Alternatively we could opt to commission brand new tests specifically designed for those aspiring to a particular public office. To devise it we could employ a professional testing corporation such as ETS. In the end they might create items roughly like these:
MULTIPLE CHOICE
1. Given an unprecedented federal budget deficit, the worst course of action would be to:
a. borrow more money to repair the nation’s crumbling infrastructure
b. cut taxes
c. only cut taxes for the super rich
d. spend only what we take in
2. If an attractive intern offers oral sex a male public official should:
a. quickly agree before she changes their mind
b. be sure she doesn't keep the dress
c. politely decline
d. ask them what they mean by "sex."
3. Should our schools decide to emphasize “character formation,” the best model to base the curriculum on would be:
a. J. Edgar Hoover
b. Richard Nixon
c. Bill Clinton
d. none of the above
4. Should a terrorist attack on the U.S. originate in country A, the best course of action for the U.S. would be to:
a. stay home
b. invade country C
c. invade country B
d. invade country D, they've been "asking for it"
TRUE FALSE:
5. With the exception of Jefferson, every U. S. President has played golf.
6. This time Mexico will pay for "the wall"
7. Biblical scholars actually refer to "Second Corinthians" as "Two Corinthians"
8. Denmark actually does have Greenland up for sale.
Let's also require testing of all potential political appointees who will have particular responsibilities. For instance, every aspiring state Secretary of Education would have to pass the same battery of tests required of aspiring teachers. In Pennsylvania, for example, he or she would have to pass separate NTE tests in Reading, Writing, Listening Skills, Mathematics and Principles of Teaching and Learning. We might also want to add a content specialty test in their college major (aspiring secondary educators have to take these) Alternatively we could require tests in Elementary Education Content and Curriculum — after all, secretaries of education presume to tell elementary teachers what to do and when to do it. I for one, think that few chief state school officers could pass what they now prescribe for high schoolers. After all, they’re usually politically connected B.S. artists, not professionally trained educators.
The beauty of this hoist them on their own petard approach should be apparent. Officials will typically be reluctant to mandate any testing because they will also have to take whatever they prescribe. No Child Left Behind's emphasis on one-size-fits-all standardized testing is a concern of many. But the cure for this federally induced malady is the the hair of the dog. If you don’t pass the test, you're out.
Admittedly.in any test of aspiring politicians, cheating would be a significant problem. Safeguards are certainly required. One possibility is simply strict test security and different forms of the test to make copying impossible. More severely, we could administer the test while test-takers are hooked up to lie detectors. Imagine a candidate testing and squirming as the polygraph relentlessly tells the tale. “Is that your actual answer? Is that your final honest answer?” (Philadelphia’s infamous departed Duce/Mayor Frank Rizzo once failed a lie detector test while trying to prove the device’s reliability. Evidently the polygraph was more discerning than the city's voters.)
Alternatively, we could inject test-takers with scopolamine, the truth serum favored by secret policemen the world over. The test would be administered orally as the subjects drift guilelessly on a tripped out but truthful cloud. Regardless of the method, however, we must be absolutely certain that our subjects are answering truthfully. And we must keep in mind that most of them would be very unaccustomed to doing this.
That, in broad outline, is the plan. But it needs filling in. That’s where you can help. Tell us what you think. Should aspirants for public office take the same tests they prescribe for others or should they be required to take brand new custom designed tests? If so should we measure wisdom, rectitude, practical knowledge, educational expertise, sexual cravings or what have you? And should we test just once, or longitudinally every year that the person is in office? (Longitudinal testing has the obvious advantage of measuring whether or not the subject is learning while “serving.”)
You also might like to suggest specific test items. They need not be multiple choice as exemplified in this commentary. Any type of questions typically found on standardized tests are welcome. Trfue-false, short answer, etc, Rush your comments and suggestions to the Worm Turns Foundation. org, or post them here.
To examine like issues, see articles at www.newfoundations.com