Somewhere along the line the Teacher's Unions decided to throw the children in front of them like a shield. (ie You need us or the Teachers will stop caring and teaching... ) Then the Wisconsin Teachers decided to shut the schools down to show how much they care about the children's education. I really dislike confused and inconsistent people, though I do truly appreciate the irony. And I am certain it makes sense to them from their self centered perspective.
So I did a little google searching and found that the jury is still out regarding the benefit or detriment to having Unions representing the Teachers in your State. Though it is certain that the Union Reps are misrepresenting the facts. (see links) The key to reading these is to watch for causality. Meaning, the Union causes the benefit or detriment. Versus correlation, Unions just happen to exist in States where the results are good or bad.
A typical example is when I have compared Wayzata and Robbinsdale school district student results in the past. Many would think that Wazata is the better district based on the correlation between Wayzata and good test results. Whereas RAS may actually be the better district due to how well it does given it's diverse student body and challenges. (ie mobility, poverty, languages, etc)
So beware saying Unions improve Student performance if Unions exist mostly in the wealthier Northern states. Unions may still be actually be stifling the results that could be better. Even though the Northern state may have better results than a non-union Southern state. Please keep this in mind and think beyond the headlines.
You know my simplistic view, if Administrators can not fire poor employees quickly and efficiently, there is no way the system can be more effective. The best companies are made up of good and effective employees that work together well. The Company lets employees go that no longer fit the business need, culture, etc. This helps the company thrive and pushes the employee to look for a better fitting position. And there are plenty of laws to minimize unfair termination.
Likewise, the best schools need to be made up of good and effective Teachers !!! If there is no way to purge the poor performers, there is no way the Student's win through Collective Bargaining and Tenure/Seniority. This means the students are harmed everyday they spend with that poor Teacher. (ie loud classroom, lost assignments, unable to answer questions, ineffective lectures, etc.) And remember that the kid does not get a second chance!!!
Is protecting the poor Teachers worth sacrificing the Students?
My old question: Why don't schools have Parents fill out Teacher and class evaluation forms? This is a base expectation in College, Private, business and every other type of training. Could it be that there is no leverage to improve the Teacher or Class? So why bother asking?
Thoughts either way?
Collective Bargaining and ACT Scores
Collective Bargaining and Perf Schools
Collective Bargaining in the Public Schools
Student in Union State Perform Better
Lies about Wisconsin ACT/SAT
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
You know the answer to this one. The nature of unions is that the only thing distinguishing one member from another is seniority. Merit is fundamentally incompatible with unionism. Teachers can be professionals paid by merit or they can be union drones, there is no middle ground.
I do note in my district that the Superintendent has made some "changes" in the "non-licensed" headquarters staff. Would that he or his principals could do the same for "licensed" personnel.
Post a Comment