(C) Center for Economic & Policy Research This story was originally published by Center for Economic & Policy Research and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . California Teacher Pay: Decades of Falling Behind [1] [] Date: 2025-01 Results The first set of results is based on the total sample of teachers and other college graduates in California who met our sample criteria. Figure 1 reports the simple average weekly wage trends for teachers and other college graduates (adjusted only for inflation). There are several notable features to emphasize. In the first three periods, the wages of teachers and other college graduates trended closer together; from the early 1980s to the early 1990s, teachers in California on average earned 11.9% less than other college graduates in the state. Over time the two wage trends diverged; by 2022 teachers earned 35.2% less than their nonteacher peers. In other words, over four and a half decades the inflation-adjusted average weekly wage of teachers increased by 26.3%, while those of their nonteaching counterparts increased by 70.0%. Figure 1 As mentioned, it is best to go beyond comparisons of simple averages to employ standard regression techniques that account for differences in the samples of teachers and other college graduates that typically affect pay—such as age, educational attainment, and race/ethnicity. Figure 2 reports the output from the regression-adjusted analysis, or what I refer to as the relative difference in weekly wages between teachers and other college graduates.12 Figure 2 In the early years, the relative difference was somewhat stable and small, but over time an ever-increasing teacher penalty emerged. In the first four periods, the teacher gap averaged -6.2% – but a steady erosion in relative teacher pay followed and the gap grew to -23.8% in 2022. In sum, teachers in California earned 76.2 cents for every dollar earned by similar nonteaching professionals in 2023 – much less than the 95.2 cents on the dollar they made in 1991. The output in the first two figures were generated from the full sample. However, my previous research on teachers revealed that the trends in weekly wages as well as regression-adjusted relative pay vary considerably by gender. Providing separate analyses by gender may also inform the historical context of teacher trends along with present day dynamics. The weekly wage trends for female teachers compared to other female college graduates is shown in Figure 3—the depiction is distinctive from Figure 1. The female wage trends crisscross around 1998, indicating that the average weekly wages of female teachers were about the same as those earned by other female college graduates. Before the two wage trends reached parity in 1998, female teachers on average earned more than their nonteacher female counterparts. However, after the brief period of parity, the average wages of other female college graduates increasingly outpaced that earned by female teachers in California. Figure 3 In sum, female college graduates outside of the teaching profession earned 12.4% less than female teachers in 1981, but by 2022 the nonteacher graduates earned 32.9% more.13 Notably, gains in female teacher wages have stagnated since the early 2000s, up just 0.6% from 2003 to 2022 compared to an increase of 26.6% for other female college graduates. The strong upward trendline for nonteacher females indicates that wages, on average, exceeded the rate of inflation—in other words, buying power has increased over time, but generally not the case for female teachers in California since 2003. Given the historical trends in the weekly wages of the female teachers compared to their nonteacher peers, the corresponding regression-adjusted estimates presented in Figure 4 may not be all that surprising. California’s female teachers enjoyed an 8.3% premium in 1981. The relative gap reached parity in 1998 and a small -1.3% differential followed in 2003—but since then relative female teacher pay fell increasingly behind that of their female peers. In 2022, the female teacher penalty grew to 18.7%. in California. Figure 4 The relative trend shown in Figure 4 is similar to what I found historically for female teachers, on average, in the US. I reported in Allegretto (2024) that the regression-adjusted difference for female teachers in the US was at a premium or near parity prior until the latter 1990s, after which a steady worsening penalty ensued and grew to 21.4% in 2023. There is an important and unique story behind the dwindling relative wages of female teachers in the US and in California. Historically, the teaching profession relied on a somewhat captive labor pool of women who had few other employment and educational opportunities. This is thankfully no longer the case. Over time, expanding opportunities enabled women to become better educated and earn more as they entered occupations and professions from which they were once barred — a major factor in the story reflected in this research. Today, a much smaller share of educated women chooses the teaching profession over expanding career opportunities with better pay. Simply maintaining the quality of the current labor market pool for teachers requires significant increases in teacher pay to compete with the average pay of other female professionals. Otherwise, the quality of education will be compromised. Today, women continue to dominate the teaching profession. In California, using the same five-year increments of pooled data used in all analyses, the share of male teachers fell from 38.3% in 1981 to 29.6% in 2022.14 The corresponding average weekly wage trends and the regression-adjusted relative wage gaps of male teachers compared to their nonteacher male peers tells a story that differs from female teachers—and may well have contributed to the decline in male teachers. Average weekly wage trends for male teachers compared to their nonteacher male counterparts are shown in Figure 5. Throughout the timeframe male teachers earned, on average, significantly less than their male nonteacher counterparts in California. In 1981, male teachers earned 18.5% less than their peers in California. The disparity widened considerably starting in the early-2000s, and by 2022 teachers earned 38.9% less.15 Figure 5 In sum, over the entire timeframe, the average weekly wages of male teachers increased 29.5%, while those of their male nonteaching peers grew by 72.6%. Similar to the wage stagnation that female teachers experienced, there was little improvement in the inflation-adjusted wages of male teachers from 2003 through 2022 – up just 3.2% compared to a 27.9% increase experienced by male nonteacher college graduates. Unlike the early period results that showed a wage premium for female teachers, the corresponding estimated relative pay of male teachers has always lagged considerably behind that of their male counterparts in California. Figure 6 reports the regression-adjusted relative weekly wage gaps for male teachers. The relative male teacher wage gap in California was -20.6% in 1981, and showed some improvement as it lessened to -16.5% in 1998, but the trend continued to worsen and grew to -34.5% in 2022. Figure 6 The very large relative pay penalty experienced by male teachers is unfortunate given the recent statistics and reporting of boys struggling in school. Performing poorly in school is associated with problems encountered later in life – including addiction, mental and physical health issues, and involvement with the criminal justice system.16 One solution put forth, among many, is to recruit more male teachers into the profession so that boys, as well as girls, are represented. There are many possible theories as to why a more equal representation of gender (as well as race and ethnicity) of teachers and students matters, including differences in communication styles, expectations and perceptions. Thomas Dee found that a teacher’s gender has large effects on student test performance, teacher perceptions of students, and students’ engagement with academic material.17 Unfortunately, it is hard to imagine a successful campaign to recruit male college students into the teaching profession given the extreme and persistently worsening pay penalties experienced by male teachers in California. Moreover, underrepresentation is more acute when broken out by race and ethnicity. The majority (64.4%) of teachers in California are white (not Hispanic), while just 20.3% of students are in this category. Hispanic/Latino students at 56.1% make up the single largest group, but only 21.0% of teachers represent this group.18 While more studies are needed to assess the full implications of gender and race/ethnicity disparities between teachers and students, the recruitment of a wider diversity of teachers into the profession would be wise on many levels.19 [END] --- [1] Url: https://cepr.net/publications/california-teacher-pay-decades-of-falling-behind/ Published and (C) by Center for Economic & Policy Research Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons 4.0 Int'l.. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/cepr/