This report explores the historical origins, evolution and modern trends of teacher compensation — including salaries, health benefits and retirement — that created both opportunities and problems that persist today. It provides research-backed recommendations for state leaders to create more strategic, sustainable and comprehensive pay and benefit structures to help attract and retain quality educators. Skip to report ››

Key Takeaways

Teacher compensation is more than salary: Health and retirement benefits significantly impact teachers’ decisions to stay in or leave the profession.

Current pay structures actively discourage new teachers: “Backloaded” systems that delay peak earnings until teachers reach their 50s contribute directly to early career turnover.

Health benefit costs are outpacing teacher salary growth: Costs have risen 45% since 2018 while salaries increased 10%, effectively cutting teacher compensation.

The pension crisis is diverting classroom resources: 75% of pension contributions service debt rather than fund future benefits, forcing districts to spend less on salaries and student support.

State action is needed now: Net salaries, health and retirement benefits are declining as inflation and administrative costs rise. States with targeted reform efforts see better outcomes related to sustaining a quality educator workforce, and through them, increased student learning.

 

A HISTORY OF TEACHER COMPENSATION

Factors That Shaped Teacher Pay Structures

Understanding today’s teacher pay structures requires examining their historical roots and ongoing efforts to justify increasing teacher wages.  

Teacher salaries in the U.S. have historically been low. In the early 19th century, teaching required no specialized training and served as a temporary job for young men. Horace Mann, a key figure in American public education, called male teachers “elephants brooding chickens” and encouraged hiring female teachers, arguing women could do the job better for half the cost — establishing a precedent for undervaluation that persists today. 

By 1860, women dominated the profession. They also fought for better pay — such as in Boston during the 1830s, where they secured raises from $200 to $250 annually. 

Black educators faced greater challenges. In the early 1900s, Black teachers in the South earned far less than their white peers. In 1940, white teachers earned $910 annually compared to $510 for Black teachers, as state aid was redirected to white schools.  

The NAACP began targeting pay disparities in the 1920s, pursuing lawsuits in several states and winning 27 out of 31 cases. These victories led to increased salaries for Black teachers, who by 1950 were earning 85% of their white peers. States responded by creating standardized salary schedules based on training and experience; schedules were often required for districts to receive state aid. 

Not all states embraced teacher salary reforms. In some areas, new salary schedules incorporated distorted measures, such as scores from the National Teacher Examination — a test with no proven link to teaching effectiveness but known for disproportionately lower scores among Black teachers. 

 

The Nation’s First Health Insurance Plans

SECTION HIGHLIGHTS Teachers Pioneered Modern Health Insurance: In 1929, the first modern health insurance plan emerged from a partnership between a Texas hospital and a teachers’ union, creating the foundation for group insurance models such as Blue Cross.  Union Advocacy Expanded Coverage: Teachers’ unions drove health insurance and sick leave benefits expansion from the 1940s through the 1970s, making healthcare a standard in teacher compensation.  Teacher Benefits Shaped National Employment Norms: What began as a teacher benefit influenced nationwide employment norms, establishing healthcare coverage expectations for full-time government and private-sector workers.

Modern health insurance policies originated with teachers. Today’s expectation that government employment includes healthcare coverage began just a century ago. Previously, individuals paid for healthcare out of pocket, and lengthy hospital stays could bankrupt families. Limited employer-provided forms of insurance generally made up only for lost wages, not medical care.  

In 1929, the Texas Baptist Memorial Sanitarium partnered with a local teachers’ union to make healthcare more accessible in times of critical need. For $6 per year, or 50 cents per month, teachers accessed up to 21 days of hospital care with a one-week deductible costing about $35 (or $735 in 2016 dollars). This model expanded statewide and nationally, becoming Blue Cross in 1939.  

In 1937, the Michigan Education Association created a group hospitalization program for all public-school employees statewide. These plans benefited both hospitals and patients by preventing unpaid debt for institutions and ensuring necessary care for individuals without bankruptcy risk.  

National teachers’ unions advocated for insurance in teacher compensation packages throughout the 20th century. In the 1940s, the vice-president of the National Education Association led efforts to enhance teacher health insurance and sick leave policies. In the 1960s, American Federation of Teachers members led numerous strikes for better pay and benefits.  

By the 1970s, health insurance coverage became standard compensation in most large and mid-sized school districts. This benefit became so critical that state governments began organizing and managing their own health insurance programs. 

 

The Beginning of Social Security and Educator Pension Plans

SECTION HIGHLIGHTS Teachers Led Early Pension Adoption: Long before the 1935 Social Security Act, teachers were among the first employer-sponsored pension recipients, with 21 states implementing plans by the early 20th century.  Social Security Initially Excluded Teachers: When enacted, Social Security excluded public-sector employees like teachers, disproportionately impacting female and Black teachers. States could only opt in starting in 1950.  Social Security Access Remains Uneven: Today, 17 states still allow full or partial opt-outs for teachers, leaving 30% to 40% of teachers without Social Security benefits.

Social Security was revolutionary when President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed it into law in 1935. Before then, institutions like poorhouses were among the limited options available for those in financial hardship.  

Formal pension systems arose after the Civil War, when many women and children lost financial support after losing husbands and fathers. By 1900, five U.S. companies offered employer-based pensions for industrial workers, but private sector adoption lagged.  

Teachers became the earliest and most significant beneficiaries of employer-sponsored pension plans. Over 30 years, 21 states implemented retirement plans for public employees, with about 40% of those covered being schoolteachers — then a largely young, female and unmarried workforce with low pay and limited wage prospects. 

When the Social Security Act passed in 1935, about 20 countries had already implemented contributory retirement programs to support their aging populations. 

However, Social Security excluded many groups, including agricultural workers, domestic servants and public-sector employees like teachers, nurses, librarians and social workers. Benefits were directed at private-sector employees. This effectively denied access to the women and Blacks who often held excluded jobs. 

Government employees were initially excluded due to constitutional concerns about requiring states to remit employee wages to the federal government. After legal disputes, 1950 amendments to the Social Security Act allowed states to opt in. While all 50 states signed agreements to include government employees by 2007, only 60% to 70% of U.S. teachers participate today. In 17 states, either the state has opted out entirely or allows districts to choose participation, creating inconsistent benefit access. 

 

 

MODERN TRENDS IN TEACHER COMPENSATION

Teacher Salaries

SECTION HIGHLIGHTS Teacher Pay Lags Behind Peers: U.S. teachers earn significantly less than international educators and similarly educated professionals domestically — up to 22% less, making education majors among the lowest-paid degree holders.  Pay Structures Discourage Early-Career Teachers: Teacher salaries rise slowly over decades, with peak earnings not reached until teachers’ mid-50s, creating large pay gaps between new and veteran teachers and contributing to early-career attrition.  Low Pay Drives Financial Strain: Many teachers rely on second jobs; in some states, even experienced educators qualify for public assistance. Lifetime earnings vary widely based on district location and pay policies.

COMPARISONS TO OTHER PROFESSIONS

Critics point to students’ low achievement scores compared to other nations without acknowledging that American teachers are significantly underpaid compared to international peers.  

Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce found teacher salaries are 22% lower than those in comparable professions. Education majors ranked at the bottom of 14 college majors for annual salary at both the bachelor’s and master’s levels. 

 

AVERAGE TEACHER PAY RATES

In 1990, teacher salaries averaged just under $60,000 and barely increased by 2000. During this period, per-pupil spending rose from $9,731 to $10,837, indicating greater investment in education but not in teacher pay. By 2010, the average salary reached $61,804, while per-pupil spending exceeded $13,000. 

Teacher pay varies dramatically by location. One study found that after 30 years, a teacher might earn $42,000 in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, versus $110,000 in Washington, D.C. In some states, teachers with 10 years’ experience and families of four qualify for public assistance. Many teachers take second jobs — up to 25% in some states.  

Earning a graduate degree can boost pay through traditional salary schedules, but a master’s degree does not necessarily improve teacher effectiveness. 

 

TEACHER PAY ACROSS THE CAREER AND “BACKLOADED” PAY STRUCTURES

Starting salaries poorly predict lifetime earnings. A teacher’s average starting salary was $36,605 in 2013, increasing to $44,530 by 2023. SREB found that average salaries of the highest paid teachers rose from $67,712 to $81,026 over the same period.  

Lifetime earnings vary widely, with some districts offering $1.2 million over 30 years while others double that amount. It may take 27 years for a teacher with a bachelor’s degree to reach $75,000 annually, or 24 years with a master’s degree.  

Teacher pay is largely “backloaded,” with peak earnings reached in their mid-50s after 25 to 30 years of service, unlike other professionals who peak by age 40. Backloaded pay structures rely on percentage-based raises, which benefit senior teachers. In 2015, a 3% raise had a greater effect on a senior teacher earning $65,000 than on a new teacher earning $40,000. This increases pay gaps and offers little incentive for early-career retention. 

Most teachers are paid based on experience and education alone, without regard for student impact, caseload or leadership roles. Although some states and districts have attempted merit-pay systems — to sometimes controversial effects — current reforms focus on differentiated pay for additional responsibilities, arising from local innovation rather than state policy

 

Teacher Health Benefits

SECTION HIGHLIGHTS Teachers Have Broad Health Coverage: Nearly all public school teachers (99%) receive employer-sponsored health insurance — far exceeding private-sector rates, with greater access to prescription, dental and vision benefits.  Rising Costs Undermine Affordability: Despite high coverage rates, healthcare costs increasingly burden teachers; premiums and out-of-pocket expenses have risen faster than salaries, leading many to forgo optional benefits.  Employer Contributions Vary: While single teachers receive more support than their private-sector peers, those with family plans face higher costs and lower district contributions.

Unlike other sectors, teachers enjoy broad access to healthcare. In 2018, 66% of private-sector workers received employer-sponsored health benefits compared to 99% of public-school teachers. Around 90% of teachers receive prescription coverage, 55% receive dental insurance and 34% receive vision insurance according to the NCTQ. These rates exceed private-sector employees’ participation rates of 66% for prescriptions, 42% for dental and 23% for vision

A common belief holds that districts cover most healthcare premiums. Rising costs are changing that perception. Teachers have 92% of their premiums covered on average compared to 80% in the private sector. 

Despite broad coverage, affordability remains problematic. In 2024, the NCTQ found that take-up rates for optional benefits like dental and vision dropped 3 to 7 percentage points over five years, suggesting teachers are forgoing non-essential benefits to trim costs. Teachers’ willingness to pay for insurance varies: older teachers prefer comprehensive plans, while mid-career teachers prioritize dental and vision coverage. Most are willing to pay over 10% of their salary for insurance. 

Since 2018, U.S. living costs rose 17%, but healthcare costs jumped 45%. Districts increased contributions by 14%, but teacher salaries only rose 10%, leading teachers to make difficult financial choices. 

Although teachers receive more employer support for premiums, their out-of-pocket costs are higher. Single teachers received nearly $1,000 more in employer contributions than private-sector peers, but those with family plans paid $257 more and received $600 less from districts. 

The average monthly premium for single teachers rose from $139 in 2018 to $162 in 2023. Family plans increased from $592 to $711 over the same period. 

 

Teacher Retirement

SECTION HIGHLIGHTS Teacher Pensions Are Becoming Less Generous: Though nearly all teachers access defined-benefit pensions, benefit erosion is widespread — especially for newer, short-term and mid-career teachers. Only a fraction earn full pensions, while many forfeit contributions due to long vesting periods.  Rising Pension Debt Undermines the System: Unfunded liabilities have ballooned to over $800 billion, with most pension contributions now servicing debt rather than funding future benefits. This has tripled per-pupil pension costs and diverted funds from salaries and classroom resources.  Plan Design Creates Imbalances: Pensions are “backloaded” and reward longevity, disadvantaging younger teachers and those in high-minority or under-resourced schools. Teachers retiring in 2020 received thousands less annually than peers with identical service in 2000.  State Disparities Persist: Teachers in states with teacher-specific retirement plans and active unions have fared better, though all states have seen benefit declines. Reforms have focused on cost-cutting rather than sustainability or fairness.  Current Reforms Are Inadequate: Some states have introduced hybrid or defined-contribution plans, but few meet standards for transparency or portability. Without structural reform, teacher retirement systems face long-term instability.

One of the key benefits of a teaching career is access to employer-sponsored retirement plans, open to 3.5 million U.S. public school teachers. Defined benefit (pension) plans guarantee lifetime income but often fail to keep pace with inflation. A 2024 Equable report found that the average cost-of-living adjustment in 2024 was only 1.96%, trailing most inflation estimates. 

Currently, 27 states offer teacher-specific pension plans, while 23 states use public employee retirement systems. Tailored teacher-specific plans tend to outperform public employee plans.  

Defined-benefit systems require contributions from both employees and employers, often determined by statute or adjusted annually. Since 2008, 32 states increased mandatory employee contribution rates, and 37 states increased employer contributions. In 2022, schools paid about $10,000 per employee toward retirement. Between 2001 and 2020, payroll costs rose 75%, while pension costs increased over 275%, disproportionately impacting newer teachers who face lower benefits and higher contributions. 

Pension structures encourage teachers to remain in the profession through “backloading” and “pension-spiking,” which heavily weight benefits toward the end of a teacher’s career. Such “careerist” plans favor those who remain in the profession for decades while penalizing younger or mid-career teachers who leave early. As of 2017, only six states allowed unvested teachers to withdraw contributions, resulting in nearly half of teachers forfeiting benefits, while just one in five receive full pension payouts. Late-career teachers are incentivized to retire once they hit benefit ceilings, contributing to career educators retiring earlier than comparable professionals. 

Teachers in high-minority schools earn less in pension wealth than peers in lower-minority schools due to pay disparities based on experience and education — an additional disadvantage for struggling schools. Between 2000 and 2020, average monthly payouts for teachers with 30 years of service dropped 11.2% ($280 monthly) due to reductions in benefit formulas. That equals a $3,300 annual gap between 2000 and 2020 retirees despite identical salaries and service. The decline in lifetime retirement benefits for new teachers is estimated at $100,000. 

Teachers in teacher-specific plans saw 8% benefit declines versus 15.4% for public employee plans. States with more active unions saw smaller losses (9.8% vs. 13.7%).  

 

UNFUNDED LIABILITIES AND TEACHER PENSION SYSTEM DEBT

The decline in benefits ties directly to rising unfunded liabilities — commonly referred to as pension debt, or “negative amortization” of partial and full payment obligations for vested retirees.  

In 2001, teacher pensions were fully funded: By 2022, unfunded liabilities reached $816 billion. As early as 2008, teacher pension plans faced a $731 billion shortfall against $2.7 trillion in promised benefits. 

By 2016, only seven states had teacher pensions funded at 90% or higher. By 2023, the national average dropped to 72% funded. While private-sector retirement costs rose just 1% between 2004 and 2015, public pension costs surged. 

Today, most pension contributions fund debt, not future benefits. In 2021, out of $63 billion contributed, $45 billion serviced existing debt while only $18 billion funded retirement payouts. In 2001, just 17% of contributions serviced debt, growing to 75% — an over 400% increase — in two decades. Teachers are contributing more while receiving less; districts are allocating larger budget shares to pensions. 

Per-pupil pension costs tripled from $547 in 2001 to $1,520 by 2021, diverting funds from salaries, classroom resources and student support. In California, redirecting pension payments to salaries could raise teacher pay by 15%, but Los Angeles Unified is projected to spend 22% of payroll on pensions by 2032. In Texas, rising pension obligations have resulted in cuts to support services.  

This crisis results from sustained underfunding, generous benefit structures and inconsistent fiscal oversight. Some policymakers have overlooked actuarial guidance and underestimated increasing life expectancies and rising retirement claims.  

Reforming pension systems is politically difficult, leading to tiered systems and rising pension debt. Many states have created tiered systems that cut benefits for new teachers while raising contribution rates for all. Such stopgap measures fail to address the systemic imbalance.  

 

RECENT REFORMS

The current system is under immense strain, despite the cutbacks for newer teachers, reduced COLAs and increased vesting periods. No state currently meets all four criteria for a high-quality pension system: flexibility, sustainability, neutrality and transparency.  

Some states now offer defined-contribution or hybrid plan options in response to high costs, system debt and early-career turnover before vesting — typically 5 to 10 years. These 401(k)-style defined-contribution plans offer portability but face market volatility and lack income guarantees. Hybrid plans attempt to balance both models, though their effectiveness varies. 

Without comprehensive reform, the fiscal sustainability of teacher retirement systems remains in jeopardy. 

 

 

RESEARCH-BACKED RECOMMENDATIONS

Goals for Policymakers

Modernizing Teacher Compensation to Address Workforce Shortages: Modern workers require modern compensation policies. SREB encourages states to design well-rounded packages that include strategic pay, health benefits, retirement security, monetary and non-monetary incentives, and improved working conditions.

PRIMARY GOALS FOR POLICYMAKERS

1. Prevent net pay cuts to teachers.
2. Improve teachers’ overall monetary and non-monetary compensation packages.
3. Be strategic with compensation to help rebuild and sustain the educator workforce.

 

Strategically Incentivizing Teacher Pay

When people think about teacher compensation, gross salary usually springs to mind. Teacher compensation is a range of benefits that influence teachers’ decisions to stay or leave the profession. Today’s educator workforce shortages offer states an opportunity to consider flexible, competitive compensation packages that reflect teachers’ real needs. 

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Avoid Over-Reliance on Percentage-Based COLAs 
Consider alternative approaches to cost-of-living adjustments based on salary percentage. Typical COLAs offer the greatest benefit to the highest-paid teachers — those least at risk to leave the profession. Newer teachers with lower salaries see minimal increases from percentage-based COLAs, contributing to dissatisfaction and turnover. 

Implement Differentiated Pay Structures 
Adopt pay structures that reflect teachers’ roles, skills and school impacts while incentivizing career advancement. Differentiated pay provides different minimum salary levels for distinct roles, such as assistants, residents, apprentices, novice teachers, professionally certified teachers and advanced role teachers. Districts offering differentiated pay can range from $61 to $26,000 in payouts per year, a massive discrepancy. 

Target Incentives to High-Need Subjects and Schools 
Use financial incentives to attract and retain certified, effective educators, especially early-career teachers, in hard-to-staff subjects and schools that might otherwise be staffed by substitutes or underqualified teachers. Students in these classrooms experience much lower achievement, although research shows effective teachers staffing these schools improve “a variety of proximal and later-life student outcomes,” according to Wyckoff.  

Some states and districts offer large flat bonuses of $3,000 to $7,000 to teachers in hard-to-staff subjects and schools, available annually for the first five years of a teacher’s career. Such bonuses effectively help novice teachers get past the typical five-year turnover period. Recruitment bonuses work best for newer teachers, less so for experienced teachers nearing retirement. 

 

Expanding Teacher Health Insurance Coverage

Health insurance is vital to teacher compensation. Many educators and public-school employees rely on state or district health insurance for themselves and their families. While costs for public school employee health insurance are typically lower than the private sector, healthcare costs are rising faster than inflation, and teachers are shouldering more of the burden, lowering their overall compensation. 

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Ensure Salary Growth Matches Insurance Cost Increases 
Increase gross salary to offset health insurance increases for teachers. Without regular salary adjustments, rising premiums and copays decrease take-home pay. 

Cross-Sector Collaboration 
Collaborate across the healthcare, education and policy sectors to identify cost drivers and explore shared solutions. In Oklahoma, state legislators have called for hospital administrators, insurance companies, education administrators and other stakeholders to study strategies to lower healthcare costs. 

 

Reforming and Sustaining Teacher Retirement

While pensions have historically helped retain teachers, rising costs and workforce mobility are undermining the system’s value. Pension reform is a complex task that requires long-term planning and implementation without the immediate benefits that create and sustain buy-in. Reform often results in opposition among pension holders, making change challenging. States can strive for a balance between sustainability, flexibility and fairness. 

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Offer Modern, Flexible Retirement Options 

• Offer more flexible, portable retirement options that entice the newest generation entering the workforce, particularly if those options offer the same level of benefits and financial security as traditional plans. These include well-structured defined contribution or hybrid retirement plans. States can then provide accessible, understandable information to help teachers make informed decisions. 
• Adopt shorter vesting periods, such as no more than three years of employment, for eligibility for lump-sum rollovers in the event of employment termination prior to retirement. Interstate retirement plan transferability can support a mobile workforce.  

Strengthen Retirement System Sustainability 

• Ensure all teachers have a safety net by enrolling them in Social Security. Over a dozen states either do not require or do not allow their teachers to participate in Social Security.  Teachers show a stronger preference for enrolling in Social Security than choosing different retirement plan options, one study found. 
• Use surplus state funds to reduce unfunded liabilities or seek dedicated revenue sources, like bonds or special taxes, to pay down debts over time. Such investments can increase retirement plan sustainability and potentially prevent reduced pension benefits and less retirement security for newer teachers. Cross-sector collaborations can help states identify effective funding practices to meet payment obligations rather than passing these obligations to districts.  
• Consider making stipends and bonuses “unpensionable” — not generating additional benefits from the teacher retirement system until such funds are stabilized. As such payments are irregular, they will not sufficiently adjust the balance of a teacher’s benefits. 

 

Comprehensive, Innovative Teacher Compensation Packages

Many young teachers enter the profession willing to accept modest pay in exchange for job security, time off and the ability to make a difference in students’ lives. Once on the job, classroom realities — such as long hours, additional duties and challenging conditions — may drive overwhelmed teachers to seek better pay or working conditions. 

Teacher compensation packages deserve a modern reboot to help states and districts attract and retain top talent. Raising pay is not enough, as more teachers are dissatisfied with their working conditions. Current educator workforce shortages merit more effective policies than across the board salary increases.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Add Flexibility and Innovation 

• At the state level: Offer retirement plan options, Social Security and healthcare plan choices that suit both individual and family needs. Link base pay to licensure tiers and reward teachers in advanced roles with higher salaries to compensate them for their professional growth and increased responsibilities. 
• At the district level: Use tools like targeted recruiting stipends, housing and transportation allowances, highly flexible school calendars, adjusted bell schedules and other incentives that increase teacher satisfaction and retention. 

Expand Non-Traditional Benefits 
Consider offering childcare subsidies, student loan forgiveness, tuition reimbursement, job-sharing or part-time employment options, and additional support staff to improve working conditions and attract new talent. 

 

 

SOURCES

View reference list

Abashidze, N., Clark, R. L., & Craig, L. A. (2023). Quantifying and explaining the decline in public schoolteacher retirement benefits. Industrial Relations, 62(4), 335–358. https://doi.org/10.1111/irel.12329  

Aldeman, C. (2018, October 17). How much does teacher health insurance cost? TeacherPensions.Org. https://www.teacherpensions.org/blog/how-much-does-teacher-health-insurance-cost  

Aldeman, C. (2022, August 29). 4 ways state leaders can lower teacher pension cost. Education Commission of the States. https://www.ecs.org/4-ways-state-leaders-can-lower-teacher-pension-costs/  

Baumgartner, K. (2024). Even more is required: Confronting the teacher pay crisis in the United States. History of Education Quarterly, 64, 365–370. https://doi.org/10.1017/heq.2024.22   

Beezer, B. (1986). Black teachers’ salaries and the federal courts before Brown v. Board of Education: One beginning for equity. The Journal of Negro Education, 55(2), 200–213. https://doi.org/10.2307/2294882  

Boser, U., & Straus, C. (2014). Mid- and late-career teachers struggle with paltry incomes. Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/mid-and-late-career-teachers-struggle-with-paltry-incomes/  

Bui, T., Sidorova, J., & Randazzo, A. (2022). Best practices for pension debt amortization (Gold Standard in Public Retirement System Design Series—No. 5). Pension Integrity Project at Reason Foundation. https://reason.org/wp-content/uploads/best-practices-pension-debt-amortization.pdf  

Carnevale, A. P., & Cheah, B. (2018). Five rules of the college and career game. Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/5rules/Carnevale, A. P., Cheah, B., & Hanson, A. R. (2015). The economic value of college majors. Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/valueofcollegemajors/  

Cascio, E. U., & Lewis, E. G. (2024). Teacher salaries and racial inequality in educational attainment in the midcentury South. Journal of Labor Economics, 42(S1), S95–S131. https://doi.org/10.1086/728470  

Doherty, K. M., Jacobs, S., & Lueken, M. F. (2017). Lifting the pension fog: What teachers and taxpayers need to know about the teacher pension crisis. National Council on Teacher Quality. https://www.nctq.org/dmsView/Lifting_the_Pension_Fog  

Dongwoo, K., Koedel, C., Kong, W., Ni, S., Podgursky, M., & Wu, W. (2021). Pensions and late-career teacher retention. Education Finance and Policy, 16(1), 42–65. https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00293  

Equable. (2019). Where are teachers allowed to join Social Security? https://equable.org/where-can-teachers-join-social-security/  

Equable. (2022, June 29). The best U.S. states for new teacher retirement benefits. https://equable.org/the-best-u-s-states-for-new-teacher-retirement-benefits/  

Equable. (2024, March 21). Teacher pension COLAs in 2023. https://equable.org/teacher-pension-colas/  

Fitzpatrick, M. D. (2017). Pension-spiking, free-riding, and the effects of pension reform on teachers’ earnings. Journal of Public Economics, 148, 57–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2017.02.007   

Fuchsman, D., McGee, J. B., & Zamarro, G. (2023). Teachers’ willingness to pay for retirement benefits: A national stated preferences experiment. Economics of Education Review, 92, Article 102349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2022.102349  

Gerber, N. (2019, April 25). How are school districts dealing with rising health insurance costs? National Council on Teacher Quality. https://www.nctq.org/blog/How-are-school-districts-dealing-with-rising-health-insurance-costs  

Hess, F. M., & Squire, J. P. (2010). “But the pension fund was just ’sitting’ there.” The politics of teacher retirement plans. Education Finance and Policy, 5(4), 587–616. https://doi.org/10.1162/EDFP_a_00016  

Kirk, J. A. (2009). The NAACP campaign for teachers’ salary equalization: African American women educators and the early civil rights struggle. The Journal of African American History, 94(4), 529–553. https://www.proquest.com/openview/20939f97e44003f4210edd9933414588/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=27037  

Marchitello, M., Rotherham, A. J., & Squire, J. (2021). Teacher retirement systems: A ranking of the states. Bellwether. https://bellwether.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Teacher-Retirement-Systems-A-Ranking-of-the-States-Bellwether-Education-Partners-Final-Updated-v11.12.21.pdf  

Michigan Education Special Services Association. (n.d.). About. https://www.messa.org/about/  

Morrill, M. S., & Westall, J. (2019). Social security and retirement timing: Evidence from a national sample of teachers. Journal of Pension Economics & Finance, 18(4), 549–564. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474747218000422  

Mullins, J. (2015, May 26). Courageous teacher broke ground. Muskogee Phoenix. https://www.muskogeephoenix.com/news/courageous-teacher-broke-ground/article_ea9f3543-4cfb-5464-8104-4b18bec079be.html  

Ni, S., & Podgursky, M. (2016). How teachers respond to pension system incentives: New estimates and policy applications. Journal of Labor Economics, 34(4), 1075–1104. https://doi.org/10.1086/686263  

Pearlstein, M. (2019, April 30). Comparatively speaking, how much K-12 spending goes to teacher salaries? American Experiment. https://www.americanexperiment.org/comparatively-speaking-how-much-k-12-spending-goes-to-teacher-salaries/  

Randazzo, A., & Moody, J. (2023). Hidden education funding cuts: How growing teacher pension debt stresses America’s K-12 education budget. Equable. https://equable.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Equable-Institute_Hidden-Education-Funding-Cuts_Final.pdf  

Roza, M. (2015, November 19). Breaking tradition: A fixed-dollar pay raise strategy that benefits teachers and school districts. Edunomics Lab. https://edunomicslab.org/2015/11/19/fixed-dollar-pay-raise-strategy/  

Roza, M., & Hagan, K. (2017). Who benefits the most from pensions? Edunomics Lab. https://edunomicslab.org/2016/12/01/equity-problem-teacher-pensions/  

Rosenthal, E. (2017). Insurance policy: How an industry shifted from protected patients to seeking profit. Stanford Medicine Magazine. https://stanmed.stanford.edu/how-health-insurance-changed-from-protecting-patients-to-seeking-profit  

Saenz-Armstrong, P. (2021). Smart Money 2.0: A 90-district comparison of what teachers make, what it takes to make more, and the missed opportunities to raise pay and improve outcomes. National Council on Teacher Quality. https://www.nctq.org/pages/Smart-Money-2021  

Saenz-Armstrong, P. (2024, January 11). Affording to stay healthy: The costs of health insurance for teachers. National Council on Teacher Quality. https://www.nctq.org/blog/Affording-to-stay-healthy:-The-costs-of-health-insurance-for-teachers  

Social Security Administration. (n.d.). Historical background and development of Social Security. https://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html  

Southern Regional Education Board. (2024). SREB takeaways on teacher compensation data: Trends and highlights from our 2024 analysis. https://www.sreb.org/post/sreb-takeaways-teacher-compensation-data-0  

Sweeney, C. (2018, July 23). Interim study to scrutinize teacher health insurance costs. Journal Record. https://journalrecord.com/2018/07/23/interim-study-to-scrutinize-teacher-health-insurance-costs/  

Wyckoff, J. (2024). Teacher salaries, a policy brief. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 43(3), 944–953. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22591  

 

 

This report is licensed under CC BY 4.0.