Group items tagged

American teachers unions are increasingly the target of measures, authored by friends and foes alike, intended to limit their power, or even eviscerate them. Looking at this scene, one would never guess that the countries that are among the top 10 in student performance have some of the strongest teachers unions in the world. Are those unions in some way different from American teachers unions? Do unions elsewhere behave differently from American teachers unions when challenged to do what is necessary to improve student performance? To explore these questions, I compare teachers and their unions in Ontario, Canada and Finland with their U.S. counterparts.

For the past couple of months, Steve Brill's new book has served to step up the eternally-beneath-the-surface hypothesis that teachers' unions are the primary obstacle to improving educational outcomes in the U.S. The general idea is that unions block "needed reforms," such as merit pay and other forms of test-based accountability for teachers, and that they "protect bad teachers" from being fired. Teachers' unions are a convenient target. For one thing, a significant proportion of Americans aren't crazy about unions of any type. Moreover, portraying unions as the villain in the education reform drama facilitates the (mostly false) distinction between teachers and the organizations that represent them - put simply, "love teachers, hate their unions." Under the auspices of this dichotomy, people can advocate for changes , such as teacher-level personnel policies based partially on testing results, without having to address why most teachers oppose them (a badly needed conversation).

Last February, two very different narratives played out in Denver and Madison. In Madison, political vandals tried to take out one of the state's great civic institutions: public sector unions. Unions were radically reduced in their capacity to bring the wisdom of the practitioner voice to policy. They were loaded down with legal requirements designed to hobble them with an obsession with mere survival. They lost legal rights to speak for workers in any meaningful way. We know the story: it was big news. In Denver, overshadowed by events in Madison, the US Department of Education convened a Labor-Management Collaboration Conference. Here, a very different narrative played out. Unions were treated not as enemies to be destroyed, but as valued partners in the policy process. Twelve districts that had collaboratively integrated their union voice, and twelve locals who had responded with care and creativity were highlighted as models. Over 150 districts sent teams of administrators, political leaders, and union leaders to learn from these twelve districts.

For-profit colleges and universities have a well-deserved reputation for deceptive recruiting, low-quality programs, and sky-high prices. Now you can add union suppression to that reputation. A branch of the for-profit college mega-provider Kaplan University has noticed that some of its teaching staff are considering a union, and the management is not pleased. Recently, administrative staff at a branch of Kaplan International Centers (KIC) in New York City issued a memo to teachers to explain "the risk" of showing an interest in "union organizing." And the contents of the memo are revealing of the smears and innuendo that for-profit education institutions and other employers use to squelch union organizing activities and to make employees uneasy of asserting their rights to collective action.

"It has been difficult to discern what specific details are left on the table in the Chicago teachers' negotiations. Broadly, we know the union leadership resents Mayor Rahm Emanuel's enthusiasm for non-unionized charter schools and neighborhood school closings. It is also clear that professional evaluation is a big issue, as it is in states and cities across the country. To what extent should teachers be judged by their students' test scores, as opposed to by more holistic measures? Job security, especially for teachers in schools that will be shut down, has been eroding, which the CTU sees as a calamity, yet many reformers applaud. And of course, there is pay. Is it fair for teachers to demand regular raises when unemployment is so high, and budgets at every level of government are strapped? I'm not going to pronounce on these questions today, but I do want to offer a quick history of teacher unionism to keep things in perspective. The modern teachers' union movement began in Chicago in 1897, and many of the problems back then -- from low school budgets to testing to debates over classroom autonomy -- remain more than salient today."

As the Chicago Public Schools begin what are certain to be contentious contract talks with the Chicago Teachers Union, Mayor Rahm Emanuel emerged as the star of a new online video criticizing the union and promoting charter schools, whose teachers mostly are not unionized. An interview with Mr. Emanuel is a highlight of the 35-minute video, produced by the Michigan-based Education Action Group Foundation and the Fox News political analyst Juan Williams. Mr. Williams narrates the video, saying the union is "radically politicized" and is "repeatedly providing terrible examples for Chicago's schoolchildren."

