TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

Teacher Turnover in Central Pennsylvania: What Can School Districts and
Principals Do to Promote Teacher Retention?

A Doctoral Capstone Project
Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies and Research
Department of Education

In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Education

Shane M. Cowher
PennWest University of Pennsylvania
July 2025

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

ii

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

iii

Dedication
This doctoral work is dedicated to the children in my hometown, especially those
who face the steepest challenges, the overlooked, and the underestimated. Though you
may come from humble beginnings, you can accomplish your dreams with self-belief,
self-discipline, and resiliency. Please know that ordinary, small-town people can do
extraordinary things!
For the teachers I lead. To me, there is no more noble calling than the education of
our youth. May I be the leader you both need and deserve.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

iv

Acknowledgements
I would not be where I am today without the love and support of my wife, Kelly.
Kelly was my high school sweetheart. Our path has not always been easy. We became
parents very young, and we scraped by on a meager income, starting out together in
government housing. I almost gave up on my dream of becoming a teacher after being
turned down for countless jobs over a two-year span. Kelly believed in me long before
anyone else, and that belief inspires me. For the past three years, she allowed me all the
time I needed to complete my schoolwork, she listened to my frustrations, and she picked
up extra household chores. To my parents, children, and mother-in-law, who support me
every step of the way, thank you! We have an awesome family!
I would also like to thank the leadership team in my district. Leslie Estep has
been a great mentor for me. She gave me the opportunity to come home and for that I am
forever grateful. Kourtney Klock served as my external chair. She provided muchneeded guidance, support, and suggestions in this process. I also want to give a special
shout out to my amazing support team at our middle school. Leading a middle school is
no easy task, and I couldn’t ask for a better group of people to help me through it.
Thank you to all of my research participants. Thank you, Sarah Cox, for your
research tips and for moderating my focus group. Thank you, Dr. Wolf, for guiding me
through this process. Your suggestions were always right on point, and your
encouragement meant the world to me. For all those who supported me throughout my
career, dating back to my early days as a substitute teacher, thank you! I would not be
where I am today without your encouragement.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

v

Table of Contents
Dedication .......................................................................................................................... iii
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... vii
List of Figures .................................................................................................................. viii
Abstract .............................................................................................................................. ix
CHAPTER I. Introduction .................................................................................................. 1
Background ..................................................................................................................... 1
Capstone Focus ............................................................................................................... 3
Research Questions ......................................................................................................... 3
Expected Outcomes ......................................................................................................... 4
Fiscal Implications .......................................................................................................... 5
Summary ......................................................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER II. Review of Literature .................................................................................. 7
Attrition by the Numbers................................................................................................. 7
The Impact of Teacher Turnover ................................................................................... 10
Reasons for Attrition ..................................................................................................... 15
District Retention Strategies.......................................................................................... 23
The Importance of Principal Support ............................................................................ 29
Leadership Styles That Promote Retention ................................................................... 32
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 37
CHAPTER III. Methodology ........................................................................................... 39
Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 40
Setting............................................................................................................................ 41
Participants .................................................................................................................... 42
Research Plan ................................................................................................................ 45
Research Methods ......................................................................................................... 46
Data Collection .............................................................................................................. 47
Fiscal Information ......................................................................................................... 53
Validity .......................................................................................................................... 54
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 55

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

vi

CHAPTER IV. Data Analysis and Results ........................................................................ 58
Data Analysis................................................................................................................. 59
Results ........................................................................................................................... 61
Triangulation of Data Sources ....................................................................................... 81
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 82
CHAPTER V. Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................... 84
Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 85
Limitations .................................................................................................................. 100
Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 101
Summary ..................................................................................................................... 106
References ........................................................................................................................110
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................ 121
APPENDIX A. IRB Approval......................................................................................... 122
APPENDIX B. Informed Consent .................................................................................. 123
Informed Consent to Participate in a Survey .............................................................. 123
Informed Consent to Participate in a Focus Group ..................................................... 125
Informed Consent to Participate in an Interview ........................................................ 127
APPENDIX C. Survey .................................................................................................... 129
APPENDIX D. Focus Group Questions ......................................................................... 133
APPENDIX E. Interview Questions ............................................................................... 134

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

vii

List of Tables
Table 1. Data Collection Plan Implemented in Winter 2025

53

Table 2. Why Teachers Say They Want to Leave

65

Table 3. Comparison of Why Teachers Want to Leave

67

Table 4. Top Actions School Districts Can Take to Promote Retention

71

Table 5. Top Principal Supports That Promote Teacher Retention

76

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

viii

List of Figures
Figure 1. Participants’ Experience Levels

43

Figure 2. Participants’ Grade Bands

43

Figure 3. Number of Districts in Which Participants Worked

44

Figure 4. Participants Who Worked Closely with A Colleague Who Left

62

Figure 5. Participants Who Considered Leaving Their Current Role

63

Figure 6. Participants Who Actively Sought a New Position

63

Figure 7. Participants Who Can See Themselves Retiring in Their Current Role

64

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

ix

Abstract
Traditionally, teacher turnover rates remained low in central Pennsylvania, but since the
Covid 19 Pandemic, early-career attrition rates have increased drastically. This has
coincided with less new teachers being certified, which has added to a teacher shortage in
the region. This study seeks to find answers as to why teachers are leaving schools and
what can be done about it out through the eyes of teachers. This mixed methods study
uses a survey, a focus group, and interviews to gather opinions from teachers based on
the following research questions. What are the main reasons teachers want to leave
public schools in central Pennsylvania, and how does this compare or contrast with the
researcher’s own school district? What working conditions promote teacher retention?
What forms of support do teachers need from principals to promote retention? The survey
encompasses the opinions of 132 participants across six school districts. The focus group
gathers opinions from current teachers in the researcher’s own district. The interviews
gather information from seven teachers who have left the researcher’s own district.
These data tools provide multi-faceted perspectives on teacher turnover and what can be
done about it. In the study, participants pointed to low salaries and frustrations with
leadership and the profession itself as main reasons for high turnover rates; however,
teachers shared a number of solutions, including raising salaries, supporting teachers on
student discipline, and reducing non-instructional duties. Based on this evidence,
recommendations are provided for school districts and principals to improve teacher
retention.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

1

CHAPTER I
Introduction
Teacher turnover has surfaced as a major issue for schools across the nation over
the past several years since the Covid 19 Pandemic. Valenzuela et al. (2022, para. 1)
reports, “Approximately 10% of teachers leave within their first year, and 44% leave
within five years.” Like the rest of the nation, central Pennsylvania has also seen marked
increases in teacher turnover rates in recent years. The researcher was first hired as a
teacher in a small, rural school district in Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania in 2004. At
that time, it was very difficult to obtain a teaching job, and once people accepted a job,
many stayed in that same position for several years or until retirement. Twenty years
later that landscape has changed significantly, and the teaching profession is struggling
mightily. Not only are more teachers leaving the profession but less are entering the
profession altogether. In 2021, nearly 10,000 less teaching certificates were issued than
in 2011 (Fuller, 2022). Immediate changes must be made to foster teacher retention, or
the quality of public education in Pennsylvania will see a dramatic decline.
Background
The researcher’s first role as an administrator was as an assistant principal in a large,
urban school district in Blair County. The teaching staff at that school district was
transient, and it seemed like high attrition rates were due to elements exclusive to that
community. In 2020-2021 at the height of the Covid 19 Pandemic, this researcher was
hired as principal of the middle school in his hometown. During the first two years of
this principalship, most of the middle school faculty was retained, but several elementary
staff members left the district. Initially, it seemed like this phenomenon was exclusive to

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

2

that building alone, but in the following years, the pattern began to spread to other district
schools. After the 2022-2023 school year, six teachers from the middle school staff left,
which equated to approximately 20% of the teaching staff in a building with 32 teachers.
Even the high school faculty within this district, which traditionally maintained a veteran
staff, lost several teachers after the 2022-23 school year. After the completion of the
2023-2024 school year, six more teachers left the middle school for employment outside
of the district. Replacing large numbers of new staff each year has placed great strain on
the researcher’s school district and has inspired teacher turnover as a topic for action
research.
Teacher attrition and retention problems are worth researching and solving for a
variety of reasons. For starters, it is difficult to recruit, hire, and replace teachers every
year. It takes time and money, and less certified teachers are available to fill these
positions. Replacing new teachers can cost upwards of $10,000 for small, rural districts
and $20,000 for large, urban districts (Gerald, 2019). Even with these high costs,
districts often cannot fill these positions or must settle for unqualified teachers. It is
estimated that 82,000 teachers are under-qualified across the country (Gerald, 2019).
What’s more, this constant change in staff places strain on the entire school system. New
teachers need to be trained and mentored, and it is very difficult to build consistency with
a revolving door of faculty. The high turnover rate negatively impacts staff morale.
When teachers see their colleagues leaving, they begin to question their own role within
the district. Some even begin to question district leadership and argue that the district is
not doing enough to retain teachers. Nationally, this has led to an estimated 15% decline
in teacher job satisfaction over the past decade, and a 12% increase in those who say they

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

3

want to leave the profession altogether (Gerald, 2019). Ultimately, the impacts of teacher
turnover are multi-faceted and reverberate across all levels of the district community,
including students, teachers, administrators, and community members.
Capstone Focus
Through this research project, the researcher hopes to gain insight as to what
school district leaders can do to improve teacher retention rates. The focus will be to
research what factors are causing teachers to leave traditional, brick and mortar public
schools in central Pennsylvania. These areas may include public schools within Blair
County as well as other districts near Blair County. As the research questions below
demonstrate, the researcher wants to explore why teachers want to leave traditional
public school teaching positions and what districts can do to avoid large-scale teacher
attrition. Finally, the impact of principal leadership on teacher retention will be analyzed.
The goal will be to provide school leaders with practical knowledge of how to avoid
large-scale teacher attrition and promote teacher retention through best practices in
educational leadership.
Research Questions
1. What are the main reasons teachers want to leave public schools in central
Pennsylvania, and how does this compare or contrast with the researcher’s own
school district?
2. What working conditions promote teacher retention?
3. What forms of support do teachers need from principals to promote retention?

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

4

Expected Outcomes
Teachers are leaving public schools in central Pennsylvania, and while district and
school leaders may have an idea of why this is occurring, it is imperative to listen to
teachers’ perspectives to gain a broader understanding of the issue. Hughes et al. (2014)
found that principals in hard-to-staff schools reported offering high levels of teacher
support while their teachers reported inadequate support. Therefore, one major goal of
this study is to bridge the gap between why administrators perceive teachers are leaving
versus why teachers actually are leaving. After surveying teachers and listening to their
perspectives through focus groups and interviews, recommendations for teacher retention
will be applied to the researcher’s local school district. This study and its
recommendations will be shared with district-level administration to inform them of
options that can promote retention. District-level leaders negotiate contracts with teachers
and create policies that impact teachers throughout a district. A deeper understanding of
why faculty are leaving will provide district-level leaders with information to guide their
decision-making toward policies and contracts that will promote teacher retention.
Another goal of this study is to provide guidance to principals on how they can
better support teachers through their leadership. The information gained from this study
will provide valuable information for school principals, who directly supervise teachers.
Teachers often cite the climate of their school and their relationship with their principal as
reasons for leaving. This study will provide the researcher and his colleagues with
insight into leadership styles and school climate practices that promote teacher retention.
Finally, information and insights from this study can be shared with other school districts
in central Pennsylvania to help guide their policies and practices.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

5

Fiscal Implications
The financial impact of teacher turnover is difficult to quantify. Often, new
teachers make less than experienced teachers, so when experienced teachers leave, the
district may initially save money. However, the indirect human and emotional costs
associated with teacher attrition are substantial, and solving this issue will be impactful.
In addition to the human costs mentioned, further costs can reverberate throughout a
school district and community when students’ learning goals are not being met, and the
school district must pay out more money to improve upon inadequate instruction.
Traditionally, teachers cite low salaries as a reason for leaving the teaching
profession. High inflation rates and rising college costs further exacerbate the issue of
low salaries. School districts may need to consider raising salaries in order to keep
veteran teachers. For this reason, the financial implications can be extensive, especially
since the largest portion of any district budget is allocated to employee salaries. Aside
from the financial impact of hiring new teachers initially, new hires may need more
support in the form of professional development, mentoring, and induction programs.
These programs are all associated with increased costs for local districts. Purchasing
more resources and improving security features are other measures that could come at a
cost for school districts. It is difficult to predict all of the potential measures a district
will need to implement for promoting teacher retention.
If one thing is certain, it is that more money leads to improved outcomes. Baker
(2017) explains that higher teacher wages are associated with higher student achievement
levels due to the retention and recruitment of more capable staff. He goes onto explain
that states with higher per pupil funding levels have higher achievement levels (Baker,

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

6

2017). Therefore, school districts will undoubtedly see increased costs if they are serious
about promoting the retention of quality teachers and improving outcomes for students.
Summary
The inspiration for this research is based on 20 years of experience in the
educational field. Teachers are leaving public school districts in central Pennsylvania and
the researcher’s own district in record numbers. This has made it increasingly difficult
for district leaders and building principals to staff and lead schools. Hiring and training
new teachers each year takes time, effort, and money. Additionally, turnover hurts the
climate and morale in schools where high rates of teachers are in flux each year. When
teachers leave in large numbers, those who stay begin to question the efficacy of the
entire system in which they work. This fuels a distrust in leadership leading to more
turnover.
The goal of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of why teachers are
leaving public schools in central Pennsylvania in Blair and surrounding counties. This
information will allow the researcher to make recommendations that can be used by both
district-level and building-level leaders to promote teacher retention. District-level
leaders can use this information to create policies and negotiate contracts favorable to
retaining high-quality teachers. School principals can benefit from learning what
leadership styles, supports, and practices are needed to promote teacher retention. Prior
to studying the problem at a local level, it is pivotal to take a look at the overall body of
research on this topic in order to gain a deeper understanding of the larger trends related
to teacher retention.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

7

CHAPTER II
Review of Literature
Teacher turnover has become a major challenge for schools across the country,
and more recently it has become an issue in Pennsylvania due to the overall teacher
shortage. In fact, teacher attrition accounts for nearly 90% of annual teacher demand and
less than one-third of attrition comes from retirements (Sutcher et al., 2019). When
teachers leave, it puts a strain on the entire school system. Administration must work to
hire and train new staff, and the teachers who remain must take on more duties. All of
this takes time, money, and effort, and meanwhile students receive less high-quality
instruction. What’s more, an unprecedentedly large Baby Boomer retirement group, the
Covid 19 Pandemic, and less young people entering the profession have all added to
these challenges. This review of literature delves into the overall impact of teacher
attrition, its main causes and characteristics, and what can be done to promote the
retention of teachers in our schools.
Attrition by the Numbers
Teacher attrition is an international, national, and state phenomenon. Countries
with well-paid, well-respected teachers like Finland and Singapore have attrition rates as
low as 5% (Ingersoll et al., 2018). Other European countries like Germany, France, and
the Netherlands also see low attrition rates (Shell et al., 2023). By contrast, the United
States and many other countries across the globe, including the United Kingdom, see
much higher rates of attrition. Shell et al. (2023) explained that the U.S. can see rates as
high as 20% annually, while the United Kingdom sees rates as high as 50%. Ingersoll et

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

8

al. (2018) further expounded that 45% of United States teachers leave within their first
five years of teaching.
Attrition Rates in the United States
The attrition rates within the United States vary by region. The highest attrition rates
are in the southern states at nearly 17%, while the lowest rates are under 10% in the
northeast (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019). Attrition rates seem to be
highest in urban centers and suburbs, specifically in areas with high poverty rates and
high minority populations. Title I schools often see the highest turnover rates (CarverThomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019). Title I schools support buildings with more than
40% low socioeconomic rates to support reading, language arts, and mathematics
(Pennsylvania Department of Education, 2024). Plus, teachers are 46% more likely to
migrate away from schools with high populations of Hispanic and African American
students (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019). By contrast, teachers are more
likely to stay in schools with high populations of Caucasian and Asian students (Nguyen,
2021).
Attrition Rates by Certification Area
Attrition rates vary by certification area as well. Math, science, foreign language,
English Language Learner (ELL), and special education instructors have higher turnover
rates. Math, science, and foreign language teachers can often find higher-paying jobs in
industry, while ELL and special education teachers more commonly leave the profession
due to the unique challenges of their roles (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019).
Researchers in the early 2000s found that special education attrition rates were
particularly higher than regular education teachers due to the high levels of paperwork

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

9

and challenging clientele (Boe et al., 2008). Math, science, and foreign language have all
shown the lowest rates of new teachers obtaining certification in Pennsylvania, which
only adds to the problem of staffing (Fuller, 2022).
Attrition Rates in Pennsylvania Schools
In Pennsylvania, certain types of public schools show higher turnover rates than
others. Charter schools consistently show higher turnover rates than public schools.
Fuller (2022) showed that Pennsylvania charter school teachers quit at twice the rate of
teachers in public schools, with 38% quitting after their third year. Public middle
schools, in particular, seemed to have higher rates of attrition, which led to more staffing
difficulties. “More than one out of every five middle school teachers employed in the
quintile of schools with the greatest percentage of students living in poverty had three or
fewer years of teaching experience” (Fuller, 2022, p. 16). That figure was one in four for
middle schools with high percentages of minority students (Fuller, 2022).
Schools across the globe have problems keeping teachers. While some countries
show high levels of retention, many developed and undeveloped countries struggle to
keep teachers. Certain regions in the United States display higher rates of attrition than
others, and poor, urban areas tend to see the highest rates. Furthermore, certain
certification areas and school types show higher attrition rates than others. Nationally,
math, science, foreign language, special education, and ELL teachers leave at the highest
rates. Charter schools, middle schools, high-poverty schools, and high-minority schools
show the highest rates of attrition on average in Pennsylvania.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

10

The Impact of Teacher Turnover
When teachers leave a school, there are a wide range of impacts that follow. In
describing teacher turnover, the terms attrition and turnover will be used interchangeably
for this study, but there are two noted types of attrition: teachers who move schools and
teachers who leave the profession altogether. Carver-Thomas and Darling-Hammond
(2019) report that the national attrition rate is 16%, with half of those teachers leaving the
profession entirely, and the other half moving to different schools to continue teaching.
Recent research has shown that attrition rates have been on the rise nationally, and in
Pennsylvania specifically, since the Covid 19 Pandemic. Traditionally, the attrition rate
in Pennsylvania has stood at roughly 6.2% (Fuller, 2022). However, from the 2021-2022
school year to the 2022-2023 school year, the attrition rate in Pennsylvania rose sharply
to 7.7%, which amounted to 9,587 teachers total, the largest number on record (Fuller,
2023). This sharp increase may be attributed to the lasting impacts of the Covid 19
Pandemic, which is covered later in this chapter. All the while, less new teachers are
being certified than ever before, creating unprecedented staffing issues in Pennsylvania
(Fuller, 2023).
Teacher Turnover Impacts Teacher Quality
When experienced teachers leave, the quality of instruction typically declines at
least for a short time period. Quality instruction has been consistently cited as the most
important school-based factor in promoting student achievement. In the late 1990’s and
early 2000’s, several studies showed that teacher quality was the number one determinant
in student achievement, and that having a high-quality teacher alone could increase
achievement by as much as one grade level (Rice, 2003). In fact, Rivkin et al. (2005)
reviewed data from approximately 1.5 million students in 3,000 schools and found that

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

11

teacher quality outweighed other factors like total spending and class sizes in promoting
student achievement. A later study stated that, “Turnover adversely affects the quality of
instruction in lower achievement schools” (Hanushek et al., 2016, p. 145). And finally, a
more recent study in 2021 found that students score less well in their final assessments
when they have been exposed to a new teacher in that subject area (Gibbons, et al., 2021).
As with any profession, it takes time to become a good teacher, and when teachers
leave early in their career, they never get a chance to blossom into the great teacher our
students deserve. Clement (2016) explains that teachers greatly increase their
effectiveness between their first and second years, and teachers who stay at least five
years are the most effective. Unfortunately, many teachers leave before their fifth year.
Shaw and Newton (2014) noted that it takes three to seven years to become a high-quality
teacher, and that approximately one-third will leave the profession within the first five
years. High-quality teachers know their content well, understand teaching methods
(pedagogy), and make connections with their students (Park et al., 2017). Although
experience does not necessarily translate into teacher effectiveness, several studies have
shown that experience has an overall positive correlation with teacher effectiveness
(Rice, 2003). In Pennsylvania, the highest attrition rates continue to be for retiring
teachers serving thirty years or more, who are leaving behind a wealth of experience.
Meanwhile, the next highest group leaving the profession are new teachers with three
years or less years of experience. This group includes 11.3% of Pennsylvania publicschool teachers, who left after their first year from 2012-2018 (Fuller, 2022). This means
that many teachers do not stay in the classroom long enough to become seasoned, highquality teachers with knowledge of content, pedagogy, and students.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

12

The Cost of Teacher Attrition
Replacing teachers comes with a high price tag. Evers-Gerdes and Siegle (2021)
put that national price tag at $2.2 billion dollars annually. This results in approximately
$1 billion in state expenditures across the United States (Harris et al., 2019). The
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future estimates the average cost of
replacing a teacher at the district level to be $17,862 (Ryan et al., 2017). While the cost
is likely lower for some rural districts at closer to $9,000, it can be as high as $21,000 for
urban districts (Carver-Thomas, 2017). While these are all merely averages and
predictions, the costs associated with advertising, hiring, onboarding, and mentoring
come with high price tags. These costs vary in different parts of the country, but most
studies place that the national average consistently around $17,000 (Tran et al., 2023).
Hiring and mentoring represent direct costs, but the indirect costs associated with the
extra time and effort it takes to train new teachers are difficult to measure.
Finding Qualified Teachers
In addition to the high costs, districts sometimes struggle to find qualified
teachers. This problem has been exacerbated by fewer new teachers entering the
profession. From 2009 to 2014, teacher education enrollments dropped by a 35%
reduction from 691,000 to 451,000 (Sutcher et al., 2016). Fuller (2022) explained that
Pennsylvania saw a 60% decline in students in teacher preparation programs from 20092020. Shell et al. (2013) shared that schools often hire substitutes or temporary teachers
with little experience when experienced teachers leave. In Pennsylvania, nearly 6,000
teachers were hired on an emergency certificate during the 2020-2021 school year, which
is up from 1,845 in 2010-11 (Fuller, 2022). For the first time on record, the number of

