Thesis - Strategies to Mitigate Teacher Turnover Rate in Louisiana

THE OVERALL QUALITY OF TEACHER SUPPORT STRUCTURES

AS PERCEIVED BY EDUCATORS IN A TAP SCHOOL SETTING

by

Anonymous Student

A Research Paper-in-lieu-of-Thesis

Submitted to the Graduate School of

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

In partial fulfillment of requirements for the

Educational Specialist in Educational Leadership Degree

July 2021

Introduction

Teacher shortages are not a novel concept; rather, it is a concern that appears to be increasing in urgency. The reasons for a teacher leaving, whether it is transferring to a new school or district, or leaving the profession altogether, are multi-faceted and varied depending on the individual teacher. However, regardless of the specific reason there are similarities that contribute to a teacher’s decision to leave. Toropova et al. (2019) found teacher job satisfaction was a key component in a school’s overall turnover rate. Furthermore, the authors discovered the leading factors in determining overall satisfaction of a job were the amount and quality of professional development teachers received and the overall level of a teacher’s self-efficacy (Toropova et al., 2019). Finding the reason for teacher shortages is necessary, and once addressed can slow down or reverse turnover rates in schools. Districts can be proactive in meeting the needs of teachers before shortages occur by ensuring systems are in place to increase teacher retention. When school leaders address the emotional needs of teachers, taking care to acknowledge the psychological aspects of education, teacher burnout can be avoided (Ford et al., (2019). To remain in education, teachers need to feel supported by their administrators and district leaders. The structures put in place to provide this support, as well as the overall quality of support given, is crucial in creating an overall level of job satisfaction among teachers.

Theoretical Framework

Herzberg’s motivation theory divides overall levels of employee satisfaction into two groups, hygiene and motivators, and through the implementation of both categories, employee needs are met both internally and externally (Akdemir, 2020). According to Herzberg’s theory, hygiene factors such as salary, policies, and working conditions cause job dissatisfaction; however, they do not increase motivation nor are determining factors in an employee’s desire to perform to the best of their ability (Akdemir, 2020). While these factors are certainly important to the overall atmosphere of a work environment, and can play a key role in employee satisfaction, meeting only these needs will not increase the desire of an employee to grow as an individual. Conversely, motivator factors do just that. Two of Herzberg’s motivator factors that increase employee motivation and the drive to improve are the level of feedback an employee receives, and the opportunities for development offered (Akdemir, 2020). Feedback and development, when implemented in a meaningful way, create a desire in professionals to perform and seek growth to continually improve.

Statement of the Problem

Teacher shortages are an increasing problem, and addressing the factors causing the shortage is paramount to slowing down the loss. Strong support from leadership is one factor that can be implemented to increase teacher satisfaction. However, teacher support is varied, appearing in many different formats, and not all methods are quality. In providing support to teachers, administrators must be cognizant of the individual needs of each employee in order to provide them with the most effective support available (Ford et al., 2019). Generic professional development sessions that do not provide teachers with meaningful opportunities of growth will not be effective in providing support. Some districts embed professional development within the school day, as seen in the TAP System for Teacher and Student Advancement (TAP). A key structure of TAP is the weekly professional development meetings, referred to as cluster meetings, that provide teachers with direct support from master and lead teachers. Within a TAP school, another method of support is seen in a detailed post-conference that occurs after an observation. This post-conference, focusing on strengths (reinforcements) and weaknesses (refinements) are meant to help address opportunities for growth and improve a teacher’s instruction and methods (Sloat et al., 2018). Support structures should not be put into place simply for the sake of compliance. Rather, any support provided to teachers must be high quality and meaningful to each individual educator in order to effectively develop the professional growth of the teacher and in turn impact student achievement.

Research Questions

This project addressed the following research questions:

1. What is the overall quality of teacher support structures implemented in a TAP school setting as perceived by teachers?

2. Which type of support structure (post-conference meetings, walk-through observations, cluster, or reflection meetings) is the most effective as perceived by teachers and why?

3. As perceived by teachers, which type of support structure has had the greatest impact on their classroom and student achievement?

Rationale

Teachers are generally expected to attend professional development in some manner throughout the school year; however, the quality of the development is debatable. Similarly, teachers are also expected to achieve student growth each year, yet the support given by administration to help achieve student and teacher goals varies widely among schools and school systems. The purpose of this study is to delineate the various types of support structures in place at a TAP school, evaluate the quality of each type of support, and the effectiveness of each support structure as it pertains to the classroom and/or student achievement as viewed from a teacher’s perspective.

Significance

Each school year, students must achieve growth in their classrooms, and teachers are perceived as the primary factor responsible for student growth. Professional development and administrative support are implemented with the goal to grow both teacher and student; however, not all structures are useful. While TAP schools already have set professional development structures in place, the quality of the weekly meetings needs to be addressed. No matter the type of support, if it is not beneficial to teachers it needs to be reexamined. First, support structures must be identified and analyzed to determine if they are of benefit to teachers. Second, any support structure must also be able to be implemented in a teacher’s classroom in order to be of benefit to students. If not, then the support structure is not effective. Third, the teacher’s overall perspective about a support structure must be considered, as they are the professionals responsible for taking the support structure and utilizing it to develop professionally and to help students achieve growth. The data obtained from this study can be useful for districts, administrators, and educators to see what support structures are the most beneficial to teachers and students, while allowing schools to modify or cut structures that are not deemed effective. Educators are pulled in many directions and need to be supported in ways that help grow them professionally and support the work they are undertaking in their classrooms.

Definition of Terms

TAP (System for Teacher and Student Advancement/Teacher Advancement Program)

The TAP system, as applied in schools and districts, “provides powerful opportunities for career advancement, professional growth, instructionally focused accountability and competitive compensation for educators” (NIET, n.d., as cited in Sloat et al., 2017, p.3). The school site where this study occurred is a TAP school within a complete TAP district.

Walk-through observation

The walk-through observation is “an instructional leadership practice that has become prominent as a promising avenue to collect data for enhancing teaching and learning” (Garza et al., 2016, p.1). Walk-through observations are one of the support pieces put into practice by the leadership team at the school setting where this study occurred. Within this study, the walk-through observation is a key piece of data administration utilizes to support teachers.

Reflection meeting

For the purposes of this study, a reflection meeting occurs at the middle and end of each nine weeks and takes place between the teacher and the principal. Follow-up meetings are then scheduled for the principal to observe the teacher putting the feedback from the meeting into practice. This method is a novel idea created by the school site this year, and therefore needs to be defined within the context of the study.

Limitations

One limitation of this study was the small sample size. The school site where this study occurred has 26 content teachers, so the overall results were based on a small population of teachers. Another limitation was the honesty and openness of participants. Although surveys were anonymous, the interviews were conducted in person. It is likely that due to speaking with a member of the leadership team, all participants may not have given a completely honest response when speaking in the interview. Teachers may have been more likely to speak to the positive aspects rather than discuss any negative opinions. Hopefully, the anonymous responses of the surveys showed more accurate data. Finally, due to the short span of the study, teachers were not able to accurately assess which support structure was the most beneficial to their students. While teachers may have had a general idea of how the structure helped them in their classroom, they were unable to completely see the impact of the support received until the end of the school year, which was after the conclusion of this study.

Review of Related Literature

Teacher Job Satisfaction

The characteristics related to teacher job satisfaction must be examined in order to reduce the number of teachers leaving the profession. In a 2019 longitudinal survey project, Ford et al., determined teacher burnout was a primary reason for a teacher deciding to leave the profession. The authors also found that support from administration combined with opportunities for teacher growth and development helped to prevent teacher burnout, thereby resulting in more teachers remaining at their school sites (Ford et al., 2019). A similar study conducted by Toropova et al., (2021) sought to determine characteristics as related to teacher job satisfaction. This study showed that when professional development for teachers was provided along with a manageable teacher workload, job satisfaction increased (Toropova et al., 2021). While administrative support and opportunities for professional development are two key pieces relating to teacher satisfaction, collaboration with colleagues is another crucial element. Teachers need to feel supported by their administration when engaging in collaboration with their peers (Olsen & Huang, 2019). Through the use of a staff questionnaire, Olsen and Huang (2019) determined that to enhance teacher job satisfaction, administration needed to build leadership capacity within their teachers, providing them with opportunities to lead and support from the perspective of a recent educator. The authors found that teachers were more responsive to administrator support when those in leadership had recent experience as an educator (Olsen & Huang, 2019).

