Abstract
As teacher strikes remain a prominent phenomenon within the United States, it is critical to examine their prevalence, potential causes, and consequences to understand the evolving dynamics of education policy, labor relations, and teaching as a profession. Using a unique longitudinal dataset of large teacher strikes between 1993 and 2019, we find strikes occur in waves and various economic, socio-political, and occupational factors predict strike occurrences. We also find evidence that these factors operate differently in right-to-work and non-right-to-work states. Lastly, we find that large strikes are associated with higher average teacher salaries in subsequent years, but with no substantive change in student achievement.
Keywords
In the realm of teacher strikes, a prominent and controversial issue revolves around the question of their benefits for teachers, students, and broader communities. Despite the apparent recent surge in their frequency and visibility, a debate persists. Detractors argue that the disruptions caused by teacher strikes, particularly school closures, pose significant challenges to student learning, especially for marginalized youth (Norton & Hernandez, 2018; Smith, 2019). Moreover, critics contend that the repercussions extend beyond academics, encompassing disruptions to parents’ work schedules, potential deprivation of school meals for economically disadvantaged students, strain on local budgets due to escalating demands, and even disruption of crucial government functions (Johnson, 2019; Smith, 2019). By contrast, proponents of teachers’ right to strike have long argued that strikes, or the threat thereof, establish the role of unions and collective bargaining as the “lesser of a number of evils” (Shanker, 1973, p. 48). In this sense, teacher strikes, and collective bargaining more broadly, serve as vital democratic tools built on the collective power of teachers to combat neoliberal policies undermining public education (Compton & Weiner, 2008), improve schooling and teaching conditions, and advance justice in schools and broader society (Bascia, 2004; Stark, 2019).
In contrast to a more extensive but broader literature on teacher unionization and collective bargaining (e.g., Cowen & Strunk, 2015; Lovenheim & Willén, 2019; Merkle & Phillips, 2018), there is a smaller body of empirical research concerning teacher strikes occurring within the United States in recent years. The little research that exists largely presents qualitative and historical accounts (e.g., Blanc, 2019) or has narrowly focused on a restricted set of contemporary teacher strikes in specific local or state contexts (e.g., Tarlau, 2023). While recent large-scale quantitative studies have examined the link between antecedents and consequences of teacher strikes in non-U.S. contexts (e.g., Belot & Webbink, 2010; Juame & Willén, 2019), prior studies examining teacher strikes from a national perspective using similar methods are largely dated (e.g., Chaney, 1973). The multifaceted nature of the debate surrounding teacher strikes, coupled with the dearth of empirical research to inform the underlying normative arguments of said debate, necessitates a comprehensive analysis to better understand both the enabling conditions and the outcomes of teacher strikes on schooling outcomes.
The purpose of this study is to contribute to the prior literature on educator labor strikes by examining the nature and consequences of large teacher-led strikes, those that have at least 1,000 participants, within the United States from a national perspective. 1 We begin by examining the distribution of strikes across the United States over time, overall, and by states’ right-to-work legislation status. In our study, we utilize right-to-work legislation as a proxy for a state’s political ideology, operating under the premise that right-to-work laws, often associated with conservative and anti-union sentiments, serve as an indicator of the prevailing political climate within a given state (Jacobs & Glass, 2015; Shermer, 2012). We then examine factors associated with the occurrence of large strikes and the link between large strikes and shifts in schooling outcomes, such as teacher pay, school expenditures, and student achievement. Specifically, we ask the following research questions:
How are large teacher strikes in the United States distributed across states and over time?
To what extent are economic, socio-political, and occupational factors within the public educational sector associated with the occurrence of large teacher strikes within the United States? In particular, to what extent do these relationships vary based on the presence of right-to-work legislation within a state?
To what extent are large teacher strikes associated with improvements or impairments in education conditions for teachers and students with respect to salary, per-pupil expenditures, and student achievement in math and reading?
Drawing on an interdisciplinary set of theoretical perspectives to examine how teacher strikes manifest and operate on a national scale, this study conceptualizes salient economic, socio-political, and occupational (i.e., within the educational sector) factors. In particular, an economic supply-and-demand framework provides one important lens through which to interpret how various factors, such as unemployment rates, charter school competition, and union strength, may influence the availability (supply) of qualified teachers and the willingness of schools or districts (demand) to adjust compensation and working conditions. Collectively, these perspectives help to predict the occurrence of teacher strikes and their associated shifts in resources intended to benefit students, education staff, and schools.
The study leverages a unique nationwide state-by-year longitudinal dataset of large U.S. teacher strikes occurring between 1993 and 2019 to better understand how an organized teacher workforce reacts to fundamental societal changes affecting schools and in what ways large-scale labor strikes within the educational sector translate to changes in outcomes salient to both education and social policy. Findings from our state-level analysis yield crucial insights with wide-ranging implications, informing macro- and state-level policy decisions to better understand the potential causes, dynamics, and outcomes of strikes and to enhance more effective labor relations policies in the public education sector. Specifically, our study aims to identify factors and conditions associated with the occurrence of large teacher strikes, which may prompt policymakers to re-evaluate budget priorities and reallocate resources based on factors most significantly associated with the materialization of strike activity. In addition, such research may empower teacher labor activists and unions by identifying the extent to which a key form of labor activism is associated with the advancement of positive schooling outcomes, therefore potentially strengthening future advocacy efforts.
To briefly preview our key findings, we find that large strikes come in waves, and periods of high occurrence of strikes reflect underlying social and educational conditions. Many strikes occur in reaction to long-term educational and political conditions that may negatively impact public education. Moreover, when large strikes occur, they tend to be about teacher salaries more often than not. To this point, we do find that large strikes are associated with increases in teacher salary with limited change in per-pupil expenditure (at least at the state level). Last but not least, though strikes may be disruptive to students and families when they occur, we find little evidence that they are negatively associated with student learning. In short, our work provides clear evidence that economic, socio-political, and occupational factors within the educational sector do contribute to large strike occurrences and that large strikes are associated with changes in teacher outcomes.
Background of Labor Activism Within the U.S. Public Teaching Workforce
Workers have utilized strikes for decades to protect their interests in both private and public sectors. Within the public sector, labor activism has been particularly prominent among sanitation, utility, and education employees (Darmer, 1984). Initially, the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 safeguarded collective bargaining rights for private-sector employees, but it did not extend the same protections to public employees (Shelton, 2017). However, in the mid-20th century, labor laws began to recognize public-sector employees, although the specific provisions varied by state (Shelton, 2017).
