������Ƶ

Melissa Tooley, Director of Educator Quality, and Roxanne Garza, Senior Policy Analyst, Education Policy Program at ������Ƶ
Written Testimony on Teacher Retention at District Schools
Public Meeting of the DC State Board of Education
October 24, 2018

Members of the DC State Board of Education:

Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony on the subject of teacher preparation, induction, turnover, and related issues. We specialize in research and analysis on policies and practices that impact the quality of teaching and school leadership at ������Ƶ’s Education Policy program, an organization focused on providing objective research and analysis for education policymakers, practitioners, and the public at large. Drawing on our work in this area, we aim to inform the efforts of the SBOE to reduce teacher and principal turnover in the District of Columbia, and address outstanding questions from the SBOE’s recent on this topic.

Correlation between teacher and principal attrition

While research on this topic is minimal, principal attrition can influence teacher attrition, and vice versa. In particular, the research finds when a principal leaves a school, its most . Conversely, teacher turnover adds additional work to principal’s already busy schedules. teacher turnover can lead to principal burnout, and this is a particular concern for high-need schools where . In these instances, principals are forced to spend time hiring and training new teachers rather than investing in existing teachers and building their skill sets. As from Gallup indicates that lack of career development and advancement is the number one reason teachers cite for voluntarily leaving their last teaching job, principals are then likely to lose their more experienced teachers, creating a vicious cycle of attrition among both teachers and school leaders.

What attracts teachers to schools and compels them to stay

after finds that the quality of school leadership is the in whether a teacher decides to stay or leave a school (aside from personal reasons). conducted by the Learning Policy Institute (LPI) finds that teacher turnover rates among teachers who strongly disagree that their administrator encourages and acknowledges staff, communicates a clear vision, and generally runs a school well are "more than double the attrition rate of teachers who feel their administrators are supportive.” In fact, when LPI held the quality of administrative support constant—in addition to teacher characteristics such as experience level and subject taught, and student characteristics such as race and income— (including student behavior, parent support, school resources, duties and paperwork that interfere with teaching, collegial support, concerns about job security due to accountability measures, classroom control, or teacher influence over school decisions). A 2016 suggests this is because teachers’ satisfaction with the school principal impacts their perceptions of school working conditions.

Schools with higher at-risk populations generally see than schools with lower at-risk populations. And finds that teachers tend to leave schools with higher at-risk populations to go to schools with lower at-risk population. But this is not necessarily because of a preference for teaching certain types of students, but for schools with better working conditions (and better working conditions tend to correlate with student socioeconomic status). Again, when looking to address working conditions, the principal is at the center: the school’s leadership, culture, and presence of supportive colleagues are what seem to matter most in teachers’ career decisions. In 2013, researchers from th e NYU’s Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development conducted a of teacher turnover in NYC’s middle schools and found these same factors at play: teachers were more likely to stay in their schools if they perceived the school to have strong principal leadership, high levels of order, and teacher collegiality. The study also found that teachers are more likely to leave their schools if they had less experience, entered through an alternative route, or if they were teaching a new subject for the first time.

Higher also compel teachers to remain in the profession (and initial pay is likely important in attracting teachers to the profession in the first place). Interestingly, a by the National Center for Education Statistics found that teachers who are satisfied with how things are run at their school are also more likely to be satisfied with their salaries, which also highlights the importance of school principal effectiveness, as they ultimately determine how their schools run.

What factors are important (for the State Board to learn about) in order to retain teachers

Policies designed to better prepare and develop school leaders can play a large role in reducing teacher turnover, as well as principal turnover. As the state Board of Education pursues efforts to retain teachers, it should consider the connection between teacher turnover and the quality of school leadership. Based on various research on the topic, at the system level, training and professional development that focuses on the —things like inclusive leadership styles, providing instructional support, creating collaborative learning communities, and fostering positive school cultures—can be important strategies to improve teacher retention.

However, several factors are obstacles to principals providing what teachers are seeking: 1) insufficient preparation in these areas; 2) time/competing demands; 3) ongoing feedback and development opportunities; and 4) limited resources for ongoing development. The SBOE can take steps to promote improvement in each of these areas:

1) Improving Preparation and Induction of Principals and Teachers

The type and relevance of initial preparation can be an important factor in predicting teacher turnover, as suggests that better prepared teachers remain in teaching at higher rates. The SBOE should consider elevating high-retention pathways into the profession, such as residency programs and grow your own programs that target high-need schools and subject areas, and support new teachers and principals with high-quality coaching and mentoring as they enter the profession. The SBOE can also help broker partnerships with the programs that prepare high proportions of DC principals, to facilitate more of a focus on the types of concrete relational and instructional skills that principals must employ in their work with teachers and other school staff.

2) Helping Principals Find Time to Focus on Creating Positive Working Conditions

Principals have many competing demands for their time, and spend much of their day “putting out fires” instead of promoting strong working conditions. One way to change this is through distributed leadership models where other staff—teacher leaders and/or school administration teams—within the building take on some of the responsibilities of the principal, so that the principal can have a more focused role. Recent reports by ������Ƶ provide recommendations for how states and districts can focus their time on instructional leadership and can help principals develop leadership skills. Last year, a ������Ƶ report profiled three school districts—including the District of Columbia Public Schools—that are trying out promising new school leadership models with the goal of bolstering principals’ ability to focus on improving the quality of instructional support given to teachers. The report details how models like DCPS’ are a step in the right direction, but need to be refined to truly impact teacher effectiveness and retention.

3) Providing Ongoing Feedback and Development Opportunities

������Ƶ’s research has found that most state principal evaluation policies include a focus on instructional leadership skills and behaviors in these systems, but that there’s wide variation in how states and districts define instructional leadership and support implementation. States can support principals and their supervisors by setting up mentoring programs and leadership academies. States can also provide more in-depth and comprehensive support by adding capacity via additional staff or partnerships that can provide ongoing and individualized support to leaders at the school and district level. With the right design and aligned supports, principal evaluation systems can provide greater focus and clarity on principal’s responsibilities as instructional leader, and guide principal supervisors on how best to support principal growth in this area, which can lead to more supportive structures for teachers.

Additionally, schools with high teacher turnover should also engage directly with teachers to understand why. The SBOE could help promote an assessment of teachers’ perceptions of their working conditions, and in schools where working condition ratings are low, urge them to explore how to improve them.

4) Leveraging Federal Funds to Support School Leaders

Finally, the federal Every Student Succeeds Act presents an opportunity for states and districts to focus on principals’ effectiveness, including their ability to recruit, develop, and retain effective teachers. Under ESSA, states may reserve up to an additional of total funds allotted for Title II activities to principals and other school leaders. As part of their work to of effective school principals, states and districts can—and should—utilize Title II funds to better evaluate and support the work of school leaders, including by appropriately assessing and responding to principal, teacher, and student perceptions of the conditions for leading, teaching, and learning in their schools.

Attrition of principals and teachers, particularly ones, has an impact on remaining teachers’ practice and students’ learning. We applaud the SBOE in tackling this issue, and urge you to remember that the goal is not to just retain any teacher or principal, but to retain our best. Data from DCPS finds that the policies DCPS put in place to reward high performing teachers, and particularly high performers in high need schools, , but that there is .