Paying more for a master's degree doesn't make sense
- Joanne Jacobs
- Dec 11, 2025
- 2 min read
Teachers go in debt to earn master's degrees in education, knowing their district's salary scale pays more for an advanced degree. But it's not worth it for most teachers -- or for the schools where they work, writes Chad Aldeman on The 74.
Teachers with a master's are no better -- and no worse -- than those without, research suggests. There may be a few exceptions in high school math and science, Aldeman writes, but there there appears to be no significant relationships between student achievement and teacher training, according to a rigorous study from the Institute of Education Sciences.
Yet credentialism is common. In some states, teachers must earn a master's degree to remain in the classroom after the first five years. Nearly everywhere, teachers move up the salary scale as they earn more credits beyond the bachelor's degree.
"To help teachers pay for all those additional courses, many states, districts and even the federal government have stepped in" to subsidize their training, he writes.
As a result, "more than half of all public school teachers had a master's degree or higher" in 2020-21, he writes. The average amount borrowers' owed was $38,230, according to the Learning Policy Institute.
The average salary premium in 2025 for beginning teachers with a master’s was $3,581 a year, recent reports the National Council on Teacher Quality. "For teachers with 25 years of experience, it ran to $9,315," writes Aldeman. It can be higher in some districts, but nationwide teachers get little or no return on the investment.
The best way for teachers to improve is to "practice teaching . . . especially with skilled coaches and mentors," Aldeman writes. The millions sent on credentials is money that could be spent more effectively.
States have been ramping up apprenticeship-style training programs that don’t require much of a front-end investment on the parts of teacher candidates. And a Texas program shows that states can pay teachers more without making the higher salary contingent on a master’s degree. Team-based staffing models demonstrate how schools can reward effectiveness rather than resumes.
Master's programs are "cash cows" for universities, writes AEI's Mark Schneider. As bachelor's degrees lose signaling value, more people think they need a master's to compete. The value of an advanced degree varies, but it's estimated a master's in education has a "low to negative" return on investment for the teacher.
A master's degree is required to be recognized as a professional secondary school teacher in leading educational systems; as usual Mr Aldeman is over-generalizing based on scores in elementary skills tests, but his data have no applicability to the vast majority of secondary teachers who teach neither English nor mathematics, and should be evaluated by their school employers based on their performance of their contractual duties, rather than the dictates of state legislators who are as incompetent at education (I've just learned that both Houston and Texas, too often extolled on this blog, have just had their average SAT scores decline for the sixth year in a row) as the federal department that Congress should get round to shutting down…