RSS
Home
Teachers' unions do little for education, economist says
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
Teachers' unions supposedly do a lot for education. Thanks to their efforts, dedicated teachers are paid more and our schools turn out intelligent, well-rounded students in greater and greater numbers as a result.
New economic research, however, is challenging the idea that teachers' unions have such a positive impact on our education system.
In a study recently published in the Journal of Labor Economics, economist Michael Lovenheim analyzed data from three school districts in Iowa, Indiana and Minnesota and found that no difference exists between union and non-union school districts in terms of teacher pay, spending per student, number of teachers employed and student-teacher ratio.
The study also found that teachers' unions have little impact on the student drop out rate, indicating that unionization doesn't improve teacher productivity nor does it improve student performance.
Although previous studies have concluded that unionization does increase district spending and pay for teachers, Lovenheim argues that this conclusion is flawed because the researchers "used inaccurate data on which districts were actually unionized and when those unions became active."
According to the study's press release, "Lovenheim gathered certifications of union elections from state Public Employment Relations Board offices. The certifications mark the exact time when teachers in each district elected someone to represent them at the bargaining table. Knowing exactly which districts unionized and when is essential for an accurate analysis."
With this in mind, maybe it might be a good idea to ask: exactly what good does unionization serve if its impact on education is undetectable?
Perhaps it doesn't serve any good and there isn't any justification for school districts to unionize.
