Background: The quality of a school's teaching force has a significant effect on student learning. One potential lever for increasing teacher quality is through selecting and rewarding teachers with desired characteristics.
Purpose: To analyze differences and similarities in the salary determinants of Michigan's charter and traditional public schools.
Participants: The representative sample included 723 full-time traditional public school teachers and 468 full-time charter school teachers in Michigan during the 1999-2000 school year.
Research Design: This is a multivariate analysis of quantitative data. A secondary analysis of survey data was performed, allowing for greater generalizability across the population of interest.
Data Collection and Analysis: The 1999-2000 Schools and Staffing Survey was the data source. This NCES survey provides comprehensive data on school and staff characteristics that are representative at the state level.
Findings: The average Michigan charter school teacher earns more than $15, 000 less than the average Michigantraditionalpublic school teacher. Two thirds of this salary difference is because charter school teachers often have lower endowments of valued characteristics, such as experience and certification.
Conclusions: Charter school administrators appear to be selecting and rewarding teachers in innovative ways thatcouldhavea positive impactonteacher quality. They are hampered in these efforts by the depressed salaries offered in many charter schools.
Arsen, D., Plank, D. N., & Sykes, G. (1999). School choice policies in Michigan: The rules matter. East Lansing: Michigan State University.
2.
Ballou, D. (1996).Do public schools hire the best applicants?The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111(1), 97-133.
3.
Berliner, D. C. (1987, April). Selecting for quality: What kinds of teachers do school districts seek or choose? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.
4.
Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2000). Gender differences in pay. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14(4), 75-99.
5.
Blinder, A. S. (1973). Wage discrimination: Reduced form and structural estimates. The Journal of Human Resources, 8(4), 436-455.
6.
Bomotti, S., Ginsberg, R., & Cobb, B. (1999). Teacher in charter schools and traditional schools: A comparative study. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 7(22), 28-28.
7.
Boyd, D., Lankford, H., & Loeb, S. (2003). The draw of home:How teacher preferences for proximity disadvantage urban schools (Working Paper No. w9953). Washington, DC: National Bureau of Economic Research.
8.
Brown, C., & Corcoran, M. (1997). Sex-based differences in school content and the male-female wage gap. Journal of Labor Economics, 15(3), 431-465.
9.
Buckley, K., & Fisler, J. (2002). A decade of charter schools: From theory to practice (No. RB-35). Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
10.
Cavalluzzo, L. (2004). Is National Board certificationaneffective signalof teacher quality? (No. IPR 11204). Alexandria, VA: The CNA Corporation.
11.
Charter school teachers (ECS State Note). (2002). Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
12.
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vidgor, J. L. (2002, January). Who teaches whom? Race and the distribution of novice teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Economic Association, Atlanta, GA.
13.
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., Vidgor, J. L., & Diaz, R. A. (2003, January). Do school accountability systems make it more difficult for low performingschools to attract andretain highquality teachers? Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Economic Association, Washington, DC.
14.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15.
Darling-Hammond, L., Berry, B., & Thoreson, A. (2001). Does teacher certification matter? Evaluating the evidence. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(1), 57-77.
16.
Ehrenberg, R. G., & Brewer, D. J. (1994). Do school and teacher characteristics matter? Evidence from High School and Beyond. Economics of Education Review, 13(1), 1-17.
17.
Ehrenberg, R. G., & Brewer, D. J. (1995). Did teachers' verbal ability and race matter in the 1960s? “Coleman” revisited. Economics of Education Review, 14(1), 1-21.
18.
Freeman, C., Scafidi, B., & Sjoquist, D. L. (2002, August). Racial segregation in Georgia public schools, 1994-2002: Trends, causes, and impact on teacher quality. Paper presented at “Resegregation of Southern Schools? A Crucial Moment in the History (and the Future) of Public Schooling in America, ”Chapel Hill, NC.
19.
Gill, B. P., Timpane, P. M., Ross, K. E., & Brewer, D. J. (2001). Rhetoric versus reality: What we know and what we need to know about vouchers and charter schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
20.
Goldhaber, D. D. (2001). How has teacher compensation changed? In W. J. Fowler (Ed.), Selected papers in school finance, 2000-2001 (pp. 13-40). Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.
21.
Goldhaber, D. D. (2002). The mystery of good teaching. Education Next, 2(1), 50-55.
22.
Goldhaber, D. D., & Anthony, E. (2004, March 8). Can teacher quality be effectively assessed? Retrieved October 14, 2004, from http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=410958
23.
Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (2000).Does teacher certification matter? High school teacher certification status and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(2), 129-145.
24.
Gosse, M. A. (2002). The gender pay gap in the New Zealand public service (Working Paper No. 15). Wellington, New Zealand: State Services Commission.
25.
Groshen, E. L. (1991).The structure of the female/male wage differential: Is it who you are, what you do, or where you work?The Journal of Human Resources, 26(3), 457-472.
26.
Gruber, K. J., Wiley, S. D., Broughman, S. P., Strizek, G. A., & Burian-Fitzgerald, M. (2002). Schools and staffing survey, 1999-2000: Overview of the data for public, private, public charter, and Bureau of Indian Affairs elementary and secondary schools (NCES No. 2002-313). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
27.
Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (2001, May). Does public school competition affect teacher quality? Paper presented at the Economics of School Choice Conference, Islamorada, FL.
28.
Hatry, H. P., Greiner, J. M., & Ashford, B. G. (1994). Issues and case studies in teacher incentive plans (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
29.
Heneman, H. I., & Milanowski, A. (2003). Continuing assessment of teacher reactions to a standards-basedteacher evaluationsystem. Journalof Personnel Evaluationin Education, 17(2), 173-195.
30.
Horn, J., & Miron, G. (1999). Evaluation of the Michigan public school academy initiative. Kalamazoo: Western Michigan University, The Evaluation Center.
31.
Hoxby, C. M. (2000). Would school choice change the teaching profession? (No. 7866). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
32.
Jerald, C. (2002). All talk, no action: Putting an end to out-of-field teaching (SR No. 0203). Washington, DC: The Education Trust.
33.
Kain, J. F., & Singleton, K. (1996, May/June).Equalityofeducationalopportunityrevisited. New England Economic Review, pp. 87-111.
34.
Kelley, C., & Finnigan, K. (2003). The effects of organizational context on teacher expectancy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 603-634.
35.
Kelley, C., Heneman, H. I., & Milanowski, A. (2002). Teacher motivation and school-based performance awards. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38, 372-401.
36.
Kelley, C., & Protsik, J. (1997). Risk and reward: Perspectives on the implementation of Kentucky's school-based performance award program. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33, 474-505.
37.
Koppich, J. E., Holmes, P., & Plecki, M. L. (1998). New rules, new roles? The professional work lives of charter school teachers: A preliminary study (No. ED461630). Annapolis Junction, MD: National Education Association.
38.
Labaree, D. F. (1989). Career ladders and the early public high school teacher: A study of inequality and opportunity. In D. Warren (Ed.), American teachers: Histories of a profession at work (pp. 157-189). New York: Macmillan.
39.
Ladd, H. F. (1999). The Dallas school accountability and incentive program: An evaluation of its impacts on student outcomes. Economics of Education Review, 18, 1-16.
40.
Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37-62.
41.
Levin, J., & Quinn, M. (2003). Missed opportunities: How we keep high-quality teachers out of urban classrooms. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, The New Teacher Project.
42.
Linacre, J. M. (2002). A user's guide to WINSTEPS/MINISTEP Rasch-model computer programs (Version 3.36). Chicago: MESA Press.
43.
Loeb, S., & Page, M. E. (2000). Examining the link between teacher wages and student outcomes: The importance of alternative labor market opportunities and non-pecuniary variation. Review of Economics and Statistics, 82(3), 393-408.
44.
Milanowski, A. (2002). The varieties of knowledge and skill-based pay design: A comparison of seven new pay systems for K-12 teachers. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
45.
Milanowski, A., Kimball, S. M., & White, B. (2004). The relationship between standards-based teacher evaluation scores and student achievement: Replication and extensions at three sites(CPRE-UW Working Paper No. TC-04-10). Madison, WI: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
46.
Miron, G., & Nelson, C. (2002). What's public about charter schools? Lessons learned about choice and accountability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
47.
Monk, D. (1994). Subject area preparation of secondary mathematics and science teachers and student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 13(2), 125-145.
48.
A move to invest more in effective teaching. (2004). Retrieved April 19, 2004, from http://www.pefchattanooga.org/www/docs/110-302
49.
Murnane, R. J., & Cohen, D. K. (1986). Merit pay and the evaluation problem: Why most merit plans fail and a few survive. Harvard Educational Review, 56(1), 1-17.
50.
Oaxaca, R. (1973). Male-female wage differentials in urban labor markets. International Economic Review, 14(3), 693-709.
51.
Odden, A., & Kelley, C. (1997). Paying teachers for what they know and do: New and smarter compensation strategies to improve schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
52.
Podgursky, M., & Ballou, D. (2001). Personnel policy in charter schools. Dayton, OH: Thomas B. Fordham.
53.
Pounder, D. G. (1987). Testing the generalizability of bias in teacher selection ratings across different modes of screening. Journal of Educational Equity and Leadership, 7(1), 49-59.
54.
Pounder, D. G. (1989). Improving the predictive validity of teacher selection decisions: Lessons from teacher appraisal. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 2(2), 141-150.
55.
The Revised School Code, Article 1, part 6A, section 380.505 (1976).
56.
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2000). Teachers, schools and academic achievement (No. 6691). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
57.
Rynes, S. L., & Barber, A. E. (1990). Applicant attraction strategies: An organizational perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 286-310.
58.
Sanders, W. L., & Horn, S. P. (1998). Research findings from the Tennessee value-added assessment system (TVAAS) database: Implications for educational evaluation and research. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 12(3), 247-256.
59.
Sparks, D. (2000). Issues at the table: Teacher quality and student achievement become bargaining matters: An interview with Julia Koppich. Journal of Staff Development, 21(2).
60.
State policies and/or appropriations providing National Board certification incentives and supports. (2004, June). Retrieved October 26, 2004, from www.nbpts.org/abuot/images/stateincen_sup.table.pdf
61.
Summers, A. A., & Wolfe, B. L. (1977). Do schools make a difference?The American Economic Review, 67(4), 639-652.
62.
Waldfogel, J. (1998). Understanding the “family gap” in pay for women with children. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12(1), 137-156.
63.
Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
64.
White, B. (2004). The relationship between teacher evaluation scores and student achievement: Evidence form Coventry, RI (CPRE-UW Working Paper No. TC-04-13). Madison, WI: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
65.
Wise, A. E., Darling-Hammond, L., & Berry, B. (1987). Effective teacher selection: From recruitment to retention (No. R-3462-NIE/CSTP). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
66.
Wolfe, E. W., Ray, L. M., & Harris, D. C. (2004). A Rasch analysis of three measures of teacher perception generated from the School and Staffing Survey. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 842-860.
67.
Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis: Rasch measurement. Chicago: MESA Press.
68.
Young, I. P., & Chounet, F. P. (2003). The effects of chronological age and information media on teacher screening decisions for elementary school principals. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 17(2), 157-172.
69.
Young, I. P., & Pounder, D. G. (1985). Salient factors affecting decision making in simulated teacherselectioninterviews. Journalof Educational Equityand Leadership, 5(3), 216-233.
70.
Young, I. P., & Voss, G. C. (1986). Administrators'perceptions of teacher candidates: Effects of chronological age, amount of information, and type of teaching position. Journal of Educational Equity and Leadership, 6(1), 27-44.
