As I posted yesterday, the tweets going around comparing Wisconsin’s SAT/ACT scores to five states where teachers have no right to unionize are based on bad data — it’s not true that Wisconsin’s SAT/ACT ranking is second in the nation, and that Texas, Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina are all clustered at the bottom of the pile. The chart that says otherwise is based on outdated statistics and improper statistical analysis.
So what’s the truth? What would good data tell us about this question?
Well, it turns out that that’s kind of a complicated question. I can answer it, but you’ll have to bear with me for more than 140 characters.
It’s hard to measure SAT/ACT performance, because different numbers of students take the tests in every state, and comparing the strongest students from one state with a much bigger sample from another doesn’t tell us much that’s interesting. A 2000 study in the Harvard Educational Review, in fact, found that 85% of the difference in states’ performance on those tests is due to variation in participation rates.
Having said that, though, it’s clear from the numbers in my last post that once you’ve controlled for participation Wisconsin remains near the top of the country on SAT/ACT scores, Virginia is near the middle, and the rest of the no-union states from the tweet are near the bottom. High school graduation rates — the subject of another popular Wisconsin tweet meme in recent days — tell a similar story. It’s not as dramatic as best vs. worst, but it’s still dramatic.
Wisconsin does well on a third measure of student performance, too. Its scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in 2009 were above the national average in three of four measures (fourth grade math and eighth grade math and reading) and at the national average in the other (fourth grade reading). Of the ten states in the US without teachers’ unions, only one — Virginia — had NAEP results above the national average, and four — Arizona, Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi — were in the bottom quintile. (One scholar, in fact, found that the states with the strongest teachers unions tended to out-perform states with weaker unions too.)
But there’s another problem. Most of the states that don’t have teachers’ unions are poorer than Wisconsin, and have more English Language Learners in their schools, and rank higher for other demographic factors that make strong academic performance less likely. Rich kids in a school with a teacher’s union will do better than poor kids in a school without one, generally, but that doesn’t have much to do with the union itself. States with teachers’ unions do better, on average, than states without, but is this because of the unions, or state demographics?
There’s only been one scholarly effort to tackle this problem that I’m aware of. Back in 2000, three professors writing in the Harvard Educational Review did a statistical analysis of state SAT/ACT scores, controlling for factors like race, median income, and parental education. They found that the presence of teachers unions in a state did have a measurable and significant correlation with increased test scores — that going to school in a union state would, for instance, raise average SATs by about 50 points.
Two other findings leap out from the Harvard Educational Review study. First, they concluded that Southern states’ poor academic performance could be explained almost entirely by that region’s lack of unionization, even when you didn’t take socioeconomic differences into account.
And second, and to my mind far more interesting, they found that concrete improvements in the educational environment associated with teachers’ unions — lower class sizes, higher state spending on education, bigger teacher salaries — accounted for very little of the union/non-union variation. Teachers’ unions, in other words, don’t just help students by reducing class sizes or increasing educational spending. In their conclusion, they stated that
“other mechanism(s) (ie, better working conditions; greater worker autonomy, security, and dignity; improved administration; better training of teachers; greater levels of faculty professionalism) must be at work here.”
To sum up:
Yes, Wisconsin has great schools, with great outcomes. Yes, states without teachers’ unions lag behind. Yes, that lag persists even when you control for demographic variables. Yes, that difference seems to rest less on the quantifiable resources that unions fight to bring to the classroom than on the professionalism, positive working environment, and effective school administration that unions foster.
And yes, Virginia, (and Texas, Georgia, and North and South Carolina) unions do work.
Update | Matthew Di Carlo of the Shanker Blog has a new post up reviewing the state of scholarship on the relationship between teacher unionization and student performance, looking at (and linking to) several articles I missed. Di Carlo leans a little more heavily on an “on the one hand/on the other hand” approach than I would, but it’s definitely a worthwhile read for both his data and his analysis.