Teachers, who constitute the largest unionized occupational group in the United States, have a long history of labor activism. Early attempts to organize teachers, predominantly led by women, can be traced back to the mid-19th century and included initiatives like the Chicago Teachers Federation in the 1890s, which aimed to improve salaries and working conditions (Shelton, 2017). These efforts preceded the establishment of the American Federation of Teachers in 1916 (Shelton, 2017). From the mid-1940s, teacher strikes gained momentum across multiple states, with the largest surge occurring in the 1960s and 1970s (Lucey, 2012). Since then, there have been over 3,000 teacher strikes lasting more than 1 day (Lucey, 2012).
The legal landscape regarding educator unionization, collective bargaining, and labor stoppages varies among states. While every state has at least one teachers’ union, the legal environments surrounding these unions and collective bargaining rights differ significantly. Some states support robust teachers’ unions, while others have laws that restrict their activities (Strunk et al., 2018). Laws protecting educators’ right to unionize and engage in collective bargaining can provide a platform for negotiating demands through legal means, which can either reduce the reliance on more extreme labor tactics like strikes or, in contrast, provide the infrastructure to facilitate large-scale collective action. However, grassroots mobilization may sometimes proceed with minimal or no union leadership, as teachers may rely on other mechanisms such as social media to enable collective action in the absence of active union infrastructure and support (Blanc, 2020; Tarlau, 2023).
As of 2023, school employee strikes were illegal in all but 13 states (Lieberman, 2023). However, even in states where strikes are banned, teachers may resort to strikes as a last resort after exhausting other legal options (Blanc, 2020). In addition, “right-to-work” laws have historically posed significant challenges to private sector unions, as employees in unionized work settings would not be required to join or financially support the union as a condition of employment. In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME, Council 31 eliminated the requirement of union membership as a condition of employment among public sector workers, such as teachers, and prohibited public sector unions from collecting membership dues from nonunion members for collective bargaining purposes (Lyon, 2021). Consequently, in the wake of the Supreme Cout’s Janus ruling, teacher unions may face difficulties effectively advocating for teacher demands, potentially leading teachers to explore alternative means for collective action, including organized and sometimes illegal strikes (Blanc, 2019; Lyon, 2021).
A Proposed Conceptual Framework to Explain Teacher Strikes
Over the past several decades, the relatively few efforts to model the determinants and effects of teacher labor strikes—and labor strikes more broadly—have been, to some degree or another, oriented across the fields of economics, industrial labor relations, sociology, political science, and public administration (Jenkins, 1983; Kaufman, 1982; Kelly & Nicholson, 1980; Marx & Wood, 1975; Perlman, 1960). Given the lack of a unifying framework that conceptualizes the complex interplay between potential antecedents and outcomes of labor strikes that operate on a macroscale, we synthesize and build on theoretical foundations across these fields. Based on our review of these respective literatures, we identify three categories of conditions that are salient for considering when a labor strike might occur and the degree to which it might be successful in achieving its intended aim or result in unintended consequences.
As Figure 1 depicts, factors affecting labor strikes at the macroscale can be distinguished as (a) economic factors that affect the public/private employed workforce broadly speaking, (b) socio-political factors that affect the nature of the labor-management relationship and the degree of influence that collective action will or is perceived to have on labor negotiations, and (c) occupational sector factors affecting the state of a particular industry or employment sector—in the case of teacher strikes and the educational sector, conditions and policies pertaining to public schooling.
Conceptual framework for factors affecting teacher strikes.
Economic Factors
First, from an economic perspective, labor strike might align with business cycles and macroeconomic conditions, such as unemployment rates, inflation, and employees’ cost of living. Applying a supply-and-demand framework to teacher labor provides a useful economic lens for understanding strike activity in relation to broader macroeconomic conditions. For example, an abundance of alternative employment opportunities—often reflected in a low unemployment rate—may reduce the supply of teachers by decreasing their willingness to accept existing job conditions or remain in the profession, while also increasing their leverage to engage in collective bargaining without resorting to strike activity. At the same time, economic downturns can impose budgetary constraints on school districts, limiting their capacity to improve pay or working conditions, thereby increasing the likelihood of labor disputes or strike activity.
An important strand of theory proposes that strike behavior arises from imbalanced negotiations between workers and employers, with both sides assessing the costs and benefits of a labor stoppage (Hicks, 1963; Rees, 1952). The economic literature offers insight into how, if at all, economic factors feature in this process to inform employees’ and employers’ cost-benefit assessments of a labor stoppage. By extension to the public sector, business cycles might affect public tax revenue (Vegh & Vuletin, 2015), thereby affecting the cost–benefit assessments of public employees and employers (e.g., publicly funded local education agencies) for labor strikes. One possible link proposed by Harrison and Stewart (1994) suggests that strikes may be procyclical in the sense that robust economic production could influence employees’ assessment of employers’ ability to pay higher wages and improve working conditions, thus making them more prone to strike during failed negotiations. In addition, the availability of alternative work opportunities (negatively related to the rate of unemployment) may enhance workers’ appetite for strike action, as the abundance of job alternatives could reduce workers’ loss of income (or fear thereof) due to strike action (Card, 1990; Martin & Dixon, 2010). Alternative job opportunities tend to be relatively abundant during business cycle peaks, and so the opportunity costs of strike action could be reduced in those periods. However, previous research finds that strike activity might also be countercyclical, such that business cycle downturns could be associated with worsened pay or work conditions as well as an employer’s incapacity to improve them, thus raising the incidence of strike activity (Devereux & Hart, 2011).
Scholars have also proposed that inflation and cost of living also serve as factors affecting workers’ proclivity to strike (Cramton & Tracy, 2003; Hansen, 1921; Lacroix, 1986). Fluctuations in these economic factors might either affect the quality of employee working conditions, employee perceptions of and satisfaction with the terms of their labor, or the general standard of living, thus raising the possibility of collective action in the event of a breakdown in collective bargaining negotiations.
Socio-Political Factors
The interplay between broader social and political factors can significantly influence the dynamics of labor strikes and the overall labor-management relationship, potentially creating a more conducive environment for labor movements and collective action. Within the socio-political realm, a range of factors may shape labor dynamics, including the strength and strategic capacity of labor organizations, the prevailing political ideology of governing officials, public attitudes toward organized labor, and the legal frameworks that regulate collective bargaining and strike actions in both the public and private sectors (Clegg, 1970; Dunlop, 1984; Heery, 2002; Kaufman, 1982; McAdam et al., 2003).
