Study by Associated Press Shows Schools Perform Better Without Collective Bargaining

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 1:09 AM GMT
    http://www.newschannel5.com/story/15225288/study-shows-schools-perform-better-without-collective-bargaining

    NASHVILLE, Tenn.- The issue of collective bargaining rights for teachers was a huge issue on Tennessee's Capitol Hill.

    Now the Associated Press has taken a close look, comparing how school systems do with or without collective bargaining rights.

    The AP discovered school systems without teachers' collective bargaining rights performed slightly better than those with negotiated contracts. Thirty-eight school districts don't have collective bargaining rights, and the AP found those systems averaged a higher percentage of students who earned proficient or advanced scores.

    In May, state lawmakers voted to end collective bargaining rights for teachers.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 1:20 AM GMT
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/TN_COLLECTIVE_BARGAINING_TESTING_TNOL-?SITE=VABRM&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
    Thirty-eight of the state's 135 local school districts did not engage in collective bargaining with their teachers before a new law eliminated those rights this year, according to the Tennessee Education Association.

    Those districts averaged a higher percentage of students earning proficient or advanced scores in the four categories tested. The largest difference was in math, where non-bargaining districts averaged 3.5 percentage points higher than the rest of the districts, while social science scores were just a half percentage point apart.

    But the districts that allowed collective bargaining - which included the state's four largest cities - averaged larger gains in all four categories compared with last year's scores.


    I want the gains rather than the absolute % points.

    Association does not prove causality. Lots of other factors like the students' socioeconomic backgrounds, finances of the school districts, experience of the teachers, etc. are not corrected for.

    It's not even clear that there are considerations for statistical significance here. The AP should do more of these studies, and when they find something consistent, report back.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 1:59 AM GMT
    q1w2e3 said
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/TN_COLLECTIVE_BARGAINING_TESTING_TNOL-?SITE=VABRM&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
    Thirty-eight of the state's 135 local school districts did not engage in collective bargaining with their teachers before a new law eliminated those rights this year, according to the Tennessee Education Association.

    Those districts averaged a higher percentage of students earning proficient or advanced scores in the four categories tested. The largest difference was in math, where non-bargaining districts averaged 3.5 percentage points higher than the rest of the districts, while social science scores were just a half percentage point apart.

    But the districts that allowed collective bargaining - which included the state's four largest cities - averaged larger gains in all four categories compared with last year's scores.


    I want the gains rather than the absolute % points.

    Association does not prove causality. Lots of other factors like the students' socioeconomic backgrounds, finances of the school districts, experience of the teachers, etc. are not corrected for.

    It's not even clear that there's are considerations for statistical significance here. The AP should do more of these studies, and when they find something consistent, report back.


    Collective bargaining has nothing to do with how well teachers teach and 2/3 of the factors that effect children's performance are out of teacher's hands. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 1:13 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    q1w2e3 said
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/TN_COLLECTIVE_BARGAINING_TESTING_TNOL-?SITE=VABRM&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
    Thirty-eight of the state's 135 local school districts did not engage in collective bargaining with their teachers before a new law eliminated those rights this year, according to the Tennessee Education Association.

    Those districts averaged a higher percentage of students earning proficient or advanced scores in the four categories tested. The largest difference was in math, where non-bargaining districts averaged 3.5 percentage points higher than the rest of the districts, while social science scores were just a half percentage point apart.

    But the districts that allowed collective bargaining - which included the state's four largest cities - averaged larger gains in all four categories compared with last year's scores.


    I want the gains rather than the absolute % points.

    Association does not prove causality. Lots of other factors like the students' socioeconomic backgrounds, finances of the school districts, experience of the teachers, etc. are not corrected for.

    It's not even clear that there's are considerations for statistical significance here. The AP should do more of these studies, and when they find something consistent, report back.


