Federation of Colombian Educators

We had the pleasure of meeting (sadly, very quickly) with Senen Niño, the President of the Federation of Colombian Educators, a union with a membership of 300,000 public educators.  After introducing himself, Senen opened the conversation to questions from the group.

The first half of our conversation focused on the union’s belief that concession schools are one mechanism in the privatization of public education.  His argument against concessions included three issues:  1. Funding inequities – concession schools have higher publicly provided per pupil expenditures; 2. Corruption and manipulation of attendance records – concession schools inflate their attendance records to receive extra public funds; 3. Exploitation of teachers – teachers are constantly worried that their contracts will not be renewed.  Two of these points directly conflicted with our preparatory reading for the trip as well as our meetings with others in Bogota.  We read about the equal per pupil expenditures at concession schools and regular public schools, as equal spending but higher test results were actually highlighted as one of the greatest benefits of the concession model.  When we met with the Alliance on Monday, they explained that they have a problem retaining teachers after spending extensive resources training them, namely because public school teachers are paid higher salaries.  Throughout the conversation, Senen emphasized the importance of universal free public education, and argued that concession schools distracted Colombia from this larger goal.

The second half of the conversation was focused on the tension between the interests of teachers and the interests of students.  Senen described the role of the union as fighting for the improvement of working conditions of teachers.  Although this is generally the role of a labor union, I often have trouble accepting teachers’ unions as typical institutions; I want students to be the center of all educational debates.  Senen reinforced that his role was to protect the interest of teachers, but he provided the example of reducing class size as an issue beneficial to students as well.  He also explained that the Federation organizes student committees at schools and regional meetings for students to share concerns.  He did not, however, speak about some of the fundamental issues that can make unions seem contrary to student interests.

The group left with a few key questions and thoughts:

1.       What are the data sources used by different institutions involved in education reform (i.e., the Ministry, the union, individual schools)?  What are the biases of these different resources?

2.       The analogies between concession schools in Colombia and charter schools in the U.S. were apparent again during this meeting.  Senen mentioned collaborating with unions in the US and Canada.  What issues are these collaborations focused on?

3.       Are there teachers’ unions in other countries that are more clearly focused on representing student interests as well as those of teachers?  Are there other organizations that allow teachers and other stakeholders to take on the role of student advocate?

Jessica