









































  ARESTY  RUTGERS UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOLUME I, ISSUE III 
 
 
 

 
 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. 

WORKFORCE  
COMPENSATION  

POLICIES  
FOR LEAD TEACHERS  

IN STATE-FUNDED  
PRESCHOOL 

ZAYNAB KHAN, 
ALLISON FRIEDMAN-KRAUSS (FACULT ADVISOR) 

 
 

✵ ABSTRACT 
Each state in the US has different compensa-

tion parity policies for their early childhood educa-
tion programs. Currently, public preschool teachers 
often have similar qualifications to K-3 teachers but 
earn significantly lower salaries. Compensation par-
ity policies ensure that equivalent work and qualifi-
cations are compensated with equivalent pay and 
benefits. Using data collected by the National Insti-
tute of Early Education Research (NIEER), I organized 
and analyzed policy data from all state-funded pre-
school programs in the U.S., with a focus on state 
compensation parity policies for lead preschool 
teachers. Ultimately, my purpose was to understand 
state-funded preschool compensation parity for 
lead teachers in order to identify areas of improve-
ment for the workforce within early education pro-
grams. I initially hypothesized that Pre-K programs 
that required pay parity did not cost states more per 
child than Pre-K programs that did not require pay 
parity. Literature from NIEER and other early educa-
tion research institutions has shown that quality early 
education programs are critical in a child’s formative 
years and suggests that a more satisfied workforce 
yields more positive outcomes for children. Parity 
policies in state-funded Pre-K programs are not 
highly correlated to spending per child or program 
quality. Moreover, parity policies improve workforce 

well-being and should still be incorporated into 
state-funded Pre-K. Results show that there are only 
six programs across four states that require full salary 
parity for lead preschool teachers and no states re-
quire benefit parity for lead preschool teachers in 
both public and private settings. No clear pattern 
has emerged between compensation parity policies 
and state preschool spending or program quality. 

 

1 INTRODUCTION 
i. What is compensation parity? 

Many preschool teachers earn substantially 
less than their counterparts in K-3 despite having 
comparable education and training.[3] A lack of parity 
in both salaries and benefits between preschool and 
K-3 teachers has important implications for both the 
teachers themselves as well as for the children they 
serve.  In this study, I apply the Center for the Study 
of Child Care Employment’s (CSCCE) definition of 
workforce compensation parity to analyze the work-
force compensation parity policies in state-funded 
preschools in the U.S.[10] According to CSCCE, pay 
parity occurs when preschool teachers and K-3 
teachers with equal qualifications and work experi-
ence receive equal pay (TABLE 1).  

 
 

 
COMPONENTS OF COMPENSATION 

SALARY PARITY BENEFIT PARITY 

FU
LL

  
PA

RI
TY

 

Equivalent starting salary 
with K-3 lead teachers with 

the same qualifications 

Equivalent salary  
schedule with K-3 lead  
teachers with the same  

qualifications 

Salary schedule is  
prorated for differences in 
length of workday or year 

Requires retirement benefits 

Requires paid time off 

Requires healthcare benefits 

Requires other benefits 

PA
RT

IA
L 

 
PA

RI
TY

 

Not equivalent or no salary 
schedule 

Some benefits are equivalent, 
but others are not 

TABLE 1: Compensation Parity & Related Forms of  
Compensation Improvement 

NOTE.  Definitions of parity as defined above. 
SOURCE: Adapted from Whitebook, Marcy, and Caitlin McLean. “In Pursuit of 
Pre-K Parity.” Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, Apr. 2017. 

 



  ARESTY  RUTGERS UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOLUME I, ISSUE III 
 
 
 

TABLE 1 outlines how CSCCE defines compensation 
parity. This definition divides parity into multiple cat-
egories such as full parity, partial parity, sub parity, 
and alternative forms of compensation. Parity is 
equivalent compensation which includes:  

1) starting salary,  
2) salary schedule,  
3) benefits, and  
4) payment for professional responsibilities for em-

ployees with similar qualifications.  

