It's time to dispel myths about teacher pay. This set off alarm bells from the usual suspects. Find out more here.
Good evening,
It’s that time of year again: time to dispel myths about teacher pay.
The National Education Association’s (NEA) latest report on teacher pay has revived the annual groaning over teacher salaries in North Carolina.
According to the report, overall average teacher pay fell 5 slots from 38th to 43rd in the nation. Meanwhile, beginning teacher pay climbed 3 slots to 43rd in the nation.
This set off alarm bells from the usual suspects, who want to use this information to support their demands to generically increase salary levels.
Before the volume on this year’s teacher-pay debate gets turned up, a few observations are in order.
The NEA report includes average teacher salaries by state, providing little context or nuance on how higher cost-of-living states with powerful unions (like California or New York) offer higher salaries. Or how because North Carolina’s population has been growing so rapidly, it needs to hire more teachers, thus reducing the average salary.
The report also ignores the many ways in which the salary schedule limits efforts to raise teacher pay and improve educational outcomes. The current system for paying teachers (based on years of experience and how many credentials they have) has been based on false assumptions that these factors alone would improve educational outcomes.
So North Carolina continues to feed a broken system since policymakers haven’t taken the time to fully fix a thorny — yet solvable — school finance problem.
Until they do, North Carolina will continue to hear the same story every year about how it lags behind other states in average teacher salaries from the NEA, even though they have no correlation with student achievement (see how California and New York perform on national standardized tests).
We can improve teacher pay and student outcomes if we address our funding formula. Lawmakers just need to make it a priority (and read our report on school funding).
You can read more about education here, here, and here.
The News & Observer recently ran an article regarding the NEA’s report on average teacher salary, which caught our eye
Tamika Walker Kelly, the president of the North Carolina Association of Educators (NCAE), disputed the accuracy of the $61,449 average from the NEA
Instead, she suggested the $53,295 average base teacher salary is a more accurate reflection
She also noted that the state's maximum pay scale of $55,950, arguing it hinders competitiveness and retention
This was eyebrow-raising, as Walker Kelly and the NCAE have historically used and promoted average teacher salary figures from the NEA, without questioning their methodology
Why is Walker Kelly now disputing the average, especially since it has increased in recent years?
Additionally, why did the N&O not seek input from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NC DPI) on how the average salary is calculated, or explore why the methodology is now being questioned?
Average teacher pay should include all forms of compensation, including supplements and bonuses, regardless of the source, as has been the long-standing practice of NC DPI
Why Walker Kelly takes issue with the numbers now (and why N&O didn’t ask the question) can only be answered by them
North Carolina mandates election committees, especially those exceeding financial thresholds ($5,000 for Independent Expenditures), to file both physical and digital reports with the State Board of Elections (SBE)
The SBE has struggled to enforce digital reporting requirements, particularly for IE committees, citing system and manpower limitations
A review found 42 IE committees, including major organizations like the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Republican State Leadership Committee, have failed to file digital reports, despite exceeding the $5,000 threshold
These non-compliant committees accounted for over $22 million in unreported digital expenditures during the 2023-2024 election cycle
Despite the SBE’s excuses of a lack of manpower, it took our intern less than 10 hours to pull and review the files
The notion that the SBE does not have the ability to review these organizations for digital reporting requirements seems unrealistic, to put it politely
At a minimum, the SBE should enforce existing election laws and compel IE committees to provide digital reports
The state should also modify election transparency law to require digital reporting from all election committees
In either case, if the SBE still doesn’t believe it has the manpower to enforce the law, the John Locke Foundation is willing to fill the gap
On May 7th, a new Republican-majority board was sworn in at the North Carolina State Board of Elections (SBE), and Judge Jefferson Griffin conceded his Supreme Court race
The juxtaposition is fortuitous, as the new board is positioned to address issues raised in Griffin's lawsuit
Here are 3 major issues the new SBE must fix:
Voter registrations missing HAVA numbers
Federal and state law require voter registrations to include driver's license or Social Security numbers (HAVA numbers, after the Helping America Vote Act of 2002)
Many voter registration records lack these numbers, as the SBE has previously not asked county boards to diligently collect this information
The new SBE should instruct counties to add missing HAVA numbers and contact voters for the information
The General Assembly could make ballots lacking HAVA numbers provisional until that information is provided
Require IDs for military and overseas ballots
The previous SBE claimed military and overseas ballots were exempt from voter ID requirements, based on their interpretation of the federal Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA)
However, NC state law requires military and overseas ballots to conform with general absentee voting procedures, including voter ID
The new SBE must require voter ID for all absentee ballots, and develop a means to attach voter IDs to electronically submitted military and overseas ballots
Produce federal-only ballots for “never residents”
UOCAVA allows certain overseas citizens to vote in federal elections, but the North Carolina Constitution law states that only state residents may vote in state elections
A federal district court ruling did not overturn that provision, but it did say it could not be applied retroactively (the same with requiring military and overseas voters to provide voter IDs) The SBE's "inattention" to enforcing election law is deeply troubling, and the new board must be more diligent
The new SBE must correct the violations of election law exposed by Griffin’s lawsuit, so these problems don’t rear their ugly head in the future
