Search results

The NEA did not begin as a teachers’ organization, as such. Rather, the organization began in 1870 as a federation of four organizations representing distinctly different perspectives: the American Normal School Association, the National Association of School Superintendents, the Central College Association, and the National Teachers Association (Elsbree, 1939, pp. 264–265, 500). Only the last of these groups, the NTA, formed in 1857 from 10 state teachers’ associations, actually represented teachers, and for roughly the first 100 years of its existence, the NEA was controlled by administrators rather than teachers, frequently worked against teachers’ interests (especially when they conflicted with administrative or supervisory priorities), and opposed collective bargaining. Although the NEA lobbied fairly effectively on the state level on issues such as increasing expenditures on education, consolidating and professionalizing administration of school districts, and establishing certification and standards for teachers, its unwillingness or inability to support candidates for federal elections made it relatively less successful on the national level.

Soon after Dal Lawrence became the first president of the Toledo Federation of Teachers (TFT) in 1967, he began an effort to expand the union’s role in teachers’ evaluations. Throughout most of the 1970s, the union pressed for greater job protection as well as a peer evaluation program for new teachers; a proposal that the school district refused repeatedly over that decade. In the 1981 contract negotiation, however, the district declared itself willing to include the issue, provided that the union would consider an intervention program for nonperforming teachers. This agreement – now in its third decade, despite a number of conflicts between the district and the union over the years – provided a framework for a totally new process of teacher assessment based on peer evaluation, the Toledo Plan (American Educator, 1984; Bradley, 1998b; Lawton, 1996). In the Toledo Plan, for the first time, teachers would be evaluating each other’s work, with real consequences for those who were not able to successfully meet agreed-upon expectations. “The idea of a teacher union evaluating members of its own bargaining unit was so controversial,” noted Gallegher, Lanier, and Kerchner (1993), “that the TFT president Dal Lawrence waited several months before telling a shocked American Federation of Teachers (AFT) executive council what he had done” (p. 158).

Purpose – This chapter focuses on the challenges of introducing a nationally consistent and credible system for recognizing and rewarding accomplished teachers − a standard-based professional learning and certification system. Such systems aim to provide attractive incentives for professional learning for all teachers, in contrast with competitive merit pay or one-off bonus pay schemes.Methodology – The chapter provides a case study of one country’s progress in reforming teacher career structures and pay systems, and it also draws on the experience of other countries that have been pursuing similar policies, such as Chile, England, Scotland, and the United States. Using document analysis and interviews with key stakeholders, the chapter describes progress in Australia’s latest attempt to introduce a system for the certification of teachers, this time at two levels – the Highly Accomplished Teacher and Lead Teacher levels.Findings – Despite strong support in principle by the main stakeholders, implementation is proving difficult in changing political and economic contexts. Reasons for these difficulties are compared with problems in other countries as they seek to implement advanced certification schemes.Practical implications – The Australian case indicates the importance of ensuring that agencies established to provide professional certification have the independence, stability, and professional ownership they need to carry out their function effectively.Social implications – Recent Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reports highlight the relationship between the degree to which the work of teaching has been professionalized and student performance. An independent professional certification system is a concrete and relevant way for countries to “professionalize” teaching and treat their teachers as trusted professional partners; however, the Australian case indicates some of the challenges involved in making this a reality.Value – The chapter is the first to compare professional certification schemes in different countries and analyze factors affecting their success.

After the American Revolution, educational opportunities expanded with the growth of the new democracy, especially in New England and the Middle Atlantic states. For example, policymakers and the public responded to the broadening of white male suffrage in the early 19th century by increasing the number of public and private schools. Americans also believed that women also needed to be more literate so that mothers could help in the education of their children. By the eve of the Civil War, schooling was almost universally available for the white population everywhere except in the South. There, poverty and lower population density still hindered the expansion of schools (Kaestle, 1983; Kaestle & Vinovskis, 1980).

The way in which the international teacher organizations evolved suggests both the advantages and the difficulties of maintaining a coherent and purposeful international organization for education advocacy (the abbreviations and acronyms for all the organizations are spelled out for reference in Appendix A to this chapter; the complex succession of organizations is traced in a table, presented as Appendix B to this chapter). The international teacher organizations began at the outset of the 20th century in Europe.¹ The first of these, founded in 1905 and centering on the concerns of primary school teachers, was the International Bureau of Federations of Teachers (IBFT; it became the International Federation of Teachers’ Associations [IFTA] in 1926). The second, founded in 1912, was the International Foundation of Secondary Teachers (known by its French acronym, FIPESO, the Fédération internationale des professeurs de l’enseignement secondaire officielle).

Evaluating the political influence of a teachers’ union is, necessarily, a somewhat subjective task. It appears to me that the teacher unions’ power, as measured by their membership strength, has remained healthy and in fact increased slightly since 1988. The most recent public figures for the NEA and the AFT indicate that the two organizations are collectively nearing four million members – counting the NEA’s membership of 2.7 million and the AFT’s just over one million (Newman, 2000). As a measure of the unions’ ability to mobilize teachers, however, those numbers may overstate the case for power. In the AFT, approximately half of its membership now comes from teacher aides and other non-teaching personnel such as school bus drivers (Keller, 2002). Even so, the number of teachers who are members of the NEA and AFT is considerable, and any explanation of a diminished political influence on the part of those unions must deal with the issue of their large memberships.

Staff turnover may have important consequences for the development of collective social resources based on trust, shared norms, and support among school professionals. We outline the theoretical role-specific consequences of principal and teacher turnover for features of principal leadership and teacher community, and we test these ideas in repeated teacher survey data from a sample of 73 Los Angeles elementary schools. We find evidence that principal turnover fundamentally disrupts but does not systematically decrease relational qualities of principal leadership; negative changes for initially high social resource schools offset positive changes for initially low social resource schools, suggesting that relational instability “resets” the resources that develop in the relationships between leadership and teachers. Greater consistency in measures of teacher community in the face of teacher turnover implies that the social resources inhering in the relationships among teachers are more robust to instability.