PSE - Teaching Staff Characteristics and Spendings per Student in … · (including overtime bonus and Education prioritaire bonus) is 3 % higher in REP + (ex RAR) This is thanks

Teaching Staff Characteristics and Spendingsper Student in French Disadvantaged Schools

Asma Benhenda

University College London, Institute of EducationParis School of Economics

April 2019

1 / 52

Introduction

Institutional Setting

Data

Middle School (Collège)

High School (Lycee general et technologique)

Vocational High School (Lycée professionnel)

Supplementary Analysis With Overtime and All Staff

Middle School After the 2015 Reform

2 / 52

Research Questions

Focus on Middle Schools (Collège), High schools (lycée général ettechnologique) and Vocational High Schools (lycée professionel)

• How teaching staff observable characteristics are distributedacross secondary schools ? In particular betweendisadvantaged schools (Éducation prioritaire schools) andother schools ? How has it evolved since the early 2000s ?

• What is the wage gap of teaching staff between Educationprioritaire and other schools ?

• How does the lower student to staff ratio in Educationprioritaire compensate for this wage gap in terms of spendingper student (approximated by gross wage cost per student) ?

• What is the impact of the 2015 reform, which increased theEducation prioritaire bonus by 66 %, and updated the list ofEducation prioritaire schools ?

3 / 52

Main Results – Middle Schools, Before the 2015 Reform

Before the 2015 reform :

• Teachers and Principals in Education prioritaire are more likelyto be contract staff, less likely to be agregés, and have onaverage 3 years of experience less than in other schools

• Thus, teachers and principals average gross wage (includingthe Education prioritaire bonus) is around 5-7% (depending ifwe include all staff + overtime) lower in RAR schools than innon Education prioritaire schools

• However, the student to staff ratio is around 22-38 %(depending if we include all staff + overtime) lower in RARschools than in non Education prioritaire schools

• Spendings per student (approximated by gross wage costs perstudent) in RAR schools are around 12 - 29 % (depending ifwe include all staff + overtime) higher than in non Educationprioritaire schools

4 / 52

Main Results – Middle Schools, After the 2015 Reform

After the 2015 reform :

• Assuming that the structure of teacher characteristics remainsunchanged (2014 structure), teaching staff gross wage(including overtime bonus and Education prioritaire bonus) is3 % higher in REP + (ex RAR)

• This is thanks to the 66 % increase in the Educationprioritaire bonus in REP+ (ex RAR). Without taking intoaccount this bonus, gross wage in non Education prioritaire is9 % higher than in REP+

• Spendings per student (approximated by gross wage costs perstudent) in REP + schools are around 34 % higher than innon Education prioritaire schools (keeping the ratio student tostaff same as 2014’s)

5 / 52

Main Results – High School and Vocational High SchoolsIn High schools and Vocational High schools, the Educationprioritaire is replaced by the Internat d’Excellence program from2009

• Teachers and School Principals are less likely to be contractstaff, equally likely to be agrégés and have on average 0.5years of experience more in Internat d’excellence than in otherschools

• This may be explained by the fact that in Internatd’excellence, teaching staff is recruited sur profil i.e.“hand-picked” by school principals outside of the standardcentralised assignment procedure

• Thus, teaching staff average gross wage is approximately thesame in Internat d’excellence and non internat d’excellence

• The student to staff ratio is approximately the same ininternat d’excellence and other schools

• The spendings per student (approximated by gross wage costsper student) is also approximately the same

6 / 52

Introduction


Data






7 / 52

Education Prioritaire in Middle Schools

Middle School (Collège), two levels :

• Réseau Ambition Réussite (RAR) : very disadvantagedschools, with the lowest achievement levels and the highestshare of very low Socio economic status (SES) students

• Réseau Réussite Scolaire (RRS) : other disadvantaged schools• Teaching staff in RAR and RRS : annual bonus of 1,156 euros• Major reforms between 2015 and 2018 : update of the list of

the RAR (not called Rep +) and RRS (now called Rep)schools and increase of the bonus : up to 1746 euros in Repand up to 3479 euros in Rep+

8 / 52

Education Prioritaire in High Schools

High Schools (Lycée général et technologique) and VocaltionalHigh Schools (Lycée professionnel) :

• Education prioritaire progressively replaced by the Internatd’Excellence program from 2009 (see Behaghel et al., 2013)

• Teachers recrutment process in Internat d’Excellence : surprofil, i.e. “hand-picked” by the school principal outside of thestandard centralised assigment system

9 / 52

https://www.ipp.eu/en/publication/internats-dexcellence-les-enseignements-de-sourdun-2/

Introduction


Data






10 / 52

Data (1/3)

Administrative Data on Teaching Staff and Students in SecondarySchool :

• Teaching Staff : Teachers and School Principals :• Middle School : 2004 - 2015• High School + Vocational High School : 2011 - 2015

• Students and their Schools :2008-2015• Caveats :

• lower bound approximation of labour costs because only grosswage (salaire brut, not super brut). Less precise than analysisof the Ministry of Education which uses different data (Compte de l’Education, I dont have access to this data), seeMinistry of Education Brief on Total Labour Costs

• does not include all the bonuses : includes the Educationprioritaire bonus but not overtime pay, the indemnité derésidence (up to 3 % ), family bonus (by number of children,up to 6 %), other ad hoc bonuses, up to 10 %, see Ministry ofEducation Report on Teacher Wages

11 / 52

http://cache.media.education.gouv.fr/file/2016/52/1/depp-ni-2016-32-cout-education-2015_667521.pdfhttp://cache.media.education.gouv.fr/file/revue_92/08/2/depp-2016-EF-92-enseignants-public-sont-ils-mieux-payes-que-ceux-du_prive_686082.pdfhttp://cache.media.education.gouv.fr/file/revue_92/08/2/depp-2016-EF-92-enseignants-public-sont-ils-mieux-payes-que-ceux-du_prive_686082.pdf

Data (2/3)

More precise data for 2014 only : Supplementary comprehensiveadministrative Data on Teaching Staff Hours in Secondary School :

• All Teaching Staff : Teachers, Principals, Hall Monitors(surveillants), Conseiller principal d’éducation, etc.

• Detailed information on their working hours and overtimehours

• Caveat : more precise than main analysis because includesovertime pay but still lower bound of the total labour costs +does not include all the other bonuses mentioned above

12 / 52

Data (3/3)

Supplementary data available on the Ministry of Education websiteor Teacher unions websites :

• List of schools part of the Education prioritaire program after2015 (REP+ and REP)

• List of schools part of the Internat d’Excellence program(High Schools and Vocational Schools)

• Teaching Staff wage scale• Overtime hours pay scale

13 / 52

Construction of the Main Variables

Labour costs = 75% of Educational Spendings. Focus on anapproximation of labour costs :

• Gross wage (not the labour cost) or traitement indiciaire brutcomputed using the certification level of the teacher (corps :Certifié, Agrégé, Contractuel) and her rank of the wage scale.We add to this the education prioritaire bonus, and for thesupplementary analysis with overtime hours, the overtimebonus

• Ratio student to staff : Number of Students divided by thenumber of staff in the school

• Spending per student : Sum of the Gross wages in the schooldivided by the number of student in the school

14 / 52

Analysis by Percentile Rank of the Share of High SESstudents in the school

Definition of High SES students ; SES of main parent

• CEOs• Professional Occupations• Professors, scientists• Media and entertainment• Engineers

