University, answering questions on subjects ranging from John Dewey's progres sive philosophy to Picasso's blue period.

The tense teachers were trying to pass the National Teacher Examination they could rise out of the "temporary" teacher ranks, get more pay and benefits and tenure.

I took the test to try to find why District School Supt. Carl F. Hanson recently staked his job on a school board vote to keep the test as one of the qualifications for permanent appointment of teachers.

I was also trying to find why the two main teacher organizations in the District want the test abolished and why many of the some 3,000 District school teachers classified as "temporary"-roughly 50 percent of the city staff-can't pass the

test.

RESULTS ARRIVE

Last week, a green slip came in the mail from the Educational Testing Service of Princeton, N.J., the testing firm that administers the teachers' exam as well as the college board and the graduate records exams. The slip said my "weighted common exam total" was 747.

Without ever having taken a professional education course, I scored better than 97 percent of the sample of 48,142 full-time teacher education seniors whose results were compiled three years ago as the basis for nationwide comparisons. My 747 was comfortably above the 550 passing score set for District teachers. The 550 score for the District is a modest one-about 70 percent of the national sample do better.

Among the other test-takers last month was Dr. Rufus C. Browning, the District's assistant superintendent for personnel, who has most of the worries about teacher hirings and standards. He scored a resounding 784.

What did it all prove?

"With your high score you would have a chance of getting hired, particularly if you had a background in science or mathematics, where teachers are in short supply," Browning said.

No such luck, however. In college I majored in history and English-fields with a surplus of qualified teachers. I would need several courses in educational methods, psychology, and tests and measurements before the District personnel office would consider me fit for the classroom, Browning said.

This is a bit discouraging, especially since I scored better than 99 percent of the sample on the test assessing the "Societal Foundations of Education," better than 80 percent on the "Teaching Principles and Practices" test, and as well as 50 percent on the "Psychological Foundations of Education."

I'll leave it to the educators to decide whether the professional education section of the National Teacher Examination either is not an accurate test of professional education knowledge or whether the often called "Mickey Mouse" courses are so lacking in substance that a layman with a smattering of professional "educationese" can do as well as a graduate of a teachers college.

BOTH SEE VALUE

Browning and Hansen both maintain that the value of the National Teacher Examination is that it cuts off the obviously unqualified and that it tests the general liberal arts background any well-rounded teacher should have. The test does not try to predict how effective a teacher will be in the classroom, the school officials make clear.

The key to success in the professional education section of the test is figuring out the obvious semi-progressive philosophy expressed in the test, disregarding your own opinions and choosing the answers that the test-makers wanted.

The more heavily weighted liberal arts section with tests in English expression, social studies, literature, fine arts, science and mathematics reguessing games that used to enthrall viewers on those television quiz shows. About all a high score on that test proved was that the test-taker had absorbed a low level of superficial cocktail-party-type cultural knowledge.

An examination that probably doesn't give an accurate measure of professional education knowledge and that scarcely goes below the surface of knowledge in the liberal arts may have some value if it weeds out the most poorly prepared, but I doubt it. I'll leave it up to the educators to decide, and I'll urge more of

them to take the test.

Full titles of the COMMON EXAMINATIONS and descriptions of the various scores may be found on the reverse side.
CODES FOR TEACHING AREA EXAMINATIONS:

01 Education in the Elementary School

02 Early Childhood Education 03 Biology and General Science

Other Teaching Area Exam Codes designate special tests not offered in the regular NTE program.

Mr. DOWDY. I have a statement here from Dr. Hansen which will be inserted as part of the record.

(This statement appears at p. 222)

Mr. DowDY. Mr. Goodloe, legislative representative of the Washington Teachers' Union, will be next.

STATEMENT OF DON B. GOODLOE, LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE
OF THE WASHINGTON TEACHERS' UNION

Mr. GOODLOE. Mr. Chairman, I am Don B. Goodloe, Legislative
Representative of the Washington Teachers' Union, and I am accom-
panied by Mr. Simons of our organization. Also with me is Mr.
William Peer to my right.

The Teachers' Union of Washington, D.C. appreciates this oppor tunity to testify on behalf of its members and the teachers of the public schools of the District of Columbia, in regard to the bills now being considered by this Committee.

Before I read any more testimony I wish to say this. I do not think that the guidelines are applicable to this situation. It is generally admitted that teaching is suffering from a very severe manpower shortage and everything should be done to get competent people in the profession.

Second, as pointed out by Mr. Broyhill last Tuesday, to apply the same yardstick to teachers as we do with others does not work. Teachers are already behind. If you keep them in locked step with guidelines applied to other occupations it is mathematically impossible for them ever to catch up to the place they should occupy.

That the teachers of the District need an increase in salary should be beyond question. While universal education for children throughout the United States has been a slogan for many years, adequate provision for such has never been made to include adequate financial remuneration for teachers. Today the emphasis is on education as a means of eliminating poverty. This can be accomplished if there is a personnel of high quality providing the necessary educational experiences for all the pupils in our public schools. A salary scale which will attract this type of teacher is an absolute must.

The District of Columbia, in comparison with the surrounding areas, is at a disadvantage in its competition for qualified teachers. This is due in part to the fact that there is a large number of "disadvantaged" pupils in the Washington Public Schools. These young people are by no means hopeless nor should they be consigned to the educational scrap heap. On the contrary, they can be molded into useful citizens with the proper educational preparation.