District and School Policies

Recurring themes in teacher job satisfaction and retention appear to be administrative support, opportunities for professional growth and leadership, and a manageable workload, and districts need policies in place to address these needs. Shuls and Flores (2020) examined school districts ranked highly effective to determine their methods for retaining teachers. The authors found that teachers at these schools remained due to factors such as strong support from administrators and an enhanced opportunity for leadership roles within their school and district. One unique aspect shown in the Schuls and Flores (2020) study is that teachers were supported through a mentorship experience, in which teachers were paired with a mentor, encouraging a relationship based on collaboration and collegiality. Furthermore, the authors found these highly effective districts allowed teachers to have a certain degree of freedom when choosing curriculum, rather than teachers feeling as though they were micromanaged by their district leaders (Schuls & Flores, 2020). A similar study on mentorship and district policy by Thomas et al. (2020) involved a school district that incorporated the role of instructional lead teachers to provide content support for educators. The authors found that when school administration let the instructional coaches mentor and provide support to teachers, both coaches and teachers found success; however, when administrators gave coaches non-instructional duties, their ability to provide support suffered, leading to a general feeling of a lack of support among staff (Thomas et al., 2020). For district policies to be effective, the purpose of instructional coaches and/or mentors must be implemented with fidelity, particularly when providing support to new teachers. Warsame and Valles (2018) examined the support experiences of first year teachers to determine what elements of support were deemed most beneficial to them as new teachers. The authors found the overall quality of support received in the first year of teaching was a determining factor in whether or not a teacher stayed or left the profession. Furthermore, the authors found that new teachers cited support from their universities as equally beneficial to administrator support when beginning in the classroom; however, some students felt as though the support from their universities lacked in preparing them for the actual classroom experience (Warsame & Valles, 2018). The authors observed a strong correlation between university support and administrative support for first year teachers, particularly when new teachers received continued mentoring from a person at their school site and a person from their university. When incorporating support structures, school districts and school buildings must ensure that the support provided is effective and mentors are given the time and opportunity to support all teachers in a quality manner.

TAP System

Districts and schools across the United States have incorporated the TAP system as a method of improving student achievement while simultaneously providing effective support structures to teachers. Benefits of TAP include increasing collaboration among teachers and providing teachers with feedback in areas as to what they are doing well and what can be improved upon (Kearney et al., 2018). Another positive aspect of the TAP system is found through enhanced leadership opportunities for teachers that have a desire to lead but may not want to branch out into administration. In a 2018 study, Kearney et al. found that when teachers were provided with the opportunity to lead, teachers felt rewarded, and collaboration increased because teachers felt supported by their peers. Although there are benefits to TAP, there are also areas of concern. A study by Sloat et al. (2017) showed that the TAP structure could be a poor fit particularly when scores given during teacher observations are examined. In analyzing the observation tool utilized in TAP schools, the authors found that while aspects of the observation system were directly tied to effective instructional methods of quality teaching, the overall rating system is subjective, and therefore may be skewed when attempting to reach the goal of the observation-improving instructional practices (Sloat et al., 2017).

Professional Learning Communities

Another support structure implemented in schools to provide embedded support to teachers is the creation of Professional Learning Communities (PLCs). Saglam and Dikilitas (2020) examined the Community of Inquiry Model and the impact on the professional development of teachers. The authors found that the social aspect of collaboration most positively impacted the learning of educators, while simultaneously increasing the level of satisfaction even during online professional development (Saglam & Dikilitas, 2020). While Professional Learning Communities have been shown to be effective models of support, simply being knowledgeable about the goal of PLCs is not enough for this support structure to be successful. Through the use of surveys and interviews, Sunaengsih et al. (2019) determined the level of understanding teachers had of the overall PLC process, as well as teachers’ compliance toward meeting the objectives of the PLC. The authors found that socialization or collaboration with colleagues increased the level of understanding of the PLC objectives, and the key to a successful PLC was determined to be clear communication from leadership to teachers (Sunaengsih et al., 2019).