15 / 52

Introduction


Data






16 / 52

Share of Contract Staff (Teachers & Principals) – MiddleSchool

.02

.04

.06

.08

.1.1

2Sh

are

of C

ontra

ct S

taff

2005 2010 2015Year

Non EP RARRRS

17 / 52

Average Nb of Years of Experience (Teachers & Principals) –Middle School

1011

1213

1415

Aver

age

Num

ber o

f Yea

rs o

f Exp

erie

nce

2005 2010 2015Year

Non EP RARRRS

18 / 52

Share of Agreges Staff (Teachers & Principals) – MiddleSchool

.035

.04

.045

.05

Shar

e of

Agr

eges

2005 2010 2015Year

Non EP RARRRS

19 / 52

Ratio Student to Staff (Teachers and Principals) – MiddleSchool

1112

1314

Rat

io s

taff

to s

tude

nt

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Year

Non EP RRSRAR

20 / 52

Average Monthly Gross Wage (Teachers and Principals) –Middle School

2400

2450

2500

2550

2600

Aver

age

Wag

e

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Year

Non EP RRSRAR

21 / 52

Average Monthly Spending (Teachers and Principals) perStudent – Middle School

200

210

220

230

Aver

age

Spen

ding

per

Stu

dent

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Year

Non EP RRSRAR

22 / 52

Share of Education Prioritaire Schools per Pctile Rk of Shareof High SES Students in the School – Middle School

0.2

.4.6

Shar

e of

sch

ools

0 20 40 60 80 100Percentile rank of share of student from high SES

RAR RRS

23 / 52

Ratio Student to Staff (Teachers and Principals) per PctileRk of Share of High SES Students in the School – MiddleSchool

810

1214

16R

atio

Stu

dent

to S

taff


24 / 52

Average Monthly Gross Wage (Teachers and Principals) perPctile Rk of Share of High SES Students in the School –Middle School

2400

2500

2600

2700

2800

Mon

thly

Gro

ss W

age


25 / 52

Average Monthly Spending (Teachers and Principals) perStudent per Pctile Rk of Share of High SES Students in theSchool – Middle School

200

250

300

350

400

Mon

thly

Spe

ndin

g pe

r Stu

dent


26 / 52

Introduction


Data






27 / 52

Share of Contract Staff (Teachers & Principals) – HighSchool

.02

.03

.04

.05

.06

Shar

e of

Con

tract

Sta

ff

2011 2012 2013 2014Year

Non Internat d'Excellence Internat d'excellence

28 / 52

Average Nb of Years of Experience (Teachers & Principals) –High School

16.2

16.4

16.6

16.8

17Av

erag

e N

umbe

r of Y

ears

of E

xper

ienc

e

2011 2012 2013 2014Year


29 / 52

Share of Agreges Staff (Teachers & Principals) – High School

.2.2

5.3

.35

.4Sh

are

of A

greg

es S

taff

2011 2012 2013 2014Year


30 / 52

Ratio Student to Staff (Teachers and Principals) – HighSchool

1112

1314

15R

atio

Sta

ff to

Stu

dent

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Year

Non Internat d'Excellence Internat d'Excellence

31 / 52

Average Monthly Gross Wage (Teachers and Principals) –High School

2880

2900

2920

2940

2960

Aver

age

Wag

e

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Year


32 / 52

Average Monthly Spending (Teachers and Principals) perStudent – High School

240

245

250

255

260

265

Aver

age

Spen

ding

per

Stu

dent

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Year


33 / 52

Ratio Student to Staff (Teachers and Principals) per PctileRk of Share of High SES Students in the School – HighSchool

1011

1213

14St

aff t

o St

uden

t Rat

io


34 / 52

Average Monthly Gross Wage (Teachers and Principals) perPctile Rk of Share of High SES Students in the School –High School

2700

2800

2900

3000

3100

3200

Aver

age

Gro

ss M

onth

ly W

age


35 / 52

Average Monthly Spending (Teachers and Principals) perStudent per Pctile Rk of Share of High SES Students in theSchool – High School

240

250

260

270

280

Aver

age

Spen

ding

per

Stu

dent


36 / 52

Introduction


Data






37 / 52

Share of Contract Staff (Teachers & Principals) – VocationalHigh School

.07

.08

.09

.1.1

1Sh

are

of C

ontra

ct S

taff

2011 2012 2013 2014Year


38 / 52

Average Nb of Years of Experience (Teachers & Principals) –Vocational High School

