The Clarification Hearing

Abstract

It was early morning of the second day of the Clarification Hearings in Washington, D.C. I was seated in front of the makeup table cluttered with bottles, tins, and brushes of all sorts, my new TV-compatible suit and blue shirt carefully protected by a bib. As the makeup artist was applying a brown fluid to my face (and undoubtedly wishing she had the skills of a plastic surgeon), Bob Ebel happened by the door. Seeing Bob, the incongruity of the situation hit me. How did I and a number of my colleagues in the next room waiting their turn in front of the lightbulb-studded mirror, get involved in this alien world? While I had my doubts from the beginning, Bob’s appearance triggered the realization that 11 months earlier, when I agreed to serve as team leader for the negative side in the Clarification Hearings on Minimum Competency Testing (MCT), I really had no idea what I had let myself in for. I was again brought up short about the implications of the whole process and my part in it two weeks ago after viewing, along with students and colleagues here at Boston College, the edited version of the hearings on public television. In what follows I have attempted to describe my reactions and feelings, both positive and negative, to various aspects of the process leading up to the hearings, the hearing itself, and the final TV product developed by Maryland Public Broadcasting (MPB).