The Myth of the "Powerful" Teachers' Union

[Jefferson23]

** Interesting information, article is from counterpunch. The stats on union teachers vs. non union and accountability is perhaps not what most people would typically believe is true.

** snip: "In Georgia, where 92.5% of the teachers are non-union, only 0.5% of tenured/post-probationary teachers get fired. In South Carolina, where 100% of the teachers are non-union, it’s 0.32%. And in North Carolina, where 97.7% are non-union, a miniscule .03% of tenured/post-probationary teachers get fired—the exact same percentage as California."


By DAVID MACARAY

There’s a myth circulating out there that not only threatens to ruin the reputation of America’s school teachers, but has the potential to side-track any realistic hopes of education reform. It’s the assertion that “powerful” teachers’ unions are responsible for the decline of public education in the United States in general, and California in particular.

Propagators of this myth claim that the reason test scores of American children have sunk so low in recent years is because our public school teachers are too incompetent and lazy to provide adequate instruction.

Moreover, because the teachers’ unions are so domineering and evil—because their leaders will do anything to maintain union hegemony, including not allowing demonstrably inferior teachers to be fired—school administrators are powerless to act.

You hear these charges everywhere. Arianna Huffington, the late-to-the-party liberal and celebrity blogger, has been echoing such claims for years. For Huffington to be riffing on the state of public education is, in itself, remarkable, given that she lives in Brentwood, her daughters attend prestigious private schools, and the closest she’s ever come to an inner-city school was the day she accidentally drove by one, causing her to hastily lock the doors and windows of her Prius and speed away.

article in full here: http://www.counterpunch.org/macaray03202009.html

[msongs]

1. its a conspiracy of principals and superintendants lol nt

[DonCoquixote]

2. Teacher Unions

Now, I will not lie, are there some wonks who do coast along, yes? Could the Union do more to deal with these folks, yes? But frankly, they are the minority. Furthermore, many hacks started off as good teachers, but they got burned out when the schools, students and especially parents treated them like some form of evil. Frankly, as many teachers can tell you, they get far less bang for the buck from the teacher union, than, let's say, the UAW.

And let us not forget the number one threat to public education, the Churches.

[Jefferson23]

4. I agree with much of what you say here, what I did appreciate is

that the author has taken a closer look at the standard reason used against teachers and contrasted that with specific data that indicates the answer is not so black and white.

I'm not a teacher, but I do see a society that funds education as if each town/city is a country to itself, and the obstacles faced by low income areas result with children compromised on many levels for a variety of reasons.

I have no problem with my tax dollars funding programs for poorer children for after school, weekends, summer camps, there is a lot missing in many families home environments, teachers alone will not fill that void, why some expect them to is unfortunate and unrealistic.

[tonysam]

5. As Much as I Support Unions, I Agree.

Teachers' unions, at least in Nevada, are called "associations," and they are little more than subsidiaries of the school districts. I found out in my case they were all but worthless. They try like hell to discourage people from hiring outside lawyers and filing lawsuits, which I should have done when my former district went on their scapegoating campaign to get me out of there. Never, ever go through arbitration--it's worthless because it is rigged in favor of the districts and you lose all of your constitutional rights to sue in civil court in the process.

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. Why is it the union's job to deal with bad teachers?

Wouldn't that be the district's responsibility? :shrug:

[DonCoquixote]

9. Because

Part of the idea of a union is that they are there to increase skill and professionalism. They show that a body is mature enough to police itself, without the need for micromanaging wonks to come in and rule with an iron fist.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. I disagree

Unions protect workers and yes they can help increase skills. But employers hire employees. When unions have a say in hiring and firing teachers, then we can hold them responsible for bad teachers.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. The union has a lot more influence than just stopping firings

In some places its higher than others. To say that the only things the education unions do is to prevent firings is to sell them quite short

[tonysam]

6. They DON'T Prevent Firings. "Tenure" is a Myth.

Teachers' unions are good only for negotiating for better pay and benefits, and, in most states--not Nevada--for being able to strike. But that's it. Forget about them going to bat for you--you get exactly what you pay for in a cheapo union.

If you are a teacher, ALWAYS have an outside attorney. Always.

[LWolf]

8. K, R, & thanks from this teacher.

Now I'm going to go back and read through all the responses to see how many Democrats, from the supposed party of labor, are going to jump in to bash teachers and teachers' unions.

I'm predicting that there will be plenty.

[Jefferson23]

10. You're very welcome teach!

[Smarmie Doofus]

12. Kick. Thanks for posting. I can't believe Maher, of all people,....

... would fall for such nonsense.