Full parity is when teachers receive equivalent treat-
ment across all four parity categories. Partial parity is 
the equivalent treatment across some of the parity 
categories. For example, starting salary could be the 
same, while salary schedule, benefits, and/or pay-
ment for professional responsibilities may differ.[1] 
Sub-parity is similar to partial parity but does not en-
tail equivalent treatment across all four parity cate-
gories. Alternative forms of compensation include 
strategies to improve compensation but do not fall 
into one the three other categories.[1] Only full and 
partial parity will be further discussed in this paper.  

Early childhood education in the U.S. con-
sists of a variety of programs such as the federal 
Head Start program, childcare, state-funded pre-
school, or private school. This paper will specifically 
discuss state-funded preschool. State-funded pre-
school is defined as a program that is directed, 
funded, and controlled by the state, serves mainly 3 
and 4 year-olds, and focuses on early childhood ed-
ucation.[3] Furthermore, state-funded preschool is a 
distinct program from state-subsidized childcare, 
programs that do not need to include early learning 
components. Some states such as New Jersey have 
multiple preschool programs which are all funded 
and instituted by the state. Each state is responsible 
for the licensing and administration of these pro-
grams. State-funded preschool programs may be 
provided in both public (e.g., public schools) and 
nonpublic settings (e.g., childcare centers) when 
states have mixed-delivery systems.  

This paper will specifically focus on parity for 
lead teachers in state-funded Pre-K, in contrast to as-
sistant teachers or other staff employed at state-

funded preschool programs. Lead teachers are of-
ten required to have the similar qualifications to K-3 
teachers (such as a bachelor’s degree). Assistant 
teachers often do not need the same level of educa-
tion as lead teachers and are typically not present in 
K-3 programs. Qualifications requirements for lead 
teachers can be compared to those of K-3 teachers 
as they require similar education levels. 

 

ii. Why is compensation parity important? 
Prior research suggests that teacher com-

pensation affects both teachers as well as their stu-
dents.[9] For example, improved well-being of the 
preschool workforce is associated with higher qual-
ity preschool programs. One recent review found 
that teacher stress was associated with poor teacher-
child relationships and ineffective teaching of social 
and emotional skills.[9] Teachers’ financial instability 
was identified as a significant source of stress and 
thus associated with less positive child outcomes. 
Low emotional wellness of teachers is associated 
with negative effects on students such as misbehav-
ior, indicating the relationship between teacher well-
ness and student outcomes.[7] 

Furthermore, low wages are correlated with 
high turnover rates.[9] Consequently, this may nega-
tively affect program quality for children. Parity poli-
cies in general are associated with higher wages for 
lead teachers and can improve teacher well-being. 
Compensation parity is critical because it is associ-
ated with higher wages for preschool teachers, put-
ting them on a pay scale like their K-3 colleagues. 
While both K-3 and many preschool teachers are re-
quired to have the same educational backgrounds 
(e.g., at least a BA), preschool teachers typically earn 
significantly less than K-3 teachers. Teachers in the 
federal Head Start program with at least a BA still 
make, on average, $23,000 less than public K-3 
teachers.[2]  

In a study conducted by the research insti-
tute Child Trends, researchers examined Alabama’s 
First Class Pre-K program after the state increased 
funding for salary parity in 2016.[5] Teachers began 
receiving pay similar to public K-3 teachers. In this 
qualitative study, some preschool directors reported 



  ARESTY  RUTGERS UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOLUME I, ISSUE III 
 
 
 

that they could lead more effectively since parity re-
sulted in easier recruitment of high-quality teachers. 
Furthermore, the researchers also noticed an in-
crease in teamwork after the policy took effect. From 
the preschools the researchers surveyed, all direc-
tors reported high staff retention rates of teachers. 
More lead teachers opted to remain employed 
within Alabama’s First Class Pre-K program than be-
fore, and directors and teachers noted that there was 
an increased amount of interest from public school 
teachers to find employment in Alabama’s First Class 
Pre-K program. However, this did not apply to auxil-
iary staff, who were not affected by the new parity 
policy. Teachers also reported better economic and 
personal well-being after salary parity went into ef-
fect.[5] While this study was conducted in 2016, the 
parity policies remain in place in Alabama’s First 
Class Pre-K.[8] 

