Four fallacies of the ‘teachers are overpaid’ argument
Researchers argue why public school teachers are overpaid; here’s where they are wrong
The paper's arguments are based on a number of logical fallacies that undermine its conclusions.
The Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute have released a new paper arguing that public school teachers are overpaid relative to the private-sector market, and therefore policy makers can balance their budgets by cutting teachers’ benefits without affecting teacher recruitment and retention.
The paper is sure to provoke a great deal of thought and debate, but its arguments are based on a number of omissions and false assumptions that badly undermine its conclusions. Here are four such fallacies.
1. Teaching degrees aren’t as valid as the academic credentials of other professionals.
Public school teachers earn about 19 percent less in wages, on average, than non-teachers with the same level of education, the paper found. But it dismisses this finding by arguing that advanced degrees for teachers aren’t as valid as those earned by private-sector employees.
The paper’s researchers then compare the wages of teachers and non-teachers with similar “cognitive abilities” instead (as measured by scores on the Armed Forces Qualification Test) and conclude there is no measurable difference—meaning teachers aren’t underpaid in relation to their abilities.
Where to begin in deconstructing this elitist argument, which invokes the feeble old stereotype of teachers as “those who can’t do”?
The paper claims that an education degree isn’t as academically rigorous as a degree in other fields, based on the results of two studies that suggest the grade point averages of education majors are higher than those of other students. Upon closer scrutiny, however, this argument falls apart like a newspaper left out in the rain.
For one thing, the grading in an education course is subjective—unlike, say, that of a math or science course, where there is only one right answer. Comparing the GPAs of education majors with those of engineering majors is like comparing apples and pineapples—it’s not a valid comparison.
What’s more, it requires a dizzying leap of logic to claim that higher average grades in a field of study mean it isn’t as rigorous, or that its practitioners aren’t as skilled.
Citing the conclusions reached by one of the GPA studies, the paper’s authors, Jason Richwine and Andrew G. Biggs, argue that overall student effort is lower when the standards for grading are lower—and therefore education majors are likely learning less than their peers in other studies. While I would agree that grade inflation is a problem across higher education, that kind of broad generalization about human behavior is so ridiculous, it’s shocking to find it in a serious policy paper.
11 Responses to Four fallacies of the ‘teachers are overpaid’ argument
You must be logged in to post a comment Login
Pearcen
November 8, 2011 at 6:44 pm
Working in a school system I firmly believe that many teachers are overpaid and underpaid compared to their non-teaching counterparts. This is due to the fact that school district and the teachers union keep teacher pay artificial flat rate, regardless of market demand. For instance, physics teachers are in demand. However, because of the current pay system in schools, the physics teacher will be paid the same as the profession that is least in demand. The same can be said about the computer science and engineering teachers. Any teacher with a degree in physics, computer science or engineering are likely underpaid. Especially if they transition into teaching later in life.
If schools were to pay teachers based on experience and market forces, you’ll see salaries align with the private sector.
dinapie
November 8, 2011 at 8:00 pm
The fact remains that the State of California, as well a our Federal Government, is flat busted broke! Yet, we still have entire sectors of Civil Servants on lifetime, full-time, post retirement salaries and benefits. Fire, Police, ex captains, ex Cal Trans workers…some making in excess of 450,000 per year. And whats worse, this can extend beyond their passing.
As a matter of fact, the retired Unified School District “past employees/admin force” budget far exceeds that of the presently working force. Is it me? Or does this suck? I can understand 3500/month…but Half a mill?
Perhaps another idea would be to review the constitution of the United States and more clearly define taxation rules for “laborers.” I would certainly include teachers in this equation. Many are of the belief that it MAY be UNCONSTITUTIONAL to charge income tax on laborers:
“the Congress has no constitutional power to tax labor or income from labor”~ Sullivan
The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution makes involuntary servitude illegal under any U.S. jurisdiction, whether at the hands of the U.S. government or in the private sphere (And the IRS is a private company), except as punishment for a crime: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Therefore: for those of us working as “mind and matter” laborers, teachers inclusive…we should not be forced to work 2.5 long days each week, (which also forces most of us to work nights and weekends), for “slave labor” as required by Uncle Sam.
is it me? or does the whell feel less round and more square???
gmkovich
November 8, 2011 at 9:37 pm
Arrgh!
I am not a teacher, but I am married to one and had the good fortune to serve as a Technology Coordinator at two districts.
In my vast work history – blue collar steel worker, white collar steel worker, tech coordinator and now in a large multi-national services organization – Teachers are the most professional and talented folks I’ve worked with.
This article does a very good job identifying how wrong the Heritage Foundation’s report is… what would be very interesting to me is an analysis of why the current drum beat of “Teacher’s are bad”.
The dynamics of a public classroom range from terrific to terrible – to lump an entire profession into a classification of overpaid and ineffective is absolutely wrong.
I challenge anyone who believes that a teacher does not earn their pay to actually teach for a week.
See how you fare with a bathroom break once every 3 hours. Or a lunch hour of 25 minutes. Or staying several hours after your work day to adjust lesson plans, answer parent voicemails/emails, and then come home and grade papers for another 3 hours (and if you’re female, probably have to make dinner, and tend to the children). And then do that each day for 180+ days.
Don’t forget the quick trip to the grocery store that takes an hour because you ran into 2 parents and a neighbor who want your advice on their struggling child.
I guarantee that if you walk a mile in a teacher’s shoes, you will thank your lucky stars that you decided on another profession.
However, if you are the rare individual that enjoys knowing that your hard work can make a difference in someone’s life – truly make a difference – then you are probably going to work in that profession whatever the pay, benefits or work environment.
Teachers should be revered, not reviled.
What would motivate someone to attack this profession?
What is really behind this?
rbiehl
November 8, 2011 at 11:48 pm
I don’t know if you are a teacher or not, but do you have any idea what such a pay system would do to the morale and collegiality of the system? Imagine if, as you suggest, physics teachers earned more money than English teachers because of such “market demands.” Your notion of “underpaid” and “overpaid” is based – it would appear – merely on market demand, not on equity of responsibility and workload. I could as easily (but I do not) argue that English teachers should earn more money because they have to grade so much writing, which is extremely time-consuming.
Pearcen
November 9, 2011 at 2:46 pm
It simple economics. Your paid what your worth. I see hundreds of new English applicants applying for a HS position, but only a few chem and physics applicants for science related teaching positions. How do you broaden the base of the chem and physics teachers apply for the job, you offer more money. Reading and grading papers is undoubtedly time consuming for an English teacher, but its not taking a toll on the amount of applicants that are applying for the same position.
Market demand isn’t the only factor that should be included, years of practical and teaching experience should be taken into consideration. An accountant with 20 years of working experience transitioning into teaching will make a year 0 teacher salary. To me and most americans, that sounds criminal (figuratively). Should they be paid the same as a 20 year, probably not. However, they should be making more than a year 1 teacher fresh out of college.
nwallevand
November 8, 2011 at 11:53 pm
Then this same argument should hold true for other professions, let’s say, lawyers and nurses. We have more then enough lawyers in the market, yet we don’t have enough nurses. Why are lawyers paid so much more regardless of experience.
I am tired of generalizations.
Pearcen
November 9, 2011 at 2:56 pm
A typical lawyer with a phD is paid a median salary of 94k in Chicago. A nurse practicer with similar education makes a median salary 96k. I’m guessing the market values both positions.
debbiemak
November 9, 2011 at 3:44 am
First off, one could say I was and am a “best and brightest” teacher. I’m board certified, a mensa member, high GPAs, SAT and GRE scores. I have an endorsement in mathematics. I was premed before I switched to education. I teach in elementary education. However, I have never begrudge the fact that other teachers are paid the same as I am. I’m not in it to prove I’m “better” but to provide the best education for my students that I can. Smart and competitive are not the same thing, and don’t go hand in hand as the study seems to imply. Competition among teachers would lead to less collaboration and lower morale, not better education for all. We are not a market company or factory, we are providing for the future of our country. However, if my pay was half what I make now, I’d work in another field. I work a lot harder than my husband who works for a major corporation and my fellow teachers are a lot more professional and dedicated than the immature, backbiting people he works with. And those people make more than I do. In addition, they don’t take work home, they cut out as soon as they can, and if they do work at home, they get to flex their time. Try flexing teaching sometime!
toolkit
November 9, 2011 at 1:38 pm
You provide an excellent academic rebuttal of this “Never-Should-have-been-Published” hack “Research.”
However, sticking to a “Professional” response to the “Political Dirt” of this “Research” misses the opportunity to use “Subjective Analysis” and “Call the “Research’s” “Raw Sewage” by more appropriate “Street Names.”
It would be appropriate for your rebuttal to identify the hidden agendas, the political malevolence and the patent disgust that “Extremist Political Foes” hold against education (in general) and against “Teachers-that-Teach-Students-to-Think-for-Themselves” teachers (in particular).
This “Research” is no less an attack on public education than The NCLB under a previous presidential administration and “Public-Education-Hating” Congress. The real intent of The NCLB was to show that Public Schools were “Defective” so that public money could be funneled to “Church Schools.”
This “What-the-Neighbor’s-Dog-Leaves-on-your-Lawn Research” comes from the same ilk as the “Anti-Evolution,” “Teach-Abistinance-Only,” “Immigrants-Blight-and-Benight-our-Land” or “Gay-Soldiers-Corrode-our-Military” manure.
This “Research” oozes the same stench as “Should-have-been-Flushed” research a generation ago that “Purported to Prove” that “Black” Americans were less intelligent than “White” Americans.
This “Research” demonstrates pure political venom…and pure “Horse/Bull/Chicken” excrement! So, why not say so in your rebuttal.
rbiehl
November 9, 2011 at 2:31 pm
As for the lawyers and nurses point, a couple of points
1. you are comparing apples and oranges. Teachers are teachers, regardless of the academic discipline. Nurses and lawyers are two completely different professions.
2. Not all lawyers are overpaid. Many young lawyers make very little money, and many cannot even find jobs.
3. If you are tired of generalizations, then don’t use them (i.e., “Why are lawyers paid so much more regardless of experience?”). Are they, really?
rzienta
November 17, 2011 at 1:09 pm
Overpaid teachers? This is nothing new, especailly when politically motivated, as many of these “studies” are. It comes down to the “eye of the beholder”. Information is shaped to comfortably fit the opinion and then spewed forth as fact.
Is knowledge important? Most would “say” that it is, however, although teachers are some of the most educated workforce in the nation, their salaries do not reflect it. Therefore, does this show knowledge isn’t important? This is just the kind of message our students need.
Most teachers that I’ve been associated with have not pursued this career for fame,fortune,or retirement benefits, but a desire to prepare students to be successful, not only in education; but life. They have tolerated the challenges of meager budgets, difficult environments, student or parent confrontation, and more because they care about the success of their students. Many of the teachers I’ve known appreciate the acquisition of knowledge over wealth, which you think would be considered a noble endeavor.
I think the article presents some food for thought and I am glad that someone stepped forward to remove the varnish from such “studies” that get more attention than they deserve.