University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Best practices charter school CEOs are implementing to recruit and retain teachers

(USC Thesis Other)

Best practices charter school CEOs are implementing to recruit and retain teachers

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

Best Practices Charter School CEOs Are Implementing to Recruit and Retain Teachers

by

Alen Akhverdyan

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California

May 2016

The Degree Being Conferred is
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

ii
Dedication
To my amazing wife Gayane. Without your love, encouragement, patience, and belief in
me, I would not be able to finish this dissertation or this doctoral degree.
To my beautiful son, Alexander, who was born while I was writing chapter five. I pray
for nothing but the best for you in life. You have forever changed my life! I live for you.
To my late father, Vahan Akhverdyan. Everything I am today is because of the way you
loved and cared for your family. Thank you for everything.
To my mother, Maro, who has been the rock in our family since the passing of our
beloved father. Thank you for your love and strength, grandma.
To my brothers, Armond and Aram. Thank you for your encouragement, your love, and
all the trips to Starbucks you made for me while I was writing this dissertation.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

iii
Acknowledgement
This dissertation was made possible with the support and guidance of many people. I
would like to thank my dissertation chair and co-chair, Dr. Pedro Garcia and Dr. Rudy Castruita.
Without your feedback and encouragement, this dissertation would not have been possible. I
would also like to thank the third member on my committee, Dr. Derrick Chau. Dr. Chau has not
only been a friend, but a reliable and worthy mentor and has supported my academic and
professional career for nearly a decade. And finally, I would like to thank all of the charter
school leaders who participated in this important study. Thank you for inviting me into your
homes and work places to talk about the challenges associated with teacher attrition and what
your charters’ plans are on recruiting and retaining highly qualified and effective teachers.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

iv
Table of Contents
Dedication ii
Acknowledgement iii
List of Tables vii
List of Figures viii
Abstract ix
Chapter One: Introduction 1

Background of the Problem 2
Statement of the Problem 6
Purpose of the Study 7
Research Questions 7
Importance of the Study 8
Limitations 8
Delimitations 9
Definition of Terms 9

Chapter Two: Literature Review 11

Introduction 11
Charter School History and Vision 11
Charter Management Organizations (CMOs) 12
CMO Governance and Organizational Structure 13
CMO Challenges 14
CMO Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) 14
Charter School Autonomy 16
High Teacher Attrition at Charter Schools 17
The Effects of High Teacher Attrition on Student Achievement 17
Challenges With Teacher Retention 19
Teacher Age 20
Teacher Ethnicity 20
Teacher Gender 22
Teacher Certification and Years of Experience 22
Induction, Mentorship Programs, and Availability of Supports 23
Specialty Area and Teaching Load 25
Teacher Perception of the School’s Vision and Mission 25
Teacher Perception of Student Achievement and Ability Levels 26
Teacher Perception of Principal Leadership 27
Teacher Burnout and Perception on Workload 28
Adequate School Facilities 30
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

v
Teacher Pay and Benefits 31
Teacher Job Satisfaction and Collective Bargaining Units 32
Conclusion 34

Chapter Three: Methodology 35

Overview of the Problem, Purpose of the Study, and the Research Questions 35
Research Design 36
Instrumentation 36
Qualitative Methods 37
Quantitative Methods 38
Sample and Population 39
Data Collection 39
Data Analysis 40
Validity and Reliability 40

Chapter Four: The Findings 42

Introduction 42
Research Questions 43
Data Gathering and Analysis 43
Study Participant Demographics 44
Study Participant School Demographics 46
Study Participant School Demographics: Teachers and Principals 48
Number of Teachers 49
Fully Credentialed and Teach for America Teachers 49
Teacher Age and Experience 49
Principal Experience 50
Teacher Attrition Percentages 51
Findings by Research Question 52
Research Question One 52
Promoter and Protector of the Vision and Mission 55
Recruiting the Right People 60
Prioritizing and Funding the Policies 62
Building and Nurturing Community and Culture 64
Discussion 68
Final Thoughts on Research Question One 72
Research Question Two 73
Life Circumstances, Teacher Age, and Teacher Experience 79
Teacher Pay and Benefits 83
Teacher Burnout 88
Principal Leadership 90
Unstable and Uncooperative Charter Authorization Process 92
Discussion 94
Final Thoughts on Research Question Two 98
Research Question Three 99
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

vi
Teacher Recruitment 99
Teacher Retention Policies 103
Higher Pay and Increased Benefits 103
Bonuses, Incentive Pay, Pay for Performance, and Teacher Leadership
Opportunities 105
Extended Contracts 108
Teacher Supports and Professional Development 109
Promoting the Charter School Model 111
Discussion 114
Research Question Four 115
Discussion 116

Chapter Five: Summary, Conclusions, and Implications 117

Summary 117
Methodology 118
Summary of Findings 118
Research Question One 118
Research Question Two 119
Research Question Three 120
Research Question Four 121
Implications for Practice 122
Limitations 122
Recommendations for Future Research 123
Conclusion 123

References 125

Appendices 129

Appendix A: Interview Protocol 130
Appendix B: Online Survey 132
Appendix C: Interview Invitation Email 135

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

vii
List of Tables

Table 1: Primary CMO Functions and Supports 13
Table 2: Interview Participants 45
Table 3: Interview Participants—School Demographics 47
Table 4: Interview Participants—School Demographics: Teachers 51
Table 5: Survey and Interview Totals 52
Table 6: Charter Leader Influence—Survey Responses 55
Table 7: Charter Leader Survey Responses (Retention Rates) 75
Table 8: Attrition Rate Percent Breakdown 76

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

viii
List of Figures

Figure 1: Primary Reasons for Teacher Attrition Part A—Survey #18 78
Figure 2: Primary Reasons for Teacher Attrition Part B—Survey #18 79

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

ix
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine—in consort with the root causes of charter school
teacher attrition—what charter school and charter management organization (CMO) chief
executive officers (CEOs) or executive directors (EDs) in the Southland (Greater Los Angeles)
are doing to retain teachers. This study further provides a reference of best practices for all new
and existing charter school CEOs and EDs who are interested in implementing specific tried and
true initiatives to recruit and retain teachers. To explore these issues further, this study employed
a mixed methods design to examine the role of the charter school CEO/ED and what specific
policies they have implemented to address the high teacher attrition rates at charter schools. The
combination of both quantitative and qualitative forms of data through the use of surveys and
interviews provided a more complete understanding of the topic as 35 CEOs/EDs participated in
the online survey and 14 of them were interviewed using a semi-structured interview technique.
Findings from the study revealed the multilayered challenges that charter schools face when it
comes to factors that contribute to teacher attrition. Challenges such as competitive pay and
benefits, teacher burnout, ineffective principal leadership, teacher age and experience, and the
unstable charter authorization process were among the top reasons charter CEOs/EDs identified
as contributing factors to high teacher attrition at their schools. To address these issues, charter
leaders have implemented policies around higher pay and increased benefits, the addition of
bonuses and incentive pay, extended teacher contracts, differentiated teacher supports and
professional development, and promoting the charter model as ideal for teachers who want
autonomy in exploring and developing innovative pedagogies in small schools, with small class
sizes, serving students and families in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities.
Keywords: Charter teacher retention, charter teacher attrition, charter CEO, CMO CEO
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

1
Chapter One
Introduction
The rapid growth of charter management organizations (CMOs)—more commonly
known as charter schools—and the political and parental embracing of the idea of “schools of
choice” have forced educators to examine the effectiveness and overall practices of charter
schools (Toma & Zimmer, 2012). According to the California Charter School Association
(CCSA), California authorized 104 new charters in 2013 alone, bringing its total to 1,130 schools
serving over 500,000 students. Additionally, with over 241 schools operating within the Los
Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), Los Angeles continues to lead the growth among
school districts in California that authorizes charters (CCSA).
Despite significant ongoing growth, much success, and many more promises, one issue
continues to trouble most charter schools; teacher retention rates at charter schools continue to
drop, adding to the ongoing narrative that the rate of teacher turnover at charter schools is
significantly higher than those at traditional public schools (Herman, Wang, Straubhaar,
Schweig, & Hsu, 2013; Stuit & Smith, 2012; Smith & Ingersoll, 2004; Miron & Applegate,
2007; Toma & Zimmer, 2012; Carruthers, 2012; Newton, Rivero, Fuller, & Dauter, 2011).
Additionally, research shows that students are negatively affected with the “revolving door
phenomenon” (Ingersoll, 2001; Smith & Ingersoll, 2004) of high teacher attrition rates. As
teachers leave, new charter school teachers coming in generally have 0-1 year of teaching
experience, making it difficult to grow and sustain a school with experienced and highly
effective teachers in every classroom (Borman & Dowling, 2008). Furthermore, research shows
that the difference between being taught by a highly qualified, highly effective teacher or an
inexperienced and ineffective teacher can translate into at least two years of negative or positive
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

2
growth for the student; it can also mean the difference between taking remedial courses or
accelerated courses as the student advances into the next grade level (Sanders & Rivers, 1996;
Wright, Horn, & Sanders, 1997; Borman & Dowling, 2008; Hanushek, 1992).
Background of the Problem
Studies on teacher retention rates for charter school teachers indicate the complex and
multifaceted challenges that schools and communities face as teacher turnover takes its toll on
student achievement. Some of the immediate challenges and related issues concerning teacher
retention rates that both current and historical research attribute to include: teacher age, years of
teaching experience, and the availability of teacher supports and opportunities for professional
development at the school site (Johnson, Birkeland, Kardos, Kauffman, Liu, & Peske, 2001;
Stuit & Smith 2012; Miron & Applegate, 2007; DeAngelis, Wall, & Che, 2013; Herman et al.,
2013; Smith & Ingersoll, 2004); teacher certification in formal credentialing or certification
programs (Stuit & Smith 2012; Borman & Dowling, 2008; Inman & Marlow, 2004); teacher pay,
benefits, job security, and “trust” in the school’s leadership team (Malloy & Wohlstetter, 2003;
Kohn, 2003; Stuit & Smith 2012; Wise, Darling-Hammond, McLaughlin, & Bernstein, 1985);
the teacher’s overall perception of the school’s mission/vision and the opportunity to work in
specific programs, communities, or with like minded educators (Malloy & Wohlstetter, 2003;
Ingersoll, 2001); and teacher burnout as a result of the unsustainable workload at charter schools
(Torres, 2014).
Younger teachers who enter the teaching profession without any supports, becoming
stereotypes for the “sink or swim” motto, have a lower retention rate than older, more
experienced teachers who are given support at their school site—especially during the first five
years of employment where it is estimated that more than 50 percent of new teachers leave the
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

3
profession (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004; Stuit & Smith, 2010). Findings from Ingersoll (2001), Stuit
and Smith (2012), and DeAngelis et al. (2013) all indicate that younger teachers—30 and
younger—are more likely to leave the profession than middle-aged teachers with more
experience. Ingersoll (2001) additionally adds, “…the relative odds of young teachers departing
are 171% higher than for middle aged teachers” (p. 518). Research on charter school attrition
rates conducted by Miron and Applegate (2007) also confirms that the single most important
background characteristic that could predict charter school teacher attrition was age. They found
that younger charter school teachers were more likely to leave not just the school but also the
profession as opposed to older and more experienced teachers.
Aside from age and years of experience, the availability of teacher supports, opportunities
for growth, and professional development translates not only into higher retention rates among
both charter and regular public school teachers but also to job satisfaction and efficacy (Smith &
Ingersoll, 2004). Research from Smith and Ingersoll (2004), DeAngelis et al. (2013), Johnson et
al. (2001), Herman et al. (2013), and Inman and Marlow (2004) all conclude that when there are
supports such as mentorships, weekly professional development sessions, weekly new teacher
meetings, administrator and peer teacher observations and feedback, and availability of common
planning time so that teachers can meet and plan together, teachers in charter, private, and
regular public schools are more likely to not only remain at the school longer but to also express
job satisfaction and awareness of growth and progress. Inman and Marlow (2004) additionally
recognize the importance of providing teachers with structured supports by emphasizing the
growing challenges that all teachers—and specifically new teachers—are confronted with. Such
challenges include: student socio-economic status, uninvolved parents, the rise in English
Language Learner (ELL) populations at schools and the addition of immersion programs, new
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

4
standards and accountability measures, the inclusion of technology and cooperative learning,
limited resources and funds, and state and federally mandated programs all of which compound
an already complex working environment that new and young teachers inherit as they go into the
profession.
Furthermore, teacher credentialing and certification programs also become a very clear
indicator when looking at which teachers are staying and which teachers are leaving. Borman
and Dowling (2008) support the statement above by adding that teachers who have more
training, who have graduate degrees, and who went through and earned certifications are more
likely to remain in the teaching profession than those teachers who do not have teaching
certifications or credentials. This becomes an important factor in teacher retention rates for
charter schools in particular that are more likely than regular public schools to hire teachers
without credentials through either internships or organizations like Teach for America (TFA).
Stuit and Smith (2012) also support this claim by saying that the strongest contributor to the
turnover gap in charter schools is the high number of uncertified, uncredentialed, and
inexperienced teachers. Inman and Marlow (2004) go a little further by suggesting that teacher
credentialing programs and education colleges could be doing more to better initially match
teachers to specific schools that they will find most success at and be compatible with. Teachers
oftentimes blindly take jobs in schools and CMOs without first assessing what supports new
teachers will receive, without understanding the communities and demographics of the students
they will be teaching, and without fully understanding what their relationship with the school
administrators will be like (Inman & Marlow, 2004).
Teacher pay, benefits, job security, and trust in the school’s leadership team are among
other factors that research has concluded can increase or decrease attrition rates at charter
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

5
schools. Research shows that although most new teachers view teacher pay, merit pay, and
bonuses as extrinsic motivators, most charter schools do continue to promote their schools by
offering some sort of merit pay or bonus pay option (Malloy & Wohlstetter, 2003). When
charters do offer merit pay and bonus pay, they are usually also tied to evaluation models and
accountability measures from standardized tests and student growth percentiles from grade to
grade. The problem with this though is that, both historically from research conducted by Wise et
al. (1985) to current findings by Kohn (2003), the vast majority of educators do not consider
standardized tests as a valid measure of teacher effectiveness which in turn decides the bonus
and merit pay schedules. Kohn (2003) further added that no conclusive scientific research has
proven that incentives through rewards and pay determines long term enhancements of the
quality of work a person will do. Kohn (2003) also suggests that the entire premise of paying
teachers more so that they can “work harder” is not only flawed, but insulting. Stuit and Smith
(2012) did however find that teacher salary—and not necessarily merit pay or bonuses—does
eventually play a determining role as to whether teachers leave charter schools or not as new
teachers got more experience. In California more specifically, charter school teachers oftentimes
start at significantly higher starting pay schedules than the local district schools. The pay
schedule, however, does level off with additional years of experience, leaving teachers more
“disgruntled” but able to voluntarily leave the charter school for the local district school that
pays more (Smith & Stuit, 2012).
More important than pay for most charter school teachers, however, is job security.
Inman and Marlow (2004), Stuit and Smith (2012), Wise et al. (1985), and Malloy and
Wohlstetter (2003) all do agree that teachers value and place importance on job security. In
regular public schools where all new teachers are placed in tenure track after a 2-3 year
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

6
probationary period, findings from Inman and Marlow (2004) does indicate that “…the majority
of beginning teachers view job security as a positive factor for remaining in the profession” (p.
610). That said, most CMOs do not have tenure track options for any of their teachers and
instead implement only at-will employment contracts for all of their employees including the
leadership team, counseling team, and classified staff (Malloy & Wohlstetter, 2003).
As a result of the lack of job security, new teachers at charter schools do end up valuing
and placing great importance on their relationship with the leadership team and other teachers.
Additionally, the teacher’s perception of the school’s mission and vision and the opportunity to
take on leadership roles early on are other reasons why teachers are attracted to some charters
and also reasons why they stay at certain charters (Malloy & Wohlstetter, 2003). Malloy and
Wohlstetter (2003) emphasize that, “From its inception, the charter school movement relied on
teachers as critical components of urban school reform” (p. 2003). Malloy and Wohlstetter
(2003) also add that teacher involvement in both decision-making bodies and involvement in
curricular development, innovative teaching strategies, and participation in the governance of the
school was at the heart of the charter movement. Since charter schools were designed to be small
schools centered around the concept of more personal connections between the community,
teachers, and leaders of the school, Ingersoll (2001) adds to this narrative by stating that,
“Educational sociologists, in particular, have long held that the presence of a sense of community
and cohesion among families, teachers, and students is important for the success of the school”
(p. 526).
Statement of the Problem
Since teacher effectiveness matters in terms of student growth and achievement, hiring
and retaining good teachers are important considerations for all new and existing charter schools
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

7
as they continue to promote the charter option as the better alternative to the traditional
neighborhood public schools. What best practices and evidence of efficacy in retaining charter
school teachers that CMO leaders are implementing within their schools—if any at all—may
foreshadow the future of charter schools in terms of their continued growth and popularity or be
the downfall of charters as we know it.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine—in consort with the root causes of charter
school teacher attrition—what CMO and charter school chief executive officers (CEOs) or
executive directors in the Southland (Greater Los Angeles) are doing to retain teachers. More
specifically, this study seeks to understand what strategies promote the recruitment and retention
of charter school teachers. This study furthermore provides a reference of best practices for all
new and existing charter school CEOs and executive directors who are interested in
implementing specific tried and true initiatives to recruit and retain teachers.
Research Questions
The following four questions will help guide the stated purpose of this research:
1. How do charter school/charter management organization (CMO) CEOs perceive their
role in keeping attrition rates down?
2. What do charter school/charter management organization (CMO) CEOs identify as the
primary factors that contribute to teachers leaving charter schools?
3. What initiatives and best practices are charter school/charter management organization
(CMO) CEOs implementing to recruit and retain teachers?
4. What specific initiatives or policies can show evidence of successfully retaining charter
school teachers?
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

8
Importance of the Study
Not much literature has been written about CMO CEOs and their perceptions and plans
on teacher retention rates within their schools. This study will be one of the first to examine what
CMO CEOs are doing to positively influence teacher retention. Because CMOs and the
leadership teams within CMOs are structured differently than the traditional district school
leadership teams and the superintendency, the ability to intervene and bring about quick change
through different initiatives is a lot easier for a CMO CEO than it is for the traditional district
school superintendent (Lake, Dusseault, Bowen, Demeritt, & Hill, 2010). Therefore, identifying
the policies and programs that CMO CEOs are utilizing will help other CMO CEOs focus their
resources, time, and money towards similar initiatives with the hope of retaining more teachers.
Lastly, because research has shown that providing a highly effective teacher in every single
classroom is one of the most powerful ways to help improve student achievement, recruiting,
developing, and retaining teachers will be an important part of the work that all new and existing
CMO CEOs need to consider if they want to be perceived as the better alternative and remain
competitive with the neighborhood public schools and other schools of choice (Sanders &
Rivers, 1996; Wright et al., 1997; Borman & Dowling, 2008, Hanushek, 1992).
Limitations
This study includes the following limitations:
1. The timeline for data collection only spans four months with only one to two interviews
per CMO CEO as opposed to multiple interviews to follow-up on the data that were
collected.
2. The sample size and geographical location for the data collection are limited in
generalizability since the focus will only be on CMO CEOs and executive directors in the
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

9
Greater Los Angeles area encompassing the five counties made up of Los Angeles,
Riverside, Ventura, San Bernardino, and Orange.
3. The qualitative nature of this study leaves open the possibility of researcher bias.
Delimitations
This study includes the following delimitations:
1. The CMOs were selected primarily by the number of years in operation. CMOs that were
in their first year of operation were intentionally excluded because they would not have
enough schools, policies, or data on teacher retention.
2. The research methods were limited only to interviews, surveys, and document reviews.
Definition of Terms
• Charter Management Organizations (CMOs): CMOs are nonprofits that manage more
than one charter school. They provide similar operational, financial, legal, organizational,
and academic management and support that traditional districts provide to schools. CMOs,
like independent charter schools, are still a relatively new phenomenon. CMO-affiliated
schools operate in nine states including California, Arizona, Texas, Ohio, Illinois, New York,
Louisiana, Florida, and Pennsylvania (Lake et al., 2010).
• Charter Management Organization (CMO) Chief Executive Officers (CEOs): CMOs are
led by CEOs. Most CMOs today are still led by their founding CEO (Lake et al., 2010). Lake
et al., (2010) additionally adds that CMO CEOs are “charismatic, personable leaders with
nearly irreplaceable fundraising, management, and political skills” (p. 59).
• Charter Schools: Charter schools are semi-autonomous public schools. Their “charter” is
granted and regulated by local school districts and other government authorities permitted by
state law (Lake et al., 2010).
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

10
• Schools of Choice: Gaining ground from the idea that American public education is on the
demise, the schools of choice movement sought to place more freedom and choice on where
students can go to school in the hands of students and parents. Charter schools became part
of the schools of choice movement, competing to attract students and families who would
have otherwise attended their traditional neighborhood school based solely on residency.
• Southland or Greater Los Angeles: The Southland or Greater Los Angeles is made up of
five counties including Los Angeles, Riverside, Ventura, San Bernardino, and Orange.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

11
Chapter Two: Literature Review
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to examine both the causes of charter school teacher attrition
and what charter school leaders—chief executive officers (CEOs) or executive directors (EDs)—
are doing to retain more of their teachers. The study examines specific strategies and initiatives
that charter school leaders are implementing to address the high attrition rates at their schools. In
this chapter, a comprehensive review of the literature will highlight current and historical causes
of high teacher attrition rates with an overview of the characteristics of individuals who stay in
teaching and those who leave teaching. Additionally, the literature review will examine the
inception of charter schools, charter school governance and its organizational structures, and the
role, power, and influence of charter school CEOs. Lastly, because both current and historical
research on teacher retention is so extensive with a plethora of studies and findings focusing on
every aspect and point-of-view of teacher retention, this literature review will provide only an
overview of the key findings that sufficiently summarizes the most important considerations that
will also help guide and be relevant to this specific study.
Charter School History and Vision
The charter school movement is a new and oftentimes controversial phenomenon that is
challenging the status quo in public education. Advocates for charter schools—which include
parents, students, educators, and community members—saw major advantages and opportunities
to change public education through the “schools of choice” movement that gives more power and
choice to socio-economically disadvantaged neighborhoods and families in deciding which
schools to enroll their students in. With an emphasis on small schools, small class sizes, an
extended school year, extended school hours, availability of college-ready, honors, and advanced
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

12
placement (AP) level courses for all students, a college-ready mission and vision for all students,
committed parents, principals as instructional leaders, and innovative teaching, the charter school
movement aims to empower teachers and teacher leaders to use nontraditional instructional
methods and curriculum to help close the achievement gap for historically underserved, low-
income, minority students (Miron & Applegate, 2007; Lake, et al., 2010; Gross, 2011).
The first charter school law was passed in 1991 in the state of Minnesota (Zgainer &
Kerwin, 2015; Toma & Zimmer, 2012). Nearly 25 years later, 42 states and the District of
Columbia have charter schools that serve over 2.9 million students in over 6,700 charter schools
(Zgainer & Kerwin, 2015). Alabama, Kentucky, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Vermont, and West Virginia are the remaining eight states that have yet to enact charter
school legislation although efforts have been made to introduce legislation by some of these
states including West Virginia and Alabama (Zgainer & Kerwin, 2015).
Charter Management Organizations (CMOs)
Charter Management Organizations (CMOs) are nonprofit entities that manage public
charter schools (Lake et al., 2010). According to a national, longitudinal research study on CMO
effectiveness by Lake et al. (2010), “CMOs were seen as a way to capture economies of scale for
groups of charter schools and to support the performance improvement efforts of schools
pursuing similar approaches to teaching and learning” (p. 3). Despite the rapid growth of charter
schools and CMOs across the nation in the last 25 years, there is limited research on the overall
impact and effectiveness of CMOs for improving public schools at scale because they are still a
fairly new phenomenon and lack extensive research (Lake et al., 2010). At this time, empirical
research on the overall effectiveness and characteristics of CMO CEOs is also limited.
According to the extensive literature review done for this study, to the best of my knowledge,
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

13
this study will in fact be one of the first studies done on CMO CEOs and their specific role,
responsibility, and perspective on retaining charter school teachers and explaining how high
teacher attrition rates specifically affects charter schools, CMOs, students, and communities.
CMO Governance and Organizational Structure
One of the primary roles of CMOs is to help charter schools overcome the challenges of
school start-up including initial start-up funding, legal advice, and facilities support. CMOs
operate their schools directly and have a nonprofit governing board that oversees all the schools
and hires and fires the CEO and school principals (Lake et al., 2010). Similar to a traditional
public school district, CMOs have a central office and associated schools. The CMO provides all
of the basic services that traditional public school districts offer from operational, facilities,
budgeting, and financial services to human resources, performance oversight, and curricular and
instructional development (Lake et al., 2010). Data collected from case studies and surveys from
Lake et al. (2010) and the Center on Reinventing Public Education in Table 1 highlights some of
the primary functions that CMOs try to consistently provide to all of their affiliated schools.
Table 1: Primary CMO Functions and Supports
Purpose Growth
Strategy
Operations Educational
Model
Quality
• Mission,
vision
• Theory of
action
• Goals
• Size, pacing
• Feeder
schools
• Location
choices
• Takeovers
vs. new start
ups
• Partnerships
• Fundraising
• Finance and
budgeting
• Organizational
structure
• Operational
practices and
procedures
• HR structure
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
of schools
and students
• Expectations
for student
behavior and
performance
• Instructional
time
• Professional
development
• Replicate
schools
• Accountability
for all
• Incentives
• Interventions
in performance
problems
• Organizational
culture
Table 1: Source—Lake et al. (2010) and Center on Reinventing Public Education

