It became commonplace in he media to say over and over that the average salary for Chicago teachers is $71,000-$76,000.
I heard this and didn’t question it. I didn’t think it was inappropriate or extravagant as compensation for a professional.
But it seems the number is hugely inflated.
According to this post, the actual average salary for teachers in the Chicago metropolitan area is $56,720.
Maybe this will make the teachers’ cause somewhat more tolerable to the pundits in the media who can barely get by on four times that much.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Aren’t the pundits in the media supposed to be college graduates in journalism? How is it that they can’t check this information out of their own volition? Maybe they don’t have their own volition as the money (of their salaries) talks in a way that we teachers can’t understand. Whores is too denigrating to the true professionals in that profession to describe the pundits.
LikeLike
While I don’t dispute that Chicago salaries average below the touted $71,000+, you have to be careful not to conflate “Chicago metropolitan area” with CTU. It depends a lot on what you consider the metropolitan area. If you only include, say, Cook County, you have a lot of poorer suburbs like Cicero and Blue Island that would pull down average salaries. But if you include the entire 5 county area, you have very wealthy suburbs like Lake Forest where, if you believe what you hear in the media, teachers are allegedly making $100,000+. I would like to see a break down of CTU salaries vs. poorer and richer suburbs.
LikeLike
There are other conflating issues. Some members of CTU, I hear, are administrators, some are college professors.
Personally, I don’t think teachers are paid enough even if their average pay is $74,000.
They are professionals.
Instead of taking about teachers’ paid “too much,” why aren’t we talking about CEO compensation?
Diane
LikeLike
Oh, I agree completely. I just think it’s interesting that people are having conniptions about CTU teachers allegedly being “the highest paid in the nation” at $71,000, while teachers in places where they send their own kids make tens of thousands more. If anything, it should be the reverse – anyone willing to take on the challenges of teaching children stuck in high poverty areas deserves at least $100,000.
LikeLike
I agree. CEO salaries are outrageous considering hte time spent on boards and the compensation packages regardless of failure./success. The New York Times editorial. it has a spot on the front page online version, indicates that teachers are in agreement with evaluations based on test scores and again repeats this high compensation amount of 74k as a salary average for Chicago. What has happened to our press that it can be either so biased or so poorly researched. CNN and New York Times and the BBC used to be my go to for real news. Not any more. Thank you for shouting out the need to think of teacher compensation like any other profession. No one screams that CPA compensation is out of line. How do they think they can attract anyone but tfa teaching as two year mission types to go into this profession?
Teachers are professionals and should get paid accordingly.
LikeLike
“indicates that teachers are in agreement with evaluations based on test scores”
If that is the case then the strike seems to be rather futile. Either that or someone has thrown in the towel (probably in exchange for some $$).
LikeLike
To the poster @Duane, the editorial was more a puff piece indicating the generally teachers ( not sure who these said teachers are) are in favor of evaluation and alluded to the testing being a part of that. It was a poorly written piece and seemed more to bolster the case against the Chi teachers- who are the most highly compensated teachers in the country -how dare they vote against evaluations when everyone else who is a teacher wants one – type editorial. It was sickening to read between the not so subtle lines.
Sigh, NYTImes has been bought out to it would seem.
LikeLike
CC,
Thanks for the clarification.
LikeLike
I am sorry. I am a teacher in Southern California. I think 74K is a very good salary for working 6 months a year. We are not talking about CEO compensation because they make money based on consumers who choose their products voluntarily. They make a lot and they can lose alot. They often work far more than 6 months a year. We teachers educate but we are paid purely by tax dollars and unless you have the money to send your children to a private school, we have a captive audience who have no choice in product choice.
LikeLike
Where do teachers work six months a year?
LikeLike
Do all professionals in your opinion need to be paid inflated wages? The guy who works at a gas station is a professional. The mindset of this country that teachers are Gods amongst men and everyone else are mere mortals is angering. They are employees. My wife grew up in the Chicago system, and she will tell you that the Chicago teachers didn’t do anything to even attempt to teach. So how is that deserving of a higher paygrade? She didn’t even know her time tables until she was in 7th grade. Not because of being a poor math student, but because no teacher had ever even attempted to teach it.
I am not advocating to pay teachers less, and indeed, some teachers should be paid more, but these sweeping statements about all teachers don’t get paid enough, get real. And in what world is 56,000 a year not good enough to live off of? That’s a good job, and that’s on the low end because teachers get raises based on years of service, not merit, so by the time they retire, they are usually making very much considerably more.
