No description available.

No description available.

The purpose of the study was to determine if the language of the negotiated agreements of Indiana School Corporations was reflected in professional growth and staff development activities. Collective bargaining agreements during 1982-1983 and 1988-1989 from 289 Indiana School Corporations were compared to identify the existence, if any, of (a) a trend in the acknowledgement of professional growth and staff development-related statements found in the contracts, and (b) policy statements delineating how staff development activities and curriculum-related activities were to be conducted in schools. Contract language in which comparisons appeared to be significant were subjected to the Friedman Two-way Analysis of Variance (Friedman ANOVA) to determine whether or not comparisons were statistically significant at the .05 level. Such statistically significant comparisons also helped to determine whether or not school corporations incorporated contract language, which gave instructional staff a legal position in decisions which affected teacher professional growth and participation in curriculum-related matters.Conclusions1. Compared to small enrollment Indiana School Corporations (3,000 students or less), large enrollment Indiana School Corporations (3,001 or more students) were more likely than statistically expected to provide salary compensation for higher levels of teacher education training and sabbatical leave compensation at statistically significant levels of .05 or less, based upon use of the chi-square statistic.2. The research findings failed to support movement toward greater Indiana School Corporation contract language in 1982-1983 and 1988-1989 in most of the specified staff development factors under investigation in the research. Therefore, contrary to the literature which claimed that collective bargaining would be used as a vehicle for staff development change, collective bargaining has not provided structural support for such change among Indiana School Corporations. / Department of Educational Leadership

The purpose of this study was to determine the level of satisfaction of selected teacher spokespersons toward Indiana Public Law 217, the collective bargaining law for teachers.A survey instrument consisting of forty-six items in five Likert-response categories was mailed to 125 randomly selected teacher spokespersons in Indiana. Space was provided for respondents to write comments or rationale for their answers. Fifty-seven teacher spokespersons responded to the survey.The following rank order was utilized for each of the sections of Indiana Public j 217 ranging from (5) highly dissatisfied, (4) somewhat dissatisfied, (3) neutral, (2) somewhat satisfied to (1) highly satisfied based on the mean scores.Findings1. Selected teacher spokespersons rated four section items between 4.00 and 5.00.2. Of the forty-six section items that were surveyed, seventeen sections were rated between 3.00 and 3.99.3. Negotiators for the teachers ranked seventeen sections of Indiana Public L&7_ between 2.00 and 2.99.4. Eight section items were rated between 1.00 and 1.99 by the teacher spokesperson.Conclusions1. Teacher spokespersons were dissatisfied with the inability to strike and the penalities for unlawful strikes.2. Teacher spokespersons were dissatisfied with the procedures and restrictions governing bargaining and discussions.3. Teacher spokespersons were dissatisfied with the provisions and procedures of fact-finding, arbitration and maintaining a status quo contract.4. Teacher spokespersons were dissatisfied with the sections of the law dealing with the rights of the employer5. Teacher spokespersons were dissatisfied with the stated intent of the law.6. Teacher spokespersons were dissatisfied with the structure and powers of the Indiana Education Employment Relations Board.7. Teacher spokespersons were satisfied with the definitions of certificated employees and exclusive representative.8. Teacher spokespersons were satisfied with the procedures of unfair practices as stated in the law.9. Teacher spokesperson were satisfied with the procedures of dues deductions as stated in the law.

The purpose of the study was to investigate and report hierarchies of teacher job and working condition wants. Teacher ranked wants were compared with ranked perceptions of teacher wants as perceived by school board presidents, superintendents, principals, Indiana State Teachers Association staff and the staff of the Indiana Federation of Teachers. Comparisons were also made of elementary and secondary teacher wants. The study was predicated upon the need for current information defining teacher priorities for collective bargaining.The instrument consisted of two decks of rank-sort cards. The job wants deck was imprinted with ten motivators and hygiene factors. The working conditions deck was imprinted with ten hygiene factors in the teaching environment. Teachers were instructed to rank factors in both decks according to prepotent job wants. Participants other than teachers were instructed to rank factors in both decks reflecting personal perceptions of teacher job and working condition wants. Completed instruments were returned by thirty-six elementary teachers, forty-two secondary teachers, sixty board presidents, eighty-seven superintendents, eighty principals, forty-two Indiana State Teachers Association representatives and six Indiana Federation of Teachers representatives. Eighteen hypotheses were tested to provide for two-way comparisons between teacher wants and perceptions of teacher wants.Significant differences were noted between job rankings by elementary and secondary teachers. Meaningful work was the most prepotent teacher motivator. Board presidents, superintendents, and teacher organization staffs ranked improved wages as the most prepotent teacher want. Significant differences were noted between rankings of teacher job wants and rankings of teacher wants by non-teachers. Rankings of perceived teacher job wants by board presidents, superintendents and teacher organization professional staff members were significantly congruent. Perceptions reported by principals concerning teacher job wants were more congruent with teacher rankings of job wants than were the rankings of other non-teacher samples. Non-teacher groups were able to rank teacher working condition (hygiene) wants with greater correlation to teacher opinion than was achieved in ranking teacher job wants (motivators). Administrators need to demonstrate loyalty to teachers and teacher organization leaders need to recognize the need for loyal relationships between teachers and administrators. The study seems to support the contention that administrators and other teacher leaders need to become sensitized to teacher job wants.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--Teachers College, Columbia University, 1994. / Includes tables and appendices. Typescript; issued also on microfilm. Sponsor: Jonathan T. Hughes. Dissertation Committee: Margaret Terry Orr. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 159-163).

No description available.

No description available.

It is commonly observed that elementary and secondary teachers often work in isolation and that providing opportunities for teachers to work together helps improve student outcomes. But it can be difficult to find time for teacher collaboration, whether in professional learning communities, grade-level teams, or other collaborative groups. Given the extensive role of collective bargaining agreements in governing teachers’ hours and working conditions, this study explores the role of collective bargaining in creating time for teacher collaboration. Using legal and content analyses, the study examines scope-of-bargaining statutes in each state to determine the extent to which district and union leaders are required to bargain over teacher time. It also uses the content-analysis methodology to review how collective bargaining agreements from thirty-one of the nation’s largest school districts restrict or promote teacher time for collaboration. The study concludes that collective bargaining plays a considerable role in teacher collaboration time. Not only do most states have statutes that require stakeholders to bargain to create opportunities for collaboration time, the resulting collective bargaining agreements directly and indirectly affect time for collaboration. These findings establish that in almost all states where collective bargaining is required, school officials and teachers cannot advance teacher collaboration without the assistance of collective bargaining. Moreover, success in creating collaboration time depends largely on how the collective bargaining agreements restrict or promote that time. In light of these findings, the study recommends that local leaders and state policymakers take steps to promote teacher collaboration through collective bargaining by (1) prioritizing and reducing teacher workload; (2) removing teacher duty-hour limits; (3) expanding noninstructional time, including through additional teacher-collaboration set-asides; and (4) involving school leadership in determining how noninstructional time is used.

Thesis (MBA)--Stellenbosch University, 2005. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Collective bargaining has gained more prominence within the industrial relations system as the latter is undergoing a worldwide transformation process. None of the effects of this transformation process is potentially more important to workers than the impact on dispute resolution. Changes in world markets furthermore necessitate a renewed emphasis on quality of products and services. Within this context labour conflicts in the public service have potential crucial consequences for the South African government's ability to promote economic development and service delivery. The Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC) with its nine provincial chambers provides the infrastructure for collective bargaining in the public education sector and plays an important role in managing conflict and disputes within this sector. The goal of this research is to determine whether the Western Cape provincial chamber of the ELRC (PELRC) is effective in the fulfilment of its statutory functions, with specific reference to its collective bargaining and dispute resolution functions. Data has been collected by conducting interviews using an interview schedule. The research indicated that the PELRC does perform its statutory collective bargaining and dispute resolution functions. The PELRC, however, is more active in terms of dispute resolution than collective bargaining. The research established that the PELRC does not measure its effectiveness. Results were inconclusive regarding the PELRC's effectiveness in terms of its service delivery. The research, though did manage to identify those factors that contribute to effectiveness as well as those that counter it. It furthermore indicated that when effective, the PELRC's service delivery has a positive impact on the said statutory functions. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Kollektiewe bedinging het in vernaamheid binne die arbeidsverhoudinge sisteem toegeneem soos wat laasgenoemde 'n wêreldwye transformasie proses ondergaan. Geen van die gevolge van hierdie transformasie proses is vir werkers moontlik belangriker as die invloed wat dit op dispuut oplossing het nie. Veranderinge binne wêreld markte het verder 'n hernuwe klem op die kwaliteit van produkte en dienste genoodsaak. Binne hierdie verband het arbeidskonflik in die staatsdiens potensieel kritieke gevolge vir die Suid-Afrikaanse regering se vermoë om ekonomiese ontwikkeling en dienslewering te bevorder. Die Raad van Arbeidsverhoudinge in die Onderwys (RAVO) met sy nege provinsiale kamers verskaf die infrastruktuur vir kollektiewe bedinging in die openbare onderwys sektor en speel 'n belangrike rol in die bestuur van konflik en dispute binne hierdie sektor. Die doel van hierdie navorsing is om te bepaal of die Wes-Kaap provinsiale kamer van die RAVO (PRAVO) effektief is in die uitvoering van sy statutêre funksies met spesifieke verwysing na sy kollektiewe bedinging en dispuut oplossing funksies. Data is ingesamel deur onderhoude te voer waartydens 'n onderhoud skedule gebruik is. Die navorsing het aangetoon dat die PRAVO wel sy statutêre kollektiewe bedinging en dispuut oplossing funksies uitvoer. Die PRAVO is egter meer aktief in terme van dispuut oplossing as kollektiewe bedinging. Die navorsing het vasgestel dat die PRAVO nie sy effektiwiteit meet nie. Resultate was onoortuigend betreffende die PRAVO se effektiwiteit in terme van sy dienslewering. Die navorsing het wel daardie faktore wat tot effektiwiteit bydra sowel as dié wat dit teenwerk geïdentifiseer. Dit het verder aangetoon dat wanneer effektief, die PRAVO se dienslewering 'n positiewe invloed op die genoemde statutêre funksies het.