Taken together, this research by Child 
Trends and the paper Early Care and Education 
Teacher Well-Being: Associations with Children's Ex-
perience, Outcomes, and Workplace Conditions: A 
Research-to-Policy Brief suggests that compensation 
parity is an essential ingredient for improving pre-
school program quality. As a result, it can potentially 
improve outcomes for children in their formative 
years and teachers’ well-being. Further, this research 
highlights that it is important for states to prioritize 
compensation parity policies in their state-funded 
preschool programs and that it is necessary to un-
derstand the landscape of compensation parity pol-
icies in state-funded preschool. 

 

iii. What are the main questions relating to the 
state of compensation policies in state-
funded preschool? 

In response to the existing literature that in-
dicates the importance of the compensation parity 
policies, I examined the existing structure of parity 
policies within state-funded Pre-K. In this exploratory 
paper, I addressed the following questions:  

1) What do we know about preschool parity policies?  

2) Which state-funded preschool programs institute  
partial or full parity for lead teachers?  

3) How do parity policies differ across public and  
nonpublic settings within state-funded preschool  
programs? 

4) How are parity policies related to teacher salaries for 
public programs? 

5) To what extent do parity policies relate to state  
preschool spending and program costs? 

6) To what extent do parity policies relate to the quality 
of state-funded preschool programs? 

Ultimately, this research focuses on pay parity poli-
cies within the different state-funded preschool pro-
grams across the United States and their relationship 
to cost and compensation in Pre-K. This research was 
conducted to understand if programs with pay parity 
policies spent more per child and if programs with 
pay parity policies had a higher wage for teachers. 
 

2 METHODOLOGY  

 The National Institute for Early Education Re-
search (NIEER) has tracked state-funded preschool 
enrollment, spending, and policies in order to sup-
port quality programs across states since 2002. Re-
cently, NIEER has taken an in-depth look into com-
pensation parity policies, including the extent to 
which they support the preschool teaching work-
force. Data used in this paper pertain to the 2017-
2018 school year. 
 NIEER surveys all 50 states, the District of Co-
lumbia, and U.S. territories about their current poli-
cies regarding their state-funded preschools. All 
states that have state-funded preschool programs 
have provided requested data. This includes 61 pre-
school programs across 44 states and D.C.; the pro-
grams serve over 1 million children. This information 
is compiled into the annual State of Preschool Year-
book.[3]  

To explore lead preschool teacher compen-
sation parity policies, I used data about state-funded 
preschool policies, such as each state’s required 
teacher qualifications, average salary of lead pre-
school teachers, and average salary of lead K-3 
teachers, for programs in both public and nonpublic 
settings. That is, although all programs receive state 
funding, many states use a mixed-delivery system 
where some preschool programs operate in public  



  ARESTY  RUTGERS UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOLUME I, ISSUE III 
 
 
 

 

[a] Consistent with U.S. government statistical reporting practices, the District of Columbia will be referred to as a “state” throughout this report. 
Hence, we report 45 “states” providing state-funded preschools. 

schools and others operate in nonpublic settings 
such as private childcare centers or Head Start  
programs. While data were collected on the 44 
states, D.C., and territories (only Guam) that have a 
state-funded preschool program, only the states and 
D.C. were included in the analyses for this study.[a]  

Quality as discussed throughout the paper 
refers to the NIEER’s quality standards, which evalu-
ate programs according to 10 benchmarks: early 
learning and development standards, curriculum 
support, teacher and assistant teacher educational 
background, training, and professional develop-
ment, class sizes, staff-student ratios, and continuous 
quality improvement system.  

I conducted a thorough literature review of 
NIEER’s previous publications on compensation par-
ity as well as other credible publications to under-
stand compensation parity policies and their im-
portance. To analyze the current state of compensa-
tion parity for lead teachers in state-funded pre-
school programs, I analyzed raw survey data col-
lected by NIEER for the 2017-2018 State of Pre-
school Yearbook. I also conducted statistical anal-
yses, including correlations and regression analyses, 
on NIEER’s data to explore associations between 
compensation parity policies, state preschool 
spending, and preschool quality.  

For the regression analysis between parity 
policies and state preschool spending, the length of 
the day was included as an independent variable in 
the regression. The dependent variable, adjusted 
spending per child in each state’s Pre-K program, 
was regressed against the following binary variables: 
if they program offered part day, full day, or ex-
tended day service and whether the program of-
fered partial salary parity, full salary parity, and ben-
efit parity within their programs. 

A regression analysis was also conducted 
between parity and quality benchmarks. Given that 
prior literature finds an association between teacher 
compensation and preschool quality, I also explored 
the association between state preschool programs’ 
parity policies and NIEER’s 10 benchmarks for pre-
school quality.[6] Examples of NIEER’s quality stand-

ard benchmarks include supports for curriculum im-
plementation, qualifications of lead (at least a B.A.) 
and assistant teachers (at least a Child Development 
Associate (CDA)), class size (maximum 20 children) 
and staff to teacher ratios (1:10 or better), as well as 
other non-workforce related specifications (such as 
required health screenings for children). All the pro-
grams are graded on quality on a scale from 1-10. 
The programs are evaluated across the 10 policy 
standards and then given an average total score. 
 

3 RESULTS  & DISCUSSION 
i. What do we know about preschool parity 

policies?  
Of the 44 states and District of Columbia 

that offered state funded preschool, some states re-
quired similar qualifications for lead preschool 
teachers and public-school K-3 teachers. According 
to NIEER’s 2018 Workforce Special Report, 28 states 
required that all lead teachers in state-funded pre-
school have at least a bachelor's degree (B.A.). 25 
states required that lead teachers have an additional 
state-specified certification. However, of those states 
that require both a B.A. and a certification, only four 
—Hawaii, New Jersey, Oklahoma, and Rhode Island 
—require starting salary parity.[3]  

 
ii. Which state-funded preschool programs in-

stitute partial or full parity for lead teachers?  
I explored state preschool parity policies to 

determine which states have full and partial parity 
policies in place for lead preschool teachers. NIEER 
collected data on state policies regarding both sal-
ary parity and benefit parity in state-funded pre-
school. As per the data from the 2017–2018 State of 
Preschool Yearbook, there were no states that re-
quired both salary and benefit parity for all lead 
teachers in state-funded preschool programs, which 
includes teachers in programs that offer both non-
public and public settings.  

Fifteen state-funded preschool programs 
have policies in place that meet the requirement for 
at least one component of salary parity, such as 
equivalent starting salaries but not an equivalent sal- 



  ARESTY  RUTGERS UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOLUME I, ISSUE III 
 
 
 

ary schedule. However, there are only six state-
funded preschool programs that require full salary 
parity, which requires all three components (equiva-
lent starting salary, equivalent salary schedule, and 
proration of salary based on work hours, see TABLE 1) 
for lead teachers in both public and nonpublic pro-
grams. These six programs are in four states: Califor-
nia, Minnesota, New Jersey, and Oregon. Only six 
programs meet at least one component of benefit 
parity, while no state program meets all three cate-
gories of benefit parity (see TABLE 1) for teachers in all 
settings.  

 
iii. How do parity policies vary across public 

and non-public settings? 
In many state-funded preschool programs, 

parity policies differ for preschool teachers em-
ployed by public and non-public schools. Parity pol-
icies are more likely to be in place for preschool 
teachers employed by public rather than non-public 

schools. According to the NIEER Workforce Special 
Report, “In states requiring the same degree require-
ments for all teachers, almost 70% (of those with 
data) reported wage disparities where preschool 
public school teachers earned up to $21,136 more 
than private preschool teachers in the same pro-
gram. Disparities are even larger when comparing 
state-funded preschool teachers where a bachelor’s 
degree is required to public school K–3 teachers. 
Preschool pay gaps of $20,000 to $30,000 per year 
are common.”[3]  

Moreover, there are 19 state-funded pre-
school programs that require full salary parity only 
for teachers employed by public programs. Oregon, 
California, New Mexico, Texas, Kentucky, Minnesota, 
West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, New 
Jersey, Delaware, Rhode Island, Vermont, and 
Maine have some form of salary parity. Only three 
states (Nevada, D.C., and Georgia) require full ben-
efit parity for lead preschool teachers employed by  

FIGURE 1: Map of Salary and Benefit Parity Policies for Lead Teachers in State-Funded Preschool Programs Employed by  
Public Schools Compared to K-3 Lead Teachers 

Note: Map outlining parity by state public programs.  

