Russel Bradley-Cook
Re-envisioning Education and Democracy
Public Intellectual Essay
April 26, 2002
THE ROLE OF UNIONS IN STAFF
DEVELOPMENT
AND DEFENDING TEACHERS IN THE CLASSROOM
“Guilds
began precisely for the regulation of practice.
Middle management union people had bought the American legal model: not to judge but to defend. This kind of unconditional love and
acceptance should be expected only of one’s mother-not one’s union.”
-Adam
Urbanski, President of the Rochester Teachers
Association
Introduction
Teacher’s unions are often
perceived as being opposed to any changes that require more work for
teachers. In-service, also known as
“teacher training” or “staff development,” is a crucial area in which unions
can act directly to improve the quality of teaching and education. By ensuring that teachers receive the best
training available, unions expand their role from defending teachers at the
bargaining table to defending teachers in the classroom, simultaneously
fighting for self-improvement and for the public good. To successfully embrace and enact in-service,
unions must avoid the mistakes of yesteryear.
First, they must resist the old model of in-service, known as the
one-shot program. Second, unions must
promote individual and systematic change within the schools system through new
forms of in-service. Third, unions must
prepare teachers for the changing racial demographics of classrooms in the near
future. Fourth, they must creatively
address the challenges presented by funding deficits. The incorporation of in-service into the role
of unions, not as an isolated task but as a step that is cohesive with other
tasks of the union, from “negotiating contracts to developing state
legislation,” will lead the way to a stronger, more professional union that
defends its own interests as well as those of the public (www.aft.org/edissues/downloads/ProfessionalDev.pdf).
In-service programs are criticized for many reasons. The research in the field of in-service is saturated with complaints of the inadequacies of current efforts. The single largest attack on in-service is its reliance on the “one-shot workshop.” This format consists of “short-term passive activities with limited follow-up” (Miller, 2). Nearly all researchers criticize this one-shot method for failing to reach beyond a superficial level of learning. For example, in a 1994 survey of elementary school math teachers in California, half of the teachers who attended a math-related in-service session spent only a day on the activity (Cohen, 4). Short-term programs, such as the one-shot workshop are seen as an unsuccessful effort, achieving little long-term or even short-term effects on “educator practices, organizational changes, and student outcomes” (www.sharingsuccess.org/code/bv/pd/html). Teachers recognize the lack of impact of such training and generally find it to be “boring and irrelevant” (Miller, 2).
Although the one-shot
method of in-service has been criticized for over a quarter of a century, it is
still used today. In 1975, D.C. Lortie performed a study on brief in-service programs, such
as the one-shot method. Lortie reported that these programs were an acute problem
in the failure of school systems to claim “responsibility for systematically
improving staff performance through serious training programs” (Lortie, 234). Yet,
in the 1994 California survey only approximately three percent had attended
workshops longer than one week (Cohen, 4).
Despite teachers’ complaints and a lack of results, the one-shot
workshop has subordinated other forms of in-service.
Unions, Promoters of Individual and Systematic Change Through New Forms of In-service
In the effort to provide
teachers with the skills to teach to the best of their ability, teachers’
unions have a distinct advantage; unions consist of a network of professionals
who can contact each other on a regular basis with relative ease. In a five-year study of high schools, two
researchers from Stanford University, Milbrey
McLaughlin and Joan Talbert, found that this type of professional contact and
networking has dramatic benefits.
Teachers “addressed problems and found solutions together, gaining in
their sense of professional identity, motivation and willingness to undertake
challenges” (Miller, 3). The
prioritization of communication and networking among teachers is essential for
a constructive in-service program. One
of the important aspects of these networks is that learning is addressed as a
process rather than an event (www.aft.org//Edissues/downloads/ppd.pdf). Networks are also distinct from the
traditional one-shot workshop because of the opportunity for feedback from
participating teachers. Teacher feedback
is identified by most scholars as crucial to the successful enactment of an
in-service program; it allows for programs to adapt to local circumstances and
concurrently provides a small army of researchers who can experiment with new
practices and theories in the field. Any
system of in-service that ignores teachers in the process of implementing
school changes disregards their knowledge of the classroom and status as
professionals. By harnessing union
networks around the issues and personal experiences of members participating in
in-service programs, unions can strengthen skills, provoke curiosity and engage
members intellectually. Furthermore, by
advancing the pre-existing individual and organizational contacts on a national
level, unions can provide for systematic change to schools and in-service
programs based on the interaction of professional networks.
