University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Factors influencing special education teacher attrition in a Hawaii school district

(USC Thesis Other)

Factors influencing special education teacher attrition in a Hawaii school district

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 1
FACTORS INFLUENCING SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII
SCHOOL DISTRICT

by

Kristin Liana Geiling

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2016

Copyright 2016 Kristin Liana Geiling
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 2
Dedication
This dissertation is dedicated to my best friend and love of my life, John. Your loyalty,
support, and commitment to our love nourish my soul and give my life purpose and meaning.
Your thirst for learning and service to our students inspires me and fills my heart with joy. This
journey was undeniably fueled by our grit and passion; achieving this milestone came only
because we sacrificed and celebrated as a team. I am honored to stand by your side as a fellow
educator and partner in this crazy, beautiful life. Congratulations Johnny…celebrate, celebrate,
celebrate, we finally did it my love!
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 3
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my parents for their love and support. My parents instilled values in
me that are unquestioningly the reason I continue to achieve my life goals. My father taught me
the value of hard work, honoring my commitments, service to my country, and the power of
daily naps. My mother taught me that I have to nourish my mind, body, and spirit if I want to
experience healthy personal and professional relationships. My mother’s success as a female,
credit union executive has always been a poignant example of resiliency, grit, and leadership. I
am forever grateful for the significant sacrifices made by both of my parents so that I could chase
my dream of earning a doctorate.
I would be remiss if I did not thank my soul sisters, Uluwehi and Katherine. Their
unfaltering support of my educational aspirations never ceases to amaze me. I know that no
matter how much our lives change, when we’re together, I am home. These two women have
helped me tackle the challenges of this doctorate degree with grace, they have been there to
celebrate the joyful moments, and they have dished out healthy doses of encouragement when I
felt defeated. I am infinitely blessed by these women’s love and friendship.
I would like to thank the teachers of Wheeler Middle School, past and present. One of my
favorite quotes by Buddha says, “Your work is to discover your world and then with all your
heart give yourself to it.” Wheeler teachers, thank you for making our students your world.
Whether my colleagues or the teachers I coach and mentor, these teachers’ tireless commitment
and relentless drive to ensure success for our students inspires me and ignites my passion for
public education. I owe these educators much gratitude for teaching me, renewing my spirit, and
challenging me; this journey was filled with purpose because I had the opportunity to serve our
students and school community alongside these incredible souls.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 4
I would also like to thank the members of my dissertation committee. Dr. Keim, my
dissertation chair, made this arduous journey manageable. His guidance, humor, stellar
knowledge of statistics, and loving spirit, gave me the courage to fight on and finish strong.
Much appreciation also goes out to Dr. Hocevar and Dr. Tobey; their feedback was insightful
and their perspective strengthened this dissertation. I owe immense gratitude to Dr. Brummel.
The gift of Dr. Brummel’s leadership, mentoring, and guidance will impact my career in
education forever.
I would like to thank the Wheeler Middle School leadership team for their unconditional
support and for the gifts of fellowship and family. Wheeler Middle School is my home and I am
incredibly lucky to work and learn alongside such a dedicated and talented group of leaders.
Many thanks especially to Leilani, Leighton, Koki, Sam, and Kaipo. I could always count on this
‘ohana to make me laugh. Those lighthearted moments undoubtedly carried me through the
extreme stress and exhaustion that accompanied this doctoral program.
I would especially like to thank Brenda. Brenda has impacted my personal and
professional leadership development more than any other individual. Brenda’s openness to share
her leadership challenges and successes molded my skill development and bolstered the
relevance of my doctoral studies. Brenda’s wisdom, guidance, humble leadership, friendship, and
love have truly inspired my passion for school leadership. My greatest hope and deepest honor
would be that my work with students and teachers brings Brenda joy and makes her proud.

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 5
Table of Contents
Dedication 2

Acknowledgements 3

List of Tables 7

List of Figures 8

Abstract 9

Chapter One: Overview of the Study 10

Background of the Problem 11

Statement of the Problem 15

Purpose of the Study 16

Research Questions 18

Hypotheses 19

Theoretical Frameworks and Conceptual Models 19

Conceptual Models 20

Significance of the Study 21

Assumptions 21

Limitations and Delimitations 22

Limitations 22

Delimitations 23

Definition of Terms 23

Organization of the Study 26

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 27

Literature Review Procedures and Selection Criteria 28

Special Education Literature Review 28

Definition and Number of Special Education Students 28

History of Special Education 29

Challenges Associated with Special Education Legislation 31

Special Education Teacher Attrition Literature Review 33

Definitions of Attrition, Retention, and Transfer 33

Conceptual Framework 35

Shortage of Special Education Teachers 36

Special Education Teacher Attrition 38

Special Education Teacher Attrition in Hawaii 40

Costs of Teacher Attrition 41

Personal and Work-Related Factors that Influence Special Education Teacher Attrition 43

Thematic Approach to Literature 43

Teacher Characteristics and Personal Factors 43

Teacher Qualifications 46

Work Environments 48

Affective Responses to Work 54

Summary of Research Findings 55

Conclusion 56

Chapter Three: Methodology 59

Research Design 59

Appropriateness of Design 60

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 6
Research Questions 61

Hypotheses 62

Sample and Population 62

Geographic Location and District Information 63

Informed Consent 63

Confidentiality 64

Sampling 65

Instrumentation 65

Data Collection 67

Data Analysis 68

Summary 70

Chapter Four: Results 72

Review of the Data Collection Procedures 73

Research Questions 74

Hypotheses 75

Sample 75

Results 78

Research Question 1 78

Research Question 2 90

Summary 97

Chapter Five: Discussion of Findings 99

Background of the Problem 99

Purpose of the Study 102

Research Questions 103

Discussion of Findings 103

Research Question 1 104

Research Question 2 106

Limitations 107

Implications for Practice 109

Implications for Teacher Preparation Programs 109

Implications for Teaching Practices 110

Implications for School Administrators and Leadership 111

Recommendations for Future Research 112

Teacher Preparation and Quality 113

Teachers’ Perspectives 113

Teacher Induction and Mentoring 114

Supporting Teachers 114

Conclusions 115

References 116

Appendix A: Hawaii Department of Education Approval Letter 129

Appendix B: Aloha School District Special Education Teacher Survey 130

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 7
List of Tables
Table 1: Frequencies and Percentages for Participants’ Personal Characteristics and
Teaching Qualifications 76
Table 2: Intent to Leave (Dependent Variable) 77
Table 3: Intent to Leave and Sex 79
Table 4: Intent to Leave and Ethnicity 81
Table 5: Intent to Leave and Degree Level 83
Table 6: Intent to Leave and Years of Teaching Experience 85
Table 7: Intent to Leave and Current Work Assignment 86
Table 8: Intent to Leave and Type of Certification 88
Table 9: Intent to Leave and Teaching in Area of Certification 89
Table 10: Independent-Samples T-Tests 91
Table 11: Participants’ Responses Listing Stress as a Reason They Would Leave their
Current Special Education Position for a Position in General Education, a Different School
System, or Exit the Teaching Profession Entirely 94

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 8
List of Figures
Figure 1: Intent to Leave and Sex 80
Figure 2: Intent to Leave and Ethnicity 82
Figure 3: Intent to Leave and Degree Level 84
Figure 4: Intent to Leave and Years of Teaching Experience 85
Figure 5: Intent to Leave and Current Work Assignment 87
Figure 6: Intent to Leave and Type of Certification 88
Figure 7. Intent to Leave and Teaching in Area of Certification 90

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 9
Abstract
This study focused on the attrition of special education teachers from the Aloha School District
(ASD) located on the island of Oahu, Hawaii. This quantitative study surveyed 299 special
education teachers to identify personal and work-related factors that influence attrition.
Statistical analysis of personal factors revealed that type of certification, specifically special
education certification, was a positive predictor of intent to leave. Other personal factors such as
sex, ethnicity, degree level, years of teaching, teaching assignment, and whether a teacher was
teaching in their area of certification were not found to be predictors of intent to leave. Statistical
analysis of work-related factors indicated that stress is a positive predictor of intent to leave the
special education teaching position. Work-related factors such as salary, administrative support,
colleague support, induction/mentoring support, paperwork, and job satisfaction were not found
to be predictors of intent to leave. Analysis of the open-ended questions suggests that stress,
administrative support, paperwork demands, salary, and the opportunity of a new career with
better salary and less stress were also factors influencing participants’ intent to leave special
education. Findings highlight stress and type of certification as factors that influence ASD
special education teacher attrition. The results could provide valuable insight for ASD’s district
leadership and school administrators. The results may inform the district’s future research in
special education teacher preparation, recruitment and retention strategies, satisfaction and
motivation as well as different types (administrative, colleague) and levels (induction and
mentoring) of support.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 10
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
“The single most important school influence in a student’s education is a well-prepared, caring
and qualified teacher.”- Kozleski, Mainzer, Deshler, Coleman, & Rodriguez-Walling (2000)

