Teaching Assistants, Except Postsecondary Salary: Vermont vs Washington
Teaching Assistants, Except Postsecondary earn a median of $43,800 in Vermont and $49,120 in Washington. That is a nominal gap of $5,320 (-10.8%), with Washington paying more before any cost-of-living adjustment.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics survey, May 2025 estimates. Cost-of-living adjustment uses BEA Regional Price Parities, most recent release.
The story behind the numbers
On raw wages, Washington pays $5,320 more per year than Vermont for teaching assistants, except postsecondary, a gap of +10.8%.
After adjusting for cost of living, Washington still comes out ahead, with roughly $1,188 of extra purchasing power (+2.6% real gap). Local prices do not reverse the nominal advantage.
Full breakdown by location
Detailed wage, employment, and cost-of-living figures for teaching assistants, except postsecondary in each location. Click through to the full local salary page for percentiles, outlook, and peer areas.
Vermont
- Median salary
- $43,800
- Mean salary
- $42,040
- Employment
- 4,960
- Location quotient
- 1.79
- Jobs per 1,000
- 16.3
- COL-adjusted median
- $44,713
- Regional Price Parity
- 98.0%
Exact state RPP match.
Full Teaching Assistants, Except Postsecondary page for Vermont →
Washington
- Median salary
- $49,120
- Mean salary
- $50,650
- Employment
- 43,420
- Location quotient
- 1.34
- Jobs per 1,000
- 12.2
- COL-adjusted median
- $45,901
- Regional Price Parity
- 107.0%
Exact state RPP match.
Full Teaching Assistants, Except Postsecondary page for Washington →
Related pages
Keep digging into teaching assistants, except postsecondary from a different angle.
- National Teaching Assistants, Except Postsecondary salary page
- Compare a different occupation or location
Common questions about this comparison
What does the cost-of-living adjustment actually do? +
It divides each location's nominal median wage by its Regional Price Parity (RPP), which measures how local prices compare to the national average (100 = national). A wage of $100,000 in an area with RPP 120 has the same purchasing power as roughly $83,000 nationally.
Why would the nominal and adjusted winners disagree? +
High-cost metros often pay higher salaries, but not by enough to fully offset the higher cost of housing, goods, and services. When that happens, the location with the lower nominal wage actually offers more real purchasing power.
What is a location quotient? +
The location quotient measures how concentrated an occupation is in a given area versus the national average. A value of 2.0 means the occupation is twice as common there as nationally. It is a signal of what a state specializes in.