Between the FY2019 and FY2023 F-33 releases, the median district estimate moved +15.1%. 9,701 of the 10,682 districts reporting in both years moved up and 981 moved down. The middle 80% of districts sit between +0.6% and +31.5%, which is the more useful number than the extremes: these are estimates built on an enrollment denominator, so the tails are dominated by districts that restated enrollment rather than districts that changed pay.
Why the extremes are not the story
This dataset estimates average salary by dividing reported instructional-salary expenditure by an enrollment-derived teacher headcount. That makes enrollment part of the denominator, so a district that restates its enrollment between releases moves the estimate without anyone's pay changing. 108 districts moved by more than 60% between the two releases; every one of them is excluded from the figures on this page, because no real salary schedule moves that far in 4 years. Naming the exclusion is the point: a ranking of the largest movements in this dataset would be a ranking of reporting changes.
How the middle of the distribution moved
Percentage change by percentile, FY2019 to FY2023
- 10th percentile 1
10th percentile
1 %
- Median
Median
15 %
- 90th percentile
90th percentile
32 %
Which states moved most, by median district
State figures below are the MEDIAN of that state's panel districts, not an average, so one very large or very odd district cannot set a state's number. States with fewer than five panel districts are omitted rather than shown on thin evidence.
Median district change by state (top 10)
- NH
NH
36 %
- DE
DE
31 %
- MS
MS
28 %
- UT
UT
28 %
- OR
OR
26 %
- CA
CA
24 %
- CO
CO
23 %
- AZ
AZ
22 %
- SC
SC
21 %
- ID
ID
21 %
| # | State | Median change | Panel districts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NH | +35.5% | 70 |
| 2 | DE | +30.5% | 18 |
| 3 | MS | +28.3% | 134 |
| 4 | UT | +27.7% | 41 |
| 5 | OR | +26.0% | 169 |
| 6 | CA | +24.4% | 840 |
| 7 | CO | +22.8% | 165 |
| 8 | AZ | +22.4% | 186 |
| 9 | SC | +21.0% | 67 |
| 10 | ID | +20.8% | 109 |
What this does not say
These are nominal dollars. A +15.1% median over 4 years is not a statement about purchasing power, and this page makes no inflation adjustment. It is also not a raise: the figure is a district-level estimate, not an individual teacher's salary or a bargained schedule. For the level rather than the change, see the state salary rankings; for the method, see the methodology.
Limitations
This page compares a BALANCED PANEL: only districts reporting a usable salary figure in both FY2019 and FY2023 are counted, so districts entering or leaving the survey between releases cannot appear as movement. Average salary is an ESTIMATE derived by dividing reported instructional-salary expenditure by an enrollment-based teacher headcount, not a salary schedule and not an individual raise. Because enrollment is the denominator, a district that restates its enrollment between releases moves this estimate without any change in pay; 108 districts moved by more than 60% and are excluded from every figure on this page for that reason. Figures are nominal dollars and are not adjusted for inflation or cost of living, so a positive median does not by itself mean teachers gained purchasing power. State medians are shown only where at least five panel districts qualify. F-33 fiscal years lag publication, so "latest release" refers to the most recent published fiscal year in this dataset, not the current school year.
Research question: Between the FY2019 and FY2023 NCES F-33 releases, how did estimated district teacher salaries move across the districts that reported in both years, and how much of the apparent movement is a reporting artifact rather than a change in pay?
Source: