Teacher retention

Last updated

Teacher retention is a field of education research that focuses on how factors such as school characteristics and teacher demographics affect whether teachers stay in their schools, move to different schools, or leave the profession before retirement. The field developed in response to a perceived shortage in the education labor market in the 1990s. The most recent meta-analysis establishes that school factors, teacher factors, and external and policy factors are key factors that influence teacher attrition and retention. [1] Teacher attrition is thought to be higher in low income schools and in high need subjects like math, science, and special education. More recent evidence suggests that school organizational characteristics has significant effects on teacher decisions to stay or leave. [2]

Contents

Wage elasticity of teacher supply and demand with equilibrium Supply-demand-equilibrium.svg
Wage elasticity of teacher supply and demand with equilibrium

Teacher shortage can be caused both by decreased teacher retention and decreased teacher supply. [3] The teacher supply depends on wage elasticity. [4]

Factors

Schools

Researchers and policy makers have identified some commonalities across schools and districts that affect teacher retention. [5] [6] Some school factors are "push" factors that push teachers to leave their current school or the profession. Other school factors are "pull" factors that encourage teachers to stay in their current school. Teacher attrition and retention also vary based on the sector of the school (e.g., traditional public vs. charter) and whether it is located in an urban or rural area. [7] [8]

Push factors

Certain factors are linked to teachers leaving schools or leaving the profession before retirement. Researchers have used data from school districts and national surveys of teachers and schools to demonstrate that there are common factors that push teachers to either leave their schools or leave the profession. The most significant factors include low salary, student behavior issues, lack of support from school administration, and inability to participate in decision-making. [5] Teachers may also be more likely to leave if they are resistant to using prescribed curriculums or are discouraged from modifying their instruction. [9] Over time, individual school environments affect teacher attrition more than district measures like teacher salary, student demographics, or urban settings. [10]

Pull factors

Other factors encourage teachers to stay at their current school. Teachers are more likely to stay in elementary schools than middle or high schools. [6] Teachers who earn at least $40,000 per year are most likely to stay through their fifth year at the same school. [6] Teachers stay longer in schools that have missions in alignment with the teacher's personal mission. [11] One of the most successful strategies used to retain teachers includes mentoring and teacher teaming. [12] Others point to the importance of teachers being treated as professionals who are trusted and collaborate with one another to meet student needs. [13] These professional practices can include individuality, creativity, high expectations for students, and community building with mentors or peers. [9] Teachers are also more likely to stay when they report being satisfied with their school. [6] School location and student demographics are not major factors in either pushing teachers away or pulling them in.

Teacher factors

Researchers and policy makers have also collected information about teacher demographics to better understand teachers' choices to stay or leave their schools. Most studies include research on teacher age, experience, and gender as well as teacher qualifications.

Age, experience, and gender

Teachers are most likely to stay in their schools if they are between the ages of 30–50. [5] Teachers under 30 are more likely to move schools within districts, move districts, or move to other states to teach. Younger teachers often still have preliminary credentials which allows them more flexibility within states as states often have their own standardized licensure and testing requirements that discourage teachers from moving. Younger teachers are also less likely to be vested in their pension systems and more likely to move districts before choosing a district which may offer a higher salary or better benefits and retirement options. [14] Relatedly, novice teachers are more likely to turn over than more experienced teachers, particularly when they work in traditionally disadvantaged schools. [15]

Salary increases can draw younger teachers to particular districts with the promise of higher payment for teaching in the long term. [16] The relationship between life cycle events such as marriage or having children and teacher attrition can be difficult to measure, but teachers who leave the profession are more likely to have recently had children. [17] Teachers with children under 5 are increasingly likely to leave the profession. Gender also plays a role in this trend: young female teachers are more likely than young male teachers to leave. [10] Women who leave the profession are also more likely to return to teaching than men. [6] Teachers over 50 are also more likely to leave the profession, but this is generally explained by teachers who are closer to retirement.

