TeacherShortagesand TurnoverinRural
SchoolsintheUS:An OrganizationalAnalysis†
RichardM.Ingersoll1 andHenryTran2
Abstract
EducationalAdministrationQuarterly 2023,Vol.59(2)396–431
©TheAuthor(s)2023
Articlereuseguidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI:10.1177/0013161X231159922 journals.sagepub.com/home/eaq
Purpose: Theobjectiveofthisstudyistoprovideanoverallnationalportraitofelementaryandsecondaryteachershortagesandteacherturnoverin ruralschools,comparingruralschoolstosuburbanandurbanschools.This studyutilizesanorganizationaltheoreticalperspectivefocusingontherole ofschoolorganizationandleadershipinthecausesof,andsolutionsto, teachershortagesandstaffingproblems. Data/Methods: Thestudyentailed secondarystatisticalanalysesofthenationallyrepresentativeSchoolsand StaffingSurvey,itssuccessortheNationalTeacherPrincipalSurvey,and theirsupplementtheTeacherFollow-UpSurvey,conductedbythe NationalCenterforEducationStatistics. Findings: Theanalysesdocument that,contrasttourbanandsuburbanschools,thestudentpopulationand teachingforceinruralschoolshasdramaticallyshrunkinrecentdecades,
1UniversityofPennsylvania,Philadelphia,PA,USA
2UniversityofSouthCarolina,Columbia,SC,USA
†VersionsofthispaperwerepresentedattheDevelopingLeadershipCapacityforEquitable RuralEducatorRecruitmentandRetentionSeminar,UniversityofSouthCarolina,Columbia (October23–24,2019)andtheAmericanEducationalResearchAssociationAnnualMeeting (April,2023).
CorrespondingAuthor:
RichardM.Ingersoll,UniversityofPennsylvania,3700WalnutStreet,Philadelphia,PA,USA. Email:rmi@upenn.edu
Correction(May2023): Thisarticlehasbeenupdatedwithminortextualcorrectionssince itsoriginalpublication. SpecialSectionOnRuralEducation
thatdespitethisdecreaseinstudents,anddemandforteachers,rural schoolshavefacedseriousdifficulties fillingtheirteachingpositions,and thattheseteacherstaffingproblemsaredrivenbyhighlevelsofpreretirementteacherturnover.Moreover,thedatadocumentthatteacherturnover variesgreatlybetweendifferentkindsofschools,isespeciallyhighinhighpovertyruralschools,andiscloselytiedtotheorganizationalcharacteristics andworkingconditionsofruralschools. Implications: Researchand reformonteachershortagesandturnoverhavefocusedonurbanenvironmentsbecauseofanassumptionthatschoolsinthosesettingssufferfrom themostseriousstaffingproblems.Thisstudyshowsthatteachershortages andteacherturnoverinruralschools,whilerelativelyneglected,havebeen assigni ficantaproblemasinotherschools.
Keywords
ruralschools,teacherturnover,teachersupply,demandandshortages, schoolleadership,teachers’ workingconditions
Introduction
Feweducationalproblemshavereceivedmoreattentioninrecentdecadesthan thefailuretoensurethatelementaryandsecondaryclassroomsareallstaffed withqualifiedteachersduetoperennialteachershortages.Ithasbeenlong andwidelyheldthatteacherstaffingproblems1 andshortagesareprimarily duetoaninsufficientsupplyofnewteachersinthefaceoftwolarge-scale demographictrends increasingstudentenrollmentsandincreasingteacher retirementsduetoanagingoftheteachingforce andthatthesestaffingproblemshaveresultedinlowerschoolperformance(see,e.g.,AmericanFederation ofTeachers,2022;García&Weiss,2019;GovernmentAccountabilityOffice, 2022;NationalAcademyofSciences,1987,2007;NationalCommissionon ExcellenceinEducation,1983;NationalCommissiononMathematicsand ScienceTeachingforthetwenty-firstCentury,2000;NationalCommission onTeachingandAmerica’sFuture,1996,1997;NationalResearchCouncil, 2002;President’sCouncilofAdvisorsonScienceandTechnology,2010; U.S.DepartmentofEducation,2009.
Theprevailingpolicyresponsetotheseschoolstaffingproblemshasprimarilyfocusedonincreasingthesupplyofnewteachers(e.g.,Allenetal.,2023; Fowler,2003,2008;Greene,2019;Hirschetal.,2001;Liuetal.,2004;Liu etal.,2008;Randazzo,2022;Riceetal.,2008;Theobald,1990).Overthe decades,awiderangeofinitiativeshavebeenimplementedtorecruitnewcandidatesintoteaching.Amongthesearemidcareer-changeprograms;alternative IngersollandTran 397
certificationprogramsdesignedtoexpediteentry;overseasteacherrecruiting initiatives;and financialincentives,suchasscholarships,signingbonuses andstudentloanforgiveness.Anexampleofthisgenreofreformwas PresidentObama’s “100kin10” programinitiatedin2010torecruit100,000 newSTEMteachersby2020.Someoftheseinitiativesentaila “loweringof thebarandwideningofthegate” to fillopenings,resultinginhigherlevels ofunderqualifiedteachers,andsomedon’t.But,regardlessoftheirdifferences, underlyingthiswidevarietyofinitiativesisacommonassumption that schoolstaffingproblemsareduetoaninsufficientsupplyofnewteachers andhencethebestsolutionistoincreasethesupplyofnewteachers.
TheImportanceofTeacherTurnover
Morerecently,researchandreformonteachershortageshasbeguntorecognizetheroleofpreretirementteacherturnoverinteacherstaffingproblems. Beginningovertwodecadesagoweempiricallydocumentedthatteachershortagesarenotsolelyaconsequenceofproducingtoofewnewteachers,butalsoa resultoftoomanyexistingteachersdepartinglongbeforeretirement,whichin turnislargelydrivenbyschoolorganizationalconditions.Andhencethesolutiontoshortages,suggestedbythedata,doesnotsolelylieinrecruitingmore newteachers,butalsoinimprovingtheretentionofexistingteachersthrough improvementsinschoolsasworkplaces(Ingersoll,1997,2001;Ingersoll& May,2012;Ingersoll&Perda,2010;Ingersolletal.,2019,2022).Anumber ofstudieshavesinceprovidedsupportforthisthesisthatteacherturnoveris aleadingfactorbehindteachershortages(e.g.,Behrstock,2009;Simon& Johnson,2015;Sutcheretal.,2016;Carver-Thomas&Darling-Hammond, 2017,2019;García&Weiss,2020).Theobjectiveofthisstudyistoextend andutilizethisperspectiveinanexaminationofteachershortagesandturnover inruralschools.
Researchonthemanyfacetsofteacherturnover itsdeterminants,levels,variationsandconsequences hasseenadramaticgrowthinrecentdecades(for reviews,seeBorman&Dowling,2008;Guarinoetal.,2006;Johnsonetal., 2005;Nguyenetal.,2020).Turnovercanbebeneficialforstudentsincases wherethedepartingteachersareineffectiveorlowperformingandtheentrance of “newblood” intofacultiescanenhanceinnovationandstudentlearning (Grissom&Bartanen,2019;Ingersoll,2001;Ingersoll&May,2012).Onthe otherhand,agrowingnumberofstudieshaveshownthatturnoverinteaching canincursubstantial financialcosts(e.g.,AllianceforExcellentEducation, 2005;Barnesetal.,2007;Milanowski&Odden,2007;Synar&Maiden,2012; TexasCenterforEducationalResearch,2000;Villar&Strong,2007; Watlingtonetal.,2010)andcanhaveanegativeimpactonfacultyquality, 398 EducationalAdministrationQuarterly59(2)
studentachievementandschoolperformance(e.g.,Boydetal.,2007;Clotfelter etal.,2006;Henry&Redding,2018;Keesler,2010;Krieg,2004Levyetal., 2010;Merrill,2014;Ronfeldtetal.,2013;Smylie&Wenzel,2003;Sorensen &Ladd,2020).Alongwithhisresearch,therehasalsobeenagrowingrecognition intherealmofeducationalpolicyandreformthatteacherturnoverisaserious nationalproblemthatneedstobeaddressed(AllianceforExcellentEducation, 2005;AmericanFederationofTeachers,2022;Aragon,2016;García&Weiss, 2019;NationalCommissiononTeachingandAmerica’sFuture,2003).
ResearchonTeacherShortagesandTurnoverinRuralSchools
Researchershavealsolongheldthatbothteachershortagesandteacherturnover problemsaffectsometypesofschoolsandcommunitiesmorethanothers.Much oftheexistingresearchandreformhastendedtofocusonurbanenvironments becauseofanassumptionthatschoolsinthosesettingssufferfromthemost seriousstaffingproblems especiallyincomparisontosuburbanschools (e.g.,García&Weiss,2019;Liuetal.,2008;Quartzetal.,2008;Simon& Johnson,2015).Incontrast,therehasbeenfarlessrecognitionofteachershortagesandteacherretentionchallengesfacingschoolsinruralcommunities. Indeed,anumberofresearchersandreformershavearguedthatthisimportant andsignificantsegmentofthepopulationofschools,studentsandteachershas beenrelativelyneglected(e.g.,Lavalley,2018;Pendola&Fuller,2018; Schaeferetal.,2016),andthatruraleducationexemplifiesacaseof “spatial injustice,” whereinequitiesanddeficitsinkeyresources,suchasadequate teacherstaffing,aredeeplyrootedingeography(Tieken,2017).
Tobesure,therehavebeenasmallbutgrowingnumberofempirical studiesthathaveinsightfullyidentifiedtheparticularchallengesanddeficits commontoruralschoolsthatimpacttheirabilitytoensureadequate teacherstaffingandteacherretention.Theseinclude:lowersalariesduetoa smallertaxbase;unsafeandinadequatefacilities;fewerclassroomandpedagogicalresources;moreout-of-fieldandcross-gradeteachingbecauseof smallerfacultysizes;lessseparationbetweenpersonalandprofessionallife resultinginlimitedprivacy;fewerjobopportunitiesforfamilyorsignificant others;enhancedresponsibilityforoverallcaretakingofstudents;professionalandpsychologicalisolationduetodistancefromprofessionalcommunitiesandothereducationinstitutions;aswellasfeweramenities,suchas retailservicesandrecreationalactivities;(forreviews,seeMcClure& Reeves,2004;Tranetal.,2020;Tran&Dou,2019).
Researchershavealsoidentifiedaparticularcharacteristicofruralschoolsthat canpositivelyimpactteacherstaffingandretention thestrengthofcommunity ties.Teachersoftenstayinruralschoolsprimarilyonthestrengthofrelationships,
400 EducationalAdministrationQuarterly59(2)
includingthosewithstudents,colleaguesandadministrators,aswellascommunitymembers.Becauseofthesmallersizeofmostruralschools,strongbonds oftenformbetweenteachersandtheircolleaguesandstudents,thatresultinlifelongrelationships.Ruralteachers’ efficacyandimpactontheirstudentscanbe morevisiblebecauseofthesmallercommunity.Teachersseetheirstudents aftertheygraduateandbecomeadultswhoworkandgrowtheirownfamilies inthelocalcommunity(e.g.,Eppley,2015;Seelig&McCabe,2021).Theseattributescanbeusedasplace-basedteacherrecruitmentandretentiontools(Tran etal.,2020),andresearchhassuggestedsomepotentialsuccesswiththisstrategy (Maranto,2013).However,ifsmallerruralschooldistrictsconsolidate,alocalized senseofcommunitycouldbedisrupted underminingthiskeyattractionofrural schools(Duncombe&Yinger,2010).
Suchstudieshaveilluminatedthefactorsimpactingteachershortagesand retentioninruralschools.However,muchoftheliteratureonruralteachers focusesonsinglesettings(e.g.,Brownelletal.,2005;Seelig&McCabe, 2021)oronsinglestates(e.g.,Goff&Brueker,2017;Kane,2010;Maranto, 2013;Miller,2012) providingin-depthanalyses,butnotabroaderportrait. Moreover,muchofthisresearchfocusessolelyonruralareasanddoesnot entailcomparisonstoothertypesofcommunities(e.g.,Lowe,2006;Monk, 2007).Asaresultoftheselimitations,itremainsunclearwhataretheoverall levelsofteacherstaffingproblems,shortagesandturnoverinruralschools acrosstheU.S.,andwhetherthesehavebeenthesame,ordifferent,thanthose inothertypesofcommunitiesandlocales.Thisstudyseekstoaddressthisgap.
TheStudy
Theobjectiveofthisstudyistoanalyze nationaldatatoprovideanoverallportraitofteachershortagesandturnoverinruralschoolsacrossthenation.Our methodiscomparative;wespecificallyfocusonruralschoolsandcompare themtoschoolsinothertypesoflocalesandcommunities.Thisstudyisanextensionofourabove-describedpriorresearchonteacherturnoverandshortagesto focusonteacherstaffingproblemsinruralschoolsUnderstandingthelarger nationallandscapeofteachershortagesandturnoverinruralschoolsprovides alargercontextfortheotherpapersinthisspecialjournalissueonspatialinjusticeinruraleducation,andisessentialtounderstandingthesourcesandsolutions totheongoingteacherstaffingproblemsconfrontingruralschools anoften marginalizedandneglectedsegmentoftheteachingforce.
ResearchQuestions
Thereare fivespecificresearchquestionsweseektoaddress:
1. HastheNumberofRuralSchools,StudentsandTeachersChangedin RecentDecades?
Whatdothenationaldataindicateaboutdemographicchangesinrural education?Havetherebeenchangesinstudentenrollments,andthe sizeandageoftheteachingforceinruralschools?Dothesetrends differinothercommunitiesandlocales?
