Education reform, Chicago style |
On Board Online • September 24, 2012
One of a community’s worst fears just played out in the Chicago Public Schools, the nation’s third largest school system. For more than a week, teachers went on strike, creating chaos for 350,000 students and their parents.
The strike in the Windy City loomed large nationally because the debate mirrored issues in other U.S. communities. School districts across the nation are implementing teacher evaluation reforms, competing with charter schools and looking for heroes to champion the cause of public education, even if that hero is a big city mayor.
Adding significance was the fact that the strike took place in Chicago – a Democratic stronghold with strong links to the Obama Administration. President Obama cut his political teeth there, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel served as Obama’s chief of staff and led campaign fundraising, and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan formerly headed up the Chicago Public Schools. When Chicago (on the eve of a presidential election) becomes hamstrung in its efforts to implement the administration’s key reforms, hopes dim nationwide for an educational decision-making and delivery system based on metrics that includes some measure of student performance.
What lessons can we learn from the Chicago teachers’ strike?
1. There remains no agreement on how to measure performance. Several years ago, I began calling attention to research on “value added” approaches to measuring student achievement and linking student and teacher performance, which is now the thorniest aspect of new teacher and principal evaluation systems. Those on strike complained that the task of raising student achievement in the face of financial constraints and student poverty should not be laid at the feet of the teachers. Most of us agree on the problems, but we are all over the map when it comes to workable solutions. The strike did not resolve any of these questions.
2. Unions and management will be spending enormous amounts of political capital to seek control of public education. One of the oft-cited reasons for the Chicago strike was the feeling of disrespect felt by teachers. Mayor Emmanuel was, indeed, unflattering in comments about teacher salaries, hours and low performance standards, and he had a point. But, I wonder if this strike could have been avoided if both parties were not so hell-bent on demonizing each other. In the end, who won? The mayor’s poll numbers will not significantly improve, poor staff morale will define the school climate, many parents will try to avoid involvement in schools, and students will remain unfortunate pawns. While the tentative agreement contains new language, I don’t see how the plusses outweigh the minuses for any of these parties.
3. Charter schools will look more attractive to
parents. After dealing with myriad problems created by the strike, Chicago parents are probably seeing charter schools in a positive light. Imagine a single mother who had to arrange for some form of child care during the strike while working a minimum wage job. Wouldn’t she be interested in having her child or children attend a charter school that offered a safe environment, with a longer school day, greater structure and discipline, a focus on student outcomes and a faculty that is not part of the Chicago teachers’ union?
Compared to Chicago, implementation of teacher evaluation reforms in New York State so far looks smooth. But let’s not be naïve. Notwithstanding the fact that New York State law imposes harsh penalties for teacher strikes, all the issues that led to Chicago’s strike exist here, too. In many districts, negotiations are moving slowly (or not at all). If the number of SED approvals are any indication, we have a long way to go.
It seems that the Washington and Albany reformers may not have taken into account that negotiating language to implement rigorous new forms of teacher and principal evaluations would prompt unions to make demands for higher wages, better working conditions or improved benefits. Let’s not forget that here in New York the teachers’ union sued the state over proposed regulations for the new teacher and principal evaluation system, thereby gridlocking implementation of reform efforts for months.
Could Chicago-level obstruction happen here? My guess is that New York City’s mayor, teachers’ union officials and parents have been watching Chicago with an especially keen eye. There is little love lost between Mayor Bloomberg and the teachers union president, Michael Mulgrew. The New York City Department of Education has yet to submit an evaluation agreement for state review, and charter school operators are rushing through the mayor’s open door. An impasse with the city teachers’ union over new evaluation procedures has already jeopardized millions of dollars in grant funding.
A popular nickname for Chicago is “The City that Works.” A strike is the opposite – a work stoppage – and the effects don’t evaporate once the pickets end. Given the lingering animosity and hostility to school reform, I doubt that moniker will apply to Chicago this year, as far as public education is concerned.