Every child, regardless of ability, deserves a quality teacher. The United States
government began its defense of this assertion in 1975 with the Education for All Handicapped
Children Act and continued to renew this pledge through multiple revisions of the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). IDEA (1990) mandated that students with identified
disabilities receive a “free and appropriate” education. One decade later, the federal government
passed the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), which called for highly qualified teachers
and increased accountability measures for schools. Under NCLB, students with disabilities were
identified as a subgroup of students for whom academic achievement and progress would be
tracked. By the 2014-2015 school year, students with special needs were required to demonstrate
the same proficiency levels as their general education peers on standardized state assessments.
With the close of the 2014-2015 school year, NCLB statutes may have expired, but the
era of high stakes accountability and standards-based education marches on. States, many still
petitioning for federal funding, developed similar accountability systems for schools and
teachers. The state of Hawaii received praise from the U.S. Department of Education for its post-
NCLB reforms. Hawaii earned the highest marks in all categories monitored by the federal
government, and the Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, stated, “Hawaii is a model for the
rest of the country” (Kelleher, 2015). Hawaii’s Strive HI Performance System contains similar
elements of accountability measures required by NCLB, such as highly qualified teachers and
student achievement scores. Most notably, the Strive HI system expanded the accountability
discussion to include an emphasis on student growth and closing the achievement gap between
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 11
high needs students and non-high needs students, indicating that accountability measures for
special education teachers remains high (Hawaii’s Strive HI Performance System, 2015).
The responsibility of public schools to serve students with special needs suggests a
critical demand to hire and retain highly qualified special education teachers (McLeskey &
Billingsley, 2008; Thornton, Peltier, & Medina, 2007). However, this task becomes
insurmountable with a constant exodus of teachers leaving the profession long before retirement
age (Ingersoll, 2001). Consequently, schools across the nation battle a persistent trend: special
education teachers either exit the profession or transfer to general education positions at
alarmingly high rates (Brill & McCartney, 2008; Thornton et al., 2007).
Special education teacher attrition is a pervasive problem. This study focused on the
attrition of special education teachers from a school district located on the island of Oahu,
Hawaii. For the purpose of this study, this school district is referred to as Aloha School District
(ASD). ASD is a pseudonym used for the intention of safeguarding the identity of the
participants in this study. ASD hires hundreds of new teachers every year, consistently
representing between 15% and 20% of the state’s total number of newly employed teachers
(Hawaii State Department of Education, 2013, 2014). In 2012-2013, 30.9% of ASD new hires
were special education teachers. The percentage of newly hired special education teachers
suggests that teachers either transfer out of their current positions or exit the profession in high
numbers. This employment trend suggests that special education teacher attrition is a significant
problem for the ASD and deserves immediate attention.
Background of the Problem
The teaching profession has historically high attrition rates compared to other
occupations (Ingersoll, 2001; Lortie, 1975). Data released in 2010 by the National Commission
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 12
on Teaching and America’s Future (NCTAF), indicated teacher attrition rates continued to raise
since 1994. The NCTAF reported that, within one to three years, approximately 33% of teachers
left the education field. Over 40% of teachers exited the profession within five years of service
(Ingersoll & Smith, 2004). Data released by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)
in 2010 further detailed the prevalence of high teacher attrition rates. The NCES cited that, out of
the three million public school educators working throughout the 2007-2008 school year,
approximately 8% left the education field altogether.
Unfortunately, the statistics representing special education teacher attrition are
increasingly grave. The rate of special education teachers transferring to different schools or
transferring out of special education altogether is steadily increasing (Billingsley, 2007a; Boe &
Cook, 2006; Boe, Cook, & Sunderland, 2007; Edgar & Pair, 2005; McLesky, Tyler, & Flippen,
2004; Kozleski et al., 2000). Approximately 9% of special education teachers leave teaching
after the first year and over 7% accept teaching assignments in general education settings
(Thornton et al., 2007). Both special education and general education teacher attrition rates
appear to be the highest during the first three years of service (Billingsley, 2004b; Billingsley,
2007a; Bozonelos, 2008; Guarino, Santibanez, & Daley 2006; Ingersoll, 2002; Loeb &
Reininger, 2004; McCann, Johannessen, & Ricca, 2005; McLeskey et al., 2004; NCTAF, 2010;
Stronge, Richard, & Catano, 2008).
Billingsley (2004a) released findings that special education teachers had the highest
attrition rates among teachers of all subjects, including math and science. Additionally, 98% of
the nation’s school districts do not have enough special education teachers to fill existing
vacancies; therefore, school districts are forced to fill vacancies with uncertified special
education teachers (Billingsley, 2004a; McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008; Wasburn-Moses, 2006).
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 13
Most recently, Donne and Lin (2013) reported that almost 50% of special educators,
compared to 43% of general educators, left the profession before completing five years of
service. Further compounding the problem, the number of students identified with disabilities
rose over 20% since 1993 (DeMik, 2008). However, with almost 30% of all schools reporting
difficulties filling special education positions, fewer than half a million special education
teachers service over six million special education students. In other words, there are only six
special education teachers for every 100 students with special needs (Donne & Lin, 2013).
Limited data sources and empirical research exist on the topic of special education
teacher attrition in Hawaii, thus illuminating the saliency of this study. The research that is
available suggests that Hawaii’s teacher attrition trends are similar to national ones. Over half of
Hawaii’s public school teachers exit the profession with less than five years of teaching
experience (Vorsino, 2010). In 2013, 67% of the teachers hired by the Hawaii Department of
Education (HIDOE) had zero years of teaching experience (HIDOE, 2014). Further complicating
Hawaii’s teacher attrition trend is the inability of the HIDOE to recruit qualified teachers to
replace those who exit the public school system. From 2008 to 2014, the HIDOE hired over a
thousand teachers every year; the department was replacing approximately 10% of its teacher
workforce annually (HIDOE, 2013, 2014). In a press release at the commencement of the 2015-
2016 school year, Suzanne Mulcahy, the assistant superintendent of the Office of Curriculum,
Instruction, and Student Support, reported that, out of the 2,108 established special education
teaching positions, 156 remained vacant at the start of the school year (Mulcahy, 2015).
Special education teacher attrition trends in Hawaii are especially poignant when
examined at the district level. The HIDOE is divided into eight districts encompassing 288
schools located across six Hawaiian Islands. In 2013-2014, there were 185,273 students enrolled
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 14
in HIDOE schools and 17,741 of them, approximately 10% of the total population, received
special education services. The ASD district is the second largest district in the state and
oversees 42 elementary, middle, and high schools. During the 2013-2014 academic term, ASD
enrolled 33,496 students and 3,205 of them, just fewer than 10% of the total population, received
special education services.
For a span of six years, ASD hired between 203 and 248 new teachers every year,
representing as much as 24% of the state’s newly employed teachers (HIDOE, 2013, 2014). In
2012-2013, the district hired 207 new teachers, of whom 64 were special education teachers and
made up 30.9% of new hires that year. In the 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 school years, only 30%
of teacher attrition was due to retirement and 11% was due to termination, indicating that 59% of
teachers left the HIDOE for personal and/or work-related reasons (HIDOE, 2013, 2014).
Teacher attrition negatively impacts schools in multiple ways. Attrition costs include
financial burdens, lower levels of student achievement, and undesirable effects on school climate
(Billingsley, 2004a; Edgar & Pair, 2005; Guarino et al., 2007). The NCTAF (2010) reported that
teacher attrition costs approximately $7.3 billion a year. The most common financial costs
associated with teacher attrition include their recruitment, hiring, and professional development
(Loeb & Reininger, 2004; McLeskey et al., 2008; NCTAF, 2010).
Student achievement is also affected by teacher attrition (Billingsley, 2004b; Darling-
Hammond, 2003; NCTAF, 2007, 2010; Schlichte, Yessel, & Merbler, 2005). Students who are
instructed by inexperienced teachers demonstrate lower levels of learning than do students
instructed by experienced teachers (Barnes, Crowe, & Schaefer, 2007; Edgar & Pair, 2005;
NCTAF, 2007, 2010). Given that many special education students originally came from general
education settings in which they did not experience academic success and were often performing
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 15
well below grade level expectations, ensuring these students receive instruction from a highly
qualified teacher is paramount (McLeskey et al., 2008).
Another cost of teacher attrition is the unfavorable effect on school climate (Boe et al.,
2008; Ingersoll, 2002; Loeb & Reining, 2004; McLeskey et al., 2008; NCTAF, 2010; Stronge et
al., 2008). When teachers decide to leave the profession or transfer to another position, they take
their knowledge and experience with them. In their absence, schools must hire and train
replacements, which often causes the remaining teachers additional strain to either help transition
the replacement or provide assistance to close gaps in services until one is hired (McLeskey et
al., 2008; NCTAF, 2010).
Statement of the Problem
The HIDOE’s 2011-2018 State Strategic Plan (2012) asserts that the department will
“recruit, retain, and recognize high-performing employees” as well as “revise recruiting policies,
practices, and procedures to improve the quantity and quality of DOE job applicants” (p. 17).
These goals are difficult to achieve when 50% of Hawaii’s public school teachers depart with
less than five years’ experience and the department has to replace approximately 10% of its
workforce every school year (Vorsino, 2010; HIDOE, 2013). With the start of the 2015-2016
school year, the HIDOE reported 156 special education teaching vacancies (Mulcahy, 2015).
Additionally, the attrition trends are not evenly experienced across all districts in the state,
leaving some districts more heavily affected by teacher attrition than others. For instance, during
the 2012-2013 term, the ASD hired 64 special education teachers, which amounted to 30.9% of
new hires for the district that year (Hawaii DOE Employment Report, 2013).
The quality of education that students with special needs receive is jeopardized because
the state of Hawaii cannot effectively recruit and retain an adequate number of highly qualified
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 16
special education teachers. With mounting evidence that special education teachers are exiting
the profession or moving to general education teaching assignments, special education teacher
attrition is a problem that deserves immediate attention. Research conducted in the ASD on the
factors that influence special education teachers’ career decisions might assist district and school
leaders in their efforts to decrease economic burdens on districts and schools, improve school
climates, and most importantly, increase student achievement. Students identified with special
needs are the victims of special education teacher attrition; therefore, it is the legal and ethical
obligation of Hawaii’s education leaders to further investigate and identify solutions for this
persistent problem.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this quantitative study was to identify factors that influence the attrition of
special education teachers in a Hawaii school district. This study explored both personal and
work-related factors that affect the attrition of special educators. A review of special education
teacher attrition literature indicated that the following personal factors are connected to attrition:
age, gender, race, degree level, years of teaching experience, and certification (Billingsley,
2004b). The following work-related factors (environmental and emotional responses to work)
frequently surfaced in literature surrounding special education teacher attrition: salary,
administrator support, colleague support, mentoring and induction support, professional
development, excessive paperwork, stress, and job satisfaction (Billingsley, 2004b).
This study surveyed 299 special education teachers from the ASD in an effort to explore
the reasons special educators choose to exit the field completely or transfer to general education
teaching positions. ASD special educators who chose to participate in the study represented 42
elementary, middle, and high schools in the district. The study was limited to special education
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 17
teachers who currently teach in the ASD. Every special education teacher in the ASD was asked
to complete a survey. Distributing the survey to every teacher maximized the probability that a
minimum of 15% to 20% of valid surveys would be returned, the minimum percentage required
to run statistical analyses on the results.
A quantitative research method and descriptive research design are suitable to quantify
the factors that affect ASD special education teachers’ intent to stay or leave the field. The
dependent variable in this study was the teacher’s intent to remain in or exit the field of special
education. Analysis of the survey results looked at personal and work-related factors as
predictors of a special educator’s intent to leave the field. These personal and work-related
factors were the independent variables. Personal factors were sex, ethnicity, degree level, years
of teaching experience, and teaching certification (Billingsley, 2004b). Work-related factors
were salary, administrative support, colleague support, induction/mentoring support, paperwork,
stress, and job satisfaction (Billingsley, 2004b).
ASD’s struggle to hire and retain highly qualified special education teachers is of
paramount concern for the district’s leaders and school administrators; thus, this quantitative
study examined this educational problem by attempting to predict the variables that have an
impact on the career decisions of ASD’s special educators.
Chi-square tests for independence are utilized when a researcher wishes to investigate the
relationship between two categorical variables with each variable having at least two or more
categories (Pallant, 2013). The chi-square test for independence “compares the observed
frequencies or proportions of cases that occur in each of the categories, with the values that
would be expected if there was no association between the two variables being measured” (p.
225). Chi-square tests for independence were conducted to explore whether there is a
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 18
relationship between intent to leave and personal characteristics and between intent to leave and
teacher qualifications.
Pallant (2013) notes that researchers utilize independent-samples t-tests when they want
to “compare the mean score, on some continuous variable, for two different groups of
participants” (p. 247). Independent-samples t-tests are used to compare values on some
continuous variable of two different groups or on two occasions (Pallant, 2013). Independent-
samples t-tests were conducted to determine whether there was a difference between teachers
who say they intend to leave and teachers who do not intend to leave with respect to work-
related scale variables.
Research Questions
In an effort to generalize the results from this study’s survey to the larger special
education teacher population in Hawaii, it was vital to analyze factors common among teachers
who intended to stay or leave the special education field. The goal of this quantitative,
descriptive study was to answer the following research questions:
1. What personal factors influence the career decisions of ASD’s special educators?
a. What personal characteristics (sex and ethnicity) impact the career decisions
of ASD’s special educators?
b. What factors associated with teacher qualifications (degree level, years of
teaching experience, current teaching assignment, certification type, and
teaching in area of certification) impact the career decisions of ASD’s special
educators?
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 19
2. What work-related factors influence the career decisions of ASD’s special educators?
a. What work environment factors (salary, administrative support, colleague
support, induction/mentoring support, and paperwork) impact the career
decisions of ASD’s special educators?
b. What emotional responses to work (stress/job satisfaction) impact the career
decisions of ASD’s special educators?
Hypotheses
According to Creswell (2014), a null hypothesis “makes a prediction that, in the general
population, no relationship or no significant difference exists between groups on a variable” (p.
245). The following null hypotheses were postulated for this study:
1. Sex, ethnicity, degree level, years of teaching experience, current teaching assignment,
certification type, and teaching in area of certification are not predictors of special
education teachers’ intent to leave special education.
2. Salary, administrative support, colleague support, paperwork, and stress/job satisfaction
are not predictors of special education teachers’ intent to leave special education.
Theoretical Frameworks and Conceptual Models
Special education attrition research identifies numerous variables that affect teachers’
career decisions but offers limited theoretical frameworks to guide this area of research. General
education attrition research is typically more concentrated and theory-driven (Billingsley,
2004b). Some of the general education attrition models include social learning theory,
organizational theory, career-choice theories, and human capital theory (Gold, 1996). Future
special education teacher attrition studies will require an increased emphasis on theory
conceptualization.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 20
Conceptual Models
In the absence of well-developed theoretical frameworks, conceptual models serve as
satisfactory guides for research studies. Miles and Huberman (1994) stated a conceptual model
“explains, either graphically or in narrative form, the main things to be studied – the key factors,
constructs, or variables – and the presumed relationships among them” (p. 18). There are two
models, Billingsley (1993) and Brownell and Smith (1993), that illustrate the plethora of factors
that have an impact on the decisions special educators make about their careers (Billingsley,
2004b). Some researchers question the degree to which prevailing special education conceptual
models, such as Billingsley’s (1993) and Brownell and Smith’s (1993) models, support and
explain attrition research discoveries (Billingsley, 2004b).
Billingsley’s model. Billingsley’s (1993) model discusses three types of factors that
influence the decision-making process of special educators. External factors (economic, societal,
institutional) have unintended effects on teachers’ career decisions (p. 147). Employment factors
(professional qualifications, work conditions and rewards, commitment to school, district,
teaching field and teaching profession) have a direct effect on teachers’ career decisions (p. 147).
Employment conditions such as unfavorable work environments and professional qualifications
result in lower levels of job commitment. Personal factors that typically exist beyond the
employment realm directly and indirectly influence whether or not teachers exit special
education (p. 147).
Brownell and Smith’s model. Brownell and Smith (1993) offered an alternate
conceptual model. This model describes four interconnected systems: microsystems,
mesosystems, exosystems, and macrosystems. Microsystems incorporate the teacher’s immediate
setting and interactions between teachers and students. Mesosystems are the interrelations among
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 21
several variables in the workplace. Exosystems are the official and unofficial social structures of
the community where the teacher works. Macrosystems represent the dominant culture’s beliefs
and ideologies. Unlike Billingsley’s (1993) model, Brownell and Smith (1993) did not intend for
their attrition model to be a causal model for research. However, Brownell and Smith (1993) did
expect that the relationships between the factors would be intricate and that some factors would
more greatly correlate with attrition than would others.
Significance of the Study
This study attempted to identify the common factors that influence the attrition of special
education teachers in a Hawaii school district. Survey results revealed factors that were strongly
connected to a special educator’s choice to leave special education or remain in the field.
Specifically, this study examined the personal and work-related factors that appeared throughout
existing literature on special education teacher attrition. The results of this study contribute to the
overall body of literature on special education teacher attrition. Additionally, the results of this
study are significant to Hawaii’s special educators because only one other study was conducted
on a similar topic, and the results of that study are 20 years old. It is anticipated that the results of
this study will inform the practice of district leaders and school administrators across the state as
well as the leaders of comparable populations across the nation. Undoubtedly, this study
highlights the need for future research in the concentration areas of special education teacher
preparation, recruitment and retention, satisfaction and motivation, as well as different types
(administrative, colleague) and levels (induction and mentoring) of support.
Assumptions
For the purpose of this study, it was assumed that all participants occupied a special
education teaching position in the ASD. It was also assumed that participants responded to the
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 22
questions honestly and that their answers reflected his/her true feelings connected to his/her
intent to remain in or leave special education. Lastly, it was assumed that information gathered
about special education teachers in the ASD could be applied to other districts in Hawaii or other
states that have comparable demographics.
Limitations and Delimitations
It is critical to communicate the limitations and delimitations of this study to reveal
possible threats to internal and external validity.
Limitations
Creswell (2014) noted that limitations, or threats to internal validity, of a study should be
identified to reveal potential weaknesses of the study. As readers attempt to extrapolate
information from this study, the limitations provide insight to the extent to which comparisons to
other studies can be made (Creswell, 2014). ASD’s superintendents were only able to release
data on current special education teachers and in a manner that kept the participants’ identities
confidential. In other words, this study was limited to current ASD special education teachers.
No attempt was made to collect information on special education teachers who were no longer
employed by the ASD. Additionally, this study’s survey was completely voluntarily. ASD
employed 299 special education teachers; hence, the size of this sample limits the use and
generalizability of the study’s results. This study’s timeline for obtaining completed surveys was
limited so that the data could be analyzed in a timely fashion. There were limited resources to
complete this study. The notion that all teachers who completed the survey did so with honesty is
difficult to determine; therefore, the survey results were further limited. There are several other
factors that influence special educators’ career decisions, especially their intent to stay or exit the
profession, that were not identified as predictor variables in this particular study.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 23
Delimitations
Delimitations describe what the study is not about and establish the boundaries of the
study’s scope (Creswell, 2014). This study’s survey was only administered to special education
teachers currently employed by the ASD. The findings of this study pertain only to special
educators in the ASD. This study focused exclusively on investigating the attrition trends of
special educators by attempting to identify the personal and work-related factors that influence
their intent to stay or leave.
Definition of Terms
Operational definitions are provided to minimize confusion about the meaning of
concepts and ideas. The following list of terms is essential to understanding the factors that are
associated with special education teacher attrition.
Attrition: Attrition is the term used to describe a teacher who decides to leave the
teaching profession. For the purpose of this study, the term attrition is referenced in connection
to the attrition of special education teachers. Billingsley (1993) sorted special education teacher
attrition into three categories: transfer attrition, exit attrition, and returns (p. 139).
Certification: Certification is the process a teacher undergoes in order to obtain a
teaching license. The Hawaii Teachers Standards Board is the licensing board that determines the
procedures and requirements to teach in the Hawaii public school system. Hawaii has a
reciprocity agreement with most other states making it possible for a teacher to transfer their
teaching license from another state to Hawaii. In addition to obtaining a teaching license through
a state approved teacher education program or through a reciprocity agreement, there are
alternate paths to receiving a teaching license in the state of Hawaii (Hawaii Teachers Standards
Board, 2015).
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 24
Education for all Handicapped Children Act: Public Law 94-142 law was passed in 1975
and established the following: (1) students with disabilities receive “a free appropriate public
education” emphasizing special education and related services to meet their unique needs, (2) the
rights of handicapped children and their parents or guardians are protected, (3) states and
localities provide for the education of all handicapped children, (4) and states “assess and assure
the effectiveness of efforts to educate handicapped children” (p. 3).
Exit attrition: According to Billingsley (1993), exit attrition occurs when teachers exit the
teaching profession entirely.
Highly qualified: NCLB required that all teachers be highly qualified. In order to be
considered highly qualified, a teacher must possess state certification, have a teaching license in
the state in which they teach, possess at least a bachelor’s degree, and display subject knowledge
in the academic topics they teach.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): Originally, the Education for all
Handicapped Children Act, this law was amended in 2004 and renamed IDEA. IDEA (2004)
IDEA (2004) readdressed the definition of a special needs child. The act stated that students with
disabilities do not automatically qualify for special education services. Instead, an evaluation
must be conducted to determine whether the student’s disability impacts their ability to
experience academic success in a general education setting.
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB): NCLB is the reauthorized Elementary and Secondary
Act (2001). The law required states to administer annual standardized assessments and publicly
report student progress. Schools eligible for Title I funding were required to make Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP), meaning that students in a tested grade level must do better on state
assessments than the previous year’s students in that same grade level. NCLB was an outgrowth
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 25
of standards-based education reform; standards-based reform movements assert that high
standards coupled with measurable goals leads to increased academic achievement (McLeskey &
Billingsley, 2008). Under NCLB, all schools were required to meet math and reading proficiency
goals by the 2013 school year.
Personal factors: A special education teacher’s decision to remain in or leave special
education is influenced by a series of personal factors. In the context of this discussion, personal
factors include age, sex, race, degree level, years of teaching experience, and teaching
certification (Billingsley, 2004b).
Retention: Billingsley’s (1993) explains retention as teachers who stay in the same
teaching position at the same school for consecutive school years.
Special Education: Public Law 94-142 (1975) defines special education as “specifically
designed instruction, at no cost to parents or guardians, to meet the unique needs of a
handicapped child, including classroom instruction, instruction in physical education, home
instruction and instruction in hospitals and institutions” (p. 3).
Transfer Attrition: Billingsley (1993) indicated that transfer attrition has two sub-
categories: “teaching position transfers” and “teaching field transfers” (p.139). Teaching position
transfers are teachers who transfer to another special education position in the same school or at
another school or district. Teaching field transfers are teachers who transfer to general education
teaching positions. For the context of this study, teaching field transfers are considered a greater
loss to special education because these teachers no longer service students with special needs.
Work-related factors: A special education teacher’s decision to remain in or leave the
field of special education is influenced by a series of work-related factors. In the context of this
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 26
discussion, work-related factors include salary, administrative support, colleague support,
induction/mentoring support, paperwork, stress, and job satisfaction (Billingsley, 2004b).
Organization of the Study
This study contains five chapters. Chapter One includes a background of the problem,
statement of the problem, purpose of the study, research questions, conceptual framework,
significance of the study, assumptions, limitations and delimitations, and definition of terms.
Identifying the factors that influence the career decisions of ASD’s special educators is relevant
because the ASD continuously experiences high attrition in this department. The results of this
study may provide valuable insight for ASD’s district leadership and school administrators;
ideally, the results of this study will inform the district’s recruitment and retention strategies and
policy development. Chapter Two includes a review of the literature related to special education
teacher attrition. Chapter Two bolsters the significance of the study by critically evaluating
existing empirical studies in an effort to identify information gaps in special education teacher
attrition literature. Chapter Three presents the study’s research design and methodology and
explains that a quantitative research design is an appropriate method for the proposed research
questions. Chapter Four reports the results of the survey and organizes the data by each research
question. Chapter Five concludes the study with a discussion of the findings and implications for
future practice.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 27
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This chapter introduces the background of the study and includes the statement of the
problem, purpose of the study, research questions and hypotheses, theoretical framework,
importance of the study, limitations and delimitations of the study, and definition of key terms.
Chapter Two conducts a comprehensive review of the literature and research connected to
special education teacher attrition. Creswell (2003) noted that the literature review is a critical
component of quantitative research and suggested that the review summarize the existing body
of research surrounding a given topic. In reviewing the literature, there should be an emphasis
placed on locating original research studies (Creswell, 2003).
Chapter Two begins with an overview of special education. The definition of special
education, history of special education, and the challenges associated with special education
legislation are also discussed. The next section of Chapter Two reviews literature pertaining to
special education teacher attrition. This section includes definitions of attrition, retention, and
transfer in the context of this discussion. Billingsley (1993) and Brownell and Smith’s (1993)
conceptual models are previewed before discussing the national shortage of special education
teachers, types of special education teacher attrition, and the cost of teacher attrition. Special
note is given to the only special education attrition study conducted in Hawaii (Carlson &
Thompson, 1995). The final section of Chapter Two is an examination of the literature
surrounding the personal and work-related reasons special educators leave teaching completely
or move to a general education teaching assignment. Summarized by Billingsley (2004b),
recurrent themes in the literature include “teacher characteristics and personal factors”, “teacher
qualifications”, “work environment factors”, and teachers’ “affective reactions to work” (p. 42).
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 28
Literature Review Procedures and Selection Criteria
This literature review was conducted using databases such as Educational Resources
Informational Clearinghouse (ERIC), ProQuest, PsychARTICLES, PsycINFO, and Sage
Publications. The following terms were used to scour the databases for relevant literature: special
education teacher attrition, special education attrition, attrition, special education retention,
retention, special education teacher turnover, and teaching position transfers. Professional
journals, books, dissertations, and peer-reviewed journals from the USC libraries online system
provided information for the study. Some of the references were not peer-reviewed journal
articles. However, these sources contained pertinent statistical data from sources like NCES and
the NCTAF. This literature review contains peer-reviewed studies that are ten or more years old,
as these articles represent seminal work still relevant to education and to the study of factors that
contribute to special education teacher attrition.
Special Education Literature Review
Definition and Number of Special Education Students
Public Law 94-142 (1975) defines special education as “specifically designed instruction,
at no cost to parents or guardians, to meet the unique needs of a handicapped child, including
classroom instruction, instruction in physical education, home instruction and instruction in
hospitals and institutions” (p. 3). In 2011, Scull and Winkler (2011) estimated that special
education spending encompassed approximately 21% of the nation’s education expenditures.
According to Scull and Winkler (2011) the number of special education students in the
United States reached its peak during the 2004-2005 academic year when there were 6.72 million
special education students, amounting to 13.8% of the total number of students enrolled in K-12
public education. During the 2005-2006 term, the number of students receiving special education
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 29
services declined for the first time since IDEA was passed (Scull & Winkler, 2011). During the
2009-2010 school year, Scull and Winkler (2011) noted there were 6.48 million students with
disabilities, which was 13.1% of the total student population.
Narrowing the focus to the state of Hawaii, researchers cited that there were 119,957
students, or 11.28% of the population, receiving special education services. Scull and Winkler
(2011) reported that during the 2008-2009 term, there were 243 special education teachers in the
state of Hawaii for every 1,000 students, placing Hawaii above the national ratio of 129 teachers
per 1,000 students. Recent reports of a shortage of special education teachers in the Hawaii
Department of Education at the start of the 2015 school year may have altered the
aforementioned student to teacher ratio (Mulcahy, 2015).
History of Special Education
Prior to 1970, students with special needs did not benefit from modifications to
curriculum and instruction to ensure their academic success. Beginning in the 1970’s, the United
States government established a series of federal laws in an effort to better serve students with
disabilities. Special education reforms in the 1990’s and 2000’s called for increases in student
achievement for all students, regardless of ability, and escalated teacher accountability (IDEA,
2004; NCLB, 2002).
The Education for All Handicapped Children Act. Congress passed the Education for
All Handicapped Children Act, or Public Law 94-142, in 1975. Under this law, states and school
districts that serviced special needs students were guaranteed financial assistance. Additionally,
Public Law 94-142 (1975) established the following: (1) students with disabilities receive “a free
appropriate public education” emphasizing special education and related services to meet their
unique needs, (2) the rights of handicapped children and their parents or guardians are protected,
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 30
(3) states and localities provide for the education of all handicapped children, (4) and states
“assess and assure the effectiveness of efforts to educate handicapped children” (p. 3). Public
Law 94-142 (1975) also developed an individualized educational program (IEP), which is a legal
document for students who are eligible for special education. An IEP is a document that must be
reviewed annually by the educational support team (parents, teachers, child, and other support
staff). An IEP details the child’s specific educational needs, current levels of performance, lists
of provided services, and annual achievement goals.
No Child Left Behind Act. In 2002, Congress passed Public Law 107-110, commonly
referred to as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). NCLB was an outgrowth of standards-
based education reform; standards-based reform asserts that high standards coupled with
measurable goals leads to increased academic achievement (McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008).
NCLB (2002) required states to administer annual standardized assessments and publicly report
student progress. Schools eligible for Title I funding were required to make (AYP), meaning that
students in a tested grade level must do better on state assessments than the previous year’s
students in that same grade level. The pressure to make AYP increased accountability for schools
and teachers while districts across the nation scrambled to place highly qualified teachers into
every classroom (McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008). Under NCLB (2002), students with
disabilities were identified as a subgroup for whom academic achievement and progress would
be tracked. Special needs students were required to demonstrate the same proficiency as their
general education peers on state assessments by the close of the 2013-2014 school year (NCLB,
2002).
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. In 1990, President George H. W. Bush
amended Public Law 94-142 and signed into law the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 31
(IDEA). IDEA (2004) readdressed the definition of a special needs child. The act stated that
students with disabilities do not automatically qualify for special education services. Instead, an
evaluation must be conducted to determine whether or not the student’s disability has an impact
on their ability to experience academic success in a general education setting (IDEA, 2004). In
2004, President Bush passed the most updated version of IDEA, which closely aligned with
NCLB (2002). Most significantly, IDEA (2004) echoed the demands of NCLB (2002) with the
requirement that all special education teachers must be highly qualified. In order to be
considered highly qualified, a special education teacher must possess state certification, have a
teaching license in the state in which they teach, possess at least a bachelor’s degree, and display
subject knowledge of the academic topics they teach.
Challenges Associated with Special Education Legislation
NCLB (2002) and IDEA (2004) mandated that a highly qualified special education
teacher would teach children with disabilities. In order to maintain compliance under NCLB and
IDEA, education leaders ensured that every student with special needs received instruction from
a highly qualified special education teacher (Thornton, Peltier, Medina, 2007). Considerable
debate swirls around what type of preparation a teacher requires to receive recognition as highly
qualified (Ingersoll, 2008; Plash & Piotrowski, 2006).
A study conducted by Therrien and Wasburn-Moses (2009) discovered that university
and school district personnel did not have adequate information regarding highly qualified
requirements for special education teachers. Therrien and Wasburn-Moses (2009) surveyed 92
participants connected to special education from universities and school districts in Ohio. The
study revealed that information provided about the NCLB highly qualified requirement for
special education teachers varied depending on who was responding. University personnel
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 32
articulated that it was difficult to become highly qualified in the time it took to complete an
undergraduate program and often advised students to take additional certification tests in areas
other than special education. The study’s researchers believed this placed a burden on the school
districts in which teachers were hired to fulfill highly qualified requirements. Unsurprisingly,
school administrators displayed frustration with the NCLB highly qualified requirement because
they could assign special education teachers only to classes based on their areas of certification.
As NCLB and IDEA attempted to elevate teaching standards, the national teacher
shortage simultaneously continued to rise (McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008). Some researchers
claimed that NCLB mandates had an inverse effect on teaching standards. Researchers claimed
that NCLB contributed to lowering certification requirements for special educators by permitting
alternative routes to certification and teacher preparation programs (McLeskey & Billingsley,
2008). Sindelar, Brownell and Billingsley (2010) stated that non-traditional training programs for
special education teachers pursuing highly qualified status had “deprofessionalized the entry to
special education” (p. 11). Patterson, Collins, and Abbot’s (2004) study echoed similar sentiment
with research from the state of California. Patterson et al.’s (2004) research on teacher resilience
explored California’s struggle to find highly qualified special educators to teach in urban
schools. In an effort to satisfy NCLB legislation, California proposed to temporarily authorize
interns with emergency permits to be classified as highly qualified, which further
deprofessionalized special education.
An additional challenge that NCLB and IDEA presents is the mandate that special
education teachers must be highly qualified in special education as well as each of the subject
areas they teach (Quigney, 2009). This requirement clearly places additional pressure on special
educators who teach multiple subjects. Quigney (2009) illustrated this point by describing
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 33
special educators who teach in self-contained classrooms. In self-contained classrooms, the
teacher instructs students in all core subject areas, thus requiring him/her to obtain special
education, math, science, social studies, and language arts certifications.
Special Education Teacher Attrition Literature Review
Definitions of Attrition, Retention, and Transfer
Part of the challenge in deciphering the scope of attrition in special education is the
multiple definitions researchers adopted for teacher attrition, retention and transfer (Billingsley,
1993). Grissmer and Kirby (1987) affirm that there is “no single appropriate definition of teacher
attrition” (p. 7). Furthermore, there is little agreement in the literature about what these terms
denote and these terms are not used reliably across studies. For the purpose of this discussion, the
work of Billingsley (1993) will provide a foundation for defining attrition, retention, and
transfer.
Billingsley (1993) presented a visual illustration of special education attrition, retention
and transfer. The illustration is sorted into three categories: “transfer attrition”, “exit attrition”,
and “returns” (p. 139). The first category, transfer attrition, has two sub-categories: “teaching
position transfers” and “teaching field transfers” (p.139). Teaching position transfers are teachers
who transfer to another special education position in the same school or at another school or
district. Teaching field transfers are teachers who transfer to general education teaching
positions. Understandably, teaching field transfers are considered a greater loss to special
education because these teachers no longer service students with special needs. The second
category, exit attrition, occurs when teachers exit the teaching profession entirely. Boe, Bobbitt,
and Cook (1997) stated, “The most troublesome component of turnover is exit attrition, because
it represents a reduction in the teaching force, requiring a compensating inflow of replacement
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 34
teachers” (p. 377). Billingsley’s (1993) fourth category, returns, is structured around the work of
Boe (1990). This category explains retention as teachers who stay in the same teaching position
at the same school for consecutive school years. It is common for researchers to include multiple
types of attrition in a particular study.
Billingsley’s (1993) conceptual framework describes the actual decisions of special
education teachers (i.e., stay, transfer, or exit). Additionally, Boe and colleagues used data from
the National Teacher Follow-Up Survey for their studies on special education teachers who leave
(Boe, Bobbitt, & Cook, 1997; Boe, Bobbitt, Cook, Whitener, & Weber, 1997). Numerous other
researchers also chose to trace the leavers (Billingsley, Bodkins, & Hendricks, 1993; Billingsley,
Pyecha, Smith-Davis, Murray, & Hendricks, 1995; Miller, Brownell, & Smith, 1999; Morvant,
Gersten, Gillman, Keating, & Blake, 1995).
Analyzing the trends in reasons teachers leave and reposition themselves in the teaching
force calls for additional studies that are expensive and time-intensive. These factors indicate
substantial challenges to examining teacher attrition (Billingsley, 2004b). As a result, this
discussion considered the career behaviors of teachers currently teaching as they decide on their
intent to leave the profession as an agent for attrition (Billingsley & Cross, 1992; Cross &
Billingsley, 1994; Gersten, Keating, Yovanoff, & Harniss, 2001; Littrell, Billingsley, & Cross,
1994; Singh & Billingsley, 1996; Westling & Whitten, 1996; Whitaker, 2000). Studying
intentions allows researchers to contemplate the connection between teachers’ career plans and a
variety of teacher and district components without the burden of locating teachers who left.
Some researchers question the use of the intent variable when studying special education
teacher attrition behavior (Boe, Bobbitt, Cook, Whitener et al, 1997; LeCompte & Dworkin,
1991). In response, Boe, Barkanic, and Leow (1999) found that “plans to stay in the same school
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 35
next year are associated with actual staying, and plans to leave the school are associated the
voluntary moving, voluntary leaving, and involuntary leaving” (p. 12). Forthcoming attrition
studies should contemplate the time frame for investigating whether teachers who intend to leave
actually do leave (Billingsley, 2004b). For instance, Gersten et al. (2001) hypothesized that
researchers who critiqued the intent variable used too short of a time frame. In a study of 33
teachers who planned to leave within a 15-month period, Gersten et al. (2001) described that
69% of the teachers who planned to leave actually left special education teaching.
Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework is necessary to guide a research studies. Miles and Huberman
(1994) stated a conceptual framework “explains, either graphically or in narrative form, the main
things to be studied – the key factors, constructs, or variables – and the presumed relationships
among them” (p. 18). There are two models, Billingsley (1993) and Brownell and Smith (1993),
that illustrate the plethora of factors that have an impact on the decisions special educators make
about their careers (Billingsley, 2004b).
Billingsley’s model. Billingsley’s (1993) model discusses three types of factors that
influence the decision making process of special educators. “External factors” (economic,
societal, institutional) have unintended effects on teachers’ career decisions (p. 147).
“Employment factors” (professional qualifications, work conditions and rewards, commitment to
school, district, teaching field and teaching profession) have a direct effect on teachers’ career
decisions (p. 147). Employment conditions, such as unfavorable work environments and
professional qualifications, result in lower levels of job commitment. “Personal factors” that
typically exist beyond the employment realm directly and indirectly influence whether or not
teachers exit special education (p. 147).
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 36
Brownell and Smith’s model. Brownell and Smith (1993) offered an alternate
conceptual model. This model describes four interconnected systems: microsystems,
mesosystems, exosystems, and macrosystems. Microsystems incorporate the teacher’s immediate
setting and interactions between teachers and students. Mesosystems are the interrelations
between several variables in the workplace. Exosystems are the official and unofficial social
structures of the community where the teacher works. Macrosystems represent the dominant
culture’s beliefs and ideologies. Unlike Billingsley’s (1993) model, Brownell and Smith (1993)
did not intend for their attrition model to be a causal model for research. However, Brownell and
Smith (1993) did expect that the relationships among the factors would be intricate and that some
factors would correlate greater with attrition than would others.
Some researchers question the degree to which prevailing special education theoretical
models, such as Billingsley’s (1993) and Brownell and Smith’s (1993) models, support and
explain attrition research discoveries (Billingsley, 2004b). Special education attrition research
identifies numerous variables that affect teachers’ career decisions but offers limited theories.
General education attrition research is typically more concentrated and theory-driven
(Billingsley, 2004b). Some of the general education attrition models include social learning
theory, organizational theory, career-choice theories, and human capital theory (Gold, 1996).
Future special education teacher attrition studies will require an increased emphasis on theory
conceptualization.
Shortage of Special Education Teachers
There is a shortage of special education teachers in every region of the United States
(Irinaga-Bistolas, Schalock, Marvin, & Beck, 2007; McLeskey, Tyler, & Flippin, 2004; Thornton
et al., 2007). Even after two decades of efforts to increase the quantity of qualified special
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 37
education teachers, the shortage continues to increase (Brownell, Hirsch, & Seo, 2004;
McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008). McLeskey et al. (2004) reported that the special education
teacher shortage exceeds deficits in the number of available highly qualified teachers in every
subject area, including math and science. NCLB mandates also contribute to the teacher shortage
because teachers must be highly qualified in every subject they teach. The practicality of this
mandate is questioned when it causes severe hindrances to schools’ staffing efforts (Quigney,
2009). Irinaga-Bistolas et al. (2007) estimated that the special education teacher shortage would
not dissipate as long as the number of students identified with special needs continued to rise.
Using statistics generated by the NCES, researchers Cook and Boe (2007) asserted that
the demand for special education teachers rose 38% between 1987 and 2000 while the demand
for general education teachers increased by 26%. The researchers hypothesized that insufficient
numbers of special educators triggered the shortage. Cook and Boe (2007) warned of focusing
solely on retention strategies because only 25% of teachers who left their teaching position did
so due to issues related to their job, while the other 75% left because of personal reasons that
retention strategies would not prevent.
Thornton et al. (2007) argued that policy leaders and education leaders could reduce the
special education teacher shortage by enlarging the supply and minimizing attrition rates.
McLeskey and Billingsley (2008) also agreed that attrition is a significant aspect of the special
education teacher shortage. Therefore, an effort to retain highly qualified teachers is critical to
decreasing the shortage (Payne, 2005; Stronge et al., 2008; Thornton et al., 2007). However, the
special education teacher shortage will not be remediated via recruitment efforts if attrition rates
do not slow (Billingsley, Carlson, & Klein 2004; NCTAF, 2007).
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 38
Special Education Teacher Attrition
Researchers report varying statistics for special education teacher attrition rates. Annual
attrition rates for special education teachers with one year or less of experience is between 8%
and 10% (Thornton et al., 2007; Wasburn-Moses, 2006). Attrition rates for special education
teachers with five years or less of experience jumps to between 30% and 60% (Edgar & Pair,
2005; Irinaga-Bistolas et al., 2007). Specifically, both special education and general education
teacher attrition rates appear to be the highest during the first three years of service (Billingsley,
2004b; Billingsley, 2007a; Bozonelos, 2008; Guarino et al., 2006; Ingersoll, 2002; Loeb &
Reininger, 2004; McCann et al., 2005; McLeskey et al., 2004; NCTAF, 2010; Stronge et al.,
2008).
When comparing attrition rates of special educators with those of general educators, the
literature presents varied results. Special education teachers do not leave teaching at higher rates
than general education teachers do (Boe, Cook, & Sunderland, 2008). However, the rate of
special education teachers transferring to general education teaching positions or transferring to
different schools has risen (Billingsley, 2007a; McLeskey et al., 2004). Billingsley (2004a)
reported that special education teachers continue to have the highest attrition rates compared to
teachers in other subject areas. Billingsley’s (2004a) attrition study also established that special
education teachers at the secondary level remained in the profession 1.6 years less than did
elementary level special education teachers.
Special education migration and transferring to general education. As previously
mentioned, Billingsley (1993) suggested that there are many types of teacher attrition. Transfer
attrition has two sub-categories: “teaching position transfers” and “teaching field transfers”
(p.139). Teaching position transfers are teachers who transfer to another special education
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 39
position in the same school or at another school or district. Teaching field transfers are teachers
who transfer to general education teaching positions. Billingsley (1993) argued that teaching
field transfers are considered a greater loss to special education because these teachers no longer
service students with special needs. Edgar and Pair (2005) also discussed the effects of teaching
position transfers, or migrations, and teaching field transfers. According to Edgar and Pair
(2005), both teaching migrations and teachers leaving the profession entirely, caused conflict for
school administrators because for either scenario, a vacancy is created. Edgar and Pair (2005)
followed the employment patterns of 161 special education teachers from seven different
teaching cohorts. Special education teachers enrolled in dual certification programs demonstrated
the highest rates of attrition; 28% of these teachers transferred to general education teaching
positions while only 20% of the teachers who were dissatisfied with their special education
position transferred to a different special education position.
Gehrke and McCoy (2007) also conducted a study of special education teachers who had
plans to transfer out of special education. Approximately 70% of the special education teachers
who participated in the study stated that they would remain in their current position. These
teachers cited that they received adequate support and had access to instructional materials
provided by their school and multiple professional development opportunities. The remaining
30% of the teachers who participated in this study stated that they did not receive similar support
from their schools and indicated they would transfer out of special education to a general
education teaching position.
Boe et al. (2008) compared the migration and transfer patterns of special education and
general education teachers during the 1990’s. Using the NCES data generated from the Teacher
Follow-Up Survey, the researchers proved that special education teachers migrated at
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 40
significantly higher rates than their general education counterparts did. Migration rates were
notably higher than those for both teaching area transfers and attrition for special education
teachers. Migration of special education teachers was especially high during the first three years
of service. Additionally, Boe et al. (2008) noted an increase in teaching area transfers. Similar to
migration trends, special education teachers transferred teaching areas at the highest rates within
the first four years of teaching.
Involuntary attrition. Teacher attrition is traditionally viewed as having negative effects
on a school’s climate, economic status, and students’ achievement. However, there are instances
in which attrition does not produce negative consequences. McLeskey and Billingsley (2008)
stated that not all cases of attrition are voluntary or destructive to schools and students. Attrition
rates are typically the highest in the first three years of teaching because teachers are determining
whether or not they are qualified to perform their duties satisfactorily (Boe et al., 2008). In
addition, Elder (2004) argued that this is also the time frame in which administrators should be
evaluating teachers for their effectiveness and in instances where skill sets fall short,
administrators have an obligation to release teachers from the profession.
Special Education Teacher Attrition in Hawaii
There is only one known study of Hawaii special education teachers. Carlson and
Thompson (1995) questioned whether teacher and organizational variables contributed to (a)
significant variance in teachers’ scores on components measuring burnout and (b) teachers’
intentions to leave special education. The researchers sent a survey to over 1,000 teachers, and
490 completed surveys were returned. Results of multiple regression analyses revealed that, for
the burnout components of Emotional Exhaustion and Depersonalization, large and significant
amounts of variance could be explained by a set of predictor variables. For the third burnout
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 41
component, Personal Accomplishment, variance for a set of predictor variables was small but
significant. Stepwise discriminant function analysis was utilized to determine the difference
between teachers who stated that they did and those who stated they did not intend to leave their
special education teaching position. Eight variables were discovered as predictors of “Intention
to leave special education teaching,” accurately classifying 73% of the study’s participants into
either the “Yes-Leaving” and “No-Leaving” groups. The predictor variables identified by
Carlson and Thompson (1995) align with factors that affect special education teacher attrition
recognized in studies conducted elsewhere in the United States. Two decades passed without
additional research being conducted in Hawaii. The results of this study are necessary to fill in
gaps in Hawaii’s special education teacher literature.
Costs of Teacher Attrition
Attrition has a negative impact on schools in multiple ways. While studies specifically on
special education teacher attrition are limited (Boe et al., 2008; Irinaga-Bistolas et al., 2007;
McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008), there are numerous studies on general education teacher
attrition that indicate costly consequences to schools and students (Darling-Hammond, 2003;
Stronge et al., 2008; NCTAF, 2007; Schlichte, Yssel, & Merbler, 2005; SMHC, 2009). Attrition
costs include financial burdens, influences on student achievement, and an undesirable effect on
the school climate (Billingsley, 2004a; Edgar & Pair, 2005; Guarino et al., 2007). The NCTAF
(2010) reported that teacher attrition costs approximately $7.3 billion a year. Carroll and Fulton
(2004) estimated that schools spend approximately $50,000 a year hiring and training new
teachers. An earlier report by the NCTAF (2007) reported that it can cost as little as $4,366 for a
rural school and in excess of $17,872 for larger, urban school districts to replace exiting teachers.
The most common financial costs associated with teacher attrition include the recruitment,
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 42
hiring, and professional development of new teachers (Loeb & Reininger, 2004; McLeskey &
Billingsley, 2008; NCTAF, 2010).
Student achievement is also affected by teacher attrition (Billingsley, 2004a; Darling-
Hammond, 2003; NCTAF, 2007; NCTAF, 2010; Schlichte et al., 2005). Student achievement is
directly related to the quality of a student’s teacher (Darling-Hammond, 2003; McLeskey &
Billingsley, 2008; SMHC, 2009). Students who are instructed by inexperienced teachers
demonstrate lower levels of learning than do students instructed by experienced teachers, further
emphasizing the need to reduce attrition rates (Barnes et al., 2007; Edgar & Pair, 2005; NCTAF,
2007; NCTAF, 2010). Students with special needs commonly receive instruction from
inexperienced teachers due to high special education teacher attrition (Billingsley, 2004a; Boe et
al., 2008; Edgar & Pair, 2005; Irinaga-Bistolas et al., 2007). Given that many special education
students originally come from general education settings in which they did not experience
academic success and often performed well below grade level expectations, ensuring that these
students receive instruction from a highly qualified teacher is paramount (McLeskey &
Billingsley, 2008).
Another cost of teacher attrition is unfavorable effects on school climate (Boe et al.,
2008; Ingersoll, 2002; Loeb & Reining, 2004; McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008; NCTAF, 2010;
Stronge et al., 2008). When teachers decide to leave the profession or transfer to another
position, they take their knowledge and experience with them. In their absence, schools must hire
and train replacements, which often causes the remaining teachers additional strain to either help
transition the replacement or provide assistance to close gaps in services until one is hired
(McLeskey et al., 2008; NCTAF, 2010). Additionally, when schools are forced to allocate
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 43
resources for training new teachers, they are often sacrificing funding for student achievement
initiatives (Barnes et al., 2007; Billingsley, 2007b; Darling-Hammond, 2003).
Personal and Work-Related Factors that Influence Special Education Teacher Attrition
Thematic Approach to Literature
Since the 1980’s, special education teacher attrition research has focused heavily on
personal and work-related issues that have an impact on special educators’ career decisions;
therefore, this literature review emphasizes these factors (Billingsley, 2004b; Major, 2012). This
review presents themes that frequently surfaced in the studies conducted from the 1980’s through
2015. Summarized by Billingsley (2004b), recurrent themes in the literature include “teacher
characteristics and personal factors”, “teacher qualifications”, “work environment factors”, and
teachers’ “affective reactions to work” (p. 42).
Teacher Characteristics and Personal Factors
The links between teacher characteristics and attrition has received significant attention
from researchers studying general education teacher populations but less consideration has been
placed on special education teacher populations. However, demographic variables such as age,
gender, and race surface in multiple pieces of literature surrounding attrition (Billingsley,
2004b). Multiple studies also recognized the significance of the fact that personal conditions
influence some teachers’ decisions to leave the field of special education. Preventing special
education teacher attrition due to personal reasons is difficult because districts and schools often
have little control over these factors (McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008).
Age. Age is the only demographic variable repeatedly connected to special education
attrition. Young special education teachers express intent to leave more often than do older
special education teachers (Boe, Bobbitt, Cook, Whitener et al., 1997; Cross & Billingsley, 1994;
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 44
Morvant et al., 1995; Singer, 1992). In a longitudinal study investigating over 6,000 special
education teachers who left the profession, young special education teachers left twice as often
as did veteran teachers (Singer, 1992). Miller, Brownell, and Smith’s (1999) survey of over
1,000 special education teachers from Florida also found that less-experienced teachers were
considerably more likely to leave the field. A series of studies, with smaller sample sizes and
qualitative research methods, also supported that less-experienced special education teachers
indicated their intent to leave at much higher rates than did veteran special education teachers
(Cross & Billingsley, 1994; Gersten et al., 2001; Morvant et al., 1995; Singh & Billingsley,
1996).
Gender. Only a small number of special education studies comment on the relationship
between attrition and gender. Research findings on gender and attrition are varied and
inconsistent. A large, national, quantitative analysis of leavers, movers, and stayers did not
identify a connection between gender and attrition (Boe, Bobbitt, Cook, Whitener et al., 1997).
Miller et al. (1999) did not find connections between attrition and special education teacher
turnover. Cross and Billingsley (1994) also did not find any indication that gender influenced a
teacher’s intent to exit the special education field. However, an earlier study conducted by
Morvant et al. (1995) corroborated a connection between gender and attrition. This study
revealed that male teachers stated intent to leave more often than did females. Singer (1992)
discovered females left special education classrooms at a higher rate than males; however,
females resumed teaching careers at the same rate as their male counterparts did. Inconsistencies
in the data on gender and attrition are likely due to variances in the population samples and
methods exhausted. Additionally, the complexion of the teaching workforce has evolved;
women’s participation trends are increasingly similar to men’s (Billingsley, 2004).
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 45
Race. Race and attrition were not linked in the results of a national study completed by
Boe, Bobbitt, Cook, Whitener et al. (1997), in the research studies of over 6,000 former special
education teachers from North Carolina and Michigan (Singer, 1992), or in a survey of 1,208
special education teachers from Florida who left or transferred out of the field (Miller et al.,
1999). Billingsley et al. (1995) completed a study of 99 special education teachers from a large,
urban district. These teachers, all of whom had left their assigned teaching positions in special
education, responded to questionnaires they received in the mail. Billingsley’s et al. (1995) study
reported that White teachers left special education teaching positions more often than did Black
teachers. The results from Billingsley et al. (1995) echoed the results of a much earlier study
completed by Dworkin (1980) that stated White women quit positions at urban schools more
often than did Blacks or Hispanics.
Personal factors. Personal factors, like finances and prospective job opportunities, also
swayed special education teachers’ decisions to leave or stay at their current teaching positions.
Teachers may also leave due to a pregnancy, health reasons, or the relocation of a spouse
(Billingsley et al., 2004; Guarino et al., 2006; McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008; McLeskey et al.,
2004; Thornton et al., 2007). Over 400 special education teachers participated in a national study
and 35% reported personal reasons for leaving (Boe, Bobbitt, Cook, Barkanic, & Maislin, 1999).
Billingsley’s et al. (1995) study of teachers who left an urban school district revealed similar
findings; 37% of the 99 teachers reported leaving primarily for personal reasons. Research
produced by Cross and Billingsley (1994), supported by Singh and Billingsley (1996), stated that
teachers with higher levels of education, fewer years of teaching experience, and who considered
themselves members of a minority group, were more likely to leave because of perceived
opportunities outside of the education field. Collectively, the work of Billingsley et al. (1993),
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 46
Billingsley et al. (1995), Brownell, Smith, McNellis, and Miller (1997) and Morvant et al. (1995)
assert that reasons not related to work influenced teachers’ choices to leave special education
teaching positions.
Teacher Qualifications
The majority of special education studies centered on attrition are occasionally deemed to
collect rudimentary indicators of quality (e.g. experience, test performance, degrees earned,
certification status). Therefore, less attention has been paid to teacher qualifications in special
education literature because measuring or agreeing on “quality” is difficult (Billingsley, 2004b;
Blanton, Sindelar, Correa, Hardman, McDonnell, & Kuhel, 2002).
Certification. Small numbers of research studies indicate that special education attrition
is strongly associated with a teacher’s certification status. Miller et al. (1999) determined that
uncertified teachers demonstrated higher levels of attrition than did certified teachers. Teachers
who were not certified contributed to higher levels of exit attrition but did not affect transfer
attrition rates (Boe, Bobbitt et al., 1999). Special education frequently has the lowest number of
certified teachers (Payne, 2005). According to McLeskey and Billingsley (2008), 82% to 99% of
secondary special educators were not highly qualified in their content area. A study on the
shortage of special education teachers in rural Idaho revealed that more than 10% of the teachers
were not certified (Johnson, Humphrey, & Allred, 2009). Boe et al.’s (2008) analysis of NCES
data from 1999-2000, revealed that only 46% of special education teachers were certified
compared to 82% of general education teachers. Not many studies focused on the links between
certification and attrition; therefore, it is difficult to draw inferences.
Academic ability. The relationship between attrition and standardized test performance
is fairly strong. Teachers with above average National Teacher Exam scores were twice as likely
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 47
to leave special education teaching positions as were teachers with average to below average test
scores (Singer, 1992). In a previous study, similar findings by Frank and Keith (1984), asserted
that special educators who were found academically capable, as measured by the Scholastic
Assessment Test, left special education at higher rates than teachers with poorer academic
performances. While academic ability measures do not necessarily indicate teacher competence,
the results of these two studies revealed concerns that teachers who demonstrated elevated
testing ability were exiting special education (Billingsley, 2004b).
Teacher preparation. Teacher preparation programs may have an impact on special
education teacher attrition (Darling-Hammond, 2003; Loeb & Reininger, 2004). Cross and
Billingsley (1994) and Westling and Whitten (1996) reported that the more training a teacher
obtained, they were more likely to indicate intent to leave. Contrarily, the literature stemming
from the early 2000’s indicated that special education teachers are less likely to exit teaching or
transfer out of their positions if they are adequately prepared (McLeskey et al., 2004; Thornton et
al., 2007). Edgar and Pair’s (2005) study showed that teachers who were enrolled in the
University of Washington’s five-year teacher preparation program demonstrated attrition rates
lower than the national special education teacher attrition rate. Connelly and Graham’s (2009)
study utilized data from national teaching surveys to determine that special education teachers
who received a minimum of ten weeks of student teaching experience were less likely to leave
special education than were teachers who received fewer than ten weeks of student teaching.
This finding supported Boe et al.’s (2008) position that special education teacher preparation
programs require extensive amounts of time to prepare teachers for the realities of working in
special education.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 48
Work Environments
Special education teacher attrition literature demonstrates that work surroundings are
critical to job satisfaction and the career choices teachers make (Billingsley, 2004b). The
literature defines work environment variables both specifically and broadly. This section
describes the relationship between attrition and specific work variables such as salary, school
climate, administrator support, colleague support, support via induction and mentoring,
professional development, excessive paperwork as an indicator of role overload, and caseload
issues (Billingsley, 2004b).
Salary. Multiple studies suggest that salary and turnover are closely related (Billingsley,
2007b; Boe, Bobbitt, Cook, Whitener et al., 1997; Darling-Hammond, 2003; Edgar & Pair, 2005;
Henke, Choy, Chen, Geis, and Alt, 1997; Loeb, Darling-Hammond, & Luczak, 2005; Loeb &
Reininger, 2004; Miller et al., 1999; Rice & Goessling, 2005; Singer, 1992). Miller et al. (1999)
and Singer (1992) suggested that higher-paying jobs encouraged special education teachers to
stay more often than lower-paying jobs did. Boe, Bobbitt, Cook, and Whitener (1997) stated that
special education teachers did not transfer or leave as often when their salary was raised. Henke
et al. (1997) released findings that indicated that compensation was critical to teachers in their
decision to stay or leave. This study also hypothesized school districts that failed to offer
competitive salaries would more than likely struggle to hire and retain highly qualified special
education teachers, as salary influences teachers to remain in their current positions but is rarely
something local school leaders control (Edgar & Pair, 2005). In a study of 99 special education
teachers who chose to leave, merely 7% indicated that increasing their salary would have swayed
them to stay (Billingsley, 2007a). Rice and Goessling (2005) researched the disproportionate
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 49
number of females versus males in special education. In addition, Rice and Goessling attributed
the considerably smaller percentage of men in special education to low teachers’ salaries.
School climate. Special education teacher attrition literature is generally vague when
considering school climate. Researchers try to disconnect work-related influences when
conducting surveys but this poses a challenge because many of these variables are indelibly
connected; essentially, researchers are trying to ask, “Overall, is your school/district a good place
to work?” (Billingsley, 2004b). Teachers who assert that their school is a pleasant place to work
and believe that their school has an optimistic school climate are more inclined to remain at their
current teaching assignment (Billingsley, 2004a; Loeb & Reininger, 2004; Stronge et al., 2008).
Billingsley (2004a) noted that novice special education teachers who chose teaching as a life-
long career had higher school climate scores on recorded surveys versus beginning special
education teachers who remained unclear about their career aspirations.
Administrative support. Literature findings suggest that support is difficult to define
because of its comprehensive and varied nature. However, there is strong evidence from the
literature of the 1990’s and 2000’s that indicates teachers stay in teaching when they feel as
though they have sufficient support from their administrators (Billingsley, 2004; Boe, Barkanic
et al., 1999; Boe et al., 2008; DeMik, 2008; Gehrke & Murri, 2006; Griffin, Winn, Otis-Wilborn,
& Kilgore, 2009; Littrell et al., 1994; Miller et al., 1999; Nance & Calabrese, 2009).
DeMik’s (2008) narrative inquiry of five special educators revealed that the participants
valued strong, professional support from their administrators. Gehrke and Murri (2006) studied
eight special education teachers and their mean scores about the support of their principal ranked
as the third highest on a list of ten items. Boe et al. (2008) reported that one of the most
frequently cited reasons special educators chose to depart from their current position was a lack
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 50
of administrator support. In a study of 596 first year special education teachers, Griffin et al.,
(2009) discovered that 50% of the participants perceived their principal to be very supportive and
37% of the participants believed their principal to be somewhat supportive. In a qualitative
multiple case study, Nance and Calabrese (2009) reported that special education teachers want to
have their needs considered and to be listened to by their building administrators.
Boe, Barkanic et al. (1999) conducted a national study that found teachers who stayed in
their current special education positions were four times more likely than those who leave to feel
supported and inspired by their administrators’ behaviors. Miller et al.’s (1999) descriptive
analysis of a questionnaire also linked administrator support to lower attrition rates. Miller et al.
reported that, out of 484 Alaskan special education teachers, 88% stated that a supportive
principal was the highest incentive to stay in their current teaching position. Littrell, Billingsley,
and Cross (1994) discovered that emotional support was identified as the most critical to special
educators. According to Littrell et al., examples of emotional support included consistent and
open communication, demonstrating interest in teachers’ work, and showing gratitude. While
Littrell et al. found that high levels of emotional support correlated with teachers’ school
commitment and job satisfaction, links between intent to leave and administrator support were
not identified. Consequently, administrative support is expected to have an impact on attrition
rates through other factors such as stress, professional development, job commitment, and role
design (Billingsley, 2004b).
Colleague support. Unlike administrative support, the relationship between colleague
support and special education teacher attrition has received less attention in the literature, and the
results of research studies produced mixed results (Billingsley, 2004b; DeMik, 2008; George et
al., 1995; Gehrke & McCoy, 2007; Gehrke & Murri, 2006; Griffin et al., 2009; Miller et al.,
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 51
1999;). Miller et al.’s (1999) survey of over 1000 special education teachers in Florida found that
minimal supports from colleagues lead to increased attrition rates. These findings were not
consistent with an earlier study conducted by George et al. (1995) that reported that, while
special education teachers labeled the support they received from their colleagues as
“inadequate,” collegial support did not factor into the decisions of those special education
teachers that intended to leave. Gehrke and Murri (2006), Gehrke and McCoy (2007), and
DeMik (2008) released findings that suggested that special education teacher attrition rates rise
when relationships between general education and special education teachers are not supportive.
In a study of first year special education teachers, Griffin et al. (2009) reported that 69% of the
participants felt supported by their colleagues in the special education department, but only 34%
felt that their general education colleagues were supportive. Research from the 1990s and 2000s
indicates that principals cannot provide enough support for special education teachers alone,
instead, reciprocity of support among special and general education teachers is equally as
important to cultivate (Billingsley, 2004b).
Support through induction and mentoring. Special education teacher attrition rates are
the highest within the first three years of teaching (Billingsley, 2004b; Billingsley, 2007b;
Bozonelos, 2008; McLeskey et al., 2004). Gold (1996) discovered that novice special education
teachers’ enthusiasm for their work is quickly replaced with dissatisfaction, pessimism, and
disenchantment. Paramount to decreasing attrition rates is the adequate support of teachers via
mentoring. Unfortunately, very few studies reported on the link between induction experiences
and attrition (Billingsley, 2004a; Babione & Shea, 2005; Whitaker, 2000; White & Mason, 2006;
Sindelar et al., 2010). Although Whitaker’s (2000) study’s effect size was small, teachers’ plans
to stay in special education was significantly correlated to the perceived effectiveness of
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 52
mentoring programs. Whitaker (2000) also reported that mentors should come from special
education and not general education. Billingsley’s (2004a) study did not find a correlation
between the usefulness of induction programs and special education teachers’ plans to remain in
special education. Whitaker (2000), Billingsley (2004a), and Babione and Shea (2005) reported
common results regarding the effectiveness of informal contacts with mentors. Each of these
researchers reported that informal contact with mentors was perceived more useful than formal
mentorship. White and Mason (2006) suggested that proximity as well as similar grade and
content area mattered when assigning mentors to beginning special education teachers. White
and Mason (2006) also found that 70% of the study’s participants wished they had more support
from their mentor when writing IEPs, completing paperwork, making referrals, and determining
placement for special education students. White and Mason (2006) recommended that mentors
not be placed in evaluative positions so that mentees would more readily seek their support.
Professional development. Many researchers explored the link between professional
development and special education teacher attrition (Billingsley, 2004b; Boe, 2006; Gersten et
al., 2001; Kozleski et al., 2000; Morvant et al., 1995). Kozleski et al. (2000) found that
administrators and district leaders do not emphasize professional development for special
educators. Therefore, special education teachers do not have opportunities to stay abreast of
current research and instructional practices related to servicing students with special needs.
Gersten et al. (2001) studied three separate urban school systems and reported that professional
development had an indirect effect on teachers’ intent to leave the special education field. Using
data from the Data Analysis System to evaluate the professional development trends and the
attrition rates of special educators, Boe (2006) determined that universities and school districts
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 53
should increase the availability of professional development designed specifically for special
education teachers.
Paperwork. Excessive paperwork contributes to role overload for special educators.
Literature from the 1990’s consistently notes paperwork as a contributing aspect of increased
special education attrition (Billingsley et al., 1993; Billingsley et al., 1995; Brownell et al., 1997;
Morvant et al., 1995; Schnorr, 1995; Westling and Whitten, 1996). Westling and Whitten (1996)
reported that teachers did not have enough time to finish paperwork. Schnorr (1995) reported
that, out of 484 Alaskan special educators, 71% considered paperwork a major distraction to
their teaching. Billingsley et al. (1995) completed qualitative and quantitative analyses of open-
ended interviews and reported that paperwork surfaced as a consistent frustration for special
education teachers. Many studies suggested that excessive paperwork contributed to role
overload and eventual attrition; however, not all leavers considered paperwork cumbersome
enough to affect their decision to leave special education. It is likely that differences of opinions
regarding the impact of excessive paperwork is due to the various support systems implemented
by different schools, districts and states (Billingsley, 2004b).
The body of evidence that supports the idea that excessive paperwork contributes to
higher teacher attrition expanded during the 2000’s as additional studies on special education
teachers were conducted (Bay & Parker-Katz, 2009; Billingsley, 2007; Bozonelos, 2008; DeMik,
2008; Gehrke & Murri, 2006; Stephens & Fish, 2010; Schlichte et al., 2005; White & Mason,
2006). Special education teachers who participated in Schlichte et al. (2005) and Billingsley’s
(2007a) studies reported that they required assistance handling paperwork. In White and Mason’s
(2006) evaluation of a mentoring program for new special education teachers, 70% of the
teachers reported that they sought support from their mentor to manage their paperwork. The
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 54
participants in Gehrke and Murri’s (2006) reported that the burden of dealing with excessive
paperwork was alleviated with the use of technology. DeMik’s (2008) study revealed that special
education teachers expressed high levels of stress and frustration due to excessive paperwork.
Caseload issues. In a review of the literature on special education teacher attrition from
the early 1990’s through 2004, Billingsley (2004b) did not discover any empirical research that
suggested a connection between the size of a teacher’s caseload and attrition. However,
Billingsley (2004b) noted that among special education teachers that planned on leaving the
field, teachers considered their caseloads to be unmanageable. A more recent study conducted by
Billingsley (2007a) found that caseload issues were the highest reason cited for leaving by
special education teachers working in an urban school. Bozonelos (2008) reported that large
student caseloads were one of the most mentioned reasons for special education teacher attrition.
Affective Responses to Work
Negative reactions (i.e., stress and low job satisfaction) to work are a result of extreme
and lengthy work problems and can undermine a teacher’s effectiveness (Billingsley, 2004b;
Major, 2012). The mixture of varied, related work difficulties not only deteriorates teachers’
capacity to be successful but also minimizes their chances for intrinsic rewards (Billingsley et al.,
1995).
Stress. Teaching has long been considered stressful and many teachers choose to leave
the profession due to stress (Fredricks, 2005; Hanushek, 2007; Jarvis, 2002). Several researchers
noted stress as a reason special educators state they intend to leave the field (Billingsley & Cross,
1992; Cross & Billngsley, 1994; Gersten et al., 2001; Schnorr, 1995; Singh & Billingsley, 1996).
In a large study of Florida special educators, Miller et al. (1999) determined stress to be an
influential predictor of special education attrition. Additional researchers connected stress to
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 55
intent to leave (Billingsley & Cross, 1992; Cross & Billingsley, 1994; Gersten et al., 2001).
Morvant et al. (1995) found that 80% of special education teachers that indicated intent to leave
stated that they experienced high levels of stress on a daily to weekly basis. Frank and McKenzie
(1993) conducted a longitudinal study on 41 special education teachers who taught for at least
five years following college. They discovered that special education teachers’ stages of burnout
intensified the longer they taught. Additionally, educators who felt the greatest emotional
exhaustion were those who instructed pupils over the age of 12 and pupils diagnosed with
behavioral disorders (Frank & McKenzie, 1993).
Job satisfaction. There is a strong connection between job satisfaction and attrition
(Billingsley & Cross, 1992; Billingsley et al., 1995; Brownell et al., 1997; Cross & Billingsley,
1994; Gersten et al., 2001; Major, 2012; Singh & Billingsley, 1996; Westling & Whitten, 1996;
Whitaker, 2000). Research shows that special education attrition can be reduced when job
satisfaction is increased (Billingsley, 2004b). Surveying close to 900 special education teachers
from several urban school districts, Gersten et al. (2001) determined job satisfaction, over all
other factors, to be the greatest differences between those that stay and those that leave. Berry’s
(2012) investigation of 203 rural special education instructors over 33 states found that 67% of
teachers were dissatisfied or strongly dissatisfied about the parts of their profession not related to
teaching. Billingsley, Carlson, and Klein (2004) found that new special education teachers who
were not provided time to work together with coworkers noted high levels of job dissatisfaction.
Summary of Research Findings
Research spanning 40 years, from the 1980’s through the 2010’s, indicates that teacher
characteristics, qualifications, and work factors are influential to special education teachers’
overall job satisfaction and future career choices (Billingsley, 2004b). A review of the literature
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 56
reveals various teacher characteristics and teacher qualifications that persuade teachers’ choices
to leave the field of special education:
1. Younger and inexperienced teachers left special education at higher rates than did
their veteran counterparts
2. Personal circumstances of teachers frequently played a role in attrition
3. Uncertified teachers demonstrated a higher level of attrition than certified teachers
4. Work environment factors commonly associated with attrition were low
salaries/compensation, inadequate administrative support, and excessive paperwork
5. Teachers experienced negative feelings towards work when they were stressed and
lacked job satisfaction; these emotional reactions lead to higher levels of attrition
Most special education attrition studies concentrated on the influences of teacher
characteristics and personal factors, district/school working conditions, job role factors, and
special educators’ affective responses to their work (Billingsley, 2004b). Work environment
features related to higher levels of retention included higher salaries, satisfactory administrative
support and sensible role requirements. Difficult school and district factors – notably low
salaries, insufficient administrative support, and role overload – produced negative emotional
reactions to work, resulting in increased stress levels and low job satisfaction. Negative affective
responses to work contributed to special education attrition (Billingsley, 2004b).
Conclusion
This literature review reemphasized the purpose of the research, which is to identify the
factors that affect attrition for special education teachers in the ASD. The objective of the
research is to share the results of this study with schools across the state of Hawaii in need of
recommendations to help alleviate problems associated with special education teacher attrition.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 57
Chapter Two began with a historical overview of special education, continued with a review of
special education teacher attrition, and concluded with an analysis of the personal and work-
related factors that affect the national trends of special education teacher attrition. A review of
the literature revealed consistent themes about the factors that affect attrition; these themes
included teacher characteristics and personal factors, teacher qualifications, work environment
factors, and emotional reactions to work (Billingsley, 2004b).
Despite an abundance of literature surrounding general education teacher attrition, there
is a lack of empirical research on special education teacher attrition from 2005 to 2015. The
following limitations exist: researchers are still struggling to define attrition, there are only a few
theoretical and conceptual models to explain the attrition phenomenon, much of the special
education teacher attrition literature was conducted by a limited number of researchers, and the
research studies contained small samples. Furthermore, there are no research studies on special
education teacher attrition conducted in Hawaii since 1995 when Carlson and Thompson
investigated public school special educators’ intent to leave special education teaching. Noting
the aforementioned limitations, more research is required on special education teacher attrition in
the state of Hawaii. Without further investigation in to the factors that affect special education
teacher attrition, Hawaii’s education leaders will struggle to identify relevant solutions for
recruiting and retaining highly qualified special education teachers. Research conducted in
Hawaii with special education teacher populations will also provide insight for district leaders
seeking to minimize the economic burden of high attrition, administrators wanting to create
positive school climates, and teachers committed to increasing the academic achievement of
special education students.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 58
Chapter Three details the research methodology used in this quantitative descriptive
study. The chapter commences with a comprehensive overview of the sample population
including a discussion on what type of sampling was used, criteria for selecting the sample
population, process of selection, description of sampling issues, and the larger population the
sample was drawn. Chapter Three also details the survey instrument used to collect data in this
study including notes on the instrument’s reliability and validity. Chapter Three concludes with a
description of how data will be collected and the process in which the data were analyzed.

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 59
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The literature review presented in Chapter Two illustrated that special education teacher
attrition is a pervasive and persistent problem for school districts across the nation. A review of
the literature also revealed that there is minimal empirical evidence about the factors that
influence special education teacher attrition in Hawaii, thus elevating the purpose and
significance of the study.
Chapter Three describes the methodology that was used in the study of the factors that
influence special education teachers to either transfer to general education positions or exit the
teaching profession altogether. The purpose of this study was to examine the factors that
influence attrition among special educators in the Aloha School District (ASD), located on the
island of Oahu, Hawaii. The study utilized a quantitative research design to determine the links
between the independent and dependent variables measured by the study’s survey. Chapter Three
begins with a description of the sample and population including a description and background
of the population and why the sample was chosen for this study. Chapter Three also describes the
instrumentation method selected for this study and establishes the reliability and validity of the
instrumentation tool. Chapter Three concludes with a detailed account of the data collection
process and an explanation of how the data collected from the study was analyzed.
Research Design
Creswell (2014) suggests that the researcher’s decision to implement either a qualitative
or quantitative methodological approach hinges on multiple factors. These factors must take into
consideration the type of research problem, the needs of the study’s intended audience, and the
proficiency and training of the individual conducting the research. Careful examination of these
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 60
factors help to determine whether a qualitative or quantitative approach is suitable to provide
insight to the study’s research questions.
The study used a quantitative descriptive research design to examine the influence of
common personal and work-related variables on the attrition of special education teachers in a
Hawaii school district. Quantitative research designs either highlight trends or explain the
relationships between variables (Creswell, 2014). The common personal and work-related
variables explored in this study are variables that repeatedly surfaced in the study’s literature
review on special education teacher attrition.
Specifically, this study utilized a survey design. The study delivered a survey to the
special education teachers employed by the ASD. The results of the survey provided a numeric
description of the attrition trends of the selected sample of teachers (Creswell, 2014).
Administration of a survey was ideal for this study because it could be easily administered and
allowed for a quick turnaround in data collection and subsequent analysis (Creswell, 2014).
Given the time constraints of this study, the survey was cross-sectional, meaning that data were
collected at one particular point in time (Creswell, 2014). The survey was administered to the
299 special education teachers in the ASD via Lotus Notes, the HIDOE’s email system. Teachers
accessed the survey via a link to take the survey online using the program USC Qualtrics, an
online survey software program.
Appropriateness of Design
The purpose of this quantitative descriptive study was to examine factors perceived by
special education teachers in a school district in Hawaii that may influence career decisions to
stay or leave special education. Hite (2001) stated, “the objective of quantitative research, as
distinguished from qualitative research has always been to assert, investigate, and generate
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 61
results and theories that are generalizable” (p. 17). Hite’s (2001) comments on quantitative
research suggest that the results of a quantitative investigation increase the likelihood of
applicability to a population larger than the survey sample.
Quantitative research was appropriate to achieve the goals of the study and was the most
ideal design to conduct this specific research. Previous predictions and empirical studies
examined in the literature review were helpful to developing the research questions for this
study. Additionally, analyzing attrition trends assisted the development and subsequent revisions
of the survey tool. Ultimately, a quantitative research design utilizing a survey to collect
information was chosen over a qualitative design because teachers are familiar with surveys and
do not have time to commit to extensive interviews (Creswell, 2014). The survey implemented in
this study was cross-sectional and collected information about the factors that influence special
education teacher attrition at a specific point in time (Creswell, 2014). Ultimately, the survey
was advantageous because it collected information within a short period of time and allowed for
timely data analysis.
Research Questions
In an effort to generalize the results of this study’s survey to the larger special education
teacher population in Hawaii, it was vital to analyze factors that were common among teachers
who intend to stay or leave the special education field. The goal of this quantitative, descriptive
study was to answer the following research questions:
1. What personal factors influence the career decisions of ASD’s special educators?
a. What personal characteristics (sex and ethnicity) impact the career decisions
of ASD’s special educators?
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 62
b. What factors associated with teacher qualifications (degree level, years of
teaching experience, current teaching assignment, certification type, and
teaching in area of certification) impact the career decisions of ASD’s special
educators?
2. What work-related factors influence the career decisions of ASD’s special educators?
a. What work environment factors (salary, administrative support, colleague
support, induction/mentoring support, and paperwork) impact the career
decisions of ASD’s special educators?
b. What emotional responses to work (stress/job satisfaction) impact the career
decisions of ASD’s special educators?
Hypotheses
According to Creswell (2014), a null hypothesis “makes a prediction that, in the general
population, no relationship or no significant difference exists between groups on a variable” (p.
245). The following null hypotheses were postulated for this study:
1. Sex, ethnicity, degree level, years of teaching experience, current teaching assignment,
certification type, and teaching in area of certification are not predictors of special
education teachers’ intent to leave special education.
2. Salary, administrative support, colleague support, paperwork, and stress are not
predictors of special education teachers’ intent to leave special education.
Sample and Population
The ASD is the second largest district in Hawaii, and the Hawaii Department of
Education Data Governance Office provided the total number of special educators in the ASD.
Thus, the target population for this study consisted of all 299 special education teachers from
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 63
elementary, middle, and high schools in the ASD, and all were invited to participate in this study.
The special educators varied in age, sex, ethnicity, and years of experience. The survey was
anonymous; therefore, confidentiality was maintained. The fact that ASD employs a large
number of special education teachers increased the chances that the results obtained from this
study will be representative of the larger, total population of Hawaii public school special
education teachers.
Geographic Location and District Information
The study is limited to the ASD. Schools in the ASD are primarily located in central
Oahu. Due to the size of the district, it was divided into two sections: ASD north and ASD south.
Two complex area superintendents lead schools located in the northern and southern regions of
the district. The ASD oversees 42 elementary, middle, and high schools. In 2013-2014, ASD
enrolled 33,496 students and 3,205 of those students, just fewer than 10% of the total population,
received special education services. For a span of five years, ASD hired between 207 and 248
new teachers every year, representing as much as 23% of the state’s newly employed teachers
(Hawaii DOE Employment Report, 2013). In 2012-2013, the district hired 207 new teachers of
which 64 were special education teachers, or 30.9% of the total new hires for the entire state that
year.
Informed Consent
The study implemented the use of a special education teacher survey. The survey
required the direct participation of current special education teachers in the ASD. The survey
attempted to identify factors common among individuals who intend to either stay or leave
special education.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 64
The two complex area superintendents for the ASD, as well the Hawaii Department of
Education Data Governance Office, received a request to conduct research in the ASD via email
in July 2015. The research request highlighted the study’s intended goals and significance to the
ASD. Following the Hawaii Department of Education’s (HIDOE) approval in August of 2015,
ASD principals were also briefed about the study via a twenty-minute presentation at a district
principals’ meeting on August 18, 2015. Principals were notified that the results of the study
would be shared with the leaders and teachers of the ASD. Additionally, school personnel in
each of the ASD schools were notified that the survey would be deployed mid-September 2015.
ASD special educators received a letter via email describing the goal and significance of
the study and notification that participation in the survey was voluntary and responses were
anonymous. The email that current ASD special educators received also contained a link to
participate in the survey. Participants who decided to participate clicked on the survey link and
completed the survey. Teachers were notified that there were no consequences for choosing not
to participate in the study.
Confidentiality
All participants received a confidentiality and purpose statement via email prior to
completing the survey. There were no potential risks to special education teachers who decided
to participate in the study. The study did not use personal or identifying information. An added
precaution was taken to preserve confidentiality: a filter on the online survey was set so that
teachers’ email addresses were not traceable. Completed survey responses were collected via
USC Qualtrics and exported to an Excel spreadsheet that was stored on a personal computer and
backed up on a secure database. Outside use of the researcher’s computer was strictly prohibited
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 65
throughout the duration of the study. All of the data collected from this study will be kept for
three years before being shredded.
Sampling
Special education teachers in the ASD were selected to participate in this study because
they represent the second largest population of special educators in Hawaii and were readily
available. Due to the fact that ASD special educators represent the second largest group of
special educators in Hawaii, a minimum of 15% to 20% return rate was desired in order to
generate results that were representative of the total ASD population of special educators.
Ultimately, the goal of this this study was to produce results that can be generalizable to
comparable populations in Hawaii and across the nation (Creswell, 2014).
Creswell (2014) states that nonprobability, or convenience, sampling is less desirable
than random sampling, in a quantitative study. However, given the time constraints of this study,
convenience sampling was implemented. Special educators from the ASD were selected to
participate in this study because they were geographically close to the researcher’s primary area
of work and the researcher was able to obtain permission to conduct research from the state and
ASD district leadership in a timely manner.
This study was subject to institutional and HIDOE review. Permission to conduct the
study was obtained from the researcher’s university Institutional Review Board (IRB) and from
the HIDOE (Appendix A).
Instrumentation
This quantitative study utilized the “Special Education Teacher Survey” originally
created by Dr. Berna Levine (2001) and later modified by Dr. Paulette France (2008). Levine
(2001) deemed this survey both reliable and valid. Levine (2001) stated that the “Special
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 66
Education Teacher Survey” is an appropriate instrument for measuring the factors that influence
special education teacher attrition. Minor modifications to the “Special Education Teacher
Survey” were made to the survey to fit the needs of this particular study. Changes included the
name of the school and district. The adapted “Special Education Teacher Survey” is located in
Appendix B.
Levine (2001) ascertained content validity by recruiting a panel of 25 special education
leaders from her school district to appraise the original version of the survey. The special
education leadership panel, consisting of five supervisors and ten teachers, made
recommendations to Levine in which she incorporated their feedback to improve the quality of
the survey. Levine (2001) utilized Cronbach’s (1951) coefficient alpha to test the survey’s
reliability. Levine (2001) established that the coefficient alpha for the survey was .81 that
exceeded the .65 criterion and the norm for research studies making decisions about individuals
versus decisions about groups of people. For this research study, Cronbach’s alpha was
determined to be .906, which is notably higher than Levine’s (2001) reliability rating In an effort
to explore the structure and organization of the study, Levine (2001) completed a factor analysis.
Levine (2001) completed the factor analysis to “substantiate the organization of the instrument
and the conclusions drawn from it” (p. 63).
Section 1 of the survey was designed to obtain demographic information about the
teacher completing the survey. Section 2 of the survey was designed to measure participant
perceptions about the delivery of special education services, variety of delivery models, and
teaching expectations. Section 2 utilized a Likert-style format in which a response of 1 means
that the participant was not very satisfied, a response of 2 means that the participant is somewhat
satisfied, a response of 3 means that the participant is satisfied, and a response of 4 means that
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 67
the participant is very satisfied. Section 3 of the survey was designed to measure the degree of
satisfaction with the manner in which the school or district addresses quality of education,
paperwork, goals, and the mission. Section 3 also utilized a Likert-style format with response
choices identical to those mentioned above. Section 4 of the survey tackled teacher preparation
and training. Section 4 utilized a Likert-style response format in which a response of 1 indicates
not very adequate, a response of 2 indicates somewhat adequate, a response of 3 indicates
adequate, and a response of 4 indicates very adequate. Section 5 of the survey investigated
participant responses to factors that would influence special educators’ decision to leave or stay.
Section 5 also utilized a Likert-style format in which a response of 1 indicates not very
important, a response of 2 indicates somewhat important, a response of 3 indicates important,
and a response of 4 indicates very important. The last section of the survey, Section 6, measured
the degree to which identified factors affect special education teacher shortages and whether
these factors influence participants’ decisions to leave or stay in special education. The survey
concluded by asking teachers a binary response question (yes/no response). The question was
phrased, “Do you intend to leave the field of special education within the next 5 years?”
Data Collection
The survey instrument used in this study included independent variables to measure both
personal and work-related factors. The dependent variable in this study is the special educator’s
intent to remain or leave the field of special education. To establish the predictive validity of the
independent variables, a literature review was conducted to identify correlations between the
dependent and independent variables.
The Hawaii Department of Education and the ASD granted permission to conduct the
study (Appendix A). Following the University of Southern California’s IRB approval and the
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 68
HIDOE study approval, an email was sent to the 299 ASD special educators. The email notified
teachers about the goal and significance of the study, voluntary participation, and efforts to
protect confidentiality. The email also contained the link to participate in the online survey.
Teachers voluntarily completed the “Special Education Teacher Survey.” The survey was
anticipated to take teachers anywhere from 10 to 15 minutes to complete. There was a 2-week
timeline established to complete the survey. One week following the initial email and survey link
sent to teachers, a second notice email was sent as a reminder to complete the survey. The
reminder encouraged teachers to participate in the survey, as the results would be shared with
ASD leadership in an effort to decrease special education teacher attrition.
After the 2-week timeline to complete the online surveys expired, the survey results were
analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). SPSS is a predictive
analysis software program that assists researchers in analyzing large data sets. As mentioned in
the previous confidentiality section, all appropriate measures were taken to protect the study’s
participants and the information gathered during the study.
Data Analysis
The goal of the study was to determine a set of predictors for special education teacher
attrition. Once ASD’s special education teachers completed the surveys, this study used a chi-
square test for independence and an independent-samples t-test to analyze the survey results.
Chi-square tests for independence are utilized when a researcher wishes to investigate the
relationship between two categorical variables with each variable having at least two or more
categories (Pallant, 2013). The chi-square test for independence “compares the observed
frequencies or proportions of cases that occur in each of the categories, with the values that
would be expected if there was no association between the two variables being measured”
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 69
(p.225). Chi-square tests for independence were conducted to explore if there is a relationship
between intent to leave and personal characteristics and whether there is a relationship between
intent to leave and teacher qualifications.
Pallant (2013) notes that researchers utilize independent-samples t-tests when they want
to “compare the mean score, on some continuous variable, for two different groups of
participants” (p. 247). Independent-samples t-tests are used to compare values on some
continuous variable of two different groups or on two occasions (Pallant, 2013). Independent-
samples t-tests were conducted to determine whether there was a difference between teachers
who say they intend to leave and teachers who do not intend to leave with respect to work-
related scale variables.
The study’s dependent variable was the special educator’s intent to stay or leave.
Analysis of the survey results looked at personal and work-related factors as predictors of a
special educator’s intent to leave special education. These personal and work-related factors
were the independent variables. Personal factors included gender, ethnicity, degree level, years
of teaching experience, and teaching certification (Billingsley, 2004b). Work-related factors
included salary, administrative support, colleague support, induction/mentoring support,
excessive paperwork, stress, and job satisfaction (Billingsley, 2004b).
Responses to the survey were coded for each of the variables. For the dependent variable
(intent to remain in or leave special education), the value of 2 was assigned to responses of “No”
because it indicates the intent to remain in special education whereas responses with a “Yes”
were coded with a value of 1 because there is intent to leave special education. Each of the
independent variables were also coded.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 70
Coded survey items were placed into an Excel spreadsheet with the survey responses and
interpreted using of the SPSS software. Pallant’s (2014) SPSS manual assisted with the data
analysis process of conducting chi-squared tests for independence and independent-samples t-
tests.
Summary
The ASD suffers from high levels of special education teacher attrition, and district
leadership struggles to recruit and hire highly qualified special education teachers. Therefore, the
students receiving special education services fall victim to inadequate attempts to staff quality
teachers. As accountability measures for special education teachers in Hawaii increase, there is
an urgent need to resolve this attrition problem. Special education teacher attrition literature
reveals several personal and work-related factors that influence decisions to stay or leave the
profession. Thus, the purpose of this study was to identify variables that affect special educators’
attrition in the ASD.
Data was collected through a survey and analyzed using an advanced computer software
program. The study maintained anonymity and confidentiality of the teachers who participated in
the study. Ideally, state and district leaders will use the results of this study to identify strategies
to increase retention and decrease attrition. While this study focused on one school district in
Hawaii, the results of this study may be generalizable to other states and districts facing similar
challenges.
Chapter Three helped the reader understand how the researcher planned to study special
education teacher attrition. In light of the literature presented in Chapter Two and the aim of the
study’s research questions, this study utilized a quantitative research design. Chapter 3 focused
on the sample and population being studied, the instrumentation tool that was used to collect
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 71
data, and how the data was collected and subsequently analyzed. Chapter Four reports the results
of the survey organized by research question. Chapter Five concludes the study with a discussion
of the findings and implications for future practice.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 72
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
The purpose of this quantitative study was to identify factors that influence the attrition of
special education teachers in a Hawaii public school district. A 16-item survey, previously used
by Levine (2001) in a Georgia school district and again by France (2008) in a Virginia school
district, was used to collect data for this study. The survey was deployed to every special
education teacher in the Aloha School District (ASD), totaling 299 teachers and 172 (57%)
completed the Aloha District Special Education Teacher Survey online.
This chapter presents the results of the data analysis introduced in Chapters One, Two,
and Three. Chapter One included a background and statement of the problem, purpose of the
study, research questions, conceptual framework, significance of the study, assumptions,
limitations and delimitations, and definition of key terms. Identifying the factors that influence
the career decisions of ASD’s special educators is relevant because ASD continuously
experiences high attrition in this department. Additionally, the results of Carlson and
Thompson’s (1995) study of special educators’ intent to leave teaching is the only other similar
study conducted in Hawaii. Chapter Two contains a literature review that bolsters the
significance of the study by critically evaluating existing empirical studies in an effort to identify
information gaps in special education teacher attrition literature. Chapter Three explains that a
quantitative research design is an appropriate method for the proposed research questions.
Chapter Four reports the results of the survey and organizes the data by each research
question. This chapter is separated into three parts: introduction, results, and summary. The
introduction includes demographic information. The results section presents statistical analysis
of the survey responses pertinent to each of the study’s research questions and will also identify
themes that surfaced from the two open-ended questions located at the conclusion of the survey.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 73
The summary section includes a brief discussion of the results; this discussion is meant to draw
insight into what the results mean and begin to introduce the final chapter of the study. Chapter
Five includes a complete discussion of the results, implications for practice, and suggestions for
future research.
Review of the Data Collection Procedures
The survey instrument that was used in this study included independent variables to
measure both personal and work-related factors. The dependent variable in this study is the
special educator’s intent to remain in or leave the field of special education. To establish the
predictive validity of the independent variables, a literature review was conducted to identify
connections between the dependent and independent variables.
The Hawaii Department of Education (HIDOE) and the ASD granted permission to
conduct the study (see Appendix A). Following the University of Southern California’s IRB
approval and the HIDOE study approval, an email was sent to the 299 ASD special educators.
The email notified teachers about the goal and significance of the study, informed consent,
voluntary participation, and efforts to protect confidentiality. The email also contained the link to
participate in the online survey.
Teachers voluntarily completed the Aloha School District Special Education Teacher
Survey. The survey was anticipated to take teachers anywhere from 10 to 15 minutes to
complete. There was a 2-week timeline established to complete the survey. One week following
the initial email and survey link sent to teachers, a second email notice was sent as a reminder to
complete the survey. The reminder encouraged teachers to participate in the survey, as the results
would be shared with ASD leadership in an effort to decrease special education teacher attrition.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 74
After the 2-week timeline to complete the online surveys expired, the survey results were
analyzed using SPSS. SPSS is a predictive analysis software program that assists researchers in
analyzing large data sets. As mentioned in Chapter Three, all appropriate measures were taken to
protect the confidentiality of study’s participants and the information gathered during the study.
Research Questions
In an effort to be able to generalize the results of this study’s survey to the special
education teacher population in Hawaii, it was vital to analyze factors that are common among
teachers who intend to stay or leave the special education field. The goal of this quantitative,
descriptive study was to answer the following research questions:
1. What personal factors influence the career decisions of ASD’s special educators?
a. What personal characteristics (sex and ethnicity) impact the career decisions of
ASD’s special educators?
b. What factors associated with teacher qualifications (degree level, years of
teaching experience, current teaching assignment, certification type, and
teaching in area of certification) impact the career decisions of ASD’s special
educators?
2. What work-related factors influence the career decisions of ASD’s special educators?
a. What work environment factors (salary, administrative support, colleague
support, induction/mentoring support, and paperwork) impact the career
decisions of ASD’s special educators?
b. What emotional responses to work (stress/job satisfaction) impact the career
decisions of ASD’s special educators?
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 75
Hypotheses
According to Creswell (2014), a null hypothesis “makes a prediction that, in the general
population, no relationship or no significant difference exists between groups on a variable” (p.
245). The following null hypotheses were postulated for this study:
1. Sex, ethnicity, degree level, years of teaching experience, current teaching assignment,
certification type, and teaching in area of certification are not predictors of special
education teachers’ intent to leave special education.
2. Salary, administrative support, colleague support, paperwork, and stress are not
predictors of special education teachers’ intent to leave special education.
Sample
The target population for this study was 299 special education teachers from elementary,
middle, and high schools in the ASD. The special educators varied in sex, ethnicity, and years of
experience. A total of 173 teachers participated in the survey. The frequencies and percentages
for the teachers’ personal characteristics and teaching qualifications are presented in Table 1.
There were 133 (77.3%) female and 39 (22.7%) male teachers who completed the survey. In all,
61 (35.7%) of the participants were Asian, 46 (26.9%) were Caucasian, 36 (21.1%) were of
mixed ethnicities, 17 (9.9%) were Native Hawaiian, 9 (5.3%) were African American, and 2
(1.2%) were Hispanic. Over half of the participants, 97 (56.4%), indicated that they completed a
master’s degree, 72 (41.9%) completed a bachelor’s degree, 1 (.6%) person held less than a
bachelor’s degree, and 2 (1.2%) participants possessed their doctorate. Survey participants’ years
of teaching experience varied; 26 (15.1%) had less than four years’ experience, 32 (18.6%) had
four to seven years’ experience, 40 (23.3%) had eight to twelve years’ experience, 47 (27.3%)
had thirteen to twenty years’ experience, and 27 (15.7%) of the teachers had more than 21 years’
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 76
experience. Almost half of the participants’ (82, 47.7%) teaching assignments in the ASD were
at elementary schools, 58 (33.7%) were teaching at a high school, and 32 (18.6%) were teaching
at a middle school. When asked about the type of certification they held, the majority (157,
91.3%) of the teachers had a special education teaching certification, 9 (5.2%) had an alternate
certification, and 6 (3.5%) had a general education teaching certification. Teacher participants
were asked if they were currently teaching in their area of certification, and 158 (92.4%)
responded “yes” while only 13 (7.6%) responded “no”.
Table 1
Frequencies and Percentages for Participants’ Personal Characteristics and Teaching
Qualifications
Variable n %
Sex
Male 39 22.7
Female 133 77.3
Ethnicity
Caucasian 46 26.9
African American 9 5.3
Hispanic 2 1.2
Asian 61 35.7
Native Hawaiian 17 9.9
Mixed 36 21.1
Degree Level
Less than a bachelor’s 1 .6
Bachelor’s 72 41.9
Master’s 97 56.4
Doctorate 2 1.2