LikeLike
I am Engineer with several decades experience and I have hard time to find the Job with benefits not even close like teachers,Medical Insurance care , to have 80% of their salary pension, 3 month off per year .That’s absurd from tax payers money that don’t have even basic fringe benefits.Get down from a clouds and face the reality of the other professional’s life .Teachers always live on their own shell.You don’t expect to pay your benefits by people that don’t have any benefits.You living in Socialistic system?
LikeLike
So we will all watch the news tomorrow, CNBC, NBC, Fox and CNN, because I am sure they will correct their inaccurate reports. They would surely want to get the facts straight, right?
LikeLike
NYTimes editorial has the 74 k amount front and center. Grrrh
LikeLike
Diane, did you see that CPS salaries chart that was circulating last week? It listed every union member (CTU, SEIU etc) position and salary. “Regular teacher” pay was consistently in the 70s. The post you link to is based on questionable assumption “Chicago metro area = City of Chicago.” Sorry, but it doesn’t hold up.
Anyway, the point should not be that teacher salaries in Chicago are too high — comparable professionals in health care, public safety and (gasp) the private sector are also well compensated in Chicago relative to their counterparts in other cities — but that critics who argue they aren’t earning their pay are in no position methodologically to make such assertions. CTU members are highly trained and experienced teachers and many if not most parents, based on the response to the strike, believe they are worth every penny.
LikeLike
I’m ok with teachers making professional salaries.
The average teacher salary in US is about $51,000, way too low.
The strike was not about salary, but the conditions of teaching and learning.
Critics could only see salary, nothing else.
LikeLike
In addition to the information in my post that you linked to are the facts that the average teacher in CPS has 13 years experience and 63% have a Master’s Degree. They are highly experienced and highly educated compared to both the general working population and to public school teachers in general. Comparing that to the average employee in Chicago is silly.
LikeLike
“The strike was not about salary, but the conditions of teaching and learning.”
This will be the opening paragraph of the CPS’s memorandum in support of their motion to enjoin the strike.
LikeLike
Considering this strike is now putting the whole education reform in a national spotlight, they are worth even more than what their salary states. Right to work states and states where it is illegal for teachers to strike have now got a voice and a movement to point to to say that their concerns are not trivial= that these concerns were enough for these teachers to strike over with an unbelievable number of people signing on in a greement. The consensus alone from the chicago teachers should give anyone pause to consider the merit of their arguments. They are galvanizing a movement to take back education away from the corporate reformers and from the out and out but to chicken sh.. to state outloud racists who only want some children to get an education.
LikeLike
Sometimes our salary is calculated to reflect the amount the district pays for health care and insurance. I’m not sure if that’s the cause of the disparity, but I’ve seen teachers ambushed on the news with “Here’s your salary!” and it’s much higher than the teacher’s pay.
LikeLike
I, too, now await the great correction on the media.
LikeLike
Don’t hold your breath, Querculus, et. al.!
LikeLike
Thom Hartmann was interviewing a Chicago teacher union representative and she said that the $74K claimed avergae was exaggerated and that the teachers in the suburbs were making more than Chicago teachers. Unfortunately, because of time constraints, she didn’t have a chance to go into more details about the salaries.
LikeLike
The $76,000 average salary refers to Chicago Teachers Union teachers. The CTU has said that the correct figure is $71,000. Not sure why you’re pointing to BLS figures about “Chicago metropolitan region” teachers who aren’t CTU members, who aren’t striking, and who aren’t involved in the contract negotiations in Chicago.
LikeLike
The BLS lists about 100 different occupations under teaching, including a number of post secondary positions and others, like head start, that I do not believe are teachers in the Chicago public school system. Exactly which of these was included in thenposter’s calculations?
LikeLike
I’m all for the CTU strike, but it should be pointed out that the information cited in this article doesn’t represent the average salary for Chicago Teachers Union members. Teacher salaries in the Chicago metropolitan area vary widely from district to district. It used to be that high school districts (9-12) paid better than elementary districts (K-8), which tended to pay worse than unit districts (K-12). I’m not sure if this has changed.
Districts that contain affluent bedroom communities and districts with ample industrial or commercial tax bases (or some combination) can afford to pay higher salaries than districts made up of impoverished suburbs. Property tax rates vary throughout the area, and school districts can ask for a tax increase via referendum.
Statistics that include higher education only confuse the issue, as top-earning public school teachers are paid better than most college teachers, (depending on the type of institution and the teaching discipline). This is further complicated by differences in class load and student load, and whether research is part of the teaching assignment. Community college part-timers are certainly among the worst-paid teachers in the area, but their pay rates probably wouldn’t be included in the full-time data.
Another fact I’m wondering about… Do the quoted salaries include the teacher’s mandated annual contribution to the pension fund, or is the teacher’s contribution covered by the District? Here’s an answer from an Ezra Klein article I just discovered: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/11/how-much-do-chicago-teachers-make/
While Klein’s assertion that “high school teachers will have to work another 14 minutes every day” under an agreement reached in July is laughable (if you’ve ever taught school, especially in recent years), he does answer the pension question and more.
Although Klein makes some good points, a real apples-to-apples comparison is hard to pin down. One thing he neglects to mention is that the typical teacher’s per-hour teaching wage can’t be determined, at least not by dividing the number of contact hours by the median salary. Any teacher who takes his job seriously puts in many hours that aren’t in the contract. The more students, the more hours. An English teacher’s day (and weekend) will be partly determined by how many students show up in his classes. As the student load increases, so does the paper load, often to the point of guaranteed burnout, resulting in less and less pay per hour spent at the job, poorer and poorer health for the teacher, and an eventual cutback in assigned writing.
One last point that rarely shows up in these discussions. How much of the salary is used to purchase supplies and professional development? I taught in a fairly affluent district, but most years I spent several hundred dollars–sometimes a lot more–on equipment, office supplies, conference fees, publications, and professional travel.
LikeLike
Did you want your headline to post the $56,720 number and not the $74,000?
Or to say is NOT $74,000?
Conservative Charles Krautheimer repeated the $74,000 and said the city average is $47,000. (Don’t know the source for the latter, but poverty is very high in Chicago, affecting students outcomes, of course.
I hope Karen is holding up. She has been very courageous.
________________________________
LikeLike
After working for 10 years in Miami with a Master’s Degree my salary is $42,000. I checked the pay scale for Chicago and I would be making $72,000. I do not begrudge the Chicago teachers their fair salaries. It just shows you what you get when you work in a “right to work state” like Florida where teacher strikes are banned. You get the “right to work for an abysmally low wage.”
LikeLike
After ten years of teaching, with a Masters Degree, and a salary of only $42K in a major city! That is just shocking, stunning and appalling. That’s what the so-called reformers really want for teachers: lower wages, no benefits and lots of churn. It’s called the Walmartization of the Amerian workforce. This is why we need strong unions.
LikeLike
“we need strong unions.”
What you need is either a significantly better economy or a significantly revised tax code that includes higher rates across the brackets and a more progressive bracket structure. In other words, cities need a lot more money. Without that, strong unions just accelerate the Walmartization of teaching. Higher salaries for existing public teachers (and protecting current benefits for public teachers) increase the pressure to close public schools and replace them with charters staffed by non-union workers and to find ways to replace older, more expensive teachers with rookies. You can disagree with Rahm, but you can’t disagree with math.
LikeLike
Several news sources have questioned the $74,000 figure and have arrived at a figure closer to $70,000. While I agree this shouldn’t even be a point of contention as professional teachers should be making AT LEAST this much, it does not help your cause to blast the “pundits” and media when you should be concentrating on discussing the real issues of contention- evaluations, pay structure, working conditions.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/11/how-much-do-chicago-teachers-make/
LikeLike
Put what Chicago teachers make in perspective. $71,000 average salary for working approximately 1,400 hours a year or $50/hour. The average person works 2,080 hours a year. The union has done very well for the Chicago teachers – high pay, automatic pay raises and job security whether you perform or not. But what do the children get – better education? No, the teachers have no incentive to be a better teacher. Better school environment, more school supplies, better textbooks – No, that’s not in the union’s pervue – they don’t represent the children, they don’t collect union dues from the children, they make no money from the children, but the higher pay the teachers get, the more money the union gets.
LikeLike
While $56, 720 is far from wealthy, it’s not exactly poor either; it’s hardly warrants a strike. Teaching has historically been on the lower end of the pay scale and the teachers knew that when they applied for the job. If they were wanting to become wealthy, they chose the wrong profession. They are obviously teaching for the wrong reason. This is the reason why many areas of the country are voting to ban unions for government employees. It takes a lot of nerve take go into a job that is supported by taxpayer dollars, knowing full well what the wages are, yet bitch about it, go on strike, and demand more. This is not a case where you’re sticking it a corporation that sits on record profits. You’re sticking it every home owner and taxpayer who lives in your community.
LikeLike
You are ignorant. We are not trying to become rich financially. We have the right to have families and feed them. We would like homes..shall we live in tents? We also pay taxes. We have children who also attend college. We are not indentured servants. We are not society’s whipping boy. Just because you are unhappy and miserable does not mean we are ruining your life. Make a difference…volunteer to read with a child, coach a sport, be a big brother. Do something besides harp about the greedy lazy teachers…unless of course, that makes you feel better about your miserable life.
LikeLike
The starting salary is $59,000 for a 1st year teacher. PLEASE check it out!
LikeLike
100% correct.Let’s them to face the reality of the real life of other Graduates even with higher education.One thing to clarify that with my education I could handle a teaching Job but teacher could not do my Engineering Job!!!
LikeLike
The figure is $71,236 according to the Illinois Interactive Report Card, Northern Illinois University, with support from the Illinois State Board of Education.
http://iirc.niu.edu/District.aspx?source=District_Profile&districtID=15016299025&level=D
LikeLike
That sounds what one would expect for an experienced professional
Diane Ravitch
LikeLike
I think we are now all in agreement that the $71,000 to $74,000 number is not “hugely inflated” as the original post stated. It is about correct for CPS teachers.
LikeLike
If any of you choose to go to the actual salary scale for CPS you will find for the 2011-2012 school year that the STARTING salary for a teacher with a BA and NO years of experience is $59,000 and change. There is NO way the AVERAGE salary can POSSIBLY be in the $56,000 range. CHECK THE FACTS PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There is a link to this on the Chicago Magazine staff blog. LOOK at it. PLEASE.
LikeLike
Milwaukee Teacher, and All:
I visted th Chicago mag site an got the link. http://cpspayrollservices.com/pdf/Teachers_Salary_Schedules_2011-12.pdf
In the article it quotes:
Lane I (bachelor’s degree), step one (first year) teachers working a 38.6-week position make $50,577 ($47,268 without the pension pickup). Lane I maxes out at step 16, $85,135 ($79,566).
I couldnt find the $59,000 average for a first year teacher with no years and a BA that you used anywhere in the link. It looks like that correct figure based on the link is between 47,000 and 50,000 depending on if you include the pension pickup.
Also if you visit the CPS site you can see average salaries based on each school’s individual budget that gets released. I will say from those figures it looks like average salary cost per school is probably around 63,000 to 67,000 but that looks like it includes Principles and adminstrators as well.
Regardless, of MIL. TEACHER’S intent, the Chicago mag article is a good source to point out the obvious, which they conclude at the article’s end by basically saying that based on their level of education and the massive commitment you have to make in time and energy, a teacher in chicago is getting comped about what they deserve and about what similarly educated people are getting in the private sector for jobs that require
commensurate levels of education.
LikeLike
Hi, Diane! Just found your blog, the lonely voice in the forest. It is good to have you on my side now-a-days! Of course, I’m still a fan!
Alex
LikeLike
The problem is that you must understand that the higher number is adjusting for them not working all year round. Because you can’t say 56,000 per year, because its 56,000 per 9 months of work. 56000*1.33(to adjust their pay to a per 12 months rate)=74480
LikeLike
You are incorrect. Please check the salary report from the Chicago Public Schools website itself: Teacher annual salary: $74,839. That’s a lot of money for 8.5 months of work and a pension for life… http://www.cps.edu/about_cps/at-a-glance/pages/stats_and_facts.aspx
LikeLike
Nick,
I would say that a professional should earn at least that much, and more, especially in an expensive city.
LikeLike
That’s enough pay. They get paid by the public ‘s taxes. They also get money put into their pension seperatly from again the public. Liftetime health insurance again from the public. The pensions government workers get are ridiculous. Government does not generate revenue. Do government workers not have a clue how economics work. Do they not understand they do not generate revenue so they do not help with keeping the economy work. The public does. To ask for more money from the tax payers is greedy, ridiculous and irresponsible. This demanding for more money is unsustainable. In Europe where the education is so much better, educators get paid less. Paying higher and higher salaries does not equal better education. If the educators really cared about the students they would ask for more money for the schools themselves (computers, air conditioning etc…) not for themselves. Maybe if they weren’t so greedy every year, there would be enough money to keep schools open. Look at how thriving businesses are operate. The public keeps giving teachers more and more money and the education keeps getting worse. What this shows me is how ignorant and aloof most government workers are to how the economy works and how they get paid. The majority of the public who pay the salaries, insurance and pensions of government workers do not make nearly the same salary. Many of my friends work harder than teachers and make less money, but yet they are expected to pay more taxes, because teachers want more money. The public struggles more financially. How is this fair or seen morally right. The answer is not to keep asking for more money to make the school system work for the students. There are more government jobs than private jobs. This is unsustainable. Do Americans not see what is going on in the world?
LikeLike