Walk-through Observations

Generally, walk-through observations are less formal than required observations, and the overall goal is to provide the teacher with in-the-moment feedback. Garza et al. (2016) examined the format of the walk-through observation and the overall perception of the exercise. This study showed that walk-through observations could be a powerful tool with many purposes depending on the needs of the administrator, the school, and the individual teacher. Additionally, within their study, the authors found that the walk-through observation generally fell into two categories: the principal being the sole person conducting walk-throughs, and a coaching structure which is more collaborative in nature (Garza et al., 2016). Although walk-through observations are not meant to be formal, teacher perceptions toward this support structure can be skewed based on the approach taken during the process. When a walk-through observation occurred in a more collaborative manner, a more trusting relationship developed between the teacher and observer and the teacher was more open to constructive feedback about instructional practices (Garza et al., 2016). No matter the method utilized, observation tools are meant to provide teachers with feedback on their teaching methods while simultaneously giving teachers a chance to build coaching relationships with administrators and mentors (Barrogo, 2020). In a study focused on teachers’ perceptions of observations, Barrogo (2020) found that when structured in a coaching manner, post-conferences after observations gave teachers meaningful feedback that teachers could then incorporate into their classrooms. Jogan (2018) provided a different perspective on classroom observation approaches. The author found that when teachers were allowed to visit the classrooms of other teachers to observe instructional practices, the impact outweighed the typical observation structure. The author also found through survey collection, that 70 percent of teachers, particularly newer teachers, always found observing fellow teachers helpful (Jogan, 2018). Observing fellow teachers provided a different lens for teachers to view instruction. When teachers were provided the opportunity to see real-life classroom instruction in action, they were able to gain knowledge in ways not available in a typical administrative observation (Jogan, 2018).

Instructional Leadership

The conversations and coaching that occur after an observation are typically more important than the observation itself. Nuemerski et al. (2018) interviewed principals to determine how these administrators were utilizing data from classroom observations. The authors found that the most effective principals were not simply rating teachers; instead, the principal took on the role of an instructional leader, coaching and providing instructional based feedback to support teachers. Another change from the typical observation, is that principals were more specific in their observation goals, thereby increasing the meaningfulness of the feedback to the teacher (Nuemerski et al., 2018). While there are many positives in administrators making the shift to more of an instructional coach mindset, there are challenges as well. Nuemerski et al. (2018) found that time was the biggest obstacle in providing more frequent and focused walk-through observations. While deemed a necessity in providing teachers with support, principals stated that carving out the time to do so could be a monumental task. A similar study reviewing the principal’s role as an instructional leader rather than a stand-alone observer was conducted by Rigby et al. (2017). In this study, the authors examined the impact of a principal’s feedback to classroom teachers from the perspective of an instructional leader, and they determined unless the administrator has had explicit training in instruction, the feedback that was given to teachers was not as helpful as desired. The authors found that in order for instructional feedback to be meaningful, there must be structures in place to help build the knowledge of the administrator, otherwise any feedback utilized to change instructional practices was limited. The least effective feedback was generally in the areas of classroom management and student behavior issues, and unfortunately, the authors discovered this type of feedback appeared more frequently than specific instructional feedback. Rigby et al. (2017) also found that a major challenge of an administrator is making time to provide meaningful feedback to classroom teachers. While certainly time is a challenge, in order for instructional practices to change because of specific feedback, time must be set aside for administrator growth, teacher observations, and reflection in order to provide the most effective support structures for teachers.

Methodology

Design

The research design for this study was a mixed-method design utilizing quantitative research through surveys and qualitative research through interviews. Results from the surveys were displayed visually in graphs created through Google Forms. Results from the interviews were summarized by the researcher to identify common themes from responses. A strength of the study was the researcher’s position on the school leadership team which allowed specific knowledge into how each of the support structures would be implemented into the school site, as well as when these support structures would occur. A second strength of the study is the researcher will be able to bring the results of the study to the leadership team in order to determine which of the four support structures are the most beneficial to teachers. A weakness of this study is the lack of anonymity in the interview process which could skew the results. Another weakness is the small population size of the participants. This small sample size could alter the results if the study were replicated in a larger setting.

Setting and Participants

This study occurred at North DeSoto Middle School (NDMS). This school is high performing with a student population of 598 sixth to eight grade students, and a teacher population of 32 teachers with varying levels of experience. The school is rural, and 58 percent of students qualify for free or reduced lunch. The participants in this study included 24 core content teachers from English Language Arts, Science, Social Studies, and Mathematics. All teachers were Caucasian and there were five males and 19 females. All teachers with one exception have taught for more than five years.

Sampling Strategy

For the survey portion of this study, sampling was nonrandom convenience sampling. Due to the small population size, all content teachers were surveyed. For the interview section of this study, a table of random numbers was created to select teachers to interview. Sampling error and sampling bias were avoided because for the survey section, all content teachers were surveyed, and in the interview section, the table of random numbers avoided any bias within the selection process.

Ethical Standards

Informed consent is required for this study because participants must be made aware of the use of information in the study and that their participation in the study is voluntary. Informed consent was obtained for both the survey and interview sections. To ensure compliance with the National Research Act of 1974, the researcher sought IRB approval for an exemption. An IRB exemption was granted because the research was conducted at a school site, includes common educational practices, and all information was analyzed and recorded in a manner that did not link responses to participants. This study ensured anonymity within the survey because email addresses were not collected and there was no identifying information asked of the participants. This study ensured confidentiality because even though the researcher was aware of participants’ identities during interviews, no identifying information was used in the analysis of data. There were no risks to the participants, and there was no deception involved in this study.

Data Collection

This study occurred over the course of the 2021-2022 school year and involved two instruments: a survey and an interview. At the beginning of the school year, in September, teachers were asked to complete a Likert scale survey ranking their experiences regarding four support structures in place at North DeSoto Middle School. These four structures are: post-conference meetings after formal observations, weekly cluster meetings, walk-through observations, and teacher reflection meetings. These four structures all occurred at various points throughout the school year and each teacher experienced each structure multiple times. Post-conference meetings occurred twice a year, cluster meetings occurred weekly, walk-through observations happened at least once every two weeks, and teacher reflection meetings took place at the end of each nine weeks. The survey was created by the researcher and included questions such as, “The walk-through observation positively impacted my instructional practices. Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided, Disagree, Strongly Disagree”. Teachers were also asked to rate their overall support experience at a TAP school as compared with their support experiences at a non-TAP school. This could limit some responses as not all teachers have experience at a non-TAP school. All content area teachers completed the survey through Google Forms. This instrument was appropriate for this study because it provided the researcher with an overall perspective of which of the four support structures were the most beneficial and which were the least beneficial to classroom teachers. This instrument was valid because the survey questions were specific and appropriate to each type of support structure which helped to avoid misinformation and confusion. The survey was shown to be reliable due to internal consistency of participants. At the end of the first semester, in December, the survey was repeated to determine any changes after more exposure to the support structures. The survey was scored by an analysis of each question through calculations of percentages for each answer.

After the survey was given at the beginning of the year, the researcher utilized a table of random numbers to select teachers to interview. Interviews were conducted in the participant’s classroom during their planning period and given to obtain more specific information than the surveys addressed. Interview questions were created by the researcher and included questions such as, “How did you implement feedback from your walk-through observation into your classroom?” This specific feedback allowed the researcher to determine why certain support structures were more effective than others, instead of simply determining the most effective structure itself. Interviews were conducted twice throughout the school year, first in December at the end of the first semester, and again in March at the end of the third nine weeks. The interview was scored by the researcher and answers were categorized according to commonalities and similar themes. Answers were grouped by support structure to provide elaboration to answers given in the survey. This instrument was valid because interview questions were specific to each type of support structure. Reliability was determined through internal consistency of participants and the commonalities found in subsequent interviews. Data from surveys were stored in the researcher’s password protected Google Drive, and data from interviews were stored on the researcher’s password protected laptop.

Treatment of the Data

The data from the survey were analyzed using Google Forms. Answers were collected and converted into charts and graphs, which provided a visual representation of all information. Data from the interviews were reviewed and categorized by the researcher to determine commonalities and similar themes among responses. This qualitative information was then transferred into a table created in Microsoft Word. The research questions answered by the data were: What is the overall quality of different teacher support structures implemented in a TAP school setting? Which type of support structure is the most effective as perceived by teachers and why? As perceived by teachers, which type of support structure has had the greatest impact on their classroom and student achievement? The development of the charts and graphs visually represented the answers to the research questions through the use of percentages.

References

Akdemir, E. (2020). The determination of teachers; motivation based on Herzberg’s

motivation theory. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 19(4), 89-

101.

Barrogo, S. (2020). Teachers’ perception of standardized classroom observation tool.

International Journal of Academic Pedagogical Research, 4(7), 33-37.

Ford, G., Olsen, J., Khojasteh, J., Ware, J., & Urick, A. (2019). The effects of leader support for

teacher psychological needs on teacher burnout, commitment, and intent to leave. Journal of Educational Administration, 57(6), 615-634. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2018-0185

Garza, R., Ovanda, M., & O’Doherty, A. (2016). Aspiring school leaders’ perceptions of the

walkthrough observation. NCPEA International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1), 156-173.

Jogan, S. (2018). Classroom observation as an important tool for initial trainee teachers.

International Journal of Current Research, 10(11), 75808-75811. https://doi.org/10.24941/ijcr.33272.11.2018

Kearney, W., Murakami, E., Bunch, K., Viamontes, C., & Campbell, A. (2018). Leadership

advocacy towards teacher and student success: Addressing inequities and opportunities in a rural district. Rural Society, 27(2), 143-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/10371656.2018.1477512

Neumerski, C., Grissom, J., Goldring, E., Drake, T., Rubin, M., Cannata, M., & Schuermann, P.

(2018). Restructuring instructional leadership: How multiple-measure teacher evaluation

systems are redefining the role of the school principal. The Elementary School Journal,

119(2), 270-297.

Olsen, A., & Huang, F. (2018). Teacher job satisfaction by principal support and teacher

cooperation: Results from the schools and staffing survey. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27(11), 1-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.4174

Rigby, J. Larbi-Cherif, A., Rosenquist, B., Sharpe, C., Cobb, P., & Smith, T. (2017).

Administrator observation and feedback: Does it lead toward improvement to inquiry-oriented math instruction? Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(3), 475-516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X16687006

Saglam, A., & Dikilitas, K. (2020). Evaluating an online professional learning community as a

context for professional development in classroom-based research. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language. 24(3), 1-17.

Shuls, J., & Flores, J. (2020). Improving teacher retention through support and development.

Journal of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, 4(1), 1-20.

Sloat, E., Amrein-Beardsley, A., & Sabo, K. (2017). Examining the factor structure underlying

the TAP system for teacher and student advancement. AERA Open, 3(4), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417735526

Sunaengsih, C., Komariah, A., Isrokatun, I., Anggrani, M., & Silfiani, S. (2019). Survey of the

implementation of professional learning community (PLC) program in primary schools.

Mimbar Sekolah Dasar, 6(3), 277-291. https://doi.org/10.17509/mimbar-sd.v6i3.20626

Thomas, M., Panesar-Aguilar, S., McCraney, M., & Cale, C. (2020). Educational instructional

lead teachers perceptions on improving teacher quality. American International Journal

of Contemporary Research, 10(2), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.30845/aijcr.v10n2p1

Toropova, A., Myrberg, E., & Johansson, S. (2020). Teacher job satisfaction: The importance of

school working conditions and teacher characteristics. Educational Review, 73(1), 71-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1705247

Warsame, K., & Valles, J. (2018). An analysis of effective support structures for novice teachers.

Journal of Teacher Education and Educators, 7(1), 17-42.