The Chicago Math and Science Academy is arguing that it is not a public institution; therefore, it should not have to allow teachers to form a union. The debate that has ensued provides interesting food for thought.
For example, one argument is that the school receives about 80% of its support from the state so it must be a public institution. That may be evidence of a public institution, but it isn't conclusive.
However, it seems to me that while the legal battle is about what is and isn't a public institution, the larger question is what is the purpose of a charter school and what role does it fill for the public. For example, there are many companies and organizations that receive public funds to do their work--research institutes, food service companies and others often rely heavily on public funding through contracts with school districts or other government entities. In this case they are obviously not public institutions. Even so, we insist that they follow the law and use public funds well or at least that our government representatives ensure that our public funds are used wisely.
In the same way, we want charter schools to use public funds wisely while fulfilling the role that we've contracted them to perform. A charter school must provide a good education. The question that I'm addressing is not necessarily a legal one. The question about unions is a practical and perhaps moral one. Should charter schools be subject to the same laws about unions whether or not they are public institutions?
The goal of having charter schools is to provide parent choice, but also to find ways to provide a good education or even a better education than surrounding schools. What if one of those ways is to allow teacher waivers and to use non-union teachers?
It seems to me that forcing charter schools to allow unions takes away one of the critical components of a charter school's strategy. To take away such a tool is like telling an auto mechanic that she can't use a lift to get a car up in the air to work on it. I can't go back and tell my mechanic that she should have finished the job faster, if I take away her tools or normal approach to fixing my car.
Here in Colorado, our charter schools exceed the state averages and, in general, out perform the local district schools. We do not have union schools. While this is only one variable, it's surprising to me that with all of the arguments against charter schools that are based on average performance of schools across the U.S. against the average schools in their neighborhoods. Critics (or even proponents) of charter schools have not done more research on why Colorado schools have been so successful.
CMSA may lose its legal battle, but the practical battle seems to support the idea that charter schools don't need union or even certified teachers to succeed. In this fight, I'd hope that the Illinois legislature and legislatures across the country would look at the facts and the substance and not so concerned about form and procedure. If a school serves the public, then it should be deemed worthy of public funding whether or not it allows a teachers' union.
1 comment:
Schools are for students. Teachers are there to teach and basically do the job. I am myself is a teacher. This job is not like a regular manufactoring job. We do not manufactor students. We TEACH them.
Unions are about "workers". I do not see a teacher as a worker but more than that. You cannot teach (or actually be a successful teacher) unless you are making sacrifices!
Union limits the teachers' horizon by putting their rules. The so called collective bargaining agreement has almost no input about what will be the students' education will look like! Only and mainly thing they talk about is "protect the rights of the teachers". Yeah right!
Not only in education but in every aspect of life if I am doing my job and doing it in a very produvtive way why would I need to belong to a union? If I am teaching why would my principal/school board fire me?
Union is all about money, power and politics. What I see in my school is also there is no union in the union itself. Besides they come together during school time or at tweir social parties to talk about the "teacher rights" for hours but nothing about how will they make their students successful!
The public school system is failing and they all blame that it is the fault of the administration but not the bad teachers who got their tenure and do nothing under the wings of the union!
That is why there is the Charter School idea. Free of union, free of their stupid boundaries working for the students. There are so many great charter schools around the country proving the idea is right.
No union in education is the step for success!
Post a Comment