Another way in which
teachers’ unions can promote individual and systematic change is to encourage
intervention among its own members.
Intervention is an intense form of in-service that is enacted on the
individual level to address the challenges struggling teachers face. In a common form of the intervention program
described by Lisa Birk in “The Harvard Education
Letter,” an administrator and/or a union member refers an ineffective teacher
to a panel comprising of union and administrative representatives. If a majority of the panel determines that
the teacher truly is in need of intervention, an expert teacher is assigned to
him or her for a period of time, usually no less than a year. During this period, the expert teacher works
with the teacher to bring him or her up to an acceptable level of
teaching. The training that occurs is
one-on-one and is customized to meet the needs of that particular teacher. At the end of the time, the expert sends a
documented history of the case to administrators and the union. If the administration is happy with the level
of teaching then the teacher moves on, if not, there is a termination hearing
in which the union may choose to defend or not to defend the teacher (Birk, 2).
The intervention program
has several advantages over the traditional system of teacher evaluation, which
is performed by an administrator. First,
unlike the administrative review where teachers are evaluated by an administrator
unfamiliar with his or her field, the teacher is paired with an expert teacher
from his or her field. Second, any
criticism of the teacher is coming from an evaluator who has recently taught
classes as opposed to an administrator who has little classroom
experience. Third, peer reviewers are
more likely to terminate weak teachers than administrators. There is not evidence identifying why this is
the case, however, it may be because teachers understand the systemic
difficulties produced by bad teachers; not only the short-term effects, such as
bad behavior, but the long-term effects, such as the difficulties created for
the students’ next teacher who must overcome the earlier teacher’s
failures. After an intervention program
was established in Cincinnati an administrator noted that “[t]he teachers have
non-renewed twice as many incompetents as the administrators did in previous
years” (Birk, 3).
Fourth, a system of peer evaluators decreases the friction of a
hierarchical system. Rather than having
an outsider come down to evaluate a teacher, the adaptation of an intervention
system promotes the honest evaluation of individual members on their own
merits. Whereas the old system
encourages teachers to protect their own against outsiders who do not seem to
understand their daily experiences, the new system allows teachers to give and
receive the constructive criticism of their peers. Fifth, the program allows administrators to
focus on duties involved in running the school and allow teachers to concern
themselves with activity in the classroom.
Nevertheless, if an intervention program is to be successful, it must
offer both support and encouragement for teachers under review. The goal of the program should not be too
eliminate all teachers who are not currently adequate, but to bring those
teachers in question up to an adequate level.
As one teacher who successfully underwent intervention said, “At first
it was kind of a blow…They tell you, ‘It’s either intervention or you’re
fired.’ But the principal and my mentor were supportive and constructive” (Birk, 3).
Intervention programs also aim to encourage continual improvement beyond
the required level of adequacy. One of
the end results of this program and any other in-service program should be the
improvement of the morale of teachers.
In the case of intervention, it is not only the teachers participating
in the program whose morale should improve; there should be an increase in
“professional self-esteem” among the surrounding teachers (Birk,
3).
Union control over
in-service faces several obstacles. The
main obstacle is the self-image of union members; some union members and
leaders feel that it is a conflict of interest for the union to adopt a program
that has traditionally within the domain of school administrators. As the report on Union Sponsored Staff
Development notes, “unions have found it difficult-often for good reason, but
difficult nonetheless-to move beyond adversarial relations to more productive
labor-management arrangements” (www.aft.org/edissues/downloads/ProfessionalDev.pdf). Still, adopting such a position will allow
unions and teachers to apply their knowledge in prescribing the help they
receive in the classroom. The second
obstacle to union control over in-service is administrative resistance. Administrators maintain a view of unions that
“does not extend the union’s role to areas of professional practice or
educational policy” (www.aft.org/edissues/downloads/ProfessionalDev.pdf). In Rochester, New York, administrators
resisted adamantly when Adam Urbanski, President of
Rochester Teachers Association, sought to organize a program of peer
review. Administrators even sued twice
to have the program disbanded, however they lost both cases and “now say that
intervention saves time and can even prevent some conflicts” (Birk, 2).