59 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 21, 2011 at 9:23 am
Wisconsin Update: Ranking State SAT/ACT Statistics By Teacher Union Laws « Student Activism
[…] « Radio Interview Teachers Unions, ACT/SAT, and Student Performance: Is Wisconsin Out-Ranking the Non-Union State… […]
February 21, 2011 at 9:29 am
Nina Johnson
Quick analysis of NAEP/union relationship controlling for demographics:
http://shankerblog.org/?p=980
February 21, 2011 at 9:55 am
Angus Johnston
Thanks for that link, Nina. I’d considered including it in my post, but it was already getting too long and complicated. Short version: the scholar who wrote it did a quick-and-dirty statistical analysis of NAEP results controlled for demographics, and found that teachers’ unions weren’t strongly correlated with results. This jibes with what other folks have uncovered, which is that demographic factors are a much bigger influence.
February 21, 2011 at 10:36 am
margaret hanzimanolis
And of course states with teacher’s unions will also be states with more progressive anti-poverty programs and a more progressive set of statues in general. I would imagine that the per cap income in union states is higher too, which means a more “prosperous” electorate, and a student population measurably more “prepared’ and “disposed to” education.
But thank you, Angus, for getting this out. I posted the first set of stats on my fb and got a single “source?” question… so I started to drill down a bit myself. Then I found your post. well done.
February 21, 2011 at 11:50 am
Esteban
Can’t think of a reason why states without strong unions are poorer…wait.
February 21, 2011 at 3:20 pm
Very Important Post On The Effect Of Teachers Unions On Student Achievement | Larry Ferlazzo's Websites of the Day...
[…] under school reform Teachers Unions, ACT/SAT, and Student Performance: Is Wisconsin Out-Ranking the Non-Union States? is a very important post by Angus Johnston. He examines the research connecting the role of […]
February 21, 2011 at 3:31 pm
Kathleen Moore
My very long post supposed posted to my fb page, but as of yet I can’t see it. Sure hope it shows up!
February 21, 2011 at 3:45 pm
Koch Brothers Behind Wisconsin Plan - CycloneFanatic
[…] […]
February 21, 2011 at 4:07 pm
Kathleen Moore
Yes, Virginia, unions DO work! They certainly worked when they forced unwilling employers to provide safety equipment for men working on bridges and construction of tall buildings; to provide personal protective equipment for men working with hazardous materials; to pay overtime after 8 hours of work; to get children out of sweat shops; and to provide the dreaded group health care. Read your American history. It’s all there!
Those of you who think you are too well bred or too well educated to agree with unions should remember that your “living wage” was established when unions fought for higher standards and brought non-union America along behind them on their coattails.
There is no altruism, and there is no trickle-down goodness. Those of you who believe in such employer fairies must be living in a parallel universe.
February 21, 2011 at 4:07 pm
Melissa Anderson
is this the Harvard Review article you’re citing?
L. C. Steelman, B. Powell, and R. M. Carini, “Do Teacher Unions Hinder Educational Performance? Lessons Learned from State SAT and ACT Scores,” Harvard Educational Review 70 (2000): 437-466.
February 21, 2011 at 4:19 pm
The Best Resources For Learning About Attacks On Teachers & Other Public Sector Workers In Wisconsin | Larry Ferlazzo's Websites of the Day...
[…] Teachers Unions, ACT/SAT, and Student Performance: Is Wisconsin Out-Ranking the Non-Union States? is a very important post by Angus Johnston. He examines the research connecting the role of teachers unions to student achievement. […]
February 21, 2011 at 4:41 pm
chris902
There’s also another issue here:
Why should liberals, social democrats and leftists use data gathered from standardized testing to argue for or against education policy at moments when it’s convenient?
Using that data selectively to support teacher’s unions lends undue credence to something that most politically “progressive” people admit (or should admit) is a poor way to judge the effectiveness of teachers, schools and curriculum.
February 21, 2011 at 4:57 pm
Angus Johnston
Yes, Melissa. I thought I’d included a link, but apparently not. Thanks for the backup, and I’ll add a link directly when I get the chance.
