Education Secretary Arne Duncan thinks public-school teachers are “desperately underpaid” and has called for doubling teacher salaries. In a new paper co-authored with Jason Richwine of the Heritage Foundation, I look into whether teachers really are desperately underpaid, or underpaid at all. Jason and I find that the conventional wisdom is far off the truth.
At first glance, public-school teachers definitely look underpaid. According to Census data, teachers receive salaries around 20 percent lower than similarly educated private-sector workers. The Bureau of Labor Statistics says teachers’ benefits are about the same as benefits in the private sector. But both the salary and benefits figures are dubious.
Most teachers have Bachelor’s or Master’s degrees in education, and most people with education degrees are teachers. Decades of research has shown that education is a less rigorous course of study than other majors: Teachers enter college with below-average SAT scores but receive much higher GPAs than other students. It may be that a degree in education simply does not reflect the same underlying skills and knowledge as a degree in, say, history or chemistry. When we compare salaries based on objective measures of cognitive ability — such as SAT, GRE, or IQ scores — the teacher salary penalty disappears.
And the real world bears this out: Contrary to teachers’ insistences that they could earn more outside of teaching, we show that the typical worker who moves from the private sector into teaching receives a salary increase, while the typical teacher who leaves for the private sector receives a pay cut.
If salaries are about even, benefits push teacher pay ahead. The BLS benefits data, which most pay studies rely on, has three shortcomings: It omits the value of retiree health coverage, which is uncommon for private workers but is worth about an extra 10 percent of pay for teachers; it understates the value of teachers’ defined-benefit pensions, which pay benefits several times higher than the typical private 401(k) plan; and it ignores teachers’ time off outside the normal school year, meaning that long summer vacations aren’t counted as a benefit. When we fix these problems, teacher benefits are worth about double the average private-sector level.
Finally, public-school teachers have much greater job security, with unemployment rates about half those of private-school teachers or other comparable private occupations. Job security protects against loss of income during unemployment and, even more importantly, protects a position in which benefits are much more generous than private-sector levels.
Overall, we estimate that public-school teachers receive total compensation roughly 50 percent higher than they would likely receive in the private sector. Does this mean that all school teachers are overpaid? No. But it does mean that across-the-board pay increases are hardly warranted. What is needed is pay flexibility, to reward the best teachers and dismiss the worst.
— Andrew G. Biggs is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
"Anything worth learning can never be taught." --Oscar Wilde.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOne additional benefit that would come from much greater flexibility in teacher hiring & compensation is the ability to better accommodate adjunct teachers in the secondary levels. One of the problems we have is that many teachers, even those with degrees in the topics they teach, have zero real-world experience using that knowledge. Practical experience enhances one's capacity to teach effectively, I think.
The catch-22 is that teacher salaries are far too low to attract experienced professionals (particularly in science & technology), so even someone like me who is inclined to teach can't possibly do it because the cut in pay would be dramatic, and schools aren't terribly friendly to part-time adjuncts who aren't in the teacher's union or otherwise just not part of the club. This, of course, as at the expense of students who stand to benefit from experienced teachers, even if the schools can't support such teachers full-time.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm not so sure about the catch-22.
More than once I've said I'd like to teach as my final career. I'm looking at being financially in great shape (paid off house, nicely funded retirement accounts) at 55 and the mix of fewer hours and the joy of teaching appeals to me.
Money isn't the sticking point as I look now at something admittedly ten years out. It's the amount of BS work I'd have to do first to be "qualified" to teach mathematics.
BTW, I'm assuming the aggie part is Texas A&M?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse". It's the amount of BS work I'd have to do first to be "qualified" to teach mathematics."
If money isn't a big issue, look into teaching at a private school. The pay isn't as good, but the students are generally better. If you have a master's degree, you could probably adjunct at a local community college or even a university (people willing and able to teach math courses are in fairly high demand).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think his point is that he is eminently qualified to teach math and it would probably be great for whatever grade in elhi he chooses to teach. But.... the "certifications" one has to go through, the mindless classes on "how to teach" are ridiculous and are nothing more than a barrier to entry.
Besides, there are so many unprepared students who attend community college or university, wouldn't it make a great deal of sense to have experts teach at lower levels so the kids could actually learn and be proficient?
