Recruiting, Retaining, and Fairly Compensating Our Teachers

Abstract

This article examines three interlinked problems facing public schools today: how to recruit, retain, and pay our teachers. The article begins with an overview of the current situation in the United States, paying particular attention to schools in areas where minorities are the majority. It goes on to examine some of the causes of teacher attrition, with a special section on charter schools, which have a unique set of problems. Finally, it looks at the effects of in-school policies such as teacher preservice and in-service programs, and then discusses several successful programs around the country, including the TAP model and the Missouri Career Ladder

Keywords

• Recruitment
• retainment
• fair compensation
• teacher pre-service and inservice programs

References

1. Allensworth, E., Ponisciak, S., & Mazzeo, C. (2009). The schools teachers leave: Teacher mobility in Chicago Public Schools. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/publications/CCSR_Teacher_Mobility.pdf Retrieved School Research. October 1, 2009 from
2. Borman, G., and Dowling, N. (2008). Teacher attrition and retention—a meta-analytic and narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 367–409.
3. Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., & Wyckoff, J. (2009). The influence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions.
4. Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2005). Explaining the short careers of high-achieving teachers in schools with low-performing students. American Economic Review, 95(2), 166–171.
5. Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2006). How changes in entry requirements alter the teacher workforce and affect student achievement. Education Finance and Policy, 1(2), 176–216.
6. Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2007). Who leaves? Teacher attrition and student achievement (Research report). Albany, NY: Teacher Policy Research.
7. Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff. (2005). The impact of assessment and accountability on teacher recruitment and retention: Are there unintended consequences?
8. Brown, E. (2012). Teacher tenure: A Fairfax schools firing case. The Washington Post. Retrieved http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/teacher-tenure-a-fairfax- schools-firing-case/2012/06/02/gJQAVt4l9U_story.html from

9. Carroll, S. J., Reichardt, R. E., Guarino, C. M., & Mejia, A. (2000). The distribution of teachers among California‘s school districts and schools (MR-1298.0-JIF). Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
10. Coleman, J. S., & Campbell, E. Q. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity.
11. Washington, D.C., U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education.
12. DeAngelis, K. J., & Presley, J. B. (2007). Leaving schools or leaving the profession: Setting Illinois‘ record straight on teacher attrition (IERC 2007-1). Edwardsville: Illinois Education Research Council.
13. Gill, B. P., Timpane, M., Ross, K. E., & Brewer, D. J. (2001). Rhetoric versus reality: What we know and what we need to know about vouchers and charter schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
14. Glazerman, S. (2004). Teacher compensation reform: Promising strategies and feasible methods to rigorously study them. Washington, D.C.: Mathematica Policy Research.
15. Glazerman, S., Silva, T., Addy, N., Avellars, S., Max, J., McKie, A., Natzke, B., Puma, M., Wolf, P., & Greszler, R. (2006). Mathematica policy research for the U.S. Department of Education.
16. Goldhaber, D. (2006). Everyone‘s doing it, but what does teacher testing tell us about teacher effectiveness? CRPE working paper # 2006_1.
17. Goldhaber, D., Gross, B., & Player, D. (2007). Are public schools really losing their ―best‖?: Assessing the career transitions of teachers and their implication for the quality of the teacher workforce. Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research (Working Paper 12). Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute.
18. Guarino, C. M., Santibanez, L., & Daley, G. A. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of the recent empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 173–208.
19. Hansen, P., & Mulholland, J.A. (2005). Caring and elementary teaching: The concerns of male beginning teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 56, 119–131.
20. Hanushek, E., Kain, J., & Rivkin, S. (2004). Why public schools lose teachers. Journal of Human Resources, 39(2), 326–354.
21. Hanushek, E., & Raymond, M. (2005). Does school accountability lead to improved student performance? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24(2), 297– 328.
22. Imazeki, J. (2005). Teacher salaries and teacher attrition: How much is enough? Economics of Education Review, 24, 431–449.
23. Ingersoll, R. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499–534.
24. Johnson, S. P. (2008). The status of male teachers in public education today. CEEP Education Policy Brief.
25. Johnson, S. M., Berg, J. H., & Donaldson, M. L. (2005). Who stays in teaching and why: A review of the literature on teacher retention. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved May 17, 2009 from http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/articles/NRTA/Harvard_report.pdf
26. Kleiner, M. M. (2000). Occupational licensing. Journal of Economic Perspectives 14(4), 189–202.
27. Ladd, H. (2009). Teachers‘ perceptions of their wor ing conditions: How predictive of policy-relevant outcomes. National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research Working Paper 33. Washington, D.C.: CALDER.
28. Loeb, S., Darling-Hammond, L., & Luczak, J. (2005). How teaching conditions predict teacher turnover in California Schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(3), 44–70.
29. Lortie, D. C. (2002). Schoolteacher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30. Marvel, J., Lyter, D. M., Peltola, P., Strizek, G. A., & Morton, B. A. (2006). Teacher attrition and mobility: Results from the 2004–05 teacher follow-up survey (NCES 2007–307). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
31. Mintrom, M. (2000). Leveraging local innovations: The case of Michigan‘s charter schools. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.
32. Miron, G., & Applegate, B. (2007). Teacher attrition in charter schools. Western Michigan University: Miron.
33. National Commission on Teaching and America‘s Future (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America‘s future. Woodbridge, VA: National Commission on Teaching and America‘s Future.
34. Nelson, B.G. (2002). The importance of men teachers and reasons why there are so few. Minneapolis: Men Teach and Men in Child Care and Elementary Education Project.
35. Rivkin, S., E. A. Hanushek, et al. (2005). Teachers, schools and academic achievement. Econometrica 73(2), 417–458.
36. Rotherham, A. J., & Mead, S. (2004). Back to the future: The history and politics of state teacher licensure and certification. A qualified teacher in every classroom? Appraising old answers and new ideas. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
37. Rockoff, J. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on students‘ achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Economic Review, 94(2), 247–252.
38. Sargent, P. (2001). Real men or real teachers: Contradictions in the lives of men elementary school teachers. Harriman, TN: Men‘s Studies Press.
39. Scafidi, B., Sjoquist, D. L., & Stinebrickner, T. R. (2005). Race, poverty, and teacher mobility (Research Paper Series No. 06-51). Atlanta, GA: Georgia State University, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies.
40. CORRECTION STATEMENT
41. Dr. Mustafa Yunus Eryaman
42. Editor, International Journal of Progressive Education Dear Dr. Eryaman,
43. Sean Lennon and I recently published an article in the journal, International Journal of
44. Progressive Education. It was pointed out to us by another colleague that there was a
45. typographical error in the article. The number “N=167” should have been “N=67.”
46. This was published in volume 7, no. 2 in June 2011.
47. We sincerely apologize for any misunderstanding or misreading this may have caused.
48. We would ask that you publish a correction in your next issue, if possible. If you
49. decide to print the correction, please let us know the date of the issue, so we can keep
50. this for our records.
51. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Ann Marie Smith
52. [e-mail] Sean Lennon
53. [e-mail]