FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HADN’T HEARD, Bloomberg’s educational reform proposal, which would force 8-year olds to repeat 3rd grade if they score in the lowest percentile of a year-end reading examination, was passed under a cloud of controversy yesterday. Mayor Michael Bloomberg admitted to firing two members of a committee who would have voted against the bill, and appointing new members who would have voted in its favor. But while the mayor’s tactics have incensed the various critics of mandatory 3rd grade testing, none of his actions fall outside the scope of authority given to him by the Board of Education. So Bloomberg’s critics can cry foul all they want about strong-arm tactics. Meanwhile, the 15,000 New York City public school students in danger of being left back in the 3rd grade will have to crack open their grammar textbooks, and get used to the idea that achievement is not a right, but a privilege that must be earned. Sort of like in real life.

So, did I manage to simulate serious, thought-provoking commentary? Because I really just want to ask what the critics of mandatory 3rd grade reading testing have against the idea. I’ve read some of the rebuttals towards the plan, and most of them, not surprisingly, have played the race card. Mayor Bloomberg and Education Chancellor Joel Klein’s plan would impact, and supposedly harm, blacks and hispanics most severely, since the majority of students who score in the lowest percentile of the reading test—that’s a score of 1 out of a possible 4—are black and hispanic. If the numbers hold up over the course of this year’s reading test, thousands of young blacks and hispanics would have their self-esteem irreparably damaged by being left back. What injustice! After that whole slavery thing, hasn’t Whitey and/or the Jew done enough to hold down the colored man?

The majority of those who raised a fuss over mandatory 3rd grade reading tests are, not surprisingly, parents of students in danger of failing the upcoming test. These are the most vocal, as well as anxious, critics. Their main argument is that a single exam should not determine whether their child should go to the next grade. I think their argument is reasonable, but they are misinformed as to how the exam would work. Remember, only those children who score a 1 out of a possible 4 would be left behind. A score of 2, while it would count as below-average reading ability, is still high enough a score that the student is allowed to move on to the 4th grade.

Bottom line: While it’s true that 3rd graders must score higher than a 1 on the reading exam, a passing score is still possible with even the minimal preparation, which a student should have received over the previous 9 months.

And let’s not forget, according to Bloomberg and Klein’s plan for educational reform, even if a 3rd grader scores a 1, which indicates that he’s basically illiterate, intensive summer courses are available for emergency instruction. These reforms provide lifelines; they are meant to help students stay afloat, not let them drown. The mayor’s enemies need to realize that condemning underperforming students to a future of illiteracy and non-existent job prospects does much more to damage self-esteem than a second year in the third grade. This is how America should be: No one who hasn’t put in an honest effort should be allowed to get by. No one should get a free pass simply because of the color of their skin.

(Coming tomorrow: The GOD, I HATE RALPH NADER rant.)