Qualifications

Researchers are examining teacher preparation in relation to retention, including the quality of higher education curriculum and student teaching experiences. Mentorships and inductions have been shown to help early-career teachers and other educators adapt and stay in the job. [18] Teachers with better academic qualifications including grades, test scores, graduate degrees, and undergraduate college selectivity are more likely to leave the profession. There is no major retention difference between teachers who completed traditional preparation programs and teachers who completed alternative certification programs, like Teach for America. [10] Teachers are more likely to stay when students are high achieving. [19]

Teachers with certain teaching qualifications and teaching assignments are more likely to leave their schools or the profession. Special education teachers are not more likely to leave teaching, but they are more likely to transfer to positions as general educators. [20] Elementary teachers are more likely to stay than middle and high school teachers. Teacher who feel effective in their jobs are also more likely to continue teaching. [21]

External and policy factors

This is a new area of research that examines how policy factors and factors beyond school and teacher correlates influence teacher attrition and retention. This is an increasingly important strand of research linking how external policies such as accountability and evaluation may affect turnover. The policies are evolving to address specific needs in various educational contexts. For instance, many accountability-based policies such as merit pay, retention bonuses, and teacher evaluation aim to change the teacher composition in school. [1] A more recent approach provides districts with flexible financial support to create targeted strategies locally, moving away from "one-size-fits-all" policies. This flexibility allows for more customized solutions based on specific district needs. [22]

Retaining teachers of color

Retaining teachers of color is an important element of teacher retention. Students of color perform better with race congruent teachers of color [23] and American students are increasingly non white. In 2014 50.3% of American public school students were Latino, Asian, and African-American with demographic data suggesting that the percentage of students of color will continue to grow. [24] Some evidence suggests that teachers of color have higher attrition rates than white teachers and other evidence suggests the opposite. [10]

Teachers of color are more likely to stay in a school in which they are led and supervised by administrators of color. Overall, 84% of white teachers have a race matched principal while only 44% of Black teachers have a race matched principal and 8% of other races have a matched principal. Teachers with a race matched principal are more likely to report earning additional pay, feeling autonomy, and experiencing additional support, all of which are linked to overall teacher retention. Race matched teachers are also more likely to report being satisfied with their jobs. [6] [25] Race matching also affects exits from the profession more than transfers to another school. Also, white men are more likely to leave the profession when there are more students of color. In contrast, teachers of color have higher exit rates overall but are less likely to leave when they have more non white students. [16]

Retaining effective teachers

Federal policy initiatives during the Obama Administration have emphasized the importance of retaining effective teachers, rather than just working to retain all teachers. This is partly due to President Obama and the United States Department of Education’s Race to the Top initiative which granted money to states pledging to institute policies which retained and released teachers based in part on their evaluations. [26] The measurement of teacher success is often based on “value added” determinations based on student standardized test scores. Value-added measurements assess the effect of a teacher on student test scores by quantifying teacher ability. These measurements are seen by some as “noisy” and only partly a measure of teacher performance, but still useful. [27] The American Education Research Association cautions against using value added models in most situations due to scientific and technical limitations. [28]

The Race to the Top incentives represented a major shift in how districts and administrators evaluated and retained teachers. Prior to Race to the Top, teacher effectiveness had been determined by years of experience and years of graduate study. Now, in many states, value added modeling is used alongside principal evaluations of teacher observations and teacher progress on student learning outcomes. One controversial use of value-added teacher evaluation was in Washington D.C. under the leadership of Michelle Rhee. [23] The D.C. program was unique in rewarding high performing teachers with higher salaries and bonus pay while also threatening to dismiss low performing teachers. Teachers in D.C. under threat of dismissal made greater gains in their teaching practice than teachers who stood to gain financially. The dismissal threat also increased voluntary attrition of lower performing teachers by 50%. [23] Statistics suggest that having a top performing teacher rather than a low performing teacher “four years in a row would be enough to close the black-white test score gap.” [26]

Teacher effectiveness has also been linked to how often teachers move schools. Overall, leavers are less effective than movers. More effective teachers are more likely to stay in the same schools, unless they being their careers in lower performing schools. [19] Teachers with low performing students are more likely to leave their schools in the first 1–2 years. Low performing teachers are more likely to move to schools that are similar to the schools they currently teach in, while higher performing teachers will move from low performing schools to higher performing schools. [19] This evidence indicates that some teacher attrition may be beneficial to students.

Retention of Early Career Teachers

The most comprehensive nationally-representative study on early career teachers in the United States is a study that examines early career teachers using the Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) and its supplement, the Teacher Follow-Up Survey (TFS) from 1987-88 to 2011-2012. [15] The authors find that novice teachers are more likely to be certified than before and they are more likely to begin their careers in schools with more racially and ethnically diverse students. While they do turn over more frequently than more experienced teachers, supportive colleagues and administrators as well as induction supports are associated with lowering attrition rates. [15]

A Canada-wide survey revealed that most cases of teacher attrition occur within the first five years of teaching, with 50% of cases occurring within the first two years. [29] It is therefore important to consider a) the factors that lead to early career teacher attrition and b) viable interventions that aim to retain beginning teachers.

One study found factors that contribute to early career teacher attrition to include: a difficulty with balancing work and home life and the time constraints involved, issues in classroom management and students' challenging behaviours, strained relationships with parents, staff and/or administration, and feeling incompetent in one's role as a teacher. [29] Another study considered teacher perceptions' of the workplace environment, and how these perceptions play a role in motivating teachers to stay or leave their current positions. [30] School climates that were perceived to be nurturing were characterized as open to both collaboration and differences in instructional preferences, uplifting, and supportive. [30] When aspects of this environment were perceived to be missing, teachers more often noted their negative experiences in the workplace environment. [30] An Australian study suggested that decisions to leave the profession are influenced by the quality of mentoring and induction programs in a school, as well as relationships with other teachers and school leadership. [31]

Organizational-level interventions aimed to retain early career teachers can involve the monitoring of workload amounts, mentorship programs that help early career teachers create a better work-life balance, guidance from administration and/or mentors in navigating the specific socio-cultural environment of the school, mentor modeling of effective teaching practices, and providing feedback on teaching practices. [32] It is also important to consider interventions at the individual-level. One might investigate how early career teachers in remote schools manage negative aspects of their workplace environment. One study noted that in the absence of professional or organizational supports, teachers may still develop resilience by relying on "personal" supports, such as relationships with family and friends and the construction of a teaching identity. [33] Future research in the area of the retention of early career teachers may therefore look at how the construction of a teaching identity affects one's likelihood to stay or leave his or her teaching post.

Conceptual Frameworks of Teacher Attrition and Retention

There are few comprehensive conceptual frameworks of teacher attrition and retention since individual studies present their specific framework to focus on a narrow range of factors within their own study. However, a systematic review of the empirical international literature has established a comprehensive conceptual framework of teacher attrition and retention. Synthesizing nearly 160 studies from forty years of research on teacher turnover, the authors organize the determinants of teacher attrition and retention into nine categories grouped into personal correlates, school correlates, and external correlates. [34]

Related Research Articles

Education policy consists of the principles and policy decisions that influence the field of education, as well as the collection of laws and rules that govern the operation of education systems. Education governance may be shared between the local, state, and federal government at varying levels. Some analysts see education policy in terms of social engineering.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Teacher education</span> Training teachers to develop teaching skills

Teacher education or teacher training refers to programs, policies, procedures, and provision designed to equip (prospective) teachers with the knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, approaches, methodologies and skills they require to perform their tasks effectively in the classroom, school, and wider community. The professionals who engage in training the prospective teachers are called teacher educators.

In human resources, turnover refers to employees who leave an organization. The turnover rate is the percentage of the total workforce who leave over a certain period. Organizations and wider industries may measure their turnover rate during a fiscal or calendar year.

Grade retention or grade repetition is the process of a student repeating a grade after failing the previous year.

The Diploma in Computer Science is a diploma offered by several post-secondary institutions:

Educational Inequality is the unequal distribution of academic resources, including but not limited to school funding, qualified and experienced teachers, books, physical facilities and technologies, to socially excluded communities. These communities tend to be historically disadvantaged and oppressed. Individuals belonging to these marginalized groups are often denied access to schools with adequate resources and those that can be accessed are so distant from these communities. Inequality leads to major differences in the educational success or efficiency of these individuals and ultimately suppresses social and economic mobility. Inequality in education is broken down into different types: regional inequality, inequality by sex, inequality by social stratification, inequality by parental income, inequality by parent occupation, and many more.

The EHS Institute for Teacher Induction is an induction training program primarily designed for first, second or third year public school teachers or seasoned teachers who are new to an urban district. The Institute is offered to public school districts and is held every summer on the Eagle Hill School campus in Hardwick, MA. Since the first cohort in 2005 over 500 teachers from Massachusetts districts have completed the EHS Institute. The training is funded by private organizations, Massachusetts school departments and was a line budget item in the 2008 Massachusetts state budget.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Class-size reduction</span>

As an educational reform goal, class size reduction (CSR) aims to increase the number of individualized student-teacher interactions intended to improve student learning. A reform long holding theoretical attraction to many constituencies, some have claimed CSR as the most studied educational reform of the last century. Until recently, interpretations of these studies have often been contentious. Some educational groups like the American Federation of Teachers and National Education Association are in favor of reducing class sizes. Others argue that class size reduction has little effect on student achievement. Many are concerned about the costs of reducing class sizes.

The racial achievement gap in the United States refers to disparities in educational achievement between differing ethnic/racial groups. It manifests itself in a variety of ways: African-American and Hispanic students are more likely to earn lower grades, score lower on standardized tests, drop out of high school, and they are less likely to enter and complete college than whites, while whites score lower than Asian Americans.

Structural inequality has been identified as the bias that is built into the structure of organizations, institutions, governments, or social networks. Structural inequality occurs when the fabric of organizations, institutions, governments or social networks contains an embedded bias which provides advantages for some members and marginalizes or produces disadvantages for other members. This can involve property rights, status, or unequal access to health care, housing, education and other physical or financial resources or opportunities. Structural inequality is believed to be an embedded part of the culture of the United States due to the history of slavery and the subsequent suppression of equal civil rights of minority races. Structural inequality has been encouraged and maintained in the society of the United States through structured institutions such as the public school system with the goal of maintaining the existing structure of wealth, employment opportunities, and social standing of the races by keeping minority students from high academic achievement in high school and college as well as in the workforce of the country. In the attempt to equalize allocation of state funding, policymakers evaluate the elements of disparity to determine an equalization of funding throughout school districts.p.(14)

<span class="mw-page-title-main">School segregation in the United States</span> Racial separation in schools

School segregation in the United States was the segregation of students based on their ethnicity. While not prohibited from having schools, various minorities were barred from most schools, schools for whites. Segregation was enforced by formal legal systems in U.S. states primarily in the Southern United States, although elsewhere segregation could be informal or customary. Segregation laws were dismantled in 1954 by the U.S. Supreme Court because of the successes being attained during the Civil Rights Movement. Segregation continued longstanding exclusionary policies in much of the Southern United States after the Civil War. Jim Crow laws codified segregation. These laws were influenced by the history of slavery and discrimination in the US. Secondary schools for African Americans in the South were called training schools instead of high schools in order to appease racist whites and focused on vocational education. School integration in the United States took place at different times in different areas and often met resistance. After the ruling of Brown v. Board of Education, which banned segregated school laws, school segregation took de facto form. School segregation declined rapidly during the late 1960s and early 1970s as the government became strict on schools' plans to combat segregation more effectively as a result of Green v. County School Board of New Kent County. Voluntary segregation by income appears to have increased since 1990. Racial segregation has either increased or stayed constant since 1990, depending on which definition of segregation is used. In general, definitions based on the amount of interaction between black and white students show increased racial segregation, while definitions based on the proportion of black and white students in different schools show racial segregation remaining approximately constant.

Teacher quality is said to be the most important factor influencing learner outcomes. The Education for All Goals set by UNESCO have been achieved by some countries but many millions of children remain out of school or with poor teachers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Educational inequality in the United States</span>

Unequal access to education in the United States results in unequal outcomes for students. Disparities in academic access among students in the United States are the result of several factors including: government policies, school choice, family wealth, parenting style, implicit bias towards the race or ethnicity of students, and the resources available to students and their school. Educational inequality contributes to a number of broader problems in the United States, including income inequality and increasing prison populations. Educational inequalities in the United States are wide-ranging, and many potential solutions have been proposed to mitigate their impacts on students.

School climate refers to the quality and character of school life. It has been described as "the heart and soul of the school ... that essence of a school that leads a child, a teacher, and an administrator to love the school and to look forward to being there each school day." A positive school climate helps people feel socially, emotionally and physically safe in schools. It includes students', parents' and school personnel's norms, beliefs, relationships, teaching and learning practices, as well as organizational and structural features of the school. According to the National School Climate Council, a sustainable, positive school climate promotes students' academic and social emotional development.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Susanna Loeb</span> American economist

Susanna Loeb is an American education economist and director of the Annenberg Institute at Brown University. She was previously the Barnett Family Professor of Education at the Stanford Graduate School of Education, where she also served as founding director of the Center for Education Policy Analysis (CEPA). Moreover, she directs Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE). Her research interests include the economics of education and the relationship between schools and educational policies, in particular school finance and teacher labor markets.

James H. Wyckoff is a U.S.-American education economist who currently serves as Memorial Professor of Education and Public Policy at the University of Virginia, where he is also the Director of the Center for Education Policy and Workforce Competitiveness. His research on the impact of teacher compensation on teacher performance has been awarded the Raymond Vernon Memorial Award of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management in 2015.

Helen F. Ladd is an education economist who currently works as the Susan B. King Professor Emeritus of Public Policy and Economics at Duke University's Sanford School of Public Policy. In recognition of her research on the economics of education, she has been elected to the National Academy for Education and the National Academy of Sciences.

According to the National Science Foundation (NSF), women and racial minorities are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Scholars, governments, and scientific organizations from around the world have noted a variety of explanations contributing to this lack of racial diversity, including higher levels of discrimination, implicit bias, microaggressions, chilly climate, lack of role models and mentors, and less academic preparation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Emiliana Vegas</span> Policy analyst, academic, author

Emiliana Vegas is a U.S.-based policy analyst, academic, and author. She is a Professor of practice at the Graduate School of Education, Harvard University.

Disproportionality in special education is the unequal representation of certain demographic groups in restrictive placement and discipline, particularly in the United States' public school system. Disproportionality is often displayed as the under- or over-representation of specific racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, or culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) groups in special education compared to their presence in the overall student population. A child's race and ethnicity may significantly influence the likelihood of being misidentified as needing special education services, raising concerns about fairness, equity, and the potential impact on students' educational outcomes.