February 21, 2011 at 4:59 pm
Angus Johnston
That’s a good point, chris902. I think a lot of the problems with using standardized testing as measures of student achievement are lessened when you use them only as broad aggregate statistical tools, having controlled for demographic and other variables, but it’s true that some issues remain. A useful and welcome perspective.
February 21, 2011 at 5:11 pm
leo lea
Yay, WI! But there’s not much “research” in this article, silly. No offense, but I’m not sure our ranking should be credited to unions when comparing ACT/SAT scores with the kids my nephew teaches in Appalachia. Sorry, but isn’t this just another one of those “what our itching ears want to hear” articles? The author spends a good percentage of the article apologizing for his lack of credible research, i.e. rich/poor states, employment, budgets, demographics; nor does he seem to factor in/out non-union private/parochial schools…seems he’s basically comparing apples and oranges or union states like IL, MI, CA, etc. would have higher rankings…
February 21, 2011 at 7:07 pm
Top Posts — WordPress.com
[…] Teachers Unions, ACT/SAT, and Student Performance: Is Wisconsin Out-Ranking the Non-Union States? As I posted yesterday, the tweets going around comparing Wisconsin’s SAT/ACT scores to five states where teachers have […] […]
February 21, 2011 at 8:05 pm
Richard Teasdale
I found these blogs after hearing Ohio’s Gov. addressing CNN’s questions about upcoming demonstrations in his state and how he supports Wis.’s Gov. for his efforts to Bust Unions. I found it funny that he mentioned how “Southern States” do better at controling the cost of education. Yes, here in Georgia, they shut the schools done a few days each month to pay for the Budget Shortfalls, laying off teachers (and students alike.)
And Angus, I came here fully expecting to find Wisconsin does a BETTER Job of Education than Georgia! I was raised (and educated) in Wisconsin and live in Georgia now. And it’s a Shame what I see here!
The South may have done a Great Job of drawing Corporations down here, but they’ve done it at the cost of their people and it’s future!
I can only hope Ohio’s Gov. takes that into consideration, but of course he and the Corporate Big Wigs could care less…
February 21, 2011 at 8:09 pm
Patience
I am a public school teacher in Texas and want to address chris902’s comment. I think that if you were to talk to teachers in Texas (my only frame of reference), they would use standardized test scores as a marker of progress and as an aggregate statistical tool at any moment in time, not just when its convenient. We are required to meet AYP by the federal government, but we all look at the data from our tests to see how well we are communicating concepts to students. Now, most research says that we have only about a 10-15% increase on baseline test scores, but that 10-15% increase is very important to our sense of effectiveness as teachers. Last year, my school raised our scores in science by 12% due to alot of hard work on the part of our department, and that increase is a huge sense of pride for our Title 1, mostly ELL campus. Thanks for this article! We don’t have collective bargaining in our state and I strongly feel that if we did, that at least we would have more power to do more for our kids than we do. We have very little money, and soon will have less, for our kids, and we are struggling with super high teen pregnancy, high starvation but also high obesity, poverty, and immigration. But we’re keeping fighting the good fight!
February 21, 2011 at 9:01 pm
tami terrana
Both my Aunts were teachers in the Chicago area suburbs. They retired after 21 and 23 years of service. Both have pensions and benefits that would be desired by many. I work in the private sector, have for 28 years, and have another 20 to go..Hmmmm? I will be responsible for my own retirement and my taxes will continue to pay for both of my aunts retirement. Its funny that most SAT/ACT test are precluded by two months of solid SAT/ACT prep and grilling by teachers as described to me by both my Aunts as well as my high school aged daughter. What is happening in WI is not Democracy, it is Lunacy. They are not helping our children learn anything but how not to get along. Collective bargaining agreements made by Government Union officials has bankrupted this country and we the people that pay ( and pay is the operative word here) our taxes are tired of carrying all Government workers for the rest of their lives.
