Abstract
Guided by New Structuralism theory, this work examines the context of novice teacher socialization as it relates to their attitudes regarding teacher unionism. Using survey data gathered from novice elementary and middle school teachers and their veteran colleagues across 10 districts, we identify differences between novice teachers and their veteran colleagues in their evaluation of union practices, and the extent to which novices’ evaluation of union practices are shaped by their interactions with their colleagues. The findings from this study have implications for understanding how novice teachers evaluate teacher unionism and the extent to which they are socialized into their local teacher unions through their collegial relationships.
Although novice teachers enter the profession with preconceived notions of what it is like to be a teacher (Lortie, 1975; Staton & Hunt, 1992), their socialization into teaching is undoubtedly context specific because each school organization has its own organizational culture and climate. In other words, how teachers come to adopt specific routines, beliefs, and practices is shaped largely by the other teachers and administrators in their school. In many traditional public school settings, a key element of the school context is related to the role the local teacher union plays in shaping the work environment. Therefore, not only are novice teachers socialized into their particular schools, they are also socialized into their local teacher unions. It is through this socialization that novice teachers understand the core goals and values of the union, as well as how they orient themselves toward the school organization more generally (Chao, O’Leary-Kelly, Wolf, Klein, & Gardner, 1994; Jones, 1986; Van Maanen & Schein, 1979). In several organizational contexts, new member socialization has been associated with satisfaction with the organization (Feldman, 1981; Louis, Posner, & Powell, 1983; Van Maanen & Schein, 1979); therefore, the extent to which novices are socialized into their teacher unions has implications for union organizational focus and strength, which then further influences school working conditions.
However, although there has been extensive research on novice teacher socialization into the teaching profession, there has been very limited research on novice teacher socialization into teacher unions, particularly as it relates to informal socialization. That is, even though novice teachers are formally recruited and socialized into unionism by union leaders (e.g., official orientations, union sponsored social events, regular meetings, etc.), it is not clear how their everyday interactions with teacher colleagues and administrators shape their perceptions of teacher unionism. This form of informal socialization may be particularly important because we know from previous research that formal union socialization is quite limited (Pogodzinski, 2012a).
Therefore this study provides a framework for investigating how novice teachers’ beliefs and behaviors related to teacher unions are influenced through interactions with their teacher colleagues. Specifically, the purpose of this work is the following:
Detail a framework used to identify teacher colleagues’ influence on novice teachers’ attitudes and practices regarding teacher unionism.
Use this framework to quantitatively measure this influence through social network regression analysis.
Provide implications for future research and practice regarding novice teacher socialization into teacher unionism.
This work is important because novices’ lack of exposure to teacher unionism may lead to indifference about the role of unions in their work lives, including the costs and benefits associated with membership (Newton & Shore, 1992). Thus they may remain disconnected from the work of the teacher union, which ultimately weakens the organization’s capacity to collectively bargain over critical aspects of the work environment (e.g., teacher evaluations and compensation). This may be particularly important as recent legislation in several states has hampered teacher unions’ ability to recruit and maintain union membership (e.g., Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Florida, Idaho, and New Jersey). In addition, recent research has suggested that the newest generation of teachers are more open to reforms in the area of teacher evaluations and compensation (Goldhaber, DeArmond, & DeBurgomaster, 2010; Jacob & Springer, 2007; Johnson, 2004; Johnson & Papay, 2009). Although new teachers are more open to change, “they rarely associate their union with such activity” (Kerchner & Koppich, 2004, p. 198). Therefore, examining the context within which novice teachers learn about teacher unionism is essential to understanding their preferences for union involvement in their work lives, and has important implications for the future strength of teacher unions (Fullagar, Gallagher, Gordon, & Clark, 1995; Newton & Shore, 1992).
A Framework for Researching Novice Teacher Socialization
Members of an organization are exposed to the norms, rules, and policies of the organization through formal mechanisms such as orientations, official literature, and meetings with organizational leaders, but it is also through personal relationships and interactions among members of the organization that norms of behavior and expectations are communicated and networks of knowledge and resource flow are established (Coburn & Russell, 2008; Penuel et al., 2010). For example, local teacher union presidents and building representatives make attempts to formally socialize new members into the union organization through participation in new teacher orientations, initial one-to-one meetings with new hires, and sponsoring social events such as happy hours during the beginning of the school year (Pogodzinski, 2012a), but it is also through daily interactions with teacher colleagues where novice teachers learn about the role of the teacher union in their work lives and come to understand the attitudes and behaviors they are expected to portray as union members (or in some circumstances pressured to become union members).
If new teachers learn about teacher unionism from their colleagues, then we should attend to the processes through which these relationships shape novices’ beliefs and practices regarding unionism. Relationships with colleagues are based often on some combination of shared professional and personal interests. These relationships communicate their own unique set of norms and expectations, while also providing novice teachers with access to resources and supports (Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman, 1988). In addition, different types of informal teacher relations will—to varying degrees—mediate the effects of policies and expectations (Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Coburn, 2004; Coburn & Russell, 2008; Coleman, 1988; Granovetter, 1978). For example, even within a single school, attitudes and behaviors regarding teacher unionism may vary based on membership within a subgroup of teachers, each of whom has their own beliefs and expectations regarding the value of their local teacher union (Coburn & Russell, 2008; Granovetter, 1978; Macy, 1990). If a novice teacher is located within a subgroup of teachers who are strong unionists, she may be swayed toward being a strong unionist herself even if she previously had neutral feelings toward the union’s role in her work life.
Therefore, researchers have called for more attention to be given to the micro-foundations of organizations, or the unstructured intra-organizational processes that are enacted on a daily basis by organization members (Lounsbury & Vantresca, 2003; Powell & Colyvas, 2007). Specifically, New Structuralist theory suggests that the everyday interactions among members of an organization in many ways define the structure of an organization, as well as the norms and expectations of behaviors. This theory grew out of Institutionalism, which suggests that although organizations are rationally ordered to attain goals, the formal structures cannot eliminate non-rational dimensions of organizational behavior, which includes the complex informal systems that link participants with one another (Selznick, 1948). That is that even though a local teacher union is part of the formal organization of the overall school system, but everyday interactions among members of the system ultimately determine the overall influence the union has on the everyday beliefs and practices of those members.
Building on previous work on teacher socialization into schools (Pogodzinski, 2012b), to guide future research on teacher socialization into unions we propose a general framework suggesting that the information novices receive through interactions with their colleagues will in part shape their beliefs and behaviors regarding teacher unionism. That is as novices are socialized into their local context, in a unionized school, they are also socialized into union membership.
Informal relationships with colleagues may help new teachers integrate various pieces of information and policies received from their union and communicate the more subtle values, norms, and expectations not expressed by formal socializing agents (i.e., union presidents and building representatives) (Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992; Schein, 1968; Van Maanen, 1976). In addition, these different interactions may focus on different work-related topics (e.g., how to relate to the administration, work load, compensation, evaluations, or professional etiquette in meetings), and some relationships may be more valuable to the new teachers than others (Feldman, 1981; Louis et al., 1983; Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992).
Figure 1 provides an illustration of the framework that can be utilized to help guide future research and practice. As shown, all teachers are housed within a school’s social context, which partially defines the type of individual relationships that emerge within schools. The characteristics of individual relationships are also based on the characteristics of the teachers themselves, such as their values, goals, and philosophy of teaching, as well as personal interests and personalities. In addition, the extent to which an individual teacher identifies with the goals and values of the teacher union partially defines how they relate to their work and their colleagues. For example, a strong unionist teacher may actively encourage more participation in union activities or possibly even shun teachers who oppose union initiatives. Therefore the characteristics of these relationships determine the frequency and content of teacher interactions, and these interactions provide varying levels of support and resources (i.e., social capital), as well as projecting various expectations and pressures onto novice teachers.
Socialization of novice teachers.
Given the general framework, we elaborate on each of the key elements. Specifically, the following four elements are the cornerstones of the framework:
social context,
characteristics of novices and their colleagues,
alignment among novices and their colleagues, and
frequency and content of novice–colleague interactions.
Although the emphasis on these focal points may not be new to the study of novice teacher socialization, framing these elements in the context of union socialization allows for a more systematic understanding of how these elements of relationships within schools impact novice teachers’ attitudes and practices regarding teacher unionism. Therefore, it can lead to improved research in understanding union socialization.
Social Context
It is important to consider how the social context impacts teacher socialization into unions, particularly levels of relational trust and collective responsibility among teachers (Bryk & Schneider, 2002). These characteristics of the broader school organization more broadly reflect the flow of resources within a school as well as teachers’ willingness to collaborate with others, thus impacting the level of support to which novice teachers have access (Coburn & Russell, 2008). It also defines the climate of the school, or the routine beliefs and practices of organizational members that influence members’ attitudes and behaviors.
Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2000) describe trust in schools as “one party’s willingness to be vulnerable to another party based on the confidence that the latter party is (a) benevolent, (b) reliable, (c) competent, (d) honest, (e) open” (p. 556). With regard to teacher unions, this would reflect not only a general trust among teachers regarding their work, but also that teachers within a school are looking out for each other’s best interest. For example, trust may be threatened when veteran teachers prefer higher salaries and benefits at the cost of novice teacher job security.
The level of collective responsibility is also an important element of the social context of a school. Collective responsibility has been defined as the extent to which teachers in a school are committed to the goals of the school (Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Penuel, Riel, Krause, & Frank, 2009). In a unionized school, this could then be extrapolated to include the extent to which teachers in a school are committed to the goals of the union. Researchers have shown that ties between members of an organization are important in motivating collective action, such as supporting union positions on controversial topics (Granovetter, 1978; Macy, 1990). Particularly, individuals within an organization assess the level of involvement of others around them, and adjust their level of participation accordingly (Macy, 1990). Therefore, it could be expected that novices’ who interact with apathetic teacher unionists would themselves be apathetic toward union practices.
Finally, the overall quality of relations between teachers and administrators likely influences the content and frequency of novice teachers’ interactions with their colleagues. The quality of administrator–teacher relations in a school is based on the collective relationship between an administrator and the teaching staff as a whole (Belman, 1992). This aspect of the organizational climate is likely related to teachers’ perceptions of the role of the union in their work lives. For example, it could be expected that when the quality of administrator–teacher relations across a school are negative, teachers are more likely to be unified and desire more union effort in enforcing work rules or improving teacher access to resources and support. Therefore, regardless of an individual teacher’s personal relationship with the administration, the overall quality of administrator–teacher relations likely impacts the social context among teacher interactions. Conversely, if the quality of administrator-teacher relations within a school is positive, teachers may see less need for union initiatives or the need to rely more heavily on colleagues for additional resources and support.
Teacher Characteristics
Within this general social context, it is important to focus on the characteristics of teachers because these characteristics can shape the nature and outcomes of their interactions (Coburn, 2001; Glazerman et al., 2010). Teachers often self-select into particular types of schools based on their individual preferences for work environments, which are largely shaped by members of the organization (Achinstein, Ogawa, & Speiglman, 2004; Boyd, Lankford, Loeb, & Wyckoff, 2005; Hanushek, Kain, & Rivkin, 2004). It is the characteristics of these teachers that in part define the social context (e.g., levels of relational trust and sense of collective responsibility), as well as partially define the role of the teacher union in their work lives. In addition, teachers who had previously been exposed to unionism (e.g., through previous work experiences or through family members) may be fundamentally different from teachers who know little about unionism.
Therefore, the characteristics of teachers are an important factor in defining the organizational climate as it relates to teacher unionism. In this regard, teachers’ levels of experience and their ability and willingness to convey knowledge and resources to colleagues are important in promoting a unified teaching faculty (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004; Youngs, 2007). Formal teacher mentors and other colleagues with greater overall experience, particularly within a specific school setting, are likely to have developed a greater understanding of the labor relations specific to the school context (Youngs, 2007). In addition, they likely have ties across subgroups of adults within a school and can therefore help guide a broader range of resources and supports to novice teachers and communicate the goals and values of the union more effectively (Frank, 2009; Granovetter, 1978).
Alignment
The third element of focus for this framework is degree of alignment, or fit, among novice teachers and their more senior colleagues. That is, novice teachers who do not share in organizational preferences for attitudes and practices that permeate throughout a school are likely to have divergent attitudes toward teacher unionism (Chan, Lau, Nie, Lim, & Hogan, 2008). It is likely that novice teachers not only have emotional responses to these work socialization experiences (e.g., they like or dislike coworkers), but they also evaluate the degree to which they are aligned with the goals, values, and expectations of their work, including how that work is related to teacher union activities (Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005). In line with previous research findings, it is likely that when novice teachers hold similar beliefs and practices as their colleagues (including beliefs and practices regarding teacher unionism), they are more likely to believe that they are a member of the school community and are more likely to have access to resources and support (Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Desimone, Porter, Garet, Suk Yoon, & Birman, 2002; Kardos, Johnson, Peske, Kauffman, & Liu, 2001).
Frequency and Content of Interactions
Together, the social context, the characteristics of the teachers, and the alignment among teachers ultimately influences the frequency and content of interactions between novices and their colleagues. It is through these interactions that novices are socialized and through which they evaluate the collegial climate as it relates to teacher unionism (Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Coburn & Russell, 2008; Penuel et al., 2010). Evaluating colleagues’ beliefs and practices regarding unionism is at the heart of using this framework for understanding novice teacher socialization into teacher unions. When the social context promotes collaboration among teachers (i.e., high levels of relational trust and collective responsibility among teachers), and novice teachers have high levels of fit with their colleagues, they are more likely to engage in frequent interactions and these interactions are more likely to effectively communicate the norms and expectation regarding attitudes and practices toward unionism (Achinstein et al., 2004; Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Coburn & Russell, 2008; Grossman & Thompson, 2004; Kardos et al., 2001; Wechsler, Caspary, Humphrey, & Matsko, 2010; Youngs, 2007).
In sum, the framework we are proposing suggests that researchers take steps to measure the social context within which teachers work, the degree of fit among teachers, and the frequency and content of their interactions to identify the association between informal novice teacher socialization and their attitudes and practices regarding teacher unionism. Although much of novice teacher socialization into unions occurs through formal socialization efforts enacted by union leaders, novices’ understanding and evaluation of the role of teacher unions in their work lives cannot be divorced from their everyday interactions with their teacher colleagues.
Methods of Data Collection and Analysis
Guided by this framework, we draw on data from a multiyear study of novice teachers to better understand novice teacher socialization into their unions. Data collection occurred in five Michigan districts and five Indiana districts between 2007 and 2009 (see Table 1 for district descriptive information). Our goal was to recruit urban and suburban districts in both states that (a) served varying student populations with regard to race/ethnicity and socio-economic status and (b) had at least 10 full-time core content teachers (mathematics, science, social studies, English/language arts, and elementary general education) in Grades 1 to 8 in their first 3 years of the profession. Urban and suburban schools were targeted because labor relations in larger school systems are often more complicated due to organizational size and complexity, and the outcomes of bargaining impact a larger number of administrators, teachers, and students. Data collection in these two states was done out of convenience based on the proximity of the researchers to the study sites.
2007-2008 Enrollment and Demographic Information for Participating Districts.
Novice Teacher Sample
To measure novice teachers’ perceptions of the social context, content and frequency of interactions with their colleagues, and beliefs and attitudes regarding the role of teacher unions in their work lives, we invited all novice teachers (N = 345) across the 10 districts who taught in core content areas in Grades 1 to 8 and who were in their first 3 years of teaching in public schools as certified teachers to complete four surveys, one each in the fall of 2007 (October/November), spring of 2008 (April/May), fall of 2008, and spring of 2009. Overall, 118 early career teachers completed both the fall and spring surveys (response rate of 34%). Approximately 85% of the teachers were female, 72% were teaching at the elementary school level, and 27% were in their 1st year of teaching, 44% in their 2nd year of teaching, and 29% in their 3rd year of teaching. The novice teacher sample included teachers who were in their first career as well as career changers, though the vast majority of the novice teachers were relatively fresh out of college entering their first career.
We acknowledge there may be important intangible factors that may make non-responders fundamentally different from responders for which we cannot account for. At the same time, there were no statistically significant differences (p < .05) in the baseline measures of our focal variables between those who only completed the first two surveys and those who completed all four surveys. Therefore, although we cannot make any causal claims, this study is intended to improve our understanding of novice teacher socialization into teacher unions.
Colleague Sample
An important contribution of this framework is its emphasis on the role of social relations in shaping novices’ attitudes and beliefs. Therefore it is essential to measure novices’ colleagues’ beliefs and practices regarding teacher unionism to identify the influence they may have on novices’ beliefs and practices. Therefore, to gauge the broader context, in the fall 2007 survey, novice teachers were asked to list their formal mentor and up to eight colleagues they felt were sources of support. Surveys were sent to these colleagues to measure their participation in union activities and their perceptions regarding the appropriate role in their work lives. This egocentric social network data was used in estimating the influence colleagues have on novices’ attitudes regarding teacher unionism.
Due to resource constraints, surveys were not distributed to all teachers within the schools. Because the teacher colleague sample only includes those teachers who were nominated by the novice teachers, the sample of teacher colleagues is not necessarily representative of the overall population of teachers within these schools. However, they do likely represent the most influential teacher colleagues for this sample of novice teachers, which is important when considering the context within which novices self-select into and how they form their perceptions of teacher unionism.
A total of 336 of their more senior teacher colleagues completed a survey in the winter of 2008 (December/January), with a response rate of 46%. The veteran teacher colleagues in the sample averaged 16 years of experience (standard deviation of 9.87 with a minimum of 4 years and a maximum of 40 years); approximately 39% were middle school teachers, 83% were female, and 92% were White.
Analytic Approach
We took a multi-step approach to studying novice teacher socialization into unions. We first identified the extent to which novices’ beliefs and attitudes regarding teacher unionism changed from spring 2008 to spring 2009, and tested for the statistical significance of these differences using Wilcoxon signed rank tests. We then calculated correlations between measures of the social context (i.e., perceptions of the degree of fit, relational trust, and collective responsibility among teachers) and union attitudes and behaviors. In addition, we calculated correlations between the union measures and a state dummy variable (1 = Michigan; 0 = Indiana) as there could be state-specific political and economic factors that influence teachers’ perceptions of teacher unionism. Next we identified the extent to which novice teachers’ beliefs and attitudes regarding unionism deviated from those of their colleagues that they named as key sources of support and tested for statistical differences by using Wilcoxon signed rank tests.
Finally, we estimated a series of regression models to quantitatively measure the influence that these colleagues had on the attitudes and behaviors of novice teachers regarding teacher unionism. This influence effect relates to the level of change in a novice teacher’s beliefs or behaviors (i.e., perceptions of administrator–teacher relations) as a result of interactions with colleagues (Frank, 1998). Three general areas will be the focus of this analysis corresponding to the research focus: (a) teachers’ participation in union activities, (b) teachers’ beliefs about the appropriate role of the union in their work lives, and (c) teachers’ perceptions of the quality of administrator–teacher relations within their schools.
Following the work of Frank (1998), influence was modeled as
In this model, wii′ represents the frequency of interaction between a novice teacher i and colleague i′ as reported by the novice teacher, yi′t−1 represents a specific belief or behavior reported by a given colleague i′ at time t − 1 (spring 2008), yit represents the belief or behavior for novice teacher i at time t (spring 2009) that was subject to possible influence, and yit−1 represents a novice teacher’s belief or behavior at time t − 1 (spring 2008).
Because prior novice teacher beliefs or behaviors are controlled for, this model measures change in novice teacher beliefs or behaviors as a result of interacting with various colleagues. By controlling for the prior measure of novices’ beliefs or behaviors, the model accounts for many differences among teachers that are manifest at the time the prior measure is obtained (Allison, 1990). The influence of a single veteran colleague is in a sense weighted by the frequency of interaction they have with a novice teacher, and a single influence effect p is calculated based on taking the average of the sum of the influence of interactions between a single novice teacher and her colleagues.
Construction of Variables
To measure teachers’ beliefs and attitudes regarding teacher unionism, both novice and veteran teachers were asked in spring 2008 and spring 2009 whether or not they were members of their local teacher union (1 = yes; 0 = no), their frequency of union meeting attendance (1 = at least occasionally; 0 = rarely or never), and whether or not they had participated in union-sponsored political activity (1 = yes; 0 = no). In addition, both novice and veteran teachers were asked to indicate the amount of effort (1 = no effort at all; 2 = a little effort; 3 = don’t know; 4 = some effort; 5 = a lot of effort) they felt their union should put forth in securing various benefits. There were 10 separate items in this set that were developed for this research study in consultation with an expert in public sector labor relations from Michigan State University, and a composite measure was calculated by taking the mean response to each item to represent a more global measure of desired union effort (there was a correlation α of .85 among the 10 items based on novice teachers’ responses). Table 2 provides more descriptive information about the variables included in the analysis.
Variable Descriptions.
Note. NCLB = No Child Left Behind affects teachers.
1 = yes; 0 = no.
1 = at least occasionally; 0 = never or rarely.
1 = no effort; 2 = a little effort; 3 = not sure; 4 = some effort; 5 = a lot of effort.
1 = poor; 2 = fair; 3 = good; 4 = excellent.
Based on following scale: 1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = agree; 4 = strongly agree.
Based on following scale: 1 = none; 2 = less than half; 3 = about half; 4 = most; 5 = all.
There were three specific aspects of the social context that were also the focus of this study: perceptions of professional fit, relational trust, and collective responsibility among colleagues. To measure perceptions of professional fit, novices were asked to indicate the degree to which they agreed (1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree) with six statements from which a composite variable was created by taking the mean response across the six measures. There was a correlation α of .89 among the six measures, indicating a high degree of internal validity. To measure teachers’ perceptions of relational trust among teachers, they were asked to indicate the degree to which they agreed (1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree) with four statements from which a composite variable was created by taking the mean response across the four measures (correlation α = .92). To gauge teachers’ perceptions of the degree of collective responsibility shared by the teachers in the school, they were asked to indicate the proportion of teachers (1 = none, 2 = less than half, 3 = about half, 4 = most, and 5 = all) who participated in six different school-wide activities, from which a composite measure was created by taking the mean response across the six measures (correlation α = .93). The items used to measure perceptions of professional fit, relational trust, and collective responsibility were all derived from the work of Bryk and Schneider (2002), and have been found to be associated with novice teachers’ commitment to teaching in their schools (Grogan, 2011; Pogodzinski, Youngs, & Frank, 2013). Finally, novices were asked to rate the quality of administrator–teacher relations (1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, and 4 = excellent). This measure of organizational context has also been found to be associated with novice teachers’ commitment to teaching in their schools (Pogodzinski, Youngs, Frank, & Belman, 2012).
Findings
We began the analysis by identifying the extent to which novices’ beliefs and attitudes regarding teacher unionism significantly changed from spring 2008 to spring 2009. The results presented in Table 3 indicate that overall there was minimal change in the average novice teacher measure of attitudes and beliefs regarding teacher unionism over this time period. Only one measure of change, union effort in giving teachers more say in teaching assignments, was statistically significant (p < .10). Interestingly though, the majority of changes in the measures were in the negative direction suggesting a desire for less union involvement in their work lives over this 1-year time period.
Change in Average Novice Teachers’ Union Measures.
Note. NCLB = No Child Left Behind affects teachers.
The next stage of analysis was to calculate correlations between measures of the social context (i.e., perceptions of the degree of fit, relational trust, collective responsibility, and administrator–teacher relations) and union attitudes and behaviors. The results in Table 4 indicate that overall the correlations between union measures and social context measures were relatively small in magnitude, with only measures of collective responsibility and administrator–teacher relations showing a statistically significant correlation with select union measures. Generally speaking, as expected the findings suggest that the better the quality of relations between teachers and the administrators within a school the overall less involvement they expect their union to exert in their work lives. In addition, novices who reported higher levels of collective responsibility among teachers within a school also desired less union say in giving teachers a say in how the school system is run. This suggests that at least some aspects of novices’ perceptions of unionism is contextualized based on teachers’ relationships with both colleagues and administrators.
Correlations Among Union Measures and Measures of Collegial Context (Spring 2008).
Note. NCLB = No Child Left Behind affects teachers.
p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .01.
It is also important to consider how these views may vary by the state context. As reported in the last column of Table 4, there were some statistically significant correlations between the union measures and the state dummy variable. Specifically, not only were novice teachers in Michigan more likely to be union members and more regularly attend union meetings, but on average they were more likely to desire more union effort in promoting job security and giving teachers a say in their teaching assignments. Conversely, novice teachers in Michigan were less likely to desire more union effort in mediating the impacts of NCLB on their work lives.
Next we identified the extent to which novice teachers’ beliefs and attitudes regarding unionism deviated from those of their colleagues that they named as key sources of support. Specifically, for a given individual novice teacher we calculated the mean response for each measure (spring 2008) taken from the colleagues identified as being key sources of support and subtracted the novice teacher’s response from this mean measure. We then calculated the Wilcoxon signed rank to identify statistical significance of this deviation. The results reported on in Table 5 show that there are quite a few statistically significant deviations, indicating that on average novice teachers often have differing beliefs and attitudes regarding teacher unionism from even their close veteran colleagues. In addition, over time, several of these deviations increased in magnitude suggesting a lack of convergence regarding union beliefs and practices.
Measures of Novices’ Union Measures Deviated From Their Group Mean.
Note. NCLB = No Child Left Behind affects teachers. Novice teacher measures deviated from 2008 colleague measures.
p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .01.
All of the statistically significant deviations are in the positive direction, indicating that on average novices’ colleagues are more involved with the union and desire more union effort in their work lives than the novices themselves. For example, on average a novice teacher’s close colleagues are more likely to attend union meetings, desire overall more union involvement in their work lives, specifically in fighting for securing fringe benefits, negotiating the standards for teacher evaluation, getting teachers more say in teacher assignments, informing members of union activities, and handling member grievances. There is only one measure where the deviation was statistically significant (p < .10) in 2008 and not in 2009 (giving teachers more say in how union is run), indicating that generally from 2008 and 2009 there was not an increase in alignment in attitudes and beliefs regarding unionism between a novice teacher and her colleagues.