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

13

newly certified teachers was less than the number of teachers working on emergency
certificates (Fuller, 2022). The issue of hiring highly qualified teachers rings especially
true in hard-to-staff areas like math, science, special education, and ELL instruction
(Fuller, 2022). “The declines over time and very low ratios strongly suggest the pool of
prospective teachers from which districts hire beginning teachers has become too small to
meet the demand for beginning teachers” (Fuller, 2022, p. 9). Furthermore, once
uncertified, novice teachers are hired, districts must provide them with training. This
training represents another cost increase that may or may not pay dividends if the teacher
does not remain in the school.
Teacher Turnover Impacts an Entire School
The impact of teachers leaving a school is not limited to a single classroom or
hallway but has been shown to have an impact on entire schools. For students, teachers,
and administrators alike, it is difficult to build continuity from one school year to the next
when staff needs to be replaced each year. Ronfeldt et al. (2013) explain that turnover
harms students even in classes with teachers who remain in a particular school.
Reviewing data from over 1.1 million fourth and fifth-grade students in New York City
over a ten-year period, these researchers found that students scored lower in both reading
and math in grade levels with higher turnover rates. Plus, the negative impact of turnover
was increasingly strong in schools with high poverty rates and high minority populations
(Ronfeldt et al., 2013).
When experienced teachers leave a school, they take with them institutional
knowledge, which helps a school function efficiently. “Turnover adversely affects the
quality of instruction in lower achievement schools. This result is due to a turnover-

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

14

induced loss of general and grade-specific experience” (Hanushek et al., 2016, p. 145).
In addition to a loss of institutional knowledge, when buildings are dealing with high
turnover, it often results in teachers shifting grade levels, programs being cut, or larger
class sizes (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019). All of these measures hamper
continuity and collaboration, which places strain on schools. Extensive research has
shown that high turnover rates negatively impact collaboration, which in turn, impacts the
overall environment of the school (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019). EversGerdes and Siegle (2021) explain that collective efficacy is an important concept,
wherein teachers feel like they can overcome challenges together to support students.
“When teachers believe in their collective capabilities, they stay in their schools” (EversGerdes & Siegle, 2021, p. 63). In sum, research supports that when teachers perceive a
positive school climate, they are more likely to remain teaching, and this is more likely to
support the achievement of the entire school.
Positive Impacts of Teacher Attrition
Some research has shed light on the positive impacts of teacher attrition,
especially when low-performing or negative-minded teachers leave a school. Looking at
schools in Texas, Hanushek et al. (2016) noted that while there are some benefits to poor
teachers leaving, the impact was not great enough to make up for the overall negative
impact of teacher turnover. Adnot et al. (2017) found that teacher turnover actually had a
positive impact on student achievement in District of Columbia schools. The study found
that when low-performing teachers left, student achievement increased in math and
reading. The study also found that the exit of highly rated teachers had a negative impact
on student achievement, but that impact was minimal (Adnot et. al., 2017).

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

15

Positive benefits have been noted for teachers who leave who have negative
attitudes. These negative attitudes do not support a positive school culture, which can
negatively impact teacher collaboration and student achievement. Teachers are more
likely to stay when they have positive perceptions of school, supportive colleagues, and a
supportive principal (Kullar & Cunningham, 2019). Clement (2016) noted that negative
teachers who become ringleaders can be dangerous for a school climate. She went on to
state that “the nonrenewal of a contract for certain teachers may actually raise the morale
of those remaining” (Clement, 2016, p. 88).
Teacher attrition has a negative impact on student achievement, school finances,
and school climate, but this must be balanced with the evidence that shows a positive
correlation when low-performing teachers leave.
Reasons for Attrition
A variety of reasons have been listed as causing teacher attrition. The most
commonly listed reasons for teacher attrition are low salary, lack of administrative
support, and a negative school climate. According to one author, “Cash and culture are
two factors that retain teachers—especially effective ones” (Clement, 2016, p. 82). This
section delves into the literature on why teachers choose to leave the profession.
Compensation
Compensation is listed as a factor in almost every teacher attrition study. Recent
numbers shed light on the markedly low wages teachers earn when compared with other
professions. A recent article published by the Economic Policy Institute shows that
teachers make 26.6% less on average than other comparable college graduates
(Allegretto, 2024). This is coupled with the fact that the average student borrows over
$30,000 to obtain a bachelor’s degree, which can take more than 20 years to pay off

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

16

(Hanson, 2024). While teachers typically receive strong benefits packages, like
healthcare, time off, and a pension plan, this benefit advantage may not be enough to
offset the costs of the wage gap (Allegretto, 2024). Harris et al. (2019) surveyed over
2,000 teachers in one western state, and 93% percent of respondents listed salary as a
major factor in wanting to quit teaching.
Although low salary is one of the most popularly listed causes of attrition, it is not
always seen as the main factor. When most teachers enter the profession, they understand
that they are not going to be the highest earners. Many teachers go into the profession
wanting to help students and benefit society, but when they are confronted with heavy
workloads, disrespect, and a lack of support, these low wages become harder to justify.
Hughes (2012) explained it more clearly, “Teachers’ dissatisfaction with salary is
exasperated by increased workloads without increased salaries” (p. 247). Moreover,
noticeable salary gaps often exist between high-performing, affluent schools and high
poverty schools. Inadequate compensation can lead to dissatisfaction and prompt
teachers to seek better paying jobs elsewhere (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond,
2019). Finally, Tompkins (2023) found that new teachers listed pay and benefits as a
significant factor in whether or not they considered leaving the profession. Those who
felt unprepared and unsupported were more likely to leave the profession, especially
when compensation was deemed inadequate. In sum, compensation is a common and
important factor in teacher attrition, but the research has shown that it is normally paired
with other factors when teachers choose to leave teaching.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

17

Administrative and Collegial Support
Compensation is only one small part of the reason why teachers may choose to
leave a school or the profession entirely. Becker and Grob (2021) explained that teachers
make a cost-benefit analysis when deciding to leave by comparing the amount of money
they make with how much support they receive and if they like their job. Thus, lack of
administrative and collegial support are very important factors in teacher attrition.
Looking at data going back as far as the 90s and early 2000s, researchers found that
better preparation and support for new teachers could help reduce turnover. One
particular study out of New York found that the highest-ranking reason for teachers
leaving after their first year was dissatisfaction with administration, and a close second
was discipline support (Boyd, et al., 2011). Other researchers noted that improved
support from a principal could help teachers overcome feelings of stress and isolation
(Boe et al., 2008).

Hughes (2012) added to that research by showing that teachers were

more likely to stay when they felt like their colleagues and principal believed in them. In
Hughes’ study, teachers listed principal support on student discipline as second only to
salaries as a main factor for teachers wanting to leave the profession. Later, Nguyen
(2021) added to the literature by explaining that teachers who feel more supported from
their administration through resources, guidance, and encouragement are less likely to
leave teaching. Finally, some very recent literature shows that principal leadership is one
of the most important predictors of teacher attrition, and that teachers value principals
who support them in student discipline, build trust, act fairly, and involve them in
decision-making (Shell et al., 2023).

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

18

Administrators can play a key role in reducing workloads for new teachers. Much
of the research shows a disconnect between why teachers leave and why principals
“think” they leave. For example, one of the most highly predictive factors for attrition is
that work expectations are overwhelming (Harris et al., 2019). Helping teachers navigate
the bureaucracy of the school and large amounts of paperwork are key functions of
principal support. “The best principals provide protection from excessive stress, enabling
teachers to do their jobs in a less threatening environment” (Fiore & Whitaker, 2004, p.
37).
Mentoring and Induction
Another distinct type of support comes from a teacher’s mentor and induction
program. Dating back to 2003, Ingersoll and Smith found that upwards of 40% of
teachers leave without a formal induction process versus only 18% who experience a
robust induction process. A separate study of over 2,000 new teachers in California
showed that new teachers feel large amounts of stress. This study showed that when
teachers found their induction and mentoring programs to be positive experiences, they
felt less stress and were more likely to continue teaching (Tompkins, 2023).
Unfortunately, many new teachers often state that their mentor and induction programs
are inadequate and are not supportive. Some new teachers consider them a burden.
“Teachers routinely stated that their induction and mentorship program was not only
unhelpful, but even an additional burden” (Tompkins, 2023, p. 32). It is unfortunate that
mentoring and induction programs that are designed to help teachers actually do the
opposite. What’s more, schools should be very wary of moving teacher assignments
before teachers are comfortable in their roles. Ost and Schiman (2015) found that
teachers who teach the same grade in their first two years are 20% more likely to stay.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

19

Until their sixth year, teachers are more likely to leave teaching if reassigned to a new
grade level. This shows that in addition to mentoring, continuity helps build more
confidence and skills in early-career educators.
Focus on Standardized Tests and Stress
While compensation and support are the most frequently listed causes of teacher
attrition, there is a growing body of research showing that an unhealthy focus on
standardized testing is a growing factor in attrition. Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2017)
surveyed over 700 middle and elementary teachers in Norway. They found that a
supportive learning environment can enhance teachers’ motivation to stay in the
profession, but that an unhealthy focus on achievement increases stress and teachers’
desire to leave. Ryan et al. (2017) found the same results when looking at the impact of
standardized testing policies on over 1800 teachers in Maryland, Connecticut, and
Pennsylvania. Notably, this study found that test-based accountability policies at the state
level predicted higher rates of stress and burnout among teachers and an increased drive
to leave the profession (Ryan et al., 2017). A more recent journal article built off this
knowledge base. It showed that 30% of teachers have experienced clinically significant
anxiety because of state testing policies (Farmer, 2020). This stress was caused by
overwhelming expectations to collect and analyze large amounts of data, excessively long
work hours, and a lack of a healthy-work life balance (Farmer, 2020). This unhealthy
focus on testing alone led to challenging relationships in the workplace, burnout, and
compassion fatigue (Farmer, 2020).
An unhealthy focus on achievement and standardized testing are not solely to
blame for stress and burnout. Unreasonable expectations from administrators and

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

20

unhealthy work environments add to stress and desires to leave teaching. Madigan and
Kim (2021) performed a meta-analysis reviewing 24 studies on teacher stress and
burnout. They explained that burnout has three dimensions—exhaustion,
depersonalization, and reduced accomplishment—all of which showed a significant
relationship with teachers’ intention to quit the profession (Madigan & Kim, 2021).
These researchers went on to explain that burnout teachers are more likely to leave now
than ever, and that burnout is a better predictor of attrition than job satisfaction is of
retention (Madigan & Kim, 2021). “Stress is one of the clearest predictors of teacher
attrition” (Ryan et al., 2017, p. 3). Stress impacts job satisfaction, performance, physical
and emotional health, work-life balance, and relationships with colleagues (Tompkins,
2023).
Covid 19
Covid 19 is a markedly new, yet major cause of teacher attrition. The Covid 19
Pandemic changed the entire landscape of education in March 2020, and the profession,
as a whole, is still seeing the impacts of this event on students and staffing. A 2021 study
showed that half of all public-school teachers who left the profession cited Covid 19 as
one of their reasons for leaving (Diliberti et al., 2021). Goldhaber and Theobald (2022)
looked at teacher data from Washington state over the past 37 years. They found that
attrition initially dropped during the 2019-2020 school year because of concerns over the
economy. Historically, teacher attrition slows during uncertain times but increases
during a strong labor market, which has been seen in the post-pandemic era (Goldhaber
& Theobald, 2023).
In addition to the strong labor market, many teachers felt stressed by virtual and
hybrid learning models, the increased needs of students, and parent backlash. Devers et

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

21

al. (2024) talked to ten veteran teachers who had left the profession after the pandemic.
These former teachers listed stress, financial concerns, less professional autonomy, lack
of parental support, and lack of administrative support as reasons for leaving after the
pandemic. One researcher noted that during the pandemic, “A much higher proportion of
teachers reported frequent job-related stress and symptoms of depression than the general
adult population” (Steiner & Woo, 2021, para. 5). These teachers listed both virtual and
hybrid instructional models as their highest-ranked stressors (Steiner & Woo, 2021).
Still, Goldhaber and Theobald (2023) went on to add that students in traditionally
underperforming schools were hit the hardest, as school-to-school-teacher migration
increased. This caused experienced teachers to move away from more challenging, lower
paying schools. In addition, Fuller (2022) noted that in Pennsylvania, like many other
states, school districts hired over 3,000 more professionals to account for academic and
mental health needs. This added to teacher migration and the ongoing teacher shortage in
the wake of the pandemic.
Finally, many teachers, particularly in hard-to-staff areas like math and science,
found better paying jobs in the private sector. Goldhaber and Theobald (2023)
specifically noted that in 2022, near the end of the pandemic, 55% of teachers said they
intended to leave teaching sooner than they had originally planned. Overall, the Covid 19
Pandemic raised stress levels and uncertainty among educators, which eventually pushed
teachers out of the profession. Although attrition rates did not skyrocket immediately,
they eventually rose sharply due to a strong labor market and more school-to-school
migration in the school years directly following the pandemic.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

22

School Safety Concerns
With high rates of school violence seen on the news, one would suspect that
growing fears would have an impact on teacher attrition. Several articles shed light on
the influence of school violence on teacher turnover; however, most studies highlight the
importance of school organization and student behavioral control. Many studies looked
at incidents of both student aggression and parent aggression as possible factors in
teacher attrition. May et al. (2010) showed that teachers were becoming increasingly
fearful of angry parents. In this study, 30% of Kentucky teachers described seeing at
least one act of parent aggression in their career. In a separate study, research indicated
that 5.8% of teachers reported being physically attacked by students, and 44% of these
victims shared that it regularly impacted their job performance (Farmer, 2020). A more
recent study surveyed over 450 teachers and found that parents regularly become upset
over discipline or grades and can become aggressive toward teachers (McMahon et al.,
2023). When teachers face parental aggression, they experience anxiety and a loss of
empowerment, and they are more likely to leave the teaching profession (McMahon et
al., 2023). School safety was not listed as one of the major factors in teacher attrition, but
student behavior and parent aggression were noted as key factors that lead to stress,
anxiety, and wanting to leave teaching.
Lack of Autonomy
Teachers enjoy creativity and value their autonomy to plan lessons of their own.
When this creativity is stifled, many teachers lose the joy of teaching. Furthermore,
teachers appreciate having some say in the polices of their school. When teachers feel
they have a say in their school’s policies, they feel more respected. Ingersoll et al.
(2018) found that the teacher accountability movement has decreased teacher control in

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

23

the classroom. Teacher control is essential to having a positive school climate. Lack of
control can lead to increased student misbehavior, lower collegiality among staff, and
higher turnover rates. When teachers have a say in decision making, they are more likely
to perform effectively and earn the respect of colleagues and students. Nguyen et al.
(2020) also showed that teachers who experience high levels of autonomy are more likely
to remain in their positions because autonomy is closely linked with job satisfaction.
To summarize, teachers leave for a variety of reasons: some of which can be
controlled, and others cannot. Less than a third of teachers leave because of retirement,
but many more leave for a variety of other reasons before retirement. School districts
cannot control all attrition-causing factors, like when teachers leave to raise a child, for a
change of location, or for a lifestyle change, etc. On the other hand, school districts have
some control over certain attrition-causing factors, such as low salaries, lack of support,
and overwhelming workloads. The focus of the next part of this literature review will be
on methods that promote teacher retention.
District Retention Strategies
To this point, the research has shed light on which teachers are leaving, why
teacher attrition is a problem, and what motivates teachers to leave the profession. The
next logical step is to look at what school districts and administrators can do to keep
teachers from leaving their schools.
Raising Salaries
Low salary is one of the most frequently cited reasons for teacher attrition.
Hughes (2012) found that teachers who were satisfied with their salary were twice as
likely to be retained as those who were not. Teachers, who require costly four-year

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

24

degrees, need to make enough to support themselves and pay off their student loans.
When compared to other professions requiring a four-year degree, teachers make far less.
Thus, early career teachers need to make a high enough starting salary to cover these
costs. Van den Borre et al. (2021) reviewed data from multiple countries and found that
higher annual starting salaries are associated with greater retention of early career
teachers. In the past, low salaries were justified with strong benefits packages, a pension,
and summers off. However, these benefits are becoming less enticing for teachers, who
are struggling to support themselves. Harris et al. (2019) surveyed parents, teachers, and
principals in one western state on their perceptions of teacher attrition. This data
incorporated information from over 2,000 teachers, 93 administrators, and nearly 500
parents. They found that low salaries were a major cause of attrition, but they also found
that raising salaries alone was not effective at reducing attrition (Harris et al., 2019).
To be clear, there is some evidence that raising salaries can have an impact on
retention, especially through merit pay or bonus packages. Hanushek et al. (2016) found
that compensation systems in Washington D.C. and Texas schools, which increased pay
for highly effective teachers, increased teacher retention rates and student achievement.
Nguyen et al. (2020) also found evidence that retention bonuses and merit pay can be
influential in improving teacher retention and reducing teacher turnover.
While low salaries are often cited as a reason for attrition, raising salaries alone
has not been shown to promote high levels of teacher retention. Many teachers admit
that they did not go into the profession to get rich. They went into the profession to make
a difference in society. When teachers feel ineffective, disrespected, and unsupported,
this is when they begin to question why they are working for such low salaries.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

25

According to Cross (2011), low salaries are not the top reason for teachers leaving.
“Educators want supportive school leadership, enough time for planning and
collaboration, an atmosphere of trust and respect, and an appropriate workload” (Cross,
2011, p. 23). Richard Ingersoll, who has published a wealth of information on this topic,
stated very clearly that “salary is not the main factor” in promoting teacher retention (The
Brainwaves Video Anthology, 2018). Farber (2013) interviewed many teachers about the
subject of increasing salaries and teacher attrition, and one teacher explained it clearly:
I left because of lack of respect for the profession. People say they respect it.
They need to put their money where their mouth is. Now, I work half as hard, get
twice the pay, more respect, and I can feel safe at work. (p. 85)
Therefore, salary increases have been shown to promote teacher retention, but they are
not a panacea. Salary increases are only one piece to the puzzle in promoting teacher
retention in our schools. Many other strategies are needed in conjunction with fair wages
to promote teacher retention.
Positive School Climate and Culture
Building a positive school climate is essential to teacher retention. Teachers are
less likely to leave when they are satisfied with the school environment and
administrative support (Nguyen et al., 2020). Vaidya and Hanna (2023) looked at human
social, structural, and psychological capital impacting attrition. They found that
“teachers thrive when there is an opportunity to participate in a school community and
when there is support from peers and others in the school” (Vaidya & Hanna, 2023, p.
29). School culture and climate are directly related to teacher job satisfaction and
retention. Climate and culture are related to feelings among colleagues, support from
administrators, and relationships with parents (Fiore & Whitaker, 2004). Van der Vyver

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

26

et al. (2020) added that school climate can promote higher levels of teacher efficacy and
can help teachers feel more satisfied in their work. When teachers feel more support, it
promotes teacher retention and improves student achievement. “The stability of teachers
remaining in the profession due to positive professional wellbeing indirectly results in
improved learner performance” (Van der Vyver et al., 2020, p. 99). If districts want to
retain good teachers and promote student achievement, creating a positive school climate
can tip the scales in their favor.
Hiring
The hiring process plays an important role in promoting teacher retention. When
the right teachers are hired for the right jobs, they rarely quit. One important point in
hiring teachers is finding those who truly want to be teachers. Teachers who chose
teaching as their first career choice and teachers who are intrinsically motivated to teach
are much more likely to stay in the profession longer than those who chose teaching
because they had no other alternative. “The teaching profession has been characterized by
high levels of intrinsic and altruistic motivation which have been associated with a
greater commitment to teaching later in the career” (Van den Borre et al., 2021, p. 105).
Countries that have competitive entry exams, higher starting salaries, and more overall
respect for the profession attract more teachers who truly want to be teachers. Not
surprisingly, these countries have higher rates of teacher retention (Van den Borre et al.,
2021). Although districts may not have the ability to control some of these variables,
they have some control over the quality of teachers they hire. This can and should
promote teacher retention. The hiring committee should be up front about the vision of
the school, the expectations of the job, and the student population the teacher will

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

27

encounter (Heller, 2004). Kullar and Cunningham (2019) discuss at length the
importance of hiring new teachers. They recommend including current teachers in the
hiring process, marketing a school to new candidates, being specific about school needs,
and being very thorough in the interview process (Kullar & Cunningham, 2019). Some
methods to create a more thorough hiring process can include setting up multiple
interviews, requiring an instructional component, tailoring questions to the specific
position, and checking references (Kullar & Cunningham, 2019).
Mentoring and Induction
Much of the current evidence on teacher attrition shows that most teachers are
leaving the profession early in their career. Improving mentor and induction programs
can be a pivotal strategy in keeping teachers in schools. According to Clement (2016),
time with experienced teachers and mentors is time well spent, and 96% of teachers can
be retained with quality mentoring. After reviewing over 11,000 surveys, Van den Borre
et al. (2021) found early-career teachers who received constructive feedback from a
mentor and who had more access to professional development were much more likely to
remain teachers than those who did not have these supports. For mentor programs to
work correctly, mentors must be chosen wisely, and mentors must have time with their
mentee, preferably a common prep period (Heller, 2004). As for orientation programs,
these should last three days, and on-going professional development must be provided
over the first five years to sufficiently support new teachers (Clement, 2016).
Improving Efficiency
Another popularly cited factor in teacher turnover is the burnout caused by large
amounts of paperwork and inefficient operating procedures. Tompkins (2023) found that

