Ee RR BP CR a iS KA ee IR Pa rg ENE ERS T EE rs TT RE TT V Educating Youth---A Constant Challenge Threat of Teacher Strike: a iia ea heron Fea $ Photo by Mike Hendricks school. GoiniMato its fourth year, the Public Employes Relations Act has begun mak- ing changes in what happens in the class- room--changes that are now encouraging, if not i pronounced. Indications of fur- ther improvements abound. When Act 195 was passed, hopes were high, for teachers across the state fore- saw an opportunity at last to work at improving just about every aspect of a child’s education, The beginnings have been made; whether the act will measure The Question Has the passage of Act 195 contributed to the betterment of public education for kids? 2 ] After four years of Act 195, passed in 1970, which granted collective bargaining rights, and a limited right to strike to public Woo teachers and other public employes, this question has been on the minds of the general public, the news media, and the state Legislature. The answer to the question is complex. If the question is: has the cost of public education escalated in the past four years, the answer is definitely yes. Have teachers and other public employes gained materially in salaries and other fringe benefits - the answer is yes. If you ask, have these additional dollars produced a better educated youngster, you’ll get a mixed bag of answersy But the preponderance of evidenc®n all available studies indicates additional expenditures alone do not impact on the quality of the educational output. And if you ask the question, has Act 195 provided the needed flexibility at the local level to provide the best possible education, based on local needs and ~ public input, the answer would have to be that local control is being seriously eroded. Let’s look at the cost of Pennsylvania public education over the past four years, remembering that local and state support comes from the same pocketbook -- the citizen taxpayer. (See table 1) While student enrollments have decreased over the past four years, the number of classroom teachers has in- creased; In fact, one teacher has been added for every 12 students no longer in up to the hopes of educators will be deter- mined over the next few years. - When the subject of collective bargain- ing for teachers is discussed it is most often in connection with teacher salaries- -the one item in teacher contract that is measurable, concrete, and reportable. There is no question but that collective bargaining has improved teacher salaries, thus having an effect in stabiliz- ing the teaching force. Able educators can now enter the profession with some Total statewide expenditures, in- cluding sta.e and local funds, have in- creased at almost $165 million a year. The per pupil cost, including’ all ex- penditures, has junped almost 30 percent during the same period. Over half of the state’s 120,000 classroom teachers, now earn $10,000 or more for a 185-day work year. The average teaching salary for professional employes is now $11,475, an increase of 19 percent in the same period. Raising a body of 120,000 employes an average of $1,842 during this period where a group of the highest paid em- ployes retire and new employes begin at the entrance salary range requires yearly increases statewide of 10 to 12 percent and literally millions of dollars. What those dollars do for the better- ment of public education for Pennsyl- vania’s youth is not as debatable a point as teacher spokesmen would have the public believe. Education is among the most intensive labor efforts in our society. From 65 to 70 percent of a typical school district budget is made up of salary and wage costs. Granted, persons engaged in public education, as in other fields of public service, should be fairly compensated. It should be noted, however, that often artificial require- other limitations vigorously pursued by teacher groups, greatly increase such costs. 3 (continued on PAGE B NINE) assurance of salary advencement and with the knowledge that their incomes will not be totally controlled by the whims of political bodies, their respective school boards. Teacher stability, of which Pennsyl- vania’s students have not had the benefit for a long time, has further improved with the negotiation in some school dis- tricts of health plans, life insurance, and other family security provisions already enjoyed by other occupations. teachers since passage of the law has been their attitude toward their respec- tive classroom problems. Before the act, a teacher who was concerned about a lack of classroom learning materials the insufficient time he had available for pre- paring lessons, or the excessive number of students in his classes which caused them all to be cheated--for voicing any of these concerns, he was labeled a ‘‘trouble maker.” Indeed, he still is labeled such to an ex- tent, but now at least, instead of being forced to hear, ‘‘If you don’t like it here, why don’t you go somewhere else,” he can take his teaching problems to the bargaining table. Unfortunately, in these early years of the law, matters directly relating to stu- dents’ education are being termed inappropriate for bargaining. In other words, the cry, ‘If you don’t like it here-- ”” has changed to ‘‘non-negotiable!’’ --the cry heard at tables across the state. Teachers are frustrated and often an- gry about this aspect of the law; the first few years have shown that school boards are determined to trade off quality of teaching and learning for dollars. At one bargaining table after another, the school district negotiators are heard saying, “We don’t want to talk about education— we want to talk money!” Most public school educators, if asked what reforms are most needed to give kids the best break in their education, would probably name ‘‘time to teach;”’ sensible, down-to-earth curricula, for- come and stability; and personal and professional growth. So far most of teachers’ top priority concerns for students have been resisted by school boards as ‘‘non-negotiable.’’ The courts over the next decade or so will have to decide whether the teacher will have a voice in improving his class- involved only in his own economic pro- gress. So (continued on PAGE B NINE) / by Dr. Richard T. Rees Wilkes-College ‘“Strike!”’ “Teachers Walk Out!” “Teachers Threaten Job Action!” like them are rapidly becoming more and more familiar to all as the process of collective bargaining in public education moves agonizingly along. As teacher organizations continue to flex their newly found legal muscles, there appears to be a definite shift in the power alignment in public education.- Teachers are gaining concessions in areas such as salaries, fringe benefits, course loads, class size, and in some cases, are invading policy-making territory long held by Boards of Educa- tion and Administrators. The fact that teachers appear to be moving up the rungs of the hierarchial ladder and assuming positions alongside administrators and board members in terms of decision-making would seem to imply flexibility and broad input with respect to the formation of educational decisions. Few would argue that this is a most positive result in that there is ample theory and research to indicate that the more the subordinate is involved in the grams which govern his work situation, the more satisfaction and commitment effective he will be. We know full well that if the relation- ship between employer and employee is democratic in nature, the lines of com- munication and interaction tend to remain open so that the organization and its participants may respond, react, and change as the situation warrants. A close examination of the negotiation process in education seems to indicate an area for concern with regard to the maintenance of an open and flexible communication system. A review of contractual agreements which are emerging from the deliberations between teacher groups and boards of education provides some alarming findings. More and more elements of the work situation are being specified in formal rules and regulations. This is not to suggest that an organiza- tion should function without some rules and regulations to govern the behavior of its participants, for without institutional norms, anxiety levels of participants may be unusually high as they find dif- ficulty in assuming their roles within the organization. But rather, the concern is with the degree to which the rules are overly restrictive. Teachers have been rebelling against the oppressiveness (percieved or actual) of hierarchically imposed demands but it appears that as contractual agreements become more complex and voluminous, the system. may become every bit as bureaucrat- ically confining even though the rules were developed ‘‘cooperatively.” Bureaucracy is defined as consisting of the following characteristics: hierarchy of authority, division of labor, uniformity of rules and regulations, and formalized, impersonal relationships. What is in- teresting tonote is that the impetus in the development of bureaucracy, especially with respect to rules and regulations, (continued on PAGE B NINE) Normal Ratio of College Bound Students Here The number of high school graduates in Northeastern Pennsylvania enrolling in colleges and other degree-granting instit- utions compares favorably with those in Pennsylvania. 4,700 or 42 percent of the 11,000 public high school graduates in the region applied to some type of higher learning institution last year. In Pennsyl- vania 66,000 or 43 percent of the state’s 154,000 public high school graduates plan- ned to continue some type of formal education. These figures were drawn from the Economic Development Council of Northeastern Pennsylvania’s July “Data Notes,” which highlights data from ‘Our Schools Today,” an annual series of pub- lications dealing with all facets of elementary and secondary education in Pennsylvania. (continued on PAGE B NINE) > va lc Qualit Z Fd uation ~Oint = Po al Z oa A == 2 = ~- “ QQ Q 0 § Pp A ™ &) BB or THN fk YN Zag 4 3 Y 1 1) NJ a : > 4 / ’ | 4 2X i WY] ' Q [i 3 Ry — [oe 7 oo NS RN 3 M1] Gthy # Meri Sy . Thursday, August 22, 1974 < v s Fd os a 25 Sd Shak nr
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers