(Mis-)Measuring the Relative Pay of Public School Teachers | Zendy

Michael Podgursky | Zendy; Ruttaya Tongrut | Zendy

AI Assistant Blog Pricing

Home ZAIA Blog

Open Access

(Mis-)Measuring the Relative Pay of Public School Teachers

Author(s) -

Michael Podgursky,

Ruttaya Tongrut

Publication year - 2006

Publication title -

education finance and policy

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 2.413

H-Index - 25

eISSN - 1557-3079

pISSN - 1557-3060

DOI - 10.1162/edfp.2006.1.4.425

Subject(s) - earnings , current population survey , metropolitan area , compensation (psychology) , survey data collection , actuarial science , work (physics) , demographic economics , plaintiff , population , business , economics , psychology , accounting , political science , medicine , statistics , social psychology , environmental health , mechanical engineering , mathematics , pathology , law , engineering

Statistics on the relative pay of public school teachers are routinely cited by plaintiffs in school finance (adequacy) lawsuits. However, comparisons of pay and benefits for public school teachers to those of professional employees in other sectors are complicated by the fact that most teachers work under contracts that are nine or ten months in length rather than a full year. The authors show that this makes household survey data on weekly earnings in the widely used Current Population Survey (CPS-ORG) unreliable. In general, employer-reported data on salaries and benefits such as the National Compensation Survey (NCS) or state administrative data are preferred for this type of comparison. NCS data on weekly earnings in metropolitan labormarkets suggest that pay of public school teachers compares much more favorably to that of nonteachers than CPS-ORG data suggest.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research