Can you imagine what would happen to current teachers if one of the requirements was that you had to have a degree in the subject you teach rather than a degree in "education". The majority would be working elsewhere.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHey, I completely agree with you - see my post down thread. Sadly we don't live in an ideal world, so you've got to be pragmatic, and if that's the sort of lifestyle he's looking for those are probably the best options.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBandmom, the No Child Left Behind legislation required school districts to have a certain percentage of highly qualified teachers. Highly Qualified is defined as having a degree in the subject that you are teaching. Most school districts only hire highly qualified candidates for new positions to fulfill this requirement. The wheel may turn slowly but it is turning.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYep, Texas A&M is my alma mater - twice.
I agree with you about the BS. I actually have taught adjunct at a local university's graduate program because the barrier to entry in doing adjunct teaching in universities isn't much (and even less at junior/community colleges), if you have a degree in the area. I've also taught adjunct at my high school. Neither of those places is unionized or entrenched in the way that most public schools are, though.
I guess I'm probably closer to the beginning of my career than you, though. The catch-22 is very real to me. I would give serious consideration to teaching if I could afford it, and that calculus probably won't change for at least 30 years.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou make a very good point. My father recently retired from Boeing - he was literally a rocket scientist. He'd like to spend a few years teaching high school math, but he's not "qualified."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIn the small town in Michigan where I grew up, my sister and her husband, both teachers, bought a 4800 Square Foot Home on a six acre lot. When I was growing up, that particular neighborhood was all professionals and small business owners. The home they bought formerly belonged to a prominent local attorney. Now, all the houses are being bought by teachers and school administrators.
That should tell you something.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt says in the paper that you compared full-time workers in other professions to teachers, without adjusting for the fact that teachers have nearly four months of vacation per year (summer, two weeks at Christmas, one week in spring, one week in fall in some school districts, plus several other paid holidays every year, vacation time and sick pay).
This makes your paper absolutely moot. It's ridiculous to compare a typical worker (2,000 work hours per year) to a teacher (probably 1,600 work hours per year) without adjusting for the 20 percent fewer hours worked. Clearly, when hours are factored in, teachers are grossly overpaid - especially if you consider the sub-standard results in most American schools.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOur point was that the comparisons are wrong if you don't control for the length of the teaching work year, but we do control for it in the paper.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExcellent. I'm sorry that I misunderstood.
I only wish that your analysis, including the costs of benefits and massive vacation, would be accurately considered as part of the public debate.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTeachers are very well payed. Also they are exempt for Social Security in a lot of places and have a much better retirement plan. In a free market place their overall income would be cut because it is a job that most college graduates could do with no additional training.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI used to agree - now I see it as combat pay. Consider that so many teachers are expected to keep indifferent and disruptive students in their classes, no matter what, and the principal does not care what their problem is. Just keep their butts in the seats and move them on. There are schools where no one does homework, no one does anything but show up, maybe.
This is a complete switch from schools of the 50s, when there were girls' deans and boys' deans who kept the paddle handy. Kids who were expelled were on their own. Both my brothers were expelled and joined the navy.
Add to that the unending parade of new teaching fads, designed to close the achievement gap by making hard subjects "fun" and "relevant." Or by making smarter students help the younger or stupider ones.
Ya gotta feel for the teachers, many of whom are still very dedicated in spite of it all. I don't know how they put up with it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCry me a river.
1. Many, many professionals have difficult jobs. Many professionals don't like their jobs. Why is there this myth that corporate America is so easy, and entrepreneurship is so ideal, yet teaching is unique in its challenges?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse2. I know many teachers. None of them work the hours that I (entrepreneur) or my husband (corporate mid-manager) work.
3. If you want "hazard pay," all those vacation days should suffice.
4. Don't like it? Quit! Nobody is forcing teachers to teach.
You must be really successful as indicated by your stupid comments. Teaching is a unique skill and you have no clue why or how. Pathetic.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTeaching is *not* a "unique" skill. I have taught and do teach. Nice attempt at an ad hominem, though.
(My captcha? "fast and loose" - how appropriate.....)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUnique skill? How do you account for the seven million teachers in the U.S.? Maybe look up the word unique? I hope you don't teach English.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou successfully added nothing to this discussion. Good show!
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse