Teacher Perceptions of the Teachers’ Union Possible Influence on Student Achievement

Submitted by

Tracie Ann Wendorf-Happel

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctorate of Education

Grand Canyon University

Phoenix, Arizona

April 22, 2020

© Tracie Ann Happel, 2020

All rights reserved.

 Abstract

With nearly 3.2 million public school teachers in the United States and nearly all of them

having some sort of membership in the national teachers’ union, the National Education

Association, some serious consideration needs to be given to the thoughts and

perceptions of those teachers and what the teachers’ union does for them and their

students. When Wisconsin entered the national spotlight in 2010 surrounding mandatory

unionism, teachers, parents, communities, and stakeholders from across the state shared

their informal thoughts about the union. The purpose of this case study, which used a

qualitative methodology, was to explore how public-school teachers perceive the

influence of teachers’ unions on student achievement. The conceptual framework used

critical systems theory and included 27 anonymous teachers from Wisconsin who

answered questions in an online questionnaire, 15 anonymous teachers also from

Wisconsin who participated in telephone interviews, and a review of archival data. The

over-arching question was, “What perceptions do Wisconsin public school teachers have

on the possible influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement?” The findings of

the study revealed four themes. Public school teachers in Wisconsin perceive (1) very

little to no influence from the teachers’ union on student achievement, (2) a systems

influence that may lead to an indirect influence on student achievement, (3) an influence

in pedagogy and teaching strategies, and (4) political activity from the union that affects

teaching.

Keywords: teachers’ union, union, Wisconsin, WEAC, NEA, teacher perceptions,

teachers, student achievement, public school

 vi

Dedication

There were two years in my life where I thought life would never get any better.

They were 1996 and 1998, the two years God blessed me with the earthly care of two of

His children. No greater gift can be given to a human than that of a child. Everything I’ve

done in my life since then has been for them. From being the best mom and wife I could

be, always being present in some very dark times, training for and competing in five US

Ironman races, the laughs, late nights, saving them from monsters, to warm soups during

ski season, and all the cookies to lure friends over, and this study. They are always my

muse and motivation. Therefore, this is foremost dedicated to my two children, Andrea

and John. You are my sunshine, my only sunshine. May God shine His light upon you

and hold you in His peace forever.

Mom, Dad…wow. Vicki, Sam, and Jill. We’re not supposed to swear in this

document, but you can hear me just about now. Can you believe it’s done? Nope, me

either. I never thought I’d see the day, and I wouldn’t have if I didn’t have you to call and

cry or to hear you say, “Get it done. You can do this. No, you are NOT quitting!” Or an

even better motivator, “What? You have writing to do? More?! Well, we’re going to be

out on the boat. Have fun.” I got it done so I could be out on the boat with you. Thank

you for your love, support, and bleeding ears as I cried and screamed with frustration into

the phone. Let’s head out on the boat!

Lastly, to Mi Papi Chulo. My heart is yours. You came into this at the end, but

you were there every minute, believing in me when I didn’t. Thank you for wiping my

tears, erasing my self-doubt, and having a celebratory glass (or two, or three) of whiskey

with me on the small victories. Te amo.

 vii

Acknowledgments

Dr. Mark Duplissis, my Chair who has been an incredible source of support and

inspiration. The man is a saint, I am exceptionally grateful to you for sticking with me

despite the countless threats to quit. You never left my side, always gave me your

professional opinion, and shared your personal opinion, too. Thanks, Mark! You are

always in His service!

Dr. David Swoyer, my content expert. Thank you so much for your support,

silliness and calming me down on social media. You rock and I was lucky to you have

you on the team!

Dr. Daniel Smith, my methodologist who was rough, direct, and tough. But hey,

we got it done and this study is better because of his insight and very high expectations.

Thank you for all you did to make me successful and produce a quality piece of literature.

Dr. Robert Carini, who started out as a resource, then became a committee

member but later left. Your insight and previous research motivated me in ways I’ll never

be able to verbalize. Thank you for paving the road, your insight, your ideas, honesty,

thoughts, and suggestions. I am honored to know you.

Dr. Joe Heim, friend, professor, and fellow political guru. Thanks for keeping me

on the straight and narrow as I wrote this. Your feedback in the early stages was

priceless. Thank you for your time and energy! Prost!

Dr. Jake Jacobs, Rebecca Friedrichs, Mark Janus, Kristi Koschkee, and my fellow

union warriors. Thank you for standing with me, allowing me to stand with you, and your

spirit.
 viii

Thank you to all my participants. Literally couldn’t have done it without you! I

enjoyed talking with all of you. Your stories and insight just made this whole process so

much better!

And lastly, I’d like to acknowledge the teachers out there every day doing their

best in our schools: public, charter, private, and homeschool. I appreciate you and this is

for you!
 ix

Table of Contents

List of Tables ................................................................................................................... xiv

List of Figures ....................................................................................................................xv

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study....................................................................................1

Introduction ....................................................................................................................1

Background of the Study ...............................................................................................7

Problem Statement .......................................................................................................10

Purpose of the Study ....................................................................................................12

Research Questions ......................................................................................................12

Advancing Scientific Knowledge and Significance of the Study ................................15

Rationale for Methodology ..........................................................................................20

Nature of the Research Design for the Study...............................................................23

Definition of Terms......................................................................................................26

Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations ....................................................................28

Assumptions........................................................................................................28

Limitations ..........................................................................................................29

Delimitations.......................................................................................................31

Summary and Organization of the Remainder of the Study ........................................32

Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................34

Introduction to the Chapter and Background to the Problem ......................................34

Background to the problem.................................................................................37

Identification of the Gap ..............................................................................................39

Theoretical Foundations...............................................................................................43
 x

Review of the Literature ..............................................................................................45

Teacher union impact on education. ...................................................................48

Unions drive schools to standardize education for all children ..........................53

Unions lobby for various educational strategies and approaches .......................56

Union supports educational strategies and approaches.......................................61

Union lobbying indirectly affects students through teachers..............................66

Methodology .......................................................................................................71

Instrumentation ...................................................................................................74

Summary ......................................................................................................................77

Chapter 3: Methodology ....................................................................................................79

Introduction ..................................................................................................................79

Statement of the Problem .............................................................................................82

Research Questions ......................................................................................................83

Research Methodology ................................................................................................86

Research Design...........................................................................................................87

Population and Sample Selection.................................................................................89

Sources of Data ............................................................................................................92

Interview .............................................................................................................92

Questionnaire ......................................................................................................94

Archival data .......................................................................................................95

Trustworthiness ............................................................................................................97

Credibility. ..........................................................................................................97

Transferability.....................................................................................................98

Dependability ....................................................................................................101
 xi

Data Collection and Management ..............................................................................103

Interviews..........................................................................................................103

Questionnaire ....................................................................................................106

Archival data .....................................................................................................108

Data Analysis Procedures ..........................................................................................109

Constant comparison.........................................................................................111

Analytic induction.............................................................................................111

Theoretical sensitivity .......................................................................................112

Ethical Considerations ...............................................................................................113

Limitations and Delimitations....................................................................................114

Summary ....................................................................................................................117

Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Results ..............................................................................121

Introduction ................................................................................................................121

Descriptive Findings ..................................................................................................123

Online questionnaire .........................................................................................124

Interview ...........................................................................................................128

Interview protocol .............................................................................................129

Archival data protocol ......................................................................................134

Data Analysis Procedures ..........................................................................................135

Collection and preparation of data ....................................................................136

Coding protocol ................................................................................................138

Level one coding ...............................................................................................139

Level two coding ..............................................................................................140

Identifying categories .......................................................................................141

Identifying themes ............................................................................................142

 xii

Archival data .....................................................................................................143

Triangulating the data .......................................................................................143

Potential effects on the data ..............................................................................144

Credibility and trustworthiness .........................................................................145

Results ........................................................................................................................145

Research question 1 ..........................................................................................146

Research question 2 ..........................................................................................149

Phenomenological question ..............................................................................152

Summary ....................................................................................................................160

Limitations ........................................................................................................161

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations ............................................164

Introduction and Summary of Study ..........................................................................164

Summary of Findings and Conclusion.......................................................................166

Research question 1 ..........................................................................................167

Research question 2 ..........................................................................................170

Over-arching question themes ..........................................................................173

Research alignment. ..........................................................................................177

Implications................................................................................................................180

Theoretical implications ...................................................................................181

Practical implications ........................................................................................182

Future implications ...........................................................................................184

Strengths and weaknesses of the study .............................................................186

Recommendations ......................................................................................................188

Recommendations for future research ..............................................................188

Recommendations for future practice ...............................................................189

 xiii

References. .......................................................................................................................191

Appendix A. Site Authorization Letters ..........................................................................202

Appendix B. IRB Approval Letter ...................................................................................203

Appendix C. Informed Consent .......................................................................................206

Appendix D. Copy of Instruments ...................................................................................210

Appendix E. Questionnaire Questions .............................................................................212

Appendix F. Archival Data ..............................................................................................213

Appendix G. Abbreviations Used During Transcription .................................................220

Appendix H. Codebook Coding – Level One Interviews ................................................221

Appendix I. Codebook Coding – Level One Questionnaire ............................................228

Appendix J. Coding – Level Two ...................................................................................232

Appendix K. Level 1 and 2 Coding to Categories ...........................................................235

Appendix L. Final Themes ..............................................................................................236

 xiv

List of Tables

Table 1. Sources of Data Triangulation Matrix ............................................................ 124

Table 2. Demographic Profile: Teaching Status ........................................................... 126

Table 3. Interview Overview ........................................................................................ 132

Table 4. Archival Data and Literature Review Themes ............................................... 135

Table 5. Participant Phrase into Code Example RQ2 ................................................... 137

Table 6. Examples of Phrases or Words Used for Level 1 Coding for both Research
Questions ......................................................................................................... 140

Table 7. Examples of Level 2 Coding .......................................................................... 141

Table 8. Examples of Codes to Categories ................................................................... 142

Table 9. Examples of Codes to Categories to Themes ................................................. 142

Table 10. Pedagogical Processes to Accountability: Positive ...................................... 155

Table 11. Pedagogical Processes to Accountability: Negative ...................................... 156

Table 12. More Influence for Teachers.......................................................................... 174

 xv

List of Figures

Figure 1. Union membership. ......................................................................................... 127

Figure 2. Professional organization membership............................................................ 128

Figure 3. Demographic profile: participant gender......................................................... 129

Figure 4. Common words and phrases used by participants. .......................................... 139

Figure 5. Triangulating the data. ..................................................................................... 144

Figure 6. Trickle-down effect. ........................................................................................ 169

 1

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study

Introduction

Teachers’ unions have been an integral part of the fabric of the American public-

school system since the mid-1800s (Moe, 2011). Both the National Education

Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) are prominent

teachers’ unions in the United States. These unions have brought organization and clarity

to the teaching profession by advocating for better working conditions, collective

bargaining, and a gender equal work force (NEA, 2019). The NEA and AFT have also

focused on increased benefits for teachers, smaller class sizes, and shared building

responsibilities (NEA, 2019). Teachers’ unions focused on working conditions, collective

bargaining, working hours, and classroom expectations (Hoxby, 1996) to equalize the

field of education with other professions such as factory work (Lovenheim, 2009). Along

with the protection of teachers, teachers’ unions have also focused on student needs and

increasing academic success (NEA, 2019).

Existing research to date was mostly quantitative in nature, and considered

various factors that contribute to teachers’ union role in student achievement at a national

level, including education, learning, and teaching (Carini, 2002, 2008a; Eberts, 2007;

Eberts & Stone, 1987; Garden, 2012; Hoxby, 1996; Kerchner, 2004; Lovenheim, 2009;

Milkman, 1997). Lovenheim (2009), Nixon, Packard, and Dam (2016), and Russo

(2012a) concluded fewer studies exist at a regional level. Borland and Howsen (1992),

Lang (2015), and Lindy (2011) studied these effects at a state level. Even though there

was a plethora of quantitative data to determine the possible influence of the teachers’

union on student achievement, none has given a voice to teachers. Choi and Chung
 2

(2016) proposed offering a voice to workers in the public sector union. While Choi and

Chung (2016) utilized grievance procedures, this study offered teachers a voice in student

achievement as possibly influenced by the teachers union.

Baron (2018) also indicates a gap in the literature. The authors suggest “additional

research” (p. 55) to further explore the effects of union policies, specifically focused on

Wisconsin, Tennessee, and Michigan where union reforms and deunionization has been

the greatest and most controversial. This study closed this gap in that the focus was on

public school teachers’ perceptions of the possible influence of the teachers’ union on

student achievement.

Authors Cowen and Strunk (2015) indicate a gap in the literature stating , “the

enactment or the attempted enactment of policy reforms intended to curb union power

and/or remove union-advocated protections also offer fertile ground for qualitative

explorations of the teachers’ unions in these policies” (p. 55). This study attempted to

address the union’s role in student achievement through the perceptions of teachers.

Meanwhile, Cowen and Strunk (2015) completed a thorough investigation of much of the

historical quantitative research into how the union may influence student achievement. In

their conclusion, based on their findings, the authors explicitly suggested qualitative

exploration. This study fulfilled that suggestion by being qualitative in nature and

focusing on the perceptions of teachers on the unions’ influence on student achievement.

Two relevant studies were found (Kerchner, 2004; Murray, 2000) that focused

solely on teachers’ perceptions of their union in California and New York. Two other

studies involved individual states (Lang, 2015; Lindy, 2011) and pertain to this study

because they focused on a particular state as this research did. In addition, most studies
 3

found were published more than five years ago. As of 2020, no qualitative research

considering how public-school teachers perceive the possible influence of the teachers’

union on student achievement has been found. Baron (2018) indicated a need for further

research to understand better the effects of union policies on student achievement. Choi

and Chung (2016) explained that members of a social network such as a public sector

union might have more to say when given a voice in which to share their perceptions.

Cowen and Strunk (2015) also express the need for qualitative research to explore

teachers’ unions’ policies effects on student achievement. This lack of recent qualitative

research and the lack of teachers’ voices constitutes a considerable gap in the literature

and accentuates the need for this proposed study.

With the growth of, and later, legislatively mandated membership into the union

for all Wisconsin public school teachers (Wisconsin State Legislature, 1971), teachers’

unions became a significant source of power for legislation, which affected what and how

children were taught in public schools (Cowen & Strunk, 2015). With the union’s support

of various political candidates and lobbying, the Wisconsin Education Association

Council (WEAC) affected federal and state legislation through their membership

(WEAC, nd). The NEA (2019) chronicled this growth and the philosophy development to

organize and affect student environments. This study explored the perception of public-

school teachers of the Wisconsin teachers’ union influence on student achievement. A

general understanding of unions was relevant in this case as Wisconsin was the first state

in the country to offer unions as an agent of collective bargaining. Wisconsin was also

important to study in that it was the center of national attention from 2010 to 2011 as the

governor-elect sought to fix the state’s budget with Act 10. The tenets of the Act repealed
 4

public workers’ mandated rights to a union (Wisconsin State Legislature, 2016). These

were discussed further in Chapter 2. The facts provided a historical uniqueness to the

state that supports the need closely study the perceptions of public-school teachers in

Wisconsin.

Prior to Act 10, WEAC boasted a membership of 140,000 teachers, teacher

assistants, and other education professionals both current and retired. Post Act 10, those

numbers declined to less than 60,000 and claimed to hold approximately 40% of public-

school professionals as members (WEAC, 2019). In this qualitative case study, the

researcher interviewed 15 classroom teachers who were retired or were currently

teaching, sent a questionnaire to 27 public school teachers in Wisconsin schools, and

reviewed archival data to better understand the current and past public-school teachers’

perceptions of the teachers’ union possible influence on student achievement. More detail

for participant requirements was given in Chapter 3.

Wisconsin was the first state that legislatively mandated union membership for

public school teachers (Wisconsin Legislation, 1971). In 2011, the new governor

effectively changed this law to enable educators a choice in membership. This decision

created a national discussion about the validity, necessity, and impact of teachers’ unions

on students (Stein & Marley, 2013) considering the NEA’s position that the association

functions to support students and their academic achievement (NEA, 2019). Although

empirical research shows both teacher support and nonsupport of union choice, these

empirical studies have shown mixed effects of unionism on student achievement. What

the quantitative research did show was the extraneous culture such as teacher salary,

contract hours, workday expectations, or support staff the union has bargained or
 5

negotiated for has an indirect effect on educational achievement (Carini, 2008a). Other

factors the union has achieved for teachers through collective bargaining, such as salary,

tenure, class size, procedures, nonteaching duties, and working conditions also seemed to

influence student achievement (Hoxby, 1996; Mickel, 2015; Nicholson-Crotty, Grissom,

& Nicholson-Crotty, 2012; Winkler, Scull, Zeehandelaar, & Fordham, 2012). All of these

possible influences were quantitatively shown to indirectly affect students through

professional staff within the educational setting.

Researchers have shown evidence of the various factors that potentially indicate

the union’s indirect impact on student achievement, but this researcher found no research

involving the perceptions or experiences of teacher concerning the possible influence the

teachers’ union has on student achievement. Nicholson-Crotty, Grissom, and Nicholson-

Crotty (2012) analyzed all 50 states and ranked the strength of the teachers’ union within

the state according to five variables: (a) resources and membership, (b) involvement in

politics, (c) scope of bargaining, (d) state policies, and (e) perceived influence. Again,

what was lacking was any discourse with the teachers themselves. With teachers at the

heart of the classroom, and teachers responsible for the academic growth and

development of their students through various accountability measures, the field was

lacking in qualitative research. Perceptions of teachers may provide a base of perception

of the union’s influence on teaching, learning, and educating. The researcher gathered

perceptions through in-depth interviews with educators in Wisconsin public schools.

Russo (2012b) provided a quantitative analysis of how the unions may or may not

affect education reform and collective bargaining. With the onset of Act 10 legislation,

which allowed teachers a choice in union membership, teachers were impacted directly
 6

and voiced their concerns before, during, and after the legislation was passed. In addition,

Russo (2012a) reported that teachers filed a federal lawsuit against the legislation in

response to their discontent with the legislation. Stein and Marley (2013) reviewed the

public response to the new legislation and reported on the thousands of teachers who

protested at the state capitol. The proposed research gave teachers their own voice,

reported directly from themselves, to express how and if the teachers’ union was

influencing student achievement.

This research attempted to resolve a qualitative gap in the literature relating to

how teachers perceive the union that may or may not affect student achievement and the

lack of research in Wisconsin that was the birthplace of the teachers’ union (Baron, 2018;

Choi & Chung, 2016; (Cowen & Strunk, 2015)). Lovenheim (2009) and Nixon et al.

(2016) offered conclusions on regional impacts and included some state-by-state

comparisons but did not focus on any one particular state. The research that focused on

one state was limited to three studies; Lang (2015) provided perspective from

Massachusetts. Lindy (2011), focused on New Mexico, and Borland and Howsen (1992)

considered Kentucky. In this research, Wisconsin became the emphasis because it

continues to be in the nation’s focus since the state’s then-governor signed Act 10 into

law in 2011 (Wisconsin State Legislature, 2016). The introduction of this legislation

raised many questions about the necessity of the teachers’ union in the state and its

relationship to student achievement. Baron (2018) specifically mentions further

qualitative research was needed in Wisconsin as the state has “arguably the most

controversial union reform so far” (p. 55). Additional research was needed to address the

primary research question of this study: What were the perceptions of Wisconsin’s
 7

public-school teachers on the possible influence of the teachers’ union on public school

student achievement?

Chapter 1 relayed the importance of the tenets of this study. While the literature to

date concedes both positive and negative attributes of the teachers’ union on student

achievement, the data were quantitative. There was no current research that offered

teachers a voice on whether or not their unions may or may not have an effect on student

achievement. Baron (2018) and Cowen and Strunk (2015) expounded the possibility of a

qualitative study focusing on the effects union reforms and polices might have on the

field, while Choi and Chung (2016) advocated for research that shows how voice can

have on impact a social organization such as teaching. This case study fulfilled those two

gaps in the literature.

Background of the Study

The United States has two large teachers’ unions: the NEA and the AFT. Together

they have a national membership of over three million members and hold considerable

power over school policy (NEA, 2019). According to government data, and both the

NEA and AFT websites, the teachers’ union influences regulations, laws, and candidates

for government, all of which significantly affect the direction of American public

education (AFT, nd; Center for Responsive Politics, 2017; NEA, 2019).

Some researchers indicated the national teachers' union had negative effects on

the academic achievement of students in public schools (Eberts & Stone, 1987; Hoxby,

1996; Lovenheim, 2009; Milkman, 1997). Alternatively, some researchers noted positive

impacts from teachers’ unions in public schools (Adelberg, 2008; Carini, 2002; Yusim,

2008). Furthermore, Carini (2008b) reported both negative and positive effects,
 8

depending on which specific educational outcomes such as class size, working hours, and

number of support staff were considered and the research methodology. Previous

research provided a considerable amount of information at a national level on teachers’

unions, citing both positive and negative influences. Previous research also provided a

considerable amount of quantitative data for the purpose of the study. However, there

was no qualitative research pertaining to the purpose of the study. This provided the gap

in the literature that was the basis of the proposed study. The proposed study attempted to

close that gap in that it provided insight into the thoughts of public-school teachers who

work, or have worked, with students every day and assess student achievement. Public

school teacher perceptions might lead to actionable insights on the subject of unionism on

student achievement.

More recently, Cowen and Strunk (2015) synthesized much of the literature on

the subject from 1977 to 2015. Their research acknowledged the important role the

teachers’ union plays in setting school district policy as a collective bargaining agent in

45 states, including Washington D.C., for setting almost every aspect of a schools’

operation. This included teachers’ salaries, benefits, assignments and transfers, student

placement, instruction and curriculum, grievance and leave procedures, lay-offs, teacher

preparation periods, and non-instructional duties. The authors also noted that most past

research was binary, considering only teachers or districts that were in the union or not,

which was reflective of the field at that time. Cowen and Strunk (2015) analyzed the

studies from the aforementioned time period and found three implications of union effect

on student achievement:

1. Districts that were unionized had slightly higher expenditures and wages.
 9

2. There was a negative correlation between unionization and student achievement

(but the authors indicated it was unclear if this was because the collective
bargaining agency (CBA) drives the lower achievement or if strong unions exist
in lower-achieving districts).

3. There was a strong political lobbying to union-friendly causes that often oppose
reform, sets policy, and affects political power in local school districts.

The author conclude qualitative research was needed in the area of policy and its’ effect

on student achievement.

In 2018, Baron explored the causal effect of the teachers’ union on student

achievement following Act 10 in Wisconsin. This quasi-experimental study used science

and math scores on the Wisconsin Concepts and Knowledge Exam (WKCE) and found a

30% decrease in scores in low-performing schools but no change in high-performing

districts in the years post-Act 10 to 2017. The author attributes this change to teacher

retirements. Baron (2018) also considered that more teachers retired in the approach of

Act 10 due to the uncertainty of the impact of Act 10 on retirement benefits. This change

in teacher workforce showed higher performing schools replaced those teachers who

retired, while low-performing schools did not replace those teachers. Baron (2018)

acknowledges there was no correlation to that effect and was merely hypothesizing. The

author suggests further study into Act 10 policies to provide a clearer understanding of

the effects of deunionization.

Lindy (2011) used a regression model study with Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT)

scores in New Mexico to look at the effects of collective bargaining laws on student

achievement. Like Cowen and Strunk (2015), Lindy (2011) found average students

maintained their achievement levels while students who were at risk decreased in

achievement pre- and post-mandated unionism. The author noted that New Mexico

maintained mandatory bargaining from 1992 to1999 but became a permissive state in
 10

1999. At this time, schools were allowed to reallocate teacher resources, shift teachers to

other teaching positions and schools.

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore how public-school

teachers perceive the influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement in

Wisconsin for grades K-12. As indicated in the review of relevant studies, this approach

has not been attempted in the past. Therefore, the proposed study will add to the existing

body of literature. Perceptions of the unions’ possible influence on student achievement

will be defined as student growth as determined by the amount of learning a student does

in a specific content area in a specific amount of time according to his or her own ability.

In this qualitative research, a case study inquiry was used to study the identified

phenomenon. The phenomenon within this study was to understand how teachers

perceived the teachers’ union possible effect on student achievement.

Problem Statement

It was not known how public-school teachers perceive the possible influence of the

teachers’ union on student achievement. Research shows various educational outcomes

that unions may pursue to shape graduation rates (Hoxby, 1996), such as standardized

test scores (Milkman, 1997) and school culture variables (Carini, 2008a), such as class

size (Carini, 2008b). Because of the nature of a teacher’s job, it was important to

document what teachers see, experience, and know professionally in their classroom

(Choi & Chung, 2016; (Cowen & Strunk, 2015)). The perceptions and understandings of

teachers about the possible influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement have

been subjects of debate in Wisconsin since 2010 (Stein & Marley, 2013), with the

introduction of Act 10 legislation and later Right to Work, when the state governor
 11

removed mandated union membership for public school teachers (Wisconsin State

Legislature, 2016). Along these lines was Baron’s 2018 study that encouraged further

research in the area of policy as it affects student achievement.

The study included a questionnaire sent out to participating teachers. This

questionnaire allowed for one-on-one interviews with teachers. Also, a thorough review

of archival data helped to develop an understanding of the perceptions of Wisconsin’s

public-school teachers of the possible influence of the teachers’ union on student

achievement. For qualitative research and explorations of perceptions of certain group of

people to explain a certain experience, interviews and questionnaires were an appropriate

method (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015; Yin, 2016).

The general population affected by the phenomenon was public school teachers.

The target population was current or retired public school teachers in Wisconsin. The unit

of analysis was current or retired public school teachers who were either a union member

or not a union member of the state’s teachers’ union. Understanding the perceptions from

the teachers who work, or have worked, with students and the teachers’ union could

enable better understanding, growth, and development in public education for educators,

Wisconsin legislators, and the state government for students in public school settings. As

legislation and discussions surround teachers’ unions, this research may affect further

discussions, legislation, union membership, policy, and student learning. Wisconsin has a

uniqueness with respect to teacher union history and legislation (NEA, 2019), and the

impact of what was happening in this state could potentially affect other states’ decisions

and discussions.
 12

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore how public-school

teachers perceive the possible influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement.

The research included interviews with current or retired teachers in Wisconsin who may

or may not be part of the teachers’ union, a questionnaire sent out teachers who do not

participate in the interviews, and a thorough review of archival data. Teachers were

included because of the insight they have, or have had, on a day-to-day basis working

with students in various curricular areas. Research showed four potential themes, which

emerged from the participants’ perceptions including:

• Unions standardize education (Stake, 2010).

• Unions lobby for various educational strategies and approaches (Lot & Kenny,
2013).

• Unions support educational strategies and approaches (Lang, 2015).

• Union lobbying indirectly affects students through teachers (Vachon & Ma,
2015).

These themes could not only potentially affect teachers’ perceptions of student

achievement but may also appear through discussion during the interview. Research

showed unions possibly standardizing education, lobbying for educational strategies and

approaches, supporting educational strategies and approaches, and indirectly affecting

students through teachers. These themes were fully developed in Chapter 2 and addressed

in Chapter 3 in the data collection methods.

Research Questions

The proposed qualitative case study was guided by the overarching question:

What were the perceptions of Wisconsin’s public-school teachers about the possible

influence of the teachers’ union on public school student achievement?

 13

RQ1: How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student

achievement?

RQ2: What, if any, types of union influence do the teachers perceive?

Teachers incorporate classroom requirements from federal, state, and local laws

on a daily basis. They also work within the context of a school-based organization that

may be governed, in part, by specific provisions of the collective bargaining contract.

Specific provisions were limited to the individual district as each school negotiates with

the union at the district level. The phenomenon of this study looked at the perceptions of

the effects of the teachers’ union through the lens of teachers. A natural research question

asks teachers what union influence, it any at all, they were seeing at the classroom level.

Discussion with all levels of education will include a union aspect, which includes federal

and state unions. Questions in the interview also explored the climate and culture of the

school, leadership, lobbying, accountability, bargaining, and how any or all of those

possible themes may or may not have an effect on student achievement.

Most of the information was driven by NEA approaches to educational support.

The NEA outlined its relationship to education through implementing various pedagogies

such as social justice initiatives, reading strategies, approaches to math and science, and

its support of the Common Core State Standards (NEA, 2019). The NEA also comments

on teacher salaries, working conditions, student-teacher ratios, and representation in

political issues that generated the second research question (NEA, 2019).

Research focusing on teachers’ unions’ effect on student achievement has been

criticized for its methodology (Carini, 2008b). Bargaining alone was not a predictor of

determining student success via the teachers’ union and provided other predictors for
 14

student success, such as social organization (Carini, 2008b). Instead, social organization

gives instructional autonomy, teacher empowerment, standardization of programs and

instruction, and collaboration or formalization of hierarchical relations between principals

and teachers more likely lent themselves to be predictors of student academic success

(Carini, 2008a). Schools and unions will often bargain for class size, salary requirements,

student/teacher ratio, and work hours, all of which can affect student achievement

(Carini, 2008a). Some researchers attempted to find a direct correlation between

bargaining and student performance; instead found other outcomes, such as union

recertification rates and minority student achievement (Eberts & Stone, 1987; Hoxby,

1996; Lovenheim, 2009; Milkman, 1997). The ideas presented by that research led to the

second research question.

A qualitative case study looks at the real-life context of a phenomenon and data

collected about a single individual, group, or event (Guest, Namey, & Mitchell, 2013).

Qualitative case study also provides researchers with the necessary tools to study a

complex phenomenon within its context (Baxter & Jack, 2008). Within this framework,

the purpose was to understand something unique to the case, which was the intent by

interviewing the teachers. With each participant having his or her own perspective on

how the teachers’ union may or may not influence student achievement, the focus was on

the themes that emerged from the participants; responses (Guest et al., 2013).

Guest et al. (2013) also implicated the inductive and flexible nature of using a

case study when researching a social phenomenon. The biggest advantage was the ability

to investigate further the responses to answer the what of the original research question.

When using an interview method in a case study, Guest et al. (2013) also suggested that
 15

researchers use open-ended questions, which can allow for probing for more information

not anticipated by the researcher. In this qualitative case study, the researcher

investigated answers provided by the participants through further questioning techniques

to obtain a better understanding of the phenomenon. The research open-ended questions

guide the conversation for clear and concise insight into the overarching question

(Johnson & Christiansen, 2012).

Advancing Scientific Knowledge and Significance of the Study

In light of the research surrounding the concepts, theories, and literature relating

to teachers’ unions and student achievement, it was generally agreed the variables

concerning the union’s impact on student success, such as school culture and climate

were apparent, but no consensus exists as to their effects (Carini, 2008b; Coulsen, 2010;

Cowen & Strunk, 2015; Eberts, 2007; Hoxby, 1996; Lovenheim, 2009; Mickel, 2015).

Carini (2002, 2008b) explored the social organization of schools; Hoxby (1996)

discussed graduation rates; Milkman (1997) studied minority student achievement;

Lovenheim (2009) examined union certification impacts. Cowen and Strunk (2015)

reviewed the aforementioned studies to conclude there was an overall negative

correlation between the union and student achievement. Within the field, there were

many mediating variables between teachers’ unions and student achievement (Carini,

2008b; Cowen & Strunk, 2015). None of the research has considered how teachers might

perceive these variables, and how these variables may affect student achievement, but

researchers such as Baron (2018), Choi and Chung (2016), and Cowen and Strunk (2015)

suggested that perceptions of teachers on the possible influence of the teachers’ union on

student achievement needed to be studied further using qualitative methods.

 16

Some researchers found a positive correlation between unions and student

achievement. Nationally, various researchers found unions bound teachers together, and

that collectivism empowered them to make changes they found necessary for their

students (Yusim, 2008). Some researchers suggest unions provide more support for

teachers instead of students (Winkler et al., 2012). The president of the AFT suggested

the idea that teachers who collaborate with other teachers were better teachers

(Weingarten, 2011). Lot and Kenny (2013) suggested teachers with a strong support

system through the union have access to stronger support systems for students. Yusim

(2008) and Weingarten (2011) noted that teachers who have shared power also have the

power to enhance the profession of teaching and can develop better school plans, which

will have a positive, yet indirect, effect on students. Summarily, these researchers seemed

to indicate teachers’ unions support teachers using collective approaches that provides

ways to increase student achievement.

Alternatively, other researchers found a negative correlation between the teachers’

union and student achievement. It was important to note these studies were quantitative in

nature and did not include the ideas, experiences, or thoughts of teachers or school

leaders. Coulsen (2010) explored a nationwide sample using a regression model to

theorize teachers’ unions raised pupil spending by 130% through higher salaries and

smaller class sizes but showed zero growth in reading, math, and science.

In a 2007 study, Eberts found that students with differing abilities were affected

differently in unionized schools. Eberts (2007) concluded that average students

performed better than the whole student population on standardized assessments when in

a unionized school, but students who were low or high achieving performed worse than
 17

the whole student population on standardized assessments when in a unionized school

district. Looking back more than thirty years ago, in the 1980s, researchers found

unionized districts did not improve student achievement (Eberts & Stone, 1987; Kurth,

1987).

Other studies showed teachers’ unions focus more on teachers than students

(Lang, 2015; Murphy, 1985). In addition, students in the general-education population

maintained learning levels under unionized school districts, while students who were at-

risk (either high - or low-level learners) showed a decline in achievement in the same

district (Lindy, 2011). One study (Nixon, Packard, & Dam, 2016) investigated reasons

that school leaders recommended nonrenewal of probationary teachers’ contracts. These

reasons included the union provided barriers, such as high litigation costs, laws that

protected teachers instead of students, and time requirements when principals

recommended non-renewals for probationary teachers, therefore, preventing the dismissal

of teachers when they had violated ethics or engaged in inappropriate conduct. Another

study analyzed the impact teachers’ unions had on the economy versus the impact on

student achievement (Pantuosco & Ullrich, 2010). The aforementioned authors suggest

that unionized schools displayed a negative correlation between the gross state product of

capital and labor output and employees’ impact on the economy.

This proposed study focused on one state, so it was important to note that limited

research could be found at a state or regional level. One study found, using a quasi-

experimental design, the casual effects of the teachers’ union on student achievement

following the passage of Act 10 in Wisconsin (Baron, 2018). Further state-specific

research wrote a state-by-state comparison of politics and unions, which gave a limited
 18

example of quantitative analysis done at a state level (Winkler et al., 2012). As well,

another state-specific study reviewed teachers’ unions in Massachusetts (Lang, 2015),

and yet another looked at collective bargaining laws in New Mexico (Lindy, 2011).

Finally, a study in Kentucky took a quantitative approach to study attendance rates in

Kentucky schools as a possible factor in student success (Borland & Howsen, 1992). An

important note was all the studies were quantitative in nature except the

phenomenological report that examined principals’ views on nonrenewal of probationary

teacher contracts through the lens of union intervention (Nixon, et al., 2016). The need

for further qualitative case study research was apparent through the lack of empirical

research thus far.

To date, four studies focused on teachers’ unions at the state level, which

constitutes a gap in the research (Baron, 2018; Borland & Howsen, 1992; Lang, 2015;

Lindy, 2011). Only one of those considered Wisconsin post-Act 10; however, it was

quantitative in design (Baron, 2018). Baron (2018) suggested further research to explore

the effect of union policies. The totality of these studies also revealed a conundrum in the

evidence because much discussion and dissent exist in what was successful, why, and

how. This researcher hopes to advance the literature by focusing the research in the state

of Wisconsin, as suggested by Cowen and Strunk (2015). This researcher hopes, through

case study interviews with teachers and other data sources, to discover the thoughts,

ideas, and experiences of the people who may be affected by union practices because

these were the people in position to view the possible effects of unions and in some cases,

were directly affected by union practices. Choi and Chung (2016) suggested studies that

involved employee voice around policies implemented within an organization. This study
 19

addressed this suggestion by allowing teachers to share their perceptions through open-

ended questionnaire questions and interviews. Narrowing the scope of research from

national to the state level will give another consideration when looking at unionism state

by state. As well, the state level was where much education legislation was made.

Furthermore, because of the unique history of Wisconsin in relation to teachers’ unions,

this state was particularly important to study (Baron, 2018).

Given the aforementioned studies, three prevalent concepts emerged from the

research and were used to drive the discussion about the teachers’ union and student

achievement:

• Unions drive schools to standardize education for all children, regardless of their
ability (Cowen & Strunk, 2015; Eberts, 2007; Eberts & Stone, 1987; Hoxby,
1996).

• Unions lobby for various educational strategies and approaches that help or hinder
education (Coulsen, 2010; Cowen & Strunk, 2015; Lovenheim, 2009).

• Union lobbying results in greater benefits for teachers than students (Carini,
2008a, 2008b; Cowen & Strunk, 2015; Lindy, 2011; Nixon et al., 2016).

The framework of this study addressed the gap in the literature where researchers

use quantitative measures to delineate the potential causes of union effects on student

achievement. This research focused on using a qualitative approach to further explore

teacher perceptions of the union on student achievement (Choi & Chung, 2016; Cowen &

Strunk, 2015). As a result, this research uniquely added to the existing body of

knowledge through a discourse of the teachers’ union through the perceptions of teachers.

Educational issues, as evidenced by the research discussed, can be complex.

Many times, quantitative approaches were adapted for a qualitative approach but did not

quite address the critical, interpretive, and various methodologies (Watson & Watson,

2013). Critical Systems Theory (CST), developed in the mid-twentieth century, was
 20

established to help researchers understand the complex issues in education (Watson &

Watson, 2013). This theory advanced by joining the strengths of critical social theory and

systems theory. The combination of the two theories into CST will allow this researcher

to explore the perceptions of teachers on the influence of the teachers’ union on student

achievement through interviews, a questionnaire, and the use of archival data. A detailed

explanation of each was shared in Chapter 3. While other theories such as constructivism,

positivism, grounded theory, and social theory were considered, CST best fits the need to

better understand teachers’ perceptions. The theory was furthered developed and

explained in Chapter 3.

Rationale for Methodology

Some researchers consider test results, such as state-based assessments (Eberts,

2007; Kurth, 1987; Milkman, 1997; Nicholson-Crotty et al., 2012), and others looked at

teacher-focused outcomes such as salary, benefits, litigation, class size (Nixon et al.,

2016) , and nonteaching duties (Murphy, 1985). In the research by Carini (2002, 2008a,

2008b), Hoxby (1996), Milkman (1997), Russo (2012a), Kerchner (2004), Lang (2015),

and Lindy (2011) an agreement exists in the field that while unions were the focus of

much debate in relation to student achievement, there was also agreement that the

approaches to that conclusion were wide and varied. A fair amount of research exists

regarding the idea of unionism and student achievement, but the evidence between

unionism and student achievement was not concrete nor consistent. Instead, more

attention was warranted where union bargaining may show larger influence in areas such

as how contracts shape the day-to-day processes of a classroom or school building or

other areas of school culture (Carini, 2002, 2008a).

 21

Baron (2018) considered Act 10’s limits imposed on collective bargaining and the

effects on student achievement as demonstrated by standardized test scores. While Baron

(2018) shows a decline in student achievement by 20%, the majority of the decline

occurred in schools that were low performing prior to Act 10. The author suggests further

study into the effects of the policies put into place due to deunionization.

Choi and Chung (2016) quantitatively examined the voice effects of teacher

turnover in New York State. While acknowledging the quantitative evidence of the

teachers’ union on student achievement, the authors also base their study on the voice

teachers have through the grievance process allowed through the union. In the author’s

conclusion, Choi and Chung (2016) suggest qualitative research that gives voice to

members of an organization.

A qualitative case study invites teachers vested in the educational process to share

their real-life experiences regarding how the union may or may not have influenced

student achievement in Wisconsin’s public schools. A qualitative case study was an

approach that would allow a voice and perspective from a unique population that had not

yet been investigated (Yin, 2016). Cowen and Strunk (2015) specifically mention the use

of qualitative methodology within the field of teacher union policy, “offer fertile ground

for qualitative explorations” (p. 221).

A qualitative case study allows the research inductively to reveal the case itself.

Inductive research will usually use the response to the research questions to narrow the

scope of the study while exploring new phenomena. In some cases, inductive reasoning

will consider the phenomena from previous research from a different perspective. An

inductive case means the themes were connected with the data rather than the theory;
 22

whereas deductive reasoning uses an existing theory to develop further meaning (Patton,

2015). The primary applications of this research were to generate knowledge, add a

unique perspective to the existing body of literature, and contribute to scientific

knowledge in qualitative case studies on the topic of unions and student achievement.

This approach was used for two reasons: for theoretical elaboration and analytic

generalization (Yin, 2016). Understanding the perceptions of teachers in a qualitative

case study toward the over-arching question will satisfied the goals for this research. This

study created a better understanding of teachers’ perceptions on the possible influence of

the teachers’ union on student achievement by using the four steps Yin (2016) states to

developing a case study:

1. Designing the study

2. Conducting the study

3. Analyzing the evidence into themes

4. Draw and discuss conclusions, recommendations, and implications

As of 2020, significant controversy exists when reviewing the teachers’ union. In

researching this area of thought, the impact the political aspect of the union had in

affecting the youth for whom it advocates was highlighted (NEA, 2019). In addition, this

study was a result of the recommendations from existing research. Finally, the study

offered a perspective from teachers. This approach was unique to the field of inquiry.

The results of the study conveyed the opinions, thoughts, ideas, and perspectives

of current and retired classroom teachers through interviews, questionnaires, and archival

data. These viewpoints were organized into themes. These themes provide some insight

into the perception of how the teachers’ union may influence learning and student
 23

achievement. The results of the study might also aid teachers in understanding the impact

of the teachers’ union in classrooms and districts.

Nature of the Research Design for the Study

A qualitative case study approach is used to discover and develop a further

understanding of the phenomenon (Yin, 2016). The methods used in a study such as this

study can uncover the true perceptions of the people involved in the phenomenon (Yin,

2016). Therefore, this research used case study as it best addressed the need to answer the

phenomenon: What were the perceptions of Wisconsin’s public-school teachers on the

possible influence of the teachers’ union on public school student achievement? Case

study was also inherent to developing more about this inquiry and studying it from the

unique perspective of teachers. The value of a case study was that it deals with the

individual through direct observation and the thoughts, feelings, and desires of the

participant (Yin, 2016).

The definition of a case when conducting a case study is to study a “person,

organization, community, program, process, policy, practice, institution, or occurrence”

(Yin, 2016, p. 237). A case study was appropriate for this study as the research surrounds

a contemporary issue in a real-life context, where the researcher has little or no control

over the events, circumstances, or behavior of the participants. For this study, the case

was a group of teachers in Wisconsin. Within this study, the participants participated in

in-depth interviews were thoughts, feelings, and behaviors were considered (Yin, 2016).

The goal of this qualitative case study was to uncover perceptions and experiences

of the participants, who have first-hand experience with the phenomenon. The informal

conversation occurring during an open-ended interview offered as much flexibility as was

 24

needed to take the interview conversation in the direction most appropriate (Patton,

2015). The questions flowed from the conversation, based on a predetermined list of

open-ended questions. The strength of this approach of interviewing lies in opportunities

for flexibility, spontaneity, and responsiveness to individuality and situational changes.

The benefit was the researcher was able to use the time allotted for the interview and gain

as much insight as possible through systematic questioning. This research used

predetermined questions in the interview process and the questions were designed to

include spontaneous thought and sharing of ideas.

Another approach to interviewing was standardized open-ended interviews. In this

method, the researcher asks specifically worded questions and then probes deeper with

another set of specific questions. This approach benefits the researcher in that data can be

collected and analyzed easier, which minimizes the interviewer effects. The interview

guide lists the questions to be asked and explored (Appendix D). The best approach was

to combine the three approaches to discover the perceptions of the teachers:

• Prescribed questions

• Sub-set of probing questions

• Informal conversational interview

These three steps provided the researcher with the real experiences from each participant

in their own words. In this study, it was expected that data would lead to the discovery of

patterns or common themes, which will resolve the research question.

A second approach to data collection was archival data. In qualitative research,

archival data can be an important feature that allows the researcher to gain a clearer

understanding of a phenomenon through history. The researcher can then interpret the
 25

information almost immediately, instead of aggregating it with other sources of data

(Stake, 2010). This form of data collection was described in detail in Chapter 3.

The use of archival data can help with current research by using a thorough

review of what was already available through various sources (Schultz, Hoffman, &

Reiter-Palmon, 2005). Advantages of using archival data include research that is highly

supported, with not only previous data, but also combining that with new data (Schultz et

al., 2005). However, the same researchers warn that the use of archival data can be

viewed as simply replicating existing research. In this research, archival data were used

to first report what was found in the questionnaires and interviews, thereby enhancing the

research. Archival data was also used to counter or support that same information found

in the questionnaires and interviews in Chapters 4 and 5. Reporting and addition to

research were two of the benefits of using archival data (Schultz, Hoffman, & Reiter-

Palmon, 2005). While the use of archival data is new to the field of qualitative research, it

can be a very powerful tool when aligned with current research (Schultz, et al., 2005;

Stake, 2010).

To complete methodological triangulation, a questionnaire will be used to gather

data from a larger group of teachers. Appendix D contains the questions that will appear

on the document. In an effort to enhance reliability, the questions will be different from

those asked in the interview process. However, in the case of the questionnaire, the

statements were open-ended, meaning participants were encouraged to share their

thoughts and feelings with no limits in a text box about each question. Again, this data

source will be described in detail in Chapter 3.

 26

The proposed nature of the research design for this qualitative case study includes

a triangulation of data consisting of interviews, archival data, and a questionnaire.

Triangulation provides multiple lines of inquiry, all of which can converge on one or

more precise perceptions from the participants, consisting of teachers from public schools

in Wisconsin. Thus, the conclusion for a case study will more likely be convincing and

accurate if the data was triangulated (Yin, 2016).

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of this study, the following terms and concepts were defined as

follows. These terms and concepts were used further in the study and/or by the

participants during their discussions of their perceptions of the effect of the teachers’

union on student achievement. Words are listed in alphabetical order, defined, and

supported with empirical research.

Act 10. Also known as the Budget Repair Act. It allowed public workers (police,

fire, jail workers, and teachers) the choice to join their related union, as opposed to

mandated membership (Wisconsin Legislature, 2016).

Collective bargaining or bargaining. Collective bargaining is a process between

a group of teachers, selected through a democratic voting process, and administrators

who try to agree on regulations that determine working conditions, compensation,

benefits packages, and arbitrary rules, which may or may not influence educational

outcomes (Eberts, 2007). This term is often shortened to “bargaining.”

Mandated unionism. Wisconsin Legislation mandating all public workers (police,

fire, jail workers, and teachers), as a condition of employment, to join their related union
 27

(Wisconsin Legislation, 1971). The goal was to create a supported workforce who was

protected by the rights gained within collective bargaining.

Phenomenon. The study of the appearance of things, or things as they appear in

one’s experience through a first-person narrative. Patton (2015) explained this type of

study as one where real experiences were shared through the perspective of a person.

School culture. School culture is the accepted term that refers to both written and

assumed rules that affect every aspect of the role, purpose, and meaning of a school.

These rules often include beliefs, perceptions, relationships, and attitudes such as

perspectives and interactions, and practices within a classroom or building (Abbott,

2014).

Student achievement. Student achievement is determined by the amount of

learning a student does in a specific content area in a specific amount of time according

to his or her own ability. Cunningham (2012) and Weber (2010) explain that student

achievement is difficult to define but uses a variety of assessment procedures, including

formative and summative assessments, the ACT or SAT, as well as daily grades and end

of the year grades.

Teachers’ union, the union, unionism. The teachers’ union is defined as the

national organization of the National Education Association (NEA), the American

Federation of Teachers (AFT, and the state affiliate, the Wisconsin Education

Association Council (WEAC), which focused on collective bargaining for all certified

teachers (NEA, 2019).

Voice. Choi and Chung (2016) explain voice as one of the two parts for voice and

exit theory. With voice, members of an organization either perceive to have a say in what
 28

was happening within the organization that directly affects them, or their voice actually

creates change within the organization.

Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations

Assumptions. Assumptions are the components of a study that were assumed to

be in a non-prejudiced or established state for the purposes of the study. Assumptions

were assumed to be true or at least possible by any scholar who reads the study. In other

words, there were certain aspects of the proposed study that were assumed to be true

given the defined population, or research design that typically consist of normality,

homogeneity, and linearity. For this study, one assumption included the participants

represent most teachers in Wisconsin. While not all experiences will be the same, the

assumption was the consensus was representative of most teachers in the proposed

research location. A second assumption was the interview participants will answer in an

honest and candid manner. There was also the assumption in qualitative case studies that

all precautions will be taken to preserve the confidentiality of the participants in an effort

to encourage honesty and transparency when responding to questions (Yin, 2016). A third

assumption was that the inclusion criteria of the participants were appropriate which will

assure a thorough cross sample of experiences with the phenomena. A fourth assumption

was that all teachers would be honest in their teaching experience, as a three-year

teaching minimum was required for participation. The researcher assumes a teacher will

be honest when disclosing years’ experience in a classroom. A fifth and final assumption

was that the participants were sincerely interested in participating in the research and had

no ulterior motive to participate. It was assumed all participants had volunteered in an

effort to further the research and were willing share their personal experiences.
 29

Limitations. A limitation as “a factor that may or will affect the study in an

important way but is not under the control of the researcher,” and will ultimately involve

the inherent weaknesses in the methodology (Roberts, 2010, p. 139). One item out of the

control of the researcher was the honesty provided by the participants. Participants were

required to have at least three years’ teaching experience for participation. Three years’

experience was the expectation across the state for teachers to move past probation as

new teachers, prior to Act 10. The assumption was the participants would be honest in

accepting an invitation to participate under that guideline. As well, there was an

assumption that all participants were licensed teachers. Since Wisconsin requires all

public-school classroom teachers to hold state licensing, it was assumed the district

employs only licensed teachers.

Another limitation considered by the researcher in this research was whether the

number of participants was sufficient to develop common themes. The number of

participants must reach a level where saturation of the data is achieved and no new data

are discovered during the analysis stage (Yin, 2016). Another limitation was the political

aspect in Wisconsin concerning the teachers’ union in that state. In many cases,

discussing the teachers’ union can be professionally detrimental for teachers if they voice

displeasure or negativity toward the union (Brimelow, 2003; Stein & Marley, 2013;). The

events of the political landscape concerning the teachers’ union in Wisconsin were

largely chronicled by various media outlets including newspaper, television, articles,

blogs, and books. However, the researcher used all necessary means to protect the

identity of participants, so they could feel comfortable speaking freely during the

interview. This limitation proved to be a detriment in recruiting participants for the study
 30

as many teachers indicated an interest in participating but refused out of fear of retaliation

from their school, district, or the union if any identifying information was released.

Chapter 3 explains the changes made to the methodology to alleviate this limitation.

The lack of extant research constitutes another limitation in the proposed study.

Much of the empirical data were older than five years, which was less than acceptable for

doctoral research. Scholarly standards might set a precedent that the data were considered

out of date by and prove to be a limitation. Much of the available research focuses on a

national perspective rather than the state level, which proposes a limitation as the analysis

of data includes an overlook of all, or most states through a variety of lenses. Lastly, the

majority of the literature employs a quantitative methodology to the phenomenon.

Another limitation in the proposed study was any bias the participants may

express during the interview process. Although the objective was to obtain as many

perceptions of the participants in an effort to explain the phenomena, some participants

may express bias in various forms such as cultural, preferential for the union, against the

union, or in student achievement. In addition, was self-reported bias. Not only may

participants have personal and professional bias in their responses, there may also be bias

in the reporting aspect of the research. Rarely can self-reported data be independently

verified. Within the larger limitation of self-reported data were sub-groups of further

limitations consisting of selective memory, telescoping, where the participant might

remember an event at an alternate time frame than it actually occurred, attribution where

the participant may apply negative or positive attributes to a positive or negative

situation, or the exaggeration of representing outcomes or embellishing events (Yin,

2016).
 31

A final limitation within the proposed study was the researcher’s relationship with

and perception of the teachers’ union. The researcher engaged in several activities, which

assisted in bringing Act 10, and ultimately Right to Work, to fruition in the state and

actively campaigned against the state’s teachers’ union. The researcher was also a public-

school teacher in Wisconsin and ran for political office in the state. Being cognizant of

this limitation, and what the research indicated about being so close to the research topic,

allows the researcher to avoid any bias within the research (Patton, 2015; Yin, 2016).

Along this same thought, while it was possible, there was no reactivity to the researcher

from participants if the researcher was recognized by face or name. It was also possible

that the presence of the researcher and her involvement with union activities and Act 10

may introduce certain biases in how participants respond to the researcher not only in the

interviews, but also on the questionnaire. However, to the best of the researcher’s

knowledge, this did not happen.

Delimitations. Delimitations are those boundaries the researcher sets within the

study. The research contained several delimitations set to produce a scholarly review of

the phenomena. A quantitative study using state assessment scores was considered as a

means to discover more about the teachers’ union impact on student achievement.

Because of time and financial constraints, the focus was shifted from quantitative to a

qualitative case study. Using this perspective, the phenomena can be explored and

explained using the lived experiences shared in in-depth interviews with willing

participants (Yin, 2016). Although a larger participant base was discussed in the

limitations section, a smaller cross-section of the population was chosen to represent the

larger group. This cross-section was coming from teachers in various districts and public
 32

schools in Wisconsin. The participants must meet the specific criteria listed in Chapter 3

to be considered and chosen for participation. The criteria allowed the research to reach

saturation of data with a full spectrum of perceptions and experiences from the

participants. Interviews were chosen as a method to explore the phenomena due to the

nature of interviewing participants. Interviewing participants provided the researcher with

the opportunity to reach into the phenomena through further questioning, discussion, and

clarity (Yin, 2016).

The research questions in the study were another delimitation. The questions

came about as a response to the intense debate in Wisconsin when the then state

Governor revoked mandated union membership for public school teachers (Stein &

Marley, 2013). This poses a delimitation as the questions were meant to serve as

instigators to a more vivid discussion surrounding the perceptions of teachers about the

impact of the teachers’ union on student achievement. As reviewed in Chapter 2,

teachers, public employees, parents, administrators, union officials, the public, and

politicians debated the effectiveness of the teachers’ union on student achievement. As

discussed in Chapter 2, extant empirical research was lacking in a definitive answer, as

well as a qualitative case study perspective. The study was designed to contribute to the

existing literature from this research perspective.

Summary and Organization of the Remainder of the Study

The extant literature lacks answers relating to the role of the teachers’ union on

student achievement in public schools in Wisconsin. Some studies indicated a positive

impact at a national level (Carini, 2008b; Eberts & Stone, 1987). Other studies showed a

lack of support for a positive impact on student achievement at a national level

 33

(Adelberg, 2008; Cowen, 2009; Eberts, 2007; Kurth, 1987). Other studies (Baron, 2018

Choi & Chung, 2016; Lindy, 2011; Lang, 2015) focused on teachers’ unions in one state.

The research presented in this study was meant to close the gap in the literature using in-

depth interviews with current or retired public school teachers in Wisconsin.

The following chapters were designed to reveal various aspects of the proposed

study not included thus far. Chapter 2 presents a review of current research and how it

impacts this proposed study. Chapter 3 describes the methodology, research design, and

procedures for this investigation. Chapter 4 details how data were analyzed and will

provide written and graphic summaries of the results. Chapter 5 was an interpretation and

discussion of the results as they relate to the existing body of research related to the

dissertation topic.

Chapters 2 and 3 were completed as part of the proposed study, which was

reviewed and approved by the dissertation committee, Academic Quality Review (AQR),

and the Institutional Review Board (IRB). Upon receipt of approval, data were collected,

reviewed, and analyzed to lead to completion of Chapters 4 and 5. With the agreement

and complete cooperation from all entities involved in this endeavor, full completion of

this dissertation was expected before mid-2020.

 34

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Introduction to the Chapter and Background to the Problem

In 2010, Wisconsin was in the nation’s political spotlight and the implications for

union teachers were momentous (Stein & Marley, 2013). Then Wisconsin Governor Scott

Walker’s election received immense media coverage due to ending the Democratic

control of the state since 1938. The election allowed the Republicans to take control of

the legislature by turning over all offices during the election (Stein & Marley, 2013).

During the gubernatorial campaign, the governor-elect began talking about ending the

hold labor and teacher unions had on Wisconsin as a response to the multi-billion-dollar

deficit the state had under the previous administration (Novak, 2015). Walker made

sweeping changes to the state’s then current legislation on public unions, specifically the

teachers’ union. The governor began full implementation of new legislation in February

2011, just three months after election to his first term. The new legislation was highly

controversial in Wisconsin, with 14 senators leaving the state in a display of rebellion

against the proposed legislation (Condon, 2011). The biggest source of contention was

the removal of collective bargaining for public employees, which included public school

teachers.

Collective bargaining, through union membership, had been a state law since

1971 (Wisconsin State Legislature, 1971). For public school teachers, union leaders at

WEAC, the state teacher’s union, led the collective bargaining. WEAC and National

Education Association (NEA) are both national union organizations for public school

teachers. After much debate and contest, the bill passed, but, as a display of compromise,

Governor Walker rescinded the removal of collective bargaining for public workers with
 35

most of the impact felt by public school teachers but some public workers, such as fire

fighters and correction officers, being exempted (Stein & Marley, 2013). However,

bargaining for salary and insurance would stay. The teachers’ union could no longer

bargain for class size, working days or hours, educational staff, or other school inputs.

When the NEA originally organized in 1853, the staff reported the organization as

a way to unite as one voice in the cause of public education (NEA, 2019). During that

time, learning to read and write was a luxury for most children and a focus of the union

(NEA, 2019). To date, much debate has been whether this focus influenced public

education. With more than three million members nationwide, the impact of the teachers’

union could be strong (NEA, 2019). With social justice causes, voting record, ideas on

curriculum, planning, teacher resources, and working conditions, the engagement of the

union was thorough and varied regarding its impact on public education. With collective

bargaining legislation signed into law in Wisconsin in 2011, much focus had been on

both national and state unions, the union impact on education, and the state of Wisconsin

(Stein & Marley, 2013). For these reasons, the topic of this study concerns the impact of

the teachers’ union on public education, specifically in the state of Wisconsin.

In this study, the existing literature from authors within the field was reviewed

with an unbiased perspective. Interviewing public school teachers, both union and

nonunion members, provides a scholarly approach to the perceptions and lived

experiences of people who have a stake in public education (Patton, 2015). All efforts

were made to survey the literature using several search engines and resources to reassure

the reader all sources were utilized for thoroughness. Search engines used included

Google, Google Scholar, Google Alerts, ProQuest and ERIC. Search terms used included,
 36

but were not limited to, teachers’ union, Wisconsin teachers’ union, benefits of the

teachers’ union, cons of the teachers’ union, how does the teachers’ union affect student

achievement, and public-school student achievement. Google Scholar search terms

included but were not limited to searching the various authors found in previous research

and many of the previous search terms. Google Alerts were set to Wisconsin teachers’

union, teachers’ union, and teachers’ union, and public- school student achievement. The

same search terms were used in ProQuest from Grand Canyon University’s online library

portal.

This chapter examined current research focused on several key concepts in an

effort to describe the factors that were a part of the teachers’ union and what role, if any,

the unions played in public school student academic achievement. The literature reviewed

investigates reviewed scholarly journal articles, books, and dissertations found with the

EBSCOhost, ProQuest, and Google Scholar databases. Every effort was made to review

empirical research published within a five-year time limit to ensure the accuracy and

expertise of recent findings related to this topic. Research articles, books, and

dissertations published before 2015 also helped define and clarify related concepts to this

study. This researcher made every attempt to exhaust the research in its entirety to paint a

clear and unobstructed view of why the perceptions of teachers about the possible

influence the teachers’ union has on student achievement needed further research and

consideration. Important to note was that extant literature on the topic was lacking. In a

quick Google search using the key words teachers’ unions and student achievement, 1.4

million results were offered. Of these results, the first nine directly related to the key

word search.
 37

This chapter describes the background of the study, reviews the theoretical

foundations, and explores facts and research related to this topic. A discussion was also

included in the literature review, which defends the reasoning for the use of the research

design. A chapter summary brings all these details together, redefining the necessity of

this study.

This chapter begins by introducing the background of this research and by

reviewing the history of teachers’ unions in the United States, then specifically in

Wisconsin, where this study was focused. As well, this researcher reviewed teachers’

unions’ influence across the country through legislation. The chapter focused on the

influence of the teachers’ union in Wisconsin, as well as the impact of Act 10. Finally,

the chapter offered a synthesis on the current research, which identified the needed

research to explain the possible relationship between the teachers’ union in Wisconsin

and its impact on public school student academic achievement.

Background to the problem. Since 1857, the NEA has worked with students and

teachers to create a better work environment for teachers and a better learning

environment for students (NEA, 2019). In 1971, Wisconsin passed legislation mandating

union membership for all public workers in the state (Wisconsin Legislation, 1971). In

2010, Governor-elect Walker proposed Act 10 to reduce the state’s multi-billion-dollar

deficit. After much protesting and a hearing at the State Supreme Court level, Act 10

passed. One of the requirements of the Act was to allow teachers the option of union

membership. While individual teachers could choose or not choose to be a member of the

state teachers’ union, the district must vote to maintain its standing with the union. This

option allowed districts to negotiate only salaries and insurance benefits. Work hours,
 38

class size, teacher’s aide assistance, and other parts of a school district were no longer

allowed to be bargained for after Act 10 passed. In 2018, the Supreme Court heard

statements by Janus v. ASFMCE that led to the dismissal of mandated requirements for

any worker, private or public, to be a union member across the country (National Right to

Work (NRTW), 2018). However, members of states that were not Right to Work must

participate in collective bargaining even if they were not union members (NRTW, 2018).

As of 2018, there were 32 states that were Right to Work (NRTW, 2018).

Although the NEA’s vision was to create a great school for all children (NEA,

2019), the state chapter focused on students through public education employees

(WEAC, nd). Studies on the unions’ effects on student achievement have shown both

positive and negative results. Some studies have mixed results, often citing other

variables having more of an impact than the union does (Carini, 2008a, 2008b). In

addition, some studies show a negative correlation with the teacher’s union and student

achievement (Coulsen, 2010; Eberts & Stone, 1987; Hoxby, 1996). Other studies showed

a positive influence (Griffith, 2009; Kerchner, Koppich, & Weeres, 1998; Winkler et al.,

2012; Yusim, 2008). This researcher found six common themes within the literature

presented by the previously mentioned authors:

1. School culture - how the environment feels to employees (Anrig, 2015; Carini,
2008b; Eberts & Stone, 1987; Hoxby, 1996; Winkler et al., 2012)

2. Leadership (Mickel, 2015; Moe, 2011)

3. Lobbying (Cowen, 2009; Eberts & Stone, 1987; Lot & Kenny, 2013; Moe, 2011;
Winkler et al., 2012)

4. Accountability (Eberts & Stone, 1987; Kurth, 1987; Mickel, 2015)

5. Best practices (Anrig, 2015; Baron, 2018; Carini, 2002)

 39

6. Contract provisions (Carini, 2002, 2008a, 2008b; Moe, 2011; Winkler, et al.,
2012)

All of the studies discussed thus far examined unions through a national lens. To

date, this researcher found seven studies that narrowed the focus from national to either

regional or state focus (Antonucci, 2015; Baron, 2018; Borland & Howsen, 1992; Choi &

Chung, 2016; Lang, 2015; Lindy, 2011; Lovenheim, 2009). Although national attention

to the issue was lacking, state focus was almost non-existent. A focus at the state level

was necessary because this was where much of the legislation directed toward schools

and education was made. In addition, to date, this researcher found limited

phenomenological research focusing on the perception of teachers on the teachers’ union

effect on student achievement. Studies by Baron (2018) and Choi and Chung (2016)

suggested a qualitative look at perceptions of the teachers’ union. These gaps in the

literature led this researcher to carefully consider the phenomenon and what approach

would be best suited to address perceptions and lived experiences.

Identification of the Gap

It was not known how public-school teachers perceived the possible influence of

the teachers’ union on student achievement. Researchers have been studying ways that

the teachers’ union might impact student success. Graduation rates were studied and

found not to increase in unionized schools (Hoxby, 1996). The social organization of

schools was studied and found various results (Carini, 2008a). Minority students’

achievement was quantitatively studied to find students who were identified as minority

students but did not have any more achievement than non-minority students in a union

school (Milkman, 1997). Achievement gains of students at numerous schools was

analyzed and no more gains than their peers were found (Eberts & Stone, 1987). States
 40

were compared against one another on the strength of their teachers’ union (Winkler et

al., 2012). New Mexico’s union laws and how the changes affected student achievement

was also studied (Lindy, 2011). Massachusetts was considered for collective bargaining

requirements as they pertain to student achievement (Lang, 2015). School districts that

had higher union involvement inform the purpose and function of unions over anything

else ((Cowen & Strunk, 2015)). Three themes in studying collective bargaining were

found: unions participate in enormous political lobbying, unions were able to set policy

and oppose reform, and unions have strong political power in local school districts

((Cowen & Strunk, 2015)). One study in Wisconsin found a 30% decrease in math and

science scores since Act 10 passed in 2012 (Baron, 2018). These studies were discussed

in depth earlier in the Literature Review. Choi and Chung (2016) studied New York

teachers’ agreements through teacher turnover and the grievance procedure. They found

that teachers who perceive a voice to their bargaining unit tend to stay in their contracted

position longer than those districts with less-strong grievance procedures. However, the

existing research to defend these statements lies in quantitative measures. There were

currently no studies that qualitatively consider the perceptions of teachers. While these

studies have greatly contributed to the field, there were still several gaps in the literature

that needed to be filled.

The literature shows a gap in understanding the effects of voice and policy as they

pertain to student achievement. In Baron’s (2018) study, which explored the “short-run”

(p 1) effects of Wisconsin’s Act 10 legislation on student achievement, the author

conceded that while standardized test scores decreased, the results may be influenced by
 41

a change in the tests from pre-Act 10 to post-Act 10. Therefore, the author suggested

additional research to understand how the policies affect schools in Wisconsin.

Choi and Chung (2016) also indicated a gap in the literature in the conclusion of

their study. The authors explored contract language in school districts in New York State.

Findings included that when teachers perceive to have a voice in an organization, there

was less teacher turnover, which affects students in the classroom. Choi and Chung

(2016) suggested using qualitative research to explore teachers’ voices in an organization.

Cowen and Strunk(2015) also researched the impacts of teachers’ unions. The study

concluded that much research attempts to determine if “teachers’ unions are ’good’ or

’bad’” (p. 221). The authors suggest there was “fertile ground” (p. 221) in qualitative

study pertaining to teacher union policies. This study attempted to close the gap of voice

and policy addressing the needs indicated by Baron (2018), Choi and Chung (2016), and

Cowen and Strunk (2015).

There was also a lack of recent literature on the phenomenon. Most of the studies

found were published more than five years ago, with the exception of Baron (2018), Choi

and Chung (2016), and Cowen and Strunk (2015). Quality academic review requires

researchers to use more current studies; preferably those that were within the previous

five-years. The lack of current research constitutes a considerable gap in the literature and

accentuates the need for this proposed study. Some may argue this lack of extant research

constitutes more of a non-interest in the topic. However, with many states arguing the

Janus decision, moving toward Right to Work or defending their Right to Work status, or

lessening the power of the teachers’ union, this is not the case.
 42

In 2010, when the governor-elect of Wisconsin introduced Act 10 as a response to

the fiscal problems of the state, part of the bill included teachers’ unions becoming

optional for teachers instead of mandatory as it had been in Wisconsin since 1971.

Teachers’ unions were the largest part of the public sector union (Cowen & Strunk,

2015). With Act 10’s provisions, any cuts to spending would include cuts to public

education. The National Association of State Budget Officers (2019) shared data that

explained states had a total education (K-12) expenditure of 19.6% with most of the

budget going toward teacher salaries. This led to a large uprising of teachers and union

officials with an argument that membership in the union was necessary for student

success (Stein & Marley, 2013). The president of the union at the time, Mary Weingarten,

also reiterated this statement with the idea that teachers collectively have the power to

enhance the profession of teaching and can develop better school plans that will have a

positive, yet indirect, effect on students (NEA, 2019).

This section summarized the gap in literature that justified the need for this study.

Much of the research studied the effects of unionism on student achievement from a

quantitative perspective. There were no studies that explored teachers’ perceptions of the

possible influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement. Also discussed in this

section were seven studies conducted in specific states, with one in Wisconsin, which

was the birthplace of mandated unionism, as well as the end of mandated unionism.

Lastly, this section explored two studies, both of which suggested further research in

teacher perceptions using a qualitative methodology. These two studies highlight the need

for this study.

 43

Theoretical Foundations

To support the research purposes set forth in this study, the theoretical foundation

for this proposed qualitative case study relied on Critical System Theory (CST). CST is

the combination of systems theory and critical social theory (Watson & Watson, 2013).

CST provided a framework that allows the perceptions of teachers and the possible

influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement to be explored and developed.

CST was defined by three core principles that include critique, emancipation, and

pluralism. Beginning with critique, this principal required the researcher to be critical of

the methodology in the research to move away from hidden assumptions that more

traditional research approaches may bring (Midgley, 1995). The second principle,

emancipation, frees the researcher from those traditional methodologies that may bring an

impediment to uncovering the underlying meanings in the phenomenon. The last

principle, pluralism, lies in conjunction with critique and emancipation in that it negates

the idea of conventional methods. Instead, pluralism helps researchers gain clarity with

stakeholders through obtaining a cross-cultural understanding of the phenomenon

(Midgley, 1995). Given that researchers have studied teachers’ unions’ impact on student

achievement through a variety of lenses and research designs, this theory can close the

gap in the literature. Carini (2002, 2008a, 2008b) discussed collective bargaining at a

national level and cautioned researchers to understand collective bargaining and its

impact on student achievement. Hoxby (1996) used high school dropout rates to validate

her research findings. Milkman (1997) considered minority achievement. Eberts (2007)

discussed all the possible effects of teachers’ unions on student achievement under the

umbrella of collective bargaining. Finally, Eberts and Stone (1987) measured the
 44

achievement gains of students from a national sample of school districts. Within this

scope, a variety of concepts was considered. The research focused on Wisconsin students

in public schools. The influential sources for this approach include Carini (2002, 2008a,

2008b), Eberts (2007), Eberts and Stone (1987), and Hoxby (1996). The research findings

contend there were various mitigating variables that could influence this possible

relationship as evidenced with the different methods used to consider the phenomenon.

Using CST in this research allowed the researcher to bring an approach individually

suited to researching the complex social systems found in education, while at the same

time seeking to change them. A reoccurring theme in CST was collaboration between the

researcher and participants to qualify the experiences being shared by the participants.

Collective bargaining and its impact, no matter what outcome was considered, has

been the subject of discussion since the inception of teachers’ unions. The discussion

presented here focused on a national trend, as well as state-focused studies (Borland &

Howsen, 1992; Lang, 2015; Lindy, 2011). The gap provided by Baron (2018) and Choi

and Chung (2016) led this researcher to believe this information was needed. Following

the previous studies, the teachers’ union in Wisconsin was considered from the

perspective of both union and non-union public-school teachers. These aspects were not

found in the literature. CST will provide a structured theoretical framework in which to

close this gap, provide a continuous critique of the methods being used during data

collection and analysis, and provide a unique perspective on a problem within the field of

education.

The research surrounding the affect teachers’ unions have on student

achievement, whether it be positive or negative, and has many possible outcomes as

 45

evidenced by Borland and Howsen (1992), Eberts and Stone (2007), Carini (2008b),

Lovenheim (2009), Coulsen (2010), Lindy (2011), Lang (2015), and Mickel (2015). As a

result, the researcher will further add to the existing body of knowledge through a

discourse of the teachers’ union through the perceptions of public-school teachers in

Wisconsin. Choi and Chung (2016) emphasize the need for qualitative literature that

gives teachers a voice to policies within a school setting.

Review of the Literature

Communities, teachers’ unions, policy makers and other stakeholders shaped

public education. As the research suggests, it was too often that teachers were not asked

what they thought or wanted. As of 2019, the National Council on Educational Statistics

(NCES) reported almost four million teachers in the United States. Of those four million,

3.6 teach in traditional public schools. Prior to Janus v. ASFCME succeeding at the

Supreme Court level, twenty-seven states mandated unionism (NRTW, 2018). In 2008,

Duffet, Farkas, Rotherham, and Silva (2008) conducted a study of over 1,000 K-12

public school teachers on their thoughts on the teaching profession, teachers’ unions, and

educational reforms facing public education. For the purposes of this study, the focus

stayed on the teachers’ responses to the union. Overall, the authors reported that the

teachers found problems with the union but saw it as a necessity for the profession in

safeguarding their jobs. However, teachers report they would like to see the union take a

stronger role in educational reform, but not if it came at the expense of union’s core

mission (although it does not detail that mission) (Duffet et al., 2008). The teachers also

reported they felt the unions should continue to bargain for benefits, safeguard their jobs
 46

through grievance procedures, and protect them from politics. The study asked teachers

their views on several union issues and the results were as follows:

• 54% of teachers surveyed believe the union “absolutely essential” (p. 14)

• 74% of teachers surveyed believe in the traditional protections of the union

regarding working conditions and bargaining

• 75% of teachers surveyed believe the union protects teachers through the
grievance process and regularly informing members about their rights

• 17% of teachers believe the union was active in removing ineffective teachers
from the classroom

• 46% of teachers surveyed believe the union supports and mentors new teachers

When asked what the most important method the union can engage in to improve

teaching, 72% of the teachers surveyed believe the union should negotiate more effective

and meaningful ways to evaluate educators. In the section entitled “How Unions Can

Improve Teaching,” students were not directly mentioned until 61% of teachers surveyed

indicated they felt the union should keep them updated on new instructional methods and

curriculum. Of the survey questions, that was the only question that directly related to

students. While Duffet et al.’s (2008) work was a survey and not empirical research; it

was still relevant to this proposed research in that it was the only source of evidence that

inquired about teacher perceptions. However, the survey did not ask any questions about

teacher perceptions about the influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement.

Many researchers have studied the teachers’ union impact on student achievement

through a variety of lenses. Carini (2002, 2008a, 2008b) discussed collective bargaining

at a national level and cautioned researchers to understand the political considerations of

collective bargaining and their impact on student achievement. Hoxby (1996) used high

school dropout rates to validate research findings. Milkman (1997) considered minority
 47

achievement. Furthermore, Eberts (2007) discussed all the possible variables under the

umbrella of collective bargaining. Finally, Eberts and Stone (1987) measured the

achievement gains of students from a national sample of school districts. Within this

scope, collective bargaining, minority achievement, high school drop-out rates, and

politics can all be considered under the umbrella of collective bargaining within the

larger understanding of the teacher’ union. While the majority of empirical research

focused on the national level, this research focused on Wisconsin children in public

schools. Focusing on one state will add to the body of literature surrounding the

perceived impact of the teachers’ union may have on pedagogical processes. The

influential sources for this approach include Eberts and Stone (1987), Hoxby (1996),

Eberts (2007), and Carini (2002, 2008a, 2008b). All contend that mitigating variables,

such as bargaining details, school environment, or standardization may impact this

possible relationship.

Collective bargaining and its impact, no matter what variable considered, has

been a subject of discussion since the inception of teachers’ unions. This discussion has

focused on a national trend, and three studies focused on one, although not the same, state

(Borland & Howsen, 1992; Lang, 2015; Lindy, 2011). The gap in this literature leads this

researcher to believe this information was needed. Following the previous studies, the

teachers’ union in Wisconsin were considered from the perspective of both union and

non-union public-school teachers. These aspects have also not been found in the

literature.

In this study, three relevant concepts drove the discussion about teachers’ unions

and student achievement. These three concepts were derived from the six potential
 48

themes (school climate and culture, leadership, lobbying, accountability, best practices,

and bargaining) found in literature. The aforementioned ideas state the unions drive

schools to standardize education for all children, regardless of the student’s ability.

Standardizing education for all children does not meet the needs of students above or

below the norms in academic achievement. The studies also state that unions lobby for

various educational strategies and approaches that help or hinder education, and union

lobbying indirectly affects students through teachers.

Teacher union impact on education. Although teachers’ unions were

responsible for increasing teacher’s salaries and district resources, unions were often just

as responsible for increasing standardization within the classroom, thus relaxing student

achievement by lowering academic expectations in testing or major assignments or

growing learning gaps in learner sub-groups (Hoxby, 1996; Milkman, 1997).

Standardizing the classroom means learning expectations were equal for all students.

Students who fall in the middle of the proverbial bell curve were not affected as they

continued to learn as usual. Students, who were gifted or require an increase in rigor as

compared to their peers for their learning, were no longer academically challenged.

Students, who struggle with learning and required extra help from peers or teacher

assistants to increase their cognitive processes, tended to give up with standardization.

They struggle in much of their academic career, but when expectations were the same for

everyone with no exceptions, they often gave up and did not feel compelled to do more

since they believe they would fail. With much emphasis on standardized testing, many

teachers felt compelled to teach to the test (Salloum & BouJaoude, 2019). Testing

removes autonomy from the teacher, which narrows standards and reduces student
 49

achievement (Salloum & BouJaoude, 2019). Students who learn by focusing on the

achieving success of the mandated standardized test tend to learn to think in a box rather

than expand their critical thinking skills (Salloum & BouJaoude, 2019). The effect of

teachers’ unions on national student achievement has been a source of contention among

many scholars such as Hoxby (1996), Milkman (1997), Eberts (2007), Garden (2012),

and Tucker (2012).

