I found a very interesting study on the pay of school teachers, and I think it’s relevant because I’ve been discussing the high pay of the Milwaukee Public School teachers, but the low performance of the district.
Take a look at this study:
How Much Are Public School Teachers Paid?
by Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters
Executive Summary
Education policy discussions often assume that public school teachers are poorly paid. Typically absent in these discussions about teacher pay, however, is any reference to systematic data on how much public school teachers are actually paid, especially relative to other occupations. Because discussions about teacher pay rarely reference these data, the policy debate on education reform has proceeded without a clear understanding of these issues.
This report compiles information on the hourly pay of public school teachers nationally and in 66 metropolitan areas, as collected by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) in its annual National Compensation Survey. We also compare the reported hourly income of public school teachers with that of workers in similar professions, as defined by the BLS. This report goes on to use the BLS data to analyze whether there is a relationship between higher relative pay for public school teachers and higher student achievement as measured by high school graduation rates.
Among the key findings of this report:
- According to the BLS, the average public school teacher in the United States earned $34.06 per hour in 2005.
- The average public school teacher was paid 36% more per hour than the average non-sales white-collar worker and 11% more than the average professional specialty and technical worker.
- Full-time public school teachers work on average 36.5 hours per week during weeks that they are working. By comparison, white-collar workers (excluding sales) work 39.4 hours, and professional specialty and technical workers work 39.0 hours per week. Private school teachers work 38.3 hours per week.
- Compared with public school teachers, editors and reporters earn 24% less; architects, 11% less; psychologists, 9% less; chemists, 5% less; mechanical engineers, 6% less; and economists, 1% less.
- Compared with public school teachers, airplane pilots earn 186% more; physicians, 80% more; lawyers, 49% more; nuclear engineers, 17% more; actuaries, 9% more; and physicists, 3% more.
- Public school teachers are paid 61% more per hour than private school teachers, on average nationwide.
- The Detroit metropolitan area has the highest average public school teacher pay among metropolitan areas for which data are available, at $47.28 per hour, followed by the San Francisco metropolitan area at $46.70 per hour, and the New York metropolitan area at $45.79 per hour.
- We find no evidence that average teacher pay relative to that of other white-collar or professional specialty workers is related to high school graduation rates in the metropolitan area.
To reiterate interesting points of the study: Teachers work 30 to 40 hours per week, and this figure includes lunch time, rest periods, preparation, and grading time. (i.e. It includes all possible time worked, and probably also includes time spent not working.) The average public school teacher earns $34.06 per hour, and there is no correlation between rates of pay and graduation rates. (i.e. Higher pay doesn’t mean better education.)
06 Jul 08 at 8:36 am
The question I would like to answer is this: does paying teachers for performance (or paying for greater education) lead to increased performance? Of course the study finds that compensation is not correlated with performance. There are a couple reasons why it is not:
1. Bimodal distribution: on average, Catholic schools and other private schools are better than public schools, yet their pay is significantly less. This leads to a bimodal distribution of income and outcome, which prevents any correlation in the overall data.
2. Poor performance leads to greater compensation on a citywide / statewide basis because of the fallacy of greater compensation leading to better teaching. This means that the best paid are in effect rewarded for poor performance of their students.
3. The single greatest predictor of school performance is the socio-economic status of the parents of the students. This is not generally correlated with teacher pay and would make it hard to see any relationship between pay and student performance.
The key to educational reform is to destroy the teacher’s union (while we are at it, let’s destroy the doctor’s union too …) so that districts have greater ability to hire and fire and can reward high-performing teachers with high pay. Allowing highly-educated non-teachers to get a teacher’s certificate with minimal fuss would also help and would make the teaching field more competitive.
06 Jul 08 at 10:10 am
Ah yes… you raise a point that isn’t clear in my comments. The current system does not have a cause/effect relationship between pay and performance. Getting rid of the unions, I believe WOULD create a situation in which greater pay causes better performance. Teachers should ABSOLUTELY be judged on their performance and whether or not their students learn. (Of course, the unions won’t let that happen.)
I was once told by a Milwaukee Public Schools teacher that 40% of the teachers were really bad, and the other 60% ranged from average to outstanding. I believe the union’s main purpose is to protect the jobs of the 40%. Why? If they’re terrible, let them go. (This is an especially important issue now that MPS is losing students rapidly and therefore teachers are being laid off solely based upon seniority.) The 60% needs to get rid of their union to reform the district as a whole.