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

14
CMO Challenges
Despite much success and promise in the recent years, many CMO leaders are struggling
to find ways to operate at scale due to funding, budgetary, facilities, and personnel related issues
(Lake et al., 2010). Some CMOs also feel much pressure from funders, boards, and parent groups
who want to rapidly expand and add on more schools—including feeder elementary and middle
schools into high school (Lake et al., 2010). These challenges along with all of the new reforms
in public education with the addition of Common Core State Standards (CCSS), new
accountability measures, the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), and the Local Control
Accountability Plan (LCAP) will test most CMOs and charter schools as they continue to
promote the charter option as a better alternative to the traditional public school system for
students and families (Lake et al., 2010).
CMO Chief Executive Officers (CEOs)
The chief executive officer (CEO), serving at the pleasure of the CMO governing board,
provides the organizational leadership needed to operate the CMO and the CMO affiliated
schools. The report on the nationwide longitudinal review of CMO effectiveness by Lake et al.
(2010) found that most CMOs are still led by founding CEOs and executive leadership teams.
The report also highlighted CEO qualities like charisma, personable leadership, and skills in
fundraising, management, and politics as among the most important for CEO success in the
charter world. As founding CEOs are starting to be replaced by incoming new ones, it is still too
early to tell how or if the transition will affect the CMO and its affiliated schools. Additional
research in this area is needed. As charter schools continue to grow and gain momentum, more
empirical studies on their overall effectiveness across all areas including CEO effectiveness will
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

15
no doubt paint a better picture as to where charter stands in comparison to the traditional district
schools.
Compared to traditional public school district superintendents, CMO CEOs also see their
role as less political and more mission-driven. Among the greatest difference, CMO CEOs have
greater flexibility to allocate school resources and fund certain initiatives and policies without
having to get board approval (Lake et al., 2010). This allows initiatives tied directly to the
CMO’s vision and each individual school’s needs to be quickly actualized from a vision and
stated goals to action. Unlike the role of the superintendent at traditional public school districts,
CMO CEOs also spend a lot of their time trying to cultivate personal connections and
relationships with school leaders. CEOs directly communicate with school principals and
leadership teams on a regular basis to gauge the progress of the school. When schools are
struggling, CEOs and CMO leadership work to provide one-on-one mentoring with the principal,
conduct classroom observations and school walk-throughs with the principal, and create
individualized, measurable goals for each principal (Lake et al., 2010).
Additionally, survey data collected from CMO leaders by Lake et al. (2010) and the
Center on Reinventing Public Education highlights CMO and educational priorities in order of
importance as identified by the CMO leaders. The results show that CMO CEOs feel most
responsible for setting performance goals for all school staff, recruiting and retaining highly-
qualified staff, helping schools analyze student data, establishing high expectations for all,
managing the budgeting and legal aspects of schooling, and providing school leader training.
Many of the priority areas identified as having the most importance seem to focus around
instructional leadership, which is also consistent with what CMO CEOs expect from all of their
school principals.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

16
Charter School Autonomy
Although CMOs and CMO leaders spend a lot more time at their affiliated school sites
and may be “moderately to highly prescriptive” around curriculum and instructional techniques,
human resource functions, and student behavior and support programs (Lake et al., 2010),
charter schools are a lot more autonomous than traditional public schools. The rhetoric and
vision behind the charter school movement is the underlying promise of transforming public
education. In order to achieve this, charter schools thrive on and promote ingenuity and
entrepreneurship (Gross, 2011) and at the same time try to minimize the bureaucratic and
centralized organizational structure that traditional public schools follow (Renzulli, Parrott, &
Beattie, 2011). Autonomy in all aspects of schooling, therefore, has helped charter schools
realize and actualize their vision. According to charter school research done by Gross (2011) and
Lake et al. (2010), autonomy allows charter schools to develop independently by redefining and
personalizing the needs and expectations for students. Autonomy allows charters to be guided by
a mission, have freedom over its budget, and have freedom over hiring and firing decisions, all
of which redefines professional norms for teachers and school leaders (Gross, 2011). Additional
research on school autonomy by Chau (2002) also highlights the importance of school autonomy
with regards to student achievement. Schools that had greater autonomy over decisions around
budgets, personnel, and curriculum and instruction had a greater influence on overall classroom
practices all aimed to improve student performance and achievement (Chau, 2002). Earlier
research around the idea of more autonomy in schools also suggests that the amount of autonomy
and influence teachers had at schools significantly influences the degree of cooperation or
conflict in schools (Ingersoll, 1996). Since most charter schools are small in size and rely on
their teachers and leaders as critical components in helping to guide the vision and mission of the
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

17
school, autonomy around issues of budgets, personnel, and curriculum and instruction are
important considerations for creating a culture of shared decision making, shared accountability,
and greater job satisfaction and retention (Malloy & Wohlstetter, 2003; Miron & Applegate,
2007; Renzulli et al., 2011).
High Teacher Attrition at Charter Schools
There exists a comprehensive number of research studies and findings around the topic of
teacher retention and high attrition rates across schools and districts all over the United States.
Studies and findings on high teacher attrition rates for both charter and traditional public schools
show the challenges schools and communities are faced with as teacher turnover continues to
negatively impact student achievement. Furthermore, despite much of the work and the efforts of
the charter and “schools of choice” movement with smaller schools, smaller class sizes,
availability of resources, and more teacher and principal autonomy to make budgetary,
curriculum and instructional decisions at the school level, charter school teacher retention rates
continue to be significantly lower than traditional public school teachers (Herman et al., 2013;
Stuit & Smith, 2012; Smith & Ingersoll, 2004; Miron & Applegate, 2007; Toma & Zimmer,
2012; Carruthers, 2012; Newton, Rivero, Fuller, & Dauter, 2011; Renzulli et al., 2011; Guarino,
Santibanez, & Daley, 2006; Torres, 2014).
The Effects of High Teacher Attrition on Student Achievement
More importantly, as teachers move across schools and districts or leave the teaching
profession altogether, research shows that high teacher attrition has a direct negative impact on
student achievement and performance in the classroom (Sanders & Rivers, 1996; Wright et al.,
1997; Borman & Dowling, 2008; Hanushek, 1992). Findings by Hanushek (1992) indicate that
differences among teachers are “unquestionably large and significant” and can alter student
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

18
achievement by as much as one grade-level equivalent in test performance. Sanders and Rivers
(1996) corroborated these finds by stating that groups of students with comparable achievement
levels,
may have vastly different academic outcomes as a result of the sequence of teachers to
which they are assigned…Regardless of initial achievement level, teachers in the top
quintile facilitated desirable academic progress for all students. However, regardless of
their entering achievement levels, students under the tutelage of teachers in the bottom
quintile made unsatisfactory gains (pp. 6-7).
Sanders and Rivers (1996) also found that as the teacher effectiveness quintile increased, lower
and middle achieving students benefited the most with regards to increased achievement and
performance levels. Wright et al. (1997) added to these findings by yet again corroborating what
Sanders and Rivers (1996) found by concluding that the single most important factor affecting
student learning is the teacher. Wright et al. (1997) further found that effective teachers were
effective with students of all achievement levels “regardless of the level of heterogeneity in the
classroom” (p. 63). The opposite was also true in their findings. Students of all achievement
levels will achieve inadequate progress academically when taught by an ineffective teacher
(Wright et al., 1997).
With teacher effectiveness being one of the most important contributing factors to student
achievement, finding ways to retain highly qualified and effective teachers is the most important
work charter schools can do as they continue to find ways to help all students succeed.
Additionally, since most charter schools serve low-income, minority students coming from
socio-economically disadvantaged neighborhoods, the challenges of finding quality teachers
become even greater since all the research around teacher attrition continually reveals that there
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

19
is a higher attrition rate at high poverty schools, thus causing a shortage of highly effective
teachers in high-poverty and high-needs schools (Guarino et al., 2006; Lake et al., 2010; Renzulli
et al., 2011; Newton et al., 2011; Stuit & Smith, 2012).
Challenges With Teacher Retention:
Characteristics of Individuals Leaving and Reasons Why They Leave
Many of the challenges and related issues concerning teacher retention that both current
and historical research attribute to include: teacher age, gender, and ethnicity (Hanushek, Kain,
& Rivkin, 2001; Ingersoll, 2001; Guarino et al., 2006; Miron & Applegate, 2007; Stuit & Smith,
2010; Newton et al., 2011; Renzulli et al., 2011; Stuit & Smith 2012; Toma & Zimmer, 2012;
DeAngelis et al., 2013; Herman et al., 2013); teacher certification in formal credentialing or
certification programs, induction programs, years of teaching experience, and specialty area
(Inman & Marlow, 2004; Podgursky, Monroe, & Watson, 2004; Smith & Ingersoll, 2004;
Guarino et al., 2006; Miron & Applegate, 2007; Borman & Dowling, 2008; Freedman &
Appleman, 2008; Donaldson & Johnson, 2010; Newton et al., 2011); teacher perception of the
school’s mission/vision and the opportunity to work in specific programs, communities, or with
like minded educators (Hanushek et al., 2001; Ingersoll, 2001; Malloy & Wohlstetter, 2003;
Smith & Ingersoll, 2004; Guarino et al., 2006; Newton et al., 2011; Renzuelli et al., 2011; Stuit
& Smith, 2012); student achievement and ability levels, the availability of teacher supports and
opportunities for professional development at the school site, and principal leadership
(Hanushek, 1992; Sanders & Rivers, 1996; Ingersoll, 2001; Johnson et al 2001; Inman &
Marlow, 2004; Smith & Ingersoll, 2004; Guarino et al., 2006; Miron & Applegate, 2007;
Borman & Dowling, 2008; Gross, 2011; Carruthers, 2012; Stuit & Smith, 2012; Toma &
Zimmer, 2012; DeAngelis et al., 2013; Torres, 2014; Wei, Patel, Young, 2014); teacher burnout
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

20
(Herman et al., 2013; Torres, 2014); school characteristics including facilities and availability of
resources (Buckley, Schneider, & Yang, 2005; Guarino et al., 2006; Gross, 2011; Newton et al.,
2011; Renzuelli et al., 2011); and teacher pay, benefits, job security, availability of unions and
collective bargaining, and “trust” in the school’s leadership team (Hanushek et al., 2001;
Ingersoll, 2001; Malloy & Wohlstetter, 2003; Inman & Marlow, 2004; Podgursky et al., 2004;
Guarino et al., 2006; Miron & Applegate, 2007; Gross, 2011; Renzuelli et al., 2011; Stuit &
Smith 2012; Toma & Zimmer, 2012).
Teacher Age
Research on teacher age consistently highlights that younger teachers have higher
attrition rates than middle age or older teachers (Miron & Applegate, 2007). In comparing the
age of teachers in traditional public schools versus charter schools, Miron and Applegate (2007)
state that only about 11 percent of teachers in traditional public schools are younger than 30
while 37 percent of charter school teachers were younger than 30 and 45.5 percent were between
30-40 years of age. Because most charter school teachers on average are much younger than
teachers in traditional public schools and because research shows that teachers who are 30 or
younger have higher attrition rates, this presents a serious dilemma for charter leaders who are
trying to recruit and cultivate highly qualified, effective, and experienced teachers (Ingersoll,
2001; Miron & Applegate, 2007; Renzuelli et al., 2011; Stuit & Smith, 2012).
Teacher Ethnicity
While age alone is a significant indicator for higher attrition rates, Newton et al. (2011)
also found a relationship between age and exit rates by linking it to teacher ethnic backgrounds.
Specifically in their study, Newton et al. (2011) found that the odds of leaving among younger
teachers of Hispanic background were about 19 percent lower than white teachers of a
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

21
comparable age group. The same was true for African American teachers in their study. Newton
et al. (2011) concluded that younger teachers of non-white backgrounds generally had higher
retention rates at the same school than white teachers.
Recent research corroborates findings by Newton et al. (2011) by adding that teacher
satisfaction and ultimately teacher retention is intimately related to the racial composition of the
schools in which teachers work (Renzuelli et al., 2011). As schools across the United States see a
change in student demographics with ten states already reporting that a majority of their students
are nonwhite, while at the same time education remains dominated by whites, schools and
districts will need to work harder to address the racial mismatch dilemma that Renzuelli et al.
(2011) present.
The racial mismatch findings by Renzuelli et al. (2011) further concluded that white
teachers who were teaching in majority black schools were five times more likely to leave
teaching and be dissatisfied with their job than if they were teaching in a majority white school.
Findings by Guarino et al. (2006) additionally shows that minority teachers tended to have lower
attrition rates than white teachers. Guarino et al. (2006) also references Ingersoll (2001) and
other studies that found that Hispanic teachers had the lowest early attrition rates both at the
elementary and secondary level among all other racial groups. Hispanic teachers are also less
likely to leave schools that serve higher proportions of Hispanic students (Newton et al., 2011).
The racial mismatch study done by Renzuelli et al. (2011) is also one of the only studies
which concluded that African American teachers teaching in schools with a majority of African
American students are more likely to have higher attrition rates than white teachers in
predominantly white schools. Whether the problem is a racial mismatch between the teacher and
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

22
students or not, the fact remains that schools serving large numbers of low achieving, low
income black or Hispanic students tend to have higher attrition rates (Hanushek et al., 2001).
Teacher Gender
Studies on the gender of the teacher in connection to attrition rates have produced mixed
results (Newton et al., 2011). It is important to note that any results in attrition with regards to
gender will always be skewed because education has and continues to be dominated by females.
Female teachers and staff continue to be the majority in charter schools as they are in public
schools (Guarino et al., 2006; Miron & Applegate, 2007). On average, female secondary teachers
have slightly lower attrition rates than their male counterparts. In looking at gender and age,
younger female teachers had higher attrition rates than middle-aged female teachers, which again
shows that younger teachers across gender and ethnicity have a higher propensity to exit teaching
(Newton et al., 2011).
Teacher Certification and Years of Experience
Because a significant number of charter school teachers are first year teachers with
limited teaching experiences who also tend to be younger than 30 years of age (Miron &
Applegate, 2007), results from research on teacher certifications, mentorships, and induction
programs (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004; Newton et al., 2011) indicate that when teachers have
structured and consistent supports during the first few years of teaching, they are less likely to
move to other schools and also less likely to leave teaching altogether. Fully credentialed
teachers who had gone through some sort of formal teacher credentialing program also have
significantly higher retention rates than teachers without credentials (Newton et al., 2011).
Studies also suggest that teacher certification programs that place novice teachers with
master teachers, provide frequent observations and reflective sessions, and provide intensive
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

23
training in curriculum and development with written feedback on lesson planning are among the
most effective ways to prepare and support first year teachers (Freedman & Appleman, 2008).
The challenge for a lot of charter schools as identified by Donaldson and Johnson (2010) and
Herman et al. (2013) is that a significant number of charter school teachers enter the teaching
profession through programs other than the traditional credentialing programs that most district
public school teachers go through.
More specifically, charter schools and CMOs rely on Teach for America (TFA) to supply
them with new recruits. TFA supplies about 5 percent of all new teachers to schools all across
the country (Donaldson & Johnson, 2010). TFA recruits are oftentimes assigned to high-poverty,
low achieving urban and rural schools by signing a two year commitment agreement to stay at
the schools they are assigned to (Donaldson & Johnson, 2010). Unlike traditional teacher
credentialing programs that prepare students through a one to two year program with required
student-teaching time with a master teacher, TFA recruits are placed in classrooms after just five
weeks of preparation (Donaldson & Johnson, 2010). Referring back to what Smith and Ingersoll
(2004) said about teacher preparation and supports, Donaldson and Johnson (2010) found that
approximately 50 percent of TFA teachers left their initial schools before their two-year
contracts were up. Forty-four percent of TFA teachers remained in their assigned schools after
their two-year contractual commitment to TFA had ended. Fewer than 10 percent of these same
teachers stay at their initial placement schools longer than five years (Donaldson & Johnson,
2010).
Induction, Mentorship Programs, and Availability of Supports
Research also consistently highlighted the importance of mentorship and induction
programs for all teachers and in particular for first-year teachers as another way to reduce
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

24
attrition rates and increase teacher job satisfaction and efficacy (Johnson et al., 2001; Smith &
Ingersoll, 2004; Inman & Marlow, 2004). Findings from Smith and Ingersoll (2004) show that
over 70 percent of teachers who work at traditional public schools receive consistent mentoring
matched with mentors in the same field. Only 42 percent of charter school teachers received
consistent mentorship (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004). One possible reason why charter school
teachers are not receiving as much mentoring as traditional public school teachers are may be
attributed to the fact that charter schools do not have many veteran teachers who are experienced
enough to provide ongoing mentoring. Johnson et al. (2001) found that novice teachers in charter
schools did not have access to senior teachers who they could plan with, reflect with, and
observe.
Smith and Ingersoll (2004) also emphasizes that charter school teachers compared to
traditional public school teachers in general have fewer supports at the school level. Wei et al.
(2014) additionally found that charter school teachers reported having less access to
differentiated and quality professional development and less overall collaboration with
colleagues even though they reported having more of a supportive teaching environment focused
around high student expectations and freedom to design their own curriculum and instructional
practices. Even so, Smith and Ingersoll (2004) conclude that new teachers benefit from seminars
and district level professional development opportunities, common planning time with teachers
in the same subject, regularly structured collaboration time with teachers, department chairs, and
administrators, and district supported induction programs in addition to all of the other supports
(Smith & Ingersoll, 2004). Without the availability of these types of ongoing supports, Smith and
Ingersoll (2004) found that beginning teachers who entered teaching and received no induction
or mentoring support, had a 41 percent predicted probability of turnover after their first year of
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

25
teaching. The opposite was also true in that first year teachers who received ongoing induction
and mentoring throughout the school year had lower attrition rates.
Specialty Area and Teaching Load
Studies on specialty areas show a consistent pattern of higher attrition rates among
special education, mathematics, and science teachers (Newton et al., 2011). Secondary math and
science male teachers are also more likely to leave than elementary teachers (Newton et al.,
2011). One other factor for charter schools to consider is placement of teachers with regards to
grade level or course that teachers are expected to teach. Donaldson and Johnson (2010) found
that new teachers who were assigned more challenging teaching loads, more preps, and who
taught subjects that were out of their field of preparation had a greater risk of burnout and
turnover. TFA teachers specifically who were assigned to charter schools in low-income, low
achieving schools and who had challenging teaching assignments had a significantly higher
chance of leaving both the school and the profession within just one year (Donaldson & Johnson
2010).
Teacher Perception of the School’s Vision and Mission
Despite many of the challenges that charter schools are constantly faced with, one area
that they seem to thrive in centered around autonomy and choice is the freedom, flexibility, and
empowerment they grant to teachers and leaders to take risks and develop innovative ways of
teaching and learning (Malloy & Wohlstetter, 2003). Control over curriculum and instruction and
the ability to work in smaller schools with smaller class sizes is what Malloy and Wohlstetter
(2003) found to be the motivating reasons for most California teachers who choose to work in
charter schools.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

26
One other important and oftentimes overlooked factor for school success is the idea of
creating a cohesive and intimate sense of community and culture with students, teachers, and
families (Ingersoll, 2001). Large public schools, especially those in high-poverty, low-achieving
urban areas oftentimes have a harder time of fostering a sense of community and belonging
among all stakeholders (Ingersoll, 2001). Malloy and Wohlstetter (2003) suggest that charter
schools are better able to accomplish this with their smaller schools, smaller class sizes, inclusion
of families and community members, and a clear vision and mission for student success—
particularly for the students that most charters serve, which include high-poverty, low-achieving
minority students.
Findings from Miron and Applegate (2007) add to the narrative that charter school
teachers, students, and parents feel more of a sense of community at their smaller schools, which
in turn also provides increased safety at schools that are oftentimes located in high-poverty and
high-crime areas. Miron and Applegate (2007) additionally identified several other reasons why
teachers chose charters over traditional public schools including the opportunity to work with
like-minded educators and leaders who are also interested in educational reform.
Teacher Perception of Student Achievement and Ability Levels
Extensive research and findings have established that student characteristics, including
race and achievement, are strongly related to high teacher attrition rates above all else including
teacher salaries and benefits (Hanushek et al., 2001). Findings from a study on Texas public
schools by Hanushek et al. (2001) reveal that schools that serve large numbers of academically
disadvantaged black or Hispanic students have significantly higher attrition rates. Hanushek et al.
(2001) additionally states that, “In contrast to the modest changes in salary…evidence [shows]
that teachers systematically favor higher achieving, non-minority, non-low income students”
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

27
(p.13). Findings from this same study also show that non-black, non-Hispanic teachers
“systematically” prefer non-black, non-Hispanic students (Hanushek et al., 2001). These findings
continue to add on to the narrative that socio-economically disadvantaged neighbors and schools
with high concentrations of minority students, English Language Learners, severe behavior
problems, and higher number of special education students tend to have more problems with the
“revolving door” phenomenon (Ingersoll, 2001) of high teacher mobility.
More troubling than the findings by Hanusek et al. (2001) is the study by Bridges (1996)
that Sanders and Rivers (1996) refer to when addressing the disproportionate assignment of
minority students to ineffective and unqualified teachers. Sanders and Rivers (1996) write,
Bridges found that when parents and students complained about inadequate teachers, in
many instances the inadequate teachers were transferred to schools where no one was
likely to complain about their performance. Typically, the teachers were transferred to
schools with one or more of the following characteristics: schools with high student
transfer rates, schools with large numbers of students receiving free and reduced priced
meals, schools with high numbers of minority students, schools with high numbers of
students who were considered to be “disadvantaged” in some way by the educational
community (p. 5).
These realities continue to highlight both the importance and the urgency of retaining highly
qualified and highly effective teachers at every school including those serving predominantly
disadvantaged students and communities.
Teacher Perception on Principal Leadership
Another area that greatly contributes to lower teacher attrition rates is teacher satisfaction
with school leadership (Miron & Applegate, 2007). Trust and confidence in the school leadership
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

28
team is important at any school but it is especially important in charter schools where teachers do
not have unions or collective bargaining agreements to help advocate for their needs. Only about
12 percent of charter schools actually have unions (Gross, 2011). Principals at charter schools
oftentimes struggle to balance the demands of the operational aspects of running a school
including dealing with the budget, facilities, safety, and oversight, while at the same time trying
to cultivate a safe, supportive, and professional working environment for all teachers by also
providing strong instructional leadership to their oftentimes young and novice teaching staff
(Gross, 2011).
Young and inexperienced charter school teachers who oftentimes struggle with a heavy
workload also cited principal leadership as one of the most important contributing factors to their
growth and reason why they chose to stay at their school (Torres, 2014). In the same study,
Torres (2014) found that teachers had a greater propensity to stay at schools where the principal
was more experienced and could provide the supports that teachers needed to do their job well.
In recommending what schools need to do to retain more of their teachers, Inman and Marlow
(2004) additionally highlight the importance of school principals providing all teachers, and
particularly novice teachers, with structured and differentiated ongoing professional development
opportunities. Referring back to charter teacher demographics, since the majority of charter
teachers are young and novice teachers, the availability of these types of ongoing supports and
professional development opportunities is a critical component of the success of the teachers and
the schools.
Teacher “Burnout” and Perceptions on Workload

As charter schools continue to promote the charter option as a better alternative to the
traditional public school system for students, families, and teachers, the issue of teacher burnout
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

29
must be addressed because teacher burnout is also directly related to higher attrition rates (Lake
et al., 2010; Newton et al., 2011; Torres, 2014). Research by Torres (2014) on teacher
perceptions of workload and its relation to high attrition in CMOs finds that in many instances
the workload at charter schools is “unmanageable” and “unsustainable” and may in fact be the
primary cause of teacher turnover. Capitalizing on the youth, passion, and commitment to the
idea of transformational school reform, many CMOs report that their teachers are working 60 to
80 hours a week (Lake et al., 2010). These types of unsustainable practices that lead to burnout
and eventually turnover were hard to ignore for even CMO leaders who openly recognize that
they must provide their young and inexperienced teachers with a balanced approach to teaching
while at the same time having them remain committed to the vision and goals of their schools
(Lake et al., 2010; Torres, 2014).
Some of the other challenges that Torres (2014) identifies as potential causes of teacher
burnout are actually areas that most charter schools and CMOs celebrate and promote. Factors
such as serving low-income, low-achieving minority students from urban areas, longer school
days and extended school years, frequent teacher observations and pay for performance
evaluation models are all contributing factors to teacher burnout and job satisfaction according to
Torres (2014). Since research continues to show that young and inexperienced teachers serving
low-income, low-achieving minority youth have the highest propensity to leave these schools
and to leave teaching altogether (Hanushek et al., 2001; Miron & Applegate, 2007; Stuit &
Smith, 2012), charter schools and CMO CEOs must address this issue and find solutions to help
retain more of their teachers.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