Although Marzano’s best practices theory reviews leadership, learning

communities, tiered intervention, brain research, and classroom management as keys to

student achievement, no indisputable proof has been offered in the discussion about

teachers’ union use and their political power to directly affect student achievement in

public schools. The unions often lobby for teaching strategies and approaches that

directly influence student academic progress, so one might assume these best practices

would have an influence on student achievement (Moe, 2011; NEA, 2019). Much of the

empirical research used assessment results, observation, and effects such as salary,

student-teacher ratios, the number of staff in a building, and other variables. Hoxby

(1996) performed a quantitative analysis comparing union membership and its effect on

district financial and staffing resources, as well as student achievement. Hoxby’s (1996)

conclusion was comparative to Carini’s (2008a) in that school culture or climate could

influence student achievement.

Brimelow (2003) and Moe (2011) contended that collective bargaining had

detrimental effects on student achievement in schools in America. Winkler et al. (2012)

also suggested a conflict of interest that unions had with collective bargaining and student

achievement. Their conclusion was that the teacher’s union, despite the state, look out for
 50

teachers’ interests. A common theme within this research was that there appeared to be a

negative effect of unions on student achievement in public schools in America.

Lot and Kenny (2013) studied the adverse impact teachers’ unions had on student

achievement. Their study looked at teachers who were union members. Lot and Kenny

(2013) argued the union tended to focus on teachers’ rights and not students’ rights.

Adelberg (2008), a previous union leader, discussed teachers’ unions’ role in education

reform. The qualitative study used interviews with 25 unionized educators from five

regions in upstate New York. Participants were asked several questions about their

perceptions on the role of unions with teachers and with a student. The emerging

consensus from interviewees was that the union was there to protect teacher’s rights.

Hoxby (1996), Brimelow (2003), Moe (2011), and Lot and Kenny (2013) all

contended that teachers’ unions had a negative impact on public schools. Using various

sources and sets of data, the authors’ postulations included an increase in spending, lower

test scores, higher dropout rates, and less teacher accountability in states where

compulsory unionization was mandated.

Carini (2002), Adelberg (2008), and Yusim (2008) highlighted positive findings

on the effects of unionization on public schools. These authors argued that students were

stronger academically in those states where there were unions. These authors postulated

success to the bargaining and quality relationships unions had with districts.

Eberts and Stone (1987) collected data from the Sustaining Effects Study from the

Department of Education and found student achievement to be 3% higher in unionized

schools than in non-unionized. Milkman (1997) found support for the hypothesis that

minority students would have lower achievement rates in unionized schools. In the Eberts
 51

(2007) study, results showed the effects of unionized schools were mixed. Average

students tended to have higher achievement scores, whereas low-achieving and high-

achieving students tended to perform worse.

In 2016, the Supreme Court decided to review an appeals court ruling with

Friedrichs v. the State of California. In this case, Friedrichs, the lead plaintiff, contended

mandatory union dues were an imposition on free speech. Based on this, Henderson,

Peterson, and West (2016) conducted an informal poll for Education Next (EdNext)

between the general public and public-school teachers. Results showed the majority of

both groups (43% of the public and 50% of teachers) agreed with Friedrichs in that

mandatory unionism was an imposition of free speech. The poll also asked both groups if

they thought the teachers’ union had a positive or negative affect on schools. When

asked, the two groups differed. Forty percent of the public responded that the teachers’

union had a negative impact, while 50% of teachers responded the union had a positive

impact. The poll did not detail what “positive” or “negative” meant.

Using an analysis method of variance and multiple regression to hypothesize the

relationship between collective bargaining and student achievement, Fenster (2009)

found mixed results. Adjusting for socioeconomic factors and precluding high school

data, as it was not available by National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the

author found differing results in mathematics and reading. Fenster (2009) considered data

from a national perspective. Data were divided into three categories: states with

permissible bargaining laws (11 states), states with mandatory bargaining laws (35

states), and states that do not allow bargaining (five states). Data were also drawn from

fourth and eighth grade mathematics and writing NAEP scores. Analysis of the data
 52

showed a negative effect in both content areas for states where bargaining was

mandatory, and no statistical significance was shown in states where bargaining was

either permissible or illegal.

In the book Special Interest: Teacher Unions and America’s Public Schools, Moe

(2011) discusses various aspects of the teachers’ union influence on public schools in the

United States. Moe’s (2011) own national survey was discussed at length in Chapter 3 of

the book and was used as an impetus for the remainder of the book. In the survey,

teachers respond that they felt forced to join the national and local unions out of

professional interests yet felt collective bargaining, a large component of teachers’

unions, has “benign consequences” (p. 69). Teachers also stated they believed the

political processes of the union, specifically tenure, accountability, vouchers, and charter

schools, were a source of dissatisfaction. Moe (2011) states, “Whatever the unions do in

promoting their special interests…these interests were the teacher’s own interests, and

the unions were generally doing things that the teachers want them to do” (p. 69). In his

book The Worm in the Apple, Brimelow (2003) quoted an NEA official as, “No single

determining factor – least of all student achievement – should dictate who among us will

be paid more than others” (p. 86). If Moe’s 2011 study was accurate and teachers were

after their own interests, this proposed research was relevant in that the findings should

reveal if teachers were seeing an influence in student achievement from the teachers’

union.

Lovenheim and Willen (2018) analyzed the long-term effects of states that allow

bargaining have on students’ educational attainment outcomes. The estimates show a

lowered productivity and earnings’ rate when compared against states that do not legalize
 53

collective bargaining. However, as previously discussed and further developed in this

chapter, the information both supports and contradicts the past empirical research that

was currently available. Lovenheim and Willen (2018) contended the research showed a

long decline in educational achievement when collective bargaining became mandated

and widespread. This statement was supported by the continued research and was the

focus of this proposed research.

These studies will be further presented in the four theme areas found in the

literature. Each study will discuss the methodology and outcomes. Each theme was

developed in full and the correlated studies reviewed and summarized. From there, the

themed section was summarized as a whole and discussed how it related to the

overarching research question presented in this research.

Unions drive schools to standardize education for all children. Eberts and

Stone (1987) concluded teachers in unionized districts teach smaller classes and relied on

more traditional instruction time. Teachers can then focus on the average student and do

not accommodate for students with gifted or specialized learning needs and spend less

time on instruction but slightly more time on preparing. However, the authors found

scores on standardized tests to be approximately three percent lower difference between

unionized and non-unionized districts. The authors also concluded that unionized districts

with collective bargaining reduced achievement gains for atypical students due to the lack

of specialized instruction in those districts. Despite the standardization of education in

bargaining districts, Eberts and Stone (1987) also concluded that bargaining increased the

cost of education by about 15%. The authors used the math scores of over 14,000 fourth

graders across the country in elementary public schools. Using value added data (growth
 54

measures which were used to estimate how much positive or negative effect teachers

have on student learning in a school year) to complete their scores, the researchers

concluded that while factors such as teacher ability, administrative leadership, peer

groups, modes of instruction, and past findings of student achievement could affect

learning, the more obvious factor was bargaining in union districts. The restrictions in

teaching, methods, modes, strategies, and regulation impacted students through

standardization.

In the Sustaining Effects study, Eberts and Stone (1987) stratified a sample of

approximately 14,000 fourth graders from 328 elementary schools around the nation. The

researchers found consistency in the view that unions tended to standardize public

schools using standardized classroom teaching strategies, uniform teaching approaches,

reduction of specialized teaching resources, and tailored learning to the average student

rather than specializing for gifted students or students who were at-risk learner. Using

standardized test scores, Eberts and Stone (1987) concluded that while other factors, such

as dropout rates and attendance may affect data, the average union productivity

advantage was three percent. After cross-referencing union and nonunion districts using

the same students, the authors contended unionization of districts tended to standardize

the workplace through work rules and production methods associated with collective

bargaining.

Eberts (2007) considered several quantitative collective bargaining factors, such

as compensation, working conditions, employment security, and workplace governance,

when studying unions and student achievement. The author noted collective bargaining as

defined as an “establishment of rules governing the workplace, and compensation

 55

through negotiated collective bargaining agreements” (p. 6). Using a cumulative review

of the Sustaining Effects Survey, High School and Beyond, The National Assessment of

Economic Education, and the National Education Longitudinal Study, Eberts (2007)

explained the studies “yield remarkably consistent results” (p. 10). The author wrote that

the studies concluded a one-to-two percent difference in achievement according to

standardized assessments between unionized and non-unionized districts. However,

standardization was found across unionized schools. Teaching and learning tended to

focus on an average student, leaving behind students who have differentiated learning

needs.

Using SAT scores, Milkman (1997) found minority students in a unionized public

school have more success than those who were in a non-union school. The author also

explained this hypothesis to be true only if the school had more minority students than a

school where the majority of students were non-minority. Milkman (1997) also caveats

the findings with more minority students having special learning needs and responded

differently to educational resources than majority students.

Lot and Kenny (2013) also held administrators accountable for standardization of

education within public schools. The research showed administrators tended to spend less

time on curriculum development, program needs assessment, and program planning,

monitoring, and assessing were lowest in union districts than non-union districts.

However, the authors found similarities in instructional leadership between union and

non-union districts. These findings relate to Eberts and Stone’s (1987) findings

previously described. Less time on student and program needs translates into

standardization for learners.

 56

The seminal authors for unions bringing standardization to public schools were

Eberts and Stone (1984, 1987), Milkman (1997), Eberts (2007), and Lot and Kenny

(2013). Over the course of twenty-three years, their conclusions remained consistent in

that unionized school districts standardize education for students. This was done through

curriculum, pedagogy, and focusing on assessments. Eberts and Stone (2007) also hold

administrators responsible for standardizing education. A limitation of the study was that

it did not know how teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student

achievement when the study began. While teachers were not directly part of the data

presented in these studies, the research showed an influence from the teachers’ union on

student achievement. This information was relevant for the purposes of this research for

three reasons:

1. Teacher perceptions were not used as part of the methodology.

2. It postulated there was an influence from the teachers’ union on student

achievement.

3. The research was conducted at the national level not the state level.

Unions lobby for various educational strategies and approaches. Carini

(2008a) stated, “The study of the implications of the teacher unions is hampered by the

paucity of national data sources that include both measures of collective bargaining and

student achievement” (p. 6). Data were gathered from the National Education

Longitudinal Study of over 5,000 eight and tenth grade students from 1990 and 1998

(Carini, 2008a). The focus was on the gains or differences in math and reading in districts

that were either collectively bargained or not and compared the two sets of data,

employing various controls such as student demographics, teacher experience and

demographics, and whether or not the student had a learning disability. Results found,
 57

given a series of ordinary least squares regressions at the individual level, that students in

districts that were collectively bargained had higher test scores in tenth grade math and

math before controls were introduced.

Lot and Kenny (2013) looked at the effectiveness of public schools through

various variables, one of which was unionized states and non-unionized states. Using four

levels of regression of union dues per teacher compared to the union monies spent for

each student in fourth and eighth grade in unionized and non-unionized states, as well as

monies spent lobbying and test scores, the authors contended states with high

membership and high value had lower reading and math scores. “High value” (p. 3) was

defined as districts where there was high union membership and engaged activity within

the membership, “…the teachers union indeed matters and that students learn less in

states with stronger teachers’ unions” (p. 10).

Lot and Kenny (2013) provided updated information on their previous research

and study on how the teachers’ union affects student achievement in public schools

nationwide. Using a now-defunct website to collect assessment data for more than 10,000

students across the United States, the authors studied 832 districts in 42 states using

descriptive statistics via regression analysis to measure student performance in reading

and math. Lot and Kenny (2013) found that at the district level bargaining, the contracts

were more restrictive and resulted in lower student achievement. The authors found that

unions contribute a significant amount of money to candidates for state and federal

offices. This type of lobbying could help or harm the state’s teachers’ aid bills be

defeated or passed. After controlling for lobbying and the political aspect of the teachers’

union, the authors concluded that student math and reading scores were lower in states
 58

with a strong teachers’ union, but in states where the teachers’ union was weak, student

scores tend to be “robust” (p. 102).

Writing for the University of Toledo Law Review, Garden (2012) discussed the

impact the teachers’ union bargaining had on the First Amendment rights of teachers

concerning pedagogy and free speech. Garden (2012) cited several legal cases where

teachers were either terminated or contracts were not renewed the following year when

school districts decided to punish teachers for making reasonable curricular decisions that

later prove to be unpopular. The author concluded that union bargaining should consider

including provisions protecting teachers’ right to teach as necessary, within a professional

context.

Winkler et al. (2012) compared states against one another on the strength of their

teachers’ union. Using five themes (resources and membership, involvement in politics,

scope of bargaining, state policies, and perceived influence), the authors found the unions

tended to look after teachers’ interests over students. The authors discussed the use of

politics as a way to accomplish this task. According to Winkler, et al. (2012) collective

bargaining was required in 32 states, 14 states were called “permissive” (p. 5), and five

states prohibited bargaining. As well, the authors acknowledged the politics of influence

in education by detailing that teachers’ unions in 22 states were in the top 10 overall

political donors to governors and other top-level executive positions. The authors also

concluded that teachers’ unions in these states also had a great influence on shaping

educational policy. They were also careful to acknowledge that while the study did not

focus on student achievement in these states, there were few factors that could influence

student achievement.
 59

Lindy (2011) empirically reviewed graduation rates, along the lines of Hoxby

(1996). Lindy (2011) used a cross-sectional regression model, while controlling for

teacher salary, to review SAT scores in districts where unionism was strong. One of the

few studies focused on New Mexico’s sunset bargaining law. A sunset law is one that is

legislatively mandated unionism to occur within a certain time frame unless legislation

continues it (Lindy, 2011). In this case, the study compared one area in New Mexico

affected by the legal change, and one area in the state not affected by the legal change. In

this instance, the area affected by the legal changes was defined as the specific times

between1993 to1999 where union membership was mandated, 1999 to2003 where union

membership was permissive, and then 2003 to the present where unionism for public

school teachers was again legislatively mandated. For further reliability, state freshman

graduation rates (SFGR) were used as quantifiers for these rates as more dependable than

end-of-year graduation rates. End-of-the-year graduation rates were compared to SAT

scores by the SFGR. The conclusion was that students who had higher SAT scores tended

to stay in school while those who had low scores tended to drop out. The author

explained this occurrence was the direct result of bargaining (Lindy, 2011). The focus

tended to shift from low performing students to high performing students than when

bargaining was mandated. Since districts were freed from the constraints of the

bargaining contract, districts could then focus on alternative priorities; ones where the

academic needs of low-performing students could be attended to and become high

performing students (Lindy, 2011).

Since A Nation at Risk was released in 1983 (United States Commission on

Excellence in Education, 1983), teachers were not looked upon as valid professionals.
 60

The report indicated a national concern regarding the successful teaching of math and

science in the U.S. in the wake of Sputnik. Mickel (2015) researched teacher

accountability through teacher autonomy, self-efficacy, motivation, and perceptions of

state-mandated testing in the context of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Through the

analysis of educational laws and regulations posed in part and lobbied for by the teachers’

union that, in the five years following the release of A Nation at Risk, more educational

laws and regulations had been passed than in the previous 20 years (Mickel, 2015). The

teachers’ union has contributed millions of dollars to political lobbying efforts affecting

educational pedagogy, practice, and professionalism (Center for Responsive Politics,

2017).

Lot and Kenny (2013) considered the impact a district’s union strength had on

student achievement. Looking at national test scores and using comparative data, the

authors hypothesized students in larger districts and where districts had negotiated a

contract more amenable to teachers over students had lower test scores. The authors

contended areas with strong teachers’ unions had lower proficiency rates than did

students residing in states with weak statewide teachers’ unions. Lot and Kenny (2013)

contended that because teachers’ unions contributed a great deal of money to candidates

for state and federal offices, this gave unions some influence in passing bills that guide

the state’s teachers. According to information shared at The Center for Responsive

Politics (2017), the NEA donated over $20 million dollars to state and federal election

offices. Likewise, the same group contends the AFT donated $11.8 million dollars to

state and federal election offices. These totals represent the 2012 election cycle on all

governmental levels (Center for Responsive Politics, 2017). This is important to note in
 61

that political lobbying and positioning within the political parties directly affects public

education.

Nicholson-Crotty, et al. (2012) conducted another study considering government

impact and collective bargaining on organizational performance. Using a sample of

public schools across the country, the authors postulated an associational between strong

teachers’ unions and lower student performance. The authors noted that school boards

and superintendents could moderate this relationship. In other words, while unions have

influence, the local entities have a greater say in what happens in local schools.

This theme was studied in various formats between 2011 and 2013. Overall, the

data supported the theme that unions lobby for various educational strategies. Some of

the evidence also commented on the influence on student achievement of lobbying. This

information was relevant for the purposes of this proposed research for three reasons:

1. Teacher perceptions were not used as part of the methodology.

2. It was postulated there was an influence from the teachers’ union on student
achievement.

3. The research was conducted at the national level, not the state level with the
exception of Lindy (2011).

Union supports educational strategies and approaches. In a statewide study

focusing on Massachusetts, Lang (2015) studied the likely differences between traditional

and reform contracts in collective bargaining. The author indicated an interest in how

collective bargaining has changed in recent years to include school reform proposals to

improve student achievement such as bargaining for student achievement or performance

incentives for teachers. The study concluded that bargaining contracts indicated increased

teacher collaboration, teacher quality, and professional development were essential to

school improvement plans.

 62

In an essay written by Malott (2015), the discussion of union impact on learning

and teaching began with relating the union to Marxist and communist leanings toward

capitalism. The author contended that without the teachers’ union investing in its

members, capitalism would suffer because money was not flowing through the economy,

as it should be, which would affect how students were learning, and ultimately, future

jobs would be uncertain. Malott (2015) believed the teachers’ union strength and activity

could bring principles of Marxism and socialism to schools, which would strengthen

schools and students. Although this was written as an essay, the author’s thoughts were

important to this proposed study. That author’s link uses historical references as well as

recent references such as Friedrichs v. The State of California, and the Seattle Education

Association’s strike to discuss the necessity of teachers’ unions positively affect not only

students and schools, but also the economy as a whole.

In DiSalvo’s (2105) book, Government against Itself: Public Union Power and Its

Consequences, the author reviewed empirical research standardized assessments that led

to a discussion with teachers and educational professionals about the union’s effect on

student achievement. After a complete synopsis of Governor Scott Walker’s approach

and reasons for Act 10/the Budget Repair Act, DiSalvo (2015) contended there was no

scholarly correlation of unionization and productivity in the public sector. Although the

focus of the book was unions in general, public school teachers’ unions were included in

the final discussion.

Garden (2012) considered the indirect effects of union contracts and unionism on

teachers’ first amendment rights. The author postulated that as teachers lose their union

rights, their first amendment rights would also lessen in their professional setting. Garden
 63

(2012) questioned if teachers would feel confident to teach controversial material, or if

their loss of rights would silence them to teach material put upon them by the district.

The author also queried if unions protect teachers from curricular accusations, such as

teaching controversial material or deviating from the assigned curriculum, or if the

United States Constitution protects teachers. Garden (2012) postulated this supposed fear

or possible loss of first amendment rights could inhibit teachers from being effective in

their job and impacting student achievement and learning.

Kahlenberg (2012) argued that the assault on teachers’ unions was bipartisan, but

unfounded. The author wrote there was no strong evidence that teachers’ unions reduced

overall educational outcomes or that unions were the impetus behind educational

problems. Kahlenberg (2012) wrote that if unions were such a terrible practice for

education, there would be excellent educational outcomes in states without bargaining

such as the South or in charter schools.

Rubenstein and McCarthy (2014) investigated whether union-management

partnerships might influence how educators communicate and collaborate and how this

affects student achievement. Choosing a district in Los Angeles, the authors offered a

three-question survey to all educators in the district. The questions in the survey

addressed union-management communications, collaboration among staff, and openness

to input from all staff completing the survey. The authors also conducted a social-

network survey that addressed the type of communication shared with management

(collaboration or student achievement and how well that communication was received).

The surveys had a 69% completion rate (Rubenstein & McCarthy, 2014). Also

considered in the data was student achievement using the California Academic
 64

Performance Index (API) and various state and district assessments. The data showed that

schools that had the highest collaboration and communication between unions and

management had the highest student achievement gains (Rubenstein & McCarthy, 2014).

Unions collaborating and communicating with management had even greater gains

among those students from schools with high poverty rates and disadvantaged students

(Rubenstein & McCarthy, 2014). Overall, statistically significant results showed in

schools where there was greater quality of partnerships, no matter what the

demographics, ranging from a -18-point improvement score to a 58-point improvement

score (Rubenstein & McCarthy, 2014).

Meridian, CT was a struggling community where over 70% of its students were at

or below poverty level, qualifying them for free and reduced meals (Dubin, 2014). The

poverty level in Meridian is double that of the state average (Dubin, 2014). For these

reasons, the state teachers’ union and the district superintendent came together in 2008 to

form a partnership where students’ needs came first. Test scores showed the students in

grades K-8 well below the state average in math and reading (Dubin, 2014). Test scores

from 2013 showed students’ scores raised steadily in both reading and math. Math scores

increased from 70% to 75% scoring above proficiency, and reading scores increased from

61% to 74%. The partnership featured monthly meetings between the union president and

the district superintendent to discuss personnel issues. Their objective was to retain as

many teachers as possible. Once those issues were resolved, those involved in the

partnership could look at methods were the union would be able to support the district in

providing resources to focus on student achievement. These resources included a teacher

dashboard where teachers and administrators were able to see student test scores,
 65

absences, and instructional time. Other interventions included a tiered school day, one

level for grades K-1 and another for grades 2-3. Teachers were able to move according to

the schedule they needed, or they could choose to teach in both tiers for a stipend

attached to their salary. During the tiered days, older students received enrichment

instruction at the beginning of the day, and younger students receive enrichment

instruction at the end of their day. Enrichment includes programs such as woodworking,

foreign language, vocabulary, nature studies, and others. The union-district partnership

also included a shorter school day on Thursdays were grade levels and content area

teachers met to review and analyze test data to drive instruction. The union-district

partnership since 2008 shows greater student achievement through various interventions

for students in a high-risk district (Dubin, 2014).

Anrig (2015) writes about various districts across the country where collaboration

between the teachers’ union and administrators and/or teachers has led to increased

student achievement outcomes. Anrig (2015) stated, “Research consistently finds a high

degree of trust between administrators and teachers is an essential ingredient making

successful schools tick” (p. 3). The article focused mostly on urban schools where there

were high poverty rates and high student failure rates. According to Anrig (2015), the

University of Chicago’s Consortium on Chicago School Research gathered demographic

and test data from more than 400 schools and conducted surveys of stakeholders in those

schools from 1990 to 2005. The findings concluded the following five organizational

characteristics that determined student success when schools collaborated with the union.

These five characteristics were dependent on an “…unusually high degree of relational

trust among administrators, teachers, and parents” (p. 3).

 66

1. Curriculums and assessments coordinated across grade levels with meaningful

teacher involvement

2. Progressive and consistent professional improvement methods, including opening

classroom work for peer evaluation and external evaluation

3. Strong collaboration between parents, teachers, and administrators with integrated

supports for students

4. Student-centered learning and support systems

5. Leadership promoted engagement from parents, teachers, and the community for
shared responsibility in improving schools

Six empirical articles were found to support the theme that unions supported

educational strategies and approaches. While not all focused on the same strategies and

approaches, a sub-theme arose within the theme. This sub-theme focused on strong

partnerships between district and union leadership (Anrig, 2015; Dubin, 2014;

Rubenstein & McCarthy, 2014). This theme relates to the overarching question in this

proposed research in the following ways:

1. Teacher perceptions were not used as part of the methodology.

2. It postulated there was an influence from the teachers’ union on student

achievement.

3. The research was conducted at the national level, not the state level with the
exception of Dubin (2014) and Lang (2015).

Union lobbying indirectly affects students through teachers. A Google

Scholar search showed researcher Hoxby (1996) cited more than 13,000 times in various

works. The economist used graduation rates as an indicator of union strength. Through

analysis using regression models of school inputs and union involvement, the empirical

data showed no correlation between the two. However, inputs such as teacher salary,

higher student spending, and lower student-teacher ratios increased, student achievement
 67

decreased (Hoxby, 1996). The author found the results to be stronger where districts had

more bargaining power.

A rigorous study by Vachon and Ma (2015) concluded that studies focusing on union

impact on student achievement had wrongly combined the industrial model of unionism

with the professional union model. Using both the industrial and professional models of

unionism and examining the effects of the two variables, they found that when separating

out the provisions in each model, the industrial model did show a negative impact on

student achievement. However, only when combining the two models did the industrial

model show a negative effect on student achievement. When allotting for only the

professional model impact, the model showed a positive association with student

achievement. This finding was explained in that industrial unionism focuses on working

conditions within a school building such as done through bargaining. Professional

unionism considered the steps taken to focus on students, pedagogy, and the learning

environment. To strengthen the findings, the authors further broke down the union effect,

and found teachers’ unions were more beneficial to middle and high academically

achieving students. Vachon and Ma (2015) also found it was only through both models

that teachers were able to secure higher salaries, credentialing, and greater autonomy that

the authors found led to improved student achievement.

Freeman and Han (2012) discussed the merits of collective bargaining on

pedagogy. The authors maintained that collective bargaining wielded higher salaries in

states with higher density membership numbers than those states not engaging in

collective bargaining. The authors used the current population survey (CPS) to measure

states with compulsory union membership (23 states), states with compulsory union
 68

membership but also have right to work laws for public sector employees that prohibit

agency fees (11 states), and no laws on union membership (9 states). They also used the

school and staffing survey (SASS) as a means to measure the peripheral benefits

associated with union membership. The study used quantitative measures to gain a

greater understanding of union membership can affect the salary of its employees.

Employees that joined the union, either through legally mandated avenues or by choice,

tended to have higher salaries than those who did not. Added benefits included what

Freeman and Han (2012) call “fringe benefits” (p. 2). These benefits included better

working conditions defined as lower contract days, higher employee contribution to

retirement funds, and higher salaries. However, the authors were careful to note all of this

was more apparent in states were unionism was mandated, than states where union

membership was optional or not legally mandated.

Kahlenberg (2012) defended teachers’ unions as a method of implementing a

strong democratic approach to schools, learning, and teaching. The author explained

collective bargaining was a necessity for providing teachers with a quality wage,

acceptable working conditions, and a representative voice in issues that matter to them to

the do their job efficiently and effectively. Kahlenberg (2012) contended, “Collective

bargaining should be broadened…to give teachers a voice on a range of important

educational questions, from merit pay to curriculum” (p. 5).

Goldharber, Lavery, and Theobald (2014) reviewed bargaining contracts from

270 public school districts in Washington State. The authors wanted to know what cross-

district effects there were in teacher contract provisions. Goldharber et al. (2014) found

the provisions influenced centered around geography and what was educationally
 69

necessary in any specific location such as rural, suburban, or urban. The authors found

provisions, such as workloads, evaluations, strike or lockouts, seniority, release time of

union members, grievances, lay-offs, and new employee references within bargaining

contracts. They found that evaluations were related indirectly to student needs or

achievement.

Nixon, Packard, and Dam (2016) looked at principals’ primary reasons for

recommendation of non-contract renewals for probationary teachers in the Southeast and

Midwestern parts of the country. While principals were more willing to renew

probationary contracts with teachers who exhibited high instructional skills over subject

content knowledge, the principals also negated contracts based on ethical violation or

inappropriate conduct. Relevant to this study because of location, Midwestern principals

also indicated barriers, such as the teachers’ union, high costs to litigating legal actions,

laws protecting teachers, CBAs and the desire to avoid conflict and confrontation, as

reason to avoid renewing probationary teachers’ contracts.

Further study in the Midwest by Lovenheim (2009) also found Iowa, Indiana, and

Minnesota teacher contracts had indirect impacts. The author used an estimation of union

election certifications and student educational attainment. Lovenheim (2009) describes

his methodology as, “…estimate difference-in-difference with nonparametric leads and

lags for union age that allow me to analyze the time pattern of the union impact on

district resources” (p. 526). He determined there was no impact on teacher pay or district

student expenditures, but teacher employment increased by five percent. The author

concluded that enrollment tended to rise in union districts, but class size was not affected

and the increase in teaching force negates any change in class size. Despite this, the
 70

author also established that schools with union contracts did not have a net effect on high

school dropout rates. It is important to note this contradicts Hoxby’s 1996 study that

showed stronger union districts have higher dropout rates.

Cowen and Strunk (2015) reviewed three decades of research on the teachers’

union influence on shaping educational policy. With the teachers’ union influencing

political elections as well as school board elections (Cowen & Strunk, 2015; Eberts &

Stone, 1987), the politicians elected will influence policy (Cowen & Strunk, 2015). The

review of research collectively showed that policy does influence student achievement

through indirect avenues (Cowen & Strunk, 2015). The authors discuss factors such as

collective bargaining contracts that included district and building provisions such as class

size, teacher tenure, teacher evaluation systems, discipline, salary expenditures, and

teacher aide supports. The majority of research indicates unionized districts have higher

student outcomes with the exception of students who struggle, where the research shows

they have worse outcomes (Cowen & Strunk, 2015). However, the authors highlight a

caveat on the review of the research by citing “two studies with rigorous methodologies”

(p. 7), specifically research done by Hoxby (1996) and Lovenheim (2009). Cowen and

Strunk (2015) reiterate the findings in that Hoxby (1996) and found higher dropout rates

in districts with strong unions but Lovenheim (2009) contradicts those findings in a

replica of Hoxby’s (1996) study.

Using an online survey with 561 teachers in Oklahoma and six one-on-one

interviews, Mickel (2015) hypothesized a correlation of teacher autonomy and state

mandated testing. The research design combined an online survey and one-on-one

interviews, which included over 500 teachers from Oklahoma. This research included
 71

discussion surrounding the relationship between teachers who administer standardized

assessments and their confidence in their teaching. Positive correlations were found in

teacher autonomy, motivation, self-efficacy and perceptions of state-mandated testing.

Lang (2015) analyzed 39 collective bargaining contracts in Massachusetts to

determine if unions treated student achievement as part of their scope. In review of the

contracts in districts across the state, the author found only one contract to have any

renegotiations relating to student achievement. The author concluded that union contracts

focused on teachers under the pretense of students and their academic achievement.

Unions tend to lobby for and spend money on those pedagogical processes that

impact teachers, classrooms, students, and schools (Milkman, 1997). As with the

previous themes, this theme relates to the overarching question in this proposed research

in the following ways:

1. Teacher perceptions were not used as part of the methodology.

2. It was postulated there was an influence from the teachers’ union on student
achievement.

3. The research was conducted at the national level, not the state level with the
exception of Goldharber, Lavery, and Theobald (2014) who studied Washington
State.

Methodology. Based on the literature review presented in this chapter, the role

the teachers’ union plays in the achievement of public-school students from the

perceptions of public school teachers has had insufficient support in the literature. There

was also a lack of state-focused research. An investigation of this phenomenon

contributed to identifying the perceptions teachers have on the role the union plays in

student achievement in Wisconsin public schools.

 72

This study relied on a qualitative case study approach that used semi-structured

interviews to offer a first-person look at the people involved in the phenomenon, a

questionnaire, and archival data to preclude triangulation and a quality case study. This

designed conglomerated a variety of research methodology that allowed participants to

offer explanations into the lived experiences told from their personal experiences and

with their personal feelings, perspectives, and opinions regarding the phenomena

(Babbie, 2013; Giorgi, 2009; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015; Yin, 2016). The

phenomenological process allows researchers to derive real meaning from those

experiences. A breakdown of each part of the methodology occurred in Chapter 3 of this

research.

This study will use a sample size of at least 15 teachers that achieves full and rich

data fully to explain the phenomenon. Teachers will be recruited via social media. Those

who met the inclusion criteria were invited to participate, with the understanding they

could withdraw at any time, for any reason, without any penalty.

Those 15 participants were asked to involve themselves in an in-depth, in-person

interview with the researcher to discuss their ideas, perceptions, and opinions about the

overarching question: What were the perceptions of Wisconsin’s public school teachers

on the possible influence of the teachers’ union on public school student achievement?

Upon agreement, each person was given a written explanation for the reason and process

of the study. Each participant was reminded he/she could withdraw from the study at any

time for any reason without concern of retribution (see Appendix B). Withdrawal from

the study, should the participant make that choice, was simple. The participant only

needed to inform the researcher in a manner comfortable to the participant.

 73

Communication could have been done in writing, or verbally. Upon receipt of knowledge

of withdrawal, the researcher would have confirmed the decision to withdraw with the

participant in writing through email. This was to ensure a written line of communication

should any questions arisen in the future. However, no participants withdrew. With

agreement of participation and approval from IRB, interviews were set up and conducted

at the convenience of both the participant and interviewer. During the interview, a

transcript of the interview was taken. The transcript was then sent to the participant for

careful review and approval. These steps were taken to ensure the utmost accuracy when

introducing themes and ideas growing from the various discussions as they pertained to

the phenomenon. As well, any inconsistencies, misconceptions, unclear statements, or

ideas were further investigated when the data was reviewed by each participant for. All

information was uploaded to the online data analysis software, MaxQDA. From there,

themes were found through further analysis and coding. At this point, further follow up

with each participant occurred to assure accurate thoughts, ideas, and opinions through

the use of transcripts from each conversation. After this was concluded, data were

translated into overarching themes and relayed in Chapter 5, which presents the

discussion portion of the study.

There were participants who wanted to engage in the study but were not

comfortable with an interview. These respondents were given a questionnaire to

complete. The questionnaire included different questions than the interview participants

were asked. Those who completed the questionnaire had ample room in a text box to

share completely their thoughts as they wished on each question.

 74

Archival data were also included the study as part of triangulation. Yin (2016)

explains archival data as an invaluable source of primary evidence for a qualitative study.

It can provide important contextual information to support what was found in the

fieldwork. The documents used in archival data were not only important because of what

could be directly learned but could also be used as a type of stimulus of inquiry during an

interview process (Patton, 2015).

Limitations in this study could result from the limited sample size. Another

perceived limitation could be the one-to-one interviews. Data collected in this manner

could be seen as biased, but the researcher overcame this possible limitation by providing

a transcript to each interview participant for their review and approval. A third limitation

could be the personal attitudes brought to the study by the researcher as the researcher

was a previous public-school teacher in Wisconsin who had mandated participation with

the teacher’s union. Being that the researcher was a teacher in Wisconsin, any potential

participants who might have known the researcher on a personal level, were dismissed

from participation to avoid perceived bias.

Instrumentation. The proposed study used one-one-one interviews to analyze the

perceptions of public-school teachers on the impact or effect the teachers’ union has had

student achievement. Following the work of Patton (2015) and Yin (2016), interviews

can lead to insightful discoveries about a phenomenon. In these cases, the data were

gathered through interviews in the form of unstructured conversation, dialogues, and

stories. Helfferich (2009) wrote that a successful instrument (researcher) will have three

qualities enabling the participant to offer the information the researcher is attempting to

find.
 75

• Technical competence. With this skill, the researcher will need to find
participants, make arrangements for an interview, prepare consent forms which
will clearly explain participation and confidentiality, and have the ability to make
participants feel comfortable.

• Interactive competence. The most difficult quality as interviewing is not simply

talking with another person as in a regular conversation. An interview needs to be
guided, yet the interviewer must remain as quiet as possible during the
participant’s story in an effort to encourage sharing and non-judgement. Non-
verbal cues must be maintained, as well as empathy in an effort to keep the
dialogue moving forward. This will take practice as it deviates from normal
person-to-person interaction, but a focused interview can be successful in
capturing the full experience as explained by the participant.

• Knowledge about communication theory. This skill allows the interviewer either
to maintain the level of conversation needed in a qualitative research project or to
get the conversation balanced and focused.

The two research questions in the proposed study include:

RQ1: How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student

achievement?

RQ2: What, if any, types of union influence in the classroom do teachers perceive?

To address these two questions, they were converted to topics raised during the

interview process and into questions asked during the interview conversation and for the

open-ended questionnaire (Appendix E). The topics within the research questions

included teacher perceptions, the teachers’ union, pedagogy, accountability, and the role

of the teachers’ union in the classroom. From there, the topics were organized into blocks

of questions. Boeije (2013) wrote this linear approach should not be imposed on the

participant. In the spirit of true qualitative measurement, the questions should flow

naturally as in a daily conversation. Helfferich (2009) explained that this skill comes with

practice and can be seen in the notes taken during the conversation. The author

contended, as notes were reviewed and data were analyzed, the researcher will see

patterns, strengths, weaknesses, and missing pieces which all can be adjusted as the
 76

interviews continue, were reviewed, and were clarified as the process continues.

Throughout the process, the instrumentation includes the conversation through the

interview, the record of the participant’s non-verbal language, a description of the setting,

and a complete transcript of the full conversation (Yin, 2016). Yin (2016) explained

qualitative interview instrumentation as the “real world encounter [which] dominates

fieldwork” (p. 130).

A second source of instrumentation was a questionnaire (Appendix E). A

questionnaire can draw responses from a large number of respondents (Stake, 2010),

which allows a researcher to gather data from a large population and further the validity

of the study. Questionnaires follow the sampling procedures and instruments in a typical

survey, as well as a means to an end with providing more evidence for the phenomenon

(Yin, 2016). The purpose was to triangulate the data by supporting the information

gathered through interviews (Yin, 2016).

A last source of instrumentation within triangulation was archival data. In an

effort to validate data across two or more resources, a thorough review of archival data

was considered as it relates to the research questions:

RQ1: How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student

achievement?

RQ2: What, if any, types of union influence in the classroom do teachers perceive?

Archival data are data that already exists in some format such as documents (paper or

electronic), photos, audio or video recordings, or a form of coded language (Patton,

2015). While it is generally kept for legal purposes, it can be generated for reporting or

research purposes and is accessible to the public. The benefit of it was that the data tends
 77

to reflect completed activities, therefore not bound to change. The archival data will be

collected from various research organizations, schools or education departments specific

to Wisconsin, academic industry, or possibly businesses. Organizations that were

considered:

• Wisconsin Department of Public Education

• Rules and Laws: Department of Public Instruction

• Laws and Regulations: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction

• Wisconsin Educational Laws (LawFind)

• Wisconsin State Law Library

• Committee on Education – Wisconsin Legislative Documents

• WEAC Legislative Updates

The collected data were carefully reviewed as to develop a strong awareness of the

issues, the demographics of the population being studied, and knowledge about the

teachers’ union and student achievement.

Summary

It is imperative to recognize the research concerning teachers’ union impact on

student achievement is lacking and contains many variables surrounding the possible

relationship of teachers’ unions and student achievement, with the majority of the

variables being found through quantitative approaches and almost none that include the

perceptions of teachers. The current research uses drop-out rates (Hoxby, 1996), SAT

scores (Antonucci, 2015), membership rates within the teacher’s union (Eberts & Stone,

1987), and other school cultures (Carini, 2008a, 2008b). As well, the current research

contends legislation has played a significant role in how schools operate, therefore

affected how well students learn or do not learn. Research summarizes that unions drive
 78

schools to standardize education for all children, regardless of their ability (Eberts, 2007;

Eberts & Stone, 1987; Hoxby, 1996).

Research also indicated a need for a qualitative case study that gave teachers a

voice within the organization (Baron, 2018; Choi & Chung, 2016). Studies showed the

possible influence on student achievement using various quantitative approaches but, to

date, there were none that were qualitative. This lack of evidence supports the need for a

study such as this one that gives teachers a platform and voice within the organization.

In this research, all ethical considerations were implemented according to IRB

recommendations and regulations. All required disclosures and permissions were

obtained according to all rules and regulations to protect those involved. When working

with the entities holding the information and data needed to complete this study,

professionalism, and unbiased discussion took precedence to ensure a quality study.

Chapter 3 detailed the methodology used within the study. The problem statement

dictated the research questions that led to the research methodology. The research design

encompasses the population and sample selection. Sources of data were provided as well

as an account of the trustworthiness of the study. Data collection, management, and

procedures were outlined along with ethical considerations, limitations and delimitations

of the study.
 79

Chapter 3: Methodology

Introduction

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore public school teachers’

perception of the influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement. The role of the

public-school teacher union in Wisconsin has been at the forefront of discussions since its

legislative inception in 1971 (WEAC, 2019). Wisconsin was chosen because it has been

in the national focus of teachers’ union since the state governor signed Act 10 into law in

2011 (Wisconsin State Legislature, 2016). The introduction of this legislation raised

many questions about the role of the teacher unions in the state.

The prevalent issue within state news, discussion, protests, and hearings was the

impact on public employees and the changes to collective bargaining and union

membership. Many public employees across the state collectively organized to protest the

suggested changes. Throughout all the protests, the unions, specifically the teachers’

union was worried about union collapse in the state (Stein & Marley, 2013). Many

teachers, public workers, families, politicians, policy makers, community organizers, and

others were concerned that the face of education would change for the worse should Act

10 succeed at the legislative level (Condon, 2011). However, the discourse was based on

postulations and suppositions. While discussion ensued during 2010 when Act 10 was the

prevalent news story, there was no empirical research documenting and analyzing the

actual perceptions of teachers. The goal of this proposed study attempted to offer insight

into the perceptions that teachers may have on the possible effects of the teachers’ union

on student achievement.
 80

Proponents claimed the union legislates carefully for the betterment of public

schools through teachers (WEAC, nd). Supporting their collective bargaining rights such

as salary/benefits, working conditions, hours worked, class size, physical school

environment, support staff, and legal protection provides a better education to the

children those teachers serve. Union bargaining may offer an increase in student

achievement through school climate and culture (Carini, 2008a). Wages were suggested

as a means of indirectly affecting student achievement (Cowen, 2009). Unions may also

allow smaller class sizes, more planning time, and less time in instruction, but none of

that affected student achievement in a positive manner (Eberts & Stone, 1987). The

methodology in this study addressed these issues and report on the perceptions of

teachers.

Those against the teachers’ union suggested collective bargaining did not include

all teachers in negotiations for a wage and salary amenable to the individual, thereby

standardizing the field (Eberts & Stone, 1987). The authors also claimed working

conditions and environment would not increase the effectiveness of the teacher; instead,

it was suggested that the quality of the teacher was what made the most impact (Mickel,

2015). Some educators also believed the more autonomy a public-school teacher had, the

more success their students will have because the teachers were free to meet their

individual needs rather than standardizing lessons, environment, and professionalism

(Kerchner, 2004). The union was successful only under the guise of students, where, in

fact, unions focused on teachers while hiding behind students (Lang, 2015).

However, with evidence supporting both sides of the phenomenon, it was hard for

stakeholders to know which perspective to embrace fully as evidenced by how the

 81

research lacks in the way unions might shape schools and professional environments

(Carini, 2008b). Interestingly, the majority of research on this issue was quantitative in

nature. Researchers have looked at outputs (Hoxby, 1996) and school cultures (Carini,

2008a), but as of this writing, only one study was found which considered the actual

thoughts and ideas of the teachers who were working in the classrooms every day, or who

had been in the classroom but were now retired (Baron, 2018). Only the Baron (2018)

study focused on Wisconsin, the setting of the argument against teacher unions in 2009-

current, which asked teachers what they thought about the union. In 2010, teachers let

their opinions be publicly known concerning union membership when the then-governor

passed legislation. However, no teachers have had the opportunity to voice their ideas,

concerns, questions, or thoughts in a scholarly study about the role the union has possibly

played for the children of public schools in Wisconsin.

Based on the literature, the insufficient amount of support in scientific literature

accentuates the gap the role the teachers’ union plays in the success of public-school

student achievement in Wisconsin. Therefore, research on this phenomenon was

necessary to identify the role that it plays, as described by teachers. This chapter outlines

the specific problem and research question in this study. As well, the methodology,

research design, and sample population used in the study was fully explained. This

chapter will also discuss how the data was analyzed once it was collected and reviewed.

A review of the ethical considerations to be applied to all participants was included as

well as the limitations related to the research. Finally, a summary was presented to

identify key points within the chapter. This continuum ends with a lead to Chapter 4,

which explains the data analysis and results portion of the research.
 82

Statement of the Problem

It was not known how public-school teachers perceive the possible influence of

the teachers’ union on student achievement. National studies were conducted to

understand if the role of teachers’ unions has any influence on student achievement

(Carini, 2002, 2008a, 2008b; Hoxby, 1996; Milkman, 1997). Carini (2008a) analyzed that

most of these studies had contradictory results and attributed this resulting controversy to

a lack of consistency in the research and suggested looking at the social organization of

schools through the lens of collective bargaining. Studies have looked at graduation and

dropout rates (Hoxby, 1996), bargaining (Carini, 2008a, 2008b; Kerchner, et al., 1998),

district characteristics (Cowen, 2009), level of support of the union (Griffith, 2009;

Kahlenberg, 2012) and the legislative role unions played in student achievement (Lot &

Kenny, 2013).

As of 2020, minimal studies have examined unions at a regional or state level.

Winkler, et al., 2012 offered a state-by-state review of politics and unions. In

Massachusetts, Lang (2015) studied 39 school districts and found one district had a

specific line in contract negotiations about student achievement; the other districts

focused on teacher reform contracts. Lindy (2011) studied New Mexico and found unions

offered a stable learning environment for average students, but students who were at risk

faced lower support and achievement. Choi and Chung (2016) added to the literature by

studying New York State bargaining contracts grievance procedures and how the process

affected teacher turnover. Only one study focused on Wisconsin as this study focused.

Baron (2018) used standardized test results to determine if teacher turnover immediately

following Act 10 affected student achievement.

 83

With most research beginning in the early 1980’s and continuing, there were not

many studies done in the last five years. This lack of recent research constitutes a gap in

the literature. Most of the literature within that period utilizes a quantitative methodology.

There was only one with a qualitative methodology (Nixon et al., 2016).

The previously mentioned studies used a quantitative approach to study unions in

public schools. Carini (2008b) suggested a qualitative approach where teachers and

others with a stake in public school student success were heard through their stories and

experiences. More recently, Baron (2018) suggested “additional research to understand

these policies [Act 10]” (p. 56). Choi and Chung (2016) suggested a qualitative approach

for teachers to voice concerns over policies within an organization. The authors

suggested when there was a perception of voice and being heard, there was more success

within the organization. Consequently, this study offered a place for teachers, both union

and non-union members, current or retired, to share their concerns, opinions, ideas, and

questions about the possible role Wisconsin’s teacher union has in student achievement.

This differs from quantitative analysis, as the perspective was that of perception, not of

numbers and statistical evidence. This added to the research of Baron (2018) Choi and

Chung (2016) by using a qualitative methodology to explore how the policies of the

teachers’ union may or may not influence student achievement through teachers’ voices.

Research Questions

The proposed qualitative case study will be guided by this overarching question:

What were the perceptions of public-school teachers’ perceptions of the possible

influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement? In light of the research

completed surrounding the concepts, theories, and literature relating to teacher unions
 84

and student achievement, it was agreed that there were too many variables in the data

surrounding union impact, and there was no consensus on its effect. Carini (2002, 2008a)

took a social organization perspective, Hoxby (1996) discussed graduation rates,

Milkman (1997) considered minority student achievement, and Lovenheim (2009)

examined union certification impacts. All of these unrelated variables left the field

without the teacher’s perspective and voice.

Conversely, some research also conveys a relationship between unions and

student achievement. Nationally, various researchers found unions bound teachers

together, and collectivism empowered them to make changes they found necessary for

their students (Yusim, 2008). This occurs through politics as the NEA and AFT spend an

average of 96% of members’ dues on legislation with one political party over another

(Coulsen, 2010). This also means there appears to be more support for the teachers over

the students (Winkler et al., 2012) with the idea that teachers collectively have the power

to enhance the profession of teaching and can develop better school plans that will have a

positive, yet indirect, effect on students (Weingarten, 2011).

The previous research’s focus was on a national level, which benefits this

discussion at that level; limited research was at a state or regional level. Winkler et al.

(2012) wrote a state-by-state comparison of politics and unions, which was a limited

example of quantitative analysis done at a state level. As well, Lang (2015) reviewed

teacher unions in Massachusetts, and Lindy (2011) looked at collective bargaining laws

in New Mexico. Finally, Borland and Howsen (1992) studied attendance rates in

Kentucky as a factor in student achievement. An important note was that all the studies

listed were quantitative in nature except the phenomenological report that considered
 85

principals’ views on non-renewal of probationary teacher contracts through the scope of

union intervention (Nixon et al., 2016). The need for further qualitative research was

apparent through the limited findings in a qualitative case study approach in methodology

thus far.

For the purposes within this study, personal perceptions would be best retrieved

through individual interviewing. In an effort to collect data from participants directly

involved in the phenomena, these approaches will best achieve the purpose of the study.

Triangulation of data will occur through individual interviews, consisting of open-ended

questions and questionnaires will be offered to public school teachers, both current and

retired. While the themes of the interviews and questionnaire will be the same, the

questions will be different. As of 2018, the author of this study was not aware of any

extant studies which have given voice to teachers who were directly involved in the

process of student achievement on a daily basis. Interviewing this group of people will

give unique insight to the phenomena. A third method that will be used to provide a case

study includes the use of archival data. Archival data can be another source of primary

evidence in a qualitative study that can provide important contextual information (Yin,

2016). Yin (2016) explains reviewing documents and knowing their content can lead to a

deeper understanding of the information shared and can assist in keeping the flow of

conversation moving along smoothly. Yin (2016) and Patton (2015) both explain that

archival data (i.e. documents, references, quotations, or other public record) must be used

carefully so there is no breach of confidentiality. The use of archival data can prove

valuable as it not only provides a direct learning path, but also can be a stimulus of

inquiry through interviewing and other means such as observation (Patton, 2015).
 86

Triangulation through interviews, questionnaires, and archival data will address the over-

arching question and subsequent research questions.

Research Methodology

This research will apply a qualitative methodology with a focus on inductive

analysis as a means of understanding the phenomena from the perspective of the

participants. Patton (2015) further explained qualitative research helps tell a story rich in

detail and information and fully explains the experiences and ideas of the participants in

the study in their natural settings. Qualitative research must include careful data

collection and analysis of the data (Patton, 2015).

While using qualitative exploration, the researcher was interested in

understanding the phenomena under study instead of predicting and controlling the query

(Boeije, 2013). The research here seeks to consider the perceptions teachers have on the

teacher unions on public school student achievement, either directly or indirectly. To do

this, the research consisted of in-depth interviews and questionnaires with public school

teachers who were either currently teaching or retired, and a complete review of archival

data. The goals of the interview were to acquire and communicate someone else’s

experience and to tell a detailed story from another’s point of view and personal

experiences (Patton, 2015). Teachers received questionnaires (Appendix D) with

questions different from those given during the interview, addressing the research

question through themes found in a review of the current literature and discussed earlier

in Chapters 1 and 2. Using archival data supports the individual interviews (Patton,

2015). Therefore, a qualitative case study seems the best fit for this kind of proposed

research. These stories, ideas, thoughts, behaviors, and comments can convey a real
 87

experience (Patton, 2015). This provided a sufficient context to be interpretable enough

to add to the current literature.

Research Design

When choosing a design study, a researcher was required to look at the various

qualitative designs. In this study, a qualitative approach was used. The purpose of the

study was to understand the real experiences of the participants through open-ended

interviews and a questionnaire where categorization was used to develop similarities and

differences. As well, archival data were utilized to assess the six themes from literature

that were discussed in Chapters 1 and 2:

• school culture and climate

• leadership

• lobbying

• accountability

• best practices

• bargaining

These narratives were categorized to develop the overall themes of experiences as

they related to the research question: What were the perceptions of public-school teachers

on the possible influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement?

Within qualitative research design, a case study methodology exists (Starman,

2013). This qualitative research took a case study approach to understand better a

perception. Perception is how one looks at or thinks about “something.” A more scholarly

word for something is phenomena. The phenomena within this study were the perceptions

of Wisconsin’s public-school teachers on the possible influences of the teachers’ union

on public school student achievement. Individual interviews, questionnaires, and archival

 88

data were used to further understand the thoughts, feelings, ideas, and perceptions of this

target population. Philosophically, these perceptions and meanings “awaken our

conscious awareness” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 9) through how the participant

experiences the phenomena.

This qualitative case study focused on the perceptions that teachers have about the

possible influence the teachers’ union has on student achievement. Johnson and

Christiansen (2012) described this kind of qualitative research method as one where the

researcher provides a detailed account of one or more cases. A case study focuses on one

case as a whole unit as it exists in a real-life context. For this reason, a case study

approach is holistic (Giorgi, 2009). In this study, the perceptions of teachers from public

school teachers, retired or currently teaching, will be examined, categorized, and

analyzed. This provided rich data to cross-case compare while searching for similarities

and differences. Giorgi (2009) explains the process in four steps when working with a

qualitative approach:

1. The researcher reads the entire description to understand a generalized view of the
experience.

2. Once the researcher understands the full experience of the participant, the
researcher must read the description one more time to grasp general “meaning
units” (p. 10) that focuses on the phenomenon.

3. When the general meaning units are delineated, the researcher focuses on the
phenomenon again with meaning units specific to the research question.

4. Finally, the researcher conglomerates the meaning units into one consistent
statement regarding the participant’s experience.

This approach was important. This qualitative case study used experiences instead

of numbers on a group of people with similar experiences to address the perceptions of

teachers on the possible effects of the teachers’ union on student achievement. The basis
 89

for this proposed study was to understand further how a certain group of people perceives

a certain situation that looks further into the ideas, thoughts, and experiences of those

people.

In summary, the proposed qualitative case study included current classroom

teachers, past public-school teachers who were currently retired. Chapter 3 contains

further participant inclusion criteria. To provide data saturation, open-ended individual

interviews, questionnaire, archival data will be used to categorize, examine, and analyze

comparisons and differences. These approaches were discussed in detail later in Chapter

3. These processes provided a look into how the participants experienced the phenomena

from their own perspectives.

Population and Sample Selection

The general population for this study consisted of teachers. The study focused on

the perceptions this population had on the possible influence of the teachers’ union

regarding student achievement. From this larger general population, smaller groups of

teachers who live and work in the field in Wisconsin were interviewed using open-ended

questions. A larger group from the same sample was offered a questionnaire containing

questions different from the interview questions to saturate the data with information

related to the research questions.

Patton (2015) alludes to no specific number of data for saturation. Qualitative

inquiry allows for depth and careful attention to detail, as opposed to quantitative

methods that incur predetermined responses (Patton, 2015). While personal experiences

may never be fully understood, qualitative methods can provide much detailed data about

a small group of people through a broad range of experiences thereby increasing the
 90

reliability of the research more than the personal selection of participants in the research

(Patton, 2015).

Credibility in qualitative research is not based on numbers, as a quantitative study

would report. Yin (2016) supports this and stated the sample size is only intended to

represent the larger population and be sufficiently large enough to achieve an acceptable

confidence level within that representation. The samples used were not representative of

one view of the phenomenon being studied. Instead, there was a deliberate attempt to

include participants who may hold different views that will expand the possibility of

various themes and insight into the phenomenon (Yin, 2016).

The sample came from teachers who were currently teaching in Wisconsin public

schools or who were retired teachers from Wisconsin’s public schools. Participants were

recruited using social media. Social media has become a popular research tool for the

social sciences, and it constitutes a large pool of candidates from which to survey

(Kosinski, Matz, Gosling, Popov, & Stillwell, 2015). While the majority of users were

younger and more educated than non-users, the same authors also concluded that 35% of

users were over the age of 65 and that number was increasing.

Recruitment came from sharing the invitation on the researcher’s personal social

media pages, including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn. Potential

participants were encouraged to share the invitation on their personal social media

accounts. To ensure there was no bias, any potential participants indicating a personal

relationship with the researcher were denied participation. To assure further lack of bias,

the researcher requested participation and recruitment on various social media pages

including, but not limited to, the NEA, WEAC, Conservative Teachers of America,
 91

Teachers4Transparency, and Teachers for School Choice. Permission was obtained from

the site administrators of Conservative Teachers of America and Dissertation Guru as

these pages were private and permission was needed to recruit participants. Site

permissions are listed in Appendix A. No other site permission was needed as NEA,

WEAC, Teachers4Transparency, and Teachers for School Choice were not closed or

private. The invitation was an initial first step in finding viable participants by screening

interested parties to assure compliance with recruitment expectations. Subsequent steps

were not needed as all participants were gathered through this method.

Upon obtaining IRB permission, all rules and regulations were followed. Once

participants were recruited, following IRB protocols, emails were sent out to all teachers

through their preferred method of contact explaining the study, the process, participants’

rights, and requesting participation in the study. Those teachers who indicated an interest

in participating had further contact to determine best times to interview via telephone, as

well as determining a time preference for an individual interview. Interviews were held

via telephone and were not recorded. Sometimes, if a participant does not want to be

recorded, notes can be taken during the interview (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The

questionnaire was provided in an online format via Qualtrics, so the participants were

able to complete it at their convenience before the given deadline. The questionnaire

contained questions different from those in the interviews to provide saturation of data

and a full understanding of the phenomenon but within the same themes. Archival data

were reviewed separate from the interviews and questionnaire but thoroughly to ensure

complete knowledge of the contextual information.

 92

To qualify as a participant for the study, the person had to be a certified teacher or

retired from a public school in Wisconsin. The participants were also required to be

willing to disclose membership in the teachers’ union, non-membership, or membership

in another professional organization related to education. This requirement allowed the

researcher to consider the similarities and differences between teachers owning

membership in a teachers’ union, those who were involved in a professional organization,

and those who were involved in neither.

At least 15 participants were included in the study in both the interview and the

questionnaire, for at least 30 participants. The study included a total of 27 participants

who completed the questionnaire and 15 participants who participated in the interview. A

field of 15 in each area provided data saturation, or enough response to elicit repetitive

responses (Patton, 2015; Yin, 2016). From those responses, codes were categorized into

common themes during the data analysis stage, which was discussed in detail in Chapter

4.

Sources of Data

This study utilized methodological triangulation to best identify the phenomenon

being studied. Methodological triangulation contributes to a study that was rigorous,

dependable, transferable, and credible (Baxter & Jack, 2008). Triangulation included

interviews, an online questionnaire, and a review of archival data.

Interview. The first source of data in the study was an interview, utilizing open-

ended questions to interview the participants. The questions were designed to facilitate a

greater understanding of the perception of teachers’ impressions of how the teachers’

union may or may not influence student achievement. The questions were also designed
 93

to align with Cowen and Strunk’s (2015) recommendation for further research that uses

“highly focused questions that link educational outcomes to rules, regulations, and

conditions directly relatable to union efforts” (p. 221). A complete list of the questions

can be found in Appendix D. The interviews began with an easy and short conversation

to provide relaxation and comfort to the participants. Participants were also reminded of

the participation criteria and protocol, and that they could withdraw from the process at

any time with no penalty. The interviews were designed to elicit conversation and

guidance toward probing into the experiences, perspectives, and perceptions of the

participants. The interviews lasted between 22 and 85 minutes.

Customary and good research includes the practice of carefully reviewing the

interviews (Yin, 2016). During the interview process, the researcher listens carefully, and

without bias, as the participants offers their personal experiences (Merriam & Tisdell,

2016; Patton, 2015; Yin, 2016). In doing so, the researcher is able to engage the

participant through deeper questioning and gain “…a slice of the social world from the

informants’ perspective and the interviewer is merely facilitating the process” (Boeije,

2013, p. 63). Upon completion of the interviewing, transparency of the raw data is

important as it allows others to see what transpired as the data changed from raw data to

meaningful material that contributes to the study (Boeije, 2013). The author offered a

review to the participants in the form of a written transcription of the conversation. Since

the researcher has professional responsibility to have accurately reflected the ambiguous

aspects of the interview into meaningful impressions, observations, and meanings, the

participants were invited to review the transcripts at their discretion and provide feedback

to any changes or clarifications needed. This was done carefully as to not compromise the
 94

true essence of the message or the identity of the participant (Boeije, 2013). This

debriefing after the interview provided an opportunity for both the participant and

researcher to review the conversation and meanings within context (Guest et al., 2013).

The clarity offered an opportunity to validate further the transcripts. The transcripts in

this study were very important because while audio recording can provide a level of rigor

and convenience, some material may be just too sensitive and interviewees do not give

permission for recording (Guest et al., 2013). This is further discussed in Chapter 4.

Upon completion of the interviews and transcription of the interviews, the

transcripts were shared with the participants (Guest et al., 2013). Using respondent

validation and being adequately engaged in the data were two strategies used to “get as

close as possible” (p. 246) to the phenomenon (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Respondent

validation involves the participants reading the transcripts of their own interview and

commenting on the accuracy of the interpretation (Baxter & Jack, 2008). The participant

can accept this invitation, or decline, and will be given a timeframe in which to respond

to ensure proper time commitment. While some words may be used differently, the

essence of the experience should be clear and accurate (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

Questionnaire. A second source of data to complete the recommended use of

triangulation is questionnaires (Yin, 2016). The questions within the questionnaire were

developed from the six themes found within the literature and discussed in Chapter 2.

Baron (2018), Choi and Chung (2016), and Cowen and Strunk (2015) all suggest the use

of qualitative measures to understand further the complexities of the union impact on

student achievement. The sample of participants was suggested at fifteen to obtain

saturation (Yin, 2016). A questionnaire was offered to gain insight from teachers who, for
 95

various reasons could not participate in the interview portion of the research but still

wanted to contribute to the study findings. This option can only add to the depth and

breadth in understanding the phenomenon (Yin, 2016). Questionnaires can be directed to

a large number of participants at one time and offer very similar questions on a single

focus (Stake, 2010). The questionnaires were analyzed in the same manner as an in-

person interview. The questions asked in the questionnaire in this study can be found in

Appendix E.

Archival data. Archival data, in the form of documents, electronic formats,

photos, audio/video recordings, or coded language. This type of data can prove valuable

not only because of what can be directly learned, but also from what inquiry can be

stimulated (Patton, 2015). Archival data can be another source of primary evidence and

was used as a third source of data in this study. It can prove invaluable for qualitative

research that provides important contextual information from data gathered in the field

(Yin, 2016). However, it was necessary to review carefully documents and other sources

of archival data before reporting them (Yin, 2016) to ensure that no breach of

confidentiality exists and that the data did not become part of pubic record (Patton, 2015).

Sometimes archival data is referred to as “fixed data” as it is data based on completed

activities and is not subject to change (Patton, 2015). For the purposes of this research, it

was referred to as “archival data.” The archival data used aligned with the three main

themes found within the literature, which drove both the interview and questionnaire

questions:

• Unions drive schools to standardize education for all children, regardless of their
ability (Eberts, 2007; Eberts & Stone, 1987; Cowen & Strunk, 2015; Hoxby,
1996).
 96

• Unions lobby for various educational strategies and approaches that help or hinder
education (Coulsen, 2010; Cowen & Strunk, 2015; Lovenheim, 2009).

• Union lobbying results in greater benefits for teachers than students (Carini,
2008a, 2008b; Cowen & Strunk, 2015; Lindy, 2011; Nixon et al., 2016).

This type of data was generated for general research for reporting or research

purposes and kept for legal requirements (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In this research, it

was generated for both reporting and research, as described below.

Reporting. To answer the research question: What were the perceptions of

Wisconsin’s teachers on the possible influence of the teachers’ union student

achievement? data used in the literature review in Chapter 2 reported what types of

influences the teachers’ union has had on students, their achievements, and any other

relevant information. Using knowledge, the awareness of issues surrounding the research

question, and demographics of the population, archival data will further enhance

reporting the research as well as reference for future research (Guest, et al., 2013).

Research. Likewise, the data were used to support or counter the research gained

from the interviews and questionnaires. In Chapters 4 and 5, archival data were used to

further the findings and discussion. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) suggested several sources

of archival data:

• Research organizations

• Schools and education departments

• Academic and similar industry

• Business and industry

Methodological triangulation consisting of open-ended interview questions,

questionnaire, and archival data provided an ample amount of rich data for this

qualitative case study, as encouraged by Yin (2016), Patton (2015), and Stake (2010).
 97

Questionnaires and archival data were used as two forms of triangulation to provide

support of the phenomena. The interview source was also reviewed for accuracy by both

the researcher and the participant, transcribed, and reviewed again. Common themes were

categorized in an effort to answer the overarching research question: What were the

perceptions of Wisconsin’s teachers on the possible influence of the teachers’ union

student achievement

Trustworthiness

Qualitative research is based on assumptions about reality, the standards of rigor

in qualitative research differ from those of quantitative research (Merriam & Tisdell,

2016). This study utilized methodological triangulation to best identify the phenomenon

being studied. Methodological triangulation contributes credibility, transferability,

dependability, and rigor to a study (Baxter & Jack, 2008).

Credibility. Credibility deals with the question of how well research findings

were congruent with reality. However, reality cannot ever be matched as it is relative to

the person experiencing it (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In most cases, qualitative research

is holistic, multidimensional, and always changing as the perceptions of each participant

influence the outcome of the data. Stake (2010), Merriam and Tisdell (2016), and Yin

(2016) all concur; triangulation of data will increase credibility, transferability, and

dependability. In this research, triangulation occurred in the form of interviews,

questionnaires, and review of archival data. Triangulating data ensures the case study’s

findings supported by more than one source of evidence, lending itself to credibility (Yin,

2016).
 98

Interviews took place using a VoIPlatform such as Zoom, Skype, or Facetime.

These methods have become more popular in social science research as they afford

researchers more flexibility in reaching participants throughout the world. During the

interviews, participants had an opportunity to participate in respondent validation

(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This allowed participants an opportunity to check in with

what was being said and verifying meaning, clarity, and interpretations (Merriam &

Tisdell, 2016). Participants should be able to “see” their experience in the researcher’s

interpretation or suggest some editing. Stake (2010) calls this the “Stop, Look, and

Listen” method (p. 123). Participants will also have this opportunity from the

questionnaire responses. Written material was checked and followed up on just as closely

as verbal and observed material. Member checking (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) occurred

before the final transcript was prepared. Participants had a final opportunity to review

their responses, whether verbally, written, or observed, before the final transcript was

prepared.

Transferability. To attempt transferability, or the extent to which the findings

can be applied to other situations (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), a thorough description of

the methodology for the proposed study is described here. However, Merriam and Tisdell

(2016) point out that it is very difficult to guarantee transferability in a qualitative case

study. Again, perceptions were those of the participants; personal interpretations and

understanding of reality cannot be transferred to another person (Stake, 2010). However,

this researcher will attempt to detail the steps taken to assure an in-depth study and

possible transferability.
 99

This researcher obtained permission from current or retired teachers who meet the

following criteria:

• Licensed and contracted teacher

• Current or past experience teaching

• Proof of retirement from a Wisconsin public school

• A teacher with at least three years teaching experience

• A member of a professional teachers’ organization

• Not a member of a professional teachers’ organization

• Able and willing to comply with the parameters of the study

Not all willing participants were extended an invitation for participation. Exclusion

criteria include:

• Not a licensed teacher

• A teacher with no teaching experience

• A teacher with less than three years’ teaching experience

• Not willing to participate in the parameters of the study

• One who personally or professionally knows the researcher

Participants were expected to have at least three years’ teaching experience and

were members of the teachers’ union or were not members of the teachers’ union. Three

years was the usual probationary timeframe for new teachers. The criteria of three years’

experience allowed for non-probationary teachers to participate. For full inclusion, the

criteria included teachers who may or may not be members of the teachers’ union. Upon

successful recruitment using social media, emails were sent to all teachers indicating

interest as an invitation to participate in the qualitative case study that was used to

consider the currently unknown phenomenon of: What were the perceptions of Wisconsin
 100

teachers about the possible influence of the teachers' union on student achievement?

Teachers were invited to participate in an in-person interview (Appendix E). At least 15

participants were sought in an attempt to reach data saturation to better understand the

phenomenon (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015; Yin, 2016). If more participants

accept the invitation, they will also be included. Interview locations and times were

secured via email. Questionnaires (Appendix D) were sent via an online format, such as

Survey Monkey. Response boxes were set to allow participants to answer as fully as

needed.

Interview questions are located in Appendix D. This researcher established

comfort and rapport with the participant by asking about teaching experience and

classroom environments. A brief overview of the study was also explained, and any

questions were answered. The participants were also reminded that they could withdraw

at any time, without penalty or recourse. Once comfort was established, the interview

began. The questions in Appendix D were designed to provide an in-depth understanding

of the over-arching research question and the subsequent research questions. Interviews

were attempted to be recorded using the researcher’s MacBook Pro computer audio

recording hardware. Notes were also taken.

Upon completion of data collection through interviews and questionnaire, all were

transcribed by hand. To assure accuracy Stake (2010) recommends that the transcriptions

be sent back to each participant for review. When clarification was needed on any part of

the what was said, observed, or written, the participant had an opportunity to offer clarity

to the researcher and vice versa. This process continued until the full meaning of the

conversation, observation, or writing was achieved.

 101

At this point, transcribed documentation was entered into MaxQDA. From there,

the research was analyzed for themes across all participant. MaxQDA software allowed

the researcher to color code themes and analyze themes to find sub-themes. Had this

occurred, it would have become part of the data review. The researcher was looking for

saturation of themes (Yin, 2016). This means when themes become repeated, the data has

been saturated. All transcriptions were reviewed; there was no stopping point until all the

data were reviewed and analyzed. Themes were then categorized and ranked according to

how many times participants discussed them.

Archival data were noted and discussed in Chapter 4 in the discussion section.

The reviewed data and knowledge learned will be attached to the themes found in the

literature review as they pertain to the research questions RQ1: How do teachers

perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student achievement? RQ2: What, if any,

types of union influence do the teachers perceive? These themes, as discussed in detail in

Chapter 2 include:

• Unions standardize education (Eberts & Stone, 1987; Lot & Kenny, 2013).

• Unions lobby for various educational strategies and approaches (Lot & Kenny,
2013).

• Unions support educational strategies and approaches (Lang, 2015).

• Union lobbying indirectly affects students through teachers (Vachon & Ma,
2015).

Dependability. Dependability refers to the degree to which research procedures

are documented and were reliable. To ensure that all procedures were properly

documented and reliable, all data were written, and interviews were attempted to be

recorded. To ensure confidentiality, written material was kept in a locked cabinet in the

researcher’s home. Any recorded material was kept on a flash drive and locked in the
 102

same cabinet with any written material. All information will be kept for the expected

three years.

Meticulous descriptions were used to compile a comprehensible record of

interviews, archival data, and questionnaires. MaxQDA was used to code all uploaded

transcriptions. According to the MaxQDA website, the online program allows a

researcher to import, organize, analyze, and visualize data from interviews, written

descriptions of archival data, and questionnaires. MaxQDA was a helpful tool in

analyzing data to find themes to answer Wisconsin’s teachers on the possible influence of

the teachers’ union student achievement. As well as the two research questions:

RQ1: How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student

achievement?

RQ2: What, if any, types of union influence do the teachers perceive?

By inputting the data into the online software, using the coding features in the

program, and using the categorizing feature, solid themes were attempted to be

determined from the participants’ conversations during the interview, as well as supports

from archival data, and answers from the questionnaire. To ensure confidentiality in the

use of an online program, MaxQDA requires all users to set up an account with a

username and password accessible only to the user. The password will be encrypted for

security reasons.

Throughout this process, the researcher’s dissertation committee, consisting of a

dissertation chair, methodologist, and content expert reviewed all documentation related

to data collection. The researcher consulted with each of them accordingly and received
 103

feedback throughout the data collection, analysis, and discussion phases of Chapters 4

and 5.

Data Collection and Management

This section details the full process used to collect the data. The procedures used

to carry out all the major steps for data collection were described in detail. This process

and discussion allows another researcher to reproduce the study and ensures reliability.

The following steps were taken to assure the integrity of the data collection. First, willing

participants were sought via social media recruitment. The expected criteria were:

• Licensed and contracted teacher

• Proof of retirement from a Wisconsin public school

• Current or past experience teaching

• A member of a professional teachers’ organization

• Not a member of a professional teachers’ organization

• Able and willing to comply with the parameters of the study

Not all willing participants were extended an invitation for participation. Exclusion

criteria include:

• Not a licensed teacher

• A teacher with no teaching experience

• Not willing to participate in the parameters of the study

• One who personally knows the researcher

Interviews. The main source of data for this proposed study was the use of semi-

structured questions in a personal interview format. Yin (2016) contends this kind of

interview method was the “overwhelmingly dominant mode of interviewing in qualitative

research” (p. 141). Although qualitative interviewing is more relaxed and conversational
 104

than structured interviews, it was imperative to the heart of the research to successfully

converse with participants (Yin, 2016). Therefore, several researchers have suggested a

relaxed protocol for this interviewing (Boeije, 2013; Guest, et al., 2013; Yin, 2016). All t

agreed researchers should first build rapport with the participant and then establish a

comfortable discussion atmosphere. This allows the researcher to learn about the

phenomena through the perceptions of the people experiencing it (Boeije, 2013). Once

comfort was reached, the interview began. It is important for the interviewer to speak as

minimally as possible after starting a topic of discussion (Yin, 2016). The goal of the

discussion was to allow the participant to express his or her meanings as part of their

narrative, so the interviewer must be careful to be “nondirective” (Yin, 2016, p. 144). In

other words, the interviewer needed to allow the participant to relay the message as he or

she deemed fit for the topic at hand and speak freely.

Yin (2016) suggested an “interview guide” (p. 147) for directing the course of the

discussion, while Boeije (2013) suggested a “topic list” (p. 69) and Guest et al. (2013)

suggested, “probing” (p. 148). Regardless of the verbiage, the general expectation was

the interviewer came prepared to the interview with a contrived idea of topics, ideas,

thoughts, questions, or other data to prompt the participant for as much information as

possible throughout the interview. This list can be found in Appendix D.

Once interested individuals were recruited, an invitation email was sent to the

email address the potential participants shared, asking them to participate in the study.

Participants were given ten days to accept or decline the invitation. To those accepting

the invitation, an email was sent out with further details about participation and selection

(Appendix C). Because this study focused on teachers’ perceptions on the impact of the
 105

teachers’ union on school achievement, selection criteria included both union and non-

union membership. Those participants who accepted the invitation were asked to disclose

membership in various professional organizations. Because of time and logistics

constraints, as well as documentation of communication, emails were used in all

communications except the actual interview. Times were decided upon accordingly, with

all meetings taking at a time amenable to the researcher and participant. Interviews were

expected to last 60-90 minutes but were flexible due to the nature of the research and

questioning technique. A $10 Amazon.com e-gift card was offered as incentive to all

participants, as well as a $50 Amazon.com e-gift card to one randomly selected

participant upon study completion. For those participants referring others to the study,

they earned another $10 e-gift card to Amazon.com for each person referred and

completing the required participation. All interviews were transcribed during the

interview. This was an acceptable means of interviewing technique if the topic was

sensitive, and the participant was not comfortable being recorded (Merriam & Tisdell,

2016).

Each transcription was forwarded to the participant for review. If there were any

areas needing clarification, the researcher returned the transcript to the participant to

gather the exact meaning. Clarifying interviews is also a strategy commonly used in

qualitative research. An interviewer must transcribe the interviews, including exact

language, describing the setting, and expounding the hidden language (Merriam &

Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015; Yin, 2016). After the transcription, part of the data collection

process is to review it with each participant to assure accurate meanings and descriptions

(Patton, 2015). Any changes will need to be made as many times as necessary to capture
 106

the full experience (Yin, 2016). The use of interviews can be a useful tool in truly

understanding the social science behind the phenomena of the study (Yin, 2016).

However, to get accurate and unbiased information, the interview must be conducted

carefully (Guest, et al., 2013). Yin also suggested that interviewers are careful not to give

verbal or non-verbal encouragement or discouragement to the participants. Doing so may

inadvertently direct the conversation in a direction the participant does not want and will

affect results. If so, the researcher will return to the participant and gather clarification to

the exact meaning.

Questionnaire. While Yin (2016) suggests fifteen participants to obtain

saturation in a study, this research offered a questionnaire in an attempt to meet that goal

to participants in who met the inclusion criteria. Participants were recruited using the

same social media methods as the interviews. Once a participant indicated interest in the

questionnaire, informed consent was sent to the individual (Appendix C). The participant

was asked to read and indicate agreement through electronic signature via DocuSign.

When consent was given, the questionnaire (Appendix E) was sent to the participant to

complete at his or her leisure. The questionnaire was written with and sent using

SurveyMonkey. The questionnaire consisted of nine questions, all of which aligned to the

educational themes found in the literature. Participants were instructed to read the

questions and, using a textbox with unlimited character count, answer the questions as

thoroughly as the participants felt were needed to accurately portray their thoughts.

This second source of data enhanced the data triangulation often recommended in

a qualitative study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015; Stake, 2010; Yin, 2016).

Questionnaires can provide insights from participants who cannot participate in one of
 107

the other two data sources but have a desire to contribute to the research. In the case of

this study, the questions offered in the questionnaire were different than those asked in

the interview setting but followed the same themes in an effort to maintain reliability,

validity, and alignment. As well, Yin (2016) suggests the themes found were included in

data analysis the same as the interview questions. The questions asked in the

questionnaire for this study can be found in Appendix D.

 108

Archival data. To complete triangulation in a qualitative study the study utilized

archival data. Archival data can be another invaluable source for a qualitative study and

can be used as primary evidence (Yin, 2016). It was important to conduct a thorough

review of archival data to ensure quality research as the data can provide a better

understanding of the content and not interrupt a healthy flow of conversation if the

researcher has to stop and ask for clarification (Yin, 2016). In reviewing the data, the

researcher took great care in deciding which data deserved attention and which data did

not pertain to the study. This provided a solid base of contextual information that could

have led to other paths of inquiry (Patton, 2015).

Archival data were used to augment the evidence from the questionnaires and

open-ended interviews and either corroborated or contradicted the other findings. The

archival evidence provided detailed descriptions of the laws and lobbying related to

teachers’ unions and student achievement. This researcher used documents and legal

evidence from public domain such as the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction

(WDPI), Rules and Laws DPI, Wisconsin Education Laws through LawFind, the

Wisconsin State Law Library, Wisconsin Legislative Documents on the Committee of

Education, WEAC Legislative Updates from various regions, and lobbying websites.

In this study, a thorough understanding of the phenomenon and the themes found

in the literature review were needed. The literature showed the following four themes that

were considered during the archival data review:

1. Unions standardize education (Stake, 2010).

2. Unions lobby for various educational strategies and approaches (Lot & Kenny,
2013).

3. Unions support educational strategies and approaches (Lang, 2015).

 109

4. Unions lobbying indirectly affects students through teachers (Vachon & Ma,
2015).

Using various research organizations, schools, education, and academic

departments, archival data were retrieved in paper or e-document formats, audio/visual

formats, photographic, or coded language formats. The data were aligned to both support

or negate the four themes found. The alignment was able to connect the archival data

with the current literature. Upon completion of the interviews and questionnaires, the

themes found using MaxQDA were discussed with the information found in the review of

the archival data and literature.

All information will be kept for five years per GCU recommendations. The

information will be locked under a personal identification number (PIN), accessed only

by the researcher. Before any of these steps occur, IRB must give their full consent and

support for the study to commence and research to begin. This request was shown in

Appendix C.

Data Analysis Procedures

Using transcriptions from the interviews, responses from the questionnaire, and

MaxQDA software, data were analyzed carefully, thoroughly, and thoughtfully. This

allowed the research to relay accurately the thoughts, ideas, and perceptions of

participants who answered the overreaching question: What were public school teachers

perceptions of the teachers’ union on student achievement? This led to answering the

following research questions:

RQ1: How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student

achievement?

RQ2: What, if any, types of union influence do the teachers perceive?

 110

In qualitative case study research, the researcher is responsible for refraining from

making assumptions. The researcher focuses on a phenomenon, develops a research plan

accordingly, and explores findings that provide reason for further thorough research and

investigation (Moustakas, 1994). Watson and Watson (2013) align these steps in the use

of CST:

• Record all statements of relevance to the phenomenon (page 46).

• After review of the statements, remove duplicates and vague comments.

• List what is left.

• Group into theme categories.

• Organize the themes with the statements to create a visualization of the lived
experience and capture the essence.

• Construct a textual-structural description from the themes and structural

description.

• Synthesize the experiences of the participants.

Patton (2015) claimed that data analysis begins at the data collection stage.

Considering that in-depth, interviews inherently open the research to inductive method,

the analysis of data goes hand in hand with the collection of data. Patton (2015) also

stated that inductive research occurs as naturalistic inquiry and patterns begin to emerge,

which continues the argument for in-field analysis so that researchers remain neutral

while conducting research. Although expected in quantitative analysis, qualitative

depends on the emergent nature of inductive collection and analysis.

There was also the expectation within professional research that formal analysis

will occur after the immediate response to the interactions in the field. While Patton’s

(2015) theories were valid and well researched, there was also the expectations that these

inductions and hypotheses were analyzed carefully and scientifically. From here, the data
 111

were collected and segmented (Boeije, 2013). Data must be reassembled with three

starting points: constant comparison, analytic induction, and theoretical sensitivity (Yin,

2016). Each one was described as it pertains to the proposed research here.

Constant comparison. During the interview phase of collecting data, a researcher

should continually compare the data coming in through the interviews (Yin, 2016).

However, an interviewer must maintain objectivity and let the story come alive as it was

told from the unique perspective of the participant; the researcher is also contemplating

the themes as they develop through the course of interviews (Patton, 2015). This requires

constant comparison but also maintains objectivity by letting the story unfold as it

pertains to the overarching question. The researcher also looked for saturation of data as

it relates to the phenomenon during this process (Yin, 2016). To validate the process, a

reasonable inquiry was made by gathering the evidence through in-depth, predetermined

interview questions with each participant through inductive reasoning (Corbin & Strauss,

2008). The themes emerged as the discussions ensued, creating the ability to consider the

personal experiences of the participants toward the overarching question.

Analytic induction. This part of analytics takes the most amount of care and skill

(Boeije, 2013). To deduce themes within the interview responses and code properly, the

researcher remained open-minded, resourceful, sensitive, well-informed, and thoughtful

(Boeije, 2013). The MaxQDA program was used to evaluate the themes that evolved

through interview analysis. Data were entered into the database within MaxQDA.

According to the MaxQDA website, analytic deduction can happen succinctly and

accurately using their nodes - like virtual filing boxes, that allowed the researcher to see

all information on a theme summarized together after information is highlighted,

 112

organized, and set aside for further analysis as more themes emerge. Finding trends,

patterns, and connections is imperative to quality analysis (Yin, 2016). MaxQDA

attempts to provide the resource to achieve this in this stage.

Theoretical sensitivity. This part of the analysis is, “sensitive to thinking about

data in theoretical terms” (Boeije, 2013, p. 88). Here, using a theoretical lens, the

researcher developed creative ideas from the data. This is where the analysis happened as

the coding of themes and common ideas came into meaningful interpretation (Watson &

Watson, 2013). To accomplish this phase of analysis, this researcher used the data

through the idea of looking through the CST theoretical lens. Codes were developed into

stronger categories and, ultimately, categories were discussed in the final themes of the

study (Yin, 2016). The categories and themes may or may not have aligned with current

research theories and postulations. They were discussed in Chapter 4 as they developed.

By developing codes, categories and themes from the research data, they were used to

suggest further research and study into the perceptions of teachers. The categories were

thoughtfully and carefully reported as meaningful interpretation of the data (Boeije,

2013).

Entering the data entered through in-depth interviews, questionnaires, and

archival data, this researcher carefully and succinctly analyzed each interview transcript

to develop categories through coding. Eventually, themes arose that aligned with the

overarching phenomenological question and new themes appeared from the data that did

not align with the overarching question. Attempting to use MaxQDA, transcripts were

analyzed and layered into themes that followed the literature. From there, in-depth
 113

analysis was used to authenticate the research. Archival data were used to support or

negate the perceptions, and the themes that came from the data.

Ethical Considerations

As required before completing the dissertation proposal, this researcher completed

the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI), which enables all researchers to

complete their study in a safe and reliable manner. Within this training initiative, the

Belmont Report was reviewed. This report reviews the principles involving beneficence,

justice, and respect to all participants. This study adheres to those principals as they relate

to each participant. As well, each participant was protected by the guidelines created by

the IRB during the study. Each phase of the study was submitted for review to both AQR

and the IRB through Grand Canyon University. The data collection and analysis phase of

this study began only after proper permissions were received, in alignment with the IRB

process (Appendix C).

A certain level of ethical considerations needs adhering to when conducting

research involving human participants as opposed to a quantitative study that involves the

analysis of numbers and hard data. In this case, the purpose was to answer the question:

What perceptions do public school teachers have on the possible influence of

Wisconsin’s teachers’ union on public school student achievement? After the participants

understood the research, the researcher explained their part in the research. Based on

empirical research, this researcher offered an informed consent contract for voluntary

participation (Appendix B), as well as the option to leave at any time without penalty or

judgment (Guest et al., 2013). Based on recommendations from the Common Rule, the

consent was written at a sixth to eighth grade reading level without the use of industry
 114

jargon or technical terms. All communications were completed in written format with

only professional email addresses to reflect confidentiality and ethics as outlined in IRB

guidelines. All discussions, questions, and concerns from the participants were treated

with respect for the duration of the study.

During the study, confidentiality, access to the data, and boundaries were

maintained as research suggests (Patton, 2015). Confidentiality and anonymity were

assured using anonymity of reporting within the study. Names of participants will not be

shared or known by anyone except the researcher. There may be a personal concern by

participants of others knowing union attitudes and involvement. As discussed in Chapter

2, the feelings toward the teacher union were still real in Wisconsin. If personal thoughts,

ideas, and concerns were made public, livelihoods may be jeopardized. Therefore, careful

consideration to discussions, transcripts, and data were protected to avoid unintended

consequences. To do this, this researcher maintains tight control of any materials used in

the interview process. All electronic material was kept under a passcode on this

researcher’s personal computer. Any tangible materials were kept in a locked file cabinet.

Both will be kept this way for the required timeline set by research standards. The

researcher also kept communication lines open to those who participated for transcript

reviews, questions, or concerns. However, while interview answers were changed

through the ethical consideration stage, they were clarified as needed throughout the data

collection process.

Limitations and Delimitations

There were no known health and well-being risks involved in taking part in

this study or participating in the interview process. There are, however, certain
 115

inherent limitations and delimitations in this type of study (Patton, 2015). These

included, but were not limited to, the researcher affecting the situation in unknown and

unpredictable ways such as participants wanting to answer in a certain manner to

avoid conflict or appease the researcher. There may have also been some

miscommunication through the lack of articulating thoughts properly. However, this

was the reason the researcher provided transcripts of the conversation. This still might

have posed a limitation, as the participant might not have taken the time to review the

transcript or relay thoughts accurately. Interview responses may have been distorted

because of various discrepancies in the participants, personal bias, perspective, and

opinion (Patton, 2015). As well, there may have been interviewee error recall or

possible reactivity when further probing questions were asked to enhance the

discussion. The interviewer was also aware of not understanding fully the experiences

of another person (Patton, 2015). The thoughts, feelings, and perceptions of another

participating in the study may not have been explained fully or understood. As a

result, it was possible for the full understanding of this research to be incomplete and

the phenomenon not fully measured.

The sample size was also be a limitation. An invitation was extended to all

possible participants who met the inclusion criteria. All attempts were made to engage

enough participants to offer saturation in the data (Yin, 2016).

Guest et al. (2013), Patton (2015), and Yin (2016) agreed that personal

interviews could lend to personal bias through the course of face-to-face

communication. Through this type of informal communication, non-verbal language

can preclude verbal communication. Additional information may be produced through

 116

these two types of communication. It was the professional responsibility of the

researcher to assure this was clarified in the data collection and analysis stages.

Since the researcher had a public presence in the state regarding teachers’

unions, it may have impeded some participants and enacted reactivity from some

participants. All attempts were made to assure participants their responses were their

own and the researcher had complete objectivity for the experiences that participants

shared. This could have also occurred from participants who engaged in the

questionnaire.

A final limitation in this research was the personal inflections the researcher

brought to the study. The researcher was a non-union previous public-school teacher.

Therefore, there was a potential risk, or perceived risk, of personal bias. To counteract

any suggestion of bias, this researcher offered triangulated data sources, analytical

perspective through coding of themes found in inductive analysis to increase the

accuracy and credibility (Patton, 2015) of the research and methodologically

minimized subjectivity throughout the course of the study.

The research contained several delimitations set to produce a scholarly review of

the phenomena. A quantitative study using state assessment scores was considered as a

means to discover more about the teachers’ union impact on student achievement.

Because of time and financial constraints, the focus shifted from quantitative to a

qualitative case study. Using this perspective, the phenomena was explored and explained

using the perceptions shared in in-depth interviews with willing participants. Although a

wider participant load was discussed in the limitations section, a smaller cross-section of

the population was chosen to represent the larger group. A smaller sample size can
 117

represent the whole when data becomes saturated and triangulated (Yin, 2016). This

cross-section comes from various teachers around the state of Wisconsin. The

participants met the specific criteria listed in Chapter 3 to be considered and chosen for

participation. Following these criteria allowed the researcher to reach saturation of data

with a full spectrum of perceptions and experiences from the participants. In-depth

interviews were chosen as a method to explore the phenomena due to the nature of

interviewing participants. Interviewing participants face to face provided the researcher

with the opportunity to reach into the phenomena through further questioning, discussion,

and clarity (Yin, 2016).

The research questions in the proposed study were another delimitation. The

questions came about as a response to the intense debate in Wisconsin when the then-

State Governor revoked mandated union membership for public school teachers (Baron,

2018). This posed a delimitation as the questions were meant to serve as instigators to a

more vivid discussion surrounding the perceptions of teachers about the impact of the

teachers’ union on student achievement. As reviewed in Chapter 2, teachers, public

employees, parents, administrators, union officials, and politicians debated the

effectiveness of the teachers’ union on student achievement. As discussed in Chapter 2,

extant empirical research was lacking in a definitive answer, as well as a qualitative case

study perspective. The study contributed to the existing literature from this research

perspective.

Summary

Chapter 3 presented a methodological description of the qualitative case study.

Based on the literature review presented in Chapter 2, the perceptions of teachers about
 118

the possible influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement has had insufficient

attention in the extant literature. For this reason, an investigation of this union

phenomenon contributed to identifying the perceptions teachers have on the influence the

union plays in student achievement in Wisconsin public schools.

This study relied on a qualitative case study approach that used in-depth

interviews to offer a first-person look at the people involved in the phenomenon. Using a

design like this allowed the participants to offer thorough explanations into the essence

and lived experiences told from their personal experiences and with their personal

feelings, perspectives, and opinions regarding the phenomena (Babbie, 2013; Merriam &

Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015; Yin, 2016). The study used a questionnaire for participants

who chose not to or were not able to participate in interviews. The last component of the

triangulation of data was archival data.

This study used a sample size commensurate to understand fully the phenomenon.

Teachers, both current and retired, in Wisconsin were contacted to participate. Those who

met the inclusion criteria, as discussed earlier in Chapter 3, were invited to fully

participate, with the understanding they could withdraw at any time, for any reason,

without any penalty.

Participants were asked to involve themselves in interviews via telephone with the

researcher to discuss their ideas, perceptions, and opinions about the overarching

question: What were the perceptions of Wisconsin’s public-school teachers on the

possible influence of the teachers’ union on public school student achievement?

Interview questions can be found in Appendix D. Upon agreement, each person was

given a written explanation for the reason and process of the study. They were reminded
 119

that they could withdraw from the study at any time for any reason without concern of

retribution. Upon agreement of participation and approval from IRB, interviews were

arranged and conducted at the convenience of both the participant and interviewer.

During the interview, data were kept in written format. This was done to ensure the

utmost accuracy when inducing themes and ideas growing from the various discussions

as they pertain to the phenomenon. As well, any inconsistencies, misconceptions, unclear

statements, or ideas were further investigated when the data presented to each participant

for review. All information was uploaded to the online data analysis software, MaxQDA.

From there, themes were found through further analysis and coded. At this point, further

follow up with each participant occurred as needed to assure accurate thoughts, ideas, and

opinions. After these steps were concluded, the data were translated into overarching

themes and relayed via Chapter 5, the discussion portion of the study.

Limitations in this study resulted from the limited sample size. Another perceived

limitation could be video interviews. This limitation was discussed in detail earlier in

Chapter 3. Data collected in this manner could be seen as biased, but the researcher

minimized biases by providing a written transcript to the participant immediately

following the interview. A third limitation was the personal attitudes brought to the study

by the researcher who was a previous public-school teacher in Wisconsin and had

mandated participation with the teacher’s union.

As previously detailed in Chapter 3, a questionnaire was sent out to participants

who did not take part in the interview. This option provided a viable, measurable, and

reliable source of data to add to understanding the phenomenon (Patton, 2015; Yin,

2016). The last set of data that was collected was a review of archival data.
 120

Upon closure of interviews and data collection, the data were carefully reviewed

and transcribed. A full review of this process unfolds further in Chapter 4. An in-depth

review and discussion of the findings are found in Chapter 5.

 121

Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Results

Introduction

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore public school teachers

perceptions of the possible influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement. As

school leaders, policy makers, and politicians search for ways to improve public school

student achievement, they were faced with (a) the lack of research involving the

perceptions of teachers, and (b) the current literature saturated with quantitative measures

over qualitative measures. Multiple studies have addressed the phenomenon of the

teachers’ union influence on student achievement using graduation rates (Hoxby, 1996),

school culture (Carini, 2008a), and assessment scores (Milkman, 1997). Only a handful

have explored this phenomenon from a qualitative perspective (Lindy, 201; Lang, 2015).

The current literature lacks public school teachers’ perceptions on the phenomenon. In an

effort to address this gap in the current literature, this research explored the public-school

teachers’ perceptions of teachers’ union on student achievement.

A qualitative case study was determined to be appropriate in understanding the

phenomenon of public-school teachers’ perceptions of the teachers’ union possible

influence on student achievement. Qualitative research provides an opportunity to reveal

a story told only from the perspective of the participant as a real, lived experience

(Patton, 2015). A case study approach provides the researcher an opportunity to get a real

and in-depth understanding of the phenomenon (Baxter & Jack, 2008). This methodology

allowed for a full exploration of public-school teachers’ perceptions of the possible

influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement.

 122

The foundation of this study was developed from the critical systems theory

(CST). This theory stipulates that a system is developed to note the existence of

principles and laws that can be generalized across systems and their components (Watson

& Watson, 2013). The following two research questions were established to guide this

qualitative case study:

RQ1: How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student

achievement?

RQ2: What, if any, types of union influence do the teachers perceive?

Data were collected via questionnaires, in-depth interviews, and the review of

archival data. The questionnaires were developed and administered to gain perception

data around the four main themes found in the literature review: (1) unions standardize

education, (2) unions lobby for educational strategies and approaches, (3) unions support

educational strategies and approaches, and (4) union lobbying indirectly affects students

through teachers.

The questions were open-ended, and participants were encouraged to be as

detailed as needed to answer the questions. Those that were willing to engage in the

questionnaire were recruited from social media, as well as referrals from participants. All

participants met inclusion criteria for both the questionnaire and the interview. Separate

from the questionnaire were interviews from a different set of participants. The questions

within these interviews were also aligned with the four themes found in the literature but

were worded differently (Appendix D). This was purposeful in an effort to get a thorough

understanding of the phenomenon. Those who chose to participate via social media in the

open-ended interviews contacted the researcher by email to schedule the interview. Each
 123

interview was conducted over the telephone, transcribed during the conversation, and

sent to each participant for review and accuracy. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) explained

this form of member checking as important for respondent validation to make sure his or

her responses were depicted accurately. Bloomberg and Volpe (2019) support hand

transcription of interviews, explaining the researcher becomes intimately familiar with

the nuances of the interview when transcribing by hand.

Publicly available archival data were obtained by examining the Wisconsin

Department of Public Instruction (WI DPI), Rules and Laws of DPI, Law Find

(Wisconsin Educational Law), the Wisconsin State Legislative Library, Wisconsin

Legislative Documents, and WEAC Legislative Updates. Archival data were collected to

become familiar with the phenomenon and to understand legislation as it pertained to

public school student achievement. Archival data also created comparative data that

enriched the responses of the participants for both research questions.

The remainder of the chapter includes a description of the setting of the study and

the demographics of the participants in both the questionnaire and the interview. A brief

summary of data collection and data analysis procedures follows. The chapter ends with a

summary of the results that includes themes, both expected from the discussion in

Chapter 2 and unexpected excerpts from the data that align with the purpose of this study

and discussion of the findings to the research questions. Finally, key points were used to

summarize the entirety of Chapter 4.

Descriptive Findings

This section provides a narrative of the case study findings derived from the

online questionnaire as well as the interview and archival data. The general population
 124

for this study included public school teachers in Wisconsin who were either currently

teaching or retired. All participants were assigned a number to ensure confidentiality.

From the general population, 27 teachers currently teaching responded to the

questionnaire and two retired teachers responded. While sixteen participants responded to

recruitment strategies for the interview, fifteen of them consented to the study’s inclusion

criteria. See Table 1.

Table 1.

Sources of Data Triangulation Matrix

Research question Online Questionnaire Interview Archival Data
Question Number Question Number
RQ1: How do teachers 2 and 3 1 & 2, 4-7 Wisconsin Department of Public
perceive the influence Instruction (WDPI)
of a teachers’ union on WDPI – Instruction of Rules and
student achievement? Laws
Wisconsin Educational Laws/Law
Find
Wisconsin State Law Library
Wisconsin Legislative Documents
– Committee on Education

RQ2: What, if any, types 4–7 3 Wisconsin Department of Public

of union influence do the Instruction (WDPI)
teachers perceive? WDPI – Instruction of Rules and
Laws
Wisconsin Educational Laws/Law
Find
Wisconsin State Law Library
Wisconsin Legislative Documents
– Committee on Education

Online questionnaire. For purposes of this study, an online questionnaire was

used to gather data pertaining to the four themes found in the literature regarding

unionism for public schools in Wisconsin. These four themes were aligned to the five

topics found in the literature review: (a) climate and culture of public schools, (b) the
 125

leadership within the school, (c) union lobbying, (d) teacher and leader accountability,

and (e) union bargaining on behalf of the teachers:

• Unions standardize education (Eberts & Stone, 1987; Lot & Kenny, 2013).

• Unions lobby for various educational strategies and approaches (Lot & Kenny,
2013).

• Unions support educational strategies and approaches (Lang, 2015).

• Union lobbying indirectly affects students through teachers (Vachon & Ma,
2015).

Initially, fifteen participants were recruited to engage in the online questionnaire.

Of the fifteen, all met the inclusion criteria and consented. Inclusion criteria consisted of:

(a) licensed and contracted teacher, (b) current or past teaching experience, (c) if retired,

proof of retirement from a Wisconsin public school, (e) at least three years’ teaching

experience, (f) a member of a professional teachers’ organization (g) not a member of a

professional teachers’ organization, (h) able and willing to comply with the parameters of

the study. Upon review of the responses, saturation of the data was not achieved.

Therefore, another post was made on social media recruiting more participants in an

effort to reach saturation. A total of 27 participants met inclusion criteria and consented.

At this point, saturation of the data was achieved and is discussed in detail later in this

chapter. The participants were assigned a number in order of participation to ensure

confidentiality. Of the 27 who participated, three were retired teachers, and the remaining

24 were currently teaching in the State of Wisconsin. See demographic information in

Table 2.
 126

Table 2.

Demographic Profile: Teaching Status

Years Teaching
Number of Participants Current or Retired
n=7
1 6 Current
2 3 Current
3 5 Current
4 19 Current
5 5 Current
6 3 Current
7 4 Current
8 8 Current
9 6 Current
10 5 Current
11 17 Current
12 18 Current
13 7 Current
14 8 Current
15 7 Current
16 6 Current
17 4 Current
18 36 Retired
19 4 Current
20 27 Retired
21 40 Retired
22 19 Current
23 15 Current
24 23 Current
25 7 Current
26 5 Current
27 15 Current
 127

Participants were also asked to indicate membership in the state teachers’ union.

Of the 27 participants, 66% indicated they were a member of WEAC and 33% indicated

they were not a member. See Figure 1.

Figure 1. Union membership.

Of all 27 participants, 22% indicated they were a member of another professional

education organization. See Figure 2. Organizations included:

• Retired WEAC teachers

• Milwaukee Teachers Education Association (MTEA)

• American Association of Educators (AAE)

• Alpha Delta Kappa and Arizona Rural Schools Association (ASRA)

• Wisconsin Art Education Association

 128

Figure 2. Professional organization membership.

Interview. Fifteen teachers, who met the criteria, were invited to participate in the

interviews. To ensure confidentiality, numbers were assigned to each participant. The

interview consisted of eight open-ended questions (Appendix D) related to the themes

found in the literature and one question asking participants if they had anything more to

add to the phenomenon. The interview questions were also designed to approach the

same four themes embedded in the five topics addressed in the online questionnaire: (a)

climate and culture of public schools (b) the leadership within the school (c) union

lobbying (d) teacher and leader accountability and (e) union bargaining on behalf of the

teachers:

• Unions standardize education (Eberts & Stone, 1987; Lot & Kenny, 2013).

• Unions lobby for various educational strategies and approaches (Lot & Kenny,
2013).

• Unions support educational strategies and approaches (Lang, 2015).

• Union lobbying indirectly affects students through teachers (Vachon & Ma,
2015).
 129

Fourteen of the participants have current employment in a public school in the

State of Wisconsin, and one is retired. Of the fourteen currently teaching, thirteen teach at

the middle school level or higher. One teaches at the K-5 level. Of the fifteen

participants, four declined sharing information about their position, 20% were male, and

80% were female. This is representative of gender demographics of the teaching

profession as the NCES (2019) states that as of 2017, 77% of teachers in the US were

female. See Figure 3.

Figure 3. Demographic profile: participant gender.

Interview protocol. Several potential participants reached out to the researcher

indicating interest but after learning the interview would be recorded, they retracted their

interest. The researcher spent several weeks trying to find a teacher in Wisconsin willing

to be recorded during the interview. All potential participants declined. While AQR and

IRB approved MAXQDA to assist in coding the data, the researcher determined hand

coding was the best approach. Researchers acknowledge potential difficulty in recording

interviews where there is sensitive information (Flick, 2019; Guest, et al, 2013; Yin,

2016). Flick (2019) explains if skepticism exists because an interview was being

recorded, participates may not speak freely, thereby changing the outcomes of the
 130

research. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) explain hand-recording interviews were best when

a participant did not want to be recorded. Once this change was made from the original

protocol, participants agreed to the interviews. The researcher found that once the

analysis procedure began, the creation of codes, identifying themes, and noting

similarities of responses from the participants were more cohesive and accurately

depicted when using hand-coding. Saldana (2016) explained that when working with

several participants, it helps to code one participant’s response and then move on to the

next. This approach allowed the researcher to code, categorize, and find themes with

more precision. Bloomberg and Volpe (2019) indicated that coding requires the

researcher to read and reread in an effort to code and then recode as the data were

pondered, scrutinized, and connected. The requirement to record the interviews was

removed from the consent, and fifteen participants consequently consented.

After receipt of consent, the researcher contacted each participant via email to

find a time convenient to both the researcher and the participant to conduct the interview.

In some cases, the participant asked the researcher to call to arrange an interview time.

The average duration of each interview was 34 minutes. P11was eager to discuss the

questions and went in depth in his/her responses lasting 64 minutes, while P2 was brief

and to the point lasting only 19 minutes. A review of the data also showed all the men

had nothing to add on interview Question #9 “Is there anything you would like to add to

the phenomenon.” Of the females, three indicated they had no further comments. The

lack of desire to add further thoughts or comments to the phenomenon may have

contributed to the short interview duration.

 131

Each interview began with a review of the consent and reminder that the

participants could remove themselves from the process at any time, with no recourse. The

researcher explained that eight questions would be asked, but if the participant did not

know an answer, he/she could pass on it or come back to it later. Only one participant

could not answer one of the questions. The researcher also explained that since the

interview would not be recorded, the conversation was being transcribed as it happened.

The participants were asked to continue talking, sharing freely and as much as they felt

comfortable. Some participants were cognizant of the question and focused fully on

answering it. Some participants discussed other topics that were not directly related to the

questions but somewhat related to the topic. At this point, the researcher rephrased the

question or asked a refocus question to bring the participant back to a quality response.

As the conversation continued, the researcher simply transcribed the conversation as it

happened without regard to spelling, punctuation, or grammar. The goal was to capture

accurately the words and lived experiences of the participant.

Immediately following the interview, each document was proofread, edited, and

sent to the participant for member checking. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) explain this step

as important to ensure trustworthiness and reliability of the study. The participant had up

to three days to review the transcription, but most approved it that same day. Two

participants took over one day. Table 3 illustrates the participants, date of interviews, the

duration time of the interview, and the number of transcribed data pages.
 132

Table 3.

Interview Overview
Pages of Double-Spaced,
Duration of Interview
Participant Number Date of Interview Transcribed Data
n = 34 min
n=4
P1 7/4/19 34 min 4
P2 7/22/19 19 min 4
P3 7/22/19 25 min 4
P4 7/24/19 38 min 5
P5 7/27/19 22 min 3
P6 7/27/19 36 min 4
P7 7/30/19 48 min 5
P8 8/4/19 44 min 5
P9 8/3/19 27 min 4
P10 7/31/19 25 min 4
P11 7/30/19 64 min 7
P12 8/28/19 32 min 4
P13 8/22/19 55 min 6
P14 8/21/19 24 min 3
P15 8/1/7/19 35 min 5

After the transcripts were approved by each participant, they were printed and

hung on the researcher’s office wall. Here, the researcher began coding repetitive words

and phrases. These words and phrases were highlighted with different colored markers.

None of the participants was familiar with the researcher. Each participant

appeared to be at ease with the questions and the researcher. Participants explained their

thoughts and experiences for each question pertaining to climate and culture, school

leadership, union lobbying, teacher accountability, bargaining, and how each has possibly

influenced student achievement. All but one of the participants seemed to enjoy the

conversation and freely shared their thoughts answering all the questions. When asked

question #5, one participant responded with a long pause, “I don’t know…I’m not sure.”

The researcher came back to the question at the end of the interview, encouraging a
 133

response but the participate was still not able to respond. As Yin (2016) noted, sharing

lived experiences can enhance the research and contribute to developing themes.

The researcher’s experience with the political climate in Wisconsin was

advantageous because all participants discussed the previous governor’s Act 10, and its

implications on the teaching profession, school climate and culture, and student

achievement. Act 10 was passed in response to the state’s budget crisis when the new

governor took office. Governor Walker implemented Act 10 as means for the State of

Wisconsin to save money (Baron, 2018). All public workers, including teachers, were

now offered the option of joining their respective union whereas previously, unionism

was legislatively mandated for all public workers in the state. This was discussed at

length in Chapter 2. For example, P3 explaining on Question #3, “I’m not from this

country, and came in after Act 10…I never heard of Scott Walker…I got to see how

much of a controversial topic it was…and it continues to grow.” P7 expanded on the

political climate in Wisconsin with Question #2, “When Act 10 first went down, people

were calling for teachers to be fired. People were being called ‘piece of [expletive]

teachers.’” Later, in Question #8, P3 expanded with, “Wisconsin used to be one of the top

states in education, our universities used to be the best, but now we are just average after

Act 10. Then Walker came in and did the opposite with Act 10 and developed anti-

teachers in the state….” Yin (2016) notes, as a researcher studies the culture of a group of

people, it is important to capture their “language and habits” (p. 166). Understanding the

culture of teachers and the impact of Act 10 on said teachers, enabled the researcher to

capture the language and habits of the participants as described by Yin (2016).
 134

Archival data protocol. Publicly available data from (a) Wisconsin DPI, (b)

Wisconsin Legislative Documents, (c) Rules and Laws of the DPI, (d) Wisconsin State

Law Library and (e) WEAC Legislative Updates were reviewed to develop a deeper

understanding of the four themes found in the literature. Table 4 describes the data

garnered from each entity as it pertains to each theme. Each contributed in various ways

to enhance clarification of how legislative activities, WEAC, and the law could possibly

influence student achievement. The Wisconsin Educational Law Library was also

researched but proved to be of no use to the research being conducted, therefore it was

not included. See Table 4 for more information on the archival data used in the data.
 135

Table 4.

Archival Data and Literature Review Themes

Entity Theme 1: Unions Theme 2: Unions Theme 3: Unions Theme 4: Union
standardize education lobby for educational support educational lobbying affects
strategies and strategies and students through
approaches approaches teachers
WI DPI Informational Paper Informational Paper Informational Paper n/a
26: Open Enrollment 26: Open Enrollment 26: Open Enrollment
Program Program Program
Informational Paper Informational Paper Informational Paper
28: Pupil Assessment 28: Pupil Assessment 28: Pupil Assessment

Rules and Laws n/a n/a n/a Assembly Bill 681

DPI

Wisconsin n/a n/a n/a n/a

Educational
Library

WI State Law n/a n/a n/a n/a

Library

WI Legislative Act 20: School Assembly Bill 315: Chapter 115:

Documents Accountability reduce aid to public n/a explains
Senate Bill 33: schools when a student superintendent role,
Achievement Gap attends a private school definitions for
Reduction Assembly Bill 319: students with
Senate Bill 245: reduce funding for disabilities, mental
Achievement Gap special education health training,
Reduction Program Chapter 115: explains Smarter Balanced
superintendent role, Assessment
Senate Bill 640
definitions for students WI State Legislature Consortium
(2015): Wisconsin
with disabilities, Chapter P1 1: (SBAC), Common
Act 212
mental health training, Complaint and Core state
Smarter Balanced Resolutions Appeals initiatives
Assessment
Consortium (SBAC),
Common Core state
initiatives

WEAC Legislative2017-2018 WEAC n/a n/a 2017-2018 WEAC

Updates Position Document Position Document

Data Analysis Procedures

The following data analysis procedures explain how the data were collected,

prepared, reviewed, and analyzed. Using triangulated data from participant responses on

the questionnaire and from the interviews, the researcher coded the responses. Responses
 136

were grouped into codes at a first and second level. Then categories were inductively

extracted from the second level codes. Finally, categories were grouped into themes that

answered the over-arching question: What are the perceptions of Wisconsin public school

teachers on the possible influence on the teachers’ union on student achievement?

Collection and preparation of data. This qualitative case study explored the

phenomenon of the perceptions of public-school teachers on the possible influence of the

teachers’ union on student achievement. The purpose of the data analysis procedure in a

qualitative case study is to bring more depth of understanding (Clausen, 2012). To

achieve this, the raw data must be scrutinized, codes and categories must be created, and

themes must be identified (Yin, 2016). The data analysis procedure was aligned with

Bloomberg and Volpe’s (2019) data analysis steps.

First, the data from the online questionnaire and interviews was read, reviewed,

interpreted, and similar responses were highlighted using various colors to potentially

match codes to the four themes found in literature discussed in Chapter 2. Another color

was used to highlight similar responses that possibly indicated a new category. Usually

similar responses elicited initial codes, and this was the case with analyzing this raw data

(Appendix H). A second review of the raw data resulted in new codes (Appendix H) and

categories (Appendix H.3), which resulted in the themes that emerged. Merriam and

Tisdell (2016) say coding is a shorthand messaging system clear to the researcher that

allows the researcher to retrieve easily specific pieces of the data. The researcher was

able to identify multiple codes within the raw data from both the online questionnaire and

the interviews. Taking the raw data from both the interviews and the questionnaire, the

data were read through multiple times and each common phrase or words were
 137

highlighted with colored highlighters. As redundancy occurred and phrases and words

repeated, they were grouped into categories.

In Chapter 3, a computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software program was

included as part of the data analysis procedures, which received Academic Quality

Review (AQR) and Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. However, the researcher

determined hand-coding would be a better approach after initially reviewing the raw data.

The rationale for this change began once the researcher started reviewing the raw data,

creating a codebook, identifying categories and themes, and noticed similar responses

across participant conversation; it was more cohesive to use hand-coding. Hand-coding

better depicted the responses and interactions with the participants than the use of a

computer-assisted qualitative data software program. Hand-coding led to a deeper and

greater understanding of the information presented from the online questionnaires and

interviews. Clausen (2012) explained that breadth of data collected ensures validity and

fewer pages of raw data ensure transparency. Both of these were accomplished with

hand-coding as presented in Table 5.

Table 5.

Participant Phrase into Code Example RQ2

Code Created Phrase from Participants Participant
Systems Influence Support for my boards has been huge from P2
WEAC.
It’s a trickle-down effect. P5
They’re about scheduling, PD, and pay scales. P6
They help develop leaders. P5
There’s only a lot of bargaining. P6
It’s all about the salary. P1, P2, P5, P6, P10, P12, P14
Prep time was lessened. P1, P2, P5, P6, P10, P12, P14
 138

From the example in Table 5, the code “systems influence” was created from the

participant responses. The participants listed commented on indirect influences such as

support from the union regarding boards, scheduling, bargaining, salary, prep times, and

influencing students from a teacher perspective. The researcher named those inputs

“systems influence.” These systems served as influences from the union on teachers but

not on students or student achievement.

Coding protocol. Saldana (2016) explains that coding is not an exact science and

there is no one right way to code qualitative data, “I must also emphasize at the very

beginning that there are times when coding is absolutely necessary, and times when it is

most inappropriate for the study at hand” (p. 6). To ensure validity, reliability, and

transparency, the researcher utilized a two-tiered process for coding. Merriam and Tisdell

(2016) define coding as “using simple words or short phrases to capture the meaning of a

larger portion of the text” (p. 334). Ultimately, the researcher was responsible for what

was coded and how. Bloomberg and Volpe (2019) suggested using a table to review

codes and to sort participants’ responses. The raw data from a case study can be

overwhelming to manage (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Figure 4 shows the common

phrases and words used by participants that were used in Level 1 coding.
 139

Figure 4. Common words and phrases used by participants.

Level one coding. Upon the completion of the first level of coding, 278 codes

were generated (Appendix H and Appendix I) from all questions from the questionnaire

and interviews combined. These codes represented words or phrases repeatedly used by

participants throughout the questionnaires and interview process as they discussed their

perceptions on the teachers’ union influence on student achievement. To find viable

words and phrases, the researcher read and reread the transcribed conversations, noting

common and repeated words, phrases, descriptions, experiences, and ideas. Those were

noted by hand using a highlighter. Bloomberg and Volpe (2019) called this “open

coding” (p. 242) where the descriptors inductively emerged from the data through

reading, marking, and labeling. The comments from the questionnaires and transcribed

interviews were developed into a three-tiered matrix, as suggested by Bloomberg and

Volpe (2019) where the words and phrases commonly heard during the interview process

were highlighted (Appendix H). The second research question asked what possible

influences teachers perceived from the teachers’ union, which elicited 26 codes such as

“zero,” “salary,” “support for my boards,” and “representing student diversity.” These

highlighted phrases and words were again read and reread to find common ideas or
 140

phrases that led to categories. Once this happened, the researcher determined data

saturation had been achieved. This led to Level 2 categories (Appendix J). Table 6

highlights samples of the simple words or short phrases used for level one coding from

the raw data collected for each research question.

Table 6.

Participant Response Code

P10 “When you have a school based on ‘I can, We will’ Teacher autonomy
mentality, you’ve limited just about everything. Accountability
P10 “Standardized testing isn’t a measure of achievement; Standardize education
it’s a measure of income.”
P4 “The union doesn’t fight for curricula or direct impact on Lobby for educational
students.” strategies/approaches
Supportive of educational
strategies/approaches
P14 “We have to be held accountable to do our job.” Accountability
Examples of Phrases or Words Used for Level 1 Coding for both Research Questions

Level two coding. The second level of categorizing included combining words

and/or phrases with like concepts or meaning (Appendix J). In the qualitative process of

talking to participants, the goal was to understand their experiences and their perceptions.

Keeping this in mind, the researcher kept the conceptual framework flexible and open to

change throughout the analytic process. During the second level, the researcher focused

on developing a conceptual framework that aligned with the research questions. Merriam

and Tisdell (2016) call this “finding the trees in the forest” (pp. 207-208). In Table 7,

common phrases from Level 2 were highlighted and color-coded according to the

research question. Pertaining to the first research question, codes from the questionnaire

included phrases or words such as, “it’s not their focus” and, “lobby for ineffective

teachers.” Codes from the interview included phrases and words such as, “none,” “the
 141

union does nothing for the kids,” and “none whatsoever.” Combining these sentiments

from the participants lead to a Level 2 code of little to no perception or influence.

Table 7.

Participant Comment Level 2 Code

PQ: I feel to a good extent, but again, in my opinion, it’s not their focus. Very little
PQ: The fact they lobby to protect ineffective teachers shows they have no Hinders education
intent but to hinder education. Does nothing
P1: None
P9: The union does nothing for kids.
P10: None, whatsoever.

PQ: I believe 100% the union lobbies for various educational strategies and Differentiation
approaches that help education. Educator Effectiveness
PQ: A lot of influence, especially with outdated curriculum. Supports teachers
P13: I get feedback from my admins Salary
P12: My admin requires Danielson.
Examples of Level 2 Coding

Using two levels of reviewing the data allowed the researcher to review and

analyze the data retrieved from the questionnaires and transcribed interviews directly

from the participants. Level 1, as indicated in Figure 1, explored larger and more general

codes. This captured the major words or phrases used by participants. Level 2, as

indicated in Figure 2, narrowed down the words and phrases into categories for each

research question and were labeled as themes. The third step in coding was identifying

the themes that emerged from the data, which are found in Appendix I.

Identifying categories. After identifying codes in the first level of coding, then

combining those codes into stronger and more common codes, the common phrases and

words were categorized. For example, addressing the first research question, common

codes from the questionnaire were identified such as “unions help us through boards,”

“they will support me,” and “I believe the union is pretty good at supporting teachers.”
 142

These were then combined with “the teachers’ union is an advocate for all people,” and

“the teachers’ union lobbies for kids through the teachers.” When combined into the

category of supporting teachers and students, the theme that emerged was, “perception of

indirect influence.” See Table 8.

Table 8.

Code Category
Do more interesting things in the classroom Teaching
Teachers make more interesting lessons
Standards-based grading
Qualified teachers

Danielson Teacher evaluations

Educator Effectiveness
My principal lets me teach
Examples of Codes to Categories

Identifying themes. All of the codes from each research question were listed in

the codebook, then analyzed for common patterns and categorized. The categories were

further scrutinized and analyzed for repetitive ideas and words. These became the themes

for each research question, as well as the over-arching question (Appendix L). Table 9

illustrates the flow of codes to categories to themes.

Table 9.

Examples of Codes to Categories to Themes

 143

Category Theme
None No influence on student achievement
Doesn’t lobby for a certain program
Very little/negative influence
Hinders education

Educator Effectiveness Systems influence

Supports teachers
Scheduling
Salary

Differentiation Pedagogy
Re-evaluates outdated strategies
Archival data. The last step in the data analysis process was to consider the

findings within the archival data. Appendix G and Table 4 explain how the data found

from the online and publicly available sources aligned with the themes found in the

literature. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) discuss archival data as those data as “things that

cannot be observed” (p. 164) and were vital to qualitative research in that they can

construct, deconstruct and reconstruct social reality. These meta-analyses can contribute

to an increased understanding of the phenomenon.

Triangulating the data. Multiple sources of data were frequently used within

qualitative research to develop a more complex understanding of the phenomenon within

the study (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019). The researcher used a combination of online

questionnaires, interviews, and archival data to afford an in-depth understanding of the

perceptions of teachers on the possible influence of the teachers’ union on student

achievement. A review of archival data showed that WEAC (2019) explains two

resolutions considered current to serve as policy direction: (a) to serve as the State’s

voice for education to promote education quality, curriculum, assessment, and (b) to

promote quality education, curriculum, and assessment. An analysis and meta-analysis of

the data provided through the online questionnaires and interviews showed a discrepancy
 144

in these resolutions. P1 explained, “They [administration] was stymied by the union.

There was nothing they could do.” However, P3 shared, “I have a feeling we’d be greatly

limited if we didn’t have them [the union] fighting for us.” Most participants were more

closely aligned with P1’s sentiments. While these did not align, triangulating the data

allowed the researcher to explore further the phenomenon within these parameters. Figure

5 shares how the three sources of data were triangulated into data. More details will be

shared in the next section.

Questionnaire Interviews Archival

37 15 Data
participants participants

Figure 5. Triangulating the data.

Potential effects on the data. Participants offered many insights and lived

experiences (Patton, 2015) into their perceptions of the possible influence the teachers’

union has on student achievement. These codes translated to categories, which were

mainstreamed into themes, and aligned to each research question and the macro question.

The potential effects on the data from these codes and categories may lend themselves to

generating new theoretical insights about the phenomenon. When qualitative data were

analyzed, they were rarely done linearly, and other themes may have emerged that were

not found in the literature or discussed within the realm of the phenomenon. However, all

data in this study were reviewed carefully for relevance and meaningfulness throughout

the coding, categorizing, and thematic processes.

 145

Credibility and trustworthiness. Stake (2010), Merriam and Tisdell (2016), and

Yin (2016) all explain that triangulating data will increase validity and reliability. In this

research, archival data, online questionnaires, and interviews were used contributing to

validity and reliability. The uses of a variety of resources to cross check the results. Next,

after each interview, transcripts were sent to each participant within 24 hours for member

checking. Participants were asked to return the reviewed transcript with approval or

corrections within one week, but all returned them within 24 hours. All verified that their

ideas, perceptions, and experiences were accurately captured. Merriam and Tisdell (2016)

discuss member-checking as a method to provide validity and reliability to a study.

Results

This section provides a summary in narrative form and an analysis of the data in a

nonevaluative, unbiased, and organized manner that directly relates to the study

phenomenon: “How do Wisconsin public school teachers perceive the possible influence

from the teachers’ union on student achievement?” In this section, this macro-level

question was synthesized into two research questions: RQ1: How do teachers perceive the

influence of a teachers’ union on student achievement? RQ2: What, if any, types of union

influence do the teachers perceive? The responses to the two questions were analyzed and

the results summarized to give a better understanding of what Wisconsin teachers

perceive to be true of the union on student achievement.

This section was organized by themes relating to each research question. First,

each research question was listed, addressed, and the coded themes which inductively

emerged from the data were addressed through evidence presented from various

participants, where relevant. Finally, the macro-level question was addressed similarly.
 146

This allows the common themes, comments, thoughts, and ideas from the participants to

be cumulated in one final large picture. The research questions were addressed in six

online questionnaire questions and eight interview questions of which two themes

emerged for RQ1: How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student

achievement (1) there is a perception of very little or no student achievement support, and

the union (2) supports teachers, not students. From the online questionnaire and

interviews, three themes emerged for RQ2: What, if any, types of union influence do the

teachers perceive (1) teacher schedules and salary, (2) pedagogy, (3) Act 10. Combining

the themes found while addressing the two research questions led to general themes that

addressed the phenomenon, “What are the perceptions of public-school teachers of the

possible influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement?” These three included:

(1) pedagogy (2) more influence on teachers than students did (3) no perceptions of

influence on student achievement. As discussed earlier in the chapter, the inherent nature

of qualitative data analysis can lead to themes that were not anticipated through a

literature review. In this case, a new theme emerged that did not align with RQ1 or 2, or

with the phenomenological question. Participants introduced the unanticipated theme of

Act 10 through the online questionnaire and during the interviews. This theme is

discussed at the end of this section.

Research question 1. How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’

union on student achievement?

1. Teachers perceive very little to no influence from the union on student

achievement.

2. Teachers perceive an indirect influence.

 147

Theme 1: Perception of very little or no influence. While all the questionnaire

and interview questions addressed student achievement to some extent, questionnaire

question #8 and interview questions #5 and #7 focused on what kind of support teachers

perceived from the union for their students’ achievement. Questionnaire question #8

specifically asks, “To what extent do you believe the teachers’ union lobbies for various

educational strategies and approaches that help education?” While 27 participants were

presented with the question, 16 answered in either a positive or negative manner, one

indicated being “unsure,” and 11 provided a response but did not address the question. Of

the 16 who responded in a positive or negative manner, eight indicated they perceived the

union to lobby in benefit of student achievement. However, of those eight, none

expanded on their answer other than “A lot,” or “To a great extent.”

Conversely, questionnaire question #9 asks, “To what extent do you believe the

teachers’ union lobbies for various educational strategies that hinder education?”

Participants responded that, “They just want what is right for themselves.” Another

participant indicated the union was “a lot, especially with outdated curriculum.” A third

response reads, “The fact that they lobby to protect ineffective educators shows they have

no intent but to hinder education.”

Interview questions #5 and #7 required teachers to think about their perceptions of

influence from the teachers’ union on their accountability to students, and what influence

their accountability had on student achievement, respectively. Of the fifteen participants

interviewed, all but one indicated no influence or support from the teachers’ union on

their own professional accountability. However, all but one of the fifteen indicated

accountability came from themselves or from a combination of themselves and

 148

administration. P12, the only participant whose response was not indicative of

accountability explained it, “I really don’t know. I think…how do I say this…I think it’s

about survival at MPS.” When discussing self-accountability, 93% said they held

themselves accountable. P11 explained how he holds himself accountable:

My accountability is the look on my students’ faces – that’s my accountability.

When a student says, “I don’t get it,” I have to find a better way to do it. I get

feedback from my admins, but I ignore them – they’re admin, not teachers. I’ve

been teaching for 25 years, and I can read my students’ faces.

P15 also explained her self-accountability in a similar manner, “Well, uh, I think

accountability comes from myself than anyone else. Because of that, I think, ‘What can I

do? How can I change it?’” Similarly, P1, P9, P10, and P15 indicated that they felt no

influence at all from the teachers’ union on either their accountability or on student

achievement.

Theme 2: Indirect influence. The phenomenon of the perceptions teachers hold

on the possible influence from the teachers’ union on student achievement was embedded

in all questions in the questionnaire and interviews. Throughout both, teachers indicated

there was a “systems influence” on student achievement from the teachers’ union. A

systems influence is being defined as third party influencers such as a strong

administration or union assistance for the teacher. Teachers from the questionnaire

indicated indirect influence from DPI, administration, or school boards. Teachers from

the interviews explained some of the systems influences with the same terms. P1 said,

“Some of the principals focused on it [student achievement] because their jobs depended

on it.” P3 explained, “If you’re doing well on the Danielson model, you’ll be doing well
 149

with achievement.” These two systems had both DPI and administrative influences on

student achievement. Contrary to the majority of teachers, one participant responded to

question #6, “Please think about ways you are held accountable to your students and their

achievement. What, if any, influence from the teachers’ union do you see in your

measures of accountability?” P2 responded this way:

I go back to the support I have for my NBC [National Board Certification].

Different supports – collecting data, ideas, support through meetings, others going

through the process – helped me change how I work with students and opened my

mind to what else I can be doing to help.

While this support from the union does not directly influence student achievement, the

support influences this particular teacher who, in turn, influences students.

Research question 2. What, if any, types of union influence do the teachers

perceive?

1. Teacher schedules and salary

2. Pedagogy

3. State political activity

Theme 1: Teachers schedules and salary. This research question allowed the

researcher to find what influence teachers were perceiving from the teachers’ union. The

question was designed to not focus on student achievement and allow an open discussion

on experiences, ideas, and thoughts on what the teachers’ union might be doing for

teachers in public schools in Wisconsin. Of the 42 respondents, 100% of them indicated

the greatest influence they see from the teachers’ union was bargaining for salary and

benefits. However, one participant, P15, indicated she felt this was only to “create

conflict” among members and the community. P15 explained her thoughts on this by
 150

explaining how she views the union coming in to “bully their way to get the public to

listen” and were not happy with changes occurring in salary and benefits.

Other benefits mentioned in the questionnaire and interviews were how the union

bargains for scheduling for working hours and required professional development time,

class size, and amount of staff in the building. While one questionnaire participant

commented on this theme, “Salary has become stagnant and benefits have become

expensive,” the participant did not expand on the definition of benefits. However, several

interview participants commented and expanded on this theme. P3 explained:

I’m happy the union is there – someone has your back. That someone will be

there and make sure we have good teachers there. They help negotiate pay, which

is nice. They helped the para’s [paraprofessionals] get raises, which was really

nice. They helped attract new para’s.

P4 shared how his union fought for getting new school board members, all of which are

union-backed. This participant said, “So lobbying for a salary increase was helped by the

union.” He continued with, “Our prep time was lessened, but the union helped us increase

that, too.” Of the fifteen participants, 80% contributed to the development of this theme

by discussing how they perceived the union influencing salary, working conditions, staff

numbers, and class sizes. Two of the participants did not join the union, and one person

indicated they did not know of any bargaining that union did on their behalf.

Theme 2: Pedagogy. Participants indicated this as a theme through discourse of

how they believe the union was working to lobby for new strategies and approaches to

education, in the field of education, this was called pedagogy. However, it was important

to note this theme came more from the online questionnaire than the interviews. The
 151

questionnaire directly asked to what extent the participant believes the union helps or

hinders educational strategies. The interview questions did not directly address this

concern, but responses to the affirmative and negative were noted. Responses from the

online questionnaire indicate eight participants who see this was a strong focus of the

teachers’ union. While seven of those indicate a strong belief, one responded, “I feel this

is the case to a good extent, but I also feel it is not their focus.” On the contrary, a few

participants commented on the questionnaire that they do not feel pedagogy was a

priority for the union. Four participants commented that they felt this not to be true “at

all.”

The responses in the interviews indicated that when the union was not a strong

presence, P3 felt that there was more autonomy in the classroom. One participant, P2,

indicated he felt that since he had support from the union when obtaining his National

Board Certification (NBC), he was able to produce better lessons, i.e. pedagogy. Other

participants from the interview did not discuss union influence on pedagogy.

Theme 3: Act 10. Act 10 was passed by legislation in 2012 in response to

Wisconsin’s budget deficit. The Act affected teachers in that they were no longer

legislatively mandated to be a part of the state and national teachers’ union. However, the

Act also led to changes in public schools that many participants brought up during the

interviews. Participants discussed Act 10 in relation to teacher affects such as schedules,

salary, hiring, and retirements. Some participants also indicated an awareness that while

they were not mandated to be a part of the union, their school districts did vote to become

unionized. Out of 15 interview participants, four indicated they were not in the union. Of
 152

those who indicated union membership, P3 indicated appreciation for the union, “We’d

be greatly limited if we didn’t have them fighting for us.”

Phenomenological question. What were the perceptions of Wisconsin public

school teachers of the teachers’ union possible influence on student achievement?

1. More influence for teachers than students

2. Teachers hold very little to no perception of union influence on student

achievement

3. Pedagogy

Theme 1: More influence on teachers than on students. The majority of

participants, 93%, indicated they felt the union had more influence and focus on teachers

than on students. Many referred to Act 10 as the reason for this as Act 10 allows districts

to only bargain on behalf of the teachers. Some teachers indicated through the

questionnaire and in the interviews, they felt the union was working toward pedagogical

processes (Theme 4), as well. Ways participants indicated more influence on teachers

included:

• Support and assistance with NBC (P2)

• A “trickle down” effect where the teachers have union benefits which in turn,
benefits students (P5, P9, & P15)

• Protect the quality of teachers (P3, P6, & P7)

• Protect bad teachers (P9, P15)

• Support in implementing Educator Effectiveness/the Danielson model (P2, P8,

P7, P11, P13)

Theme 2: Little to no influence on student achievement. Across the two research

questions, participants responded in both the questionnaire and during the interviews

stating a total of 19 times that, they felt the union did nothing for student achievement. As
 153

theme 2 indicates, participants feel the focus was on teachers through theme 4, pedagogy.

Regarding the question, “To what extent do you believe the teachers’ union lobbying

results in greater benefits for students than teachers?” fifteen respondents addressed the

question. Of those fifteen, seven indicate the saw no benefit from the teachers’ union for

students. Four replied they felt a strong belief to that statement and four were either

unsure or believed the extent was equal between teachers and students.

Within the interviews, 26 responses were indicated in the negative to the question

out of 37, “What, if any, influences from union lobbying have you seen on student

achievement?” Teachers indicated they felt, overall, that lobbying benefitted teachers (see

Theme 3) over students. Some teachers had strong feelings to this question with answers

such as, “Absolutely nothing FOR the kids” stated P8. P1 also responded very clearly in

the negative with, “None.” Other responses included:

• It’s all about the teachers (P1).

• It’s trickle-down, teachers were first (P5).

• Indirectly, and It’s the teachers who lobby for the students (P10).

• They don’t do anything or help the teachers to be better at their job (P15).

Theme 3: Pedagogy. Data showed 60% of participants felt personally accountable

for student achievement through their teaching practices, or pedagogy. Almost all of the

participants, (93%) indicated they felt the teachers’ union had no accountability to

student achievement (see Table 10). As shown in Table 10, 86% of participants indicated

they felt solely responsible for the success of their students’ achievement. The remainder

(14%) discussed a quality partnership between administration and teaching staff. Two

participants indicated support from WEAC in pedagogical processes. P2 discussed union

 154

support for National Board Certification (NBC), and P7 felt support in the area of

pedagogy with the Educator Effectiveness process.


Table 10.
Pedagogical Processes to Accountability: Positive
Q6: Please think about ways you are held
accountable to your students and their
achievement. What, if any, influence from the
teachers’ union do you see in your measures of
accountability?
POSITIVE
P2: I go back for the support for my NCB.
P7: I feel like our union is pretty good in
supporting teachers in processes like Educator
Effectiveness
Some participants felt they were offered no support from WEAC on the pedagogy
in their classrooms. Table 11 shows pedagogical processes to accountability with
155
Q7: Continuing your thoughts on accountability, what,
if any, influence do you think it has on student
achievement?
POSITIVE
P1: The teachers need to reflect on their lesson – if a
kid failed a test for me, I would bring them in and do
re-teaching.
P2: [using data] Before I did it as a means to an end,
but now I use that information to better support the
students. Now I can take what they’ve done and go
forward or deeper.
P5: I want that accountability from others so I can
improve – I like to think I’m perfect, but I know I’m
not, so I always want to improve.
P6: [As a special education teacher writing IEPs]
Something that will help them to be more successful –
maybe it’s more time, rephrased questions, take a test
alone (accommodation). That’s a huge accountability
piece.
P7: For the achievement of my students, it’s a huge
personal thing. I take great pride in my pass rate.
P8: It has huge impact. [Grade level team and
participant] are always adjusting to make sure kids are
succeeding.
P9: And so like, for example, I place a big emphasis on
preparing for the ACT since it’s a measure of
accountability for the school and the kids.
P10: I like to hold myself accountable. I have a certain
failure rate I hold myself to – and an achievement rate.
P11: The way I hold myself accountable is the looks on
my students’ faces – that’s my “accountable.”
P12: Our accountability? As a teacher? HUGE! It’s
what it’s all about.
P15: I think accountability comes from myself than
anyone else. Because of that, I think, ‘What can I do?
How can I change it?’
 156

negative comments from participants. P3 and P15 discuss how they feel about funding

and student success. P4 says, “They [the union] don’t fight for curricula.” P1, P9, P10 all

share sentiments that they feel the union does nothing or very little for student

achievement. Lastly, P8 negates P7’s thoughts on Educator Effectiveness and shared that

he felt this system does not help student achievement.

Table 11.

Pedagogical Processes to Accountability: Negative

Q6: Please think about ways you are held accountable Q7: Continuing your thoughts on accountability,
to your students and their achievement. What, if any, what, if any, influence do you think it has on
influence from the teachers’ union do you see in your student achievement?
measures of accountability?
NEGATIVE NEGATIVE
P1: No, not from the union. (No comments.)
P3: I feel threats if we don’t have X level of A, we
lose funding.
P4: The union doesn’t fight for curricula or direct
impact on students
P8: Like the Educator Effectiveness – no one likes it.
It’s a pain in the [expletive].
P9: No, none whatsoever.
P10: As far as the students, I would say very minimal.
P11: The union now has a rule that even if a kid
doesn’t do the work, they still get a 40%. It makes it
hard to convince kids to work hard enough to pass
this class. So, right there is your answer.
P12: But when there are grievances, we don’t like to
support the teachers who haven’t been strong teachers
or advocates, not there for the students or part of the
program.
P13: Oh, that’s tough…I don’t think the union is
affecting my accountability as a staff member in the
building.
P14: No.
P15: It’s about money, the conflict, keeping the bad
teacher.

Unanticipated insight: State political activity. Of the 42 participants in both the

online questionnaire and interviews, 100% discussed state political activity as it relates to

public schools in Wisconsin. Thirty-eight of the 42 used various negative methods of

 157

expressing their thoughts about this theme from using expletives, to sarcasm “...when

lovely Act 10 was passed….” (P4). Overall, the participants indicated they did not like

the political climate in the state surrounding public education. Comments from the online

questionnaire included, “I believe teachers want more and want better benefits. While

that was important, sometimes that focus goes to the teachers instead of the students.”

Another questionnaire participant explained, “It should never be about the teachers, even

though benefits is [sic] another issue. The main focus should be around the students.”

With the implementation of Act 10, schools and unions were only allowed to bargain for

benefits through CBAs. Participants referred to this by directly naming the political

activity or discussing the parameters of the activity such as benefits.

Of the 42 participants from both the online questionnaire and interviews, three

commented positively on the union’s state political activity. It was important to note that

the questionnaire did not give participants a direct opportunity to expand on personal

thoughts toward the union, but the interview, question #8, “Lastly, let’s talk about

bargaining. If your school is unionized, what times of bargaining does your union do for

you?” This question indirectly allowed participants to expand on their thoughts and

attitudes toward the union and the pros and cons of its bargaining for members. P3

indicated:

I’m happy that the union is there – someone to have your back. That someone will

be there and make sure we have good teachers there. They help negotiate pay,

which is nice. They helped the paras [paraprofessionals] get raises, which was

really nice. It helps attract new paras. Costs were rising and unions care about
 158

that, as well as teachers and paras. We have to keep up with all around increases

in costs and pay.

Another participant, P4, believes in the “power” of the union in regard to building

staff strength in lobbying efforts in conjunction with the union. The participant explained

that most of her school was in the union because “they understand the power of the

union.” She goes on to say, “There’s power in having most of the staff in the union.” A

last participant indicated she was happy with how the union bargained for an early

retirement package, “That was significant.” She believes the bargaining power of the

union for insurance, pay, and retirement is “extremely beneficial to keep staff longer.”

It was important to note that the term “Act 10” was used ten times across

participants. One questionnaire participant commented on Question #10, “To what extent

do you believe the teachers’ union lobbying results in greater benefits for teachers and

students?”

I think for the recent budget proposal that union has lobbied more on behalf of

students than teachers. Since Act 10, I do not believe that union has lobbied for

pay or benefit increases. This is actually detrimental to education as we were

seeing more teacher shortages in WI as well as far less people entering the field. I

think they should lobby for teachers than they do. WI ranks 43rd in teacher pay

and benefits.

Nine questionnaire participants also discussed Act 10 in their responses. One

participant, P7, referenced to Act 10 four times. He explained he believes Act 10

negatively affected the number of teachers applying for teaching positions within the

state. The remaining eight participants also negatively addressed Act 10 with comments
 159

such as, “We are not a unionized school because of the wonderful [said with sarcasm]

Act 10” from P4. Also, “I’m not from this country, and came in after Act 10 – never

heard of it or Scott Walker – and I see all the great things the union can do for teachers,

that they’re protected” Stated P3). P10 shared his thoughts on Act 10, “The union doesn’t

have a lot of say because of Act 10 – we don’t have contracts, we have policies.” Later,

with Question #3, “Continuing your thoughts on the leadership in your school, what, if

any, influence do you see on leadership in your school?” his response was, “Since Act 10,

I know the union has been trying to keep as many members as it can, and also create a

media impression through the news where teachers are working hard.”

Summary of results. This section provided a narrative of the data analysis and

findings as they related to the study phenomenon, “How do Wisconsin teachers perceive

the possible influence from the teachers’ union on student achievement?” The

phenomenon was synthesized into two research questions, RQ1: How do teachers

perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student achievement? RQ2: What, if any,

types of union influence do teachers perceive? The responses to the questions were

analyzed and shared in a nonevaluative, unbiased, and organized manner. This

contributed to the literature by providing a better understand of what Wisconsin teachers

perceive to be true of the union on student achievement.

The section was organized by first introducing each research question and the

themes discovered in a thorough analysis of the data for each. Codes were found,

categorized, and then themes emerged inductively from the evidence provided by the

various participants in both the questionnaire and the interviews. Then, the
 160

phenomenological question was addressed in a similar manner as the thoughts, ideas, and

perceptions of participants cumulatively emerged.

The following themes were found for RQ1: How do teachers perceive the

influence of a teachers’ union on student achievement (1) there is a perception of very

little or no student achievement support, (2) supports teachers, not students. Themes

which emerged for RQ2 What, if any, types of union influence do the teachers perceive

include (1) teacher schedules and salary, (2) very little or no influence on student

achievement, (3) pedagogy, (4) Act 10. In response to the macro-question, three themes

were found which included (1) pedagogy, (2) more influence on teachers than students

did, and (3) no perceptions of influence on student achievement.

Summary

This qualitative case study sought to explore the perceptions public school

teachers in Wisconsin hold about the possible influence of unions on student

achievement. The population included any current or retired teacher in Wisconsin in a

public school with three or more years’ teaching experience. Methods of triangulation

included an online questionnaire, interviews, and a review of archival data to answer two

micro-research questions: RQ1: How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’

union on student achievement and RQ2: What, if any, types of union influence do the

teachers perceive? Data were retrieved from six questions in an online questionnaire and

eight questions in an interview with each participant. The interviews were transcribed and

to ensure trustworthiness, each participant received a copy of their transcribed interview

for member checking. The data were hand-coded and analyzed for codes and themes, of

which several emerged for the over-arching question and two research questions.
 161

The first research question: “How do teachers perceive the influence of a

teachers’ union on student achievement?” This question had two themes emerge: (1) very

little to no influence on student achievement, and (2) systems influence. The second

research question: “What, if any, types of union influence do the teachers perceive?” This

question had three themes emerge: (1) systems influence, (2) Act 10, and (3) pedagogy.

The over-arching question, “What are the perceptions of Wisconsin public school

teachers on the possible influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement?” had

three themes emerge from the data (1) no influence on student achievement, (2) more

influence on teachers than students, and (3) pedagogy. There was one unanticipated

insight that emerged from the data from participants, (1) state political activity. The

participants, all of whom met the inclusion criteria explained above and in Chapter 3,

seemed to answer all questions with open honesty, and some with great passion. The

researcher did not have any predisposed expectations of what the results would reveal.

Analysis of the data revealed that teachers, overall, do not see an influence from the

teachers’ union on student achievement. Instead, they see themselves, as professionals,

responsible for teaching methods of achievement to their students.

Limitations. During the participant seeking process, the researcher found that

prospective participants were not willing to be recorded, often citing fear of the union

being able to identify them if security was breached. Despite being assured this would

not happen and explaining the security measures in place and required by law, no

participants were willing to be recorded. Guest et al. (2013) explain this can happen when

material was so sensitive that interviewees were not willing to provide permission to be

recorded. The same researchers indicate this reason was compelling enough to not
 162

electronically record interviews but to hand record. When the researcher adjusted the

participation requirements accordingly not to include recorded interviews, fifteen

participants were more easily secured.

Another limitation was lack of information or clarity about a question from the

participant. For example, when Question #6 was asked, “What, if any, influence from the

teachers’ union do you see in your measures of accountability?” P5 answered, “I’m not

totally sure if we’re talking about the teachers’ union specifically.” P14 indicated

unsureness on Question #5, “Let’s talk about teacher union lobbying. What, if any,

influence from the union lobbying have you seen on student achievement?” This

participant responded with a long pause and then, “I don’t know…I am not sure…”

Neither were able to respond beyond their lack of knowledge.

A fourth limitation was that of legalities. During the course of this study,

Wisconsin passed Act 10, an act was designed to relieve the State of its financial deficits

by allowing public school teachers to choose union membership rather than legally

mandate it. Act 10 led to Wisconsin becoming a Right to Work state where no union

membership was expected unless the school district voted to unionize. In 2018, the

United States Supreme Court handed down its decision on Janus vs. AFSCME. This

decision allowed all workers across the country to be a member of a union if they chose;

union membership could no longer be mandated by any state. These decisions affected

public school educators in Wisconsin and was reflected in the data. These changes may

have limited, changed, or influenced how teachers perceive the possible influence of the

teachers’ union on student achievement.

 163

The last possible limitation was the change in how the raw data were coded.

Chapter 3 indicated review and approval from Academic Quality Review (AQR) and

Institutional Review Board (IRB) for the use of coding using a computer-assisted

qualitative data analysis program called MAXQDA. However, once the raw data were

collected and initial review and coding began, the researcher found hand-coding to be

more useful and appropriate. Therefore, the codes and themes were not verified as

originally planned and approved, yet the researcher manually verified all codes and

themes by highlighting and cross-checking the data several times (Appendix G and

Appendix H).

The final chapter, Chapter 5, includes a summary of the findings and conclusion.

The chapter also includes theoretical, practical, and future potential implications as well

as strengths and weaknesses in the study. It also includes recommendations for future

research.
 164

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations

Introduction and Summary of Study

The intent of this qualitative case study was to explore the perceptions public

school teachers in Wisconsin have on the possible influence of the teachers’ union on

student achievement. Wisconsin made international headlines in 2010 when the then

governor candidate, Scott Walker, proposed revoking mandated union membership,

called “Act 10,” for all public workers, including teachers, in the state (DiSalvo, 2015).

The state’s teacher union, WEAC, was instituted in 1972 (WEAC, 2019) in response to

the passage of a collective bargaining law for public employees. One of the missions of

WEAC was to work for the protection of children and public education (WEAC, 2019).

When Wisconsin made international headlines about the possible dismantling of the

teachers’ union, many school leaders, teachers, politicians, and community members

were against this legislation (DiSalvo, 2015).

To explore the phenomenon, a thorough review of the literature revealed many

benefits of the union to teachers but lacked evidence to the direct benefit of students

lacked. Carini (2008a) discussed benefits around school inputs, meaning class size, the

number of professional positions within a building or district, mandated breaks during the

workday, work schedules, and professional expectations. Hoxby (1996) focused on

graduation rates because of districts being unionized. Murray (2000) and Kerchner (2004)

both discussed teachers’ perceptions of their union. Being state-specific, Lindy (2011)

and Lang (2015) both provided empirical research on the teacher’s union influence.

Although empirical research showed both teacher support and nonsupport of union

choice, empirical studies have shown mixed effects of unionism on student achievement.
 165

Despite being on world headlines, Wisconsin teacher unions have never been studied. In

addition, with the exception of Murray (2000) and Kerchner (2004) being qualitative in

methodology, the remaining literature reviewed was quantitative in methodology. Baron

(2018), Choi and Chung (2016), and Cowen and Strunk (2015) all agree that further

qualitative research with focused questions for teachers that link together educational

outcomes to union efforts was needed in the field. This research sought to fill this gap in

the literature on the perceptions of teachers on the teachers’ union possible influence of

student achievement.

The general population was public school teachers. The target population was

public school teachers in Wisconsin. This study was guided by an over-arching macro

question and two research questions. The over-arching question: What were the

perceptions of teachers on the possible influence of a teachers’ union on student

achievement in Wisconsin? This led to the research questions:

RQ1: How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student

achievement?

RQ2: What, if any, types of union influence do the teachers perceive?

The researcher used qualitative methodology in a case study to explore the

phenomenon of how Wisconsin public school teachers perceive the possible influence of

the state’s teachers’ union on student achievement. Yin (2016) describes qualitative

research as research that seeks to create understanding of a particular phenomenon. The

approach this study employed was to explore the phenomenon through the lived and real-

life experiences of participants, as Stake (2010) discussed was the goal of qualitative
 166

research. Data were triangulated using an online questionnaire, interviews, and review of

archival data.

Publicly available institutional archival data was collected and reviewed for the

purpose of triangulating data. The researcher obtained archival data from (a) Wisconsin

DPI, (b) Wisconsin Legislative Documents, (c) Rules and Laws of the DPI, (d)

Wisconsin State Law Library and (e) WEAC Legislative Updates. As discussed in

Chapter 4, the data were used to support the data from the online questionnaire and the

interviews.

The data for this study were interpreted using Critical Systems Theory (CST),

developed in response to qualitative research by Watson and Watson (2013) and in

alignment with van Kaam’s modified approach (Moustakas, 1994). The following steps

were utilized, (1) record all statements of relevance to the phenomenon, (2) remove

duplicates and vague comments, (3) list what is left, (4) group into theme categories

(Level 1 - coding), (5) organize the themes with the statements to create a visualization of

the lived experience (Level 2 - categorizing), (6) construct a textual-structural description

from the themes (development of themes), and (7) synthesize the experiences of the

participants. This chapter will provide a summary of the overall study, the findings and

conclusions. The chapter also presents study strengths and weaknesses, and

recommendations for future research and practice, both practical and hypothetical.

Directions for future research close out the chapter.

Summary of Findings and Conclusion

This section presents conclusions based on the data analysis and findings of the

study based on the themes that emerged from the responses through the coding process in
 167

the online questionnaire and interviews. Each research question was presented using a

thorough analysis of the significant themes found by comparing, contrasting, and

discussing them as they related to the existing body of knowledge. All conclusions were

based on the findings within the literature, significance of the study, and how they

advanced scientific knowledge. RQ1 had two themes develop, while RQ2 had four

themes develop, and the over-arching question revealed three themes, as well as an

unanticipated theme separate from the research questions emerged from the data.

Research question 1. How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’

union on student achievement?

1. Very little influence

2. Systems influence

Theme 1: Very little influence. Both the online questionnaire and the interviews

revealed participants felt a lack of support from the teachers’ union on student

achievement. This theme aligns with research that says unions were more focused on

teachers than on students. Carini (2008b), Cowen and Strunk (2015), and Lindy (2011)

all found evidence that stated the unions were in place for teachers over students. While

this was a common belief, the NEA (2019) and WEAC (2019) both state on their

respective websites that these organizations exist also for the betterment of students. The

evidence from this research shows teachers do not see this statement to be true. P1 stated,

“They were really never focused on [student achievement]. At faculty meetings, we

focused on it, but not in reality.” P3 explained his thoughts on the union’s influence on

student achievement:

I think they’re good at watching to keep things good for the students. But on the

other hand, I get real tired of the robo-calls telling me to vote one way or another.
 168

But think the union is there to protect the existence of schools and quality of

teaching. I think they go out and protect our resources.

In reference to Question #6, “Please think about ways you are held accountable to your

students and their achievement. What, if any, influence from the teachers’ union do you

see in your accountability?” P3 said, “The union doesn’t fight for curricula or direct

impact on students.” P5, P9, and P14 all used the phrase “trickle down” effect of union

influence on student achievement. All three participants explained it as a process where

the teachers’ union lobbied for pedagogy, intervention, or school inputs that benefitted a

teacher. In turn, the teachers could use this to impact their students, which may or may

not influence student achievement. The participants said this was an indirect influence on

kids and usually the result of the teacher being autonomous with their preferred

approaches to best influence students. One teacher, P3, had a different view of the

“trickle-down” effect. He explained:

If teachers need something, the union will lobby for what they need to support the

student. We’re seeing a lot more lobbying for our students from

Burma/Sudan…we’ve had a lot of union support to help those students be more

successful. What do teachers need to support these kids? Teachers plus kids plus

union equals success.

This participant looked at one group of students new to the United States instead of total

student achievement. He did later say, “I haven’t seen anything direct. It’s the whole

trickle-down thing again.” See Figure 6 for an explanation of their description of the

“trickle-down effect.”
 169

Student
Teachers’ union Teachers Students
Achievement

Figure 6. Trickle-down effect.

Baron’s (2018) research alluded to a trickle-down effect when Act 10 was

implemented. The author concluded teacher turnover influenced students’ achievement as

evidenced by lower standardized test scores by “roughly 20% of a standard deviation.” (p

54) Baron (2018) also suggests that with new policies through Act 10 in place, districts

will be able to individually negotiate salaries with teachers making the trickle-down

effect more positive for students.

Theme 2: Systems influence. This secondary theme coincides with the first theme

found with RQ1. While in the first theme, teachers did not find any direct influence from

the teachers’ union on student achievement and found student achievement was more

influenced by them the teachers, the second theme indicated an influence by what the

researcher labeled “systems.” The data revealed that student achievement came from a

combination of influences from administration, leadership, parents, teachers, the

community, and the students themselves. Hoxby’s (1996) landmark study attested to the

systems influence and Carini (2008a) also indicated that school inputs influenced student

achievement. These inputs were established by the union, thereby affecting student

achievement. This study indicated more of a systems input; internal and external systems

that were in place to assist students as they move through school, as opposed to union

inputs such as those found through collective bargaining were more prevalent. P3 also

indicated an influence from the Danielson model, which is currently used to evaluate
 170

educator effectiveness in the state of Wisconsin. P3 said, “If you’re doing well on the

Danielson model, you’ll be doing well with achievement.”

Of all participants, 93%, indicated an influence on student achievement from their

administration or school leadership. Within those responses, P10 and P15 explained that

while there is an influence from administrative leadership, ultimately their students’

success came directly from them, as the classroom teacher. Both focused on higher level

learning expectations such as success on the Academic Achievement Test (ACT) or as an

Advanced Placement (AP) student. When asked if teacher accountability influenced

student achievement, P9 exclaimed, “Ummm, yes! Hugely!” Only P12 indicated she did

not know where student success came from. She focused more on her school being about

“survival” rather than success.

Research question 2. What, if any, types of union influence do the teachers

perceive?

1. Teacher salary and benefits

2. Very little or none

3. Pedagogy

4. State political activity

Theme 1: Salary and benefits. This research question was designed to further

explore what influences teachers were perceiving from the teachers’ union and not on

student achievement. The question was designed to allow the participants to open their

dialogue and experiences about the phenomenon, to align with Carini’s (2008a) study

indicating school inputs that influenced student achievement. The overwhelming

response from all participants was “salary and benefits.” After the implementation of Act

10, where union membership was optional instead of legislatively mandated, the union
 171

also became limited in what it could do for teachers. Despite archival data from WEAC

(2019), showing one of the tenets of the union to support students and children in

Wisconsin public schools, the data in this research revealed this was not the case, but

instead, the influence from the union was around salary and benefits. One teacher, P15,

explained this influence as the union coming in to, “bully their way to get the public to

listen” and is not happy with the changes occurring in salary and benefits. P4 had an

opposite response, “So lobbying for a salary increase was helped by the union.” P4

supported this with her explanation, “I’m happy the union is there – someone has your

back. That someone will be there and make sure we have good teachers there. They help

negotiate pay, which is nice.” Other benefits the teacher participants commented on were

benefits for paraprofessionals, working conditions such as hours worked and attendance

at meetings, staff numbers, and class size.

Theme 2: Very little or none. Nineteen responses total between the online

questionnaire and interviews addressed participants’ perception that there was very little

to no influence on student achievement from the teachers’ union. Within the interviews,

five out of the fifteen teachers indicated the unions’ lack of influence on student

achievement. One participant, P13, who is also a union leader at the building level

shared, “They [the union] do nothing for us.” Another participant referred to the union as

it relates to student achievement as “a joke.” Another participant, P13, shared that the

perception teachers share in that building was that the union only creates an illusion of

relevance and does nothing for students or teachers. Several participants used the word

“bully” to describe the union’s possible influence. These candid responses allowed
 172

participants a voice (Choi & Chung, 2016) to express their honest thoughts about their

perceptions of union influence on student achievement.

Theme 3: Pedagogical. The data showed participants viewed pedagogical

processes as a possible influence from the teachers’ union on student achievement, but

they were also clear in that it was an indirect influence through teachers. While

participants from the questionnaire were more direct in their responses, the interview data

also indicated an affirmative to this theme. Participants indicated the union influenced

pedagogical process in their classroom through support in obtaining National Board

Certification, which allowed teachers to produce higher quality and more engaging

lessons. Participants also indicated they felt one of the focuses of union lobbying was for

new and updated teaching strategies and resources. On the contrary, there were a few

participants who commented on the questionnaire that they did not feel pedagogy was a

priority for the union. This theme was conducive to Choi and Chung’s (2016) conclusion

that when teachers were given a voice, they felt empowered and were likely to feel

engaged in their work within an organization. Pedagogy is a form of voice in the field of

education as this allows teachers to design lessons and teach as their professional training

and experience allows them.

Theme 4: Act 10. Act 10 was a legislative effort to reduce the State’s financial

deficit, which affected teachers in that they were no longer legislatively mandated to be a

part of the state and national teachers’ union. However, the Act also led to changes in

public schools that many participants introduced during the interviews. Participants

discussed Act 10 in relation to teacher affects such as schedules, salary, hiring, and

retirements. Some participants also indicated an awareness that while they were not
 173

mandated to be a part of the union, their school districts did vote to become unionized. Of

the fifteen participants in the interviews, four chose not to join the union. Nine

questionnaire participants indicated they were not members of the union. Cowen and

Strunk (2015) conclude:

As policy makers increasingly propose and enact meaningful changes to policies

that teachers’ unions have long protected, implement reforms that unions have

historically opposed, and limit unions’ ability to garner political resources, the

groundwork will be laid for more fruitful avenues of research on not only the

impacts of unionization, but the impacts of unions’ activities and strength on

relevant outcomes. (p. 221)

The research presented here proliferates the sentiment by the authors in that teachers have

shared their perceptions about political reforms in Wisconsin that affect relevant

outcomes such as student achievement.

Over-arching question themes. What are the perceptions of Wisconsin public

school teachers’ perception of the teachers’ union possible influence on student

achievement?

1. More influence for teachers than students

2. No influence

3. Pedagogy

Theme 1: More influence for teachers than students. Ninety-three percent of

participants indicated they felt the union had more influence and focus on teachers than

on students. All of those participants indicated Act 10 as a reason for this, also indicating

a dislike for the legislation. However, Carini’s 2008a study indicated a focus on a teacher
 174

influences over student influences. This study aligns and concludes that these influences

still exist. Table 12 indicates comments made by participants regarding this theme.

Table 12.

Participant(s) Comment
P2 Support and assistance with NBC
P5, P9, and P15 A “trickle down” effect where the teachers have union
benefits which in turn, benefits students
P3, P6, P7 Protect the quality of teachers
P9, P15 Protect bad teachers
P2, P8, P7, p11, P13 Support in implementing Educator Effectiveness/the
Danielson model
More Influence for Teachers

Theme 2: None. Participants responded in both the questionnaire and during the

interviews 19 times that, they felt, the union did nothing for student achievement.

Question #11 in the questionnaire asked, “To what extent do you believe the teachers’

union lobbying results in greater benefits for students than teachers?” Fifteen respondents

addressed this question. Of those fifteen, seven (46%), indicated they saw no influence

from the teachers’ union for students. Four replied they felt a strong belief to the

statement with comments from P8 “Absolutely nothing FOR the kids,” and P1

responding very clearly in the negative with, “None.” Four were either unsure or believed

the extent was equal between teachers and students. There was no previous research that

discussed this theme. However, Baron (2018) and Choi and Chung (2016) both suggested

qualitative research that might help identify themes such as this.

Theme 3: Pedagogy. Data showed 60% of participants felt personally accountable

for student achievement came directly from their own teaching practices or pedagogy.

Thirteen comments were made in the positive toward teachers being professionally
 175

responsible for student achievement. To the contrary, eleven participants indicated a

perception that the union had no influence on their pedagogical processes that could

possibly influence student achievement. This theme aligns with Choi and Chung’s 2016

suggestion to explore the role of voice in organizations. In this study, participants were

able to share their thoughts and ideas on what helps their students succeed in the

classroom. P11 explained her thoughts on this theme, “The union now has a rule that

even if a kid doesn’t do the work, they still get a 40%. It makes it hard to convince kids to

work hard enough to pass this class. So, right there is your answer.”

Unanticipated insight: State political activity. This unexpected theme aligned

with Baron’s 2018 study. In that study, “recent studies have begun to provide a clearer

understanding of the effects of teacher deunionization. However, additional research is

necessary in order to understand the full scope of these policies.” All of the participants

discussed state political policy activity as it related to public schools in Wisconsin.

Almost all of the participants, or 90%, in both the online questionnaire and interviews

used various negative methods of expressing their thoughts about this theme from using

anger in the form of expletives, to sarcasm such as P4’s comment “...when lovely Act 10

was passed….”Comments from the online questionnaire included, “I believe teachers

want more and want better benefits. While that is important, sometimes that focus goes to

the teachers instead of the students.” Another questionnaire participant explained, “It

should never be about the teachers, even though benefits is [sic] another issue. The main

focus should be around the students.”

Of the 42 participants from both the online questionnaire and interviews, three

(.7%) commented positively on the union’s state political activity. It is important to note
 176

that the questionnaire did not give participants a direct opportunity to expand on personal

thoughts toward the union, but the interview, question #8 stated, “Lastly, let’s talk about

bargaining. If your school is unionized, what types of bargaining does your union do for

you?” This question indirectly allowed participants to expand on their thoughts and

attitudes toward the union and the pros and cons of its bargaining for members. P3

indicated:

I’m happy that the union is there – someone to have your back. That someone will

be there and make sure we have good teachers there. They help negotiate pay,

which is nice. They helped the paras [paraprofessionals] get raises, which was

really nice. It helps attract new paras. Costs are rising and unions care about that,

as well as teachers and paras. We have to keep up with all around increases in

costs and pay.

Another participant, P4 believes in power in the union. The participant explained

that most of her school was in the union because “they understand the power of the

union.” She went on to say, “There’s power in having most of the staff in the union.” A

last participant indicated she was happy with how the union bargained for an early

retirement package, “That was significant.” She believes the bargaining power of the

union for insurance, pay, and retirement is “extremely beneficial to keep staff longer.”

It is important to note that the term “Act 10” was used ten times across

participants. One questionnaire participant commented on Question #10, “To what extent

do you believe the teachers’ union lobbying results in greater benefits for teachers and

students?”
 177

I think for the recent budget proposal that union has lobbied more on behalf of

students than teachers. Since Act 10, I do not believe that union has lobbied for

pay or benefit increases. This is actually detrimental to education as we are seeing

more teacher shortages in WI as well as far less people entering the field. I think

they should lobby for teachers than they do. WI ranks 43rd in teacher pay and

benefits.

Nine questionnaire participants also discussed Act 10 in their responses. One

participant, P7, referenced to Act 10 four times. He explained he believes Act 10

negatively affected the number of teachers applying for teaching positions within the

state. The remaining eight participants also negatively commented on Act 10 with

comments such as, “We are not a unionized school because of the wonderful [said with

sarcasm] Act 10” (P4). Also, “I’m not from this country, and came in after Act 10 – never

heard of it or Scott Walker – and I see all the great things the union can do for teachers,

that they’re protected” (P3). P10 shared his thoughts on Act 10, “The union doesn’t have

a lot of say because of Act 10 – we don’t have contracts, we have policies.” Later, with

Question #3, “Continuing your thoughts on the leadership in your school, what, if any,

influence do you see on leadership in your school?” his response was, “Since Act 10, I

know the union has been trying to keep as many members as it can, and also create a

media impression through the news where teachers are working hard.”

Research alignment. This study addressed the gap in the literature by gathering

the perceptions of teachers either currently teaching or retired from a public-school

classroom on the possible influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement. The

gap in the literature suggests the need for “highly focused questions that link educational
 178

outcomes to rules, regulations, and conditions directly attributable to union efforts”

((Cowen & Strunk, 2015), p 221). Baron (2018) also suggested research to better

understand union policies and how they influence student achievement, specifically in

states where there has been “considerable union reform” (p. 55).This study also

addressed the gap in literature identified by Choi and Chung (2016). The authors suggest

qualitative research that provides a clearer understanding of the role of voice in an

organization. WEAC states on its website (2019) that it “champions efforts to protect

children and the promise of public education” (para. 4) and “is a strong voice for 865,000

children in Wisconsin public schools” (para. 2). This occurred when the researcher

collected data and triangulated it from archival data, an online questionnaire, and

interviews with Wisconsin teachers who were currently teaching or retired. This study

added to the literature by exploring teachers’ perceptions and gathering their real world,

lived experiences with the phenomenon by providing answers to understand better

public-school teachers’ perceptions of the teachers’ union on student achievement.

The following perceptions have been identified as to contributing to the

phenomenon of “What are the perceptions of Wisconsin public school teachers on the

possible influence on the teachers’ union on student achievement?”

1. Teachers perceive very little to no influence from the union on student

achievement

2. There is a systems’ influence on educators in Wisconsin

3. Teachers perceive a union influence on salary and benefits

4. Teachers perceive Act 10 influencing student achievement

5. Teachers perceive student achievement as a result of pedagogy

 179

It was not known how public-school teachers perceive the influence of the

teachers’ union on student achievement. Considering the literature review, the researcher

found several alignments with the literature in this study. The first alignment was with

theme 2, which indicates a perception of a system’s influence on educators. As explained,

a system’s influence is when influences were not direct, but systems and processes can

indirectly influence student achievement. Vachon and Ma (2015) concluded that union

lobbying directly affects students through teachers. Of the questionnaire participants,

almost 60% of teachers indicated they felt they have union support that indirectly

influences student achievement. Of those respondents, 50% indicated they felt this either

“a lot,” or “to a great extent.”

The perception of a union influence on salary and benefits, theme 3, aligns with

Carini’s (2008a) results of “school inputs” and describes them as salary, benefits, class

size, and working hours. Theme 3 was also reminiscent of Cowen and Strunk’s (2015)

research. Their study acknowledged the teachers’ union role in setting school district

policy as a collective bargaining agent that, included teachers’ salaries.

Russo (2012b) researched the effects of union bargaining on education reform.

Theme 4 supports this in that many of the teachers in Wisconsin who participated in this

study indicated acknowledgement of the decrease of Wisconsin’s bargaining power on

behalf of teachers as well as the implications of Act 10 on the profession, and ultimately

the students. Theme 4 was also supported in Baron’s (2018) research showing more

teachers retired in the approach of Act 10 due to the uncertainty of retirement benefits for

teachers. P3 explained, “This was actually detrimental to education as we are seeing more

teacher shortages in WI as well as far less people entering the field.” Teacher interviews
 180

also reiterated what Lindy (2011) found in the quantitative study regarding bargaining

laws on student achievement in New Mexico. The remainder of the themes: 1 showed

little to no influence from the teachers’ union on student achievement. Theme 2 found

there was a system’s influence on student achievement. Theme 5 indicated that teachers

perceive student achievement as a result of teachers, not the union validate this study as

contributing to the existing body of literature on the phenomenon discussed later in the

chapter.

Implications

This study expounded implications to the guiding and practical theories:

• Unions standardize education (Eberts & Stone, 1987; Lot & Kenny, 2013).

• Unions lobby for various educational strategies and approaches (Lot & Kenny,
2013).

• Unions support educational strategies and approaches (Lang, 2015).

• Union lobbying indirectly affects students through teachers (Vachon & Ma,
2015).

This section will explore these two types of theories, as well as provide a critical

evaluation of the study’s strengths and weaknesses and the degree to which the

conclusions deserve credibility when considering the methodology, research design, and

data.

This qualitative case study was designed to address the gap in the literature and

help solve the problem that it was not known how public-school teachers perceive the

influence of a teachers’ union on student achievement.. This study consisted of one over-

arching question and two research questions. While the study was implemented in the

state of Wisconsin and with teachers who were and were not members of the state’s
 181

teachers’ union, findings cannot be generalized to other states, the results provide

meaningful insights into the phenomenon.

Theoretical implications. The framework of this qualitative case study was

designed to explore how teachers, current or retired, in the state of Wisconsin perceived a

possible influence from the teachers’ union on their students’ achievement. As described

in Chapter 2, the conceptual framework for this study derived from Critical Systems

Theory (CST), which was a combination of systems theory and critical social theory

(Watson &Watson, 2013). CST allowed the phenomenon to be explored and developed

through critique, emancipation, and pluralism. Using these three principles, the researcher

was able to uncover a unique approach to answer a problem not yet addressed in the

literature using a qualitative methodology suggested by Baron (2018), Choi and Chung

(2016), and Cowen and Strunk (2015).

Whereas each research question was designed to address teachers’ perceptions of

the influence of the teachers’ union on student achievement, RQ1 asked specifically

about teacher perceptions on student achievement. RQ2 focused on “what” or “if any”

perception from the union teachers might perceive. The findings revealed that teachers in

Wisconsin do not see any direct influence from the teachers’ union on student

achievement. Instead, the data showed teachers perceived student influence coming from

teachers. The findings revealed teachers perceive one influence from the teachers’ union,

which was an influence on salary and benefits since that was all unions were legally

allowed to bargain for since Act 10 was passed in 2010. The findings further revealed

that teachers perceived student achievement because of the teachers themselves, and that

the political activity within the state has influenced education.

 182

Practical implications. The practical implications of this study were based on the

state specific studies of Lindy (2011), Lang (2015), and Baron (2018). However, only

one of the three studies considered teachers’ perceptions in Wisconsin (Baron, 2018) and

all employed quantitative methodologies. Therefore, the findings of this study yielded

insightful qualitative perspective in what teachers saw as influences from the teachers’

union on their students’ achievement. The researcher found three practical implications to

expand the literature discussed in Chapter 2.

The first practical implication derived from the themes found in the literature

showed unions lobby for various educational strategies that help or hinder education.

This theme can be divided into each approach to education: help or hinder. The practical

strategy precludes teachers to be aware of union lobbying for education. Teachers were

aware of what was being lobbied for in educational legislation; however, teachers

indicated perceptions of being the recipients of such lobbying rather than the instigators.

Therefore, teachers and school leaders could consider becoming more aware and

involved of legislation being discussed among union leaders and legislators that could

influence their classrooms.

The union lobbies for strategies that help education. None of the respondents

indicated they perceived the union to lobby for pedagogical strategies that help education.

The findings revealed the opposite in that most teachers indicated they perceive students

were helped through the teachers themselves, and in some instances, teachers’ perceived

support from administration or school leadership in helping students with their

achievements. However, the findings also indicate that teachers perceive an indirect

influence from the teachers’ union on strategies that help education or student
 183

achievement such as support in obtaining National Board Certification. The respondents

included non-pedagogical approaches such as class size, contract hours, the number of

paraprofessionals, and professional development requirements.

The union lobbies for strategies that hinder education. The findings suggest that

while respondents did not indicate strategies that hinder education specifically, teachers

commented that they felt very little support from the teachers’ union to help student

achievement. Findings also indicate that the teachers perceive the teachers’ union to be

very limited in what it could do for students after Act 10. A few respondents shared that

they perceived the union to be purposeful in hindering education using bullying tactics

and misleading the public about teachers and education.

A second practical implication describes how teachers perceive greater benefits

for them than the students, as Cowen and Strunk (2015) revealed. All respondents but one

indicated the major teachers’ union benefits include salary and benefits. All respondents

discussed Act 10 as the impetus behind the bargaining ability of the union on salary and

benefits such as retirement. Other benefits mentioned included class size, schedule or

hours worked, and other educational professionals hired to provide support for teachers in

the classroom or building, such as paraprofessionals. Therefore, the implication was that

teachers could discuss among themselves what was needed for professional performance

and consider approaching building or district leadership regarding options for achieving

those benefits that would influence students to a greater degree.

A third practical implication revealed through careful analysis of the data was not

previously discussed in the literature. Almost all participants indicated a passion and

innate sense of success for their students’ achievement. Only one participant indicated
 184

she believed her school was more focused on survival within the school day than any sort

of student achievement. Data revealed teachers who feel empowered and engaged in their

profession to instill student achievement on their own, without the assistance of the

teachers’ union. Participants expressed this by discussing a desire to focus on improving

test scores for graduation requirements and college entrance, to classroom pedagogy and

best practices used to engage students and develop critical thinking skills. This

implication could encourage current and future educators to consider their approach to

education and how they, as a professional educator, will promote student achievement

without the expectation of support or resource from an outside entity. All teachers who

discussed intrinsic motivation to see their students achieve also indicated their motivation

as based on their students learning, understanding, and inquiring further knowledge.

Teachers indicated they find professional success within themselves and for their students

when they have educational autonomy.

Future implications. Since this study began, Wisconsin became a Right to Work

state. School districts have the option to unionize, but union membership is no longer

legislatively mandated as a condition of employment. As the union continues to

encourage membership and adjust its focus for communities, schools, students, and

teachers, two future implications developed from this study. The results revealed that the

participants do not perceive influence from the teachers’ union on student achievement.

Instead, the data showed the participants perceive student achievement as derived from

the teacher through careful thought regarding what happens in each classroom. Three

possible future implications were revealed from the results of this study.
 185

Implication 1. The first implication was that teachers were prepared to be the

main source of influence on student achievement. All participants indicated they do not

perceive an influence from the teachers’ union on student achievement. The future

implication revealed was for districts, administration, and school leaders to support their

teachers in the autonomy needed to deliver methods, pedagogies, strategies, and

resources currently being used to develop and increase student achievement. While

previous research indicates school culture inputs such as salary, class size, scheduling,

and support staff as possible influences on student achievement (Carini, 2008a), this

study indicates a shift in responsibility to the teachers. Likewise, Lindy (2011) concluded

collective bargaining influenced student achievement. The data from this study seemingly

negates those influences and indicates teachers as the main source of student

achievement.

Implication 2. The second implication was that 93% of the participants were only

able to identify an influence from the teachers’ union in the area of salary and benefits.

One participant was not able to identify any influence from the union. Future use of this

study suggests teachers investigate how the union may or may not offer other benefits

that may or may not influence student achievement. Lindy (2011) and Carini (2008b)

indicate collective bargaining inputs such as salary and benefits to be recognizable union

influences in public schools. This research shows teachers do not view these as positive

influences from the teachers’ union.

Implication 3. The findings presented in this study have important policy

implications. As the teachers’ union in Wisconsin continues to lose membership, policy

makers could consider finding ways to help teachers with classroom autonomy and
 186

support. The union currently does not have any have policy or direct lobbying for

teaching strategies or pedagogy. To continue, teachers’ ability to affect positively their

students’ achievement, policy makers can find teacher-based ways to continue that trend.

Baron’s (2018) study addressed the need for policy makers to tackle new reforms as

unions continue to lose their influence. This study aligns with this conclusion as well as

Choi and Chung’s (2016) research that teachers indicated they want more autonomy in

the classroom and want policy makers to give them a voice.

Strengths and weaknesses of the study. The following limitations were present

in the study:

1. The study presented 15 teachers’ perceptions from Wisconsin.

2. Further research may be required to include teacher perceptions across every

state.

3. Further research may be required to present the phenomenon to teachers in

Wisconsin who were teaching before Act 10 was passed.

The interview process explored the lived experiences of current and retired

teachers in Wisconsin. These interviews were hand-recorded by the researcher and

member-checked (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) for credibility and trustworthiness. In

addition to interviews, participants also engaged in an online questionnaire. The

researcher also reviewed institutional archival data to determine continuity and

consistency in themes.

This study addressed the gap in the literature by exploring the perceptions of

Wisconsin public school teachers on the possible influence of the teachers’ union on

student achievement. This occurred with a complete review of institutional archival data,

participants engaging in an online questionnaire, and the completion of interviews with

15 participants. Baron (2018) explored student achievement in Wisconsin using test

 187

scores from the WKCE. This study added to the literature by exploring teacher

perceptions of the teachers’ union in Wisconsin on student achievement.

The sample size for this study, based on Yin (2016) Patton (2015) suggestions

was 15. The researcher used social media outlets seeking participants. After limited

success using recorded interviews, the researcher discussed the option of removing the

requirement to be recorded with the dissertation committee. The dissertation committee

encouraged reviewing empirical research for support and a review of Clausen (2012) and

Bloomberg and Volpe (2019) found non-recorded interviews could also be considered

credible and trustworthy. Following this change to the methodology, 15 participants, who

met the inclusion criteria as discussed in Chapter 4, engaged in the study.

As part of the data analysis for this study, 287 codes were determined from the

participants’ responses. The codes were then reviewed and analyzed for repetition in

words and thoughts and grouped into categories. The categories were there grouped into

common themes based on further scrutiny, which helped answer the over-arching

question leading this study: “What are the perceptions of public-school teachers of the

teachers’ union on student achievement?”

The population of the study was its strength. Fifteen teachers from Wisconsin

were interviewed. Chapter 4 reviewed the demographics of the participants in detail. The

gap in the literature indicated no studies having explored the phenomenon of how

teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student achievement in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin’s educational climate changed from mandatory unionism to Right to

Work during the course of this study. This presented a weakness for this study as the

participants indicated a strong desire to discuss this legislation over the questioned
 188

phenomenon. Embedded in this weakness was a secondary weakness in that most

participants could not articulate the impact of this legislation on their students’

achievement. Further clarification of Act 10 in follow-up questions may have produced a

clearer connection to the phenomenon and what teachers perceive in their classrooms.

Recommendations

This study provided insight into how public-school teachers in Wisconsin

perceived the teachers’ union influence on student achievement. Fifteen teachers shared

their lived experiences about the phenomenon through an online questionnaire or

interviews. The data shows that while teachers do not perceive an influence from the

teachers’ union on student achievement, there are recommendations for future research.

Recommendations for future research. As a result of this study, the researcher

has identified areas in need of further exploration in the field.

1. Increase sample size. This study explored the phenomenon and included teachers
from all parts of Wisconsin. Participants were recruited via social media. Yin
(2016) Patton (2015) suggest a sample size of 15 to reach data saturation. While
this was accomplished in this study, increasing the sample size to purposefully
include teachers from every area of the state: urban, suburban, and rural, may
variate the data to include more insight into the phenomenon.

2. Narrow the field of participants. During the course of this study, the Wisconsin
Legislature implemented The Budget Repair Act, or Act 10 as it is colloquially
known. The median number of years teaching for participants was six, which is
within the timeframe Act 10 was passed. Future research on the phenomenon
might include participants who taught a significant number of years prior to Act
10. The new legislation limits the union to offer support for areas of teacher
inputs. (Carini, 2008a) of salary and benefits. For teachers who taught prior to
these changes, their perceptions might be different.

3. Use a quantitative methodology. As discussed in Chapter 2, the literature only

shows a quantitative methodology proving a gap. This study closed this gap with
a qualitative methodology. To address the phenomenon, using quantitative
methodology might provide another perspective. Comparing one of the two
standardized assessments, the Smarter Balanced Assessment (SBA) or the WKCE
pre- and post-Act 10, might provide insights that were not included in this study.
 189

4. Reword questions. While all questionnaire and interview questions were designed
to align with the themes found in the literature, they still did not directly address
the over-arching question. Themes were found as the data were analyzed, but
direct questions such as: “What influences do you see from the union on student
achievement?” might be more pertinent to address the phenomenon. The
questions presented focused more on literature themes than the phenomenon,
itself.

Recommendations for future practice. This research has the potential to benefit

student achievement and teachers across the state and nation. The following are

recommended for future practice:

1. Be intentional about professional autonomy. The National Center for

Educational Statistics (NCES, 2019) indicates as of 2012, 51.5% of teachers in
Wisconsin hold Masters’ Degrees. An assumption can be made that these teachers
are highly educated and have professionalism. The findings indicate a strong
preference in professional responsibility for student achievement. The findings
also indicate teachers do not perceive any influence from the teachers’ union on
student achievement. With the educational level of teachers and their strong desire
to see their students achieve, the union does not need to be involved with learning
strategies, approaches, or other pedagogies that influence student achievement.
Teachers are already accomplishing this, independent of the union.

2. Grow professional autonomy. The findings from this study indicated teachers not
only take responsibility for autonomy in their classrooms, but they also see a large
support system from their leadership within their building. Administrators,
building leadership, and policy makers can build professional relationships with
classroom teachers to develop plans and systems that increase teacher confidence
and freedom to teach to their professional knowledge.

3. Work within the Budget Repair Act. Currently, Wisconsin schools vote to
unionize. Legislatively mandated unionism is no longer required for public school
teachers. When a district votes to unionize, the district bargains for teacher
salaries and benefits such as insurance and retirement investments through a
collective bargaining contract (CBA). All teachers in that district, whether or not
they have opted to join the union, are included in the bargaining. Since bargaining
occurs and the findings show teachers acknowledge this aspect of the union,
teachers can use that knowledge to collaborate with the union and develop a more
amenable approach to teacher pay and benefits.

4. Build a trust environment. During the interviews, many participants were

confident in saying they felt the union does nothing for them. Baron (2018)
indicated the teachers’ union in Wisconsin lost over 50% of its membership from
2011-2015. WEAC indicated a membership loss of 67% as of 2019. The
participants reflected this statistic in that 60% of participants are current WEAC
 190

members. Conversely, 93% of the respondents indicated that they do not see any
influence from the teachers’ union for student achievement. The contradictory
numbers implied that teachers need a trusting environment to reveal their true
feelings about the union, and its impact on their profession. Participants indicated
a strong cooperative relationship with administration and school leadership. The
final recommendation for future practice is for this communication to continue
and strengthen for the benefit of teachers, students, and schools.
 191

References.

AFT, (nd). American Federation of Teachers. Retrieved from

https://www.aft.org/about/mission

Abbott, S. (2014). Hidden curriculum: The glossary of education reform. Retrieved from

http://edglossary.org/hidden-curriculum

Adelberg, J. (2008). The role of the teachers' union in the education reform debate from

the perspective of the union membership. Retrieved from

http://fordham.bepress.com/dissertations/AAI3312051

Anrig, G. (2015). How we know collaboration works. Educational Leadership, 72(5),

30–35.

Antonucci, M. (2015). Teachers unions and the war within: Making sense of the conflict.

EducationNext 15(1) Retrieved from https://www.educationnext.org/teachers-

unions-war-within/

Babbie, E. (2013). The practice of social research. Chapman University. Belmont, CA:

Wadsworth CENGAGE Learning.

Baron, J. (2018). The effects of the teachers’ union on student achievement in the short

run: Evidence from Wisconsin’s Act 10. Economics of Education Review. 67,40-

57. doi:10.1016/j.econedrev.2018.09.003

Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and

implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559.

Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol13/iss4/2

Bloomberg, L., & Volpe, M. (2019). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A road

map from beginning to end. Thousand Oaks, CA. SAGE Publications.

 192

Boeije, H. (2013). Analysis in qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA. SAGE

Publications.

Borland, M., & Howsen, R. (1992). Student academic achievement and the degree of

market concentration in education. Economics of Education Review 11(1) pp. 31-

39.

Brimelow, P. (2003). The worm in the apple: How the teacher unions are destroying

American education. New York, NY. HarperCollins Publishers.

Carini, R. (2002). Teachers’ unions and student achievement. School reform proposals:

The research evidence. In A.Molnar, School Reform Proposals: The research

evidence. (pp. 196-216) Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Carini, R. (2008a). Is collective bargaining detrimental to student achievement? Evidence

from a national study. Collective Negotiations 32(3) 215-235.

Carini, R. (2008b). New directions for the study of collective bargaining in schools.

Collective Negotiations 32(4) 317-328

Center for Responsive Politics. (2017). Retrieved from

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=L1300

Choi, Y., and Chung, H. (2016). Voice effects on public sector unions on turnover:

Evidence from teacher contracts. Personnel Public Management 45(2) 213-233

doi: 10.1177/0091026016645063

Clausen, A. (2012). The individually focused interview: Methodological quality without

transcription of audio recordings. The Qualitative Report 17(14) 1-17. Retrieved

from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol17/iss19/1
 193

Condon, J. (2011, February 18). Wisconsin union vote on hold after Democrats leave

state. Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. Retrieved from:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/wisconsin-protests-continue-as-dems-leave-state-

to-stall-budget-repair-vote/

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and

procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Coulsen, A. (2010). The effects of teachers' unions on American education. Cato

Institute, 30(1), 155-170

Cowen, J. (2009). Teacher unions and teacher compensation: New evidence for the

impact of bargaining." Journal of Education Finance, 35(2). 172-193. Retrieved

from https://muse.jhu.edu/

Cowen, J., & Strunk, K. (2015). How do teachers’ unions influence education policy?

What we know and what we need to learn. Working Paper #42. Education Policy

Center. April 2014. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED558142

Cunningham, J. (2012). Student Achievement. National Council of State Legislators.

Denver, CO and Washington, D.C.

DiSalvo, D. (2015). Government against Itself: Public union power and its consequences.

Oxford, England, UK. University Oxford Press.

Dubin, J. (2014). Moving meridian: In Connecticut, a roadmap for union-district

relations. American Educator, 37(4), 29-35.

Duffet, A., Farkas, S., Rotherham, A., & Silva, E. (2008). Waiting to be won over:

Teachers speak on the profession, unions, and reform. Education Sector Reports.

Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED502154

 194

Eberts, R. W. (2007). Teachers’ Unions and Student Performance: Help or Hindrance?

Future of Children, 17(1), 175-200.

Eberts, R. W., & Stone, J. A. (1987). Teacher unions and the productivity of public

schools. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 40(3), 354-363.

Fenster, M. (2009). The impact of teacher unions on student learning. Western Kentucky

University. Georgia Educational Research Association, Savannah, GA.

Flick, U. (2019). An Introduction to qualitative research. (6th Ed.). London, England:

SAGE Publications.

Freeman, R., & Han, E. (2012). Public sector unionism without collective bargaining.

AEA Meetings, San Diego, CA. 2012.

Friedrichs, et al v California Teachers Association, et al. No. 14-915, 578 U.S. (Decided

March 26, 2016).

Garden, C. (2012). Teaching for America: Unions and academic freedom. University of

Toledo Law Review, 43(3), 563-582.

Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology. A modified

Husserlian approach. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.

Goldharber, D., Lavery, L., & Theobald, R. (2014). My end of the bargain: Are there

cross-district effects in teacher contract provisions? ILR Review, 64(4), 1274-1305

doi:10.1177/0019793914546305.

Griffith, J. S. (2009). Differences among teachers' perceptions of school climate: Does

support for the local teacher union make a difference? (Doctoral dissertation).

Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305071381?accountid=7374

 195

Guest, G., Namey, E., & Mitchell, M. (2013). Collecting qualitative data. Thousand

Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Helfferich, C. (2009). The quality of qualitative data: Manual for conducting qualitative

interviews. Wiesbaden: Publishing House of Social Sciences.

Henderson, M., Peterson, P., & West, M. (2016). The 2015 EdNext poll on school

reform: Public thinking on testing, opt out, common core, unions, and more.

EducationNext 16(1) Retrieved from https://www.educationnext.org/2015-ednext-

poll-school-reform-opt-out-common-core-unions/

Hoxby, C. (1996). How teachers' unions affect education production. The Quarterly

Journal of Economics, 111(3), 671-718. doi:10.2307/2946669

Johnson, B., & Christiansen, L. (2012). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,

and mixed approaches (2nd. ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Kahlenberg, R. (2012). Bipartisan but unfounded: The assault on teachers’ unions.

American Educator, 35(4), 14-18.

Kerchner, C. T. (2004). The relationship between teacher unionism and educational

quality: A literature review. National Education Association. Retrieved from

http://charlestkerchner.com/cr/uploadImages/Kerchner-TUEQ%20Review.pdf

Kerchner, C., Koppich, J., Weeres, J., (1998). Taking charge of quality: How teachers

and unions can revitalize schools (An introduction and companion to “United

mind workers”). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kosinski, M., Matz, S., Gosling, S., Popov, V., Stillwell, D. (2015). Facebook as a

research tool for the social sciences: Opportunities, challenges, ethical

 196

considerations, and practical guidelines. American Psychology 70(6), 543-556

doi:10.1037/a0039210.

Kurth, M. (1987). Teachers’ unions and excellence in education: An analysis of the

decline of ACT scores. Springer Science and Business Media, 8(4), 351-367.

Lang, R. (2015). Teacher collective bargaining in Massachusetts: The scope of non-

bargaining. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses (Accession Order No. 3662826)

Lindy, B. (2011). The impact of teacher collective bargaining laws on student

achievement: Evidence from a New Mexico natural experiment. Yale Law

Journal, 120(5), 1130-1191

Lot, J., & Kenny, L. (2013). State teacher union strength and student achievement.

Economics of Education Review, 35, 93–103

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.03.006

Lovenheim, M. (2009). The effect of teachers' unions on education production: Evidence

from union election certifications in three Midwestern states. Journal of Labor

Economics, 525

Lovenheim, M., & Willen, A. (2018). The long-run effects of teacher collective

bargaining, presented at New Evidence on the Effects of Teachers’ Unions on

Student Outcomes, Teacher Labor Markets, and the Allocation of School

Resources Paper Session, Pennsylvania, 2018: American Economic Association

Malott, C. (2015). Right to work and Lenin’s communist pedagogy: An introduction.

Texas Education Review 3(2), 32-43.

 197

Merriam, B., & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and

implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mickel, N. (2015). Exploring teachers’ autonomy, self-efficacy, motivation, and

perceptions of state mandated testing in the context of No Child Left Behind.

Oklahoma University Dissertations and Theses (Accession Order No. 14735)

Midgley, G. (1995) What Is This Thing Called CRITICAL Systems Thinking?. In: Ellis

K., Gregory A., Mears-Young B.R., Ragsdell G. (eds) Critical Issues in Systems

Theory and Practice. Springer, Boston, MA

Milkman, M. (1997). Teachers' unions, productivity, and minority student achievement.

Journal of Labor Research, 18(1), 137-150.

Moe, T. (2011). Special interest: Teacher's unions and America's Public Schools.

Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA. SAGE

Publications.

Murphy, M.J. (1985). The impact of collective bargaining on school management and

governance. Public Budgeting and Financing, 5(1), 3-14.

Murray, C. (2000). Exploring the new unionism: Perceptions of recently tenured teachers.

Department of Education and Human Development, State University of New

York College at Brockport. American Education Research Association.

NEA (2019). National Education Association. Retrieved from

https://www.nea.org/home/2580.htm?cpssessionid=SID-5B7A6871-1F503CF6
 198

National Association of State Budget Officers (NASBO), (2019). State Expenditure

Report. Retrieved from https://www.nasbo.org/reports-data/state-expenditure-

report

National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES), (2019). Schools and staffing survey,

districts. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/sass/

National Right to Work (NRTW), (2018). Retrieved from https://www.nrtw.org/

Nicholson-Crotty, S., Grissom, J., & Nicholson-Crotty, J. (2012). Governance and the

impact of public employee unions on organizational performance. Public

Performance & Management Review (35)3, 422-448.

Nixon, A., Packard, A., & Dam, M. (2016). Teacher contract non-renewal: Southeast and

Midwest principals. International Council of Professors of Educational

Administration. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1103656.pdf

Novak, N. (2015). Wisconsin’s turn-around should serve as a model to other states like

Illinois. The MacIver Institute. Retrieved from

http://www.maciverinstitute.com/2014/01/wisconsin-turnaround-model-illinois/

Pantuosco, L., & Ullrich, L. (2010). The impact of teachers’ unions on state-level

productivity. Journal of Education Finance, 35(3), 276-294.

Patton, M. (2015). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, (4th ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Roberts, C. (2010). The Dissertation Journey. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Rubenstein, S., & McCarthy, J. (2014). Teacher unions and management partnerships.

Center for American Progress, Washington, D.C.: Publisher.

 199

Russo, C. (2012a). A cautionary tale of collective bargaining in public education: A

teacher’s right or tail wagging the dog? University of Dayton Law Review, 37,

317.

Russo, C. (2012b). The status of teachers’ unions: Are rumors of their demise

exaggerated? School Business Affairs. 33-38.

Saldana, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. (3rd ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Salloum, S., & BouJaoude, S. (2019). The use of triadic dialogue in the science

classroom: A teacher negotiating conceptual learning with teaching to the test.

Res Sci Educ49, 829–857 doi:10.1007/s11165-017-9640

Schultz, K., Hoffman, C., & Reiter-Palmon, R., (2005). Using archival data for I-O

research: Advantages, pitfalls, sources, and examples. Psychology Faculty

Publications 5.

Stake, R. (2010). Qualitative Research: Studying how things work. New York, NY: The

Guilford Press.

Starman, A. (2013). The case study as a type of qualitative research. The Journal of

Contemporary Studies, 28-34.

Stein, J., & Marley, P. (2013). More than they bargained for: Scott Walker, unions and

the fight for Wisconsin. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press,

Tucker, M. (2012). A Different Role for Teachers Unions? Education Digest, 77(9), 4-

10.

United States Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: An

imperative for educational reform: a report to the Nation and the Secretary of
 200

Education. United States Department of Education. Washington, D.C.: The

Commission.

Vachon, T., & Ma, J. (2015). Bargaining for success: Examining the relationship between

teacher unions and student achievement. Sociological Forum, 30(2), 391-414. doi:

10.111/socf.12168

Watson, S., and Watson, W. (2013). Qualitative research: A reader in philosophy, core

concepts, and practice. Counterpoints, 354, 111-127.

WEAC (nd). Wisconsin Education Association Council. Retrieved from

https://weac.org/about-weac/who-we-are/

Weber, S. (2010). Student Achievement. Association for Supervision and Curriculum

Development. Alexandria, VA: Publisher.

Weingarten, R. (2011). Voicing concerns, crafting solutions: Unions in the age of teacher

bashing. Education Review, 24(1), 41-48.

Winkler, A., Scull, J., Zeehandelaar, D., Fordham, T. (2012). How strong are U.S.

teacher unions? A state-by-state comparison. Thomas B. Fordham Institute.

Washington, D.C.

Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC), (2019). Retrieved from

www.weac.org

Wisconsin State Legislature, (1971). Employment Relations. Wisconsin State Legislative

Documents. Madison, WI.

Wisconsin State Legislature, (2016). Employment Relations. Wisconsin State Legislative

Documents. Madison, WI
 201

Yin, R. (2016). Qualitative research from start to finish. (2nd ed.). New York, NY: The

Guildford Press.

Yusim, S. E. (2008). Teacher unionism: The past, present, and future. A study to

determine the future of union involvement in school reform. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/304808658?accountid=7374.

Vachon, T. and Kuo-Hsun Ma, J. (2015). Bargaining for success: Examining the

relationship between teacher unions and student achievement. Sociological Forum

30(2), 391-414.
 202

Appendix A.

Site Authorization Letters

Site authorizations on file at Grand Canyon University.

 203

Appendix B.

IRB Approval Letter

3300 West Camelback Road, Phoenix Arizona 85017 602.639.7500 Toll Free 800.800.9776 www.gcu.edu

DATE: May 06, 2019

TO: Tracie Happel

FROM: Grand Canyon University Institutional Review Board

Teacher Perceptions of the Teachers’ Union Possible Influence on

STUDY TITLE:
Student Achievement
IRB REFERENCE
IRB-2019-727
#:
SUBMISSION
Submission Response for Initial Review Submission Packet
TYPE:

ACTION: Determination of Exempt Status

REVIEW
Category 2
CATEGORY:

Thank you for your submission of New Project materials for this research study.

Grand Canyon University Institutional Review Board has determined this project
is EXEMPT FROM IRB REVIEW according to federal regulations. You now have GCU
IRB approval to collect data.

If applicable, please use the approved informed consent that is included in your
published documents.

We will put a copy of this correspondence on file in our office.

 204

If you have any questions, please contact the IRB office at irb@gcu.edu or 602-
639-7804.

Please include your study title and reference number in all correspondence with
this office.

ADVANCEMENT TO CANDIDACY

Congratulations!

On behalf of the College of Doctoral Studies, we were pleased to inform you that
you have now advanced to the Candidacy stage of your Doctoral journey. This means you
have completed all of the required proposal phases of the dissertation and you were now
ready to move into the research portion of the dissertation work.

This is an important step in the doctoral process. Through advancing to

candidacy, you are now among an elite group of learners who are doing academic
research. This also means you are representing yourself and Grand Canyon University as
an independent doctoral researcher and with that comes a great deal of responsibility. We
wish you the best in your endeavors!

Congratulations on this important step in your doctoral journey and welcome to

Candidacy!

Dr. Michael Berger

Dean, College of Doctoral Studies

Dr. Cynthia Bainbridge

 205

Assistant Dean, Research and Dissertations Director, Institutional Review Board

College of Doctoral Studies

 206

Appendix C.

Informed Consent

Individual Interview and Questionnaire

Grand Canyon University

College of Doctoral Studies
3300 W. Camelback Road
Phoenix, AZ 85017
Phone: 602-639-7804
Email: irb@gcu.edu

INFORMED CONSENT FORM

INTRODUCTION
The title of this research study is the Perceptions of the Teachers’ Union on Student Achievement. My
name is Tracie Happel and I am a doctoral student under the supervision of Dr. Mark Duplissis in the
College of Doctoral Studies at Grand Canyon University. I am doing this study because I would like to
understand the perceptions teachers might have about the teachers’ union on student achievement.

KEY INFORMATION
This document defines the terms and conditions for consenting to participate in this research study.
How do I know if I can be in this study?
• Licensed and contracted teacher
• Current or past experience teaching
• Proof of retirement from a Wisconsin public school, if retired
• A teacher with at least three years’ teaching experience
• A member of a professional teachers’ organization
• Not a member of a professional teachers’ organization
• Able and willing to participate in the study
You may not participate in this research study if you meet the following criteria:
• Not a licensed teacher
• A teacher with no teaching experience
• A teacher with less than three years’ teaching experience
• Not willing to participate in the study
What am I being asked to do? If you agree to be in this study, you will be asked to:
What You may choose to participate in a questionnaire in the form of a Word document or an
interview with me via Skype, FaceTime or Zoom. During the interview, you will answer some
questions that I will ask you about the teachers’ union and student achievement. In addition, following
the interview, you will be emailed a copy of the interview conversation for you to verify and email it
back to me.
If you choose to participate by answering the questions on the questionnaire, you will take
approximately 30-45 minutes to respond to questions on a Word document. I will email the consent
form for your signature; you will respond to the questions and email it back to me upon completion.
When Questionnaire which will take about 30-45 minutes.
Interview will take approximately 60-90 minutes, participate from wherever you are through
 207

videoconference.
Verify the interview transcript – 20-30 minutes.
How FaceTime, Skype or Zoom will be used.
Audiotaping:
I would like to use a voice recorder to record your responses. You can still participate if you do not
wish to be recorded. I want to make sure no one knows who you are at all times. To this, I will give
you a number instead of using your name. I will not use your location. Everything related to the study
will be kept on my personal computer. It will have a passcode that only I know.
Videotaping:
I would like to use a video camera to record your actions. Because this tape will show who you are,
these extra steps will be taken: I want to make sure no one knows who you are at all times. To this, I
will give you a number instead of using your name. I will not use your location. Everything related to
the study will be kept on my personal computer. It will have a passcode that only I know.
You can still participate if you do not wish to be recorded. I want to make sure no one knows who you
are at all times. To this, I will give you a number instead of using your name. I will not use your
location. Everything related to the study will be kept on my personal computer. It will have a passcode
that only I know.
Who will have access to my information? My dissertation committee and I are the only people who
will have access to your personal information. The committee includes Dr. Mark Duplissis (chair), Dr.
Daniel Smith (methodologist), and Dr. Mark Swoyer (content expert).
Participation is voluntary. However, you can leave the study at any time, even if you have not
finished, without any penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. If you decide to
stop participation, you may do so via email or a handwritten note. You do not need to provide an
explanation of why you are leaving the study. If this happens, I will only use the information I have
already gathered from you.
Any possible risks or discomforts? There are no possible psychological or physical risks or
discomforts to you.
Any direct benefits for me? Although there are no direct benefits to you, indirect benefits include
professional development in the area of student achievement and practices.
Any paid compensation for my time? You will not be compensated for your time.
How will my information and/or identity be protected? You will stay anonymous at all times as
described above. All information will be kept on my personal computer locked by a passcode. No
names and/or locations will be used to identify the you. Lastly, you will be assigned a Participant
Number to provide confidentiality and security.

PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION COLLECTED

The data collected will be published in a final dissertation publication. It will also be presented at
various and relevant conferences. The data will be grouped into common themes and it may be used
individually to highlight various thematic points.

PRIVACY AND DATA SECURITY

• Will researchers ever be able to link my data/responses back to me? Researchers
will not be able to link the data or your responses back to you. This will not be available as
no names or locations will be used to identify you. As well, all participants will be assigned a
Participant Number to be used in place of names or locations.
• Will my data include information that can identify me (names, addresses, etc.)?
No
• Will researchers assign my data/responses a research ID code to use instead of my
name? No names and/or locations will be used to identify the you. Lastly, you will be
assigned a Participant Number to provide confidentiality and security.
• If yes, will researchers create a list to link names with their research ID codes?
 208

While the researcher will create a list of participant names, this list will not be accessible to
anyone except the individuals listed above.
• If yes, how will researchers secure the link of names and research ID codes? How
long will the link be kept? Who has access? Approximate destroy date? The list will be
kept for three years, as suggested by Grand Canyon University guidelines. After three years,
data and identifying information will be deleted from researcher’s computer and any written
documentation, including signed consent forms, will be shredded.
• How will my data be protected (electronic and hardcopy)? Where? How long?
Who will have access? Approximate destroy or de-identification date? Confidentiality will
be maintained unless disclosure is required by law. Your data will be protected on the
researcher’s personal computer, locked by a passcode known only to the researcher. It will be
kept for GCU’s recommended timeframe of three years. Once identifiers collected for this
study are removed, the de-identified information could be used for future research studies but
will not be distributed to other investigators for future research studies.
• Where and how will the signed consent forms be secured? Signed consent forms
will be kept for GCU’s recommended time frame of three years. After three years, data and
identifying information will be deleted from researcher’s computer and any written
documentation, including signed consent forms, will be shredded.

FUTURE RESEARCH

Once identifiers collected for this study are removed, the de-identified information will not be
distributed to other investigators for future research studies.

STUDY CONTACTS

Any questions about the research study or your participation in the study, before or after your consent,
they will be answered by Tracie Happel, ---------------------------.

If you have questions about your rights as a subject/participant in this research, or if you feel you have
been placed at risk, you can contact the Chair of the Human Subjects Institutional Review Board,
through the College of Doctoral Studies at IRB@gcu.edu; (602) 639-7804.

VOLUNTARY CONSENT

PARTICIPANT’S RIGHTS
• You have been given an opportunity to read and discuss the informed consent and
ask questions about this study;
• You have been given enough time to consider whether or not you want to
participate;
• You have read and understand the terms and conditions and agree to take part in this
research study;
• You understand your participation is voluntary and that you may stop participation
at any time without penalty.

Your signature means that you understand your rights listed above and agree to participate in
this study.
 209

I choose to participate in the interview via Skype, FaceTime, or Zoom:

__________________________________________________________________
Signature of Participant or Legally Authorized Representative Date

I choose to participate in questionnaire via a Word document:

_______________________________________________________________
Signature of Participant or Legally Authorized Representative Date
INVESTIGATOR’S STATEMENT
"I certify that I have explained to the above individual the nature and purpose, the potential benefits
and possible risks associated with participation in this research study, have answered any questions
that have been raised, and have witnessed the above signature. These elements of Informed Consent
conform to the Assurance given by Grand Canyon University to the Office for Human Research
Protections to protect the rights of human subjects. I have provided (offered) you a copy of this signed
consent document."

Signature of Investigator______________________________________ Date____________

 210

Appendix D.

Copy of Instruments

Structured Interview

1. Think about the climate and culture in your school. Where do you think it comes

from? What makes you think that?

2. In reflecting on the culture and climate of the school, how might it influence student

achievement?

3. Continuing your thoughts on the leadership in your school, what, if any, influence

from the teachers’ union do you see on leadership in your school?

4. What, if any, influence does the leadership in your school have on student

achievement?

5. Let’s talk about teacher union lobbying. What, if any, any influence from union

lobbying have you seen on student achievement?

6. Please think about ways you are held accountable to your students and their

achievement. What, if any, influence from the teachers’ union do you see in your

measures of accountability?

7. Continuing your thoughts on accountability, what, if any, influence do you think it

has on student achievement?

8. Lastly, let’s talk about bargaining. (If the school is unionized: What types of

bargaining does your union do for you? If the school is not unionized: What

bargaining does the union do for schools that are unionized?) What influences, if any,

do you think bargaining has on student achievement in your school?

 211

9. Is there anything else you would like to add that may contribute to this phenomenon

of the potential effect of unions on student achievement?

 212

Appendix E.

Questionnaire Questions

1. How long have you been teaching?

Please read the following statements and share your thoughts and opinions of each,

with as much detail as possible, in the provided text box:

2. To what extent do you believe the teachers’ union standardizes education for all

children, regardless of ability?

3. To what extent do you believe the teachers’ union promotes differentiation for all

students, regardless of ability?

4. To what extent do you believe the teachers’ union lobbies for various educational

strategies and approaches that help education?

5. To what extent do you believe the teachers’ union lobbies for various educational

strategies that hinder education?

6. To what extent do you believe the teachers’ union lobbying results in greater

benefits for teachers than students?

7. To what extent do you believe the teachers’ union lobbying results in greater

benefits for students than teachers?

8. Is there anything you would like to add to the phenomenon?

 213

Appendix F.

Archival Data

This summary of reviewed archival data includes all legislative, assembly, WEAC, and

other sources bills, suggestions, lobbying attempts and successes, which pertain to the

following areas as, discussed in Chapters 1 and 3:

• Teachers’ unions lobby for the standardization of education.

• Teachers’ unions lobby to promote differentiation for student learning.

• Teachers’ unions lobby for various educational strategies or approaches that

help or hinder student achievement.

• Teachers unions lobby for greater benefits for teachers than students.

• Teachers unions lobby for greater benefits for students than teachers.

Each theme is highlighted as a section. Some document reviews have been posted

in several categories as they include information within those differing areas. The

following sources were used to obtain archival data:

• Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction

• Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction Rules and Laws

• Wisconsin Educational Laws/LawFind

• Wisconsin State Law Library

• Wisconsin Legislative Documents – Committee on Education

• WEAC Legislative Updates

Themes from the

Act or Paper What it means Link
literature
The teachers’ union Act 20 School relates to student http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2
lobbies for various Accountability assessments, evaluation of 015/related/acts/20
educational teacher effectiveness, and
 214

Themes from the

Act or Paper What it means Link
literature
strategies or school accountability reports.
approaches that help
or hinder learning.
Senate Bill 33 addresses the achievement http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2
Achievement gap reduction contracts 015/related/acts/53
The teachers' union Gap Reduction which require participating
lobbies for schools to implement
educational strategies for improving
strategies that academic performance in
standardizes low-income pupils in reading
education. and math, granting rule-
making authority, and
The teachers' union making an appropriation. The
lobbying results in latter two strategies will not
greater benefits for be addressed as they do not
students rather than pertain to the contents of this
teachers. study.
Senate Bill provide independent financial http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2
254 audits of private schools 015/related/acts/212
Achievement participating in a parental
Gap Reduction choice program, a civics
Program exam as a condition for
obtaining a high school
diploma, and factors for
determining school and
school district performance
on the school and school
district accountability report.
Informational Kava (2015) shares https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/fi
Paper 26 Open information regarding les/imce/policy-
Enrollment Wisconsin’s Open budget/pdf/2015%2026_Open%
Program Enrollment program which 20Enrollment%20Program.pdf
allows parents to choose the
school of choice. Kava
(2015) states since 1998,
students are allowed to attend
a school outside of their
assigned district as long as
the parent agrees to and
complies with certain
application dates and
procedures. Chapter 220
Program precludes allowing
a student to open enroll if the
enrollment provides an
imbalance to the school’s
racial profile.

Informational Pugh (2015) provides an

Paper 28 Pupil overview of assessments
Assessment provided to students to assess
achievement. The
informational paper explains
 215

Themes from the

Act or Paper What it means Link
literature
the definitions, background,
and information on
alternative assessments,
current assessments, previous
assessment methods, funding
for assessing, and federal
requirements as they pertain
to student assessment.

2017-2018 WEAC (2018) explains its http://weac.org/wp-

WEAC position on various content/uploads/2017/04/2017-
Position educational matters they 2018_WEAC_Resolutions.pdf
Document consider “current and serve
as policy direction for the
officers and staff” (page 1).
Areas of interest in the
resolutions include, but are
not limited to:
Serve as the State’s voice for
education to promote
education quality,
curriculum, and assessment,
promote professional
excellence among educators,
ensure professional
standards, certifications, and
licensure.
Promote adequate and
equitable funding for public
education, Promote civil
rights of students,
Promote academic and
professional freedoms of
educators, Protect the rights
of educational employees and
advance their interests and
welfare
Promote quality education,
curriculum, and assessment
Assembly Bill Relates to state aid to a https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/
315 school district of residence of 2017/proposals/ab315
a pupil attending a private
school under the Racine and
statewide parental choice
programs.
This bill requires a
referendum before the
Wisconsin Department of
Education can reduce state
aid to public schools. The bill
specifically refers to aid
between a student attending a
 216

Themes from the

Act or Paper What it means Link
literature
private school instead of a
public school.

Wisconsin This legislative document https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/

State (WI State Legislature, 2018) code/admin_code/pi/1
Legislature includes eleven sections
Chapter P1 1: which direct the state
Complaint superintendent in direction
Resolutions and determining all
and Appeals complaints and appeals made
to the office. According to
the document (WI State
Legislature, 2018),
complaints and appeals can
come from the identification,
evaluation, placement or
provision of a free and
appropriate education for any
student with a disability in a
WI public school. Chapter P1
1 also includes a history of
each section in relation to its
development, amendments,
or repeals.

The teachers’ union Assembly Bill Allow grants for national http://weac.org/wp-
lobbying results in 681 215 teacher certification or content/uploads/2017/04/2017-
greater benefits for Wisconsin Act master educator licensure and 2018_WEAC_Resolutions.pdf
teachers than 190 licensure for alternative
students education program teachers.
Informational Kava (2015) shares https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/
Paper 26 Open information regarding budget/pdf/2015%2026_Open%
Enrollment Wisconsin’s Open 20Enrollment%20Program.pdf
Program Enrollment program that default/files/imce/policy-
allows parents to choose the
school of choice. Kava
(2015) states since 1998,
students are allowed to attend
a school outside of their
assigned district as long as
the parent agrees to and
complies with certain
application dates and
procedures. Chapter 220
Program precludes allowing
a student to open enroll if the
enrollment provides an
imbalance to the school’s
racial profile.

Senate Bill Creates the Achievement http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2

 217

Themes from the

Act or Paper What it means Link
literature
254 Gap Reduction Program. 015/related/acts/71
Achievement This Senate Bill creates
Gap Reduction professional training in small
Program group instruction and to
reduce class size in an effort
to provide data-driven
instructional coaching to aid
teachers in improving
education in math and
reading and reduce the
achievement gap or to
provide data-driven coaching
and instruction either one-to-
one or in small groups to
students who are struggling
in math and/or reading.

Senate Bill 33 Addresses the achievement http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2

Achievement gap reduction contracts that 015/related/acts/53
Gap Reduction require participating schools
to implement strategies for
improving academic
performance in low-income
pupils in reading and math,
granting rule-making
authority, and making an
appropriation. The latter two
strategies will not be
addressed as they do not
pertain to the contents of this
study.
2017-2018 WEAC (2018) explains its http://weac.org/wp-
WEAC position on various content/uploads/2017/04/2017-
Resolutions educational matters they 2018_WEAC_Resolutions.pdf
consider “current and serve
as policy direction for the
officers and staff” (page 1).
Areas of interest in the
resolutions include, but are
not limited to:
Serve as the State’s voice for
education to promote
education quality,
curriculum, and assessment
Promote professional
excellence among educators
Ensure professional
standards, certifications, and
licensure
Promote adequate and
equitable funding for public
education
 218

Themes from the

Act or Paper What it means Link
literature
Promote civil rights of
students
Promote academic and
professional freedoms of
educators
Protect the rights of
educational employees and
advance their interests and
welfare
Promote quality education,
curriculum, and assessment
Assembly Bill Relates to state aid to a
315 school district of residence of
a pupil attending a private
school under the Racine and
statewide parental choice
programs.
This bill requires a
referendum before the
Wisconsin Department of
Education can reduce state
aid to public schools. The bill
specifically refers to aid
between a student attending a
private school instead of a
public school.

Assembly Bill increases funding for special https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/

319 education. The bill acts to 2017/related/proposals/ab319
increase spending for special
education services and school
age services programs to no
less than 33 percent of the
schools certified and eligible
costs.
Wisconsin Chapter 115 includes a series https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/
State of definitions, classifications, statutes/statutes/115
Legislature and explanations for the state
Chapter 115 superintendent and children
with disabilities. It includes
nine subchapters, each of
which is expanded in a
subsequent sub-topic. These
sub-topics include, but are
not limited to, the role of the
state superintendent, offices
which can be held while in
the role of superintendent,
interactions with various
state agencies while in the
role of superintendent,
definitions for students with
 219

Themes from the

Act or Paper What it means Link
literature
disabilities, partnerships with
various learning agencies
such as National Geographic,
collaborative content delivery
and online instruction, mental
health training programs,
Smarter Balanced
Assessment Consortium and
Common Core State
Standards initiatives, and
statewide student data
systems. All of which could
have a possible influence on
student achievement.

Wisconsin This legislative document https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/

State (WI State Legislature, 2018) code/admin_code/pi/1
Legislature includes eleven sections
Chapter P1 1: which direct the state
Complaint superintendent in direction
Resolutions and determining all
and Appeals complaints and appeals made
to the office. According to
the document (WI State
Legislature, 2018),
complaints and appeals can
come from the identification,
evaluation, placement or
provision of a free and
appropriate education for any
student with a disability in a
WI public school. Chapter P1
1 also includes a history of
each section in relation to its
development, amendments,
or repeals.
 220

Appendix G.

Abbreviations Used During Transcription

A = Achievement or Administration (contextually based)

AP = Assistant Principal

C/C = Climate and culture

EE = Educator Effectiveness

Mke = Milwaukee

MTEA = Milwaukee Teachers’ Education Association

P = Principal or Parent (contextually based)

PD = professional development

SA = Student Achievement

T = Teacher

U = union

TU = teachers’ union

( ) = surrounds statement by interviewer asking a clarifying question

 221

Appendix H.

Codebook Coding – Level One Interviews

#1 Think about the climate and culture in your very pro-union

school. Where do you think it comes from? What rather than complain you join
makes you think that? bulled our way through
blue flu
all about money
students
principals
culture is teachers
teachers are the tone
combination of everyone
set by the admin and lead teachers
tone set by admin
our culture is our students
admin and leaders
holds people accountable
culture is very positive and nurturing
principals
interesting culture of kids
not a lot of teachers to choose from
administration
in flux
collaborative between two levels of admin
admin has responsibility to provide c/c to staff
comes from board policy
committee review
expectations of the community
the principal
main force, heart of our school
students and administration
teachers
kids create it too
not making gains
attitude of the staff, students
#2 In reflecting on the culture and climate of the never really focused on SA
school, how might it influence student for the students
achievement? push themselves to be better
contagious competition
longevity
high expectations
day to day is basic skills for SA
culture of pride
this is MY school
they feel a part of something
family
most S are really excited to come to school
positive stone
feel comfortable
teachers are expected to stay after to help
come in for help
 222

we stay an hour and a half to help the kids

rapport
parent relationships
they still negotiate for me
T are on the same page, get consistent message,
helps students
all the adults
helps them trust us
can usually support the kids
very student-centered
stay after school
SA comes from the S, not anyone else
factors of achievement – who’s in the room - P,
Admin,
parenting is probably #1
teachers
it's teacher attitude
care so deeply
takes work
takes caring about the students
it was very toxic
new union rep is very positive
depends on who we have in our building
teachers not coming to work
protected by the union for non-teaching behavior
MPS needs teachers
union was in our building the next day when a T
complained
political climate
#3 Continuing your thoughts on the leadership in hours are over and I'm leaving
your school, what, if any, influence from the principal values the union
teachers’ union do you see on leadership in your support from WEAC
school? support for my boards have been huge from WEAC
don't see huge influence on leadership
there's little they can do now
negotiated set of rules to play by
boundaries
do more interesting things in the class without the
union
it's one thing after another
unpredictable
it's a conversational topic
leaders in our school have huge for the union
I'm a union rep
help develop leaders
I can't see I’ve seen it or experienced it personally
scheduling, PD times, pay scales/salary
teachers
workshops
toxic community
pay us more money
second-class citizen
almost quit
couldn't pay my bills
P has butted heads with the union several times
does not let them unfairly influence her
 223

thinks of them as a thorn in her side

legal rep, salary
does not play an active role
I'm the head union rep
teachers are focused on their classrooms
not really
Since Act 10 union has been trying to keep
members
leadership as followers
Danielson
should not be standardization
there's not a lot of union influence in our school
people working together so everyone benefits
doesn't play that game
doesn't see value in union
always working with our T
coach/teachers make more engaging lessons
bash us
rake us through the coals
bad things in the news
#4 What, if any, influence does the leadership in stymied by the union
your school have on student achievement? leadership team
vested interested in moving the children forward
making sure initiatives or curriculums are
implemented
high expectations
admins are positive
don't care - just do your thing
been in the trenches and understand what S need
before they entered admin
removed from the classroom for too long
I don't know anything directly they do other than
support S through T
Trickle-down effect
a lot
AP and P are very involved
Teachers’ union is weak
don't have influence on principals
leadership is awesome
new initiatives
knows when T are good for kids and when they are
no
admin and T work together
sit and get
standards-based grading
emphasize accountability
people in the union - extremely dedicated really
good attitude
let's us do our job
she wants T to do their best
trickle down
hindrance
things union lobbies for does not affect kids AT
ALL
support T - more money, lest time worked
social justice issues - LBQT/sex

#5 Let’s talk about teacher union lobbying.
What, if any, any influence from union lobbying?
224
teachers
a culture that's negative
creating a culture of conflict and negativity to keep
themselves in business
union is on the side of the T, not our kids
I don't understand protecting the bad teacher
even after Act 10, I kept my union membership
until I became a Dean then I stopped
I can't support protecting bad T
climate has no influence on leadership from union
admin has no respect for the union policies
union has lost all their clout
no consequences
sick out
admin doesn't not respect the union
our P is very concerned about SA
struggling to fill T positions
have you seen on student achievement?
none
it's all about the teachers
support for my NBC
watching to keep things good for students
protect our resources
we'd be greatly limited if we didn't have them
fighting for us
union protects public schools and quality of teachers
means S can have opportunity to achieve
trickle down
teachers need something
teachers + kids + union = success
advocacy
advocate for us
we do all we can for the students
hiring the best people
concerned about getting qualified teachers in
classroom
educator effectiveness
Danielson
nothing FOR kids
complain
refuses to do anything above and beyond (T who are
in the union)
constant doers (T who are not in the union)
not directly
indirectly
teachers are lobbying for the S
Danielson
accountability
looks on my students faces
feedback from my admins and I ignore them
don't get it, I change it - that's my accountability
Danielson model is not relevant, manufactured and
stilted - it's not teaching
a lot of accountability
comes from administration
union doesn't have as much leverage
 225

they don't do anything ot help the T to be better at

their job
money
conflict
they want to keep the bad teacher
No
I don't see direct influence on T lobbying for SA
focus is on energy to keep kids in MPS
to get choice schools
#6 Please think about ways you are held not from the union
accountable to your students and their from myself
achievement. What, if any, influence from the join the union to see if I could change it
teachers’ union do you see in your measures of everything is clear
accountability? more consistent
I personally feel held accountable
we lose funding
I can see gaps
union helps us through that
doesn't suggest or lobby for a certain program
will support me
union doesn't fight for curricula
do what we want within Common Core
not totally sure
I'm not held accountable for grades
this Act 10
Walker
union is pretty good in supporting teaches
Educator Effectiveness
no raise
EE program
no likes it
it's a pain in the ass
successful in electing several people to our school
board that are very school and student centered
none whatsoever
have to be held accountable to do our job
comes from myself
survival at MPS
achievement is not the forefront of their focus
I don't think union is affecting my accountability as
a staff
my own morality affects my SA
Educator Effectiveness
not implemented correctly (EE)
standards-based grading
no reason to pass students who didn't do work, but
they were passed
#7 Continuing your thoughts on accountability, the staunch union mindset says too bad
what, if any, influence do you think it has on work with that child when they don’t understand
student achievement? reteach that skill
Danielson - evaluated with as a teacher but not on
accountability
perceptions
staff are treated and held accountable
behave the same way
I want that accountability from others so I can
 226

improve
always want to improve
help them be more successful
I'm proud of my high pass rate
it's personal
personally motivated
huge impact
Act 10, we have policies
myself accountable
not really sure if they have any power
don't have much power
we can get a raise
insurance, wages
bully their way to get the public to believe lies
complain about things
no one pays attention and really knows, they just
take the union's word for it
bully
they create the illusion of relevance
T schedule (8:30 instead of 8)
2% raise
Scott Walker - we lost a lot of good teachers
insurance, salary
#8 Lastly, let’s talk about bargaining. (If the Salary
school is unionized: What types of bargaining blue flu
does your union do for you? If the school is not union hasn't been able to do much with our salaries
unionized: What bargaining does the union do I was a union rep prior to Act 10
for schools that are unionized?) What influences, facilitate the connection
if any, do you think bargaining has on student I don't get involved a lot
achievement in your school? they seem to be worrying about their teaching
instead of the politics
I'm happy the union is there
wonderful Act 10 (sarcasm)
bringing back the step pay
new members are union backed
salary
prep time was lessened
union helped increase that
a lot of bargaining
I don't think we're unionized
salary
bargaining
to belong to the union
adjust our schedules
MTEA bargains for salary, benefits
didn't join
Act 10
no one was sad to see Walker go
used to have a T pension but now we have to pay
our own pension - Walker took it all from us
we do have a union
membership is declining
our union does nothing for us
increasingly frustrated
Act 10
Scott Walker

#9. Is there anything else you would like to add
that may contribute to this phenomenon of the
potential influence of unions on student
achievement?
227
base wages
voted to unionize
only thing they can do is pay
wages and health insurance prep time
it's pretty much a joke
bargain for more staff
I’m happy the union is there
union makes sure we have good teachers and good
pay
the TU should be advocating for teacher safety
we hold students accountable for behavior against
each other but not against the teachers
I'd like to see the union sponsor more events for our
young people.
it's an advocate for them, makes us stronger and our
students stronger.
I can say FOR SURE that the less union
involvement in a school, the better the culture and
the more achievement.
ever since Act 10, things have improved but there
are a few of us who hold back.
the union creates problems to create relevance.
it’s all about the money, it's never about the kids.

Appendix I.
Codebook Coding – Level One Questionnaire
#1 To what extent do you believe the teachers’
union standardizes education for all children,
regardless of ability?
#2 To what extent do you believe the teachers’
union promotes differentiation for all students,
regardless of ability?
228
I think to the most extent, but not 100% I say that
because some teachers have other motives than for
the children
I think the union stands for the right of each
students' education, no matter what of ability.
Not sure
I feel it goes many ways. While it should be about
the children, there's many different points that most
teachers have.
I feel that most feel this way for all children, while
some have other thoughts about who or what child
should have the education.
I believe that is the main focus and it circles around
that.
Unsure
I think that the union goes by it 100%. Teaching all
children should be the main focus point.
The union I feel believes that all children should
have the right to a great education.
I believe fully that the union lobbies for a full
education for all children. No child should be left
behind no matter what they have.
I believe that the union in all stands for the right for
education for all education, regardless of their
ability.
I don't believe they do. Gov't regulations have put
procedures in place we must follow. Unions are
redundant to that end.
To a small degree.
Unions don't drive educational decisions at all.
I believe the TU standardizes education at a greater
degree for all children, regardless of ability.
I do not believe the TU standardizes education for
all children.
I am sure of this.
The union does nothing that focuses on students and
education.
I think it does to a point where it circles around
education, but not by 100%.
I think that state and national laws standardize
education through required tests and assessments,
regardless of ability. This often perpetuated by
admins. I do not think the TU has anything to do
with standardized education.
Most feel that any student should be recognized
regardless of ability, but others feel that sometimes
it won't work.
I feel that is the direction the union is aiming for,
but don't feel the whole focus is on that subject.
I feel most of the union feels that way, but some

#3 To what extent do you believe the teachers’
union lobbies for various educational strategies
and approaches that help education?
229
might have different objectives towards it.
To a good extent.
I believe the union does promote differentiation and
diversity of the students.
I honestly think that the union does what
representation for all students, regardless of ability.
I feel to that extent that the TU promotes it 100%
for all students. Every child should have a chance.
Somewhat. Differentiation seems to be the
buzzword these days but what it means depends on
who is using the word. Some teachers do a great job
thinking about ways to differentiate, however they
do not differentiate expectations. They also defer to
sped teachers for most students with IEPs.
Very little
Differentiation happens in the classroom. A TU
does not promise these procedures. It happens with
the DOE from both the state and federal gov't.
I believe the TU definitely promotes differentiation
for all students regardless of ability.
I don't know how TU specifically promote
differentiation.
They do not. Their focus in on membership, money,
and politics.
It depends on the what the teachers feel about the
students. Some feel that all students matter, while
others seem to feel a certain type of student
shouldn't have much time wasted on.
I believe the TU is an advocate for all students,
specifically for inclusion and advancement for all
children of color, with disabilities, and non-
conforming gender.
I feel to a good extent, but again, imo, feel it's not
their focus.
A great extent.
To a great extent. There are many problems with
education that many of the strategies are old and
need to be reevaluated.
To some extent. Some feel they can use knew ways
for education, while some feel that the old ways are
the best.
A lot.
I'm sure, most strategies and approaches seem to
come down from DPI or administration. Teachers
are expected to fall in line.
I think they lobby it 100%.
That goes to a great extent.
I think that is one of the biggest concerns that the
union has. Most teachers feel that different
strategies will help children who have different
abilities of learning.
To a small degree.
They do not.
Really not sure about this one.
I believe 100% lobbies for various educational
strategies and approaches that help education.

#4 To what extent do you believe the teachers’
union lobbies for various educational strategies
that hinder education?
#5 To what extent do you believe the teachers’
union lobbying results in greater benefits for
teachers than students?
230
I am not aware of this being a specific objective.
I do not believe that to be true.
I have not seen one penny donated to help students.
I don't think anyone from the union wants to hinder
education. They just want what is right for
themselves and the students.
I don't feel the want to hinder education at all.
To a small extent. There's some teachers who feel
some ways about educational strategies aren't
correct.
To be honest, I'm not really sure.
A lot, especially outdated curriculum.
I don't feel the TU are able to lobby for much these
days at any level - local or state.
Do not believe they do.
I do not feel that TU have any real effect on
educational strategies. They come from district staff
and the gov't.
Not sure.
I believe that the TU does not lobby for various
educational strategies that hinder education.
I am unsure.
That I believe is the sole purpose of my union is
teacher salary and benefits - educational strategies
were not discussed. The district held workshops that
held workshops on ed strategies.
That fact they lobby to protect ineffective educators
shows they have no intent but to hinder education.
I don't know if the union is lobbying for things
which hinder education.
I do think that some teachers only join the union just
to fight for better benefits. While that's important, it
should always be about the students.
That is a difficult question. On one side, teachers
feel the students better but the teachers feel for all
their hard work, they should get the same.
A great extent.
To some extent.
To some extent.
Both, I can't say they value teachers more than the
kids.
Some, but districts can do what they want. Wages
are stagnant and benefits become more expensive.
To a small extent. Some teachers feel they deserve
better pay and benefits.
Strongly believe.
I don't believe the union offers any significant
benefits for either teachers or students.
I believe the TU lobbying results in greater benefits
for both T and S.
DEFINITELY.
I believe 100% of their efforts goes toward teachers
and political nonsense. Nothing is about the
students.
Most teachers feel they deserve the extra benefits
since they have a lot to deal with and the stress of

#6 To what extent do you believe the teachers’
union lobbying results in greater benefits for
students than teachers?
231
trying to help everyone do well.
I think for the recent budget proposal that the union
has lobbied more on behalf of S than T.
To a great extent.
None.
To some extent even though S should get the
benefits, some feel only certain students should be
allowed to obtain them.
To a huge extent. Most feel that students should
have the best education possible.
Most of the time. At the end of the day, it should be
about the students
Both
Unsure, I don’t see the unions in WI having much
success in lobbying for anyone. Unions were
stripped of their voices.
To a small degree.
I don’t believe the union offers any significant
benefits for either teachers or students.
I don’t.
I believe the teachers’ union lobbying results in
greater benefits for teachers and students.
I do believe that most teachers want what’s best for
students, but I don’t know to what extent they’re
lobbying would result in greater benefits for the
teacher vs the student.
No, not at all.
Zero.
I think one of the most important things the union
does to benefit for kids it to lobby for funding for
educational resources.
 232

Appendix J.

Coding – Level Two

RQ1: How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student achievement?
RQ2: What, if any, types of union influence do the teachers perceive?
INTERVIEWS: none
everything is clear
more consistent
I personally feel held accountable
we lose funding
I can see gaps
union helps us through that
doesn't suggest or lobby for a certain program
will support me
union doesn't fight for curricula
do what we want within Common Core
this Act 10
Walker
union is pretty good in supporting teaches
Educator Effectiveness
no raise
EE program
no likes it
it's a pain in the ass
successful in electing several people to our school
board that are very school and student centered
none whatsoever

QUESTIONNAIRE: I think the union stands for the right of each

students' education, no matter what of ability.
To a good extent.
I believe the union does promote differentiation and
diversity of the students.
I honestly think that the union does what
representation for all students, regardless of ability.
I feel to that extent that the TU promotes it 100%
for all students. Every child should have a chance.
Somewhat. Differentiation seems to be the
buzzword these days but what it means depends on
who is using the word. Some teachers do a great job
thinking about ways to differentiate, however they
do not differentiate expectations. They also defer to
sped teachers for most students with IEPs.
The union I feel believes that all children should
have the right to a great education.
Very little
 233

I believe fully that the union lobbies for a full

education for all children. No child should be left
behind no matter what they have.
I believe that the union in all stands for the right for
education for all education, regardless of their
ability.
I believe the TU definitely promotes differentiation
for all students regardless of ability.
They do not. Their focus in on membership, money,
and politics.
I believe the TU standardizes education at a greater
degree for all children, regardless of ability.
I believe the TU is an advocate for all students,
specifically for inclusion and advancement for all
children of color, with disabilities, and non-
conforming gender.
The union does nothing that focuses on students
and education.
I don't believe the union offers any significant
benefits for ether T or S.
I believe the TU lobbying results in greater benefits
for T and S.
No, not at all.
Zero
I think one of the most important things the union
does to benefit for kids is to lobby for funding for
educational resources.
I feel to a good extent, but again, imo, feel it's not
their focus.
A great extent.
I don't think anyone from the union wants to hinder
education. They just want what is right for
themselves and the students.
I don't feel the want to hinder education at all.
To a great extent. There are many problems with
education that many of the strategies are old and
need to be reevaluated.
To some extent. Some feel they can use knew ways
for education, while some feel that the old ways are
the best.
A lot.
A lot, especially outdated curriculum.
I think they lobby it 100%.
That goes to a great extent.
I think that is one of the biggest concerns that the
union has. Most teachers feel that different
strategies will help children who have different
abilities of learning.
I believe 100% lobbies for various educational
strategies and approaches that help education.
That fact they lobby to protect ineffective educators
 234

shows they have no intent but to hinder education.

 235

Appendix K.

Level 1 and 2 Coding to Categories

RQ1: How do teachers perceive the influence of a teachers’ union on student achievement?
CODES from Levels 1 and 2: Number of instances:
Salary 11
No influence on student achievement 9
Differentiation 4
Doesn’t lobby for certain programs 3
Supports teachers 3
Educator effectiveness 2
RQ2: What, if any, types of union influence do the teachers perceive?
CODES from Levels 1 and 2: Number of instances:
Very little/negative comments 13
Salary 11
Doesn’t re-evaluate old strategies 4
Act 10 3
Scheduling 2
 236

Appendix L.

Final Themes

Categories from RQ1: CODES FOR RQ1:

very little (13) Very little
educator effectiveness (2) Systems influence
differentiation (4)
doesn't lobby for a certain program (3)
Categories from RQ2: CODES FOR RQ2:
scheduling (2) Systems influence
salary (11)
Act 10 (3) Political activity
very little/negative (13) Very little
re-eval old strategies (4) Pedagogy
Phenomenon: What are the perceptions of WI public school teachers’ perception of the teachers'
union possible influence on student achievement?
Final Themes:
doesn't lobby for a certain program
Systems Influence:
Educator Effectiveness
supports teachers
scheduling
salary
re-eval old strategies
Act 10
very little/negative
hinder education
systems influence
pedagogy
differentiation
Extra:
State political activity