|
4401-A
Connecticut Avenue, Box 294, Washington, DC
20008
Tel: (202) 244-7535, Fax: (202) 244-7584
|
Education Exchange
Volume 3, Issue 5 -- May
1999
|
Focusing on
Education Reforms at Your School, in Your State
Legislature, and in Congress
|
Teacher
Unions Block Road to Excellence in Teaching
On May 6, Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-6th), a
former high school teacher, and several education experts
expressed their high regard for teachers during Teacher
Appreciation Week. But while teachers received praise,
teacher unions did not.
Tancredo said "Despite egregious contract provisions,
unsavory political activities, and anti-parental involvement
policies of the National Education Association and American
Federation of Teachers, our nation is blessed with a
wonderfully dedicated teaching force. But it cannot reach
its finest hour when more than 70 percent of public school
teachers are working pursuant to restrictive teacher union
contracts."
Speakers identified three areas in which the teacher
unions hinder teachers who strive for excellence in their
classrooms. David Kirkpatrick, expanded on the research done
by Howard L. Fuller, George A. Mitchell, and Michael E.
Hartmann in their study of "The Milwaukee Public Schools'
Teacher Union Contract."
Kirkpatrick also advanced several other concerns about
teacher union contract provisions which interfere with
teachers' performance. As a former president of the
Pennsylvania State Education Association, Kirkpatrick also
drew from experiences in his own background.
As sponsor of the press conference, Charlene K. Haar,
President of the Education Policy Institute, questioned
several specific political activities of the NEA and AFT.
She related how the teacher unions use member dues to
support Democratic candidates, political causes and issues
detrimental to classroom teachers.
Haar said "Member dues 'donated' to organizations like
People for the American Way, the National Organization for
Women, and gay and lesbian alliances certainly don't improve
the quality of teaching, empower teachers, or improve a
teacher's ability to use technology as a classroom tool. On
the contrary, using dues for these and other political
activities undermines teachers." Haar has written
extensively about the teacher unions.
Virginia Walden elaborated on the theme that the NEA and
AFT are roadblocks to excellence in teaching. "Teacher
unions project the idea that parents cannot or should not
contribute to how children are taught," she said. "That
attitude trickles down and creates an unspoken conflict that
prevents teachers from working with parents in a way that
would effectively benefit children." A former teacher,
Walden works with parents in the District of Columbia as the
executive director for DC Parents for School Choice.
George W. Liebmann recognized that "There are many good
teachers in the public schools, but those who want to escape
from the system will find it difficult." He offered the
possibility of reforming the workforce from within, an
option that is likely to work only in small school districts
and counties. Elsewhere, teacher union opposition will keep
teachers in line and uncooperative, he said. Included among
the solutions Liebmann raised were legislation to permit a
variety of new types of alternative schools.
Liebmann, an attorney and author of "The Agreement: How
Federal, State and Union Regulations Are Destroying Public
Education in Maryland," also stressed the importance of
board control at each school and alternatives to the current
teacher certification requirements.
Washington
Education Association Gives Up Fight Against Grassroots
Teacher Group
National Right to Work attorneys recently announced that
the Washington Education Association (WEA), a statewide
teacher union, dropped its year-long campaign to punish two
teachers.
Middle school counselor Barbara Amidon of Olympia and
Spokane-area speech language pathologist Cindy Omlin founded
"WEA Challengers Network" to provide information to 9000
teachers who had been involved in a statewide class-action
suit. In Leer v. WEA, the teacher union was
stopped from illegally using teachers' compulsory dues for
political purposes.
In part, the WEA Challenger newsletter informed teachers
of their constitutional rights to reclaim the portion of
their compulsory dues used for non-bargaining activities.
Last February, Omlin and Amidon received a summons
informing them that the WEA had filed suit against them in
Thurston County Superior Court. The claims included
"trademark infringement" for using the labor union's acronym
in their newsletter's masthead and "tortious interference"
with "business expectancy" and "unfair competition."
The teachers had used the "WEA Challengers" masthead for
years, without any protest from WEA officials until teachers
statewide filed the Leer case against the union.
The settlement forces WEA officials to withdraw their
lawsuit against the teachers group in return for the group's
promise to no longer use the "WEA Challengers" masthead in
the its name.
The National Right to Work Foundation provided free legal
aid to Omlin and Amidon. With that aid, the teachers
defended against the suit and also filed counterclaims
because of the retaliatory and frivolous nature of the
union's suit.
During discovery, union lawyers demanded that the
teachers forfeit a copy of the membership and mailing lists
of the "WEA Challenger Network." Omlin and Amidon refused to
turn over the names of their members for fear that they too
would become targets of the union. After hearing the
teachers' pleas, the judge blocked the union's attempt to
obtain the list, stating that the demand for the list
violated the members' First Amendment right of free and
private association.
"The union's reason for trying to obtain the membership
list was clearly two-fold," said Stefan Gleason, Vice
President of the National Right to Work Foundation. "They
wanted to intimidate teachers into silence, and they also
wanted to frighten possible new supporters away."
After defeating the attempts to get the lists, the
teachers sought internal union documents and testimony of
high-ranking WEA officials in connection with the teachers'
counterclaims. Soon afterward, WEA officials began
negotiating the subsequent settlement, abandoning their
lawsuit and agreeing to drop the charges against Omlin and
Amidon.
Los
Angeles and New York Adding Union History to Curriculum
Connecticut writer/researcher David Stallman states,
"Teacher union control is already a major stumbling block
for improvement of public education. And now we are to
accept union designed curriculum, which has the prospect of
putting union control even deeper into public education."
Stallman was reacting to the New York Times report that
the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) plans to spend $2
million to develop a core curriculum for New York City
schools. The union claims this will "raise academic
standards for children at all grade levels and help stave
off what the union regards as attacks on public education,
such as school vouchers."
The May/June issue of American Teacher reports that two
members of United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA), with the
help of a $100,000 grant from the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service, have developed a labor education
curriculum for Los Angeles high school students. "Although
most students know little about unions," says co-creator
Linda Tubach, "that doesn't mean they are hostile to the
idea of organized labor. On the contrary, 'Teenagers have a
natural interest in equity and justice, so the union theme
doesn't fall on deaf ears.'"
Like the Los Angeles program, source materials for the
New York program indicate a propensity toward union
indoctrination. Projects in the curriculum include
dramatizing a meeting where a union leader convinces an
employer of the advantages of using union produced products,
and designing an original union label. In Los Angeles,
day-long collective bargaining institutes are sponsored for
students.
"This centrally driven effort will certainly render
individual school curriculum development efforts mute, in
favor of waiting for the union curriculum, thus bringing
unionism into the basics of education," notes Stallman.
Federal
Money Solicited for PTA Social Policy Programs
Contributions parents across the country make to the
National PTA supply funds for federal lobbying, but those
funds are decreasing as membership declines. With increasing
frequency, the PTA is soliciting grants from the government
to pay for such publicized initiatives as AIDS education and
environmental awareness programs.
The May 1999 issue of Our Children (the
National PTA magazine) states that "The National PTA, in
cooperation with the National Education Association (NEA),
has received funding from the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC) to continue providing HIV prevention
education for parents.
"The New HIV initiative is a $75,000 subcontract with the
NEA for the one-year period from March 15, 1999, to March
14, 2000, to pilot a training program for use of an
interactive kit called Can We Talk? Families Talk about
Self-Esteem, Peer Pressure, and Sexuality."
In the last half decade alone, the PTA has received
hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal grants. For
example, a supplemental grant of $100,000 from the CDC came
through the American School Health Association in FY 1997-98
for a nationwide study of PTA affiliate health program
needs. The CDC had previously and subsequently sent
additional funds for production and distribution of HIV-AIDS
brochures.
Charlene K. Haar, author of an upcoming book on the
National PTA, writes "In June 1995, the PTA entered into a
cooperative agreement with the Environmental Protection
Agency. This three-year project included publications,
environmental awareness training workshops and mini-grants
to state affiliates. The EPA contributed approximately
$250,000 (95 percent) per year for each of the three years."
The question arises as to whether the PTA is helping to
form public policy in the best interests of children whom
they purport to represent, or whether the government money
funneled to them through grants brings about the positions
they advocate with national lawmakers.
It's
Elementary Scheduled for PBS Airing in June
Dozens of public television stations have scheduled
It's Elementary for airing in June. Designed to
show teachers how to teach gay/lesbian issues in the
elementary grades, It's Elementary is an
outrageous effort to promote a gay/lesbian curriculum from
kindergarten to the sixth grade.
Some stations around the country are planning panel
discussions about the video either before or after it is
shown. EPI is making its data on the influence of the
gay/lesbian caucus in the National Education Association and
the American Federation of Teachers (NEA/AFT) available to
anyone who plans to participate in such a discussion.
These caucuses wield a significant amount of power with
regard to formulating union policy stances on gay rights and
other social issues. Along with massive support from the NEA
and AFT PACs, the policies these organizations push have an
enormous impact on what politicians enact. Those laws can
make a significant difference right down to the local school
level.
More than a year ago, EPI held an airing of It's
Elementary along with a question and answer session
for Congressional staff. This was shortly after the video
was first released and subsequently endorsed by the NEA. In
fact, NEA President Bob Chase said of the film, "Schools
cannot be neutral when we're dealing with issues of human
dignity and human rights. I'm not talking about tolerance.
I'm talking about acceptance. It's Elementary
is a great resource for parents, teachers, and community
leaders working to teach respect and responsibility to
America's children."
Rather than shoving this type of activist video under the
carpet, EPI believes it should receive critical analysis by
viewers. Passive viewers often overlook egregious ideas and
proposals when they are couched in the language of political
correctness.
EPI's
Education Quick Facts
- Although only 2 percent of school-age children are
educated at home, the number of home-schooled students
has been increasing by 15 to 20 percent a year since
1985. In 1980, only 20 states permitted home schooling.
In 1993, it became legal on a nationwide basis. (Source:
Christian Science Monitor, April 27, 1999)
- Channel One Network is the leading provider of
television news and educational programs to U.S.
secondary schools, delivering information and
programming, via satellite, directly to 12,000 public,
private, and parochial schools, reaching 400,000
educators and more than 8 million teenage viewers daily.
(Source: Teacher Education Reports, National
Center for Education Information, April 19, 1999)
- The number of teachers seeking national certification
has jumped from 1,983 last year to 7,244. Part of the
reason: a new federal program that provides 50 percent of
the certification fee. (Source: NEA Today,
May 1999)
- The American Federation of Teachers is challenging
the erosion of full-time teaching positions at the
nation's colleges and universities. In a 1998 survey, AFT
found the number of part-time faculty members jumped 226
percent from 1970 to 1995 and could outnumber full-time
faculty by 2001. (Source: America @ Work,
May 1999)
- In "Some Findings from an Independent Investigation
of the Tennessee STAR Experiment and from Other
Experiments of Class Size Effects," Professor Eric A.
Hanushek finds 19 of 23 studies show no effect on student
achievement, three show a negative effect, and just one
shows a positive effect. (Source: Policy
Note, The Buckeye Institute, May 1999)
Copyright 1999
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
|
