|
4401-A
Connecticut Avenue, Box 294, Washington, DC
20008
Tel: (202) 244-7535, Fax: (202) 244-7584
|
Education Exchange
Volume 1, Issue 5 -- December
1997
|
Focusing on
Education Reforms at Your School, in Your State
Legislature, and in Congress
|
Peer
Review is Hot Topic with Many Unanswered Questions
Only in recent years has public opinion seriously
considered the possibility that the National Education
Association and the American Federation of Teachers are
obstacles to reform. After decades of denial, the teacher
unions now concede that they have had a negative impact upon
certain school operations -- including making it extremely
difficult for school districts to fire incompetent teachers.
Teacher union contracts frequently include provisions
which severely limit a principal's evaluation procedure,
time alloca-tion, and review. Furthermore, teachers who pay
union dues of up to $700 annually expect the NEA/AFT cadre
of attorneys to represent them in dismissal cases. Prolonged
cases can cost a school district hundreds of thousands of
dollars in legal fees and, even then, the teacher may be
reinstated with back pay, benefits, and financial coverage
of litigation expenses.
Following an NEA sponsored study that characterized the
union's reform leadership as essential to the survival of
public education, NEA President Bob Chase announced at a
nationally televised press conference that "educational
quality would now be the highest NEA priority." He said the
primary means for effectuating this priority of "the new
unionism" would be "peer assistance and review." Peer review
encompasses various procedures by which teachers and their
unions exercise more responsibility ostensibly for improving
teacher performance and for terminating the services of
teachers who do not perform adequately after receiving
assistance.
Peer review is utilized for three different purposes:
- to determine contract renewal or non-renewal of
first-year teachers, usually designated as "interns" in
peer review programs;
- to identify tenured teachers who are not performing
adequately; and
- to provide assistance to tenured teachers upon their
request.
Before Chase could encourage NEA affiliates to adopt peer
review programs, however, he had to convince NEA leaders and
convention delegates to eliminate or amend NEA policy which
discouraged peer review. Under its previous policy, the NEA
would not support or defend teachers who participated in
peer review plans as "consulting teachers", the phrase most
commonly used to denote teachers who observe and/or evaluate
other teachers in peer review plans. (Despite NEA's
nonsupport, its local affiliate in Columbus, Ohio negotiated
and implemented a peer review program 10 years ago.)
New D-6, adopted at NEA's 1997 convention, constitutes a
break from NEA's previous policy of not supporting its
members when they act in a supervisory capacity. As a
result, peer review and assistance is the focal point in the
ongoing NEA campaign to be perceived as the leader of the
education reform movement.
In contrast, the AFT has encouraged peer review for
several years. Over the last twelve years, AFT local
affiliates in Toledo and Cincinnati, Ohio, and Rochester,
New York, have developed and implemented peer review plans.
Unfortunately, independent evaluations of those programs
demonstrate that they are expensive and offer few positive
results.
In an extensive analysis of peer review programs --
especially those in Toledo and Columbus -- Dr. Myron
Lieberman, author of The Teacher Unions (Free Press, 1997),
raises several significant questions.
- What evidence demonstrates that consulting teachers
are more qualified than principals to evaluate teachers?
- What are the full costs of peer review?
- In view of the fact that new teachers "peer reviewed"
out of teaching after the first year can teach elsewhere
in the state or nation, how effective is peer review in
raising teacher standards?
- Can the new unionism be reconciled with core union
functions of negotiating terms and conditions of
employment, enforcing collective bargaining contracts,
and processing grievances?
- Since only a minuscule number of tenured teachers
have been terminated under peer review, wouldn't it be
more effective to give school administrators more
authority (as opposed to less authority under peer
review) to terminate incompetent teachers?
- How can the NEA/AFT effectively represent both the
consulting teacher and the teachers subject to peer
review?
- How can teachers be held collectively responsible for
teacher competence?
- What impact, if any, does peer review have on student
academic achievement?
Dr. Lieberman discusses these and other peer review
issues in a forthcoming book to be published early in 1998.
To reserve your copy, e-mail SDChar@aol.com or call the
Education Policy Institute at (202) 244-7535.
Do
Schools of Education Merit
Additional Government Subsidization?
Views of America's education professors were compiled in
a 1997 Public Agenda report sponsored by the Thomas B.
Fordham Foundation. The report, "Different Drummers: How
Teachers of Teachers View Public Education," reveals six
findings.
- "...the process of struggling with questions is far
more important than knowing the right answers."
- "Teachers of teachers want to discard what they see
as crude and outdated tools of teaching and managing
classrooms -- techniques the public often sees as
part-and-parcel of good schooling. They resist approaches
that rely on competition, reward and punishment,
memorization, or multiple-choice questions."
- "Professors of education hold a vision of public
education that seems fundamentally at odds with that of
public school teachers, students, and the public. While
the public's priorities are discipline, basic skills, and
good behavior in the classroom, teachers of teachers
severely downplay such goals."
- "Even as they advocate an ambitious teaching agenda,
education professors harbor serious doubts about whether
they are adequately preparing teachers to succeed in the
real world. Most education professors have been out of
the classroom for many years and they themselves suspect
they are too detached from today's schools..."
- "Education professors support a core curriculum and
higher academic standards but often balk at requiring
students to pass tests that demonstrate relatively simple
academic skills and knowledge."
- "Teachers of teachers think of public education as an
almost sacred democratic institution that is under siege
and unfairly blamed for problems not of its making. They
rally to its defense and reject reforms that challenge
the primacy of public schools..."
With the Higher Education Authorization Act slated for
Congressional review early in 1998, this report may give
legislators cause to think twice before automatically
approving additional funding for teacher training.
The disconnect between education professors and the
public was also prevalent in the recently concluded National
Commission on Teaching and America's Future, where the
commission was comprised primarily of education producers,
with little input from consumers.
To request a copy of "Different Drummers," write to
Public Agenda, 6 East 39th St., New York, NY 10016, or call
(212)686-6610.
Parents to
Partner Through NCPIE; PTA's Fege Resigns
In conjunction with the U.S. Department of Education's
Regional Conference, approximately 50 organizations will
display their materials and share successful programs on
parent involvement. At an exhibit on December 15, the
midpoint of the three day conference on Improving America's
Schools, The National Coalition for Parent Involvement in
Education intends to promote ways in which parents can
become partners in the educational process. NCPIE program
suggestions include building upon a five-point program
incorporating parents and schools as communicators, as
supporters, as learners, as teachers, and as members of
advisory councils in school governance.
Over 60 organizations, including the National PTA, NEA,
AFT, a division of AARP, and the national organizations of
Elementary and Secondary School Principals, as well as the
National Association of State Boards of Education are
members of the coalition.
Arnold Fege, the PTA's director of the Office of
Governmental Relations resigned last month after 17 years
with the group. As the PTA's foremost lobbyist and one of
its longest-serving staffers, Fege increased the PTA's
visibility on Capitol Hill and encouraged state PTA
affiliate members to focus on promoting PTA's agenda in the
state legislatures as well.
Will
California Root Out Union Corruption with Initiative?
California Federation of Teachers president Mary Bergan
warned other AFT affiliates to be on the lookout for
legislation which could "make it extremely difficult -- if
not impossible -- for the CFT and other unions to be a
factor in the 1998 general election." Bergan referred to the
successful petition drive in California which put an
initiative on the June 1998 ballot. It would require each
employee to make an annual authorization for payroll
deduction for union dues. The initiative also bars unions
and businesses from using, without permission, any money for
political purposes.
There is some precedence for the CTA's concern. A similar
measure, Initiative 134, passed in 1992 by voters in
Washington state changed the dynamics considerably. When PAC
contributions were no longer automatically deducted from
teachers' paychecks, contributors dropped from 45,000 to
8,000. Similarly, payroll deductions of "member
contributions to the AFSCME union PAC dropped from 2,500 to
82," reported the union's director of legislative and
political action.
Governor Pete Wilson not only supports the California
referendum, he encouraged his 31 Republican governor
colleagues to support similar proposals in their respective
states. Wilson is urging Congress to enact similar
legislation. Already, the Senate GOP majority is backing
legislation to prohibit unions from spending members' money
on a broad range of activities, including phone banks and
voter education, unless they have the written approval of
members.
It is widely known that duties of NEA's political
operatives (UniServ staff) and leaders in the NEA/AFT
include soliciting candidates, designing and coordinating
campaign strategies, delivering political and legislative
training programs, managing phone banks, supervising voter
registration and absentee ballot programs, providing
consulting and advertising assistance, and generating
thousands of campaign volunteers. These activities are
conducted outside of the cash and in-kind contributions
through the unions' political action committees.