    Collective bargaining has nothing to do with how well teachers teach and 2/3 of the factors that effect children's performance are out of teacher's hands. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Yes, I'd like to see the underlying data as well. It is however silly to say that this has no effect on kids. Collective bargaining is likely a proxy for other factors - but it is an interesting data point and I can see how a weaker union could have a positive impact on education and the flexibility of both teachers and their principals.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 1:32 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 said
    q1w2e3 said
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/TN_COLLECTIVE_BARGAINING_TESTING_TNOL-?SITE=VABRM&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
    Thirty-eight of the state's 135 local school districts did not engage in collective bargaining with their teachers before a new law eliminated those rights this year, according to the Tennessee Education Association.

    Those districts averaged a higher percentage of students earning proficient or advanced scores in the four categories tested. The largest difference was in math, where non-bargaining districts averaged 3.5 percentage points higher than the rest of the districts, while social science scores were just a half percentage point apart.

    But the districts that allowed collective bargaining - which included the state's four largest cities - averaged larger gains in all four categories compared with last year's scores.


    I want the gains rather than the absolute % points.

    Association does not prove causality. Lots of other factors like the students' socioeconomic backgrounds, finances of the school districts, experience of the teachers, etc. are not corrected for.

    It's not even clear that there's are considerations for statistical significance here. The AP should do more of these studies, and when they find something consistent, report back.


    Collective bargaining has nothing to do with how well teachers teach and 2/3 of the factors that effect children's performance are out of teacher's hands. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Yes, I'd like to see the underlying data as well. It is however silly to say that this has no effect on kids. Collective bargaining is likely a proxy for other factors - but it is an interesting data point and I can see how a weaker union could have a positive impact on education and the flexibility of both teachers and their principals.


    Explain how? Even in charter schools, the majority of which are not unionized, the gains come from things that are not impacted by collective bargaining - e.g. smaller class sizes, longer school days, enrichment programs, social workers, family engagement programs, all paid for with private donations. And, of course, charters are able to exclude kids with disabilities, ESL kids and "counsel out" (expel), those that don't perform.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 1:53 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidExplain how? Even in charter schools, the majority of which are not unionized, the gains come from things that are not impacted by collective bargaining - e.g. smaller class sizes, longer school days, enrichment programs, social workers, family engagement programs, all paid for with private donations. And, of course, charters are able to exclude kids with disabilities, ESL kids and "counsel out" (expel), those that don't perform.


    Not entirely true. Smaller class sizes are definitely not consistently the case for highly successful charter schools for instance and I would guess the same is true for the rest of the supposed gains you refer to. I would speculate that the removal of collective bargaining gives principals more freedom to manage teachers as they see fit - which of course can be a double edged sword. But given the nature of schooling and principals, I happen to suspect that results fall on the generally good side of the sword.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 3:13 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidExplain how? Even in charter schools, the majority of which are not unionized, the gains come from things that are not impacted by collective bargaining - e.g. smaller class sizes, longer school days, enrichment programs, social workers, family engagement programs, all paid for with private donations. And, of course, charters are able to exclude kids with disabilities, ESL kids and "counsel out" (expel), those that don't perform.


    Not entirely true. Smaller class sizes are definitely not consistently the case for highly successful charter schools for instance and I would guess the same is true for the rest of the supposed gains you refer to. I would speculate that the removal of collective bargaining gives principals more freedom to manage teachers as they see fit - which of course can be a double edged sword. But given the nature of schooling and principals, I happen to suspect that results fall on the generally good side of the sword.


    Smaller class sizes are, indeed, a hallmark of successful charters and something they pride themselves on.

    So all you have is conjecture based on a false premise that collective bargaining prevents bad teachers from being dismissed?

    Great. The reality is that poor teachers can be dismissed pretty easily if the administrators do their jobs . I know a lot of teachers who were observed once a year. And I know a number of teachers who received bad ratings due to the administrator not liking them, including my mother. In Mom's case, we wrote to the union, the principal and the district and took apart the "observation" piece-by-piece since it was completely flawed in its logic, argumentation and premise.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 6:45 PM GMT
    I wonder if the non-collective bargaining schools treated their teachers more fairly and that's why there was no need for collective bargaining that year. Happier teachers make more productive students, no? icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 7:42 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidExplain how? Even in charter schools, the majority of which are not unionized, the gains come from things that are not impacted by collective bargaining - e.g. smaller class sizes, longer school days, enrichment programs, social workers, family engagement programs, all paid for with private donations. And, of course, charters are able to exclude kids with disabilities, ESL kids and "counsel out" (expel), those that don't perform.


    Not entirely true. Smaller class sizes are definitely not consistently the case for highly successful charter schools for instance and I would guess the same is true for the rest of the supposed gains you refer to. I would speculate that the removal of collective bargaining gives principals more freedom to manage teachers as they see fit - which of course can be a double edged sword. But given the nature of schooling and principals, I happen to suspect that results fall on the generally good side of the sword.


    Smaller class sizes are, indeed, a hallmark of successful charters and something they pride themselves on.

    So all you have is conjecture based on a false premise that collective bargaining prevents bad teachers from being dismissed?

    Great. The reality is that poor teachers can be dismissed pretty easily if the administrators do their jobs . I know a lot of teachers who were observed once a year. And I know a number of teachers who received bad ratings due to the administrator not liking them, including my mother. In Mom's case, we wrote to the union, the principal and the district and took apart the "observation" piece-by-piece since it was completely flawed in its logic, argumentation and premise.


    Sorry, smaller class sizes are not a hallmark of successful charters. Some have smaller class sizes while others have larger ones. The reality is that poor teachers can not be easily dismissed given the level of bureaucracy required in order to do so and I suspect you at least recognize this. As for whether it is conjecture as to what I think might be why schools with collective bargaining rights for teachers perform worse, I think q might be right there.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 8:35 PM GMT
    "Now the Associated Press has taken a close look"

    ASSOCIATED PRESS----as in 'The Lamestream Media'???

    And any good conservative is supposed to accept their interpretation of statistics?

    Riddler, I know you'll be skeptical enough to keep searching for answers....and not settle for one AP article.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 8:51 PM GMT
    The article you linked is the following:

    NASHVILLE, Tenn.- The issue of collective bargaining rights for teachers was a huge issue on Tennessee's Capitol Hill.

    Now the Associated Press has taken a close look, comparing how school systems do with or without collective bargaining rights.

    The AP discovered school systems without teachers' collective bargaining rights performed slightly better than those with negotiated contracts. Thirty-eight school districts don't have collective bargaining rights, and the AP found those systems averaged a higher percentage of students who earned proficient or advanced scores.

    In May, state lawmakers voted to end collective bargaining rights for teachers.

    THAT'S IT?

    WHERE'S THE STUDY?

    Riddler, if you had read the opposite story, that school systems WITH teacher's collective bargaining "PERFORMED SLIGHTLY BETTER" would that have been enough for you. Or might you have had some follow up questions:

    Like, WHERE'S THE STUDY?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 9:10 PM GMT
    PresentMind saidThe article you linked is the following:

    NASHVILLE, Tenn.- The issue of collective bargaining rights for teachers was a huge issue on Tennessee's Capitol Hill.

    Now the Associated Press has taken a close look, comparing how school systems do with or without collective bargaining rights.

    The AP discovered school systems without teachers' collective bargaining rights performed slightly better than those with negotiated contracts. Thirty-eight school districts don't have collective bargaining rights, and the AP found those systems averaged a higher percentage of students who earned proficient or advanced scores.

    In May, state lawmakers voted to end collective bargaining rights for teachers.

    THAT'S IT?

    WHERE'S THE STUDY?

    Riddler, if you had read the opposite story, that school systems WITH teacher's collective bargaining "PERFORMED SLIGHTLY BETTER" would that have been enough for you. Or might you have had some follow up questions:

    Like, WHERE'S THE STUDY?


    Um I pointed out that I would have liked to see more details of the study. that's all I was able to find so far - I'm sure more details will eventually be released.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2011 9:27 PM GMT
    Ah, peer review of the political press...nothing is too unworthy to be published there.icon_lol.gif