Normas de educación universitaria

through college at a rate that exceeds the national average, which is even more

students, or the first in their families to attend post-secondary schooling (KIPP, 2011; Pondiscio, 2013).

Teacher Retention in No Excuse Charter Schools

The mission of No Excuse schools demands more of the people that work under their banner. Teachers, principals, and other support staff at such schools in almost all cases work longer hours and longer school years than their peers at traditional public schools. They also generally are required to submit extensively detailed lesson plans on a weekly basis and conduct thorough analyses of assessment data. The extra hours and workload are rooted in the belief that in order to achieve the mission of college for all for students who are historically marginalized and disenfranchised, more is required. I use the word “more” in isolation intentionally, because there is a litany of things that could follow the word: time (both in hours and in school days), effort, oversight, accountability, community and family outreach, resources, support systems, and so on (Monahan, 2014; Ash, 2014).

The mission and demands of No Excuse schools can have unintended consequences, particularly as it pertains to teacher retention. Teachers at these schools are generally young and inexperienced, and recruited more for their mindsets than for their credentials outside of a

bachelor’s degree. Teach For America places a significant amount of its teachers in such schools, who then have a recurring challenge of replacing those teachers after their two-year commitment concludes. Beyond TFA, many of the teachers recruited at No Excuse schools don’t remain long in part because of the extreme working conditions and hours required to be a successful teacher under the No Excuse model (Torres, 2013).

Teacher Attrition, Migration and Retention

Teacher retention, which can be measured at different levels, refers generally to the rate and state at which teachers choose to stay in their position. For example, teacher retention at a

school level means the rate at which teachers are retained at that particular school. At a district level, it is the rate of teachers that remain within the district but perhaps transfer between schools, and so on.

While a deep dive analysis on teacher attrition has revealed how many teachers are leaving the profession, and more importantly why they are leaving, such an analysis fails to answer an even more compelling question for principals and school leaders who are looking to retain their best talent. While attrition and retention are often related and sometimes have overlapping factors, teacher retention—and what has been done over the years to improve it—is a completely separate issue which will be addressed through the lenses of national trends, rural schools, and charter schools.

Teacher attrition—the term commonly used to refer to the act of teachers exiting the profession—has been an issue of growing concern in the United States, and has garnered the attention of practitioners and policymakers alike and caused them to reflect on why teachers decide to leave the classroom and what, if anything, can be done about it (Ingersoll, 2001; 2007; Ingersoll & Strong, 2011). Most teacher attrition has a negative impact on schools and the broader school community that includes students, families, and other stakeholders. When a teacher leaves, they often create a burden on the school to replace that teacher, which can be difficult, especially in schools with a high percentage of students who come from high-poverty neighborhoods. Teacher attrition has been associated with a number of undesirable

consequences, including lower test scores, lower attendance rates, and increased disciplinary problems (Hanushek et al., 2004; Louis, Marks, & Kruse, 1996). Beyond that, schools with a higher population of black and Latino students and students who qualify for FRPL are

statistically more likely to struggle with teacher attrition, which can exacerbate pre-existing problems that these schools must deal with (Frankenburg, 2009).

To understand this phenomenon, one must first separate it from teacher migration and teacher retention, which each speak to different but similar challenges when it comes to staffing America’s public schools. Beyond that, it is important to understand the myriad reasons why teachers leave the classroom, their motivations, and various factors which impact their decision- making process.

Teacher attrition refers to the flow of teachers out of teaching—those who leave the profession altogether for reasons that include—but go well beyond—retirement. Teacher migration refers to teachers who remain in the profession but choose to leave their school for another. Reasons for teachers leaving for the greener pastures of another school or teaching assignment may include a higher salary, support from administration (or lack thereof), student discipline concerns, proximity to home and the reduction of a commute, a special program offered at one school and not another, and many others (Ingersoll, 2001).

Teacher Retention

One of the greatest challenges in education today is recruiting and retaining high quality teachers (Ingersoll, 2007). It has been demonstrated that teachers are the primary variable in determining student performance (Chetty, Friedman & Rockoff, 2011). Thus, stated generally, recruiting and retaining high quality teachers is arguably the most pressing and important challenge that educational leaders, researchers, and policymakers face. Research has shown that even in low-income or traditionally low-performing schools, high quality teachers can reverse the effects of poverty and close achievement gaps between socioeconomically disadvantaged students and their more affluent peers and between minority and white students (Darling- Hammond, 2000, 2003; Rice, 2010).

Knowing what factors, conditions, and considerations will get teachers to stay in the classroom is a critical consideration for school and district leaders, especially considering the amount of time and resources that are poured into training and developing new teachers (Lake, Dusseault, Bowen, Demeritt, & Hill, 2010). Keeping teachers in the classroom allows districts and schools the chance to “recoup their investment” that went into the recruitment, training, and development of that teacher (Brown & Schainker, 2008, p. 4). The cost of losing good teachers is high (Podolsky, Kini, Bishop, & Darling-Hammond, 2016). When teacher attrition occurs, there is often a disruption to the broader school community that stems from the instability caused by attrition, a deficit in the quality of teachers and instruction, and a renewed allocation of time, attention, and funding to recruitment rather than support (Johnson & Birkeland, 2003).

The challenge is further complicated for CMOs and No Excuse charter schools who often have unique cultures and systems of operation within their organizations that limit the supply of teachers who are a good fit (Tuttle, Gill, Gleason, Knechtel, Nichols-Barrer & Resch, 2013). Those considerations aside, it has been widely established that teacher effectiveness increases over time (Harris & Sass, 2011; Rivkin et al., 2005; Rockoff, 2004), This makes the departure of these teachers—many of whom are on the cusp of entering the prime of their careers—

particularly frustrating for school leaders who are left to seek that teacher’s replacement instead. Teacher retention presents challenges to districts and school leaders, particularly in low- income communities and urban areas where challenges facing teachers can be magnified due to a host of variables that are unique to communities of poverty. Likewise, there are unique and problematic challenges in rural communities too where the teacher applicant pool is smaller by nature of the number of qualified individuals living within the region, the number of qualified, degree-holding adults is limited, and the allure of city-life and amenities found in more vibrant

communities are largely absent, making it harder for schools in those communities to attract outsiders to fill its teaching vacancies (Frankenburg, 2009; Howard, 2016; Sleeter, 2008).

Teacher Retention in Rural Schools

Much of the national discussion on education has been focused on urban and suburban education due to the overwhelming number of students who live in such settings. In 2013, approximately 24% of the nation’s K-12 students were living in rural communities, compared to the 76% of students who lived in cities and suburbs (NCES report, 2013). However, the fact that the majority of American students attend schools in busy cities or sprawling suburbs likely matters little if at all to a student who lives and attends school in a rural community, nor does it excuse researchers, lawmakers, or policymakers from needing to turn their attention to the challenges within rural education. Students in these rural communities are just as deserving of the attention given to students from inner cities or the suburbs, and just as deserving of high quality teachers. Sadly, many of these students have grown accustomed to a carousel of teachers who are constantly getting on and off the ride (Henry, Bastian, & Fortner, 2011; Ronfeldt, Loeb & Wyckoff, 2013). These students deserve not only intelligent teachers who are experts in their fields, but teachers who understand the importance of place and appreciate the unique history and context of rural communities (White, Green, Reid, Lock, Hastings & Cooper 2008).

Often overlooked, these rural schools struggle with many of the same challenges facing urban schools, such as high concentrations of children living in poverty, limited access to quality healthcare, or the “soft bigotry of low expectations” (Bush, 1999). The challenges also include— but are not limited to—lower salaries, remote locations, and small school and community populations, all of which hinder the recruitment and retention of quality teachers in rural areas (Ingersoll & Rossi, 1995).

Teacher Retention Challenges and Solutions in Rural Schools

In addition to the standard challenges that accompany education generally and low- income communities specifically, rural schools face added challenges that are mostly foreign to urban schools. While this study will focus more on the solutions to retention challenges rather than the retention challenges themselves, this section is dedicated to the unique retention

challenges facing rural schools as made evident by trends in existing research. An understanding of these challenges enables an understanding of the solutions.

1. Isolation. The nature of this retention challenge can be traced directly to the nature of