Texas Teacher Retention, Mobility, and Attrition › sites › default › files › Spec_PRR_6...mobility, and attrition. Teacher 91 school year, as well as longitudinal almost half

Policy Research Report Page 1

Texas Teacher Retention, Mobility,and Attrition

Teacher supply is the total num- The National Center for Educationteachers surviving through each ofber of eligible individuals available Statistics (NCES) has conducted a several successive years, and thefrom all sources who are willing to series of surveys over the past decadehazard probability, or the probabilitysupply their services to teaching underthat collect national teacher data, that a teacher will quit in a particularprevailing conditions. Teacher supplyincluding data on the characteristics year given that he or she survivedis influenced by the number of teach- of teachers who stay in the profession,through the end of the previous year.ers who leave their teaching positionsthose who stay in the profession buteach year, either to take a different who move from school to school or In general, new teachers in Texasteaching position or to leave the district to district, and those who leaveleave the profession early in theirprofession altogether. the profession altogether. Data careers. Nineteen percent of the

focusing on the changing supply entering teachers left teaching afterThis Policy Research Report sources of newly hired teachers havetheir first year, and of those who

focuses on issues related to teacher also been collected by NCES. NCESremained, 12 percent left teaching aftersupply including teacher retention, data for teachers teaching in the 1990-their second year. By the fifth yearmobility, and attrition. Teacher 91 school year, as well as longitudinalalmost half of the 10,381 Texasretention refers to the proportion of data on teachers from other states, areteachers had left the classroom.teachers in one year who are still used for comparison of retention,teaching in the following year. Of mobility, and attrition. Historical Trendsthose teachers who are retained in theprofession from year to year, teacher Discrete-time survival analysis is Trends in teacher supply andmobility refers to those teachers who used to provide data for this report thatdemand have been influenced by manymove to another school or district to better examine the relationship be- factors over the years, includingteach. Teacher attrition refers to the tween Texas teacher characteristics changing demographics, changes innumber of teachers in one year who and the length of their teaching the labor market, modifications toare no longer teaching the following careers. Survival analysis allows public policy, and political and socialyear. examination of teachers’ careers fromconsiderations. The teacher popula-

the time they enter the profession untiltion is aging, thus, more teachers willThere were 223, 082 teachers the time they leave. Findings from thebe retiring at the same time that, after

representing 219,338 full time equiva-survival analysis for this report are years of decline, the number of chil-lents (FTE’s) in Texas public schools derived from investigating the careersdren reaching school age is growing.in 1992-93. The following year, 81.6 of 10,381 teachers who started teach-From the mid 1970’s to the midpercent returned to the same campus toing in the Texas public schools during1980’s, a presumed teacher surplusteach, 10.4 percent moved to a differ- the 1988-89 school year. Although discouraged college students froment campus to teach, and 8.0 percent data collection inevitably ends before choosing teaching as a career. Teach-did not return to Texas public schools all teachers leave, this analysis allowsers hired during the baby boom yearsas teachers. This report presents us to make predictions about how longof the 1950’s and 1960’s are nowanalyses of the retention, mobility, andTexas teachers are likely to stay in thereaching retirement age. In 1991,attrition of the Texas teaching force inprofession. Survival analysis providesnearly one in four teachers nationallythe 1992-93 school year by teacher us with the survival probability, or the were 50 years of age or older. Statis-characteristics and school conditions. proportion of an initial cohort of tics such as these raise some important

Page 2 Policy Research Report

National Center for Education StatisticsSchools and Staffing Survey

Beginning in the 1980’s, the U.S. Department of Education’sNational Center for Education Statistics (NCES) conducted a seriesof surveys designed to collect data on the demographics of the studentpopulation, the demand for teachers in different regions of the UnitedStates, the educational qualifications of school teachers and adminis-trators, and the working conditions of teachers.

In 1985, NCES worked jointly with staff from the Rand Corpora-tion to review and redesign the portion of their data collectionconcerned with teacher demand and shortage, teacher and administra-tor characteristics, and general conditions in school. The collabora-tion with Rand resulted in an integrated set of surveys called theSchools and Staffing Survey (SASS). In 1987-88, the administrationof the SASS was followed by the administration of the TeacherFollowup Survey (TFS), which collected information on teacheremployment and teaching status, educational activities and futureplans, and teacher opinion on school climate and job perceptions.

Taken together, the SASS and the TFS strive to:

• profile the nation’s elementary and secondary teaching force;• improve estimates and projections of teacher demand by teaching field, level, and geographic location;• analyze teacher mobility and turnover;• develop assessments of teacher quality and qualifications; and• obtain more complete information on school policies, practices and programs, administrator characteristics, teacher characteristics, and workplace conditions.

questions. Will there be enoughteachers to teach our students incoming years? Who will these teach-ers be? Will they be prepared to teachan increasingly diverse student popu-lation?

In a background paper preparedfor the National Commission onTeaching and America’s Future(1994), it was reported that nationally,states and districts have addressed theproblem of teacher shortages indifferent ways, including increasingsalaries or providing other incentivesfor prospective teachers, creating

alternative paths to certification, orallowing the use of emergency ortemporary credentials. In 1991, morethan one in four new hires nationallyeither had temporary certification ordid not have certification at all. Thosewho were hired without certificationwere concentrated in teacher shortageareas such as bilingual education,mathematics, science, and specialeducation.

As has been pointed out in earlierPolicy Research Reports, in Texas,the proportion of teachers who areethnic minorities does not match the

proportion of students who are minori-ties. This disparity is particularlynoteworthy among African Ameri-cans, where the number of teachershas increased only slightly over thepast 10 years. In recent years,college-educated minorities andwomen have gained greater access tonon-teaching positions traditionallyheld by white males. These formerlyunavailable positions frequently offerhigher salaries and more desirableworking conditions than teaching.Additionally, national research showsthat less than 60 percent of those whoare certified to teach actually enter theteaching force by the year after theygraduate. The rate for minorityteacher candidates is even lower(Murnane, 1991).

There is a discrepancy betweenthe qualifications of teachers enteringpositions in low-income districts andthose entering higher income districts.The overall academic quality of newrecruits is reported to be good, withalmost one-fourth nationally holdinggraduate level degrees and comingfrom quality preparation programs.However, the teachers entering lowincome schools increasingly holdonly marginal qualifications(Darling-Hammond, 1994).

The remainder of this reportexamines in greater detail currentretention, mobility, and attrition datain relation to teacher characteristicssuch as gender and ethnicity andschool conditions such as percent ofeconomically disadvantaged students.

Teacher Characteristics

Gender

National data show that propor-tionately male and female teacherstend to stay, move, and leave teachingat approximately the same rates.

As Chart 1 shows, in Texas maleteachers left at slightly higher rates


than female teachers in 1992-93.Almost nine percent of male teachersfrom 1992-93 did not return to teach-ing in 1993-94, compared to almosteight percent of female teachers. Ofthose Texas teachers who stayed inteaching from 1992-93 to 1993-94, ahigher percentage of male teachersmoved to new campuses or districts toteach. Over 12 percent of maleteachers from 1992-93 moved to adifferent campus in 1993-94, com-pared to less than 10 percent of femaleteachers.

As Chart 2 shows, when lookingat the first five years of a teacher’scareer, female teachers on averageleave at slightly higher rates thanmales, except for the first year whenthe risk of leaving teaching is highestfor males. By the fifth year, almosthalf of both male and female teacherswho entered the profession in 1988-89had left teaching in Texas.

Teacher Race/Ethnicity

Nationally, the attrition rates ofwhite, African American, and His-panic teachers are reported to besimilar, with African Americanteachers being slightly more likely toleave teaching. Teachers who areAsian or Pacific Islander leave athigher rates than any of the others,while American Indian, Aluet, andEskimo teachers leave at the lowestrates. Other national data show thatwhen school conditions are taken intoaccount, African American teachersare actually less likely to leave thanwhite teachers. It was pointed out thatAfrican American teachers (as well asother minority teachers) are morelikely to teach in large urban districtsthat serve higher proportions of poorchildren. Teachers who work in suchschool conditions are more likely toleave, regardless of race/ethnicity.When this is taken into considerationAfrican American teachers actuallyhave higher retention rates in theteaching workforce than whiteteachers.

1 2 3 4 50

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Male

Female

Years of Teaching Completed

Chart 2Texas Teachers’ Risk of Leaving Teaching in the

First Five Years, by Gender

Of teachers who entered the profession in 1988-89, 19 percent had left teachingafter their first year, and of those that remained, 12 percent left after theirsecond year. For the first five years of teaching, the greatest difference inattrition rates for males and females occurs after the first year, with 22 percentof males leaving the profession compared to 18 percent of females. In subse-quent years, females leave at slightly higher rates so that by the end of the fifthyear the same percentage of females remain in teaching as males.

Data Source: Texas Education Agency Public Education Information ManagementSystem (PEIMS).

PercentLeaving

In Texas, when district conditionssuch as percent of minority students,percent of low income students, andenrollment are taken into account,white teachers who began teaching in

A higher percentage of male teachers moved from campus to campus to teach in1992-93 than female teachers. Male teachers also left the profession of teachingat slightly higher rates.


redneGforebmuN

srehcaeT sreyatS srevoMetaRnoitneteR

)srevoM+sreyatS(etaRnoitirttA

)srevaeL(

elameF 274,471 %3.28 %9.9 %2.29 %8.7

elaM 016,84 %0.97 %2.21 %2.19 %8.8

latoT 280,322 %6.18 %4.01 %0.29 %0.8

Chart 1Texas Teacher Retention and Attrition Rates by Gender — 1992-93

1988-89 left at higher rates thanminority teachers, except after theirfirst year of teaching, when minorityteachers were more likely to leave.


Among Texas teachers, American Indian and Asian teachers left the teachingprofession at the highest rates in 1992-93. Hispanic teachers in Texas leftteaching at the lowest rates.

Data Source: Texas Education Agency Public Education InformationManagement System (PEIMS).

Chart 3Texas Teacher Retention and Attrition Rates

by Ethnicity — 1992-93rehcaeTyticinhtE

forebmuNsrehcaeT sreyatS srevoM

etaRnoitneteR)srevoM+sreyatS(

etaRnoitirttA)srevaeL(

naidnInaciremA 972 %7.77 %0.9 %7.68 %3.31

etihW 034,271 %3.18 %4.01 %7.19 %3.8

naisA 577 %8.77 %7.11 %5.98 %5.01

naciremAnacirfA 694,81 %1.48 %1.8 %3.29 %7.7

cinapsiH 201,13 %0.28 %3.11 %3.39 %7.6

As Chart 3 shows, however, one-year attrition rates for all Texasteachers by ethnicity shows thatAmerican Indian and Asian teachersleft at the highest rates in 1992-93while Hispanic teachers left at thelowest rates.

About nine percent of 1990-91 teach-ers under 30 nationally did not returnto teaching in 1991-92. Nationally,those teachers aged 60 and over leavethe profession at much higher ratesthan any other age group, presumablyto retire. Over 40 percent of teachers65 and over in 1990-91 left the profes-sion nationally.

Other national and state levellongitudinal research (Bobbitt, 1994;Grissmer, 1992; Murnane, 1991)confirms the trends shown in Chart 4.Attrition tends to be highest in theearly years of teaching, particularlyamong teachers who are new to theprofession, and again at the end of ateaching career as retirement age isapproached. This pattern of teacherattrition forms a U-shaped picture,with teachers in their middle yearsstaying at the highest rates, and thosein their early and late years leaving athigher rates.

Among Texas teachers, onesimilar trend emerges, as Chart 5shows. Texas teachers under the ageof 30 also leave at higher rates thanolder Texas teachers. Over 10 percentof Texas teachers who were under 30years old in 1992-93 did not return toteaching in 1993-94. Until the age of50, Texas teachers in every age groupleave at higher rates than seen nation-ally. However, Texas teachers ofretirement age are not leaving at thehigher rates that are seen nationally.Only 5.2 percent of Texas teacherswho were 65 or older in 1992-93 leftthe profession after that year.

The reasons for teacher attrition atcertain times in their careers have beenattributed to a variety of factors. TheNCES survey of former teachersreports that for teachers under 40 yearsold the main reason for leaving teach-ing was pregnancy or child rearing(31.6 percent); however, for teachers40-49 years old the main reason givenfor leaving teaching was to pursueanother career.

Teacher Age

As Chart 4 shows, teacher ageprovides a telling indicator of reten-tion and mobility. Teachers under theage of 30 are more likely to leave theprofession than those aged 30-59.

* Percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding.

Nationally, higher percentages of teachers under 30 years of age move fromcampus to campus to teach each year than older teachers. Teachers approach-ing retirement, those aged 60 or over, have the highest rates of leaving theprofession.

Data Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,May 1994.

Chart 4National Retention and Attrition Rates by Age — 1990-91*

TeacherAge Stayers Movers

Retention Rate (Stayers + Movers)

Attrition Rate (Leavers)

Under 25 73.8% 17.2% 91.0% 9.1%

25-29 76.6% 14.3% 90.9% 9.0%

30-39 85.9% 9.9% 95.8% 4.2%

40-49 92.5% 5.5% 98.0% 2.0%

50-59 89.3% 4.0% 93.3% 6.7%

60-64 71.0% 2.2% 73.2% 26.8%

65 or more 48.9% 10.3% 59.2% 40.8%


Full-Time Teaching

Experience Stayers MoversRetention Rate

(Stayers + Movers)Attrition Rate

(Leavers)

Less than 1 Year 51.5% 31.3% 82.8% 17.2%

1 Year 79.0% 12.6% 91.6% 8.4%

2 Years 78.7% 14.1% 92.8% 7.2%

3 Years 81.6% 12.4% 94.0% 6.0%

4-9 Years 84.8% 9.9% 94.8% 5.2%

10-19 Years 91.0% 6.5% 97.5% 2.5%

20-24 Years 93.3% 3.3% 96.6% 3.4%

25 Years or More 85.9% 3.1% 89.0% 11.0%

Chart 6National Retention and Attrition Rates

by Years of Experience — 1990-91

(The chart on Page 7 provides addi-tional information on reasons given forleaving teaching.)

Years of Experience

As might be expected, attritionrates by years of teaching experiencefollow a similar trend to that of age.As Chart 6 illustrates, nationwideteachers in the beginning of theircareers, with less than one year to threeyears of experience, tend to move andleave at much higher rates than thosewho have been teaching for 4-9 years,10-19 years, or 20-24 years. Thosewith 25 or more years of experiencealso leave at high rates, presumablyto retire.

Among Texas teachers a similarpicture emerges. As shown in Chart 7on Page 6, Texas teachers in their firstthree years tend to move and leave athigher rates than those with more yearsof experience. Texas teachers with 25years of experience or more also leaveat high rates, presumably to retire.

Of the 17,843 Texas teachers wholeft teaching after the 1992-93 schoolyear, 2,553 or 14.3 percent moved toother fields in education the followingyear. As Chart 8 on Page 6 shows, ofthe 2,553 who remained in education,623 became counselors, 580 becameassistant principals, and 247 becamelibrarians.

Teacher Salary

The influence of salary on rates ofteacher attrition has been documentedin studies conducted in other states,including Michigan and North Caro-lina (Murnane, 1991). These studiesfound that teachers who were beingpaid at comparably lower rates weremore likely to leave than those whowere being paid at an average or higherrate. This effect was particularlystrong in the early years of teachingcareers when the retention rate is thelowest and the attrition rate is highest.

Nationally, those teachers with the fewest years of experience are the mostmobile, moving at the highest rates from campus to campus to teach each year.Those teachers with the most years of experience, 25 years or more, leave theprofession at high rates, presumably to retire.


rehcaeTegA




52rednU 016,4 %8.27 %9.51 %7.88 %3.11

92-52 500,72 %8.37 %2.61 %0.09 %0.01

93-03 795,46 %0.18 %1.21 %1.39 %9.6

94-04 228,87 %3.68 %0.9 %3.59 %7.4

95-05 160,63 %8.88 %1.7 %9.59 %1.4

46-06 880,5 %5.09 %6.5 %1.69 %9.3

eromro56 321,1 %8.78 %0.7 %8.49 %2.5* Information available on teachers with reported age data only.

In Texas, as in the nation, higher percentages of teachers under age 30 movefrom campus to campus to teach each year than older teachers. Young teachersin Texas, those under age 30, also leave the profession at the highest rates.

Data Source: Texas Education Agency Public Education Information ManagementSystem (PEIMS) and Teacher Retirement System.

Chart 5Texas Teacher Retention and Attrition Rates by Age — 1992-93*


These studies also reported thatteachers in the lower salary groupswere actually one and one-half timesmore likely to leave at the end of theirfirst year of teaching than thoseteachers paid in higher salary groups.In Texas, over 26 percent of 1988-89teachers in the lower salary groups left

Board (SREB) and the Texas Educa-tion Agency (TEA). Noting that theearly years of teaching are marked byhigh attrition rates, the study foundthat salaries for new teachers in Texasare lower by 5-20 percent than begin-ning salaries in other occupations forwhich their training makes themeligible. The study suggests that a 10percent increase in salary would resultin a 2.4 percent increase in retentionfor first-year teachers, a 2.3 percentincrease in retention for second-yearteachers, and a 2.2 percent increase inretention for third-year teachers.Thus, for a 10 percent increase insalary the projected retention rate forfirst year teachers would increase from84.2 percent to 86.6 percent , forsecond-year teachers, it would in-crease from 89.4 percent to 91.7percent, and for the third-year teach-ers, from 90.3 percent to 92.5 percent.

Degree Held by Teacher/SubjectArea Taught

NCES data on teachers who hold amaster’s degree show that theseteachers are no more likely to leaveteaching or move to a differentcampus than are those teachers with abachelor’s degree. Teachers withdoctoral degrees tend to leave theprofession at higher rates. The NCESdata show that the subject taught doesnot influence teacher attrition. That is,the rate at which public school teach-ers of general education subjects leaveteaching varies little by field. Inaddition, the NCES data report thatscience and mathematics teachers areno more likely to leave the professionthan teachers of other subjects, likeEnglish and social studies.

In contrast, reports of NorthCarolina and Michigan data suggestthat science and mathematics teachers,particularly those teaching chemistryand physics, are more likely than thoseteaching other subject areas to leavethe profession. This same trend isreported in a longitudinal study of

after their first year of teaching com-pared to under 17 percent of those inthe higher groups.

A study of Texas teacher salariesfrom the 1988-89 school year to the1992-93 school year was conductedfor the Southern Regional Education

Chart 8Texas Teachers Who Left Teaching After the 1992-93

School Year For a Different Profession Within Education

Profession Number Percent

Counselor 623 24.4%

Assistant Principal 580 22.7%

Librarian 247 9.7%

Principal 175 6.8%

Educational Diagnostician 172 6.7%

Other Education Professions 756 29.6%In 1992-93, the largest number of teachers who left teaching, but stayedin the education field, became counselors.



by Years of Experience — 1992-93*

emiT-lluFgnihcaeTecneirepxE




raeY1nahTsseL 510,51 %6.86 %6.51 %2.48 %8.51

raeY1 556,31 %9.37 %5.51 %4.98 %6.01

sraeY2 717,21 %8.57 %5.41 %3.09 %7.9

sraeY3 513,01 %4.67 %7.31 %1.09 %9.9

sraeY9-4 787,45 %5.08 %6.11 %1.29 %9.7

sraeY91-01 255,47 %9.58 %9.8 %8.49 %2.5

sraeY42-02 557,32 %7.78 %7.6 %4.49 %6.5

eroMrosraeY52 662,81 %8.28 %0.5 %8.78 %2.21

* Information available on teachers with reported years of experience data only.

In Texas, as in the nation, teachers with the fewest years of experience are themost mobile, moving at the highest rates from campus to campus to teach eachyear. Those teachers with the most years of experience, 25 years or more, leavethe profession at high rates, presumably to retire.


(Continued on page 8)


Data Source: U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Profession Average Tenure (in years) in Occupation

Preschool Teachers 6.6

Elementary Teachers 12.0

Secondary Teachers 14.1

Special Education Teachers 10.6

Vocational Education Teachers 6.6

Dentists 15.1

Veterinarians 14.0

Registered Nurse 10.6

Pharmacists 12.7

Chemists 7.6

Computer Programmers 6.2

Psychologists 8.5

Lawyers 10.4

Data Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center forEducation Statistics, May 1994.

gnihcaeTgnivaeLrofnosaeR 88-7891 19-0991

eriteroT %3.22 %4.03

gniraerdlihC/ycnangerP %9.81 %9.01

evoMlanosreProylimaF %7.8 %0.01

reeracrehtonaeusrupoT %4.31 %8.7

reeracasagnihcaethtiwdeifsitassiD %9.8 %3.8

nosaerlanosreproylimafrehtO %8.4 %7.5

noitcagniffatsloohcS %8.5 %8.9reeracevorpmiotsesruocekatoT

noitacudefodleifehtniseitinutroppo %4.3 %3.6

htlaeH %2.2 %7.3

stifenebroyralasrettebroF %5.4 %6.3kaerbrehtorolacitabbasaekatoT

gnihcaetmorf %4.5 %1.2reeracevorpmiotsesruocekatoT

noitacudefodleifehtedistuoseitinutroppo %4.1 %5.1

detropertoN %5. 0

Tenure by Occupation

The main reason given by former teachersnationally, both in 1987-88 and in 1990-91, forleaving the profession was to retire. Preg-nancy/child rearing remained the second mostcommon reason. More teachers left teachingin 1990-91 due to a school staffing action or totake courses to improve their career opportuni-ties than in 1987-88. However, a larger per-centage of teachers left in 1987-88 than in1990-91 to pursue another career.

National average tenure information isderived from special questions added to theJanuary 1991 Current Population Survey. Thissurvey is conducted monthly as a joint effortby the Bureau of Labor Statistics and theBureau of the Census. Special questions re-lated to employment are added to the surveytwo times a year. The survey is sent to approxi-mately 58,000 households across the countryeach month, including about 5,000 in Texas.Results from the Current Population Surveyare reported monthly in the Bureau of LaborStatistics publication, Employment and Earn-ings. Tenure in selected occupations is listedin contrast to that of teachers.

Reason for Leaving Teaching


SREB Salary Study

A study of Texas teacher salaries from 1988-89 to 1992-93 wasconducted for the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) in1994. The results allow examination of how different geographicregions, race/ethnicity, gender, and district type influence teachersupply.

The following provides a summary of the key study results.

• Salaries for new teachers are lower than beginning salaries inother occupations for which their training makes them eligible.During the first three years of teaching, entering salaries in otherprofessions for which teachers are qualified are 5 percent to 20percent higher than the salaries offered to teach. The early yearsof teaching are marked by high attrition rates.

• After about 5-8 years, depending on a teacher’s area of training,district, and degree level, the teaching salary begins to come intoparity with, or to exceed, the entry salary in other professions.The market incentive to leave teaching and the attrition rate arereduced.

• For the state as a whole, a 10 percent increase in the salaries ofteachers, assuming competing salaries do not change, could beexpected to increase teacher retention by about 0.9 percent forthe entire teacher work force. This would reduce the currentattrition rate of 8.0 percent to 7.1 percent. Teachers with 0-4years of experience, who represent about 21 percent of the totalteaching work force, would show the greatest increase in reten-tion.

• Special education showed consistently lower retention rates thanother subject areas while vocational education and computerscience showed consistently higher retention rates.

• Elementary teachers have higher retention rates than secondaryteachers except in the regions of Dallas/Ft. Worth and Houston.

• Race/ethnicity and gender also influence teacher retention.There are variations by region of the state, but overall, maleshave lower retention rates than females, and white teachers havelower retention rates than African American or Hispanic teach-ers.

• Teachers with higher academic degrees have lower retentionrates.

• The kind of district—urban, suburban, or rural—had noinfluence on retention rates.

• Districts with lower percentages of economically disadvantagedstudents had higher teacher retention rates than districts withgreater percentages.

teacher attrition in Indiana, where,after five years of teaching, theattrition rate for physics and chemistryteachers was 57 percent, while theattrition rate for elementary teachersover the same period was 36 percent.The use of different study methodolo-gies may have contributed to thedifferences found between the NCESsurvey results and the state-levellongitudinal study results. The NCESdata looked at attrition over a one-yearperiod, while the other studies lookedat changes over several years.

As Chart 9 on Page 10 illustrates,one-year attrition rates from 1992-93to 1993-94 for Texas teachers by levelof degree shows that teachers withdoctoral degrees are much more likelyto leave the classroom than areteachers with master’s degrees orbachelor’s degrees. Teachers withbachelor degrees leave at the lowestrate.

As shown in Chart 10 on Page 10,Texas special education teachers hadthe highest attrition rate and thehighest mobility rate compared toteachers in other subject areas. Teach-ers of gifted students in Texas hadamong the lowest rates of attrition andmobility.

In Texas, beginning mathematicsand science teachers (those in theirfirst year of teaching in 1988-89) wereno more likely to leave during the firstfive years of their careers than thosewho taught other subjects. Beginningscience teachers teaching high-levelcourses were no more likely to leaveteaching during the first five yearsthan those teaching low-level courses.Of beginning mathematics teachers,however, those teaching high levelcourses were less likely to leave thanthose teaching low-level courses.

Teacher Test Scores

Nationally, those teachers with thehighest standardized test scores tend

(Continued from page 6)



Teacher Mobility by Student Performance

A three-year district mobility rate was calculated tocompare teacher mobility with student performance onthe Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) test.The TAAS is a criterion-referenced test that assessesstudent performance in reading, mathematics, and writ-ing. The TAAS testing program has been in place sincethe 1990-91 school year. In 1990-91, TAAS wasadministered for the first time to almost 1.2 millionstudents in grades 3, 5, 7, and 11. In 1992-93 testing wasmoved from the fall of the school year to the spring, andgrades tested changed to 4, 8, and 10. Beginning in1993-94, TAAS was administered to grades 3-8, and 10.Although the testing program has gone through severalchanges since 1990-91, the average performance of thedistrict can be compared across years by comparing thepercent of students passing all tests taken.

In 1990-91 the average percent of students passingall TAAS tests taken was 55.5 percent. In 1993-94 theaverage percent of students passing all tests taken was55.6 percent. Of Texas teachers who moved, those whotaught in districts with below average TAAS perfor-mance moved equally to other districts with belowand at or above the state average TAAS performance.Teachers teaching in districts at or above the stateaverage tended to move to other districts that also wereat or above average TAAS performance.

Data Source: Texas Education Agency Public EducationInformation Management System (PEIMS).

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Above to Below Above to Above

PercentTeachersMoving

Percent Teachers Moving From DistrictsWith At or Above Average TAAS Performance

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Below to Below Below to Above

PercentTeachersMoving

District TAAS Performance

District TAAS Performance

Percent Teachers Moving From DistrictsWith Below Average TAAS Performance

50.7% 49.3%

34.8%

65.2%


to have shorter teaching careers.A longitudinal study of teachers inNorth Carolina showed a strongpositive relationship between high testscores on the National Teachers Exam(NTE) and likelihood of leaving theprofession. Teachers with higher

scores on the NTE, regardless of raceor years of experience, were morelikely to leave teaching than thosewith average or low scores.

In contrast, certified Texas teach-ers in 1988-89 with higher scores on

the ExCET were no more likely toleave the profession in their first fiveyears of teaching than were teacherswho had average or lower scores.

School Conditions

School Level

As shown in Chart 11, NCES dataon school level with regard to teacherattrition shows that elementary schoolteachers are somewhat more likely tomove and leave than secondaryteachers; however, teachers who teachin combined elementary and second-ary schools move at the highest rates.

In Texas, overall, teachers at themiddle school grades were somewhatmore likely to move or leave after the1992-93 school year than elementaryor high school teachers, as Chart 12shows. As with the national data,Texas teachers who taught in com-bined elementary and secondaryschools moved and left at the highestrates.

Regardless of school size andstudent population, beginning teachersat the secondary level are more likelyto leave within five years than begin-ning teachers at the elementary level.Of teachers who began teaching inTexas schools in 1988-89, 45 percentof secondary teachers left within fiveyears compared to 38 percent ofelementary teachers.

