Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics - IEA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PART 2: UNITED STATES 175 Figure 72: United States, Ratio of Teachers’ Weekly Earnings to Weekly Earnings of Other College Graduates of the Same Gender, 1983 to 2003 1.10 1.00 Ratio of Weekly Earnings 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.50 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Female Teachers/Female College Grads Year Male Teachers/Male College Grads Note: Calculating estimates for 1994 and 1995 was complicated by the fact that the CPS did not indicate imputed wages. Source: Allegretto et al. (2004, Figure 3). This pattern varies from state to state, however. If we assume that spending per student correlates with teacher salary increases, what we find is that states such as Massachusetts and Texas, which have consistently increased spending per student more than the national average in each decade since the 1970s, are probably more likely to be attracting better teachers than states whose expenditure per student is much less than the national average. Some states, such as Connecticut, increased teacher salaries by a large amount in the 1980s, specifically to attract higher quality college graduates into teaching. However, spending per student in Connecticut remained almost flat in the 1990s, but if the increase in the 1980s had been large enough, teacher salaries in Connecticut may still have been high enough in more recent years to ensure continued quality of mathematics teaching in that state’s schools. If not, we should see evidence of erosion in quality. Comparisons between Salaries of Teachers and of Other Professionals The Current Population Survey (CPS), taken every year in the United States, allowed us to estimate teacher income relative to other occupations. Allegretto et al. (2004) used data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to measure the skill levels of different occupations, including K–12 teaching. On the basis of “points” and “market value” of occupational skill levels, they identified 16 professional and managerial occupations with skill ratings similar to those of K–12 teachers (see Allegretto et al., 2004, Table 5). The ratio of teachers’ weekly wages to the weekly wages of these 16 comparable occupations in the 1980s and the 1990s is shown in Figure 73. The reason why the ratio jumps so abruptly in 1996 is that the CPS redesigned the way it estimated teachers’ wages, and thereby raised them relative to other wages. But the important point here, as discussed above, is that relative wages fell sharply for teachers in the period 1996 to 2002, a trend that probably increased the cost of recruiting more able individuals into teaching.
176 TEACHER PAY AND STUDENT MATHEMATICS ACHIEVEMENT Figure 73: United States, Ratio of Teachers’ Weekly Earnings to Weekly Earnings of Comparable Professionals, 1983 to 2002 1.00 0.98 Ratio of Weekly Earnings 0.96 0.94 0.92 0.90 0.88 0.86 0.84 0.82 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year Note: Calculating estimates for 1994 and 1995 was complicated by the fact that the CPS did not indicate imputed wages. Source: Allegretto et al. (2004, Table 7). We also used the CPS to estimate age/income profiles for teachers by gender and level of education, comparing their weekly earnings with those of scientists and engineers and those of all others in the labor force with the same level of education in 1995 and 2000. These two years bracket a period of decline in teachers’ relative wages. The results are presented in Table 50 and graphically only for individuals with Bachelor’s degrees in Figures 74 to 77. The table and the figures suggest that the mean annual incomes of teachers (both males and females) were already lower in 1995 than were the earnings of scientists, engineers, mathematicians, and non-scientists. Teacher earnings became relatively even lower in 2000. Note, though, that these are annual earnings, so the differences are larger than the differences for weekly earnings because teachers work fewer weeks per year than do other professionals. Even after building into our estimation eight weeks less for teachers than for other professionals (40 weeks annually versus 48 weeks), we still found a considerable difference in salary between the two groupings. 31 Teachers in the United States are paid relatively much less than professionals in competing occupations. If the brighter college students who might consider teaching mathematics or science in middle and high school can also go into industry as a scientist or engineer, the income they have to forego to take up teaching is substantial. 31 One of the advantages of estimating age–income profiles rather than estimating incomes without indicating age is that, on average, those in teaching may be older than other workers. This fact biases comparisons between the earnings of teachers and those in competing occupations, with teachers apparently earning more than workers of the same age in other occupations.
Page 1 and 2:
TEACHER EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT S
Page 3 and 4:
2 TEACHER PAY AND STUDENT MATHEMATI
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
10 TEACHER PAY AND STUDENT MATHEMAT
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
100 TEACHER PAY AND STUDENT MATHEMA
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126: 124 TEACHER PAY AND STUDENT MATHEMA
Page 175: 174 TEACHER PAY AND STUDENT MATHEMA
show all

Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics - IEA

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?