Money and Education: The Problem with Paying Teachers Less

Lara Cerri / St. Petersburg Times / ZUMAPRESS.comShore Acres Elementary fourth grade teacher Telsha Marmash leads her students in a discussion about prefixes Nov. 1, 2011 in St. Petersburg, Florida.

It’s not often that you hear teachers should be paid less. In fact, it’s almost always the exact opposite. From teachers unions to education reformers to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, the refrain that teachers are underpaid is a constant. So, when conservative thinkers at the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation issued a paper on Tuesday arguing not only that teachers are overpaid, but when you factor in pensions, health care and other benefits, that total compensation for teachers is 52% higher than fair market value, it was bound to be controversial.

To get to that conclusion, AEI and Heritage focused on three main findings:

The wage gap between teachers and non-teachers disappears when both groups are matched on an objective measure of cognitive ability rather than on years of education.

Translation: Teachers have lower IQs than their non-teacher equivalents because education degrees are easier to get. There are plenty of people who would find this assertion offensive, but even taken at face value, it doesn’t necessarily show that teachers are overpaid. Experts say one of the best ways to attract highly qualified people with advanced skills into the teaching profession is to pay higher wages.

Public school teachers earn higher wages than private school teachers, even when the comparison is limited to secular schools with standard curricula.

This is probably true, but is not a very useful comparison because working for private schools has its own set of advantages, such as a lighter emphasis on standardized tests and better job security, that can’t be measured by salary alone.

Workers who switch from non-teaching jobs to teaching jobs receive a wage increase of roughly 9%, while teachers who leave the profession on average see their wages decrease by roughly 3%.

The biggest problem with this finding is that while it may be true, you have to consider where non-teachers are coming from when they enter the profession. Since it’s hard to attract highly skilled workers to teaching, many enter the profession from other low-paying fields or from jobs that did not require a college degree. If a highly skilled science major is choosing between pursuing a career in teaching or going into bioengineering, unless the person is incredibly idealistic, dollars and cents will likely win out.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, says the paper “uses misleading statistics and questionable research to make its case,” but that really isn’t the point. As Jonathan Chait notes in a piece titled, “You Get the Teachers You Pay For,” the paper doesn’t show that we pay teachers enough, it shows the skill level of teachers is commensurate with their pay level — an important distinction. “Pay teachers badly, and you’ll get a lot of bad teachers,” he writes.

According to a 2003 study from the Education Policy Analysis Archives, only 4.7 percent of college juniors would consider teaching at the current starting salary (about $39,000, on average, nationwide), while 68% of those same students said they would consider teaching if it paid 50% more than the current occupations they were considering. Of those who do enter the field, 46% leave during the first five years.

The irony, of course, is that this report comes from two conservative think tanks. Conservative education folks often preach the need to infuse public education with the essence of the private sector. And, you know how people in the corporate world attract highly qualified employees? They actively recruit smart people into the field, use head hunters to find only the very best applicants and pay the most-qualified employees large salaries to keep them happy and dedicated to their jobs.

Kayla Webley is a reporter at TIME. You can follow her on Twitter at @kaylawebley or on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/kaylawebley.

Show Them the Money: Three Cheers for the Return of Economic Populism

Jon Meacham on Occupy Wall Street's Economic Populism | TIME Ideas | TIME.com /* */ Home TIME Magazine Photos Videos Specials Topics Subscribe Mobile AppsNewslettersRSS @TIME NewsFeed U.S. Politics World Business Money Tech Health Science Entertainment Opinion SEARCH TIME.COM Full Archive Covers Videos ContributorsLetters U.S.Show Them The MoneyIt's about time economic populism became as big a force in American politics as it used to beBy Jon Meacham | @jmeacham | October 12, 2011 | View CommentsTweetAndrew Burton / APDemonstrators affiliated with the "Occupy Wall Street" protests chant outside 740 Park Avenue in New York, October 11, 2011.

Meacham's book American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House was published in 2008.

The homepage of occupywallst.org is somewhat plaintive. Under the heading “Mail,” the organizers of the populist economic movement advise supporters to send what they can to a UPS Store in downtown Manhattan. But all donations are not created equal: “Money orders only please, cannot cash checks yet. Non-perishable goods only. We can accept packages of any size. We’re currently low on food.”

Judging from the reaction of the broad American establishment, however, they are not low on energy or impact. The mayor of New York City has said such protests against economic inequality and banking excesses will cost the city jobs; I have heard Wall Street satraps in recent days take a dismissive tone about the “crazies” that suggest the powers that be are not entirely dismissive. For they know in their hearts — or at least in their guts — that this backlash is long overdue.

(MORE: Kanye West Visits Occupy Wall Street; Cold Weather Looms)

From the 1820s to the 1960s, the major engine of the politics of the few versus the many was more about money and power than it was about symbols and power. From Andrew Jackson to William Jennings Bryan to Harry Truman, leaders rallied in support in of “the little guy who has no pull,” in Truman’s phrase.

Then came the mid-1960s. Roughly put, the white backlash against civil rights and an increasingly expensive government enabled politicians such as Richard Nixon — who is really the architect of the kind of populism still practiced by figures like Sarah Palin — to change the conversation from economics to culture. For decades now, Republicans have successfully urged Truman’s “little guy” to think more about cultural elites than financial ones. (George Wallace’s “pointy-headed professors,” for instance, or Roger Ailes’s “liberal media.”) Democrats who talked about economic justice were marginalized or defeated outright. And so cultural populism displaced economic populism as a political force in American life.

The Occupy Wall Street protests at last suggest that America’s wealth gap is once again becoming an organizing political principle in the country. Mobs rarely have good answers to problems, and there is no doubt much to be skeptical about in the crowds making all the noise. But the noise they’re making deserves a place in the broad arena of contending forces. They may not be eating much, but what they’re saying is important. The rest of us owe them a hearing.

Meacham is the author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House and executive editor at Random House, where he also runs The Conversation OnlineRead other related stories about this:Michael Bloomberg: Occupy Wall Street Is Trying To Destroy JobsThe GuardianPaul Krugman: Panic of the PlutocratsThe New York TimesRelated Topics: economic populism, occupy wall street, wealth gap, Politics, U.S.
emailprintshareLinkedInStumbleUponRedditDiggMixxDel.i.ciousWriteView Comments@TIMEIdeasLatest on TIME IdeasSociety | October 14, 2011How To Feed A Country

As charming as it sounds, growing kale in your backyard won’t solve the nation’s food ills

From our PartnersRepublicans Channel Their Inner David Cronenberg Robert J. Elisberg, HuffPoWhat If the Terror Plot Had Succeeded?Frida Ghitis, CNNThe Shameful Bias Against MormonsKathleen Parker, Washington PostMovies | October 14, 2011In Defense of Movie Remakes

Those familiar titles you’re seeing on theater marquees are a sign of good stories, not creative bankruptcy

previousWake Up Rick Perry — And Smell the FumesnextThe Stories I Carry With Meblog comments powered by Disqus Letters to the EditorOctober 12, 2011American ProtestationsWhat does "antiglobalization" mean?October 10, 2011The Harassed Can Have HopeIn the face of death threats, a Boston transsexual encourages bullied teensOctober 8, 2011Hitting the BooksA Korean middle-school student's firsthand experience with inflexible educationSend us your letters | View more lettersMore on TIME.comPhotos: Occupy Wall StreetChicago Ideas Week 2011: Intelligence SquaredWhat You Need to Know About BullyingFull ListMost PopularTIME.COMBLOGSIdeas Scientists Discover a Diamond as Big as a PlanetMandela: His 8 Lessons of LeadershipWhy You Should Worry About China's Real Estate Bubble BurstingThe Saudi-Iran Cold War: Will the Assassination Plot Heat It Up?Dilma vs. Gisele: The War over Brazilian WomanhoodTeacher, Leave Those Kids Alone: A Look at South Korea's Education SystemSteve Jobs, 1955?2011: Mourning Technology's Great ReinventorKazakhstan Passes Restrictive Religion LawNew Proof That Comets Watered the EarthThe Supreme Court: When Double Jeopardy Isn't Double Jeopardy Harold Camping's Back, With a Brand-New Doomsday PredictionNYC Official: Occupy Wall Street Cleanup Is Being PostponedWill the Washington Bomb Plot Force Obama into War with Iran?What's Behind Violence at the World's Largest Gold Mine?Reality Check: The Cain Train Is Going to WreckWealth Matters, Part 2: Materialistic People Are Less Happy in MarriageHerman Cain's '999 Plan' Looks a Lot Like Sim City's 999 PlanWatch: Nicki Minaj Surprises Two Tiny Fans on 'Ellen'Top 10 Must-Have iPhone GamesTeen Sex Update: Fewer Teens Doing It, More Boys Using CondomsThe Myths of “Natural” ChildbirthShow Them The MoneyFrom the Arab Spring to the American Fall?Can Whites Say The N-Word?Don’t Denigrate The PotatoThe Stories I Carry With MeMitt Romney’s Faith Has Been Called Into Question. That’s Bad for All of Us.Can Education Be ‘Moneyball’-ed?Has Empathy Become The New Scapegoat?God and the NFL: What Tim Tebow’s Celebrity Says About AmericaHistoric TIME LettersJune 5, 1933The Royal TreatmentVanderbilt reports from pre-war GermanyFebruary 9, 1948Unfair Snapshot?Journalist Eric Sevareid takes issue with a story that mentions himNovember 2, 1959In Defense of Clark GableTony Randall speaks out for one of his own Powered by WordPress.com VIP Stay Connected with TIME.comSubscribe to
RSS FeedsSign Up for
NewslettersGet the TIME
Magazine iPad EditionRead TIME Mobile
on your PhoneBecome a
Fan of TIMEGet TIME
Twitter Updates NewsFeed U.S. Politics World Business Money Health Science Entertainment Photos Videos Specials Magazine © 2011 Time Inc. All rights reservedPrivacy PolicyRSSNewsletterMobileTIME For KidsLIFE.com SubscribeContact UsTerms of UseMedia KitReprints & PermissionsHelpSite MapAd Choices TIME Our partners CNN CNN MONEY LIFE