Ugh, I wouldn't want to touch this, but it deserves the research. As a comparison, (and you may have thought of it), the Dutch experimented with union membership in their military - which is a professional force. Not a happy mix. The same with attempts to commingle draftees with volunteers. For what it is worth.

In Australia, I imagine the fit is unclear. Unionism is much more normalised than the US. Some teachers choose NOT to be in a union for other ethical and financial reasons, unrelated to professionalism. As well, we have professional organisations at 2 levels:

compulsory - to demonstrate fitness to teach, and

voluntary - which is tied to professional;ism but not consistent with. Eg as a teacher of 36 years, I have never joined a voluntary professional organiusation, but have been involved with them, and even delivered professional development for them.

From a German perspective, i would say that it fits pretty well together.

 Blaise, Mark, and Anna-Maria,

Thank you for responding. Your international perspective is most helpful. Casey and I found that American teachers clearly prefer the protection of the union to no union; this is a consistent finding in other research. We also found, in the response to the prompts of how unions help and how they hinder professionalism, that "support" was the top theme for both prompts.

Anna-Marie, I am curious as to why teacher unionism in Germany seems to be less tangled than it appears to be in the U.S. Is it that the general perception in Germany regarding unions is more positive than in the U.S.?  Public sector unionism in the U.S. is predicated upon the industrial union model of the 1935 National Labor Relations Act. This decision to model public sector collective bargaining on an industrial union model has consequences. The public sector which is primarily service oriented, and in the case of teaching, rely on a professional workforce, may not fit well with the industrial model.

Thanks again to the three of you for joining in.

Regards,

Todd

As Mark describes for Australia, some teachers choose not to be in a union in Scotland. However, the majority do choose to belong to a union. I believe they are right and i chose to belong when I worked as a teacher, as, unfortunately, without some collective bargaining employers sometimes step over the mark in imposing unreasonable conditions and actually attack professionalism. In fact, it could be argued that, even  with union attempts at protection, politicians succeeded in de-professionalising teaching in the UK during the 1980s/90s and it is only slowly being reversed - in Scotland at least - the political system is now more independent from the rest of the UK, so I can't speak for England etc.. The image of a teacher pushed at that time was more one of a technician applying quality control indicators - something more akin to an industrial model then a public service model, I suppose. However, there were also times when I thought the unions were going too far and chose to oppose/ vote against their proposals. 

i suppose my answer to the question would be that Unions are  tools to be used professionally, as one judges what is professional in the circumstances you find yourself in. I would be wary of outsiders telling me I am not being professional when I think that union  negotiations and actions are in the best interests of my public service aims around meeting  the interests and needs of my pupils. However, like all tools, they can at times be misused or attmepts made to misuse them, or there are arguments about how to use them. 

Something that I failed to mention, and that is certainly worthy of definition - is "profession", "professional", and professionalism.  Without that and an elaboration of an ethic of the profession, the contrast does not make much sense. Is teaching a profession in the same sense as a career military officer, a lawyer, or a doctor of medicine? 

• Yes Blaise. I realised that my own answer raises that issue and makes certain assumptions but decided, maybe wrongly, not to go there. However, you are right that lit is an important issue and raises many questions. Among them, how much automomy does a professional have, union or professional organisation (some teaching unions see themselves in both roles), should I  give some my autonomy to my Union? And so on. 

Blaise and Colin,

You raise good points. The definition of what constitutes a profession, thus defining the responsibilities of a professional is somewhat contested territory. This is important for educators, even though we characterize our work as professional and consider ourselves as professionals, not all commentators do. For example, Amitae Etzioni describes us as one of the semi-professions. 

The working definition that I use contains the following elements (they are clearly up for debate). I rely on work by Edward Friedson and Barbara Barber.

1. Professionalism is built around knowledge, usually gained through extensive education and training.

2. Professional work is complex and non-routine.

3. It involves a standard of practice recognized and adhered to by its practitioners.

4. The standards are enforced by the professional organization, typically through an internal code of ethics.

5. Professionals exercise judgment within the accepted standards in the best interests of the clients or others.

William J. Goode asserts that the two core principles of professionalism  are a service orientation and the application of a body of specialized knowledge.

Do these elements of a profession fit neatly into a negotiated collective bargaining agreement that is often bounded by formalization, standardization, and centralization?

An essential question that confronts teachers, and other professionals, is the fit between two legitimate, but possibly competing interests––how does my role of professional based on service to my students and the public good fit with my role as a union member in pursuit of my self-interests? Casey Cobb and I concluded, based on our research on teacher perceptions, "Teachers have a tangled view of how their sense of professionalism fits within the context of a unionized workforce" (DeMitchell & Cobb, 2006, p. 19).

Do teachers continue to see the fit as tangled? Does research support the tangled hypothesis?

The great majority of teachers live their daily lives in classrooms rendering a professional service to their students and their community. 

I appreciate your comments. They help me as I continue to try to sort through this issue. (BTW, I have been a union member when I was a teacher, and am one as a professor, but I have also been an administrator who bargained with unions when I represented my school districts. I find that my view is also tangled.)

Regards,

Todd

Nice description of professionalism Todd. The balance between professional and technical in teaching has become responsive to pollitics, as Colin suggests. I think (opinion only from a distance) that in the USA, the tendancy has leant more ton the technical in the last few years. Ie teachers deliver prepared materials without too much professional intervention on their part. In Oz, we still have a reasonable balance, but many teachers do not want to use their professional judgement, because it is hard work and scary. Unions here do make a difference, but I am not sure that they always understand the stakes. To me professionalism is critical to my perception of myself as a teacher. Without it teaching is just hard work and not satisfying.

Mark,

Thanks for your response. It is interesting that you discuss the technical aspect of teaching. I believe that there are elements of our practice are technical and probably necessary if we are to have standards of practice that inform our professional expectations--does the rise of technology move us more in that direction?

Another aspect of our teaching is the craft element in which technical expertise is important but craft combines the elements of creativity and a personal stamp on our teaching. Technical sometimes reminds me of the potential automatation of teaching in which teaching is virtually teacher-proof if the appropriate process is followed.

I really like your last two sentences, well stated.

Todd

Agreed. Todd, like Mark, I think those are a nice set of definitions and the frame that side of the issue rather well. And those last two sentence are first rate but I think even speak to the larger point that Todd seeks to untangle. There are (and this is opinion only as my work is with military education) it seems many so-called professionals (only in the sense of long employment or tenure) in public education that care more about the position and the remuneration without much accountability and use the union to protect themselves. I am not all that certain the majority truly reflect Mark's well turned phrase.

Blaise, your point brings up an issue with which I struggle. In 36 years of teaching, I have found few teachers who do not truly want the best for their students, but at the same time, the number of teachers who are professional in the sense of taking responsibility ofr those students who do not learn easily (and I don't mean special needs, I mean the increasing number who do not learn for social reasons) is also not high. To teach students who want to learn is relatively easy and it is here that technical issues come to the fore. A better technical teacher will be more successful with students who want to learn. But for the increasing number of students who are not committed to learning. Who m,erely attend without focus or committment, it takes a teacher to take risks and go beyond the mere technical to reengage them. I have been fortunate in that I have been responsible for many teachers who, given the opportunity and the permission to be creative, have risen to the challenge of such students.

What I am trying to say is:

1. Teachjers want to do the right thing.

2. Teachers do act truly professional when given permission and a challenge.

3. Teachers choose to be less professional and less creative in their teaching when they feel threatened or constrained.

I think that teachers who use unions as a protector is a mere symptom of a larger problem facing teaching. - an unwarranted lack of trust in the teaching profession by politicians

Blaise & Mark,

Both of your comments underscore the importance of the classroom teacher. I agree, the skills and dispositions that they bring to the classroom matter. It is true that not all teachers are up to the high demands of teaching. Unfortunately, and too often, these teachers retreat to the protections of dismissal procedures, designed not to insulate the incompetent, but to provide due process. (The way tenure/due process protection works in the U.S. is an excellent subject for another discussion. Joe Onosko have recently published on the highly visible Vergara v. State of California tenure case. See attachment if interested.)

Unions bargain for and implement terms and conditions of employment. This includes discipline and dismissal that must, at a minimum, comport with existing state dismissal and tenure laws. In my estimation, this responsibility of fair representation does not require unions to do everything they can to make sure that a teacher does not lose his or her job. The union must ensure that the procedures that are articulated in contract are followed. It does not mean that the union must stand in the way of fair outcomes fairly arrived at (I discussed unions as public adversary and silent ally in a previous publication.) that remove incompetent teachers from our classrooms. Professions provide for the weeding out of incompetence.

In a follow-up study, as I mention above, Casey Cobb and I explore the perceptions of teachers regarding professionalism and unionism. Our respondents  agreed or strongly agreed that the union protects teachers from administrators. One teacher wrote that the union, "Protect[s] you from inept administrators and Protect[s] you from the whims of administrators."

However, teachers were also critical of a reflexive protection for those who should be removed from teaching. For example, a high school teacher wrote, "Allows incompetence to continue. Mediocrity is rewarded." The union's role is complex. As Bob Chase, former President of NEA, stated. "We must not only stand for teachers, we must stand for teaching."

Article Teacher as Union Member and Teacher as Professional: The Voi...

Article Vergara v. State of California: The End of Tenure or a Flawed Ruling?

Gentlemen,

Again an outsider perspective, but the challenge is almost a mirror image. So firstly, the issue of administrators. I can see very much how union representation can protect against incompetence, whimsy, and poor program execution. In military education, the corollary role of administrator are officers, with perhaps good intentions, but have no educational background (well some do), and are unaware of the implication to learning of many of their decisions. By the same token, though instructor professional development is appallingly shallow and short lived, there are many that have chosen to teach and all of the things that Mark said apply, but in too many cases the have virtually no autonomy, even though if not subject matter experts, they at least have very real and valid operational experience - they know what they are talking about.

One of the things I have been studying is the role of autonomy in the learning environment, and not exclusively for the teacher. The U.S. Army is attempting to transform learning to be learner-centric (without really understanding the full implications), but still, it is a big step forward.

Todd, to what extent does union membership offer protection of teacher authority (for learner development) and autonomy (to control and shape curriculum for THEIR crafted learning environment?

Thanks for letting me be part of this conversation.

Blaise,

This is an interesting question. I am not sure if I have a clear answer to it. 

The question can be phrased as to what extent does a union, typically through bargaining have any leverage over teacher autonomy and teacher authority. The leverage of the union may well be diminished in this area because these areas can be considered the province of the school board's policy making. This would exclude the union from bargaining authority for learner development and the autonomy/academic freedom of the teacher to control the curriculum they offer in their classroom because policy is a prohibitive subject of bargaining.

Unions may be able to be persuasive in these arenas of authority and autonomy, if the actions of the administration tread on other contractual protections. The courts have not been particularly helpful in expanding the academic freedom rights of P-12 teachers. Some jurisdictions do not recognize academic freedom over the curriculum and some only recognize limited academic freedom over the choice of instructional methods.

I have taken the liberty of attaching some focus group research that Kim Fries, Vince Connolly, and I did with teachers on how they view academic freedom. I found their responses to be very interesting. In our conclusion, we write,

"To them, academic freedom is not a robust right that can be used to define practice. Rather, professional practice, the teaching responsibilities that teachers have for their students, defines the academic freedom. These teachers see restrictions on their academic freedom and tend to accept those restrictions" p. 522.

"Teachers work in a more regulated environment with more oversight than professors. Teachers do not discover truth but are required to dispense it. They want and believe that they need freedom but are not free of observation and multi-layered external accountability requirements. It is indeed messy fitting into a regulated environment" p. 524.

I hope that this helps. I attached a copy of the article. I hope that you excuse my presumptuousness.

Todd

Thank you Todd. You have given me fascinating insights to how public law intrudes in the learning environment. I really had no idea. What a mess it is!

Todd,

You might be interested to know that in England the landscape of teacher professionalism has become more complex with the recent launch of the profession-led College of Teaching (http://www.claimyourcollege.org/ ).  This is not a union (of which there are several for teachers in England), but a formally chartered, collegiate body which has the aim of promoting teachers' professional knowledge and standing in the same way as the UK's medical Royal Colleges.  It's early days, but supporters of the project feel that this may be the missing link between teachers and full professionalisation that some of these answers to your question identify.

Simon, Thanks for sharing this information with me. I visited the link and watched the YouTube and found both quite interesting. It is an important side to the issue of professionalism in education. Medicine and law, and for example have a recognized voice for their respective professions. In the U.S. it is often asserted, with mixed responses, that the voice of teachers is that of the NEA and the AFT. The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards is nationally recognized as a certifying organization with high credibility. But has it transformed, and should it transform, to have a wider voice for the profession? Who gets quoted as speaking for the profession on issues of policy and practice?

I will keep an eye on the Claim Your College movement. I liked the end of the YouTube, "Be the voice of our profession."

Todd

http://www.nbpts.org

Mary,

Thank you for your questions, they help to provide greater depth to the discussion. I will respond to your questions below.

1. The study did not measure levels of professionalism or union activity. It was concerned with how teachers understand their role as a professional educator and as a union member, some consider contradictory positions. We posited a definition of professionalism so as to ground the responses in a common understanding of professionalism. "The assumption is that education is a profession in the eyes of its practitioners; consequently the perceptions of teachers regarding professionalism and their unions and their collective bargaining agreements form the reality of their work." At 8.

2.Our research was guided by three questions. (1) Do union activities support the professionalism of its members? (2) Does a collectively bargained contract support the professional activities of teachers? (3) Is there a difference between union leader's perceptions and the perceptions of rank-and-file members with regard to professionalism?

3. Schools were randomly selected from 34 states with public sector collective bargaining laws.

4. We did not break the analysis into grades or subjects taught. However, we did look at the level, elementary, middle, and high school.

5. The respondents overwhelmingly agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that teaching is a profession.

6. We did not include professors in the sample (however, that would be an interesting study), thus there was no comparison. The closest that some of my research came to comparing higher ed and P-12 education were two studies on academic freedom perceptions of P-12 teachers. The studies used mixed methodology of law & quantitative analysis and a qualitative focus group study. the latter revealed some interesting perceptions of the respondents on what constitutes academic freedom.

I have taken the liberty of attaching the study with the questions.

Best,

Todd

Interesting topic, earlier I read a subject for  Han(2012), who stated that teachers unions affect teachers (see The Impact of Teachers Unions on Teachers’ Well-being under Different Legal Environments: Evidence from Districts and Teachers Matched Data) in  http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~ehan/Job_market_paper_EuniceHan.pdf.

Thank you for the interesting topic

Thanks, I am not familiar with this study. It will assist me as I finish my book on labor relations, bargaining, and teacher unions.--Best,

Todd

Neoliberalism, at least as it has been adopted in the US, focuses on a hierarchical workplace that eliminates, to the extent possible the autonomy of subordinates.  As states aimed to reduce educational disparities, politicians began eroding teacher autonomy by claiming that teachers were not doing enough to educate children, especially those of color.  High-stakes testing was introduced to hold them accountable.

Thinking that unionization would serve as a barrier to total outside control, teachers gave up their own voices and placed their welfare in the hands of unions.  The unions failed to stop or even slow down the erosion.  Indeed, political control of education was facilitated because unions are so easily demonized in the minds of parents.  By the 1990s, the federal government began taking over from the states, accruing unprecedented power in the name of fairness and a one-size-fits all approach to education.  From this perspective, unionization has led to the de-professionalization of teachers, with dire consequences.

Interesting viewpoint James. And one that I can accept the possible truth in. It seems to me that neither unions and professional organisations are well placed to solve the problem of loss of autonomy (and the possible loss in education quality). Unions did not necessarily have enough of a stake in educational quality and outcomes, just focussing on teacher conditions, while professional organisations, while focussing on (research based) education quality, do not take enough of a political role. Maybe the roles of unions and professional organisations need to be amalgamated.