Undoubtedly, union strength—reflected in organizational infrastructure, resources, membership size, and membership engagement—can shape the likelihood and success of strikes in meeting workers’ demands (Franzosi, 1995; Korpi & Shalev, 1979; Martin & Dixon, 2010). Larger and more cohesive unions are better positioned to mobilize members and exert pressure on employers during labor disputes. However, socio-political factors external to unions can also play a critical role in shaping the willingness of both labor and employers to engage in strike activity. For instance, governments led by officials sympathetic to labor interests or aligned with ideologies favoring worker rights may be more likely to enact laws and policies that strengthen the position of unions and empower workers to organize, collectively bargain, and strike more effectively. Either the symbolic or active support from public officials may lower the perceived costs and risks of labor actions while increasing the anticipated benefits, thereby shifting workers’ cost–benefit calculations in favor of organizing and engaging in strike activity. Public opinion also plays a pivotal role in shaping labor relations by enhancing the legitimacy of union actions. When strikes garner strong public support, they not only increase workers’ bargaining power but also help unions frame their demands as aligned with broader societal values. From an institutional theory perspective, organizations—including unions and public employers—seek legitimacy by conforming to prevailing norms and public expectations (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977). Public approval of strikes can serve as a powerful symbolic resource, legitimizing collective action and protecting unions from criticism. In this way, public sentiment shapes not just the strategic viability of strikes but also their perceived justification and potential impact.
In the public education sector, state-level legal frameworks vary considerably with respect to the rights of teachers to collectively bargain, engage in work stoppages, and the consequences of doing so. Various legal distinctions—such as whether collective bargaining is permitted or teacher strikes are explicitly prohibited, and the severity of penalties for illegal work stoppages—play a central role in shaping the strategic calculus and feasibility of strike actions. As Saltzman (1985) demonstrates that the enactment of laws requiring public employers to bargain with majority-representative unions was a significant driver of teacher union growth during the mid-20th century. Yet, legal constraints on union activity have changed over time. In particular, the rise and spread of right-to-work laws over time—which prohibit mandatory union membership and the automatic deduction of union fees—constrained union resources and weakened organizational capacity in many states. These developments were further compounded by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Janus decision, which barred public-sector unions from collecting agency fees from non-members. As Strassfeld and Strassfeld (2020) argue, Janus has had significant implications for teacher unions’ ability to sustain membership, engage in advocacy, and pursue equity-oriented agendas. In this post-Janus landscape, unions have increasingly turned to more grassroots and high-visibility strategies—such as large-scale walkouts and strikes—to amplify teachers’ voices and mobilize public support. At the same time, state policies continue to diverge on the legality of teacher strikes and the severity of sanctions for illegal work stoppages, including penalties such as suspension, loss of tenure, or termination (Blanc, 2020). These factors may influence not only whether strikes occur, but also how they are organized, framed, and justified. As legal and political contexts evolve—reshaping the constraints facing organized teacher labor—unions may be compelled to navigate new limitations while simultaneously experimenting with more assertive forms of collective action, such as strikes.
Occupational Factors Within the Education Sector
Finally, factors within a particular occupational sector can significantly shape the cost–benefit calculus of strike activity and influence both the likelihood and character of labor mobilization. In the case of public school teachers, the size and number of school districts within a region can significantly impact both the likelihood and success of large teacher strikes (Zwerling, 2007). In regions with many small or fragmented school districts, coordinating a strike can be challenging, potentially reducing the likelihood of widespread action. Conversely, in areas with fewer, larger districts, there may be more effective organization and mobilization, increasing the potential for large-scale strikes. In addition, the impact of strikes in larger districts can be more noticeable, generating greater public and political pressure, which can enhance the likelihood of successful outcomes.
Another salient factor affecting teachers includes the rise of “neoliberal” policies, such as the expansion of charter schools and stricter accountability measures under No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and the Race to the Top (RTTT) initiative (Givan & Lang, 2020; Slater, 2020; Uetricht, 2014). Research has shown that privatization efforts can undermine traditional public schools, impacting resources and job security for educators (Ramos, 2023; S. Rodriguez, 2016). From a supply-and-demand perspective, the growth of the charter school sector—an adjacent labor market requiring similar skills—can reduce public schools’ ability to retain teachers under unfavorable conditions. By expanding alternative employment options, charter schools may lower the perceived risks of striking, making collective action a more viable strategy for teachers dissatisfied with their working conditions. Furthermore, accountability policies that tie teacher evaluations to standardized test scores can increase pressure on teachers and potentially diminish job satisfaction (S. Rodriguez, 2016). These reforms not only impact teachers’ working conditions but can also foster discontent and lead to strike actions as educators protest against perceived injustices and systemic issues within the education system.
Teacher salaries are another critical factor, as salary levels directly affect teachers’ livelihoods and their perceived value in the profession (Chaney, 1973; Delaney, 1983). In addition, school performance and working conditions at schools, including financial resources and essential teaching tools, play a crucial role in teacher satisfaction (Swain & Redding, 2022). Collectively, these factors may interact to shape the dynamics of teacher strikes, influencing both their frequency and their effectiveness.
Hypotheses Regarding Large Teacher Strikes From a Macro-Level Perspective
We posit several hypotheses regarding the relationship between macro-level economic, socio-political, and occupational (within the educational sector) factors with the occurrence of a teacher strike in a state during a given year. Importantly, while teacher strikes often stem from local factors—such as district-specific policies, school conditions, or union capacity (Ganz, 2004)—a macro-level perspective reveals how these events both reflect and shape broader statewide dynamics. Strikes arising from issues like inadequate pay or poor working conditions can gain media attention, raising public awareness beyond an immediate district. This visibility may influence policy decisions in other locales and pressure school boards to act, even in the absence of strikes in their respective districts (Burstein, 2003; Pacheco, 2010). As similar actions emerge across districts, they can signal systemic problems to state-level policymakers, prompting broader reforms. This process illustrates policy diffusion, where successful resolutions in one context inform change elsewhere (Cook et al., 2019; Dolowitz & Marsh, 1996). In this regard, local strikes can catalyze statewide movements for reform, while also being driven by state-level conditions such as inadequate education funding. Moreover, local labor disputes can be driven by broader, systemic problems, including insufficient statewide educational funding. Thus, we argue that a comprehensive understanding of teacher strikes requires attention to both micro- and macro-level influences shaping their causes and consequences.
Our first hypothesis concerns economic factors and their relationship to the occurrence of large teacher strikes. Public tax revenue, which influences school budgets, tends to fluctuate with the business cycle—potentially shaping strike activity in either a procyclical or countercyclical manner (Devereux & Hart, 2011; Harrison & Stewart, 1994). The relationship between unemployment and strike activity is similarly complex. On one hand, higher unemployment may suppress strike activity by weakening teachers’ bargaining power and reducing their willingness to risk job loss in a tight labor market. On the other hand, it may increase the likelihood of strikes by making successful negotiations less likely, as districts feel less pressure to offer concessions. By contrast, the effect of cost of living may be more direct: rising living costs increase financial strain, prompting more assertive collective bargaining and raising the potential for strike activity. Accordingly, we hypothesize a two-sided relationship with unemployment—where both very high and very low levels may increase the likelihood of strikes under different mechanisms—and a positive association between higher cost of living and strike activity, as economic pressures make collective action more likely (Card, 1990).
As for socio-political factors, regions governed by more conservative administrations and representatives, characterized by support for policies limiting teacher bargaining power and tenure-related protections, may be more likely to experience strike activity among educators seeking to address grievances, whereas in more liberal political contexts with higher support for teacher occupational rights and tenure, strike activity may be comparatively less frequent (Kaufman, 1982). In addition, stronger unions, possessing a history of collective action and robust organizational structures, may exhibit a higher propensity for strike activity as these unions are more capable of mobilizing members to address labor grievances through strikes (Martin & Dixon, 2010).
Finally, based on prior literature exploring common catalysts for collective action, we hypothesize that educational sector conditions marked by reduced school resources (such as per-pupil expenditures), lower compensation and benefits for teachers, lower academic performance, increased competition from charter schools, and heightened accountability measures may be positively associated with teacher strike activity (Chaney, 1973; Delaney, 1983; Ramos, 2023; S. Rodriguez, 2016).
As for how teacher strikes may result in changes in schooling outcomes, we hypothesize that teacher strikes may be significantly associated with changes in school expenditures, salaries, and academic performance. Specifically, we test whether strikes are associated with increases in school expenditures and teacher salaries, but potentially coincide with short-term declines in academic performance due to disruptions to schooling. Conceptually, we acknowledge that each of the economic, socio-political, and occupational factors depicted in Figure 1 can independently influence schooling outcomes of interest, even in the absence of strikes. For example, economic pressures such as inflation and local cost-of-living fluctuations shape district revenues and budgets, thereby directly affecting pay scales while altering the likelihood of collective action. Similarly, socio-political contexts—union strength, legislative ideology, and labor-management relations—and occupational factors in the educational sector—district size, accountability regimes, and the degree of charter competition—influence bargaining power and school-level working conditions with direct implications for staffing, pay scales, and student learning, in addition to determining the structural capacity for strikes. Accordingly, our chief methodological challenge is to isolate the relationships of interest—teacher strike occurrence with subsequent changes in school expenditures, teacher salary, and student academic performance.
Data and Methods
This study utilizes a unique state-by-year longitudinal dataset that links an exhaustive list of large U.S. teacher strikes between 1993 and 2019 originally compiled from across several national datasets of education and state-level policy characteristics. We use descriptive and regression analyses to examine the factors that are associated with teacher strikes and the extent to which strikes improve or impair teacher and student outcomes. Below we describe data and methods in more details.
Data Sources and Key Measures
The independent variable of interest is a binary indicator for whether teachers strike in a given state in a given year. To accomplish this, we searched for all records of large teacher strikes in the United States from 1993 to 2019 and leveraged teacher strike data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). We manually searched for news records of large teacher strikes in the United States over the same time period. We did not consider teacher strikes after 2019 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, as the nature of the pandemic prevented strikes from happening for at least a few years. Moreover, to examine the outcomes of teacher strikes, we need at least 2 years of data on teacher and student outcomes that are just recently available. The BLS collects data about all strikes with at least 1,000 participants across the United States, of which teacher strikes are a subset of. Specifically, we use industry code to isolate teacher strikes in the BLS. All the strikes as recorded by the BLS match the strikes as reported by major newspapers, and we have also found no other large strikes reported in the news other than the ones recorded by the BLS. With these two methods, we are confident that we have captured all recent large teacher strikes in the United States.
In terms of the factors affecting teacher strikes, we focused on exploring measures of economic, socio-political, and educational sector factors that we conceptualize might affect the likelihood of strikes occurring and their relationship with schooling outcomes. These measures were collated from a variety of sources, including the BLS, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the School Finance Indicators Database (SFID), Institute for Public Policy and Social Research (IPPSR) data maintained by Michigan State University, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Common Core of Data (CCD), National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), and other select sources. Economic factors include measures of unemployment from the BLS, state-level measures of public tax revenue from CCD, state and local revenue progressivity measures from SFID, and the cost of living. To operationalize cost of living at the state level, we utilize two measures, including a percentage change in the cost of living adjustment for the average rent for a two-bedroom apartment made available through HUD, as well as an indicator drawn from IPPSR for whether universal pre-K is available in the state as a form of affordable childcare. Socio-political factors include measures of political ideology, including a continuous scale representing the state house majority party ideological median, ranging from −1 (liberal) to +1 (conservative), made available through IPPSR, as well as an indicator for whether right-to-work legislation was in place in the state as a proxy for anti-union political sentiment. In addition, indicators for whether the state had tenure legislation for teachers (L. A. Rodriguez et al., 2023), whether tenure eligibility was attached to special performance-based requirements (L. A. Rodriguez et al., 2023), and a measure of teacher union power/strength derived by the Fordham Institute (Winkler et al., 2012). The union power/strength construct synthesizes information from 37 different variables across five broad categories: union resources and membership, union involvement in politics, scope of union bargaining power, alignment of state policies to traditional union interests, and perceived influence based on an original survey of key stakeholders within each state (Winkler et al., 2012). Educational sector factors included the number and size of large districts with at least 1,000 teachers; degree of competition from the charter school sector (proportion of charter schools in the state) based on CCD and NCES Reports; school accountability and reform policies, including whether a state had a school accountability system prior to NCLB (Dee et al., 2013; Grissom et al., 2014) and whether the state instituted teacher evaluation reforms as well as other RTTT components (Howell & Magazinnik, 2017; Redding & Nguyen, 2025); state-level measures drawn from CCD for teacher salary and per-pupil expenditure (adjusted for inflation); and student academic performance from NAEP. We merged these various data sources to create a unique state-level longitudinal panel of data of all large teacher strikes in the United States, from 1993 to 2019, along with potential predictors and outcomes of said strikes. For more details on these variables and their sources, see Table 1. For descriptive statistics of key predictors and outcomes, see Supplemental Appendix Table A1 (available in the online version of this article).