Although the information presented in Table 5 suggests that on average novices’ attitudes and beliefs regarding teacher unionism diverge from those of their close colleagues, we estimated a series of regression models to further analyze the association between novices’ attitudes and beliefs and those of their close colleagues. Table 6 reports the regression coefficients and standard errors from estimating these regression models (variations of Model 1 introduced in the Analytic Approach section). As shown, only one coefficient (Assignments) was statistically significant (p < .10). Interestingly, the coefficient is negative, suggesting that the more effort the colleagues desire union effort in getting teachers more say in teacher assignments the lower the desire for such involvement is expressed by a novice teacher, ceteris paribus. This may be due to the fact that generally teacher assignments are in part determined by seniority (e.g., during times of voluntary and involuntary transfers) that favors teachers with more experience. Generally, though, the data indicate no strong colleague influence on novices’ attitudes and beliefs regarding teacher unionism, at least over this 1-year time period.
Colleagues’ Influence on Novices’ Union Measures.
Note. NCLB = No Child Left Behind affects teachers.
p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .01.
Discussion
The role of unions appears to be changing. Novices are increasingly less connected to the work of teacher unions, while being more open to evaluation and compensation reform (Goldhaber et al., 2010; Jacob & Springer, 2007). At the same time, we began this work by suggesting that novice teachers’ socialization into teacher unions has not been adequately investigated. Researchers have lacked a framework for understanding the consequences of changes in how beginning teachers perceive unions and how novices are likely to be influenced by their school-based colleagues, who may likely identify more strongly with unions. In this article, we have proposed an initial framework, based in New Structuralism theory, which we believe will help researchers and practitioners better understand how novice teachers evaluate teacher unions over a period of time in a specific collegial context.
This general framework takes as a starting point the assumption that teachers’ beliefs and behaviors regarding unions are subject to change (Newton & Shore, 1992). A focus of prior research on unions has been on identifying policies and initiatives that schools, districts, and union organizations can take to facilitate teacher socialization into unions. Our framework instead argues that much of this socialization is informal, falling outside of the union’s formal efforts to increase novices’ identification with unions. Furthermore, we suggest that teachers’ socialization into teacher unions is inherently context specific, meaning it depends on the set of routines, beliefs, and practices enacted in a given school. Finally, union socialization is heavily dependent on novices’ prior beliefs—how they integrate new beliefs about the role of unions in their lives will depend on how they integrate this information with prior beliefs. With this in mind, we have proposed that union socialization consists of four core components: (a) social context, (b) characteristics of novices and their colleagues, (c) alignment among novices and their colleagues, and (d) frequency and content of novice–colleague interactions.
We have attempted to demonstrate the potential use of this framework through an analysis of a data set of novice teachers and their school-based colleagues, drawn from a multiyear study of 1st-, 2nd-, and 3rd-year teachers in 10 districts in Michigan and Indiana. This unique sample allows us to investigate several of the components of our framework, including novices’ perceptions of the social context, the content and frequency of their interactions with colleagues, and their attitudes and beliefs about unions in their work lives; and because we also survey colleagues who are nominated by novices, we can also directly measure the degree to which novices’ attitudes and beliefs are shaped by those of their colleagues, which we describe as an influence effect.
However, despite the potential contribution of our framework and a couple of key suggestive findings, our findings regarding the impact of colleagues’ beliefs on novices are largely inconclusive. One interesting finding, based on the correlational analysis, suggests that novices’ who reported higher quality relations between school-level administrators and teachers in a school desired less union involvement in their work lives. Researchers have shown that administrative quality and support is a strong predictor of teacher satisfaction and commitment (e.g., Boyd et al., 2011; Horng, 2009; Ladd, 2011; Pogodzinski et al., 2012). It is expected that teachers who rate the administrator–teacher relations in their school as positive perceive a supportive environment in which administrators help ensure teachers’ needs are being met. Therefore it makes intuitive sense that teachers located in these types of schools would, on average, desire less union involvement in their work lives, simply because their needs are to a large degree already met.
