Stats on Teacher Pay
November 12th, 2007Continuing with the National Center for Education Statistics 04/05 dataset, which, according to CCSD quoted in the Las Vegas Sun, uses a classification system that violates NCES guidelines thus rendering the current/non-current subcategories useless for comparing Nevada to other states, an alert reader writes:
The last paragraph of the Sun article was very puzzling: “Beers, who determined we’re 37th in per pupil spending, also pulled out how our teachers’ salaries compared with other states’. By his calculation, our teachers’ pay ranks 48th.” Huh … what’s that about?
Good Question.
The reporter was not quite correct… Nevada ranks 48th in teacher pay per student. This statistic must be considered in tandem with the number of students per teacher, and Nevada’s ratio is much higher than average. Thus, Nevada’s teacher pay per teacher ranks pretty good after you multiply the pay per student times the large number of students per teacher.
There are two main teachers unions in America, the National Education Association (NEA) and American Federation of Teachers (AFT). Both produce studies comparing teacher pay between states. The raw data is the same as that used at Nevada Elite.
The AFT 2005 study ranks Nevada teacher pay 25th (see PDF page 32/printed page 23; the next page shows Nevada has the highest average salary of all states in the “Southwest” geographic category).
The NEA 2005 study also shows Nevada average teacher pay ranks 25th (see chart 11 on PDF page 37/printed page 19).
In the technical state notes (PDF page 115/printed page 97) for rankings they acknowledge that “each state department of education (DOE) has its own system or accounting and reporting … As a result, it is not always possible to obtain completely comparable data for every state. For this reason, NEA Research encourages each state department of education to include clarifying information …”
Here is the prior year’s NEA report. On PDF page 117/printed page 99 you can see that Nevada’s notes say the salary figures do not include the 10% “bonus” that teachers in Clark and Washoe Counties have negotiated - in those counties, taxpayers pay both halves of each teachers PERS contribution, and no social security is taken out of teachers’ paychecks. The 2006 report no longer includes this important fact.
If the value of this benefit were properly included in calculating teacher compensation, we would rank around 15th highest.
November 13th, 2007 at 8:37 am
The old adage still rings true: “There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics.” As a finance professor once said to me: “If you let me choose the denominator, I can give you whatever answer you want!”
November 13th, 2007 at 9:06 pm
This is funny. All the blow hard speeches on paying higher salaries so that they can attract better teachers. Yet, they low ball the numbers and produce the opposite effect.
November 17th, 2007 at 7:05 am
The only rational test of whether teacher salaries are high enough is whether we are able to attract enough qualified teachers. In Washoe County, the answer is yes, and it has been that way for years. Even our current Washoe County Superintendent had to take an out-of-the-way teaching assignment to get his foot in the door, because of the vigorous competition for jobs. In Clark County, they are struggling to get enough teachers. Or so I am told.
November 17th, 2007 at 8:21 am
GOD BLESS BOB BEERS FOR CUTTING THROUGH THE BULL!!!
November 17th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
As I always point out to people who say teachers don’t get paid enough, remember that they only work 9 months out of the year, so whatever the salary is, annualize it by dividing by 3/4. So $40,000 a year divided by .75 = $53,333. Not bad, especially when you add in the better-than-private sector benefits and extra days off they receive. Even at $40K, those with children at home love having three months in the summer to spend quality time with them. How can you put a price on that?
November 18th, 2007 at 8:14 am
If teachers’ pay is adjusted to account for the differences in the cost of living in each state, the rankings would be very different.
November 18th, 2007 at 10:52 am
10% BONUS AND NO SOCIAL SECURITY DEDUCTIONS !!!!!!!!
Jon Ralston never told me about that!
December 21st, 2007 at 6:56 pm
[…] Stats On Teacher Pay […]
December 22nd, 2007 at 8:01 am
I am totally amazed at how the educrats have deceived us on the cost of education. All it takes is a little simple math. I believe from what I have read that Nevada collects $5-6,000 per year per student in taxes paid into the K-12 educational system. If you have a 30 student class then that would come to $150,000 to $180,000 per class. If the teacher gets say $50,000 with benefits and payroll taxes then where does the rest of the money go?
I have an idea. Let us privatize the whole educational system. Let the Counties and State maintain ownership of the buildings but let us turn each school into an independent business. Let the currrent administration of each school become the operators of each school. In addition let us open up this system to other new independent schools. Then let us see what happens when they compete for students for whom the State will pay $5-6,000 per year. What we will see is an immediate and dramatic improvement in the education of our children. Teachers will get paid more and our kids will turn out smarter and better behaved. There will be more harmony and peace in our homes because of that and our children will have a hope for the future because they will actually be looking at achieving their life goals. As a bonus the new independent schools will be so happy with the generous funding they are receiving that they will not ask the State for a per student increase for 20 years.
March 1st, 2008 at 10:01 pm
“10% BONUS AND NO SOCIAL SECURITY DEDUCTIONS !!!!!!!!
Jon Ralston never told me about that!”
- Well I for one thing Jon owes you a drink… and he certainly knows where to find those.