Employment in Public School

Chart 3. Growth of full-time equivalent education staff

in public schools, 1969-90

Percent Percent
100 100
80 4 eo
oF | 60
40 = 40
20 | 20
0 0

Principals Teachers Teacher Guidance Librarians

and aides counselors

assistants

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics.

classrooms has therefore contributed to the de-
mand for special education staff.

Other trends. Employment growth in public
schools is also positively influenced by:

Footnotes

© Shifts toward smaller classes, which are be-
lieved to be beneficial for learning. Many States
have passed laws mandating smaller class sizes.

Establishment of vocational training centers
for high school students and “magnet” schools
that offer specialized instruction.

© Increases in the amount of money spent per
pupil. The current expenditure per student rose
from $2,162 in the 1965-66 school year to $5,054
(estimated) in 1992-93 (1991-92 dollars).'* Dis-
posable income has risen; at the same time there
has been a decrease in the ratio of the number of
students to the population as a whole.!5 This al-
lows more money to be spread among fewer
pupils.

Will the surge continue?

Public school enrollment is projected to grow
throughout the 1990’s; by 1998, enrollment is
projected to surpass the 1971 peak.'® This surge
in enrollment will require State and local gov-
ernments to hire more teachers and other staff
just to maintain the current student-to-employee
ratio.

Even if there are more Federal funds for re-
medial, bilingual, and special education pro-
grams, State and local budgets will likely be
strained by the increase in school-age children.
Asaresult, there may not be enough money avail-
able to allow the student-to-employee ratio to
decline further. Thus, the recent pattern of a
stable, or even increasing student-to-employee
ratio in public education, established since 1990,
may remain for some time. a

' Data from 1964 forward are used because enrollment
data prior to 1964 encompassed the entire school year. For
1964 and later years, enrollment figures are for fall only
and thus can be compared with fall employment data.

2 National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Edu-
cation Statistics 1992, sces 92-097 (Washington, pc, Na-
tional Center for Education Statistics, October 1992), p.1.

3 These recessionary periods, as identified by the National
Bureau of Economic Research, are: December 1969-Novem-
ber 1970; November 1973-March 1975; January 1980-July
1980; July 1981-November 1982; and Juty 1990-March 1991.

4 Digest of Education Statistics 1992, table 78.

5 Data on support staff and school administrative staff are
not comparable prior to 1984. Therefore, they are not used
in this comparison.

Chapter | office, U.S. Department of Education, Wash-
ington, Dc.

7 Who is Teaching Our Children: A Look at the Use of
Aides in Chapter 1, Issue Paper (International Reading As-
sociation, January 1994).

44 Monthly Labor Review July 1994

® Rochelle Stanfield, “A Blistering Report Card,” Wash-
ington Update: Policy and Politics in Brief (Washington,
e, The National Journal, 1992), p. 2899.

° Mary Jordan, “Panel Says Poor Children Disserved by
School Aid,” The Washington Post, Dec. 11, 1992, p. A10.

1° Edward B. Fiske, “The Controversy Over Bilingual
Education in America's Schools; One Language or Two?”
The New York Times, Nov. 10, 1985, p. 1.

"' Marilyn Elias, “Kids’ Best Interests the Crux of Bilin-
gual Education Debate,” usa Today, July 21, 1993, p. 7D.

Eileen M. Gardner, “The Growth of the Federal Role in
Education,” Critical Issues: A New Agenda for Education
(Washington, pc, The Heritage Foundation, 1985),
p.27.

3 Digest of Education Statistics 1992, table 50.

' Digest of Education Statistics 1992, table 156.

'5 National Center for Education Statistics, Projections
of Education Statistics to 2002, xces 91~490 (Washington,
pe, National Center for Education Statistics, December
1991), p. 77.

"© Projections of Education Statistics to 2002, table 1



Table 1. Student enrollment, all employees and teachers In local government education, and student-to-employee
and student-to-teacher ratios, 1964-93

{Numbers in thousands}

Student enroliment Employment of alt workers In
In public achools local government education, | Employment of fulltime | ‘Student-to- | Student-to-
‘Year grades K-12, fall! November equivalent teachers employee teacher
ratlo ratlo
Level Change ‘Change Number ‘Change
41,416 _ - 1,648 _— 13.3 25.1
42.173 757 212 62 126 24.7
43,039 866 292 79 1.9 24.1
43,891 852 150 66 116 23.7
44,944 1,053 137 81 11.5 23.2
45,550 606 172 80 12 22.6
45,894 aa 172 43 108 22.3
46,071 177 147 4 10.5 22.3
45,726 345 237 43 99 247
45,444 ~282 164 30 9.4 21.3
45,073 -371 183 29 9.0 20.8
44,819 254 63 33 a8 20.4
44,311 508 49 9 8.7 20.2
43,577 -734 149 20 8.3 19.7
42,551 -1,026 -10 2 8.4 19.3
41,651 900 130 -22 77 19.1
40,877 774 84 0 75 18.7
40,044 833 -21 58 7.3 18.8
39,566 478 -60 6 7.3 18.5
39,252 314 4 6 73 18.4
39,208 44 148 29 7.4 18.1
39,422 214 153 38 69 17.9
39,753 331 181 38 6.8 17.7
40,008 256 90 35 6.7 17.6
40,189 181 132 44 6.6 17.3
40,526 337 Aral 34 65 17.2
41,217 691 167 4 6.4 17.2
242,000 783 54 34 85 47.3
242,731 731 128 22 76.5 A74
943,353 622 6,728 116 63 6.4 47.3
‘Based on data from the National Center for Education Statistics. 2 Preliminary. 3 Estimated.
Chart 2. Student-to-employee ratio in local government education, 1964-93
Students per ‘Students per
employee employee
14 14
125 412
10 410
Br 48
6k 46
4p da
ar de
° 1 : °
1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992

NOTE: Ratio is calculated by dividing fall public schoo! enroliment by November employment in local government education.
Shaded areas denote recessions as identified by the National Bureau of Economic Research.
SOURCE: Enrollment data are published by the National Center for Education Statistics.

Monthly Labor Review July 1994 43



Teresa L. Morisi

Teresa L. Morisi is an
‘economist in the Office of
Employment and
Unemployment Statistics,
Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Employment in public schools
and the student-to-employee ratio

Through the stampede of the baby-boom generation
entering and leaving the school systems

and the stormy recessionary periods,

employment in local government education

surged over the 1964-93 period

since 1964. As a result, the student-to-em-

ployee ratio fell from 13.3 in 1964 to 6.4
in 1990.' Schools had fared well even in reces-
sionary periods, when the student-to-employee
ratio continued to drop or at least held steady. In
the most recent recession, however, the student-
to-employee ratio rose for the first time in the
history of the data series. By 1993, the student-
to-employee ratio returned to the 1990 level. It
is unclear whether the ratio will decline further,
as tightly constrained Federal, State, and local
budgets will be forced to accommodate a rising
student population in the coming years.

Fiseciset in public schools has doubled

Enrollment linked to ‘baby-boomers’

Enrollment in public elementary and secondary
schools grew steadily from 1964, peaking at 46
million in 1971. The rise was caused by the
“baby-boom generation” (persons born during
the 1946-62 period) entering the public school
system.’ As the members of the baby-boom gen-
eration graduated or left school, enrollment fell
steadily for the next 13 years — a total decline
of 7 million students. Enrollment again began to
climb in 1984 when the children of those born
during the baby-boom period began attending
school. Enrollment has risen by 4 million since
1984, but still remains 3 million below the 1971
peak level. (See chart 1 and table 1.)

40 Monthly Labor Review July 1994

Trends in total employment

The surge in public school employment over the
1964-93 period occurred despite four small an-
nual declines (1978, and the 1981-83 period),
falling enrollment, and the recessions.

