School Funding Series | Making the Case for Teacher Compensation as an Imperative Policy Issue by Nikki Cohron

Photo by Fabian Blank on Unsplash

This is the first in our two-part series on school funding. In “Making the Case for Teacher Compensation as an Imperative Policy Issue,” Nikki Cohron discusses the lack of teacher voice in policy, teacher compensation disparities and the relationship between salary, recruitment, and retention. In the second article, Frank Ayata will zoom in on the financial policies of charter schools in Pennsylvania and how a legal challenge to the funding calculation has destabilized district budgets across the state. Together, these two installments tackle salient budget issues in American school funding and consider a path forward for each.

Three years into my teaching career, I left the classroom, and I am not alone. In 2018, teachers across the country fled their positions at record rates (Hackman & Morath, 2018). Research shows that attrition is particularly problematic for new teachers (Ingersoll, Merrill, Stuckey & Collins, 2018; Gray & Taie, 2015). To further complicate things, teachers are not only running from classrooms in droves; they are actively choosing never to enter the field of teaching. The growing student population coupled with issues in teacher recruitment and retention have resulted in an increasingly detrimental gap in the demand over the supply of teachers (Sutcher, Darling-Hammond & Carver-Thomas, 2016). While a previous AJE Forum series explores teacher recruitment through the lens of declining enrollments in teacher education programs, this piece makes the case for increased teacher compensation and the vital role of teacher voice in policy development as a means to both attract teachers to the classroom and, above all, keep them there.

Inequities in Teacher Compensation and Their Relationship with Recruitment and Retention

Inadequate compensation is not a new issue for teachers, and in the past decade, the problem has been exacerbated rather than alleviated (Allegretto & Mishel, 2018). Policymakers and school district leaders must acknowledge teacher demands for increased compensation as legitimate, particularly in light of growing deficiencies in state education budgets, the teacher pay penalty, and the relationship between gender and teacher compensation (NCES, 2016).

According to a 2018 report by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), twenty-five states have significantly lower spending on K-12 education than before the Great Recession hit in 2008. President Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act sent a surge of money to protect state and local education budgets and support teacher salaries during the Great Recession. Yet, when that aid came to an end in 2011, many states failed to pick up the slack and, too often, also reduced their overall tax effort. Shrinking education budgets make it more essential now that ever to emphasize the dismal state of teacher compensation in the United States.

The teacher pay penalty is defined as “the percent to which public school teachers are paid less than comparable workers” (Allegretto & Mishel, 2018, p. 1). From 1996 to 2017, the average weekly wages of public school teachers decreased by $27, when adjusted for inflation. This figure is dramatic when compared to the $137 increase in weekly wages for the average college graduate during the same period. The average teacher wage penalty across the United States is -23.8%. In dollar-for-dollars terms, this means that teachers, on average, earn a mere 76.2 cents on the dollar compared to similarly educated peers (Allegretto & Mishel, 2018).

A flawed argument against increases in teacher pay is rooted in the suggestion that teachers enjoy more attractive job benefits than other professionals. From having summers “off” to generous insurance and retirement packages, teacher benefits are perceived to be good, or at least comparable, to other professions. When benefits are considered, an overall compensation penalty for teachers still exists, but it is far less pronounced than the pay penalty based purely on weekly wages (Allegretto & Mishel, 2018). The tendency for overall compensation to soften the perceived severity of inequities in teacher pay is evidence of a “benefit bias” that works against public school teachers. Beyond compensation, the growing wage penalty is “critical to keep in mind, given the nature of wages and benefits—only wages can be spent or saved!” (2018, p. 10).

Statistics can also be misleading in regard to gender pay equality in teaching. Overall, the teaching profession has a low rate of gender inequality, compared to other occupations, due to the common practice of fixed salary schedules for all employees (Hansen & Quintero, 2017). However, this metric fails to paint a complete picture of the complexities of gender in teaching. While the number of males working in public schools has increased considerably since the 1980s, the number of females has increased at twice that rate (Ingersoll, Merrill, Stuckey & Collins, 2018). The increasingly female teaching force perpetuates inequalities on multiple fronts, as fixed salary schedules simultaneously guarantee more narrow gender pay gaps than other professions, deter males from entering the field, and mask the underlying issues of gender discrimination at play.

Further, the gendered narrative of teaching as a philanthropic career is pervasive, and although not wholly untrue or ill-intentioned, the idea that teachers are not “in it for the money” can be wielded as a weapon to keep teacher working conditions and compensation low. This, coupled with the reality that males occupy an inordinate proportion of seats at policymaking tables, illustrates why the policy window for increased teacher compensation has been difficult to pry open, but the relationship between salary, recruitment, and retention demonstrates that it must (Podolsky, Kini Bishop & Darling-Hammond, 2016).

Reports from Learning Policy Institute and Economic Policy Institute underscore crafting competitive compensation packages for teachers as a policy imperative (Sutcher, Darling-Hammond & Carver-Thomas 2016; Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017; Espinoza, Saunders, Kini & Darling-Hammond, 2018; Allegretto & Mishel, 2016 and 2018; Garcia & Weiss, 2019). Higher salaries attract more people into the profession and keep beginning and veteran teachers in the classroom, and low salaries increase the likelihood of teachers of all experiences levels to leave he classroom (Garcia & Weiss, 2019; Gray & Taie, 2015; Loeb, Darling-Hammond & Luczak, 2005; Manski, 1987). Additionally, salary may incentivize teachers who fled the profession to return to the classroom, as 67% of teachers who left the classroom said an increase in salary would substantially influence their decision to return (Podolski et al., 2016).

By 2025, there is a projected 200,000 teacher gap in the estimated demand over the supply of teachers (Sutcher, Darling-Hammond & Carver-Thomas, 2016). Not only is a shortage of quality, experienced teachers bad for students, it also perpetuates funding issues in schools by requiring school systems to allocate substantial funds for teacher recruitment. The more attractive the profession is made by increased compensation packages, the more these valuable funds can be allocated to more directly benefit students by funding school programs, support staff, or other valuable resources (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017).

Together, those advantaged in education policy must not only elevate teacher voices but also open seats for teachers at decision-making tables

A Path Forward for Teacher Compensation Policy

For me, the decision to leave teaching was rooted in a realization that, from the vantage point of the classroom, the realms of policy and research felt worlds away. The impossibility of addressing the needs of my students with only pedagogy coupled with an unclear means of effective advocating for meaningful change loomed over me. Further, I felt demoralized by the reality that I worked longer hours, exhausted more mental energy, and enjoyed far less professional respect than my similarly educated friends, most of whom brought home a lot more money than me. Among all teachers who quit their jobs, 55 percent rated myriad dissatisfaction factors as being “very important” in their decision to leave teaching, including but not limited to dissatisfaction with accountability measures, instructional support, compensation metrics, allocation of time, discipline issues, class size, working conditions, and lack of autonomy and voice in policies and practices (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017). Among these measures, compensation is arguably the teacher issue we hear about the most, and perhaps, it is also the most tangible, straight-forward issue to remedy.

In addressing compensation increases, policymakers must resist the temptation to increase teacher compensation with increases in benefits alone. While not insignificant, the benefits bias should not cloud judgment when analyzing the worthiness of pay increases. Weekly take-home pay should be thoroughly considered, as well. Wage increases provide teachers with the immediate and real ability to spend and save more, and evidence from research highlighted in this piece widely supports the notion that teacher pay is indeed an essential factor in teacher recruitment and retention. Additionally, it is essential that policymakers do more than simply increase wages.

Secondly, but no less crucially, they must solicit and leverage teacher voice in this policy process. Over the past two years, a wave of teacher strikes shaped the conversation about the state of teaching in the United States. Beginning in West Virginia, these Red for Ed strikes quickly swept across the nation to states including Colorado, North Carolina, Arizona, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Arkansas, California, and Illinois. At the heart of this movement are teacher voices calling for better working conditions, more classroom resources, smaller class sizes, general improvements in education funding, and increased compensation. The substantial teacher strikes and the potency of the Red for Ed movement since early 2018 demonstrate this dissatisfaction and the potential of teacher activism to catalyze change, but teacher voice should not be limited to the vacuum of a strike. (Blanc, 2019; Karp & Sanchez, 2018). Together, those advantaged in education policy must not only elevate teacher voices but also open seats for teachers at decision-making tables. Unquestionably, this includes conversations about teacher pay, as research shows the presence of teacher voice in designing compensation structures that challenge the status quo are imperative to their success (NEA, n.d.; Goldhaber et al., 2016).

Nikki Cohron is a Ph.D. student in the Educational Theory and Policy Program at Penn State. She holds master’s degree in Educational Leadership, Organizations, and Policy from Samford University and a bachelor’s degree in Collaborative Education from Birmingham-Southern College. Her background includes teaching at the elementary and undergraduate levels, as well as promoting college faculty development as an instructional technologist. Nikki’s current research focus is on the intersections between research, policy, and the K-12 classroom. Specifically, she is interested in understanding how teachers perceive their role in educational change.

References

Allegretto, S., & Mishel, L. (2018). The teacher pay penalty has hit a new high. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://www.epi.org/publication/teacher-pay-gap-2018/

Allegretto, S., & Mishel, L. (2016). The teacher pay gap is wider than ever. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://www.epi.org/publication/the-teacher-pay-gap-is-wider-than-ever-teachers-pay-continues-to-fall-further-behind-pay-of-comparable-workers/

American Federation of Teachers [AFT]. (2017). Merit pay and high stakes testing. Retrieved from https://www.epi.org/publication/teacher-pay-gap-2018/

Blanc, E. (2019). Red state revolt: The teachers’ strikes wave and working-class politics. Brooklyn, New York: Verso.

Carver-Thomas, D. & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher turnover: Why it matters and what we can do about it. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved April 18, 2019, from https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-turnover.

Espinoza, D., Saunders, R., Kini, T., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2018). Taking the long view: State efforts to solve teacher shortages by strengthening the profession. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/long-view-report

Garcia, E., & Weiss, E. (2019). The teacher shortage is real, large and growing, and worse than we thought. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute. April 18, 2019, from https://www.epi.org/publication/the-teacher-shortage-is-real-large-and-growing-and-worse-than-we-thought-the-first-report-in-the-perfect-storm-in-the-teacher-labor-market-series/

Goldhaber, D., Bignell, W., Farley, A., Walch, J., & Cowan, J. (2016). Who chooses incentivized pay structures? exploring the link between performance and preferences for compensation reform in the teacher labor market. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 38(2), 245-271. doi:10.3102/0162373715615233

Gray, L., and Taie, S. (2015). Public School Teacher Attrition and Mobility in the First Five Years: Results from the First Through Fifth Waves of the 2007–08 Beginning Teacher Longitudinal Study (NCES 2015-337). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved [date] from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.

Hackman, M., & Morath, E. (2018, December 28). Teachers quit jobs at highest rate on record. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/teachers-quit-jobs-at-highest-rate-on-record-11545993052?ns=prod/accounts-wsj

Hansen, M., & Quintero, D. (2017). “Scrutinizing equal pay for equal work among teachers.” The Brookings Institution. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/research/scrutinizing-equal-pay-for-equal-work-among-teachers/

Ingersoll, R., Merrill, E., Stuckey, D., & Collins, G. (2018). Seven Trends: The Transformation of the Teaching Force, updated October 2018. Research Report (#RR 2018-2). Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved, from https://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_researchreports/108/

Podolsky, A., Kini, T., Bishop, J., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2016). Solving the Teacher Shortage: How to Attract and Retain Excellent Educators (research brief). Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/solving-teacher-shortage-brief

Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2016). A coming crisis in teaching? Teacher supply, demand, and shortages in the U.S. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/coming-crisis-teaching.

8 Comments