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

28

64% of California teachers in his study said that less busy work and paperwork would
increase job satisfaction. “Teachers can become so bogged down in paperwork and
seemingly meaningless bureaucratic activities that they lose interest in the work of being
a teacher” (Becker & Grob, 2021, p. 14). School leaders, then, must act as protectors
against too much paperwork and streamline these processes (Becker & Grob, 2021). To
promote retention, teachers need more efficient school systems where they have prep
time, disciplinary support, resource availability, a trusting school environment, and
reasonable expectations (Harris et al. 2019). Parents and principals often think teachers
leave because of low pay, disrespectful students, and lifestyle changes, but that is not
always the case according to teachers. Harris et al. (2019) noted that 80% of teachers in
his study said overwhelming work expectations were a reason for leaving and found that
25% of teachers did not like their job due to high amounts of paperwork. What teachers
do want is a supportive school environment where parents and students are engaged.
This has been shown to significantly impact teacher job satisfaction and their likelihood
to stay (Hughes, 2012). And while some may think that having a lot of resources and top
of the line facilities might promote retention, these have not been shown to have a major
impact on teacher retention (Hughes, 2012).
Increasing Teacher Autonomy
Teachers want to work in school systems where they have the freedom to teach in
their own way. State mandates have led to districts being more involved in what teachers
are teaching in their classrooms. This has led to teachers feeling smothered by district
regulations and in many ways has removed the joy, creativity, and fun from the
profession. Nguyen et al. (2020) found that teachers with more classroom autonomy are

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

29

more likely to stay in the profession than those with less freedom to teach as they choose.
According to DeMatthews et al. (2022), higher levels of teacher autonomy are associated
with increased job satisfaction and retention. This means giving teachers more freedom to
make decisions about their teaching methods and classroom environment.
School districts have many viable options to promote teacher retention. Raising
salaries can be one option that aids teacher retention, but there are strategies. Retention
bonuses and merit pay have been shown to have some influence on retention.
Furthermore, supportive environments with strong induction programs, efficient
processes, and teacher autonomy have all been shown to increase teacher retention.
Above and beyond these district strategies, the school principal plays an essential role in
teacher retention.
The Importance of Principal Support
Outside of salary increases, satisfaction with the school principal is one of the
most frequently cited factors in teacher retention. Boyd et al. (2011) surveyed over 4,000
first-year teachers in New York City and followed up with 400 more in their second year.
According to this research, 40% of those who left teaching after year one mentioned
dissatisfaction with the principal as a key reason for leaving (Boyd et al., 2011). Teacher
efficacy is increased when principals provide instructional feedback, support for their
decisions in front of others, and recognition of a job well done (Hughes et al., 2014). The
relationship with the principal is so pivotal that when a principal leaves, teachers often
follow. DeMatthews et al. (2022) saw an increase of 2.3% in teacher turnover in the year
after a principal left a school. Although principal transfers showed an overall negative
impact on teacher retention, hiring experienced principals was shown to promote

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

30

retention in the following school year (DeMatthews et al., 2022). Nguyen et al. (2020)
explained that a one standard deviation increase in administrative support is associated
with a 1.3 percentage point decrease in turnover and a 9% decrease in the teacher
mobility rate. Hence, principal support has been shown to increase teacher retention
significantly.
Communication and Vision
In a meta-analysis of 14 studies, Shell et al. (2023) specifically stated, “Principal
characteristics, particularly the support for teachers and open, clear communication, have
a considerable impact on teacher retention” (p. 112). Clear communication, support, and
encouragement were the most listed factors that teachers noted as promoting retention
and job satisfaction (Shell et al., 2023). The best principals are effective communicators
and create a vision that is inclusive of the entire staff. According to Fiore and Whitaker
(2004), the best principals are visible, exude positive energy, communicate well, build a
positive school culture, and empower others through service. Communication, trust, and
building personal connections are all typically listed as important supports by teachers
(Tran et al., 2023). Building on communication, good principals create a unifying vision
for their school. “Shared vision is about members of a team or organization having
widespread agreement on where the organization is headed” (Becker & Grob, 2021, p. 9).
Thus, principals who communicate well, build trust, and create a shared vision have more
success in retaining staff.
Discipline Support
After clear communication and encouragement, follow-through on student
disciplinary measures is consistently listed as an important support provided by the

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

31

principal (Shell et al., 2023). According to Tran et al. (2023), the top three administrative
supports consistently listed by teachers are respect, enforcing discipline, and having an
open-door policy with a supportive leader. “It is pertinent to understand that school
principals who support teachers during student disciplinary actions enhance teachers’
trust and respect for them” (Shell et al., 2023, p. 112). Teachers are more likely to stay
when they have higher perceptions of student behavior regulation, safety, and order
(Becker & Grob, 2021). Teachers are also more likely to stay in harder to staff schools
when they feel supported by the principal. “Teachers will likely stay in schools serving
higher proportions of traditionally disadvantaged students if they feel supported and are
satisfied with their working conditions” (Nguyen et al., 2020, p. 12). Therefore, it is very
important for principals to set clear behavior expectations, back teachers during
disciplinary issues, and involve teachers in developing safety and discipline policies
(Becker & Grob, 2021). When teachers feel that students’ behaviors are under control,
they feel safer and are more likely to be satisfied in their work.
Mentoring for Principals
Even though principals realize their impact on teacher retention, most principals
think they provide more support than they really do. This is why principals need
increased training on how to support teachers. To do this, some researchers suggest
providing more support for principals in this regard. Apprentice and mentoring programs
are very important as well as ongoing training and professional development for
principals. To be fair, Pennsylvania requires principals to continue their professional
development through the Pennsylvania Inspired Leadership (PIL) Program. This is a
“statewide, standards-based continuing professional education program for school and

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

32

system leaders. This comprehensive program is focused on developing the capacity of
leaders to improve student achievement” (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 2024, para.
1). For principals to succeed, specific training is needed in conflict resolution,
instructional leadership, and communication (Boyd et al., 2011). And because high-need
schools see the highest rates of teacher attrition, researchers recommend incentives for
principals at high-need schools to support these teachers (Boyd et al., 2011).
Overall, principals play an important role in teacher retention. Satisfaction with
the school principal is second only to improving salaries as a factor listed to help improve
teacher retention. According to the research, the best principals discipline students
consistently, encourage teachers, communicate well, and create a positive school
environment. Just as mentoring can be helpful for teachers, it can be beneficial for new
principals as well.
Leadership Styles That Promote Retention
Since the principal plays such a key role in teacher retention, some research has
delved into what leadership styles are the most effective. Distributive leadership, servant
leadership, authentic leadership, transactional leadership, and transformational leadership
have all been cited as effective leadership styles for today’s principal.
Distributive Leadership
Teachers enjoy being a part of the decision-making process, and they want to be
involved in leadership roles in the school. Therefore, distributive (or distributed)
leadership has been cited as an effective leadership style to empower teachers.
Distributive leadership promotes shared responsibility among staff which can improve
faculty morale. Schools can develop a sense of ownership and belonging using this style,

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

33

which leads to higher retention rates (Sulit, 2020). Many principals confuse distributive
leadership with delegating, but it is much more than that. It includes coaching and
empowering teacher leaders within a school (Solly, 2018). “The purpose of distributed
leadership is to increase the leadership capacity within a school so that the school can
improve and grow in an authentic manner, with no tricks, stunts, or game-playing” (Solly,
2018, para. 8). In a small qualitative study in Arizona, half of the participants said that
distributive leadership would play a meaningful role in them choosing to remain teachers
(Sulit, 2020). “This approach empowers teachers, staff, and even students to take on
leadership roles, contributing to decision-making and school improvement” (Morgan,
2023, para. 34). In distributive leadership, the principal is no longer someone who fixes
all the problems for everyone. The principal’s job is to build leadership among teachers
through creating a shared vision of success. The principal does not need to have all the
answers (Heller, 2004). In sum, teachers support distributive leadership as a strategy
because it builds teacher leaders in a school and has been shown to promote job
satisfaction and teacher retention.
Authentic Leadership
Authentic leadership was first defined by Bill George in 2003 in his book
Authentic Leadership (Western Governors University, 2020). George described authentic
leaders as leaders who have a sense of purpose, distinct values, and self-discipline.
Authentic leaders build relationships with people, show compassion, and listen to their
employees (Western Governors University, 2020). Evers-Gerdes and Siegle (2021)
explained that principals who are authentic leaders are much more likely to retain
teachers because they build trusting relationships with faculty. “When teachers don’t trust

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

34

you as their leader, they are less likely to support any of your efforts, even when those
efforts are valid and worthy of consideration” (Ever-Gerdes & Siegle, 2021, p. 88). A
common theme from much of the research on principal support is that teachers do not
feel like their principals really listen to them. Evers-Gerde and Siegle (2021) interviewed
one teacher who stated, “It would be helpful if he [the principal] would just take the time
to listen to me and place value in what I have to say” (p. 106). Authentic leaders build
efficacy in their teachers, making them feel like they are effective as individuals and as a
group, through constant encouragement. Teachers who feel more effective are much less
likely to burn out and leave the profession. Authentic leaders consistently work to foster
relational trust between them and their employees. “For trust to grow, there needs to be
continuous validation of role expectations; the work of maintaining relational trust cannot
be sporadic” (Becker & Grob, 2021, p. 11). Building trust takes on-going work; it cannot
be a one-time conversation. To be an authentic leader, principals cannot be a traditional
boss that gives orders and has all the answers (Heller, 2004). The principal’s role has
changed to one who listens to his or her employees, builds relationships, and encourages
teachers.
Servant Leadership
Servant leadership was first defined as a leadership style by Robert K. Greenleaf
in a 1970 essay entitled “The Servant as Leader.” According to Greenleaf, servant
leadership is markedly different from the traditional top-down approach to leadership,
wherein the leader has the power and expects others to blindly follow. Servant leaders,
by contrast, share power with others, put the needs of others first, and focus on
developing others to reach their highest potential (Greenleaf Center for Servant

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

35

Leadership, 2021). “For servant leaders…, leading is about the selfless pursuit of
developing people, enriching their lives and supporting them to become the best version
of themselves” (Evers-Gerdes & Siegle, 2021, p. 41). Studies have shown that servant
leadership can be effective in promoting teacher retention. Shaw and Newton (2014)
surveyed 234 high school teachers and found a strong correlation between servant
leadership and the likelihood of teachers being retained. They went on to note that
teacher job satisfaction levels were higher depending on the levels of servant leadership
implemented by the principal (Shaw & Newton, 2014). Kainde and Mandagi (2023) put
together an extensive literature review that included 50 studies on the impact of servant
leadership on educational outcomes. The overwhelming evidence from their study found
that servant leaders enhance teacher morale, increase job satisfaction, increase employee
engagement, and build a positive, trusting school culture. “Servant leadership emerges as
a powerful catalyst, positively shaping the dynamics of teacher-administrator
relationships and fostering a positive and engaged teaching workforce” (Kainde &
Mandagi, 2023, p. 2571).
Transactional, Transformational, and Laissez-faire Leadership
Transactional and transformational leadership are two styles that were developed
through the research of James McGregor Burns and built on by Bernard M. Bass.
Transactional leadership focuses on exchanges between leaders and followers that are
characterized by a clear structure of rewards and punishments based on performance
(Bass, 1995). “Transactional leaders…recognized what it was you wanted to get from
your work and tried to see that you got what you wanted” (Bass, 1995, p. 469). In the
educational setting, this occurs when principals provide some type of positive recognition
for a job well done. This may come in the form of praise or some type of extrinsic

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

36

reward, which has been shown to have a positive impact on teacher retention. Van der
Vyver et al. (2020) noted that principals who utilize transactional leadership had a
positive impact on teachers’ efficacy when they rewarded them for doing good work.
However, transactional leadership focuses primarily on performance outcomes and task
completion but does little to inspire or develop followers (Bass, 1995).
Transformational leadership has a broad range of categories and is much more
difficult to define. Transformative leaders may utilize some transactional devices, but
they align the goals of their followers with the needs of the organization. Transformative
leaders create a clear vision, inspire creativity, pay attention to individual needs, and
empower their employees (Bass, 1995). “Transforming leaders convert followers to
disciples; they develop followers into leaders” (Bass, 1995, p. 467). Transformational
leadership has been shown to increase job satisfaction and team performance. Braun et
al. (2012) surveyed 360 employees from 39 academic teams in the fields of medicine and
natural sciences. They found a positive relationship between individual supervisors’
transformational leadership and followers’ job satisfaction. They also found that trust
was the key factor that employees listed as promoting such job satisfaction (Braun et al.,
2012). There is some recent evidence that transformational leadership can be an effective
style in promoting teacher retention. Van der Vyver et al. (2020) found that
transformational leadership reduced stress and increased well-being in teachers, whereas
laissez-faire leadership was associated with lower levels of teacher well-being.
Laissez-faire leadership is basically a hands-off leadership style, and it was found
that although teachers need some level of autonomy, a complete hands-off style of
leadership is ineffective in schools. Thus, the overwhelming evidence presented by Van

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

37

der Vyver et al. (2020) was that both transactional and transformational approaches are
related to positive teacher well-being which promotes teacher retention.
Several leadership styles surfaced as being effective in promoting teacher
retention. Distributive leadership occurs when a principal shares power within a school.
Authentic leadership occurs when principals are genuine and form trusting relationships
with their staff. Like distributive and authentic leadership, servant leaders build
relationships, listen to employees, and empower teachers. Finally, transactional leaders
provide rewards for positive behaviors, while transformational leaders inspire high
performance from their staff. Each of these leadership styles have similar elements and
have been shown to increase teacher job satisfaction and promote retention.
Summary
Historically, teacher attrition has been an issue in the United States and
throughout the world. Just recently, it has become a larger issue due to a decrease in new
teacher candidates and many other variables. The Covid 19 Pandemic has proven to be a
major reason for teacher attrition and migration. Low salaries in relation to inflation
rates, other professions, and student loan debts have also had an impact on teacher
turnover. Finally, school operations and support have proven to be a major influence on
teacher turnover. Student discipline, lack of support for new teachers, and increased
stress over testing are some examples of school operations that have added to teachers
wanting to leave the profession.
Research has noted several strategies that are effective in promoting teacher
retention. Raising salaries, particularly in the form of bonuses and merit pay, can be
effective in keeping quality teachers. However, salary is not the only strategy for keeping

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

38

teachers in schools. Creating a positive school climate, allowing room for teacher
autonomy, hiring strong candidates, and creating supportive schools can all be impactful
in retaining quality teachers.
Principals play an important role in creating a positive environment for teachers.
Studies have shown that the principal can be one of the deciding factors in whether or not
a teacher wishes to stay at a school or leave. Principals can employ a variety of
leadership styles, including distributive, servant, transactional, transformational, and
authentic leadership.
Still, there are many gaps in the research pertaining to teacher retention. Little
research was found on the impact of school shootings on teacher attrition. Additionally, it
is very difficult to pinpoint the exact impact of teacher attrition on individual student
performance. Many studies have been tried with mixed results. Some studies have
shown negative correlations between teachers leaving and student achievement, while
others have shown positive results when poor teachers leave. Finally, though the world
economy has largely rebounded from Covid 19, not enough time has lapsed to see the
overall impact of the pandemic on our educational systems. The United States
educational system is likely still seeing the results on students and teachers of the
complete upheaval it experienced from 2020 to 2022.
Given these circumstances, the researcher has continued to see marked increases
in teacher turnover in his own school district and surrounding school districts in central
Pennsylvania in the counties surrounding Altoona and State College. This necessitated
the need for more research to look further into why teachers are choosing to leave public
schools in central Pennsylvania and what schools can do about this issue.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

39

CHAPTER III
Methodology
As the literature shows, teachers are leaving the profession and transferring
schools at unprecedented levels in the years following the Covid 19 Pandemic both in
Pennsylvania and nationally. On a broad scale, research shows that teachers leave the
profession for a variety of reasons, and the most commonly listed factors include low
salary, lack of administrative support, decreased autonomy, and increased stress.
Conversely, research shows that increased compensation promotes teacher retention, but
it is not the only strategy for promoting retention. Increased support from the
administration, better mentoring programs, and more orderly school environments are all
commonly mentioned as factors for retaining teachers. Teachers who feel valued, safe,
and respected are more likely to be retained even without considering salary and benefits.
In a nutshell, a wide range of research has shown why teachers leave or stay in a given
school and the profession altogether. However, the researcher sought to understand the
recent increase in teacher attrition on a more local level.
Historically, high percentages of teachers in central Pennsylvania remained in a
given school district throughout their entire career. This trend has shifted dramatically in
recent years. In the past two years alone, the researcher has replaced 12 teachers among
his staff of 32 teachers at the middle school level, more than one-third of the entire staff.
Since the summer of 2020, 68% of the faculty at the researcher’s middle school have
been replaced. During that same time period, the elementary school saw 40% of its
teachers leave, while the high school saw 31% leave. This amounts to 66 total teachers
who have left the district since the Covid 19 Pandemic. This turnover rate has caused

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

40

increased stress at the school and district levels. A great deal of institutional knowledge
was lost when these teachers left. Plus, new teachers needed to be hired, trained, and
mentored, which created increased workloads for administration and remaining faculty
members. In addition, faculty morale has become strained because many teachers have
seen their network of colleagues leave the district. Altogether, the dramatic increase in
teacher turnover coupled with the fallout from such turnover inspired the researcher to
seek a deeper understanding of the phenomenon on a regional and local level.
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of why teachers are
leaving their teaching positions in the researcher’s own district as well as surrounding
districts. The study used a mixed-methods design, which incorporated both numerical
survey data and qualitative, narrative data. The study was a non-experimental,
phenomenological study with the researcher seeking a better understanding of the
phenomenon of teacher attrition and perspectives on retention. According to Mertler
(2022, p. 95), “The intent of phenomenological studies is to describe and interpret the
experiences or reactions of participants to a particular phenomenon from their individual
perspectives.” The information gleaned from this study will allow the researcher to make
recommendations that can be presented to the district-level administration in his own
school district, and it will also inform his own professional practice as a middle school
principal.
Although the literature on this topic is extensive nationally, the researcher sought
to understand the phenomenon at the local level. The researcher wanted to understand
why teachers are leaving his own district in particular, what can be done about it at the

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

41

district level, and what principals can do about it. The researcher included participants in
his survey from surrounding school districts to see if teachers’ perspectives on this topic
were similar or different to that of teachers in his own district. The research questions
that guided this study are listed below.
Research Questions
1. What are the main reasons teachers want to leave public schools in central
Pennsylvania, and how does this compare or contrast with the researcher’s own
school district?
2. What working conditions promote teacher retention?
3. What forms of support do teachers need from principals to promote retention?
These research questions served as the driving force of this entire study. The
answers to these questions provided essential knowledge that the researcher can use to
help his own school district retain high-quality teachers.
Setting
This study was set in central Pennsylvania, incorporating school districts in Blair,
Clearfield, and Huntingdon Counties. Blair County provided the majority of the
participants for the study. Blair County covers 525.8 square miles with 122,822 people
residing within its boundaries (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020). According to 2020 census
data, the median household income in Blair County is $54,002, and the employment rate
sits at 56.3% (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020). The researcher’s school district lies mostly in
northern Blair County as well as parts of Huntingdon and Centre counties in central
Pennsylvania. The district covers 176 square miles total, and roughly 12,600 people
reside within its boundaries (TASD, 2025). The entirety of the district is largely rural

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

42

with many residents seeking employment in the larger communities of State College and
Altoona. The district serves approximately 1800 students across three schools, including
an elementary (which includes preschool), a middle school, and a high school (TASD,
2025). Among the student population, 56.1% are considered economically
disadvantaged, 15.7% receive special education services, and 95.7% identify as
Caucasian (Pennsylvania Department of Education, 2025).
Participants
As described later in the research plan, the researcher collected data using three
instruments, including a survey, a focus group, and individual interviews. During the
first phase of the study, the researcher emailed surveys to all superintendents in his own
county as well as superintendents in other surrounding districts in other counties. In all,
11 school districts were invited to participate in the survey portion of the study. Four of
seven school districts in the same county, and two school districts from surrounding
counties participated in the survey portion of the study. These counties are largely rural
and have similar demographic features, such as ethnic/racial backgrounds and
socioeconomic levels. In all, 132 teachers from six school districts responded to the
survey. Thirty-one respondents came from the researcher’s own district, and 101
respondents came from nearby school districts. The participating districts provided
variation in size. Three districts can be described as smaller than the researcher’s, one
participating district can be described as significantly larger than the researcher’s, and
another district can be described as relatively the same size as the researcher’s.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

43

A wide range of participants responded to the survey. The gender make-up of the
participants was 70.5% female and 29.5% male. Figure 1 shows that a slight majority of
the respondents could be described as veteran teachers with over 16 years of experience.
Figure 1
Participants’ Experience Levels

Figure 2 shows that teachers from a variety of grade bands responded to the survey.
Figure 2
Participants’ Grade Bands

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

44

Figure 3 shows the degree to which some of the respondents have moved around in their
teaching career.
Figure 3
Number of Districts in Which Participants Worked

The researcher used a focus group to collect information using only teachers from
his own school district. The focus group consisted of ten teachers in total. Six of the ten
participants in the focus group were female. Four participants were elementary teachers,
four were middle school teachers, and two were high school teachers. Teachers from a
variety of career points participated in focus group.
Twelve former teachers from the researcher’s school district were invited to
participate in the interview process. All those invited had left the school since the Covid
19 Pandemic or the 2020-2021 school year. Of the twelve former teachers who were
invited to participate in the study, seven agreed to participate. Three participants were
elementary teachers, three were middle school teachers, and one taught at the high school
level. Four of the participants were female, while three were male. Since leaving the
district, three participants taught in a larger school district, three taught at smaller,

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

45

religious-affiliated schools, and one no longer worked in K-12 education. Therefore, a
variety of former teachers from many backgrounds or who left for various reasons were
sought out to participate in the interview process.
Research Plan
Broad national and international research shows that teacher attrition has become
a major issue facing schools, particularly since the Covid 19 Pandemic in 2020. National
research has shown that increased stress levels coupled with financial reasons have led to
large scale teacher attrition. Most of these studies, however, have focused on a national
level. This study homed in on Blair County and surrounding counties in central
Pennsylvania to see if these same reasons for attrition held true at a more local level.
According to the National Education Association (2024), the average starting teaching
salary in Pennsylvania is $49,083, but the minimum living wage is higher at $57,664. By
comparison, the average starting teaching salary in Blair County is far lower at $45,347
(Pennsylvania State Teachers Association, 2025). Not only are teachers entering the
workforce with salaries lower than average, but they are also facing mounting levels of
student loan debt. Pennsylvania teachers earn 18% less than similarly educated
professionals, which means they have less money available after paying student loans
than other professionals (National Education Association, 2024). Given that information,
are financial concerns really the main driving force behind teachers leaving public
schools in central Pennsylvania? Or, are other reasons—such as perceived unfair work
expectations, discipline issues, and stress—causing teachers to leave? What’s more, the
researcher’s own school has seen a sharp increase in teachers leaving his school district.
Are teachers in surrounding districts voicing the same concerns about teacher attrition?

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

46

These factors set the stage for the research plan, which included multiple data
collection tools. This research plan can be described as phenomenological and/or
descriptive. As Mertler (2022) explains, descriptive research allows the researcher to
describe and interpret the current status of individuals, settings, conditions, and events.
The researcher studies a phenomenon as it exists naturally with no attempt to manipulate
the individuals, conditions, or events (Mertler, 2022). In sum, the plan consisted of three
distinct data collection methods, with each providing a unique perspective on the same
phenomenon.
Multiple perspectives gained from multiple data collection tools and participants
provided detailed information about why teachers are leaving and what school districts
can do about. Teachers from surrounding districts were surveyed, teachers from within
the district were interviewed as a group, and finally former teachers were interviewed.
Also known as triangulation, “The use of multiple methods and sources of data collection
only serve to enhance the validity of both research data and findings” (Mertler, 2022, p.
204). This multi-faceted approach to data collection provided the researcher with the
answers to his research questions and informed his plan of action for promoting teacher
retention in his school district.
Research Methods
In order to gain multiple perspectives on this problem, the researcher used a
mixed methods approach to research. Mixed-methods research uses aspects of both
qualitative and quantitative research. Both quantitative and qualitative research methods
provide benefits and limits to the researcher. Therefore, using both methods allows the
researcher to pull from the strengths of both methods. Quantitative data typically targets

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

47

a larger sample, and therefore, the data can be more easily applied to the wider population
(Dawadi et al., 2021). Quantitative data can easily be placed into a graph to provide a
visual representation of the data. Qualitative data, on the other hand, “provides a deeper
understanding of the issue being investigated, honoring the voices of the participants”
(Dawadi et al., 2021). While it is more difficult to provide a visual representation of
qualitative data, this data provides first-hand information from people living through the
phenomenon in question.
Several variations of mixed-methods research have been developed over the
years. For this study, the researcher chose a convergent parallel design. Using this
design, the researcher collects both quantitative and qualitative data in the same time
frame. Both forms of data are given equal importance and analyzed independently
(Mertler, 2022). Other mixed-methods approaches may start with a broad quantitative
portion of the study. Then, based on what is found in that portion of the study, the
researcher will use a qualitative approach to focus the second portion of the study on
certain participants or certain topics. For the purposes of this study, the researcher gave
equal weight to both forms of data, both were collected in the same time frame, and both
were analyzed during the same time frame. An in-depth explanation of this research
process is provided in the next section.
Data Collection
The data collection process for this study took place during February and March
2025. The planning process, however, began in the Summer of 2024 when surveys, focus
group questions, and interview questions were developed. These were compiled and sent
digitally in an application to the PennWest University Institutional Review Board in July

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

48

2024. The researcher received approval with no revisions needed, effective July 29,
2024, with an expiration date of July 28, 2025. A copy of the PennWest IRB Approval
can be found in Appendix A. Initial research began with a review of related literature in
the Fall of 2024, and the data collection process was implemented in the Winter of 2025.
Surveys
The first data collection tool used was a survey sent out to all Blair County school
districts as well as other school districts in surrounding counties. The information gained
from this survey was both quantitative and qualitative. This information allowed the
researcher to compare and contrast viewpoints from other districts’ teachers with his own
district’s teachers. The researcher began the process in early February 2025 by emailing
surveys to superintendents in surrounding school districts. Surveys were emailed to 11
superintendents on February 3, 2025, and teachers in these districts were given until
February 14, 2025, to respond to the survey. Six out of 11 school superintendents
forwarded the study out to their faculty. Some superintendents responded with
reservations about certain aspects of the study, while others did not respond at all.
Google Forms was used to create the survey, and an informed consent to participate was
provided at the beginning of the survey (Appendix B). Respondents could not move on
to the second portion of the survey without agreeing to the informed consent. The survey
provided quantitative data based on questions which were anchored to each of the three
larger research questions. Several open-ended questions were also included in the survey,
providing some qualitative information from this data collection tool. This information
provided a window into the thoughts and feelings of the participants in the survey. In all,
132 participants responded from six different school districts. The researcher deemed

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

49

this response rate a success because a variety of schools were represented and a variety of
teachers at different career points were represented in the responses. A copy of the
survey can be found in Appendix C.
Focus Group
The second data collection tool came in the form of a focus group. This second
phase began in mid-February 2025, directly following the deadline for the survey. Focus
groups typically consist of about 10-12 individuals. According to Mertler (2022), focus
groups provide a more comfortable setting because people are often more comfortable
talking in small groups, and they are more likely to feed off of one another’s responses.
The focus group consisted of only current employees of the researcher’s own district,
which provided a unique perspective of those working in that district alone. Since the
participants in this part of the study were teachers within the researcher’s own district,
great lengths were taken to make the participants feel comfortable. Therefore, the
researcher enlisted an honest broker to moderate the focus group. The honest broker was
chosen for two reasons. First, she was a recent doctoral student herself, so she possessed
familiarity with research protocols. Second, she was employed by the local intermediate
unit, so while she was familiar with the district, she maintained a third-party relationship
with the district.
Once this person agreed to moderate the group, the researcher emailed all district
faculty asking for participation in the focus group. An initial email was sent out on
February 14, 2025, asking for participation in the group. An informed consent form to
participate in the focus group was created using Google Forms, and a link was included
in this email (Appendix B). The researcher explained that all participants would be

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

50

entered into a drawing to win a $25 gift card. No responses were received to this initial
email, so the researcher sent a follow-up email on February 20, 2025. In this email, the
researcher specified the time frame to sixty minutes total and provided a clear date and
time for the event. After this email, twelve teachers agreed to participate, but two others
had prior obligations and could not participate in the focus group itself, leaving a total of
10 participants.
The focus group took place on February 25, 2025, from 3:05-4:05PM. The honest
broker facilitated the event via Zoom, and she recorded the proceedings. Ten questions
were provided for the moderator, using a semi-structured interview, which allowed the
interviewer to go off the script of questions. These questions were anchored to the three
research questions, using the denotations R1, R2, or R3, by each question. A copy of the
questions used for the focus group can be found in Appendix D. The honest broker sent
the audio file to the researcher via email directly after the focus group had concluded.
Focus group participants were made aware that the broker shared this audio file with the
researcher. The audio file enabled the researcher to listen to the file, take notes, and
upload it to a transcription service for further analysis.
Interviews
The final data collection tool to be implemented was the use of semi-structured
interviews with former employees of the researcher’s school district. These interviews
were conducted by the researcher himself via phone or Zoom. Beginning in early March
2025, this final phase allowed the researcher to gain yet another perspective on teacher
attrition and retention. This data provided the perspective of those who had left the
district.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

51

The researcher was purposeful in selecting interview participants. “Purposeful
sampling involves the intentional selection of individuals and sites to learn about or
understand the topic at hand” (Cresswell, 2005, as cited in Mertler, 2022, p. 192).
Specifically, the researcher reached out to several teachers who had left his own school
district since the 2020-2021 school year. Here, the researcher was intentional about
selecting individuals who had left the school district for a variety of reasons and from a
variety of schools within the district. This can be described as maximum variation
sampling because the researcher sought out participants who differed on some important
characteristic or trait (Mertler, 2022). This sampling methodology allowed the researcher
to gain a better perspective on the topic from a wide variety of viewpoints (Bobbitt,
2020). Some left education altogether, some left for a non-public school, and others left
for another public school.
Contact information for these participants was obtained by the researcher’s own
personal knowledge base and through discussion with various individuals still working
within his school district. Prior to sharing contact information, the researcher asked those
sharing the information to ensure the would-be participant was comfortable sharing his or
her contact information. In all, the researcher targeted twelve former teachers to
participate in the interview process. Using email and text messaging, the researcher
began contacting former staff members beginning March 4, 2025. Four individuals
worked at the high school level, five worked at the middle school level, and three worked
at the elementary level. From that larger sample, only one former high school teacher
agreed to participate, three former middle school teachers participated, and all three
elementary teachers agreed to participate. An informed consent form was sent to each

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

52

participant using Google Forms prior to the interview (Appendix B). The researcher
offered to conduct the interviews via Zoom or through phone. Each method allowed the
researcher to record the interview. The interviews took place from March 6, 2025, to
March 14, 2025.
The ten interview questions used for the study are all anchored to one of the three
main research questions by an R1, R2, or R3 label (Appendix E). All participants were
asked the same ten interview questions during the course of the interview, but the
interviewer had the ability to follow topics of concern or interest. This semi-structured
interview process is beneficial because it allows the researcher to have a basic plan for
the interview, while leeway is also provided to veer from the standard questions to follow
a topic of particular interest (Mertler, 2022). For this reason, interviews ranged in length
from twenty minutes to an hour, depending on the depth of the participant’s responses or
any follow-up questions that were asked. During each session, the interviewer used a
pre-printed version of the questions to take notes as the participants responded. Each
session was also recorded to allow for later listening, transcription, and analysis.
Data Collection Timeline
The entire timeline of the data collection process ran from February to March
2025. Prior to implementing the data collection process, a timeline for completing this
research was developed. The researcher focused on one phase of the research at a time
for simplicity purposes; however, no data collection tool necessarily needed to be
implemented prior to another. Because each data collection tool was given equal weight
by the researcher, it made no difference what tools were implemented in what order.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

53

Table 1 provides a simple, visual representation of the research plan as implemented in
Winter 2025.
Table 1
Data Collection Plan Implemented in Winter 2025
Data
Source

Type of Data

Participants

Data
Collection
Timeline
February 314, 2025

Format

Survey

Mostly
quantitative &
some
qualitative

132 current
teachers from 6
school districts

Focus
Group

Qualitative

10 current teachers
from the
researcher’s own
district

February
25, 2025

Semi-structured
interview
facilitated by an
honest broker.

Interviews

Qualitative

7 former teachers
who left the
researcher’s own
district since 2021.

March 6March 14,
2025

Semi-structured
interview
facilitated by the
researcher.

Google Form
sent via email.

Fiscal Information
The cost to complete this study was relatively low. Surveys and forms were
developed using Google Forms, which is a free service offered through Google. Other
questions and documents were generated using the Microsoft Office Suite. The
researcher’s district email and Zoom account were utilized to communicate with
participants. While these services came at a cost to the district, they would have been
provided to the researcher regardless of whether he conducted this study or not. Other
added costs to the district included tuition reimbursement for the doctoral candidate, the
use of district facilities, and the use of district office supplies. Overall, these costs were

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

54

estimated to be less than $12,000 per calendar year. Again, these costs were associated
with the employment of middle-level management employees regardless of whether a
study was conducted or not.
In addition to the cost to the district, the researcher experienced his own costs
throughout this study. The researcher spent much of his own personal time and money on
this project. This included purchasing several services to aid in research and data
collection. In addition, the researcher used his own personal phone to conduct a great
deal of communication for this project. The web-based Dovetail AI tool cost the
researcher roughly $80 for a two-month subscription. This was used to help organize and
analyze large amounts of data. Plus, the researcher purchased a $25 gift card that was
given to one random focus group participant.
Validity
Validity refers to the overall trustworthiness of the research. Valid research is
credible, transferable, dependable, and confirmable (Hendricks, 2016). Multiple
perspectives were sought during the course of this study in order to ensure that the data
was, in fact, valid. The researcher used several data collection tools and sampled a wide
variety of participants. According to Hendricks (2016), “When a researcher uses multiple
sources to corroborate findings, the credibility of those findings is increased.” This
triangulation of data sources is necessary in action research, and it was implemented
throughout the course of this study (Hendrick, 2016). First, the researcher surveyed
participants from several different school districts, including his own. Then, the
researcher used a focus group to interview teachers from his own district about the same
topic. Finally, the researcher interviewed teachers who had left the school district by

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

55

asking their perspectives on the same topic. These three data collection tools allowed the
researcher to corroborate data from one source to another.
With all of these perspectives taken as a whole, conclusions drawn from the
totality of this research encompassed a range of viewpoints. Therefore, similarities in the
responses of participants provided a strong indication that the evidence was valid. It is
highly likely that if teachers from other districts were saying it, current teachers were
saying it, and former teachers were saying it, then the evidence must have been valid.
Throughout the study, it was the researcher’s goal to sort out exactly why teachers are
leaving and what could make them stay from their perspective. Talking to one individual
from one school would not have provided enough evidence to draw any major
conclusions, nor would one set of interviews, or one survey provide all of the needed
evidence. Rather, a plethora of evidence from multiple sources and tools provided the
researcher with enough data to ensure the information was indeed a strong representation
of teachers’ feelings on this topic.
Summary
The implementation of this research plan was the culmination of several steps that
were put into place long before February 2025. The initial plan was developed in the
Summer of 2024. It was at that time that the researcher identified teacher attrition as a
research problem worthy of action research within his own school district. At that time,
the researcher began to formulate his initial research questions and research plan. The
researcher’s initial plan focused primarily on his own school district, but after discussions
with his superintendent and external chair, the researcher expanded his research sample to
include other school districts in his local area. These discussions focused on the need to

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

56

understand if teachers were leaving other area school districts for the same reasons they
were leaving his own school district. The researcher took this advice and worked with
his PennWest faculty chair to revise the initial research questions and research plan.
Once the initial plan and questions were created, a survey was created using
Google Forms, and questions for the focus groups and interviews were developed. This
was put into a basic research plan that was reviewed by the PennWest faculty chair, a
PennWest classmate, and the researcher’s local external chair. After several revisions, the
researcher obtained permission to implement this plan at the local level by his
superintendent. It was at this point that the researcher compiled his data collection tools
into an IRB application, which was sent digitally to the PennWest Instituational Review
board in mid-July 2024. On July 29, 2025, the IRB application was approved without
revisions (Appendix A).
During the Fall of 2024, the researcher read an extensive amount of literature in
the form of books, websites, and journal articles regarding the topics of teacher attrition
and retention. The researcher organized this review of literature into two main
subsections, one dealing with attrition, and the other, retention. First, the researcher
sought to understand what existing literature reported about why teachers are leaving the
profession (teacher attrition). During the next phase of the literature review, the
researcher delved into what makes teachers want to stay in schools (teacher retention).
Two distinct approaches were taken to review the literature on teacher retention: first,
what districts can do to retain staff; and second, what principals can do to retain staff.
Like all other phases of this study, the literature review was grounded by the same three

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

57

research questions that were developed at the beginning of the study. Namely, why are
teachers leaving? What can districts do about it? What can principals do about it?
The literature review provided voluminous amounts of information on the reasons
for teacher attrition and strategies to promote teacher retention. This information
provided a strong framework to understand the topic from a broad standpoint. This
foundation of knowledge proved very useful for the researcher in making sense of his
own research and in guiding his own practice as a principal. Even still, the researcher
needed research at the local level, from his own district and others, to gain a better grasp
on the problem. Thus, in February 2025, the research plan as described in previous
pages, was implemented. Over the course of a month and a half in the Winter of 2025,
the researcher surveyed teachers, set up a focus group, and interviewed former teachers to
gain a better understanding of the topic. The results of this data collection process are
analyzed in the next section of this study.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

58

CHAPTER IV
Data Analysis and Results
The main goal of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of the
phenomenon of teacher turnover as it exists in central Pennsylvania. After an extensive
review of literature on the topic on a broad scale, the researcher gathered a strong
understanding of the phenomenon as it occurs nationally and internationally. However,
the researcher needed to implement the data collection plan described in the previous
chapter to gain a better understanding of the topic at the local level. Therefore, a mixedmethods approach was employed locally to procure both quantitative and qualitative data
on the topic using three distinct data collection tools across three target groups.
The three data collection tools used in this study included a survey, a focus group,
and interviews. These three tools allowed the researcher to access three specific target
group’s perspectives on this topic. The survey provided statistical data and some
narrative data from a broad local audience that included his own school district in
addition to five other school districts. The focus group provided narrative data from
teachers currently employed in his own district, and the interviews provided narrative
data from teachers who had left the district. Each data collection tool included teachers
from a variety of grade bands, certification areas, and career points. While each tool
targeted a different group of participants, each tool focused on the same three research
questions that were established from the very start of this study. The goal of this chapter
is to present the data and results found through the data collection process in a manner
that is both understandable and relates back to the three basic research questions.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

59

Data Analysis
The researcher took several methodical steps through the data analysis process.
First, information from each data collection tool was reviewed separately from each
other. Second, as information from each data collection tool was reviewed, the researcher
used the research questions in order to locate information that was pertinent in answering
the research questions.
Survey Analysis
The first data collection tool to be implemented and analyzed was a survey
created through Google Forms and sent via email to several school districts on February
3, 2025, and ending on February 14, 2025. In all, 132 current teachers from six different
school districts in central Pennsylvania responded to the survey. In general, the survey
provided numerical data, but it also contained open-ended questions to provide some
narrative data.
Demographic information about the participants can be found in the previous
chapter, whereas statistical analysis is tabulated in this chapter as a result of the
participants’ responses to the questions pertaining to teacher turnover. The survey itself
was organized by questions that provided information for each of the three main research
questions. Organizing the survey by each of the three research questions kept the
researcher focused through the data analysis process. The Google Forms web application
created pie charts and provided percentages based on the statistical data collected in the
survey. This allowed the researcher to quickly observe the data that was obtained.
Survey participants were also given the opportunity to provide narrative responses to
each of the three research questions. These responses were uploaded to the AI program

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

60

Dovetail, which summarized responses by themes. This enabled the researcher to dive
into the responses to observe the participants’ quotes that best reflected the overall
feelings of survey participants. Finally, the researcher was able to compare and contrast
teacher attitudes across districts by filtering the data set created by the survey. The
researcher was first able to filter all of the responses provided by teachers from other
districts; then he filtered out the responses from teachers in his own district. The data
was entered into Dovetail, which provided a statistical breakdown of each data set for
further analysis.
Focus Group Analysis
The focus group occurred on February 25, 2025. Ten teachers from the
researcher’s own district participated in the focus group via Zoom. The focus group
was moderated by an honest broker who was a recent doctoral student and works for
the local intermediate unit. After the focus group was completed, the honest broker
sent an audio file to the researcher for analysis. The researcher took several steps to
analyze the data provided by the focus group. The first step was to simply listen to the
audio and take notes. The researcher listened to the audio several times, made notes of
the key themes, and tallied common themes. Second, the data was uploaded to
Dovetail which transcribed the data. This allowed the researcher to go back through
the transcribed document to review common themes and revisit key quotes pertaining
to the research questions. In the results section, participant quotes are shared
representing the common themes found in the focus group. As with the survey, the
researcher used the research questions to guide the data analysis process.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

61

Interview Analysis
The researcher interviewed seven teachers who had left his school district within
the last four years. These interviews provided another unique perspective on teacher
turnover, through the eyes of those who left the school district. The researcher
interviewed three elementary teachers, three middle school teachers, and one high school
teacher, which also provided a district-wide view of teacher turnover. To analyze the
data, the researcher took notes during each interview and later coded the notes for
common themes. The researcher then uploaded each recorded interview to the AI
transcription service Dovetail. The researcher reviewed these transcripts searching for
and tallying common themes for each of the three research questions. Finally, quotes
were found that best represented the common themes that shined through in the interview
participants’ responses.
Results
A large amount of data existed from the data collection process. The data
consisted of survey results with 132 responses to nearly 20 questions, an hour-long focus
group with 10 participants, and nearly seven hours of recorded, transcribed interviews.
To remain focused, the researcher analyzed each data set one by one looking at responses
relevant to each research question. Throughout this section, results are presented from
each data set as they pertain to the three basic research questions.
Research Question #1:
The first research question focuses on teacher attrition. It asks, “What are the
main reasons teachers want to leave public schools in central Pennsylvania, and how does

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

62

this compare or contrast with the researcher’s own school district?” The survey results are
presented first, followed by focus group results, and finally interview results.
Survey Results for R1.
Research Question #1 has two parts. The first part of the question is looking for
information from the greater population of teachers in central Pennsylvania, while the
second part of the question looks to compare results from the wider population to his own
school district. When delving into this research question, the researcher first sought to
understand the pervasiveness of teacher retention in central Pennsylvania as a whole. In
this regard, 86.4% of respondents claimed that they worked closely with someone who
left their district in the past three years. This is pictured in Figure 4 below.
Figure 4
Participants Who Worked Closely with A Colleague Who Left