30
Adequate School Facilities
Recent studies done on school facilities suggest that another predictor of high teacher
attrition—especially in urban settings—is the quality of the school facilities (Buckley et al.,
2005). The challenge of providing adequate facilities and resources to teachers is one that most
charter schools—and especially new, start-up charter schools—struggle with on a consistent
basis (Lake et al., 2010). CMOs in fact expend much of their resources including funds, time,
and human capital into helping their start-up schools become fully operational (Lake et al.,
2010). Charter school principals who were surveyed about their greatest challenges in a study by
Gross (2011) also overwhelmingly identified that facilities and finances were among their top
concerns for their respective schools. Furthermore, because most charters and CMOs do not have
access to similar funding sources as district schools have with state capital funding and voter-
approved bonds, Lake et al. (2010) found that some CMOs were spending up to 12 percent of
their operational budget on facilities alone. These types of handicaps have forced many charters
to seek greater reliance on philanthropy, which has not proven to be the most reliable and
consistent form of funding (Lake et al., 2010).
Even with the harsh realities charters face with regards to the availability of adequate
facilities, charters and CMOs have to take into account what Buckley et al. (2005) underscore are
the factors that contribute to the quality of the building. They specifically emphasize factors such
as poor indoor air quality that most teachers in their Washington study reported (Buckley et al.,
2005). Availability of teacher control over the classroom temperature, classroom lighting, and
“soundproofing to reduce ambient noise levels,” are among other considerations schools need to
take into account as they begin to address their overall dilapidating facilities. While Buckley et
al. (2005) concede the fact that improving the quality of facilities can be an expensive
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

31
investment, their findings suggest that the added benefits of these one-time costs to facility
improvement for retention can be “equal to or even greater than those from [teacher] pay
increases” (p. 1119). Whether it is going to be through policy changes, creative ways of
allocating funds, or more philanthropy, charters and CMOs will continue to face challenges with
facilities including its possible connection to teacher job satisfaction and high attrition rates
(Buckley et al., 2010).
Teacher Pay and Benefits
Similar to everything else that has been presented in this literature review with regards to
teacher attrition patterns, research has produced mixed results on the role of compensation and
benefits as a determining factor to teacher mobility. Teacher dissatisfaction due to low salaries
and lack of support from school administration has always negatively influenced teacher
migration patterns at both charter and traditional public schools (Ingersoll, 2011; Hanushek,
2011; Guarino et al., 2006). Some consistent findings, however, suggests that compensation
eventually plays an important deciding factor for teachers in charter schools more so than for
teachers in traditional public schools when it comes down to voluntarily leaving either the school
and/or the profession itself (Stuit & Smith, 2012). It is also important to note that most charter
schools in California actually offer comparable and even higher starting salaries than state
averages within traditional district schools (Malloy & Wohlstetter, 2003; Podgursky & Ballou,
2001). The problem, however, is that after usually the fifth year, charter school pay schedules
level off and the traditional district schools offer more competitive pay schedules and benefits
packages than charters through larger incremental increases (Miron & Applegate, 2007). As a
result of this structure and the salary schedule setup, charter school teachers “receive a lower
return on experience” (p. 21, Miron & Applegate, 2007) and inevitably choose the traditional
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

32
district option which offers them more money, the opportunity for tenure, and membership in a
union.
Compensation and benefits also matters when it comes to certain groups and specialty
areas within the teaching profession. Guarino et al. (2006) suggest that white male teachers were
less likely to leave if their teacher salaries were competitive with other industries that they could
easily move into. Additionally, schools—both charter and traditional public schools—need to
provide pay increases and competitive packages to reduce attrition of high-ability specialty area
math, science, and special education teachers who can easily migrate from one school to another
or exit the profession altogether since their positions are in high demand and they can find
employment outside of education as well (Podgursky et al., 2004).
Other polices that many charters and CMOs have adopted to remain competitive and to
help retain teachers is to offer up more bonuses and base teacher salary schedules on some sort
of pay-for-performance or merit-pay model (Podgursky & Ballou, 2001). In a report analyzing
survey results from charter school teachers in seven states, Podgursky and Ballou (2001) found
that 46 percent of charter schools report using pay-for-performance models. Pay-for-performance
models were used in a variety of different ways depending on the CMO or individual charter
school including one-time bonuses, signing bonuses, advancing teachers an extra step on the
salary schedule, and other additions on teacher’s base pay dependent on evaluations, parent and
student satisfaction surveys, and standardized test results (Podgursky & Ballou, 2001).
Teacher Job Security and Collective Bargaining Units
Charter schools are exempt from state regulations on having collective bargaining
agreements with teacher’s unions and for the most part hire teachers as at-will employees (Miron
& Applegate, 2007; Stuit & Smith, 2012). Charter school teachers still have the option and the
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

33
legal right to ask a union to represent them, in states that permit collective bargaining, if a
majority of the teachers (50 percent plus one) formally agree to have a union. It is evident that
the lack of job security and collective bargaining units at most charter schools are reasons why
charter schools have a higher attrition rate than traditional public schools (Miron & Applegate,
2007). In fact only about 12 percent of charter schools are unionized (Gross, 2011). Schools
without unions must find mechanisms where teachers can formally express disagreements with
school policies without fear of retribution (Ingersoll, 2001). Although most charter schools rely
heavily on the personal relationships and the trust that is formed between teachers and the
administrative team, without formal agreements and without unions, teachers quickly realize that
there is no formal grievance process or forum where they can voice their concerns and
disagreements with school policies about anything from ideal class size to disagreements on
teacher evaluations (Gross, 2011). Without these formal procedures and the unpredictable
realities of being on an at-will annual contract at charter schools, it is easy for teachers to lose
trust in their administrators and seek outside representation (Gross, 2011).
Most CMO level leadership and charter school principals feel that their autonomy and
flexibility in managing their staff and even their school and charter vision will be harder to
accomplish if their schools unionize (Gross, 2011). As the charter movement grows and more
teachers stay long enough at these schools, unionization may be hard to avoid (Gross, 2011).
CMOs and charter schools again need to find unique ways to balance and address the needs and
rights of their teachers while maintaining the work to fulfill the goals in their charter and the
vision of their school.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

34
Conclusion
With hundreds of studies done on the various components of high teacher attrition in
American schools dating back as early as the 1960s and as recent as 2015, there can be no doubt
that both the world of research and the field of education are still trying to unveil the most
appropriate and perhaps even systematic ways of recruiting and retaining highly qualified and
highly effective teachers. More importantly, as research has made evident time and time again,
because education unequivocally has phenomenal transformative powers, the need to place and
retain an effective teacher in every classroom is an especially urgent need for high-poverty, high-
minority, low-achieving urban districts and schools.
Lastly, as charter schools and CMOs continue to grow across the country and continue to
challenge the status quo in the traditional public school system, they can only do so if they
address their own internal conflicts that have forced more of their teachers to either migrate over
to traditional district schools or exit the teaching profession altogether. Because charter schools
and charter school leaders understand the urgency of providing quality education to every
student, and because they understand that education is by far the most important social justice
and equity issue facing all students, and in particular socio-economically disadvantaged students,
they will need to continue to find innovative and resourceful ways to address the challenges of
high teacher attrition.
In the next section, chapter three will describe in detail the research design, sample and
population of the research, instrumentation, data collection, data analysis, and threats to the
validity of the study.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

35
Chapter Three: Methodology

Chapter three describes the methods used to conduct this research study. The chapter will
highlight the research design, sample and population of the research, instrumentation, data
collection, data analysis, and potential threats to the validity of the findings from the study.
Overview of the Problem, the Purpose of the Study, and the Research Questions
The myriad of research that exists around the topic of teacher retention and the
correlation of teacher retention to higher student achievement (Sanders & Rivers, 1996; Wright
et al., 1997; Borman & Dowling, 2008; Hanushek, 1992) further demonstrates the urgent need
for charter schools to find innovative ways of retaining more of their teachers. As charter schools
in Southern California continue to grow in higher numbers than anywhere else in the country
(Lake et al., 2010; California Charter Schools Association), CMO and charter school CEOs and
executive directors will play an important role in helping to create organizational policies to help
support teacher growth, job satisfaction, and retention.
The purpose of this study was to examine both the root causes of charter school teacher
attrition and what charter school and CMO leadership teams in Greater Los Angeles are doing to
retain teachers. More specifically, this study seeks to understand what strategies promote the
recruitment and retention of charter school teachers. This study furthermore provides a reference
of best practices for all new and existing charter school CEOs and executive directors who are
interested in implementing specific tried and true initiatives to recruit and retain teachers.
Therefore, identifying the policies and programs that CEOs are utilizing will help other CEOs
focus their resources, time, and money towards similar initiatives with the hope of retaining more
teachers.
The following four questions will help guide the stated purpose of this research:
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

36
1. How do charter school/CMO CEOs perceive their role in keeping attrition rates down?
2. What do charter school/CMO CEOs identify as the primary factors that contribute to
teachers leaving charter schools?
3. What initiatives and best practices are charter school/CMO CEOs implementing to recruit
and retain teachers?
4. What specific initiatives or policies can show evidence of successfully retaining charter
school teachers?
Research Design
Creswell (2014) identifies six steps for conducting a research study, which include the
following: 1) identifying a research problem, 2) reviewing the literature, 3) specifying the
purpose of the study, 4) collecting data, 5) analyzing and interpreting the data, and 6) reporting
and evaluating research. Chapter three will elaborate on Creswell’s steps four, five, and six by
discussing the sample of the study, the instrumentation used, and data collection and analysis.
Chapter three also addresses issues of validity and reliability with the research methodology.
Instrumentation
This research study used the mixed methods design to examine the role of the charter
school CEO and what specific policies these executive directors were implementing to address
the high teacher attrition rates at charter schools (Creswell, 2014). The mixed methods design
used for this study allowed the researcher to collect both quantitative and qualitative data for
analysis and interpretation (Creswell, 2014). The combination of both quantitative and
qualitative forms of data through the use of surveys and interviews provided a more complete
and verificatory understanding of the four research questions presented in this study (Creswell,
2014).
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

37
Qualitative Methods
Qualitative research is the process of investigating and inquiring in a systematic fashion
to know more about a phenomenon through multiple realities and interpretations, with the
researcher being the primary instrument for data collection and analysis (Merriam, 2009). The
researcher collects data through observations, interviews, and document analysis in order to
triangulate findings with maximum validity (Merriam, 2009). Through rich descriptions and data
collection in naturalistic settings, qualitative researchers are interested in “understanding the
meaning people have constructed, that is, how people make sense of their world and the
experiences they have in the world” (Merriam, 2009, p. 13).
This research triangulated its findings specifically through extensive interviews and
document analyses. Fourteen one-on-one, in-person and telephone interviews (Creswell, 2014)
were conducted with CMO CEOs and charter school executive directors. All of these interviews
were conducted within the Greater Los Angeles area, also known as the Southland—
encompassing five counties in Southern California comprised of Los Angeles County, Orange
County, San Bernardino County, Riverside County, and Ventura County. Most of the executive
directors and CEOs interviewed for this study lead schools within Los Angeles County. Chapter
four will provide additional details about the individuals who were interviewed for this research
study (see Appendix A for Interview Guide).
Additionally, the interviews done for this study were conducted using a semi-structured
interview technique (Merriam, 2009). An interview guide with a mix of more and less structured
interview questions was used (Merriam 2009). The interviews included multiple probes and
strategically placed transitions. Opinion and values questions (Patton, 2002) were also asked
during the interview because it was important for answering research question one.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

38
Understanding how CMO CEOs and charter executives perceived their roles in keeping attrition
rates down, and understanding what they thought about how high teacher attrition rates
negatively affects student achievement—as suggested by research from Sanders and Rivers
(1996); Wright et al. (1997); Borman and Dowling (2008); and Hanushek (1992)—is intimately
connected to the types of policies they ultimately will or will not implement to address the issue.
Lastly, to corroborate and triangulate findings from both the interviews and the surveys,
documents were reviewed and data were collected from various CMO and charter school
documents (Merriam, 2009). CMO and charter school data on yearly attrition rates were
reviewed. Data from exit interviews conducted by charter schools and CMOs on teachers who
left the school were also reviewed to understand specific areas teachers identified as reasons why
they were leaving the charter school. Documents were reviewed and data were collected from
teacher contracts, salary schedules, recruiting policies, staff handbooks, teacher complaint
procedures, evaluation procedures, collective bargaining agreements, human resources policies,
and other documents highlighting policies that charter schools and CMOs have been
implementing as part of their efforts to retain teachers.
Quantitative Methods
Surveys were administered for the quantitative portion of this study. All CMO CEOs and
charter school executive directors who were interviewed received the survey in an email from
Survey Monkey. Surveys were also emailed with a detailed description of the research study and
its purpose to other CMO and charter school leaders in the Southland who were not interviewed.
The surveys allowed for additional quantitative data to be gathered from a larger pool of charter
leaders to better assess trends, policies, attitudes, and opinions on teacher retention in charter
schools (Creswell, 2014). Items on the survey included both forced response choices, Likert-type
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

39
ordinal scale questions, and open-ended questions to allow for more detailed responses (Fink,
2013). (see Appendix B for Online Survey).
Sample and Population
This study used purposeful sampling (Patton, 2002; Merriam, 2009) by selecting a
sample of CMO CEOs and charter executive directors from whom the most can be learned about
with regards to teacher retention challenges and specific policies charter leaders are
implementing to address the issue (Merriam, 2009). Both convenience sampling and snowball
sampling were used as part of purposeful sampling for this study (Merriam, 2009). As CEOs and
executive directors were interviewed and surveyed, snowball sampling, in particular, helped to
locate additional CMO and charter executives and leadership teams. Snowball sampling also
allowed for a larger sampling pool and, along with triangulation, helped to provide increased
validity and credibility for the findings of the study (Merriam, 2009).
Data Collection
Interviews were recorded using a MacBook Pro GarageBand podcast feature and a simple
tape recorder as recommended by Merriam (2009). The GarageBand podcast was used
specifically because of the quality of the voice recording and the easy access and special features
through GarageBand to then go back and mark up specific times for coding. The Voice Recorder
feature on the iPhone was used as the tape recorder. All interviews were also transcribed for
coding as recommended by Merriam (2009) and Creswell (2014). The interview guide
(Appendix A) for this semi-structured interview included all of the main questions that were
asked. The semi-structured format of the interview also allowed for additional probing,
clarifying, and extending questions to better answer each of the four research questions.
Additionally, all data collected from this study were secured and only used by the approved
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

40
researcher. Identifiable data such as CEO names, school names, CMO names, and even names
of specific programs and policies were not used so as to keep the confidentiality and privacy of
all participants and organizations involved in the study.
Data Analysis
According to Merriam (2009) data analysis is a “process of making sense out of data” (p.
193). Immediately after different sets of data were collected for this research study, the process
of segmenting and taking apart the data began (Creswell, 2014). Following the criteria set by
Merriam (2009) and Creswell (2014) for validating the accuracy of the information and for
coding the raw data, the raw data from notes, interviews, and surveys were collected and
organized for analysis. All data from document reviews, notes, interviews, and surveys were
read. The data were then coded in its initial phase through open coding (Merriam, 2009). The
second cycle coding produced patterns as the data revealed repeated ideas that were connected.
These repeated ideas were then linked together into themes. The themes were analyzed and
interpreted. Assertions from these themes then led to the findings in chapter four.
Validity and Reliability
The role of the researcher is “first and foremost to gather data” (Patton, 2002, p.405).
Merriam (2009) additionally adds, “the interviewer is neither a judge nor a therapist” (p. 231).
Having said that, the researcher is left with hundreds of pages of raw data from interviews,
document reviews, informal observations, and survey results to appropriately analyze, interpret,
and validate in an ethical manner. In order to ensure validity and reliability, this research study
utilized several different recommended strategies including: triangulation with the analysis of
documents and interviews, member checks, adequate engagement in data collection with 14 in-
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

41
person and telephone interviews, reflexivity, and maximum variation with the inclusion of CEO
and charter executive director samplings from all across the Southland (Merriam, 2009).

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

42
Chapter Four: The Findings
Introduction
This chapter provides a comprehensive analysis of the data collected from the mixed
methods study which aimed to examine both the root causes of charter school teacher attrition
and what specifically charter school executive leaders in the Southland (Greater Los Angeles)
were doing to retain teachers. Moreover, the study aimed to understand what specific strategies
promote the recruitment and retention of charter school teachers and to serve as a reference of
best practices for all new and existing charter school leaders who are interested in implementing
tried and true initiatives to recruit and retain teachers.
As charter schools continue to grow in large numbers in the Southland, it becomes
increasingly important for charter leaders to recruit and retain teachers since research shows that
the single most important factor affecting student learning is the teacher (Sanders & Rivers,
1996). Research additionally shows that the difference between being taught by a highly
qualified, highly effective teacher or an inexperienced and ineffective teacher can translate into
at least two years of negative or positive growth for the student; it can also mean the difference
between taking remedial courses or accelerated courses as the student advances into the next
grade level (Sanders & Rivers, 1996; Wright, Horn, & Sanders, 1997; Borman & Dowling, 2008;
Hanushek, 1992).
In order for both existing charter schools and new charter schools, that open in record
numbers in Los Angeles each year according to the California Charter Schools Association, to
continue to be competitive with district and private schools, and to offer parents an alternative in
the school of choice movement, charter schools must be able to better recruit and retain teachers.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

43
Research Questions
The following four questions helped guide the stated purpose of this research:
1. How do charter school/CMO CEOs perceive their role in keeping attrition rates down?
2. What do charter school/CMO CEOs identify as the primary factors that contribute to
teachers leaving charter schools?
3. What initiatives and best practices are charter school/CMO CEOs implementing to recruit
and retain teachers?
4. What specific initiatives or policies can show evidence of successfully retaining charter
school teachers?
Data Gathering and Analysis
Using the mixed methods design, the researcher gathered both quantitative and
qualitative data to best triangulate findings. Online SurveyMonkey surveys were distributed to
65 charter school executives in the Greater Los Angeles area encompassing the five counties
made up of Los Angeles, Riverside, Ventura, San Bernardino, and Orange. Items on the survey
included forced response choices, Likert-type ordinal scale questions, and open-ended questions
to allow for more detailed responses (Fink, 2013). From the 65 surveys that were distributed via
email, 35 charter leaders responded back and completed the survey. Three leaders refused to
participate in the study citing various reasons such as lack of time. The researcher attained an
overall 54 percent response rate to the online surveys.
From the 35 leaders who completed the online survey, 14 of them were selected to be
interviewed. The interviews done for this study were conducted using a semi-structured
interview technique (Merriam, 2009). An interview guide with a mix of more and less structured
interview questions was used (Merriam 2009). The interviews included multiple probes and
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

44
strategically placed transitions. All interviews and surveys were done between May 2015 and
August 2015. Interviews were done in-person at the homes or offices of the charter executives or
by telephone. Interview times ranged from 30 to 90 minutes long with each charter executive.
The next section of Chapter Four will highlight in detail all participants who were
interviewed with specific information about their experience in education, the number of schools
they lead, the number of teachers they serve, and the primary location of where in the Greater
Los Angeles area their schools are located. Pertinent information about the charter leaders who
participated in just the survey will also be provided. Finally, the quantitative and qualitative data
will be analyzed and presented with each of the four research questions for this study.
Study Participant Demographics
Throughout this study, the researcher has referred to the upper leadership teams as CMO
CEOs or charter school executive directors (see chapter one and two for specific definitions).
During both the quantitative and qualitative research gathering phase, the researcher quickly
realized that when it comes to employment position names, individual charter schools and CMO
schools are all so different and unique that it would be much easier to classify all upper
management executives who were interviewed and/or surveyed for this study as simply “leader”
and in some cases “charter leader.” Table 2 will highlight in more detail the exact title for each
of the charter leaders who were interviewed for this study.
The 14 charter leaders who were interviewed for this study had varied experiences and
backgrounds that eventually brought them to their current leadership role. Only two of the 14
charter leaders had no prior experience in education. The other twelve leaders had varied
experiences in public K-12 and higher education including teaching, counseling, and
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

45
administrative experiences as assistant principals, principals, district level coordinators and
directors, and district assistant superintendents.
Four of the 14 leaders were male and ten were female. The average years of experience
for all 14 leaders was 8.1 years with Leader 6 having the most experience at 17 years and Leader
7 with only one year of experience.
The specific job titles for all 14 leaders also varied depending on the CMO or individual
charter school. Seven of the 14 charter leaders were referred to as “chief executive officer”
(CEO). Two of the seven CEOs also had “president” in their title and were the president of the
board of directors at their CMO in addition to being the chief executive officer. One of the seven
had the title of “CEO and superintendent.” The other seven charter leaders were all called
“executive director.”
Table 2: Interview Participants
Charter
Leaders
Gender Title Years of
Experience in
Current Position
Prior Experience in
Education
Leader 1 Male Chief Executive
Officer (CEO)
4 Director, Assistant
Superintendent
Leader 2 Female Chief Executive
Officer (CEO)
6 Teacher, Principal, Higher
Education
Leader 3 Male Chief Executive
Officer (CEO)
7 None
Leader 4 Female Chief Executive
Officer (CEO)
13 Teacher, Principal,
Coordinator
Leader 5 Female Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) and
President
11 Teacher, Assistant
Principal, Principal,
Assistant Superintendent
Leader 6 Female Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) and
President
17 Teacher, Assistant
Principal, Principal
Leader 7 Female Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) and
Superintendent
1 Elected School Board
Member
Leader 8 Female Executive Director 7 None
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

46

Study Participant School Demographics
The 14 charter leaders who were interviewed also had very unique schools that varied
from number of schools to number of students served. Three of the leaders had schools operating
in Orange County, Riverside County, and San Bernardino County. Twelve of the 14 school
leaders operated their schools within Los Angeles County—the fastest growing charter school
district in all of California according to the California Charter Schools Association (CCSA).
These schools were spread across all parts of Los Angeles County including North, South, West,
East, and Central Los Angeles. Eight of the 14 Charter Management Organizations (CMOs) also
operated schools primarily in South and East Los Angeles—serving high numbers of low socio-
economically disadvantaged students and families in high poverty, high crime neighborhoods.
Additionally, the percent of students who were classified as free and reduced lunch
students according to survey data showed that 11 of the 14 school leaders served communities
and schools that had between 75 and 99 percent of their students classified under free and
reduced lunch status. The four schools under Leader 9, Leader 12, and Leader 14—located in
Riverside County, San Bernardino County, and Los Angeles County respectively—that were
classified as suburban schools reported between 25 and 50 percent free and reduced lunch status.
Leader 9 Female Executive Director 10 Teacher, Assistant
Principal, Principal,
Coordinator
Leader 10 Female Executive Director 12 Teacher, Counselor,
Assistant Principal
Leader 11 Male Executive Director 8 Teacher
Leader 12 Male Executive Director 9 Teacher, Assistant
Principal
Leader 13 Female Executive Director 5 Teacher, Assistant
Principal, Principal
Leader 14 Female Executive Director 4 Teacher, Assistant
Principal, Principal
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

47
All combined, the 14 charter leaders interviewed for this study serve well over 50,000
students across over 121 individual schools within the mentioned five counties. Table 3
highlights the exact number of schools each leader serves. Table 3 also highlights the number of
students per school and CMO. School demographic and enrollment data were taken from both
survey data that the leaders filled out on SurveyMonkey and were verified by the researcher
using the California Department of Education’s Dataquest website.
Furthermore, each of the 14 charter leaders operated schools that have been open
anywhere between five and 17 years. Charter schools are still a fairly new phenomenon in most
states. The first charter school law was passed in 1991 in the state of Minnesota (Zgainer &
Kerwin, 2015; Toma & Zimmer, 2012). Only one charter leader (Leader 6) interviewed for this
study had their school open in the 1990s. Most California charters have only recently been
authorized within the last decade or so (including the ones that were interviewed for this study).
The over 121 individual schools serving over 50,000 students within the mentioned five
counties are also broken up into different grade levels. Some CMOs and charters have a K-12
curriculum with separate facilities for their primary and secondary schools while others only
operate elementary schools, middle schools, or high schools exclusively. Table 3 further breaks
down the grade level offerings for each charter leaders’ CMO or individual charter school.
Table 3: Interview Participants—School Demographics
# of
Schools
# of
Years
Open
Location by
County
School
Type
Grade
Levels
# of
Students
% Free
Reduced
Lunch
Leader 1 12 15 Los Angeles Urban Elementary
Middle
HS
3,400 80
Leader 2 3 11 Los Angeles Urban Elementary
Middle
HS
1,381 90
Leader 3 21 15 Los Angeles Urban Middle 10,494 94
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

