District Administration - July 2007 - (Page 36)

HUMAN RESOURCES learn what I needed to successfully reach the population of students that I had in these three classes. I really needed a mentor who knew my subject and who could oﬀer some assistance on an ongoing basis, and the only person that I got that from was another teacher.” While her experience remains the norm in many districts across the country, ﬁrst-year teachers in Taylor’s district now receive meaningful evaluation and support, thanks to a peer assistance and evaluation program that the CFT successfully bargained for in the mid-1980s. Like CFT, other teacher unions work to broaden the scope of bargaining in their contracts, moving beyond the typical salary and beneﬁts negotiations to tackle issues that improve all aspects of the profession, from teacher quality to the school environment, in the name of children. “Looking at the scope of bargaining is really important because we are focused on creating a great public school for every child,” says William Raabe, director of collective bargaining and member advocacy for the National Education Association (NEA). “It’s all about having our voice—the people who are working directly with the students—in the room when we’re talking about issues that impact the quality of teaching and learning.” Peer Review and Assistance School principals often initially resist peer assistance and evaluation programs. Not only are they skeptical that teachers will assess each other as objectively and critically as they themselves would, but they do not believe that teacher evaluators will be willing to recommend another teacher for dismissal, even if he or she has failed to perform the job satisfactorily. In Toledo, principals managed to block three of the teachers’ union’s attempts to negotiate a peer evaluation program into its contract. In fact, it wasn’t until the district hired a private-sector attorney to serve as its chief negotiator in 1981 that 36 July 2007 Negotiating in Nonbargaining States Although most states have laws that permit teachers to collectively bargain aspects of their contracts, three states—North Carolina, Texas and Virginia—have laws that prohibit collective bargaining, and two states—Georgia and South Carolina—have no laws either way. While the lack of an established collective bargaining system makes it harder to get the conversation started, teacher unions have found creative ways to negotiate in nonbargaining states. “We advocate for our members, but we just don’t do it in the same way,” says Gaye K. Shin, president of the Cobb County Association of Educators in Georgia. To achieve their goals, the association’s leaders focus on building strong relationships with legislators to gain their support for bills that will change the rules and provide a better working environment for educators. Plus, they meet with school board members privately to talk about where they stand on key issues and why, and they attend school board meetings to express their views. In addition, they work with key district-level representatives to inﬂuence policy, such as meeting with the director of human resources to implement changes to the transfer policy or the professional development policy. While relationship building often occurs informally in nonbargaining states, some districts, like Arlington Public Schools in Virginia, have invented their own form of collective bargaining. Arlington created its collaborative problem-solving team to get and keep the conversation ﬂowing between teachers and administrators. Each month, seven teachers and seven administrators gather to discuss ongoing and upcoming teaching-related issues in the district, such as negotiating for site-based substitute teachers to receive the same beneﬁ ts as other full-time employees or implementing new professional development requirements. “Hostility doesn’t get you anywhere,” according to Gerry Collins, president of the Arlington Education Association. “Conﬂict and confrontation are good for showing feathers, but really, if the objectives are to improve instruction and to make working conditions and the working environment more positive for all employees, it’s important to understand the other person’s perspective.” Why a policy is in place, including the purpose and background that led to its wording, is important. Without good reason for it, it should probably be reconsidered. “It’s a process that requires a lot of give as well as take,” Collins says, “and it has worked quite well.” an agreement was reached. When the union explained that the peer evaluation program would enable teachers to develop the performance standards for both those within the profession and those being inducted into it and to take responsibility for that performance, the attorney, whose profession has similar peer-driven oversights in place, understood and supported their position. Some principals, like those in Rochester (N.Y.) Public Schools, even go so far as to take the teacher unions and the superintendent to court after a peer review teacher evaluation program is negotiated into the contract, arguing that it encroaches upon District Administration

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of District Administration - July 2007

Contents
Editor’s Letter
Letters
News Update
Facilities/Construction Update
Curriculum Update
Inside the Law
Administrator Profile
District Profile
Cover Story: Rethinking School Bus Safety
Broadening Collective Bargaining
Searching for Subs
Jersey City’s Broad Appeal
Improving Nutrition in Schools
New Products
Computer Literature
How Well Does This Web Site Work?
Research Corner
Problem Solution
Online Edge
Speaking Out
Supervisor’s Opinion
Calendar of Events
Understanding the Times

District Administration - July 2007