How Teacher.org Ranks School Districts on Teacher Support
Teacher.org's school district ranking methodology scores districts on how well they support teachers, not on student outcomes or property values. Three equally weighted measures drive it: student-teacher ratio, teacher-to-support-staff ratio, and combined reading and math proficiency. The best district in each state scores 100, and the rest score as a percentage of that.
We scored and ranked districts on the working conditions teachers actually feel. Class size comes first, because the higher the student-teacher ratio, the less time a teacher has for any individual student. Support staff comes second, meaning how much administrative and classroom help is available when you need it. Student proficiency on state examinations comes third, which says something about the learning environment a teacher walks into every morning. Those three areas, weighted equally, produce each district's overall score.
Methodology
The rankings draw on two federal datasets: the National Center for Education Statistics Common Core of Data for the 2013-14 school year, and the U.S. Department of Education EdFacts Data Files for 2012-13. Those are the vintages the scores were calculated from, and the rankings have not been recalculated since. Read them as a snapshot of that period rather than a current assessment of any district.
| Scoring area | What it measures | Data source |
|---|---|---|
| Student/Teacher Ratio | Students per full-time equivalent teacher. A lower ratio means more of a teacher's attention is available to each student. | NCES Common Core of Data, 2013-14 |
| Teacher/Support Staff Ratio | Teachers per full-time equivalent support staff member. This is the administrative and classroom backup a teacher can call on. | NCES Common Core of Data, 2013-14 |
| Combined RLA & Math Proficiency | Share of students scoring proficient on state reading/language arts and mathematics examinations. | U.S. Department of Education EdFacts Data Files, 2012-13 |
Once all the district data was obtained, school districts with the following characteristics were excluded:
- Nonoperational agencies as reported in data files
- Special or non-traditional agencies as defined by NCES (Agency Type Codes: 4-8)
- Agencies where all associated schools are charter schools
- Agencies where total number of full-time equivalency teachers was less than 100
- Agencies where total number of students was less than 1000
- Agencies where total number of schools was less than two
- Agencies where total number of support staff was zero
- Agencies that did not report student proficiency levels on state examinations
Those filters rule out the districts too small or too specialized for the three measures to say anything meaningful. A two-school agency with 40 teachers can post an excellent ratio without that ratio reflecting anything a teacher would recognize as support.
Once the agency filter was applied, the ranking process ran as follows for each state separately:
- School districts that operate as a Supervisory Union (e.g., NYC Schools) had all the data from their local school district components combined, and the Supervisory Union was represented as a whole.
- The agency with the best student-teacher ratio of the state was given a score of 100, and other school district agencies were scored as a percentage of this score.
- The agency with the best teacher-support staff ratio of the state was given a score of 100, and other school district agencies were scored as a percentage of this score.
- The agency with the best combined RLA & Math student percent proficiency scores was given a score of 100, and other school district agencies were scored as a percentage of this score.
- The three equally weighted area scores were then averaged to produce a final overall score.
- Overall scores were then sorted and listed from the highest to lowest.
What a Score Actually Means
Scoring runs state by state, never nationally. Within a state, the district with the best student-teacher ratio receives a 100 on that measure, and every other district is scored as a percentage of it. A district sitting at 80 has a ratio four-fifths as favorable as the state leader's. The same applies to the other two areas, and the three results are averaged for the final figure.
That design has one consequence worth stating plainly. A district's number tells you where it stands against other districts in its own state, and nothing about how it compares to a district two states over. A 90 in one state and a 90 in another are not the same measurement.
Ranking Details By State
The table below lists information by state, including the number of school districts analyzed and the number of top-ranked districts.
| State | School Districts Analyzed | School Districts Ranked |
|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 111 | 30 |
| Alaska | 13 | 5 |
| Arizona | 88 | 30 |
| Arkansas | 97 | 30 |
| California | 437 | 50 |
| Colorado | 53 | 20 |
| Connecticut | 106 | 30 |
| Delaware | 16 | 5 |
| Florida | 64 | 20 |
| Georgia | 148 | 30 |
| Hawaii | 1 | N/A |
| Idaho | 29 | 10 |
| Illinois | 259 | 50 |
| Indiana | 159 | 50 |
| Iowa | 82 | 30 |
| Kansas | 71 | 20 |
| Kentucky | 118 | 30 |
| Louisiana | 66 | 20 |
| Maine | 55 | 20 |
| Maryland | 24 | 10 |
| Massachusetts | 160 | 50 |
| Michigan | 220 | 50 |
| Minnesota | 108 | 30 |
| Mississippi | 102 | 30 |
| Missouri | 141 | 30 |
| Montana | 16 | 5 |
| Nebraska | 31 | 10 |
| Nevada | 9 | N/A |
| New Hampshire | 59 | 20 |
| New Jersey | 281 | 50 |
| New Mexico | 33 | 10 |
| New York | 383 | 50 |
| North Carolina | 108 | 30 |
| North Dakota | 10 | 5 |
| Ohio | 289 | 50 |
| Oklahoma | 81 | 30 |
| Oregon | 64 | 20 |
| Pennsylvania | 342 | 50 |
| Rhode Island | 26 | 10 |
| South Carolina | 69 | 20 |
| South Dakota | 15 | 5 |
| Tennessee | 107 | 30 |
| Texas | 419 | 50 |
| Utah | 30 | 10 |
| Vermont | 4 | N/A |
| Virginia | 115 | 30 |
| Washington | 109 | 30 |
| West Virginia | 47 | 20 |
| Wisconsin | 137 | 30 |
| Wyoming | 21 | 10 |
Hawaii, Nevada, and Vermont show no ranked districts. Hawaii runs a single statewide district, so there is nothing to rank it against, and Nevada and Vermont had too few districts clear the filters to produce a defensible list.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this ranking measure that other district rankings don't?
Working conditions. Most district rankings are built for families choosing a neighborhood, so they weight test scores, college readiness, and student life. This one weights the ratios a teacher lives with day to day: how many students per teacher, and how much support staff backs those teachers up. Proficiency is one of three inputs here, not the whole picture.
How current is the data?
It isn't current. The scores were calculated from the 2013-14 NCES Common Core of Data and the 2012-13 EdFacts Data Files, and they have not been recalculated since. Staffing levels and proficiency rates have moved in most districts since then, so treat the rankings as a record of that period.
Why isn't my district listed?
Probably a filter. Districts were excluded if they had fewer than 100 full-time equivalent teachers, fewer than 1,000 students, fewer than two schools, no support staff on record, or no reported proficiency data. Charter-only agencies and NCES agency type codes 4 through 8 were also excluded.
Can I compare a district's score to one in a different state?
No. Scoring is normalized inside each state, with the state's best performer on each measure set at 100. A score describes standing among that state's districts only. Two districts with identical scores in different states are not necessarily comparable.
How were large districts like New York City handled?
Districts operating as a Supervisory Union had the data from their component local districts combined and were scored as a single entity. That keeps a large city system from appearing dozens of times as separate fragments.
Questions or Comments?
There is more to district support for teachers than three numbers can capture. Mentoring, planning time, and how a principal handles a hard week all matter, and none of them show up in a federal dataset. What these three measures do offer is a consistent basis for comparison across thousands of districts, which is the trade-off any ranking makes.
Please send comments or questions via our contact form.
- Built around teachers - The ranking scores districts on working conditions rather than student outcomes or property values, which is what separates it from Niche, U.S. News, and similar family-facing rankings.
- Three equal weights - Student-teacher ratio, teacher-to-support-staff ratio, and combined reading and math proficiency each contribute one third of a district's overall score.
- State-relative scoring - The best district in each state is set at 100 on each measure, and the rest score as a percentage of it, so scores compare districts within a state and not across state lines.
- Filtered for meaningfulness - Districts under 100 teachers, under 1,000 students, under two schools, or with no reported proficiency data were excluded from the analysis.
- A 2013-14 snapshot - Scores come from NCES Common Core of Data 2013-14 and ED EdFacts 2012-13, and have not been recalculated since.
The conditions a district offers matter, but so does the credential you bring through the door. The sponsored programs listed on this page include online and hybrid formats, and several are built for people who already hold a degree in another field.