48
HS
Leader 4 6 15 Los Angeles Urban K-8
HS
3,137 95
Leader 5 27 12 Los Angeles Urban Middle
HS
11,635 90
Leader 6 15 17 Los Angeles Urban Elementary
Middle
HS
4,614 92
Leader 7 11 13 Orange & Los
Angeles
Urban Elementary
Middle
HS
2,725 85
Leader 8 11 11 Los Angeles Urban Elementary
Middle
4,014 90
Leader 9 1 10 Riverside Suburban K-12 1,547 25
Leader 10 1 12 Los Angeles Urban Middle
HS
691 75
Leader 11 5 12 Los Angeles Urban Middle
HS
2,250 90
Leader 12 1 9 San
Bernardino
Suburban K-8 876 28
Leader 13 5 5 Los Angeles Urban Elementary 2,479 98
Leader 14 2 11 Los Angeles Suburban K-6
7-12
952 50

Study Participant School Demographics: Teachers and Principals
Table 4 further breaks down the school demographics for each leader’s CMO schools or
individual charter schools and focuses on the following seven areas:
• Number of teachers at each CMO school or individual charter school
• Percent of fully credentialed teachers
• Percent of teachers who are Teach for America (TFA) teachers
• Average teacher age at each of the schools
• Average teaching experience (number of years)
• Average experience of principals (number of years)
• Percent of teacher attrition
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

49
Number of Teachers
All combined, the 14 charter leaders employee around 3,000 teachers. Leader 3 and
Leader 5 each employee the highest number of teachers at around 600 and 500 teachers
respectively with Leader 10, Leader 12, and Leader 14 at the lowest end with 43, 45, and 48
teachers respectively.
Fully Credentialed and Teach for America Teachers
Both historical and current research (Borman & Dowling, 2008; Stuit & Smith, 2012) on
teacher retention repeatedly acknowledges the importance and positive lasting impact of formal
teacher credentialing and certification programs on teacher retention. From the 3,000 teachers,
98 percent of them are fully credentialed to teach in their subject matter. Ten of the 14 leaders
have schools with 100 percent fully credentialed teachers. Leader 11 reported having an 80
percent fully credentialed staff, while Leader 7 and Leader 12 reported having 98 percent fully
credentialed teachers, and 99 percent fully credentialed teaching staff for Leader 10’s school.
Additionally, less than ten percent of the 3,000 teachers employed within the schools of the 14
leaders interviewed for this study were reported as being Teach for America (TFA) teachers.
Leader 4 and Leader 8 reported having the highest number of teachers affiliated with TFA at
around 40 percent of their teaching staff. Five of the leaders reported having zero TFA teachers
on their staff while the remaining seven leaders reported anywhere from two to ten percent of
their staff coming from TFA as opposed to traditional teacher credentialing programs.
Teacher Age and Experience
Extensive research on the subject of teacher age and experience states that younger
teachers who enter the teaching profession have a lower retention rate than older and more
experienced teachers—especially during the first five years of employment where it is estimated
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

50
that more than 50 percent of new teachers leave the profession (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004; Stuit &
Smith, 2010). Findings from Ingersoll (2001), Stuit and Smith (2012), and DeAngelis et al.
(2013) all indicate that younger teachers—30 and younger—are more likely to leave the
profession than middle-aged teachers with more experience. Research on charter school attrition
rates conducted by Miron and Applegate (2007) also confirms that the single most important
background characteristic that could predict charter school teacher attrition was age. They found
that younger charter school teachers were more likely to leave not just the school, but also the
profession as opposed to older and more experienced teachers.
The average age of the 3,000 teachers that the 14 leaders interviewed in this study
employee is 30.5 years old. Four of the leaders reported average teacher ages of 27 and 28 years
old. Only one leader, Leader 13, reported having an average teacher age of 40. Furthermore,
Leader 13’s average teacher experience was also much different than the other thirteen leaders.
Leader 13 reported 12 years as the average teacher experience at her school. The total average
teaching experience for all 14 leaders was at five years. Leader 5, Leader, 10, and Leader 11
reported the lowest teacher experience average at three years. The remaining leaders reported
averages of four to seven years of teaching experience within their schools.
Principal Experience
Similar to the average teaching experience of five years for the 3,000 teachers that the 14
leaders interviewed in this study employee, the average leadership experience for the principals
leading the over 121 schools, serving over 50,000 students is also at five years. According to
Torres (2014), young and inexperienced charter school teachers cited principal leadership as one
of the most important contributing factors to their growth and reason why they chose to stay at
their school. Torres (2014) additionally found that teachers had a greater propensity to stay at
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

51
schools where the principal was more experienced and could provide the supports that teachers
needed to do their job well.
Teacher Attrition Percentages
Each of the 14 charter leaders also reported teacher attrition percentages in their surveys
and interviews. There will be a more detailed explanation and breakdown of the attrition
percentages in the findings report under Research Question Two. Two of the leaders, Leader 1
and Leader 10 reported the highest teacher attrition percentages at 26-30% and 21-25%
respectively. Leaders 2, 3, 5, and 11 reported the second highest attrition percentages at 16-20%.
Only four leaders reported attrition rates between 0-10% with Leader 12 and Leader 13 reporting
the lowest attrition rates between 0-5%.

Table 4: Interview Participants—School Demographics: Teachers
# of
Teachers
Average
Teacher
Age
Average
Teacher
Experience
(Years)
% Fully
Credentialed
%
TFA
%
Teacher
Attrition
Average
Experience
of Principals
(Years)
Leader 1 170 30 5 100 10 26-30 2
Leader 2 59 32 5 100 10 16-20 1.5
Leader 3 600 30 4 100 13 16-20 4
Leader 4 200 27 4 100 40 11-15 2.5
Leader 5 500 30 3 100 10 16-20 4
Leader 6 200 30 4 100 2 6-10 4
Leader 7 300 30 4 98 0 11-15 11
Leader 8 250 28 4 100 40 16-20 2
Leader 9 80 35 7 100 0 6-10 11
Leader 10 43 28 3 99 0 21-25 8
Leader 11 115 27 3 80 10 16-20 3
Leader 12 45 30 7 98 0 0-5 12
Leader 13 175 40 12 100 3 0-5 3
Leader 14 48 30 5 100 0 11-15 4
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

52
Findings by Research Question
The findings from each of the four research questions for this study will be presented in
the following section. Each research question will be presented, followed by the findings, and
concluded by a discussion that will include a reflection of the findings by the researcher.
Research Question One: How do charter school/CMO CEOs perceive their role in keeping
attrition rates down?
Thirty-five charter leaders within the Greater Los Angeles area encompassing the five
counties made up of Los Angeles, Riverside, Ventura, San Bernardino, and Orange were
included in this research study. From the 35 leaders surveyed, 14 of them were also interviewed.
As shown in Table 5, the 35 leaders combined represent over 157 schools, employing over 4,500
teachers, and serving over 60,000 students within the five mentioned counties. Both survey and
interview data will be presented in this section of the findings report to highlight exactly how
charter leaders perceive their role in keeping attrition rates down. Moreover, survey data from
the 14 leaders who were also interviewed will be referred to more frequently and in more depth.

Among other priorities, charter leaders identified the following four areas as their most
important work and scope of influence in keeping teacher attrition rates down: communicating
Table 5 Survey and Interview Totals
Total Charter Leaders Surveyed 35
Total Charter Leaders Interviewed 14
Total Number of Schools 157
Total Number of Teachers 4,500
Total Number of Students 60,073
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

53
the vision and mission of the organization, recruiting the right people to do the work, prioritizing
and funding policies, and nurturing a sense of community and culture within their schools.
Because charter leaders enjoy greater flexibility in being able to allocate school resources and
funds without having to get board approval (Lake et al., 2010), their overall scope of influence in
all matters—including teacher retention—is much greater.
Additionally, Likert-type survey Questions 20-22 asked charter leaders specific questions
regarding the amount of influence they have over policies around teacher recruitment, teacher
retention, and professional development (see Table 6). The five response choices in order
included: A great deal, quite a bit, somewhat, very little, and not at all (see Appendix B: Online
Surveys). Supported by the findings from Lake et al. (2010) about the influence of charter CEOs,
the survey results from this study also found that charter leaders acknowledge that they have
either “a great deal” of influence or “quite a bit” of influence over all issues regarding
recruitment and retention (see Table 6).
Furthermore, when it came to issues around influence over policies regarding teacher
professional development, eleven of the charter leaders responded in the survey results and
commented during the interview that they had either “a great deal” of influence or “quite a bit”
of influence. This finding was also supported by research conducted on charter CEOs wherein
Lake et al. (2010) found that many of the job responsibilities and priorities charter CEOs
identified as having the most importance always focused around instructional leadership in the
areas of curriculum and instruction, assessment of schools and students, helping schools to
analyze student data, establishing high expectations for all, and providing quality professional
development for teachers. Additional research from Smith and Ingersoll (2004), DeAngelis et al.
(2013), Johnson et al. (2001), Herman et al. (2013), and Inman and Marlow (2004) all emphasize
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

54
the importance of professional development and affirm that the availability of teacher supports,
opportunities for growth, and professional development translates not only into higher retention
rates among both charter and regular public school teachers, but also to job satisfaction and
efficacy.
Only Leader 3 said he had “very little” influence regarding professional development
policies saying specifically during the interview that he does not “get involved into the design [of
programs and policies around professional development].” Instead, Leader 3 said, “I make sure I
think through it and allocate the right resources and make the right investments. That’s my role.”
The other two leaders who responded to Survey Question 22 with “somewhat” also had similar
responses to their specific role in providing professional development. During one of the
interviews, Leader 4 said, “Our teachers want to continue to grow and those opportunities must
be quality opportunities. So the CEO can definitely play a role in evaluating and monitoring. Not
doing the specific professional development, but doing some of the oversight on quality control.”
Leader 4, similar to what Leader 3 said, also commented on hiring the most effective principals
and school leaders to do important work like professional development. In her interview, Leader
4 said:
Whether it’s your Chief Academic Officer or a director at some level who works directly
with principals, this is something the CEO has a lot of control over. That person is very
key because the principals have to have the support that they need in order to be able to
support their teachers at the school site.

The research findings show that even the practices of Leader 3 and Leader 4 are enough to
conclude that overall, all 14 charter leaders acknowledge the importance of their broad influence
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

55
over policies regarding teacher professional development with the goal of helping to
professionally develop, support, and retain their teachers.
Table 6 Charter Leader Influence
Survey Question 20:
To what degree do you
have influence over
policies regarding
teacher recruitment?
Survey Question 21:
To what degree do you
have influence over
policies regarding
teacher retention?
Survey Question 22: To
what degree do you have
influence over policies
regarding teacher professional
development?
Leader 1 A great deal A great deal A great deal
Leader 2 A great deal A great deal Somewhat
Leader 3 Somewhat Somewhat Very little
Leader 4 A great deal Quite a bit Somewhat
Leader 5 A great deal A great deal A great deal
Leader 6 A great deal A great deal Quite a bit
Leader 7 A great deal A great deal A great deal
Leader 8 Quite a bit A great deal A great deal
Leader 9 A great deal A great deal A great deal
Leader 10 A great deal A great deal A great deal
Leader 11 Quite a bit Quite a bit Quite a bit
Leader 12 A great deal A great deal Quite a bit
Leader 13 A great deal A great deal A great deal
Leader 14 Quite a bit Quite a bit Quite a bit

Promoter and Protector of the Vision and Mission
In continuing to examine what charter leaders perceive their specific roles are for keeping
attrition rates down, it is important to report that all 14 charter leaders spoke extensively and
passionately about their duty to promote and protect the vision and mission of their CMOs or
individual charter schools. Many of the leaders also spoke specifically about their charter’s
mission to serve the underserved in the high poverty, high crime, working class neighborhoods
of Los Angeles. Leader 1 said:
I think what draws teachers to [CMO name] is a belief in the plight of African-Americans
in education. To some degree, Latino students as well, but we’re about 80% African-
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

56
American. I think teachers who are successful here deeply believe in serving the
underserved…There is a very strong tie to the community here, so we have a tremendous
number of people who live in the community who work with us.
Similarly to what Leader 1 reported, Leader 3 added:
What draws teachers to [CMO name] is the reputation that we have in terms of our
mission to help the most underserved communities in Los Angeles…It’s important…A
lot of teachers get into the profession for the desire to make a difference for underserved
kids, and we certainly serve amongst the most underserved kids in LA.
Leader 3 additionally impressed upon the importance of being very straightforward and sincere
when presenting and promoting his charter’s mission and overall vision in order to avoid a
mismatch with the teacher and the charter. All teachers coming into Leader 3’s organization
must fully understand, appreciate, and welcome the true realities, the true struggles, and the hard
and oftentimes difficult work that they are tasked with to do. According to Leader 3, this reality
must be presented to all incoming teachers and then coupled with the supports and resources
needed to help them be successful. With respect to this idea, Leader 3 said:
Definitely get very clear around cultural fit and alignment to the mission. Make sure you
understand what you’re trying to do, number one. Number two, I think be very realistic in
the depiction of what the work is and how hard it is, particularly for charters that are
serving low-income communities. There’s an achievement gap for a reason. To overcome
the gap is hard work. It’s not sugar coated. The reality is we need to be very upfront.
Like, listen, “yeah, you’re going to work harder here because these kids need it. Here’s
how we’re going to support you: lower class sizes, a lot more coaching and support, a lot
more mental health support, all these things.” It is hard work and being incredibly upfront
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

57
about it is important because I think sometimes people make it sound like it’s awesome.
It is, but the honeymoon gets over very quickly. I think this is very important to consider.
Similar to what Leader 3 stated about the achievement gap and the hard work required to get the
job done, Leader 6, in her interview, reinforced this idea and added:
If it was easy to close the achievement gap and get every kid in low socioeconomic areas
who came in several grade levels below their grade into college and succeed, if it was
easy, everybody would be doing it. I just don’t feel the traditional districts are really
serious about it and they shrug and go it’s just really hard and keep the teachers
comfortable…If you can achieve what we want to achieve in our organization, you’re
going to work hard. You’re going to work relentlessly. You have to be strategic, you have
to have critical thinking skills, you have to be creative, you have to be relentless. That we
can promise people; but you’ll see results and that will hold paths together united in one
vision that we have school cultures that are amazing [and] characterized by mutual
respect and dignity…But is it work where you’re going to feel comfortable?...I would not
think charters should advertise stuff that paints a pretty picture where really the work is
very tough. If you’ve got great determination and you believe that we have a lot of
injustice in this country about the haves and have-nots, and you want to roll your sleeves
up and protect the rights of all children which will be exhausting at times, then you
belong with us. That’s the way we advertise [CMO’s name].
These findings are further supported by literature wherein Renzuelli et al., (2011) found
that teacher satisfaction and ultimately teacher retention is intimately related to the racial
composition of the schools in which teachers work. The racial mismatch findings by Renzuelli et
al. (2011) concluded that white teachers who were teaching in majority black schools were five
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

58
times more likely to leave teaching and be dissatisfied with their job than if they were teaching in
a majority white school. Additionally, the simple fact that schools serving large numbers of low
achieving, low income black or Hispanic students tend to have higher attrition rates (Hanushek et
al., 2001) should be enough to acknowledge the importance of being transparent about the
circumstances of one’s CMO or charter and the mission of the organization as recommended by
Leader 3 and Leader 6. Even if the support structures for teachers are available, unless the vision
and mission is understood, accepted, and lived everyday by the teacher, the chances of
successfully retaining that teacher immediately becomes compromised as realities become
slowly exposed and the “honeymoon period” slowly fades away as suggested by Leader 3 and
Leader 6.
In keeping with the theme of promoting and protecting the mission and vision of the
charter, Leader 2 emphasized the importance of her CMO’s mission and added the following:
As the CEO, I feel like one of my jobs is to help create the vision. I help to make sure
that we’re all aligned with our mission and philosophy, and knowing that we also need to
be open to change. I see my job as managing and trying to balance that within reason to
constantly get feedback to make things better without losing our identity and the sole
mission of our organization.
Leader 4, Leader 5, and Leader 7 also highlighted their CMO’s mission and vision and talked
about the need to serve the underserved and to get students college-ready. They believe that these
are the reasons why teachers are attracted to their schools and why they want to remain at their
schools. Leader 6 said that her CMO’s reputation is what draws teachers to the organization. She
added, “We are serious about our mission and that teachers will get a lot of great support and
professional development. They will grow as teachers and professionals when they are in our
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

59
organization. Even if they leave, they will leave better than the way they were when they came
in.”
Leader 9 additionally commented specifically about the recruitment process and said,
“Do whatever you have to through that interview to discern whether or not that person really
lines up with what you’re doing…hold fast to what your beliefs [mission/vision] are so that you
hire people that line up with that.” Leader 11 expanded upon Leader 9’s argument about
recruitment and said one of the most important things to do is “being clear about what you want
in your people, and then, developing systems that are really disciplined about going out and
getting those people.” For Leader 11, as with all 14 leaders interviewed for this research study,
none of this can be done without ensuring that everyone understands and makes every decision
to help foster and actualize the vision of the organization.
Some leaders escalated the importance of the vision and its direct connection to retention
of teachers by including this idea into an actionable goal in their Local Control Accountability
Plan (LCAP), which is part of the new school funding system in California through the Local
Control Funding Formula (LCFF). Leader 12 expanded upon this idea and said, “I think the ED
[Executive Director] should really be setting the vision and the process for how they’re going to
retain the best teachers possible.” Leader 12 added, “In fact, that’s goal number one in our
LCAP—to find and retain the best teachers for our school. I think the ED [Executive Director]
should really be setting the tone for that, should be setting the vision for that…” Furthermore, in
talking about the vision of his school and connecting that to the overall vision of charter schools
and the charter movement, Leader 12 described the teachers who stay with his organization as
“believers.” He added:
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

60
We call them believers. They’re people who actually believe in the movement. They are
almost like a religious fanatic. They recognize and really have adopted the core beliefs of
the charter movement. Not necessarily just the charter movement, [but] the actual
school’s mission and vision. The folks that have stuck around with me are loyal to this
movement.
Leader 12 also added:
With the executive director on the forefront…[charter leaders] must recognize that the
charter world has an opportunity to change the course of education, not just tweak it a
little bit or use a couple cool strategies, but really has an opportunity to change the whole
environment. I look at the LCFF and the LCAP as really things learned from the charter
movement. Local control. Having the opportunity to figure out what your community and
the kids in your classrooms need and desire for their education, to make it happen. That
whole local movement is the charter movement.
These types of mission driven philosophies (Lake et al., 2010) coupled with greater
flexibility to quickly allocate resources and fund certain initiatives and policies without having to
get board approval for everything (Lake et al., 2010), also allows charter leaders to quickly
actualize their visions and goals. These findings, supported by the research Lake et al. (2010)
conducted on charter CEOs, continues to depict one of the primary roles of charter leaders as the
promoter and protector of the organization’s values and overall vision.
Recruiting the Right People
While promoting and protecting the vision and mission of the organization was of utmost
importance for each of the 14 charter leaders, recruiting the right people to do the important
work was as urgent for charter leaders whose goal it was to retain and reward their most effective
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

61
teachers. Leader 1 summed it all up when he repeatedly said, “There is nothing more important
to an organization than the people we have.” Leader 4 additionally added:
Recruitment is an area that I focus on because we were letting go of a lot of teachers for
performance reasons and you kind of say, “okay let’s get to the root of this. So what is
our recruitment process? What kind of teachers are we recruiting? Are they mission
aligned? Have they demonstrated competency?” So that’s definitely an area that the CEO
doesn’t have to do all the legwork for, but can be asking the right questions in terms of
getting at the root of recruiting the right kind of teachers so that at least your attrition is
not due to weak teachers.
Leader 11 also reiterated the point that it is the people at his CMO who make all the
difference. “Everything else can be figured out” once you have the right people on the bus
according to Leader 11. He further added:
I don’t mean to be flip about that. It’s not easy to start a school, but there are resources
available that you can purchase [and] consultants who can help you write a charter.
Lawyers who can help you get through the district or the county or a state process. There
are vendors that will sell you curriculum, who will sell you information systems, who
will sell you adaptive learning platforms, who will sell you technologies…it’s all
accessible. The hard part is putting the pieces together…there are whatever it is some
280-something charter schools in LA. There are a bunch that are high performing, and
there are a bunch that are really low performing. There are a whole bunch kind of in the
middle. They all have the same stuff. They all have computers and curriculum. They’ve
all got stuff. They’ve all got somebody paying the bills. They’ve all got a board of
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

62
directors. What distinguishes one from the other? I think a lot of it is, people! It’s people
who create good teams. It’s people who create culture.
Charter leaders also talked more openly and more frequently about weak and ineffective
principals and the need to recruit more experienced leadership teams at their respective schools.
Echoing several other leaders, Leader 7 said, “We’re also really focused on getting principals
who are awesome. I think the number one reason why charters in general lose teachers is that
sometimes you just don’t have that right leader on site.” Research question two will further
expand on the importance of hiring and retaining effective principals as a way to retain teachers.
The findings in this research study concluded that among other priorities, charter leaders
believe that recruiting the right people to do the work is part of their role in helping to keep
attrition rates down at each of their CMOs and individual charters.
Prioritizing and Funding the Policies

A third area that all 14 charter leaders unanimously agreed was a part of their role in
helping to guide the vision of their schools and retain teachers was prioritizing polices and
procedures and funding policies CMO or school-wide. In addressing this topic, Leader 2
described her role and a charter CEO’s role and said, “As a CEO, you are trying to juggle
strengthening your organization-wide culture and philosophy, and policies and procedures…and
it’s always this tension between what are the non-negotiables and what are negotiables? What is
flexible and what is not flexible?” Her dilemma was also just how to balance all of the different
needs and to prioritize what was important and urgent now and what can wait until next week,
next month, next year. Leader 2 further added, “If you start that high a promise, some pie in the
sky and then, the next year you go, ‘Oops, I can’t promise that.’ People are going to be very
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

63
unhappy…then you know that you’re probably going to have a higher turnover and you’re going
to need to be okay with that.”
Furthermore, in describing priorities and funding, Leader 9 commented on how difficult
it was to start her charter and to find funds for facilities. Most charter schools continue to
struggle with finding permanent sites for their schools and rely heavily on private funding or
Proposition 39—use of district school facilities (California Department of Education). Under
Proposition 39 and California Education Code 47614, school districts must make available open
classrooms and buildings to all charter schools operating within their school district. Leader 9
said:
We just built the campus two years ago…probably the hardest thing that I’ve ever done
personally because we [charter schools] do not qualify for any facility money and we
didn’t qualify for any reimbursements…we didn’t qualify for any help whatsoever. We
borrowed money to build our school.
The importance of allocating funds appropriately and maintaining—and in the case of
most charter schools—having adequate facilities is important for retaining teachers. Buckley et
al. (2015) found that one predictor of high teacher attrition—especially in urban settings—is the
quality of the school facilities. Start-up charter schools struggle with facilities-related issues on a
regular basis according to Lake et al. (2010). CMOs additionally expend much of their resources
including funds, time, and human capital into helping their start-up schools become fully
operational (Lake et al., 2010). Charter school principals who were surveyed about their greatest
challenges in a study by Gross (2011) also overwhelmingly identified that facilities and finances
were among their top concerns for their respective schools.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

64
Finding ways to “beef up,” as one charter leader said, certain programs, policies, and
initiatives that have been identified as priorities and allocating appropriate resources and funds to
support those programs quickly and effectively is an important part of the charter CEO’s role in
helping to bring balance and harmony to the organization. By doing this, charter leaders believe
they are helping to not only fulfill their charter’s vision and mission, but that they are also
helping to alleviate high attrition rates that may arise as a result of neglecting these types of
priorities and concerns that directly and intimately affects teachers and the important work they
do with students and families every day.
Building and Nurturing Community and Culture

Findings from Lake et al. (2010) highlight the importance that charter school CEOs place
on developing and sustaining personal connections and relationships with everyone in the
organization. Charter leaders are spending a lot of their time trying to cultivate personal
connections and relationships with their school-site leadership teams, their teachers, and their
community members at large. In describing CEO qualities and what boards look for when hiring
new CEOs, Lake et al. (2010) described qualities like “charisma” and “personable leadership.”
To further illustrate this idea, when charter leaders were asked about what specific policies their
individual CMOs or charters had implemented to address the high attrition rates at their schools,
all 14 leaders impressed upon the idea of building and nurturing school cultures as more
important and powerful than having specific policies or initiatives for retaining teachers. Leader
1 described his CMO and said:
You know, to me, it’s a little bit more focusing on our culture than on official policy.
That’s what we’re trying to do now is really focus on the culture of family here because
[CMO name] has always thought of itself as a family—which was very difficult during
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

