« Union, KIPP Dispute Wages, Working Hours in Baltimore | Main | Teacher Beat Is Now Teacher Tweet! »

Master's Degrees in Education: A Better Way?


There are times when you know a story is going to upset a lot of people, such as this one I wrote this week on the cost of paying teachers more for earning master's degrees in education. Read the comments for a taste of the reaction, which ranges from anger (i.e., "The studies that show this are bunk because they're based on test scores"), to defensiveness, (i.e., "I paid for this degree and it made me a better teacher"), to frustration, (i.e., "OK, if ED master's don't correlate to improved student achievement, what does?!").

And it's true that is hard to paint all education M.A. degrees with the same broad stroke. Even the most vocal critics of education schools can point to some truly superb programs out there, as well as exciting innovations that are starting to come out, like teacher residencies.

That said, though, what the report and these comments reveal is that right now this system does not seem to be working well for anyone. Attaining these degrees is expensive for teachers and doesn't necessarily make them better instructors. It's expensive for districts to pay out for the degrees and ties up funds that could be spent on other things (giving teachers release time for collaboration and in-school professional development, for instance). One could even argue that the policy ends up hurting education schools, which are not always given their fair share of resources by their parent universities because the universities know that the incentive system built into salary schedules will result in an endless supply of people wanting master's degrees regardless of quality.

The discussion about whether there's a better way to pay teachers more shouldn't just be about performance-based pay, but about comprehensive reforms.

It's what Jim Carlson, an NEA UniServ director in Wisconsin whom I quote in the story, is doing. Essentially, his proposal is to align compensation increases with practices that are correlated with student achievement: Boost pay if teachers earn degrees in content areas. Reward teachers for conducting "action research" and finding effective practices (see this story on the Teacher Advancement Program, which charges master teachers with doing this, for more details). Create a career ladder to give teachers more opportunities to help with professional development.


What an interesting article. Really made me think. I'm currently a master's degree student and my district (Maine) is only paying for 2 classes a year. I will probably wind up taking 6 classes a year. Why am I getting my master's degree? No, my district does not require it. Ever. It's because I want to learn, I want to be constantly challenging what I believe in education and in order to learn more, what do people do? Either PD or classes. PD in my district is poorly organized. Therefore, I enrolled in graduate school in hopes of bettering myself as an educator. I do agree that some teachers that have their master's do not use what they have learned, or maybe it's the content that was taught. I think what Jim Carlson said hits it right on the head- "boost pay if teachers earn degrees in content areas....and for conducting action research." Thanks for the article.

Wondering what will happen in all the states that require Master's Degrees to maintain certification, like New York? You have to pay and work to receive a Master's Degree, but your salary won't necessarily reflect the time, effort and knowledge? Another case of educators not being considered professionals like doctors or lawyers. Everyone went to school, so everyone knows how to teach, right?

Comments are now closed for this post.


Most Viewed on Education Week



Recent Comments