Allocating Quality: Collective Bargaining Agreements and Administrative Discretion Over Teacher Assignment

Abstract

Background: School leaders argue that to make the improvements in both quality and equity that government mandates demand, they need more flexibility with regard to personnel management—specifically, teacher assignment. According to some, such flexibility is constrained by collective bargaining between teachers unions and school districts. Purpose: To examine how collective bargaining agreements govern the assignment of teachers to schools and classrooms and whether any observed variation among the agreements is due to district demographics and/or performance. Research Methods: Sixty-six collective bargaining agreements between teachers unions and Florida's school districts were collected and analyzed for provisions germane to teacher assignment. The authors looked for contrasts among the contracts by district size, district socioeconomic status, district race, and district Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test performance with data from the Florida Department of Education. Findings: Although staffing rules often favor seniority, contracts also grant administrators more discretion over transfers, reductions, and reassignments than critics have suggested. In addition, contracts are no more likely to restrict administrators' decisions about assignment in large, poor, minority, or low-performing districts than they are in other districts. Implications for Research and Practice: Future research should consider whether teacher assignment looks any different in districts where contracts grant administrators discretion over teacher assignment. If so, what norms have replaced seniority as the primary basis for transfers, reductions, and reassignments, and do these norms hold promise for school improvement and equity? The authors encourage the development and testing of new systems that use teachers' past performance with different types of students to make evidence-based assignments.