The Negative Impact of Teacher Unions on Public Education in the US - Prof. Michal M. Mito, Exams of Grammar and Composition

Download The Negative Impact of Teacher Unions on Public Education in the US - Prof. Michal M. Mito and more Exams Grammar and Composition in PDF only on Docsity!

A Classroom At Risk: How Teacher Unions are ruining Public

Education

Matt Kerns Dr. Mitol Engl 105 Section 08-A In the 1970’s, a man by the name of Jimmy Carter was running for the office of the president of the United States. Mr. Carter wished to insure his victory on election day so he formed an alliance with the largest union in North America, The National Education Association. The NEA promised Carter the votes of its members and campaign contributions under one condition, the establishment of a Federal Department of Education. In 1977 Jimmy Carter was sworn into office and followed through on his promise. The Department of Education was established in 1979 and still exists today. In 1981 Ronald Reagan handily defeated Jimmy Carter and threatened to dismantle the DOE, which he referred to as “…President Carter’s bureaucratic boondoggle…”. Ronald Reagan failed to deliver upon this threat partly due to a report in 1983 titled “A Nation at Risk” (Salisbury, Leiberman). In the report the Reagan administration was told that drop out rates were going to soar and America’s students would not be able to fill jobs that required a strong education. The DOE’s mission: to prevent this from happening. The department still exists today and amazingly, drop out rates are still very high, drugs and violence are commonplace, and our nation’s schools are losing ground to foreign public education. How could this happen? On the surface it seems the Unions have our children’s best interest at heart, but more often than not students just become a means to a political end. Simply put, the Teachers Unions are ruining public education. The NEA takes a consistent stance that our schools need more money. What most people don’t know is that per pupil spending adjusted for inflation has doubled since the

of the United States of America heard the case of Brown v. Board of Education. This was the most significant moment in the civil rights movement. After the Supreme Court ruling no longer could there be segregation in our nation’s schools (Kauchak, Eggen). This certainly was to be the defining factor of equality. Wrong. Since the historic decision our public schools have become re-segregated with many minorities zoned into failing inner city schools (Stossel). Many fiscal conservatives support the idea of school choice and voucher programs. Such programs have found success in other countries, introducing a type of free market competition that makes schools strive to become better. These programs could also allow these under privileged inner city kids the chance of a good education (Rod Paige, at Cato book Forum better find the date). The NEA refuses such reforms and supports the continuation of zoning laws. In the L.A. Unified School District they have a huge problem. The problem is they have a huge district. LAUSD has well over 700,000 students in 791 different schools but only 1 school board. As you might have guessed this makes school management nearly impossible. In 2001, the state of California announced 13 schools that would be subject to state take over unless they improved, ten were in the district (Boaz, Unions vs. Education). The School district boasts one of the worst exit exam rates in the entire state with three quarters of its ninth graders failing the mathematics section and a majority failing English. When there was an initiative on the ballot to divide the LAUSD into two smaller districts, the teachers Union, with $125,000 to spare, campaigned against the reformers outspending them 25 to 1. To this day L.A. schools are still mismanaged under the same gigantic bureaucracy that the Unions fought so valiantly for.

A specific group of students which the NEA claims to champion are the inner city minorities. With culturally responsive learning initiatives and constant funding of studies meant to keep inner city youth in school it’s hard to disagree. On the outside the NEA seems to be taking up their cause, but these disadvantaged youth fall pray to deep betrayal. One example of such betrayal to these downtrodden students is the case of the Gary Indiana teacher’s strike. Since the 2000-2001 school year Indiana schools have slowly been doing better on the Istep+ achievement exam. At Theodore Roosevelt High School in Gary they have been getting much worse. Since 2000 they have gone from a dismal 28% percent pass rate to a pathetic less than 20% passing today (Indiana Department of Education). So at the start of the 2006 school year what did they do? They walked, demanding higher salaries. Not only that, they kept the students out of the classroom just weeks before the Istep was to be administered. Kids who fail the Istep are unable to graduate and are more likely to drop out. Did the teachers union have the students in mind? Do these teachers deserve higher salaries despite their lack of competence? The publicly elected bureaucrats caved and the teacher’s got a new contract and a higher salary. This is a classic example of the system’s lack of consideration for the student and unions protecting defective teachers. In the end workers do need representation. Maybe teacher unions aren’t protecting the student’s best interest and maybe they are a necessary evil. But keep in mind that every union due paid to the unions comes first from you the taxpayer. Be reminded every time you hear about a poorly performing school that you are paying an incompetent teacher’s salary. So what shall we do? Can we protect the student’s interest and have worker representation? Myron Leiberman, chairman of the Education Policy

by the Unions are students will get the shaft every time. I don’t believe that’s what our taxes should be going toward.