NCES 2010-329 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

An Evaluation of the Data From the 

Teacher Compensation Survey: 

School Year 2006–07

Research and Development Report
An Evaluation of the Data From the 

Teacher Compensation Survey: 

School Year 2006–07

Research and Development Report

SEPTEMBER 2010

Stephen Q. Cornman

Frank Johnson

National Center for Education Statistics

Lei Zhou

Education Statistics Services Institute – 

MacroSys, LLC

Steven Honegger

Amber M. Noel

Education Statistics Services Institute – 

American Institutes for Research

Frank Johnson

Project Officer 

National Center for Education Statistics

NCES 2010-329

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
U.S. Department of Education

Arne Duncan 

Secretary

Institute of Education Sciences

John Q. Easton 

Director

National Center for Education Statistics

Stuart Kerachsky 

Acting Commissioner 

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, and reporting data

related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and 

report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in the United States; conduct and publish reports and 

specialized analyses of the meaning and significance of such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving

their statistical systems; and review and report on education activities in foreign countries. 

NCES activities are designed to address high-priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable, complete, and accurate 

indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and high-quality data to the U.S. Department of Education, 

the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, practitioners, data users, and the general public. Unless specifically 

noted, all information contained herein is in the public domain. 

We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a variety of audiences.

You, as our customer, are the best judge of our success in communicating information effectively. If you have any comments 

or suggestions about this or any other NCES product or report, we would like to hear from you. Please direct your comments 

to 

 NCES, IES, U.S. Department of Education

 1990 K Street NW 

 Washington, DC 20006-5651 

September 2010 

The NCES Home Page address is http://nces.ed.gov. 

The NCES Publications and Products address is http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch. 

This report was prepared in part under Contract No. ED-05-CO0044 with Education Statistics Services Institute—American 

Institutes for Research. Mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government. 

Suggested Citation 

Cornman, S.Q., Johnson, F., Zhou, L., Honegger, S., and Noel, A.M. (2010). An Evaluation of the Data From the Teacher 

Compensation Survey: School Year 2006–07 (NCES 2010-329). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

For ordering information on this report, write to 

 ED Pubs, U.S. Department of Education 

 P.O. Box 22207 

 Alexandria, VA 22304 

or call toll free 1-877-4-ED-Pubs or order online at http://www.edpubs.gov. 

Content Contact 

Frank Johnson 

202-502-7362 

frank.johnson@ed.gov
Foreword 

The Research and Development (R&D) series of reports at the National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES) has been initiated to 

• share studies and research that are developmental in nature. The results of such studies 

may be revised as the work continues and additional data become available; 

• share the results of studies that are, to some extent, the “cutting edge” of methodological 

developments. Emerging analytical approaches and new computer software development 

often permit new and sometimes controversial analyses to be done. By participating in 

“frontier research,” we hope to contribute to the resolution of issues and improved 

analysis; and 

• participate in discussions of emerging issues of interest to education researchers, 

statisticians, and the federal statistical community in general. Such reports may 

document workshops and symposia sponsored by NCES that address methodological 

and analytical issues or may share and discuss issues regarding NCES practices, 

procedures, and standards. 

The common theme in all three goals is that these reports present results or discussions that do 

not reach definitive conclusions at this point in time, either because the data are tentative, the 

methodology is new and developing, or the topic is one on which there are divergent views. 

Therefore, the techniques and inferences made from the data are tentative and subject to revision. 

To facilitate the process of closure on the issues, we invite comment, criticism, and alternatives 

to what we have done. Such responses should be directed to 

Marilyn Seastrom 

Chief Statistician 

Statistical Standards Program 

National Center for Education Statistics 

Institute of Education Sciences 

1990 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006-5651 

iii 
iv 

Acknowledgments 

The authors would like to thank all of the professionals in state and local education agencies who 

track, record, and report the data used in this report. Particular thanks are owed to the Teacher 

Compensation Survey coordinators, without whose efforts this collection would not exist. 
Contents Page 

Foreword ............................................................................................................................ iii 

Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................. iv 

List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... vi 

List of Figures .................................................................................................................... ix 

List of Exhibits ................................................................................................................... ix 

1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................1 

2. The Teacher Compensation Survey .............................................................................3 

Overview ...................................................................................................................... 3 

TCS Variables .............................................................................................................. 3 

3. Data Availability ..........................................................................................................7 

4. Data Quality .................................................................................................................9 

Data Formatting Issues ............................................................................................... 9 

Teacher Identification Numbers .................................................................................. 9 

Data Irregularities ...................................................................................................... 9 

Edit Rules .................................................................................................................. 11 

5. Comparison of the Teacher Compensation Survey With Other Sources of Data .........13 

Teacher and School Data in the TCS and Other CCD Data Files ............................. 13 

Salary Data in the TCS and Other Surveys ............................................................... 19 

Summary .................................................................................................................... 24 

6. Limitations and Advantages of the Teacher Compensation Survey ..........................25 

Limitations of the Teacher Compensation Survey ..................................................... 25 

Advantages of the Teacher Compensation Survey .................................................... 26 

7. Selected Findings .......................................................................................................29 

Full-Time and FTE Teacher Status ........................................................................... 29 

Base Salaries ............................................................................................................. 30 

Base Salaries by Teacher Characteristics ................................................................. 31 

Variation in Base Salaries ......................................................................................... 44 

Two-Year Comparisons ............................................................................................. 48 

Total Salary and Total Benefits Comparisons .......................................................... 50 

8. Conclusion and Future Directions ..............................................................................53 

References and Related Data Files ....................................................................................55 

Appendix A—Glossary ................................................................................................... A-1 

Appendix B—Data Plan Responses .................................................................................B-1 

Appendix C—State Notes ................................................................................................C-1 

v 
List of Tables

Table Page 

1. Number of and percentage difference in full-time-equivalent (FTE) teachers 

reported in the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) and School Universe 

Survey, by participating state: School year 2006–07 ..............................................14 

2. Number of schools reported in the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) and 

School Universe Survey, by survey coverage status and participating state: 

School year 2006–07 ...............................................................................................15 

3. Number of schools, full-time-equivalent (FTE) teachers, and teachers for schools 

reported in the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS), but not in the School 

Universe Survey, by participating state: School year 2006–07 ...............................16 

4. Number of schools, full-time-equivalent (FTE) teachers, and students for 

operating schools reported in the School Universe Survey, but not in the Teacher 

Compensation Survey (TCS), by participating state: School year 2006–07 ...........17 

5. Number of schools that reported full-time-equivalent (FTE) teacher counts in 

both the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) and School Universe Survey, 

number of and percentage difference in FTE teachers for these schools, and 

number of teachers and students for these schools, by participating state: School 

year 2006–07 ............................................................................................................18 

6. Number and percentage distribution of schools that reported full-time-equivalent 

(FTE) teacher counts in both the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) and 

School Universe Survey, by percentage difference in FTE teachers in the surveys 

and participating state: School year 2006–07 ..........................................................19 

7. Number and percentage distribution of school districts matched in the Teacher 

Compensation Survey (TCS) and School District Finance Survey (F-33), by 

percentage difference in district total teacher salaries reported in the surveys 

and participating state: School year 2006–07 ..........................................................20 

8. Mean of and percentage difference in full-time teacher total salaries reported in 

the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) and National Education Association 

(NEA) data collection, by participating state: School year 2006–07 .......................21 

9. Mean of full-time teacher base salaries reported in the Teacher Compensation 

Survey (TCS), school year 2006–07, and the Schools and Staffing Survey 

(SASS), school year 2007–08, by participating state ..............................................23 

10. Number of records in the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) and percentage 

of teachers by teachers’ full-time equivalent (FTE) status and participating state: 

School year 2006–07 ...............................................................................................30 

11. Total number of full-time teachers, mean base salary, and median base salary, 

years of teaching experience, age, and number of contract days, by participating 

state: School year 2006–07 ......................................................................................31 

12. Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, 

by highest degree earned and participating state: School year 2006–07 .................33 

vi 
List of Tables―Continued 

Table Page 

13. Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, 

by years of teaching experience and participating state: School year 2006–07 ......35 

14. Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, 

by age and participating state: School year 2006–07 ..............................................39 

15. Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, 

by race/ethnicity and participating state: School year 2006–07 ..............................42 

16. Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, 

by sex and salary difference between sexes, by participating state: School 

year 2006–07 ............................................................................................................44 

17. Number of full-time teachers, base salary at the 5th, median, and 95th percentile 

cutpoints, and federal range ratio, by educational attainment, years of teaching 

experience, and participating state: School year 2006–07 .......................................46 

18. Number of full-time teachers in both administrations of the Teacher 

Compensation Survey (TCS), and percentage of teachers staying and leaving, 

by participating state: School years 2005–06 and 2006–07 ....................................48 

19. Number and percentage of full-time teachers represented in both administrations 

of the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) who changed districts or schools 

between these school years, by participating state: School years 2005–06 and 

2006–07 ...................................................................................................................49 

20. Median base salary and percentage change in median base salary for full-time 

teachers represented in both administrations of the Teacher Compensation 

Survey (TCS), by participating state: School years 2005–06 and 2006–07 ............49 

21. Number of full-time teachers represented in both administrations of the Teacher 

Compensation Survey (TCS), and number and percentage of teachers at each 

degree level who completed a higher degree between the school years, by highest 

degree earned and participating state: School years 2005–06 and 2006–07 ...........50 

22. Median total salary and government expenditures for total benefits, health 

benefits, retirement benefits, and all other benefits for full-time teachers, by 

participating state: School year 2006–07 .................................................................51 

B-1. Data plan responses to questions 1 through 4, by participating state: School 

year 2006–07 ..........................................................................................................B-2 

B-2. Data plan responses to questions 5.a through 5.d, by participating state: School 

year 2006–07 ..........................................................................................................B-3 

B-3. Data plan responses to questions 6 through 9, by participating state: School 

year 2006–07 ..........................................................................................................B-4 

B-4. Data plan responses to questions 10 through 12, by participating state: School 

year 2006–07 ..........................................................................................................B-5 

vii 
List of Tables―Continued 

Table Page 

B-5. Data plan responses to questions 13 through 13.a, by participating state: School 

year 2006–07 ..........................................................................................................B-6 

B-6. Data plan responses to questions 14 through 17, by participating state: School 

year 2006–07 ..........................................................................................................B-7 

 

viii 
ix 

List of Figures

Figure Page 

1. Percentage distribution of total full-time teachers in participating states, by 

highest degree earned: School year 2006–07 ........................................................ 32

2. Percentage distribution of full-time teachers, by years of teaching experience 

and participating state: School year 2006–07 ....................................................... 37

3. Median base salary for full-time first-year teachers and teachers with more than 

1 year of teaching experience, by participating state: School year 2006–07 ........ 38

4. Percentage distribution of full-time teachers in participating states, by age: 

School year 2006–07............................................................................................. 41

List of Exhibits 

Exhibit Page 

1. Data items included in the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) restricted-use data 

(RUD) file: School year 2006–07 .................................................................................4 
This page intentionally left blank. 
1. Introduction 

Teachers are the largest component of school spending, with more funding being 

allocated to teacher salaries than to any other education expense (Loeb, Miller, and 

Strunk 2009). Teacher and staff1

 salaries and benefits consume up to 80 percent of 

current expenditures (Aud et al. 2010). Yet, there is not a wealth of data on teacher 

compensation. National data on teachers are limited to periodic sample surveys or to 

simple counts at the district or school level. School districts and states often maintain 

significant databases on teachers in their jurisdictions, but these databases are rarely 

comparable across states. Some databases contain personally identifiable or sensitive 

information (e.g., Social Security Number), thereby preventing them from being available 

to researchers and the public. 

Comparable teachers’ compensation data across districts and states are needed in 

order to address a wide variety of education policy issues. For example, many 

commentators believe teachers are the key determinant of school quality (Hanushek and 

Rivkin 2004). Accordingly, the ability of schools to attract and retain high-quality 

teachers to work in urban districts is currently the focus of new policy initiatives. 

Recently, school officials in urban districts such as Denver, New York, and the District of 

Columbia have been contemplating “front loading” teacher compensation by increasing 

the salaries for new teachers. New York City Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein stated, 

“You want to allocate your money in a way that attracts new talent and rewards 

excellence” (Sawchuk 2009). 

In response to the need for individual teacher-level data to address these and other 

policy issues, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) developed the Teacher 

Compensation Survey (TCS), an administrative records universe survey that collects total 

compensation, teacher status, and demographic data about all public school teachers from 

multiple states. In 2007, NCES launched the pilot TCS data collection, with seven states 

volunteering to provide administrative records for school year (SY) 2005–06. In the 

second year of the data collection, the TCS expanded to 17 states reporting SY 2006–07 

data. 

The TCS offers several advantages over other data sources. For example, much of 

the teacher compensation research to date has been based upon sample surveys. The TCS 

removes sampling error and self-reporting bias through the use of a dataset that contains 

universe data at the teacher level for multiple states. 

The TCS file can be merged with the Common Core of Data (CCD) Public 

Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey file (referred to as the School Universe 

Survey, or School Universe, in this report) to obtain such school information as school 

type, operational status, locale code, number of students eligible for free and reducedprice lunch, student totals and detail (by grade, race/ethnicity, and sex), and pupil/teacher 

ratio. 

 

1

 Staff includes both instructional and noninstructional staff. 

1 
The TCS permits comparisons of teacher salaries at various points along the 

career trajectory according to teacher characteristics (such as teacher’s educational 

attainment, years of teaching experience, etc.). To ensure data confidentiality, the TCS 

does not use Social Security Numbers as the identification numbers for teachers. The 

Census Bureau has assigned new teacher IDs to all teachers for the TCS data file. The 

TCS data have also undergone a perturbation to eliminate the possibility of the data being 

used to identify individual teachers. The TCS is designed to provide comparable data 

across states and districts and may shed light on the compensation necessary to attract 

teachers, the ability to retain teachers, and teacher mobility. 

The TCS data collection is a research and development effort to see if it is 

possible to collect and publish teacher-level data from the administrative records residing 

in state education agencies (SEAs). This report provides an overview of the TCS data 

collection for SY 2006–07; a comparison of state administrative records of the TCS with 

other sources of data; and a discussion of the data availability and quality, as well as 

limitations, of the TCS. This report also includes findings and descriptive statistics for 

SY 2006–07. 

2 
2. The Teacher Compensation Survey 

Overview 

The Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) is conducted by the National Center for 

Education Statistics (NCES), a center of the Institute of Education Sciences within the 

U.S. Department of Education. NCES is authorized to collect education statistics data by 

Congress through the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, section 151(b)(3), 20 

U.S.C. 9541. The Governments Division of the U.S. Census Bureau collected the TCS 

data on behalf of NCES. 

The TCS is part of the NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) survey system. The 

CCD collects administrative records data and has nonfiscal and fiscal components. The 

nonfiscal components are the State Nonfiscal Survey of Public Elementary/Secondary 

Education, the Local Education Agency (LEA) Universe Survey, and the Public 

Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey; the fiscal components are the School 

District Finance Survey (F-33), the National Public Education Financial Survey 

(NPEFS), and the TCS (which includes both fiscal and nonfiscal data). CCD surveys are 

universe surveys, and the CCD data are reported annually by state education agencies 

(SEAs) through the efforts of state CCD coordinators. 

The TCS collected individual teacher-level data for SY 2006–07 from the 

administrative records of 17 states that volunteered to participate: Arizona, Arkansas, 

Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, 

Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas. The TCS 

universe file for SY 2006–07 contains 1.4 million records encompassing 1.1 million fulltime-equivalent (FTE)2

 teachers and represents 33 percent of the 3.2 million FTE 

teachers in the United States (Sable and Noel 2008). The TCS will be considered a 

research and development effort until at least 45 states participate in the collection. 

Participation in the TCS is voluntary. The long-term goal is to expand the TCS into a 

national survey. 

Three data files based on the data collected by the TCS are produced for each 

survey administration: an individual teacher-level restricted-use data (RUD) file, a 

school-level public-use file, and an LEA-level public-use file. The RUD file is only 

available to researchers who have received a restricted-use data license from NCES. 

Applications for a restricted-use data license must be made online. For more information 

about applying for a restricted-use data license, please visit the NCES website at 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/licenses.asp. 

TCS Variables 

Exhibit 1 contains a list of the data items included in the SY 2006–07 TCS RUD 

file, along with a short description of each item. There were no changes in the variables 

 

2

 FTE is defined as the amount of time required to perform an assignment stated as a proportion of a fulltime position and computed by dividing the amount of time employed by the time normally required for a 

full-time position. 

3 
or variable definitions between the SY 2005–06 and SY 2006–07 data collections, which 

allows comparisons to be made between the 2 years. A glossary with data item 

definitions is in appendix A. 

Exhibit 1.―Data items included in the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) restricted-use data (RUD) 

Exhibit 1.―file: School year 2006–07 

Data item Description 

TCS ID Unique ID number for each record in the TCS RUD file 

NCES Teacher ID Unique ID number within each state for teachers 

NCES School ID Unique 12-digit ID number for each public school in the United States, which contains 

the 7-digit NCES local education agency (LEA) ID followed by the 5-digit NCES 

School Number 

FIPS State Code Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) state code 

State Abbreviation Two-letter postal abbreviation of state name 

NCES LEA ID NCES 7-digit LEA ID number 

NCES School Number NCES 5-digit school ID number 

State LEA ID Unique ID number within each state for the LEA 

State Education Agency (SEA) 

 School ID Unique ID assigned by SEA for the schools in their state 

School Name Name of the school 

Year School year covered by the data 

Base Salary Base salary of the teacher for teaching duties at the specific school indicated on the 

record 

Total Salary Total salary paid to the teacher at the specific school indicated on the record 

Retirement Benefits Contributions made by the school district, municipal, state, and other government 

agencies toward the teacher’s retirement plan, prorated to the specific school 

indicated on the record (does not include contributions made by the teacher) 

Health Benefits Contributions made by the school district, municipal, state, and other government 

agencies for the teacher’s health insurance, prorated to the specific school 

indicated on the record (does not include contributions made by the teacher) 

Other Benefits All other benefits (excluding retirement and health insurance) paid by the school 

district, municipal, state, and other government agencies for the teacher, prorated 

to the specific school indicated on the record (does not include contributions made 

by the teacher) 

Total Benefits Sum of retirement, health, and all other benefits, or total benefits paid by the school 

district, municipal, state, and other government agencies, prorated to the specific 

school indicated on the record 

Experience Number of years of teaching experience of the teacher 

Degree Highest degree earned by the teacher 

Race Race/ethnicity of the teacher 

Sex Sex of the teacher 

Birth Year Year of birth of the teacher 

Age Age of the teacher 

Contract Days Number of days specified in the teacher contract 

Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Amount of time required to perform a teaching assignment stated as a proportion of a 

full-time position by dividing the amount of time employed by the time normally 

required for a full-time position 

Teacher Status Indicator Indicator that identifies whether the teacher is a full-time or part-time employee and 

whether the teacher teaches at one or more schools or is a substitute teacher 

Salary Indicator Indicator to determine whether the teacher’s base salary includes pay for teaching 

assignments alone or is a combination of teaching and other assignments, such as 

administration1

New Teacher to District Indicator Indicator to determine if the teacher is new to the district 

New Teacher to State Indicator Indicator to determine if the teacher is new to the state 1

 By definition base salary does not include other duties but some states cannot make this separation. The salary indicator 

provides information on this distinction for analysis. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Teacher 

Compensation Survey,” school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

4 
5 

There are 10 identification variables in the TCS: 

o Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) state code: Unique numeric 

identifier of each state in the United States. 

o State abbreviation: Unique two-letter identifier of each state in the United 

States. 

o NCES local education agency ID: A 7-digit NCES-assigned identification 

number for the local education agency that operates the school. The first two 

characters of this number are the FIPS state code. 

o NCES school number: A 5-digit NCES-assigned school identification number. 

o NCES school ID: A 12-digit school ID that contains the NCES 7-digit LEA 

ID followed by the NCES 5-digit school number. This ID can be used to 

match teachers with characteristics of schools at which they teach. 

o State local education agency ID: An LEA ID assigned by the SEA that may 

not be unique across states. 

o SEA school ID: A school ID assigned by the SEA that may not be unique 

across states. 

o Name of school: A school name reported by the SEA. 

o NCES Teacher ID: A unique NCES-assigned identification number for each 

individual teacher. It is neither the teacher identification number that the state 

submitted nor the Social Security Number (SSN). The first two characters of 

this number are the FIPS state code. The Teacher ID number should remain 

the same for each teacher over time, as long as the teacher remains teaching in 

the same state. Some states cannot provide a teacher ID that meets this 

requirement. The Teacher ID cannot be used to track teachers across states. 

o TCS ID: A combination of the NCES Teacher ID followed by the 12-digit 

NCES school ID. This is a unique number for each record in the TCS RUD 

file that allows users to distinguish each teacher in each school where the 

teacher was teaching. 

Base salary and total salary are the salaries paid to the teacher for teaching duties 

at the specific school indicated on the record. The base salary includes only pay for 

regular teaching duties at the school according to the negotiated contract. The total salary 

is the total pay the teacher received, including pay for additional duties such as 

afterschool programs, teacher mentoring, administrative work, and other duties that are 

not directly related to classroom instruction. 

Demographic information collected in the TCS includes birth year, race/ethnicity, 

sex, highest degree earned, and years of teaching experience. The number of years of 

teaching experience reflects the years of experience as of the end of the school year. 

Teachers hired at the beginning of the school year with no professional teaching 

experience are reported as having 1 year of experience.
This page intentionally left blank. 
3. Data Availability 

A 2006 feasibility study by National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), with 

follow-up interviews by a team of researchers in 2007 found that at least 34 states collect 

teacher-level compensation data (Pantal et al. 2008). Of the 34 states identified, 15 chose 

to participate in the school year (SY) 2006–07 Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS), as 

did an additional 2 states that were not identified in the feasibility study. The 17 states 

participating in the TCS cannot be considered a nationally representative sample. 

Researchers should take caution because not every data item was reported for all 

the teachers in the participating states. NCES encouraged states to submit data even if 

some of the TCS data items were not collected for all the teachers in the state for the 

school year. Highlights of the key data item availability in the SY 2006–07 TCS 

restricted-use data file are discussed below. For complete details on the availability of 

other data items, such as demographic information and indicator variables, please see 

Appendix C—State Notes. 

In cases where a teacher taught in more than one school, NCES required a 

separate record be reported for each teacher in each school. Each of these separate 

records included an ID for the respective school, an identical teacher ID, and a full-time 

equivalent (FTE) value that reflects the amount of time the teacher worked at that school. 

In Arizona, every record had a unique teacher ID, indicating that they taught in only one 

school. It is possible that Arizona assigned different teacher IDs to the same teacher in 

different schools. 

States were asked to report school identifiers for each teacher, allowing the 

teachers to be matched with school-level data surveys using NCES school identifiers. 

Arkansas did not report school identification numbers, although school district identifiers 

were available for about 99 percent of its records. Additionally, Arkansas did not report 

data for teachers in several large school districts, including Little Rock in SY 2006–07. 

FTE is the most widely available variable, missing for only 0.1 percent of records 

in Texas and 7 percent of records in Florida. FTE was reported for all records in the other 

15 states. 

Base salary was also reported by all states for nearly all records (7 percent of 

Florida records were missing a value for base salary; 0.02 percent of Arizona and Texas 

records were missing base salary). Fewer states were able to report data for total pay: 

Colorado, Maine, and South Carolina did not report total pay for any record submitted, 

and total pay was missing for 0.02 percent of records in Arizona and Texas and 3 percent 

of records in Florida. 

Benefits data, including health, retirement, and other benefits, were only available 

for 6 of the 17 states. Four states, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Oklahoma, were 

able to report total benefits and all detailed benefit categories for all teacher records 

submitted. Florida reported total benefits and all benefits categories for 96 percent of the 

7 
teacher records submitted. Nebraska was able to report total benefits for all teacher 

records submitted, but was not able to break out the total into the detail components. 

Among the seven states that participated in both the SY 2005–06 and SY 2006–07 

data collections, four states (Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, and Oklahoma) were able to 

assign a consistent teacher identification number if the teacher was employed in both SY 

2005–06 and SY 2006–07, which enables NCES to link the teachers across years. A total 

of 175,506 out of 197,484 teachers (89 percent) for SY 2006–07 in these four states could 

be linked between the 2 school years. The rest of teachers in these four states could not be 

linked across years. Possible reasons for this could be the teacher moved out of the state, 

transferred to a private school, left the teaching profession, or the teacher was new to 

teaching in SY 2006–07. Additional issues in maintaining consistent teacher 

identification numbers over time are discussed in the following section. 

8 
4. Data Quality 

Data Formatting Issues 

The U.S. Census Bureau developed a web-based submission system that allowed 

states to submit data in a variety of file format types. State Teacher Compensation Survey 

(TCS) coordinators were asked to submit their data files with variables in a particular 

order, and using specified values, such as “1” for “male” and “2” for “female” in the 

“sex” variable field. 

If states were not able to comply with these requests, Census Bureau staff worked 

with state TCS coordinators to transform the data to National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES) specifications and develop methods that would enable the state to 

transform the data before submitting files for future data collections. States were 

receptive to suggestions, and among the seven states that participated in both the school 

year (SY) 2005–06 and SY 2006–07 data collections, less follow-up was needed in the 

second year. These states also indicated that the remaining formatting problems (such as 

matching teacher records with schools or being able to indicate which teachers work at 

multiple schools) should be resolved by the time of the SY 2007–08 data collection. 

Teacher Identification Numbers 

For teachers with multiple records (multiple teaching assignments), data checks 

were conducted to evaluate the consistency of demographic information between records. 

Characteristics such as birth year, sex, and highest degree earned would be expected to be 

the same for a teacher identified in different schools. In some cases, demographic 

information was only reported for one of the teacher’s records, and the information was 

missing for subsequent records. In these cases, teacher characteristic information was 

replicated from the first record. In other cases, the information differed for the multiple 

records (such as having the highest degree be a bachelor’s degree for one record and a 

master’s degree for another record), and in these cases no correction could be made. 

Of the seven states participating in both TCS surveys, four indicated that teacher 

identification numbers were held constant for a teacher employed in both school years. 

However, it is possible that the identification number was applied to the wrong individual 

in some of these cases. In Colorado, 1,717 out of 41,187 teachers (4 percent) had 

different demographic information in the 2 school years. Demographic data also differed 

across school years for 71 out of 32,923 teachers (0.2 percent) in Iowa, 167 out of 62,042 

teachers (0.3 percent) in Missouri, and 588 out of 39,354 teachers (1 percent) in 

Oklahoma. In all these cases, NCES chose not to edit the records in these cases, leaving 

decisions about editing or suppressing these records to data users. 

Data Irregularities 

Many comparisons are possible with the TCS data, particularly within a single 

state that reported 2 years of data. However, data users must analyze the data between 

9 
states with caution due to variations in state data collection periods, variable definitions, 

and response patterns. 

NCES initially requested that states report teacher data at the end of the year, 

providing actual number of days worked, cumulative salary earned, etc., for all teachers 

employed for any duration during the school year. However, some states provided a 

snapshot of data from early in the year, with projections of days worked and salary based 

on the teaching contract. This “snapshot” reporting limits information on teachers who 

joined the workforce midyear and those who left partway through the school year. 

By TCS definition, base salary is the negotiated annual base salary in the contract 

for teaching duties. While teaching duties may vary by state to include extra pay for 

additional responsibilities related to teaching, base salaries are comparable across states 

as a contractual payment for teaching. 

Another example of inconsistent definitions is that of full-time equivalent (FTE) 

employment. NCES requested that states report FTE as the proportion of the time 

required for a full-time teaching position, prorated for each school the teacher worked at 

in cases where an individual had multiple teaching assignments. However, states often 

varied in the details of how they defined FTE. Some states could only distinguish full 

time or part time and, in the case of part-time teachers, could not prorate the amount of 

FTE to each school. As a result, in these states all values of FTE were 1.0 or 0.5, 

regardless of how much time a teacher actually spent teaching. In other states, FTE was 

based on the number of hours worked over the entire school year or was calculated based 

on both the number of days worked and the hours worked each day. Maximum values of 

FTE also varied by state – in some states, the maximum value of FTE was 1.0, regardless 

of how much time the teacher actually worked (i.e., overtime hours for extra duties 

cannot be identified). In other states, the total FTE for a teacher could be greater than 1.0. 

This typically occurred when a teacher worked at multiple schools or had taken on 

additional duties, such as coaching. 

Some responses to variables in the TCS were compared with responses to other 

variables to check for consistency. For example, states were asked to provide the FTE for 

each teacher and to indicate whether the individual was a full-time teacher or an 

employee who taught part time and performed other duties part time. It was then 

expected that teachers who had an FTE of 1.0 would be noted as a full-time employee. 

However, there were unexpected combinations, such as teachers reported as part time 

with an FTE equal to or greater than 1.0. 

In addition to the teacher compensation data specified in the TCS, NCES also 

collects information in a data plan from each state to help process the data and gain a 

better understanding of what programs and/or policies are connected with the data items 

and definitions. The SY 2006–07 TCS data plan responses by participating states appear 

in appendix B. The data plan responses are presented as reported by SEAs with minimal 

editing by NCES. 

10 
After reviewing and editing the data, NCES is aware that inconsistencies still 

remain in the data file. NCES has decided to leave this information for researchers to 

draw their own conclusions. For more information on state reporting and definitions, 

please see Appendix B—Data Plan Responses. For the edits that NCES conducted to the 

TCS data, see the next section—Edit Rules and Appendix C—State Notes. 

Edit Rules 

Staff at NCES, the U.S. Census Bureau, and the American Institutes for 

Research’s Education Statistics Services Institute (ESSI) collaborated in editing TCS data 

submissions and asking state TCS coordinators to correct or confirm any numbers that 

appeared to be incorrect compared with other data. If no explanation for anomalous data 

was provided by the state, NCES had the option of changing the data value to missing. 

Major edits and anomalies are discussed below. 

Business rules for acceptable ranges of data values were developed and 

implemented based on data plans submitted by the states, a review of state policies, and 

response pattern consistency. For instance, if a teacher was marked as new to the state, 

then the teacher must also have been new to the district; if there were multiple records for 

a single teacher identification number, then the teacher status must indicate that he or she 

worked at multiple schools. 

Specific variable responses were suppressed in some cases. These included cases 

where a teacher’s age was less than 17 or more than 90 years old, the teacher had more 

than 65 years of experience, or the number of days the teacher was contracted to work 

was more than 365. In these cases the record remained in the file, and the anomalous 

variable response was changed to missing. 

NCES edited the years of experience data in Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, 

Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas; since they each reported experience as 

of the beginning of the year to count teaching experience as of the end of SY 2006–07, 1 

year was added to the number of years of experience in these eight states. For all 

participating states, the age of a teacher was derived from the birth year reported by the 

state. Age was calculated by subtracting the birth year from 2007. 

Oklahoma and Texas reported salary data for teachers working at multiple schools 

that were not prorated to each school. NCES used the values of FTE for these teachers to 

redistribute the salary data (e.g., a teacher earning $30,000 annually and working half 

time in two schools may be incorrectly reported by the state as earning $30,000 in the 

first school and $30,000 in the second school. After redistributing by FTE the salary 

would have been $15,000 in each school.). 

The initial data file submitted by the state of Missouri showed an approximately 

equal distribution of the birth year variable between 1900 and 1999. It was expected that 

the number of teachers would increase slightly for people in their 20s (as they finish 

higher education) and would start to decrease as people reach their 40s and 50s (as 

teachers change professions, retire, etc.). Census staff worked with the state coordinator 

11 
and agreed to use the birth year data submitted for the SY 2007–08 data collection, which 

had been submitted in July 2009 and followed a more expected distribution. Ninety 

percent of the records in the SY 2006–07 dataset could be matched to the SY 2007–08 

dataset based on the teacher identification number, and birth year could be carried over. 

For the remaining 10 percent of records that could not be matched based on teacher ID, 

birth year was set to missing. 

In Kansas, there were a number of cases with duplicate combinations of a single 

teacher ID and NCES-assigned 12-digit school ID that could not be resolved by other 

business rules. In these cases, if the records had consistent data on school name, teacher 

demographics, and teacher status indicator, NCES believed that these records were for 

the same teacher in the same school, and then combined them to one record by summing 

up the FTE and salary data. 

Each variable in the restricted-use data file has a corresponding edit flag, and if 

the variable has been altered for a given record, the flag is set to “A.” For a complete list 

of edits that are specific to each participating state, see Appendix C—State Notes. 

12 
5. Comparison of the Teacher Compensation Survey With Other Sources of Data 

Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) data were compared with data from other 

surveys in order to assess the quality and completeness of the data. This section provides 

comparative analysis of schools, teachers, and teacher salary data between school year 

(SY) 2006–07 TCS data and other Common Core of Data (CCD) data files, National 

Education Association (NEA) data, and Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) data. 3

 

Teacher and School Data in the TCS and Other CCD Data Files 

FTE Teacher Counts. Each TCS record indicates the school where the teacher 

worked by reporting the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) school ID 

number. These schools were compared to the schools in the CCD School Universe, which 

is recognized as the most complete listing of all public schools in the nation. The total 

numbers of full-time equivalent (FTE) teachers in the TCS and the School Universe were 

close for the 17 TCS participating states in SY 2006–07 (1,058,554 vs. 1,057,974; a 

difference of 0.1 percent) (table 1). Because the School Universe is a “snapshot” count of 

schools and teachers at the beginning of the school year, the two surveys were expected 

to report similar, but not necessarily the same numbers. The TCS collected data on 

1,058,554 FTE teachers who taught during SY 2006–07. The number of FTE teachers in 

the School Universe during the same year, for the same 17 states participating in the 

TCS, was 1,057,974. Teachers in the TCS without valid NCES school IDs or valid SEA 

school IDs were not counted. The TCS file had valid school IDs associated with 

1,022,606 FTE teachers. The difference between the TCS and the School Universe FTE 

teacher counts was more than 20 percent in Arkansas; an examination of the TCS data 

from Arkansas revealed that no data were reported for teachers in several large school 

districts, including Little Rock. 

The teacher count from the School Universe for South Carolina was confirmed by 

the state CCD coordinator to be unreliable; therefore, the teacher count from the CCD 

State Nonfiscal Survey was used in table 1 for South Carolina. The FTE teacher counts in 

the TCS and the School Universe were within 5 percent of each other for 14 of the 17 

states where a comparison could be made (using the State Nonfiscal Survey teacher count 

for South Carolina).4

 

 

3

 NEA data were reported in: National Education Association, Rankings & Estimates, “Rankings of the 

States 2008 and Estimates of School Statistics 2009.” SASS data were reported in: U.S. Department of 

Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS), “Public School 

Teacher Data File,” school year 2007–08. 4

 The difference in the FTE teacher counts between the TCS and the School Universe was greater than 9 

percent for Kansas and Missouri. The counts were from files collected for different reporting periods (full 

year count for TCS, and fall count only for the School Universe), however there may be other issues as 

well, and NCES is working towards identifying and resolving those issues. 

13 
Table 1.—Number of and percentage difference in full-time-equivalent (FTE) teachers reported in the Teacher 

Table 1.—Compensation Survey (TCS) and School Universe Survey, by participating state: School year 2006–07 

 

Participating state 

Number of FTE 

teachers in the 

TCS 

Number of FTE 

teachers in the 

School Universe 

Survey

Percentage

difference

Number of FTE 

teachers reported in 

the TCS with valid 

school IDs 

Percentage of FTE 

teachers reported 

in schools with 

valid school IDs

 Reporting states 1,058,554 1,057,974 0.1 1,022,606 96.6

 

Arizona 52,659 52,569 0.2 52,651 100.0

Arkansas 25,9611 37,579 -30.9 02 0.02

Colorado 46,974 46,455 1.1 46,457 98.9

Florida 169,073 162,825 3.8 169,073 100.0

Idaho 14,859 14,770 0.6 14,859 100.0

 

Iowa 34,910 35,156 -0.7 34,585 99.1

Kansas 33,878 37,681 -10.1 32,624 96.3

Kentucky 43,123 41,452 4.0 41,590 96.4

Louisiana 45,147 45,688 -1.2 45,142 100.0

Maine 16,232 16,795 -3.3 16,232 100.0

 

Minnesota 52,663 50,838 3.6 51,610 98.0

Mississippi 32,348 31,851 1.6 32,348 100.0

Missouri 67,573 61,891 9.2 65,144 96.4

Nebraska 21,433 21,516 -0.4 21,369 99.7

Oklahoma 42,119 40,999 2.7 40,974 97.3

South Carolina 47,948 49,2843 -2.7 47,325 98.7

Texas 311,654 310,624 0.3 310,624 99.7 1

 Arkansas did not provide teacher data on the TCS for some of its large school districts (e.g., Little Rock School 

District). Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not reported on the TCS for Arkansas. 

2

 Arkansas did not report any school identifiers. 3

 Number is the FTE teacher count in the State Nonfiscal Survey. The total FTE teacher count reported in the School 

Universe Survey was 65,352 for South Carolina in school year 2006–07. The state indicated that the number in the State 

Nonfiscal Survey was more reliable. 

NOTE: The TCS and School Universe Survey were collected at different times during the school year. The TCS 

collected individual data on teachers, whereas the School Universe collected teacher information aggregated to the 

school level. Arkansas teachers were included in the teacher counts in this table to demonstrate the fact that the data 

were missing for more than 20 percent of teachers in the state. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a; “Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe 

Survey,” school year 2006–07, Version 1c; "State Nonfiscal Survey of Public Elementary/Secondary Education," school 

year 2006–07, Version 1c. 

School Counts. The number of schools covered by the TCS was close to the 

number of operating schools covered by the School Universe for the 16 states meeting 

NCES reporting standards in the TCS (31,410 vs. 31,087) (table 2). The TCS collected 

data on teachers in 31,410 schools that were individually identified. Some of these 

schools did not have valid NCES School IDs and were counted based on the state’s own 

ID number. Arkansas did not report any school ID numbers, but did report state local 

education agency ID numbers (LEAIDs). The number of schools in the 16 remaining 

states reporting school ID data ranged from 668 (each) in Idaho and Maine to 8,074 in 

Texas. 

The School Universe contained data for 31,087 operating schools5

 for the 16 

states meeting NCES reporting standards in the TCS (table 2). All but 183 of these 

schools could be found in the TCS. Of the 31,410 schools identified in the TCS, 30,904 

schools could be matched to operating schools in the School Universe; 278 schools could 

 

5

 Schools coded as closed, inactive, to be opened within 2 years, or without teachers were removed from all 

of the School Universe school counts. 

14 
be matched to the closed, inactive, future schools, or schools without teachers in the 

School Universe; and 228 schools could not be matched to the School Universe. 

Table 2.—Number of schools reported in the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) and School Universe Survey, by 

Table 2.—survey coverage status and participating state: School year 2006–07 

 

Participating state 

Number of

schools in 

the TCS1

Number of

operating

schools2 in the 

School 

Universe

Survey

Number of

operating 

schools2

matched in the 

TCS and School 

Universe 

Survey

Number of

operating 

schools2 in the 

School Universe 

Survey but not 

in the TCS

Number of

nonoperating 

schools3

matched in the 

TCS and School 

Universe 

Survey

Number of

schools in the 

TCS1 but not in 

the School 

Universe 

Survey

 Reporting states4 31,410 31,087 30,904 183 278 228

 

Arizona 1,438 1,415 1,415 0 23 0

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 1,727 1,727 1,726 1 1 0

Florida 3,458 3,370 3,334 36 124 0

Idaho 668 687 657 30 11 0

 

Iowa 1,500 1,509 1,500 9 0 0

Kansas 1,402 1,403 1,394 9 0 8

Kentucky 1,375 1,363 1,360 3 15 0

Louisiana 1,405 1,425 1,393 32 11 1

Maine 668 670 667 3 1 0

 

Minnesota 2,205 2,213 2,195 18 5 5

Mississippi 1,037 1,048 1,033 15 4 0

Missouri 2,368 2,329 2,328 1 20 20

Nebraska 1,138 1,164 1,138 26 0 0

Oklahoma 1,787 1,787 1,787 0 0 0

South Carolina 1,160 1,101 1,101 0 58 1

Texas 8,074 7,876 7,876 0 5 193

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. 

1

 Only schools with a valid NCES school ID or a valid state school ID are counted. 

2

 Excludes schools in the CCD School Universe that are not operating (closed, inactive, or future schools) or are without 

teachers. 

3

 Includes schools in the CCD School Universe that are not operating (closed, inactive, or future schools) or are without 

teachers. 

4

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas. 

NOTE: The TCS and School Universe Survey were collected at different times during the school year. The TCS collected 

individual data on teachers, whereas the School Universe collected teacher information aggregated to the school level. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a; “Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe 

Survey,” school year 2006–07, Version 1c. 

 

Matching Schools in the Teacher Compensation Survey and the School Universe. 

All of the schools reported in the TCS for Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, 

Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Nebraska, and Oklahoma could be matched to the School 

Universe, and all of the schools reported in the School Universe in Arizona, Oklahoma, 

South Carolina, and Texas could be matched to the TCS (table 2). For Oklahoma, the 

number of reported schools in the TCS matched the number of the operational schools in 

the School Universe. Louisiana and South Carolina each reported one school in the TCS 

that could not be matched to the School Universe. Colorado and Missouri each reported 

one school in the School Universe that could not be matched to the TCS. 

15 
The 228 schools in the TCS, but not in the School Universe, were associated with 

1,149 FTE teachers (table 3). All but 127 of these FTE teachers were located in Texas 

(derived from table 3). 

Table 3.—Number of schools, full-time-equivalent (FTE) teachers, and teachers for schools reported in the Teacher 

Table 3.—Compensation Survey (TCS), but not in the School Universe Survey, by participating state: School year 

Table 3.—2006–07 

 

Participating state 

Number of schools in the TCS1

but not in the School

Universe Survey

Number of FTE teachers 

of the schools in the TCS1

but not in the School 

Universe Survey

Number of teachers of

the schools in the TCS1

but not in the School 

Universe Survey

 Reporting states2 228 1,149 1,517

 

Arizona 0 † †

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 0 † †

Florida 0 † †

Idaho 0 † †

 

Iowa 0 † †

Kansas 8 59 64

Kentucky 0 † †

Louisiana 1 3 4

Maine 0 † †

 

Minnesota 5 17 24

Mississippi 0 † †

Missouri 20 47 48

Nebraska 0 † †

Oklahoma 0 † †

South Carolina 1 1 1

Texas 193 1,022 1,376

† Not applicable. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. 

1

 Only schools with a valid NCES school ID or a valid state school ID are counted. 

2

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas. 

NOTE: The TCS and School Universe Survey were collected at different times during the school year. The TCS collected 

individual data on teachers, whereas the School Universe collected teacher information aggregated to the school level. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a; “Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe 

Survey,” school year 2006–07, Version 1c. 

The 183 schools in the School Universe that were not represented in the TCS 

were associated with a total of 1,887 FTE teachers serving 22,395 students (table 4). 

(Schools in the School Universe without any teachers were excluded from this analysis.) 

 

16 
Table 4.—Number of schools, full-time-equivalent (FTE) teachers, and students for operating schools reported in 

Table 4.—the School Universe Survey, but not in the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS), by participating state: 

Table 4.—School year 2006–07 

 

Participating state 

Number of operating schools1

in the School Universe Survey

but not in the TCS

Number of FTE teachers

of the operating schools1

in the School Universe 

Survey but not in the TCS

Number of students

of the operating schools1

in the School Universe 

Survey but not in the TCS

 Reporting states2 183 1,887 22,395

 

Arizona 0 † †

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 1 19 412

Florida 36 338 4,646

Idaho 30 233 3,492

 

Iowa 9 24 220

Kansas 9 138 528

Kentucky 3 36 685

Louisiana 32 673 9,921

Maine 3 36 355

 

Minnesota 18 69 1,036

Mississippi 15 207 891

Missouri 1 13 195

Nebraska 26 101 14

Oklahoma 0 † †

South Carolina 0 † †

Texas 0 † †

† Not applicable. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. 

1

 Excludes schools in the School Universe that were not operating (closed, inactive, or future schools) or were without 

teachers. 

2

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas. 

NOTE: The TCS and School Universe Survey were collected at different times during the school year. The TCS collected 

individual data on teachers, whereas the School Universe collected teacher information aggregated to the school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a; “Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe 

Survey,” school year 2006–07, Version 1c. 

After removing the data for Arkansas (due to the missing school IDs) and South 

Carolina (due to the teacher overcount in the School Universe), a total of 29,774 schools 

in 15 states were represented in both the TCS and School Universe (table 5). For these 

29,774 schools, the TCS reported 973,434 FTE teachers, or a headcount of 1,007,825 

teachers. The School Universe reported 968,959 FTE teachers serving 14,827,025 

students. The percentage difference between the number of teachers in the School 

Universe and in the TCS was 0.5 percent. The percentage differences between the teacher 

counts in the two surveys were smaller in table 5 (where only data for schools appearing 

in both files were counted) than in table 1 at the state level (where all records were used 

in the counts). The exceptions (where the absolute difference in teacher counts was larger 

when only matching schools are considered) occurred in Arizona, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, 

and Mississippi. 

 

17 
Table 5.—Number of schools that reported full-time-equivalent (FTE) teacher counts in both the Teacher 

Table 5.—Compensation Survey (TCS) and School Universe Survey, number of and percentage difference in FTE 

Table 5.—teachers for these schools, and number of teachers and students for these schools, by participating state: 

Table 5.—School year 2006–07 

 

 Schools matched in the TCS and School Universe Survey1

Participating state 

Number of schools

matched in the TCS

and School Universe

Survey1 that reported

FTE teacher counts

Number of

FTE teachers 

in the TCS

Number of

FTE teachers 

in the School 

Universe 

Survey

Percentage 

difference of

FTE teachers

Number of

teachers in 

the TCS

Number of

students in 

the School 

Universe 

Survey

 Reporting states2 29,774 973,434 968,959 0.5 1,007,825 14,827,025

 

Arizona 1,415 52,455 52,569 -0.2 54,652 967,827

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 1,726 46,438 46,437 # 47,889 791,376

Florida 3,306 167,779 162,223 3.4 179,589 2,601,831

Idaho 657 14,808 14,537 1.9 15,260 263,835

 

Iowa 1,500 34,585 35,132 -1.6 35,498 481,468

Kansas 1,394 32,623 37,543 -13.1 33,510 458,877

Kentucky 1,360 41,482 41,416 0.2 42,053 644,382

Louisiana 1,393 45,064 45,015 0.1 47,156 665,388

Maine 667 16,201 16,759 -3.3 16,750 193,626

 

Minnesota 2,195 51,609 50,769 1.7 54,297 835,894

Mississippi 1,033 32,328 31,644 2.2 33,498 494,135

Missouri 2,327 65,096 61,877 5.2 67,026 918,575

Nebraska 1,138 21,369 21,415 -0.2 22,108 287,561

Oklahoma 1,787 40,974 40,999 -0.1 42,468 638,295

South Carolina ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Texas 7,876 310,624 310,624 0.0 316,071 4,583,955

# Rounds to zero. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. Teacher counts for South Carolina on the School Universe Survey were characterized as 

unreliable by the data coordinator. 

1

 Excludes schools that were matched in both the TCS and School Universe Survey but reported zero or missing FTE 

teacher count in either of the surveys. 

2

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas and South Carolina. 

NOTE: The TCS and School Universe Survey were collected at different times during the school year. The TCS collected 

individual data on teachers, whereas the School Universe collected teacher information aggregated to the school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a; “Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe 

Survey,” school year 2006–07, Version 1c. 

In table 6, the teacher counts from the TCS and the School Universe are compared 

for each school in the 15 states for which data were available. For the 29,774 schools 

represented in both surveys for these 15 states, the FTE teacher counts were within 1 

percent for 17,220 schools, or 58 percent of the schools. The teacher counts were within 

10 percent of each other in an additional 8,626 schools, or 87 percent of schools overall. 

 

18 
Table 6.—Number and percentage distribution of schools that reported full-time-equivalent (FTE) teacher counts in both 

Table 6.—the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) and School Universe Survey, by percentage difference in FTE 

Table 6.—teachers reported in the surveys and participating state: School year 2006–07 

 

 

Number of schools

matched in the TCS

and School

Universe Survey1

that reported FTE

teacher counts

 Number of schools where the 

percentage difference in FTE 

teachers between the TCS and 

School Universe Survey is 

Percent of schools where the 

percentage difference in FTE 

teachers between the TCS and 

School Universe Survey is 

 

 

 

Participating state 

less than 

or equal 

to 1 

percent

greater than 

1 and less 

than or

equal to 10 

percent

greater

than 10 

percent

less than 

or equal to 

1 percent

greater than 

1 and less 

than or

equal to 10 

percent

greater than 

10 percent

 Reporting states2 29,774 17,220 8,626 3,928 57.8 29.0 13.2

 

Arizona 1,415 1,288 112 15 91.0 7.9 1.1

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 1,726 1,694 30 2 98.1 1.7 0.1

Florida 3,306 780 1,933 593 23.6 58.5 17.9

Idaho 657 180 363 114 27.4 55.3 17.4

 

Iowa 1,500 184 816 500 12.3 54.4 33.3

Kansas 1,394 22 387 985 1.6 27.8 70.7

Kentucky 1,360 379 794 187 27.9 58.4 13.8

Louisiana 1,393 322 883 188 23.1 63.4 13.5

Maine 667 126 497 44 18.9 74.5 6.6

 

Minnesota 2,195 1,588 457 150 72.3 20.8 6.8

Mississippi 1,033 125 576 332 12.1 55.8 32.1

Missouri 2,327 184 1,347 796 7.9 57.9 34.2

Nebraska 1,138 1,034 99 5 90.9 8.7 0.4

Oklahoma 1,787 1,533 245 9 85.8 13.7 0.5

South Carolina ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Texas 7,876 7,781 87 8 98.8 1.1 0.1

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. Teacher counts for South Carolina on the School Universe Survey were characterized as 

unreliable by the data coordinator. 

1

 Excludes schools that were matched in both the TCS and School Universe Survey but reported zero or missing FTE 

teacher count in either of the surveys. 

2

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas and South Carolina. 

NOTE: The TCS and School Universe Survey were collected at different times during the school year. The TCS collected 

individual data on teachers, whereas the School Universe collected teacher information aggregated to the school level. 

Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a; “Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe 

Survey,” school year 2006–07, Version 1c. 

Salary Data in the TCS and Other Surveys 

In order to verify the salary data collected in the TCS, they were compared with 

data from three other sources. First, the TCS data were compared with data from the 

CCD School District Finance Survey (F-33). The F-33 survey contains district-level 

expenditure data, including expenditures for teacher salaries, which is an optional item in 

the F-33 that was reported by only 9 of the 16 states meeting NCES reporting standards 

in the TCS. (Arkansas was excluded because data were missing for more than 20 percent 

of the teachers in that state.) The F-33 had data for 1,978 of the districts with TCS data in 

these 9 states (table 7). When the sum of the TCS total salaries for each school district 

was compared with the F-33, the salaries were within 1 percent for 201 of the 1,978 

districts and within 10 percent for an additional 1,196 districts. In other words, for 71 

percent of the districts with data, the salary data from the two sources agreed to within 10 

19 
percent. In Mississippi, the salary data agreed to within 10 percent for 97 percent of all 

school districts. The difference between the two sources was largest for Idaho, where 72 

percent of the school districts had differences in salary data of more than 10 percent. 

Table 7.—Number and percentage distribution of school districts matched in the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) 

Table 7.—and School District Finance Survey (F-33), by percentage difference in district total teacher salaries reported in 

Table 7. the surveys and participating state: School year 2006–07 

 

 

Number

of school 

districts 

matched 

in the 

TCS and 

F-33

 Number of school districts where 

the percentage difference in 

district total teacher salaries 

between the TCS and F-33 is 

Percent of school districts where 

the percentage difference in 

district total teacher salaries 

between the TCS and F-33 is 

 

 

 

Participating state 

less than

or equal 

to 1 

percent

greater

than 1 and 

less than 

or equal to 

10 percent

greater

than 10 

and less 

than or

equal to 25 

percent

greater

than 25 

percent 

less than 

or equal 

to 1 

percent

greater than 

1 and less 

than or

equal to 10

percent

greater

than 10 

and less 

than or

equal to 25 

percent

greater

than 25 

percent 

 Reporting states1 1,978 201 1,196 479 102 10.2 60.5 24.2 5.2

 

Arizona 215 13 107 77 18 6.0 49.8 35.8 8.4

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado — — — — — — — — —

Florida 67 3 52 11 1 4.5 77.6 16.4 1.5

Idaho 124 6 29 86 3 4.8 23.4 69.4 2.4

 

Iowa 365 67 260 37 1 18.4 71.2 10.1 0.3

Kansas 296 35 173 69 19 11.8 58.4 23.3 6.4

Kentucky 175 16 117 28 14 9.1 66.9 16.0 8.0

Louisiana 86 8 65 11 2 9.3 75.6 12.8 2.3

Maine — — — — — — — — —

 

Minnesota 498 23 275 157 43 4.6 55.2 31.5 8.6

Mississippi 152 30 118 3 1 19.7 77.6 2.0 0.7

Missouri — — — — — — — — —

Nebraska — — — — — — — — —

Oklahoma — — — — — — — — —

South Carolina — — — — — — — — —

Texas — — — — — — — — —

— Not available. Colorado, Maine, and South Carolina did not report teacher total salary data in the TCS. Missouri, 

Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas did not report any teacher salary data in the F-33. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. 

1

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and 

Texas. 

NOTE: Teacher total salary is the total amount of money paid to teachers by the school district for school year 2006–07. 

Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a; “School District Finance Survey (F-33),” fiscal year 

2006, Version 1a. 

Next, data on average teacher salaries reported by the National Education 

Association (NEA), which are from an annual, national state-level data collection, were 

compared with the TCS data. The NEA collects data from state departments of education 

and other sources. The NEA collection defines salary as the gross salary received by 

teachers before deductions for Social Security, retirement, health insurance, etc. An 

average teacher salary from the TCS was computed based on the total salaries of full-time 

teachers who taught only at one school. Total salaries from the TCS were used because 

the definition of total salaries agreed best with the salary definition used by the NEA. 

20 
The differences between NEA average total salaries and TCS average total 

salaries were 1 percent or less in Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi (table 8). The TCS 

and NEA average total salaries were within 5 percent of each other in 11 of the 13 states 

for which a mean total salary from the TCS could be calculated. The greatest disparity 

between the surveys occurred in Kansas (9 percent) and Oklahoma (-8 percent). This 

comparison could not be performed for Colorado, Maine, and South Carolina because 

only base salaries were reported for these states in the TCS. 

Table 8.—Mean of and percentage difference in full-time teacher total salaries reported in the Teacher 

Table 8.—Compensation Survey (TCS) and National Education Association (NEA) data collection, by participating 

Table 8.—state: School year 2006–07 

 

Participating state 

Mean teacher total salary

reported in the TCS1

Mean teacher total salary 

reported in the NEA data 

collection2

Percentage

difference 

 Reporting states3 $44,987 — —

 

Arizona 43,743 $44,700 -2.1

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado — 45,833 —

Florida 45,750 45,308 1.0

Idaho 43,902 42,798 2.6

 

Iowa 43,711 43,130 1.3

Kansas 47,249 43,358 9.0

Kentucky 44,855 43,646 2.8

Louisiana 42,863 42,816 0.1

Maine — 42,103 —

 

Minnesota 50,556 49,718 1.7

Mississippi 40,193 40,182 #

Missouri 43,642 41,751 4.5

Nebraska 43,653 42,044 3.8

Oklahoma 38,902 42,379 -8.2

South Carolina — 43,891 —

Texas 45,816 44,897 2.0

— Not available. 

# Rounds to zero. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. 

1

 Teacher total salary reported in the TCS is the total amount of money paid to a teacher by the school district for school 

year 2006–07. Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school with fulltime equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated that the 

teacher was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, but their 

data were included if other criteria above were met. These data were not adjusted for geographic cost differences across 

the states. 

2

 Teacher total salary reported in the NEA data collection is the gross salary before deductions for Social Security, 

retirement, health insurance, and so on for school year 2006–07.

3

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, and South Carolina. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a; National Education Association, Rankings & 

Estimates, "Rankings of the States 2008 and Estimates of School Statistics 2009." 

Finally, average base salaries for full-time teachers derived from the TCS were 

compared with average base salaries from the NCES Schools and Staffing Survey 

(SASS). SASS is a nationally representative sample survey of public, private, and Bureau 

of Indian Education-funded K–12 schools, principals, and teachers in the 50 states and 

the District of Columbia. Public schools in SASS are sampled to support state level 

estimates in a way that it is possible to compare teacher salaries at the state level. The 

SASS salary data are reported by the individual teachers participating in the survey. The 

21 
survey is conducted every 3 to 6 years, most recently in SY 2007–08. In order to compare 

the SY 2007–08 SASS data with the SY 2006–07 TCS data, the SASS data were deflated 

to 2006–07 dollars using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjusted to a July to June fiscal 

year. (The CPI is produced by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic 

Analysis.) Base salaries from the TCS were used in this comparison because these 

salaries correspond better to the salary definition used by SASS. SASS collects salary 

data through responses to the following survey item: “What is your academic year base 

teaching salary?” 

This analysis was able to use data from 16 of the 17 states participating in the 

TCS, since all states reported base salaries. For 15 of the 16 states participating in the 

TCS and meeting NCES reporting standards, the TCS mean base salary was higher than 

the mean base salary from SASS (table 9). The comparison has been tested for statistical 

significance to ensure that the differences are larger than might be expected due to 

sampling variation.6 Differences should also be interpreted carefully, due to differences 

in salary definitions between the surveys and the accuracy of the deflation factor applied 

to the SASS data. 

 

 

6

 The test procedure used in this analysis was one-sample Student’s t test, which tests the difference 

between the sample mean and the population mean. The formula used to compute the t statistic is as 

follows: ௑തିఓ

௦௘ , where ܺത is the SASS mean base salary, μ is the TCS mean base salary, and se is the standard 

error of the SASS mean base salary. The t test formula was not adjusted for multiple comparisons. In this 

test an alpha value of .05 was used, which has critical t values of ±1.96. If the t statistic was larger than 

1.96 or smaller than -1.96, then the difference between the two means is statistically significant. 

22 
Table 9.—Mean of full-time teacher base salaries reported in the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS), school 

Table 9.—year 2006–07, and the Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS), school year 2007–08, by participating state 

 

Participating state 

Mean teacher base salary

reported in the TCS1

Mean teacher base salary

reported in the SASS2

SE

 Reporting states3 $43,814 (—)

 (†)

 

Arizona 43,743 $38,958* 

 ($530) 

Arkansas ‡ ‡ 

 (†) 

Colorado 45,268 43,394* 

 (810) 

Florida 44,283 42,815* 

 (521) 

Idaho 42,842 40,693* 

 (540) 

 

Iowa 43,182 37,704* 

 (424) 

Kansas 42,163 39,826* 

 (588) 

Kentucky 43,301 43,201 

 (415) 

Louisiana 42,006 39,729* 

 (424) 

Maine 42,882 39,922* 

 (501) 

 

Minnesota 50,556 48,022* 

 (598) 

Mississippi 39,724 38,379* 

 (415) 

Missouri 41,988 39,151* 

 (752) 

Nebraska 42,026 35,776* 

 (723) 

Oklahoma 37,576 35,968* 

 (203) 

South Carolina 42,913 41,368* 

 (444) 

Texas 44,811 42,718* 

 (530)

— Not available. 

† Not applicable. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. 

* p < .05. 1

 Base salary reported in the TCS is defined as the negotiated annual salary for teaching duties, excluding bonuses and 

extra pay for extra duties. Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one 

school with full-time equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable 

indicated that the teacher was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status 

indicator, but their data were included if other criteria above were met. These data were not adjusted for geographic cost 

differences across the states. 

2

 Base salary is the self-reported value to the SASS-4A Public Teacher 2007–08 Survey question, "What is your academic 

year base teaching salary?" The 2007–08 amounts are adjusted to 2006–07 dollars by using the Consumer Price Index 

adjusted to a fiscal-year basis (July through June). 3

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas. 

NOTE: Standard errors appear in parentheses. When comparing the mean base salaries in the TCS and SASS, the 

standard error should be counted since SASS is a sample survey. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a; Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS), "Public School 

Teacher Data File," school year 2007–08; Digest of Education Statistics: 2008, retrieved May 20, 2010, from 

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d08/tables/dt08_031.asp?referrer=list. 

 

23 
Summary

Overall, the TCS and CCD School Universe collection of individual teacher data 

appear to be nearly aligned for most all of the states participating in the TCS. The FTE 

teacher counts in the TCS and the School Universe were within 4 percent of each other 

for 13 of the 16 states for which a comparison could be made. Schools reported in the 

TCS also appeared to match up well with the schools reported in the School Universe. Of 

the 31,087 schools in the School Universe in the 16 states participating in the TCS and 

reporting NCES school IDs, 30,904 could be found in the TCS. 

Comparing average teacher total salary between TCS and F-33 data for 9 of the 

16 states for which comparisons could be made indicated that total salaries between the 

two surveys were within 10 percent for more than two-thirds of the districts with data. 

The TCS mean base salary was higher than the mean base salary from SASS for 15 of the 

16 states participating in the TCS and meeting NCES reporting standards. However, this 

difference may be attributable to the deflation factor applied to the SASS data to align 

reporting years for comparison and differences in definitions and survey designs. Finally, 

the average teacher total salary calculated from the TCS data agreed to within 5 percent 

of the average teacher total salary reported by NEA for 11 of the 13 states for which 

comparisons could be made. 

24 
6. Limitations and Advantages of the Teacher Compensation Survey 

Limitations of the Teacher Compensation Survey 

The limitations of the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) for research purposes 

are generally applicable to some, but not all, states. They also vary in their potential 

impact on data quality. 

o Not all state education agencies (SEAs) collect administrative data on teachers’ 

compensation. There are no legal or regulatory requirements that SEAs collect or 

report teachers’ compensation data to National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES) or any other federal entity. For example, in early 2009, officials from 

California and Massachusetts indicated that their states do not collect 

administrative data on teachers’ compensation at the district or school level. 

o Administrative records maintained by the SEAs for many states do not include all 

the data needed for the TCS. For example, many SEAs do not have the capacity to 

provide health and retirement benefits data. There are many challenges to 

obtaining health and retirement benefits from state administrative records. First, 

some SEAs do not collect individual teacher-level data on health and retirement 

benefits. Second, even if SEAs collect health and retirement benefits data, there 

may be significant differences in the way states collect and report the data. 

o Although NCES provided detailed instructions and definitions for each data item 

in the TCS, a subsequent review of the data found differences in how the states 

interpreted these definitions. Thus, states were asked to submit a data plan that 

provided them an opportunity to present clarifying information on the data they 

submitted. In some instances, it was necessary for NCES and the U.S. Census 

Bureau to communicate with the states in order to address these differences. In 

some cases, data were revised to align more closely with the TCS definitions and 

resubmitted by the states. In other cases, inconsistencies were resolved 

completely. For more information on state reporting and definitions, please see 

Appendix B—Data Plan Responses and Appendix C—State Notes. 

o Unique teacher identifiers are not being reported on a longitudinal basis for some 

states. If states maintained unique teacher identifiers on a longitudinal basis, 

researchers could track the increases in teachers’ base salaries over time, advances 

in the education levels of teachers, mobility between districts and schools, and 

exit and reentry into the workforce, among other variables of interest. About 25 

percent of the states that submitted SY 2006–07 data to the TCS used unique 

teacher identifiers on a longitudinal basis. 

o Currently there is no unique identification number that can be used to track 

teachers moving across state borders (e.g., Social Security Numbers are not used 

due to privacy concerns). The question of conducting longitudinal analysis of 

individual teacher-level data across state lines poses formidable challenges. 

Michel Pantal stated, “One of the most powerful potential uses of [teacher 

25 
compensation data] is for longitudinal analyses across states that would allow 

researchers to investigate the flow of teachers back into teaching after a temporary 

exit. However, this analysis requires that states uniquely identify teachers in a 

uniform manner across states” (Pantal et al. 2008, p. 15). Interstate teacher 

mobility analysis could only be possible if all states were to participate in the TCS 

without interruption over time using a common teacher ID system, with an 

appropriate level of encryption. 

o The TCS cannot meet all of the data needs for research on teachers. The state 

administrative records that make up the TCS provide less comprehensive data on 

teachers than do other sources of data. While the TCS has fewer data items than 

surveys such as the Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS), it has the advantage of 

including the entire teacher population. However, because SASS samples teachers 

directly, it can collect items such as type or method of certification, subject area 

degree, and subjects taught, and ask more nuanced questions of teachers. The 

TCS is limited to items that have been collected in an administrative database, and 

any additional items are likely to be those easily obtained by the SEAs from the 

local education agencies (LEAs) and schools. 

The most serious limitations inherent in the TCS are the fact that not every SEA 

maintains administrative data on teachers’ compensation and the inability of some SEAs 

that do have compensation data to provide health and retirement benefits data. 

Systemic limitations to the TCS are being addressed progressively as SEAs build 

longitudinal data systems that include teachers. The other challenges to the TCS can be 

surmounted, by requesting that states that have administrative records on teachers’ 

compensation submit data to NCES and by improving the clarity of variable definitions. 

Recent meetings and communication among the U.S. Census Bureau, NCES, and the 

states have facilitated the consistent interpretation of variable definitions across states. 

Advantages of the Teacher Compensation Survey 

 The consistency of data on individual teachers between the TCS and the Common 

Core of Data (CCD) School Universe as well as the comparability of the average teacher 

salary between TCS and National Education Association (NEA) data indicate the 

collection is a reliable source of information on teachers’ compensation. The ability to 

link the TCS data to the CCD School Universe and/or Local Education Agency (School 

District) Universe provides the researcher with the opportunity to analyze the association 

of teachers’ salaries with such school variables as free and reduced-price lunch, 

geographic locale codes, and district variables such as English Language Learners (ELL). 

The TCS is the first individual level teacher data base that collects discrete characteristics 

and compensation data for all teachers in participating states.

26 
27 

As SEAs build longitudinal data systems that include teachers, the offers of 

technical assistance by the U.S. Census Bureau and NCES will encourage the 

participation of many more states in the TCS. Further, the federal resources currently 

available for improvement of longitudinal data collections can be leveraged by the states 

to build administrative databases that includes teachers’ data on educational background, 

certification, years of experience, and compensation. 
This page intentionally left blank. 
7. Selected Findings 

This section provides descriptive and summary statistics and findings from the 

Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) data for school year (SY) 2006–07, beginning with 

state-level teacher records and full-time equivalent (FTE) counts, base salaries, and 

teacher characteristics, followed by a presentation of variation in teacher base salary by 

teaching experience and highest degree earned. Tables are then presented covering 

teacher characteristics and base salary longitudinal changes over a 2-year span for the 

four states that can match data to teachers across both years of TCS data (SY 2005–06 

and SY 2006–07). Finally, total salary findings are presented. The analyses in this report 

do not take into account geographic cost differences. 

Full-Time and FTE Teacher Status 

The findings in this report are based on full-time teachers who taught in only one 

school. However, TCS data include teacher and school indicators and other variables that 

can be used to broaden analyses by providing additional information on part-time status 

and FTE values for teachers at each school where they taught. There were 1,137,917 

records from all reporting states in SY 2006–07, of which 83 percent were full-time 

teachers in one school included in this analysis, 5 percent were other full-time teachers 

not included in this analysis (including full-time teachers who did not receive any base 

salary, or for whom the teacher status indicator variable revealed contradictory 

information), 6 percent were part-time teachers with at least 50 percent FTE in one 

school, and 5 percent were less than 50 percent FTE part-time teachers. FTE data were 

unavailable for 1 percent records (table 10). 

 

29 
Table 10.—Number of records in the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) and percentage of teachers by 

Table 10.—teachers’ full-time equivalent (FTE) status and participating state: School year 2006–07 

 Percentage of teachers 

 

Number of

records

Full-time

teachers1

 

 FTE ≥ 0.9, but 

not included in 

the report2

Part-time teachers 

 

50 percent to

90 percent FTE

Less than 50 

percent FTE 

 

 FTE not

Participating state available 

 Reporting states 1,137,917 82.8 5.1 6.2 4.8 1.1

 

Arizona 54,885 91.9 # 5.5 2.5 0.0

Arkansas 26,202 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 50,419 85.2 0.4 9.1 5.2 0.0

Florida 182,809 82.1 9.3 1.5 0.3 6.7

Idaho 15,340 87.7 5.8 5.3 1.3 0.0

 

Iowa 35,864 78.7 16.0 5.3 0.0 0.0

Kansas 37,880 79.3 2.3 10.2 8.2 0.0

Kentucky 44,726 93.2 0.1 4.5 2.2 0.0

Louisiana 49,502 83.1 2.6 6.0 8.3 0.0

Maine 17,690 80.7 1.9 10.6 6.8 0.0

 

Minnesota 60,471 73.7 0.9 14.5 10.9 0.0

Mississippi 33,541 82.9 5.0 10.8 1.3 0.0

Missouri 75,332 81.3 1.1 8.2 9.3 0.0

Nebraska 24,845 75.9 0.4 12.7 11.1 0.0

Oklahoma 46,135 80.2 3.7 8.6 7.6 0.0

South Carolina 48,517 97.1 0.4 2.1 0.4 0.0

Texas 333,759 87.9 0.2 5.7 6.1 0.1

# Rounds to zero. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. 

1

 The analysis in this report included these records only. Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a 

base salary, taught at one school with full-time equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher 

status indicator variable indicated that the teacher was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not 

report the teacher status indicator, but their data were included if other criteria above were met. Arkansas data are not 

included in the analysis because data were missing for more than 20 percent of teachers in the state. 2

 Includes all records where FTE is greater than or equal to 0.9 but that are excluded from the analysis in this report (e.g., 

teachers working in more than one school, teachers whose base salary was reported as zero, and teachers in a state 

where the reporting standards were not met).

NOTE: The FTE in each record is the FTE of a teacher in each school where the teacher was teaching. Detail may not 

sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

Base Salaries 

The median base salaries of full-time teachers ranged from $36,450 in 

Oklahoma to $50,535 in Minnesota in SY 2006–07 (table 11). The mean base salaries 

of full-time teachers in participating TCS states ranged from $37,576 in Oklahoma to 

$50,556 in Minnesota. The median level of teaching experience ranged from 7 years in 

Arizona to 17 years in Maine. The median teacher age was between 41 and 47 in each 

of the states with reportable data. 

30 
Table 11.—Total number of full-time teachers, mean base salary, and median base salary, years of teaching experience, 

Table 11.— age, and number of contract days, by participating state: School year 2006–07 

 

Participating state 

Total number of

full-time teachers

Mean base 

salary1

Median base 

salary1

Median 

years of

teaching 

experience Median age

Median 

number of

days in teacher

contract

 Reporting states2 942,415 $43,814 $42,400 10 ‡ ‡

 

Arizona 50,452 43,743 41,261 7 — —

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 42,970 45,268 43,201 10 42 185

Florida 150,138 44,283 40,500 8 43 196

Idaho 13,447 42,842 43,436 13 47 190

 

Iowa 28,226 43,182 43,050 14 45 191

Kansas 30,052 42,163 40,650 13 44 —

Kentucky 41,689 43,301 43,474 11 ‡ 185

Louisiana 41,156 42,006 41,409 13 — 182

Maine 14,273 42,882 43,515 17 47 182

 

Minnesota 44,553 50,556 50,535 12 43 185

Mississippi 27,803 39,724 38,240 10 43 187

Missouri 61,280 41,988 39,118 10 41 182

Nebraska 18,845 42,026 41,514 13 43 187

Oklahoma 36,993 37,576 36,450 12 45 180

South Carolina 47,127 42,913 42,751 12 — 190

Texas 293,411 44,811 43,600 9 42 —

— Not available. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 15 percent of teachers 

were not reported for the reporting states at the national level. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not 

reported for Arkansas. Age data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not reported for Kentucky. 

1 Base salary is defined as the negotiated annual salary for teaching duties, excluding bonuses and extra pay for extra 

duties. 

2

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas. 

NOTE: The median is the midpoint. If the teachers’ salaries were ranked from highest to lowest, half of the salaries would 

be below the median. Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school 

with full-time equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated 

that the teacher was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, 

but their data were included if other criteria above were met. These data were not adjusted for geographic cost differences 

across the states.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

Base Salaries by Teacher Characteristics 

Highest Degree Earned. Sixty-three percent of teachers in the TCS in SY 2006–

07 had a bachelor’s degree as their highest degree earned; 35 percent held a master’s 

degree (figure 1). The percentage of teachers holding a master’s degree ranged from 21 

percent in Texas to 75 percent in Kentucky (table 12). One percent of teachers in the 

TCS had less than a bachelor’s degree. 

31 
Figure 1. Percentage distribution of total full-time teachers in participating states, by highest 

degree earned: School year 2006–07 

NOTE: Full-time teachers in the figure included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school with full-time 

equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated that the teacher 

was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, but their data 

were included if other criteria above were met. Data included teachers for whom the highest degree earned data were 

reported only. The highest degree earned was missing for 0.2 percent of teachers in Kansas, 0.3 percent in Kentucky, 

0.01 percent in Oklahoma, and 0.8 percent in South Carolina. Arkansas data are not included in this figure because 

reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not reported for 

Arkansas. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

No 4‐year degree

(1.1%)

Bachelor's degree

(63.2%)

Master's degree

(35.2%)

Doctor's degree

(0.6%)

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

32 
Table 12.—Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, by highest degree earned and 

Table 12.—participating state: School year 2006–07 

 

 No 4-year degree Bachelor's degree 

Participating state Number

Percentage

distribution

Median base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median base 

salary1

 Reporting states2 10,118 1.1 $35,967 595,070 63.2 $40,258

 

Arizona 201 0.4 46,618 27,746 55.0 37,535

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 180 0.4 32,219 21,089 49.1 37,485

Florida 4,214 2.8 35,967 98,005 65.3 38,156

Idaho 59 0.4 41,667 10,400 77.3 41,080

 

Iowa 31 0.1 48,474 20,064 71.1 39,875

Kansas 14 # 35,507 16,969 56.6 37,092

Kentucky 197 0.5 26,326 10,143 24.4 32,628

Louisiana 204 0.5 49,596 28,569 69.4 39,704

Maine 166 1.2 40,275 8,837 61.9 39,948

 

Minnesota 84 0.2 33,653 20,882 46.9 41,475

Mississippi 1,995 7.2 32,586 15,310 55.1 36,143

Missouri 438 0.7 37,764 29,798 48.6 34,500

Nebraska 11 0.1 32,847 10,997 58.4 37,253

Oklahoma 56 0.2 31,045 26,703 72.2 35,083

South Carolina 1 # ‡ 20,942 44.8 35,994

Texas 2,267 0.8 40,500 228,616 77.9 42,857

See notes at end of table. 

33 
Table 12.—Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, by highest degree earned and 

Table 12.—participating state: School year 2006–07—Continued 

 

 Master's degree Doctor's degree 

Participating state Number

Percentage

distribution

Median base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median base 

salary1

 Reporting states2 331,064 35.2 $47,683 5,597 0.6 $52,447

 

Arizona 22,169 43.9 47,036 336 0.7 53,891

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 21,375 49.7 51,111 326 0.8 55,748

Florida 46,606 31.0 46,900 1,313 0.9 50,800

Idaho 2,900 21.6 49,812 88 0.7 51,470

 

Iowa 8,073 28.6 51,662 58 0.2 59,067

Kansas 12,883 43.0 46,925 121 0.4 54,025

Kentucky 31,217 75.1 46,309 0 0.0 †

Louisiana 12,207 29.7 45,942 176 0.4 49,446

Maine 4,981 34.9 48,597 289 2.0 53,594

 

Minnesota 23,201 52.1 57,616 386 0.9 62,321

Mississippi 10,409 37.4 43,810 89 0.3 51,130

Missouri 30,768 50.2 45,850 276 0.5 57,948

Nebraska 7,774 41.3 47,441 63 0.3 55,123

Oklahoma 10,046 27.2 41,050 186 0.5 40,763

South Carolina 25,387 54.3 48,619 430 0.9 62,342

Texas 61,068 20.8 48,150 1,460 0.5 47,952

† Not applicable. 

# Rounds to zero. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. For South Carolina, the number for teachers with no 4-year degree was suppressed to 

protect the confidentiality of the small number of teachers reported. 

1 Base salary is defined as the negotiated annual salary for teaching duties, excluding bonuses and extra pay for extra 

duties.

2

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas. 

NOTE: The median is the midpoint. If the teachers’ salaries were ranked from highest to lowest, half of the salaries would 

be below the median. Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school 

with full-time equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated 

that the teacher was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, 

but their data were included if other criteria above were met. Data included only teachers for whom the highest degree 

earned was reported. Highest degree earned data were missing for 0.2 percent of teachers in Kansas, 0.3 percent in 

Kentucky, 0.01 percent in Oklahoma, and 0.8 percent in South Carolina. These data were not adjusted for geographic 

cost differences across the states. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

In 16 of the 17 participating states, median base salaries for teachers with a 

master’s degrees as their highest degree earned were higher than median salaries for 

teachers with only a bachelor’s degree (table 12). In 9 of the 15 states with reportable 

data, median base salaries for teachers with a bachelor’s degree as their highest degree 

earned were higher than salaries for teachers without a 4-year degree. 

 

34 
Teaching Experience. The percentage of teachers with 1 year of total teaching 

experience as reported by each state (i.e., teachers who were hired at the beginning of the 

reported school year) ranged from 0.3 percent in Colorado to 19 percent in Florida in SY 

2006–07 (table 13 and figure 2). The median base salary for teachers with 1 year of 

teaching experience ranged from $28,951 in Maine to $39,500 in Texas (table 13 and 

figure 3). 

Table 13.—Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, by years of teaching 

Table 13.—experience and participating state: School year 2006–07 

 

 1 year 2–5 years 6–10 years 

Participating state Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median

 base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median 

base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution 

Median

 base 

salary1

 Reporting states2 77,442 8.3 $35,539 205,189 21.9 $36,745 195,089 20.9 $40,114

 

Arizona 5,699 11.3 34,295 13,971 27.7 36,774 12,002 23.8 41,048

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 130 0.3 39,169 11,410 26.6 34,451 10,853 25.3 41,112

Florida 26,787 18.7 36,286 32,031 22.4 37,146 25,329 17.7 39,676

Idaho 699 5.2 30,000 2,337 17.4 30,000 2,639 19.6 36,833

 

Iowa 1,312 4.6 29,987 4,460 15.8 32,678 5,278 18.7 38,041

Kansas 1,773 5.9 33,700 5,460 18.2 34,985 5,805 19.3 38,019

Kentucky 583 1.4 31,171 9,187 22.0 32,355 9,424 22.6 38,875

Louisiana 1,666 4.0 34,696 7,594 18.5 36,347 8,045 19.5 38,673

Maine 306 2.1 28,951 1,776 12.4 30,145 2,620 18.4 35,014

 

Minnesota 1,763 4.0 32,988 7,145 16.0 36,206 10,075 22.6 45,366

Mississippi 3,460 12.4 31,680 6,004 21.6 33,703 4,982 17.9 36,745

Missouri 3,930 6.4 31,000 13,180 21.5 33,225 14,249 23.3 38,141

Nebraska 1,005 5.3 29,484 3,352 17.8 33,106 3,530 18.7 38,156

Oklahoma 1,931 5.2 31,100 6,633 17.9 32,350 8,286 22.4 34,428

South Carolina 3,130 6.7 30,317 8,666 18.5 32,722 9,271 19.8 38,388

Texas 23,268 7.9 39,500 71,983 24.5 40,649 62,701 21.4 42,400

See notes at end of table. 

35 
Table 13.—Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, by years of teaching 

Table 13.—experience and participating state: School year 2006–07—Continued 

 

 11–20 years 21–30 years Over 30 years 

Participating state Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median

 base

salary1 Number

Percentage

distribution

Median

 base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median

 base 

salary1

 Reporting states2 238,551 25.5 $45,568 157,247 16.8 $52,478 61,307 6.6 $55,093

 

Arizona 12,522 24.8 48,921 5,182 10.3 57,937 1,076 2.1 60,263

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 12,022 28.0 51,002 6,701 15.6 59,074 1,854 4.3 61,221

Florida 28,839 20.2 46,115 20,432 14.3 58,131 9,501 6.6 60,819

Idaho 4,103 30.5 46,582 2,623 19.5 49,896 1,046 7.8 50,812

 

Iowa 7,401 26.2 45,118 6,165 21.8 49,314 3,610 12.8 50,851

Kansas 8,080 26.9 42,634 6,175 20.5 47,180 2,758 9.2 49,725

Kentucky 12,613 30.3 46,432 7,811 18.7 51,141 2,071 5.0 52,796

Louisiana 11,677 28.4 42,866 7,747 18.8 47,376 4,427 10.8 49,908

Maine 4,015 28.1 42,866 3,539 24.8 50,080 2,017 14.1 52,123

 

Minnesota 13,625 30.6 55,926 7,636 17.1 59,553 4,281 9.6 59,506

Mississippi 6,373 22.9 41,040 5,247 18.9 48,110 1,737 6.2 50,865

Missouri 16,906 27.6 43,936 10,396 17.0 50,075 2,619 4.3 53,734

Nebraska 4,908 26.0 44,082 3,998 21.2 48,400 2,052 10.9 48,398

Oklahoma 10,500 28.4 37,825 7,137 19.3 42,857 2,506 6.8 45,023

South Carolina 11,788 25.2 45,729 9,765 20.9 52,812 4,165 8.9 54,050

Texas 73,179 24.9 46,000 46,693 15.9 53,341 15,587 5.3 58,255

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. 

1 Base salary is defined as the negotiated annual salary for teaching duties, excluding bonuses and extra pay for extra 

duties. 

2

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas. 

NOTE: The median is the midpoint. If the teachers’ salaries were ranked from highest to lowest, half of the salaries would 

be below the median. Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school 

with full-time equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated 

that the teacher was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, 

but their data were included if other criteria above were met. Data included only teachers for whom years of experience 

was reported. Years of experience data were missing for 4.8 percent of teachers in Florida, 0.1 percent in Minnesota, and 

0.7 percent in South Carolina. These data were not adjusted for geographic cost differences across the states. Detail may 

not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

36 
Figure 2. Percentage distribution of full-time teachers, by years of teaching experience and 

participating state: School year 2006–07 

# Rounds to zero. 

11

#

19

5 5 6 7 4 2 4

12

6 5 5 7 8

28

27

22

17 16

18 21

18

12

16

22

22

18 18 19

25

24

25

18

20

19

19

22

20

18

23

18

23

19 22 20

21

25

28

20

31

26

27

28

28

28

31

23 28

26

28

25

25

10

16 14

20

22

21

18

19

25

17 19

17

21

19

21

16

2 4 7 8

13 9

4

11 14 10 6 4

11 7 9 5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizona Florida Iowa Kentucky Maine Mississippi Nebraska South Carolina

Participating state

Over 30 years

21–30 years

11–20 years

6–10 years

2–5 years

1 year

Percent

Colorado Idaho Kansas Louisiana Minnesota Missouri Oklahoma Texas

NOTE: Full-time teachers in the figure included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school with full-time 

equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated that the teacher 

was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, but their data 

were included if other criteria above were met. Arkansas data are not included in this figure because reporting standards 

for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not reported for Arkansas. Detail may not 

sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

37 
Figure 3. Median base salary for full-time first-year teachers and teachers with more than 1 year 

of teaching experience, by participating state: School year 2006–07 

34,295

39,169

36,286

30,000 29,987

33,700

31,217

34,696

28,951

32,988

31,680 31,000

29,484

31,100 30,317

39,500

42,703 43,202 42,925

44,453 43,590

41,293

44,177

41,730

43,848

51,282

39,610 39,896

42,042

36,775

43,967 44,175

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

Arizona Florida Iowa Kentucky Maine Mississippi Nebraska South Carolina

Participating state

First-year teachers

Experienced teachers

Dollars

$

Colorado Idaho Kansas Louisiana Minnesota Missouri Oklahoma Texas

NOTE: Experienced teachers include teachers with more than 1 year of teaching experience. Full-time teachers in the 

figure included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school with full-time equivalent (FTE) greater than or 

equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated that the teacher was full-time at one school only. 

Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, but their data were included if other criteria 

above were met. Arkansas data are not included in this figure because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. 

Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not reported for Arkansas. Data are not adjusted for geographic cost 

differences. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

Teachers with 2–5 years of teaching experience ranged from 12 percent of all 

teachers in Maine to 28 percent of all teachers in Arizona (table 13). The median base 

salary for teachers with 2–5 years of teaching experience ranged from $30,000 in Idaho 

to $40,649 in Texas. 

The percentage of teachers with over 30 years of teaching experience ranged from 

2 percent in Arizona to 14 percent in Maine (table 13). The median base salary for 

teachers with over 30 years of teaching experience ranged from $45,023 in Oklahoma to 

$61,221 in Colorado. 

38 
Teacher Age. In 10 of the 12 states reporting teacher age in SY 2006–07, less than 

1 percent of teachers were 66 years old or over (table 14). Overall, among the 12 states, 

the highest percentage of teachers was 26–30 years old, followed closely by teachers 51–

55 years old. The median base salary for teachers ages 26–30 ranged from $30,000 in 

Idaho to $40,700 in Texas while median base salary for teacher ages 51–55 ranged from 

$41,206 in Oklahoma to $57,077 in Minnesota (table 14 and figure 4). 

Table 14.—Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, by age and participating state:

Table 14.—School year 2006–07 

 

 25 years old or less 26–30 years old 31–35 years old 

Participating state Number

Percentage

distribution

Median

 base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median

 base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median

 base 

salary1

 Reporting states2 32,317 4.3 $34,950 107,983 14.3 $37,000 101,027 13.4 $39,571

 

Arizona — — — — — — — — —

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 1,536 3.6 32,000 6,444 15.0 35,378 6,077 14.1 39,890

Florida 7,637 5.1 35,500 21,614 14.4 36,514 18,563 12.4 37,785

Idaho 391 2.9 30,000 1,282 9.5 30,000 1,493 11.1 35,142

 

Iowa 1,263 4.5 29,979 3,699 13.1 33,476 3,147 11.1 38,158

Kansas 1,517 5.1 33,465 4,140 14.0 35,204 3,531 11.9 37,400

Kentucky ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Louisiana — — — — — — — — —

Maine 378 2.6 28,375 1,343 9.4 31,159 1,456 10.2 35,155

 

Minnesota 1,344 3.0 32,988 6,089 13.7 36,778 5,861 13.2 44,298

Mississippi 1,286 4.6 31,500 4,070 14.6 33,340 3,594 12.9 35,400

Missouri 2,680 4.8 31,250 8,654 15.5 33,830 7,981 14.3 37,345

Nebraska 960 5.1 30,518 2,776 14.7 33,720 2,310 12.3 38,308

Oklahoma 1,200 3.3 31,375 3,976 10.8 32,300 4,400 12.0 33,871

South Carolina — — — — — — — — —

Texas 12,125 4.1 39,750 43,896 15.0 40,700 42,614 14.5 41,700

See notes at end of table. 

39 
Table 14.—Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, by age and participating state: 

Table 14.—School year 2006–07—Continued 

 

 36–40 years old 41–45 years old 46–50 years old 

Participating state Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median

 base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median

 base

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median

 base 

salary1

 Reporting states2 98,651 13.1 $41,413 88,353 11.7 $43,246 97,370 12.9 $45,441

 

Arizona — — — — — — — — —

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 5,675 13.2 43,600 5,241 12.2 46,165 5,889 13.7 48,997

Florida 18,775 12.5 39,175 16,637 11.1 41,270 17,727 11.8 44,201

Idaho 1,638 12.2 39,596 1,564 11.6 43,222 1,793 13.3 45,560

 

Iowa 3,286 11.6 41,576 3,175 11.2 44,345 3,563 12.6 45,949

Kansas 3,459 11.7 39,587 3,441 11.6 41,335 3,845 13.0 43,117

Kentucky ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Louisiana — — — — — — — — —

Maine 1,677 11.7 38,800 1,557 10.9 43,800 2,059 14.4 45,919

 

Minnesota 6,162 13.8 50,658 5,411 12.1 54,212 5,499 12.3 54,795

Mississippi 3,438 12.4 37,140 2,969 10.7 38,880 3,676 13.2 41,900

Missouri 7,568 13.6 39,457 6,754 12.1 40,783 7,569 13.6 43,260

Nebraska 2,261 12.0 40,950 2,048 10.9 43,185 2,433 12.9 44,926

Oklahoma 4,979 13.6 35,225 4,612 12.6 36,825 5,272 14.3 38,769

South Carolina — — — — — — — — —

Texas 39,733 13.5 43,000 34,944 11.9 44,500 38,045 13.0 46,586

See notes at end of table. 

Table 14.—Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, by age and participating state: 

Table 14.—School year 2006–07—Continued 

 

 51–55 years old 56–60 years old 61–65 years old 66 years old or over 

Participating state Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median 

base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median 

base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median 

base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median 

base 

salary1

 Reporting states2 104,298 13.8 $48,405 87,813 11.6 $50,524 31,426 4.2 $51,576 6,447 0.9 $52,327

 

Arizona — — — — — — — — — — — —

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 5,991 13.9 52,724 4,460 10.4 54,643 1,411 3.3 54,683 246 0.6 53,126

Florida 19,647 13.1 50,200 19,361 12.9 54,884 8,444 5.6 56,883 1,728 1.2 56,858

Idaho 2,130 15.8 47,667 2,151 16.0 48,961 919 6.8 46,818 84 0.6 47,740

 

Iowa 4,641 16.4 48,239 4,263 15.1 49,018 1,081 3.8 49,663 108 0.4 50,354

Kansas 4,497 15.2 45,525 3,781 12.8 47,066 1,242 4.2 48,150 170 0.6 47,220

Kentucky ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Louisiana — — — — — — — — — — — —

Maine 2,565 18.0 48,988 2,430 17.0 50,366 698 4.9 50,566 110 0.8 50,767

 

Minnesota 6,383 14.3 57,077 6,192 13.9 58,300 1,452 3.3 59,273 160 0.4 58,397

Mississippi 3,959 14.2 44,545 3,415 12.3 46,000 1,155 4.2 47,145 241 0.9 48,308

Missouri 7,481 13.4 45,737 5,224 9.4 47,408 1,489 2.7 47,450 263 0.5 49,320

Nebraska 2,739 14.5 46,884 2,444 13.0 46,956 785 4.2 46,710 84 0.4 45,791

Oklahoma 5,745 15.6 41,206 4,626 12.6 41,797 1,617 4.4 42,500 318 0.9 42,259

South Carolina — — — — — — — — — — — —

Texas 38,520 13.1 48,923 29,466 10.0 50,361 11,133 3.8 51,233 2,935 1.0 52,682

— Not available. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not reported for 

Arkansas. Age data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not reported for Kentucky. 

1 Base salary is defined as the negotiated annual salary for teaching duties, excluding bonuses and extra pay for extra duties. 

2

 Reporting states totals did not include Arizona, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, and South Carolina. 

NOTE: The median is the midpoint. If the teachers’ salaries were ranked from highest to lowest, half of the salaries would be below the median. Full-time 

teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school with full-time equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and 

for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated that the teacher was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the 

teacher status indicator, but their data were included if other criteria above were met. Data included only teachers for whom age was reported. Age data 

were missing for 0.01 percent of teachers in Idaho, 1.4 percent in Kansas, 33.3 percent in Kentucky, 9.2 percent in Missouri, 0.03 percent in Nebraska, 

and 0.7 percent in Oklahoma. Arizona, Louisiana, and South Carolina did not report any age data. These data were not adjusted for geographic cost 

differences across the states. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), "Teacher Compensation Survey," 

school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

40 
Figure 4. Percentage distribution of full-time teachers in participating states, by age: School year 

2006–07 

NOTE: Full-time teachers in the figure included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school with full-time 

equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated that the teacher 

was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, but their data 

were included if other criteria above were met. Arizona, Louisiana, and South Carolina do not appear in this figure 

because they did not report teachers’ age data. Arkansas and Kentucky do not appear in this figure because reporting 

standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not reported for Arkansas. Age 

data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not reported for Kentucky. Detail may not sum to totals because of 

rounding. 

4

14

13 13

12

13

14

12

4

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

25 years old 

or less

26–30 years 

old

31–35 years 

old

36–40 years 

old

41–45 years 

old

46–50 years 

old

51–55 years 

old

56–60 years 

old

61–65 years 

old

66 years old 

or over

Percent

Age

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

Race/Ethnicity. The majority of teachers in SY 2006–07 in the 16 states 

included in this analysis were White (80 percent), with the smallest percentage of 

White teachers (68 percent) reported for Texas (table 15). Black teachers made up the 

next highest percentage of teachers in the 16 states included in this analysis (12 

percent) with the largest percentage (26 percent) reported for Mississippi. Hispanic 

teachers were the third highest percentage of teachers in the 16 states included in this 

analysis (6 percent) with the largest proportion of Hispanic teachers (11 percent) 

reported for Arizona. Oklahoma reported the highest percentage of American 

Indian/Alaska Native teachers (4 percent) of any state. Table 15 also presents median 

base salaries by race/ethnicity categories. 

41 
Table 15.—Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, by race/ethnicity and 

Table 15.—participating state: School year 2006–07 

 

 American Indian/ 

Alaska Native1 Asian/Pacific Islander1 Hispanic1 

Participating state Number

Percentage

distribution

Median

 base 

salary2 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median

 base 

salary2 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median 

base 

salary2

 Reporting states3 5,059 0.5 $39,600 7,810 0.8 $41,917 55,078 5.9 $42,885

 

Arizona 1,128 2.2 40,138 621 1.2 39,970 5,732 11.4 40,117

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 380 0.9 45,550 455 1.1 42,199 2,826 6.6 41,699

Florida 361 0.2 41,840 1,424 0.9 38,220 15,763 10.5 40,330

Idaho 28 0.2 44,311 64 0.5 46,423 169 1.3 39,993

 

Iowa 60 0.2 42,053 103 0.4 41,150 181 0.6 41,187

Kansas 207 0.7 37,498 145 0.5 39,201 491 1.6 38,756

Kentucky 14 # 47,768 86 0.2 39,251 166 0.4 39,504

Louisiana 68 0.2 39,489 121 0.3 39,300 316 0.8 39,471

Maine 43 0.3 38,268 25 0.2 37,355 59 0.4 38,412

 

Minnesota 201 0.5 50,489 491 1.1 47,549 323 0.7 47,918

Mississippi 7 # 36,906 69 0.2 37,825 77 0.3 36,410

Missouri 93 0.2 36,475 190 0.3 41,561 334 0.5 39,979

Nebraska 29 0.2 38,778 56 0.3 38,729 202 1.1 38,788

Oklahoma 1,567 4.2 35,469 140 0.4 35,156 324 0.9 34,600

South Carolina 70 0.2 37,113 395 0.9 38,928 416 0.9 37,287

Texas 803 0.3 43,936 3,425 1.2 43,114 27,699 9.4 44,468

See notes at end of table. 

42 
Table 15.—Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, by race/ethnicity and 

Table 15.—participating state: School year 2006–07—Continued 

 

 Black1 White1

Participating state Number

Percentage

distribution

Median base 

salary2 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median base 

salary2

 Reporting states3 116,459 12.4 $42,293 755,459 80.4 $42,400

 

Arizona 1,142 2.3 41,529 41,829 82.9 41,555

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 695 1.6 44,496 38,614 89.9 43,296

Florida 21,346 14.2 40,647 111,244 74.1 40,500

Idaho 11 0.1 42,166 13,175 98.0 43,488

 

Iowa 222 0.8 41,732 27,660 98.0 43,073

Kansas 524 1.7 42,578 28,672 95.4 40,722

Kentucky 1,533 3.7 44,540 39,863 95.7 43,460

Louisiana 8,587 20.9 41,916 32,064 77.9 41,324

Maine 23 0.2 38,302 14,123 98.9 43,545

 

Minnesota 497 1.1 52,986 43,041 96.6 50,549

Mississippi 7,202 25.9 37,923 20,448 73.5 38,370

Missouri 4,130 6.7 45,820 56,533 92.3 38,720

Nebraska 200 1.1 41,700 18,358 97.4 41,588

Oklahoma 1,277 3.5 39,861 33,685 91.1 36,450

South Carolina 7,360 16.5 42,679 36,376 81.5 42,730

Texas 61,710 21.0 42,700 199,774 68.1 43,860

# Rounds to zero. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. 

1

 Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, Asian includes Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and 

American Indian includes Alaska Native. Race categories exclude persons of Hispanic ethnicity. 2 Base salary is defined as the negotiated annual salary for teaching duties, excluding bonuses and extra pay for extra 

duties. 

3

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas. 

NOTE: The median is the midpoint. If the teachers’ salaries were ranked from highest to lowest, half of the salaries would 

be below the median. Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school 

with full-time equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated 

that the teacher was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, 

but their data were included if other criteria above were met. Data included only teachers for whom race/ethnicity was 

reported. Race/ethnicity data were missing for 5.3 percent of teachers in South Carolina. Kansas and Kentucky reported 

0.04 and 0.06 percent of their teachers, respectively, as being in none of the five racial/ethnic groups presented in this 

table, were therefore excluded from the analysis. These data were not adjusted for geographic cost differences across the 

states. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

Sex. In the 16 states included in this analysis, the percentage of female teachers 

in SY 2006–07 ranged from 72 percent in Minnesota to 87 percent in Mississippi (table 

16). The largest difference in median base salary was found in South Carolina, where 

the median base salary for female teachers was $1,680 higher than the median base 

salary for male teachers. 

43 
Table 16.—Number, percentage distribution, and median base salary of full-time teachers, by sex and salary difference 

Table 16.—between sexes, by participating state: School year 2006–07 

 

 Male Female 

Participating state Number

Percentage

distribution

Median base 

salary1 Number

Percentage 

distribution

Median base 

salary1

Salary

difference

 Reporting states2 204,501 21.7 $42,805 737,460 78.3 $42,275 $530

 

Arizona 12,193 24.2 41,916 38,259 75.8 41,109 807

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 11,056 25.7 43,262 31,914 74.3 43,196 66

Florida 31,952 21.3 41,012 118,186 78.7 40,330 682

Idaho 3,587 26.7 43,217 9,860 73.3 43,507 -290

 

Iowa 5,010 17.7 43,723 23,216 82.3 42,906 817

Kansas 7,326 24.4 40,352 22,725 75.6 40,756 -404

Kentucky 8,747 21.0 42,289 32,942 79.0 43,772 -1,483

Louisiana 7,055 17.1 42,125 34,101 82.9 41,247 878

Maine 3,662 25.7 44,000 10,611 74.3 43,309 691

 

Minnesota 12,646 28.4 50,817 31,907 71.6 50,427 390

Mississippi 3,530 12.7 38,267 24,273 87.3 38,235 32

Missouri 12,699 20.7 39,389 48,581 79.3 39,042 347

Nebraska 4,626 24.5 41,514 14,219 75.5 41,588 -74

Oklahoma 7,504 20.3 36,694 29,489 79.7 36,330 364

South Carolina 8,433 18.1 41,455 38,241 81.9 43,135 -1,680

Texas 64,475 22.0 43,887 228,936 78.0 43,546 341

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers 

were not reported for Arkansas. 

1 Base salary is defined as the negotiated annual salary for teaching duties, excluding bonuses and extra pay for extra 

duties. 

2

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas. 

NOTE: The median is the midpoint. If the teachers’ salaries were ranked from highest to lowest, half of the salaries would 

be below the median. Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school 

with full-time equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated 

that the teacher was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, 

but their data were included if other criteria above were met. Data included only teachers for whom gender was reported. 

Gender data were missing for 1.0 percent of teachers in South Carolina. These data were not adjusted for geographic 

cost differences across the states. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

Variation in Base Salaries 

Variation in base salaries can be analyzed by comparing the median base salary 

with salaries at the 5th and 95th percentiles at different experience and education levels 

(table 17). It is also useful to calculate the federal range ratio,7

 which is the difference 

between the base salary at the 95th percentile and the base salary at the 5th percentile 

divided by the base salary at the 5th percentile. Higher federal range ratios indicate larger 

 

7

 The federal range ratio is used in this report as an indicator of the difference between teachers with 

relatively high base salaries and teachers with relatively low base salaries. As used by Berne and Stiefel 

(1984) and in previous NCES publications (Parish, Matsumoto, and Fowler 1995; Hussar and Sonnenberg 

2000), the federal range ratio excludes the top and bottom 5 percent of districts in order to reduce the 

influence of extreme values. 

44 
variation in base salaries for a given state. This section presents base salary variations for 

teachers with 1, 10, and 20 years of teaching experience for different education levels.8

For the 16 states included in this analysis, the median base salaries for teachers 

with 1 year of teaching experience and a bachelor’s degree ranged from $28,665 to 

$39,500 in SY 2006–07 (table 17). The federal range ratio, with a low of less than 0.1 

and a high of 6.1, reflected a wide range in salary variation. Four states had a federal 

range ratio above 1; that is, base salaries at the 95th percentile were more than twice as 

much as base salaries at the 5th percentile. 

For teachers with a bachelor’s degree and 10 years of teaching experience, the 

median base salaries ranged from $34,887 to $43,459, while teachers with a master’s 

degree and 10 years of experience had median base salaries between $36,646 and 

$53,902. The federal range ratio ranged from 0.2 and 0.8 for teachers with a bachelor’s 

degree and from 0.2 and 0.7 for teachers with a master’s degree. 

Teachers with a bachelor’s degree and 20 years of teaching experience had 

median base salaries ranging from $39,584 to $51,800, while teachers with a master’s 

degree and 20 years of experience had median base salaries between $41,950 and 

$62,598. The federal range ratio ranged from 0.2 to 0.9 for teachers with a bachelor’s 

degree and from 0.2 to 1.0 for teachers with a master’s degree. 

As years of experience increased, the variability in base salaries identified by the 

federal range ratio did not narrow or widen consistently. For example, in seven states, the 

federal range ratio for teachers with a bachelor’s degree decreased with greater 

experience (20 years vs. 1 year). However, in eight states, the ratio increased with greater 

experience. 

 

8

 This analysis compares only teachers with 1, 10, and 20 years of experience to provide a career snapshot 

comparison of teacher salaries at different levels of experience rather than an aggregated comparison of 

various experience ranges. 

45 
Table 17.—Number of full-time teachers, base salary at the 5th, median, and 95th percentile cutpoints, and federal range 

Table 17.—ratio, by educational attainment, years of teaching experience, and participating state: School year: 2006–07 

Educational attainment, years of experience, and 

participating state 

Number of

teachers

 Base salary1 Federal range 

ratio2 5th percentile Median 95th percentile

Teachers with bachelor's degree as highest 

 degree and 1 year of teaching experience 

 Reporting states3 63,145 $27,398 $35,300 $42,653 0.6

Arizona 4,478 29,077 33,686 38,785 0.3

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 52 6,878 33,727 49,172 6.1

Florida 20,936 31,350 36,000 44,402 0.4

Idaho 636 30,000 30,000 31,000 #

Iowa 1,214 25,633 29,529 36,699 0.4

Kansas 1,575 27,750 33,200 37,359 0.3

Kentucky 335 28,436 30,849 32,990 0.2

Louisiana 1,489 18,304 34,419 38,625 1.1

Maine 243 24,200 28,665 31,730 0.3

Minnesota 1,584 23,633 32,507 37,770 0.6

Mississippi 2,044 30,400 31,620 35,130 0.2

Missouri 3,403 24,500 30,500 36,839 0.5

Nebraska 923 14,781 29,120 33,770 1.3

Oklahoma 1,765 29,201 31,063 33,479 0.1

South Carolina 2,348 14,920 29,868 32,407 1.2

Texas 20,120 28,320 39,500 43,216 0.5

Teachers with bachelor's degree as highest 

 degree and 10 years of teaching experience 

 Reporting states3 20,615 33,500 40,500 47,690 0.4

 

Arizona 896 33,862 41,145 54,226 0.6

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 819 29,500 41,335 52,341 0.8

Florida 2,494 36,060 40,219 49,541 0.4

Idaho 394 33,903 39,596 49,382 0.5

Iowa 663 32,546 39,130 46,034 0.4

Kansas 619 32,025 37,850 43,992 0.4

Kentucky 294 34,106 36,353 41,932 0.2

Louisiana 1,084 34,138 39,526 43,889 0.3

Maine 317 29,086 35,507 44,854 0.5

Minnesota 747 35,154 43,459 56,414 0.6

Mississippi 446 35,084 36,660 40,525 0.2

Missouri 1,015 28,348 36,393 47,677 0.7

Nebraska 320 32,779 38,146 44,358 0.4

Oklahoma 1,190 32,767 34,887 37,713 0.2

South Carolina 780 33,979 37,731 46,477 0.4

Texas 8,537 36,644 43,058 46,984 0.3

Teachers with master's degree as highest 

 degree and 10 years of teaching experience 

 Reporting states3 12,583 35,989 43,482 57,842 0.6

Arizona 963 37,500 44,584 59,194 0.6

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 929 35,495 48,148 59,251 0.7

Florida 1,460 39,001 42,900 57,121 0.5

Idaho 74 37,186 44,760 56,218 0.5

Iowa 216 37,007 44,142 51,185 0.4

Kansas 442 35,550 41,877 50,602 0.4

Kentucky 1,487 37,965 40,551 48,129 0.3

Louisiana 356 35,846 41,597 47,360 0.3

Maine 176 34,210 40,627 49,495 0.4

Minnesota 1,277 41,595 53,902 66,236 0.6

Mississippi 314 36,670 40,165 44,450 0.2

Missouri 1,380 31,934 43,648 54,967 0.7

Nebraska 256 38,098 42,780 52,518 0.4

Oklahoma 345 34,008 36,646 41,831 0.2

South Carolina 971 38,171 42,986 54,417 0.4

Texas 1,937 37,870 45,307 49,729 0.3

See notes at end of table. 

 

46 
Table 17.—Number of full-time teachers, base salary at the 5th, median, and 95th percentile cutpoints, and federal range 

Table 17.—ratio, by educational attainment, years of teaching experience, and participating state: School year: 

Table 17.—2006–07—Continued 

Educational attainment, years of experience, and 

participating state 

Number of

teachers

 Base salary1 Federal range 

ratio2 5th percentile Median 95th percentile

 

Teachers with bachelor's degree as highest 

 degree and 20 years of teaching experience 

 Reporting states3 9,527 $37,772 $47,660 $58,974 0.6

 

Arizona 276 39,153 50,976 62,062 0.6

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 320 33,094 49,013 63,818 0.9

Florida 1,306 44,369 51,800 62,613 0.4

Idaho 209 41,527 46,818 56,142 0.4

 

Iowa 417 37,707 45,818 55,148 0.5

Kansas 263 35,253 42,950 49,615 0.4

Kentucky 17 38,666 42,851 56,939 0.5

Louisiana 606 37,283 44,294 48,854 0.3

Maine 273 32,000 45,006 53,374 0.7

 

Minnesota 349 39,003 50,150 63,317 0.6

Mississippi 298 39,900 41,053 46,100 0.2

Missouri 424 30,940 39,807 57,385 0.9

Nebraska 192 35,179 43,469 53,706 0.5

Oklahoma 474 37,253 39,584 43,236 0.2

South Carolina 374 41,606 45,971 53,474 0.3

Texas 3,729 44,510 49,550 55,341 0.2

 

Teachers with master's degree as highest 

 degree and 20 years of teaching experience 

 Reporting states3 8,456 41,170 51,972 68,500 0.7

 

Arizona 558 43,449 56,757 70,865 0.6

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado 609 37,844 58,725 73,358 0.9

Florida 991 46,350 54,884 70,962 0.5

Idaho 75 44,219 53,157 73,273 0.7

 

Iowa 236 43,328 53,994 61,198 0.4

Kansas 380 39,704 49,500 65,271 0.6

Kentucky 970 44,490 49,267 65,260 0.5

Louisiana 298 40,148 46,648 54,344 0.4

Maine 149 38,938 50,003 58,474 0.5

 

Minnesota 605 49,700 62,598 72,220 0.5

Mississippi 270 44,900 46,850 52,650 0.2

Missouri 810 36,300 51,542 71,679 1.0

Nebraska 223 40,957 49,395 58,583 0.4

Oklahoma 283 38,549 41,950 47,169 0.2

South Carolina 601 47,499 52,473 62,831 0.3

Texas 1,398 45,600 51,640 57,905 0.3

# Rounds to zero. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not reported 

for Arkansas. 

1 Base salary is defined as the negotiated annual salary for teaching duties, excluding bonuses and extra pay for extra duties. 

2 The federal range ratio is the difference between the base salary of the teacher at the 95th percentile and the base salary of the teacher at 

the 5th percentile divided by the base salary of the teacher at the 5th percentile. 3

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas. 

NOTE: How to read this table: Using Arizona teachers with bachelor's degree as highest degree earned and 1 year of experience as an 

example, this table shows that 5 percent of teachers have a base salary of $29,077 or less. If all teachers were listed by base salary, the 

teacher at the midpoint (median) would have base salary of $33,686. Five percent of teachers have a base salary of $38,785 or more. The 

federal range ratio shows that the base salary for teachers at the 95th percentile is approximately 30 percent higher than the base salary for

teachers at the 5th percentile. Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school with fulltime equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated that the teacher was fulltime at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, but their data were included if other 

criteria above were met. Only teachers with the specified degrees and years of teaching experience were included in the table. These data 

were not adjusted for geographic cost differences across the states. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), "Teacher Compensation 

Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

 

47 
Two-Year Comparisons 

Since TCS data were collected in SY 2005–06 as well as SY 2006–07, changes 

in salary, educational attainment, and whether teachers change schools or districts 

within a state can be compared over 2 years. The data reported in this section are for the 

four states (Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, and Oklahoma) that consistently reported teacher 

identification numbers over both years. 

In the four states that could match data to teachers across school years, the 

percentage of teachers who continued to work as full-time teachers in public schools in 

the same state in SY 2006–07 ranged from 91 percent in Colorado to 95 percent in 

Oklahoma (table 18). Approximately 5 percent of teachers in Oklahoma and 9 percent 

of teachers in Colorado left the teaching workforce in those states between SY 2005–06 

and SY 2006–07. 

Table 18.—Number of full-time teachers in both administrations of the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS), and 

Table 18.—percentage of teachers staying and leaving, by participating state: School years 2005–06 and 2006–07ble 

18.—

 Number of teachers Percentage of teachers 

Participating state 

 School year

 2005–06

School year

 2006–07

Matched across 

school years1 Staying1 Leaving2

Colorado 41,431 42,970 37,509 90.5 9.5

Iowa 28,054 28,226 26,019 92.7 7.3

Missouri 59,991 61,280 56,099 93.5 6.5

Oklahoma 36,476 36,993 34,661 95.0 5.0 1

 Includes teachers represented in both the school year 2005–06 and school year 2006–07 surveys. 2

 Includes teachers no longer teaching in public schools in the state in school year 2006–07 (e.g., teachers who retired, 

left the state, left the teaching profession, or taught in private schools). 

NOTE: Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school with full-time 

equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated that the teacher 

was full-time at one school only. Only the four states reporting consistent teacher identification numbers were included in 

this table. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2005–06, Version 1a and school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

The percentage of teachers who remained in the same state but changed districts 

ranged from 3 percent in Iowa to 5 percent in Oklahoma between SY 2005–06 and SY 

2006–07 among the four states that could match data to teachers across school years 

(table 19). The percentage of teachers who changed schools within the same district 

ranged from 4 percent in Iowa to 7 percent in Colorado. 

48 
Table 19.—Number and percentage of full-time teachers represented in both administrations of the Teacher 

Table 19.—Compensation Survey (TCS) who changed districts or schools between these school years, by 

Table 19.—participating state: School years 2005–06 and 2006–07 

 Number of teachers 

Changed districts 

 Changed schools within 

 matched across district 

Participating state school years Number Percent Number Percent

Colorado 37,509 1,533 4.1 2,488 6.6

Iowa 26,019 659 2.5 1,124 4.3

Missouri 56,099 2,683 4.8 3,040 5.4

Oklahoma 34,661 1,845 5.3 1,769 5.1

NOTE: Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school with full-time 

equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated that the teacher 

was full-time at one school only. Only the four states reporting consistent teacher identification numbers were included in 

this table. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2005–06, Version 1a and school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

The increase in median base salaries (not adjusted for inflation) of teachers 

ranged from 7 percent in Colorado and Missouri to 11 percent in Oklahoma between 

SY 2005–06 and SY 2006–07 for the four states that could match data to teachers 

across school years (table 20). 

Table 20.—Median base salary and percentage change in median base salary for full-time teachers represented in both 

Table 20.—administrations of the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS), by participating state: School years 2005–06 and

Table 20.—2006–07 

 Number of teachers Median base salary1 

Percentage change in 

median base salary2

 matched across School year School year 

Participating state school years 2005–06 2006–07 

Colorado 37,509 $42,046 $44,882 6.7

Iowa 26,019 40,806 43,862 7.5

Missouri 56,099 37,450 40,056 7.0

Oklahoma 34,661 33,200 36,859 11.0 1

 Base salary is defined as the negotiated annual salary for teaching duties, excluding bonuses and extra pay for extra 

duties. 

2 Calculated as the median base salary for each state in school year 2005–06 subtracted from the median base salary for 

each state in school year 2006–07, divided by the median base salary for each state in school year 2005–06. 

NOTE: The median is the midpoint. If the teachers’ salaries were ranked from highest to lowest, half of the salaries would 

be below the median. Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school 

with full-time equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated 

that the teacher was full-time at one school only. Only the four states reporting consistent teacher identification numbers 

were included in this table. These data were not adjusted for geographic cost differences across the states. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2005–06, Version 1a and school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

49 
For the four states that could match data to teachers across school years, 

between 5 and 10 percent of teachers with a master’s degree earned their degree 

between SY 2005–06 and SY 2006–07 (table 21). Between 3 and 11 percent of teachers 

with a doctor’s degree also earned their degree between these school years. 

Table 21.—Number of full-time teachers represented in both administrations of the Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS), and number and 

Table 21.—percentage of teachers at each degree level who completed a higher degree between the school years, by highest degree 

Table 21.—earned and participating state: School years 2005–06 and 2006–07 

 Bachelor's degree Master's degree Doctor's degree 

 Completed between 

school years 2005–06 

and 2006–07 

 Completed between 

school years 2005–06 

and 2006–07 

 Completed between 

school years 2005–06 

 School year School year School year and 2006–07 

Participating state 2006–07 Number Percent 2006–07 Number Percent 2006–07 Number Percent

Colorado 17,667 22 0.1 19,464 1,870 9.6 268 21 7.8

Iowa 18,206 7 # 7,739 573 7.4 50 4 8.0

Missouri 25,633 25 0.1 29,856 2,145 7.2 256 27 10.5

Oklahoma 24,757 1 # 9,704 479 4.9 157 4 2.5

# Rounds to zero. 

NOTE: Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school with full-time equivalent (FTE) 

greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated that the teacher was full-time at one school only. 

Percentage is calculated as the number of teachers who completed their degree between the 2005–06 and 2006–07 school years, divided 

by the number of teachers with that degree at the time of the 2006–07 school year. Only the four states reporting consistent teacher 

identification numbers were included in this table. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), "Teacher Compensation 

Survey," school year 2005–06, Version 1a and school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 

Total Salary and Total Benefits Comparisons 

Total salary includes all monies paid to teachers, including bonuses and extra 

pay for extra duties. The median total salary for teachers ranged from $37,900 in 

Oklahoma to $50,535 in Minnesota for the 13 states reporting usable data in SY 2006–

07 (table 22). Total benefits include retirement, health, and other benefits paid by the 

school district, municipal, state, and other government agencies and are reported 

separately from total salary for the five states reporting benefits data. Median total 

benefits ranged from $7,328 to $12,404 in these five states. 

50 
51 

Table 22.—Median total salary and government expenditures for total benefits, health benefits, retirement 

Table 22.—benefits, and all other benefits for full-time teachers, by participating state: School year 2006–07 

 Median Median government expenditures on benefits 

Participating state total salary1 Total Health Retirement All other

 Reporting states2 $43,500 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 

Arizona 41,261 — — — —

Arkansas ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Colorado — — — — —

Florida 42,223 $12,387 $4,590 $4,173 $3,716

Idaho 44,553 — — — —

 

Iowa 43,468 — — — —

Kansas 45,660 — — — —

Kentucky 44,875 11,326 5,364 5,798 22

Louisiana 42,144 12,404 5,371 6,528 539

Maine — — — — —

 

Minnesota 50,535 — — — —

Mississippi 38,605 — — — —

Missouri 41,250 — — — —

Nebraska 42,735 7,380 — — —

Oklahoma 37,900 7,328 4,129 4,286 41

South Carolina — — — — —

Texas 44,600 — — — —

— Not available. 

‡ Data suppressed because reporting standards for the TCS were not met. Data for more than 15 percent of teachers 

were not reported for the reporting states at the national level. Data for more than 20 percent of the teachers were not 

reported for Arkansas. 

1 Total salary is defined as the total amount of money paid to the teacher including bonuses, extra pay for extra duties, 

etc., for school year 2006–07. 

2

 Reporting states totals did not include Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, and South Carolina. 

NOTE: The median is the midpoint. If the teachers’ salaries were ranked from highest to lowest, half of the salaries would 

be below the median. Full-time teachers in the table included teachers who received a base salary, taught at one school 

with full-time equivalent (FTE) greater than or equal to 0.9, and for whom the teacher status indicator variable indicated 

that the teacher was full-time at one school only. Arizona, Kentucky, and Texas did not report the teacher status indicator, 

but their data were included if other criteria above were met. These data were not adjusted for geographic cost differences 

across the states. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), 

"Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a. 
This page intentionally left blank.
8. Conclusion and Future Directions 

The Teacher Compensation Survey (TCS) has the potential to address research 

and policy needs in that it provides data that can be used to chart compensation, teacher 

status, and demographic data for teachers from multiple states. The TCS data can be used 

to analyze the compensation offered to attract teachers and the ability to retain teachers. 

As the number of states participating in the TCS expands, and as more states assign 

teacher identifiers that are used from year to year, the data from more states will be able 

to support longitudinal analysis of salaries, retention, and mobility. 

The TCS data can support research ranging from a straightforward determination 

of base salary levels for varying degrees of experience and education to analyses of 

teachers’ salaries by teachers’ characteristics. By merging the TCS with the Common 

Core of Data (CCD) School Universe file, researchers can further explore associations 

between teachers’ compensation and experience, level of education, geographic location, 

teachers’ demographic characteristics (race/ethnicity, sex, and age), and selected 

characteristics of the schools and children that they teach (e.g., student poverty). 

The consistency between the TCS data and data on teachers from the School 

Universe and National Education Association (NEA) surveys suggests that the TCS 

collection is a reliable source of information on teachers’ compensation. 

There are some substantive challenges to the TCS, such as the fact that not all 

state education agencies (SEAs) collect administrative data on teachers’ compensation, 

particularly health and retirement benefits information, and not all states can track 

teachers over time. However, the majority of challenges to the TCS will be surmounted 

as states continue to develop or improve their educational data systems. 

While the school year (SY) 2006–07 administration of the TCS described in this 

report incorporates data from only 17 states, growing from 7 states in the SY 2005–06 

collection, it is the first step in creating a comprehensive teacher compensation dataset for 

every public-school teacher in the nation. With approximately 33 percent of teachers in 

the nation included in the current dataset, the TCS already covers a substantial number of 

teachers. In 2010, 23 states are currently reporting data for SY 2008–09. For SY 2009–

10 the TCS is expected to include 30–35 states. National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES) will continue to recruit new states to the survey, with the goal of building a 

complete universe of teacher compensation data. In accomplishing this goal, NCES will 

work with states to ensure accuracy and comparability, as well as confidentiality of 

personally identifiable data. As states participate over time, the capacity for longitudinal 

intrastate analyses will increase. NCES anticipates that compensation data related to 

benefits, which currently remain elusive, will become increasingly available as states 

continue to coordinate their data systems. 

53 
This page intentionally left blank.
References and Related Data Files 

References 

Aud, S., Hussar, W., Planty, M., Snyder, T., Bianco, K., Fox, M., Frohlich, L., Kemp, J., 

and Drake, L. (2010). The Condition of Education 2010 (NCES 2010-028). National 

Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC. 

Berne, R., and Stiefel, L. (1984). The Measurement of Equity in School Finance: 

Conceptual, Methodological, and Empirical Dimensions. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins 

University Press. 

Hanushek, E.A., and Rivkin, S.J. (2004). How to Improve the Supply of High-Quality 

Teachers. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Brookings Papers on Education Policy. Washington, DC: 

Brookings Institution Press. 

Hussar, W., and Sonnenberg, W. (2000). Trends in Disparities in School District Level 

Expenditures per Pupil (NCES 2000-020). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, 

DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

Loeb, S., Miller, L.C., and Strunk, K.O. (2009). The State Role in Teacher 

Compensation. Education Finance and Policy, 4(1): 89-114. 

Pantal, M., Podgursky, M., Elhert, M., and Hull, A.M. (2008). An Exploratory Analysis of 

the Content and Availability of State Administrative Data on Teacher Compensation

(NCES 2008-601). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education 

Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. 

Parish, T.B., Matsumoto, C.S., and Fowler, W.J. (1995). Disparities in Public School 

District Spending 1989–90 (NCES 95-300). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, 

DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

Sable, J., and Noel, A. (2008). Public Elementary and Secondary School Student 

Enrollment and Staff From the Common Core of Data: School Year 2006–07 (NCES 

2009-305). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, 

U.S.Department of Education. Washington, DC. 

Sawchuk, S. (2009, January 27). School Leaders Target Salary Reform Toward Newer 

Teachers. Education Week. 

Related Data Files

Data files for all CCD surveys may be found on the CCD data page of the CCD website 

at http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/ccddata.asp. 

55 
This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix A—Glossary

A-1 
all other benefits—All other benefits (excluding retirement and health insurance) paid 

by the school district, municipal, state, and other government agencies for teachers (e.g., 

unemployment compensation, worker compensation, and fringe benefits such as housing 

allowances, moving expenses, and paid parking). 

American Indian/Alaska Native—A person having origins in any of the original 

peoples of North and South America (including Central America), and who maintains 

tribal affiliation or community attachment. (OMB directive, 1977, 1997) 

Asian/Pacific Islander—A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the 

Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands. This area 

includes, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, 

Thailand, Vietnam, Guam, the Philippine Islands, Samoa, and other Pacific Islands. 

(OMB directive, 1977) 

bachelor’s degree—An award (baccalaureate or equivalent degree, as determined by the 

Secretary, U.S. Department of Education) that normally requires at least 4, but not more 

than 5, years of full-time-equivalent college-level work. This includes all bachelor’s 

degrees conferred in a 5-year cooperative (work-study) program. A cooperative program 

provides for alternate class attendance and employment in business, industry, or 

government; thus, it allows students to combine actual work experience with their college 

studies. Also includes bachelor’s degrees in which the normal 4 years of work are 

completed in 3 years. 

base salary—The negotiated annual salary for teaching duties for the school year. The 

base salary excludes pay for additional duties, such as supervising or directing afterschool activities, school administration activities, and teaching summer school or adult 

education classes. Bonuses and other incentives are not included in base salaries. 

Black or African American—A person having origins in any of the black racial groups 

of Africa. (OMB directive, 1977, 1997) 

Common Core of Data (CCD)—A group of public elementary/secondary education 

surveys of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). CCD data are collected 

from the administrative records systems of each state’s department of education. 

contract days—Number of days specified in a teacher’s contract. 

district new teacher indicator—This item indicates if a teacher is new to the district. 

doctor’s degree—The highest award a student can earn for graduate study. The doctor’s 

degree classification includes such degrees as Doctor of Education, Doctor of Juridical 

Science, Doctor of Public Health, and Doctor of Philosophy, which can be awarded in 

any field (such as agronomy, food technology, education, engineering, public 

administration, ophthalmology, or radiology). 

A-2 
full-time equivalent (FTE)—The state’s (or district’s) FTE value for a teacher. FTE is 

the amount of time required to perform a teaching assignment stated as a proportion of a 

full-time position; it is computed by dividing the amount of time employed by the time 

normally required for a full-time position. FTE is not necessarily linked to contract days. 

health benefits—All amounts paid by the school district, municipal, state, and other 

government agencies for teachers’ health insurance. 

highest degree earned—The highest degree earned by a teacher from a college, 

university, or other postsecondary education institution as official recognition for the 

successful completion of a program of study. 

Hispanic or Latino—A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South 

American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race. (OMB directive, 1977, 

1997) 

local education agency (LEA)—The government agency at the local level whose 

primary responsibility is to operate public schools or to contract for public school 

services.

master’s degree—An award that normally requires the successful completion of a 

program of study of at least the full-time equivalent of 1 or 2 academic years of work 

beyond the bachelor’s degree. 

race/ethnicity—Categories used to describe groups with which individuals identify or to 

which they belong in the eyes of the community. The categories do not denote scientific 

definitions of anthropological origins. A person may be counted in only one group. 

retirement benefits—All amounts paid by the school district, municipal, state, and other 

government agencies toward a teacher’s retirement plan. 

sex—Indicates whether the teacher is female or male. 

state education agency (SEA)—An agency of the state charged with primary 

responsibility for coordinating and supervising public instruction, including setting 

standards for elementary and secondary instructional programs.

state new teacher indicator—This item indicates if a teacher is new to the state.

substitute teacher—Individuals who fill the role of a regular teacher.

teacher—A professional school staff member who instructs students in prekindergarten, 

kindergarten, grades 1 through 12, or ungraded classes and maintains daily student 

attendance records. 

A-3 
A-4 

teacher salary indicator—This item indicates whether or not a teacher’s base salary 

includes pay for other official assignments (such as administration, curriculum 

coordinator, and guidance counseling). By definition base salary does not include other 

duties but some states cannot make this separation. The salary indicator provides 

information on this distinction for analysis. 

teacher status indicator—This indicator is used to determine a teacher’s employment 

status, such as full-time teacher at one school only; full-time teacher assigned to several 

schools (itinerant teacher); full-time employee, part-time teacher at one school only; fulltime employee, part-time teacher assigned to several schools; part-time employee whose 

primary duty is as a teacher; part-time employee who teaches and performs other duties; 

and substitute teacher.

total benefits—Sum of retirement, health, and all other benefits, or total benefits paid by 

the school district, municipal, state, and other government agencies if unable to break out 

retirement and health benefits. 

total salary—The total amount of money paid to a teacher by the school district for the 

school year. 

White—A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, North Africa, 

or the Middle East. (OMB directive, 1977, 1997)

year of birth—Teacher’s year of birth.

years of experience—Years of teaching experience recognized by the school district or 

state education agency as of the end of the school year. New full-time teachers, hired at 

the beginning of the school year (with no previous teaching experience), are reported as 

having 1 year of teaching experience. 
Appendix B—Data Plan Responses 

B-1 
Appendix B—Data Plan Responses

Table B-1. Data plan responses to questions 1 through 4, by participating state: School year 2006–07

Participating state

State 

abbreviation 

Q. 1

Will the State Teacher ID that you 

reported on the TCS remain the same 

for each teacher in subsequent years 

(as long as he or she is employed as a 

teacher in your state)? 

Q. 2

Are other staff (such as 

teacher aides, teachers 

without valid teaching 

certificates, librarians, 

guidance counselors, etc.) 

included in your TCS data?

Q. 3

Other types of staff 

that are included in 

your TCS data

Q. 3.a

What is your state’s 

definition of FullTime Equivalent 

(FTE)? 

Q. 4

Arizona

Arkansas

Colorado

Florida

Idaho

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Nebraska

Oklahoma

South Carolina

Texas

AZ

AR

CO

FL

ID

IA

KS

KY

LA

ME

MN

MS

MO

NE

OK

SC

TX

No

Yes

—

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

—

No

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

†

†

—

†

†

†

(6)

†

(9)

(11)

†

†

†

†

†

†

(19)

(1)

(2)

—

(3)

(4)

(5)

(7)

(8)

(10)

(12)

(13)

(14)

(15)

(16)

(17)

(18)

(20)

— Not available.

† Not applicable.

1

 Full-time means employed for a full school day, or its equivalent, or for a full class load, or its equivalent, as determined by the governing board. (ARS Â§15-

501.3) For purposes of computation, a full-time equivalent (FTE) certified teacher is 1.00 if employed full-time. If the teacher is employed less than full-time, 

multiply 1.00 by the percentage of a full school day, or its equivalent, or a full class load, or its equivalent, for which the teacher is employed as determined by 

the governing board. (ARS Â§15-901 B).

2 6-17-807 Works the minimum number of days specified in the normal base contract period. Normal base contract period for each district is the number of 

days worked by the majority of teachers. Also works the minimum number of hours per day that is required of the majority of teachers.

3

 The full-time equivalency of the job assignment (to the nearest whole percent). For one full-time equivalency, the employee's services are required each 

working day for at least the number of hours equal to the number of hours of a regular working day for that job.

4 Working full-days during a normal school year (usually around 1,380 hours per year). g y g y ( y , py ) 5

 A teacher with a full-time contract, contract days being greater than or equal to 180 and base salary being greater than or equal to $24,500, is counted as 

1.0 FTE. All other teachers are counted as 0.5 FTE.

6

 Librarians, guidance counselors, and school psychologists.

7

 According to the Legal Services Department, Kansas Department of Education has no STATE definition for FTE.

8 It is a way to measure a teacher's involvement in an educational institution. It reflects a percentage of time worked. An FTE of 1.0 is equivalent to a full-time 

employee, while an FTE of 0.5 is only a half-time employee. (KRS 157.069). 9

 Teachers without valid teaching certificates.

10 Individual's total minutes worked (in school district) divided by total available contract time (applicable to school district) where the individual's total available 

contract time equals individual's contract days times average workday minutes under contract with that school district. Individual's FTE within the district is 

capped at 1.0. However, if individual works for more than one school district, it is possible that the sum of FTE (all districts) for that individual may exceed 1.0.

11 The file contains teachers only. However, their certification status is unknown.

12 A teacher is full-time if his or her total hours are 990 or greater. If the hours are less than 990, then the hours are divided by 1,000 to get an FTE.

13 Full-time employment has 1.0 FTE. Calculated based on hours per week.

14 FTE is the amount of time required to perform an assignment stated as a proportion of a full-time position, and computed by dividing the amount of time 

employed by the time normally required for a full-time position. 15 Percentage of school day employed.

16 An indication of the time a staff member spends in his or her assignment as it relates to the total time in the work week defined for that assignment.

17 Number of days employed per year divided by number of days in annual contract multiplied by fraction of a day worked.

18 The percentage of time, as a decimal, that the staff member works.

19 Teachers without teaching certificates are included.

20 FTE measures the extent to which a person (or responsibility) occupies a position.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), "Teacher Compensation Survey," school 

year 2006–07, Version 1a.

B-2
Appendix B—Data Plan Responses

Table B-2. Data plan responses to questions 5.a through 5.d, by participating state: School year 2006–07

Participating state

Does the FTE reported on 

the TCS represent FTE 

regarding teacher duties 

only? 

Q. 5.a

Does the FTE reported on the 

TCS represent FTE of staff 

member (i.e., includes 

teaching and non-teaching 

duties, such as school 

administration or guidance 

counseling)?

Q. 5.b

Can FTE be 

greater than 1.0? 

Q. 5.c

Should NCES use 

FTE to determine 

the amount of 

reported salary that 

is for teacher 

duties? 

Q. 5.d

Arizona

Arkansas

Colorado

Florida

Idaho

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Nebraska

Oklahoma

South Carolina

Texas

Yes

Yes

—

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

—

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

—

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

(1)

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

—

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

— Not available.

1

 Full-time equivalent (FTE) can be greater than 1.0 statewide, but not at a specific district.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Commo

Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a.

n Core of Data (CCD), "Teacher 

—

B-3
Appendix B—Data Plan Responses

B-4

Table B-3. Data plan responses to questions 6 through 9, by participating state: School year 2006–07

Participating state

Does the base pay for parttime teachers include pay for 

other formal part-time school 

work such as administration, 

guidance counseling, etc.? 

Q. 6

What items are included in the 

“Base Pay” definition for your 

state?

Q. 7

How are you defining “Years of 

Experience” on the TCS?

Q. 8

Does the "Years of 

Experience" that you are 

reporting include the current 

year?

Q. 9

Arizona

Arkansas

Colorado

Florida

Idaho

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Nebraska

Oklahoma

South Carolina

Texas

No

No

—

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes 8

† 10

No

Yes

No

No

No

Base salary

Base salary

—

Base salary

Base salary

Base salary

Base salary

Base salary

Base salary, overtime, bonuses, 5

other

Base salary

Base salary, overtime, other 9

Base salary

Base salary

Base salary

Base salary

Base salary, other 11

Base salary

Other 1

Number of years taught overall 2

—

Number of years taught overall

Other 3

Number of years taught overall

Number of years taught overall

Number of years taught in state

Other 6

Number of years taught overall

Number of years taught overall

Number of years taught overall

Number of years taught overall

Number of years taught overall

Number of years taught overall

Number of years taught overall 12

Other 13

Yes

Yes

—

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No 4

No 7

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No 12

No

— Not available.

† . Not applicable

1

 Number of years of experience means the number of years of classroom instruction conducted by a certified teacher in the school district in which the certified teacher is 

currently employed including the number of years of experience of the certified teacher granted by the school district for the certified teacher on the district's salary 

schedule for experience outside of the school district. (ARS Â§15-941.E).

2 Arkansas collects years taught in the district, years taught in the state, and years total teaching.

3

 Number of completed years in a certificated position as of the beginning of the school year if they were in that capacity 50 percent (FTE) or more of a given school year.

4 OGH 68-102 A teacher who has completed three years of teaching is currently teaching this year.

5

 Other includes salary dedicated from local district tax collections and extended compensation salary paid vocational education instructors.

6 Number of years overall experience recognized by employing district in determining employee's salary.

7 Years of experience is prior experience at time of employment for current year. Individuals hired with no prior experience are coded "0" years experience; changing to "1" 

upon completion of first year's experience.

8 Only one salary amount is reported by school districts to the Minnesota Department of Education - the amount of salary attributable to assignments for which licensure is 

required.

9 School districts are instructed to report as salary: "actual annual salary that pertains to licensed assignments only (pay incentives as well as payment for optional 

overload/period(s) should also be included. Do NOT include benefits or salary for extracurricular activities, coaching, summer school, or advisors."

10 Reporting full-time teachers only. 11 Other includes National Board state and local salary supplements.

12 Data do not include a year of experience for reported data year. NCES cannot assume one year experience for the 2006 –07 school year. 13 Number of years of experience within the Texas Public School system, not including the 2006-07 school year. The number of years experience is not role specific, and 

can include roles other than teacher.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), "Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, 

Version 1a.
Appendix B—Data Plan Responses

Table B-4. Data plan responses to questions 10 through 12, by participating state: School year 2006–07

Would your state be able to report on teacher certification status according to the following categories:

Q. 12 Does your state 

keep records What is your Certificate that Certificate issued to 

pertaining to the state's Regular or standard requires some Certificate persons who must 

teaching certificate definition of a state certificate or additional issued except complete Does not hold 

that teachers "certified advanced coursework, completion of certification regular or 

currently hold? teacher"? professional student teaching or probationary program to standard state Other, please 

Participating state Q. 10 Q. 11 certificate a test period continue teaching certificate specify

Arizona Yes (1) Yes Yes No Yes Yes —

Arkansas Yes (2) Yes Yes No Yes Yes (3)

Colorado — — — — — — — —

Florida Yes (4) Yes No No No Yes —

Idaho Yes (5) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes —

Iowa Yes (6) Yes Yes Yes No Yes —

Kansas Yes (7) Yes Yes Yes Yes No —

Kentucky Yes (8) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes (9)

Louisiana Yes (10) Yes No No No Yes (11)

Maine Yes — Yes Yes No No Yes —

Minnesota Yes (12) Yes Yes No Yes Yes —

Mississippi Yes (13) Yes No No No No —

Missouri Yes (14) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes —

Nebraska Yes (15) Yes Yes No Yes Yes —

Oklahoma Yes (16) Yes No No No Yes —

South Carolina Yes (17) Yes No No Yes Yes —

Texas Yes (18) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes —

— Not available.

1 Any teacher who meets state requirements and has been issued a certificate under R-7-2-608 for elementary, R-7-2-609 for secondary, R-7-2-610 for SPED, and R-7-2-

611 for CTE. In addition, any Early Childhood Education certification, and those holding the Intern Certificate.

2 (1) Required to hold a teaching license from ADE; (2) Engaged directly in instruction with students in a classroom setting for more than 70 percent of contracted time; (3) A 

guidance counselor; or (4) A librarian.

3 (1) There is no probationary period on a license; (2) Certificate issued to persons who must complete certification program to continue teaching: This describes our 

provisional licenses; and (3) Certificate that requires some additional coursework, student teaching or a test AND does not hold regular or standard state certificate - Again 

this would be the provisionally licensed.

4 An individual that holds a valid Florida Professional or Temporary certificate or a Statement of Status of Eligibility from the Florida Department of Education.

5 There must be a credentialed individual holding valid certificates and/or endorsements in the classroom or working in an instructional capacity. If not, we withhold state 

funds. We also include in this "teacher" classification mentoring teachers (teachers assisting teachers) because they spend the majority of their time either assisting other 

teachers or students.

6 A licensed teacher is an individual who has completed the teacher preparation program from a regionally accredited and state approved institution and has completed the 

requirements for at least one teaching endorsement.

7 An educator that currently holds a license granted by the Kansas Board of Education giving access to practice teaching, administration, or school services in Kansas publi d t th t tl h ld li t d b th K B d f Ed ti i i t ti t hi d i i t ti h l i i K bli

schools.

8 KRS 151 B.010 (4) Teachers who fill school or educational assignments requiring the issuance of a certificate OAG 90-103. For instruction of teaching pupils KRS 161.010 

to 161.126. All certificates shall be issued in accordance with the administrative regulations.

9 KRS 157 B.030; OAG 85-109.

10 A certified teacher is generally defined as an employee of a school board/special school who holds a standard teaching certificate and whose employment requires such 

certification under rules/regulations promulgated by the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

11 Status of individuals relative to certificates is that applicable on the "as of date" of source data collection; and will not include subsequent "real time" changes that may 

occur during remainder of (or subsequent to) that school year.

12 A teacher who holds a Minnesota professional teaching license, which is any five-year or continuing teaching license issued by the Minnesota Department of Education. 

This license requires teachers to hold a bachelor's degree, complete an approved teacher preparation program, and pass required licensing tests approved by the Minnesota

Board of Teaching.

13 One that holds a valid teaching license.

14 Holds currently valid Missouri teaching certificate.

15 No specific definition of "certified teacher." Definitions of “Certificate” and “Teaching,” as defined in Rule 21, are: Certificate shall mean authorization issued by the 

Commissioner to an individual who meets the qualifications to engage in teaching, administration, or providing of special services as required by law. Teaching shall mean 

and include, but not be limited to, the following responsibilities: (a) The organization and management of the classroom or the physical area in which the learning experiences 

of pupils take place; (b) the assessment and diagnosis of the individual educational needs of the pupils; (c) the planning, selecting, organizing, prescribing, and directing of 

the learning experiences of pupils; (d) the planning of teaching strategies and the selection of available materials and equipment to be used; and (e) the evaluation and 

reporting of student progress.

16 If they pass the required tests then they can become "certified" (either traditional or alternative).

17 A teacher that holds a valid, active state teaching certificate or a valid national board certificate.

18 The state of Texas has no one definition of a certified teacher. The Texas Administrative Code describes requirements for obtaining a standard certificate (Chapter 230, 

Subchapter P), and on types of certificates (Chapter 232, Subchapter A). The Texas Education Code specifies circumstances under which an educator is required to have a 

certificate or permit and consequences of failure to obtain a certificate or permit.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), "Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 2006–07, 

Version 1a.

B-5
Appendix B—Data Plan Responses

Table B-5. Data plan responses to questions 13 through 13.a, by participating state: School year 2006–07

Participating state

Do you release, to 

any requester, 

teacher-level data 

that contain 

salaries, benefits, 

school IDs, or 

other data 

describing the 

teacher? 

Q. 13

Which teacher data do you release and do not release?

Q. 13.a

Release to 

Release to public researchers only

Do not release to 

public or researchers 

Arizona

Arkansas

Colorado

Florida

Idaho

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Nebraska

Oklahoma

South Carolina

Texas

No

Yes

—

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes 1

Yes 2

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

† †

Salary, benefits, highest degree Teacher ID, age

earned, experience, race and/or 

gender

— —

Salary, benefits, highest degree †

earned, experience, age, race and/or 

gender

† Salary, highest 

degree earned, 

experience

Salary, highest degree earned, Teacher ID, race 

experience, age and/or gender

Salary, highest degree earned, †

experience, age, race and/or gender

Salary, benefits, highest degree †

earned, experience, race and/or 

gender

Salary, highest degree earned, †

experience, race and/or gender

Highest degree earned, experience Teacher ID, salary, 

age, race and/or 

gender

Teacher ID, salary, highest degree †

earned, experience, age, race and/or 

gender

Salary, highest degree earned, Age

experience, race and/or gender

Teacher ID, salary, benefits, highest †

degree earned, experience, age, race 

and/or gender

Teacher ID, salary, benefits, highest Age

degree earned, experience, race 

and/or gender

† †

† Teacher ID, salary, 

benefits, highest 

degree earned, 

experience, age, 

race and/or gender

Teacher ID, Salary, highest degree †

earned, experience, age, race and/or 

gender

†

†

—

Teacher ID

Teacher ID, benefits, age, 

race and/or gender

Benefits

Teacher ID, benefits

Teacher ID, age

Teacher ID, age

†

Benefits

Teacher ID, benefits

†

†

†

Benefits

— Not available.

† Not applicable.

1

 Benefits data are not available.

2

 Minnesota Department of Education collect

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, N

Survey," school year 2006–07, Version 1a.

s no individual benefits data.

ational Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), "Teacher Compensation 

B-6

†
Appendix B—Data Plan Responses

B-7

Table B-6. Data plan responses to questions 14 through 17, by participating state: School year 2006–07

Participating state

If you release the data to researchers 

only, what measures, if any, do you 

require of the researchers to ensure 

confidentiality?

Q. 14

Do all the school district (or the state) 

provide a guarantee of confidentiality to 

their teachers regarding any data items 

reported on the NCES Teacher 

Compensation Survey?

Q. 15

Do all of the school districts in 

your state publish their teacher 

salary schedules (either on the 

web or in other formats)?

Q. 16

General 

comments or 

suggestions

Q. 17

Arizona

Arkansas

Colorado

Florida

Idaho

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Nebraska

Oklahoma

South Carolina

Texas

—

(2)

—

†

(4)

†

(6)

(7)

(9)

—

—

(13)

—

(15)

—

(18)

—

Yes 1

No

—

Yes 3

No 5

No

No

— 8

† 10

No

No

No 14

No

No

No

Yes 19

Yes

No

Yes

—

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Unknown

(12)

Yes

Unknown

Unknown

Yes

Yes 20

Yes

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

(11)

—

—

—

—

(16)

(17)

—

(21)

— Not available.

† Not applicable.

1 ARS 15.341 A32; ARS 15.183 F (A statute for charters and districts.)

2 Statement/agreement.

3 The State provides a guarantee of confidentiality regarding data items reported only to the extent of those that are exempt from the Florida Public Records Law 

(Section 119, Florida Statutes).

4 Under Idaho Public Records law, we release information on a case-by-case request that is readily available from our current computer system with the exception 

of those data elements protected under FERPA.

5 Our staff ID is the individual’s social security number. Since this is collected through the licensing process and criminal history (background) checks it is protected 

by law.

6 Data are not released at the individual teacher or building level.

7 Data are available on website. We never give social security numbers.

This is the first year that we have done an NCES survey. We are 8 This is the first year that we have done an NCES survey. We are only providing providing names and no confidential information. Accordin names and no confidential information. According to the standards all state to the standards all state

salaries are for review.

9 Execution of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between Louisiana Department of Education and researchers that addresses the use, control, release, and 

protection of data. Where SSAN appears as identifier, the SSAN is masked or converted to a generated ID before release.

10 Confidential data is not included within Louisiana's response to the NCES Teacher Compensation Survey.

11 Regarding Question 5c: FTE cannot be greater than 1.0 within the reporting school district; however, if teacher employed by multiple school districts, the sum 

total of FTE (all districts) for that teacher may be greater than 1.0. 12 The Minnesota Department of Education is not required to collect, publish, or otherwise keep record of school district salary schedules; nor are we aware of any 

requirement imposed on school districts themselves to do so. Education Minnesota, the state teachers union, may have salary schedules for school districts.

13 Information is of public record. Calculating age is done in cooperation with the researcher. Birth date is on the staff's file but we do not give that information out 

on a normal basis.

14 All of the information is of public record.

15 Nondisclosure agreement. 16 Question 2: State Teacher ID: In the future, Nebraska will be converting to a new system to generate and assign state teacher IDs. At that time, the answer to Q2 

will be NO for the one year transition. We are willing to work with NCES at that time to revise previous year submissions with the new State Teacher IDs.

Question 5c: FTE: FTE can be > 1.0 statewide but not at a specific district. 17 All data on the TCS are routinely released to anyone who requests them but only AFTER approval by our State Superintendent. 18 Data are not identifiable by individual teacher. A unique numbering system was used. 19 All data provided will be assigned a unique identifier that cannot be tied to a specific teacher.

20 Salary schedule available on website: http://www.ed.sc.gov/agency/Finance-and-Operations/Finance/old/finance/districtinformation/documents/WEBFY2007.XLS

21 Contract days is the actual days employed.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), "Teacher Compensation Survey," school year 

2006–07, Version 1a.

.
Appendix C—State Notes 

C-1 
The following notes can be used to track known anomalies specific to each participating state 

and the edits that the U.S. Census Bureau, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

and the American Institutes for Research’s Education Statistics Services Institute (ESSI) made to 

modify the data. Each anomaly or edit recorded here applies to school year (SY) 2006–07. 

Arizona

• Data on benefits, year of birth, contract days, teacher status indicator, salary indicator, 

and new teacher indicators were not available for Arizona. 

Arkansas

• No data were reported for more than 20 percent of the teachers in the state, including 

all teachers in Little Rock School District. 

• No school identifiers (SCHNO and SEASCH) were provided with the data 

submission. The name of the school (SCHNAM) was adjusted to the name of the 

corresponding school district. 

• For the records where the NCES 7-digit local education agency ID (LEAID) was not 

available, the LEAID was adjusted to “0599999.” 

• The state reported zero years of experience (EXP) for new teachers. The years of 

experience (EXP) data in the data file were the reported EXP increased by 1 so that 

EXP data reflected the years of experience as of the end of the school year. 

• For records where the district new teacher indicator (DSTNEWTCHIND) indicated 

that a teacher was not new to the district and the state new teacher indicator 

(STNEWTCHIND) indicated that a teacher was new to the state, and the years of 

experience (EXP) was equal to 1, then DSTNEWTCHIND was adjusted to “1” for 

new to district. For records where the district new teacher indicator 

(DSTNEWTCHIND) indicated that a teacher was not new to the district and the state 

new teacher indicator (STNEWTCHIND) indicated that a teacher was new to the 

state, but the years of experience was not equal to 1, then both DSTNEWTCHIND 

and STNEWTCHIND were set to “M” for missing. 

Colorado

• Data on total salary and benefits were not available for Colorado. 

• For the records where the NCES 7-digit local education agency ID (LEAID) was not 

available, the LEAID was adjusted to “0899999.” 

Florida

• For records where the total benefits were reported, but some component (retirement, 

health, or other benefits) was missing, the missing value was adjusted to “0.” The 

state confirmed that in these cases the teacher did not receive the benefit. 

• For records where the district new teacher indicator (DSTNEWTCHIND) indicated 

that the teacher was not new to the district and years of experience (EXP) was greater 

than 1, then state new teacher indicator (STNEWTCHIND) was adjusted to “2” (not 

new to the state). 

• For records where the district new teacher indicator (DSTNEWTCHIND) indicated 

that the teacher was not new to the district and years of experience (EXP) was equal 

C-2 
to 1, then the district new teacher indicator (DSTNEWTCHIND) was adjusted to “1” 

(new to the district). 

• For records where the district new teacher indicator (DSTNEWTCHIND) indicated 

that the teacher was not new to the district and years of experience (EXP) was 

missing, then the district new teacher indicator (DSTNEWTCHIND) was adjusted to 

“M” for missing. 

• If there was more than one record for a teacher, based on the teacher ID 

(NCESTEACHID), indicating that a teacher works at multiple schools, and the 

teacher status indicator (TCHSTSIND) was set to “1” (full-time teacher at one school 

only) then TCHSTSIND was adjusted to “2” (full-time teacher assigned to several 

schools (itinerant teacher). If there was more than one record for a teacher and 

TCHSTSIND was set to “3” (full-time employee, part-time teacher, at one school 

only) then TCHSTSIND was adjusted to “4” (full-time employee, part-time teacher, 

assigned to several schools). 

Idaho

• Data on benefits were not available for Idaho. 

• The state reported zero years of experience (EXP) for new teachers. The years of 

experience (EXP) data in the data file were the reported EXP increased by 1 so that 

EXP data reflected the years of experience as of the end of the school year. 

• For records where birth year (BRTHYR) was submitted as “-1,” BRTHYR was 

adjusted to “M” for missing. 

• For records where the district new teacher indicator (DSTNEWTCHIND) indicated 

that a teacher was not new to the district and the state new teacher indicator 

(STNEWTCHIND) indicated that a teacher was new to the state, and the years of 

experience (EXP) was equal to 1, then DSTNEWTCHIND was adjusted to “1” for 

new to district. 

• If the reported NCES 12-digit school ID number (NCESSCH) was not equal to the 

combination of the NCES 7-digit local education agency ID (LEAID) and the NCES 

5-digit school ID (SCHNO), then NCESSCH was adjusted to be LEAID followed by 

SCHNO. 

Iowa

• Data on benefits were not available for Iowa. 

Kansas

• Data on benefits, contract days, and salary indicator were not available for Kansas. 

• Where there were multiple (duplicate) combinations of a single teacher ID 

(NCESTEACHID) and NCES-assigned 12-digit school ID (NCESSCH) that could 

not be resolved by other business rules, if the records had consistent data on school 

name, teacher demographics, and teacher status indicator, NCES believed that these 

records were for the same teacher in the same school, and then combined them to one 

record by summing up the FTE and salary data. 

• The state reported zero years of experience (EXP) for new teachers. The years of 

experience (EXP) data in the data file were the reported EXP increased by 1 so that 

EXP data reflected the years of experience as of the end of the school year. 

C-3 
Kentucky

• Data for teacher status indicators and new teacher indicators were not available for 

Kentucky. 

• For the records where the NCES 7-digit local education agency ID (LEAID) was not 

available, the LEAID was adjusted to “2199999.” 

• For teachers with multiple records where one or more record for the teacher had a 

consistent birth year (BRTHYR) and one or more record for the teacher had 

BRTHYR equal “M” for missing, then the nonmissing value for BRTHYR was 

applied to all records for that teacher. 

• For teachers with multiple records for the same school, these records were combined 

to form one record by summing up the salaries, benefits, and FTEs of all these 

records. 

• Year of experience (EXP) data were taken from the SY 2007–08 data submission 

(adjusted to reflect the SY 2006–07 value) because the SY 2006–07 data were not 

correct. 

• The state reported zero years of experience (EXP) for new teachers. The years of 

experience (EXP) data in the data file were the reported EXP increased by 1 so that 

EXP data reflected the years of experience as of the end of the school year. 

• For records where health benefits (HEALTHBEN) were missing, HEALTHBEN was 

adjusted to “0.” The state confirmed these teachers did not receive health benefits. 

Louisiana

• Data on year of birth were not available for Louisiana. 

• The state reported zero years of experience (EXP) for new teachers. The years of 

experience (EXP) data in the data file were the reported EXP increased by 1 so that 

EXP data reflected the years of experience as of the end of the school year. 

• If there was more than one record for a teacher, based on the teacher ID 

(NCESTEACHID), indicating that a teacher works at multiple schools, and the 

teacher status indicator (TCHSTSIND) was set to “1” (full-time teacher at one school 

only), then TCHSTSIND was adjusted to “2” (full-time teacher assigned to several 

schools (itinerant teacher). If there was more than one record for a teacher and 

TCHSTSIND was set to “3” (full-time employee, part-time teacher, at one school 

only), then TCHSTSIND was adjusted to “4” (full-time employee, part-time teacher, 

assigned to several schools). 

Maine

• Data on benefits, total salary, salary indicator, and new teacher indicators were not 

available for Maine. 

• For teachers with multiple records (teaching at several schools), on records where the 

teacher status indicator was set to “1” (full-time teacher at one school only), then 

TCHSTSIND was adjusted to “2” (full-time teacher assigned to several schools 

(itinerant teacher)). 

C-4 
Minnesota

• Data on benefits were not available for Minnesota. 

• The state confirmed that first-year teachers were reported as having years of 

experience (EXP) set to 1; therefore, records where EXP was set to 0 were adjusted to 

“-1” for missing. 

Mississippi

• Data on benefits were not available for Mississippi. 

• For records where year of birth (BRTHYR) was set to “0,” BRTHYR was adjusted to 

“M” for missing. 

Missouri

• Data on benefits were not available for Missouri. 

• The state reported zero years of experience (EXP) for new teachers. The years of 

experience (EXP) data in the data file were the reported EXP increased by 1 so that 

EXP data reflected the years of experience as of the end of the school year. 

• If there was more than one record for a teacher, based on the teacher ID 

(NCESTEACHID), indicating that a teacher works at multiple schools, and the 

teacher status indicator (TCHSTSIND) was set to “1” (full-time teacher at one school 

only), then TCHSTSIND was adjusted to “2” (full-time teacher assigned to several 

schools (itinerant teacher). If there was more than one record for a teacher and 

TCHSTSIND was set to “3” (full-time employee, part-time teacher, at one school 

only), then TCHSTSIND was adjusted to “4” (full-time employee, part-time teacher, 

assigned to several schools). 

• Birth year (BRTHYR) data were taken from the SY 2007–08 data submission 

because the SY 2006–07 data were not correct. For records in SY 2006–07 that did 

not have a matching record in SY 2007–08, BRTHYR was set to “M” for missing. 

Nebraska

• Data on retirement benefits, health benefits, and other benefits were not available for 

Nebraska. 

Oklahoma

• The state reported zero years of experience (EXP) for new teachers. The years of 

experience (EXP) data in the data file were the reported EXP increased by 1 so that 

EXP data reflected the years of experience as of the end of the school year. 

• For teachers with multiple records, total salary (TOTPAY) was redistributed based on 

the portion of time a teacher worked at a given school. FTE was summed over all the 

records for a teacher, and a fraction was calculated as the FTE at the school divided 

by the total FTE at all schools. Then the reported total pay was multiplied by this 

fraction, approximating total pay for that teaching assignment. 

C-5 
C-6 

South Carolina

• Data on benefits, total salary, and year of birth were not available for South Carolina. 

• For the records where the NCES 7-digit local education agency ID (LEAID) was not 

available, the LEAID was adjusted to “4599999.” 

• The state reported zero years of experience (EXP) for new teachers. The years of 

experience (EXP) data in the data file were the reported EXP increased by 1 so that 

EXP data reflected the years of experience as of the end of the school year. 

• If there was more than one record for a teacher, based on the teacher ID 

(NCESTEACHID), indicating that a teacher works at multiple schools, and the 

teacher status indicator (TCHSTSIND) was set to “1” (full-time teacher at one school 

only), then TCHSTSIND was adjusted to “2” (full-time teacher assigned to several 

schools (itinerant teacher). If there was more than one record for a teacher and 

TCHSTSIND was set to “3” (full-time employee, part-time teacher, at one school 

only), then TCHSTSIND was adjusted to “4” (full-time employee, part-time teacher, 

assigned to several schools). 

Texas

• Data on benefits, contract days, teacher status, salary, and state new teacher indicators 

were not available for Texas. 

• For the records where the NCES 7-digit local education agency ID (LEAID) was not 

available, the LEAID was adjusted to “4899999.” 

• The state reported zero years of experience (EXP) for new teachers. The years of 

experience (EXP) data in the data file were the reported EXP increased by 1 so that 

EXP data reflected the years of experience as of the end of the school year. 

• For teachers with multiple records, total salary (TOTPAY) was redistributed based on 

the portion of time a teacher worked at a given school. FTE was summed over all the 

records for a teacher, and a fraction was calculated as the FTE at the school divided 

by the total FTE at all schools. Then the reported total pay was multiplied by this 

fraction, approximating total pay for that teaching assignment.