The American Federation of Teachers’ Quality Education Agenda
American  public schools have a responsibility to prepare all students for the  opportunities and challenges that await them, and in so doing, to  develop an educated citizenry that strengthens our country. Our  aspirations for our children are inseparable from our societal  imperatives. 
Every  day, in classrooms across the country, teachers help move us toward  those goals. But our schools are not organized or supported in a way to  provide all children with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed  in life and career. By and large, our education system, public and  private, has not been affected by the knowledge-driven revolutions that  have transformed so many other sectors—technology, medicine,  manufacturing and communications, to name a few. As a result, too many  American schools are not equipped to prepare students for pursuits in  these areas, or in others yet to emerge or be imagined. 
Many  American education policies reinforce the inadequacies of our approach  to education: the misuse of standardized testing, the narrowing of the  curriculum, the emphasis on competition over collaboration, and other  top-down reforms that have divested parents and teachers of input and  have led to inadequate support and difficult conditions—all producing  rampant teacher turnover. Add to that the deep, harmful and ongoing cuts  to education, and it’s little wonder that the United States falls below  many other countries on international education comparisons. (It should  be noted, however, that if we control for our higher rate of child  poverty, U.S. students perform as well as or better than all our  competitors. This speaks volumes about the necessity to address  children’s poverty issues with healthcare, social services and  after-school programs.)
Such  an approach to education will not get our children, our communities or  our country where we need to go. Test-taking skills must take a back  seat to developing students’ ability to analyze and apply knowledge.  Memorization must give way to true mastery of concepts. Narrowed  curricula must be broadened to give students the breadth and depth of  knowledge they need to be truly well-educated individuals. The education  we provide our children—all our children—must help develop their  capacity to problem-solve, think critically and approach challenges with  ingenuity. And in order for children to do all this, their teachers  must be well trained, supported and developed throughout their careers;  given true voice in their work; and treated as professionals. 
American public education must change; that much is beyond dispute. But how to change it is a matter of great debate, with two main theories emerging. 
Those  who describe themselves as education “reformers” advocate top-down  overhauling of systems, using standardized testing in math and English  as the primary measure of student and teacher performance and success,  and using competition to leverage change, although neither approach has  been shown to improve student achievement. Their tactics are  intentionally disruptive and invite instability: frequently opening and  closing entire schools rather than fostering stable, successful  neighborhood schools; and cycling through a procession of short-term  teachers, seeking to fire, instead of develop, large numbers of  teachers. They require teachers to implement policies made without their  input, yet in effect shift responsibility for school outcomes solely  onto teachers. They use international comparisons to denigrate American  schools, but pursue practices that are antithetical to the successful  strategies employed in high-achieving countries. 
This  stands in stark contrast to the approach to educational improvement  supported by the American Federation of Teachers and other advocates for  systemic, effective education reform. In a speech shortly after  becoming president of the American Federation of Teachers, Randi  Weingarten said that, when it comes to education reform (with the  exception of vouchers), “Everything should be on the table, provided it  is good for kids and fair to teachers.” Since that time, the AFT has  pursued a quality education agenda focused on evidence (to ensure quality, efficiency and effectiveness), equity (to provide a great education to all children), scalability (to make success systemic, not isolated) and sustainability  (so that the reforms outlast changes in school, district and union  leadership; don’t fall prey to budget cycles; and aren’t buffeted about  by political shifts). And the AFT and our affiliates have sought to  achieve this through collaborative efforts and shared responsibility. 
The  AFT’s quality education agenda is based on best practices in American  public school systems as well as in high-achieving countries. In this  theory of education reform, teachers and teachers unions are partners in  reform—not impediments. 
The American Federation of Teachers’ Quality Education Agenda:
The  major proposals the AFT has developed and implemented are serious and  comprehensive. They focus on the two primary linchpins of educational  attainment—what students need to succeed, and what their teachers need  to facilitate success. And they include the societal support necessary  to foster the conditions to achieve all this.
Teacher Development and Evaluation
With  few exceptions, the best teachers, the ones who make a difference in  children’s lives year after year, are made, not born. That is why an  ongoing teacher development program, closely aligned with teacher  evaluation and due process, is crucial to reform that lasts. When we  started this work in April 2009, teacher evaluations (with few  exceptions) were broken—brief, isolated classroom visits providing often  meaningless snapshots. 
The  AFT set about to design a better way. We convened leading independent  teacher evaluation experts, as well as educators and teachers union  leaders, to develop a teacher development and evaluation framework that  overhauls the way most teachers currently are evaluated. This framework  is rigorous, objective and in-depth. It provides a foundation for  teacher evaluation to be a supporting exercise, not simply a sorting  exercise.
The  AFT is helping to put into place development and evaluation systems  that help new and struggling teachers improve, help good teachers become  great, and accurately identify teachers who do not belong in the  profession. These systems focus on improving the vast majority of  teachers, not just removing a small minority, in order to ensure that  all kids are taught by the excellent teachers they deserve. 
Since  we announced this framework in January 2010, more than 100 school  districts have started working with the AFT to adopt this more effective  way of evaluating teachers and developing their skills. And in July  2011, the American Association of School Administrators joined us as a  partner in implementing the framework in school systems across the  country. 
Our  focus on developing great teachers once they are in the classroom is  not intended to ignore or minimize the issue of teacher preparation.  Pipeline issues must be addressed to ensure that our nation’s schools of  education properly prepare and train future teachers, and that new  teachers receive mentoring and other support through induction programs  to reduce high turnover rates. 
Some  officials seem to believe you can fire your way to good teaching. Not  only is such an approach disruptive to learning, it defies both common  sense and voluminous research showing that teachers improve over time  and with support. 
In  addition, trying to fire your way to good teaching is very costly,  making it untenable in this difficult fiscal environment. The National  Commission on Teaching and America’s Future found that teacher turnover  costs the nation $7.34 billion each year. That figure includes the  amount of money it takes annually to recruit, hire, process and train  new teachers. This approach is not just bad education policy, it’s bad  economic policy. 
The  AFT also has proposed a process for aligning teacher evaluations to due  process. Our proposal begins with implementing a comprehensive teacher  development and evaluation system, such as the one outlined above. In  cases where teachers are deemed to be unsatisfactory, it triggers an  improvement and support process that can last no longer than one year.  At the conclusion of the support and assistance period, an administrator  judges whether the teacher is now performing up to the standards. The  school district decides whether to retain or remove a teacher, a  decision that can be reviewed by a neutral third party. The entire  hearing process can take no longer than 100 days, and in many cases  would be much faster.
Curricula
Students  need great curricula, delivered within an environment that eliminates  barriers to success. Our children won’t have the opportunity to become  the thinkers, innovators and leaders of tomorrow if they have been  taught only the subjects tested. Curricula should ground students in  areas ranging from foreign languages to physical education, civics to  the sciences, history to health, as well as literature, mathematics and  the arts. 
A  curriculum does what academic content standards can’t do. It provides  teachers with a detailed road map for helping students reach the  standards. It is the how-to guide for teachers. The curriculum provides  information to teachers about the content, instructional strategies and  expectations for student performance levels necessary to meet the  standards. A curriculum must be comprehensive without being restrictive;  it must provide examples and allow for flexibility; and it must  establish the broad parameters within which teachers apply their  professional knowledge and judgment.
Curricula  do not work in isolation and must be a part of the entire  system—including reading materials, textbooks and software; information  on instructional strategies to help teach the standards in a variety of  ways; professional development; and assessment. Curricula and these  supports must be aligned with the academic standards and standards-based  assessments that students are expected to master, including the Common  Core standards for reading and math. And teachers must have access to  high-quality, ongoing professional development to help them use the  curricula to differentiate their instruction to ensure all students  succeed. Right now, such curricula aren’t routinely in place, and many  teachers are forced to make it up every day. 
 Community Schools—Schools as the hub of a neighborhood
While  good teaching is crucial to student learning, there are factors in  every child’s life that are beyond the teacher’s control and may deeply  affect the child’s ability to perform well in school. In fact, decades  of research have shown that out-of-school factors account for up to  two-thirds of student achievement results. Sadly, there are more  impediments to learning in the lives of poor children than there are in  the lives of children from more advantaged circumstances. If we are to  close the achievement gap, we must address the factors that impede  learning. This is especially important now, when the struggling economy  has increased the pressures on families. 
The  most direct and effective solution is to provide accessible services  right in the school. Schools can coordinate with local providers—medical  providers, Boys and Girls Clubs, and other local nonprofits, for  example—to provide services where families can readily access them. The  community schools model has proven successful in a number of school  systems, and it should be replicated more widely. 
Community  schools typically are open beyond regular school hours to provide  access to tutoring, homework assistance and recreational activities, as  well as medical, dental and mental health services. Families and other  community residents also may benefit from legal advice, immigration  assistance, employment counseling, housing help and English-language or  GED instruction, depending on needs. These services can alleviate family  crises and stresses that interfere with children’s schooling. 
Teachers  are a critical focal point for coordinating the services that each  child needs and ensuring that academic services are connected with what  children are learning in school. Community schools have been supported  by numerous AFT affiliates, including the successful programs in  Syracuse, N.Y., where Say Yes to Education, a nonprofit foundation,  links students and their families to needed services, including a  guarantee of tuition to a state university or college for high school  graduates. And in Cincinnati, Community Learning Centers provide access  to health and social services, as well as enrichment, tutoring and adult  education programs. Among the benefits have been higher student test  scores, and better attendance and parent involvement rates. In addition,  the AFT Innovation Fund is supporting the expansion of community  schools in Philadelphia and West Virginia.
