While the National Association of Education is the 800-pound gorilla of k-12 education, it’s being challenged by organizations that appeal to teachers looking for an alternative to the trade union model.
According to an article in today’s Wall Street Journal (“Rise of Nonunion Groups Costs NEA Membership and Clout”), a number of teachers have decided to bypass the nation’s largest teachers union. While the NEA still has 2.7 members (and the American Federation of Teachers remains a force with 1.3 million members), “rival nonunion groups have amassed at least 250,000” members. In at least four states, alternative groups claim more members than does the NEA. Growth seems to be limited to states without collective bargaining laws for public school teachers.
The Center for Education Reform has compiled a list of some alternative organizations. The Association of American Educators is an umbrella group that encompasses some of the state groups.
What’s driving the move away from the NEA? Says Betsy Rogers, the “National Teacher of the Year” for 2003, the NEA “has been very active in protecting the rights of teachers,” but “it hasn’t always acted in the best interests of the child.”
One reason may also be the NEA’s penchant for taking up political causes unrelated to education. Of course it wants more money for schools and teachers. But oddly enough, it supports “reproductive freedom.” What does that have to do with education? If anything, nothing good, for by its definition an abortion eliminates a human life that could turn into a student–who may then require a public school teacher. Isn’t student population growth in the business interest of teachers? Also on the union’s agenda: racial-based reparations for slavery. Says one teacher who declined to join the NEA: “I don’t think a teachers union has any business being involved in issues like birth control and gun control.”
Despite the slight decay of the NEA’s strength, the union remains a powerful force, donating $13 million this election cycle to support favorable candidates and oppose the No Child Left Behind act. And it remains a powerful force within the Democratic Party.
The alternative associations, on the other hand, are not entirely politics free. Groups in Kentucky and Missouri, for example, have endorsed candidates, though, they would say, out of reaction to unfavorable developments.
How will these groups affect K-12 policy? They may help promote increased flexibility and accountability, and thus serve as a force for good. But groups tend to change missions over time. As Samuel Huntington once noted, the YMCA of years ago is no longer limited to young men, nor is it exclusively Christian, and with a fancy facilities in some cities, it resembles a corporation more than a non-profit association.
Even the NEA worked as a professional organization, rather than a union, for 100 years. But eventually it changed, and there’s nothing ruling out a change by these alternative groups as well. In the meantime, though, let’s hope they are a force for improving our way of schooling.