Skip to main content
Log in

Could Different Retirement Benefits Result in More Effective Teachers?

  • Article
  • Published:
Eastern Economic Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We evaluate the chance that changing retirement benefits will lead to greater teacher effectiveness. Changing from defined benefit pensions to defined contribution or cash balance plans would raise initial compensation and effectiveness, while it would increase turnover and thus lower effectiveness. We simulate the effects of higher initial compensation and greater turnover on teacher effectiveness from changing retirement plans and calculate the potential transition costs. There is a 60–70 percent chance that effectiveness would fall if retirement benefits are changed. Transition costs could amount to 0.8 percent of payroll in the third decade after changing retirement benefits.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Key examples include Baker and Weisbrot [1999] and SSA [2012] for simulations on Social Security, and CBO [2012] and Gale and Orszag [2002] for simulations on the federal budget.

  2. More studies than we list research the key variables, but we cannot translate many estimates into model parameters. Many salary estimates, for example, only consider lump sum payments or show estimates for teachers in other countries and many turnover estimates show the effects of pension coverage on length of tenure.

  3. We use the prospective unit credit method to calculate normal cost to illustrate additional retirement wealth for teachers in a given year. Public pensions typically use an entry-age normal cost calculation, but this obscures the additional retirement wealth that each cohort of teachers annually earns.

  4. Key examples include Baker and Weisbrot [1999], CBO [2012], Gale and Orszag [2002], and SSA [2012].

  5. Our results do not change materially if we reduce or increase the number of zero observations.

  6. This scenario is equal to cutting benefits even further to raise initial pay since we apply parameter estimates for initial salary to total initial compensation in our estimates of initial effectiveness.

  7. Raising the turnover change for CB plans quickly drops the chance of improving average effectiveness below 50 percent.

  8. DC plan costs are lower than cash balance plan costs because turnover is greater and fewer teachers are vested.

References

  • Allen, S.G., R.L. Clark, and A. McDermed . 1993. Pensions, Bonding, and Lifetime Jobs. Journal of Human Resources, 28 (3): 463–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almeida, B., and W. Fornia . 2008. A Better Bang for the Buck: The Economic Efficiencies of Pensions. Washington DC: National Institute on Retirement Security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, D., and M. Weisbrot . 1999. Social Security — The Phony Crisis. Chapter 6: The Glories of Privatization. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barro, J., and S. Buck . 2010. Underfunded Teacher Pension Plans: It's Worse Than You Think. Civic Report, April 6, New York, NY: Manhattan Institute and The Foundation for Educational Choice.

  • Cahill, K., and M. Soto . 2003. How Do Cash Balance Plans Affect the Pension Landscape? An Issue in Brief No. 14. Boston, MA: Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

  • Clark, R., and S. Schieber . 2000. An Empirical Analysis of the Transition to Hybrid Pension Plans in the United States, Paper presented at the conference on “Public Policies and Private Pensions,” sponsored by the Brookings Institution, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, and TIAA-CREF Institute, Washington, DC, September 21, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.196.4955&rep=rep1&type=pdf, accessed January 12, 2011.

  • Cohn, E. 1968. Economies of Scale in Iowa High School Operations. The Journal of Human Resources, 3 (4): 422–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Congressional Budget Office. 2012. The 2012 Long-term Budget Outlook. Washington DC: CBO.

  • Costrell, R., and M. Podgursky . 2009. Peaks, Cliffs, and Valleys: The Peculiar Incentives in Teacher Retirement Systems and Their Consequences for School Staffing. Education Finance and Policy, 4 (2): 175–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Institutional Investors. 2006. Protecting the Nest Egg: A Primer on Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution Retirement Plans. Washington DC: CII.

  • Even, W.E., and D. MacPherson . 1996. Employer Size and Labor Turnover: The Role of Pensions. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 49 (1): 707–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedberg, L., and M.T. Owyang . 2005. Explaining the Evolution of Pension Structure and Job Tenure, Working Paper. St. Louis, MO: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

  • Gale, W., and P. Orszag . 2002. Budget Deficits, National Saving, and Interest Rates. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 2: 101–210.

  • Gustman, A.L., O.S. Mitchell, and T.L. Steinmeier . 1994. The Role of Pensions in the Labor Market: A Survey of the Literature. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 47 (3): 417–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, J. 2010. An Introduction to Teacher Retirement Benefits. Education Finance and Policy, 5 (4): 402–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E.A. 1997. Assessing the Effects of School Resources on Student Performance: An Update. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis., 19 (2): 141–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E.A. . 2003. The Failure of Input-Based Schooling Policies. Economic Journal, 113 (485): F64–F98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E., and S.G. Rivkin . 2006. Teacher Quality, in Handbook of the Economics of Education, Edited by E. Hanushek and F. Welch. Vol. 2, Chapter 18, Amsterdam, NL: Elsevier B.V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E., S.G. Rivkin, and L.L. Taylor . 1996. Aggregation and the Estimated Effects of School Resources. Review of Economics and Statistics, 78 (4): 611–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, D., and S. Adams . 2007. Understanding the Level and Causes of Teacher Turnover: A Comparison with Other Professions. Economics of Education Review, 26 (3): 325–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, D., and T. Sass . 2011. Teacher Training, Teacher Quality, and Student Achievement. Journal of Public Economics, 95 (7–8): 798–812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ippolito, R.A. 1997. Pension Plans and Employee Performance: Evidence, Analysis, and Policy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R., and C. Uccello . 2001. The Potential Effects of Cash Balance Plans on the Distribution of Pension Wealth in Midlife, Final Report to the Pension and Welfare Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

  • McGurn, W. 2010. Main Street: Education Reform Starts with Pension Reform. Wall Street Journal, September 7 A21.

  • Montgomery, E., and K. Shaw . 1992. Pensions and Wage Premia, NBER Working Paper No. 3985, Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Munnell, A., J.P. Aubry, and L. Quinby . 2010. The Funding of State and Local Pensions 2009–2013. Chestnut Hill, MA: Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munnell, A.H., K. Haverstick, and G. Sanzenbacher . 2006. Job Tenure and Pension Coverage, CRR Working Paper 2006–18. Chestnut Hill, MA: Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

  • Nalebluff, B., and R. Zeckhauser . 1984. Pensions and the Retirement Decision, NBER Working Paper No. 1285. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • National Education Association. 2010. Characteristics of Large Public Education Pension Plans. Washington DC: NEA.

  • New York City, Department of Education. 2010. New York Teacher Salary. New York, NY: NYC DoE.

  • Nyce, S. 2007. Behavioral Effects of Employer-Sponsored Retirement Plans. Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, 6 (3): 251–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perl, L.J. 1973. Family Background, Secondary School Expenditure, and Student Ability. The Journal of Human Resources, 8 (2): 156–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pew Center on the States. 2011. Pension and Retiree Health Care Reform in the States, Washington DC: Pew, http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/initiatives_detail.aspx?initiativeID=61599, accessed April 22, 2011.

  • Ronfeldt, M., H. Lankford, S. Loeb, and J. Wyckoff . 2011. How Teacher Turnover Harms Student Achievement, NBER Working Paper No. 17176, Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Rice, J.K. 2003. Teacher Quality: Understanding the Effectiveness of Teacher Attributes. Washington DC: Economic Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivkin, S.G., E.A. Hanushek, and J.F. Kain . 2005. Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement. Econmetrica, 73 (2): 417–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Society of Actuaries. 2000. The RP-2000 Mortality Tables. Washington DC: SOA.

  • Social Security Administration. 2012. The Annual Report of the Board of Trustees of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Federal Disability Insurance Trust Funds. Washington DC: SSA.

  • Watlington, E., R. Shockley, P. Guglielmo, and R. Felsher . 2010. The High Cost of Leaving: An Analysis of the Cost of Teacher Turnover. Journal of Education Finance, 36 (1): 22–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weller, C., and S. Jenkins . 2007. Building 401(k) Wealth One Percent at a Time: Fees Chip Away at People's Retirement Nest Eggs. Washington DC: Center for American Progress.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Weller, C. Could Different Retirement Benefits Result in More Effective Teachers?. Eastern Econ J 39, 547–563 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1057/eej.2012.21

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/eej.2012.21

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Navigation