Participants went on to explain that not only did they have a colleague who had
left their district, but they had also thought about or actively sought employment outside
of their current role. Figure 5 reflects those who thought about leaving their current role.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

63

Figure 5
Participants Who Considered Leaving Their Current Role

Figure 6, by contrast, shows that far less participants actively sought employment
outside of their current role.
Figure 6
Participants Who Actively Sought a New Position

In general, the numerical figures provide data showing that a majority of teachers
in central Pennsylvania either knew someone who left or considered leaving themselves.
On the other hand, the data demonstrates that far fewer have actively sought alternative

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

64

employment. Figure 7 adds that many teachers can still see themselves staying in their
current role through retirement.
Figure 7
Participants Who Can See Themselves Retiring in Their Current Role

These statistics provide a strong sense of just how pervasive teacher attrition was
in central Pennsylvania at the time of the study, but still more information was needed on
why teachers wanted to leave their teaching positions. Therefore, if participants
expressed the desire to leave their current role, they were asked to explain why they
wanted to leave. The researcher provided several common reasons for attrition in the
survey, but participants had the ability to provide their own reasons for leaving. Teachers
then chose three of the most common reasons for attrition. Table 2 displays the most
common reasons that central Pennsylvania teachers said they wanted to leave their
current teaching role.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

65

Table 2
Why Teachers Say They Want to Leave
Reasons for Wanting to Leave

Percentage of Responses

More Money

22.0%

Dissatisfaction with the School District

7.6%

Dissatisfaction with Building Leadership

7.6%

Change of Location

6.1%

Dissatisfaction with Teaching Altogether

4.5%

Other

11.3%

Note. 40.9% of respondents did not consider or actively seek another position, and
therefore did not provide a reason for wanting to leave.
“More Money” had the highest percentage of responses out of all the reasons
shown for wanting to leave in Table 2. Dissatisfaction, on any level, whether it was with
the district, building leadership, or the profession itself, equaled 19.7% of responses when
totaled together. For the “Other” category, participants responded in their own words
with their reason for wanting to leave. Responses in the other category included those
who expressed a combination of both frustration and wanting more money, increased
stress and workload, and seeking other opportunities.
Many of the participants mentioned low salary, lack of respect for the profession,
and lack of administrative support as reasons for wanting to leave their current district.
One participant stated, “It is really difficult to survive making the pay that I do.” Some
participants specifically mentioned being frustrated with student behavior which led to
feeling ineffective or stressed. One participant noted “dealing with behavioral issues and

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

66

lack of respect from the students,” while another mentioned “feeling ineffective and
mentally exhausted” from dealing with student behaviors. Others noted that neighboring
districts offered higher salaries, which tempted them to seek employment there. One
teacher said, “Other districts pay their top teachers approximately $20,000-$30,000
more.” Still others remained frustrated with the profession in general. “Teachers are
disrespected and expected to be magicians with little compensation.”
The second part of Research Question #1 looked to compare teacher attitudes
about attrition from other school districts with the researcher’s own district. In total, 101
teachers from other school districts responded to the survey, and 31 teachers from the
researcher’s own district responded to the survey. The researcher filtered each data set
and uploaded both data sets separately to the Dovetail AI summarizer to look for key
insights from both data sets. Roughly 42% of respondents from the researcher’s district
actively sought other employment versus just 25% of teachers from other school districts.
Of those who considered or sought outside employment in other districts, 20% were
looking for higher salaries, 20% were dissatisfied in some way (principal, district
leadership, profession), and others were looking for a variety of other reasons, including
change of location and less stress. In the researcher’s own district, 32% said they were
seeking higher salaries, 19% were dissatisfied in some way, and the remainder were
looking for a variety of other reasons. Table 3 shows how teachers from other school
districts responses compared with responses from the researcher’s own school district. It
should be noted that the sample sizes are very different, so the percentages cannot be
adequately compared. One participant accounts for approximately 3% of the respondents

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

67

in the researcher’s district, and one participant accounts for about 1% among the
respondents in all other districts.
Table 3
Comparison of Why Teachers Want to Leave
Reasons for Wanting to Leave

Other Districts
in Study
(n=101)
19%

Researcher’s
District
(n=31)
32%

Dissatisfaction with the School District

9%

3%

Change of Location

7%

3%

Dissatisfaction with Building Leadership

6%

13%

Dissatisfaction with Teaching Altogether

5%

3%

Other

8%

20%

More Money

Note. 46% of teachers from other districts did not consider seeking or actively seek
another position, and 26% of respondents from the researcher’s district fell into this same
category. These respondents did not provide a reason for wanting to leave.
Several items could also be gleaned from the qualitative portion of the survey
when comparing the two data sets. Teachers in other districts and the researcher’s district
both said that salary was the number one action that could be taken at the district level to
keep teachers. Teachers from both data sets also mentioned increased planning time and
reducing non-instructional duties as incentives to stay. As far as principal actions,
teachers in other school districts were more likely to mention administrative support for
student discipline, while teachers from the researcher’s district mostly mentioned
improving the overall climate through visibility, communication, and valuing staff.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

68

Focus Group Results for R1. The focus group provided current teachers’
perspectives on teacher attrition from the researcher’s own district. Some key insights
were derived from specific questions pertaining to this topic. Six teachers in the focus
group mentioned feeling overworked. Specifically, several noted that covering classes
was a major issue, and one teacher brought up paperwork. One participant explained
the issue of coverage and compensatory time, “We are asked to cover and cover and
cover, and then we can only get one sick day now.” Another teacher added that this
takes away time teachers need for collaboration. “Well, to add to the coverage…we
are losing our planning to collaborate with them, we’re never together.” Four teachers
mentioned that they did not feel valued by current administration. “Just going to say
that we often feel very unappreciated,” a teacher stated, and another added, “We’re
never told that we do something right, but we’re often told when we are not doing
something right.” Student behavior concerns were also mentioned by multiple
teachers. “We're seeing the behavior issues in the classrooms and sadly, it sounds like in
some buildings issues are not being dealt with appropriately.” To summarize, teachers
cited several reasons for teacher attrition in the focus group. Feeling overworked and
stressed due to non-instructional duties, covering classes, and loss of prep time were
discussed by multiple participants. Several other teachers mentioned feeling
unappreciated by administration. Finally, behavioral issues not being handled
appropriately were also mentioned as another factor for teachers leaving.
Interview Results for R1. The interviews provided a third perspective of teacher
attitudes on attrition: that of teachers who have left the researcher’s own district. Three
of the seven interview participants left traditional public schools to teach in a smaller

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

69

Christian environment. Three of the seven teachers left to work in a much larger school
district, which offers higher salaries, increased benefits, and improved working
conditions (as they explain). One of the seven participants left K-12 public education
altogether to pursue a career in coaching an NCAA sport. Several other potential
interview candidates who left traditional public education to teach at cyber charter
schools were contacted to participate, but they declined.
When reviewing the notes and interview transcripts, several common themes
came to light as reasons for leaving. Three participants specifically mentioned salary as a
reason for leaving. These happened to be the same participants who left their roles to
move to a much larger school district. Not all participants placed the sole blame for low
salaries on district leadership. Two interviewees were frustrated with the union
leadership during past contract negotiations. The three participants who left for smaller
Christian schools mostly took pay cuts in their new roles. They specifically mentioned
some level of frustration with public education. These participants left for philosophical
reasons rather than monetary reasons. One of these respondents, in particular, mentioned
the Covid 19 Pandemic as a major catalyst for his exit, citing changes with online
learning. He stated, “Technology is great…but technology can never take the place of a
live teacher.” The two other participants in this group noted more frustrations with the
one-size-fits-all approach to public education. One participant was frustrated with a
“conveyor-belt approach” to educating students on a mass scale, while the other
participant lamented the freedom to do more hands-on projects outside the standard
curriculum.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

70

One common thread throughout all of the interviews was that some level of
frustration was listed as a reason for leaving. Five of the seven interview participants
clearly stated that they were frustrated with at least one aspect of their former role. One
participant explained that teachers are not just leaving because of pay, but because they
feel undervalued. She stated, “I believe public ed is losing really, really good people, not
because of pay…people need to feel validated, heard.” Other noted frustrations included
valuing teacher’s time, ongoing student behavioral issues, implementing changes too
quickly, and placing too much emphasis on testing and data. In sum, while a few
participants noted salary as a reason for leaving, more teachers noted some level of
frustration with public education or their former role specifically.
Research Question #2
While the first research question looked at why teachers wanted to leave, the next
two research questions focused on what could be done to get them to stay. Research
Question #2 asks, “What working conditions promote teacher retention?” First, the
researcher looked at what could be done at the district level by improving working
conditions to promote teacher retention.
Survey Results for R2. The survey provided a broader perspective on districtdriven retention strategies from the wider population of teachers in central Pennsylvania.
A survey question in this category asked participants to rank the top three actions school
districts could take to improve teacher retention. According to survey participants, the
three most popular actions included salary increases, offering performance incentives,
and providing more time for planning. Table 4 below provides a breakdown of the most
common actions teachers felt school districts could take to promote teacher retention.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

71

Table 4
Top Actions School Districts Can Take to Promote Retention
Action Taken by the District

Percentage of Responses

Increase Salary

90.9%

Provide More Time for Planning

58.3%

Offer Performance Incentives or Bonuses

31.1%

Decrease Requirements and Paperwork

30.3%

Improve Fringe Benefits

29.5%

Provide More and Better Resources

25.8%

Adjust the School Calendar

12.9%

No other responses to this question tallied more than 10% and were therefore
omitted from the chart. These categories included improving professional development,
improving onboarding, improving school safety, and improving building and grounds.
Again, teachers were given the opportunity to provide a narrative explanation for
their thoughts on district level support and/or teacher working conditions. These
responses were uploaded into the AI program Dovetail which looked for connections in
these responses. When asked what the single most important action a district could take
to promote teacher retention, a majority of participants again pointed to increasing
salaries.
Conversely, many other participants mentioned more planning time, reducing
paperwork, and improving school climate. Some notable quotes from participants
included one teacher from the researcher’s district who expressed several of these
concerns. “Teachers are often overwhelmed. If we had more planning time, and smaller

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

72

classes, and in general more support from the district, it would help lower stress
levels.” Teachers from two other districts added, “The responsibilities are becoming
more intensive and overwhelming with no incentives or increase in pay,” and “I am
personally overwhelmed some days with not having enough time to prep for all my
classes and grade papers.” To summarize, although most teachers mentioned increased
salaries, many added that other factors do play a key role in teacher retention.
Focus Group Results for R2. The focus group shed light on 10 current teachers’
thoughts on district retention strategies. The focus group specifically looked to gain
opinions from the researcher’s own district. Several positive aspects about the district
were shared that could be seen as reasons for retention. Five teachers mentioned that
they enjoyed their small community of teachers. Four teachers said they enjoy working
in the district because they live here, and two participants added that their children attend
here. One teacher added that the district provides flexibility that other districts may not
provide.
Other teachers explained that the district, as a whole, could implement other
retention strategies. One teacher brought up the issue of pay. “I have to work every
night during the week to make money just to live comfortably.” The same participant
lamented a meager raise for earning a master’s degree in comparison with other
districts. Other teachers added that the retirement and benefits are not what they once
were. “Like, whenever I first started here, which was a long time ago, it was the pension,
and now it's just not a thing really anymore.” Post-retirement insurance was mentioned
too. “But to have a school district that offers coverage after retirement versus does not.
That could, that can sway people to, to go to other districts.”

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

73

More time for planning, professional development, paperwork, and collaboration
were all seen as district-level factors that could promote teacher retention. One teacher
expanded on the issue of time, “All the paperwork that takes away from that time that
you want to spend and work with the kids.” Providing professional development that is
relevant and providing time to implement what they learned were seen as helpful. One
teacher explained that in-service days are often too busy. “I need time in my classroom to
process, process and work on trying to do some of these things that they're telling us.”
Another teacher added, “A lot of times teachers are covering during planning periods, so
we don't have a guaranteed planning period.” Overall, focus group participants shared
that increasing salary, adding fringe benefits, providing relevant professional
development, and protecting teachers’ time were the most important district-level
retention strategies.
Interview Results for R2. The interviews homed in on the attitudes of teachers
who had left the researcher’s district. Four participants specifically mentioned increasing
salaries as a method for retaining teachers. One participant explained, “Had the salary
been, like I said, more competitive, then I may have been compelled to stay and keep
those friendships.” Another added about salary, “Like with salaries, there’s no way
you’re retaining people for the long haul.” Five participants noted valuing time as a
retention strategy, with three mentioning the teacher’s schedule or school calendar and
two mentioning after-school duties or meetings. Having to cover classes and losing
preparation periods was mentioned by at least three participants. One participant
explained, “And it came down to, … the covering as much as we have it. You feel like
you cover all that time.” These participants felt like steps could be taken at the district-

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

74

level to alleviate coverage issues and add preparation time back into teacher schedules.
They noted teachers feeling overwhelmed by their workloads and this problem being
exacerbated by after-school meetings. A few felt frustrated that teachers were expected
to stay until four o’clock when a meeting ended at 3:30, just to fulfill a time requirement.
“If we were supposed to go till four, we had to stay till 4, …whether we were done with
the task at 3:30 or not.”
Several participants brought up the need to feel valued and trusted as
professionals. Having some level of autonomy was seen as very important. “I felt like
classroom autonomy was a big deal. You know, the ability to have trust.” In this same
vein, four teachers brought up the issue of a relaxed dress code. In their new roles, these
people said they felt more comfortable and felt they were treated more like professionals
because they now have the freedom to dress as they prefer each day. One teacher
described it this way, “For instance, where I work now, I can wear jeans on most days,
and it doesn’t make me lesser of a teacher by any means.” Two participants mentioned
professional development as important steps that could be taken by district
administration. These two participants noted how unequipped young teachers are at
handling the challenges of a modern classroom. They specifically focused on the lack of
teacher training on behavior management, handling students with disabilities, and dealing
with poverty. According to one interviewee, “I just don’t think colleges are preparing
[education] students for what teaching is truly.” Another added, “Teach these college
kids, like how to manage certain behaviors and give them scenarios.” Overall, while
money was offered by most as an important strategy for school districts to improve

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

75

retention, strategies that improve teacher autonomy, time, and professional development
were also mentioned as district-level strategies for retaining teachers.
Research Question #3
The final portion of the study focused on what could be done at the building level
to promote teacher retention. Research Question #3 asks, “What forms of support do
teachers need from principals to promote retention?” Here again, multiple perspectives
were gained from analysis of information provided by each data collection tool.
Survey Results for R3. In the survey, teachers from the researcher’s district and
surrounding districts were asked to rank the top three supports principals could provide at
the building level to promote teacher retention. A wider range of responses was provided
for this question than Research Question #2, which focused on district level actions.
Table 5 provides a breakdown of the most important principal supports that promote
teacher retention according to survey participants.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

76

Table 5
Top Principal Supports That Promote Teacher Retention
Type of Support

Percentage of Responses

Support Teachers through Student Discipline

73.5%

Provide More Time for Planning and Collaboration

52.3%

Be More Visible

32.6%

Allow More Teacher Freedom

29.5%

Communicate More Frequently

29.5%

Address Staff Issues More Frequently and Fairly

28%

Adjust the Schedule

13.6%

Evaluate Staff in a Different Way

10.6%

As can be seen in the table above, support for teachers through student discipline
was the most commonly listed action that a principal could take to promote teacher
retention. Providing more time for planning was another commonly chosen support, and
that corresponds with participants’ responses for the same support at the district level.
Several other actions were ranked in the top three by nearly one-third of respondents.
These supports included being visible, communicating more frequently, allowing teacher
autonomy, and addressing staff issues more frequently or fairly. The survey allowed
participants to give their own ideas for principal support, but many of the responses
seemed similar to the supports already listed. A few respondents mentioned that their
principals do a great job already and that they do not blame principals for teacher
turnover.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

77

Survey respondents were asked to elaborate on what they saw as the most
important supports that principals could provide to promote teacher retention. Most
respondents noted that the principal’s support for teachers in student behavior
management was pivotal in promoting retention. Teachers mentioned that failure to
handle behavioral problems consistently and deferring to parents for student discipline
were seen as negative actions by principals. One respondent stated, “Teachers need to
feel their classroom is important. By issuing fair, balanced discipline, it gives them this
feeling.”
In addition to behavior support, being visible and communicating effectively were
also commonly noted by teachers as effective principal supports. One teacher from the
researcher’s district stated, “Being visible is key! When you are more visible, some of
the other actions/supports will fall into place on their own.” Plus, a teacher from
another district mentioned the importance of visibility. “More visibility of a principal
equals easier approachability which leads to a better professional rapport between a
teacher and an administrator as well as the students.” Still, other participants displayed a
disdain for principals who stifle teacher autonomy through micromanagement. One
teacher specifically stated, “Show us we are appreciated without micromanaging us or
making more work for us,” and another response stated, “Teacher freedom, trust us to
complete our jobs in a manner that suits us personally and for the children.” In sum,
respondents provided a wide variety of principal actions to promote teacher ret ention.
Discipline was by far the most commonly listed support, but visibility, communication,
culture, and providing autonomy were also commonly listed principal supports.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

78

Focus Group Results for R3. Focus group participants from the researcher’s
district also shared opinions about how principals can impact teacher retention. Showing
teachers they are valued and appreciated topped the list of these suggested strategies.
Multiple teachers agreed that it makes a big difference when they feel valued by their
supervisor. According to one participant, “I think more recognition from the admin team.
I think that a little compliment or a little something, it does go a long way.” In a more
positive light, one teacher shared how her principal’s actions encouraged her. “He tells us
we're doing a good job. He sends us emails to keep up the good work, you know, what
you're doing matters. And so, I mean, that just helps for your own mentality, for your
own mental health.”
Visibility was seen as an important principal action as well. One participant
stated, “Be seen. There's weeks I go without even seeing my principal.” Another teacher
expanded on that statement by saying, “I do think visibility is a huge thing. Just being
present in the halls.” Other key principal actions that were mentioned in the focus group
included support for student discipline, handling difficult parents, communicating well,
and allowing teacher autonomy. One of the most important and final factors mentioned
was trust. According to one teacher, “If we don't trust our administrators, then how can
we then feel supported?” Multiple teachers agreed that trust is built from being authentic
and genuine, and that it shouldn’t be forced. They noted that once trust is lost, it is very
difficult to get it back.
To close, many of the items discussed in the focus group matched the results from
the survey. Teachers cited low salaries, behavioral issues, and frustrations as reasons for
attrition. Teachers explained that increasing salaries and benefits could promote

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

79

retention, but they also explained that salaries were not the sole factor in retention.
Teachers noted that protecting their time was a very important district-level strategy for
retention. At the building level, teachers wanted to see their principal and feel supported.
More importantly, they wanted to feel valued and wanted to feel like they could trust
their immediate supervisor.
Interview Results for R3. Interview participants who had left the researcher’s
district provided more insight on the topic of principal supports for teacher retention. Six
of the seven interview participants clearly stated the importance of a principal who builds
positive relationships with staff. One participant summarized this point well, “But the
key is, it’s creating a relationship. And the teachers know that. That I’m there for them,”
A second participant added, “If you have developed a relationship with somebody, it’s
easier to approach that person.” Several participants provided strategies for principals to
build relationships. At least three interviewees noted the importance of the principal
being a visible presence in the school. One participant explained, “Being visible and
present and not just there for, you know, hey I see you twice a year when you evaluate
me.” Two participants touched on the importance of an open-door policy, along with
being approachable. One of them stated, “They need to be approachable like that open
door kind of policy. They need to have teachers’ backs always.” At least three
participants used the same wording “have teachers’ backs” in their responses, noting the
importance of principal support, especially during challenging situations. Listening to all
sides in a conflict and implementing restorative practices with staff were viewed as
important. Two responses, in particular, mentioned the importance of giving grace to
teachers in challenging situations. According to one participant, “The best thing for a

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

80

principal or someone in leadership to do is be willing to talk to each side individually and
truly listen to what that person has to say.” Several interview participants discussed
times when they were challenged by a student, parent, or colleague. Interviewees
specifically mentioned that principals should be transparent and be up front with teachers
if someone has complained about them. According to one teacher, “I think also never
doing an investigation without letting the teacher know that it’s being investigated, ….
Makes you feel, like, unsafe.” Teachers mentioned how important it was for them to have
a principal who supported them through a challenging situation, while some regretted not
receiving as much support as they would have liked. Not being open and up front about
challenging situations was brought up as a factor that eroded trust between the teacher
and the principal.
Similar to relationship building, five of seven interviewees noted the importance
of a principal who fosters a strong sense of community. One participant summarized it
best, “I think encouraging community. Like, when you feel you’re a part of a
community, you don’t want to leave that.” As with the district level, four interview
participants noted it is important when principals value their time, and four participants
mentioned the importance of autonomy. With time management, interviewees found
favor with principals who were flexible with teachers. They spoke highly of leaders who
allowed some flexibility with meetings, extra duties, and classroom autonomy.
Micromanagement was not viewed in a positive light. One teacher clearly stated,
“Micromanagement is a huge deterrent for teachers.” A separate interviewee went on to
describe how having the freedom to try new things has allowed him to learn and grow as

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

81

a professional. “Because I’ve got the freedom to make those really stupid mistakes, I
also have the freedom to learn,” he said.
In conclusion, interview participants explained that principals play a key role in
teacher retention. One participant stated, “A good leader will make anything great.
Leaders matter.” Interview participants described relationship building as the most
important strategy for principals. In fact, they explained that relationships built on open
communication, trust, and support were essential to retaining teachers. A close second
behind building relationships was fostering a sense of community. Five of seven
respondents mentioned the importance of a professional community. Valuing time and
autonomy were also key actions mentioned by teachers during the interviews.
Triangulation of Data Sources
As described above, three data collection tools were utilized by the researcher to
collect data for this study. Each tool provided a different perspective in answering the
three research questions. The survey provided both quantitative and qualitative data
based on teachers inside and outside the researcher’s own district. The focus group
provided qualitative data summarizing perspectives of current teachers within the
researcher’s own district. And finally, the interviews added the narrative perspectives of
those who have left the researcher’s district since the Covid 19 Pandemic. Using several
different tools across several different target groups provided key answers to the same
researcher questions. Seeking perspectives from multiple target groups allowed the
researcher to find common threads in responses which transcended each target group.
Since multiple population samples demonstrated common responses to the same research
questions, the answers to these questions can be verified across multiple sources. This

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

82

provides a much better likelihood that the common themes brought to light by this
research are, in fact, a strong representation of the teacher turnover issue in central
Pennsylvania, as well as what strategies can be used to combat it.
Summary
Three distinct data sets were analyzed and presented in this chapter, providing a
wealth of information. Each data set was analyzed independently and organized by each
of the three main research questions. Research Question #1 focused on why teachers are
leaving their positions. Initial quantitative data showed that a majority of teachers know
someone who has left their position or thought about leaving their teaching position. On
the contrary, other results showed that less teachers have actively looked for another job,
and a majority can still see themselves staying until retirement.
More money was listed by the most survey respondents on why teachers are
leaving, but some level of frustration was a close second when three categories were
combined. When comparing other districts to the researcher’s district, more money was
still listed as the most common reason for leaving. Frustration, in general, was the second
most cited reason, and this percentage was very similar across districts when adding three
categories together. Other statistics on attrition were not exactly similar when comparing
other districts to the researcher’s own. Focus group participants and interview
participants both added that more money was a major reason for teachers leaving. Other
common reasons for leaving among all three data sets were lack of support for student
discipline and lack of rapport between administrators and teachers.
Research Question #2 looked at what districts could do to keep teachers. Once
again, raising salaries was commonly listed across all three data sets as a primary strategy

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

83

for teacher retention. Survey participants also mentioned performance incentives as
another factor that could retain teachers. All three data sets showed a common thread
among teachers wanting more time for planning and preparation. Teachers across all
three data sets also mentioned the importance of providing necessary resources and
reducing the overall workload.
Research Question #3 looked at what principals could do to retain teachers. The
top supports listed in the survey included support for student discipline, valuing teachers’
time, and being visible. Each of those supports were also mentioned by participants in
the other two data sets. Interview participants focused more strongly on principal-teacher
relationships and supporting teachers in challenging situations; however, many of the
challenging situations mentioned involved disciplinary issues.
In this chapter, information from all three data sets was presented, but conclusions
have yet to be drawn. In the final chapter conclusions will be drawn based on all of this
information to answer each of the three research questions. Common links between all
three data sets will be examined, while key differences will also be explained. Finally,
recommendations to combat turnover will be presented, limitations of the research will be
examined, and suggestions for further research will be offered.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

84

CHAPTER V
Conclusions and Recommendations
Teacher turnover is a major issue facing schools, especially since the Covid 19
Pandemic in 2020. Across the nation, teachers are either moving schools, or they are
seeking other professions all together. Schools in central Pennsylvania are not immune to
this problem. At one time, most teachers in central Pennsylvania stayed in their positions
until retirement. Today, less teachers are choosing that option.
Teacher turnover creates a variety of problems for school districts. First and most
importantly, students receive less quality instruction when experienced teachers are
replaced by less experienced teachers. Institutional knowledge about the school and its
curricula are lost when a teacher leaves. The remaining colleagues are left to pick up the
slack for teachers who have left, either by training a new teacher or by picking up new
classes, students, and responsibilities. Administrators must dedicate their time and
energy to replacing, training, and onboarding new teachers. This is becoming
increasingly difficult due to a shortage of teachers now entering the profession. Finally,
replacing teachers comes with a price tag for each school district. These costs are
associated with hiring, training, onboarding, and mentoring new teachers.
The main goals of this study were to examine the main causes of teacher turnover
in central Pennsylvania, including the researcher’s own district, and to find out what
school districts and principals can do about it. This chapter will draw conclusions to the
three research questions based on an extensive review of literature and data analysis from
the survey, focus group, and interviews.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

85

Conclusions
This was a phenomenological study, wherein the researcher asked questions to
better understand the phenomenon of teacher turnover and what can be done to promote
teacher retention. After reviewing the entirety of information from this study, several key
findings came to light regarding the research questions.
Research Question #1
What are the main reasons teachers want to leave public schools in central
Pennsylvania, and how does this compare or contrast with the researcher’s own school
district? This question focuses on why teachers are leaving, commonly known as teacher
attrition. Through this question, the researcher first sought to understand why teachers
are leaving on a broad scale, in his region, and in his own school district. Then, the
researcher sought to understand if the reason teachers are leaving his district are the same
reasons teachers are leaving other districts across his region.
Teachers Want More Money. Teachers are leaving for higher pay. In every part
of the research process, the most commonly cited reason for teacher attrition was low
pay. Looking back on the literature, 93% of 2,000 teachers in one study listed low pay as
their reason for leaving (Harris, et al., 2019). Other studies showed that teachers earn
26.6% less than their counterparts with similar degrees (Allegretto, 2024), and that the
average student borrows over $30,000 to complete a four-year degree program (Hanson,
2024). Therefore, on a national level, it is very clear that many teachers are leaving due
to dissatisfaction with their salary.
Among central Pennsylvania teachers who participated in the survey portion of
this study, 19% said more money was their reason for seeking other employment. In the

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

86

researcher’s own district, that figure was much higher at 32%, or nearly one-third of
respondents. Money was mentioned several times in the other data collection tools as
well. The focus group targeted teachers currently working in the researcher’s district.
Salary was not a major part of the focus group conversation, but two teachers specifically
brought it up. One teacher talked about needing to work extra jobs every night just to
make ends meet. The interview process focused on teachers who have left the
researcher’s district. Three of the seven teachers interviewed stated higher pay was one
of their main reasons for leaving. All three of these teachers left the researcher’s small
district for a larger district with a higher tax base.
Teachers Feel Unsatisfied and Unsupported. Teachers feel unsupported in their
work and unsatisfied in their roles. While money was the most commonly mentioned
reason for leaving, it was not the only reason why teachers wanted to leave. Many
teachers who left the district noted that had they been satisfied with their work, they may
have considered staying for less money. Feelings of support from colleagues and
administration are frequently mentioned by teachers as key elements in job satisfaction.
In particular, support for student discipline issues was a very important factor for
teachers. If teachers felt like students behaved and respected them, they reported feeling
much happier in their position. Becker and Grob (2021) noted that teachers make a costbenefit analysis when deciding to leave by comparing the amount of money they make
with how much support they receive and if they like their job.
In central Pennsylvania at large, 20% of teachers cited some form of
dissatisfaction as a reason for looking for a new position. The researcher’s own district
showed similar figures, with 19% mentioning some form of dissatisfaction with the job

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

87

other than salary. Interestingly enough, a number of respondents responded “other” and
provided a more detailed response with some combination of money and frustration. In
the focus group, four teachers specifically mentioned not feeling valued by administration
as a reason that teachers seek employment elsewhere. In the interview process, five of
the seven teachers mentioned some level of frustration as one of their reasons for leaving.
One participant clearly stated that public schools are losing good people because teachers
don’t feel heard or validated.
Teachers Are Stressed. Teachers are feeling overwhelmed. Teachers report that
the workload, especially for non-instructional duties, has grown over the years. Extra
paperwork, coverage, and an overemphasis on standardized testing have all been listed as
common stressors for teachers. One study showed that 30% of teachers have experienced
clinically significant anxiety because of state testing policies (Farmer, 2020). Another
researcher stated, “Stress is one of the clearest predictors of teacher attrition” (Ryan et al.,
2017, p. 3).
Teachers in central Pennsylvania agreed. One teacher from the survey expressed
“feeling ineffective and mentally exhausted” in her work. Six out of ten teachers in the
focus group mentioned feeling overworked. Specifically, coverage was a major point of
contention that added to teachers feeling overworked and stressed in the focus group. In
the interviews, the same sentiment about coverage was shared by those who had left the
researcher’s own district. Interview participants mentioned an overemphasis on data and
testing, dealing with discipline issues, and after-school activities and as major causes of
stress.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

88

Covid 19 Played a Role. The Covid 19 Pandemic reshaped the landscape of
education. This is supported heavily by many studies across the nation. According to a
2021 study by Diliberti et al., half of all public-school teachers cited Covid 19 as one of
their reasons for leaving. Teachers in the national studies cited hybrid learning models
and disrespect as causes of stress and reasons for seeking new roles. What’s more, new
employment opportunities arose after the pandemic both inside and outside of the
educational field. The pandemic fundamentally changed the way people view the
workplace. Workers across the economy, including teachers, now demand more
flexibility in their schedule or have other newfound workplace expectations. Cyber
education has become more prevalent. More teachers and students are moving to cyber
platforms. This has created more job openings in the entire education sector, including
public schools, which has caused great shifts in teachers.
Covid 19 greatly impacted the researcher’s district. The pandemic itself caused
great turmoil within the community. Many community members were very upset by the
government’s social distancing and masking policies. They shared their anger at several
school board meetings, where massive crowds showed up to voice their anger. Some
teachers did not feel respected or safe during this time. In addition, they were asked to
teach using a hybrid model with students who had a very difficult time staying focused.
Other local teachers did not agree with the government’s position. In fact, a new
Christian school and a new Christian homeschool platform were opened up within the
community within two years of the pandemic. Several teachers, including two who
participated in the interviews, left to teach at these smaller schools. Another interviewee
left to form his own Christian school in another community. He clearly stated that Covid

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

89

19 was a catalyst for his career change. The rise of cyber charter schools has also
impacted the local district. Many teachers from the researcher’s district as well as other
districts in central Pennsylvania have left to join cyber charter schools. This has caused a
great shift in public education and has caused openings in public schools as a result of
teachers leaving to teach in cyber charters. Thus, as supported by national studies, the
pandemic set the forces in motion that caused a great migration in teachers, whether it is
for new work altogether, cyber education, private school, or other public schools.
Regional Versus Local Trends. Teachers in the researcher’s district are mostly
leaving for the same reasons as other schools in the area, with some nuances. A higher
percentage of teachers in his district listed “more money” as a reason for leaving than at
other schools, but “more money” was the most commonly listed reason in all phases of
the study. Feelings of frustration due to lack of support showed roughly the same
percentages both regionally and locally. However, a higher percentage of teachers from
other central Pennsylvania schools cited frustration with district leadership while teachers
within the researcher’s district cited frustration with building leadership at a higher rate.
Additionally, teachers in the researcher’s own district specifically pointed to coverage as
a major cause of stress. Teachers in other central Pennsylvania districts cited “change of
location” more often than teachers from the researcher’s district in the survey. A few
teachers from other districts mentioned the lasting impacts of Covid 19, but several
teachers have left the researcher’s own district as a direct result of the pandemic. Due to
the upheaval caused by this event, its impact cannot be underestimated. Last, teachers
from the researcher’s district listed a variety of other causes for leaving more so than
other districts, which shows the problem is more nuanced at the local level.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

90

Research Question #2
What working conditions promote teacher retention? This second research
question looks at what school districts can do to promote teacher retention. Most school
districts do not have a never-ending pile of resources at their disposal. Finances are
limited, and there is only so much support that can be provided for teachers due to limited
time and resources. This section will focus on what school districts can do to promote
retention.
Improve Compensation. Raising salaries is an obvious way to increase teacher
retention. Over 90% of survey respondents from central Pennsylvania claimed that salary
increases would increase retention. Unfortunately, schools with limited budgets cannot
always raise salaries. Small, rural districts, in particular, often have smaller tax bases and
cannot compete with salaries offered by larger districts. Their tax bases just cannot bear
it, but there are some financial measures districts can take to promote retention. First,
small districts can continue to work with local unions to keep salaries at least somewhat
competitive with surrounding districts. A closer look reveals that satisfied teachers are
willing to work for somewhat less pay. Therefore, if small districts can keep salaries
competitive with other districts and provide other supports, it should promote retention.
In addition, other options for increasing salaries can be explored. There is a great
deal of evidence that monetary performance incentives and bonuses improve retention.
Both Hanushek et al. (2016) and Nguyen et al. (2020) found evidence that performance
incentives or retention bonuses increase teacher retention. In central Pennsylvania,
31.1% of the teachers surveyed listed incentives or bonuses as measures that could
increase retention. Over 29% percent of respondents said improving benefits like health

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

91

care and retirement incentives could help, while this same sentiment was echoed by focus
group participants and interview participants. Thus, performance incentives, retention
bonuses, and benefits could be lower cost methods to increase compensation and promote
retention for schools with limited budgets.
Improve Time and Efficiency. School districts can promote retention by
increasing preparation time and reducing non-instructional duties. Teachers value their
planning and preparation time, and they are feeling more stressed in general due to lack
of time. Thompkins (2023) noted that less paperwork improves teacher job satisfaction,
and Harris et al. (2019) found that over 80% of teachers in their study were overwhelmed
by paperwork. To add, high numbers of teachers in this study felt like more preparation
time and workload reduction would promote retention. In fact, more than half of central
Pennsylvania teachers from the survey (58.3%) listed “provide more time for planning”
as one of the top three district-led retention strategies. Another category showed similar
attitudes about time, with 12.9% choosing “adjust the calendar or schedule.” Teachers
from the researcher’s district were specifically frustrated with covering classes during
their planning period. Six out of ten focus group participants mentioned feeling
overworked, and several specifically mentioned the issue of covering classes during their
planning period. Several interviewees who had left the district also mentioned the issue
of coverage and lack of time to complete duties. Other interview participants cited extra
duties, like after school meetings and extra paperwork as frustrations. Over 30% of
central Pennsylvania teachers listed “decrease requirements and paperwork” as one of
their top three district-led retention strategies. Therefore, improving efficiency, adding

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

92

preparation time, and reducing non-instructional duties can improve job satisfaction and
promote teacher retention.
Improve Infrastructure and Resources. Improving infrastructure and providing
resources may promote teacher retention in central Pennsylvania. Over 25% of survey
respondents from across the region listed “provide more or better resources” as one of the
top three district retention strategies. One teacher wrote, “I believe that giving students
more and better resources, including appropriate support in the classroom will allow
teachers to do their best jobs.” Many more participants across the region supported that
notion. Here, teachers shared that if they had the necessary resources to do their jobs,
they would be more satisfied in their work and less likely to seek employment elsewhere.
Furthermore, 7.6% of respondents added that improvements to buildings and grounds
would help, while 6.8% listed improvements to school safety as beneficial for teacher
retention. Few national studies reported these same retention strategies, but central
Pennsylvania teachers noted their importance. This concern may be unique to central
Pennsylvania schools because many have aging infrastructure, and some have not made
modern safety adaptations.
Improve Professional Development. Many teachers in this study noted the
importance of professional development for new teachers. According to Valenzuela et al.
(2022, para. 1), “Approximately 10% of teachers leave within their first year, and 44%
leave within five years.” The process of supporting new teachers begins with a thorough
hiring process and choosing the best fit for a position. One survey participant feared her
district was not properly vetting candidates who were not fit for their roles. Interview
participants had similar fears about new teachers. Two interview participants felt like

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

93

new teachers were not prepared to deal with the challenges of a modern classroom. One
interviewee claimed, “And people get into the field and go, oh, my gosh, this isn’t what I
thought, and I just don’t think colleges are preparing students for what teaching is truly
like.” Van den Borre et al. (2021) found that early-career teachers with access to
professional development and mentoring programs were much more likely to remain as
teachers. Approximately 8% of participants from central Pennsylvania felt like induction
and onboarding programs could be improved.
In addition to new teachers, roughly 7% of survey respondents listed professional
development as one of the top three district actions that could improve retention.
Teachers in the focus group added to that notion. One teacher lamented that she wants to
be taught about new technologies and teaching strategies, but she needs more time to
practice them. She felt in-service days were just too busy with training that is not useful.
Teachers from other regional districts held the same attitude. Thus, improving
professional development programs, especially for new teachers, is an important districtwide strategy that could promote retention.
Research Question #3
What forms of support do teachers need from principals to promote retention?
The final research question focuses on what principals can do to promote teacher
retention. Principals typically do not have the power to raise salaries, reorganize
professional development programs, or make large improvements to infrastructure or
resources, but there are very meaningful supports that principals can employ to promote
teacher retention.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

94

Provide Disciplinary Support. Disciplinary support for student behavioral issues
is one of the most pivotal strategies that principals can use to promote teacher retention.
When teachers feel safe and respected, they are more likely to report job satisfaction. On
a national scale, several studies, including a study authored by Shell et al. (2023), found a
link between disciplinary support and teacher retention. In central Pennsylvania, 73.5%
of teachers listed “support teachers through student discipline” as one of the top three
teacher retention strategies. Open-ended survey responses reflected the same sentiment
that student behavior management is important for teacher job satisfaction and retention.
Focus group participants echoed the same feelings. One focus group participant stated,
“And a lot of it [teacher attrition] has to do with behaviors of kids that are not being
addressed.” Two interview participants who left the researcher’s district felt like teachers
weren’t equipped to deal with some of the behaviors they saw. They did not state their
principal was lax on discipline, but they noted the impact of poor student behavior on
teacher turnover. The results clearly show that disciplinary support is an important
principal action to promote teacher retention.
Be Visible and Communicate. Visibility and communication are effective
actions a principal can take to improve teacher retention. Fiore and Whitaker (2004)
found the best principals are visible and communicate well, and this creates a positive
school culture. Several other studies support these findings. According to the survey,
32.5% of central Pennsylvania teachers chose “be more visible” as one of the three most
important principal supports. Another 29.5% chose “communicate more frequently” as
one of their top three supports. One focus group participant regretted not seeing her
principal for weeks at a time. Three interview participants brought up the importance of

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

95

the principal being a visible presence in the school. Several survey respondents expanded
on the idea of communication. One person noted, “Without communication, the school
cannot run in the most effective way for everyone, including the students.” To add, many
other focus group participants stated the importance of communication and visibility in
building trusting relationship with the principal. Teachers on all levels of the research
process mentioned the importance of principals who are approachable and have an opendoor policy. Teachers expressed that successful principals were visible, communicated
well, and built strong relationships with staff.
Build Culture and Relationships. Building a positive school culture and trusting
relationships with staff are important principal actions. Teachers are less likely to leave
when they are satisfied with the school environment and administrative support (Nguyen
et al., 2020). As the leader in the building, the principal plays a major role in creating a
positive school culture. The strategies mentioned earlier—providing discipline support,
being visible, and communicating well—all help to build a positive school culture. These
three actions help principals build trusting relationships with teachers. Teachers who
trust their principal are much more likely to be satisfied with their job. One survey
participant noted two main principal actions to promote retention, “Morale and showing
you trust us that we’re professionals who do our jobs.” Focus group participants from the
researcher’s own district spent a great deal of time discussing the issue of trust and
relationships. Five of them specifically noted the importance of a positive school culture,
but many felt undervalued and unheard. Several interviewees who had left the district
echoed that sentiment. They also felt unheard and undervalued by administration.