Michael - Can you link to a study on your point #3? I am interested in this issue, because we are seeing that here that low income children are doing very well in our voucher program.You have to be at low income to even get a voucher, so that makes me curious about that point you make. I do imagine that the parents who care enough to send their children to voucher schools are also more likely to be involved in their children’s lives and are more likely to emphasize education.
06 Jul 08 at 8:25 pm
Ask and ye shall receive:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3678/is_200404/ai_n9356048
The thing with SES (socio-economic status) is that it is really a proxy for other things. In the case of education, it is likely a proxy for the important latent variables:
1. opportunity to learn (books in house, ability to take educational trips, parents likely to have more academic discussions and larger vocabularies)
2. encouragement from parents to learn
3. encouragement of peer group to learn (John Ogbu–cf. Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb–argued that considering academic success to be “white” and therefore bad is an important factor in the lack of academic success of African Americans)
4. genetic and perinatal factors that predispose the children to be smarter and more successful
The first three can all be changed via good schools and involvement of parents.
10 Jul 08 at 6:49 am
This is an interesting discussion. I am curious as to whether the above figures are straight salary or include benefits. My guess is that it is probably straight salary. This leads to another point - many of these teachers have benefits that far exceed the benefits of individuals working in the “private” sector. I have a client who retired before age 50 from teaching high school math and is basically getting paid for the rest of his life. There are not too many private companies offering these types of benefits these days.
10 Jul 08 at 7:06 am
I believe that’s just salary. Locally, the benefits package is $35k per year.
16 Jul 08 at 5:53 am
Well said Chad - my husband when he retires at 65 or older will get zero. How many ways can you say “Wal-Mart Greeter”! We have tried to save as much as we can for retirement - we do without alot of things. My family that is full of teachers have lake homes because they have a nice pension and have insurance packages … we will have none of that!
27 Jul 08 at 4:08 pm
I wish that I lived where you live. The benefits for teachers in Texas are pathetic, and the pay is not great either. In fact, my family was eligible for Chips last year and are eligible for food stamps this year. Teachers are not paid well here. Public school teachers here are not allowed to go on strike assuming that they are even in a union because of the state laws. We are one of the two thirds of people who cannot afford dental insurance described on the news about a week ago. I am certified now in two subject areas: mathematics (6-12) and composite science (8-12). There is no additional pay for a master’s degree or for additional qualifications. Most teachers here in Texas would love the so called 36 hour work week, because most teachers at my school work in excess of 60 hours per week and get paid only for about 40 weeks. In order to get a clearer picture, why doesn’t someone go sit in with a few teachers for a few weeks and see what teachers actually do. Otherwise, you don’t have a clue. Unfortunately, some things can’t be learned from sitting behind a computer or just looking at books and articles. By the way, Tracy, I scored very high on my Science Certification test!
27 Jul 08 at 10:03 pm
Maurice - Why don’t you get another job if it’s so horrible? If your family is on food stamps, then you also need a second job and your wife needs to get a job too. It is your responsibility to feed your family.
30 Jul 08 at 7:13 pm
I am a public school teacher and spend countless hours outside of the required 39 doing work for the students to help them in achieving greater performance on standardized tests and dual enrollment (college) classes. I am in a great school division, I work very hard, and I find the career quite rewarding in spite of all of the work involved - above and beyond most jobs.
The country was founded on the free enterprise system. Anyone in the country is free to go into this profession if it appears to be a “piece of cake job”. There is no guarantee that greater pay equates to greater performance by the students. It is a career that an individual must pursue because they are genuinely interested in the young people of this country and they want to “make a difference”.
08 Aug 08 at 10:43 pm
If there is not a raise in the next year in Texas, I will leave the teaching profession next year. I will have no choice. You have a nice day. Highly qualified people can always leave a job when the pay is poor leaving the mediocre people that the policymakers deserve.
12 Aug 08 at 11:13 pm
Sorry Maurice, but if you’re making the average teacher pay in Texas ($38,000) then you don’t qualify for welfare according to the calculator I found.
Maybe you should think about moving to Morgan Hill where our teachers ARE overpaid.