salary slump

As teachers across the country demand higher pay, here’s how much salaries have stalled — and why it matters for kids

It started in West Virginia. Now, Oklahoma teachers are on day two of a walkout that has closed schools across the state. Teachers in Kentucky staged in all-day protest at the state capitol. Arizona teachers are also planning a walkout.

Teachers in states across the country say they’re underpaid and their schools are underfunded. Some have already gotten results: Both West Virginia and Oklahoma teachers have won substantial raises.

And the protesters are making the case that they’re not just fighting for themselves but for their students and state.

“In the long run, we’re hurting Oklahoma when we don’t stand out here and do this,” said one teacher.

The renewed attention to teachers’ paychecks marks a departure from many of the prevailing debates about teacher pay. Those questions, like whether high ratings or student test scores should factor into teacher pay, often focused less on how much to pay teachers and more on how to pay them.

Now, those paychecks are in the spotlight. Here’s a quick guide to the numbers behind the walkouts and how salaries end up mattering for students, too.

Nationally, teacher salary has been stagnant for decades and has been falling behind that of other professionals.

The average American public school teacher earned $58,950 in the 2016–17 school year, according to data from state agencies compiled by the National Education Association and published by the federal government. Adjusting for inflation, that’s about $1,000 less than in 1989 and $3,000 less than in 2009.

Another way to examine teacher pay is to compare educators to similarly educated professionals. (It’s not a perfect apples-to-apples comparison, since people with similar levels of education may have varying skills.)

The Economic Policy Institute, a progressive, union-backed think tank, recently undertook such an analysis. In 1994, teachers’ weekly compensation, including benefits, was about equal to that of similarly educated professionals. But that’s no longer the case. By 2015, teachers nationally earned 11 percent less.

That may not be true for all teachers: High school teachers earned less than other similar workers, but elementary and middle school teachers made more, one study found.

Conservative critics also argue that these sorts of comparisons are flawed because they don’t fully account for teachers’ retirement benefits or tenure protections. They point out that teachers who leave for new jobs often take a pay cut.

Still, there’s no question that teacher salaries haven’t been going up. Why? More recently, in the wake of recession, states made steep budget cuts, and most haven’t fully recovered. Funding advocates argue that some states, including some of those facing teacher protests, just aren’t dedicating enough money to public schools.

Others say the issue is one of priorities, pointing to big increases in non-teaching staff, like aides, custodians, and counselors, and greater teacher retirement costs.

Thousands of Kentucky teachers rallied at the state Capitol in Frankfort, Ky. on Monday, April 2, 2018. (Alex Slitz/Lexington Herald-Leader/TNS via Getty Images)

There’s a lot of variation in how much teachers are paid, with particularly low pay in Arizona, Oklahoma, and West Virginia.

Teacher pay varies a lot, ranging from an average of about $42,000 a year in South Dakota to nearly $80,000 in New York.

Another report from the Education Law Center, which supports more school funding, compares early career teachers’ pay (not including benefits) to pay for similarly educated young professionals in the each state. In almost all cases, teachers are paid less.

Teachers in Arizona made 73 percent of similar non-teachers, among the worst in the country. Teachers in Oklahoma (78 percent) and West Virginia (79 percent) didn’t have it much better. Kentucky teachers actually came out ahead of teachers elsewhere, but still lagged behind non-teachers.

Higher pay means teachers are more likely to stay in the classroom. That’s linked to increased student achievement.

The policy argument for paying teachers more is straightforward: you’ll attract and keep better teachers. That’s largely backed up by research.

Several studies have shown that even relatively modest increases in teacher pay can decrease teacher turnover. One recent paper found that a $1,200 bonus in Florida decreased teacher quitting rates from about 17 percent to 11 percent. Bonuses of a few thousand dollars in Denver, North Carolina, and Tennessee had similar effects. One San Francisco study found that an incentive pay program didn’t increase teacher retention, but did seem to attract more effective teachers.

An extensive study in Texas using over a decade and a half of data found that a 10 percent salary increase led to a 1.6 percentage point drop in teacher turnover; the effect was largest among less experienced teachers.

Will students benefit directly from increased teacher pay and the decreased turnover as a result? Probably, though there’s not a great deal of recent research on this.

On average, students seem to benefit when there’s less teacher churn, and that’s particularly because turnover is greatest in high-poverty schools. The Texas study estimates that higher pay means more experienced and effective teachers are more likely to stick around, and that students do slightly better on tests as a result.

Other research has found that when school have more money to spend, including on teachers, students graduate high school at higher rates and earn more money as adults.

“These results suggest that the positive effects are driven, at least in part, by some combination of reductions in class size, having more adults per student in schools, increases in instructional time, and increases in teacher salaries that may help to attract and retain a more highly qualified teaching workforce,” the researchers wrote.

Correction: An earlier version of this story said that Oklahoma, rather than South Dakota, had the lowest average teacher salary in 2016-17. The story has also been updated to clarify the source of teacher salary data published by the federal government.

certification showdown

Judge strikes down rule allowing some New York charter schools to certify their own teachers

PHOTO: Monica Disare
Success Academy hosts its annual "Slam the Exam" rally at the Barclays Center.

In a blow to charter schools in New York, a rule that would have allowed certain schools to certify their own teachers was blocked in court Tuesday.

The judge’s ruling upends the plans of the city’s largest charter school network, Success Academy, and wipes out a legislative victory that New York’s charter sector thought it had won — though the decision will likely not be the end of the legal battle.

The regulations, approved by the State University of New York in October 2017, were designed to give charter schools more discretion over how they hired teachers. They eliminated the requirement that teachers earn master’s degrees and allowed charter schools authorized by SUNY to certify their teachers with as little as a month of classroom instruction and 40 hours of practice teaching.

Some charter networks argued their existing in-house training programs are more useful to new teachers than the training required for certification under state law.

But the rule was quickly challenged by the State Education Department and the state teachers union, which filed separate lawsuits that were joined in April. They argued that SUNY overstepped its authority and charged that the rule change would lead to children being taught by inexperienced and unqualified teachers.

The ruling was issued Tuesday by State Supreme Court Judge Debra J. Young, who wrote that the new certification programs were illegal because they fell below the minimum requirements issued by the state.

Charter networks “are free to require more of the teachers they hire but they must meet the minimum standards set” by the state, the judge wrote in her order. Young also concluded that laws requiring public comment were not followed.

“Today’s decision is a victory in our fight to ensure excellence in education at all schools,” state teachers union president Andy Pallotta said in a statement.

The Success Academy network and the Bronx Charter School for Better Learning had their plans for homegrown teacher certification programs approved in May, according to SUNY officials.

Success Academy spokeswoman Anne Michaud said the network is disappointed with the judge’s decision.

“As the top-performing public school system in the state, we are working to meet the demand for excellent schools that families in New York City are so desperate for, and we will continue to fight for what we know is our legal right: to train world class teachers and fill the teacher shortage that hampers so many disadvantaged neighborhoods,” Michaud said in a statement.

The certification policy grew out of the 2016 budget deal, when state lawmakers gave SUNY the authority to regulate the “governance, structure and operations of charter schools.”

The state’s top education officials — Commissioner MaryEllen Elia and Board of Regents Chancellor Betty Rosa — have long seemed offended by the new regulations. On a panel last year, Elia said, “I could go into a fast food restaurant and get more training than that.”

In a joint statement on Tuesday, Elia and Rosa praised the court’s decision as a “victory for all New York’s children.”

“In its strong opinion, the court rightly upheld the Board of the Regents and the Commissioner’s authority to certify teachers in New York State,” the statement reads.

On Tuesday, SUNY officials said they planned to appeal and believed that the judge’s ruling also offered a roadmap for creating new certification rules as long as they met those minimum standards.

“We are reviewing today’s decision. While we are disappointed that it did not uphold the regulation as written, it acknowledged the ability of the Charter School Institute to issue regulations,” said  SUNY spokeswoman Holly Liapis in a statement. “We will further evaluate our next steps.”

This post has been updated to include a statement from SUNY and from Success Academy.

guide to the battle

With days left in this year’s session, what will happen with teacher evaluations?

PHOTO: Photo by Jonathan Fickies for UFT
UFT President Michael Mulgrew interviews New York State Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie.

As the clock ticks on this year’s legislative session, the fate of New York’s teacher evaluations hangs in the balance.

The teachers union has been waging a spirited battle to decouple state standardized test scores from teacher evaluations this year, which would mark the culmination of years of fighting against a system they say unfairly stigmatizes teachers. The legislation has already cleared the Democratic Assembly, but it remains at an impasse in the Republican-led Senate, which wants to tie the changes to benefits for charter schools.

As end-of-session haggling gets into full swing, it’s unclear whether the union will be able to secure a bill with “no strings attached.” Alternatively, lawmakers may agree to help charter schools in exchange for the bill’s passage, or they could be unable to settle their differences and shelve the measure until next year.

Here’s what you need to know about the upcoming battle:

Why are we talking about teacher evaluations again?

New Yorkers have spent years (and years) fighting about teacher evaluations.

In 2010, New York adopted a new teacher evaluation system that included state standardized test scores. Supporters of the policy argue it is the best way to objectively measure whether teachers are helping students learn. Opponents, including teachers unions, argue test scores lead to unreliable evaluations and often mean teachers are being rated based on subjects they don’t teach.

The debate took another turn in 2015 when Gov. Andrew Cuomo pushed for a new teacher evaluation system in which as much as half of an educator’s evaluation could be based on test scores. That law technically remains on the books today, but in response to fervent pushback from parents and the union, the state’s education policymaking body paused the use of grades 3-8 math and English test scores in teacher evaluations.

Lawmakers, policymakers, and the union jumped back into the charged conversation this year in part because the temporary pause on the use of certain test scores in the evaluations is set to expire in 2019.

What exactly does the union want this year?

The union-backed bill would forbid any requirement that districts use state standardized test scores in teacher evaluations. Instead, local districts would collectively bargain the assessments used to rate teachers.

Paradoxically, this major political shift will likely make little difference in the lives of New York City teachers. That’s because for the last several years the city has already been using a system of local tests to rate educators.

New York City created a slate of assessments called “Measures of Student Learning,” which test students on everything from English to art. Michael Mulgrew, the city teachers union president, said he is happy with the current system and has already vowed, “Nothing will change for New York City teachers.”

Critics, however, point out that very few teachers are given poor ratings under this system. In New York City last year, 97 percent of teachers were given one of the top two ratings of “highly effective” or “effective,” according to Mulgrew.

What are the chances that this bill passes?

There’s a good chance some teacher evaluation legislation will pass before the end of the session but if history is any indication, it will cost something.

Senate Majority Leader John Flanagan has already staked out his position: He is willing to go even farther than the Assembly, scrapping the 2015 law all-together and leaving virtually every major decision about teacher ratings up to local collective bargaining. But in order to do that, he wants to dramatically expand the number of charter schools that can open in New York City and across the state. (The Senate introduced a second bill that the union also criticized for being friendly to charter schools.)

Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie has already called the bill “cyanide,” cuing the l back-and-forth that typically proceeds a larger deal each year in Albany. Last year, for instance, shortly after the mayor won a two-year extension of mayoral control, he made it easier for charter schools to expand and pay for space. The year before, mayoral control was attached to a provision that made it easier for charter schools to switch between authorizers.

Though Senate Republicans are typically able to secure at least a small victory, it’s unclear how much they can demand in an election year when their control of the chamber is in jeopardy. That is particularly a problem in Long Island, home to some of the most fierce resistance to standardized testing that will also be an electoral battleground this fall.

What might a compromise look like?

Anything is possible in Albany, but something charter school-related is a good bet.

Advocates have expressed concern that they will soon hit the cap on how many charter schools can open in New York City. Historically, they have also pushed to make it easier for charter schools to pay for school space and to allow charter schools to certify their own teachers.

Charter school advocates might also find it a particularly prime year to push for changes. With a major lobbying group out of the picture and the potential for Flanagan  who has been a charter school ally  to lose his majority next year, this could be the sector’s best shot to press for changes.

Also, Flanagan and others have expressed concerns that the legislation will create more testing, since it allows all local districts to create their own tests in addition to the state tests. The final deal could address this concern.