters often have enormous cultural and political consequences along with their economic and human costs. I believe the horror of the December earthquakes in Iran is an example because it helped further demonstrate to the Iranian people the huge void that exists between their tyrannized society and the developed West in terms of wealth, capital, the capability to care for human needs, and the values that make these things possible. Recent Iranian elections were disappointing to the reform elements there as well as in the U. S., and the Bush administration vowed to keep “hoping” for additional reform. In my opinion, simply hoping is not enough. France, of course, has already suggested a “wait and see” approach, and, no doubt, the “stability over all” crowd in some corners of our State Department will agree and will urge President Bush to seek additional promises from the mullahs. Radio talk show host Glenn Beck made a profound comment recently when he said that Iran is to the war on terror today what Poland was to the Cold War in 1980. I believe he is correct, and that a popular uprising against this evil regime deserves the support and encouragement of the West, led by the U. S.

Don’t look now, but it may be possible that the halftime show at the Super Bowl in Houston may prove to have been a watershed event in the turnaround of public attitudes about limits on cultural pollution. In the interest of damage control, the producers of this product want to focus on the few seconds of Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction”, but that won’t wash with the obvious public outrage over the debauchery and degrading nature of the entire production. Here’s hoping that this outrage can be sustained through a thorough examination and elevation of standards, and I think the fact that the conversation is being conducted in a Presidential election year will sharpen the focus.