Need For Cultural Awareness
Although, there is
significant debate over the standards for measuring student achievement, the
general belief is that schools should strive for higher student
achievement. If unions are going to
significantly contribute to increasing student scores, specific efforts must be
focused on decreasing the achievement gap between African American and Latino
students, and white students.
Nationwide, non-Asian minority students are out scored by three-quarters
of white students on standardized tests (www.sharingsuccess.org/code/bv/achieve.pdf). This gap represents a particular problem for
many states, such as Minnesota, in which the number of African American and
Latino students in K-12 is increasing in proportion to white students (Wray,1). There is disagreement about the causes of the
achievement gap, nonetheless all solutions are either produced or influenced by
teachers. Therefore, it is crucial that
in-service pay particular attention to eliminating this gap. Moreover if the union is to measure up to its
goal that “Professional Development should contribute to measurable improvement
in student achievement,” then it must support efforts that strive to eliminate
the gap (www.aft.org//Edissues/downloads/ppd.pdf).
In order to address the
achievement gap, unions must act as a lightning rod for research into the
reasons for the existing gaps in standardized test performance. However, this research should look beyond
standardized scores as the overall school experience. Does the disparity in
test scores reflect a real lack of learning and understanding or is it a
reflection of different test-taking skills?
First, researchers should investigate the different experiences of
school for African-Americans and whites.
If these experiences are different, why is that so, and what can be done
to improve the experience of school for all students? Second, researchers should study school
districts that have a large percentage of “overachieving” poor and minority
students (Lyle, 1). Finally, unions must
create or adopt some type of in-service that uses this research to train
teachers, not only in the course matter they must teach and the pedagogical
style they must use, but also for the students they are going to be interacting
with in the classroom.
Funding
Although the potential
benefits of in-service training are enormous, budget cuts have put enormous
amounts of pressure on schools and have resulted in the elimination or drastic
reduction of many programs, including many in-service programs. The issue of funding is a chronic concern in
education, however, unions can play a large role in providing and protecting
funding for in-service. It is difficult
to determine the total amount of money spent on in-service, yet a report by the
Westchester Institute for Human Services Research asserts, “Local districts
bear most of the costs” (www.sharingsuccess.org/code/bv/pd/html). Thus, unions must continue to seek money from
states and districts for union-lead in-service, but they must also “learn how
to build effective coalitions and partnerships” to finance in-service projects
independently of the state (www.aft.org/edissues/downloads/ProfessionalDev.pdf). By building coalitions and networks of
likeminded organizations, unions can expand the range of resources available
for the funding of creative in-service programs. The search for resources should be
open-minded enough to include not only financial resources, but also resources
from within nearby communities, such as local artists who would like to lead
workshops on the creation and meaning of art.
The creation of networks and coalitions must be pursued in a way that
provides teachers with new partners in education, including traditionally
alienated groups who would like to share their knowledge with teachers and
students.
Not only can the union
seek new ways to fund in-service, but it can also act as a defender of
in-service in times of deficit. There
are cases, such as the Maple-Oakdale, Minnesota school district, in which
teachers’ agree to forgo staff development funds in order to save job
positions. In some circumstances,
teachers may even overwhelmingly support these cuts; however cutting in-service
should not be considered “first aid” (Peters, 2B). In-service is crucial for the development and
reform of schools and unions must play a role in defending it from cuts. In Dade County, Florida, the “Dade Academy
for Teaching Arts” has been spared major cuts because of strong union
support. The Academy receives financial
support from the school board and the United Teachers of Dade/AFT, and it
offers teachers a “nine-week opportunity for professional reflection, research
and growth while regular teaching assignments are covered by subject area
certified instructors from the academy” (www.aft.org/edissues/teacherquality/At298a.htm). In-service programs in the Florida school
districts are susceptible to budget cuts, as are those everywhere throughout
the nation. However, as Evelyn C. Campbell, teacher-director of the academy says,
“everyone is trying to see what programs they can cut next, and the union has been
very important in keeping us alive” (www.aft.org/edissues/teacherquality/At298a.htm).