A year substituting in Chicago's public schools made me a radical/"reformer" from Day One. I saw the teachers' union as a force for good-including the individual good. For example, two of my 'children' became teachers and both have had to protect themselves via union-enforced due process at some point in their careers. In the absence of due process, none of us is safe from unjust bosses or benign rulers. (It's one reason I'm also such a fan of the Association for Union Democracy, which protects union members and staff from injustices by their "union bosses.") Perhaps the dividing line on reform has something to do today with our gut reaction to calls for solidarity with our peers-our identification with the powerless. And thus our devotion to due process: "There but for the grace of God goes me." The tension between individualism and solidarity even interacts with a puzzle I've been concerned with of late re. neighborhood schools vs. "schools of choice." Can choice sometimes be good for an individual and bad for the larger community, and if so ...?

"There is nothing new about Republican opposition to teachers unions, but in recent years, it has become increasingly clear that some Democrats have turned against them as well. In the following post we hear from a union leader, Bob Peterson, the president of the  Milwaukee Teachers' Education Association, about how he thinks teachers union must change to keep alive public education. This post first appeared in Rethinking Schools, a nonprofit publisher and advocacy organization dedicated to improving public education."

"Leonie Haimson is fed up with the line that the mainstream media has taken about education controversies. Reporters usually think that every protest is organized by the unions, defending their self-interest, and they are warring with high-minded reformers. She says this is balderdash! (Sorry, Leonie, my word, not yours.)   If parents hold a protest against high-stakes testing and against test-based teacher evaluations (which causes more time to be devoted to testing), most reporters will say the union made them do it, the union doesn't want to be held accountable.   Well, guess what? The unions are not leading the Opt Out movement. Many teachers support it, because they know how pointless the new tests are, but the great majority of people leading the movement are parents. They don't want their children to be pressured by fear of the Big Standardized Test, they don't want them to be ranked and labeled, they don't want them to hate school because of the endless test prep."

The distinction between teachers and their unions (as well as those of other workers) has been a matter of political and conceptual contention for long time. On one "side," the common viewpoint, as characterized by Alter's slightly hyperbolic line, is "love teachers, don't like their unions." On the other "side," criticism of teachers' unions is often called "teacher bashing." So, is there any distinction between teachers and teachers' unions? Of course there is.

Scapegoating is a powerful tool to sway public opinion. That's why I'm not surprised that teachers unions are consistently being singled out for the shortcomings of public schools ("Can Teachers Unions Do Education Reform?" The Wall Street Journal, Mar. 3). After all, they are such an easy target at a time when the public's patience over the glacial pace of school reform is running out. The latest example was an essay by Juan Williams, who is now a political analyst for Fox News ("Will Business Boost School Reform?" The Wall Street Journal, Feb. 28). He claims that teachers unions are "formidable opponents willing to fight even modest efforts to alter the status quo." Their obstructionism is responsible for the one million high school dropouts each year and for a graduation rate of less than 50 percent for black and Hispanic students. Williams says that when schools are free of unions, they succeed because they can fire ineffective teachers, implement merit pay, lengthen the school day, enrich the curriculum and deal with classroom discipline. These assertions have great intuitive appeal to taxpayers who are angry and frustrated, but the truth is far different from what Williams maintains.

I would also ask you to please stop promoting the myth that unions are abusive and make it impossible to fire bad teachers. Unions only ensure that all teachers have due process to protect them from abusive admin. (And no, I am not saying that admin. is abusive, but just as there are poor teachers out there… there are poor administrators.) It is not the unions job to evaluate teacher performance. But it is the unions job to be be sure that disciplinary action is justified by requiring proper steps to be taken.

Of the unions representing public school teachers and principals in New York City, the principals' union had played a passive role in the charged and increasingly divisive dispute over an evaluation system to gauge the performance of teachers and principals in 33 struggling schools receiving federal grants to help improve their results. No longer. On Wednesday, the principals' union president, Ernest A. Logan, pre-emptively condemned the city's proposal to close and reopen most of those schools under a new improvement model, saying in a strongly worded letter to the state's education commissioner, John B. King Jr., that it is simply a ploy to shut out the unions.