Collaboration
Top-down,  dictatorial mandates are a prescription for failure in public  education, as in most other sectors. As a theory of action,  collaboration—in other words, teamwork or working together—has boundless  potential. Collaboration based on shared responsibility means that  parties are willing to solve problems, confront challenges and innovate  in a system that promotes trust and that values involvement in  decision-making. Collaboration is not an end in itself, and it cannot be  done in isolation. It is used in service of a mission—in this case,  improving student success. 
Collaborative  work—interest-based bargaining, finding the solution instead of winning  and losing—is something that too few school systems have enough  experience with. Collaborative reform leads administrators, teachers and  parents to work together toward goals on which they all agree, using  methods they all accept. Collaboration by itself won’t create systemic  change. But it is the vehicle that creates trust, that enables risk, and  that fosters shared responsibility. Given the complex work we do in  education, it only makes sense to draw broadly on people’s knowledge and  to join forces to improve outcomes. 
Many  school districts have moved collaboration from theory to practice. In  Lowell, Mass., the partnership between the United Teachers of Lowell and  the superintendent laid the foundation for changes that have greatly  improved student outcomes in the district. The former superintendent and  union president worked in concert: visiting every school in the  district together, sharing student achievement data and goals, listening  to teachers’ concerns and soliciting their suggestions. Lowell has a  new superintendent, but collaboration has been key to the district’s  success, and the expectation is that it will be the hallmark of  labor-management relations in the district going forward. 
The  ABC Unified School District in southeastern Los Angeles County once was  mired in labor-management conflict and unacceptable conditions for  teaching and learning. The resolution of a divisive strike and the  arrival of a new superintendent provided an opportunity to wipe the  slate clean. The teachers union and the new superintendent jointly  developed an intensive reading program targeted to assist struggling  schools in the district. The success of that partnership led to further  collaborative efforts around curriculum, the use of data to improve  student achievement, and an innovative program to mentor new teachers.  The union and district have been awarded an AFT Innovation Fund grant to  extend administration-union partnerships to 10 schools through projects  tied to student achievement. And the superintendent and union  president—both of whom are successors to those who seeded this  collaboration—regularly present their approach to other districts and  education observers, in hopes of expanding it to many more school  systems. While the superintendent and union president positions are now  both held by new people, the culture of collaboration has lasted.
In  Charlotte County, Fla., school management and union leaders created  Partnership and Performance Councils in their 2004 collective bargaining  agreement, allowing for teachers and staff to provide input on  decisions affecting teaching and learning. The collaboration and joint  professional development academies have been credited for increases in  student achievement and graduation rates. 
Community
America’s  public schools truly are the public’s schools—given the responsibility  of educating all children; imparting the knowledge, values and skills  required for full civic participation; and dependent upon (and  reflective of) the support and involvement of the communities in which  they are located. 
The  AFT is committed to strengthening the ties between public schools and  their communities for the benefit of all. This commitment is evident in  our work and priorities at the national level—through initiatives such  as Faith in Action, which brings together leaders from the Catholic,  Jewish, Muslim and Protestant communities, along with AFT leaders and  staff, to work on areas of common concern. The AFT has also actively  supported efforts such as the One Nation march, a major event last fall  backed by community and civil rights groups, faith leaders and labor  unions to build support for an agenda promoting secure jobs,  high-quality schools and equal opportunity. 
Many  AFT affiliates are focusing on connecting with their communities too.  The Cleveland Teachers Union, for example, is involved in ongoing  efforts with local business leaders, educators, clergy and parents to  strengthen Cleveland’s public schools and communities. In Detroit, the  AFT and the Detroit Federation of Teachers are engaging the community in  developing a reform agenda for the city’s public schools, listening to  community groups and asking them to partner with the union on school  improvement efforts. 
New  York City’s United Federation of Teachers has worked tirelessly over  the past decade to partner with parents, community leaders and  faith-based institutions to maintain and improve relations between the  union and the community. For example, the union hired parent and  community liaisons to promote parent advocacy and sponsor regional  parent conferences. It also maintains a popular Dial-a-Teacher homework  assistance program. For the 2011 school year, the UFT’s Albert Shanker  scholarship fund provided scholarships to 250 low-income public high  school seniors, totaling more than $1 million. And the UFT’s latest  outreach efforts involve developing ongoing partnerships with the faith  community. 
The  interconnectedness between community values and the goals of America’s  labor movement was made clear recently in Wisconsin. There, the governor  sought legislation to strip public workers of bargaining rights and  voice on the job. Rather than seeing this as affecting only union  members, the people of Wisconsin railed against what they saw as an  attack on democracy and fairness that would adversely affect the quality  of their lives. The groundswell of opposition to the governor’s efforts  included farmers, teachers, parents, religious communities, union  members and nonunion members alike. 
Similarly,  in Ohio, nearly 1.3 million people signed petitions to allow voters in  the state to vote this fall on whether to repeal legislation curtailing  union rights. If the petition had been signed by every union member in  the state but not a single additional person, it would have fallen  short. Instead, widespread community mobilization secured five times the  number of signatures necessary to put the measure on the ballot.