Chapter 11

Although from the last chapter we see a strong push for education to remain out of politics and business, the national and international climates created organizations that not only fought to maintain a standard of education but also to set up external structures; such as teacher unions. Low wages, few benefits, lack of retirement funds and the struggle to reduce centralized power paved the way for teachers to come together and form their own representative organizations. Teacher unions struggled with the elitist nature of school boards and the rigid functioning imposed by scientific management. Clearly the conflict between teachers and administrators was fueled by their contrasting definitions of proper educational policy and teaching methods. Early critics denounced that teacher unions were militant forces and “radical alternatives”, however, teacher unions were successful by taking away some power from those who craved it most.
Although teacher unions efficiently function to mediate and stabilize any unjust authority within higher administrations, has their influences in educational policy grown too much? In NYC, the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) has often been criticized for its strong use of political tactics when protecting and demanding certain rights for its teachers. Until recently, “rubber rooms” were supported by the UFT because it limited the city’s power to dispose of teachers. However, the UFT still opposes any negotiations to ease the process for firing ineffectual pedagogues. Defining tenure has also been a tug of war between teacher unions and departments of education; especially in NYC. Any reform to redefine tenure is considered an “attack” by the UFT, which often results in small teacher protests. Although I think teacher unions, such as the UFT, greatly support its members, there is clearly an underlying power and political struggle. Ideally, unions should only step in to protect the rights its teachers but not continually support those teachers with low performances.