65
the financial situation because I had to make decisions that were best for the organization
which were very painful for some of our family, like merging schools, closing schools,
and even firing people…it’s never easy. We’re trying to get back now that we’re in a
different spot. We have really spent the last couple of years trying to reconnect on that
familial feel, but also to bring in a sense of accountability.
Similarly Leader 5 said:
I would add that the main thing was constantly encouraging school leaders to build a
culture of collaboration. Build a culture of high expectations; build a team of people at
the school versus just setting policy. Not the need to mandate in terms of what really
matters, but to recognize people [leaders] who are highly successful with retention rates.
As part of building this type of culture, Leader 5 expanded upon the importance of sharing
information with all stakeholders. During the interview, she described and shared the teacher
turnover documents and presentations she personally shared with all stakeholders including
board members, principals, teachers, and even parents. The report broke down attrition rates by
school, subject matters taught, years of experience, and other factors including which teachers
were part of Teach for America and which ones came directly from traditional credentialing
programs. Referring back to the turnover documents, Leader 5 said:
Every single year we publish it school by school, indicating how many teachers left each
school and why they left. I think when people see that what gets talked about, what gets
measured, they’re motivated to do something about it and they can see that, “hmmm, wait
a minute, I had a whole bunch of teachers leave and my colleagues had none. Let me talk
to my colleagues and find out what they’re doing and whether or not that’s something I
can use to improve.” I think it has significant impact on many schools.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

66
In the same way, Leader 6 further elaborated on the topic of personalized leadership and
culture building by saying that it is just part of her philosophy and leadership style as a CEO to
be very hands-on and connected with all stakeholders. “I am strategic about interfacing with
every stakeholder group and putting my fingers on the pulse of what’s happening in the
organization,” she added. “I go into classrooms as often as I can; I chat with teachers informally
and I talk to students quite a lot.” Leader 6 also meets with and interviews every graduating
senior in her organization. She additionally values and sets up community circles and meets with
every one of her teachers. “There were anywhere from 12 to 25 teachers in each circle. We went
around the entire network to all the schools and asked teachers what was working for them and
what was not.” The information Leader 6 is able to gather at these teacher community circles
allows her to examine and reflect on CMO-wide policies and to make changes as needed. “We
picked up on some really important information from which we made some changes for
them…my role is to know what’s going on and to advise changes as I see fit based on the data
that I collect.” Regarding the teacher community circles and meeting with the graduating seniors,
Leader 6 further added:
In so doing, I pick up on nuances of why teachers might be burnt out. I pick up on who is
really strong. I pick up on who wants to take on some leadership responsibilities because
they are hungry for growth, and you know I can then tell HR to give them something to
let them see we’re taking them seriously and ask what their ambitions to be a leader
is…also to be alert to those teachers that are not fulfilling our mission and not teaching at
the level that we desire. I think that works for me. It really works for me.
This type of leadership style also works for Leader 7, Leader 8, and Leader 12. Leader 7
reported spending a lot of time in the classroom as well so that teachers know that she cares
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

67
about the work that they are doing. “I show up at school events regularly. That’s an important
piece, too, because I have to be a live human to my teachers. I can’t just be sort of a CEO that’s
in some bureaucratic central office somewhere. I have to be onsite. That’s really, really
important.” Leader 8 also spends time at her individual school sites to show teachers that she
cares about them and wants them to feel comfortable about bringing up issues that affect the
work they do. In spending time at one of her schools, she quickly learned that one of the issues
teachers brought forward was “over-testing.” She was able to take that feedback back to her team
and reply back with immediate changes to the CMO’s benchmark exam policies. Leader 12
complemented the statements made by Leader 7 and Leader 8 by adding:
I think the schools and the organizations that really flourish are the ones that look at their
teachers and staff as their number one priority, as their number one resource. They're not
replaceable; a lot of them aren't. We're finding that here, you've got to figure out how to
hang on to the good ones and to create environments that they want to work in and be a
part of.
Leader 12 could not stress enough the importance of having an emotional connection to the
schools. In talking about the type of CEOs and charter leaders board of directors should hire,
Leader 12 said, “They’ve got to find somebody who really has the ability to move people, I think
emotionally as well as professionally.” Leader 12 exhausted this topic by saying:
Teachers really capture the vision and the energy from the top and if it’s not there, if the
energy is not there or it’s just absent or quiet, it’s not necessarily going to be effective for
folks. They really need to know and believe in what they’re doing. They need to have a
purpose beyond just coming in and delivering Common Core every day. I think, for me,
really learning that and understanding that it is not just about accomplishing tasks during
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

68
the day. It’s not just about making sure the organization is legally compliant. That’s just
one level.
This “other level” that Leader 12 and all of the 14 leaders kept referring to is a deeper
emotional and personal connection to each of the schools, communities, and stakeholders they
lead and serve. The charter leaders believe that this is central to their leadership styles and
perhaps even at the heart and essence of the charter movement. This idea is further supported by
literature wherein Lake et al. (2010) found that most CMOs are still led by their founding CEOs
and executive leadership teams. The amount of work and time these individuals and teams have
invested coupled with their firm belief in the mission of their organization and the overall charter
movement is exactly what makes these leaders as Lake et al. (2010) calls it, “charismatic,
personable leaders with nearly irreplaceable fundraising, management, and political skills” (p.
59).
Discussion
The 35 leaders who participated in this study by taking the online survey and the 14 from
the 35 who later participated in the interview all combined represented over 157 different schools
in the Greater Los Angeles area of Southern California—encompassing the five counties of Los
Angeles, Riverside, Ventura, San Bernardino, and Orange. Together, these 35 leaders employee
over 4,500 teachers, and serve over 60,000 students and families—most of whom are minority
students living in the high crime, high poverty, working-class neighborhoods of the five counties
represented in this study. As a result of these extraordinary figures, several interesting and
unanticipated ideas emerged from the findings in this study under research question one—which
aims to understand and depict how specifically charter leaders (CMO CEOs and Charter
Executive Directors) perceive their role in keeping attrition rates down.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

69
The findings in this study reveal that these leaders identified the following four areas as
their highest priority and in their direct scope of influence in helping to attract and retain highly
qualified teachers:
• Communicating, promoting, modeling, and protecting the vision and mission of their
CMOs or individual charter schools.
• Helping to recruit the right people to do the work and to support teachers.
• Prioritizing and quickly funding policies to help support the work teachers care about and
to maintain and protect the organization legally and financially through the vast and
oftentimes stifling compliance measures charters are scrutinized under (see research
question two for more on this).
• Building and nurturing a sense of community and culture organization-wide.
It is equally important to mention some of the other areas and topics that several of the
leaders noted in the interview as something they value, desire more of, and some of which they
are even frustrated by. Leader 10, for example, mentioned the need for greater networking and
collaboration among all the charter schools. For individual charter schools or charter schools that
only have two or three schools (which five of the leaders in this study fall under—having
between one and three schools) that are not part of a larger CMO, it is oftentimes difficult to find
resources and to be able to collaborate with other educators and leaders. Leader 10 believes these
types of networking opportunities and greater collaboration among charter schools could help her
teachers. In speaking to this, Leader 10 said, “We’re a little bit isolated here…there’s no one
around us to connect with.” She also added, “There’s not a really strong group for you if you’re
not part of a CMO…I think we all have some of the same issues and we could create something
if we just have some common time together.”
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

70
These additional findings indicate that charter leaders want to do whatever it takes to
bring additional supports and resources back to their individual schools to help support their
teachers and students. Charter leaders understand how important it is to retain their teachers and
they even highlighted some of the devastating implications that high attrition rates have on
students as attrition continues to exhaust their resources and even the morale of their schools.
Several of the leaders cited how costly and inefficient it was to constantly lose teachers
and then to recruit new ones (Stuit & Smith, 2012). In talking about this, Leader 2 said:
It eats up time and money to have to retrain and recruit. [That time and money] could
have been spent on additional training and support; taking a teacher who may have been
struggling as a brand new teacher and taking them to the next level, but now [with
attrition] you have to start all over again.
Leader 2 also stressed how difficult it becomes to provide meaningful and differentiated
professional development when you have so much turnover. “Training has been tough, too,
because teachers are all over the place in terms of what they need. A brand new teacher needs
usually classroom management training versus a veteran teacher who has been around for ten
years.” Elaborating further, Leader 2 commented on how difficult it becomes to grow a program
or initiative when her CMO is faced with so much constant teacher turnover. “You spend a year
of PD time on implementing a policy or strategy. You get buy-in…and then all of a sudden you
have a third of your teachers turnover.” Leader 2 further expressed her frustration with teacher
attrition and exposed another rather uncomfortable and harsh reality that high attrition causes for
charter schools and their already limited resources:
A challenge as you do spend a lot of time and energy helping to strengthen the teaching
force and then they leave and take that knowledge and support you gave them, and help
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

71
other schools and other kids which is great for those other schools and other kids. I’m
happy for them, but then you start all over again.
Similar to Leader 2’s sentiments about losing teachers and resources, Leader 10 despondently
said, “I think the hardest thing is training your best people and watching them go out and become
leaders at another district. That’s hard.” She further added, “We’re building their resume. As
they’re here; they have built a resume, not just as teachers, but [as] teacher leaders and teacher
innovators and now all of a sudden, they’re gone!”
Finally, it is important to conclude this discussion on the findings for research question
one by reporting what Leader 13 said about how some of these challenges that all charters face
become even more complicated and exasperated by how some charters—in her words—are
becoming more like traditional district schools and possibly forgetting the original tenets and
core principles of what the charter movement was all about in the first place. She passionately
talked about this and said:
I think that in charter management organizations, I do feel that some of them are
becoming like a school district in their desire to grow larger and larger. That was one of
the reasons we became a charter school—to be very different from the school district. We
wanted education to be more personalized for everyone: the students, their families, and
for our staff.
In the open response portion of the online survey, Leader 13 developed this idea even more and
said:
I see organizations with many administrators outside the schools running the
organization, and not doing the work that is most essential inside the school. All of our
administrators, except me, are assigned to our schools and are responsible for the day-to-
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

72
day operations and activities at our sites. We have nearly 3,000 students between five
schools. I see a number of organizations with fewer than 1,000 students and ten or more
highly compensated administrators at the CMO office. The model being implemented is
not innovative—it is very much the same as a traditional public school district’s model.
This was one of the first practices we chose to change upon conversion. We want to focus
first and foremost on the needs of the classroom...You have got to be putting more money
into those schools and not so much into the main office. That’s such a district mentality.
Final Thoughts on Research Question One
At the heart of research question one and the findings that came as a result of the
interviews, surveys, and document reviews, was the goal of trying to figure out what role the
charter CEO plays in helping to alleviate high attrition rates within their CMOs and charters. The
findings clearly and irrefutably show that charter leaders are not only intimately and directly
involved in policies and initiatives around teacher attrition and retention, but they also show
genuine concern and worry over the issue—thus prompting them to reflect on certain policies
and initiatives CMO or charter-wide that may help to retain more of their teachers and to create,
as Leader 11 suggested, “high performing environments that are sustainable long term and that
don’t ultimately wear down your most valuable asset which is your human capital.” The
particulars of these concerns charter leaders have will be addressed in the second research
question as the researcher focuses on what charter leaders identified as the primary factors that
contribute to teachers leaving their schools and then again in research question three where the
researcher will focus on the specific policies and best practices that charter leaders are
implementing to recruit and retain teachers.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

73
Research Question Two: What do charter school/CMO CEOs identify as the primary factors
that contribute to teachers leaving charter schools?
Through both survey and interview data from the 35 charter leaders who filled out the
online survey and the 14 charter leaders who were also interviewed, findings show that charter
leaders have identified several factors that they believe contribute to teachers leaving their
schools. Among many other factors, a majority of the charter leaders identified the following
eight areas as the primary factors that contribute to high attrition rates at their respective charter
schools: Teacher pay and benefits, teacher burnout, life circumstances that include such things as
marriage, parenthood, pursuit of higher education, and relocation, ineffective principal
leadership, teacher age, years of teaching experience, community and school mismatch, and the
unstable charter authorization process (see Figure 1 and Figure 2).
Before the findings are presented in the aforementioned eight areas that charter leaders
identified as the highest indicators of high teacher attrition, it is both important and informative
to briefly review survey responses to survey questions 23, 24, and 25 which asked charter leaders
a series of questions about how they felt about their CMO or charter school’s retention rates (see
Table 7). The following three questions were asked: Question 23: How satisfied are you with
your charter’s teacher retention rates? Question 24: On average, how much time would you say
you spend on dealing with retention related issues? Question 25: How important is it for your
charter to retain teachers? (see Appendix B: Online Survey).
Survey results for Question 23 show that very few leaders are satisfied with their
retention rates. Only Leader 13 reported being “extremely satisfied” with her charter’s retention
rate which she reported was between 0-5%. Leader 4, Leader 12, and Leader 14 all reported
being “satisfied” with their charter’s teacher retention rates, which they reported to be between
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

74
11-15%, 0-5%, and 11-15% respectively. Only two leaders, Leader 1 and Leader 2 reported
being “not at all satisfied” with their CMO’s retention rates, which they reported to be between
26-30% and 16-20% respectively. Three leaders, Leader 8, Leader 10, and Leader 11 reported
being “slightly satisfied” with their retention rates while the other five leaders reported being
“moderately satisfied.”
Survey results for Question 24 were a bit more peculiar and revealed a completely
different shift in how charter leaders felt about retention rates at their respective CMOs and
charter schools. For example, Question 24 asked leaders how much time, on average, they spend
on dealing with retention related issues. Responses to this question mostly fell under the
“somewhat” and “very little” category with not a single leader reporting that they spent “a great
deal” of time on retention related issues. Five leaders said they spent “quite a bit” of time on
retention related issues and Leader 7, Leader 8, and Leader 13 were the three leaders who
responded with “very little.” Leader 13’s response may be more understandable and appropriate
since it was very consistent with her 0-5% attrition rate. If her attrition rate is only at 0-5% then
she would not need to spend as much time on dealing with retention related issues whereas
Leader 7 and Leader 8 reported having 11-15% and 16-20% attrition rates respectively.
Finally, survey Question 25 asked charter leaders how important it is for their CMO or
charter school to retain teachers. Seven of the 14 leaders responded by saying it was “extremely
important” to retain teachers while another six leaders reported that it was “important” to retain
teachers. Only Leader 7 reported that it was “somewhat important”—one above the last option of
“not very important”—to retain her teachers.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

75
Table 7 Charter Leader Survey Responses (Retention Rates)
Teacher
Attrition
Percent
Survey Question
23: How satisfied
are you with your
charter’s teacher
retention rates?
Survey Question 24: On
average, how much time
would you say you spend
on dealing with retention
related issues?
Survey Question
25: How important
is it for your charter
to retain teachers?
Leader 1 26-30 Not at all satisfied Quite a bit Important
Leader 2 16-20 Not at all satisfied Somewhat Extremely important
Leader 3 16-20 Moderately satisfied Quite a bit Extremely important
Leader 4 11-15 Satisfied Somewhat Important
Leader 5 16-20 Moderately satisfied Somewhat Important
Leader 6 6-10 Moderately satisfied Somewhat Extremely important
Leader 7 11-15 Moderately satisfied Very little Somewhat important
Leader 8 16-20 Slightly satisfied Very little Important
Leader 9 6-10 Moderately satisfied Somewhat Important
Leader 10 21-25 Slightly satisfied Quite a bit Extremely important
Leader 11 16-20 Slightly satisfied Somewhat Extremely important
Leader 12 0-5 Satisfied Quite a bit Extremely important
Leader 13 0-5 Extremely satisfied Very little Extremely important
Leader 14 11-15 Satisfied Quite a bit Important

It is equally important to note that charter leaders were asked in the online survey to
further break down their overall attrition rates into four categories which included: percent of
teachers who were movers, leavers, involuntary leavers, and retirees (see Table 8). Teachers
identified as movers were those who moved from one school to another—be it a move to another
charter, district, or private school. Leavers were those teachers who left the teaching profession
altogether. Involuntary leavers were teachers whose annual teacher contracts were not renewed
for whatever reason, and retirees were those teachers who formally retired from teaching. For all
14 leaders combined, on average, 55 percent of teachers were classified as movers who left to
find a job at another school. A little over 13 percent of teachers were identified as leavers who
left education for another career. Twenty-eight percent of the teachers were involuntary leavers
and only 3 percent of teachers were identified as those who retired. Only two leaders, Leader 13
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

76
and Leader 14 reported percentages for teachers who left due to retirement—the other 12 leaders
reported zero percentages for the retiree category. This of course is of no surprise given that most
charter school teachers are very young and most charter schools in Los Angeles are also still
knew—having been in operation for less than ten years in many cases. Additionally, Leader 1,
Leader 4, Leader 6, Leader 7, Leader 9, Leader 11, and Leader 14 also reported high percentages
for teachers who fell under the category of involuntary leavers—between 30-50 percent of their
overall attrition rates were due to involuntary leave or nonrenewal of the annual teacher contract.
Table 8 Attrition Rate Percent Breakdown
Attrition Movers Leavers Involuntary Leavers Retired
Leader 1 26-30 40 20 40 0
Leader 2 16-20 80 10 10 0
Leader 3 16-20 40 40 20 0
Leader 4 11-15 60 10 30 0
Leader 5 16-20 60 10 30 0
Leader 6 6-10 60 10 30 0
Leader 7 11-15 30 30 40 0
Leader 8 16-20 50 25 25 0
Leader 9 6-10 70 0 30 0
Leader 10 21-25 70 10 20 0
Leader 11 16-20 50 0 50 0
Leader 12 0-5 80 10 10 0
Leader 13 0-5 33.3 0 33.3 33.3
Leader 14 11-15 50 5 40 5
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

77
Furthermore, despite much of the work and the efforts of the charter and “schools of
choice” movement, charter school teacher retention rates continue to be significantly lower than
traditional public school teachers (Herman et al., 2013; Stuit & Smith, 2012; Smith & Ingersoll,
2004; Miron & Applegate, 2007; Toma & Zimmer, 2012; Carruthers, 2012; Newton, Rivero,
Fuller, & Dauter, 2011; Renzulli et al., 2011; Guarino, Santibanez, & Daley, 2006; Torres,
2014). Even more importantly, as teachers move across schools and districts or leave the
teaching profession altogether, research shows that high teacher attrition has a direct negative
impact on student achievement and performance in the classroom (Sanders & Rivers, 1996;
Wright et al., 1997; Borman & Dowling, 2008; Hanushek, 1992). Findings by Hanushek (1992)
indicate that differences among teachers are “unquestionably large and significant” and can alter
student achievement by as much as one grade-level equivalent in test performance. Other studies
have shown that the difference between being taught by a highly qualified, highly effective
teacher or an inexperienced and ineffective teacher can translate into at least two years of
negative or positive growth for the student; it can also mean the difference between taking
remedial courses or accelerated courses as the student advances into the next grade level
(Sanders & Rivers, 1996; Wright, Horn, & Sanders, 1997; Borman & Dowling, 2008; Hanushek,
1992). Because most charter schools serve low-income, minority students, the challenges of
finding quality teachers become even greater since all the research around teacher attrition
consistently forecasts higher attrition rates in high poverty and high-needs schools (Guarino et
al., 2006; Lake et al., 2010; Renzulli et al., 2011; Newton et al., 2011; Stuit & Smith, 2012).
In comparing what both historical and current research has acknowledged to be the
reasons why teachers leave their schools, Figure 1 highlights the findings from this study and
reveals what the 35 charter leaders who participated in this research study specifically identified
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

78
as primary reasons why they felt their teachers left their schools. As highlighted in Figure 1,
charter leaders identified pay and benefits, life circumstances such as marriage, parenthood, and
relocation, teacher burnout, teacher age, and teacher experience to be some of the main reasons
why their teachers leave their schools and sometimes even why they leave education altogether.
Figure 2 further shows the breakdown of the 14 leaders who both took the survey and were
interviewed. Almost identical to what the other leaders who only took the survey reported, the 14
leaders identified teacher pay and benefits, teacher burnout, life circumstances that include such
things as marriage, parenthood, pursuit of higher education, and relocation, ineffective principal
leadership, teacher age, years of teaching experience, and lack of job security as reasons why
teachers might leave their schools. During the interviews many leaders also expressed they
strongly believed that the community and school match for the teacher and the unstable charter
authorization process were also major contributing factors as to reasons why their teachers and
even school leaders leave in such high numbers. Details about the findings from this study will
be presented on each of these areas in the next section.

16%
14%
14%
9%
7%
7%
6%
6%
5%
4%
4%
4%
2%
1%
1%
Figure 1. Survey Question #18: What are the primary reasons why teachers leave your charter?
Choose all that apply. (Responses from all 35 Charter Leaders who took the survey)
Pay & Benefits
Life Circumstances
Teacher Burnout
Teacher Age
Teacher Experience
Urban vs. Suburban Schools
Lack of Job Security
Facilities
Leadership Teams
Supports & PD
Promotions
Involuntary Termination
High Student Discipline
Lack of Credentials
Disconnect with School's Mission
Lack of Unions
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

79

Life Circumstances, Teacher Age, and Teacher Experience
One of the more intriguing factors that charter leaders identified as a top contender in the
list of reasons why teachers leave their schools was something they specifically referred to as
“life situations,” “life,” or “life circumstances.” This is further defined as situations that arise in
the life of these more oftentimes-younger charter teachers who leave their schools or leave
education altogether to get married, have children, and relocate back to their communities in
different cities and states. Findings show that many of these teachers also leave teaching to
pursue higher degrees in different careers other than teaching. Life circumstances was identified
as the number one reason why teachers left by the 14 leaders who were interviewed and the
number two reason why teachers resigned by all 35 charter leaders combined who took the
online survey. In commenting about this topic, Leader 1 said, “People just say, ‘you, know, this
just isn’t for me. I’m going to go sell houses. I can make more money.’” He added:
18%
16%
16%
12%
8%
6%
6%
4%
4%
4%
2%
2%
2%
Figure 2. Survey Question #18: What are the primary reasons why teachers leave your charter? Choose
all that apply. (Responses from the 14 Charter Leaders who took the survey and were also interviewed)
Life Circumstances
Pay & Benefits
Teacher Burnout
Leadership Teams
Teacher Age
Lack of Job Security
Supports & PD
Urban vs. Suburban Schools
Promotions
Teacher Experience
Facilities
Student Discipline
Lack of Credentials
Involuntary Termination
Disconnect with School's Mission
Lack of Unions
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

80
And that’s totally fine, but that gets us into a larger conversation about the teaching
profession. It’s going to be a disaster. It’s only going to get worse in the next decade.
Every year is going to be worse than the year before as far as the caliber and quantity of
teachers. It’s deeply disconcerting and it’s not just charters. It’s not just [CMO name].
It’s everybody. The question is how are we going to deal with that?
Leader 1’s concern about the future of the teaching profession was something many
leaders talked about. Many of these leaders want to change the overall attitude and perception of
the teaching profession—they want the teaching profession to be more respected and to be
considered more “professional.” In speaking to this very point, one leader commented on the
online survey about how one of the challenges at his CMO with regards to retaining teachers has
been trying to reconcile what young teachers want as they navigate through different career
options. He also specifically mentioned Teach for America teachers and said:
[The greatest challenge has been with] young teachers who see teaching as a temporary
job before going on to graduate school or other work. Although I am a huge fan of the
organization, Teach for America has had a lot to do with creating this type of mentality in
our young people where they see teaching as a service rather than a profession and a
vocation. We have to do something on the national scale, such as a PR campaign to make
teaching a respected profession. What they did in Finland comes to mind. Schools of
education also have to be extremely selective in who they admit into their programs and
we as a nation should subsidize teacher preparation by paying for it 100 percent.
Similar sentiments were expressed about Teach for America teachers by another school leader
who on the online survey said:
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

81
The reliance of many charter schools on recruitment/hiring systems such as Teach for
America to staff teachers has inherent disadvantages in teacher retention given that the
program itself has a higher than average attrition rate as compared to traditional district
hiring practices.
Findings also show that this idea of making teaching more “professional” is one reason why
many CMOs and charter schools developed pay for performance models at their schools to
recruit, reward, and retain highly effective and highly qualified teachers. Whether this is working
or not is another topic all on its own, and warrants a formal study to determine its effectiveness.
Leader 2 and Leader 3 also added to this discussion and highlighted several key points
about the caliber of the teachers they hire and about the possible new norm of the millennial
generation when it comes to their feelings and approach about choosing and staying in a
particular profession. Describing the millennial generation further, Leader 2 commented:
I think it is true what the stereotype says about the next generation of millennials—they
don’t stay in one place. It’s not necessarily because they’re not happy. That’s just the way
they grew up and their mindset. Their way of thinking is different from previous
generations where you grow up thinking, “I’m going to stay in one job, and that’s going
to be my life for the next 40 years.” The new generation is interested in a lot of different
things. They just want to explore and test the waters. I don’t think it’s necessarily because
they’re not happy. That’s just their style…and our values have changed and so, it’s going
to be interesting what happens to our profession with this new generation.
As Leader 2 went on to comment more on her overall attrition rates she said, “It will be
interesting to see how many people actually stay beyond five years.”
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