Variables, Descriptions, and Sources
Note. All data ranges are from 1993 to 2019, except for teacher union strength. Teacher evaluation reforms and Race to the Top components include multiple dimensions such as annual evaluation, professional development evaluations, low achievement intervention, measuring growth, and standards adoption. For more information, see Howell and Magazinnik (2017). NAEP = National Assessment of Educational Progress; NCLB = No Child Left Behind.
Analytic Strategy
To examine the associations of these state-level characteristics with large teacher strikes, we employed an ordinary-least square (OLS) model. Our main model is:
where
Since we are examining large teacher strikes with 1,000 or more teachers participating, some of which are statewide, while others occur at the district level. To account for differences in the probability of strikes occurring based on size, we include the number of large districts with at least 1,000 teachers for large strikes. In other words, accounting for the number of large districts allows us to adjust for the probability that a large strike in a given state is observed based on the number of large districts in that state.
To examine whether teacher strikes are associated with change in educational outcomes, we similarly used OLS to estimate a model of the following form:
where
Although our regression parameters estimate associations between each predictor and strike occurrence, these estimates should not be interpreted as purely causal in the narrow sense. Unobserved confounders—such as pre-existing budgetary trends or shifts in community support—may bias these coefficients, and reverse causality remains a concern if, for instance, emerging dissatisfaction prompts both resource reallocation and an increased likelihood of strikes. Accordingly, coefficients capture conditional associations that encompass both direct pathways—where antecedent conditions affect compensation and achievement without strikes—and mediated pathways—where strikes themselves serve as intervening events.
Results
Descriptive Portrait of U.S. Teacher Strikes—1993 to 2019
From 1993 to 2019, there were 52 instances of large teacher strikes (with at least 1,000 participating teachers) that have occurred in a state. Of these strikes, 21% are considered statewide (indicated by * in Table 2). Most of the observed strikes occurred at the district level (e.g., Anchorage School District, Alaska, in 1999; Gary School District, Indiana, in 2006), but there have also been instances where strikes took place at the county level (e.g., Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, in 2010). About one-third of strikes lasts 1 to 2 days, one-third lasts 3 to 10 days, and another third lasts longer than 10 days. Figure 2 shows the total number of strikes for each state during this time frame. As Figure 2 shows, there have been teacher strikes in every region in the United States, with most strikes located in the Northeast region, the East North Central area, and on the West Coast. To this point, some states have experienced no recent strikes, while others have experienced multiple strikes. Twenty-seven states have not had any large strikes between 1993 and 2019, eighteen states have had one or two strikes, and two states have had three to five strikes (Colorado and Michigan). Illinois, Washington, and California represent the states in which large-scale teacher strikes most frequently took place, each having six or more strikes during the observed period. We observe that teacher strikes most often happen in states without right-to-work laws that prohibit the collection of fees from nonmember employees. As Table 2 indicates, every state, except North Carolina, with more than one teacher strike did not have right-to-work laws. In other words, right-to-work states have had either zero or only one large teacher strike over the last 3 decades.
Number of Large Strikes Per State From 1993 to 2019 and Right-to-Work State Laws
Note. Large strikes have at least 1,000 teachers in the strike.
Indicates strikes occurred at the state level.
Total number of strikes for each state from 1993 to 2019.
When we examine how recent large teacher strike occurrences have changed over time, we observe that strike activity has ebbed and flowed during the 3-decade period (Figure 3). However, there appear to be three distinct periods of teacher strikes. From the early 1990s to the early 2000s, there were several large strikes almost every year. From 1993 to 2003, an 11-year period, there were a total of 21 large teacher strikes with an average of 1.9 strikes a year occurring across 14 different states throughout the United States. Of all strikes occurring during this period, the only statewide strikes took place in Washington (in 1999) and in the statewide school district of Hawaii (in 2001).
Total number of large strikes annually over time.
Teacher strike activity slowed down in the early 2000s and continued at a less frequent pace until 2018. From 2005 to 2017, a 13-year period, there were a total of 14 large teacher strikes with an average of about 1.1 strikes a year. In other words, teacher activism in the form of teacher strikes decreased by about half from the first to the second period. In addition, teacher strikes occurred in a smaller group of seven states, with repeated strikes taking place in California (two strikes), Illinois (four strikes), and Washington (four strikes). Of all the instances of teacher strikes occurring during this period, only one was statewide in the state of Washington (in 2015).
The teacher strike in West Virginia in February 2018, quickly followed by strikes in Kentucky, Oklahoma, Arizona, and Colorado in April 2018, marked a sharp increase in the frequency of teacher strikes in the United States, particularly in right-to-work states. From 2018 to 2019, in just 2 years, there were 17 large teacher strikes, an average of 8.5 strikes a year, representing about six times the average number of strikes in the previous 2 decades. In addition, in contrast to previous decades, most teacher strikes occurred at the state level, with statewide strikes occurring in Arizona, Colorado, Kentucky, and Oklahoma in 2018; in Oregon and South Carolina in 2019; and in North Carolina and West Virginia in both years. The prevalence of statewide strikes during this period was particularly notable in states traditionally considered conservative, or “red,” on the political spectrum and in states with right-to-work laws historically considered less favorable to labor unions. Emerging research suggests that a shift toward grassroots-style mobilization among teachers occurred in these states, which was facilitated by the use of social media platforms to make large-scale, statewide collective action possible, even in the absence of robust union leadership (Blanc, 2019; Tarlau, 2023). Next, we explore the factors that are associated with teacher strikes.
Economic, Socio-Political, and Occupational Sector Correlates of Teacher Strike Events
In Table 3, we present results from six separate models, a basic model, a time interaction model that examines whether strikes were more likely to occur in a right-to-work state after 2017 (because of the descriptive patterns of strike we observed earlier), a model that exclude states with the highest unemployment, a model excluding two states with the highest teacher salaries (California and New York), and two models separating out the results by right-to-work status. Model 2 is our preferred specification, and the other models allow us to explore how our results are robust to different assumptions. We exclude states with the highest unemployment or highest teacher salaries in two models to ensure our results are not driven by one or two states that have the highest unemployment or salary. In the last two models, we separate the results into non-right-to-work states and right-to-work states since the relationships between the predictors and strike occurrence may operate differently in states by right-to-work status.
Linear Probability Estimates of the Association of State Characteristics and Teacher Strikes
Note. Heteroskedastic-robust clustered standard errors at the state level are in parentheses. All models include year fixed effects.
p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01.
First, states with right-to-work laws are substantially less likely to have experienced a teacher strike. Specifically, they are 4.6 percentage points less likely to have a teacher strike than states without right-to-work laws (Model 1 of Table 3). Results from the basic model suggest that tenure availability is not associated with strike likelihood. However, states that establish tenure with special requirements (e.g., maintaining high evaluation ratings or extended years of service) are more likely to experience strikes. Specifically, states with special requirements for tenure are 5.6 percentage points more likely to have a teacher strike than those without. In states where tenure is contingent upon meeting special requirements, teachers may perceive these conditions as hurdles to job security, which may engender feelings of frustration and discontent among teachers, potentially leading to a greater willingness to resort to strikes to address perceived inequities. States with strong unions are 2.2 percentage points more likely to have large strikes, while states with large districts with at least 1,000 teachers are 0.2 percentage points more likely to have large strikes. States with no prior accountability are 3.8 percentage points more likely to have strikes. On the other hand, higher student achievement is negatively associated with the occurrence of strikes.
In Model 2, we explore whether there was an increased risk of having teacher strikes in right-to-work states after 2017 by adding an interaction term, as several strikes occurring after that point occurred in conservative “red” states, marking what many scholars have termed a “Red State Revolt” (e.g., Blanc, 2019). The results indicate that the probability of striking after 2017 is increased by 24.2 percentage points compared to before 2017. However, we do not observe that strikes are more likely to occur in right-to-work states after 2017. In Model 3, we drop states with the highest rates of unemployment and teacher salary spending to examine whether our results may have been driven by these states. We find the results are substantively similar to those of prior models. Results are also substantively similar when we do not consider two states, California and New York, with the largest teacher salaries (Model 4). In other words, our findings are not driven only by states with the largest unemployment or states with the largest salaries.
Next, we explore how right-to-work status may moderate the results, as right-to-work laws and right-to-work legislation serve as a proxy for contexts that may be unfavorable to labor unions, including teacher unions, and actively undermine their ability to advocate and negotiate on behalf of their members (Models 5 and 6 of Table 3). When we separate the results out by right-to-work status, we find substantially different results. First, the estimate of tenure with special requirements is significant in non-right-to-work states but insignificant in right-to-work states. Similarly, more union strength is associated with an increased likelihood of having a strike in non-right-to-work states but not in right-to-work states. Relatedly, in non-right-to-work states, student achievement has a significantly negative relationship with strike likelihood, which is insignificant in right-to-work states. While we view these results in Models 5 and 6 as exploratory due to the reduced sample size, the evidence suggests that the processes that influence the likelihood of having a strike act differently in right-to-work states relative to the states without right-to-work laws.
In addition to these state-level characteristics, we also consider whether property tax, universal pre-K, house majority, and per-pupil expenditure are associated with large teacher strikes. However, many of these state characteristics are not collected in the 3-decade time frame, resulting in large missing data. Hence, we do not include them in our main specifications. In Table 4, we include them to explore whether they may contribute to the likelihood of having a teacher strike. Moreover, as we move from Model 1 to Models 2 and 3, we remove the variable with the most missingness at a time to show how results may change and how the main findings are substantively similar. The results in Models 1 to 3 of Table 4 largely indicate that the house majority, property tax, and universal pre-K are not consistently associated with teacher strikes. Lastly, we conduct an exploratory analysis of strike characteristics for strikes that occurred. We find that 77% of strikes that occurred have salary demands, relative to 25% of strikes that occurred have class size reduction demands. Seventeen percent of strikes that occurred have both salary and class size demands.
The Association of State Characteristics and Teacher Strikes With Other Covariates
Note. Heteroskedastic-robust clustered standard errors at the state level are in parentheses.
p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01.
While we believe that linear probability models are the most straightforward approach to estimate the relationships between predictors of strike and strike occurrence, it is also possible to use a hazard model or logistic regression to estimate these relationships. Below, we describe the key and consistent findings from these alternative approaches. In Supplemental Appendix Tables A2 and A3 (available in the online version of this article), using Cox proportional hazard models and logistic regression, we similarly find that right-to-work law is negatively associated with strike occurrence, and that tenure with special requirements and the number of large districts are positively associated with strike occurrence. Overall, our main findings are robust to these different modeling assumptions.
Predicted Change in Teacher and Student Outcomes
Lastly, we also examine whether a large teacher strike is associated with changes in teacher salary in the subsequent years while including previous state-level characteristics as controls (Table 5). We conduct these analyses for the subsequent year (t + 1) and the year after that (t + 2). Accounting for the lagged outcomes, we find that strikes are positively associated with an increase in average teacher salary. Two years after strikes take place, we find average teacher salary increases by about $680 (p < .01). When we examine whether these salary increases are more substantial after 2017 (i.e., during the “Red Strike Revolt”), we find some suggestive evidence that much of the increase in salary was concentrated in strikes in 2018 and 2019. In particular, the interaction between strikes and whether they occur place in 2018 or 2019 is significant, with about a $2,100 increase in average teacher salary a year after the strike and about a $4,200 two years after the strike. In other words, the average teacher salary increased by more than $2,000 and $4,000 one and two years after strikes happened in 2018 and 2019, respectively. In considering how these relationships may vary during the three-strike periods (before 2005, between 2005 and 2017, and after 2017), we find the increase in average teacher salary is significant during the third strike period relative to the first strike period. In sum, we consistently find that teacher strikes are associated with an average teacher salary increase after 2017. To check the robustness of these findings, we also use the Arellano-Bond models that address the issue of autocorrelation of teacher salary (instead of using lagged outcomes). These results are attenuated, and some are not statistically significant, but the estimates are all in the same general directions (Supplemental Appendix Table A4 in the online version of the journal). For instance, the estimate of the average teacher salary 2 years after the strike is $600, but the result is not significant (Model 2). The interaction between the strike and after 2017 is $1,862 and is marginally significant (Model 4). The interaction between the strike and the third period is $2,242 and is statistically significant.
The Association of Teacher Strikes and Subsequent Teacher Salary
Note. Heteroskedastic-robust clustered standard errors at the state level are in parentheses.
p < .10. *p < .05. ** p < 0.01.
In Supplemental Appendix Table A5 (available in the online version of this article), we find little to no evidence that teacher strikes are associated with changes in per-pupil expenditure in the next year. However, we find some suggestive evidence that teacher strikes are associated with a $560 increase in per-pupil expenditure 2 years after striking during the “Red Strike Revolt” period.
In Table 6, we examine whether strikes are associated with changes in students’ academic achievement as measured by the NAEP Grade 4 and Grade 8 Math scores. Accounting for a host of factors and prior NAEP scores, we find that strikes are not associated with math achievement in Grades 4 and 8 in the year that the strike takes place or in the next 2 years. In Supplemental Appendix Table A6 (available in the online version of this article), when we examine the NAEP Reading scores, we find some evidence that a teacher strike may be negatively associated with eighth-grade reading scores (Model 4), but this represents about a 0.01 standard deviation decrease in reading scores. In sum, we find suggestive evidence that strikes have little to no significant relationship with student achievement.
The Association of Teacher Strikes and Subsequent Math Student Achievement
Note. Heteroskedastic-robust clustered standard errors at the state level are in parentheses.
p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01.
Discussion and Conclusion
Our results show that, while large teacher strikes have occurred in all regions of the United States, in the last 3 decades, it occurs most frequently in states without right-to-work laws until the “Red State Revolt” starting in 2018. When we examine the distribution of strikes over time, we observe three distinct periods: a period of substantial teacher activism in the form of strikes in the 1990s, a long period of decline and tame activism from the mid-2000s to 2017, and a resurgence of strikes in 2018 and 2019. There were 19 large teacher strikes in those 2 years compared to 33 strikes in the 2 decades prior, representing a sixfold increase in the frequency of strikes.
Our examination of the extent to which economic, socio-political, and occupational sector factors are associated with large teacher strikes indicates that each domain predicts the likelihood of a strike occurring, though economic factors do not consistently predict strike occurrence. We find consistent evidence that union strength, the presence of performance-based tenure eligibility requirements, and having more large districts are associated with teacher strike occurrence. We have some evidence that academic achievement is associated with collective action taking place, though this is driven mostly by non-right-work states. We have some preliminary evidence that, when large strikes occur, they frequently tend to be about teacher salary, though a fair number of strikes involve both salary and class size reduction demands.
Most interestingly, we find that the presence of right-to-work laws was historically associated with a lower likelihood of a teacher strike occurring. While it certainly makes sense that right-to-work laws limit the occurrence of strikes—given that they undermine unions’ ability to collect fees from nonmembers—it is important to note these laws may primarily impact private sector unions. This is especially true prior to the 2018 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, which instituted nationwide restrictions on public sector unions collecting fees from nonunion members. However, despite their specific application to private sector unions pre-Janus, right-to-work laws can still be seen as reflective of broader political attitudes toward unionization within a specific context (Blanc, 2019; Feigenbaum et al., 2019). Our study’s findings that economic, socio-political, and educational sector forces may operate differently with respect to right-to-work laws also echo recent works questioning the conventional assumptions of the effects of right-to-work laws (Chun, 2023). However, teacher strikes did occur more frequently in states with right-to-work laws in 2018 and 2019. This trend coincided with the emergence of the Red for Ed teacher strike movement, predominantly observed in conservative states with limited prior teacher strike activity. Although our study does not delve into the reasons behind this shift in right-to-work states, previous research by Blanc (2019, 2020) suggests that unions in these states, influenced by their conservative environments, increasingly emphasized lobbying over striking. However, despite this strategic move, rank-and-file teachers in these settings maintained ideological perspectives that underscored the importance of unions and collective action as essential tools for effecting social change. Their commitment to transformative leadership played a crucial role in driving collective mobilization, particularly in environments where striking had been historically uncommon among teachers.
Overall, our findings align with several of our initial hypotheses about the factors influencing strike occurrences. Specifically, we observed that strike activity was significantly related to variables such as the conservative administrations and their associated policies, and tenure eligibility requirements. These relationships suggest that political contexts, as well as changes in the education system, play crucial roles in shaping strike activity. However, our study did not support all of our hypotheses. Notably, changes in unemployment and the cost of living were not associated with strike occurrence in most models. These findings challenge some of the commonly held assumptions about the direct impact of economic and educational resources on strike activity.
Our study results also add nuance to Shelton’s (2017) analysis, which highlighted that the significant decline in teacher strikes during the 1980s was associated with a period of lower inflation and a rebounding economy. Shelton also noted a decrease in public support for state and labor unions and strikes during this time. Our study’s findings suggest that factors beyond immediate economic and educational metrics—such as political climate, the policy environment, and union dynamics—do play a prominent role in predicting strike activity.
In terms of how teacher strikes have improved or impaired teacher and student outcomes, we find some evidence that strikes are associated with increases in average teacher salary, but a limited relationship with per-pupil expenditure and student achievement. We find evidence that average salary increases may have been more substantial in the 2018 and 2019 teacher strikes, and average salary increased over time (from $2,100 after the first year of striking to $4,200 after 2 years of striking). These findings, particularly the limited results on per-pupil expenditure, align with recent work that finds mandatory bargaining laws may not lead to a general increase in education spending as most laws contain pro- and anti-union provisions (Paglayan, 2019). However, the findings that salary increases are more substantial in 2018 and 2019 do align with news reports suggesting that the average teacher salary for striking teachers was indeed higher after the 2018 and 2019 strikes (Christie et al., 2018; Goldstein & Dias, 2018). The 2018 and 2019 strikes have resulted in larger changes to teacher resources because they are a key part of what has been the core ask and agreement between teachers and the states, and in part due to how these strikes were statewide and that they were well-organized and publicized. Lastly, we find there is little to no evidence of the relationship between teacher strikes and student achievement. While teacher strikes may be disruptive to students and families in the short term when strikes are occurring, our results suggest that they do not substantively harm student learning.
We note that our findings largely align with a recent working paper that also examines teacher strikes (Lyon et al., 2024). While our data cover a wider and different time frame from 1993 to 2019 and theirs from 2007 to 2023, both papers find that teacher salary is a key component associated with strike occurrence, that strikes are associated with teacher compensation, and that strikes have minimal to no effects on student achievement.
Implications for Educational Policy and Practice
While our study is descriptive in nature, we believe that our study presents several implications surrounding the potential causes and associated outcomes of teacher strikes, which continually emerge as a critical subject of inquiry within the realm of education policy and labor dynamics. A comprehensive understanding of these phenomena underscores the pivotal role that macroeconomic forces and systemic education reforms play in shaping the educational milieu, consequently influencing the conducive conditions for effective teaching and learning. Particularly in scenarios of economic downturns or large-scale policy reforms, education policymakers and administrators face an imperative to assess how these factors impact the welfare and effectiveness of teaching personnel. Their responsibility extends to cultivating school environments that not only promote the well-being of educators but also curtail the likelihood of teacher strikes disrupting the continuity of education for students. This can be done in numerous ways; for example, state and district leaders can create low-stakes “temperature-check” surveys or other early-warning systems that continuously track teacher satisfaction, workload, and resource adequacy. Routinely sharing results with school boards gives administrators time to address grievances before they escalate into strike action.
