The Use of Educational Resources in Wyoming:
Report to theWyoming Legislature
February 14, 2008
by
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 2
Ten Steps to “Double” Performance1. Conduct a needs assessment2. Set higher goals
a. Double performance b. 90 percent of children at or above proficiency or
advanced.
3. Adopt a new research-based curriculuma. Including a vision of effective instruction/pedagogy
4. Implement Data-based decision making a. Formative assessmentsb. Tailor instruction to exactly what students do and do
not know
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 3
5. Invest in extensive, long-term professional development
a. Summer institutes for teachersb. Instructional facilitators in schoolsc. Money for trainers
6. Use school time more efficiently a. 90-120 minute reading blocksb. Protected math blocksc. Replace electives with double reading or math
periods for struggling students
Ten Steps to “Double” Performance
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 4
7. Multiple extra-help strategies for struggling students
a. 1-1 tutoring (by licensed teachers)b. Small group tutoring (by licensed teachers)c. Double periods during the regular dayd. Extended day programse. Summer schoolf. Extensive assistance for students with disabilities
8. Create professional learning communities that work together relentlessly to boost student performance
Ten Steps to “Double” Performance
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 5
9. Support for improving instruction bya. Teachers – team leaders, coordinators, IFsb. School principalc. District leadership
10. Take advantage of external professional knowledgea. State department of educationb. Regional service unitsc. Consultantsd. Research-based curriculum programse. Practice-based research findingsf. Others
Ten Steps to “Double” Performance
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 6
Core Instructional Elements of the Wyoming Funding Model
• Small class sizes
• 16 elementary (K-5)
• 21 secondary (6-12)
• High quality instruction
• Professional development
• School-based instructional facilitators
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 7
Core Instructional Elements of the Wyoming Funding Model
• Sequenced and integrated strategies – continuum of services -- to help struggling children meet state standards• Tutoring
• Extended days
• Summer school
• Special education with no budget cap
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 8
Core Instructional Elements of the Wyoming Funding Model
• Substantial resources for• Instructional materials, at sufficient
levels to buy any number of formative assessments: NWEA, DIBELS, Wireless Generation
• Technology
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 9
Instructional Materials
Gifted
Tutors and pupil support:1 per 100 at risk
Elem 20%
Middle33%
High School 33%
The Wyoming Evidence Based School Funding Model
K -5: 16 to 16-12: 21 to 1
District Admin Site-based Leadership
ELL1 per100
Technology
Small SchoolAdjustment
State
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 10
Research Questions
1. How are actual resource patterns in Wyoming aligned with or different from the resource use strategies that are used in the Wyoming Funding Model?
2. What are the current instructional improvement strategies at the school-level in Wyoming?
Instructional Strategies and the Use of Resources
At the School Level
Updated Findings
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 12
Methodology• 314 Schools visited in Year 1 (n=254) & Year 2 (n=60)
• 178 Elementary
• 67 Middle
• 69 High Schools
• 14 are alternative learning environment (ALE) schools
• Results based on 300 non-ALE, elementary, middle, & high schools.