New York City voters trust the teachers union more than Mayor Michael Bloomberg to protect the interests of public-school students, according to a new poll that gives the union a jolt of credibility as it negotiates over a new teacher-evaluation system. The poll, released Wednesday by Quinnipiac University, found that 56% of city voters said they trust United Federation of Teachers while 31% trust the mayor. Parents of public-school students preferred the union by an even wider margin, with 69% telling pollsters that the UFT can be better trusted to do what's best for their children. By a margin of 47% to 39%, voters said they believe the teachers union is playing a positive role in improving the city's education system.

Governors and teachers' unions are going head-to-head in several states across the country, and the public feels caught in the middle, a new survey on the public's perception of U.S. schools finds. When those polled were asked how teachers' unions have affected the quality of U.S. public education, 47 percent said unions hurt it. But even so, 52 percent said they side with unions in disputes with governors over collective bargaining.

"On Monday, the city's 4,700 union members are scheduled to vote on the contract. Both sides say they cannot predict the outcome, but either way, what happens here will echo among teachers' unions across the country. If the contract is approved, it could prompt other districts to push for pay-for-performance, by suggesting that merit pay is no longer so symbolic a fight among the rank and file. Newark's deal itself was prompted by recent changes to the state's tenure laws that were once considered unthinkable. And both sides insist that this deal could be a model for union-management collaboration, giving teachers a voice they have often felt was denied in reform. If it fails, beleaguered union leaders could take it as a new sign of strength in contract negotiations - similar, some teachers said, to the example of the Chicago teachers' strike last month."

This spring, the West Side Highway's typical advertising fare also includes a political message that seems aimed at teachers unions. A billboard advertising Kenneth Cole - the clothing company owned by Gov. Andrew Cuomo's brother-in-law - puns to southbound commuters, "Shouldn't Everyone Be Well Red?" In smaller lettering, the billboard says, "Teachers' Rights Vs. Students' Rights …" The second line evokes a tension drawn out repeatedly by some critics of teachers unions, including Cuomo, who say that unions' support for teachers' job protections can stand in the way of students' education. The billboard also invites viewers to visit WhereDoYouStand.com, a website maintained by the city-based company, to weigh in on "Issue in the News." This spring, one of the issues is "Should underperforming teachers be protected?"

As public school principals lead a growing insurgency against the state's new teacher-evaluation system, some teachers are beginning to question why their largest state union is defending the system and not supporting the principals' movement. Several presidents of local teachers unions told The Journal News that there is a growing dissatisfaction within their ranks with union leadership on the controversial system, which will grade teachers on a 100-point scale based in part on how their students progress on state tests.

Regarding teachers' unions with a certain distaste, maintaining the belief that they exist to champion inadequacy, is now virtually required for membership in the affluent, competitive classes, no matter an affiliation on the right or left. Over the past two weeks, as Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg have aggressively pushed for phasing in a new, more rigorous teacher evaluation process - with tens of millions of dollars in state and federal aid to schools at stake - they have deployed a rhetoric of enmity, one meant to suggest that the state's teachers' unions are committed to keeping talentless hacks in jobs they can't handle. As the governor put it on Monday, "Our schools are not an employment program." What has been lost in these performances of reproach and imperiousness is the extent to which the city and state, and the related unions (the United Federation of Teachers in the first instance and New York State United Teachers in the second) are generally in agreement over how classroom evaluations ought to be held and what, in fact, constitutes sound teaching. As it happens, the state union was at work devising substantive evaluation reform more than a year before Mr. Cuomo even took office.

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten is calling today for a new brand of unionism that focuses not only on helping members but also the communities in which they work and live. The union's annual convention starts today in Detroit, where more than than 3,000 delegates have gathered at a time when teachers and their unions have come under attack from school reformers. Though teachers have been unhappy with many of President Obama's education initiatives, Weingarten's speech urges members to support him in the November election because he shares many of the same values as union members. As for GOP candidate Mitt Romney, she says, "His idea of education reform is vouchers, which study after study has shown do not improve achievement." The two candidates, she said, "couldn't be more different." The convention will also be addressed by Vice President Biden, education historian Diane Ravitch and others. Here is Weingarten's convention speech as prepared for delivery: