Note: For a discussion of how these figures were computed, see Marzano & Waters, 2009.
Source: Marzano et al., 2011, p. 2.
As these data show, a teacher’s level of pedagogical skill has a clear influence on student achievement. In other words, the more skilled the teacher, the better chance his or her students have to grow academically. Because half of all teachers leave the field before reaching their peak effectiveness, however, students in schools with high teacher turnover may face a continual parade of inexperienced teachers (NCTAF, 2007). Mariana Haynes (2014) observed:
Since the mid-1980s the significant expansion of the teaching workforce has been accompanied by increased turnover among beginning teachers. The annual attrition rate for first-year teachers has increased by more than 40 percent over the past two decades. The influx of new teachers has neither stabilized the teaching workforce nor improved teaching quality. (p. 3)
High turnover rates among beginning teachers in the workforce have produced a continuous cycle of inexperienced educators. This trend has serious implications for student achievement, particularly when considering the impact that teacher expertise has on student outcomes.
Implications for Education Finance
Rising attrition rates also have important implications for school and district budgets. Each teacher who leaves the profession generally costs a district about $11,000 to replace, although replacement costs vary depending on the size of the district (Graziano, 2005). In large districts, such as Chicago Public Schools, a teacher’s exit costs the district almost $18,000 (Education Innovation Institute, 2011). Additionally, when a teacher leaves a district, the district also loses the money invested in that teacher’s professional development, curriculum orientation, and school-specific knowledge (Graziano, 2005). These costs add up quickly, particularly given the increasing numbers of teachers who quit. In 2007, the NCTAF estimated that teacher turnover in public schools costs the United States over $7.3 billion per year.
Teacher incentives (either for staying in the profession or for staying in low-performing schools) have also proven costly for schools and districts. For example, one Washington State program awards $5,000 annual bonuses to board-certified teachers, an incentive that doubles in amount if the board-certified teacher chooses to work in a low-income school (Education Innovation Institute, 2011). Though well-intended, this effort has become increasingly expensive:
The Center on Reinventing Public Education found that the cost of the bonuses has skyrocketed as more teachers have earned board certification, rising from less than $10 million in 2007–08, to an estimated $35 million in 2010–11 and a projected $55 million in 2012–13. Increases of that magnitude invite scrutiny of the program’s effectiveness, especially when states face budget shortfalls. Due to these rising costs, the report found little net gain: only about 1 percent of board certified teachers had moved to challenging schools each year … while almost as many eligible teachers had moved out of low-income schools in favor of ones with more affluent students. (Education Innovation Institute, 2011, p. 3)
As shown here, the expenses of replacing teachers or trying to retain them through often ineffective monetary incentives strain the financial resources of schools and districts.
Implications for the Widening Achievement Gap
Clearly, the consequences of teacher attrition affect all schools. However, the ramifications are particularly relevant to low-performing, high-poverty schools—a category that includes one in five public schools in the United States (Aud et al., 2013). Ingersoll (2003) reported that teacher attrition rates in high-poverty schools are about 50 percent higher than attrition rates in more affluent schools. This cycle of attrition contributes to student achievement gaps, the statistically significant differences in average scores between students from different demographic groups. In the United States, achievement gaps are most typically found between white students and students of color. On average, white students outperformed black students in all areas of the 2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP; Vanneman, Hamilton, Anderson, & Rahman, 2009) and Hispanic or Latino students in all areas of the 2009 NAEP (Hemphill & Vanneman, 2011). With so many teachers leaving, it becomes increasingly difficult for high-poverty schools to close these gaps in student opportunity and achievement.
Additionally, when most of the teachers at a high-poverty school are inexperienced, beginning teachers are sometimes forced to determine—on their own—how to meet the diverse needs of their students. Such isolation can have disastrous consequences for new teachers who already feel overwhelmed by the high expectations of the profession. Sometimes these teachers leave to find another school, but too often, they change professions altogether, abandoning their potential to impact student achievement at all.
Since 1990, a number of organizations have endeavored to address teacher attrition and achievement gaps in U.S. public education. One such organization, called Teach for America (TFA), aims to close the gap “by recruiting high-achieving college graduates to teach for two years in low-income urban and rural schools” (Donaldson & Johnson, 2011, p. 47). TFA’s approach has garnered both support and criticism. Supporters believe that TFA recruits talented young people who may otherwise not have considered teaching as a career choice. However, detractors argue that TFA’s monthlong teacher training period and short, two-year commitment to teaching contribute to the general lack of experience and teaching consistency in classrooms (Donaldson & Johnson, 2011). In response to these criticisms, TFA launched two new pilot programs: one that admits and trains college juniors and one that extends support to TFA alumni throughout their third, fourth, and fifth years of teaching (Sawchuk, 2014).
Despite the best efforts of TFA and other teacher recruitment and training programs, teacher attrition still contributes to low student achievement, education finance shortfalls, and student achievement gaps. The NCTAF (2003) summarized the situation thusly:
The number of teachers entering the schools increased steadily during the 1990s…. The problem is that teacher attrition was increasing even faster. It is as if we were pouring teachers into a bucket with a fist-sized hole in the bottom. (p. 8)
Educators must focus their efforts on sealing the hole. To combat the problem of teacher attrition, we must consider why so many beginning teachers quit before they develop adequate levels of expertise. Some factors—such as standardized testing mandates, class sizes, and low salaries—exist largely outside a school’s or teacher’s control (Ingersoll, 2003; Kopkowski, 2008). However, other factors are within the control of schools and districts. Specifically, beginning teachers have unique needs, and those needs too often go unmet. We assert that schools and districts can identify and meet the needs of beginning teachers to address the problem of teacher attrition.
The Unique Needs of Beginning Teachers
In order to successfully address the issue of teacher retention in their schools, school leaders must develop an understanding of the unique perspectives and needs of beginning teachers. Ellen Moir (1999) identified a series of specific mental and emotional challenges that usually occur during the first year of teaching. She organized these challenges into five phases: (1) anticipation, (2) survival, (3) disillusionment, (4) rejuvenation, and (5) reflection, with beginning teachers returning to the anticipation stage at the end of the first year. Figure 1.2 depicts the typical progression of these phases during a teacher’s first year on the job. Of course, not every beginning teacher progresses through these phases exactly as shown in figure 1.2. Still, understanding the phases can help those who support beginning teachers understand the challenges they face. Here, we briefly describe each phase.
During the first anticipation phase, beginning teachers feel excited to enter their own classrooms and make a difference in the lives of their students. Their concerns