• In-person interviews with principals & superintendents to collect schools’ staffing and fiscal resources
• Quantitative analyses and case studies
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 13
Updated Sample Characteristics
Demographics Statewide (2007-08) Updated Sample
Number of Students
85,332
Average ADM per School: 238
71,416
Number of Students in Average School: 227
Number of Schools
Elementary 196
Middle 80
High 83
Elementary 178
Middle 67
High 69
Percent Free and Reduced-Price Lunch
33% 32%
Percent ELL4% 4%
Percent Special Education
14% 14%
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 14
Average Number of Students in Updated Sample Schools*
Elementary Schools
< 49: 17
49-96: 72
>96: 270
Middle Schools
< 49: 24
49-105: 59
>105: 395
High Schools
< 49: 38
49-105: 80
>105: 448
*Does not include alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 15
Instructional Time*• Average Instructional Day: 5 hrs, 56 min• Average Class Length
• Math: 1 hr, 3 minutes
• Reading (Elementary): 1hr, 47 minutes
• English/LA (Mid/High): 1 hr, 3 minutes
• Soc. Studies & Science (each)
• (Elementary): 30 minutes
• (Mid/High): 51 minutes*Does not include alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 16
Average Resources in Elementary Schools* with More than 96 Students
Staffing Funding Model Sample
Principals 1.09 0.90
Assistant Principals 0.00 0.06
Core Teachers 16.47 14.03
Specialist Teachers 3.29 2.36
Instructional Aides 0.00 3.92
Certified Tutors 1.12 0.75
Librarians/Media Staff 0.92 0.40
Pupil Support Staff 1.12 1.30
Secretaries 1.09 1.15
*Does not include alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 17
Average Resources in Elementary Schools* with 49-96 Students
Staffing Funding Model Sample
Principals 0.73 0.42
Assistant Principals 0.00 0.02
Core Teachers 4.40 5.30
Specialist Teachers 0.88 1.07
Additional Teachers 0.92 0.00
Instructional Aides 0.00 1.39
Certified Tutors 0.29 0.00
Librarians/Media Staff 0.25 0.24
Pupil Support Staff 0.29 0.53
Secretaries 0.73 0.70
*Does not include alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 18
Average Resources in Elementary Schools* with Less than 49 Students
Staffing Funding Model Sample
Principals 0.00 0.17
Assistant Principals 1.00 0.00
Core & Specialist Teachers
2.75 2.10
Instructional Aides 0.00 0.64
Certified Tutors 0.00 0.02
Librarians/Media Staff 0.00 0.03
Pupil Support Staff 0.00 0.12
Secretaries 0.00 0.18
Total Professional Staff 3.75 3.26
*Does not include alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 19
Key Findings on Resource Use in Elementary Schools• Compared to the Wyoming Funding Model, large elementary schools have: • Slightly less school site administration
• Fewer core and specialist teachers
• More aides
• Fewer certified tutors
• Less than half the certified library and media staff
• Slightly more pupil support
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 20
Average School-Level Resources in Middle Schools* with More than 105 Students
Staffing Funding Model Sample
Principals 1.00 0.96
Assistant Principals 0.51 0.66
Core Teachers 19.75 17.80
Specialist Teachers 6.45 8.20
Additional Teachers 0.51 0.02
Instructional Aides 0.00 2.77
Certified Tutors 1.57 0.68
Librarians/Media Staff 2.32 0.77
Pupil Support Staff 3.13 2.41
Secretaries 1.51 1.77
*Does not include alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 21
Average School-Level Resources in Middle Schools* with 49-105 Students
Staffing Funding Model Sample
Principals 0.67 0.50
Assistant Principals 0.00 0.00
Core Teachers 3.44 3.53
Specialist Teachers 1.08 1.72
Additional Teacher 3.58 0.00
Instructional Aides 0.00 1.30
Certified Tutors 0.32 0.00
Librarians/Media Staff 0.87 0.23
Pupil Support Staff 0.57 0.65
Secretaries 0.67 0.62
*Does not include alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 22
Average School-Level Resources in Middle Schools* with Less than 49 Students
Staffing Funding Model Sample
Principals 0.00 0.21
Assistant Principals 1.00 0.01
Core & Specialist Teachers
3.48 3.01
Instructional Aides 0.00 0.42
Certified Tutors 0.00 0.10
Librarians/Media Staff 0.00 0.06
Pupil Support Staff 0.00 0.26
Secretaries 0.00 0.32
Total Professional Staff 4.48 4.39
*Does not include alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 23
Key Findings on Resource Use in Middle Schools
• Compared to the Wyoming Funding Model, large middle schools have: • About the same level of school administration
• Fewer core teachers
• More specialist teachers
• More aides
• Fewer tutors
• Less certified library and media staff
• Less pupil support
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 24
Average School-Level Resources in High Schools* with More than 105 Students
Staffing Funding Model Sample
Principals 1.00 0.93
Assistant Principals 0.67 0.73
Core Teachers 21.28 18.46
Specialist Teachers 7.65 12.20
Additional Teacher 1.52 0.01
Instructional Aides 0.00 2.00
Certified Tutors 1.48 0.41
Librarians/Media Staff 2.56 0.80
Pupil Support Staff 3.24 3.03
Secretaries 1.16 2.44
*Does not include alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 25
Average School-Level Resources in High Schools* with 49-105 Students
Staffing Funding Model Sample
Principals 0.74 0.61
Assistant Principals 0.00 0.02
Core Teachers 3.71 5.18
Specialist Teachers 1.34 2.92
Additional Teachers 5.34 0.00
Instructional Aides 0.00 1.03
Certified Tutors 0.37 0.11
Librarians/Media Staff 0.99 0.22
Pupil Support Staff 0.68 0.96
Secretaries 0.74 0.79
*Does not include alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 26
Average School-Level Resources in High Schools* with Less than 49 Students
Staffing Funding Model Sample
Principals 0.00 0.47
Assistant Principals 1.00 0.00
Core & Specialist Teachers
5.75 5.97
Instructional Aides 0.00 0.37
Certified Tutors 0.00 0.06
Librarians/Media Staff 0.00 0.02
Pupil Support Staff 0.00 0.46
Secretaries 0.00 0.53
Total Professional Staff 6.75 7.88
*Does not include alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 27
Key Findings on Resource Use in High Schools
• Compared to the Wyoming Funding Model, large high schools have: • Similar amounts of administration (Principals &
assistant principals)• Fewer core teachers• More specialist teachers• More aides• 2/3 fewer certified tutors• 2/3 fewer certified librarian and media staff• Less pupil support• Double the number of secretaries
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 28
Students per Core Teacher (Excludes Small & Alternative Schools data)
Ratio of Students to Core Teachers Funded by State
Model
Ratio of Actual Students to Core Teachers in Updated
Sample Schools
Elementary 16:1AVERAGE 19:1
RANGE 11:1 to 25:1
Middle 21:1AVERAGE 22:1
RANGE 10:1 to 42:1
High 21:1AVERAGE 21:1
RANGE 8:1 to 36:1
Actual student to teacher ratios are slightly larger than the model in elementary and middle schools, and about the same as the model level in high schools. But there are wide ranges in actual practice.
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 29
Students Per Core TeacherMedium and Large Elementary
21
3
56
7
12
21
23
21
1211
8
4
1
0
5
10
15
20
25
Student:Core Teacher Ratio
No
. of
Stu
den
ts
S:CT Ratio 2 1 3 5 6 7 12 21 23 21 12 11 8 4 1
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 30
Students Per Core TeacherMedium and Large Middle School
1 1
2
1
0
1
3
1
0
3
5
6
4
3
5
2
3
0
4
0 0
1
0
1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Student:Core Teacher Ratio
No
. of
Stu
den
ts
S:CT Ratio 1 1 2 1 0 1 3 1 0 3 5 6 4 3 5 2 3 0 4 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 31
Students Per Core TeacherMedium and Large High School
1 1
0
1
2 2
0
2
1
4
6
2
7
1
2
3
1 1
4
2 2
1
0
1
0
1
0
1 1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Student:Core Teacher Ratio
No
. of
Stu
den
ts
S:CT Ratio 1 1 0 1 2 2 0 2 1 4 6 2 7 1 2 3 1 1 4 2 2 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 32
Core Teachers in Sample Schools (Excludes Small & Alternative Schools Data)
Core Teachers Funded by State Model in Sampled Schools
Actual Core Teachers in Updated Sampled
Schools
Elementary 2,147.5 1,844.22
Middle 788.1 715.36
High 870.7 776.86
TOTAL 3,806.2 3,336.44
469.76 fewer core teachers than provided by the funding model
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 33
Number of Instructional Aides*Type of Inst. Aide
# Elementary Aides
# Middle School Aides
# High School Aides
Library 98 32 30
ELL 26 6 9
Title I 122 8 3
Other Extra Help 87 22 14
Other Instructional 102 11 14
Non-Certified Tutors 69 23 12
Special Education Inclusion & Resource
392 174 154
In-School Suspension 6 17 7
Gifted & Talented 5 0 0
TOTAL 907 293 243
Model does not fund instructional aides
*Does not include small or alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 34
Number of Tutors*
Tutors Funded by State Model in
Sampled Schools
Teachers Tutoring in
Sampled Schools
Aides Tutoring in Sampled
Schools
Elementary 146 95 69
Middle 63 26 23
High 62 17 12
We found substantially fewer certified tutors to provide extra help to struggling students, especiallyin middle and high schools
*Does not include small or alternative schools data
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 35
Average Number of Instructional Facilitators in Medium and Large Schools
Actual instructional facilitators loosely mirrored the level funded through the categorical program (about two thirds of model level).
Model Funded Sample Elementary 1.30 0.87 0.85 Middle 1.60 1.07 0.97 High School 1.70 1.13 0.98
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 36
Updated Findings Related to Instructional Improvement (300 non-ALE schools)
• Fewer core teachers than model funds in large schools
• Specialist Teachers in large schools• Elementary -- About 28% fewer than funded
• Middle schools -- About 27% more than funded
• High schools -- About 59% more than funded
• Large number of aides despite no funding• Substantially fewer certified tutors than funded
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 37
Updated Findings Related to Instructional Improvement (300 non-ALE schools)
• Instructional facilitators • Observed at almost the estimated funding
level in all three school levels
• This is a categorical not a block grant program
• School administrators employed at a slightly lower level than funded by the model
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 38
Tentative Conclusions• The observed resource use patterns:
• Appear to represent a different theory about how to boost student achievement
• Less professional development
• More electives
• More classroom aides dealing with academic needs
• Are different from evidence-based resource use patterns to double student performance observed in Wyoming and other states
State-Level Expenditure Analysis
Findings
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 40
Total Expenditures: 2002-03 to 2006-07
2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-075-Year Change
Enrollment 85,051 83,871 83,078 83,338 85,332General Fund $728,284,018 $741,864,255 $772,813,538 $865,539,002 $1,018,575,240Special Revenue Funds $91,095,959 $109,714,624 $131,495,499 $138,718,134 $155,786,695Food $25,717,247 $26,101,340 $27,838,483 $30,520,781 $33,239,143Other $2,612,761 $2,747,464 $2,411,531 $5,205,096 $13,190,513
Total $847,709,985 $880,427,684 $934,559,051 $1,039,983,012 $1,220,791,592Percent Increase 3.86% 6.15% 11.28% 17.39% 44.01%
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 41
Total Expenditures Per Pupil: 2002-03 to 2006-07
2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-075-Year Change
General Fund $8,563 $8,845 $9,302 $10,386 $11,937Special Revenue Funds $1,071 $1,308 $1,583 $1,665 $1,826Food $302 $311 $335 $366 $390Other $31 $33 $29 $62 $155
Total $9,967 $10,497 $11,249 $12,479 $14,306Percent Increase 5.32% 7.16% 10.93% 14.64% 43.54%
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 42
Expenditures by Function: 2002-03 to 2006-07
$0
$200,000,000
$400,000,000
$600,000,000
$800,000,000
$1,000,000,000
$1,200,000,000
$1,400,000,000
2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-07
Other
Food
Transportation
Maintenance
Operations
Central Office Administration
School Administration
Instructional Support
Student Support
Instruction
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 43
Percent of Expenditures By Function: 2002-03 to 2006-07
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-07
Other
Food
Transportation
Maintenance
Operations
Central Office Administration
School Administration
Instructional Support
Student Support
Instruction
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 44
Total Compensation as a Percent of Instruction
2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-075-Year Change
Salary $324,271,747 $328,316,000 $342,131,905 $378,968,162 $446,201,145Percent Increase 1.25% 4.21% 10.77% 17.74% 37.60%
Per Pupil $3,813 $3,915 $4,118 $4,547 $5,229Percent Increase 2.67% 5.20% 10.42% 14.99% 37.15%
Benefits $103,392,432 $108,118,694 $115,774,840 $134,204,864 $158,235,939Percent Increase 4.57% 7.08% 15.92% 17.91% 53.04%
Per Pupil $1,216 $1,289 $1,394 $1,610 $1,854Percent Increase 6.04% 8.10% 15.56% 15.15% 52.54%
Total Compensation $427,664,178 $436,434,694 $457,906,744 $513,173,025 $604,437,084Percent Increase 2.05% 4.92% 12.07% 17.78% 41.33%
Per Pupil $5,028 $5,204 $5,512 $6,158 $7,083Percent Increase 3.49% 5.92% 11.72% 15.03% 40.87%
Percent of Total Instruction 87.29% 87.24% 86.86% 87.25% 88.71% 1.42%
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 45
General Conclusions and Implications
• Large increases in salaries • Fewer teacher positions in schools
than model funds • Could lead to future pressure for
more money
Salary Analysis
Findings
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 47
Changes in Student Enrollment: 2002-03 to 2006-07
86,117
84,741
83,772 83,705
84,611
82,000
82,500
83,000
83,500
84,000
84,500
85,000
85,500
86,000
86,500
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
Year
Enrollment declined by 1,506 students or -1.75 percent
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 48
State Total Teacher FTE: 2002-03 to 2006-07
7,616 7,5997,645
7,732
8,178
7,300
7,400
7,500
7,600
7,700
7,800
7,900
8,000
8,100
8,200
8,300
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
Year
FTE
Teac
hers
Five year change 562 FTE teachers 7.37 percent
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 49
Annual Percent Change in Enrollment Compared to Change in Total FTE Teachers
-2.00%
-1.00%
0.00%
1.00%
2.00%
3.00%
4.00%
5.00%
6.00%
7.00%
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
Year
Per
enta
ge
Ch
ang
e
Enrollment
FTE Teachers
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 50
Composition of Teaching* Staff: 2002-03 to 2006-07
6,802 6,789 6,831 6,893 7,272
814 810 814 839905
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
Year
FT
E T
each
ers
Special Ed
Non-Special Ed
*Includes nurses, social workers, phychologists, and others
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 51
Percent Change in Enrollment and FTE Teachers by Type
-4.00%
-2.00%
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
Year
Per
cen
t C
han
ge
Enrollment
All Teachers
Special Ed
Non Special Ed
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 52
Model v. Actual FTE Teachers 2006-07 (W/O Special Ed.)
7,474 7,272
2,500
3,500
4,500
5,500
6,500
7,500
8,500
Model Actual
FT
E T
each
ers
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 53
Average Teacher Salary: 2002-03 to 2006-07
$39,364
$51,574
$44,049$41,284$40,204
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
Year
Ave
rag
e S
alar
y
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 54
Percent Change in Average Teacher Salary: 2003-04 to 2006-07
17.08%
6.70%
2.69%1.62%
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
14.00%
16.00%
18.00%
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
Year
Perc
ent C
hang
e
Five Year Change 29.75 Percent
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 55
Beginning Teacher Salary Schedules (BA + 0 Years Exp.)
02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 5 Yr Chg.
Minimum $22,000 $22,500 $23,000 $24,310 $24,638 $2,638
Maximum $32,000 $32,320 $32,820 $35,000 $50,000 $18,000
Range $10,000 $9,820 $9,820 $10,690 $25,363 $15,363
Average $26,251 $26,706 $27,729 $29,261 $35,924 $9,673
% Increase 1.73% 3.83% 5.53% 22.77% 36.85%
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 56
Middle Salary Schedule Steps
02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 5 Yr. Chg. BA-Step 6 $29,897 $30,423 $31,493 $33,073 $39,701 $9,804 1.76% 3.52% 5.02% 20.04% 32.79% MA-Step 0 $29,664 $30,141 $31,206 $32,009 $39,073 $9,409 1.61% 3.54% 2.57% 22.07% 31.72% MA-Step 10 $36,652 $37,238 $38,376 $39,901 $46,974 $10,322 1.60% 3.06% 3.97% 17.73% 28.16%
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 57
Top of Salary Schedule
02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 5 Yr. Chg. Minimum $40,838 $40,838 $43,538 $43,538 $43,538 $2,700 Maximum $59,000 $60,320 $61,820 $63,820 $84,091 $25,091 Range $18,163 $19,483 $18,283 $20,283 $40,554 $22,391 Average $48,949 $49,496 $50,786 $52,730 $60,085 $11,137 1.12% 2.61% 3.83% 13.95% 22.75%
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 58
Findings on Salaries
• Dramatic increase in teacher salaries in last two years
• Model funds more positions than districts employ with block grant funds
• Difference may have led to higher salaries than anticipated in the model
Allan Odden, Lawrence O. Picus, Michelle Turner Mangan, Mike Goetz & Anabel Aportela 59
Discussion and Questions
Lawrence O. Picus and Associates