According to the constitutional protections construed by
the U.S. Supreme Court in decisions of Abood v. Detroit
Board of Education and Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty
Association, a union may only collect dues that are to be
spent on collective bargaining activity. Politics, lobbying,
organizing, social events, and other nonbargaining
activities are explicitly nonchargeable to employees.
Because of another U.S. Supreme Court decision, Chicago
Teachers Union v. Hudson, when challenged -- ironically by
nonunion members who must pay "fair share fees" -- about the
unions' expenditures, union officials must provide audited
disclosure of their books and justify expenditures.
It is during these legal challenges that union
illegalities associated with spending member dues and
nonmember fair share fees on political activities are
uncovered. Currently, the National Right to Work Legal
Defense Foundation is involved in over 100 cases against the
NEA. The Foundation estimates that every year "the National
Education Association (NEA) union and its affiliates spends
tens of millions of dollars on political and other
non-bargaining activities."
NEA and
AFT Look to Gain Greater Power with Merger
Bob Chase and Sandra Feldman now publicly refer to the
probable merger of the NEA/AFT as "unity talks." Teacher
union leaders have recently agreed that an NEA/AFT merged
national organization would be affiliated with the AFL-CIO.
The NEA, the largest union in the United States, is not
currently affiliated with the AFL-CIO, the umbrella
organization for 81 labor organizations with about 10
million members. Meetings of the two unions are intended to
develop a merger agreement to present to each convention's
delegates in the summer of 1998. Critical differences
between the two unions still exist on several issues
&emdash; term limits of officers, ethnic and gender quotas,
and representation election procedures.
Despite their differences in size, revenues, and
political clout, 15 leaders from each teacher union now sit
on a national NEA/AFT Joint Council. This council represents
a significant national collaboration between the two teacher
unions, although a few state and local affiliates have
already merged or are planning to do so. In addition to
serving as a trial balloon for merger, the joint council is
focusing on three key issues: improving school discipline,
school infrastructure, and establishing peer assistance and
review programs. Both unions are lobbying vigorously for
more federal and state funds to finance their programs.
Acknowledging their concerns over the increasing scrutiny
and criticism of public education, AFT President Feldman
said, "Our enemies would have a lot more to worry about if
we were speaking with one voice that could make a big
difference in state capitals and in Washington, DC."
Not much more worry perhaps, as labor unions weighed in
as seven of the top ten contributors in the national 1996
elections. In many states, the NEA/AFT unions rank among the
most influential special interest groups.
EPI's
Education Quick Facts
- According to the director of the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms (BATF), homeschoolers fall under the
jurisdiction of the gun-free school zone law. The BATF
further states that, "while the Gun-Free School Zone Act
is being challenged in court, it is currently in effect
for all schools, including home schools, if they meet the
definition of a school under state law. (Source: Dec.
1997 Education Reporter)
- For people age 25 and over, 41.7 percent of Asians
have a college degree, compared with 23.6 percent of the
general population. (Source: Dec. 9, 1997 Associated
Press)
- The Clinton administration, in a controversial move
backed by liberals and the National Education Association
and condemned by conservative and family groups, is
pushing a special anti-hate curriculum in public middle
schools. The federally-funded curriculum, written by
mostly Massachusetts backers of diversity initiatives,
and distributed by the administration, encourages schools
to set aside time for special classes to teach students
hate code words and actions. "Healing the Hate" agenda
includes efforts to approve of same-sex parents,
celebration of homosexuality and other sexual practices.
(Source: Nov. 24, 1997 White House Weekly)
- A Peter Hart/Robert Teeter poll found that youngsters
who are more aware of government's contributions to
society -- from creating the Internet to reducing
pollution -- are more likely to express interest in
government service careers. The same poll of 505
Americans, ages 18-34, reveals that the group finds
teaching to be a more appealing career choice than
software engineering. (Source: Dec. 8, 1997 Inside
AFT)
- Eighty-six percent of professors of education say
when K-12 teachers assign math or history questions, it
is more important for kids to struggle with the process
of finding the right answers than to actually know the
right answer. (Source: 1997 Public Agenda report,
"Different Drummers: How Teachers of Teachers View Public
Education")
Copyright 1998
Education Policy Institute, PMB 294, 4401-A Connecticut
Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20008-2322 202/244-7535, Fax
202/244-7584 http://www.educationpolicy.org
|
