Chicago strike may not help students in the long run

Alan Borsuk:

After many months of difficult negotiations, the teachers' union and school system announced last week agreement on a new contract making student performance a factor in teachers' evaluations, giving school leaders more latitude in selecting teachers and keeping class sizes in middle grades in check.

In Chicago? Of course not.

So where? Boston.

While the Chicago teachers' strike, which closed public schools for the week, got huge national attention, the Boston settlement, after more than two years of negotiations (and no strike), got minimal notice. Everybody loves a fight, I suppose. But I would argue that what happened in Boston was at least as important as the grand battle in Chicago.

Why? Because I doubt much good is going to emerge from Chicago. It sounded at week's end as if negotiators were headed toward an agreement that won't really change the status quo very much - and the status quo for Chicago kids is about as happy as it is for Milwaukee kids.

Boston is much more in line with what is happening nationwide, including growing interest, even among many union leaders, in striving for improvements in teaching. It's a very complex and tricky path, but the willingness to explore it is, in itself, a positive thing. Wisconsin education leaders have been acting more in line with the Boston agreement than the Chicago brawl.

Posted by Jim Zellmer at September 17, 2012 3:03 AM
Subscribe to this site via RSS/Atom: Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas