One simple way to save money in K-12 and community colleges

Two words to keep in mind: graduate degrees.

Look at yourself at the mirror and ask this question: "Does one really need a master's degree to teach at the elementary school level?

And then, follow it up with this: "Do instructors at community colleges need doctorates to teach the classes?"

There is a good possibility that your instinct says that a master's degree is not needed for elementary school teachers, and that community college faculty don't need to have the "PhD" tag either.

It is also highly probable that you think it might be a good idea if teachers have those respective advanced degrees.

Now, ask yourself, this: will student learning be increased just because it is an elementary school teacher with a master's degree, or a community college instructor with a PhD?

Perhaps you are beginning to hedge your bets.  It is more likely that you are thinking, "really? A master's degree at a second grade class?"  Or, "hmmm, a PhD to teach basic writing composition?"

If you are hedging, you are not alone.

There is nothing in the literature that shows that student learning is enhanced merely because the teachers have those higher credentials.  In fact, the higher credentials by themselves do not make good teachers.  The advanced degrees are neither necessary, nor sufficient, conditions for improved student learning.  These are simply distractions!

Perhaps at this stage, you are thinking, "well, even if they are not great teachers, isn't it better to have more educated teachers than otherwise?"

Yes, that is absolutely logical indeed.

The problem comes up because teachers, their unions, and the schools have set up a system in which teachers get a salary bump if they have advanced degrees.

Thus, two teachers could be equally lousy or equally awesome, and one could earn more higher than the other only because of the advanced degree.  Even worse: a lousy teacher with advanced degrees could earn more than a good teacher who doesn't have them!

Warming up?  Wait, there is more.

Given that we are talking about taxpayer-funded public schools and community colleges, think about the unnecessary expenditures only because of this rigged system.  Any guesses on how much these cost?  Here is from my own post from nearly two years ago:

A 2007 study estimated that 2.1 percent of all current expenditures can be attributed to teacher compensation related to master’s degrees. Seen another way, the master’s bump costs the average school district $174 per pupil.
... A Nebraska lawmaker, for example, should probably be aware that, on a yearly basis, roughly $81 million dollars—$279 per pupil—are tied up in master’s degrees and thus unavailable for other purposes. During this time of fiscal stringency, it should raise eyebrows when a state automatically allocates over 3 percent of the average per pupil expenditure in a manner that is not even suspected of promoting higher levels of student achievement.

These days, when we are ready to organize bake-sales to fund science labs, we are talking about significant expenses all because of the salary bump for master's degrees.  Take Oregon, for instance: the extra cost as a result of this master's bump is $109,520,560. And this was from a 2007 study, using prior years data.  Update that for the years that have gone by.

Now, think about higher education as an industry.  If you are a higher education professional, you realize that there is an economic incentive for second grade teachers also to get master's degrees.  You then expand into offering those programs:

90 percent of teachers’ master’s degrees are in education programs—a notoriously unfocused and process-dominated course of study. Because of the financial rewards associated with getting this degree, the education master’s experienced the highest growth rate of all master’s degrees between 1997 and 2007.

If you are a concerned taxpayer, by now you are probably getting ticked off.  But, at the same time, you are wondering, "could this be some propaganda?  From disgruntled middle-aged faculty, or worse, from Faux Noose?"

Calm down. Here is what President Obama's education secretary, Arne Duncan, said:

state and local governments should rethink their policies of giving pay raises to teachers who have master’s degrees because evidence suggests that the degree alone does not improve student achievement.

 You are really upset by now.  I hate to add fuel to the fire; but, I have to.

Taxpayers subsidize the public universities that offer those graduate degree programs.  That is right: we pay for the generation of most of those advanced degrees.  These graduates then earn more because of the very degrees, when those degrees are not even required!

Pulling your hair out?  Wait.

The dollar figures I provided were only for the K-12 system, and not for the community colleges.  Think about the several years to get a PhD--the private and public investment it takes--and these PhD grads getting salary bumps at the community colleges, which then turn around and ask for more taxpayer money.

Have a nice day!