One of the prominent factors linked to teacher strikes is the issue of remuneration. It is evident that teacher strikes often coincide with demands for improved salaries, making it an effective tool in the arsenal of labor advocates striving to elevate teacher pay. The act of striking not only amplifies the collective voice of educators but also serves as a strategic leverage to draw attention to the indispensability of competitive compensation within the teaching profession.
Furthermore, the complex interplay between right-to-work laws and teacher strikes introduces an additional layer of intricacy. While such laws might ostensibly signal or be associated with curtailed union power and collective bargaining, their long-term effects can potentially create an environment that inadvertently fuels labor unrest. In circumstances where teachers’ interests are hampered by adverse working conditions and limited avenues for improvement, the absence of robust union representation could precipitate strikes as a last resort. This underscores the profound importance of cultivating an atmosphere where educators’ rights are safeguarded, their voices are valued, and their grievances are effectively addressed, ultimately contributing to a harmonious educational landscape conducive to positive student outcomes. As education policymakers navigate the intricate web of factors influencing teacher strikes, it becomes increasingly apparent that a comprehensive and proactive approach is imperative to foster a conducive environment for both educators and students alike.
Limitations and Directions for Future Research
It is important to acknowledge certain limitations of this study. First, due to data limitations, our analysis is restricted to strikes with at least 1,000 participants and does not take into consideration strikes smaller in scale. This suggests our findings may not generalize to smaller strikes. We believe large strikes are still very useful to examine, as by the nature of their size, they are arguably more visible to the public, media, and legislature, and disruptive to regular school schedules on a broader scale. Using a labor-intensive approach, Lyon et al. (2024) have collect data on smaller strikes that we are not able to capture. However, in their work, they are only able to examine stated reasons for strikes and not the economic, socio-political, and occupational-specific factors that are associated with strikes.
In addition, future work can examine a wider range of factors that might affect the occurrence of teacher strikes and outcomes impacted by their occurrence. For instance, the current study does not take into consideration how strikes in neighboring districts or states, or changes in union leadership might affect the prioritization of collective action in a particular context, which previous work has documented as salient factors in specific instances of teacher strikes (Ashby & Bruno, 2018; McAlevey, 2016; Uetricht, 2014). It may be possible to study spillover effects of local strikes with a finer-grained collection of strikes of all sizes, such as those collected by Lyon et al. (2024).
The set of economic, socio-political, and occupational factors we operationalize in this study is not exhaustive. While prior research has examined more granular features of collective bargaining agreements—such as specific provisions or contract restrictiveness—these efforts have largely been limited to individual states like California and Washington (Goldhaber et al., 2016; Strunk, 2011). Due to the lack of consistent, longitudinal data across states, it was not feasible to include such measures in our analysis. Although these factors are relevant to understanding teacher strikes, they fall outside the scope of the present study. Moreover, while our analysis focuses on quantifiable, structural factors (e.g., salary, unemployment), we are unable to measure triggers of strikes such as school climate, workplace culture, leadership practices, or perceptions of professional respect—elements that have been shown to influence labor actions in both educational and other public-sector settings (Liu, 2023; Payne et al., 1998)—nor do we examine how strikes may affect entry and exit of teaching candidates into and out of the profession. Beyond the traditional demands of teacher strikes such as improvements to salaries and school expenditures, our study does not attend to the degree to which collective action arises to attend to notions of the “common good” beyond the special interests of teachers, which some scholars contend would be necessary for labor movements to achieve more systemic societal change (McCartin, 2016). Lastly, as the number of large statewide strikes is limited, we are unable to examine whether this type of strike has differential outcomes relative to large non-statewide strikes. Future studies should attend to these limitations and factors, including capturing relational and cultural dimensions to provide a fuller picture of the antecedents of teacher strikes and examining the extent to which teacher strike demands have changed over time, as well as whether such demands are met by legislation or public budgetary changes.
Finally, our measures of teacher strikes, per-pupil expenditures, and student outcomes are at the state level, and our empirical approach only provides us with an association between strikes and various outcomes. This limitation prohibits us from examining how teacher strikes may affect specific schools and districts, and potentially obscures any differential relationships across various locales associated with the occurrence of teacher strikes. While our analysis of state-level longitudinal data reveals limited significant association between teacher strikes and per-pupil expenditures or academic achievement, it is important to acknowledge the limitations inherent in utilizing aggregated data at the state level. The absence of a discernible relationship at this higher level of analysis does not preclude the existence of potentially meaningful associations at more localized levels, such as individual schools. Variability in the occurrence and effects of teacher strikes, as well as other contextual factors influencing school funding and student outcomes, may not be adequately captured when examining data at the state level. Therefore, caution should be exercised in generalizing our findings beyond the aggregated state level, as relationships observed at this broader scale may not necessarily apply to more granular levels of analysis. It is possible that there may still be additional negative consequences for students in schools and districts where strikes take place. Moreover, as our study reveals that at the state level, teacher strikes are associated with increases in subsequent teacher salaries but no change in per-pupil expenditures, this combination of results implies potential substitution effects, which necessitates further research exploring how school budget allocations may be affected in the wake of strikes and what the potential long-term effects of such allocations may be on student learning. We believe that these areas are ripe for further study using more granular data and multiple methodological approaches.
Supplemental Material
sj-pdf-1-epa-10.3102_01623737261436816 – Supplemental material for Examining the Antecedents and Outcomes of Contemporary Large Teacher Strikes
Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-epa-10.3102_01623737261436816 for Examining the Antecedents and Outcomes of Contemporary Large Teacher Strikes by Tuan D. Nguyen and Luis A. Rodriguez in Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Notes
Authors
TUAN D. NGUYEN, PhD, is an associate professor in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis at the University of Missouri. He applies rigorous quantitative methods (quasi-experimental designs and meta-analysis) to examine (a) the teacher labor markets, particularly looking at the factors that drive teacher attrition and retention; and (b) the effects and implications of teacher policies and education policies intended for social equity and school improvement.
LUIS A. RODRIGUEZ, PhD, is an associate professor of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at New York University. His research focuses on the intersections of educator quality, retention, and diversity; school discipline; and school climate.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