Six of

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

96

seven interview participants discussed the importance of relationships, and five of seven
discussed the importance of a school community.
Principals must evaluate teachers, and inevitably, they may have to address some
type of personnel concern or conflict with them. In the survey, 28% felt like the principal
should address staff concerns more fairly and frequently. These are often difficult
situations for any principal to navigate, and sometimes these situations lead to hard
feelings from staff. The researcher asked questions in the focus group and the interviews
to gather feedback on these issues. Participants understood that dealing with personnel
concerns can be difficult situations for principals, but they noted that principals can
navigate these situations better by establishing trust with staff. Several interviewees
talked about the importance of a principal who “has their back” in tough situations. A
focus group participant asked, “If we don’t trust our administrators, then how can we feel
supported?” Therefore, building a positive school culture by building trusting
relationships with staff is pivotal for principals to promote retention.
Provide Teacher Autonomy. Providing teacher autonomy is another important
teacher retention strategy that can be employed by principals. Teacher autonomy is a
natural result of trust. When principals trust their teachers, they are more likely to allow
them more independence in the classroom. Ngyen et al. (2020) authored one of many
studies showing that teacher autonomy is an important factor in teacher retention.
Unfortunately, standardized testing programs have led to reduced teacher autonomy over
the past twenty-five years. In central Pennsylvania, 29.5% of survey participants listed
“allow more teacher freedom” as one of their top three principal supports. In the openended comments, many others showed disdain for principals who use micromanagement

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

97

techniques. Allowing more flexibility for teachers was specifically brought up in the
focus group. While in the interviews, four of seven participants noted the value of teacher
autonomy. Many teachers who had left the district shared that good principals trust them
to do their job without micromanaging them. To be fair, several studies have shown that
complete hands-off leadership (laissez-faire style) has a negative impact on schools, so
principals must take a balanced approach to teacher independence. Nonetheless, some
level of classroom autonomy was found to increase job satisfaction and teacher retention.
Value Teacher’s Time. Showing teachers that their time is valued can have an
impact on job satisfaction and retention. Principals do not always have complete control
of the school calendar or schedule, but where possible, if the principal can support more
preparation time for teachers, it improves job satisfaction. In the survey, 52.3% of
teachers listed “provide more time for planning and collaboration” as one of the three
most important principal strategies. Teachers in the focus group and interviews echoed
that sentiment. Time covering classes, completing paperwork, or participating in other
non-instructional duties were particularly frustrating to teachers. The coverage issue was
very specific to the researcher’s own district, but universally, teachers reported feeling
overwhelmed by extra duties. This has been well documented by many studies, and it
was supported at all levels of the research process in this study. In fact, five of the seven
interview participants noted time was an issue, and five of the ten focus group
participants reported feeling overworked. As Becker and Grob (2021) explain, school
leaders must protect teachers against too much paperwork and streamline processes.
While principals may not have complete control over all of these processes, the more

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

98

they can alleviate paperwork, extra duties, and wasted time, the more they will support
retention.
Effective Leadership Styles for Principals. Many of the principal actions
described by teachers in this study align with effective leadership styles. Various national
studies show a link between certain leadership styles and teacher retention. Given this
body of evidence, certain leadership styles would seemingly be more effective for
principals to promote teacher retention in central Pennsylvania schools.
Principals who use distributive leadership create shared ownership among staff
and empower teacher leaders in their school. Principals who utilize distributive
leadership are not expected to fix all of the school’s problems, but they work collectively
with teachers to create a shared vision of success (Heller, 2004). In this study, central
Pennsylvania teachers noted that building trusting relationships, empowering teachers,
and providing teacher autonomy were important to them. Based on this information,
distributive leadership would be an effective style to utilize to promote teacher retention.
Authentic leaders build relationships with people, show compassion, and listen to
their employees (Western Governors University, 2020). Teachers at all levels of this
study noted appreciation for principals with these qualities. Specifically, teachers
mentioned the importance of visibility, communication, and building trust. They felt like
a principal who was approachable and employed an open-door policy was someone they
could trust as a leader. Therefore, authentic leadership would be an effective style based
on the information provided by central Pennsylvania teachers.
Servant leaders share power with others, put the needs of others first, and focus on
developing others to reach their highest potential (Greenleaf Center for Servant

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

99

Leadership, 2021). Several studies have shown that servant leadership has a positive
impact on teacher retention. Central Pennsylvania teachers supported that concept.
Many noted that improvements to professional development activities, especially for new
teachers, would help them grow as professionals. Building trusting relationships is
another major aspect of servant leadership. The concept of trust was brought up on
numerous occasions throughout the study. Overall, servant leadership would be an
effective strategy for principals to use in central Pennsylvania.
Finally, transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership were other
leadership styles mentioned in national studies. There is some evidence that transactional
leadership may promote teacher retention. Many teachers noted that both intrinsic and
extrinsic incentives play a role in job satisfaction. Some teachers cited monetary
incentives or awards for strong work, while others shared that praise from their
supervisor was an intrinsic reward that improved job satisfaction. Transformational
leaders are charismatic individuals who create a clear vision and build a positive culture.
Teachers throughout this study noted the importance of communicating well and creating
a positive school culture. Little evidence exists that laissez-faire leadership would be
effective. While teachers value their independence, many noted that principals must do a
better job of handling staff concerns more frequently and fairly. On the contrary, teachers
in this study also showed disdain for principals who micromanaged or displayed
authoritarian leadership styles. They specifically disliked principals who talked down to
them or simply gave orders. Most participants valued leaders who operated in a
democratic style by gathering opinions, building consensus, and empowering teachers.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

100

Limitations
This study provided a great deal of information, but it was not without its
limitations. Several school districts surrounding the researcher’s district declined to
participate in the study. Their participation would have provided a better picture of how
teacher turnover is impacting teacher retention in the entire region. Nonetheless, five
districts in addition to the researcher’s district participated, which provided a mixture of
small and large districts. The focus group gathered the perspective of current teachers
within the researcher’s district. Ten teachers participated in the focus group out of 155
total teachers. Although teachers from all schools in the district participated, it is hard to
say that ten teachers represent all the teachers in the district. Seven teachers who left the
district participated in the interview process. These were the seven teachers who
responded to the interview request. Other teachers who had left for cyber schools or
other reasons may have provided a different perspective.
It is important to consider the motives of the research participants. More
participants could have been those who have strong feelings about teacher turnover,
whereas teachers who are satisfied with their roles may have been less likely to
participate. This could have skewed the data toward those who are unsatisfied as teachers
versus those who are satisfied with their work. Lastly, this study was characterized by
large amounts of information from three different sources. A major challenge for the
researcher was to sort the data and present it in a meaningful way. Therefore, quotes
from every participant could not be shared with the audience, nor could all statistics be
shared. The researcher had to make decisions about the most representative data points to
present in this report.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

101

Recommendations
Based on this study, recommendations can be made for the researcher’s school
district and for future research. Each year since 2020, teacher turnover has presented a
problem for the researcher’s district. Just over half of the survey respondents from the
region considered looking for a job outside of their current district. At the local level, the
number was closer to a third of all participants. A more telling figure might be those who
actively sought employment outside of their district. That number is much lower with
only 28% of participants actively seeking outside employment, and the statistics are
similar when looking at the local district. Another surprising figure is that nearly 90% of
survey respondents said they could see themselves or could “maybe see” themselves
retiring from their current district. This information shows that, perhaps, teacher turnover
is not quite as pervasive as originally thought. It also shows that other districts’ teachers
display similar attitudes about turnover as the researcher’s district. Even still, turnover
remains an issue, and recommendations can be made from the results of this study.
District Recommendations
The local school district has a history of fiscal responsibility, but it is also a small,
rural district in comparison with other regional districts. It does not possess a large
enough tax base to compete with salaries offered by some of the larger districts and cyber
charter schools in the area. However, the district should consider working with the local
union to keep salaries competitive with other regional districts of a similar size. In
addition, performance and retention incentives should be considered. The local district’s
salary schedule has many more steps than other neighboring districts. This means it takes
longer for teachers to reach the top of the salary scale. Mid-career teachers have left the

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

102

district for more money. Reducing the number of steps in the salary scale would curtail
that issue. Other retention strategies, like offering longevity bonuses, larger payouts for
sick days, or other benefits could be lower cost ways to compensate teachers and improve
retention.
Coverage is a major issue within the researcher’s district. Research shows very
strongly that teachers are stressed, overworked, and feel like their time is not valued. The
local school district must continue to reduce teacher coverage as much as possible.
Several years ago, a plan was put in place to reduce coverage. Even after that, it is still
considered a problem. Common sense methods to reduce coverage could include
recruiting more substitute teachers and reviewing the schedule to make coverage more
equitable. The problem is not easily solved because teachers will continue to take off
work, and students will need to be supervised. Nevertheless, the district must continue to
look at common sense ways to reduce teacher coverage.
Improving resources, infrastructure, and safety came to light as important districtcontrolled retention strategies. Here, as with salaries, the district is not working with
unlimited streams of funding. However, making sure teachers have what they need to be
successful in the classroom should be a priority. Just recently, the district purchased
several new curricular resources. Continuing to provide necessary resources will ensure
teachers have what they need to feel successful and satisfied in their work.
Improvements to school infrastructure were also mentioned as effective districtretention strategies. The district recently made several important updates to its facilities,
specifically for school safety. Continuing to make improvements to infrastructure,
particularly to support school safety are important teacher retention strategies.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

103

Implementing metal detectors, shatter-proof film on windows, cameras, and school visitor
check-in measures are positive steps the district has taken to improve safety. In this
regard, the district should continue to seek out safety and infrastructure grants to make
capital improvements without overburdening taxpayers.
Improving professional development was mentioned by many teachers in the
study. Several teachers at the local level said they did not feel like they had time to
implement the strategies they learned. Others did not find meaning in what they learned.
To be fair, the district must implement state-mandated training programs that are often
unrelated to instruction. Teachers generally do not prefer these programs. The district
has utilized methods to allow trade time for teachers to complete these activities on their
own, so that when teachers are in the building for in-service days, it is related to
instruction. The district should continue to look for methods for making in-service days
meaningful. In addition, the district has improved its new teacher induction and
onboarding program. The program has increased from one to two years, mentors are
more closely vetted, and administrators collaborate on these training sessions. These are
marked improvements that should continue to promote the retention of new teachers, and
the district should continue to improve its new teacher programs.
Principal Recommendations
Principals offer a more personal touch that can alleviate teacher turnover. The
researcher himself learned a great deal of high-quality information from this project. Not
only will the researcher be implementing these strategies, but this information must be
shared with his colleagues at the other buildings in the district.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

104

Disciplinary support is a highly documented principal action that increases
teacher retention. Principals must continue to take strides to provide discipline support
for teachers. Frequently, there are misunderstandings about how discipline is handled.
Principals need to do a better job of communicating how discipline issues are resolved so
that teachers feel supported. In addition, principals must do a better job of training
teachers on how to deal with discipline issues. If teachers have clear expectations for
how to deal with discipline concerns, they are much less likely to become frustrated by
these behaviors.
Teachers value principals who are visible and communicate well. They value
principals who are charismatic, energetic and build a strong school community.
Principals at the local level must heed this advice and continue to take these actions to
build trusting relationships with teachers. Many teachers noted they did not feel heard or
valued. Principals must note that teachers who feel this way are typically teachers who
leave the district. Principals must then dedicate more time to community and relationship
building. It is nearly inevitable that principals will need to have a difficult conversation
with each staff member at some point. Principals who have built strong, trusting
relationships with their staff are much more effective at having these conversations. This
is not always easy. Principals need continuous training and mentoring on how to resolve
conflict and have difficult conversations in an effective manner. Therefore, the researcher
recommends continuous training and reflecting for principals. Partnering with other
principals and reviewing scenarios are also strong methods for improving principal
conflict resolution skills. Principals will not make all of their teachers happy, but by

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

105

building relationships and continuous training, they can improve their ability to connect
with employees.
Leadership styles like distributive, servant, authentic, transformative, and
transactional leadership should be utilized instead of authoritarian or laissez-faire styles.
The principal actions discussed earlier in this chapter, including visibility,
communication, and relationship building are all tenets of these suggested leadership
styles. Teachers showed a strong disdain for authoritarian leaders who micromanage,
give orders, and talk down to employees. Teachers are happiest when they are afforded
some level of autonomy in the classroom. Even though they may not directly admit to it,
teachers do not prefer a hands-off leadership style either. Teachers want a leader who
will be proactive in dealing with issues and will work to solve problems, even if the
problems are difficult to solve. Teachers want a leader who will reduce non-instructional
duties and protect them from needless paperwork. Teachers reported time and again they
just want a leader who “has their back,” and who is “in it” with them. Principals,
therefore, should research these noted leadership styles and work to implement effective
leadership. Continuous training and experience can help principals hone their leadership
abilities.
Recommendations for Future Research
Covid 19 changed the landscape of the modern workplace and the educational
environment. New perspectives on the workplace have emerged since that time.
Employees expect more freedom and flexibility. They value their time more. Many
teachers and students alike have made the shift to cyber education platforms. This allows
them to work from home, giving them more freedom. In the past, teachers were required

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

106

to dress professionally. Modern teachers are now demanding a more open dress code. To
add, the school choice movement has created more job options for teachers. Many of
these options were not as readily available a decade ago, or they were not financially
feasible. These are all societal shifts that school districts cannot change with any one
policy. It is recommended that districts continue to stay abreast of these societal changes
and adapt their policies with the changing times.
Before wholesale changes are made to local educational policies, continued
research is necessary in upcoming years. Will these changing workplace norms last?
Will the school choice movement continue to be a factor? Will new technologies
continue to change the landscape of society and how we educate our children? Will
behavioral issues be more prevalent in future schools, thus making it harder to teach?
The answer to all of these questions will have an impact on teacher turnover trends.
Future research will need to focus on these questions to stay abreast of the teacher
turnover problem and the teacher shortage in general. This research will enable school
districts to adapt to the changing educational landscape and remain competitive and
effective.
Summary
Teachers are changing jobs or leaving the profession for a variety of reasons.
Money is the most commonly listed reason for teacher turnover; however, frustration is a
close second. Teachers who are satisfied in their position because they feel supported by
administration and colleagues are much less likely to seek outside employment, even for
more money. Stress and feeling overworked are also commonly mentioned factors for
educators leaving the profession or seeking greener pastures in other districts. Many

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

107

understand that the work may be similar elsewhere, but if they will make more money,
they are more likely to seek those positions. The impact of Covid 19 on teacher turnover
since 2020 cannot be underestimated. The pandemic set a plethora of forces into motion
that has caused, and is still causing, large amounts of teacher turnover. Teachers in the
researcher’s district left for largely the same reasons as teachers in other districts with
some small differences.
Increasing salaries is the number one district-led retention strategy that was
mentioned by teachers in the study. Districts should consider keeping salaries
competitive or offering other low-cost incentives to promote retention. Conversely,
teachers throughout the study noted that money was not the only reason why teachers
leave. Plus, an overwhelming amount of research shows that teachers will work for less
pay if they are satisfied in their work. Teachers throughout central Pennsylvania noted
that improving efficiency by adding preparation time and reducing workloads would
make them more satisfied in their roles. Others stated that improving resources for
teachers might be beneficial, while some noted improvements to infrastructure and safety
as important. Finally, improvements to professional development, particularly for new
teachers, would be helpful district-led strategies.
The researcher’s school district can take many cost-effective steps to promote
teacher retention. Increasing salaries is not always an option, but there are other methods
to increase compensation without overburdening taxpayers. The researcher’s district
should continue to look at ways to reduce coverage and extra duties for teachers. This is
a major cause of stress, which leads to burnout, and turnover. The district should
continue to seek out ways to improve resources, infrastructure, and safety features.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

108

Grants are a way to supplement the district’s budget to help pay for these items. Last,
continual improvement to the professional development program will allow the district to
grow teachers as professionals to navigate the classrooms of the future.
Principals play a very important role in teacher retention. Numerous studies have
pointed to the importance of principal leadership in teacher retention. Boyd et al. (2011)
found that 40% of teachers in his study left due to dissatisfaction with the principal. An
interview participant from this study explained, “A good leader will make anything great.
Leaders matter.” Participants revealed that principals must provide strong disciplinary
support, build trusting relationships, and foster a positive school culture to promote
teacher retention. Using leadership styles such as distributive leadership, servant
leadership, and authentic leadership are beneficial, while laissez-faire and authoritarian
styles are not as effective.
Principals can learn a great deal from this study. Teachers at every level stated
that disciplinary support was pivotal. Teachers wanted leaders who were visible,
approachable, and communicated well. They wanted leaders who developed trust and a
strong sense of community. Leadership styles that promoted these types of actions
generally promoted job satisfaction, whereas authoritarian styles generally produced
unhappiness among staff.
The modern landscape of education and the workplace is rapidly changing. The
rise of the school choice movement, distance learning platforms, and artificial
intelligence have changed the way society views education. The local public school is no
longer the only educational option. Teachers and students can and will choose other
options if they are unsatisfied. Societal expectations about the workplace have also

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

109

changed drastically. Teachers, like other employees, demand more freedom and
flexibility. Public schools have traditionally been characterized by standardized
schedules and rigid expectations, like employee dress codes. These traditional
expectations run counter to modern expectations about the workplace. It has to be
considered that these societal changes have impacted teacher turnover. While ongoing
research will be needed to stay abreast of these changing norms, this study provided
valuable information on the current state of teacher turnover in central Pennsylvania.
Conclusions garnered from this study and recommendations for addressing teacher
turnover will be beneficial for the researcher’s district, principals, and other schools in
promoting teacher retention.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

110

References
Adnot, M., Dee, T., Katz, V., & Wyckoff, J. (2017). Teacher turnover, teacher quality,
and student achievement in DCPS. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 39(1), 54–76. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373716663646
Allegretto, S. (2024, September 12). Teacher pay rises in 2023—but not enough to shrink
pay gap with other college graduates. Economic Policy Institute.
https://www.epi.org/publication/teacher-pay-in-2023/
Baker, B. D. (2017). How money matters for schools. Learning Policy Institute.
https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/how-money-matters-brief
Bass, B. M. (1995). Theory of transformational leadership redux. The Leadership
Quarterly, 6(4), 463–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90021-7
Becker, J. D., & Grob, L. (2021). The school principal and teacher retention.
Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium.
https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/merc_pubs/126/
Bobbitt, Z. (2020, September 18). What is Maximum Variation Sampling? Statology.
https://www.statology.org/maximum-variation-sampling/
Boe, E. E., Cook, L. H., & Sunderland, R. J. (2008). Teacher turnover: Examining exit
attrition, teaching area transfer, and school migration. Exceptional
Children, 75(1), 7–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290807500101
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2011). The
influence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American
Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 303–333.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210380788

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

111

Braun, S., Peus, C., Weisweiler, S., & Frey, D. (2013). Transformational leadership, job
satisfaction, and team performance: A multilevel mediation model of trust. The
Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), 270–283.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.11.006
Carver-Thomas, D. (2017, November 2). What can we do about teacher
turnover? Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/what-can-we-do-aboutteacher-turnover
Carver-Thomas, D. & Darling-Hammond, L. (2019). The trouble with teacher turnover:
How teacher attrition affects students and schools. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 27(36). http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.3699
Clement, M. C. (2016). Retaining effective teachers: A guide for hiring, induction, and
support. Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. (2024). PA inspired leadership PIL program.
https://www.pa.gov/en/agencies/education/programs-andservices/educators/continuing-education-and-professional-development/painspired-leadership-pil-program.html
Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Cross, K. (2011). Examining the role of principals in the retention of new teachers.
(ED519572). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED519572.pdf

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

112

Dawadi, S., Shrestha, S., & Giri, R. A. (2021). Mixed-methods research: a discussion on
its types, challenges, and criticisms. Journal of Practical Studies in
Education, 2(2), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.46809/jpse.v2i2.20
DeMatthews, D. E., Knight, D. S., & Shin, J. (2022). The principal-teacher churn:
Understanding the relationship between leadership turnover and teacher
attrition. Educational Administration Quarterly: EAQ, 58(1), 76–109.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x211051974
Devers, K., Duyar, I., & Buchanan, K. (2024). Examining teacher attrition through the
experiences of former teachers before and during the Covid-19
Pandemic. Education Sciences, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020184
Diliberti, M., Schwartz, H., & Grant, D. (2021). Stress topped the reasons why public
school teachers quit, even before COVID-19. Rand.
https://doi.org/10.7249/rra1121-2
Evers-Gerdes, B., & Siegle, R. (2022). Establishing a lasting legacy: Six steps to
maximize your leadership impact and improve teacher retention (1st ed.).
Solution Tree Press.
Farber, K. (Ed.). (2010). Why great teachers quit: And how we might stop the exodus.
Corwin Press.
Farmer, D. (2020). Teacher attrition: The impacts of stress. The Delta Kappa Gamma
Bulletin, 87(1), 41–50.
Fiore, D. J., & Whitaker, T. (2004). Six types of teachers. Eye on Education.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

113

Fuller, E. (2022). Pennsylvania teacher staff challenges. Penn State Center for Education
Evaluation & Policy Analysis. https://ed.psu.edu/sites/default/files/inlinefiles/CEEPA_report_V2.pdf
Fuller, E. (2023). Exacerbating the shortage of teachers: Rising teacher attrition in
Pennsylvania from 2014 to 2022. Penn State Center for Education Evaluation &
Policy Analysis. https://ed.psu.edu/sites/default/files/inline-files/ceepa-researchbrief-2023-6-_-exacerbating-the-shortage-of-teachers-ed-fuller-1.pdf
Gerald, V. (2019, October 19). Teacher retention: A growing problem. National School
Boards Association. https://www.nsba.org/ASBJ/Issues/October/TeacherRetention
Gibbons, S., Scrutinio, V., & Telhaj, S. (2021). Teacher turnover: Effects, mechanisms
and organisational responses. Labour Economics, 73(102079).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2021.102079
Goldhaber, D., & Theobald, R. (2022). Teacher attrition and mobility over time.
Educational Researcher, 51(3), 235–237.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X211060840
Goldhaber, D., & Theobald, R. (2023). Teacher attrition and mobility in the
pandemic. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 45(4), 682–687.
https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737221139285
Hanson, M. (2024, August 16). Average student loan debt. Education Data Initiative.
https://educationdata.org/average-student-loan-debt

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

114

Hanushek, E. A., Rivkin, S. G., & Schiman, J. C. (2016). Dynamic effects of teacher
turnover on the quality of instruction. Economics of Education Review, 55, 132–
148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2016.08.004
Harris, S. P., Davies, R. S., Christensen, S. S., Hanks, J., & Bowles, B. (2019). Teacher
attrition: Differences in stakeholder perceptions of teacher work
conditions. Education Sciences, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9040300
Heller, D. A. (2004). Teachers wanted: Attracting and retaining good teachers. ASCD.
Hendricks, C. C. (2016). Improving schools through action research: A reflective
practice approach (4th ed.). Pearson.
Hughes, A. L., Matt, J. J., & O’Reilly, F. L. (2014). Principal support is imperative to the
retention of teachers in hard-to-staff schools. Journal of Education and Training
Studies, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v3i1.622
Hughes, G. D. (2012). Teacher retention: Teacher characteristics, school characteristics,
organizational characteristics, and teacher efficacy. The Journal of Educational
Research, 105(4), 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2011.584922
Ingersoll, R. M., Merrill, E., Stuckey, D., & Collins, G. (2018). Seven trends: The
transformation of the teaching force. Consortium for Policy Research in
Education.
https://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_researchreports/108?utm_source=repository.upe
nn.edu%2Fcpre_researchreports%2F108&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=P
DFCoverPages
Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher
shortage. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 30–33.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