February 21, 2011 at 10:35 pm
Curious
What you forgot to touch on are the rest of the states who lag behind that DO have teachers unions. What is the reason they are near the bottom? Being 44th in a list a 50 doesn’t automatically make it ok just because the teachers in that state have unions.
I would like to see the comparison of two parent household, family values and community involvement. Could it be that the children of Wisconsin, still very much a farming commumity, are successful NOT because of unionized teachers but because of the type of environment they are raised in??
February 21, 2011 at 10:52 pm
Connie
Thanks Patience for hanging in as a teacher. When I left teaching my job that required no degree, paid as much as I made as a teacher with full benefits and I didn’t have to grade papers at night, prepare lesson plans and take classes in the summer to keep my degree anymore. This if for the dedicated teachers like you.
Are you sick of highly paid teachers?
Teachers’ hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or10 months a year! It’s time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do – babysit!
We can get that for less than minimum wage.
That’s right. Let’s give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and plan– that equals 6 1/2 hours).
Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children. Now how many students do they teach in a day…maybe 30? So that’s $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day.
However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations.
LET’S SEE….
That’s $585 X 180= $105,300
per year. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries).
What about those special education teachers and the ones with Master’s degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year.
Wait a minute — there’s
something wrong here! There sure is!
The average teacher’s salary
(nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days
= $277.77/per day/30
students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student–a very inexpensive baby-sitter and they even EDUCATE your kids!) WHAT A DEAL!!!!
Make a teacher smile; repost this to show appreciation for all educators.
February 21, 2011 at 10:57 pm
Connie
I missed copying the credit for my post.
Are you sick of highly paid teachers?by Meredith Menden on Friday, February 18, 2011 at 6:32pm
February 21, 2011 at 11:00 pm
Tom
@ tami terrana — way to use anecdotal evidence to justify your own preconceived notions! What has bankrupted this nation couldn’t be the thirty plus years of tax cuts for the wealthy. It couldn’t be two wars that have lasted a decade! It simply could not be a Medicare drug plan that forbids the government from negotiating lower drug costs! It couldn’t be that bank de-regulation has forced the tax payer to bail out major banks twice in the last thirty years! Not the loss of our manufacturing base because of irresponsible trade policies. Not the lowering of wages due to the loss of private sector unions. Not spiraling healthcare costs because of greedy health insurance companies.
No it must be a couple thousand government workers making 50k a year.
We all stand corrected.
You muppet!
February 21, 2011 at 11:43 pm
Lucy Scott
States cited as poor performers have 30+% black population. Wisconsin has 6.2% black population. States cited as poor performers have many residents living below the poverty level while states like Wisconsin have one of the lower unemployment rates in the country.
So how are you going to find enough students who are similar enough in background to make a fair comparison? I have lived in Mississippi and worked in Wisconsin schools. There is no comparison and it has nothing to do with teacher unions.
February 22, 2011 at 12:01 am
Jean
my question is how can you determine where states rank by SAT/ACT scores when, for instance, in NC, 71% of grads take the SAT, while only (and I would imagine the best and brightest) 6% of WI grads take the SAT…all sounds a little “distorted” to me. Maybe WI has figured out how to make things look better…or the unions have. Sorry, but I don’t trust any state education ranks anymore. It’s all justification for higher taxes.
February 22, 2011 at 9:50 am
Chris
Jean- I have no data for your question, but it’s a SAT/ACT ranking because not all colleges require SATs for entrance. As a matter of fact, most Midwest colleges use ACTs. Therefore, you must look at both college tests, not just the SATs. (and that’s WHY Wi’s % of test takers were lower on SATs)
February 22, 2011 at 10:40 am
colleen
What is happening in WI and around the country will not only affect teachers and students. This will affect all union employees. Remember it is collective bargaining that brought us the 40hr work week, unemployment ins, and workers compensation.
In response to tami – if you get hurt on the job and no longer able to work who will pay for you?? If you lose your job who will pay for you??? when you are old and may possibly need medicare or ss benefits who will pay for you??? And lets be clear teachers and gov’t employees do pay into their benefits maybe just not as much as you would like.
