Posts com a Tag ‘LIEBERMAN Myron (Aut)’
Understanding the Teacher Union Contract: A Citizen’s Handbook – LIEBERMAN (CSS)
LIEBERMAN, Myron. Understanding the Teacher Union Contract: A Citizen’s Handbook. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers and Social Philosophy and Policy Center, 2000. 220p. Resenha de: BRILEY, Ron. Canadian Social Studies, v.36, n.1, 2002.
In Understanding the Teacher Union Contract, Myron Lieberman, chair of the Education Policy Institute and senior research scholar of the Social Philosophy Center, continues the argument made in previous studies such as The Teachers Unions (1997) and Teachers Evaluating Teachers (1998). While often assuming the voice of objectivity, Lieberman is hardly a disinterested observer, for the Social Philosophy and Policy Centre supports privatization, vouchers, competition and the market system as the solutions for the problems of America’s public schools.
Lieberman argues that collective bargaining is by definition an adversarial process between unions and management. According to Lieberman, in public education management is the school board, the party that is theoretically and legally responsible to the electorate for representing the public interest (p. xiii). Thus, advocacy between labour and management in the public sector is very different from espousing such a position in the private sector. Lieberman concludes that in taking a pro-management position he is really advocating a stance in favour of the public interest for Lieberman asserts that teacher unionization is the principle factor blocking educational reforms. Accordingly, this handbook is intended for use by school board members, school administrators, state legislators, parents and taxpayers. Much of the volume is technical, addressing such issues as grievance procedures, release time for bargaining, union access to district buildings, payroll deduction for union dues, union recognition, and no-strike clauses.
Perceiving the public interest as being represented by school management, Lieberman holds little promise for such teacher union initiatives as peer review and the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. He insists these proposed reforms are dominated by the National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers, who want standards that most teachers can meet rather than extolling excellence. Like diplomats who insist that they are opposed to another nation’s government but not the people, Lieberman denounces union representation for teachers but is sympathetic to individual educators suffering under the yoke of union domination. In fact, Lieberman seems to have little use for teachers. He seems to assume that teachers are seeking the lowest common denominator and are motivated solely by self-interest. Missing from Lieberman’s analysis is any consideration of the long arduous hours put in by teachers after the classroom day as well as their commitment to improving the quality of life for young people.
Any indication that Lieberman is opposed simply to teacher unions and unionization in the public sector is dispelled by the handbook’s conclusion. Lieberman observes that unionization in the private sector has been declining steadily in the United States since 1953. Lieberman asserts that The fact that unionization tends to depress profits and weaken the value of stock in unionized companies is another factor in the decline of private sector unions; more and more employees recognize that their individual welfare is partly dependent on company welfare, and that company welfare is threatened by unionization (p. 192). However, Lieberman fails to acknowledge that the decline of unions has contributed to the growing gap between rich and poor in the United States.
Lieberman laments that unions continue to flourish in public education because individual teachers lack the resources to compete against powerful union monopolies in decertification campaigns. Yet he also believes that the power of the teacher unions is on the wane. Clearly Lieberman trusts that his handbook will contribute to this outcome. Nevertheless, the ideological market approach championed by Lieberman and his associates fails to acknowledge the it is smaller classrooms, decentralization, and increased teacher compensation and empowerment which would really change the face of American education.
Ron Briley – Sandia Preparatory School. Albuquerque, New Mexico.
[IF]Teachers Evaluating Teachers: Peer Review and the New Unionism – LIEBERMANN (CSS)
LIEBERMAN, Myron. Teachers Evaluating Teachers: Peer Review and the New Unionism. New Brunswick. N.J.: Transaction Publishers and Social Philosophy and Policy Centre, 1998. 137p. Resenha de: BRILEY, Ron. Canadian Social Studies, v.35, n.2, 2001.
In Teachers Evaluating Teachers, Myron Lieberman, a senior research scholar of the Social Philosophy and Policy Center, takes issue with peer review as a means through which to address the crisis in American public education. Lieberman, who has served as a chief negotiator for school districts during collective bargaining, asserts that teacher unions, such as the National Education Association (NEA) and American Federation of Teachers (AFT), have blocked educational reform by protecting the employment status of incompetent teachers.
However, Lieberman acknowledges that the teacher unions, conscious of growing public criticism, have attempted to alter their image by embracing the new unionism, which the author finds to be an undefined and ambiguous concept. The concept of peer review is representative of the new unionism which the teacher unions, based primarily upon what the NEA and AFT perceive as successful experiments in the public schools of Columbus and Toledo, Ohio, have championed as a method by which teachers needing assistance may receive evaluation and mentoring from peer consulting teachers.
Lieberman attacks the reform of peer review as a sham. The educational consultant asserts that results on student standardized tests (the panacea of contemporary American education) have not increased in schools using peer review. In addition, the process is costly and bureaucratic, while good teachers are taken out of the classroom to serve as consulting teachers. Thus, Lieberman concludes that peer review may actually hinder rather than support the cause of educational reform in the public schools. Instead, he advocates that teachers eschew collective bargaining and the traditional union model in favor of professional organizations which would allow for more individual choice among teachers; protection of occupational minorities, such as skilled mathematics teachers; and advocate what Lieberman terms as occupational citizenship.
Indeed, there is much one may find to criticize in teacher unions; however, Lieberman is hardly an unbiased observer, for he represents the Social Philosophy and Policy Center, which supports privatization, vouchers, competition, and the market system as the solution for America’s public schools. Of course, this is the same market system which rewards professional wrestler/entertainers so lavishly and teachers so poorly. Lieberman also demonstrates little respect for teachers; a public attitude which, along with low pay, has contributed to the problems of American education. For example, he pokes fun at the idea that teachers would be the ones most capable of establishing their own professional development plans. He assumes that they would seek salary credit for courses that are the easiest, the most convenient, or the least expensive (102). Nor does Lieberman express much appreciation for the role played by the labor movement in American history. Lieberman writes: The union movement in the U. S. emerged as a response to what was perceived to be the excessive power of the employers over individual employees (8). What does he mean by perceived? Was Lieberman simply daydreaming when his history teacher covered the excesses of American capitalism in the late nineteenth century?
Lieberman’s book is a contribution to the growing political debate regarding the direction of public education in America; a policy matter which emerged as a major issue in the 2000 Presidential campaign. However, Lieberman is hardly a disinterested participant in this dialogue, and readers of this volume should keep those biases in mind. As for this reviewer, who is a teacher in an independent school and not a union member, there remains considerable pride in serving alongside public and private school colleagues, who are among the most dedicated professionals in the world.
Ron Briley – Sandia Preparatory School. Albuquerque, New Mexico.
[IF]