14.5

1515

.516

Aver

age

Num

ber o

f Yea

rs o

f Exp

erie

nce

2011 2012 2013 2014Year


39 / 52

Share of Agreges Staff (Teachers & Principals) – VocationalHigh School

.1.1

1.1

2.1

3.1

4.1

5Sh

are

of A

greg

es S

taff

2011 2012 2013 2014Year


40 / 52

Ratio Student to Staff (Teachers and Principals) – VocationalHigh School

1111

.512

Rat

io S

taff

to S

tude

nt

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Year


41 / 52

Average Monthly Gross Wage (Teachers and Principals) toStudent – Vocational High School

2600

2650

2700

2750

Aver

age

Wag

e

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Year


42 / 52

Average Monthly Spending (Teachers and Principals) perStudent – Vocational High School

266

268

270

272

274

276

Aver

age

Spen

ding

per

Stu

dent

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Year


43 / 52

Ratio Student to Staff (Teachers and Principals) per PctileRk of Share of High SES Students in the School – VocationalHigh School

89

1011

1213

Staf

f to

Stud

ent R

atio


44 / 52

Average Monthly Gross Wage (Teachers and Principals) perPctile Rk of Share of High SES Students in the School –Vocational High School

2500

2600

2700

2800

2900

Aver

age

Gro

ss M

onth

ly W

age


45 / 52

Average Monthly Spending (Teachers and Principals) perStudent per Pctile Rk of Share of High SES Students in theSchool – Vocational High School

220

240

260

280

300

320

Aver

age

Spen

ding

per

Stu

dent


46 / 52

Introduction


Data






47 / 52

Middle School (2014)

Non EP RRS RAR

Ratio student to staff 9.67 8.44 7.01(1.82) (1.39) (1.44)

Total Gross Monthly Wage 2,372 2,367 2,258(142) (132) (133)

includingWage w/o bonuses 2,332 2,231 2,125

(138) (130) (126)EP Bonus 0 96.33 96.33Overtime Bonus 39.47 39.38 36.35

(20.26) (21.07) (23.07)

Spendings per Student 258.77 288.49 335.59(89.40) (53.53) (72.93)

Nb of schools 4,154 781 321

48 / 52

High School (2014)

Non Internat d’Excellence Internat d’Excellence

Ratio student to staff 9.34 9.03(1.72) (1.80)

Total Gross Monthly Wage 2,718 2,721(215) (220)

includingWage w/o bonus 2,659 2,654

(200) (196)Overtime Bonus 59.50 67.06

(34.82) (43.63)

Spendings per Student 301.64 313.01(22.69) (72.48)

Nb of schools 733 214

49 / 52

Vocational High School (2014)

Non Internat d’Excellence Internat d’Excellence

Ratio student to staff 7.17 6.82(1.51) (1.48)

Total Gross Monthly Wage 2,448 2,402(213) (220)

includingWage w/o bonus 2,383 2,347

(197) (205)Overtime Bonus 65.7 54.7

(37.48) (36.39)

Spendings per Student 356.41 369.48(80.22) (95.42)

Nb of schools 1,245 255

50 / 52

Introduction


Data






51 / 52

Middle School – After 2015 Reform, with the distribution ofteacher characteristics kept equal (2014 distribution)

Non EP REP REP+

Ratio student to staff 9.64 8.54 7.14(1.79) (1.39) (1.31)

Total Gross Monthly Wage 2,374 2,397 2,457(142) (122) (126)

includingWage w/o bonuses 2,334 2,215 2,132

(138) (121) (127.65)EP Bonus 0 144.5 289.91Overtime Bonus 39.29 38.23 34.82

(20.19) (18.95) (19.36)

Spendings per Student 259.52 287.78 350.17(89.51) (48.45) (72.93)

Nb of schools 4,146 712 353

52 / 52

IntroductionInstitutional SettingDataMiddle School (Collège)High School (Lycee general et technologique)Vocational High School (Lycée professionnel)Supplementary Analysis With Overtime and All StaffMiddle School After the 2015 Reform

Documents

PSE - Teaching Staff Characteristics and Spendings per Student in … · (including overtime bonus and Education prioritaire bonus) is 3 % higher in REP + (ex RAR) This is thanks