Employment growth during falling enrollment.
Employment in public schools rose in all but 4
years between 1972 and 1984, even though en-
rollment fell by 7 million during the period. The
student-to-employee ratio continued to decline
in 1978, despite the fact that public school em-
ployment fell for the first time since 1964, Em-
ployment again declined in 1981 and through
1983, but the student-to-employee ratio remained
steady.

By 1982, the yearly enrollment declines be-
gan to lessen in magnitude. In 1984, enrollment
declined only slightly and employment returned
to its growth trend; as a result, the student-to-
employce ratio resumed its decline.

Employment during recessions. Of the five re-
cessions that occurred between 1964 and 1993,3
only the last two recessions appeared to have any
effect on local government education employment.
(See box.) During the 1981-82 recession, employ-
ment declined both years, with a spillover effect of
a small decline in 1983, The student-to-employee
ratio remained constant during this recession,



However, the 1990-91 recession had a more
serious effect on employment in local govern-
ment education. Between 1989 and 1991, enroll-
ment surged by 1.5 million; growth of this mag-
nitude had not occurred since the late 1960's.
Although employment did not decline as it had
in the previous recessions, the number of em-
ployees added in 1991 was the smallest since the
decrease in 1983. This growth was not large
enough to offset the gain in the number of stu-
dents; therefore, the student-to-employee ratio in-
creased for the first time in the history of the series.

Despite the fact that the recession had ended
over a year earlier, hiring in 1992 was just enough
to allow the student-to-employee ratio to remain
unchanged. This sluggishness indicates that lo-
cal governments, like much of the private sec-
tor, recovered slowly from the latest recession.
By 1993, the student-to-employee ratio retumed
to the 1990 level. (See chart 2.) It is unclear
whether the trend of a declining ratio will re-
sume as government revenues improve. The stu-
dent-to-employee ratio may be at such a low level
that further declines are not possible.

Teachers and other staff

Data from the National Center for Education Sta-
tistics show a growth of 860,000 full-time
equivalent teaching positions over the 1964-93
period. The student-to-teacher ratio displayed the
same trend as the student-to-employee ratio, al-
though the rate of decline was less sharp. In the
late 1970's the declines in enrollment finally
caught up with teachers as their number dropped
by 71,000 between 1975 and 1981. Since 1981,
teaching staffs have grown by 380,000.

Although teachers have continued to consti-
tute the largest share of education staff, their
share of full-time equivalent education positions
declined from 60 percent in 1969 to 53 percent
in 1990.4 Over this period, the number of teach-
ing positions grew by 16 percent. This was
dwarfed by the 85-percent rise in teacher aide
positions, the largest percentage increase among
education staff. The number of guidance coun-
selors grew 40 percent between 1969 and 1990,
while the number of principals and assistants
grew 29 percent. Only librarian positions expe-
rienced slower growth than teaching positions.
(See chart 3.)

What caused the employment growth?

One of the most important factors affecting em-
ployment growth in public schools has been the
advent of the Federal Government assuming a
larger role in education. Beginning in 1965, the
Federal Government began spending millions of
dollars on education programs for students with

special needs in elementary and secondary
schools. Much of the money has gone toward
the hiring of specialists and aides to staff these
programs. Programs for remedial and bilingual
education and for disabled students have con-
tributed the most to the growth in the number of
education employees. Each program has its own
staff and curriculum, and many students partici-
pate in more than one program.