82
Similarly, Leader 3 reinforced Leader 2’s comments and said that when his team goes out
to recruit teachers, they are generally looking for team players and hiring the best from top
universities and teaching programs. He further added:
What I see in that generation of folks is that they want to be teaching for five to seven
years and then [they] go get another diploma and move on with another career. They
want to become lawyers or get masters in teaching and go into administration. We see a
lot of our really good people that we hire and unfortunately we suffer from the fact that
they have a lot of opportunities in life because they are top individuals.
Leader 3 went on to give several examples of his best teachers leaving teaching to become
doctors, lawyers, and businessmen. Many of these individuals are also driven to lead schools of
their own. He sees many of his best teachers getting doctorate degrees in education and opening
up their own charter schools or joining leadership teams to lead schools as principals and
directors. “It’s a huge loss,” Leader 3 said and further demonstrated the gravity of the situation
by saying:
As they [new teachers] start maturing on with their life and they want a more stable
financial situation or they want to buy a house, get married, have kids, they start to think,
“I can’t make this work at sixty thousand, seventy thousand dollars a year. I could make
over a hundred by doing the following”…I don’t think it’s no longer the career that it was
maybe forty years ago…You see less and less of people getting into careers like, “I want
to be a teacher for the rest of my life.” You see less of that. That was common around an
age. They’re leaving because they went through that [teaching] and they enjoyed it. Most
of them leave on good terms. But that type of demographic—they want to do something
else in life…we generally hire high-performing people and high performing people are in
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

83
high demand in every sector of the economy and so they have more opportunities outside
of the classroom.
Perhaps Leader 14 synthesized all of these points to its simplest form by saying that when you
are dealing with young teachers who are 24 and 25 years old, the number one reason teachers
leave her school is because “life really just gets in their way.”
Lastly, with regards to teacher age and experience, aside from the points already made
about the overall feeling charter leaders have about young people and their desire to explore and
navigate through different careers more often than previous generations, teacher age and
experience is something that charter schools will need to continue finding solutions for since
most charter school teachers are usually younger than 30 years of age, straight out-of-
credentialing school, inexperienced teachers (Miron & Applegate, 2007) (see Table 4: Interview
Participants—School Demographics: Teachers). For other leaders, however, teacher age and
experience were not necessarily considered to be a problem, but more of an “opportunity” in
terms of helping to grow these new and young teachers around the specific programs and
initiatives their charters are focused on. Leader 5 further illustrated this point and said:
I don’t think age and years of teaching are necessarily always an asset. Some people are
set in their ways when they’ve been around for a long time and aren’t willing to change,
even when research says things should be done differently.
Teacher Pay and Benefits
Supported by literature that says teacher pay and benefits are among the top contributing
factors as to why teachers leave schools, findings show that eight of the 14 leaders interviewed
for this study agreed and similarly identified teacher pay and benefits as one of the greatest
challenges they are faced with. Leader 1 illustrated this very same point in the simplest way
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

84
possible by saying it is all about, “money, dollars, and cents.” He further added, “Now that the
district is hiring, the district has a pay scale…we can’t compete with that. We can’t pay our
teachers 80 grand a year. Our cap goes up to $75,000.” Charter leaders expressed serious concern
about district schools offering more competitive pay and benefits with a set salary schedule. One
of the charter leaders who did not participate in the interview, but completed the online survey
raised additional concerns about how the district schools would be outcompeting charters for
their best teachers in more than one way by adding:
For charter schools in general, I think the increasingly robust economy will actually be a
double-edged sword. We will have larger amounts of money in our budgets, but so will
surrounding traditional school districts. Those districts that had been laying off teachers
in droves in the past decade here in California will now be hiring and hiring for a wide
variety of positions that most charter schools do not have (i.e. central office, mid-level
management, etc.)…This results in outsized resource allocations for recruitment for the
charter sector.
Leader 7 additionally commented on a specific problem her CMO faces with
competitively compensating the “hard to fill” subjects like calculus, chemistry, physics, and
special education. As it is, teachers in these specific four areas are already hard to find for all
schools even with the most competitive pay—charters continue to struggle finding qualified
people to fill these positions. “It’s always a challenge,” Leader 7 said. “Especially with special
education teachers. They’re in such short supply, and high demand…We lost some really good
special education teachers this year to another charter school because they offered her $20,000
more in salary.” Leader 7 further reflected and said, “I think one of the things that we’re going to
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

85
have to do as a system of schools is being more flexible about compensating at a higher level for
highly qualified, highly successful, and hard to fill positions.”
Charter Leader 10 also said she quickly realized that a solid school culture and a
teacher’s strong belief in the mission of the school alone is not adequate enough to retain all
teachers. She added:
We had an interesting phenomenon this year. Four teachers who came to us really
wanting something different—smaller class sizes, smaller schools—two of the four we
hired took a huge cut in pay in order to come. After several weeks, they both turned
around and rescinded their acceptance and said they couldn’t deal with that much of a cut
in pay.
For other leaders, however, pay and benefits were definitely not issues because they had
already enacted policies within their organization to ensure that they were providing teachers
with competitive compensation and benefits options. Leader 6, for example, said, “Generally
speaking, people don’t leave because of money. We stay aggressive with the other salaries…We
are always ahead of LAUSD [Los Angeles Unified School District] with our salaries. We are
again ahead of even the state contracts. Money is not usually a reason we lose people.”
Other leaders took the issue of competitive pay to a new level and very seriously likened
the situation as an issue of morality. Even though his particular CMO also lost teachers due to
issues regarding competitive pay and benefits, Leader 11 very passionately stated the following:
There is a very unfair expectation that is set in our society about teachers. That they
should be teaching, this very challenging work, that’s a really tough environment and that
they’re almost supposed to martyr themselves. Like they’re not supposed to be well
compensated for the work they do. It’s completely unfair, especially when you look at
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

86
some of the other societies around the world where the schools perform really well.
Teachers are paid very well and they are revered. Then, you come to the US and it’s like
teachers are not revered, they are underpaid, and like I said, there’s almost this
expectation that they’re supposed to sacrifice and sacrifice and sacrifice. Like, they’re a
monk or a priest or whatever. Then, that means, that I think teachers are almost
embarrassed to tell their bosses…“Hey, I’m going to work somewhere else because I
want to make a little more money.”
With regards to challenges around pay and benefits, many charter schools also have to be
ready to address the concerns around their performance pay models. Research shows that most
new teachers generally view teacher pay, merit pay, and bonuses as extrinsic motivators. Most
charter schools also continue to promote their schools by offering some sort of merit pay or
bonus pay option (Malloy & Wohlstetter, 2003). When charters do offer pay for performance
options, they are usually also tied to evaluation models and accountability measures from
standardized tests and student growth percentiles from grade to grade. The problem with this
though is that, both historically from research conducted by Wise et al. (1985) to current findings
by Kohn (2003), the vast majority of educators do not consider standardized tests as a valid
measure of teacher effectiveness which in turn decides the bonus and merit pay schedules. Kohn
(2003) further added that no conclusive scientific research has proven that incentives through
rewards and pay determines long term enhancements of the quality of work a person will do.
Supported by this research, Leader 1 and Leader 12 spoke extensively about their pay for
performance models and suggested that it does become an area of added stress on many
teachers—which in turn causes them to leave for schools that do not require such a model for
contract renewals and salary adjustments. Leader 1 added:
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

87
We’re purely effectiveness-based. We’ve been that way for three years. This last year the
salary changes for our teachers range from 1-10 percent. There are some teachers who
have gotten a 10 percent raise because they are highly effective…That’s one of the things
that teachers are still becoming familiar with because some teachers are just like, “Hey, I
want to know what I’m going to be earning three years from now.” And at a fundamental
level I disagree with that because what you should earn three years from now, in my
opinion, and unfortunately everywhere else but in public education, it depends on you—
on your performance.
Even with this model and philosophy, most of Leader 1’s teachers want the comfort and security
of a stable salary schedule that they can depend upon. Leader 12 also commented on his charter’s
performance pay model and stated that security and stability was perhaps the main reason why
his teachers were flocking to the district schools. He added:
I would say that involves the stepping column [teacher salary schedule]. We don’t offer a
stepping column. I would say secondly, pay…I’ve heard this comment a little bit on folks
when I do exit interviews with staff about our performance based system. The stress [of
pay for performance] versus the traditional rules-based district system; they feel like the
stress is less at the district level. So there’s a stress component that they [teachers] feel
like they’re not willing to keep up with the performance expectation that creates stress.
They feel that at a district level they can cruise a little bit more. In fact, I just had an exit
interview with an employee who left in one year, decided to go to the district and made
the statement, “It’ll be easier. Less expectations, a little easier and a lighter load.”

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

88
Teacher Burnout
Research by Torres (2014) on teacher perceptions of workload and its relation to high
attrition in CMOs finds that in many instances the workload at charter schools is
“unmanageable” and “unsustainable” and may in fact be the primary cause of teacher turnover.
Charter leaders interviewed and surveyed for this study similarly expressed concern over teacher
burnout and teacher fatigue. The findings in this study unequivocally show that charter leaders
are aware that their teachers are leaving due to burnout and unmanageable workloads.
Teacher burnout has always been an issue—not just for charter schools—but also just in
the profession in general as voiced by Leader 2. Leader 2 further reported that some teachers
were a lot more vocal about the challenges of burnout than others. At her CMO, teachers went
specifically to her to raise concerns about the workload, saying such things as “this is just way
too much,” and “you’re requiring us too much time” in terms of some of the policies the site
principals wanted them to follow.
Many of the root causes of teacher burnout also stem from areas that most charter schools
and CMOs celebrate and promote. Factors such as serving low-income, low-achieving minority
students from urban areas, longer school days and extended school years, frequent teacher
observations and pay for performance evaluation models are all contributing factors to teacher
burnout and overall job satisfaction according to Torres (2014). Research also shows young and
inexperienced teachers serving low-income, low-achieving minority youth have the highest
propensity to leave these schools and to leave the profession altogether (Hanushek et al., 2001;
Miron & Applegate, 2007; Stuit & Smith, 2012). In reference to this, Leader 3 said:
The fatigue factor of having to deal with students that have been kicked out of other
places, or who are coming back from jail, who have huge discipline issues, huge
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

89
behavioral or emotional issues that have not been dealt with in their history and now
they’re in front of you and they’re disruptive to the class…You see a lot of teachers just
being fatigued. That’s real! The solution is not to kick the kids out. But the question is
where are the supports that we’re building around for the teachers to help them be more
successful with these types of students?
With regards to teacher burnout and attrition, charter leaders also compared charter
burnout versus what their teachers eventually perceive the work to be like at the local,
neighborhood district schools. The general agreement around this issue was that after a teacher’s
third or fourth year of teaching, they begin to wonder how much easier the job might actually be
at a traditional district school. Leader 10 commented on this and said:
What happens after a teacher has been here a few years, the first few years, everyone is
usually working hard, onboard, trying to make it all work and then after a few years, they
start talking to their colleagues in other districts and again, their workload is less, they
have a shorter work day, they make more money, and frankly some of them have left
because they just don’t want to work this hard.
Similarly, Leader 11 said:
Burnout probably exists in all environments, but I think that there is a culture at a lot of
charter schools of longer school days, longer school hours, very mission-driven, and
especially in young schools—schools that are only a few years old where faculty
members, at the beginning, feel like founding faculty—they have a sense of ownership
that you probably are less likely to have if you’re stepping in as a teacher to a school that
has been around for 40 or 50 years. I think it’s wonderful because it creates this sense of
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

90
ownership, but I think that one of the areas of fallout is burnout…we’re asking kind of
too much from our teachers and we find that some of them run out of steam.
Principal Leadership
Another critical area that charter leaders identified as a major contributing factor in their
CMO or charter’s attrition rates was principal effectiveness. Findings from this study show
charter leaders believe ineffective and inexperienced principals cause greater teacher burnout and
ultimately higher attrition rates at their schools. These findings are further supported with
literature by Torres (2014), which found that teachers had a greater propensity to stay at schools
where the principal was more experienced and could provide the supports that teachers needed to
do their job well. Trust and confidence in an effective principal is important at any school, but it
is especially important in charter schools where teachers do not have unions or collective
bargaining agreements to help advocate for their needs. Only about 12 percent of charter schools
have unions (Gross, 2011). Reflecting about her schools, Leader 4 said, “When I have a weak
principal, that tends to be the site where there’s the most turnover. People, and teachers
particularly, want to be part of a winning team.” Troubled by the significant differences in the
attrition rates of the different schools within her CMO, Leader 5 further added the following
about principal leadership:
One thing at the top of my list, I would say, is trying to understand why there’s such a
significant difference from school to school. We have some schools with virtually zero
turnover unless somebody moves to another state or something—just very minimal
change over the years, and others, every year there is a 50 percent turnover. To me, that
can only be something happening with the leadership of the school.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

91
Because principals “set the tone and expectations for establishing core values at the
school” (Leader 5), charter leaders are also investing a lot of money and resources into better
recruiting and training their principals. Training for principals is needed in all areas according to
charter leaders. Several leaders including Leader 2, Leader 4, Leader 5, Leader 7, and Leader 8
all talked about helping principals become better at recruiting and interviewing teachers. Almost
all charter schools and CMOs grant principals full autonomy in making hiring and firing
decisions. Speaking to this specific issue, Leader 4 said, “A weak leader is also going to be the
kind of leader who is probably going to hire weaker teachers…there’s definitely a higher
probability of turnover there.” Leader 5 also made similar comments about training principals to
be better at recruiting and interviewing and said, “We need to train principals with teacher
selection. I do think that’s a need. Some principals are very good at it, some are not.” Leader 8
additionally added that her CMO sees an increase in attrition rates when there is turnover within
the leadership teams at the school. She further added:
When there is a leadership transition, we don’t have a set program and so a new leader
might come in and have a different direction. Often, when we have leadership transitions,
it’s because the school needs to improve. The new leader might require more
accountability, or put on additional requirements to make sure that the school is on the
path to improvement. I think that any time we have leadership transition, whether they’re
at a school site or in our support team, we do find turnover seems to be higher during that
period.
And finally, Leader 1 added to these findings and corroborated what the other leaders
reported by saying that he thinks weak leadership teams might be more of a reason why his
teachers leave than issues around competitive pay and benefits. He further added, “We have done
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

92
some significant leadership changes between last year and next fall because I saw a high
correlation between leaders who we thought were struggling and turnover at their schools.”
During teacher exit interviews, Leader 1 said his teachers reported not getting any support from
principals and generally feeling unhappy at their school. Having worked extensively on ensuring
a quality and effective principal is leading every one of his schools, after four years, Leader 1
said, “This is the first year I can look at every single one of our schools and be really, really
happy with our leaders.” He hopes the change in leadership will help the over 50 percent attrition
rates his schools were hitting every year before his tenure.
Unstable and Uncooperative Charter Authorization Process
Despite the fact that “unstable and uncooperative charter authorization process” was not
part of one of the choices for survey question 18 which asked charter leaders to identify the
primary factors they believed led to teachers leaving their schools, it is imperative that this
finding is presented because “unstable and uncooperative charter authorization process” was a
chief concern that many of the charter leaders brought up in the open-ended response portion of
the survey and during the subsequent interviews that followed the online survey.
California Education Code Section 47600, known as the “Charter Schools Act of 1992,”
and specifically Section 47604.32, requires each district, county, or state chartering authority—
“with respect to each charter school under its authority” to conduct annual school oversight
visits. During these visits, the chartering authority conducts reviews of the school’s fiscal
conditions and dozens of other compliance measures that it requires the charter school to adhere
to. Through these oversight visits, the chartering authority essentially has the power to a) renew
the charter, b) revoke the charter, or c) demand that the school “cease operation for any reason”
(California Education Code: Section 47604.32). It is exactly for these reasons that many charter
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

93
leaders identified this issue as another “unnecessary” added stressor that traditional district
schools do not have to worry about. Reiterating this very same point, Leader 6 stated the
following:
Because of the accountability that charters have, in terms of having to be renewed every
five years and because they are under the microscope in so many ways, there is a great
deal more accountability in the field expected of teachers. And the work is harder…We
can’t hide. Our data is presented for our renewals. Because of that, everybody in the
charter world, from the founders to the leaders to all the stakeholders, just take the work a
lot more seriously—which we should. That’s one of the greatest things about charter
schools, but I think some teachers become exhausted from the work.
In comparison, Leader 7 expressed serious concern about the school district that authorizes her
CMO’s charter and their relentless desire to close down their charter. Leader 7 said that despite
the fact that her charter schools outperform the neighborhood district schools while serving 97
percent high-poverty/free and reduced lunch children, the authorizing district was still trying to
close them down. Leader 7 added, “So teachers have left because they were worried about
whether or not they were going to have a job!” She further stated:
If the school district [authorizing district] says in June, “Well, we’re closing your
schools,” the teachers go, “Holy cow! We want to have a job in the fall.” So the
instability has been driven from our authorizers. This has been a real problem for us in
the last two years…That is just wrong and it does have an impact on our ability to find
and retain staff.
Leader 7 also reported that she feels that the district is generally attacking high quality charters.
“They’re coming up with bogus reasons to non-renew them,” she added. These constant
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

94
oversight visits and the demands that the authorizing districts require charters to fulfill are not
only causing added stress to these schools and stakeholders, it is also very costly and time
consuming. Leaders reported having to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal fees and
staff fees to respond to chartering authority audits and other requests. “It literally took up the
entire back office team’s time for a whole year responding to this request and that request, and
explaining things to them.” Additionally, in an LA School Report article published in March of
2014 it was reported that a dip in enrollment with LAUSD could cost the district hundreds of
thousands of dollars. LAUSD’s Chief Financial Officer Megan Reilly was quoted in the article
when she reported to the school board “about 44 percent of the movement has been to charter
schools.” The same report also noted “the majority of the decline is due to demographic changes
as Southern California birthrates decline, and people are moving out of the area” (Romo). All of
this translates to dollars and cents that districts will continue to lose as California—and Los
Angeles in particular—continues to see a surge in the number of charter schools as the Broad
Foundation and others have said they want to see half of LAUSD’s students be enrolled in
charter schools. “Under the projected $490-million plan, half of L.A. Unified students would be
enrolled in charters over the next eight years. That compares with about 16% today. L.A. Unified
already has the most charters and charter students — more than 100,000 — of any district in the
country” (Blume). Even so, charters cannot simply ignore or dismiss their authorizing bodies
anytime soon. As Leader 10 expressed, “We [charters] are held to a higher standard so we can’t
ignore it.”
Discussion
Findings from this study show that charter leaders are very well aware of the many
different factors that contribute to their teachers leaving their schools and in many cases leaving
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

95
the teaching profession altogether. Several areas of concern were identified by charter leaders
through online surveys and interviews including life circumstances, teacher burnout, teacher age
and experience, teacher pay and benefits, principal leadership, and many, oftentimes stifling,
accountability measures that are placed on charters by their charter authorizing bodies.
It is also important to note that findings from this study further revealed that charter
leaders understand how costly high attrition is both financially and in terms of its detrimental
effect on student achievement and school culture as mentioned by several leaders. In some cases
charter leaders were seeing that up to 80 percent of their current teachers were not at their
schools four or five years ago. Leaders understand how this kind of attrition negatively affects
program continuity, resource allocation, and school culture at their schools. In talking exactly
about this topic, Leader 1 said:
Having some continuity is important because the churn is not good for test results when
you get new teachers. It’s certainly not good for school culture because the parents and
students find it difficult to connect to a teacher. You go to a campus and you don’t even
know if you’ll see your teacher from a previous grade level there anymore. That’s
disconcerting for all.
Furthermore, a specific area in attrition rates that charter schools should examine and
reflect on is in the “involuntary leavers” category because it is directly in their scope of control
and influence. Ten of the 14 leaders interviewed for this study reported that anywhere between
25 and 50 percent of their overall teacher attrition rates fell under the category of “involuntary
leavers”—or simply put, teachers who were fired for one reason or another (see Table 8 Attrition
Rate Percent Breakdown). Since many of the teachers charter schools hire are younger and
inexperienced teachers, investing in strong professional development, induction, peer mentoring,
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

96
and coaching programs can help support and retain more of these teachers. This is further
supported by research that highlights the importance of mentorship and induction programs for
all teachers and, in particular, for first-year teachers as another way to reduce attrition rates and
increase teacher job satisfaction and efficacy (Johnson et al., 2001; Smith & Ingersoll, 2004;
Inman & Marlow, 2004).
Lastly, it is interesting to highlight one area that was not seen as a contributing factor to
teachers leaving charter schools—lack of unions and collective bargaining units. Even more
remarkable is that not one of the 35 leaders who were either interviewed and/or surveyed for this
study identified “lack of unions” as a reason why teachers might leave their schools (see Figure 1
and Figure 2). A lack of job security and collective bargaining units at most charter schools may
be reasons why charter schools have higher attrition rates. Teachers at most charter schools are
at-will employees and “the school administration or governing board can readily hire and fire
teachers and staff” (Miron & Applegate, 2007, p. 25). In fact only about 12 percent of charter
schools are unionized (Gross, 2011). Schools without unions must find mechanisms where
teachers can formally express disagreements with school policies without fear of retribution
(Ingersoll, 2001). Without these formal procedures and the unpredictable realities of being on an
at-will annual contract at charter schools, it is easy for teachers to lose trust in their
administrators and seek outside representation (Gross, 2011).
Even so, many of the leaders interviewed for this study disagreed that unions help with
retention—including two of the four schools in this study that already have unions. Leader 10,
for example, said:
Unions try to convince charter school teachers that they are traditional school teachers
and so they create this conflict within them. People go into charters for different reasons
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

97
and so when you negotiate with most union groups, I think their mindset is not wrapped
around charter [schools].
Leader 10 further added that even with the union present, they have worked hard to adamantly
not agree to such concessions as tenure. She further added that it has not helped her school with
retention at all. Most of her teachers who initiated the union process at her school have left—
including the union president who left the school shortly after the first round of negotiations.
Leader 14 made similar remarks and said:
The first year of the union, I think I lost about half my staff. I would say no [unions do
not help with retention]. I would say a lot of people don’t want to be part of a union.
They don’t want their hard-earned money to go to UTLA [United Teachers Los Angeles].
I think that maybe if they unionized internally where they were just their own group of
teachers, they probably would have done better. The politics of the large UTLA when
they are very clear that UTLA is anti-charter—teachers feel it’s disingenuous to have
them representing charters...The quality of representation that they get is also subpar, if
you will, and they are quick to realize that.
Leader 7 also talked about how “harmful” unions would be to her CMO as Leader 9 added the
following:
I think the success of charter schools really has alerted the unions to a whole group of
people they would like to participate with. In reality, charters are successful because they
don’t have a union and because there is that relationship of trust. It’s more like a family.
That definitely puts a division between the family to where now there’s almost a sense of
distrust in the family that you have to have some else, like a referee, checking up on
things.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

98
Leader 14, however, said some aspects of the union contract are very beneficial and may
help with retention:
In some ways, having a union contract helps because they [teachers] can look up and
realize, “Okay, I think it pays x amount and I can guarantee them to get paid y next year.
If I take four more classes, I can be paid z.” Having that mapped out I think is really
beneficial.
Leader 3 further elaborated on some of the positives of having a union at his CMO and said:
The fact that we have a union has actually made management way less arrogant about
pouring down ideas from the top without really listening to and getting input really well
with all teachers. If we don’t get our union to approve it then it’s meaningless. If there’s
opposition from the ranks that says this is BS, it’s not going to go anywhere, right? It
doesn’t matter how good the idea is. We invest our time, because we have a union,
investing in those communications and those input gatherings and those focus groups.
We actually spend real time listening to the people on the ground. I think that gives us the
teacher voice. You could argue that it’s because of the union, but essentially we believe
in it. We truly believe in the teacher voice. The union gives us that credibility externally.
Final Thoughts on Research Question Two
Whatever the underlying issues of what causes teacher attrition may be, it is important to
note that this study shows that most charters deal with a combination of issues; it is not just one
or two factors that contribute to teachers leaving. It is a multifaceted issue with ever changing
challenges as schools, teachers, educational policies, communities, and student demographics
continue to change and present themselves with new demands and new challenges. It is equally
important to acknowledge the fact that CMO and charter leaders are all working very diligently
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

99
to reflect on these challenges and to address these issues to help support and retain as many
teachers as they can through specific policy changes and new initiatives that they continue to
enact. Research Question Three in the next section will highlight some of these specific policies
that CMOs and charter leaders have started implementing as a response to these challenges.
Research Question Three: What initiatives and best practices are charter school/CMO CEOs
implementing to recruit and retain teachers?
Findings from this study reveal that CMO and charter leaders acknowledge and
understand the diverse set of challenges and factors that contribute to charter teacher attrition.
Findings will also show how charter schools are recruiting new teachers. Lastly, findings will
show that CMO and charter leaders are proactively exploring and experimenting innovative ways
of intervening to help control and address the high attrition rates at their schools. The specific
policies and initiatives that will be presented in this section include:
• Policies around higher pay and increased benefits
• The addition of bonuses, incentive pay, pay for performance models, and teacher
leadership opportunities
• Extended teacher contracts
• Teacher supports and professional development
• Promoting the charter school model
Teacher Recruitment
When it comes to recruiting teachers, charter schools employ a wide variety of strategies
to interview and hire the most qualified teachers. With the exception of a few schools, most
charter schools continue to allow site leadership teams—school site principals and assistant
principals—to make all hiring decisions including the manner in which they interview teacher
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

100
candidates. Leader 5 commented on this and said that her CMO grants “complete autonomy” to
the principal for all hiring decisions, but also admitted that this might not be the best process to
use. She added:
It was at the discretion of the principal as to who they would hire. I wouldn’t say that was
a strong area in terms of process. I’d say in the earlier years there was more focus on how
to conduct an interview, how to set criteria, but many principals came with their own
ideas and ways of doing things or got ideas from other principals.
Teach for America (TFA) also continues to supply charter schools with teachers—some
schools and CMOs more than others. Leader 4 and Leader 8 reported 40 percent of their teachers
come directly from Teach for America. Another five leaders reported between 10 and 13 percent
of their teachers to be TFA teachers (see Table 4 Interview Participants—School Demographics:
Teachers).
Furthermore, charter leaders reported most of their site principals used the following
multistep interview protocols to interview all potential candidates:
• Initial application process through EDJOIN.ORG (a public education job search website)
• Application screening
• Phone interview
• Initial panel interview
• Writing samples
• Follow up interview focused more on curriculum and instruction
• Demo-lessons
• Question and answer session with students
• Lesson plan reviews and feedback sessions with teachers
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

101
• Participation in professional development
Not all schools used every step highlighted above, but for the most part, charter leaders
reported very comprehensive and tiered interview protocols that their site leaders routinely
followed. The application screening included credential screenings to ensure that all candidates
were properly credentialed in the subject they teach. Once candidates pass the application
screening process, they are either given phone interviews or they are invited for an initial
interview at the school site or the CMO office. Initial interviews were reported to be panel
interviews at most charter schools. The panels consisted of teachers, counselors, assistant
principals, parents, and community members. Many charter leaders also reported having
candidates go through a sample writing exercise during the initial interview phase. Most writing
prompts asked candidates to reflect on their teaching philosophies, reasons why they got into
teaching, or about specific successful lessons they previously planned and taught. If candidates
make it to the next round, follow up interviews usually focus more on instruction and
curriculum—with teachers and department chairs leading the interviews with the principal.
Additionally, nearly all charter leaders reported having their candidates conduct a demo lesson.
Demo lessons were done either in a classroom in front of students or with the interviewing panel
members. Two schools leaders also reported having their candidates go through a question and
answer session with students during the final stages of the interview process. Another interesting
and unique interviewing practice is what Leader 3 reported with the feedback sessions. Leader 3
further added:
We have incorporated feedback sessions and not only do they [candidates] give the
lesson, but we actually provide feedback based on our rubrics and see how they react to
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

102
that feedback. We’re looking for a kind of growth where we have reflective individuals.
That’s an additional step that we added a couple of years ago.
Leader 13 and several other leaders also reported they had similar feedback sessions with the
teacher candidate and the panel. The candidates present their lesson plans before teaching the
lesson and receive feedback from the panel members. The candidates then teach the lesson and
then have a debriefing session with the panel. The panel weighs in how much of their initial
feedback the teacher candidate was able to quickly incorporate and adjust in the lesson plan and
how reflective they really were during the debriefing session. Many of the leaders also have
rubrics for all of these different steps to ensure that everyone involved in the interviewing
process is providing feedback that is objective and specific to the needs of the school and the
position they are hiring for.
Lastly, many leaders also reported hiring directly from colleges of education. Networking
with these colleges and creating a pipeline is another way of ensuring that charters are hiring
qualified individuals who are properly credentialed and better prepared to go into the classroom.
Additionally, CMOs and charter schools hold job fairs where university candidates are invited to
visit the schools and apply for open positions. Charter leaders also regularly visit the universities
and maintain close working relationships with the faculty and deans of education. They present
to credentialing program students and oftentimes even do guest lecture sessions where they
promote their CMOs and invite credential students to further research their schools and apply
online through EDJOIN.ORG.
Having such a comprehensive process for recruiting teachers is very important for charter
leaders and also beneficial for the candidates because as Leader 11 stated, he does not wish for
there to be a “mismatch” with the teacher candidate and his schools. He further added:
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

103
Avoiding a mismatch is as important to us as it is to the candidate. It’s making sure that
they don’t end up joining an organization where in six months they realize, “Wow, this is
a terrible fit.” That sets them back professionally and it sets us back in the classroom with
our students.
Teacher Retention Policies
Higher Pay and Increased Benefits
Findings from this study show that one major policy shift charter leaders are examining
and experimenting with is rethinking their teacher salary schedules and benefits plans. Several
charter schools reported not even having salary schedules and so constructing and then utilizing a
salary schedule is a major policy shift all on its own. With regards to competitive pay and
benefits, 11 of the 14 leaders interviewed for this study reported either already having
competitive pay structures that match and in many cases exceed their district school’s salary
schedule or they are in the process of introducing the plans to their boards and leadership teams.
Leader 1 additionally reported that his CMO provides cost of living adjustments every year
regardless of teacher performance. As long as teachers get their annual contracts renewed, they
automatically receive a one percent bump in their salary. Leader 2 also talked about the
importance of being able to balance the financial stability of her CMO and the promises of salary
increases. Leader 2 added:
In the last couple of years, every year we have tried to increase [salaries] as much as we
could without overburdening the potential future of our decisions and without running the
organization to the ground over promising something that we could pay now, but we may
not be able to pay in five years from now.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

104
She added, “We are trying to do right by people. We are trying to increase their salaries and
giving them what they’re worth.” Similar to what the other ten leaders said, Leader 8 also said
her CMO provides “competitive pay packages” as she is realizing that "pay is a greater factor as
everybody is struggling to hire teachers.” She also added, “Yes, I think we’re seeing that in a
couple of instances we lost teachers because somebody else was willing to give up a bigger
signing bonus or things like that.” Additionally, Leader 11 commented:
We try to maintain really competitive salary structures. We tend to set our structure
above a union scale, or above UTLA scale. I don’t think any charter is going to be able to
ever approach the kind of benefits program that UTLA and other large unions have been
able to negotiate through the CBA process…Our health insurance programs to our
employees [have] zero deductive, zero co-pay kind of plans. We’re really invested in
providing as rich a benefits environment as we can, to at least approximate what they
would get in the traditional public schools.
Leader 12 also shared his charters competitive pay structure and said, “We’re highly competitive
in terms of compensation.” He further added that his teacher’s are able to negotiate their salaries:
We negotiate based on years of experience. We use the district’s salary scale as an entry
point. If you come in with a certain number of years of experience and a certain level of
education, you go up on the step and column as if you were going to the district.
Leader 12 added that additional raises are determined based on what is available through the
budget for different school years.
Several leaders also talked about LCFF and the potential three to eight percent salary
increases teachers would receive in the coming school years based off of the additional State
funds that are now available through LCFF. No specific information regarding immediate
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

105
teacher raises under LCFF were made available during data collection for this study; however, it
was very clear that charter leaders are serious about providing competitive pay to their teachers
in hopes of attracting and retaining experienced and better qualified teachers to their schools.
Bonuses, Incentive Pay, Pay for Performance, and Teacher Leadership Opportunities
In addition to across the board salary increases for all teachers, 12 of the 14 charter
leaders emphasized the importance of bonuses, incentives, and pay for performance models.
Moreover, nine of the 14 leaders reported having additional salary increases and bonus structures
set up for the “hard to fill” subjects in primarily higher level mathematics (pre-calculus, AP
Calculus), science (chemistry and physics), and special education. With this model, different
CMOs and individual charter schools offer up anywhere from $2,000 to $8,000 salary increases
or one time signing bonuses for the “hard to fill” subjects. Leader 9, for example, will provide a
$3,000 “hard to fill” annual addition to chemistry, physics, and calculus teachers. In Leader 7’s
CMO, “hard to fill” subject annual bonuses of $4,000 is already included in the salary scale for
all math and science teachers.
The opportunities to annually earn thousands of dollars of additional bonuses and
stipends are definitely not in short supply at many of the charter schools involved in this study.
CMO and charter leaders reported they provide bonuses and stipends that range from $500 to
$8,000 in the following areas: longevity, retention, loyalty, and anniversary bonuses, signing
bonuses, referral bonuses, State testing results bonuses, student attendance and suspension record
bonuses, bonuses for mentor teachers, department chairs, and instructional coaches, Beginning
Teacher Support and Assessment (BTSA) induction reimbursement bonuses, stipends to become
a nationally board certified teacher, stipends to cover tuition costs for masters and doctorate
degrees, and even stipends to learn Spanish.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

106
To further illustrate how bonus structures work, in Leader 1’s CMO, all teachers were
offered up to $2,500 depending on how long they had been with their school under the longevity
bonus plan. Leader 1 simply said that by doing this, “We are honoring the people who’ve been
here.” At Leader 8’s CMO, teachers are rewarded with recognition and monetary retention
bonuses at every five-year mark. Leader 9’s charter school also offers teachers anniversary
bonuses between $2,000 and $4,000 starting at the ten-year mark. Starting at the five-year mark,
Leader 12’s charter also offers teachers loyalty bonuses. In speaking to this, Leader 12 said:
We use loyalty bonuses so anybody who’s been here over five years will receive a loyalty
bonus added to their salary—a compensation of a couple thousand dollars a year, just
because of their loyalty. That’s one way we try to retain folks past the five-year mark.
Many of the leaders also provide their teachers both leadership opportunities and a
chance to make additional money through stipended leadership positions like department chair
roles, instructional coach roles, and mentor teacher roles. These positions allow teachers to not
only earn up to $5,000 in some CMOs, it allows them to plan professional development
alongside the leadership team, to observe and provide feedback to novice and struggling
teachers, and to help lesson plan with teachers. These roles additionally allow teachers a path
towards other leadership opportunities within the CMO or charter school. Leader 6 describes this
process by saying how important leadership opportunities are for teachers and further adding,
“Developing career paths and options and developing a list and a philosophy regarding giving
teachers tons of opportunities to earn a little extra money [and] to do things that will help build
their capacity as leaders [is important].” Leader 8’s position is similar as she explained her
CMOs commitment to developing teacher leaders and to promoting from within the
organization. She further added that all but one or two of the deans and assistant principals at
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

107
every one of her CMO schools has been developed, mentored, and promoted from within their
CMO schools. This policy, she believes, has helped retain her best teachers who oftentimes end
up leaving to look for educational leadership opportunities at either the district school or another
charter school.
Several leaders also highlighted the importance of charters investing in people’s
individual education to allow them to grow for the collective good of the organization in its
mission to help students and communities. These leaders in turn allow their teachers to seek
professional development opportunities that they fully reimburse them for. Leader 7’s CMO
additionally pays teachers up to $7,000 a year of tuition for teachers who want to get their
master’s degree. Furthermore, nearly all of the CMOs and charters involved in this study fully
reimburse teachers to clear their credentials either through university course work or the BTSA
program. And finally, when it came to bonus opportunities, Leader 11’s CMO provided some of
the more interesting forms of bonus and stipend pay which included paying teachers to become
nationally board certified teachers, paying teachers to learn Spanish, and fully reimbursing
teachers for induction.
Half of the 14 leaders also reported they either had some sort of pay for performance
model at their school or they are in the planning phases of having a pay for performance model
in the hopes of recruiting, rewarding, and retaining their highly effective teachers. The additional
salary amounts based on the performance pay models varied across the different charters, but
included very similar metrics which were based on teacher evaluations, parent and student
surveys, and test scores. CMO and charter leaders who are already implementing pay for
performance models believe that it is largely positive and effective in not only paying teachers
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

108
more money based on their performance, but as Leader 3 said, “It has helped to create a common
language and a common understanding of what it means to be an effective teacher.”
Extended Contracts
It is a well-known fact that the majority of charter school teachers are hired under an at-
will annual contract. As Gross (2010) highlighted, it is easy for teachers to lose trust in their
administration with the added realities and uncertainties of being on an at-will annual contract.
Since charter leaders are beginning to understand the issues around job security at their schools
and its implications on teacher attrition, findings from this study show that some CMOs and
charters have changed both their philosophies and their policies towards the annual teacher
contract. Even though they are in the minority, two of the 14 leaders, Leader 12 and Leader 14,
have either already changed their policies around annual contracts or will soon change them for
the upcoming 2016-2017 school year. In addressing this issue further, Leader 14 said:
We have moved away from the single one-year contract. We’re not three to five [years],
but we are two years for proficient teachers and three years for distinguished teachers. It
is tied to their teacher evaluation and that has helped a lot where teachers know that
they’re going to be there as long as their performance is where it needs to be. That policy
has helped!
Expressing a similar policy and philosophy as Leader 14, Leader 12 also said:
The other thing I’m just kind of thinking through for [job] security, we’re looking at
offering some multi-year contracts, as opposed to an employment agreement that’s a day-
to-day kind of agreement…We’re looking at something where we can tell teachers,
“We’re committed to you for the next two to five years. We really feel like you’ve earned
this kind of a commitment.” I can think of a third of my staff right now that we could
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

109
probably offer five-year contracts to and say, “Hey, we’re committed to you for the next
five years, based on your performance.” I think multi-year contracts would help a lot of
folks…I would even feel very comfortable offering some teachers ten year contracts
saying, “Look, we commit to you for the next ten years if you’ll commit to us. You’re a
rock star and we really want you around.” Boy, that kind of takes a whole different
element for those folks.
It was also interesting to learn that even though these leaders are interested in the multi-
year contracts, they staunchly remain opposed to full tenure policies. Even four of the 14 leaders
in this study who lead CMOs or individual schools that are already unionized have not settled
and will most likely never settle for tenure. In her statement about tenure and union negotiations,
Leader 10 specifically said, “Sometimes negotiations haven’t been as pleasant, but you know we
adamantly have not agreed to tenure. We do not have tenure. We’re never going to have tenure.”
Teacher Supports and Professional Development
Findings from this study indicate that one of the most frequently cited initiatives or “best
practices” charter leaders are investing much of their resources including time, money, and
trainings is focused around quality and differentiated professional development and support
structures for teachers and principals. Findings from this study further show that all 14 charter
leaders who participated in this study believe that investing in professional development is one of
the most important and effective ways in helping to combat issues around teacher burnout and
job dissatisfaction—which are ultimately major contributing factors to higher teacher attrition
rates. These findings are further supported by research from Smith and Ingersoll (2004) who
emphasize the need for professional development opportunities, common planning times with
teachers in the same subject area, regularly structured collaboration time with teachers,
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

110
department chairs, and administrators, and strong, structured induction programs for all novice
teachers in particular. Without the availability of these types of ongoing supports, Smith and
Ingersoll (2004) found that beginning teachers who entered teaching and received no induction
or mentoring support, had a 41 percent predicted probability of turnover after their first year of
teaching.
Leader 1 further highlighted the importance of professional development at his CMO and
charter schools in general because most charter schools have younger teachers and greatly need
structured professional development through what he called “support networks” that are going to
help novice teachers to not only survive but thrive. Understanding the importance of ongoing
professional development, Leader 2 and many of the leaders in this study have invested hundreds
of thousands of dollars to promote, hire, and train veteran master teachers to teach part time and
to provide instructional coaching and mentoring the rest of the time. This is a practice that many
CMOs believe in and have fully adopted. Leader 3 also added that his CMO’s teacher supports
are so well structured and so effective that it has become one reason many teachers apply to his
CMO. He added, “We have built a really good reputation for being strong with supports. We
offer tremendous coaching and growth and I think that makes us quite desirable.” Along with the
availability of professional development for instructional coaching, Leader 3 spoke at length
about the need to provide teachers and school leaders with other forms of supports to help them
with high-needs, high discipline students. In reference to this, Leader 3 said, “Under my
leadership, we built an entire level of supports around special education. We have teams of
psychologists and mental health professionals. We have a bunch of instructional coaches for
teachers.”
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

111
With regards to professional development and training, Leader 4 also commented on the
need to better train, develop, and retain her school site principals. To fulfill that need, her CMO
has created upper management leadership positions to oversee and train principals. Leader 4
further added:
We are working on developing a more comprehensive support plan for our principals. It
will be differentiated based on novice principals versus more experienced and successful
principals. We want to make sure that we are supporting the principal so that they can
better support their teachers…We want to keep our principals long-term and so we’re
really thinking about what that looks like for them. Not just for our teachers, but also
retaining our school leaders.
Whether it is through providing strong induction programs and support structures for
novice teachers or spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on professional development,
charter leaders understand the need for developing their teachers and leaders and its direct
connection to increased teacher job satisfaction and retention.
Promoting the Charter School Model
One final area charter leaders continually referenced when talking about best practices
and initiatives that help to recruit and retain teachers was highlighting and reinforcing some of
the most fundamental tenets and policies that the charter and schools of choice movement have
embraced from its inception. These original fundamental beliefs and policies include such things
as maintaining small schools with small class sizes; giving teachers and school site leaders
autonomy in making curricular and instructional decisions to develop innovative pedagogies;
promoting the mission of the school; serving students and families in the high poverty, high
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

112
crime, underserved working communities in Los Angeles; and building and fostering family-like
school cultures.
Leader 5 reinforced these ideas and said her teachers like “being involved in their small
schools where everything was more manageable and they had some say.” Leader 5 also reported
that most of her teachers come to her CMO because they want something different than the
traditional school districts have to offer. “It comes down to each individual school—a place that
has a nurturing culture where people feel they’re part of something bigger than they are that they
care about,” she further added. Similarly, Leader 7 said, “Our schools are small and safe and
very collegial.” She went on to talk about school autonomy and culture by adding that her
teachers feel “they are a part of a group of people who are really excited about innovating
together. It’s that camaraderie around it.”
Many of the leaders further expressed the importance of school-site principals allowing
teachers to innovate and try out new ways of teaching and learning without restrictions. Leader
8, for example, said:
Teachers have the flexibility to really command their classroom. We don’t do a lot of top-
down mandates. We try to clear the runway as much as possible for teachers to just focus
on teaching and learning and to give them the flexibility to really have power to lead
within their classroom. At the same time, we continue to develop them with focused
professional development…I also think with a lot of Common Core stuff, people have
sort of standardize everything—making sure everybody is doing the same thing. I’m not
sure that’s actually going to get us where we need to be from a results perspective for
kids. I’m not sure it’s going to pride teachers to really want to be a part of what we’re
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

113
trying to do as a movement. I think continuing to give that flexibility and credence to
innovate will lead us to better places.
Leader 11 reiterated what everyone else had to say about providing teachers with
autonomy over their curricular and instructional designs, but also added that there is a “fine line
around how much autonomy teachers should be offered. How do you maintain a high fidelity to
a particular instructional model, while providing autonomy to teachers?” He further stated, “We
like to think that we strike a healthy balance.” And finally, Leader 12 reiterated the importance
and perhaps even the urgency of allowing teachers to be flexible in terms of their curricular
design and instructional program so that they can experiment with more cutting edge programs
that are progressive and challenge the traditional ways of teaching. He further added:
I hear people talking about the autonomy and they’re interested in really not doing a
cookie-cutter program, like a lot of districts are doing again with standardizing
everything. For sure that [autonomy] needs to be highlighted. That might be lost in the
conversation with everything else, but recognizing even with Common Core, parents and
staff will talk to me and ask, “What is Common Core? How are we going to do Common
Core in [charter name]?” I told them, “Look, it’s going to become [charter name] core.
It’s going to become what our teachers and staff and our local community really feels is
important in terms of the curriculum for their students in this area and it is not going to
necessarily look like the districts.”
Leader 12 continued to say that “these are the kinds of things that do get lost in the conversation”
when charters are trying to figure out what to do with retaining more of their teachers and
highlighting their strengths. Charters need to re-embrace their fundamental beliefs and
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

114
understand why the movement was started in the first place according to many of the leaders.
Leader 13 further emphasized this idea and added:
There is a reason why we have done this [started charter schools]—it’s to make a
difference in communities. Every community we go into, it’s really to make a difference
and to do it better. To have that opportunity and to do something different and innovative
so that we save the resources and make sure that every resource is devoted to that
classroom…The larger the movement becomes, I think, and especially the big CMOs, I
think they forget what this is all about. I don’t even know if they really understand what
it’s about. That’s what’s kind of sad. Some of the conversations I hear, do they even
know anything about the charter world?
Discussion
It is important to yet again recognize that charter schools and CMOs are a fairly new
phenomenon in most cities—including in Los Angeles. Nearly all of the CMOs and individual
charter schools included in this study have been in operation for just a little over a decade with a
few that have actually been in operation even less than that—between four and ten years.
Additionally, research shows that charters and charter leaders oftentimes struggle finding ways
to operate at scale due to funding, budgetary, facilities, and personnel related issues (Lake et al.,
2010). Some charters feel additional pressure from funders, boards, and parent groups who want
to rapidly expand and add on more schools—including feeder elementary and middle schools for
existing high schools (Lake et al., 2010). Charter leaders have to balance all of their operational
responsibilities while at the same time providing school site leaders and teachers with curricular
and instructional development. Add to all of this the rapidly changing landscape of education
with new teaching and learning standards with the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), new
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

115
ways of funding schools through the LCFF, and growing regulations and oversight visits
designed to keep charters accountable by their authorizing charter bodies, charter schools and
leaders have a lot on their plate in addition to the challenges and the colossal task of recruiting
and retaining qualified individuals to do this difficult work.
Another consequence as a result of all these different mandates and policies vehemently
and rapidly converging together is that people tend to lose focus, tend to forget, and perhaps even
inadvertently abandon their core beliefs and principles. This perception was expressed and
exemplified in a very passionate, but also in a very disheartening way by Leader 13 who is
wondering whether the majority of CMOs and charter schools even know why they exist and
how they are different from what the district schools have been doing for decades. As charters
continue to rapidly grow in Los Angeles and elsewhere, it will be interesting to watch and see
how they both adapt to the different needs of the time, but more importantly, how they maintain
their core tenets and philosophies on how schooling should be done.
Research Question Four: What specific initiatives or policies can show evidence of
successfully retaining charter school teachers?
Findings in this study show that while charter leaders are implementing various policies
and initiatives to help retain their teachers, many of these policies are new policies or they are in
the early phases of implementation. Therefore, at this time, this study cannot confirm which
specific policies have proven over time to show evidence of successfully retaining charter school
teachers. What can be reported are survey responses from the 14 leaders who were interviewed
in this study on one short answer response that asked leaders the following question: What are
some of the policies that have helped to address high attrition at your charter? How successful
have these policies been in retaining teachers? Answer choices included: extremely successful,
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

116
successful, moderately successful, somewhat successful, and not very successful. Two leaders
responded by saying extremely successful, three leaders said successful, four leaders said
moderately successful, three leaders said somewhat successful, and two leaders skipped the
question altogether.
Discussion
While only five of the 14 leaders reported that some of their polices are either successful
or extremely successful, during the interview phase, these responses were further qualified and
revealed the overall optimistic projections that charter leaders envision with a lot of the policies
that they have implemented over the years. Other than one leader—Leader 13—everyone else is
still either lacking or has a misalignment with the retention data that shows the correlation
between the successes of certain polices and greater retention rates. That said, we can also
project that many of the policies that the 14 charter leaders highlighted are in fact backed up by
prior research that suggests policies like strong professional development, competitive pay,
effective school leadership teams, and strong school cultures all contribute to not only greater job
satisfaction and efficacy, but also higher retention among all teachers. Lastly, follow-up research
will be needed to further assess how successful certain policies and initiatives have been at
retaining teachers. One thing is certain, charter leaders are aware of the challenges and are
equally willing and mobilized to address the challenges associated with high attrition at their
schools. The work ahead is difficult, but it is important and urgent work for all stakeholders
involved.
In chapter five, implications of these findings, limitations of the research, and suggestions
for further research are presented.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

117
Chapter Five: Summary, Conclusions, and Implications
Summary
There exists an abundance of research around the themes of teacher retention and attrition
and its adverse effects on student achievement, program continuity, school culture and morale,
and ultimately the success or failure of a school and even a community. Although much has been
researched about these topics, because charter schools are generally a new phenomenon in most
cities and states—including in Greater Los Angeles—this study examined both the root causes of
charter school teacher attrition and what specific policies charter CEOs and executive directors
were implementing to retain more of their teachers. Furthermore, this study provides a reference
of best practices for all new and existing charter school CEOs and executive directors who are
interested in implementing specific tried and true initiatives to recruit and retain teachers. In
order to address these issues, the following four research questions helped guide the stated
purpose of this study:
1. How do charter school/CMO CEOs perceive their role in keeping attrition rates down?
2. What do charter school/CMO CEOs identify as the primary factors that contribute to
teachers leaving charter schools?
3. What initiatives and best practices are charter school/CMO CEOs implementing to recruit
and retain teachers?
4. What specific initiatives or policies can show evidence of successfully retaining charter
school teachers?