Recommendations
These recommendations are
specifically targeted at unions for the creation and improvement of existing
in-service programs, however most of them can be applied to anyone concerned
with in-service training.
-Unions must discourage
the reliance on one-shot workshops. They
must promote extended intellectually challenging programs. These programs must encourage teachers to
network with other teachers to discuss the implications and impact of the
in-service in their classrooms.
-Unions must encourage a
system in which teachers are responsible for evaluating other teachers. This evaluation system must include a system
of checks and balances to prevent abuse and must be intimately linked with a
system of intervention. Intervention must provide struggling teachers with the
opportunity to meet regularly with expert teachers. These experts must be knowledgeable of the
circumstances and events of the school and even the classroom of the struggling
teacher.
-Unions must strive for
the improvement of all students’ academic performance. This means that any in-service program must
provide research-based training for teachers specifically aimed at deceasing
the achievement gap between African-Americans and Latinos, and whites.
-Unions must make
in-service programs relevant to the concerns of teachers. By creating
programs centered on the needs and concerns of teachers, unions increase the
usefulness of these programs and decrease the likelihood that these programs
will be susceptible to budget cuts.
-Unions must become more
adept in finding resources for in-service programs. This is applicable in the search for
financial resources. However, it is also
relevant in the search for non-financial resources. A relationship of networks and coalitions
between unions and traditionally alienated groups would be mutually beneficial.
Conclusion
In-service plays a crucial
role in helping teachers adapt to the dynamic situations they face in schools
on a daily basis. By creating relevant
in-service programs, as well as advocating the importance of in-service, unions
help teachers prepare for the situations they encounter on a daily basis. These programs can keep teachers learn from
the experience and activities of others in their field. The shift from defending members against
outside attack to helping members realize their full potential is reminiscent
of the role of guilds, as protectors of a craft rather than an individual. The expansion of the role of the union paves
the way for the simultaneous fight for self-interest and for the public good. By aligning union interests with the general
public, the union advances their position at the bargaining table.
In order of Appearance:
1. American Federation of Teachers. “Professional Development: It’s Union Work.” www.aft.org/edissues/downloads/ProfessionalDev.pdf. 4/15/02. P. 14.
2. Miller, Edward. “The Old Model of Staff Development Survives In a World Where Everything Else Has Changed.” The Harvard Education Letter. Harvard Graduate School of Education, January/February 1995.
3. Cohen, David K. and Heather C. Hill. "State Policy and Classroom Performance: Mathematics Reform in California" Consortium for Policy Research in Education Policy Briefs. University of Pennsylvania, January 1998.
4. Westchester Institute For Human Services Research. “The Balanced View: Professional Development.” www.sharingsuccess.org/code/bv/pd/html. 4/23/02.
5. Lortie, D. C. School Teacher: A Sociological Study. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 1975.
6. American Federation of Teachers. “Principles for Professional Development.” www.aft.org//Edissues/downloads/ppd.pdf. 4/18/02. P. 7.
7. Birk, Lisa. “Intervention: A Few Teachers’ Unions Take the Lead in Policing Their Own.” The Harvard Education Letter. Harvard Graduate School of Education, November/December 1994.
8. Wray, Lyle. “Education’s Challenges: Raising the Bar and Not Leaving Anyone Behind.” The Minnesota Journal. Minneapolis, Minnesota, February 2002. P. 1.
9. Westchester Institute For Human Services Research. “The Balanced View: The Achievement Gap.” www.sharingsuccess.org/code/bv/achieve.pdf. 4/23/02.
10. Peters, Doug. “Teacher’s Group Eases Pain of Budget Cuts.” Pioneer Press. 2/27/02. 2B.