115

Kainde, S. J. R., & Mandagi, D. (2023). A systematic review of servant leadership
outcomes in education context. Edukasia (Magetan), 4(2), 2563–2574.
https://doi.org/10.62775/edukasia.v4i2.627
Kullar, J. K., & Cunningham, S. A. (2019). Building your building: How to hire and keep
great teachers (your guide to recruiting and retaining teachers). Solution Tree.
Madigan, D. J., & Kim, L. E. (2021). Towards an understanding of teacher attrition: A
meta-analysis of burnout, job satisfaction, and teachers’ intentions to
quit. Teaching and Teacher Education, 105(103425).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103425
May, D., Johnson, J., Chen, Y., Hutchison, L., & Ricketts, M. (2010). Exploring parental
aggression toward teachers in a public-school setting. Current Issues in
Education, 13(1) 1-34.
McMahon, S. D., Bare, K. M., Cafaro, C. L., Zinter, K. E., Garcia-Murillo, Y., Lynch,
G., McMahon, K. M., Espelage, D. L., Reddy, L. A., Anderman, E. M., &
Subotnik, R. (2023). Understanding parent aggression directed against teachers: A
school climate framework. Learning Environments Research, 26(3), 915–931.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-023-09460-2
Mertler, C. A. (2022). Introduction to educational research (3rd ed.). SAGE
Publications.
Morgan, A. (2023, August 12). What is distributed leadership? Everything you need to
know. One Education. https://www.oneeducation.org.uk/what-is-distributedleadership/

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

116

National Education Association. (2024, April 18). Educator pay data 2024.
https://www.nea.org/resource-library/educator-pay-and-student-spending-howdoes-your-state-rank
Nguyen, T. D. (2021). Linking school organizational characteristics and teacher
retention: Evidence from repeated cross-sectional national data. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 97(103220). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103220
Nguyen, T. D., Pham, L. D., Crouch, M., & Springer, M. G. (2020). The correlates of
teacher turnover: An updated and expanded meta-analysis of the
literature. Educational Research Review, 31(100355).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100355
Ost, B., & Schiman, J. C. (2015). Grade-specific experience, grade reassignments, and
teacher turnover. Economics of Education Review, 46, 112–126.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2015.03.004
Park, H., Barlow, R., Hartung, K., & Waddle, K. (2017, October 12). What makes
“good” teaching? Knowles Teacher Initiative.
https://knowlesteachers.org/kaleidoscope/makes-good-teaching
Pennsylvania Department of Education. (2024). Title I. Department of Education.
https://www.pa.gov/en/agencies/education/programs-and-services/federalprograms/title-i.html
Pennsylvania Department of Education. (2025). District Fast Facts. Future Ready PA
Index.
https://futurereadypa.org/District/FastFacts?id=249216090147201075152018235
241082169048180244072#

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

117

Pennsylvania State Teachers Association. (2025). The Pennsylvania state education
association. https://www.psea.org/for-members/member-resources2/map-yourfuture/full-salary-table/
Rice, J. K. (2003). Teacher quality: Understanding the effectiveness of teacher attributes.
Economic Policy Institute.
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic
achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14680262.2005.00584.x
Ronfeldt, M., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2013). How teacher turnover harms student
achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 50(1), 4–36.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831212463813
Ryan, S. V., von der Embse, N. P., Pendergast, L. L., Saeki, E., Segool, N., & Schwing,
S. (2017). Leaving the teaching profession: The role of teacher stress and
educational accountability policies on turnover intent. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 66, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.03.016
Shaw, J., & Newton, J. (2014). Teacher retention and satisfaction with a servant leader as
principal. Education, 135(1), 101–106.
Shell, D. L., Hurt, C. S., & White, A. H. (2023). Principal characteristics’ effect on
teacher retention: A systemic review. Educational Research and Reviews, 18(6),
104–113. http://www.academicjournals.org/ERR

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

118

Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2017). Motivated for teaching? Associations with school
goal structure, teacher self-efficacy, job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 152–160.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.006
Solly, B. (2018, January 24). Distributed leadership explained. SecEd. https://www.seced.co.uk/content/best-practice/distributed-leadership-explained/
Steiner, E. D., & Woo, A. (2021, June 15). Job-related stress threatens the teacher
Supply. Rand. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1108-1.html
Sulit, A. (2020). Leadership can’t stand alone: Why school districts need policy to
increase teacher retention. eJournal of Education Policy, 21(2).
Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2016, September 15). A
coming crisis in teaching? Teacher supply, demand, and shortages in the U.S.
Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/comingcrisis-teaching
Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2019). Understanding teacher
shortages: An analysis of teacher supply and demand in the United
States. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27(35).
https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.3696
TASD. (2025). General Information. K12.Pa.Us. Retrieved March 21, 2025, from
https://www.tyrone.k12.pa.us/about-us/general-information
The Brainwaves Video Anthology [TheBrainwavesChannel]. (2018, April 5). Why
teachers quit [Video]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3jk61Yv1ys

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

119

Tompkins, A. (2023). Breaking the cycle of teacher attrition: Suggested policies and
practice for retention. Journal of School Administration Research and
Development, 8(1), 24–35. https://doi.org/10.32674/jsard.v8i1.3960
Tran, H., Cunningham, K., Yelverton, V., Osworth, D., & Hardie, A. S. (2023). How can
school leaders retain teachers: The relative importance of different administrative
supports for teacher retention in different types of schools. NASSP
Bulletin, 107(3), 185–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/01926365231198858
U.S. Census Bureau. (2020). Blair County Pennsylvania.
https://data.census.gov/profile/Blair_County,_Pennsylvania?g=050XX00US4201
3
Vaidya, S. R., & Hanna, C. (2023). The four-capital theory as framework for teacher
retention and attrition. International Education Studies, 16(6), 21-32.
https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v16n6p21
Valenzuela, A., Lara, G. D., DeFeo, D., Adelman, H., Russo, J., Davis, C., & Kramer, B.
(2022, November 1). Costs and benefits of teacher retention. Penn State Social
Science Research Institute: Evidence-to-Impact Collaborative.
https://evidence2impact.psu.edu/resources/costs-and-benefits-of-teacherretention/
Van den Borre, L., Spruyt, B., & Van Droogenbroeck, F. (2021). Early career teacher
retention intention: Individual, school and country characteristics. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 105(103427), 103427.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103427

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

120

Van der Vyver, C. P., Kok, T., & Conley, A. L. N. (2020). The relationship between
teachers’ professional wellbeing and principals’ leadership behaviour to improve
teacher retention. Perspectives in Education, 38(2), 86–102. https://doi.org/eISSN2519-593X
Western Governors University [WGU]. (2020, April 23). What is authentic leadership?
https://www.wgu.edu/blog/what-is-authentic-leadership2004.html

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

APPENDICES

121

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

122

APPENDIX A
IRB Approval

Institutional Review Board
250 University Avenue
California, PA 15419
instreviewboard@calu.edu
Melissa Sovak, Ph.D.
Dear Shane,
Please consider this email as official notification that your proposal titled “Teacher
Attrition and Retention in central Pennsylvania: What Can School Districts and
Principals Do To Promote Teacher Retention?” (Proposal #PW24-021) has been
approved by the Pennsylvania Western University Institutional Review Board as
submitted.
The effective date of approval is 07/29/2024 and the expiration date is 07/28/2025.
These dates must appear on the consent form.
Please note that Federal Policy requires that you notify the IRB promptly regarding
any of the following:
(1) Any additions or changes in procedures you might wish for your study
(additions or changes must be approved by the IRB before they are implemented)
(2) Any events that affect the safety or well-being of subjects
(3) Any modifications of your study or other responses that are necessitated by any
events reported in (2).
(4) To continue your research beyond the approval expiration date of 07/28/2025,
you must file additional information to be considered for continuing review. Please
contact instreviewboard@calu.edu
Please notify the Board when data collection is complete.
Regards,
Melissa Sovak, PhD.
Chair, Institutional Review Board

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

123

APPENDIX B
Informed Consent
Informed Consent to Participate in a Survey
Title of Study: TEACHER ATTRITION AND RETENTION IN
CENTRALPENNSYLVANIA: WHAT CAN SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND
PRINCIPALS DO TOPROMOTE TEACHER RETENTION?
KEY INFORMATION
You are being asked by Shane Cowher to participate in a research study. Participation in
the study is voluntary, and you may stop anytime.
The purpose of the study is to gain a better understanding of why teachers want to leave
their current school or traditional public schools entirely. The researcher is seeking to
understand what districts can do, as whole, to promote teacher retention, and the
researcher is seeking to understand what principals can do to promote teacher retention.
For research purposes, you will be asked to name the school district in which you are
employed, but the name of the district will be kept confidential in the results of the study.
In this study, you will be asked to answer survey questions about your attitudes about
teacher attrition and retention. You will be asked to answer questions regarding your
attitudes regarding job qualities that promote teacher retention in traditional public
schools. You will be asked to answer questions about your perspectives on leadership
styles that promote teacher retention.
It will take about 5-10 minutes to complete the study.
The potential risks during the study are relatively low but could include breach of
confidentiality or nervousness/ anxiety answering questions about your place of
employment or seeking alternate employment. Remember, you may stop taking the
survey at any time. In addition, if you feel the need to talk with someone, you may
contact the PennWest Edinboro counseling center at 814-732-2252, or for emergencies,
call 814-732-2911.
There are no direct benefits to participants from this research. It will help researchers
better understand the problem of teacher attrition in central Pennsylvania public schools.
SECURITY OF DATA
The online study is completely anonymous; you will not be asked to give any information
that could identify you (e.g., name). The survey is NOT linked to IP addresses. Individual
responses will not be presented, just the aggregated data. Remember, taking part in this
study is voluntary. If, while taking the survey, you feel uncomfortable or no longer want
to participate, you may stop at any time. To stop taking the survey, you may either:
(1) proceed to the last page of the survey and press “Submit,” or (2) if you wish toexit the
survey, close your browser completely.
There are no consequences if you decide to stop participating in this study.
There is no identifiable information collected from you during this study; all other
information from this study will be confidential within local, state, and federal laws. The
PennWest University Institutional Review Board (IRB) may review the research records.
The study results may be shared in aggregate form at a meeting or journal, but there is no

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

124

identifiable information to be revealed. The records from this study will be maintained
for a minimum of three (3) years after the study is complete.
Your information collected in this research will not be used or distributed for future
research, even if all your identifiers are removed.
If you have questions about the research or a research-related injury, you can contact Dr.
Mary Wolf at wolf@pennwest.edu. If you have a question about your rights as a research
participant that you need to discuss with someone, you can contact the PennWest
University Institutional Review Board atInstReviewBoard@pennwest.edu.
If you would like a copy of this informed consent, please print this screen or contact
Shane Cowher at cow02722@pennwest.edu.
By clicking on the “I agree” box and continuing with the survey, you have acknowledged
that you have read the informed consent and are at least 18 years old. Also, you
acknowledge that you agree to participate in the study and have the right not to answer
any or all the questions in the survey. Finally, you understand your participation is
entirely voluntary, and you may quit the study at any time without penalty.
Mark only one oval.
I agree
I disagree

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

125

Informed Consent to Participate in a Focus Group
Title of Study: TEACHER ATTRITION AND RETENTION IN
CENTRALPENNSYLVANIA: WHAT CAN SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND
PRINCIPALS DO TOPROMOTE TEACHER RETENTION?
KEY INFORMATION
You are being asked by Shane Cowher to participate in a research study. Participation in
the study is voluntary, and you may stop anytime.
The purpose of the study is to gain a better understanding of why teachers want to leave
their current school or traditional public schools entirely. The researcher is seeking to
understand what districts can do, as whole, to promote teacher retention, and the
researcher is seeking to understand what principals can do to promote teacher retention.
In this focus group, you will be asked to answer questions about your attitudes about
teacher attrition and retention. You will be asked to answer questions regarding your
attitudes regarding job qualities that promote teacher retention in traditional public
schools. You will be asked to answer questions about your perspectives on principal
support to promote teacher retention.
Participation in the focus group will take approximately 60 minutes.
The potential risks during the study are relatively low but could include breach of
confidentiality or nervousness/ anxiety answering questions about your place of
employment or seeking alternate employment. Remember, you may stop at anytime. To
make participants feel more comfortable, the researcher will use an honest broker to
facilitate the focus group. This person will ask all of the questions and will record the
entire session. This recording will then be shared with the researcher. In addition, if you
feel the need to talk with someone, you may contact the PennWest Edinboro counseling
center at 814-732-2252, or for emergencies, call814-732-2911.
There are no direct benefits to participants from the research. It will help researchers
better understand the problem of teacher attrition in central Pennsylvania public schools.
SECURITY OF DATA
The information shared in the focus group will be kept confidential, and participants will
not be named in the final report.Remember, taking part in this study is voluntary. If you
feel uncomfortable or no longer want to participate, you may stop at any time. There are
no consequences if you decide to stop participating in this study.
There is no identifiable information collected from you during this study; all other
information from this study will be confidential within local, state, and federal laws. The
PennWest University Institutional Review Board (IRB) may review the research records.
The study results may be shared in aggregate form at a meeting or journal, but there is no
identifiable information to be revealed. The records from this study will be maintained
for a minimum of three (3) years after the study is complete.
Your information collected in this research will not be used or distributed for future
research, even if all your identifiers are removed.
If you have questions about the research or a research-related injury, you can contact Dr.
Mary Wolf at wolf@pennwest.edu. If you have a question about your rights as a research
participant that you need to discuss with someone, you can contact the PennWest
University Institutional Review Board at InstReviewBoard@pennwest.edu.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

126

If you would like a copy of this informed consent, please print this screen or contact
Shane Cowher at cow02722@pennwest.edu.
By clicking on the “I agree” box and continuing with the survey, you have acknowledged
that you have read the informed consent and are at least 18 years old. Also, you
acknowledge that you agree to participate in the study and have the right not to answer
any or all the questions in the survey. Finally, you understand your participation is
entirely voluntary, and you may quit the study at any time without penalty.
Mark only one oval.
I agree
I disagree

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

127

Informed Consent to Participate in an Interview
INFORMED CONSENT
Title of Study: TEACHER ATTRITION AND RETENTION IN
CENTRALPENNSYLVANIA: WHAT CAN SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND
PRINCIPALS DO TOPROMOTE TEACHER RETENTION?
KEY INFORMATION
You are being asked by Shane Cowher to participate in a research study. Participation in
the study is voluntary, and you may stop anytime.
The purpose of this interview is to gain a better understanding of why teachers want to
leave their current school or traditional public schools entirely. The researcher is seeking
to understand what districts can do, as whole, to promote teacher retention, and the
researcher is seeking to understand what principals can do to promote teacher retention.
In this interview, you will be asked to answer questions about your attitudes about
teacher attrition and retention. You will be asked to answer questions regarding your
attitudes regarding job qualities that promote teacher retention in traditional public
schools. You will be asked to answer questions about your perspectives on leadership
styles that promote teacher retention.
This interview will take approximately 30 minutes.
The potential risks during the study are relatively low but could include breach of
confidentiality or nervousness/ anxiety answering questions about your former place of
employment or seeking alternate employment. Remember, you may stop the interview at
any time. In addition, if you feel the need to talk with someone, you may contact the
PennWest Edinboro counseling center at 814-732-2252, or for emergencies, call 814732-2911.
There are no direct benefits for the participants. It will help researchers better understand
the problem of teacher attrition in central Pennsylvania public schools.
SECURITY OF DATA
Remember, taking part in this interview is voluntary. If, while participating in the
interview, you feel uncomfortable or no longer want to participate, you may stop at any
time. There are no consequences if you decide to stop participating in this study.
Names will not be shared in this study; all other information from this study will be
confidential within local, state, and federal laws. The PennWest University
Institutional Review Board (IRB) may review the research records. The study results may
be shared in aggregate form at a meeting or journal, but there is no identifiable
information to be revealed. The records from this study will be maintained for a
minimum of three (3) years after the study is complete.
Your information collected in this research will not be used or distributed for future
research, even if all your identifiers are removed.
If you have questions about the research or a research-related injury, you can contact Dr.
Mary Wolf at wolf@pennwest.edu. If you have a question about your rights as a research
participant that you need to discuss with someone, you can contact the PennWest
University Institutional Review Board at InstReviewBoard@pennwest.edu.
If you would like a copy of this informed consent, please print this screen or contact
Shane Cowher at cow02722@pennwest.edu.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

128

By clicking on the “I agree” box and continuing with the survey, you have acknowledged
that you have read the informed consent and are at least 18 years old. Also, you
acknowledge that you agree to participate in the study and have the right not to answer
any or all the questions in the survey. Finally, you understand your participation is
entirely voluntary, and you may quit the study at any time without penalty.
Mark only one oval.
I agree
I disagree

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA
APPENDIX C
Survey
Demographic Information
Please answer to the best of your ability.
2.Name of School District
3.Gender
Mark only one oval.
Female
Male
4.Years of Experience
Mark only one oval.
0-5
6-15
16 or more
5. What grade level band do you teach?
Mark only one oval.
PreK-4
5-8
9-12
6.In how many different school districts have you worked?
Mark only one oval.
1
2
3
More than 3
Reasons for Attrition (R1) For the sake of this research, "attrition" refers to teachers
leaving their current public teaching position for a teaching position outside of their
district or the teaching profession altogether.
Please answer the following questions to the best of your ability.
7. I have worked closely with someone who has left my current district over the past
three years.
Mark only one oval.
Yes
No
8.I have considered looking for a job outside of my current district over the past three
years.

129

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

130

Mark only one oval.
Yes
No
9.I have actively sought employment outside my current district or left a traditional
public teaching role over the past three years.
Mark only one oval.
Yes
No
10.
If you answered "Yes," to either of the previous two questions, what was your primary
reason?
Mark only one oval.
I answered "No."
More money
Change of location
Dissatisfaction with the school district
Dissatisfaction with building leadership
Dissatisfaction with teaching altogether
Other:
11.If you have thought about or actively sought employment outside of your current
district, or you recently left a position in a public school, please explain why you left in
more detail.
12.I can see myself retiring in my current district.
Mark only one oval.
Yes
No
Maybe
13.Please explain your response to the previous question in more detail.
Promoting Teacher Retention For the sake of this research, "retention" refers to teachers
who remain in their current school district, even if they change teaching assignments
within the district itself.
Please answer the following questions to the best of your ability.
14.What three actions do you believe your current district can take to improve teacher
retention? (choose three) (R2)
Check all that apply.
Increase salary
Decrease requirements and paperwork

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

131

Provide more time for planning and collaboration
Improve school safety
Improve fringe benefits like insurance, time off, and tuition reimbursement
Improve the building and grounds
Provide more and better resources for students
Offer performance incentives and bonuses
Adjust the school calendar or schedules
Improve staff onboarding and induction
Improve professional development opportunities
15.What is the single most important action your current school district can take to
promote teacher retention?
16.Please explain in more detail what you believe to be the most important action your
current district can take to improve teacher retention. (R2)
17. What three supports can principals utilize at the building level to promote teacher
retention? (choose three) (R3)
Check all that apply.
Communicate more frequently/ effectively
Be more visible
Provide more time for planning and collaboration
Support teachers through student discipline
Evaluate staff in a different way
Provide more instructional leadership
Address staff issues more frequently/ fairly
Allow more teacher freedom
Adjust the schedule
Other:

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

132

18. What is the single most important action/support your principal can use to promote
teacher retention in your school?
19. Please explain in more detail what you believe to be the number one action/support a
principal can use to promote teacher retention. (R3)

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

133

APPENDIX D
Focus Group Questions
1. What do you like about your current teaching role? (R2-3)
2. What do you dislike about your current teaching role? (R2-3)
3. Overall, why do you believe teachers are leaving the profession? (R1)
4. What attrition factors are beyond the control of the school district? (R2)
5. What attrition factors are within the control of the school district and how can
these be addressed? (R2)
6. What incentives can be provided by the district to promote teacher retention (e.g.
increase salary, provide more benefits, change the calendar, allow dress down,
increased mentoring)? (R2)
7. What attrition factors are within the control of the principal and how can these be
addressed? (R3)
8. What can principals do to promote teacher retention (e.g. communicate better,
increase visibility, build rapport with staff)? (R3)
9. What can principals do to improve staff morale and/or job satisfaction? (R3)
10. How can principals improve their approach to handling difficult situations with
faculty (e.g. parent complaints, conflict among staff, disagreements about
decisions)? (R3)
*These are the questions that will be used for focus groups, in addition to any other
additional questions that may arise as a result of these conversations.
Definitions:
Teacher Attrition: For the sake of this research, "attrition" refers to teachers leaving
their current public teaching position for a teaching position outside of their district or the
teaching profession altogether.
Teacher Retention: For the sake of this research, "retention" refers to teachers who
remain in their current school district, even if they change teaching assignments within
the district itself.

TEACHER TURNOVER IN CENTRAL PA

134

APPENDIX E
Interview Questions
1. Why did you leave your teaching role? (R1)
2. Was there anything that could have been done to retain you as a district
employee? If so, what would that have been? (R2-3)
3. When you left your teaching position, were you frustrated with the district and for
what reason? (R1)
4. What did you like about your teaching role? Why? (R2-3)
5. When you left your teaching role, were you frustrated with traditional, brick-andmortar public education? (R1)
6. What can districts do, as a whole, to promote teacher retention (e.g. increase
salary, provide more benefits, change the calendar, allow dress down, increased
mentoring)? (R2)
7. What can principals do to promote teacher retention (e.g. communicate better,
allow more freedom, build rapport with staff)? (R3)
8. What can principals do to improve staff morale and/or job satisfaction? (R3)
9. How can principals improve their approach to handling difficult situations with
faculty? (e.g. parent complaints, conflict among staff, disagreements about
decisions) (R3)
10. Is there anything that you like about your new position that could be implemented
within TASD to improve faculty retention? (R2-3)
*These are the questions that will be used for interviews with former staff members, in
addition to any other additional questions that may arise as a result of these
conversations.
Definitions:
Teacher Attrition: For the sake of this research, "attrition" refers to teachers leaving
their current public teaching position for a teaching position outside of their district or the
teaching profession altogether.
Teacher Retention: For the sake of this research, "retention" refers to teachers who
remain in their current school district, even if they change teaching assignments within
the district itself.