Remedial education. The first, and by far the
largest, Federal program for elementary and sec-
ondary schools was Title I/Chapter | of the El-
ementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.
Chapter 1 provides remedial services to disad-
vantaged students; outside the classroom, the
students are tutored by instructional staff. More
than 90 percent of the Nation’s school districts
receive Chapter 1 support. Of the 172,000 posi-
tions funded by Chapter 1 in the 1991-92 school
year, teacher aides accounted for 41 percent of
positions, close to the 45-percent share held by
teachers. Schools have an incentive to hire
teacher aides for these positions because their
salaries are lower than those for teachers; indeed,
acriticism some make of the program is that aides

Data sources

The student-to-employee ratio is calculated
by dividing autumn public elementary and
secondary school enrollment by November
employment in local government education.
Data on fall public school enrollment are ac-
tual counts published by the National Center
for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of
Education. Data on local government educa-
tion employment is from the Bureau of La-
bor Statistics Current Employment Statistics
program. The November employment data are
used, because that is the last month of em-
ployment buildup related to a new school year.

Employment data include both the full-time
and part-time workers on school payrolls.
Thus, clerical, cafeteria, and custodial work-
ers are included, as well as teachers and ad-
ministrators. BLS counts the number of em-
ployees who receive wages during the pay
period that includes the 12th of the month.
Voluntary workers are not counted. In this
analysis, trends of total employment in pub-
lic schools are augmented with the data on
education staff from the National Center for
Education Statistics. However, because data
from the National Center for Education Sta-
tistics are adjusted to full-time equivalents,
they are not directly comparable to Current
Employment Statistics data. Therefore, data
from the two sources are analyzed separately.

Monthly Labor Review July 1994 41



Employment in Public Schools

Chart 1. Index of employment and student enrollment in local
government education, 1964~93

1964=100 1964=100
240 240
220 -| 220
200 4 200
180 F | 180
160 | + 160

Fulktime
440 + equivalent teachers 4 140
120 | -| 120
100 f+ an)
[ara re re ore 80

1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992

SOURCE: Enrollment and teacher data are from the National Center for Education Statistics.

with little training are being used to instruct the
neediest students.’

Some of the studies analyzing the effects of
Chapter | instruction on achievement have been.
positive and some have been negative. The gen-
eral agreement is that although disadvantaged
students are helped by this program, more could
be done. In 1992, a study by the Commission on
Chapter 1 concluded that the practice of pulling
students out of class for special instruction was
no longer adequate; that the regular curriculum
needed to be upgraded in order for special needs
students to acquire more advanced skills than the
basic skills they were currently receiving.’ The
commission recommended that schools in poorer
districts receive more Chapter 1 funding, and that
incentives be created to ensure that schools im-
prove the academic performance of needy students.?

Bilingual instruction. The Federal Government
first provided funds for bilingual education in
1968 with Title VII of the Elementary and Secon-
dary Education Act of 1965; by 1974, Congress
specified that the money be spent on native lan-
guage instruction.'° Consequently, schools had
to hire certified bilingual teachers because En-
glish could no longer be the primary language
of instruction. As immigration has increased, so
has the demand for bilingual instruction. Stud-
ies on the effects of native language instruction

42 Monthly Labor Review July 1994

have been contradictory; advocates against such
instruction argue that students who mainly re-
ceive instruction in their native languages do not
learn enough English to later succeed as adults.!!

Education of disabled children. Funding for
educating disabled children was first provided
in 1966; legislation and court decisions culmi-
nated in the Education for All Handicapped Act
of 1975, later renamed the Individuals with Dis-
abilities Education Act. It requires that school
districts provide a free, appropriate public edu-
cation for handicapped and learning disabled stu-
dents. The schools must hire not only special
education teachers and aides, but also pay for
“related services,” which includes specially
trained personnel.!? In 1977, children who did
not have a physical handicap but had a specific
learning disability were declared eligible for
these services under the Individuals with Dis-
abilities Education Act; as a result, the share of
children with learning disabilities rose from 22
percent of participants in this program during the
1976-77 school year to 44 percent in 1989-90.'3

In recent years, the trend has been to place
severely disabled children into regular class-
rooms. This usually requires the presence of a
special education teacher or aide in the classroom
along with the regular teacher. The increased
practice of putting disabled children into regular