References

  1. 1 2 Nguyen, Tuan D.; Pham, Lam D.; Crouch, Michael; Springer, Matthew G. (November 2020). "The correlates of teacher turnover: An updated and expanded Meta-analysis of the literature". Educational Research Review. 31: 100355. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100355. S2CID   224967353.
  2. ↑ Nguyen, Tuan D. (January 2021). "Linking school organizational characteristics and teacher retention: Evidence from repeated cross-sectional national data". Teaching and Teacher Education. 97: 103220. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2020.103220. S2CID   226316946.
  3. ↑ Sutcher, Leib; Darling-Hammond, Linda; Carver-Thomas, Desiree (September 2016). A Coming Crisis in Teaching? Teacher Supply, Demand, and Shortages in the U.S. (Report). Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved 20 July 2024.[ page needed ]
  4. ↑ Wolter, Stefan C.; Denzler, Stefan (2004). "Wage Elasticity of the Teacher Supply in Switzerland". Brussels Economic Review. 47 (3): 387–408. SSRN   391984.
  5. 1 2 3 Ingersoll, Richard M. (January 2001). "Teacher Turnover and Teacher Shortages: An Organizational Analysis". American Educational Research Journal. 38 (3): 499–534. doi:10.3102/00028312038003499. S2CID   8630217.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Raue, Kimberley; Gray, Lucinda (September 2015). "Career Paths of Beginning Public School Teachers: Results from the First through Fifth Waves of the 2007-08 Beginning Teacher Longitudinal Study. Stats in Brief. NCES 2015-196". S2CID   147732128. ERIC   ED560730.
  7. ↑ Crouch, Michael; Nguyen, Tuan D. (3 April 2021). "Examining Teacher Characteristics, School Conditions, and Attrition Rates at the Intersection of School Choice and Rural Education". Journal of School Choice. 15 (2): 268–294. doi:10.1080/15582159.2020.1736478. S2CID   216441377.
  8. ↑ Nguyen, Tuan D. (July 2020). "Examining the Teacher Labor Market in Different Rural Contexts: Variations by Urbanicity and Rural States". AERA Open. 6 (4). doi: 10.1177/2332858420966336 . S2CID   226338013.
  9. 1 2 Achinstein, Betty; Ogawa, Rodney (1 April 2006). "(In)Fidelity: What the Resistance of New Teachers Reveals about Professional Principles and Prescriptive Educational Policies". Harvard Educational Review. 76 (1): 30–63. doi:10.17763/haer.76.1.e14543458r811864. OCLC   425073080. INIST   17647331 ProQuest   212261339.
  10. 1 2 3 4 DeAngelis, Karen J.; Presley, Jennifer B. (September 2011). "Toward a More Nuanced Understanding of New Teacher Attrition". Education and Urban Society. 43 (5): 598–626. doi:10.1177/0013124510380724. S2CID   145466479.
  11. ↑ Egalite, Anna J.; Jensen, Laura I.; Stewart, Thomas; Wolf, Patrick J. (2 January 2014). "Finding the Right Fit: Recruiting and Retaining Teachers in Milwaukee Choice Schools". Journal of School Choice. 8 (1): 113–140. doi:10.1080/15582159.2014.875418. S2CID   144042584.
  12. ↑ Ingersoll, Richard; Smith, Thomas (May 2003). "The Wrong Solution to the Teacher Shortage". Educational Leadership. 60 (8): 30–33. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.182.106 .
  13. ↑ Cochran-Smith, Marilyn (November 2004). "Stayers, Leavers, Lovers, and Dreamers: Insights about Teacher Retention". Journal of Teacher Education. 55 (5): 387–392. doi: 10.1177/0022487104270188 . S2CID   145058509.
  14. ↑ Goldhaber, Dan; Grout, Cyrus; Holden, Kristian L.; Brown, Nate (1 November 2015). "Crossing the Border? Exploring the Cross-State Mobility of the Teacher Workforce". Educational Researcher. 44 (8): 421–431. doi:10.3102/0013189X15613981. S2CID   147626898.
  15. 1 2 3 Redding, Christopher; Nguyen, Tuan D. (July 2020). "Recent Trends in the Characteristics of New Teachers, the Schools in Which They Teach, and Their Turnover Rates". Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education. 122 (7): 1–36. doi: 10.1177/016146812012200711 . S2CID   238748068.
  16. 1 2 Imazeki, Jennifer (August 2005). "Teacher salaries and teacher attrition". Economics of Education Review. 24 (4): 431–449. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2004.07.014.
  17. ↑ Boe, Erling E.; Bobbitt, Sharon A.; Cook, Lynne H.; Whitener, Summer D.; Weber, Anita L. (January 1997). "Why Didst Thou Go? Predictors of Retention, Transfer, and Attrition of Special and General Education Teachers from a National Perspective" (PDF). The Journal of Special Education. 30 (4): 390–411. doi:10.1177/002246699703000403. S2CID   145498710.
  18. ↑ "The Educator Pipeline: Turnover, Fewer Applicants Will Impact Student Achievement" (PDF). Learning First Alliance. 2016.
  19. 1 2 3 Boyd, Donald; Grossman, Pamela; Lankford, Hamilton; Loeb, Susanna; Wyckoff, James (March 2009). "'Who Leaves?' Teacher Attrition and Student Achievement". ERIC   ED508275.
  20. ↑ Boe, Erling E.; Bobbitt, Sharon A.; Cook, Lynne H. (January 1997). "Whither Didst Thou Go? Retention, Reassignment, Migration, and Attrition of Special and General Education Teachers from a National Perspective". The Journal of Special Education. 30 (4): 371–389. doi:10.1177/002246699703000402. S2CID   143107656.
  21. ↑ Hughes, Gail D. (June 2012). "Teacher Retention: Teacher Characteristics, School Characteristics, Organizational Characteristics, and Teacher Efficacy". The Journal of Educational Research. 105 (4): 245–255. doi:10.1080/00220671.2011.584922. S2CID   145201429.
  22. ↑ Tran, Henry; Babaei-Balderlou, Saharnaz; Smith, Douglas A (2022-10-27). "The promises and pitfalls of government-funded teacher staffing initiatives on teacher employment in hard-to-staff schools: Evidence from South Carolina". Policy Futures in Education. 22: 43–65. doi:10.1177/14782103221135891. ISSN   1478-2103. S2CID   253189668.
  23. 1 2 3 Dee, Thomas S.; Wyckoff, James (March 2015). "Incentives, Selection, and Teacher Performance: Evidence from IMPACT: Incentives, Selection, and Teacher Performance" (PDF). Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 34 (2): 267–297. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.593.8357 . doi:10.1002/pam.21818. JSTOR   43866371. SSRN   2342009.
  24. ↑ "Table 203.50. Enrollment and percentage distribution of enrollment in public elementary and secondary schools, by race/ethnicity and region: Selected years, fall 1995 through fall 2023". nces.ed.gov. Retrieved 2015-11-09.
  25. ↑ Grissom, Jason A.; Keiser, Lael R. (2011). "A supervisor like me: Race, representation, and the satisfaction and turnover decisions of public sector employees". Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 30 (3): 557–580. doi: 10.1002/pam.20579 . JSTOR   23018964. OCLC   5152406559.
  26. 1 2 Green, Elizabeth (2015). Building a Better Teacher. W.W. Norton & Company.
  27. ↑ Winters, Marcus A.; Cowen, Joshua M. (August 2013). "Who Would Stay, Who Would Be Dismissed? An Empirical Consideration of Value-Added Teacher Retention Policies". Educational Researcher. 42 (6): 330–337. doi:10.3102/0013189X13496145. S2CID   144827731.
  28. ↑ "AERA Issues Statement on the Use of Value-Added Models in Evaluation of Educators and Educator Preparation Programs" (Press release). American Educational Research Association. 11 November 2015.
  29. 1 2 Karsenti, Thierry; Collin, Simon (2013). "Why are New Teachers Leaving the Profession? Results of a Canada-Wide Survey". Education. 3 (3): 141–149. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.668.252 .
  30. 1 2 3 Schuck, Sandy; Aubusson, Peter; Buchanan, John; Varadharajan, Meera; Burke, Paul F. (15 March 2018). "The experiences of early career teachers: new initiatives and old problems". Professional Development in Education. 44 (2): 209–221. doi:10.1080/19415257.2016.1274268. hdl: 10453/77021 . S2CID   151642600.
  31. ↑ Kelly, Nick; Cespedes, Marcela; Clara, Marc; Hanaher, Patrick (March 2019). "Early career teachers' intentions to leave the profession: The complex relationships among preservice education, early career support, and job satisfaction". Australian Journal of Teacher Education. 44 (3): 93–113. doi: 10.14221/ajte.2018v44n3.6 .
  32. ↑ Hudson, Peter (1 July 2012). "How Can Schools Support Beginning Teachers? A Call for Timely Induction and Mentoring for Effective Teaching". Australian Journal of Teacher Education. 37 (7). doi: 10.14221/ajte.2012v37n7.1 . ERIC   EJ995200.
  33. ↑ Sullivan, Anna; Johnson, Bruce (2012). "Questionable practices?: Relying on individual teacher resilience in remote schools". Australian and International Journal of Rural Education. 22 (3): 101–116. doi: 10.47381/aijre.v22i3.624 . S2CID   142157368. Gale   A327989291.
  34. ↑ Nguyen, Tuan D.; Springer, Matthew G. (13 July 2021). "A conceptual framework of teacher turnover: a systematic review of the empirical international literature and insights from the employee turnover literature". Educational Review. 75 (5): 993–1028. doi:10.1080/00131911.2021.1940103. S2CID   237790964.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.