Does passage of the Massachusetts Education Reform Act of 1993 and the achievement gains that have followed prove that teachers’ unions are not nearly the obstacle to school reform efforts that some claim? That’s been the subject of a lively debate over the past 10 days or so on the Washington-based Thomas Fordham Institute’s blog.
The string started with Fordham’s Mike Petrilli recounting comments at a recent conference from education historian Diane Ravitch, who suggested that our status as a strong union state, coupled with Massachusetts’s No. 1 rank on national achievement scores, demonstrates that teachers’ unions are not an impediment to school improvement. Weighing in are Ravitch, Sol Stern of the Manhattan Institute, Jay Greene and Robert Costrell of the University of Arkansas (though Costrell’s real credentials are his time as a top aide to three Massachusetts GOP governors), and Jamie Gass of the Pioneer Institute.
Take-home points from the exchanges: 1) the state’s leading teachers’ union, the Massachusetts Teachers Association, did try to block some key elements of the reform effort; and 2) notwithstanding the perception of the MTA as all-powerful, the combination of reform-minded Republicans and Democrats in key positions (starting with Bill Weld, Mark Roosevelt, Tom Birmingham, and others in the early 1990s) meant many elements of ed reform were put in place and sustained despite union concerns or opposition.
Go here for Petrilli’s wrap-up post from yesterday, which has links to all the back-and-forth.
