Valerie Jablow, D.C. parent, blogger, and activist, read two reports on teacher and principal attrition and retention. One of them was prepared by the highly respected D.C. civil rights attorney Mary Levy, who has been tracking data in D.C. for many years. Levy looked at both public schools and charter schools.
One conclusion: staff turnover is startlingly high, especially in schools with the most disadvantaged students.
Overall, our public school teacher turnover rates dwarf national averages and have socioeconomic implications, such that the more at risk students a school has, the higher its teacher turnover. The data examined by Levy from the last 3 years alone show that fully a quarter of our public school teachers leave each year—a much higher rate than other jurisdictions. The result is that over half a decade, most of our publicly funded schools will see the majority of their teachers leave.
Our DC public school principal turnover is high as well, averaging about 25% annually. Although that is closer to the national average for principal turnover, in DC it is (like teacher turnover) also correlated with socioeconomics, such that schools with the most at risk students often have the most principal turnover.
Levy had to hand-calculate some of the data because data-collection is slipshod:
For one, we have this data on teacher turnover in DCPS only because Levy herself has spent years comparing staff rosters for individual DCPS schools and budgets and reported what she found. Consider, for a moment, the painful irony of Levy being commissioned to do a report on teacher attrition in DCPS through a painstaking process of backing out data that the school system may already have in a better format–and, for all any of us knows, could provide in a much easier way.
For another, the charter school data on teacher turnover is suspect, as Levy discovered that a number of charter schools appeared to have confused teacher attrition with retention in their required annual reports.
Thus, whenever the reported teacher attrition rate in a charter school was higher than 50%, Levy painstakingly compared staff rosters from one year to the next in the same school. Roster comparisons were, however, inexact because different schools defined “teacher” in different ways, and the rosters themselves changed in form and format from year to year. (Not to mention that the attrition/retention confusion happened within LEAs–so each school had to be looked at separately.) Nonetheless, Levy recorded how many teachers appeared to stay and leave each year; used that to determine whether the reported high rate of attrition above 50% was accurate; and, if it was not accurate, flipped the percentage.
Imagine that! The schools reporting data often didn’t know the difference between retention and attrition! Are any of the data credible when the people responsible for reporting don’t inow the meaning of basic terminology?
D.C. public schools have been controlled by the mayor and by “reformers” including Michelle Rhee and Kaya Henderson (now looking for a new chancellor since Antwan Wilson left) since 2007, and there in no accurate data collection and analysis program.
Foundations including Gates, Walton, and Broad have poured tens of millions into DCPS, and there is no accurate collection and analysis program.
Whenever D.C. makes a claim about graduation rates, test scores, teacher and principal attrition and retention, they are probably just guessing. Or boasting. They really don’t know.
If you want to learn more, you can attend this meeting:
This Wednesday November 28, from 6 pm-8 pm, the DC State Board of Education (SBOE) and teacher advocacy group EmpowerEd will hold a joint forum on staff retention in DC’s publicly funded schools. The forum will be held at Walker-Jones Education Campus, 1125 New Jersey Ave. NW. RSVP here.
I conclude that nobody in DC wants to have accurate records of teacher and principal churn. Levy’s audit is a heroic effort to do what a decent auditor of reports from schools should be able to post every school year, taking into account early and late hires and departures.
The D.C. schools have been under chronic attack for decades. The result is a disinvestment in the system, and priority is being given to charter school expansion. I can recall seeing a public high school in D.C.on the news. It had holes in the roof, a non-functioning heating system and closed bathrooms with broken toilets and faucets. This school was walking distance from the White House. This is a disgrace in a country with the resources we have. No wonder there is a constant churn of teachers. Their working conditions are the students’ learning conditions. “Reform” has done nothing to improve the public schools which have been abandoned by the political leaders. There is little political will to improve public education in D.C.
There is also no DC data collected on class size, a key variable in terms of student outcomes. Right now there is a battle going on about who will collect and control the DC data, between Matt Chingos of the Urban Institute, which receives significant funding from the Gates Foundation and the Office of the DC Auditor. See the excellent article by Rachel Cohen here: https://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/news/article/21014967/who-gets-access-to-data-about-dcs-public-schools Chingos is also a leading opponent of class size reduction.
Thanks for the really eye-opening and mind-boggling link. Who is entitled or authorized to acquire and control data on schools and school systems is a hot-button political issue beyond DC.
Ohio is on the verge of dropping its A-F grades for schools, a hopeful sign until you read that the new system will be standards-based. “Standards-based” grades for students are being issued in some of our suburban schools, much to the confusion of parents and students. Last time I checked, Ohio had 3,203 standards on the books.
In any case the new plan for the state is a work in progress and if the past is prologue, the end result will be more color coded data dashboards, in layer after layer, with some attempt to stack rank schools again…just differently. The standards-based system is widely viewed as a stalking horse for awarding digital badges for “anytime anywhere learning.”
Can you imagine NOT having ALL long-term scientists on IN-SIGHT?
OOPS .. enjoy this and then think about our wonderful public schools.
Now this is what made America great Mr. Cuomo if you please
Teacher retention/attrition is complicated, teachers move to other schools in the district, to schools in other districts, and, leave teaching. High poverty schools have always had the highest attrition rates, teachers who leave high poverty schools tend to move to higher achieving schools, and, according to some researchers the high VAM teachers leave and the lowest VAM teachers stay. in the highest poverty schools. The new New York City teacher contract contains retention bonuses for teachers in the lowest retention rate schools, the details should be public in Jan/Feb
Oh, I suspect they know the difference between retention and attrition and don’t want to report the real facts. They are pretending to not know.
Or, there are a lot more people as stupid, dishonest, malignant, and ignorant as Donald Trump.