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

118
Methodology
A mixed methods approach was used to gather both quantitative and qualitative data in
response to these four research questions. Triangulation was achieved with online surveys,
interviews, and document reviews. In order to ensure validity and reliability for the findings, 35
charter school and CMO executive leaders from the Greater Los Angeles area were surveyed.
From the 35 leaders who took the online survey, 14 of them were also chosen to be interviewed
for the study. The sample size for this study was more than adequate and provided greater insight
into the world of charter schools, charter school executive leadership teams, and charter school
teacher recruitment and retention policies.
Summary of Findings
Research Question One: How do charter school/CMO CEOs perceive their role in keeping
attrition rates down?
When it comes to the question of how charter school and CMO leaders perceive their role
in keeping attrition rates down at their respective schools, findings from this study show that
leaders spend much of their resources including time and money on the following four areas:
• Promoting and protecting both the mission of their individual schools and CMOs and the
overall vision of charter schools
• Recruiting qualified individuals at the top levels to help support teachers and principals
• Prioritizing and funding policies
• Building and nurturing a sense of community and culture within the organization
All of the leaders who participated in this study demonstrated intense passion and belief in the
overall charter movement as a “school of choice” movement. These charter leaders strongly
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

119
believe in promoting the fundamental tenets of charter schools as a way to both recruit and retain
highly qualified and motivated individuals, which include convictions such as:
• Serving students in the underserved and underrepresented neighborhoods of Greater Los
Angeles
• Operating small schools and maintaining small class sizes
• Giving teachers and principals complete autonomy in making all curricular and
instructional decisions to satisfy the specific local needs of each community school
• Allowing teachers and principals to freely develop innovative pedagogies
• Maintaining and encouraging close working relationships among teachers and school-site
leadership teams
• Fostering strong small-school cultures with parents and community members as integral
partners with the school
By endorsing and popularizing these fundamental principles, charter leaders believe they are
helping to both recruit talented and mission-driven individuals and helping to retain teachers who
want to be a part of something big and important in public education.
Lastly, findings show that charter leaders are not only intimately involved in policies and
initiatives around teacher retention, but they also show genuine concern over the issue. Leaders
recognize that the growing teacher shortages added to the challenges of their individual schools
and CMOs only make it more difficult to attract and retain highly qualified and highly effective
individuals to teach and lead in their schools.
Research Question Two: What do charter school/CMO CEOs identify as the primary factors
that contribute to teachers leaving charter schools?
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

120
Charter leaders identified a myriad of challenges and factors that contribute to high
teacher turnover at their schools. The findings from this study further show that charter CEOs
and executive directors understand that these challenges are multilayered as most of their schools
are dealing with a combination of issues that contribute to high teacher attrition. Some of the
paramount challenges that leaders in this study identified as major contributing factors to high
teacher attrition included the following:
• Teacher pay and benefits
• Teacher burnout
• Life circumstances (which leaders identified as major events such as a marriage,
parenthood, pursuit of higher education, and relocation)
• Ineffective principal leadership
• Teacher age, years of experience, and community-school match
• Unstable charter authorization process
Other challenges charter leaders referenced as possible factors that contribute to teacher
burnout and inevitably teacher turnover included being very strategic and focused with the
number of initiatives and goals they set for teachers and individual schools. Many of the leaders
talked about being very “disciplined” about “respecting” and not “overwhelming” their teachers
and principals with constant changes and new initiatives—especially in the current volatile state
of public education in the era of the Common Core State Standards and so many changes with
standards, State assessments, and unpredictable accountability metrics.
Research Question Three: What initiatives and best practices are charter school/CMO CEOs
implementing to recruit and retain teachers?
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

121
Acknowledging that there are many factors that contribute to charter school teacher
turnover is one thing, but making school and CMO-wide policy decisions to directly address the
issue is another. The charter leaders in this study identified several initiatives and policy changes
their organizations are making to help address the challenges of high charter teacher attrition.
The following eight areas were identified as some of the major policy changes that nearly all
leaders who participated in this study have implemented or have plans to implement within the
next year or two:
• Policies around higher teacher pay and increased benefits
• The addition of bonuses, incentive pay, pay for performance models, and teacher
leadership opportunities
• Extended teacher contracts
• Teacher supports and professional development
• Promoting the charter school model
When it comes to recruiting teachers, charter schools employ a wide variety of strategies
to interview and hire the most qualified teachers including initial application screenings, multiple
panel interviews, demo lessons, lesson plan samples, participation in professional development,
participation in feedback sessions on their lesson plans, and even student-parent panel
interviews.
Research Question Four: What specific initiatives or policies can show evidence of
successfully retaining charter school teachers?
Findings in this study show that while charter leaders are implementing various policies
and initiatives to help retain their teachers, many of these policies are new policies or they are in
the early phases of implementation. Therefore, at this time, this study cannot confirm which
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

122
specific policies have proven over time to show evidence of successfully retaining charter school
teachers.
Implications for Practice
As the rapidly growing charter movement becomes less and less a mystery and more of a
readily available public school of choice option for parents and students, understanding how to
strategically and quickly recruit qualified and effective teachers and then how to retain those
teachers becomes ever more important for charter executive leadership teams and the schools
and communities they serve. Because research unequivocally acknowledges the importance of
having an effective teacher in every classroom, and that the difference between being taught by a
highly qualified, highly effective teacher or an inexperienced and ineffective teacher can
translate into at least two years of negative or positive growth for the student, (Sanders & Rivers,
1996; Wright, Horn, & Sanders, 1997; Borman & Dowling, 2008; Hanushek, 1992) recruiting
and retaining qualified teachers becomes as much of an ethical and moral dilemma as it is a
logistical and financial issue for charter schools and charter leadership teams who are currently
serving some of the most underserved communities in the country.
Limitations
In addition to the limitations listed in chapter one, there exists one additional limitation to
the current study; this limitation is associated with the self-reporting of data by the CEOs during
both the interviews and online survey responses. Despite the fact that all of the leaders
interviewed in this study were very transparent as they exposed the challenges associated with
high teacher turnover at their respective charter schools and CMOs, as the chief executives of
their organization, there will always be a level of bias included in the reporting of certain facts.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

123
Recommendations for Future Research
1. A follow-up study should be done with the participants from this study to further examine the
effectiveness of some of the retention policies charter leaders are implementing at their
schools or CMO-wide.
2. Since charter schools are a fairly new phenomenon in most places and research shows that
most charter school executives today are the founding leaders of their charters, a study
should be done to examine how new leaders who replace these founding leaders will address
the challenges of high teacher attrition at charter schools.
3. As charter schools continue to rapidly grow in the Greater Los Angeles region, a study
should be done to highlight the strategies charter leaders are using to recruit qualified
teachers.
4. As more charter school teachers seek union representation and more charters become
unionized schools, a study should be done to see whether unionized charter schools have
higher retention rates as a direct result of collective bargaining opportunities.
5. A comparison study should be done to examine trends in attrition rates between stand-alone,
individual charter schools and charter schools that belong to a larger charter management
organization (CMO).
Conclusion
With plans to significantly increase the number of charter schools in the Greater Los
Angeles region within the next decade, the challenges with the growing teacher shortages
throughout the State of California and the nation, and the research-backed fact that the single
most important factor affecting student learning is the classroom teacher, charter school leaders
and charter schools need to enact policies to address the teacher retention issues within their
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

124
schools. These policies around recruiting and retaining qualified teachers will ultimately
foreshadow the future of charter schools in terms of their continued growth and popularity or
may possibly be the downfall of charters as we know it.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

125
References

Borman, G., & Dowling, N. (2008). Teacher attrition and retention: A meta-analytic and

narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 367-409.

Blume, H. (2015, November 12). Charter school expansion could reshape L.A. Unified, officials
say. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved November 26, 2015, from http://www.latimes.com/
local/education/la-me-lausd-charters-20151113-story.html
Bridges, E. M. (1996). Evaluation for tenure and dismissal. In Millman, J. & Darling- Hammond,
L. (Eds.), The New Handbook of Teacher Evaluation (pp. 147-I 57). Newbury Park: Sage
Publications.
Buckley, J., Schneider, M., & Shang, Y. (2005). Fix it and they might stay: School facility
quality and teacher retention in Washington, D.C. Teacher College Record, 107(5), 1107-
1123.
Carruthers, C. K. (2012). New schools, new students, new teachers: Evaluating the effectiveness
of charter schools. Economics of Education Review, 31(2), 280-292. doi:
10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.06.001
Charter school laws across the states: 2015 rankings and scorecard. (2015). A. Zgainer & K.
Kerwin (Eds.), The Essential Guide to Charter School Law (16 ed., pp. 1-93).
Washington D.C.: The Center for Education Reform. Retrieved from
https://www.edreform.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/CharterLaws2015.pdf
Chau, D. (2002). Does autonomy matter? Investigating research-based practices in charter and
other public schools. (Doctoral dissertation).
Creswell, J.W. (2008). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

126
DeAngelis, K., Wall, A., & Che, J. (2013). The impact of preservice preparation and early career

support on novice teachers' career intentions and decisions. Journal of Teacher

Education, 64(4), 338-355. doi: 10.1177/0022487113488945

Donaldson, M. L., & Johnson, S. M. (2010). The price of misassignment: The role of teaching
assignments in teach for America teachers’ exit from low-income schools and the
teaching profession. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32(2), 299-323. doi:
10.3102/0162373710367680
Fink, A.G. (2012). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Freedman, S. W., & Appleman, D. (2008). "What else would i be doing?": Teacher identity and
teacher retention in urban schools. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(3), 109-126.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23478984
Gross, B. (2011). Inside charter schools: Unlocking doors to student success. Seattle, WA:
National Charter School Research Project, Center on Reinventing Public Education.
Guarino, C. M., Santibanez, L., & Daley, G. A. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A
review of the recent empirical literature . Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 173-
208.
Hanushek, E. A. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality . Journal of Political
Economy, 100(1), 84-117. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2138807 .
Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2001). Why public schools lose teachers. (pp. 1-
43). Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.
libproxy.usc.edu/docview/62154665?accountid=14749
Herman, J., Wang, J., Straubhaar, R., Schweig, J., & Hsu, V. (2013). Evaluation of Green Dot's
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

127
Locke transformation project. Informally published manuscript, UCLA Graduate School
of Education & Information Studies.
Ingersoll, R. M. (1996). Teachers' decision-making power and school conflict. Sociology of
Education, 69(2), 159-176. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2112804
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis.

American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499-534.

Inman, D., & Marlow, L. (2004). Teacher retention: Why do beginning teachers remain in the

profession? Education Week, 124(4), 605-614.

Johnson, S., Birkeland, S., Kardos, S., Kauffman, D., Liu, E., & Peske, H. (2001). Retaining the

next generation of teachers: The importance of school-based support.

Harvard Education Letter Research Online.

Kohn, A. (2003, September 17). The folly of merit pay. Education Week.

Lake, R., Dusseault, B., Bowen, M., Demeritt, A., & Hill, P. (2010, June). The National Study of
Charter Management Organization (CMO) Effectiveness: Report on interim findings.
Seattle, WA: National Charter School Research Project, Center on Reinventing Public
Education.
Malloy, C. L., & Wohlstetter, P. (2003). Working conditions in charter schools: What’s the

appeal for teachers? Education and Urban Society, 35(2), 219-241.

Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Miron, G., & Applegate, B. (2007). Teacher attrition in charter schools. The Great Lakes Center

for Education Research & Practice, 1-41.

Newton, A. X., Rivero, R., Fuller, B., & Dauter, L. (2011). Teacher stability and turn-
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

128
over in Los Angeles: The influence of teacher and school characteristics (Working
Paper). Retrieved from http://www.stanford.edu/group/pace/PUBLICATIONS/
WORKINGPAPERS/2011_PACE_WP_NEWTON.pdf
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications.

Podgursky, M., & Ballou, D. (2001). Personnel policy in charter schools. Washington, DC:
Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
Podgursky, M., Monroe, R., & Watson, D. (2004). The academic quality of public school
teachers: an analysis of entry and exit behavior. Economics of Education Review, 23(5),
507-518. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2004.01.005
Renzulli, L. A., Parrott, H. M., & Beattie, I. R. (2011). Racial mismatch and school type:
Teacher satisfaction and retention in charter and traditional public schools. American
Sociological Association, 84(1), 23-48. doi: 10.1177/0038040710392720
Romo, V. (2014, March 18). Dip in enrollment could cost LAUSD hundreds of millions.
Retrieved November 26, 2015, from http://laschoolreport.com/enrollment-dip-cost-lausd-
hundreds-millions/
Sanders, W., & Rivers, J.C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on

future student academic achievement. Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System

(TVASS). Knoxville: University of Tennessee.

Smith, T., & Ingersoll, R. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning

teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681-714.

Stuit, D. A., & Smith, T. M. (2012). Explaining the gap in charter and traditional public school

teacher turnover rates. Economics of Education Review, 31(2), 268-279.

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

129
Stuit, D., & Smith, T. (2010). Teacher turnover in charter schools. Informally published

manuscript, Vanderbilt Pea Body College, Available from National Center on School

Choice. (4413).

Toma, E., & Zimmer, R. (2012). Two decades of charter schools: Expectations, reality, and the
future. Economics of Education Review, 31(2), 209-212. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.
10.001
Torres, A. C. (2014). Is this work sustainable? teacher turnover and perceptions of workload in
charter management organizations . Urban Education, 1-24. doi: 10.1177/004208591454
9367
Wei, X., Patel, D., & Young, V. M. (2014). Opening the “black box”: Organizational differences
Between charter schools and traditional public schools. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 22(3), 1-32. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n3.2014
Wise, A. E., Darling-Hammond, L., McLaughlin, M. W., & Bernstein, H. T. (1985). Teacher

evaluation: A study of effective practice. The Elementary School Journal, 86(1), 60-121.

Wright , S. P., Horn, S. P., & Sanders, W. L. (1997). Teacher and classroom context effects on
student achievement: Implications for teacher evaluation .Journal of Personnel
Evaluation in Education, 11(1), 57-67. doi: 10.1023/A:1007999204543

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

130
Appendix A
Interview Protocol

Research Questions

1. How do charter school/CMO CEOs perceive their roles in keeping attrition rates down?
2. What do charter school/CMO CEOs identify as the primary factors that contribute to
teachers leaving charter schools?
3. What initiatives and best practices are charter school/CMO CEOs implementing to recruit
and retain teachers?
4. What specific initiatives or policies can show evidence of successfully retaining charter
school teachers?
Interview Questions

1. How do you feel about the high teacher attrition rates at charter schools?
2. What has been your specific role in addressing high attrition rates at your charter?
3. What have been one or two of the major challenges that your charter has had to address as a
result of the high teacher attrition rates at charters? With regards to the organization? With
regards to the individual schools within the charter? With regards to student achievement?
4. In your opinion, what motivates Charter school-teachers to leave the school?
Transition: Let’s now talk about your charter.
5. Tell me about your teacher demographics. (Age, gender, race, teacher credentialing
information, years of experience).
6. What process do you use to hire teachers?
7. What do you think draws teachers to your charter?
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

131
8. In your opinion, what is truly unique about your charter?
9. Tell me about the teaching experience of your new teachers. What is the average teaching
experience your new teachers are coming in with?
a. Follow up question: Knowing that the research shows that most Charter school
teachers are coming in with 0-3 years of teaching experience, I will ask how new
teachers to the school with 0-3 years of teaching experience are supported.
10. What are your charter’s teacher attrition rates and how do you explain that?
11. Tell me about what professional development looks like at your charter.
12. How would you describe your charters long-term goals for teacher retention?
Wrap Up: Let’s focus now on the factors that motivate your teachers to stay at your school.
13. Given the research around the high turnover rates at Charter schools, what motivates teachers
at your charter to stay longer than five years?
14. What policies can show evidence of successful retention?

Probing questions will be asked about the specific programs, incentives, and supports the charter
offers to get teachers to stay longer.

Wrap up: Is there anything else you would like to add?

Related questions (Ask only for charters that have or are in the process of unionizing):
• I would like to ask about the efforts by your teachers to unionize. To what degree do you
think unionizing the schools have helped with teacher retention?

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

132
Appendix B
Online Survey
Survey Title: “Charter School Teacher Retention: CEO’s Perspective”
Demographics
• What is your current job title: CEO, Executive Director, other (please specify)
• How many years of experience do you have in your current position?
• Do you have prior experience in education? Yes/No. In what capacity? Choose all that apply:
Teacher, assistant principal, principal, director, Assist. Sup. Sup. Other: Specify

Charter Information
• Where is (are) your school(s) located (check all that apply): LA, Orange, San Bernardino,
Riverside, or Ventura
• Number of schools within your charter:
• Number of years your charter has been open:
• Number of teachers within your charter:
• Average age of teachers:
• Average teaching experience of teachers:
• What percent of teachers have teaching credentials? (preliminary or clear):
• What percent of teachers are from TFA?
• What percent of principals are in their first year? Second year? Third year? Fourth year or
longer?
• What percent of students are identified as “free and reduced lunch” students?

Retention
• What is your charters attrition rate? 0-5% * 6-10% * 11-15% * 16-20% * 21-25% * 26-30%
31-35% * 36-40% * 41-45% * 46-50% * greater than 50%

• Extensive research studies done on teacher attrition have found that teachers leave schools
based on one or more of the reasons listed below. What are the primary reasons why teachers
leave your charter? Choose all that apply and elaborate if you wish:

o Age (Younger teachers have significantly higher attrition rates)
o Years of teaching experience (Inexperienced teachers have higher attrition rates)
o Location of school (urban vs. suburban: Teachers in urban schools have higher
attrition rates)
o High student discipline
o Mission/vision of the school (disconnect between teacher beliefs and the vision of the
school)
o Supports and professional development (Lack of or disconnect with PD and supports)
o Lack of unions
o Lack of job security
o Lack of credentials/certification
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

133
o Compensation and benefits
o Facilities
o Leadership teams
o Burnout
o Other (please specify)
• With regards to teacher attrition, A: What percent are movers (teachers who go to other
schools/districts—charters? District schools? Private schools? Online schools?) B: What
percent are leavers (teachers who left the career altogether)? and C: What percent are
involuntary leavers (teachers who were fired)?

CEO Influence on Retention
• To what degree do you have influence over policies regarding teacher recruitment?
o A Great Deal
o Quite a Bit
o Somewhat
o Very Little
o Not at All
• To what degree do you have influence over policies regarding teacher retention?
o A Great Deal
o Quite a Bit
o Somewhat
o Very Little
o Not at All
• To what degree do you have influence over policies regarding teacher professional
development?
o A Great Deal
o Quite a Bit
o Somewhat
o Very Little
o Not at All
• How satisfied are you with your charters teacher retention rates?
o Extremely Satisfied
o Satisfied
o Moderately Satisfied
o Slightly Satisfied
o Not at all Satisfied
• On average, how much time would you say you spend on dealing with retention related
issues.
o A Great Deal
o Quite a Bit
o Somewhat
o Very Little
o Not at All
• How important is it for your charter to retain teachers?
o Extremely Important
o Important
BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

134
o Moderately Important
o Somewhat Important
o Not Very Important
• Does your charter have specific policies and initiatives designed to address high teacher
attrition?
o Yes
o No
• Short Answer Response: What are some of the policies that have helped to address high
teacher attrition at your charter?
• How successful have these policies been in retaining teachers?
o Extremely Successful
o Successful
o Moderately Successful
o Somewhat Successful
o Not Very Successful

• Short Answer Responses: What has been the greatest challenge in retaining your teachers at
your charter?
• Short Answer Responses: What policies and initiatives will address these challenges?

• Short Answer Responses: Additional Comments regarding teacher retention policies, high
attrition rates for charter school teachers, and other comments:

BEST PRACTICES CHARTER SCHOOL CEOS ARE IMPLEMENTING

135
Appendix C
Interview Invitation Email

Dear [Name],

My name is Alen Akhverdyan and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of Education
at University of Southern California.

I am conducting a research study as part of my dissertation, which examines both the root causes
of charter school teacher attrition rates and what charter school and CMO leadership teams in the
Southland—(Greater Los Angeles) are doing to retain teachers. More specifically, this study
seeks to understand what strategies promote the recruitment and retention of charter school
teachers. One of the goals of the study is to provide a reference of best practices for all new and
existing charter school CEOs and executive directors who are interested in implementing specific
tried and true initiatives to recruit and retain teachers. Therefore, identifying the policies and
programs that CMO CEOs are utilizing will help other CMO CEOs focus their resources, time,
and money towards similar initiatives with the hope of retaining more teachers.

You are cordially invited to participate in this study, which will involve over 15 other CEOs and
charter executive directors from Los Angeles County. If you agree, you are invited to participate
and complete an online survey that contains multiple choice and short answer questions.

The online survey is anticipated to take no more than 20-30 minutes to complete. Depending on
your responses to the survey and your availability, you may be asked to be interviewed via
Skype or in-person. The interview is voluntary, and anticipated to last approximately 1 hour and
may be audio-taped.

Participation in this study is completely voluntary. Your identity as a participant will remain
confidential at all times during and after the study.

If you have questions or would like to participate, please contact me at akhverdy@usc.edu or call
me on my cell phone at 424-233-6115.

Thank you for your participation,

Alen Akhverdyan
Doctoral Candidate - Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine—in consort with the root causes of charter school teacher attrition—what charter school and charter management organization (CMO) chief executive officers (CEOs) or executive directors (EDs) in the Southland (Greater Los Angeles) are doing to retain teachers. This study further provides a reference of best practices for all new and existing charter school CEOs and EDs who are interested in implementing specific tried and true initiatives to recruit and retain teachers. To explore these issues further, this study employed a mixed methods design to examine the role of the charter school CEO/ED and what specific policies they have implemented to address the high teacher attrition rates at charter schools. The combination of both quantitative and qualitative forms of data through the use of surveys and interviews provided a more complete understanding of the topic as 35 CEOs/EDs participated in the online survey and 14 of them were interviewed using a semi-structured interview technique. Findings from the study revealed the multilayered challenges that charter schools face when it comes to factors that contribute to teacher attrition. Challenges such as competitive pay and benefits, teacher burnout, ineffective principal leadership, teacher age and experience, and the unstable charter authorization process were among the top reasons charter CEOs/EDs identified as contributing factors to high teacher attrition at their schools. To address these issues, charter leaders have implemented policies around higher pay and increased benefits, the addition of bonuses and incentive pay, extended teacher contracts, differentiated teacher supports and professional development, and promoting the charter model as ideal for teachers who want autonomy in exploring and developing innovative pedagogies in small schools, with small class sizes, serving students and families in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The impact of principal leadership on teacher retention in K-4 charter schools in South Los Angeles

PDF

A comparative analysis of teacher evaluation systems utilized by public and charter schools in Southern California

PDF

Elementary STEM policies, practices and implementation in California

PDF

Elements of a 1:1 computer laptop program in a Los Angeles County high school and implications for education leaders

PDF

Investigating promising school leadership practices in two California charter schools

PDF

Leadership and implementation of 1:1 technology: considering teacher self-efficacy in the implementation process

PDF

An examination of teachers’ perceived value and knowledge of mathematical development in early childhood settings

PDF

Factors influencing special education teacher attrition in a Hawaii school district

PDF

Special education teacher attrition in a Hawaii school complex area

PDF

Use of Kotter’s change model by elementary school principals in the successful implementation of inclusive education programs for students with disabilities in K-6 elementary schools in Southern ...

PDF

Best practices of school districts in the recruiting, retaining, and mentoring of principals at Title I elementary schools in southern California

PDF

Instructional coaching in California public K-12 school districts: instructional coaching programs in elementary, middle, and high schools and the impact on teacher self-efficacy with educational...

PDF

Influence of teacher recruitment, retention, training, working conditions, and improvement of district support of 21st-century teaching and learning

PDF

Teacher self-efficacy and instructional coaching in California public K-12 schools: effective instructional coaching programs across elementary, middle, and high schools and the impact on teacher...

PDF

Common Core State Standards: implementation decisions made by middle school English language arts teachers

PDF

Response to intervention: factors that facilitate and impede the process of implementation for administrators of Head Start preschools

PDF

A case study of promising leadership practices employed by principals of Knowledge Is Power Program Los Angeles (KIPP LA) charter school to improve student achievement

PDF

Instructional coaching, educational technology, and teacher self-efficacy: a case study of instructional coaching programs in a California public K-12 school district

PDF

Common Core implementation decisions made by principals in elementary schools

PDF

A case study on readmitted students: the impact of social and academic involvement on degree completion

Asset Metadata

Creator Akhverdyan, Alen (author)

Core Title Best practices charter school CEOs are implementing to recruit and retain teachers

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 02/24/2016

Defense Date 01/12/2016

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag charter CEO,charter teacher attrition,charter teacher retention,CMO CEO,OAI-PMH Harvest

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Castruita, Rudy (committee chair), Garcia, Pedro E. (committee chair), Chau, Derrick C. (committee member)

Creator Email akhverdy@usc.edu,alen.akhverdyan@ucla.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-215694

Unique identifier UC11278377

Identifier etd-Akhverdyan-4160.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-215694 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Akhverdyan-4160.pdf

Dmrecord 215694

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Akhverdyan, Alen

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA