Daniel Flesch: A much-needed effort to address low teacher retention rates

As a former student of Montgomery County Public Schools who will be graduating from Boston University in May, I often look back at the relationships with people who helped me along the way. For example, Ms. Reynolds, my ninth-grade English teacher, was a kind and talented educator with whom I was fortunate to build a student-teacher relationship throughout high school. Her guidance helped me overcome the challenges that come up from time to time for teenagers, and her mentorship contributed directly to my success as a student. Ultimately, this lasting relationship led to a college recommendation that paved the way to higher education.

Unfortunately, my experience is far from universal. A new study indicates that the opportunity to develop relationships like mine with Ms. Reynolds, readily available at my high school, is much rarer in many of DC’s public schools.

In May, the DC State Board of Education (SBOE) contracted with local education researcher and data analyst Mary Levy to investigate the DC public education system in order “to better understand teacher turnover and its implications for District students and schools.”

On Sept. 28, Levy published “Teacher and Principal Turnover in Public Schools in the District of Columbia,” an alarming report that reveals that the teacher turnover rate in DC is higher than those in other U.S. cities such as New York, Chicago and Milwaukee.

More damningly, the report also found that schools with the highest percentages of at-risk students tend to suffer from the highest rates of both teacher and principal turnover. In both DC Public Schools and public charter schools, the annual rate of teacher departure rises with the percentage of students qualifying as at-risk (a category that includes students who are homeless, in foster care, recipients of welfare and/or food stamps, or over-age for grade level in high school). In fact, Levy’s report found that DC teachers leave schools where fewer than one-fifth of students are designated at-risk at an annual rate of 18 percent to 20 percent, while schools with the highest percentages lose almost a third of their teachers each year.

Results are similar among principals. The annualized rate for turnover over five years is roughly 10 percent in schools with fewer than 20 percent at-risk students, but rises to 25 percent in schools where 60 to 80 percent are at risk, then 30 percent when it’s more than 80 percent.

In response to these alarming findings. members of the State Board issued several recommendations for action, including a call for a robust, standardized, comprehensive and publicly available source of teacher and principal turnover data. This new data source would help promote a common understanding among state and local education agencies, enabling them to take appropriate action. “The fact is that students are struggling in every classroom in every school if teachers aren’t there consistently,” John-Paul Hayworth, the board’s executive director, told me in a recent interview.

Yet, while this recommendation is important, the next two recommendations are perhaps more crucial. Both emphasize the need for qualitative research into the causes of these troubling patterns. For example, SBOE called for local education agencies to work with the Office of the State Superintendent of Education to ensure richer data collection on teacher and principal characteristics, Hayworth said. Knowing more about their motivations for leaving is crucial to addressing the underlying causes of turnover and to retaining more high-quality teachers.

With the third recommendation, SBOE suggests creation of a new, sustained research project exploring links between teacher and principal turnover and student success. This research would certainly be helpful in better understanding the extent to which low teacher retention affects schools on the ground. In fact, qualitative approaches would offer a peek inside the classroom to answer fundamental questions, Boston University’s Michelle Porche, a clinical associate professor in human applied development, told me in an interview: “What is [high turnover] like for students and parents? What are the effects?”

Many approaches to solving low teacher retention focus strictly on quantitative data, but this is a mistake. For instance, researchers have frequently analyzed teacher compensation. While some data suggests monetary incentives can be effective in getting teachers to stay, this approach has not been entirely successful in DC because higher teacher salaries do not address core issues of this problem. While raising them can certainly help, both Porche and Hayworth agree that we need to go deeper. According to Porche, policies that “throw money” at teachers do not necessarily address their concerns; turnover is most common among teachers who do not feel appreciated, she said. Why do they feel unappreciated?

“The only way to really know is by talking to them,” Porche said. “Money does not answer this question.” Qualitative research that seeks to figure out what these classrooms really look like “may give a clue about what is exactly going on in our schools,” she said.

On Nov. 28, the SBOE took an important step in this regard, hosting a public forum on teacher and principal retention in the District. The event’s qualitative emphasis was clear, with 140 students, teachers and policymakers coming together to discuss potential solutions for low teacher retention. The State Board is also planning to host additional public input opportunities, through which it hopes to hear from many more DC residents. “We really do like talking to people, and their opinions matter to us,” Hayworth said.

Increased public participation is indeed a key part of qualitative research. Addressing difficult situations from a distance seldom works; developing real solutions requires up-close-and-personal involvement.

In my own case, without my lasting relationship with Ms. Reynolds, I would certainly have had far more difficulty finding success in my collegiate and career goals. That’s why I find it so troubling that low teacher retention, which precludes relationships like this, puts so many DC students at a disadvantage.

Daniel Flesch is a graduate of Walter Johnson High School and a senior at Boston University. He was enrolled in a seminar on Poverty and Democracy this past fall. The final assignment of the class called for students to examine specific issues regarding poverty in a local community.