 

 



  ARESTY  RUTGERS UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOLUME I, ISSUE III 
 
 
 

 

 

[b] While the state of California considers TK a kindergarten program, it meets NIEER’s definition of a state-funded preschool program[3]. Despite 
TK being viewed as kindergarten by CA, there is still a large salary gap between preschool teachers in TK and elementary school teachers. 

public schools. Of these, only the District of Colum-
bia and Nevada require both salary and benefit par-
ity for state-funded preschool teachers employed by 
public schools.  
 

iv. How are parity policies related to teacher 
salaries for public programs? 
One result of the lack of parity policies in 

state-funded preschool programs is that preschool 
lead teachers in public programs with similar qualifi-
cations as public K-3 teachers often receive signifi-
cantly less pay for similar work. According to the 
2017–2018 Yearbook data, among the states that re-
ported preschool teacher salary, state-funded pre-
school teachers employed by public schools earned 
$7,456 less on average than public elementary 
school teachers. This gap is even larger when com-
paring lead state-funded preschool teachers em-
ployed by nonpublic settings with K-3 teachers; on 
average, this gap is $17,729.[3]  

I also explored the extent to which salary 
parity policies in state-funded preschool were re-
lated to lead preschool teacher salaries. However, 
only 30 states provided data on average salaries for 
lead preschool teachers. When examining the states 
that require full salary parity for all programs, there 
still exists a significant wage gap between preschool 
teachers and K-3 teachers. For example, in Califor-
nia’s Transitional Kindergarten (TK), a preschool pro-
gram that serves 4-year-olds, the wage gap is 
$18,126 despite TK being considered an early year 
of kindergarten by California.[b] Similarly, in Oregon’s 
Preschool Promise program, the wage gap is 
$15,413. Both programs institute salary parity, yet 
there still exists a large discrepancy in wages.[3]  

The inconsistency of parity policies and 
teacher salaries across the different programs can be 
partly attributed to the split between public and non-
public program designations. For example, New 
Mexico institutes full salary parity for preschool 
teachers in public schools but not those teaching in 
private settings (though still part of the state-funded 
program). The wage gap between state-funded, 
public school lead preschool and K-3 teachers in 
New Mexico is only $2,745. Conversely, in Arkansas, 

where there are no salary parity policies, the wage 
gap between public lead preschool teachers and 
public K-3 teachers is $8,824. Even after adjusting for 
cost of living, the wage gap in Arkansas is signifi-
cantly higher than the wage gap in New Mexico.[3] 
 

v. To what extent do parity policies relate to 
state spending and program costs? 
A regression analysis showed a statistically 

insignificant correlation between salary parity poli-
cies and state spending per child for preschool. As 
an example, Nevada and the District of Columbia are 
the only two states that have parity policies for both 
salary and benefits for lead preschool teachers em-
ployed in public settings (see TABLE 2). Yet the state 
spending per child is significantly different in these 
two states. The District of Columbia spends $17,545 
per child, which is the most compared to any other 
state program. The state of Nevada spends $4,025 
per child (which is only slightly lower than the me-
dian of $4,769 per child). When adjusted for cost of 
living, Nevada spends $4,124 per child and the Dis-
trict of Columbia spends $15,008. Nevada still insti-
tutes full compensation parity for public programs 
despite spending significantly less than the only 
other state that institutes full parity policies for both 
salary and benefits. However, it is worth noting that 
Nevada’s programs are part-day and only serve stu-
dents for 2.5 hours a day while the District of Colum-
bia’s program serves students for 6.5 hours a day (as 
indicated in TABLE 2).  

TABLE 3 indicates that it is somewhat surpris-
ing that there is only a weak but nonsignificant cor-
relation between spending per child and parity pol-
icies. This is likely due to other variables such as dif-
fering operating times (as in the example of District 
of Columbia and Nevada). That is, some programs 
are full-day while others are half-day, which affect 
costs. Programs also vary in the total number of 
hours and/or days per year, which also affects costs. 
Shorter programs will cost significantly less than pro-
grams that serve students for longer periods of time. 
Results of the regression analysis indicated only a 
weak and nonsignificant correlation between pay 
parity policies and the spending per child of each 



  ARESTY  RUTGERS UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOLUME I, ISSUE III 
 
 
 

 

[c] Full day programs serve students for at least 5.5 hours a day.  Extended day programs serve students for more than 6.5 hours a day. Part day 
programs serve students for at least 3 hours a day but not more than 5.5 hours. 

 
  

TABLE 2: State Preschool Spending Per Child, Minimum Operating Schedule, and Parity Policies[c] 

NOTE.  This table represents data available on the operating schedule, spending per child, partial and full salary parity, and 
full benefit parity.  



  ARESTY  RUTGERS UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOLUME I, ISSUE III 
 
 
 

 

    

 b (SE) p 

Part-Day Program (n =35) -375.9859 1165.289 P > .05 

Full-Day Program (n=10) 949.3526 1428.907 P > .05 

Extended-Day Program (n=7) 857.1525 1640.042 P > .05 

Partial Salary Parity (n=29) -113.4493 1137.561 P > .05 

Full Salary Parity (n=19) 2041.8102 1223.313 P > .05 

Full Benefit Parity (n=3) 1266.2790 1996.638 P > .05 

 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 

 b (SE) p 

Part-Day Program (n =35) 1.5262705 0.7695571 P < .05 

Full-Day Program (n=10) 2.8829284 0.9436502 P < .01 

Extended-Day Program (n=7) 2.3051779 1.0830838 P < .05 

Partial Salary Parity (n=29) 1.4399083 0.7512457 P > .05 

Full Salary Parity (n=19) -0.9485807 0.8078760 P > .05 

Full Benefit Parity (n=3) -1.7629463 1.3185800 P > .05 

 
 
 
 

  

TABLE 3: Regression analysis predicting Spending per Child from Teacher Salary Parity 

TABLE 4: Regression Analysis predicting Quality Standard Benchmarks from Teacher Salary Parity 



  ARESTY  RUTGERS UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOLUME I, ISSUE III 
 
 
 

state program (𝑝𝑝 > .05). There are several limitations 
regarding finding a relationship between parity pol-
icies and state spending. Many states have varied 
operating schedules. While the analysis accounted 
for operating schedule, it did not account for how 
many calendar days children are served. Further-
more, class size, which varies amongst programs and 
is often a driver for program costs, was not con-
trolled for.  

 

vi. How does parity relate to the quality of  
programs? 
Results of the regression analysis from TABLE 4  

indicated only a weak and nonsignificant correlation 
between pay parity policies and the number of qual-
ity standard benchmarks met by each state pre-
school program (𝑝𝑝 > .05). In 2018, the programs that 
met every minimum quality benchmark were in 
Michigan, Alabama, and Rhode Island. NIEER does 
not include parity as one of their ten quality bench-
marks and does not guarantee quality. None of 
these states institute full parity for their lead pre-
school teachers. However, both Rhode Island and 
Alabama required partial salary parity in their pro-
grams. The results suggest that there is no direct link 
between policies related to quality and parity poli-
cies.[3] However, it is possible that preschool pro-
gram quality is affected by consequences of parity 
such as high turnover rates. Similar to state spend-
ing, there are limitations regarding the relationship 
between quality and parity policies. While the litera-
ture suggested a relationship between parity and 
teacher well-being (and consequently quality), there 
are several factors not included in the analysis that 
could explain the weak correlation. The quality 
standards benchmarks represent policies related to 
quality but do not represent actual program quality. 
Further, the benchmarks include markers of quality 
that do not relate to the lead teachers at all such as a 
policy requiring that children receive health screen-
ings.  

 

4 SUMMARY & CONCLUSION 
In conclusion, compensation parity policies 

are policies that require preschool teachers to re-
ceive equal compensation, including both salary and 

benefits, on par with similarly qualified K-3 teachers. 
In general, parity policies should be associated with 
higher wages. However, results of this analysis indi-
cate that few states institute parity policies in state-
funded preschool. Teachers employed by public 
schools are more likely to be supported by parity 
policies in comparison to preschool teachers em-
ployed by nonpublic settings.  

Moreover, there seems to be little correla-
tion between state preschool spending per child 
and parity policies, but some evidence that a smaller 
wage gap between public preschool and public K-3 
was associated with preschool programs having par-
ity policies. In addition, qualitative studies indicate 
that parity policies improve teacher well-being which 
can improve program quality of state-funded pro-
grams. However, I found no direct link between pro-
gram quality and enforced parity policies.  

This study is a first step in understanding 
state-funded preschool compensation parity for 
lead teachers. Results indicate that most state-
funded preschool programs have a long way to go 
to ensure that preschool teachers receive compen-
sation packages on par with their K-3 counterparts. 
Future research could explore barriers that contrib-
ute to these discrepancies. Governments can create 
labor policies, such as parity and starting salaries, for 
their own workforce and therefore for teachers in 
public settings. However, it likely would be seen as 
government overreach for states to regulate work-

RESULTS INDICATE 
THAT MOST STATE-

FUNDED PRE-
SCHOOL PRO-

GRAMS HAVE A 
LONG WAY TO GO 

TO ENSURE THAT 
 

RESULTS INDICATE THAT MOST 

STATE-FUNDED PRESCHOOL  
PROGRAMS HAVE A LONG WAY 

TO GO TO ENSURE THAT  
PRESCHOOL TEACHERS RECEIVE 

COMPENSATION PACKAGES ON 

PAR WITH THEIR K-3  
COUNTERPARTS. 
 



  ARESTY  RUTGERS UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOLUME I, ISSUE III 
 
 
 

force policies for privately-run (non-public) pro-
grams even if they receive state funding.[1] Further-
more, many states will delegate the implementation 
of parity policies to municipalities. Some local gov-
ernments will require parity policies in their districts 
while others will not, resulting in different parity pol-
icies and varying wages across a state. Indeed, for 
many preschool programs that did not have com-
pensation parity policies, these policies were deter-
mined at the local level by school districts. Addition-
ally, as more state-funded preschool programs im-
plement parity policies, future research could ex-
plore how changes in parity policies over time affect 
teacher salaries and turnover as well as preschool 
quality, spending, and child outcomes. Current 
budgeting deficits due to COVID-19 pandemic may 
result in the regression of parity policies, though so 
far this is not evident.[4] While backtracking on parity 
policies is not a desirable outcome, it may serve as 
an opportunity to research the effects of compensa-
tion parity on teacher well-being, program quality, 
and child outcomes. Ensuring that the preschool 
workforce is well-compensated will be crucial to en-
sure that preschool programs have positive effects 
on young children’s development, as well as for 
teachers’ own well-being∎  

 

5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
I would like to thank Dr. Allison Friedman-

Krauss as well as the National Institute of Early Child-
hood Education Research for their support in this 
project. 

 

6 REFERENCES  
[1] Barnett, W. S. & Kasmin, R. (2017). Teacher Compensation 

Parity Policies and State-Funded Pre-K Programs. New Bruns-
wick, NJ: the National Institute for Early Education Research 
and Berkeley, CA: Center for the Study of Child Care Em-
ployment, University of California, Berkeley 

[2]  Barnett, W. S., Friedman-Krauss, A., Weisenfeld, G., Horo-
witz, M., Kasmin, R., & Squires, J. H. (2017, May). The State of 
Preschool 2016. 
HTTP://NIEER.ORG/WP-CONTENT/UPLOADS/2017/09/FULL_STATE_OF_PRE-

SCHOOL_2016_9.15.17_COMPRESSED.PDF 

[3]  Friedman-Krauss, A., Barnett, S., Garver, K., Hodges, K., Wei-
senfeld, G., & DiCrecchio, N. (2019, April). The State of Pre-
school 2018.  
HTTP://NIEER.ORG/WP-CONTENT/UPLOADS/2019/08/YB2018_FULL-RE-

PORTR3WAPPENDICES.PDF 

[4]  Friedman-Krauss, A., Barnett, S., Garver, K., Hodges, K., Wei-
senfeld, G., & Gardiner, B. (2021, August). The State of Pre-
school 2020. 
HTTPS://NIEER.ORG/WP-CONTENT/UPLOADS/2021/08/YB2020_FULL_RE-

PORT_080521.PDF 

[5]  Gebhart, T., Carlson, J., Harris, P., & Epstein, D. (2020 June). 
Workforce Perceptions and Experiences with the Alabama 
Early Care and Education Salary Parity Policy. Childtrends.org 

[6]  Jennings, P. A. (2014). Early Childhood Teachers’ Well-Be-
ing, Mindfulness, and Self-Compassion in Relation to Class-
room Quality and Attitudes Towards Challenging Students. 

[7]  Jennings, P., & Greenberg, M. (2009). The Prosocial Class-
room: Teacher Social and Emotional Competence in Rela-
tion to Student and Classroom Outcomes. Review of Educa-
tional Research, 79(1), 491-525. Retrieved May 18, 2021, 
from HTTP://WWW.JSTOR.ORG/STABLE/40071173 

[8]  Office of the Governor of Alabama. (2021, May 18). Governor 
Ivey Announces New First Class Pre-K Classrooms in First 
Round of Funding. Office of the Alabama Governor. 
HTTPS://GOVERNOR.ALABAMA.GOV/NEWSROOM/2021/05/GOVERNOR-IVEY-
ANNOUNCES-NEW-FIRST-CLASS-PRE-K-CLASSROOMS-IN-FIRST-ROUND-OF-
FUNDING/ 

[9]  Smith, S., & Lawrence, S. (2019, March). Early Care and Edu-
cation Teacher Well-Being: Associations with Children's Ex-
perience, Outcomes, and Workplace Conditions: A Re-
search-to-Policy Brief (Rep.). (ERIC Document Reproduction 
Service No. ED597580) 

[10] Whitebook, M. &McLean, C. (2017). In Pursuit of Pre-K Parity: 
A Proposed Framework for Understanding and Advancing 
Policy and Practice. Berkeley, CA: Center for the Study of 
Child Care Employment, University of California, Berkeley 
and New Brunswick, NJ: the National Institute for Early Edu-
cation Research. 

 
 

Zaynab Khan is a graduate from the Class of 2021. She majored in Mathematics and minored in 
Political Science and Economics. She was an Honors College student as well as a member of the 
Douglass Residential College community. As part of the Aresty Research Assistant Program, she 
worked with the National Institute of Early Education Research at the Rutgers Graduate School of 
Education to conduct research on early education policy, specifically on workforce compensation 
for early education teachers. She hopes to eventually pursue higher education in economics and 
conduct further policy related research. 

http://nieer.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Full_State_of_Preschool_2016_9.15.17_compressed.pdf
http://nieer.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Full_State_of_Preschool_2016_9.15.17_compressed.pdf
http://nieer.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/YB2018_Full-ReportR3wAppendices.pdf
http://nieer.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/YB2018_Full-ReportR3wAppendices.pdf
https://nieer.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/YB2020_Full_Report_080521.pdf
https://nieer.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/YB2020_Full_Report_080521.pdf
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40071173
https://governor.alabama.gov/newsroom/2021/05/governor-ivey-announces-new-first-class-pre-k-classrooms-in-first-round-of-funding/
https://governor.alabama.gov/newsroom/2021/05/governor-ivey-announces-new-first-class-pre-k-classrooms-in-first-round-of-funding/
https://governor.alabama.gov/newsroom/2021/05/governor-ivey-announces-new-first-class-pre-k-classrooms-in-first-round-of-funding/

