Originally Posted by Bostonian
Originally Posted by aquinas
Originally Posted by Bostonian
Originally Posted by aquinas
Well-run private schools adopt an efficiency wage model, whereby teachers are paid a premium in gross compensation over their public sector counterparts. This aligns the incentives of the teaching staff and the administrators, creates a disincentive for deficient teaching and mentorship, and mitigates agency problems present in public schools.
This theoretical model is inconsistent with the facts for most private schools in the U.S. According to the National Center for Education Statistics http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_211.10.asp average salaries for public and private school teachers in 2011-2012 was $53K and $40K, and the differences persist when conditioning on highest degree attained. The differences in non-salary benefits are huge. Private school teachers are not accruing pensions.

Which is why I stipulated well-run. smile

I agree that the model I pitched isn't common.
Private school teachers usually are not state-licensed teachers, even if they are well educated. You don't need to offer the same salary to hire them and keep them. Furthermore, public school teacher compensation is boosted by their politically powerful unions, which can determine the outcomes of many elections in state legislatures and governors' races.

Opportunity cost is opportunity cost. Assuming a top quality private school teacher is employable in the public sector, or in a lucrative research/industry position, schools have to compete to retain talent, just like any other industry.

What is to give light must endure burning.