Dive Brief:
- Oklahoma teachers are slowly returning back to the classroom, as union members tout legislative "victory" following an additional $50 million pledge from lawmakers in the state — and while striking teachers contend the money is not enough, they say there is little hope prolonging the walkout will result in more appropriations.
- The legislature had already approved $400 million prior to the walkout, much of which was to be allocated to teacher pay increases. According to the National Center of Education Statistics, Oklahoma teacher pay increased by 0.9% from the 1999-2000 school year to last year, and the state is 49th in the nation overall on teacher pay.
- Several teachers have already filed candidacy paperwork to run for elected office in the state, vowing to continue to fight for improved conditions for Oklahoma students and schools.
Dive Insight:
Speaking at the Reagan Foundation's Summit on Education in DC on Thursday, President and CEO of the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards Peggy Brookins said the walkout was "not just about pay, it's about conditions, it's about support. It's about not having a voice, not being at the table," even though these teachers were closest to the issues and community, and an overall feeling that "no one is listening to you."
"There is not a teacher out there who shows up in the morning and says 'I'm here to do a bad job today,'" she said.
U.S. Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), who was once a teacher herself, opined during the Reagan Foundation event that teacher pay should be inverted to favor elementary and secondary school teachers, who do "all the hard work," rather than university professors. She suggested the reason this model is not adopted in states is "because a majority of elementary and secondary teachers are women, and a majority of college professors are men." She said teachers are "denied ... the little things that would make them feel like professionals," like bathroom breaks.
Though striking teachers in West Virginia, Oklahoma and other states expressed their regret over how students would be impacted in the short-term — educators pooled their money to feed students while schools were closed, realizing that many students are reliant on school meals — many don't see another pathway to improvement.
The situations across the country are indicative of the overall burdens facing state budgets. A New York Times article this week profiled how the rising obligation of pension and entitlement programs, even in states touted for their fiscal responsibility, is crowding out the amount of spending needed for other programs. And though states are obligated to pay for K-12 education, the changing needs of student populations and cuts to other social programs that were once funded by the governments mean a heavier investment in school counselors and mental health providers, as well as wraparound social services like food pantries, is needed by the schools. Professional development and other supports for teachers and administrators falls to the bottom of the list, pay stagnates, maintenance is deferred, and overall conditions decline.
In some areas, parent groups and individual fundraising efforts can help bridge the gaps. But in areas where parents don't have the means or the connections, or there isn't the income tax base from which to allocate the funds to begin with, students and staff suffer. In Chicago, individual principals have complete control over their budgets, which allows them to make decisions based on their individual populations, rather than forcing the district to impose one-size-fits-all solutions on each of its 125 schools. Though more local control has helped in the district, it still does not solve the problem of scarcity.
University of Illinois social scientist William Trent said in a session at the AERA annual meeting Saturday that "competing motivations" among "those who purport to care about morality and support integration while sending their own children to segregated schools" complicates the problem by concentrating resources, rather than allowing them to be spread out to benefit all of the students in a state. And since it is often the families with the most resources who are the most politically savvy, there is little political motivation for leaders to do the politically unpopular things which might solve this issue, such as placing the competitive programs in the least advantaged schools to attract better-off families to them, rather than building new schools in better-off areas.
