Where We Stand

The last two decades have seen the courts take action on basic national issues in areas where the legislative and executive branches had not acted. The great progress we have witnessed in civil rights would not have been achieved without the impetus given by court decisions. Similarly, undemocratic forms of representation could not have been ended if not for the court decision on one-man-one-vote.

Over the last half century, there has been constant debate between "traditionalists" and "progressives" over basic educational philosophy. In the past decade, however, most of the critical writings have come from the later group. 

In the history of our country, one of the great achievements of the liberal-reform movement was the establishment of the civil service system in government employment. Civil service reform, however, has not been instituted in school systems, except for those of New York City and a few other large cities.

Mr. Shanker's guest columnist this week is Msgr. George G. Higgins, Director of the Division of Urban Life of the US Catholic Conference.

The newspaper headlines of the past few years should have readily convinced even the most skeptical that the lot of the teacher is a very difficult one. Each year teachers hope that something will happen to make the next year a better one, but, as the new school year begins, teachers are faced with unprecedented headaches.

Mr. Shanker is presently traveling in Africa as a representative of the International Federation of Free Trade Unions, for the purpose of exchanging information and ideas on education, and of fostering union solidarity. His guest columnist today is Tom Kahn, Executive Director of the League for Industrial Democracy, a labor-supported educational society.

It is hard to conceive of any economic crisis, in any society, which can be blamed equally on all of its citizens.

The spectacular surge in stock prices that immediately followed President Nixon's announcement of his new economic policy vividly underscores the fact that this policy has yielded and will continue to yield huge financial benefits to those with large stock investments while freezing the wages of teachers and other workers. The rich will get richer, and the poor will get poorer.

George Santayana once defined fanaticism as the process of redoubling your efforts after you have forgotten your aims. The definition applies fairly well to the supporters of school decentralization and community control here in New York. 

In June, the New York Times, in a year-end summary of the state of our city's public schools, reported that most of the groups active on the school scene believed that school decentralization was a success. Such expressions of approval were of course to be expected, in light of the fact that in the past few years the virtues of decentralization and community control have been put forth as absolute dogma.

With prospects looming for a steel strike, in the wake of other major strikes still in progress or only recently settled, the anti-labor propaganda machines are working full blast -- as nothing else seems to be in Mr. Nixon's recession economy.

In this column last Sunday I discussed the latest educational gimmick -- vouchers. In the July 12 issue of The New Leader, in his article on "Vouchers and Public Education," economist Lekachman's article is must reading. 

If the last decade has produced anything in education, it has been an outpouring of books critical of existing school procedures and practices and calling for a multitude of changes. The critics, almost to a man, see teachers as a major obstacle to "innovation." In the sense that teachers, drawing on their experience and training, see the need for restraint in the current passion for "innovation," the critics are right. 

One of the "hottest" educational items being peddled by the Nixon administration is the educational voucher program. 

For a three year period, New Yorkers debated the question of whether there should be school decentralization or whether there should be total community control of schools. 

Whenever public employee unions threaten or engage in strikes, the press is quick and near-unanimous in its condemnation. It rarely fails to point out that these strikes are illegal under the Taylor Law. What is omitted is the rationale underlying the strike prohibition: that strikes are not needed since the weight of public opinion will compel government officials to accept the recommendations of factfinders and to ratify and honor agreements.

One year ago, George Washington High School was plagued by anarchy and repeated violence. The day-by-day confrontations are documented in Irving Witkin's Diary of a Teacher (available from the UFT). Now, according to a New York Times report, bloody riots have been replaced by "greatly relaxed tensions, greatly improved stability and morale, and cautious hope that the future will bring instructional reforms that few deny are necessary." 

Until just a few years ago, teachers, while many in number, were a relatively voiceless group. Teacher salaries were notoriously low, and teachers were not even guaranteed such a basic working condition, enjoyed by every factory worker, as a lunch hour free of work. 

There's nothing new about the "school crisis." Almost every American community experiences the annual school budget problem. But now there is a new twist emerging. Recently, the anti-school forces have taken the offensive, basing themselves on the "latest" in educational research.

The art of shifting blame to a scapegoat is being practiced with increasing frequency as our public officials -- city and state -- refuse to face up to their responsibilities. The most recent display of this timeworn art was the attempt to amend the Taylor Law to prevent public employee unions from negotiating on anything but salaries, vacations and holidays.