Teacher Recruitment and Retention in the Next Administration

Districts across the nation are in need of highly qualified teachers, particularly in math, science and special education. Given that the estimated cost of current teacher attrition is around $2 billion annually, maintaining and growing the teaching force may be one of the greatest, and most expensive, challenges in education for the next administration. Sadly, little research has been done to examine the value added of current or potential teacher retention and recruitment activities.

Currently, the federal government makes some efforts to increase the pool of qualified teachers, with special emphasis on hard-to-staff schools. Title II of NCLB currently allocates $2.9 billion in state grants for teacher recruitment and retention activities such as incentive programs for teachers who work in hard-to-staff schools or teach hard-to-staff subjects. The TEACH grant program, part of the College Cost Reduction Act, provides up to $24,000 in tuition grants to college students in exchange for four years of teaching service in hard-to-staff schools and subjects with an expected total cost of $325 million over five years. The Higher Education Opportunity Act “spends” an unspecified amount to support innovative teacher training programs and accountability for teacher preparation schools as well as $300 million on partnerships between schools of education and high-need districts.

In response to the need for more teachers – highly qualified teachers – both presidential candidates have developed plans for teacher recruitment and retention, should they take office:

John McCain’s plan dedicates 5 percent of existing NCLB Title II funding to states to recruit teachers in the top 25 percent of their class or who have undergone alternative certification programs. His platform also allocates 60 percent of Title II funding for incentive bonuses for teachers who teach in hard-to-staff schools and subjects and 35 percent of Title II funding for high quality professional development programs. Using today’s Title II dollars, this would amount to roughly $145 million for recruitment, $1.7 billion for incentive bonuses and $1 billion for professional development.

Barack Obama wants to dedicate an unspecified amount to teacher incentive bonuses, expand funding for teacher mentoring to $1 billion, and dedicate $100 million to improving teacher education programs through school-university partnerships and research-based methods. His platform also mentions Teacher Service Scholarships (which sound very similar to TEACH grants) for college students and mid-career change teachers, and Teacher Residency Programs to bring new teachers into urban schools.

Thankfully, the candidates are dedicating time and money to teacher recruitment and retention. Some of their ideas sound similar to programs already in place and many of them have yet to prove their effectiveness. Yet, getting Congressional backing for expansion or creation of any of these programs will ultimately require the candidates to demonstrate why their programs are better or more deserving than programs already in place.

For example, Teacher Residency Programs, currently expanding in cities like Chicago and Boston, provide opportunities for second career teachers to enter classrooms alongside mentors while earning their teaching credential. While there is anecdotal evidence of their effectiveness, there is no rigorous research that definitively shows that Teacher Residencies are more effective than other teacher training programs. Similarly, the jury is still out on teacher incentive bonuses, grants for teaching service, and alternative certification programs as a whole.

Lack of evidence is not in itself a condemnation of a program. Conducting rigorous research on teachers is a challenging undertaking. The majority of states and localities lack the ability to link teachers to students, making it difficult to attribute student achievement to teacher characteristics such as participation in a particular training program. Building these data capabilities will take time and money, but the outcome will be invaluable as we consider expanding and improving our teaching force.

There is no question that teacher recruitment and retention deserves federal attention. Both candidates bring some new ideas to the table; it’s a start. We would request that as the candidates’ plans translate into policy, they incorporate opportunities for rigorous program evaluation at the start and further down the line.