School Size

National data on school size showthat the size of the school was notconnected to teachers’ leaving ormoving in 1990-91. As Chart 13 onPage 13 shows, nationally, percent-ages of teachers moving and leavingwas highest among teachers inschools with 300-499 students,although rates did not vary greatlyfrom smaller to larger schools.

In Texas, teachers who taught inthe smallest schools, those with fewer

Chart 9Texas Teacher Five-Year Retention and Attrition Rates

by Advanced Degree — 1988-89 to 1993-94

eergeDdleH




s’rolehcaB 635,451 %3.18 %2.11 %5.29 %5.7

sretsaM 980,56 %9.28 %6.8 %5.19 %5.8

etarotcoD 698 %0.87 %5.7 %5.58 %5.41

* Information available on teachers with reported degree data only.

In 1992-93, teachers with bachelor’s degrees remained in the teaching profes-sion at higher rates than teachers with advanced degrees. Teachers withdoctoral degrees had the lowest retention rates.


aerAtcejbuSthguaT




laugniliB 106,31 %5.21 %2.08 %7.29 %3.7

yratnemelE 842,88 %0.9 %8.38 %8.29 %2.7

hsilgnE 675,02 %3.9 %3.28 %6.19 %4.8

detfiG 589,3 %2.9 %8.38 %0.39 %0.7

scitamehtaM 644,31 %1.01 %5.18 %6.19 %4.8

ecneicS 677,11 %7.9 %7.18 %4.19 %6.8

seidutSlacoS 118,11 %6.9 %5.38 %1.39 %9.6

noitacudElaicepS 975,02 %8.41 %2.57 %0.09 %0.01

noitacudElanoitacoV 497,9 %2.7 %4.58 %6.29 %4.7

rehtO 962,92 %1.31 %4.77 %5.09 %5.9


by Subject Area Taught — 1992-93

In Texas, secondary social studies teachers and those teachers teaching giftedstudents had the lowest attrition rates, while special education teachers had thehighest.




than 150 students, had the highest rateof moving and leaving after the 1992-93 school year, as Chart 14 on Page 13shows.

Teachers who taught in schoolswith 150-299 students also moved atfairly high rates.

School TAAS Performance

As shown in Chart 15 on Page 13,schools with higher percentages ofstudents passing all Texas Assessmentof Academic Skills (TAAS) tests takenin 1992-93 had higher percentages ofteachers return to the campus in 1993-94. Teacher mobility and attritionrates did not vary greatly by campusstudent performance, and the data donot indicate the nature of the relation-ship between teacher mobility andstudent performance. Teachers maybe less likely to leave successfulcampuses, or students may performbetter with a stable teaching force, orother factors may result in both higherstudent performance and higherteacher retention. Teachers on cam-puses where no students were testedhad the highest mobility rates.

Student Characteristics

Nationally, the percentage ofminority students at a school appearsto be related to the rate of teacherattrition, such that schools with 50percent or more minority studentsreport teacher attrition at almost 14percent, versus just over 10 percent forcampuses with less than five percentminority students.

In Texas the percent of minoritystudents on a campus was less relatedto teacher attrition than it was nation-ally. Texas schools with 50 percent ormore minority students did have thehighest rate of teacher attrition with8.3 percent of teachers leaving theprofession after the 1992-93 schoolyear. Campuses with less than fivepercent minority students had attrition

rates of 7.8 percent. The lowestattrition rate, 7.0 percent, was reportedfor campuses with between 10 and 20percent minority students.

The percent of economicallydisadvantaged students on a Texascampus also showed little associationwith teacher attrition from 1992-93 to

Chart 11National Retention and Attrition Rates by School Level — 1990-91

Nationally, teachers who teach in combined elementary and secondary schoolshave the highest rate of moving from campus to campus to teach each year,followed by elementary teachers. Teachers in elementary, secondary, andcombination schools tend to leave the profession at approximately the samerates.


loohcSleveL sreyatS srevoM



yratnemelEedargtsewoL( ≤ 6

edargtsehgihdna ≤ )8%6.68 %0.8 %6.49 %4.5

yradnoceSedargtsewoL( ≥ 7

edargtsehgihdna ≤ )21%5.98 %6.5 %1.59 %9.4

denibmoCedargtsewoL( ≤ 6

edargtsehgihdna ≥ )8%2.38 %5.11 %7.49 %3.5

leveLloohcSforebmuN



)srevaeL(

yratnemelEedargtsewoL( ≤ 5

edargtsehgihdna ≤ )8329,111 %6.28 %0.01 %6.29 %4.7

roinuJ/elddiMedargtsewoL( ≥ 4

edargtsehgihdna ≤ )9304,74 %0.87 %5.31 %5.19 %5.8

loohcShgiHedargtsewoL( ≥ 7

edargtsehgihdna ≥ )9411,65 %8.38 %1.8 %9.19 %1.8

denibmoCedargtsewoL( ≤ 6

edargtsehgihdna ≥ )9363,6 %2.87 %7.21 %9.09 %1.9


by School Level — 1992-93*

* Information available on teachers with reported school data only.

Texas teachers at the middle/junior high school level moved from campus tocampus to teach at the highest rates, followed by teachers from combinationschools. Teachers in combination schools had the highest attrition rate, whileelementary teachers had the lowest.




Teacher Mobility by Salary

To examine the influence of salary on the mobility ofteachers in Texas, the average district salary in 1988-89was compared to the average district salary in 1993-94.The Texas Public Education Compensation Plan sets man-datory minimum salaries for teachers based on years ofexperience. In 1988-89 the average base salary for allTexas teachers was $24,876. The average teacher salary atthe end of the mobility period, 1993-94, was $28,894. Ofall Texas teachers who moved from district to districtduring 1988-89 to 1993-94, over 44 percent were teachingin districts that were below the state average for base salary,over 20 percent were teaching in districts that were at the

state average, and about 35 percent were teaching in dis-tricts that were above the state average. At the end of themobility period 41 percent of those who changed districtswere teaching in districts that were below the state average;almost 19 percent of teachers were teaching in districts thatwere at the state average, and about 40 percent wereteaching in districts that were above the state average.

Although there was a slight movement toward districtswith higher salaries between 1988-89 and 1993-94, Texasteachers tended to move to districts with average salariessimilar to the district from which they had come. Over 54

percent of teachers teaching in dis-tricts with average salaries below thestate average moved to districts wherethe average salary also was below thestate average. A surprisingly largeminority of teachers from districtswhere salaries were at the state aver-age—almost 40 percent—moved todistricts where the average salary wasbelow the state average.

District moving to in 1993-94

District moving fromin 1992-93

Salary Below State

Average

Salary at State Average

Salary Above State

Average

Salary Below State Average 58.2% 17.2% 24.7%

Salary At State Average 39.8% 17.1% 43.1%

Salary Above State Average 26.1% 20.4% 53.4%

Average Teacher Salary in 1991 = $26,000 to $27,000;

in 1994 = $28,000 to $29,000Data Source: Texas Education Agency Public Education Information ManagementSystem (PEIMS).


1993-94. Campuses where 60 percentor more of the students were economi-cally disadvantaged had only slightlyhigher attrition rates than campuseswith fewer economically disadvan-taged students. Campuses with 40percent or more economically disad-vantaged students did show somewhathigher teacher mobility rates thancampuses with fewer economicallydisadvantaged students. Campuseswith 80 percent or more economicallydisadvantaged students had the highestteacher mobility rates, with 11.8percent of 1992-93 teachers moving toa different campus for the 1993-94school year.

Community Type

Texas school districts are groupedinto four categories based on the typeof community in which they arelocated—urban, suburban, nonmetro-politan, and rural. Factors such asproximity to a metropolitan area, size,and growth rate are used to determinethe appropriate category for eachdistrict. The type of community inwhich teachers work does not seem tobe linked with teacher attrition rates.There is only slight variability inteacher attrition rates by communitytype, with campuses in suburbandistricts having the highest rate(8.2 percent) of teachers leaving theprofession after the 1992-93 schoolyear, and campuses in nonmetro-politan districts having the lowest rate(7.7 percent).

There is more variability withregard to teacher mobility rates.Campuses in rural districts have thehighest teacher mobility rate with 12.3percent of 1992-93 teachers moving toa different campus to teach for the1993-94 school year, while campusesin urban districts have the lowest rate,with 9.8 percent of teachers moving.(The chart on Page 14 presents infor-mation on five-year district mobilityof Texas teachers by community type.)

Chart 13National Teacher Retention and Attrition Rates

by School Size — 1990-91

School Size Stayers MoversRetention Rate

(Stayers + Movers)Attrition Rate

(Leavers)

Less than 150 86.6% 8.1% 94.7% 5.3%

150-299 88.0% 7.7% 95.7% 4.3%

300-499 85.8% 8.5% 94.3% 5.7%

500-749 87.7% 7.6% 95.3% 4.7%

750 or more 88.6% 6.0% 94.6% 5.4%


by School Size — 1992-93

eziSloohcSforebmuN



)srevaeL(

051nahtsseL 841,7 %6.96 %2.81 %8.78 %2.21

992-051 673,61 %6.87 %4.31 %0.29 %0.8

994-003 502,73 %3.28 %2.01 %5.29 %5.7

947-005 112,26 %1.28 %2.01 %3.29 %7.7

eromro057 241,001 %3.28 %6.9 %9.19 %1.8

Nationally, rates of moving and leaving were highest for teachers in schoolswith 300-499 students. However, rates did not vary greatly by school size.


In Texas, teachers from schools with less than 150 students had higher rates ofmoving and leaving than teachers from schools with larger numbers of students.


gnissaPtnecrePnekaTstseTlla




%3.33rednU 303,05 %2.08 %1.11 %3.19 %7.8

%2.74rednuot%3.33 683,05 %8.08 %3.11 %1.29 %9.7

%5.06rednuot%2.74 023,25 %8.28 %5.9 %3.29 %7.7

%5.06revO 574,84 %3.48 %3.8 %6.29 %4.7

detsetstnedutsoN 913,02 %6.97 %0.31 %6.29 %4.7


by Percent of Students Passing TAAS — 1992-93

Overall, retention and attrition rates were similar for teachers regardless ofthe TAAS performance of the students on their campus. Campuses where nostudents were tested had higher rates of teacher mobility than other campuses.





Teacher Mobility by Community Type

The five-year district mobility rate refers to the move-ment of all teachers from one district to another during thefive-year period from 1988-89 to 1993-94. Texas schooldistricts are grouped into four categories—urban, subur-ban, nonmetropolitan, and rural. Factors such as proxim-ity to a metropolitan area, size, and growth rate were usedto determine the appropriate category for each district.

Urban districts include the eight largest school districtsthat serve the metropolitan areas of Austin, Corpus Christi,Dallas, El Paso, Fort Worth, Houston, and San Antonio; aswell as major school districts in other large Texas cities.Suburban districts are other school districts in and aroundmetropolitan areas and large cities. Nonmetropolitan dis-tricts include other large school districts and school districtswith high growth rates. Rural districts are the remainingsmall school districts.

The five-year district mobility rate varies by communitytype, with the lowest rate occurring in rural districts and thehighest rate occurring in nonmetropolitan districts. Elevenpercent of all teachers moving from one district to anotherwere teaching in rural districts. Over 35 percent of allteachers moving from one district to another were teachingin nonmetropolitan districts.

Texas teachers in schools located in suburban ornonmetropolitan areas moved to other suburban ornonmetropolitan districts to teach. Over half of all teachersmoving from a suburban district moved to another suburbandistrict to teach. Forty-five percent of teachers moving froma nonmetropolitan district moved to another nonmetropolitandistrict to teach.

Teachers in schools located in urban areas moved tosuburban areas to teach at high rates, and teachers in ruralareas moved to nonmetropolitan areas at high rates. Overhalf of all teachers moving from urban districts went tosuburban districts to teach. Almost 47 percent of all teachersmoving from rural districts went to nonmetropolitan dis-tricts to teach.

Mobility by Community Type Percent

Urban to Urban 27.1%

Urban to Suburban 52.1%

Urban to Nonmetropolitan 17.6%

Urban to Rural 3.2%

Suburban to Urban 24.7%

Suburban to Suburban 52.5%

Suburban to Nonmetropolitan 19.3%

Suburban to Rural 3.5%

Nonmetropolitan to Urban 16.4%

Nonmetropolitan to Suburban 28.2%

Nonmetropolitan to Nonmetropolitan 43.0%

Nonmetropolitan to Rural 12.4%

Rural to Urban 8.3%

Rural to Suburban 13.8%

Rural to Nonmetropolitan 46.7%

Rural to Rural 31.2%

Data Source: Texas Education Agency Public EducationInformation Management System (PEIMS).


• To satisfy mandated requirementsrelated to induction

• To transmit the culture of thesystem to beginning teachers

Although there is great variety inthe comprehensiveness and quality ofthese types of programs, typicallysome combination of the followingcomponents are present.

• Providing information such asemployment conditions andschool regulations to new hires

• Conducting orientation meetings

ESC Region

Education Service Center (ESC)regions serve different numbers ofschool districts and students, and varyin the number of teachers moving inand out of the region each year.

Retention and attrition ratesrepresent the percent of 1992-93teachers returning to teaching andleaving the profession in 1993-94.As Chart 16 shows, the Region 12ESC serving the Waco area shows thehighest rate of teacher attrition, with8.7 percent of 1992-93 teachersleaving the Texas public schoolsystem in 1993-94. The Region 14ESC serving the Abilene area showsthe lowest attrition rate, with 5.8percent, and the highest overallretention rate, with 94.2 percent of1992-93 teachers returning to Texaspublic schools in 1993-94.

The retention rate represents bothteachers who stay on the same campusand teachers who move to anotherTexas public school campus thefollowing year. The Region 8 ESCserving the Mount Pleasant area hadthe highest “staying” rate, with 85.6percent of its teachers staying to teachon the same campus the followingyear. The Region 1 ESC in Edinburghad the highest “moving” rate, with12.8 percent of its teachers moving toa different campus to teach the follow-ing year.

Induction and Retentionof Teachers

Induction Programs

Induction programs are designedto provide support to beginningteachers as they make the transition tothe classroom. With half of theteaching population leaving theprofession within five years of begin-ning their careers, emphasis oninduction and retention programs is

crucial. Research has shown thatteachers leave the profession at thehighest rates in the early years of theirteaching careers, and thus effectiveinduction programs, those programsfocusing on beginning teachers, aremost warranted. Although the contentof induction programs varies greatlyfrom district to district, most inductionprograms have the following goals.

• To improve teaching performance• To increase the retention of

beginning teachers• To promote the personal and

professional well-being of begin-ning teachers


by Education Service Center Region — 1992-93

* Information available on teachers with reported school data only.

The Region 14 ESC, serving the Abilene area, shows the lowest attrition rate,with 5.8 percent, and the highest overall retention rate, with 94.2 percent of1992-93 teachers returning to Texas public schools in 1993-94.




noigeRforebmuN

*srehcaeT sreyatS srevoMetaRnoitneteR

)srevoM+sreyatS(noitirttA

)srevaeL(etaRgrubnidE1 069,51 %5.97 %8.21 %2.29 %7.7

itsirhCsuproC2 852,7 %9.08 %3.11 %2.29 %8.7airotciV3 778,3 %3.48 %4.9 %7.39 %3.6notsuoH4 333,44 %8.08 %7.01 %5.19 %5.8

tnomuaeB5 215,5 %8.48 %5.7 %3.29 %7.7ellivstnuH6 525,7 %7.18 %7.01 %4.29 %6.7

erogliK7 254,01 %7.48 %4.8 %1.39 %9.6tnasaelPtnuoM8 577,3 %6.58 %8.7 %4.39 %6.6

sllaFatihciW9 409,2 %3.48 %8.8 %1.39 %9.6nosdrahciR01 593,82 %6.28 %4.9 %0.29 %0.8htroWtroF11 136,91 %7.18 %4.01 %1.29 %9.7

ocaW21 089,7 %4.97 %9.11 %3.19 %7.8nitsuA31 827,31 %3.08 %0.21 %3.29 %7.7enelibA41 527,3 %9.48 %3.9 %2.49 %8.5

olegnAnaS51 135,3 %2.28 %6.01 %8.29 %2.7olliramA61 064,5 %3.28 %4.9 %7.19 %3.8kcobbuL71 131,6 %5.08 %3.11 %8.19 %2.8dnaldiM81 023,5 %8.18 %0.01 %8.19 %2.8

osaPlE91 898,8 %9.97 %7.11 %6.19 %4.8oinotnAnaS02 365,81 %9.38 %5.8 %4.29 %6.7


Teacher Mobilityby Education Service Center Region

Education Service Center RegionsThe five-year district mobility rate represents the per-

cent of teachers moving from one district to another at leastonce during the five-year period from 1988-89 to 1993-94.The Region 4 ESC serving the Houston area has the highestfive-year district mobility rate of 17 percent. This regionalso has the greatest within-region movement; that is, thegreatest movement of teachers from one district to anotherwithin the same region. The greatest movement betweenregions took place from Region 10 serving the Richardsonarea to Region 11 serving the Ft. Worth area. Region 10 hasthe second highest five-year district mobility rate, with over10 percent mobility. The lowest mobility rate occurs withinRegion 9 in Wichita Falls, with just under 1.5 percent ofteachers moving from one district to another at any timebetween 1988-89 to 1993-94.

1 Edinburg 7.7% 11 Fort Worth 6.7%

2 Corpus Christi 4.2% 12 Waco 4.7%

3 Victoria 2.2% 13 Austin 6.3%

4 Houston 17.0% 14 Abilene 2.4%

5 Beaumont 2.6% 15 San Angelo 2.2%

6 Huntsville 4.5% 16 Amarillo 2.9%

7 Kilgore 5.7% 17 Lubbock 3.7%

8 Mt. Pleasant 2.0% 18 Midland 2.9%

9 Wichita Falls 1.4% 19 El Paso 2.7%

10 Richardson 10.3% 20 San Antonio 7.7%

HeadquartersMobility

RateMobility

RateHeadquarters

Under 5%

5% - 9.9%

10% - 14.9%

15% and Over

16

17

19

18

9

14

15

7

81 01 1

12

56

1

20

13

3

2

4


Texas TeacherPreparation Study

A study of first-year Texas teach-ers by their preparation routes wasundertaken by the Texas EducationAgency (TEA) in 1993. The goal ofthe study, which is in its second andfinal year, is to assess the quality offirst-year teachers in Texas relativeto the type of teacher preparationprogram completed. The study isexamining the main avenues into theprofession: undergraduate and post-baccalaureate programs leading tocertification; the Alternative Certifi-cation Program (ACP); and certifica-tion for teachers entering Texas withcredentials issued in other states. Spe-cifically, the study is designed to:

• determine who is entering the teacher work force and where

they are teaching,• examine teacher experiences

in the classroom with regardto avenues of preparation,

and• analyze the relative retention

over time of these teachers inthe work force.

As part of this study, a survey of5,002 first-year teachers across Texaswas conducted. The survey requestedinformation on the teachers’ educa-tional backgrounds and prior workexperience; their characterization oftheir teacher training; and their first-year teaching experiences. Site visitswere conducted to 28 campuses in 11school districts. Each site visit in-cluded classroom observations offirst-year teachers and mentor teach-ers; and interviews with first-yearteachers, mentor teachers, and cam-pus administrators. Results from thefirst year of this study are reported inthe publication Texas Teacher Prepa-ration Study 1993-94 Interim Report.

information on what is working inmentoring programs, evaluationsuggestions, a composite of thevarious mentoring and inductionmodels, a glossary, and an annotatedbibliography that contains sections onmentoring, discipline management,peer coaching, and classroom man-agement.

Conclusion

This report focused on issuesrelated to teacher supply, includingteacher retention, mobility, andattrition. The characteristics ofteachers who stay in the profession ofteaching and those who leave wereexamined by gender, ethnicity, age,years of teaching experience, salary,degree held, subject area taught, andteacher test scores. School conditionsof teachers who stayed, moved, andleft were also examined.

Five-year data on Texas teachersshow that attrition rates do not varygreatly by gender or ethnicity. Teach-ers with lower salaries are more likelyto leave the profession after their firstyear of teaching than teachers withhigher salaries. However, those whoremain in the profession are onlyslightly more likely to move todistricts with higher average salariesthan to districts with the same orlower salaries over the next five years.

Texas teachers with advanceddegrees, though representing a smallpercentage of all teachers, tend toleave teaching at higher rates thanteachers with bachelor’s degrees.While data from other states reportthat teachers with the highest scoreson teacher certification examinationsleave teaching at higher rates thanthose with average or lower scores,the same trend is not true in Texas.Teachers with higher scores on theExCET are no more likely to leave intheir first five years of teaching thanare teachers who have average orlower scores.

• Conducting seminars andtraining sessions on effectiveteaching topics

• Being observed by supervisorsor peers

• Conducting follow-up meetingswith observers

• Consulting with experiencedteachers

• Being paired with a mentoror buddy

• Observing more experiencedteachers

• Conducting support meetingswith other beginning teachers

• Assigning to a team teachingsituation

Research conducted on the effec-tiveness of teacher induction programshas shown positive results. Studieshave reported that beginning teachersserved by induction programs hadimproved teaching performance andhigher retention rates after their firstyear than did beginning teachers notserved by induction programs. Begin-ning teachers also reported that theemotional support they receivedthrough induction programs wasamong the most beneficial aspect ofthe program (Holdaway, 1994; Huling-Austin, 1990).

Texas Education Code §13.038,Teacher Induction, established in 1991the requirement for an induction yearfor all new Texas teachers. It wasspecified that the induction yearcontain (1) new teacher orientation and(2) assignment of a mentor for eachnew teacher. No funding was appro-priated to establish these inductionprograms and districts were respon-sible for conducting mentor trainingout of their own budgets.

To assist districts, the TexasEducation Agency prepared amentoring manual, Mentoring Frame-works for Texas Teachers. The manualincludes a rationale for mentoringprograms, needs of new teachers,



School conditions such as schoolsize and the type of community inwhich the school is located are notrelated to teacher attrition rates.However, there is a mobility pattern ofteachers moving from rural districts tononmetropolitan districts, and fromurban districts to suburban districts.

The characteristics of students onthe campus, such as percent minoritystudents or percent of students who areeconomically disadvantaged, werelikewise not related to teacher attri-tion. Although not strong, there is arelationship between teacher mobilityand attrition and campus performanceon TAAS.

In Texas, as in the nation, teacherswith the fewest years of experience arethe most mobile, moving from campusto campus and leaving the professionat high rates. Teachers with the mostyears of experience, 25 or more, leavethe profession at the highest rates,presumably to retire. Age is alsoassociated with mobility and attrition.

In an effort to retain teachers inthe profession, especially during theearly years of teaching when attritionis high, induction programs have beenimplemented to provide support tobeginning teachers. Induction pro-grams have been mandated in Texasschools since 1991.


Selected Bibliography

Bobbitt, S. A., Faupel, E., and Burns, S. (1991) Characteristics of Stayers, Movers, and Leavers: Results from theTeacher Followup Survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research andImprovement.

Bobbitt, S. A., Leich, M. C., Whitener, S. D., and Lynch, H. F. (1994) Characteristics of Stayers, Movers, and Leavers:Results from the Teacher Followup Survey: 1991-92. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educa-tional Research and Improvement.

Bobbitt, S. A., and Whitener, S. D. (1992) “Why Do Teachers Leave Teaching? Reasons for Teacher Attrition from theTeacher Followup Survey” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association,1992.

Boe, E. E., and Gilford, D. M., editors. (1992) Teacher Supply, Demand, and Quality Policy Issues, Models, and DataBases. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Bureau of Labor Statistics (1991) Employment and Earnings. Washington, DC: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1994) The Current Status of Teaching and Teacher Development in the United States.Background paper prepared for the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1984) Beyond the Commission Reports: The Coming Crisis in Teaching. Santa Monica,CA: RAND.

Gilford, D. M., and Tenenbaum, E., editors. (1990) Precollege Science and Mathematics Teachers Monitoring Supply,Demand, and Quality. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Griffin, G. A., and Millies, S., editors. (1987) The First Years of Teaching: Background Papers and a Proposal.Chicago: The University of Illinois at Chicago.

Grissmer, D. W., and Kirby, S. N. (1992) Patterns of Attrition Among Indiana Teachers, 1965-1987. Santa Monica,CA: RAND.

Gruber, K. J. (1992) “Destinations of Movers and Leavers: Where Do They Go?” Paper presented at the annualmeeting of the American Educational Research Association, 1992.

Haggstrom, G. W., Darling-Hammond, L., and Grissmer, D. W., (1988) Assessing Teacher Supply and Demand.Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Huling-Austin, L. (1990) Teacher Induction Programs and Internships. In W. R. Houston, editor, Handbook of Researchon Teacher Education. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

Holdaway, E., Johnson, N., Ratsoy, E., Friesen, D. (1994) “The Value of an Internship Program for Beginning Teach-ers.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Volume 16, No. 2, pp. 205-221.

“How Do We Keep Teachers in Our Classrooms? The TNT Response” (March 1993) IDRA Newsletter, Volume XX,Number 3, Intercultural Development Research Association.


Jensen, M. C. (1987) How to Recruit, Select, Induct, and Retain the Very Best Teachers. Eugene, Oregon:University of Oregon.

Kirby, S. N., Grissmer, D. W., and Hudson, L. (1991) New and Returning Teachers in Indiana: Sources of Supply.Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Murnane, R. J., Singer, J. D., Willett, J. B., Kemple, J. J., and Olsen, R. J. (1991) Who Will Teach? Policies that Matter.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Rollefson, Mary. (1990) “Teacher Turnover: Patterns of Entry to and Exit from the Teaching Profession.” Paperpresented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 1990.

Rollefson, Mary. (1993) Teacher Supply in the United States: Sources of Newly Hired Teachers in Public and PrivateSchools. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Improvement.

Sedlak, M., and Schlossman, S. C. (1986) Who Will Teach? Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Texas Administrative Code. (1993) Austin, TX.

Texas Education Agency (1993) Mentoring Frameworks for Texas Teachers. Austin, TX: Texas Education Agency,Division of Professional Educator Preparation.

Texas Education Agency (1993) Policy Research Report #2: Working Conditions of Texas Teachers. Austin, TX:Texas Education Agency, Office of Policy Planning and Evaluation.

Texas Education Agency (1994) Policy Research Report #4: Texas Teacher Diversity and Recruitment. Austin, TX:Texas Education Agency, Office of Policy Planning and Evaluation.

Texas Education Agency (1994) Public Education Information Management System Data Standards. Austin, TX:Texas Education Agency.

Texas Education Agency (1995) Texas Teacher Preparation Study 1993-94 Interim Report. Austin, TX: Texas Educa-tion Agency, Policy Analysis and Evaluation Division.

Texas Education Code (1994) Austin, TX.

U.S. Department of Education (1992?) An Overview of the SASS and TFS. Washington, DC: U.S. Department ofEducation, National Center for Education Statistics.


Project Staff

Criss CloudtExecutive Associate Commissioner

Office of Policy Planning and Information Management

Nancy StevensDirector

Policy Analysis and Evaluation Division

Teacher Supply, Demand, and QualityPolicy Research Project

Lynn T. MellorDirector of Programs

Sedra G. SpanoEducational Program Director

Research and Editorial AssistanceSusan Barnes

Linda HargroveRichard Kallus

Vicky A. KillgoreMichael Mao

Marilyn H. RumbautMindy Sitton

Maria Whitsett

ReviewersEducator Assessment and Appraisal Division

Omar S. LópezPamela TackettNolan Wood

Professional Educator Preparationand Certification Division

Ricky ArredondoLynda HaynesJean Holden

William M. Wale

Documents

Texas Teacher Retention, Mobility, and Attrition › sites › default › files › Spec_PRR_6...mobility, and attrition. Teacher 91 school year, as well as longitudinal almost half