There has been much unfavorable publicity concerning the schools of the Nation's Capital. This, too, tends to steer the best qualified teachers away from the District. Another fact which works to the disadvantage of the District is the large number of obsolete buildings coupled with the general overcrowding of classes.

To be sure, a superior salary scale will not be the answer to all of the problems which our city faces in its struggle to secure and retain the best possible educational staff. This is, however, perhaps the quickest way to alleviate the crisis which is facing the public schools of our Capital City.

The Union agrees to the proposals as outlined in all of the bills before the Committee, including those submitted on Tuesday, which will enable teachers to be paid for all of their service while employed by the Board of Education, with the exception of the dollar amounts for class 15. The Union believes that the salary schedule for teachers should be $6,000 to $14,000 with a $500 differential between each level B.A., M.A., M.A. plus 30 and M.A. plus 60-attainable in eight years. This schedule would then serve to attract the best qualified teachers to the District of Columbia..

We do not think any of these bills before the Committee will do the job in so far as they mean progress. So far the whole thing is too little and too late and the scale which our national organization advocates is one we are striving for.

There are additional areas which we would like to call to the attention of the Committee, in order that it may consider them in its deliberations.

One recommendation which the Teachers' Union makes would affect some of the veteran permanent teachers in our system. Some of them have had previous service outside the District, as well as in the public schools of this city. Their service has, nevertheless, been interrupted for various reasons. When they have, however, returned to their teaching duties, they have been allowed only five years of credit on salary placement. They could, incidentally, purchase as much as ten years in the retirement fund. As these teachers have already passed the tenth step on the salary schedule, they would not benefit from the proposed nine years' credit for previous experience. Our organization, consequently, thinks that these individuals should be allowed additional placement not to exceed five years.

It may be worthy of note that this recommendation was supported by the Board of Education. We are keenly aware of the difficulties encountered in securing and retaining first class teachers. We should also do our best to get as many of them back as possible, after they have been compelled to relinquish their professional careers for a time, because of conditions beyond their control. Men and women who have thus had their periods of service interrupted should not be placed at a disadvantage as compared with other equally capable personnel. Enabling teachers in this predicament to benefit from such an amendment to this bill might help the Washington school system to get back some of its most capable employees. We wish to emphasize we not only want to get good teachers, we want to keep them, and we want to get them back if they have had to leave.

A very important suggestion concerns the proposal for an additional class on the salary schedule. We refer to the new Group D. H.R. 13702 provides for additional compensation for the Doctor's degree. Local 6 thinks that, instead of this, the payment should be made for possession of the Master's degree plus 60 credits. The classroom teacher profits from taking various courses which keep him abreast of changes in the subject matter which he imparts to the pupils. If the actual classroom teacher is to remain the backbone of the educational system, he must continue to be well informed.

Knowledge in all fields is advancing with such bewildering rapidity that the most distinguished specialists find it difficult to keep up with the constant progress being made in their fields. The education and

professional improvement of teachers must, therefore, be an almost continuous process. Acquisition of a Ph.D. is a valuable accomplishment for both the school employee and the system. Still, it is not as important in itself as continual study by the teacher. If an individual ceases his active education after getting the highest educational degree possible, he is not of as much benefit to his students as another teacher who keeps on taking courses to keep up with the phenomenal progress of human knowledge all over the world.

We wish to say here we are not implying that the average Ph.D. rests on his laurels and he stagnates after having attained it, but it is nevertheless true, we think, that there should be incentive for those who study beyond what they have to.

For these reasons, the Teachers' Union strongly urges that 60 credits beyond the Master's degree be substituted for possession of the Doctor's degree as the requisite for inclusion in Group D on the new salary scale set up by this bill.

Before concluding our testimony, we wish to emphasize the fact that we do not think that these salary scales will attract as many teachers of the highest calibre to the Washington School System as we would like. Still less would their enactment into law solve all the difficulties of our school system overnight. We face several very complex problems. Not only must we compete with wealthy suburban counties of the metropolitan area for the services of capable individuals, but there are other features of this environment which make it hard for us to hire the sort of people we want.

The Federal Government is the greatest business in Washington. It is the largest employer in our Capital City. Well trained scientists can secure lucrative federal employment. That makes it very difficult for our school system to hire and hold men and women well trained in the physical and biological sciences. Very high salaries, as compared with those now paid will be necessary to make employment in our public schools attractive to individuals of such training. The competition we just mentioned is, of course, on top of that faced by all large cities of our nation.

Another thing that we face along with other great centers of popula tion is the difficulty of teaching effectively in the underprivileged sections of large American cities. As we have pointed out, unfavorable publicity on this score has added to the difficulty of obtaining highly qualified people to work in the Washington schools.

We are, therefore, firmly of the opinion that a salary scale like that advocated by the American Federation of Teachers; namely, $6000 to $14,000 a year in eight years will be a prerequisite for securing the services of the capable individuals needed to establish the sort of school system that will be worthy of the Nation's Capital.

Even that will not be a panacea. If we pay enough to attract such personnel, we must also give them classes of teachable size. The most ingenious, resourceful and versatile teachers imaginable cannot do first class work with classes over forty. It will be necessary, furthermore, to build more than one thousand new classrooms to accommodate these classes. In addition to that, one thousand obsolescent and substandard classrooms must be eliminated, if we really intend to make available to our boys and girls the type of education they deserve. We shall not elaborate these details further.