2. ToWhatExtentDoRuralSchoolsHaveTeacherShortagesand StaffingProblems?
Towhatdegreedoruralschoolssufferfromdifficultiesstaffing theirclassroomswithqualifiedteachers?Doesthisdifferfrom schoolsinothercommunitiesandlocales?
3. WhatIstheRoleofTeacherTurnoverinRuralTeacherShortagesand StaffingProblems?
Whatportionofthedemandfornewteachers,andthesubsequent staffingproblemsinruralschools,isaccountedforbyteacherturnover?Doesthisdifferfromschoolsinothercommunitiesandlocales?
4. HowHighisTeacherTurnoverinRuralSchools?
Whatistheoverallmagnitudeofteacherturnover?Dotheturnover ratesdifferacrossdifferentkindsofruralschoolsandhowdothey comparetothoseofteachersinothertypesofcommunitiesand locales?
5. WhatAretheReasonsforTeacherTurnoverinRuralSchools?
Whatreasonsdoruralteachersgivefortheirdepartures?Dothese differforteachersinothercommunitiesandlocales?Whichparticular aspectsofschoolsandofteachers ’ jobs,especiallypolicy-amenable factors,aremosttiedtotheturnoverofteachers?
TheoreticalPerspective
Thetheoreticalperspectiveweadoptinthisresearchisdrawnfromorganizationaltheoryandthesociologyoforganizations,occupations,andwork.Our operatingpremiseisthatinordertofullyunderstandthecausesandconsequencesofschoolstaffingproblems,itisnecessaryto “puttheorganization back” intotheanalysis(cf.Stolzenberg,1978),andtoexaminetheseissues fromtheperspectiveoftheschoolsanddistrictswheretheseprocesses happen,andwithinwhichteacherswork.Inorganizationaltheoryand research,employeesupply,demand,andturnoverhavelongbeencentral issues(e.g.,Hom&Griffeth,1995;Jovanovic,1979;Mobley,1982;Price, 1977,1989;Meirer&Hicklin,2007;Siebert&Zubanov,2009).However, therehavebeenfeweffortstoapplythistheoreticalperspectiveto
understandingstaffingproblemsineducation.Byadoptingthisperspective, weseektodiscovertheextenttowhichstaffingproblemsinschoolscanbe usefullyreframedfrommacro-levelissues,involvinginexorablesocietal demographictrends,suchasstudentenrollmentandteacherretirement increases,toorganizational-levelissues,involvingpolicy-amenableaspects ofthestructure,managementandleadershipinschooldistrictsandschools (seeWoulfin&Allen,2022fordiscussionoftheuseoforganzational theorytoimproveschools).
Wedevelopedthisorganizationaltheoreticalperspectiveinaseriesof studies,beginningovertwodecadesago,analyzingmultiplenationaldata sources,especiallytheNationalCenterforEducationStatistics’ Schools andStaffingSurvey(SASS)/TeacherFollow-UpSurvey(TFS),toempirically evaluatetheadequacyofthesupplyofqualifiedteachers,toestablishthe extentofteachershortfalls,toempiricallyinvestigatetheroleofteacherturnoverinshortages,andinturntoempiricallyinvestigatethereasonsforteacher turnover(Ingersoll,1997,2001;Ingersoll&May,2012;Ingersoll&Perda, 2010).Wefocusedonthosespecificyearsoverthepast3decadesthathad themostsevereteachershortages.
Theseanalysesestablishedthatasubstantialnumberofschoolseachyear reportseriousproblems fillingtheirteachingpositionopenings,especiallyin fieldssuchasmathematicsandscience.But,ourdataalsoshowedthese teacherstaffingproblemsarenotsimplyaresultofaninsufficientsupplyof newteachers.Wedocumentedthattherearemultiplesourcesofthenew supplyofteachers,ofwhicharelativelyminorsourcehasbeentheprimary focusofresearchandcommentary thepipelineofnewlyqualifiedcandidates withdegreesfromteachereducationprograms.Oftenignored,butfarlarger, sourcesarethosecandidatesinthepipelinewithnon-educationdegrees,and thereservepoolofformerteachers.Ourdatashowedtheteachersupply, fromalloftheabovesourcescombined,hasbeenmorethansufficientto coverbothstudentenrollmentandteacherretirementincreases,eveninyears whenteacherstaffingproblemsandshortageshavebeenmostsevere,and evenforthehighestshortageteaching fields,suchasmathandscience.
However,ourdataalsoshowedthatthiswasnotthecasewhenwe includedthedeparturesofteachersbeforeretirement a figurethatismany timeslargerthanretirementdepartures.Thedatashowedthatmuchofthe hiringofnewteacherspriortoaschoolyearwassimplyto fillspots vacatedbyotherteacherswhodepartedtheirschoolsattheendoftheprior schoolyear,andmostofthesedeparturesarenotaresultofanagingworkforce.Rather,preretirementturnoverisaprimaryfactorbehindthedemand fornewhiresandtheaccompanyingdifficultiesschoolshaveadequately staffingclassroomswithqualifiedteachers.Inturn,wedocumentedthat
teacherturnovervariesgreatlyamongdifferentkindsofschools,servingdifferentstudentpopulations,andiscloselytiedtothequalityofleadershipand organizationalconditionsinschools.Hence,thedatasuggeststhatimproving teacherretention,througheffectiveschoolleadershipandbyimproving schoolorganizationalconditions,couldbeanimportantantidotetoteacher staffingproblems,andultimately,improvingschoolperformance.Fromthis empiricalresearch,wederivedanalternativeperspectivetolongstanding dominanttheoryregardingteachershortagesandtheperennialstaffingproblemsencounteredbymanyschools(seeFigure1).
Overthepasttwodecadeswehaveextendedthisresearchandutilizedthis perspectivetoexamineteachershortagesandturnoverinparticulartypesof schools(e.g.,high-poverty)andforspecifictypesofteachers.Inparticular, wehaveundertakensustainedinvestigationsoftwosegmentsoftheteaching forcewidelybelievedtofacethemostsevereshortages mathematics/ scienceteachers(Ingersoll&May,2012;Ingersoll&Perda,2010)andteachersfromunder-representedracial-ethnicgroups(Ingersoll&May,2011; Ingersolletal.,2019,2022).Thisstudyseekstoextendourperspectiveto thecaseofteachersinruralschools.Itisimportanttonotethattheabove twoperspectivesinFigure1arenotmutuallyexclusive,butcomplimentary, andweexamineourdatainlightofbothperspectives.Researchquestion(1) focusesondemographicchangesinruraleducation,includingchangesin studentenrollmentsandthesizeandageoftheteachingforce twotrends centraltotraditionaltheoryonteachershortages.Researchquestions(2–5)
Figure1. Twoperspectivesonthecausesandconsequencesofteacherstaffing problems.
utilizeourorganizationalperspectivetoexamineshortagesandturnoverin ruralschools.
Inthenextsection,wedescribeourdataandmethods.Inthefollowingsectionsofthisarticle,wepresenttheresultssequentiallyforeachofourresearch questions.Wethenconcludebysummarizingour findingsanddiscussing theirimplicationsforunderstandingandaddressingteacherstaffingproblems inruralschools.
DataandMethods
TheprimarysourceofdataforthisstudyistheSASSanditssuccessor,the NationalTeacherPrincipalSurvey(NTPS)collectedbytheCensusBureau fortheNationalCenterforEducationStatistics,thedatacollectionagencyof theUSDepartmentofEducation.SASS/NTPSisthelargestandmostcomprehensivedatasourceavailableonteachersinelementaryandsecondaryschools. SASS/NTPSadministersquestionnairestoarandomsampleofabout40,000 teachers,11,000schools,and4,500districts,representingalltypesofteachers, schools,districts,andall50states.NCEShasadministeredthesesurveysona regularbasis;todate,ninecycleshavebeencompleted 1987–88,1990–91, 1993–94,1999–2000,2003–04,2007–08,2011–12;2015–16,2017–18(for thetwomostrecentcycles,thenameofthesurveywaschangedfromthe SASStotheNTPS).Thedatarepresentteachersforkindergartenthrough grade12,part-timeandfull-time,andfromalltypesofschools,including public,charter,andprivate.OuranalysisusesdatafromallcyclesofSASS/ NTPSavailable,overthethree-decadeperiodfrom1987to2018.Among thestrengthsoftheSASS/NTPSareitslargesamplesizeanditslongduration. Theseallowustoexplorechangesintheteachingforceovertimeandtomake accuratecomparisonsamongdifferenttypesofteachersandschools(formore informationonthe2017–18NTPS,seeTaie&Goldring,2020).
Inaddition,uptothe2011–12cycleofSASS,allthoseteachersinthe schoolsamplewhodepartedfromtheirschoolsintheyearsubsequentto theadministrationoftheinitialSASSsurveyquestionnairewerecontacted toobtaininformationontheirdepartures.Thisnationallyrepresentativesupplementalsample theTFS containsabout6,000teachers.TheTFSdistinguishestwogeneraltypesofturnover.The first,oftencalled teacherattrition, referstothosewholeaveteachingaltogether.Thesecondtype,oftencalled teachermigration,referstothosewhotransferormovetodifferentteaching jobsinotherschools.Ouranalysisfocusesinparticularondatafromthemost recentTFS,administeredin2012–13,whichonlyincludedpublicschool teachers(formoreinformationonthe2012–13TFS,seeGoldringetal., 2014).Apossiblelimitationofourstudyistheutilizationofturnoverdata
from2013,collectedalmostadecadeago.However,ourprioranalyseshave revealedthatpatternsoflevels,variationsandreasonsforturnoverhave showedlittlechangesincethelate1980s.
Alongwithcollectingdataontheratesofturnover,theTFSquestionnaire includesasetofitemsthataskedteacher-respondentstoindicatethereasons fortheirdeparturesfromalistinthesurveyquestionnaire.Self-reportdata suchastheseareusefulbecausethosedepartingare,ofcourse,ofteninthe bestpositiontoknowthereasonsfortheirdepartures.But,suchself-report dataarealsoretrospectiveattributions,possiblysubjecttobiasand,hence, warrantcautionininterpretation.Inpastanalyseswehaveutilizedtheselfreportdatainconjunctionwithmultipleregressionanalysesoftherelationshipbetweenschoolcharacteristicsandjobconditionsandthelikelihoodof teachersdeparting(e.g.,Ingersoll,2001;Ingersoll&May,2012;Ingersoll etal.,2019).Thoseanalysesshowedastronglevelofconsistencybetween theself-reportedreasonsforturnover,andthefactorscorrelatedwiththelikelihoodofturnover,givingussomeconfidenceintheusefulnessoftheselfreportdata.
Ouranalysesfocusesonteachersinpublicschoolsinruralcommunitiesor localesandcomparesthemwiththepopulationofteachersandpublicschools inurbanandsuburbanlocalesandcommunities.FollowingNCES,weutilize theCensusBureau’sclassificationsoflocalesbasedontheirdegreeofurbanicity.CensusandNCEStwicealteredthedefinitionsoflocalesovertheperiod ofSASS/NTPSdatacollections,anissueweaccountforinourdataanalysis (fordetailsonlocaledefinitions,seeU.S.DepartmentofEducation,2002;and Chenetal.,2011).2 Inthe2017–18NTPS,20.4%ofpublicschoolswereclassifiedasruralschools,employing17.9%ofallpublicschoolteachers,and enrolling18.8%ofallpublicschoolstudents.The2017–18NTPSsamples represent23,859ruralpublicschools,with727,171teachersand9,544,311 students.
Apossiblelimitationofouranalysisisouruseofstandardizeddefinitions ofrurality.Analystshaveuseddifferingdefinitionsofrurality,eachwith advantagesandweaknesses(Hawleyetal.,2016).Rurality,forexample, canbedefinedbasedonaspecificcommunity,whichcancapturerichcontextualdepth,butmayfailtogeneralizetootherruralcommunities.Ontheother hand,astandardizeddefinitionofrurality,suchasweuse,allowsforbroad comparisons,butmaynotaccountforvariationsamongdifferentrural communities.
FromtheSASS/NTPS,weanalyzedataontrendsinthenumbersof schools,studentsandteachers;theportionofschoolswithteachingjobopeningsby field,andthedegreeofdifficultyschooladministratorsreport filling theirteachingjobopenings.FromtheTFS,weanalyzedataontherates,
magnitude,variationsof,andreasonsfor,teacherturnover.Givenour objectiveofprovidingabroadnationalportrait,weprimarilypresent descriptivedataestimateswegenera tedusingbasicstatisticalanalytic techniques.Inaddition, asbackground,weundertookanalysesofvariancetoassessthetheportionsofth evariationinourmeasuresofboth teachershortagesandtu rnoverthatlieatthe schoollevel.Inthis study,wedonotincludemultivariateanalysesof,forinstance,therelativeeffectsofdifferentfactorsont urnover,aswehavedoneelsewhere. Wherewereportcomparisonsforourdescriptivemeasures,forexample betweenteacherestimatesforruralschoolteachersandurbanschool teachers,weindicatewhetherdif ferencesarestatisticallysigni fi cantat a95%levelofcon fi dence.However,itisimportanttonotethat,given thelargesamplesizeoftheSASSandNTPS,mostdifferences betweenestimatesarehighlystatisticallysigni fi cant,evenifthedifferenceissmall.Inourdiscussionbelow,wefocusonlargerdifferences thatareofsubstantivesigni fi cance.BecausetheTFShasasmaller samplesize,weincludestandarderrorsinourtablespresentingthose data.TheSASS/NTPS/TFSuseacomplexstrati fi edsurveydesignwith over-andunder-samplingofpartic ularsubgroups.Toobtainunbiased estimatesofthenationalpopulationo fschools,students,andteachers intheyearofthesurvey,theobserv ationsareweightedbytheinverse oftheirprobabilityofselection.
Results
HastheNumberofRuralSchools,StudentsandTeachers
ChangedinRecentDecades?
Priortoturningtoourmaintopicofteachershortagesandturnoverinrural schools,we firstexaminethelargercontextofdemographicchangesin ruraleducation,includingchangesinstudentenrollmentsandthesizeand ageoftheteachingforce twotrendscentraltotraditionaltheoryon teachershortages(seeFigure1).
OverthepastthreedecadestotalelementaryandsecondarystudentenrollmentsintheUShavesteadilyrisen(seeFigure2).Expansioninthestudent populationisnotnew.Thenumbersofstudentsgrewthroughoutthetwentieth century,andtherateofgrowthbegantosoarinthelate1940swiththepost–WorldWarIIbabyboom.Studentenrollmentpeakedby1970andthen declineduntilthemid-1980s.Inthemid-1980s,elementaryandsecondary studentenrollmentagainbegantogrowandhascontinuedsince(for details,seeIngersolletal.,2021).
Figure2. Trendsinthenumberofelementaryandsecondaryschoolteachersand students,from1987–88to2017–18.
Giventheseoverallincreasesinstudentenrollments,notsurprisingly,the dataalsoshow,thatforanygivenyear,mostschoolshavehadjobopenings forwhichteacherswererecruitedandinterviewed,thenumberofteachers hiredannuallyhasincreased,andoverthepastthreedecadesthesizeofthe teachingforcehasincreased.AsalsoillustratedinFigure2,interestingly, thenumberofteachersemployedhasincreasedatafasterpacethanthatof studentsenrolled atovertwicetherate astriking findingweexplorein moredepthelsewhere(Ingersolletal.,2021;Ingersoll,May,etal.,2022; Ingersoll,Merrill,etal.,2022).
Ourfocushereisonhowthesedemographicchangesdifferbylocale. Assessingthesechangesbylocaleovertimeiscomplicatedbecause,asmentionedearlier,theCensusBureau,twicealtered,in1998and2005, thedefinitionsofurban,suburbanandrural.Hence,itisunclearwhatpartofthe changesinpopulations,bylocale,areduetoactualchanges,ortochanges inthedefinitionsofthoselocalecategories.Toaccountforthedefinitional changes,weseparatelyexaminethedataforthediscreteperiodswithin whichthedefinitionsareconsistent.Table1presentsdatafortwoperiods 1999–2004and2007–2018 separatelybylocale.
Whilethenumberofschools,thenumberofstudents,andthenumberof teachersinurbanandsuburbancommunities,allincreasedinrecentdecades, theoppositeoccuredinruralcommunties.Combiningthetwotimeperiods,
Table1. TrendsintheNumberofK-12PublicSchools,StudentsandTeachers,bySchoolLocale,1999 –2018. 1999 –00 schoolyear 2003 –04 schoolyear %Change 1999 –00to 2003 –04 2007 –08 schoolyear 2011 –12 schoolyear 2015 –16 schoolyear 2017 –18 schoolyear %Change 2007 –08to 2017 –18
1.)K-12Schools
a.)Urban20,39521,985 + 7.821,45523,56324,77725,379 + 18.2
b.)Suburban37,78642,325 + 1225,80524,26129,10929,656 + 14.9
c.)Rural16,50014,952 9.429,42629,93924,39323,859 18.9
2.)K-12Students
a.)Urban12,974,46213,971,998 + 7.713,023,62814,152,56414,938,08315,235,699 + 17
b.)Suburban23,202,30524,915,764 + 7.416,812,01116,215,45719,400,26520,082,857 + 19.5
c.)Rural4,636,5074,475,753 3.512,046,40313,433,2389,238,2849,544,311 20.8
3.)K-12Teachers
a.)Urban811,284929,391 + 14.6882,433958,7611,179,7471,032,003 + 17.4
b.)Suburban1,511,0741,704,231 + 12.81,200,7281,098,4151,512,8851,373,527 + 14.4
c.)Rural355,293339,037 4.6853,853916,582718,080727,171 14.8
thedatashowthatoverrecentdecadesthenumberofschoolsinurbanareas increasedby26%,thenumberofstudentsby25%,andthenumberofteachers byalmostathird.Therehasalsobeenasimilarincreaseinsuburbancommunities.Incontrast,thenumberofschoolsinruralcommunitieshasdecreasedby over28%,thenumberofstudentsby24%andthenumberofteachersby 19%.Moreover,thepaceofthesedecreasesappearstohaveacceleratedover time,especiallysince2012.3 Thisisconsistentwithresearchdocumentinga longdeclineinthepopulationinruralareas(e.g.,Davisetal.,2022).
Alongwithstudentenrollmentincreases,traditionalteachershortage theoryalsoholdsthatanagingoftheteacherforce,andhenceincreasing retirements,isalargefactorbehindshortages(seeFigure1).And,ourdata analysesconfirmthatsincethelate1980stherehas,infact,beenanincrease inthemeanageofteachers,inthenumberofteachersoverage50,andin teacherretirements.But,thedataalsoshowthistrendhaschangedinthe pastdecade.Whiledataonteacherretirementsarenotavailablebeyond 2012–13,thedataontheteacheragedistributionshowthat,since2011–12, theteacheragingtrendbegantovarybylocale.Between2012and2018, thenumberandpercentofteachersapproachingretirement(age50or more)increasedinsuburbanschools,stayedsteadyinurbanschools,but decreasedinruralschoolsby23%.Inshort,inrecentyearstherehasnot beenanoverallagingoftheruralteachingforce.
ToWhatExtentDoRuralSchoolsHaveTeacherShortagesand StaffingProblems?
Givenruralschools’ above-describeddecreaseinstudents,alongwitha decreaseinthenumberofolderteachers,(andhenceinsubsequentretirements), andinturnadecreaseindemandfor,andemploymentof,newteachers,traditionalteachershortagetheorywouldpredictthatsuchschoolswouldhaveless difficultystaffingtheirclassrooms,thatis,sufferlessfromteachershortages andstaffingproblems.Incontrast,traditionalshortagetheorywouldalso expecttheoppositeinurbanandsuburbanschools,withtheirincreaseinstudents,alongwithanincreaseinretirement-ageteachers(especiallyinsuburban schools)andhenceincreaseindemandfor,andemploymentof,newteachers. Themostgroundedandaccurateempiricalmeasuresavailableoftheextent ofactualteacherstaffingproblemsandshortagesinschoolsaredatafrom schooladministratorsontheactualdegreeofdifficultytheyencounter fillingtheirteachingpositionopenings(e.g.,Behrstock,2009;Ingersoll, 2001;Ingersoll&Perda,2010).Importantlyforouranalysis,SASS/NTPS collectdataonthenumbersofschoolprincipalsreportingteachingjob
Figure3. Percentruralpublicsecondaryschoolswithteachingvacanciesandwith seriousdifficulties fillingthosevacancies,byteaching field.
openingsfortheupcomingschoolyearandthosethatexperienceddifficulties fillingthoseopenings.ThemostrecentdatafromSASS/NTPSforthisindicatorarefromthe2015–16cycle.
Figure3focusesonruralpublicsecondaryschools.Itpresentsdataon thepercentofprincipalsreportingtheirschoolhadteachingvacanciesat thestartoftheschoolyear teachingpositionsforwhichteacherswere recruitedandinterviewed andthepercentthatreportedtheyexperienced seriousdif fi culty fi llingoneormoreofthosevacancies.Asshowninthe toprowofFigure3,overall,overthreequartersofprincipalsinrural publicsecondaryschoolshadteachingvacanciesinoneormoreofnine keyteaching fi elds,andoverhalfofthosereportedtheyhadseriousdif ficultystaf fi ngthosepositions representing46%ofallruralpublicsecondaryschools.
Moreover,thedataalsoshowlarge field-to-fielddifferencesinvacancies andstaffingdifficultiesinruralschools.Mathematicsandscienceexperienced theirmostseriousproblemsinruralschools.Thirty-ninepercentofrural publicsecondaryschoolshadjobopeningsforteachersinscience,and about44%oftheseindicatedseriousdifficulties fillingtheseopenings,representing19%ofruralpublicsecondaryschools.Similarly,36%ofsecondary schoolshadjobopeningsformathematicsteachers,andabouthalfofthese indicatedseriousdifficulties fillingtheseopenings,representingabout16% ofallruralpublicsecondaryschools.
Table2. PercentPublicSecondarySchoolswithSeriousDifficultiesFillingTeaching Vacancies,byTeachingField,bySchoolLocale.
Schoollocale
AllUrbanSuburbanRural
Teaching field
All9 fields44.445.842.245.8 Science19.919.322.619 Math16.721.913.116.1
Specialed.13.715.612.211.9 Foreignlanguage10.211.78.611 Career/technicaled.8.66.19.69.1 English6.46.33.18.9 Computerscience3.64.73.72.5 Music/art2.932.53.7 Socialstudies2.63.4.73.9
Ontheotherhand,forsometeaching fields,fewschoolshadseriousdifficulty fillingpositions.Forinstance,asalsoshowninFigure3,inthe fieldof socialstudies,32%ofruralpublicsecondaryschoolshadjobopenings,but onlyabout13%ofthese representingonly4%ofallruralpublicsecondary schools indicatedthattheyhadseriousdifficulty fillingthoseopenings.
Table2presentsthesamedataonteacherstaffingproblems,butwithcomparisonsofurban,suburbanandruralschools.Thedatarevealthatlevelsof staffingdifficultieswereverysimilarforbothruralandnon-ruralschools.As showninthetoprow,overall,suburbanpublicsecondaryschoolswereslightly lesslikelytoexperiencedifficulties fillingtheirteachingpositions 42% reporteddifficultiesinoneormoreofthenine fields,comparedto46%for bothurbanandruralschools(differencesatstatisticallysignificantlevels). But,inmost fieldstherewerenotlargedifferencesbetweenurban,suburban andruralschoolsinthepercentagesofschoolswithstaffingproblems.
Insum,thedatashowthat,asexpected,manyschoolshavehadstaffingproblems.But,surprisingly,thishasbeenjustastrueforruralasotherschools.Despite decreasingnumbersofstudents,andhencedemandforteachers,manyrural schoolshaveneverthelesshaddifficultiesstaffingtheirteachingpositions.In short,ruralschoolshavefacedsimilarteachershortagesandstaffingproblems asurbanschools.Moreover,ouranalysesofthesesamemeasuresfromearlier cyclesofSASS,fromtheearly1990s,alsorevealthatwhilelevelsofstaffing problemshaverisenandfallen,thesecross-fieldandcross-localepatternsin teacherstaffingproblemsandshortageshaveremainedconsistentovertime.
Itisimportanttorecognizethatforalltheselocales,asshowninFigure3 andTable2,whiletheactualnumberofschoolsissubstantial,itrepresentsa minorityofschoolsthathavehadseriousstaffingproblemsinanygiven field,inanygivenyear.Thatis,teachershortagesarelimitedtoparticular schoolsandparticular fields.Moreover,whiletherehasnotbeenlargedifferencesinstaffingdifficulties,onaverage,acrossschoolsfromrural,urban, andsuburbanlocales,therearenevertheless,largeschool-to-schooldifferences. Inourbackgroundanalysesofvarianceofthesedatawefoundthatthevariation inlevelsofschoolstaffingdifficultiesisfargreaterwithin,thanbetween,states and,moreover,suchvariationisfargreaterbetweenschoolsthanbetween schooldistricts.4 Thelargestvariationinthedegreeofstaffingdifficulties andinstaffingproblemsbylocationarethosebetweendifferentschools, evenwithinthesameschooldistrict.Moreover,ouranalysesdocumentthat thepovertylevelofschoolsisoneofthestrongestcorrelatesoftheirdegree ofstaffingdifficulties;high-povertyschoolsarefarmorelikelytohave seriousstaffingdifficultiesthanlow-povertyschools.Inotherwords,within thesamestate,locale,teacherlabormarket,andlicensureandpension systems,theextentofshortagesvariesgreatlyamongdifferentschools suggestingtheusefulnessofourorganizational-levelperspectivetounderstand thesourcesofthesestaffingproblems whichweturntointhenextsections.
WhatistheRoleofTeacherTurnoverinRuralTeacherShortages andStaffingProblems?
Theabovedatafromschooladministratorsonthedegreeofdifficultyencountered fillingteachingjobopeningsisausefulempiricalmeasureofteacher shortagesandstaffingproblems.But,dataontheextentofstaffingdifficulties themselvesdonotindicatethesourcesofthesedifficulties.Inparticular,these datadonotthemselvesdistinguishwhetherruralschools’ staffingproblems areprimarilyaresultofaninadequatequantityofnewteachersupply,or highlevelsofteacherturnover.WhiletheSASS/NTPSdatadonotallow ustoassesstheformer,thedatadoallowustoexaminethelatter levels ofteacherturnoverinruralschoolsandtheirroleinteacherstaffingproblems.
Researchershavelongheldthatelementaryandsecondaryteachinghasrelativelyhighratesofannualdeparturesofteachersfromschools(Lortie,1975; Murnaneetal.,1991;Tyack,1974).Toempiricallycompareteacherdeparture ratestothoseinotheroccupationsandlinesofwork,weanalyzednationaldata fromtwodifferentadministrationsofNCES’ longitudinalBaccalaureateand BeyondSurvey(1993–2003and2008–18).Wefoundthatattritioninteaching (thoseleavingtheoccupationentirely)islowerthaninsomelinesofwork
Figure4. Numbersofteachersintransitionintoandoutofruralpublicschools beforeandafterschoolyear.
(child-careworkers,secretaries,paralegals),isslightlyhigherthanpoliceofficersandnurses,andfarhigherattritionthansomeestablishedandtraditional professions,suchaslaw,engineering,architecture(seeIngersolletal.,2021; Ingersoll,May,etal.,2022;Ingersoll,Merrill,etal.,2022).
However,itisimportanttorecognizethatK-12teachersformoneofthe largestoccupationalgroupsinthenation(U.S.BureauoftheCensus, 2018)andhence,giventheirrelativelyhighturnoverlevels,numerically, the flowsofteachersinandoutofschoolsarelarge.Toillustratethisphenomenonforruralschools,weanalyzeddatafromthemostrecentSASS/TFS cyclethatincludeddataonbothhiringandturnover(2011–13).Asshown inFigure4,about90,000teachersenteredruralpublicschools,atthebeginningoftheschoolyear,andbythefollowingschoolyear,about145,000 equivalentto162%ofthosejusthired departedfromtheirschools.Thus, duringthat10–12monthperiod,before,duringandafterthatschoolyear, therewereabout245,000teachersinjobtransitioninto,betweenoroutof ruralpublicschools,representingoveronequarteroftheentireruralpublic teachingforce ascenarioakintoa “revolvingdoor.”
Whilethisrevolving-doorpatternissimilarforrural,urbanandsuburban schoolsandisconsistentacrossthecyclesofSASS/TFS,theratioofturnover tohiringisespeciallyhighforruralschoolsbecauseoftheirdeclineinthe numberofstudentsandteachers,asevidencedinTable1.Hence,theneed fornewhires,andaccompanyingstaffingdifficulties,inruralschools,are notdrivenbyincreasesinstudentenrollments asstudentsinruralschools havedecreased.Rather,thedatashowthatthehiringofnewteachersin
ruralschoolspriortoaschoolyearislargelyto fillspotsvacatedbyother teacherswhodepartedtheirschoolsattheendofthepriorschoolyear.
Itisimportanttonotethattheincomingandoutgoingteacher flowsin Figure4arecalculatedattheleveloftheschool.Hiresandturnoverrefer tothosenewlyenteringordepartingaparticularschool.Cross-school moves,evenwithindistricts,arecountedashiresorasturnover.Total teacherturnoverasdepictedinFigure4isfairlyevenlysplitbetweenits’ twomajorcomponents migrationandattrition.Teachermigration,of course,doesnotdecreasetheoverallnetsupplyofteachers,asdoesthose leavingforretirementandcareerchanges,andhencedoesnotcontributeto overallshortagesfromasystemlevelofanalysis.However,thatdoesnot meanthatcross-schoolandcross-districtmovingdonotcontributeto teacherstaffingproblemsinparticularschools.Fromanorganizationalperspective,andfromtheviewpointofthosemanagingeducationalorganizations,teachermigrationandattritionhavethesameeffect;ineithercase, theyresultinadecreaseinstaffthatusuallymustbereplaced,and,attimes resultinginstaffingdifficultiesandstaffingproblems.Moreover,aswe showinthenextsection,cross-schoolmovesareasymmetric;the flowsto andfromschoolsindifferentlocalesarenotevenlybalanced.
Inaddition,aportionofthoseleavingteachingrepresenttemporaryattrition.Thelatter,ofcourse,donotresultinapermanentlossofhumancapital fromtheteachersupplyand,hence,donotpermanentlycontributetooverall shortages.Indeed,there-entranceofformerteachersisamajorsourceofnew supply(Ingersoll&Perda,2010).However,likemigration,thatdoesnot meanthatthedepartureofteachersforoneormoreyearsdoesnotcontribute toteacherstaffingproblems.Again,fromaschool-levelandorganizational perspective,temporaryattritionresultsinadecreaseinstaffthatusually mustbereplaced,regardlessofwhetherthoseleavinglaterreturntothat sameschooloranother.
Wefurtherempiricallyconfirmedourhypothesisofalinkbetweenteacher turnoverandshortageproblemsusingaschool-levelofmeasureofturnover. Thedatashowthatthoseschoolswithseriousteacherstaffingproblems(as shownearlierinTable2andFigure3),werealmosttwiceaslikelytohave hadabove-averageturnoverratestheprioryear,asthoseschoolsreporting nodifficulties.And,aswewillshowinthenextsections,mostofthesedepartureswerenotaresultofanagingandretiringteachingforce.Rather,preretirementvoluntaryturnoverisbehindthemajorityofthedemandfornew hires,andtheaccompanyingdifficultiesruralschoolshaveadequatelystaffingclassrooms.Inshort,inruralschools,preretirementteacherturnoveristhe primarydriverbehindshortagesandstaffingproblems.
HowHighisTeacherTurnoverinRuralSchools?
Itisimportanttorecognizethatabove-describedoveralllevelsofturnover masklargedifferencesinteacherdepartureratesfromdifferenttypesof schools,revealingtheneedtodisaggregateourdata.The flowofteachers outofschoolsisnotequallydistributedacrossstates,regions,andschooldistricts.However,aswithourbackgroundanalysesofvarianceofthestaffing difficultiesdatadiscussedinthepriorsection,ourbackgroundanalysesof varianceofteacherturnoverdocumentedthatthelargestvariationsin teacherdeparturesbylocation,arethosebetweendifferentschools,even withinthesamedistrict.5 Moreover,ouranalysesofthedatashowthat teacherturnoverisconcentrated inanygivenyearalmosthalfofall publicschoolteacherturnovertakesplaceinjustonequarterofthepopulation ofpublicschools.Thepovertylevelofschoolsisoneofthestrongestcorrelatesofteacherturnover;high-povertyschoolshavesignificantlyhigherturnoverthandolow-povertyschools.
AsshowninTable3,overallruralpublicschoolteacherturnoverisabout average(15.4%),urbanteachershaveslightlyhigherthanaveragerates (17.7%),andsuburbanteachershaveslightlylowerrates(15.1%)(these
Table3. PercentTeacherMigrationandAttrition,bySchoolLocaleandSchool PovertyLevel. Turnover MigrationAttritionTotal
Schoollocaleandpovertylevel
All8.1(.4)7.7(.4)15.8(.6)
Urban7.9(.9)9.8(.8)17.7(1.)
Suburban7.8(.8)7.3(.8)15.1(1)
Rural7.0(.7)8.4(.7)15.4(.9)
Low-poverty6.2(1)5.4(.9)11.6(1.3)
High-poverty12.4(1.3)9.6(1.1)22.1(1.6)
Low-povertysuburban6.5(1.7)5.3(1.3)11.8(1.9)
High-povertyurban12.1(1.8)7.0(1.4)19.1(2.2)
Low-povertyrural5.1(1.6)6.2(1.8)11.3(2.4)
High-povertyrural10.7(2.4)17.2(2.9)27.9(3.4)
Standarderrorsinparentheses.
Note. High-povertyschoolsrefertothoseinwhich80percentormoreofthestudentsqualifyfor theNationalSchoolLunchProgram.Low-povertyschoolsrefertothoseinwhichlessthan15 percentofthestudentsqualifyfortheNationalSchoolLunchProgram.
Figure5. Ratioofpercentagesofteachersmigratinginoppositedirectionstoand frompublicschoolsindifferentlocales.
differencesareofborderlinestatisticalsignificance).High-povertyschools(in which80%ormoreofthestudentsqualifyfortheNationalSchoolLunch Program)havealmostdoubletherateofturnoverasdolow-poverty schools(lessthan15%NSLP),andataveryhighlevelofstatisticalsignificance.And,schoolsthatarebothhigh-povertyandurbanhaveamongstthe highestratesofturnover(19.1%).
However,strikingly,thedatashowthathigh-povertyruralpublicschools haveunusuallyhighratesofturnover almost28%oftheirteachersdepart annually(12%ofruralpublicschoolswereinhigh-povertycommunities).Of note,high-povertyruralpublicschoolshavehigherturnoverthanhigh-poverty urbanschools,adifferenceataveryhighlevelofstatisticalsignificance.
Thedataalsoshowsubstantial,anduneven,annualteachermigrationacross locales.WeusedtheTFSdatatomoreclosely examinethecharacteristicsofthedestinationschoolsofcross-schoolmigrantsinordertodiscernthedegreeofsymmetry inteachers’ movestoandfromschoolindifferentlocales.Wecalculatedratiosofthe percentageofteachermoversgoingfromoneschoollocaletoanother,tothepercentagemovinginthereversedirection.Thedatashowthat,interestingly,thereisan annualnetgainandlossforschools,accordingtoschoollocale.Forinstance,as showninFigure5,teacherswhomigrated wereovertwiceaslikely(ratioof2.6) tomovefromruraltourbanschools,asinreverse fromurbantoruralschools. Likewise,teacherswereovertwiceaslikely(ratioof2.3)tomovefromruraltosuburbanschools,asinreverse fromsuburbantoruralschools.Incontrastteacher
migrationfromurbantosuburbanwasonlyslightlyhigherthaninreverse(ratioof 1.2).Thenetresultisalargeannualasymmetricreshufflingwithintheschoolsystem ofasubstantialportionoftheteachingforce,withanetlosstoruralschoolsandanet gaintourbanandsuburbanschools.These findingsonmigrationprovidefurther supportforourtheoreticalperspectivethatfullyunderstandingthestaffingproblems ofschoolsrequiresexaminingthemfromaschoollevelandfromtheperspectiveof theorganizationsinwhichtheyoccur.
WhatAretheReasonsforTeacherTurnoverinRuralSchools?
Thesedataraiseseveralquestions whatarethereasonsforteacherturnover, whydosomeschoolshavefarhigherturnoverthanothersand,forourfocus, whatarethereasonsforteacherturnoverinruralschools?Onemethodof answeringthesequestionsistoaskthosewhohavemovedorleftwhythey didso.Weexaminedsuchself-reportdatadrawnfromitemsintheTFSquestionnairethataskedteacherstoindicatethelevelofimportanceof22factors, listedinthesurveyquestionnaire,intheirdecisiontomoveorleave.Thetop
Table4. PercentTeachersReportingVariousReasonsWereImportantforTheir Turnover,bySchoolLocale.
Schoollocale
UrbanSuburbanRural
Reasonsforturnover
Retirement15(1.3)24.4(1.6)21.7(1.3)
Schoolstaffingaction22.7(1.6)22.7(1.6)12.8(1.1)
Familyorpersonal40.5(1.8)46.1(1.9)47.7(1.6)
Topursueotherjob34.4(1.8)33.1(1.8)41(1.6)
Dissatisfaction53.2(1.8)54.8(1.9)61.1(1.6)
Reasonsfordissatisfaction-relatedturnover
Dissatisfiedwiththeadministration59(2.4)57.5(2.5)63.1(2.1)
Dissatisfiedwithaccountability/testing59.4(2.4)66.3(2.4)55.5(2.2)
Lackoffacultyinfluenceandautonomy48.1(2.4)59.1(2.5)50.3(2.2)
Toomanystudentdisciplineproblems47.4(2.4)48.7(2.6)45.7(2.2)
Intrusionsonteachingtime45.5(2.4)58.9(2.5)45.3(2.2)
Unsafeorinadequatefacilitiesorresources50.7(2.4)52(2.6)41.7(2.2)
Toofewprofadvancementopportunities33.5(2.3)30.5(2.4)35.9(2.1)
Dissatisfiedwithjobassignment39.4(2.4)48(2.6)35.5(2.1)
Poorsalaryorbenefits27.5(2.2)24.8(2.2)34.3(2.1)
Toomanystudents29.2(2.2)39.4(2.5)17.6(1.7)
panelinTable4presentsdataonthepercentageofteacherswhoreportedthat particularcategoriesofreasonswere “very” or “extremely” importantintheir decisiontodepartona five-pointscalefrom “notimportant ” to “extremely important.” 6 NotethatthepercentagesinthetoppanelofTable4addup tomorethan100%,becauserespondentscouldindicatemorethanone reasonfortheirdeparturesandhenceourcategoriesarenotmutuallyexclusive.Thetablecomparesruralwithurbanandsuburbanteachers.
Overall,ruralteacherswerebothsimilaranddifferentfromotherteachers inthegeneralpatternsregardingthereasonswhytheymovedfromorlefttheir jobs.Retirementislistedbyabout22%ofthetotalofthosewhodepartedas animportantreasonfortheirdeparture.Thisisanimportant findingbecause, asreviewedearlier,traditionaltheoryonteachershortageshaslongheldthat anagingandretiringteachingforceisamajorfactorbehindteacher shortages.However,thedatashowthatretirementaccountsforarelatively smallportionofdeparturescomparedtootherreasons.
Schoolstaffingactionsincludelayoffs,terminations,schoolclosingsand reorganizationsandinvoluntarycross-schooltransfers.Sometimesthesestaffing actionsentailmigrationtootherschoolsandothertimesleavingteachingaltogether.Likeretirement,theseaccount foronlyarelativelysmallportionof totalturnoverfromschools aboutone-fifthofurbanandsuburbanteachers. Ruralteacherswerelesslikely(lessthan13%)andatastatisticallysignificant level,tocitethiscategoryofreasons fortheirdeparturesthanteachersin otherschools.
Athirdcategoryofturnover forfamilyorpersonalreasons includes departuresforpregnancy/childrearing,healthproblems,andfamilymoves, includingtakingajobmoreconvenientlylocated.Theseaccountformoreturnover,andatastatisticallysignificantlevel,thaneitherretirementorstaffing actions.Thesereasonsarealsoprobablycommontoalloccupations,andall typesoforganizations,andanormalpartofworklife.Justunderhalfofallteacherscitetheseasreasonsfortheirdepartures.Ruralteacherswerenotmoreor lesslikelytocitethisreasonthanothersatastatisticallysignificantlevel.
Afourthcategory topursueanotherjob includesthosewhomovedto anotherschool,thosewholeftteachingtopursueanothercareer,ortotake coursestoimprovetheircareeropportunitieswithinoroutsidethe fieldof education.Someofthelatterareonlytemporaryleavers,andaftergettinga graduatedegreeoradvancedcredential,re-enterteachingaspartofthenew supply.Notably,ruralteachersweremorelikely,atastatisticallysignificant level,tocitethiscategory topursueanotherjob asareasonfortheirdeparturesthaneitherurbanorsuburbanteachers.
Finally,thelargestcategoryisthosewhodepartedbecausetheyweredissatisfiedwithsomeaspectoftheteachingjob.Overhalfofalldepartingteachers
reportedthatjobdissatisfactionwas “very” or “extremelyimportant” intheir decisiontodepart.Strikinglyruralteachersweremorelikelytocitethiscategory (61%),atastatisticallysignificantlevel,thaneitherurbanorsuburbanteachers. Thedataindicatethatover79,000ruralteachersleftteachingaltogetherjustafter theschoolyear.Onlyabout32,000oftheseleftbecauseofretirement.Thatis, almostthreetimesasmanyindicatedthatjobdissatisfactionwasanimportant factorintheirdecisiontoleaveteaching,comparedtoretirement.
Thesedataraiseafurtherquestion:ofthosewhoreporteddissatisfaction withsomeaspectoftheirjobasareasontodepart,whatweretheirparticular sourcesofdissatisfaction.ThebottompanelinTable4presentsdisaggregated dataontenparticularfactorsincludedinthiscategory.Thedatarevealthat therewerelargedifferencesinthefactorsmostlikelytobecitedbyteachers andalsosomedifferencesbetweenruralandotherteachers.
Amongruralteachers,dissatisfactionwiththeschooladministrationwas themostcommonfactorcited(63%)asimportanttotheirdecisionto depart.Ruralteachersweremorelikelytocitethisreason,atastatisticallysignificantlevel,thansuburbanteachers.Thenextmostfrequentlycitedreasons amongruralteacherswhodepartedbecauseofdissatisfaction, weredissatisfactionwithaccountability/testing(55%)anddissatisfactionwith alackofclassroomautonomyorlackofinputintodecisionmaking(50%).
Comparedtotheabovethreereasons,ruralteacherswerelesslikelyto indicatethatdissatisfactionwithunsafeorinadequatefacilities,withtoo fewprofessionaladvancementorleadershipopportunities,andwiththeir jobassignment,wereimportantfactorsintheirdepartures.Theleastlikely reasonsgivenbyruralteachersweredissatisfactionwiththeirsalaries/bene fits anddissatisfactionwiththenumberofstudents/class-sizes.Only34%ofrural teachersreportedinadequateorpoorsalaryand/orbenefitswereimportant reasonstodepartandlessthanone-fifthofruraldeparteesreporteddissatisfactionwiththenumbersofstudentstheytaughtasanimportantfactor. However,forbothofthesereasons,ruralteachersdifferedfrombothurban andsuburbanteachers,atastatisticallysignificantlevel.Ruralteachers weremorelikelytocitesalariesandbenefitsthanothers(NTPSdataindicate thatin2017–18,theaveragesalaryinpublicschoolsfora first-yearteacher wasabout$43,700,andfor first-yearteachersinruralschoolsitwasabout $39,900).Ontheotherhand,ruralteacherslessoftenreportedthenumber ofstudentstaughtasareasontodepartthanotherteachers.
Thedataalsorevealasimilarpatternofreasonsforbothteachermigration andattrition.Adesiretopursueanotherjobandjobdissatisfactionwerethe mostcitedcategoriesbybothmoversandleavers.Andforbothmoversand leavers,dissatisfactionwiththeschooladministration,dissatisfactionwith accountability/testinganddissatisfactionwithalackofclassroom
autonomy/inputintodecisionmakingwereamongthemostfrequentlycited andsalariesandclass-sizewereamongtheleastfrequentlycited.
ConclusionsandImplications
Theobjectiveofthisstudyistoprovideanoverallnationalportraitofteacher shortagesandturnoverinruralschools. Understandingthelargernationallandscapeoftheseproblemsisessentialtounderstandingthesourcesandsolutions totheteacherstaffingchallengesparticulartoruralschools,thatresearchers haveinsightfullybroughttolight(forreviews,see;McClure&Reeves, 2004).Tran&Dou,2019;Tranetal.,2020)Ourstudyrevealedsix findings:
TheRuralSchoolSectorisShrinking
Ouranalysisbeganbyexamininglargerdemographicchangesinruraleducation,includingchangesinstudentenrollmentsandthesizeandageofthe teachingforce demographictrendscentraltotraditionaltheoryonteacher shortages(Figure1).Incontrasttourbanandsuburbancommunities,over thepastcoupleofdecades,thenumberofschools,studentsandteachersin ruralareashavedecreasedsharply.Thisisconsistentwithresearchdocumentingalongdeclineinthepopulationinruralareas(e.g.,Davisetal.,2022). Moreover,unlikeinurbanandsuburbanschools,overthepastdecade,the ruralteachingforce,overall,hasgottenyounger,resultinginadecreasein thenumberandpercentofteachersapproachingretirementage.
ManyRuralSchoolsSufferfromTeacherShortages
Despiteadecreaseinstudents,andaccordinglyadecreaseinthedemandfor, andemploymentof,teachersinruralschools,thelatterarejustaslikelyas urbanandsuburbanschoolstohaveseriousdifficulties fillingtheirteaching openings.The fieldsofmathematicsandscienceexperiencedthemost seriousstaffingproblemsinruralschools.
ManyRuralSchoolsSufferfromaRevolvingDoorofTeachers
Ourdataindicatethatteacherturnoveristheprimarydriverofstaffingproblemsandshortagesinruralschools.Thedatashowthatpreretirementdeparturesofteachersarebehindmostofthedemandfornewhires,andthe subsequentstaffingdifficultiesexperienced,inmanyruralschools.
ThereAreLargeDifferencesinRatesofTurnoverBetweenDifferent TypesofSchools
Teacherturnoverisespeciallyhighinhigh-povertyruralschools overa quarteroftheirteachersdeparteachyear andhigherthaninhigh-poverty urbanschools.Moreover,thedatareveallargedifferencesinthedestinations ofteacherswhomigratedfromoneschooltoanother.Moverswereovertwice aslikelytomovefromruraltourban,orruraltosuburbanschools,asin reverse.Thenetresultofthisisalargeannualreshufflingwithintheschool systemofalargeportionoftheruralteachingforce,withanetlosstorural schoolsandanetgaintourbanandsuburbanschools.
JobDissatisfactionisthePrimaryDriverofTeacherTurnover inRuralSchools
Therearemanyfactorsbehindschooldifferencesinteacherturnover.Amajorset offactorsinvolvesteachers’ dissatisfactionwithvariousaspectsoftheteaching job.Over60%ofteachersdepartingfromruralschoolscitedissatisfactionasa mainreasonfortheirdeparturesand41%indicatetheyaredepartingtopursue adifferentorbetterjob.Thesearehigherlevelsthaninurbanorsuburbanschools.
SchoolOrganizationalConditionsareStronglyLinkedtoTeacher TurnoverinRuralSchools
Theleadingfactorsbehinddissatisfaction-relatedturnoverinruralschoolsare dissatisfactionwithschooladministrations,dissatisfactionwithaccountability andtestinganddissatisfactionwithalackofclassroomautonomyorlackof inputintoschooldecisionmaking.
Collectively,these findings,coupledwiththeearliersummarizedresearchhighlightingtheparticularteacherstaffingchallengesforruralschools,providean exampleofthespatialinjusticefacedbyruraleducation therelativedisparities inteacherstaffingproblems,teacherturnover,andtheorganizationalfactors behindthelatter(Tieken,2017).Accordingtoouranalysis,high-povertyrural schools,inparticular,facethemostintenseteacherturnoverandyetthestaffingchallengesofruralschoolsreceivelessattentionthanthoseoftheirurbancounterparts.It isalsoimportanttoacknowledgeapossibledatalimitationinourstudy thenational dataweanalyzeextendtospring2018.Currently,asofyetnationaldataonteacher shortagesandturnoversincethepandemicthatbeganinspring2020havenotbeen released.Thisraisesquestionsaboutwhetherthesetrendshavecontinuedintothe present,especiallyafterthepandemicthatbeganinspring2020.Numerouscommentatorshavedrawnattentiontohighlevelsofemployeeturnoveracrossthe
economysincetheadventofthepandemic(e.g.,Smith,2022).Numerousreports havealsodrawnattentiontoincreasedstressforteachersduringthepandemic (e.g.,Wright,2022).Futureimprovementsintheeconomycouldincreaseother employmentoptionsforteachers,andinturn,increaseinteacherturnover.This willmostlikelybeespeciallytrueforhigh-povertyruralschools.Hence,addressing highteacherturnovercouldbecomeevenmoreimportantovertime.
Implications
Wherethequantityofteachersdemandedisgreaterthanthequantityofteachers supplied,giventheprevailingwagesandworkingconditions,therearenumerouspossiblepolicyresponses.Longstandingtheoryonteachershortages (Figure1)holdsthatthemainsourceoftheproblemisaninsufficientsupply ofnewteachers,inthefaceofstudentenrollmentandteacherretirement increases.Inturn,increasingthesupplyofnewteachershaslongbeenadominantreformstrategy.Nothinginthisstudysuggeststheseeffortsarenotworthwhile,butthedataindicatethatteacherrecruitmentstrategies,alone,donot directlyaddressamajorrootsourceofteacherstaffingproblems preretirement turnover.Inshort,recruitingmoreteachers,whileanimportant firststep,willnot fullysolveschoolstaffinginadequaciesiflargenumbersofsuchteachersthen departinafewyears.Decreasingthelossofthoserecruitedbysuchinitiatives couldpreventthelossofthoseinvestments,andalsolessentheongoingneedfor creatingnewrecruitmentinitiatives.
Ourdataanalysessuggestthatstaffingproblemsinschoolscanbeusefully reframedfrommacro-levelissues,involvinginexorablesocietaldemographic trends,toorganizational-levelissues,involvingaspectsofthestructureand managementofschooldistrictsandschools.Fromtheorganizationalperspectiveofthisanalysis,schoolsarenotsimplyvictimsofexternaldemographic trends.Ratherourdatasuggestthereisasignificantroleforschoolmanagementandleadershipinboththegenesisof,andsolutionto,teacherstaffing problems.Fromanorganizationalperspective,manyofthereasonsfor teacherturnoverrevealedbyourdataanalysisarenotablebecausetheyare examplesofmanipulableandpolicy-amenableaspectsofparticulardistricts andschools,withimplicationsforthemanagementandleadershipofschools.
Twoofthemostfrequentlycitedorganizationalfactorsbehindruralteacher turnover – teachers’ decisionmakinginfluenceandschoolaccountability – are alsonotablebecausetheyarecentralandlongstandingtenetsinthe fieldoforganizationaltheory.Expertsinorganizationalleadershiphavelongadvocateda balancedapproachtoimplementingorganizationalaccountabilityandemployee authorityinworksettings(e.g.,Drucker,1992).Inthisview,accountability andauthoritymustgohandinhandinworkplaces.Delegatingautonomyor
authoritytoemployeeswithoutalsoensuringcommensurateaccountabilitycan fosterinefficienciesandirresponsiblebehaviorandleadtolowperformance. Likewise,implementingorganizationalaccountabilitywithoutprovidingcommensurateautonomyandauthoritytoemployeescanfosterjobdissatisfaction, increaseemployeeturnover,andleadtolowperformance.Fromthisperspective, bothoftheseorganizationalstructuresarenecessary,butneitheraloneissufficient. Thisbalancedapproachisakeycharacteristicunderlyingthetheoryandmodelof theestablishedprofessions,suchaslaw,medicine,universityprofessors,dentistry, engineering(Freidson1986).Intheprofessionalmodel,practitionersare,ideally, firstprovidedwiththetraining,resources,conditions,andautonomytodothejob andthentheyareheldaccountablefordoingthejobwell.Translatingthis balancedperspectivetoschoolsettings,inpriorresearchwehaveexaminedthe relativeeffectsofbothteachers’ decisionmakinginfluenceandschoolaccountabilityinschools.Wehavedocumentedthatschoolswithbothhighlevelsofteacher decisionmakinginfluenceandstrongacademicstandardsforteachers,haveboth betterteacherretentionandhigherstudentachievement(e.g.,Ingersoll2003; IngersollandCollins,2019).Tobesure,thedatadonotsuggestthataltering anyoftheorganizationalconditionsweexaminedwouldbeeasy,nordothe dataplaceblameonschoolleaders therecanbenumerous financial,political, organizationalandlegalbarrierstoimprovementsinschoolsasworkplaces. However,unlikereformssuchasteachersalaryincreasesandclass-sizereduction, changingsomeoftheorganizationalconditionsrevealedinthedata,suchasthe degreetowhichteachershaveinputintoschool-widedecisions,andthe amountofautonomyteachersholdintheirclassrooms,wouldappeartobeless costly financially animportantconsideration,especiallyinruralsettings.
DeclarationofConflictingInterests
Theauthor(s)declarednopotentialconflictsofinterestwithrespecttotheresearch, authorship,and/orpublicationofthisarticle.
Funding
Theauthor(s)receivedno financialsupportfortheresearch,authorship,and/orpublicationofthisarticle.
ORCIDiDs
RichardM.Ingersoll https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7916-6454
HenryTran https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2229-7111
Notes
1.Ineducationalresearch,theterm shortage hastypicallybeendefinedasaninsufficientpreparationofnewteachers.Thisisanarrowerdefinitionthantypically usedineconomicsupplyanddemandtheory whichdefinesalaborshortage asanyimbalancewherethequantityoflabordemandedisgreaterthanthequantitysupplied,giventheprevailingwagesandjobconditions.Insupplyand demandtheory,suchimbalancescanresultfromavarietyoffactors,including employeeturnover.Toavoidconfusionbetweenthesedifferingdefinitionsof teachershortages,herewewilloftenusetheterm,teacherstaffingproblems,to genericallyrefertothedifficultiesschoolsexperienceadequatelystaffingclassroomswithqualifiedteachers.
2.Beginningwiththe2007–08SASS,CensusandNCESnolongermergedtown andruralasonelocale;thesebecameseparatelocalecategories.Inthisstudy wefocusonruralanddonotincludetown.Notethatthelatterisarelatively smallsegmentofthepopulationofschools,studentsandteachers.
3.Inbackgroundanalysesweexaminedwhetherpartofthedecreaseinthesizeof theruralschoolsectorcouldbeduetoin-migrationofpopulationtoruralcommunities,leadingtotheirreclassificationastown,suburbanorurban,andhencea declineinthenumberofcommunitiesclassifiedasrural.Wefoundthisnotto bethecase.Weexaminedthoseschoolssampledinboth2008and2018. Fewruralschoolswerereclassifiedoverthisperiodandthesizeofrural schools,reclassifiedornot,decreasedduringthisperiod.
4.Usingaone-wayrandomeffectsANOVAmodel,thedatashowthatthevariance componentwithinstatesis44timesthesizeofthevariancecomponentbetween states,andthatbetweenschoolsis84timesthatbetweendistricts.
5.Forinstance,usinga4-levellogisticHLMmodel,estimatedviaMLwiN2.20,we partitionedthevarianceinteacherturnoverinthe04-05TFS.Ofthetotalvariance inannualturnover,77%wasamongschools,16%wasamongdistricts,and7% wasamongstates.
6.ForthetoppanelofTable3,fromalistof22reasons,wecreated fivecategories, asfollows:(1)Retirement;(2)SchoolStaf fingAction:reduction-in-force/ layoff/involuntarytransfer;(3)FamilyorPersonal:wantedamoreconveniently locatedjobormoved;personallifereasons,suchaspregnancy/childrearing; health;caringforfamily;(4)ToPursueOtherJob:topursueanothercareer; totakecoursestoimprovecareeropportunitieswithinoroutsidethe fieldof education;wantedtoteachatanotherschool;(5)Dissatisfaction:poorsalary orbene fits;dissatis fiedwithnumberofstudents;dissatis fiedwithjobassignment;toomanystudentdisciplineproblems;toomanyintrusionsonteaching time;lackoffacultyautonomyorinfluenceoverschoolpolicies;unsafeorinadequatefacilitiesorresources;lackofopportunitiesforleadershiporprofessionaldevelopment;dissatis fiedwithaccountability/testing;dissatis fiedwith theadministration.
IngersollandTran
References
Allen,N.,Appleman,S.,Jackson,A.,&Rouse,K.(2023). Creativityfromnecessity: Apracticaltoolkitforleaderstoaddressteachershortages.Bellwether. AllianceforExcellentEducation.(2005). Teacherattrition:Acostlylosstothenation andtothestates.Author. AmericanFederationofTeachers.(2022). Heretoday,gonetomorrow?WhatAmerica mustdotoattractandretaintheeducatorsandschoolstaffourstudentsneed. Author.
Aragon,S.(2016). Teachershortages:Whatweknow.TeacherShortageSeries. EducationCommissionoftheStates.
Barnes,G.,Crowe,E.,&Schaefer,B.(2007). Thecostofteacherturnoverin fivedistricts:Apilotstudy.NationalCommissiononTeachingandAmerica’sFuture.
Behrstock,E.(2009). TeachershortageinEnglandandIllinois:Acomparativehistory [PhDDissertation].OxfordUniversity.
Borman,G.D.,&Dowling,N.M.(2008).Teacherattritionandretention:Ametaanalyticandnarrativereviewoftheresearch. ReviewofEducationalResearch, 78,367–409.
Boyd,D.,Grossman,P.,Lankford,H.,Loeb,S.,&Wyckoff,J.(2007). Wholeaves? Teacherattritionandstudentachievement.TeacherPolicyResearchCenter,State UniversityofNewYork-Albany.
Brownell,M.T.,Bishop,A.M.,&Sindelar,P.T.(2005).NCLBandthedemandfor highlyqualifiedteachers:Challengesandsolutionsforruralschools. Rural SpecialEducationQuarterly, 24(1),9–15.
Carver-Thomas,D.,&Darling-Hammond.(2017). Teacherturnover:Whyitmatters andwhatwecandoaboutit? LearningPolicyInstitute.
Carver-Thomas,D.,&Darling-Hammond,L.(2019).Thetroublewithteacherturnover:Howteacherattritionaffectsstudentsandschools. EducationPolicy AnalysisArchives, 27(36),32pp.
Chen,C.,Sable,J.,Mitchell,L.,&Liu,F.(2011). DocumentationtotheNCES commoncoreofdatapublicelementary/secondaryschooluniversesurvey: Schoolyear2009–10 (NCES2011-348).U.S.DepartmentofEducation, NationalCenterforEducationStatistics.http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubs.info. asp?pubid=2011348
Clotfelter,C.T.,Ladd,H.F.,&Vigdor,J.L.(2006,Fall).Teacher-studentmatchingandthe assessmentofteachereffectiveness. JournalofHumanResources, 41(4),778–820. Collins,G.J.(2019). Schooldistrictconsolidationanditsacademicand financial effects.UniversityofPennsylvania. Davis,J.,Rupasingha,A.,Cromartie,J.,&Sander,A.(2022).RuralAmericaata Glance.Washington,DC:AmericaEconomicResearchService,US DepartmentofAgriculture.https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ers.usda. gov/webdocs/publications/105155/eib-246.pdf?v=2823.3
Drucker,P.(1992). Managingforthefuture:The1990sandbeyond.NewYork: TrumanTalley.
Duncombe,W.,&Yinger,J.(2010).TheBenefitsandCostsofSchoolDistrict Consolidation:WhatRecentResearchRevealsaboutPotentialCostSavings. SchoolAdministrator.67(5),10–17.
Eppley,K.(2015). “Hey,IsawyourgrandparentsatWalmart”:Teachereducationfor ruralschoolsandcommunities. TheTeacherEducator, 50(1),67–86. Fowler,C.(2008).TheheraldedriseandneglectedfalloftheMassachusettssigning bonus. PhiDeltaKappan, 89(5),380–385. Fowler,R.C.(2003).Massachusettssigningbonusprogramfornewteachers. EducationPolicyAnalysisArchives, 11,13. Freidson,E.(1986). Professionalpowers:Astudyintheinstitutionalizationofformal knowledge.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress. García,E.,&Weiss,E.(2019). Theteachershortageisreal,largeandgrowing,and worsethanwethought.EconomicPolicyInstitute.https://www.epi.org/files/pdf/ 163651.pdf
García,E.,&Weiss,E.(2020). Examiningthefactorsthatplayaroleintheteacher shortagecrisis:Key findingsfromEPI’ s ’ perfectstormintheteacherlabor marketseries.EconomicPolicyInstitute. Goff,P.T.,&Brueker,E.M.(2017). Theroleofplace:Labormarketdynamicsin ruralandnon-ruralschooldistricts (WorkingPaper2017-4).WisconsinCenter forEducationResearch.
Goldring,R.,Taie,S.,&Riddles,M.(2014). Teacherattritionandmobility:Results fromthe2012–13teacherfollow-upsurvey (NCES2014-077).U.S.Department ofEducation.NationalCenterforEducationStatistics.Retrieved[122/13/20] fromhttp://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch
GovernmentAccountabilityOffice.(2022). K-12Education:Educationshouldassess itseffortstoaddressteachershortages.UnitedStatesGovernmentAccountability Office.https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-23-105180 Greene,P.(2019,Sept5).Weneedtostoptalkingabouttheteachershortage. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2019/09/05/we-need-to-stop-talkingabout-the-teacher-shortage/?sh=147493a3494c
Grissom,J.A.,&Bartanen,B.(2019).Strategicretention:Principaleffectivenessand teacherturnoverinmultiple-measureteacherevaluationsystems. American EducationalResearchJournal, 56(2),514–555.
Guarino,C.,Santibanez,L.,&Daley,G.(2006).Teacherrecruitmentandretention:A reviewoftherecentempiricalliterature. ReviewofEducationalResearch, 76(1), 173–208.
Hawley,L.R.,Koziol,N.A.,Bovaird,J.A.,McCormick,C.M.,Welch,G.W., Arthur,A.M.,&Bash,K.(2016).Defininganddescribingrural:Implications forruralspecialeducationresearchandpolicy. RuralSpecialEducation Quarterly, 35(3),3–11. Henry,G.T.,&Redding,C.(2018).Theconsequencesofleavingschoolearly:The effectsofwithin-yearandend-of-yearteacherturnover. EducationFinanceand Policy, 15,332–356.https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00274
Hirsch,E.,Koppich,J.,&Knapp,M.(2001). Revisitingwhatstatesaredoingto improvethequalityofteaching:Anupdateonpatternsandtrends.Centerfor theStudyofTeachingandPolicy,UniversityofWashington. Hom,P.,&Griffeth,R.(1995). Employeeturnover.South-Western.
Ingersoll,R.(1997).Therecurringmythofteachershortages. TeachersCollege Record, 99,41–45.
Ingersoll,R.(2001).Teacherturnoverandteachershortages:Anorganizationalanalysis. AmericanEducationalResearchJournal, 38(3),499–534.https://doi.org/10. 1177/0042085917697200
Ingersoll,R.(2003). Whocontrolsteachers’ work?Powerandaccountabilityin America’sschools.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.
Ingersoll,R.(2019).Accountability,ControlandTeachers’ WorkinAmerican Schools.InS.Zepeda&J.Ponticell(Eds.), Wileyhandbookofeducationalsupervision.NewYork:JohnWiley.
Ingersoll,R.,&May,H.(2011).Theminorityteachershortage:Factorfable?Phi DeltaKappan, 93(1),62–65.
Ingersoll,R.,&May,H.(2012).Themagnitude,destinationsanddeterminantsof mathematicsandscienceteacherturnover. EducationalEvaluationandPolicy Analysis, 34(4),435–464.https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085917697200
Ingersoll,R.,May,H.,&Collins,G.(2019).Recruitment,employment,retentionand theminorityteachershortage. EducationPolicyAnalysisArchives, 27(37).https:// doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.3714
Ingersoll,R.,May,H.,&Collins,G.(2022a).Five findingsonteacherdiversity. EducationalLeadership, 80(2),40–43.
Ingersoll,R.,Merrill,E.,Stuckey,D.,Collins,G.,&Harrison,B.(2021).ThedemographictransformationoftheteachingforceintheUnitedStates. Education Sciences, 11,234.https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11050234
Ingersoll,R.,Merrill,E.,Stuckey,D.,Collins,G.,&Harrison,B.(2022b).Fivetrends shapingtheteachingforce. TheStateEducationStandard, 22(3),6–11.
Ingersoll,R.,&Perda,D.(2010).Isthesupplyofmathematicsandscienceteachers sufficient? AmericanEducationalResearchJournal, 47(3),563–594.
Johnson,S.M.,Berg,J.,&Donaldson,M.(2005). Whostaysinteachingandwhy:Areview oftheliteratureonteacherretention.HarvardGraduateSchoolofEducation.http:// assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/articles/NRTA/Harvard_report.pdf
Jovanovic,B.(1979).Jobmatchingandthetheoryofturnover. JournalofPolitical Economy, 87(5),972–990.https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085917697200
Kane,R.E.(2010). Aquantitativestudyoftheeffectivenessofteacherrecruitment strategiesinaruralMidwesternstate.WaldenUniversity.ProQuestLLC. Keesler,V.(2010).Estimatingcause:Teacherturnoverandschooleffectivenessin Michigan[Paperpresentation].TheannualconferenceoftheSocietyfor ResearchonEducationalEffectiveness,Washington,DC. Krieg,J.M.(2004).Teacherqualityandattrition. EconomicsofEducationReview, 25, 13–27.
Lavalley,M.(2018). Outoftheloop:Ruralschoolsarelargelyleftoutofresearchand policydiscussion.CenterforPublicEducation,NationalSchoolBoards Association.
