The purpose of this analysis is to systematically survey the impasse resolution provisions of the 30 state statutes governing teacher-board negotiations and to tentatively explore via statistical techniques whether there is a significant relationship between the degree of compulsion in such provisions and the type and comprehensiveness of such statutues. Although the terminology varies somewhat according to the scholarly or statutory souce, it is generally agreed that there are three basic levels of impasse resolution machinery for contract negotiations. These levels--mediation, advisory arbitration, and binding arbitration--represent the degree of compulsion measured. It is tentatively concluded that the degree of compulsion differed significantly between negotiation statutes targeted to teachers and those encompassing a wide range of public employees and that the degree of compulsion in these provisions was not significantly related to the extent of comprehensiveness of other aspects of these statutes. (Author/IRT)