It is also important to note that there were some statistically significant correlations among the union measures and the state dummy variable (although moderate in magnitude). This likely reflects specific differences in state laws, as well as the economic and political climate of the state. For example, at the time of data collection, all teachers in Michigan were required to join their local teacher union or pay fair share dues (in the traditional public schools), while Indiana was a “right-to-work” state that did not require teachers to join their local union or pay any type of fair share dues. In addition, both states were facing intense financial pressures due to prolonged economic recession that impacted school budgets, which was reflected in the fact that several districts (particularly in Michigan) were forced to lay off teachers during the time of data collection. Such economic conditions therefore can greatly impact local labor relations.
Our strongest results are those suggesting that novices’ attitudes and beliefs regarding unions diverge from those of their colleagues. In general, the novices in our sample were less involved with their unions and were less likely to seek union effort in their work lives; for example, the novices were less likely to attend union meetings and to desire that unions work to secure fringe benefits or negotiate teacher evaluation. Furthermore, novices rarely changed from these stances across the 2 years of data collection, 2008 and 2009. Several of the deviations actually increased in magnitude, suggesting growing gaps in union attitudes and beliefs between novices and their colleagues. This finding is supported by our influence models, which do not show a strong colleague influence on novices’ attitudes and beliefs about unions. The only significant association between colleague beliefs and novice beliefs was in the area of union effort surrounding teachers’ instructional assignments, but this association was negative, suggesting an inverse relationship between novice responses and those of their colleagues.
How do we explain these findings and—more importantly—how do we interpret our framework in light of these generally weak associations? For one, our results support previous work suggesting that the newest generation of teachers feel less attached to unions than previous generations, which could ultimately weaken union organizations’ capacity to collectively bargain. Taken at face value, the results of our influence analyses would seem to indicate that school-based colleagues can do little to change these impressions. However, there are a number of limitations of our data that bear mentioning. Overall, we see little change from 1year to the next in teachers’ attitudes about unions, making it difficult to attribute any of this change to influence from colleagues. It could be the case that the Likert-type scale measures we are using are ill-suited for identifying changes in teachers’ beliefs over time; that is, the mean response across most of the union effort items in the 1st year of data collection was between 4 = some effort and 5 = lots of effort, suggesting that we may be seeing ceiling effects in our item scales. Or, changes in beliefs about unions could come over a longer period of time and thus would not be captured over the span of 2 years.
One other alternative worth mentioning is that because of resource constraints, we did not survey all teachers in the novices’ schools. We lack data on how non-nominated colleagues feel about unions, and it is possible that the colleagues selected by novices reflect a subset of teachers who have higher-than-average union attachment. However, we are still left with the finding that the novices’ responses did not change over time, and even if they purposely selected pro-union colleagues (which seems unlikely), we still do not see any effect of colleagues on novices’ beliefs.
Despite these shortcomings of our data, we believe the primary contribution of our article is in our framework. It provides an important perspective for understanding both (a) why novice teachers may be more open to reform-oriented perspectives on teacher evaluation and compensation, and (b) why formal policies and programs for increasing novice teachers’ involvement in unions are likely to prove ineffective (Pogodzinski, 2012a). We suggest that an understudied but critical predictor of novices’ union attachment is their socialization into specific school contexts. Their daily interactions with colleagues (and the union views of those colleagues) are pivotal for understanding how novices themselves invest in unions. When considering the future role of unions in schools, it is critical that we pay attention to teachers’ union beliefs in their early years of teaching, particularly because these new members of the school organization will, over time, come to define the structure of the organization itself.
Therefore, future research should include measures that add depth and breadth in understanding teachers’ views of unionism and issues that may or may not be collectively bargained issues such as compensation, benefits, and working conditions. In addition, an extended period of data collection would help disentangle questions about whether certain novice teacher attitudes regarding unionism reflects their novice status (e.g., they simply have more pressing concerns as new teachers) or whether it reflects a fundamental change in generational teacher attitudes and beliefs regarding unionism. A longer period of data collection may also help account for exogenous factors that influence teachers’ perceptions of labor relations, such as state-level political climate regarding collective bargaining rights and state-level school budgets. Broader measures of the social context and social networks may also allow for more complete identification of information flow within a school organization regarding union attitudes and practices. Finally, in addition to solely focusing novices’ perceptions of the goals and values of their teacher unions, data collection could be expanded to also measure novices’ perceptions of the goals and values of the administration—which would allow for an analysis of the extent of convergence between union and administrative goals/values and where novices place themselves in that dichotomy.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Carnegie Corporation of New York: B 8034 Michigan State University Intramural Research Grant Program: 05-IRGP-334.