Levy,A.J.,Ellis,P.,Joy,L.,Jablonski ,E.,&Karelitz,T.M.(2010).Thecauses andcostsofturnoverforscienceandotherteachers[Paperpresentation].The 2010AmericanEducationalResearchAssociationAnnualMeeting,Denver, CO.
Liu,E.,Johnson,S.,&Peske,H.(2004).NewteacherandtheMassachusettssigning bonus:Thelimitsofinducements. EducationalEvaluationandPolicyAnalysis, 26(3),217–236.
Liu,E.,Rosenstein,J.,Swann,A.,&Khalil,D.(2008).Whendistrictsencounter teachershortages?Thechallengesofrecruitingandretainingmathteachersin urbandistricts. LeadershipandPolicyinSchools, 7(3),296–323. Lortie,D.(1975). Schoolteacher.UniversityofChicagoPress.
Lowe,J.M.(2006).Ruraleducation:Attractingandretainingteachersinsmall schools. TheRuralEducator, 27(2),28–32. Maranto,R.(2013).Howdowegetthemonthefarm?Effortstoimproveruralteacher recruitmentandretentioninArkansas. TheRuralEducator, 34(1).
McClure,C.,&Reeves.(2004). Ruralteacherrecruitmentandretention:Reviewof theresearchandpracticeliterature.AppalachiaEducationalLaboratory. Merrill,E.(2014). AnanalysisoftheteacherturnoverpolicyprobleminNewYork City’smiddleschools [PhDdissertation].UniversityofPennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Milanowski,A.,&Odden,A.(2007). Anewapproachtothecostofteacherturnover CenteronReinventingPublicEducation.
Miller,L.C.(2012).Situatingtheruralteacherlabormarketinthebroadercontext:A descriptiveanalysisofthemarketdynamicsinNewYorkState. Journalof ResearchinRuralEducation, 27(13),1–31.http://jrre.psu.edu/articles/27-13.pdf Mobley,W.(1982). Employeeturnover:Causes,consequencesandcontrol Addison-Wesley.
Monk,D.H.(2007).Recruitingandretaininghigh-qualityteachersinruralareas. The FutureofChildren, 17(1),155–174.
Murnane,R.,Singer,J.,Willett,J.,Kemple,J.,&Olsen,R.(1991). Whowillteach? Policiesthatmatter.HarvardUniversityPress. NationalAcademyofSciences.(1987). Towardunderstandingteachersupplyand demand.Author. NationalAcademyofSciences.(2007). Risingabovethegatheringstorm.Author. NationalCommissiononExcellenceinEducation.(1983). Anationatrisk:Theimperativeforeducationalreform.GovernmentPrintingOffice. NationalCommissiononMathematicsandScienceTeachingforthe21stCentury(the GlennCommission).(2000). Beforeit’stoolate.GovernmentPrintingOffice. NationalCommissiononTeachingandAmerica’sFuture.(1996). Whatmattersmost: TeachingforAmerica’sfuture.NCTAF. NationalCommissiononTeachingandAmerica’sFuture.(1997). Doingwhatmatters most:Investinginqualityteaching.NCTAF.
NationalCommissiononTeachingandAmerica’sFuture.(2003). Nodreamdenied. NCTAF.
NationalResearchCouncil.(2002). Learningandunderstanding:Improving advancedstudyofmathematicsandscienceinU.S.schools.National AcademiesPress.
Nguyen,T.D.,Pham,L.D.,Crouch,M.,&Springer,M.G.(2020).Thecorrelatesof teacherturnover:Anupdatedandexpandedmeta-analysisoftheliterature. EducationalResearchReview, 31,100355.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev. 2020.100355
Pendola,A.,&Fuller,E.J.(2018).Principalstabilityandtheruraldivide.In E.McHenry-Sorber&D.Hall(Eds.),Thediversityofruraleducationalleadership [Specialissue]. JournalofResearchinRuralEducation, 34(1),1–20.
President’sCouncilofAdvisorsonScienceandTechnology(PCAST).(2010). Prepareandinspire:K-12Science,Technology,Engineering,andMath (STEM)educationforAmerica’sfuture.GovtPrintingOffice.
Price,J.(1977). Thestudyofturnover.IowaStateUniversityPress. Price,J.(1989).Theimpactofturnoverontheorganization. WorkandOccupations, 16,461–473.
Quartz,K.,Thomas,A.,Anderson,L.,Masyn,K.,Lyons,K.,&Olsen,B.(2008). Careersinmotion:Alongitudinalstudyofrolechangingpatternsamongurban educators. TeachersCollegeRecord, 110(1),218–250. Randazzo,S.(2022).Shortageofteachersstretchesnationwide. WallStreetJournal, August17,2022.
Rice,J.,Roellke,C.,Sparks,D.,&Kolbe,T.(2008). Piecingtogethertheteacher policylandscape:Apolicy-problemtypology.TeachersCollegeRecord.http:// www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentId=15223
Ronfeldt,M.,Loeb,S.,&Wyckoff,J.(2013).Howteacherturnoverharmsstudent achievement. AmericanEducationalResearchJournal, 50(1),4–36.https://doi. org/10.3102/0002831212463813
Schaefer,A.P.,Mattingly,M.J.,&Johnson,K.M.(2016). Childpovertyhigherand morepersistentinruralAmerica.UniversityofNewHampshireCarseySchoolof PublicPolicy.
Seelig,J.L.,&McCabe,K.M.(2021).Whyteachersstay:Shapinganewnarrativeon ruralteacherretention. JournalofResearchinRuralEducation, 37(8).https://doi. org/10.26209/jrre3708
Siebert,S.W.,&Zubanov,N.(2009).Searchingfortheoptimallevelofemployee turnover:AstudyofalargeU.K.retailorganization. AcademyofManagement Journal, 52(2),294–313.https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487117702583
Simon,N.,&Johnson,S.(2015).Teacherturnoverinhigh-povertyschools:Whatwe knowandcando. TeachersCollegeRecord, 117(3),1–36.https://doi.org/10. 1177/016146811511700305
Smith,M.(January14,2022).Professorwhopredicted ‘TheGreatResignation’ shares the3trendsthatwilldominateworkin2022. CNBC.Retrievedfromhttps://www. cnbc.com/2022/01/14/the-great-resignation-expert-shares-the-biggest-work-trendsof-2022.html
430 EducationalAdministrationQuarterly59(2)
Smylie,M.A.,&Wenzel,S.A.(2003). TheChicagoAnnenbergChallenge:Successes, failures,andlessonsforthefuture (FinaltechnicalreportoftheChicagoAnnenberg ResearchProject).ConsortiumonChicagoSchoolResearch,UniversityofChicago.
Sorensen,L.C.,&Ladd,H.F.(2020). Thehiddencostsofteacherturnover.AERA Open.January2020.https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420905812
Stolzenberg,R.(1978).Bringingthebossbackin:Employersize,employeeschooling andsocioeconomicachievement. AmericanSociologicalReview, 43(6),813–828https://doi.org/10.2307/2094623
Sutcher,L.,Darling-Hammond,L.,&Carver-Thomas.(2016). Acomingcrisisin teaching?Teachersupply,demandandshortagesintheU.S. LearningPolicy Institute.
Synar,E.,&Maiden,J.(2012).Acomprehensivemodelforestimatingthe financial impactofteacherturnover. JournalofEducationFinance, 38(2),130–144. Taie,S.,&Goldring,R.(2020). Characteristicsofpublicandprivateelementaryand secondaryschoolteachersintheUnitedStates:Resultsfromthe2017–18 Nationalteacherandprincipalsurvey firstlook (NCES2020-142rev).U.S. DepartmentofEducation.NationalCenterforEducationStatistics.https://nces. ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2020142rev
TexasCenterforEducationalResearch.(2000). Thecostofteacherturnover.Texas StateBoardforEducatorCertification.
Theobald,N.(1990).Anexaminationoftheinfluenceofpersonal,professionaland schooldistrictcharacteristicsonpublicschoolteacherretention. Economicsof EducationReview, 9(3),241–250https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7757(90)90005-P Tieken,M.C.(2017).Thespatializationofracialinequityandeducationalopportunity:Rethinkingtherural/urbandivide. PeabodyJournalofEducation, 92(3), 385–404.
Tran,H.,&Dou,J.(2019).Anexploratoryexaminationofwhattypesofadministrativesupportmatterforruralteachertalentmanagement:Theruraleducatorperspective. EducationLeadershipReview, 20(1),133–149.
Tran,H.,Hardie,S.,Gause,S.,Moyi,P.,&Ylimaki,R.(2020).Leveragingtheperspectivesofruraleducatorstodeveloprealisticjobpreviewsforruralteacher recruitmentandretention. TheRuralEducator, 41(2),31–46. Tyack,D.(1974). Theonebestsystem.HarvardUniversityPress.
U.S.BureauoftheCensus.(2018). Thestatisticalabstract (147thed.).U.S. DepartmentofCommerce.
U.S.DepartmentofEducation.(2002).NationalCenterforEducationStatistics. SchoolLocaleCodes1987–2000,NCES2002-02,byNancySpeicher.Arnold A.Goldstein,projectofficer.Washington,DC.
U.S.DepartmentofEducation.(2009). Teachershortageareasnationwidelisting 1990–91to2009–10.Author.
Villar,A.,&Strong,M.(2007).Ismentoringworththemoney?Abenefit–costanalysisand five-yearrateofreturnofacomprehensivementoringprogramforbeginningteachers. ERSSpectrum, 25(3),1–17.
Watlington,E.,Shockley,R.,Guglielmino,P.,&Felsher,R.(2010).Thehighcostof leaving:Ananalysisofthecostofteacherturnover. JournalofEducation Finance, 36(1),22–37.
Woulfin,S.,&Allen,C.(2022). Theinstitutionofschooling,chapter4inthefoundationalhandbookonimprovementresearchineducation (D.J.Peurach,J.Lin Russell,L.Cohen-Vogel,&WilliamPenuel,Eds.).RomanandLittlefield. Wright,A.(2022,January31). Teachers ‘beatendown’ bystaffshortages,COVID. PEW.https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2022/ 01/31/teachers-beaten-down-by-staff-shortages-covid
AuthorBiographies
RichardIngersoll,aformerhighschoolteacher,isProfessorofEducationand SociologyattheUniversityofPennsylvania.Hisresearchfocusesonelementary andsecondaryteachingasajob,teachersasemployees,andschoolsasworkplaces. Heiswidelypublished,hasgivenhundredsofspeechesandpresentations,isfrequentlyquotedinthemedia,andhasreceivednumerousawards,including:the OutstandingWritingAwardfromtheAmericanAssociationofCollegesforTeacher Education;theLifetimeAchievementAwardfromtheOrganizationalTheory SpecialInterestGroupoftheAmericanEducationalResearchAssociation;the OutstandingResearcherAwardfromtheAssociationofTeacherEducators;andthe RichardB.RussellAwardforExcellenceinTeachingfromtheUniversityofGeorgia.
HenryTran isanAssociateProfessorattheUniversityofSouthCarolina’s DepartmentofEducationalLeadershipandPolicieswhostudiesissuesrelatedtoeducationhumanresources(HR)and finance.Hehaspublishednumerousarticlesonthe topics,holdstwonationalHRcertificationsandservedontheBoardofAdvisorsand BoardofTrusteesfortheNationalEducationFinanceAcademy.Heisalsotheeditor ofthe JournalofEducationHumanResources,theDirectoroftheTalentCentered EducationLeadershipInitiative,Co-DirectoroftheCenterforInnovationinHigher Education,andleadeditorof HowDidWeGetHere?:TheDecayOfTheTeaching Profession
The rural teacher shortage
Teacher dissatisfaction is causing more turnover at rural schools compared to urban and suburban schools, and recruitment strategies alone won’t address the issue.
By Richard M. Ingersoll & Henry Tran
Perennial teacher shortages — including those education is experiencing post-pandemic — receive a great deal of attention. It is widely believed that such teacher staffing problems are primarily due to an
insufficient supply of new teachers in the face of two largescale demographic trends: increasing student enrollments and increasing teacher retirements due to an aging workforce. The prevailing policy responses to school staffing problems
RICHARD M. INGERSOLL (rmi@upenn.edu) is a professor of education and sociology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. HENRY TRAN (htr@sc.edu) is an associate professor in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policies at the University of South Carolina, Columbia.
have focused on increasing the supply of new teachers through a wide range of initiatives. Underlying these initiatives is the common assumption that school staffing problems are due to inadequate numbers of newly qualified teachers, and hence, the best solution is to increase that supply.
But are these initiatives coming at the problem from the wrong angle? To answer that question, we need to understand the reasons for shortages.
Understanding teacher shortages
Teacher shortages are not new. For most of the past century, they have come and gone again and again in the U.S. education system. However, since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, teacher shortage concerns have dramatically escalated. It has been widely predicted and reported that the stress brought on by the pandemic spurred a drop in the supply of new teachers and a surge in the departures of existing teachers. However, it remains unclear how these current staffing problems compare to those of earlier decades. The available evidence since the pandemic began has been mostly limited to data from specific states and locales. Until recently, there have not been large-scale national data available to determine how widespread and how deep teacher staffing problems have become in recent years.
Over the past three decades, our research teams have used large-scale nationally representative U.S. Department of Education data to examine teacher demand, supply, turnover, and shortages (e.g. Ingersoll, 2001; Ingersoll & Perda, 2010; Ingersoll et al., 2019; Ingersoll & Tran, 2023). Recently, we decided to focus on rural schools. Research and reform on teacher shortages and turnover has tended to focus on schools in urban areas because of an assumption that schools in those settings suffer from the most serious teacher staffing problems. However, some researchers and reformers have argued
AT A GLANCE
• A common assumption about teacher shortages, currently and in the past, is that these are primarily due to an insufficient supply of new teachers and that the best solution is to increase the supply of new teachers.
• Researchers Richard M. Ingersoll and Henry Tran analyzed national data to find out if there are differences between teacher staffing problems in urban, suburban, and rural schools.
• Teacher staffing problems in rural schools are primarily the result of turnover, not high teacher retirement rates or growing student enrollments.
• Rural teachers cite pursuit of another job and job dissatisfaction as reasons for leaving at higher levels than in urban or suburban schools.
• Lack of classroom autonomy and being left out of decision making are among the top causes of rural teacher dissatisfaction, not salaries or class size.
• Policy focus on retention along with recruitment may help.
that rural schools represent an important, but neglected, segment of the population of schools, students, and teachers. In this view, rural education exemplifies a case of “spatial
The shrinking rural school sector
Trends in the number of K-12 public schools, students, and teachers, 1999-2021
Figure 1.
TEACHER SHORTAGE
Teachers were over twice as likely to move out of rural schools and to urban or suburban schools as they were to move from urban or suburban schools to rural schools.
injustice,” where inequities and deficits in key resources, such as local funding and adequate teacher staffing, are deeply rooted in geography (Tieken, 2017; Tran & Dou, 2019; Tran et al., 2020).
A focus on rural schools
In our new analysis, we looked at national data to provide an overall portrait of teacher staffing problems and turnover in rural schools across the nation. Our method is comparative, focusing on rural schools and comparing them to urban and suburban schools. Our main data source is the nationally representative Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS); its successor, the National Teacher Principal Survey (NTPS); and their supplement, the Teacher Follow-Up Survey (TFS). These data are collected by the Census Bureau for the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the data collection agency of the U.S. Department of Education. Together, these are the largest
rural schools
Of public secondary schools with teaching vacancies in core fields, percent with serious difficulty filling those vacancies, 2020-21
and most comprehensive data sources available on teachers in elementary and secondary schools. NCES has administered these surveys regularly from the late 1980s to 2021. Our analyses revealed six key findings, which bolster the argument that rural schools suffer from serious teacher staffing problems. It is important to note that the most recent data we analyze were collected in spring 2021, one year after the pandemic began. Other data we analyze are from earlier years. Hence, our data may or may not reflect all the changes wrought by the public health crisis. Our hypothesis is that our findings, and the trends we uncovered, have continued over time and will become even more pronounced in the future.
The rural school sector is shrinking.
We began our analysis by examining demographic changes in rural education, including student enrollments and the size and age of the teaching force. The data show that, over the past two decades, the number of schools, students, and teachers in rural areas have decreased sharply. This is in contrast to urban and suburban communities. For example, while the teaching force in urban and suburban school systems both increased by about a fifth in that timeframe, it decreased by about a fifth in rural schools (see Figure 1). Moreover, unlike in urban and suburban schools during the past decade, the average age of the rural teaching force has decreased, resulting in a decrease in the number and percentage of teachers approaching retirement age.
Given these demographic changes in rural schools, traditional teacher shortage theory would predict that such schools should see demand for new teachers decrease. Thus, they should have less difficulty staffing their classrooms and suffer less from teacher shortages. In contrast, theory also would expect the opposite in urban and suburban schools — their increase in students, retirement-age teachers, and the number of teachers employed could lead to staffing problems. Do the data confirm this?
Rural schools suffer from serious teacher staffing problems
The most grounded and accurate measures of the extent of teacher staffing problems and teacher shortages in schools are data from school administrators on the actual degree of difficulty they encounter filling open teaching positions. These data show that over the past two decades, in any given year, most schools have had openings for teachers. A significant percentage of these schools have had difficulty filling their open positions.
For instance, at the start of the 2020-21 school year, about 80% of public secondary schools, urban, suburban, and rural alike, had to recruit and interview teachers for open teaching positions in one or more of their key subjects. Among the rural schools, 59% had serious difficulty filling one or more of those openings — a percentage that was higher than in urban or suburban schools (Figure 2). The data also show large differences in vacancies and staffing difficulties for certain subject areas. The fields of mathematics, science, and special
Figure 2.
Teacher staffing problems are worse in
education have long experienced the most serious staffing problems.
In short, despite a decrease in the number of students and teachers, many rural schools have nevertheless suffered from difficulties staffing their teaching positions, even more so than urban and suburban schools.
Rural schools suffer from a revolving door of teachers
The above data from school administrators on the degree of difficulty filling openings is a useful empirical measure of teacher staffing problems. However, these data do not indicate the sources of these difficulties.
Our analyses show that the need for new hires in rural schools and the accompanying staffing difficulties are not driven by increases in student enrollments, because student enrollments in rural schools have decreased. Rather, the data show that the hiring of new teachers in rural schools each year largely serves to fill spots vacated by teachers who departed their schools at the end of the previous school year. Most of those departures are not due to teacher retirements. Our data indicate that pre-retirement teacher turnover is the primary driver of staffing problems in rural schools.
Researchers have long held that elementary and secondary schools suffer from high teacher turnover (Lortie, 1975; Tyack, 1974; Murnane et al., 1991). To put this in context, we analyzed national data from the NCES Baccalaureate and Beyond Survey, a longitudinal survey that followed college graduates for 10 years, to compare teacher attrition rates (those leaving the occupation entirely) to attrition rates for other lines of work. We found that attrition in teaching is, in fact, lower than in some professions, such as childcare workers, secretaries, and paralegals. It is slightly higher than for police officers and nurses and far higher than for many professions, such as lawyers, engineers, architects, physical therapists, and pharmacists. K-12 teachers form one of the largest occupational groups in the nation, so their relatively high departure rates means that, numerically, the flow of teachers in and out of schools is quite large.
To try to capture the magnitude of the flow of teachers in and out of schools, we analyzed the national SASS and TFS data on both teacher hiring and turnover for 2013, the most recent data available. While these data are older, we have found these same patterns and proportions in other years. As shown in Figure 3, about 90,000 teachers entered rural public schools at the beginning of the school year. By the next school year, about 145,000 — equivalent to 162% of those just hired — departed from their schools, either to other schools or to other lines of work. Thus, during the 10 to 12 months before, during, and after that school year, there were about 245,000 teacher job transitions into, between, or out of rural public schools. This represents about one quarter of the entire rural public teaching force — a scenario reflecting a “revolving door” (Figure 3).
Total teacher turnover as depicted in Figure 3 is evenly split between its two major components: migration to other schools
and attrition from teaching altogether. Teacher migration, of course, does not decrease the overall net supply of teachers and does not contribute to overall shortages. However, crossschool and cross-district moving usually does result in the need to replace staff. This means potential staffing difficulties and staffing problems. Moreover, as we show in the next section, teacher cross-school migration is asymmetric. The flows to and from schools in different locations are not evenly balanced.
Of course, not all teacher turnover is detrimental. Across a range of occupations and industries, job and career changes are normal and common. However, employee turnover can be costly for employers. And high levels of departures from an organization can be a symptom of underlying problems. Research has also shown this to be true for schools (Ingersoll & Tran, 2023). Our research has documented that one negative consequence of teacher turnover is its pivotal role in teacher shortages.
Rates of turnover differ between types of schools
The overall levels of turnover mask large differences in teacher departure rates across different settings. Teacher turnover is not spread evenly. In any given year, almost half of all public school teacher turnover takes place in just one quarter of public schools.
As shown in Figure 4, overall, there are not large differences in teacher turnover among rural, urban, and suburban schools. There are, however, large differences according to the demographic composition of the students and the community. Low-poverty suburban schools have the lowest levels of teacher turnover at 12% annually. On the other hand, urban schools with high levels of students of color or high levels of students from high-poverty communities have among the highest rates of turnover. Teacher turnover is even higher in high-poverty rural schools and rural schools with high levels of students of color. These rural schools face the most extreme teacher turnover of all schools, experiencing departures of
Figure 3.
School management and leadership play a significant role in the solution to some teacher staffing problems. Many of the reasons for rural teacher turnover can be changed through policy, with implications for the leadership of schools.
between a quarter and a third of teachers annually (Figure 4).
Exacerbating the issue for rural schools are the large differences in the destinations of teachers who migrated from one school to another. Teachers were over twice as likely to move out of rural schools and to urban or suburban schools as they were to move from urban or suburban schools to rural schools. The result is an annual reshuffling of a large portion of the rural teaching force, with a net loss to rural schools and a net gain to urban and suburban schools.
Job dissatisfaction is the primary driver of rural teacher turnover
There are many reasons for teacher turnover. The TFS data
show that teachers often indicate that their departures are due to retirement; school staffing actions (such as layoffs, terminations, school closings, and involuntary cross-school transfers); or family reasons (such as pregnancy, child rearing, health problems, and family moves). Another set of reasons involves teachers pursuing another job. Those include teachers who moved to another school because they felt it was a better teaching assignment and those who left teaching to pursue another career or to go back to school.
Notably, the most frequently cited set of reasons for leaving involves teachers’ dissatisfaction with various aspects of the teaching job. Forty-one percent of teachers departing from rural schools indicate they departed to pursue a different or better job, and 61% cite dissatisfaction as a main reason for their departures. Rural teachers cite pursuit of another job and job dissatisfaction as reasons for their departures at higher levels than in urban or suburban schools.
School working conditions are strongly linked to rural teacher turnover
There are many reasons behind the turnover of the 61% of teachers who departed rural schools because of dissatisfaction. Interestingly, though teacher salaries in rural school districts are, on average, lower than in urban or suburban school districts, dissatisfaction with salaries and benefits are among the least likely reasons given by rural teachers for their departures. Of those rural teachers who indicated that their departure was due to job dissatisfaction, only 34% reported that inadequate or poor salary and/or benefits were reasons for their departure. Also among the least likely reasons given by rural teachers is dissatisfaction with the numbers of students they taught (18%).
On the other hand, rural teachers departing because of dissatisfaction most frequently cited dissatisfaction with school administration (63%); accountability/testing (55%); and lack of classroom autonomy or input into decision making (50%) as sources of dissatisfaction.
The
implications of our findings
While rural education has shrunk in size, rural schools continue to have more difficulty keeping their classrooms staffed than do urban and suburban schools, which have both seen increases in students and teachers. The shortages in rural schools are largely due to high levels of pre-retirement teacher turnover, especially in disadvantaged communities.
Figure 4.
Long-standing theory on teacher shortages holds that the main source of the problem is an insufficient supply of new teachers in the face of student enrollment and teacher retirement increases. In turn, efforts to increase the supply of new teachers have long been a dominant reform strategy. Nothing in this study suggests these efforts are not worthwhile. However, the data indicate that teacher recruitment strategies, alone, do not directly address a major root source of teacher staffing problems — pre-retirement turnover. In short, recruiting more teachers, while an important first step, will not fully solve school staffing inadequacies if large numbers of teachers then depart in a few years. Increasing retention could prevent the loss of such investments and lessen the ongoing need for new recruitment initiatives.
School management and leadership play a significant role in the solution to some teacher staffing problems. Many of the reasons for rural teacher turnover can be changed through policy, with implications for the leadership of schools. The finding that neither salary/benefits nor class-size reduction are the main reasons for teacher turnover in rural schools is important because, on a practical level, salary increases, and class-size reduction are relatively expensive. In contrast, major reasons for teacher turnover include school management issues, such classroom autonomy and ability to have input into schoolwide decisions.
Altering these organizational conditions would not necessarily be easy. There can be numerous financial, political, organizational, and legal barriers to making these improvements. However, changing some of these organizational conditions would be less costly financially than teacher salary increases and class-size reduction — an important consideration, especially in disadvantaged settings. Retaining teachers through changing conditions, especially in high-poverty rural schools, could prevent some turnover in the future, which will come at a higher cost than making these changes that may encourage teachers to stay.
Note: This article is drawn from a longer paper published in Educational Administration Quarterly (Ingersoll & Tran, 2023).
References
Ingersoll, R. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38 (3), 499-534.
Ingersoll, R. & Perda, D. (2010). Is the supply of mathematics and science teachers sufficient? American Educational Research Journal, 47 (3), 563-94.
Ingersoll, R., May, H., & Collins, G. (2019). Recruitment, employment, retention and the minority teacher shortage. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27, 37.
Ingersoll, R. & Tran, H. (2023). Teacher shortages and turnover in rural schools in the U.S.: An organizational analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 59 (2), 396-431.
Lortie, D. (1975). School teacher. University of Chicago Press.
Murnane, R., Singer, J., Willett, J., Kemple, J., & Olsen, R. (1991). Who will teach? Policies that matter. Harvard University Press.
Tieken, M.C. (2017). The spatialization of racial inequity and educational opportunity: Rethinking the rural/urban divide. Peabody Journal of Education, 92 (3), 385-404.
Tran, H. & Dou, J. (2019). An exploratory examination of what types of administrative support matter for rural teacher talent management: The rural educator perspective. Education Leadership Review, 20 (1), 133-149.
Tran, H., Hardie, S., Gause, S., Moyi, P., & Ylimaki, R. (2020). Leveraging the perspectives of rural educators to develop realistic job previews for rural teacher recruitment and retention. The Rural Educator, 41 (2), 31-46.
Tyack. D. (1974). The one best system. Harvard University Press.
“The package deal includes eight wallet-sized portraits, two medium portraits, and one large canvas for your great hall.”