February 22, 2011 at 11:07 am
AbeFroman
they found that concrete improvements in the educational environment associated with teachers’ unions — lower class sizes, higher state spending on education, bigger teacher salaries — accounted for very little of the union/non-union variation. Teachers’ unions, in other words, don’t just help students by reducing class sizes or increasing educational spending. In their conclusion, they stated that
“other mechanism(s) (ie, better working conditions; greater worker autonomy, security, and dignity; improved administration; better training of teachers; greater levels of faculty professionalism) must be at work here.”
Can you expand on this? Are you saying that lower class sizes and increased spending does not correlate much with better performance? That seems pretty significant, as does the statement that other factors “must” be at work. That ‘must’ makes it sounds like they found nothing other than the mere presence of unions that it correlates with the performance difference.
February 22, 2011 at 4:03 pm
Unions are good for students, too. « reality-based world
[…] is here that Angus Johnson, a historian of student activism makes some very good arguments. Wisconsin is actually above average […]
February 22, 2011 at 4:30 pm
Frank
You know the old saying: “Lies, damned lies, and statistics”
Here’s another statistic for you: US News and World report High School rankings for 2009 ranked Wisconsin high schools 44th out of the 50 states. The 5 mentioned non-union states all ranked higher.
Does this prove that union teachers are bad?
http://education.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/education/high-schools/articles/2009/12/09/americas-best-high-schools-state-by-state-statistics
February 22, 2011 at 5:23 pm
japanologist
Wow Frank — talk about lies and statistics! This “ranking” is just bizarre — there’s no explanation of methodology, and no article attached that explains the findings or compares it to other rankings. It seems unworthy of any serious discussion of the issues.
February 22, 2011 at 5:42 pm
Jon
Frank,
You obviously didn’t read that much into it because this study is comparing apples to oranges. The study you are mentioning includes parochial schools, and is actually one of the bigger determining factors for their ranking system.
February 22, 2011 at 7:15 pm
Steve
Here’s another good study you might be interested in perusing:
Teachers Unions and Student Performance: Help or Hindrance?
Authors: Randall W. Eberts
Found at http://www.princeton.edu/futureofchildren/publications/journals/article/index.xml?journalid=34&articleid=81§ionid=479t
Interesting comment in the last sentence of following:
“The evidence on how unions affect student achievement leads to the general conclusion that there is no simple answer and that generalization is difficult. The average-achieving student does not appear to be harmed by attending union schools and may even fare slightly better, whereas low-achieving, at-risk students and high-achieving students tend to do better in nonunion schools. Even though some threads of evidence are promising, researchers have much to learn about how unions affect student outcomes. What is known with some certainty is that the productivity gains of unionization, if any, do not match the increase in cost, upward of 15 percent, that unions place on education through higher compensation and their influence on resource allocation within schools.”
February 22, 2011 at 7:59 pm
Frank
Jon,
You are making my point for me. It’s a statistic. You can read anything you like into it.
I would be interested to know what you mean when you say “the study you are mentioning includes parochial schools, and is actually one of the bigger determining factors for their ranking system.”
Are you suggesting that the typically non-union parochial schools bring the rankings up or down? Regardless, I would have thought (but have no evidence to prove) the overwhelming majority of high schools were public. How much influence could a small percentage of parochial schools have on the statewide outcome?
February 22, 2011 at 9:33 pm
Florida Marching Band Scores | MARCHING ON
[…] GPA School Marching band for all four years From Florida as well. 24 on ACT(1000 on SAT but my ACT score outweighs it) Over 100 volunteer hours In the National Honor Society as well as […]
February 22, 2011 at 10:10 pm
Shanker Blog » Revisiting The Effect Of Teachers' Unions On Student Test Scores
[…] week. They were addressed thoughtfully on one blog, which examined the validity of the data, and pointed out (correctly) that it remained unclear whether differences were attributable to “union effects” […]
February 22, 2011 at 10:51 pm
Angus Johnston
Abe — what the authors found was that most of the effect of smaller class size, increased spending, etc showed up in both union and non-union states, so that if you controlled for those variables, the positive effects of unions persisted. As for the “must,” yes, it’s a bit speculative, but it indicates that there was a positive union effect that couldn’t be explained by any of the obvious quantifiable variables.
