FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

What’s Driving the Chicago Teachers Strike

by BINOY KAMPMARK

“This was a strike of choice, a bad choice for our children and not necessary,” decried an irritated Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel. 350,000 students and 26,000 teachers have stayed out of classes now for two days as contract negotiations take place between Chicago Public School officials and the city’s teachers’ union.  This is not small beer – the strikes are taking place in the third-largest school district in the U.S.

It is also the first time such broad strike action has been used in Chicago since the four week strike of 1987, and many of the issues are similar – teaching conditions, benefits, pay raises, air-conditioning in class rooms.  The target may also be, speculates Rick Perlstein of Salon (Sep 11) bullyboy plutocracy.  Emanuel, in fits of misdirected toughness, has been forcing initiatives down the throats of teachers, a notable one being the lengthening of Chicago’s school day.

The force and effect of the strike may not be as significant as past actions, for the simple fact that America’s union movement has been well and truly defanged.  Since June 2009, the largest teacher’s union, the NEA, has lost 100,000 members, leaving it with a membership base of 3 million (NPR, Sep 10).  That said, it would be a mistake to underestimate their influence.  In Perlstein’s defiant words, “It’s an inspiration to anyone frustrated that people have forgotten how good it feels to stand up to bullies – and how effective it can be.”

Unions are also easily mocked as unchanging monoliths, and have come under attack in Indiana, Idaho, Tennessee and Wisconsin.  Since the 2010 elections, those states have clipped the wings of teachers keen on pursuing collective bargaining.  Mitt Romney sees them as self-interested entities keen in keeping prices and costs up. Notably, there are cracks in the Democratic Party over education policy and what the reform agenda might look like.  As Emanuel has himself stated, “We will do no favours to our city employees or our taxpayers if we let outdated rules and outmoded practices make important government services too costly to deliver.”

Parallel realities on the state of negotiations have formed.  “The Chicago Public Schools has made proposals to change every article [of the contract],” suggests union spokesperson Stephanie Gadlin.  “It is not accurate to say both sides are extremely close – this is misinformation on behalf of the board and Mayor Emanuel” (NYT, Sep 12).  This should hardly come as a surprise – the Emanuel machine is smooth, slick and totally disingenuous.

The question being posed then is: to change and collaborate, or oppose and resist altogether?  But this is hardly the question to ask when one considers the features of what has to change.  Take teacher evaluations which, depending on how they are used, can cause considerable damage. A merit and pay system, such as what has been implemented in Denver, is one thing, but how merit is measured is often contentious.   Not even the Chicago Teachers’ Union has shied away from the idea that teacher evaluations can’t be based, at least in part, on measures of student growth. The problem there lies in whether those measures are state standardized or individually designed by teachers in the district.

Banging on about teacher evaluations is a patent admission that teaching has become a consumer product that one can simply purchase from a store.  Is it deficient? Does it match ‘quality assured’ practices as guaranteed by the institution that offers them?  In a sense, the debate about how the quality of teachers and teaching can be assessed is a long one.  What has been in dispute is how uneven the processes have been.  Systems such as the edTPA, a peer-developed process that focuses on a candidate’s mastery of a certain body of knowledge and skills, is an example of an evaluation system that has received approval in some circles.

None of this gets away from a fundamental problem.  The way teachers are evaluated has become a product of entrepreneurial interference and a hostage to the tech geniuses who supposedly have some inner knowledge of the teaching process.  If there is an ‘app’, get it.  That way lies corporatisation. This is not to say that teachers have not themselves being trying to buck assumptions that they are not accountable in their practices.  A general perception, fed by Romney et al, is that they are not.

To imagine the pupil-teacher relationship as one of finance, student growth, popularity scores and spread sheets is mind jarringly obscene, but this has not stopped the process from accelerating.  In fact, it is becoming more rigorous than ever, taking hold in universities at an alarming rate.  As part of the same mix, the U.S. Department of Education has proposed to use the test scores of graduates’ students to evaluate schools of education.  Never mind the fact that such scores are notoriously unreliable.

Once you make teachers servile to the market economy and the managerial classes, their performance ceases to be one of teaching but entertaining.  One is not getting so much better teaching than better circus acts, backed by the dull machinists of power point.  In that case, we get not only the teachers we deserve but the graduates we don’t want. This is truly a kingdom of dunces.

Given that unionised labour is a traditional hunting ground for Democrat votes, the Chicago strikes may have broader resonance. President Obama can’t afford to have too many distractions leading to the election but then again, whoever wins come November will not prevent the incessant march of corporatized teaching.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

 

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

More articles by:
June 28, 2016
Jonathan Cook
The Neoliberal Prison: Brexit Hysteria and the Liberal Mind
Paul Street
Bernie, Bakken, and Electoral Delusion: Letting Rich Guys Ruin Iowa and the World
Anthony DiMaggio
Fatally Flawed: the Bi-Partisan Travesty of American Health Care Reform
Mike King
The “Free State of Jones” in Trump’s America: Freedom Beyond White Imagination
Antonis Vradis
Stop Shedding Tears for the EU Monster: Brexit, the View From the Peloponnese
Omar Kassem
The End of the Atlantic Project: Slamming the Brakes on the Neoliberal Order
Binoy Kampmark
Brexit and the Neoliberal Revolt Against Jeremy Corbyn
Ruth Hopkins
Save Bear Butte: Mecca of the Lakota
Celestino Gusmao
Time to End Impunity for Suharto’s Crimes in Indonesia and Timor-Leste
Thomas Knapp
SCOTUS: Amply Serving Law Enforcement’s Interests versus Society’s
Manuel E. Yepe
Capitalism is the Opposite of Democracy
Winslow Myers
Up Against the Wall
Chris Ernesto
Bernie’s “Political Revolution” = Vote for Clinton and the Neocons
Stephanie Van Hook
The Time for Silence is Over
Ajamu Nangwaya
Toronto’s Bathhouse Raids: Racialized, Queer Solidarity and Police Violence
June 27, 2016
Robin Hahnel
Brexit: Establishment Freak Out
James Bradley
Omar’s Motive
Gregory Wilpert – Michael Hudson
How Western Military Interventions Shaped the Brexit Vote
Leonard Peltier
41 Years Since Jumping Bull (But 500 Years of Trauma)
Rev. William Alberts
Orlando: the Latest Victim of Radicalizing American Imperialism
Patrick Cockburn
Brexiteers Have Much in Common With Arab Spring Protesters
Franklin Lamb
How 100 Syrians, 200 Russians and 11 Dogs Out-Witted ISIS and Saved Palmyra
John Grant
Omar Mateen: The Answers are All Around Us
Dean Baker
In the Wake of Brexit Will the EU Finally Turn Away From Austerity?
Ralph Nader
The IRS and the Self-Minimization of Congressman Jason Chaffetz
Johan Galtung
Goodbye UK, Goodbye Great Britain: What Next?
Martha Pskowski
Detained in Dilley: Deportation and Asylum in Texas
Binoy Kampmark
Headaches of Empire: Brexit’s Effect on the United States
Dave Lindorff
Honest Election System Needed to Defeat Ruling Elite
Louisa Willcox
Delisting Grizzly Bears to Save the Endangered Species Act?
Jason Holland
The Tragedy of Nothing
Jeffrey St. Clair
Revolution Reconsidered: a Fragment (Guest Starring Bernard Sanders in the Role of Robespierre)
Weekend Edition
June 24, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
A Blow for Peace and Democracy: Why the British Said No to Europe
Pepe Escobar
Goodbye to All That: Why the UK Left the EU
Michael Hudson
Revolts of the Debtors: From Socrates to Ibn Khaldun
Andrew Levine
Summer Spectaculars: Prelude to a Tea Party?
Kshama Sawant
Beyond Bernie: Still Not With Her
Mike Whitney
¡Basta Ya, Brussels! British Voters Reject EU Corporate Slavestate
Tariq Ali
Panic in the House: Brexit as Revolt Against the Political Establishment
Paul Street
Miranda, Obama, and Hamilton: an Orwellian Ménage à Trois for the Neoliberal Age
Ellen Brown
The War on Weed is Winding Down, But Will Monsanto Emerge the Winner?
Gary Leupp
Why God Created the Two-Party System
Conn Hallinan
Brexit Vote: a Very British Affair (But Spain May Rock the Continent)
Ruth Fowler
England, My England
Jeffrey St. Clair
Lines Written on the Occasion of Bernie Sanders’ Announcement of His Intention to Vote for Hillary Clinton
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail