Posted on 06/01/2018 9:59:37 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
An honest teacher-pay debate requires careful attention to the facts.
This spring’s teacher walkouts have spurred renewed attention to the question of teacher pay. The topic is a serious one, warranting the extensive reportage it’s received. At times, however, the media’s progressive sympathies, the allure of hard-luck tales, and concerted PR by teachers’ unions have yielded some questionable coverage. A recent case has been the spate of stories suggesting that teachers routinely reach into their own pockets to spend extraordinary sums on classroom materials.
“There is no other job I know of where the workers subsidize what should be a cost borne by an employer as a necessary ingredient of the job,” American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten has thundered. Numerous recent stories have echoed her sentiment, repeatedly stating that the average teacher spends nearly $500 a year, unreimbursed, on school supplies. “The average teacher spends $479 a year on classroom supplies, national data show,” read a typical headline in Education Week. The Washington Post reported the same finding, in a story headlined “Teachers shelling out nearly $500 a year on school supplies, report finds.” A Time story explained, “Nearly all public school teachers report digging into their pockets to pay for school supplies, spending nearly $480 a year.”
Such claims make for attention-grabbing headlines. But, as with some of the other assertions made in the teacher-pay debate, they can be misleading. It’s less that the coverage is “wrong” than that it’s credulous and sometimes deceptive. So, let’s take a moment to clear things up.
The data in question are drawn from the 2015–16 National Teacher and Principal Survey, a nationally representative study of teachers and principals in public schools, conducted by the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Using the survey results, NCES calculated average teacher spending for the 94 percent of teachers who said that they spent money out of pocket — excluding the 6 percent of teachers who did not report such spending, though the coverage frequently skips past that qualifier. (Including those other teachers lowers the average by about $30 a head.)
In reporting the “average” figure, news outlets have made the odd choice to focus on mean spending rather than the more typical median figure. There’s a reason most such data are reported in terms of medians (e.g., “median household income”). The median, after all, is the figure midway between the top and bottom of a distribution, meaning it represents the middle of the pack. A mean, on the other hand, can be dramatically moved by a few outliers. Including Warren Buffet or Bill Gates in a sample of average household income would make the typical household look much wealthier than it really is; similarly, a small number of teachers claiming big outlays can move the mean a lot. Indeed, NCES says that just one in five teachers reported spending more than $500, and the median teacher reported spending $297 — or about 60 percent of the widely quoted $479 figure.
Even these qualifications elide the real concern, however, which is the trouble with placing too much weight on a self-reported figure like this one. Journalists have generally ignored the problem inherent in asking respondents about how much they claim to do a good or noble thing. Self-reporting in such cases is highly susceptible to what social scientists term “social-desirability bias”: the tendency of respondents to say things that cast them (consciously or subconsciously) in a more favorable light. Studies show, for instance, that respondents substantially overestimate the number of days per week that they exercise, claim to watch the news three times as much as they actually do, and dramatically over-report their weekly worship-service attendance.
Now, let’s be clear. We are not suggesting that teachers are lying about their spending. But we are suggesting that, when teachers filled out the survey, precious few probably took the time to comb through twelve months’ worth of receipts and credit-card statements. Most of them probably guesstimated, and it’s safe to assume that their guesstimates tended to be on the high side.
We have no desire to diminish the real sacrifices many educators make, much less to deny that some teachers do indeed dig deep into their own pockets on behalf of their students. Spending even $100 or $200 per year out of pocket, especially for a teacher making $45,000 per year, is a big deal, and we don’t mean to suggest otherwise. But serious conversations about teacher pay should be informed by accurate data and careful analysis. Public deliberations about how much teachers should be paid, and whether raises ought to be funded by new taxes or cuts to other programs, are best served by reporting that meets that standard.
— Frederick M. Hess is the director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. R.J Martin is a research assistant at AEI.
Yes the tax law allows for a small deduction. And you need receipts.
As for the general use of personal funds, I used computer software ( microsoft, and test generation tools as well as software for special projects) I also purchased a projector for my use but the following year the school supplied all teachers with class projectors. Too late, I had already filed for the deduction. I also bought a high speed printer which I used for handouts for a while but eventually the school caught up to this and bought a professional machine.
Once in a while I brought in treats, one time pizza for the class. I know, this was for a contest but it set me back some and I did not want the reputation of doing this all the time.
In general I would bet that the generous staff would likely spend the subject $500 each year. At one school, they had staff that worked with the local community to get cast off stuff which was provided each year to the teachers. That was a very good way to resolve the concept of not enough classroom supplies.
On the other hand, when teaching Chemistry, I only had to call the district warehouse and have any chemicals I needed sent over. So it varies from district to district.
I thought about that but I also wanted to coach.
What good teachers should do is find a way to kick out the union and contract directly for their pay. This would reward the more deserving teachers and put teachers on a par with other workers.
I thought about that but I also wanted to coach.
What good teachers should do is find a way to kick out the union and contract directly for their pay. This would reward the more deserving teachers and put teachers on a par with other workers.
Isn’t that pretty much what I wrote?
I respect what you’re saying in principle, however, I would worry that merit for teachers would be defined as leftist activism as it is with college applicants.
no employer has ever paid for my stethoscope, my bandage scissors,my uniforms, etc...all necessary...
Yes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
.
it true they start out low...but their pay rises quickly and they never can be fired once their "in" the club...
The NEA says Texas spent $10,456 per student for the 2017-18 school year.
See here:
https://www.texastribune.org/2018/05/15/texas-student-teacher-spending-average/
I wonder if the state has broken down WHERE this amount (per student) goes to.... I can’t believe that nothing there goes to students at all. How can a student not have paper or pencil with this money spent per student?
The ones I feel sorry for are Substitute Teachers. They make nowhere near what teachers do, yet some are very qualified and capable. They often go into classrooms where everything is locked up. They have to come prepared with supplies they purchased themselves (out of their relatively small paychecks) to be available, just in case.
A lot of good teachers work the same hours in that short year as people who work the whole year.
RE: In our district at least, the schools no longer cover optional student expenses. So when a student doesn’t have the money for a field trip, we teachers pitch in. When a student doesn’t have the money for a team jacket, we teachers pitch in.
May we know what State you are referring to?
Here, according to the Washington Post ( 2015 figures ) are the Bottom spenders among the largest 100 school districts (per student):
1. Jordan, Utah ($5,708)
2. Davis County, Utah ($6,130)
3. Cypress-Fairbanks, Texas ($6,798)
4. Capistrano Unified, California ($6,811)
5. Conroe, Texas ($6,860)
Surely you were not in one of those districts....
Doesn’t happen if you work at a shop. You get a portion not one hundred percent
The dirty little secret about Private Schools is in most cases they pay their teachers about 15% less than they would make at a public school. They know they give a better work environment so they take some advantage of that fact.
School teachers have their history of labor-to-politics incest to blame for their usage as a pendulum weight in left/right political budget troubles. They want more money handed to them (and get it) when the left is in charge and then are hurt that they get targeted for freezes, layoffs and cuts when the right swings back in on the pendulum.
It unfortunately makes those that were not aligned with the left to begin with to go that direction as the climate makes them feel like the punching bag of the right when in truth they have only their own profession’s history to blame.
Teachers in my family are absolutely top tier practitioners as measured by their district, the parents and students. They spend a lot of extra money and time every year and the job requirements and twists are very poor for that job.
Oh, please.
There should be refundable tax credits per student per year to open the door for all parents to send their daughters and sons to private schools.
The private schools would compete for the best teachers with an array of incentives.
That would revolutionize education.
“There should be refundable tax credits per student per year to open the door for all parents to send their daughters and sons to private schools.
You may find this hard to believe but many very wealthy people CHOOSE to send their kids to public schools-—I have known some. They want to expose their kids to a varied mix of kids——and the high schools in the towns where they live are often excellent.
.
.
Sounds like a NEA scam to get an automatic allowance which will be another avenue for massive abuse of the tax-payers.
How much money does a supply of bananas/cucumbers and condoms cost for a class of children ?
$50K isn’t too bad for someone right out of college. In my local county, teachers start in the $50s, and eventually, for a classroom teacher top out at a little over $100K.
That’s not underpaid, especially with the benefits provided in my county, and, especially since, if you don’t screw it up, the job’s a sinecure, and the raises are guaranteed. You won’t get rich, but you’re far from poor.
My son graduated in 2016, and his first full-time job paid about $35K, no benefits. He’s in a field where a lot of college-degreed people start out as unpaid interns, so $35K didn’t seem too awful.
I also know some that do and I don’t get it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.