February 22, 2011 at 10:53 pm
Angus Johnston
Steve — I’d be interested in reading that study, but your link doesn’t work.
February 22, 2011 at 10:55 pm
Angus Johnston
Frank — Malcolm Gladwell had a great piece in the New Yorker a couple of weeks ago assessing the US News rankings of colleges, and finding that they didn’t actually measure much that was worth measuring. I don’t know if the same criticisms apply here, because I wasn’t able to find a link to the school rankings’ methodology, but I’m certainly skeptical of US News rankings on principle.
February 23, 2011 at 2:08 am
A Few Truths About Education | Renaissance Post
[…] have deemed it illegal: Virginia, Texas, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. Guess what? Wisconsin beats them all, and Virginia’s the only one of the bunch that isn’t circling … (Though now that Walker and his GOP legislature have just rammed through a bill that makes it all […]
February 23, 2011 at 6:13 am
Steve
Here’s another try at sending the link…
http://www.princeton.edu/futureofchildren/publications/journals/article/index.xml?journalid=34&articleid=81§ionid=481&submit
February 23, 2011 at 4:17 pm
becky
I just wanted to comment on the part about the demographics of these states. I did this research based on that original tweet you wrote about, but it is still valid for your argument: While those five states have a high percentage of African-Americans, there are many other states that have a similar or even higher percentage: http://www.censusscope.org/us/rank_race_blackafricanamerican.html In order of percentage black, those states rank: SC – 4, NC- 8, GA – 5, TX – 18, VA – 9. While those are all in the top 20, there are many other states with a higher African-American percentage, like Maryland, Delaware, New York, and Illinois. And if you’re thinking “what about Hispanic people”, Texas is #3 on that list, after California and New Mexico, and just before Arizona and Nevada. The other 4 non-union states aren’t anywhere near the same percentage. http://www.censusscope.org/us/rank_race_hispanicorlatino_alone.html Even ranking states by total percentage of minorities does not explain it away: http://www.censusscope.org/us/rank_race_nonhispaniclatino_white.html (With that chart, start at the end.) One would have to control for poverty, race, and many other things to have good statistics. But I still think the unions must have something to do with it.
February 23, 2011 at 9:20 pm
Chris McQueen
Why doesn’t the Harvard study mention the race gap?
-C
February 24, 2011 at 6:22 am
Jonathan Kim
Your analysis was good but your conclusion that union works is not. You live in New York and I live in Los Angeles. Two of worst public education system. And where two of largest teacher’s Union dominate the education arena. And for you to say union works based on data that compare Apple to Lemon is laughable. Teacher’s Union is not a beneficial organization. Per Student expense adjusted using comparable wage index.. something like that should have been added to the analysis.
February 24, 2011 at 11:49 pm
kansas reflections
[…] “Teachers Unions, ACT/SAT, and Student Performance: Is Wisconsin Out-Ranking the Non-Union Sta… (studentactivism.net) […]
February 25, 2011 at 10:17 am
jo
THEY ALL WANTED A REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR..THEY GOT ONE! SOOOO WHY THE COMPLAINING!!!! SHOULD OF JUST BEEN PATIENT….
February 26, 2011 at 6:05 pm
D***
I’m a retired unionized teacher from a state near Wisconsin. To everyone who thinks busting teachers’ unions will improve education, I’ve got news for you–it won’t.
These unions were once powerful. Those days are long gone. Strikes are a thing of the distant past. Contract concessions and pay cuts, once unthinkable, are a fact of life. Contract violations are routinely ignored. In my last year of teaching, a principal committed a major violation that affected me. I filed a grievance and met with a union official, but was told there was nothing he could do. I asked, “What happens to a principal who violates the contract like this?” I was told, “We tell him/her not to do it again.”
My former school district is in the news a lot, but it is a ghost of its former self. Weakening the union has done nothing to improve it. There are a lot of charter schools nearby with non-union teachers, but many of these schools perform worse than their nearby public schools. Many of these charters have high staff turnover.
With funds in short supply, teachers are now routinely spending hundreds (and even thousands) of dollars from their own pockets on supplies for their classrooms. I used to frequently spend my lunch periods at a nearby business that had a copy machine, paying my own money to copy papers for the children, because the one in our school was often broken.
The so-called experts who have never set foot in a classroom are always full of “helpful” advice. In the early 60s, we were told that TV instruction was going to revolutionize American education for the better, but that didn’t happen. The 60s also brought us the “new math,” but most of this was later abandoned. The late 60s and early 70s brought an end to strict student dress codes because the public at the time demanded it. We were told that less autocratic and more democratic school management (with looser school discipline) would make everything better, and I’ll let the reader draw his or her own conclusions. These decades also provided us with the open school concept; some of these schools are still around, but they’re much different than their earlier versions. It turned out that open schools weren’t “the answer” that some said they would be.
Some school districts later tinkered with decentralization, and everyone was told this would make everything better. Later, after it was discovered that decentralization didn’t work as promised, a move was made back to centralization. This didn’t exactly work as promised either.
In the 90s, various versions of school-based management became the latest trend. It had mixed success in some places, but it failed miserably in others. The 90s also brought us block scheduling on the secondary level. Education experts toured the country making big bucks pushing this new scheduling model. It also had mixed success, but it was later abandoned in some places because it was expensive and it didn’t quite work as promised.
The 1990s also brought us the first charter schools. Some of these schools are doing well, but many others are complete failures. I guarantee it–twenty years from now charter schools will still be around, but many will look back and say that they didn’t exactly deliver as promised.
The real key to improving American education will not come from busting teachers’ unions. It might save a few bucks, but it won’t do much more. What are my suggestions? First, restore order to America’s schools. Second, make sure the curriculum is age-appropriate (in other words, stop forcing kindergarten children to do work that used to be done in first and second grades). Third, pay more attention to the emotional needs of students; in other words, stop cutting school counseling and social work positions. Fourth, let schools, communities, and high school athletes know that sports are great, but that academics come first.
February 28, 2011 at 7:09 pm
Kent
I don’t think controlling for economics is proper in this case. In the areas where unions are not present, poor earnings of the constituents can be traced directly to a lack of collective bargaining.
So, that’s sort of like saying “well, we can’t judge these states 1:1 with active union states because not being union leaves them dirt poor.” Being dirt poor is EXACTLY a product of not having unions. To accurately reflect reality, one must accept the numbers as indicative of the outcome of State policies.
March 2, 2011 at 11:07 pm
Ohio Legislature Railroads State Worker Anti-Union Bill, Passes Senate | Dynamic Subspace
[…] Ohio, Wisconsin, or the other states considering this kind of legislation are playing for political points through short term solutions that unfortunately will wreck their longterm develop plans. I don’t know if these laws, if passed, will stay on the books in the next election cycle, but if they do, I will be very curious to see what effect that they will have on the quality of education in these states. According to Angus Johnston at Student Activism, it appears that teacher unions do contribute to better quantified student performance [read the details here]. […]
March 3, 2011 at 9:31 pm
Gail
A friend of mine just pointed me to this article … would you like to respond? …
“Longhorns 17, Badgers 1”
…http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2011/03/longhorns-17-badgers-1.html
March 4, 2011 at 12:33 pm
Mark Buehner
Kent- that’s ridiculous. We’re talking about specifically teachers collectively bargaining. If you are suggesting that we need to pay teachers more so they can pay more taxes to pay teachers more, I’d like to see your designs for perpetual motion machines. Wealthy states are more likely to be unionized because they have money available to throw away- poor states don’t even have the option. Poor states will always lag behind wealthy states, and wealthy states will always have stronger unionization.
Finally the conclusion to that Harvard study is trouble. It doesn’t account for WHY the 5 (longstanding) non-union states are non-union to begin with… and how those circumstances are likely to differ from taking a state like Wisconsin and making it non-union. Those factors don’t necessarily correlate whatsoever, and surely Wisconsin has very little else in common as such things go.
March 8, 2011 at 10:34 pm
Cynthia
I have always had a beef with unions, in that money is takeen directly out of the employees pay. That in itself is wrong! When some union workers learned where there money was going, they were rightfully outraged. The political support directed to Democrats and Mod. Republicans is a tactical move to guarantee election results.
Second…the minute the school teachers and/or administrators bused the students to Madison, WI — it was wrong. Almost as if they were using the children as part of “poster” campaign. The act in itself is criminal and those responsible, charged with kidnapping or something.
I think that society has come along way in identifying problems with public education, Americans for Prosperity, “The Cartel” showed me more than I wanted to ever know about NJ’s NEA. And it is the same everywhere — greed and corruption, top to bottom.
I’m not saying that all teachers/administrators are bad, but let’s all objectively recognize that a system as corrupt as the NEA is not serving the community or the children.
That is what education is all about, the children. How prepared will they be when they become adults — our next generation of leaders, employers, employees, etc. The politics of educating children is destroying the sytem it was intended to help. Our focus should be on the children, as they are caught up in the middle of this mess and have the most to loose simply because grown adults are not behaving like adults.
We teach anti-bullying, but isn’t that what is going on in WI, IN, and OH? Union bullying? Children will learn political parties when they are grown up, but for now, they need educators who will teach, nurture, inspire, and motivate — not spew issues over what is good or bad about unions.
March 10, 2011 at 11:06 am
Wisconsinite
Of course Wisconsin teachers bused their students to the rallies – then they can count it toward their state mandated union propaganda. Note that when the dems are in charge they pass laws such as the one requiring all public schools to teach the history and value of unions. When the republicans are in charge they pass laws that forbid unions to take dues by force and reducing the free ride of state employees on the taxpayers’ back.
March 11, 2011 at 3:53 pm
No, race isn’t the cause of our economic and education woes « Millard Fillmore's Bathtub
[…] Will busting the unions help Wisconsin schools? You can’t make that case based on the information from Texas. In fact, Angus Johnson conducted a more serious analysis of statistics that may provide a better view into the issue, and they tend to show that unionized teachers improve education performance. […]
March 13, 2011 at 12:17 pm
Wiscosolidarity | wiscostorm
[…] Teachers Unions, ACT/SAT, and Student Performance: Is Wisconsin Out-Ranking the Non-Union States? […]
March 20, 2011 at 10:22 am
The Best Resources For Learning Why Teachers Unions Are Important | Larry Ferlazzo's Websites of the Day...
[…] Teachers Unions, ACT/SAT, and Student Performance: Is Wisconsin Out-Ranking the Non-Union States? is a very important post by Angus Johnston. He examines the research connecting the role of teachers unions to student achievement. […]
March 22, 2011 at 3:14 am
Guest Post: Why I Stand Up: From a “Right to Work” State « Outside the Cave
[…] but that’s part of it. You don’t have to take my word for it either, there’s some evidence out there that right-to-work states do worse on several indicators of educational performance even […]
August 4, 2011 at 6:13 pm
Glenn Grothman – State Senator or Walker Education Policy Puppet? « Badger Democracy
[…] that demonstrate teachers involved in union collective bargaining actually help in the overall performance of students’ test scores, and there is no statistical detriment to students or school districts whose teachers belong to […]
August 1, 2015 at 12:23 pm
What’s It All About? KIDS! | Paula Reed's Blog
[…] that going to school in a union state would, for instance, raise average SATs by about 50 points (Angus Johnston). That looks good for kids to me. Similar results can be found studying the findings of the […]