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 77
Table 1, continued
Years of Teaching Experience
Less than 4 years 26 15.1
4 to 7 years 32 18.6
8 to 12 years 40 23.3
13 to 20 years 47 27.3
21 or more years 27 15.7
Type of Certification
Special Education 157 91.3
General Education 6 3.5
Alternative 9 5.2
Teaching in Area of Certification
Yes 158 92.4
No 13 7.6

The study’s dependent variable is the educator’s intent to stay or leave special education.
The study’s independent variables, personal and work-related factors, were analyzed to
determine predictors of intent to leave. After responding to survey questions aimed at measuring
the influence of personal and work-related variables on a teachers’ intent to leave, participants
were asked the following question: “Do you plan to leave the field of special education in the
next five years?” Response options were either a “yes” or “no.” Table 2 indicates that 165
teachers responded to the question, and 67 (40.6%) indicated they intend to leave in the next five
years while 98 (59.4%) did not intend to do so in the next five years.
Table 2
Intent to Leave (Dependent Variable)
Intent
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 67 39.0 40.6 40.6
2 98 57.0 59.4 100.0
Total 165 95.9 100.0
Missing 9 6 3.5
System 1 .6
Total 7 4.1
Total 172 100.0
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 78
Results
Research Question 1
The first research question asked, “What personal factors influence the career decisions
of Aloha School District’s (ASD) special educators?” Chi-square tests for independence were
conducted to explore whether there is an association between intent to leave and personal
characteristics and whether there is an association between intent to leave and teacher
qualifications. The personal characteristic and teacher qualification variables used to conduct the
chi-square tests for independence were sex, ethnicity, degree level, years of teaching experience,
current teaching assignment, certification type, and teaching in area of certification. The tests
failed to indicate a significant association between intent to leave and each of the previously
mentioned variables except certification type. These findings support the null hypothesis that
there is no significant relationship between sex, ethnicity, degree level, years of teaching
experience, current teaching assignment, or teaching in area of certification and intent to leave.
However, these findings did reveal that there is an association between intent to leave and
certification type.
A chi-square test was conducted on the intent to leave and sex. In Table 3, males are
coded as 1 and females are coded as 2. The results indicate that there is no association between
intent to leave and sex, x
2
(1)=.097, p>.05.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 79
Table 3
Intent to Leave and Sex
Crosstab
Count

Sex
Total 1 2
Intent 1 15 52 67
2 24 74 98
Total 39 126 165

Chi-Square Tests
Value df
Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Exact Sig.
(2-sided)
Exact Sig.
(1-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .097
a
1 .755

Continuity
Correction
b

.016 1 .900

Likelihood Ratio .098 1 .754

Fisher's Exact Test .853 .453
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.097 1 .756
N of Valid Cases 165
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 15.84.
b. Computed only for a 2x2 table.

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 80

Figure 1. Intent to Leave and Sex
A chi-square test was conducted on the intent to leave and ethnicity. The following codes
were used in this data analysis: Caucasian (1), African American (2), Hispanic (3), Asian (4),
Native American (5), and Mixed (6). The results in Table 4 indicate that there is no association
between intent to leave and ethnicity, x
2
(5)=.2.817, p>.05.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 81
Table 4
Intent to Leave and Ethnicity
Crosstab
Count

Ethnicity
Total 1 2 3 4 5 6
Intent 1 15 5 1 23 8 15 67
2 29 3 1 35 9 20 97
Total 44 8 2 58 17 35 164

Chi-Square Tests
Value df
Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.817
a
5 .728
Likelihood Ratio 2.796 5 .731
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.438 1 .508
N of Valid Cases 164
a. 4 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .82.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 82

Figure 2. Intent to Leave and Ethnicity
A chi-square test was conducted on the intent to leave and degree level. The following
codes were used in this data analysis: less than a bachelor’s (1), bachelor’s (2), master’s (3), and
doctorate (4). The results in Table 5 indicate that there is no association between intent to leave
and degree level, x
2
(2)=1.577, p>.05.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 83
Table 5
Intent to Leave and Degree Level
Crosstab
Count

Degree
Total 2 3 4
Intent 1 27 40 0 67
2 42 54 2 98
Total 69 94 2 165

Chi-Square Tests
Value df
Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.577
a
2 .454
Likelihood Ratio 2.294 2 .318
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.004 1 .950
N of Valid Cases 165
a. 2 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .81.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 84

Figure 3. Intent to Leave and Degree Level
A chi-square test was conducted on the intent to leave and years of teaching experience.
The following codes were used in this data analysis: less than 4 years (1), 4 to 7 years (2), 8 to 12
years (3), 13 to 20 years (4), 21 or more years (5). The results in Table 6 indicate that there is no
association between intent to leave and years of teaching experience, x
2
(4)=5.125, p>.05.

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 85
Table 6
Intent to Leave and Years of Teaching Experience
Crosstab
Count

Years
Total 1 2 3 4 5
Intent 1 10 17 12 16 12 67
2 15 14 27 29 13 98
Total 25 31 39 45 25 165

Chi-Square Tests
Value df
Asymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.215
a
4 .266
Likelihood Ratio 5.209 4 .267
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.108 1 .742
N of Valid Cases 165
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 10.15.

Figure 4. Intent to Leave and Years of Teaching Experience
A chi-square test was conducted on the intent to leave and current work assignment. The
following codes were used in this data analysis: elementary (1), middle school (2), and high
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 86
school (3). The results in Table 7 indicate that there is no association between intent to leave and
teachers’ current work assignment, x
2
(2)=.003, p>.05.
Table 7
Intent to Leave and Current Work Assignment
Crosstab
Count

Assignment
Total 1 2 3
Intent 1 31 13 23 67
2 45 19 34 98
Total 76 32 57 165
Chi-Square Tests
Value df
Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .003
a
2 .999
Likelihood Ratio .003 2 .999
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.003 1 .960
N of Valid Cases 165
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 12.99.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 87

Figure 5. Intent to Leave and Current Work Assignment
Table 8 shows the crosstab data and chi-square test results responses to intent to leave
and certification type. The following codes were used in this data analysis: special education (1),
general education (2), and alternative (3). The chi-square test of independence indicates there is a
statistically significant association between intent to leave special education and certification
type, x
2
(2)=8.622, p<.05. Most notably, teachers with a special education certification indicated
they intend to leave the field more often than did teachers with a general education or alternative
certification.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 88
Table 8
Intent to Leave and Type of Certification
Crosstab
Count

Type
Total 1 2 3
Intent 1 60 5 2 67
2 91 0 7 98
Total 151 5 9 165

Chi-Square Tests
Value df
Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 8.622
a
2 .013
Likelihood Ratio 10.424 2 .005
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.013 1 .911
N of Valid Cases 165
a. 3 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.03.

Figure 6. Intent to Leave and Type of Certification
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 89
A chi-square test was conducted on the intent to leave and whether a teacher was working
in their current area of certification. The following codes were used in this data analysis: yes (1)
and no (2). The results in Table 9 indicate that there is no association between intent to leave and
whether or not a teacher is working in their current area of certification, x
2
(1)=2.662, p>.05.
Table 9
Intent to Leave and Teaching in Area of Certification
Crosstab
Count

Certification
Total 1 2
Intent 1 58 8 66
2 93 5 98
Total 151 13 164

Chi-Square Tests
Value df
Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Exact Sig.
(2-sided)
Exact Sig.
(1-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.662
a
1 .103
Continuity
Correction
b

1.787

1

.181

Likelihood Ratio 2.601 1 .107
Fisher's Exact Test .141 .092
Linear-by-Linear
Association

2.646

1

.104

N of Valid Cases 164
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 5.23.
b. Computed only for a 2x2 table.

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 90

Figure 7. Intent to Leave and Teaching in Area of Certification
Research Question 2
The second research question asked, “What work-related factors influence the career
decisions of Aloha School District’s (ASD) special educators? In an effort to address Research
Question 2, independent-samples t-tests were conducted to determine whether there was a
difference between teachers who say they intend to leave and teachers who do not intend to leave
with respect to the following work-related scale variables: excessive paperwork (excessive2),
stress from demands of the job (stress2), lack of collegial support (collegial2), lack of
administrative support and guidance (support2), and more money/better benefits elsewhere
(money). The independent-samples t-tests failed to indicate a significant relationship between the
intent to leave or the intent to stay and each of the previously mentioned variables except with
respect to the variable stress. These findings support the null hypothesis that there is no
significant relationship between intent to leave or the intent to stay and the work-related
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 91
variables of excessive paperwork, lack of collegial support, lack of administrative support and
guidance, and salary. However, these findings do reveal that there was a significant difference in
the mean scores for intent to leave (M=3.43, SD=.809) and intent to stay (M=3.01, SD=1.081)
conditions with respect to the variable stress; t(159)=2.668, p=.008. Table 10 contains the
independent-samples t-test results indicating that stress makes a significant difference in those
teachers that express intent to leave.
Table 10
Independent-Samples T-Tests
Group Statistics
Intent N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Excessive2 1 66 3.21 1.015 .125
2 96 2.93 .997 .102
Stress2 1 65 3.43 .809 .100
2 96 3.01 1.081 .110
Collegial2 1 66 2.73 1.031 .127
2 96 2.53 1.056 .108
Support2 1 66 2.98 1.045 .129
2 97 2.91 1.100 .112
Money 1 67 3.12 .913 .112
2 95 3.04 .874 .090
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 92
Table 10, continued
Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df
Sig.
(2-tailed)
Mean
Difference
Excessive2
Equal variances
assumed .767 .382 1.774 160 .078 .285
Equal variances
not assumed 1.768 138.204 .079 .285
Stress2
Equal variances
assumed 5.408 .021 2.668 159 .008 .420
Equal variances
not assumed 2.818 157.328 .005 .420
Collegial2
Equal variances
assumed .368 .545 1.172 160 .243 .196
Equal variances
not assumed 1.177 142.012 .241 .196
Support2
Equal variances
assumed .187 .666 .451 161 .652 .078
Equal variances
not assumed .456 144.387 .649 .078
Money
Equal variances
assumed .645 .423 .544 160 .587 .077
Equal variances
not assumed .540 138.308 .590 .077

Independent Samples Test

t-test for Equality of Means
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Excessive2 Equal variances
assumed .161 -.032 .602
Equal variances not
assumed .161 -.034 .604
Stress2 Equal variances
assumed .158 .109 .731
Equal variances not
assumed .149 .126 .715
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 93
Table 10, continued
Collegial2 Equal variances
assumed .167 -.134 .526
Equal variances not
assumed .166 -.133 .525
Support2 Equal variances
assumed .172 -.262 .417
Equal variances not
assumed .170 -.259 .414
Money Equal variances
assumed .142 -.203 .358
Equal variances not
assumed .143 -.206 .360

Anecdotal Responses. Survey participants were asked to respond to the following open-
ended question: “Please use the space below to list any additional reasons why you would leave
your current position for a general education teaching position, a different school system, or exit
the teaching profession entirely.” This open-ended question was included in the survey because a
review of the literature highlighted multiple types of special education teacher attrition.
Researchers state that, in addition to special education teachers who exit the profession entirely,
transfers to general education teaching positions and special education teachers transferring to
different school systems are also considered forms of attrition. Teaching field transfers and
teachers transferring to different school systems are detrimental, as both types of attrition create
special education teaching vacancies that school administrators must fill (Billingsley, 2004b; Boe
et al., 2008; Edgar & Pair, 2005; Gehrke & McCoy, 2007). Independent-samples t-tests revealed
that stress is shown to significantly influence teachers who express intent to leave teaching
within the next five years. Table 11 notes all open-ended responses that mention stress as a
reason for leaving their special education position for a position in general education, a different
school system, or to exit the profession altogether.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 94
Table 11
Participants’ Responses Listing Stress as a Reason They Would Leave their Current Special
Education Position for a Position in General Education, a Different School System, or Exit the
Teaching Profession Entirely
Participant Comment
9 I definitely would leave for an opportunity that was the same pay with less stress
or a higher paying job in general. I’m barely making ends meet.
18 I foresee myself leaving my current position as well as the teaching profession as
a whole because of the excessive amount of work that are required of teachers
and the lack of compensation. I feel as though my degrees would serve me better
in a different field that offers higher pay and lower stress levels. I love teaching
and educating students, but I am already getting burned out on the politics of the
education system.
26 To have a better life for myself with less stress, time to be happy and have
relationships with family and friends, and energy left to do so.
43 The stresses of the job and the demands without much district and school
supports for the teacher in the classroom. Teachers are overworked. We do not
even get a break or lunch breaks and are constantly told there is no money to
support teachers in the classroom with difficult students. More and more
demands are being made.
46 High stress levels might cause me to leave the teaching profession.
48 I am very interest in law and would like to take classes first as a paralegal. I am
eligible to retire in 6 -7 years. I think a stressful part of our job is students
displaying severe behaviors and they still are in resource classes. Would like
process or services to start before they really cause damage to themselves or
others. There is procedures that delay the process; as much as years go by with
little or no change. I am very grateful for my job and to work at a school that is
positive in so many ways. I am happy about our principle Fred Murphy and a
competent our head of Central District Dr. Brummel. I have personally know 4
teachers sin special education who have passed away in last 4 years before
retirement age. This job can be stressful!
53 I would leave for the following reasons: less stress, emotional health, more pay,
better benefits, non-administrative support, less paper work, more time to teach
and plan, the growing number of special education cases, the amount of caseloads
per teacher, no RTI, allowance of making students special education eligible
without trying other interventions first (i.e RTI), non-parental support, smaller
class sizes

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 95
Table 11, continued
76 I am dual certified in general education and special education. The paperwork
demands as well as the possibility of due process is very stressful and I would
like to transfer to a general education position soon. I am currently teaching
inclusion and know the demands of a general education teaching position.
78 I am considering leaving due to the lack of support I am receiving this year. I
have been given the EA with the highest needs as far as training goes to work
with the students who have the highest behavioral needs so it is exhausting by the
end of the day and has added a complexity of stressors.
89 work overload, not enough support and understanding when I reach out for
assistance. I'm belittled, patronized and made out to feel inadequate. I am
constantly feeling stressed but my faith and optimism keeps me striving for my
students. For the record, my students have always made tremendous growth and
my teaching style and phylosophy is welcomed by staff and parents.
97 Less stress; no IDEA demands; better pay
120 I would leave SPED due to the high work load, the risk involved, the lack of
public support/respect for teachers, the lack of my own personal space (SPED
teachers often have to share spaces, do not have their own rooms, and have little
say in room setups or arrangments), lack of respect from other teachers (despite
having 3 different teaching certificates including general education English,
SPED, and elementary gen ed), physical risk (I have been injured by special
education students, including having my nose broken), legal risk (parents and
special education students have, in my opinion, more rights than the general
population and can sue the district- lawsuits happen all the time and I feel I have
to be perfect in every way, following all federal, state, local, district, and school
laws, policies, procedures, and guidelines despite the reality of a given situation,
which is sometimes nearly impossible and can be very stressful), lack of "down
time" or time with family due to paperwork and grading, inability to switch
positions within the profession (it is nearly impossible to gain employment as a
general education teacher after teaching SPED due to SPED shortages), and an
overall general sense of dissatisfaction with the profession of being a Special
Education teacher (despite my love for teaching children).
128 Stress, long hours, changing grades every year, no air conditioning 90-95 degrees
in classroom, disrespect for sped. Teachers
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 96
Table 11, continued
159 I wouldn't go into general education because I am a special educator and I love
what I do. I would leave the profession to increase the quality of my life and find
something that didn't give me so much stress.
174 Right now, the trend appears to be focusing on student achievement in Common
Core and that is being used as a gauge on how effective a teacher is. However, in
Special Education, we often have no way to meet proficiency on those standards.
If an 8th grade student reads at the 2nd grade level, how are we held responsible
for getting them to reach their grade-level standards? That is neither fair nor
reasonable. Very often, we are also working on other factors (behavior, for
example) that have a dramatic impact on how and how much a student learns.
Those things cannot be measured using the Common Core. It is extremely time
consuming, mentally and emotionally draining, and stressful to deal with all of
these things while still trying to teach and having the added burden of the
excessive Sped/EES/every day paperwork to do on top of actually teaching.

Participants’ responses to the survey’s open-ended question supported the results of the
independent-samples t-test linking stress as a positive predictor of educators’ intent to leave to
special education. However, further review of the open-ended question responses unearthed
additional reasons that ASD special educators considered influential to their expressed intent to
depart special education. Responses were grouped into the following major themes: new career
with better salary and less stress, excessive paperwork, and lack of administrator support.
Multiple responses cited that the opportunity of a new career with an increased salary and
less stress as an incentive to leave the field of special education. Many responses noted the
number of hours spent outside the classroom working on lesson planning and writing
individualized education plans as necessary job duties that they are not paid to complete. Survey
responses also suggested that excessive paperwork does have an effect on their intent to leave.
Participants reported that keeping up with paperwork was a major source of stress and that the
paperwork demands were impossible to keep up, overwhelming, and detracted from their
teaching responsibilities. Additionally, a large number of participants reported that they did not
feel adequately supported by their school administrator. Responses noted that school
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 97
administrators often failed to understand the scope of special education teacher’s responsibilities
versus those of a general education teacher.
The written responses collected through the study’s survey suggest that teachers consider
there to be a relationship between the intent to leave and the following personal and work-related
factors: new career with less stress and better pay, excessive paperwork, and lack of
administrator support. Further research is necessary to detect and enumerate the variables that
influence salary, paperwork, and administrator support and intent to leave special education.
Summary
The purpose of this study was to identify the personal and work-related factors that
influence the attrition trends of the special educators in the ASD. Data analysis of personal
factors revealed that the type of certification, specifically teachers with a special education
certification, was a positive predictor of special education teachers’ intent to leave. Other
personal factors such as sex, ethnicity, degree level, years of teaching, teaching assignment, and
whether or not a teacher was teaching in their area of certification were not found to be
predictors of special educations teachers’ intent to leave. Statistical analysis of work-related
factors indicated that stress is a positive predictor of special education teachers’ intent to leave
their special education teaching position. Work-related factors such as salary, administrative
support, colleague support, induction/mentoring support, paperwork, and job satisfaction were
not found to be predictors of special education teachers’ intent to leave. Analysis of the open-
ended questions suggests that stress, administrator support, paperwork demands, and salary were
also factors that influenced teacher intent to stay or leave special education. Chapter Five
discusses the findings to include limitations not previously addressed. Chapter Five also suggests
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 98
implications for practice for educational leadership and special educators. Chapter Five
concludes with recommendations for future research as a result of the study’s findings.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 99
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
This study contained five chapters. Chapter One included a background of the problem,
statement of the problem, purpose of the study, research questions, conceptual framework,
significance of the study, assumptions, limitations and delimitations, and definition key of terms.
Identifying the factors that influence the career decisions of Aloha School District’s (ASD)
special educators is relevant because ASD continuously experiences high levels of attrition. The
results of this study may provide valuable insight for ASD’s district leadership and school
administrators; ideally, the results of this study will inform the district’s recruitment and
retention strategies. Chapter Two included a review of the literature related to special education
teacher attrition. Chapter Two evaluated existing empirical studies to identify information gaps
in special education teacher attrition literature. Chapter Three presented the study’s research
design and methodology. Chapter Three explained that a quantitative research design that
utilized a cross-sectional survey, chi-square tests for independence and independent-sample t-
tests statistical analysis was appropriate for the proposed research questions. Chapter Four
reported the results of the survey and organized the data analysis by each research question.
Chapter Five concluded the study with a discussion of the findings, implications for practice, and
recommendations for future research.
Background of the Problem
Special education teacher attrition is a persistent and pervasive problem across the nation,
as the rate of special education teachers transferring to different schools or transferring out of
special education altogether is steadily increasing (Billingsley, 2007a; Boe & Cook, 2006; Boe,
Cook, & Sunderland, 2007; Edgar & Pair, 2005; McLesky, Tyler, & Flippen, 2004; Kozleski et
al., 2000). Approximately 9% of special education teachers leave teaching after the first year and
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 100
over 7% accept teaching assignments in general education settings (Thornton et al., 2007). Both
special education and general education teacher attrition rates appear to be the highest during the
first three years of service (Billingsley, 2004b; Billingsley, 2007a; Bozonelos, 2008; Guarino et
al., 2006; Ingersoll, 2002; Loeb & Reininger, 2004; McCann et al., 2005; McLeskey et al., 2004;
NCTAF, 2010; Stronge et al., 2008).
Most recently, Donne and Lin (2013) reported that almost 50% of special educators,
compared to 43% of general educators, left the profession before completing five years of
service. Further compounding the problem, the number of students identified with disabilities has
risen over 20% since 1993 (DeMik, 2008). However, with almost 30% of all schools reporting
difficulties filling special education positions, less than half a million special education teachers
service over six million special education students. In other words, there are only 6 special
education teachers for every 100 students with special needs (Donne & Lin, 2013).
Limited data sources and empirical research exists on the topic of special education
teacher attrition in Hawaii, thus illuminating the saliency of this study. The research that is
available suggests that Hawaii’s teacher attrition trends are similar to national teacher attrition
trends. Over half of Hawaii’s public school teachers exit the profession with less than five years
of teaching experience (Vorsino, 2010). In 2013, 67% of the teachers hired by the Hawaii
Department of Education (HIDOE) had zero years of teaching experience (HIDOE, 2014).
Further complicating Hawaii’s teacher attrition trend is the inability of the HIDOE to recruit
qualified teachers to replace those that exit the public school system. From 2008-2014, the
HIDOE hired over a thousand teachers each year; the department was replacing approximately
10% of its teacher workforce annually (Hawaii State Department of Education, 2013, 2014). In
an August 2015 editorial in the Honolulu Star Advertiser, Suzanne Mulcahy, the assistant
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 101
superintendent of the Office of Curriculum, Instruction, and Student Support, reported that, out
of the 2,108 established special education teaching positions, 156 remained vacant at the start of
the school year (Mulcahy, 2015).
Special education teacher attrition trends in Hawaii are especially poignant when
examined at the district level. For a span of six years, the ASD hired between 203 and 248 new
teachers every year, representing as much as 24% of the state’s newly employed teachers
(Hawaii State Department of Education, 2013, 2014). In the 2012-2013 term, the district hired
207 new teachers, 64 of whom were special education teachers, or 30.9% of the total new hires
that year. In the 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 school years, only 30% of teacher attrition was due to
retirement and 11% was due to termination, indicating that 59% of teachers left the HIDOE for
personal and/or work-related reasons (Hawaii State Department of Education, 2013, 2014).
Teacher attrition has a negative impact on schools in multiple ways. Attrition costs
include financial burdens, lower levels of student achievement, and undesirable affects on school
climate (Billingsley, 2004a; Edgar & Pair, 2005; Guarino et al., 2007). The NCTAF (2010)
reported that teacher attrition costs approximately $7.3 billion a year. The most common
financial costs associated with teacher attrition include the recruitment, hiring, and professional
development of new teachers (Loeb & Reininger, 2004; McLeskey et al., 2008; NCTAF, 2010).
Student achievement is also affected by teacher attrition (Billingsley, 2004b; Darling-
Hammond, 2003; NCTAF, 2007; NCTAF, 2010; Schlichte, Yessel, & Merbler, 2005). Students
who are instructed by inexperienced teachers demonstrate lower levels of learning than do
students instructed by experienced teachers (Barnes et al., 2007; Edgar & Pair, 2005; NCTAF,
2007; NCTAF, 2010). Given that many special education students originally came from general
education settings in which they did not experience academic success and were often performing
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 102
well below grade level expectations, ensuring that these students receive instruction from a
highly qualified teacher is paramount (McLeskey et al., 2008).
Another cost of teacher attrition is unfavorable impacts on school climate (Boe et al.,
2008; Ingersoll, 2002; Loeb & Reining, 2004; McLeskey et al., 2008; NCTAF, 2010; Stronge et
al., 2008). When teachers decide to leave the profession or transfer to another position, they take
their knowledge and experience with them. In their absence, schools must hire and train
replacements, which often causes the remaining teachers additional strain to either help transition
the replacement or provide assistance to close gaps in services until one hired (McLeskey et al.,
2008; NCTAF, 2010).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this quantitative study was to identify factors that influence the attrition of
special education teachers in a Hawaii school district. This study explored both personal and
work-related factors that affect the attrition trends of special educators. The quality of education
that students with special needs receive is jeopardized because the state of Hawaii cannot
effectively recruit and retain an adequate number of highly qualified special education teachers.
Unfortunately, when 50% of Hawaii’s public school teachers depart with less than five years’
experience and the department has to replace approximately 10% of its workforce every school
year, it is difficult for the department to ensure its goals of student and staff success (Vorsino,
2010; Hawaii State Department of Education, 2013, 2014). Further complicating the problem,
attrition trends are not evenly experienced across all districts in the state, leaving some districts
more heavily impacted by teacher attrition than others. Due to mounting evidence that special
education teachers are exiting the profession or moving to general education teaching
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 103
assignments, special education teacher attrition in Hawaii public schools is a problem that
deserves further investigation.
Research Questions
In an effort to be able to generalize the results of this study’s survey to the special
education teacher population in Hawaii, it was vital to analyze factors that are common among
teachers that intend to exit the special education field. The goal of this quantitative study was to
answer the following research questions:
1. What personal factors influence the career decisions of ASD’s special educators?
a. What personal characteristics (sex and ethnicity) impact the career decisions of
ASD’s special educators?
b. What factors associated with teacher qualifications (degree level, years of
teaching experience, current teaching assignment, certification type, and
teaching in area of certification) impact the career decisions of ASD’s special
educators?
2. What work-related factors influence the career decisions of ASD’s special educators?
a. What work environment factors (salary, administrative support, colleague
support, induction/mentoring support, and paperwork) impact the career
decisions of ASD’s special educators?
b. What emotional responses to work (stress/job satisfaction) impact the career
decisions of ASD’s special educators?
Discussion of Findings
This quantitative study surveyed 299 special education teachers from the ASD to identify
personal and work-related factors that influence attrition. Chi-square tests for independence were
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 104
selected to conduct the statistical analysis for Research Question 1. Analysis of personal factors
revealed that the type of certification, specifically teachers with a special education certification,
was a positive predictor of special education teachers’ intent to leave. Other personal factors
such as sex, ethnicity, degree level, years of teaching, teaching assignment, and whether or not a
teacher was teaching in their area of certification were not found to be predictors of special
educations teachers’ intent to leave. Independent-samples t-tests were used to conduct the
statistical analysis for Research Question 2. Analysis of work-related factors indicated that stress
is a positive predictor of special education teachers’ intent to leave their special education
teaching position. Work-related factors such as salary, administrative support, colleague support,
induction/mentoring support, paperwork, and job satisfaction were not found to be predictors of
special education teachers’ intent to leave. Analysis of the open-ended questions suggests that
stress, new career with better salary and less stress, excessive paperwork, and lack of
administrator support were also factors that influenced participant intent to stay or leave special
education.
Research Question 1
Chi-squared tests for independence indicated that there was an association between intent
to leave and type of teaching certification. Specifically, more special education certified teachers
expressed intent to leave special education than did general education certified teachers or
teachers with alternate certifications.
Many researchers explored the attrition trends of certified versus uncertified teachers but
not specifically the difference between types of certification. Miller et al. (1999) and Boe,
Bobbitt et al. (1999) determined that uncertified teachers demonstrated higher levels of attrition
than certified teachers but did not affect transfer attrition rates. Special education frequently has
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 105
the lowest number of certified teachers (Payne, 2005). According to McLeskey and Billingsley
(2008), 82% to 99% of secondary special educators were not highly qualified in their content
area. A study on the shortage of special education teachers in rural Idaho revealed that more than
10% of the teachers were not certified (Johnson, Humphrey, & Allred, 2009). Boe et al.’s (2008)
analysis of NCES data from 1999-2000, revealed that only 46% of special education teachers
were certified compared to 82% of general education teachers.
Hallmark pieces of legislation like the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) and
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990 (IDEA) attempted to elevate teaching
standards at the same time the national teacher shortage continued to rise (McLeskey &
Billingsley, 2008). Some researchers claimed that NCLB mandates had an inverse effect on
teaching standards. Researchers noted that NCLB contributed to lowering certification
requirements for special educators by permitting alternative routes to certification and teacher
preparation programs (McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008). Sindelar, Brownell and Billingsley
(2010) stated that non-traditional training programs for special education teachers pursuing
highly qualified statuses had “deprofessionalized the entry to special education” (p. 11).
Patterson, Collins, and Abbot’s (2004) research on teacher resilience explored California’s
struggle to find highly qualified special educators to teach in urban schools. In an effort to satisfy
NCLB legislation, California proposed to temporarily authorize interns with emergency permits
to be classified as highly qualified which further deprofessionalized special education.
Additionally, NCLB and IDEA mandated that special education teachers must be highly
qualified in special education as well as each of the subject areas they teach (Quigney, 2009).
This requirement clearly places additional pressure on special educators who teach multiple
subjects, as they must be certified in both special and general education.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 106
Since not many studies focused on the links between different types of teacher
certification and special education teacher attrition trends, it is difficult to connect the results of
this study to existing literature. The absence of literature to either substantiate or refute the
association between special education teacher attrition and different types of teacher
certifications illuminates an opportunity for future research endeavors.
Research Question 2
Independent-samples t-tests were utilized to address Research Question 2. Statistical
analysis of work-related factors indicated that stress is a positive predictor of special education
teachers’ intent to leave their positions.
Teaching has long been considered stressful and many teachers choose to leave the
profession due to stress (DeMik; 2008; Fredricks, 2005; Hanushek, 2007; Jarvis, 2002). Several
researchers noted stress as a reason special educators state they intend to leave the field
(Billingsley & Cross, 1992; Cross & Billngsley, 1994; Gersten et al., 2001; Nichols & Schnorr,
1995; Singh & Billingsley, 1996; Sonsnowsky, 2002). In a large study of Florida special
educators, Miller et al. (1999) determined stress to be an influential predictor of special
education attrition. Additional researchers connected stress to intent to leave (Billingsley &
Cross, 1992; Cross & Billingsley, 1994; Gersten et al., 2001). Morvant et al. (1995) found that
80% of special education teachers who indicated intent to leave stated they experienced high
levels of stress on a daily to weekly basis. Frank and McKenzie (1993) conducted a longitudinal
study on 41 special education teachers who taught for at least five years following college. Frank
and McKenzie (1993) discovered that the special education teachers’ stages of burnout
intensified the longer they taught. Additionally, educators who felt the greatest emotional
exhaustion were those who instructed pupils over the age of 12 and pupils diagnosed with
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 107
behavioral disorders (Frank & McKenzie, 1993). More recently, Nance and Calabrese (2009)
noted that job responsibilities like excessive paperwork and high stress levels “create a culture of
frustration” (p. 436).
The findings produced by this study substantiate existing literature on similar topics.
Given that most of the literature connecting special education teacher attrition and stress was
produced in the 1990s and early 2000s, the findings from this study offer a novel contribution to
the existing body of literature.
Limitations
Several limitations constrained the deductions obtained in the study’s results. This study
explored many but not all of the factors that affect special education teacher attrition. Other
factors associated with special education teacher attrition presented in Chapter Two, such as
school culture and climate characteristics, were not explored in this study. Limitations to the
study exist because there were many other factors that have an impact on the career decisions of
special education teachers that were not addressed in the study’s survey.
Multiple concerns arose during the time period in which the Hawaii Department of
Education Data Governance Office was reviewing and approving the study proposal. Due to
unforeseen circumstances, personnel changes were occurring in the Data Governance Office
simultaneously with the request for research approval; numerous staff members handled the
research proposal before the proposal ended up on the desk of the individual who would actually
grant approval to conduct the study. The fact that multiple staff members handled the research
proposal significantly stalled approval, which ultimately delayed the time frame originally
established for teachers to complete the survey. The survey was not deployed until the last two
weeks of the second quarter as opposed to the middle of the second quarter. The latter part of any
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 108
quarter is typically a busy time for teachers, as they are required to administer summative
assessments and submit grades for the grading period. These factors may have contributed to
lower participation rates.
Additionally, the Hawaii Department of Education’s Data Governance Office insisted on
providing a master list of all currently employed special education teachers and their email
addresses without enlisting the assistance of school principals. The intent of the Data
Governance Office was to eliminate involvement of school level administrators with department
approved research studies. Unfortunately, the database that the Data Governance Office obtained
the teacher names and emails from contained information dated from the first few weeks of the
school year. Principals make numerous changes to teacher positions and hired additional
teachers to fill vacancies well into the first semester of the school year; thus, the information
provided by the Data Governance Office might not have been entirely accurate. There is a
distinct possibility that some on the list were no longer special education teachers or that some
names were not included in the list provided, thus affecting the accuracy of the sample surveyed.
Furthermore, by eliminating the participation of school administrators in the dissemination of the
survey instrument, the principals were not in a position to advocate for the study’s significance
or encourage teachers to participate.
The Data Governance Office only provided the names of special education teachers in the
ASD for the 2015-2016 school year. The names of former special education teachers in the ASD
were not provided for this particular study. This study focused on the attrition trends, or reasons
cited for leaving special education, of currently employed ASD special educators. However, the
perceptions of former ASD special educators could have helped to expand the scope of the study
to include a discussion on teacher retention.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 109
The study employed the use of a previously developed survey instrument. While the use
of a previously developed survey instrument was beneficial because it boosted content validity,
only minor modifications were made to the survey to satisfy the demands of the current study.
Therefore, the dependability of the research process and use of the survey further limited the
study.
Implications for Practice
Findings derived from this study both substantiated and challenged existing literature on
the factors that have an impact on the career decisions of special education teachers. Findings
revealed stress and type of certification as predictors of intent to exit special education. However,
the study’s survey results did not support an association of the other personal and work-related
factors examined in this study as predictors of expressed intent to leave the profession. The
results of this study could be relevant for multiple education stakeholders. The study affords
potential insight for teacher preparation programs, teaching practices, and school leaders.
Implications from this study might also inspire Hawaii’s school and district leaders to reexamine
the effectiveness of their current strategies to recruit and retain highly qualified special education
teachers.
Implications for Teacher Preparation Programs
Individuals tasked with operating teacher preparation programs can utilize the findings
from this study to determine which type of certification produces the most prepared teachers who
have the skills and dispositions to experience success in special education. Given that the results
of the study indicate an association between teachers who are certified in special education and
intent to leave, teacher preparation programs could create opportunities for teacher candidates to
interact with current special education teachers in school and classroom environments. Authentic
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 110
interactions with current special education teachers might help to demystify the daily challenges
special education teachers must navigate in their efforts to service students with special needs.
Additionally, teacher preparation programs might increase funding in order to provide
study materials and support structures to assist teacher candidates in meeting certification
requirements pre-and-post graduation. If legislation like NCLB requires teachers to be certified
in special education in addition to each content area subject, then teacher preparation programs
should ensure that teachers have access to appropriate resources and supports to minimize the
stress associated with the pressure to pass certification tests.
Teacher preparation program administrators might use the variables examined in this
study as indicators to detect students who may not experience success in the program or who
might need additional supports as they work towards completing their certification requirements.
Essentially, teacher preparation programs might want to screen candidates for personal
characteristics/qualities that will help them manage the stressful conditions commonly associated
with special education teaching. Teacher candidates who feel prepared, have been exposed to
authentic teaching environments, and have had the opportunity to develop the skills and
dispositions necessary to work with special needs students will be less likely to leave special
education.
Implications for Teaching Practices
The growing number of students identified with special needs paired with a rising
emphasis on academic achievement and growth for special needs students is an indication that
accountability measures for special educators is at an all time high. As accountability measures
increase for special educators, it is vital that school support structures simultaneously rise. While
the results of this particular study found a significant relationship only between stress and intent
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 111
to leave, schools might also want to examine multiple work-related variables that contribute to
the overall environment and culture of the school.
School leaders could revisit their master schedules to incorporate a common planning
time for grade level special educators and general education teachers. A common planning time
might promote collaboration between special education and general education teachers and
decrease the chances that special education teachers will feel detached from grade level
curriculum, instruction, and assessment discussions. Additionally, if the school places a special
education teacher in a position that requires him/her to obtain additional certification(s), for
instance the hiring of an inclusion teacher, school leadership might want to figure out how to
reimburse the teacher for testing fees and study materials. School leaders could also assist
teachers in creating and monitoring a professional development plan that outlines the steps a
teacher will need to take to become certified for each subject they teach. By creating a work
environment that offers multiple types and levels of teacher support, the likelihood that a special
education teacher will experience immense, sustained stress will decrease.
Implications for School Administrators and Leadership
The results of this study could provide valuable insight for ASD’s district leadership and
school administrators. Ideally, the results of this study will inform the district’s future
recruitment and retention strategies, efforts to increase job satisfaction and motivation, as well as
systematizing different types (administrative, colleague) and levels (induction and mentoring) of
support.
Communication between college preparation programs and school administrators is vital
in order to develop novice teachers with the skills necessary to experience success in the field of
special education. Therefore, school administrators may want to build partnerships with colleges
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 112
and universities to execute strategies that will attract promising candidates to the teaching
profession. In addition to recruiting talent, school leaders might also want to improve the current
working conditions at their schools. Based on the results of this study, efforts to reduce stress and
ease certification pathways might become areas of exploration for school leaders. School leaders
might want to create professional development opportunities that are on-going and responsive to
the changing needs of students and teachers. Visible support from administrators, as well as
support staff like counselors and teacher mentors/coaches, has an impact on special educators’
perceptions of their work environment. Administrators and leaders may want to seek training and
professional development opportunities that will develop their skills as instructional leaders.
School leaders who remain involved in the challenges and celebrations of special education
teaching and learning will likely have a positive impact on school culture and may decrease
unfavorable work conditions and negative emotional responses experienced by special educators.
Recommendations for Future Research
Results from this study add to the growing body of knowledge related to teacher retention
and attrition. Stress and certification type were the only two independent variables that were
significant predictors of special educators’ intent to leave the field of special education. Although
the study did not reveal any association between the other independent variables and intent to
leave, education leaders may want to further investigate their influence on retention. Isolating
personal and work-related variables from this study, such as stress, could provide a platform for
additional research endeavors in the ASD. Stress and certification types might also need to be
explored in relation to post-NCLB state accountability systems, such as the Strive HI system.
The following section notes lingering wonderings from this study and suggests numerous
priorities for future research.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 113
Teacher Preparation and Quality
Limited inferences can be made about the study’s finding that indicated an association
between certification type and a teachers’ intent to leave. A review of the literature revealed
researchers’ comparisons between certified and non-certified teacher attrition trends and about
the additional certification challenges special education teachers endure. However, the literature
did not provide an explanation for why certified special education teachers expressed intent to
leave more than general education and alternate certified teachers. Even with the results
produced by this study, not enough is known about the connections between how long a special
education teacher’s career lasts and their educational experiences, certification route, training
opportunities, and preparation to handle the stressful demands of teaching. Additional research is
necessary to conclude the significance of teacher preparation programs and the first few years of
teaching.
Teachers’ Perspectives
The results of this study indicate that stress has an impact on the career decisions of
special educators but did not conduct qualitative research to explore individual perspectives on
the impact of stress on a teacher’s decision to leave or remain in the field. Future research could
interview former special educators to explain why they ultimately chose to leave the profession.
A qualitative study might provide greater insight in to work environments that are reportedly
more or less stressful for special education teachers. Another avenue of research connected to
stress could explore how school problems influence the daily lives of teachers by conducting
observations of their work circumstances and analysis of teachers’ journals/daily narratives.
Furthermore, analysis of teachers who stay in special education would offer clearer indications of
why some teachers persist in their work with students with special needs.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 114
Teacher Induction and Mentoring
Results of this study conclude that special education teachers encounter unique obstacles
to certification and work-related stressors. Therefore, their induction and mentoring should be
distinguished from the induction and mentoring general education teachers receive. Given that
special educators exit teaching more often than their general education counterparts, future
research should concentrate on systems and strategies connected to district and school mandated
mentoring programs. Attrition literature has vastly ignored the perspectives of beginning
teachers, their education experiences, and job environment factors that persuaded them to stay or
leave special education. Future research could conduct longitudinal studies of teachers while
they are enrolled in special education preparation programs and through the first few years of
their teaching careers. Additionally, a clearer understanding of the transition from preparation to
teaching would offer valuable material on how to effectively help beginning special education
teachers.
Supporting Teachers
Supporting teachers, especially from the administrative realm, is essential to decreasing
stress. The link between administrator support, stress, and attrition has scarcely been explored
and might provide a platform for future research studies, especially in light of Hawaii’s new
teacher evaluation system. Collaborative interactions with administrators foster increased
feelings of belonging for special education teachers and increase teachers’ feelings of efficacy.
Future research might examine administrator support and its consequence on special educators’
emotional reactions to work and career decisions. Additional research is needed to detail what
encouraging administrators do and how they cultivate optimistic school environments.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 115
Conclusions
The quality of education that students with special needs receive is jeopardized because
the state of Hawaii cannot effectively recruit and retain an adequate number of highly qualified
special education teachers. With mounting evidence that special education teachers are exiting
the profession or moving to general education teaching assignments, special education teacher
attrition is a problem that deserves immediate attention. The purpose of this quantitative research
inquiry was to analyze the personal and work-related factors that influence the career decisions
of special education teachers in a Hawaii public school district. Limited data sources and
empirical research exists on the topic of special education teacher attrition in Hawaii, thus
illuminating the saliency of this study. Research conducted in the ASD revealed that there was an
association between stress as well as the type of teaching certification and a teachers’ intent to
leave special education. The results of this examination highlighted several factors that influence
special education teachers’ career decisions and may assist district and school leaders in their
efforts to decrease economic burdens of attrition, improve school climates, and, most
importantly, increase student achievement. Implications from this study might also inspire
Hawaii’s school and district leaders to reexamine the effectiveness of their current strategies to
recruit and retain highly qualified special education teachers. Additionally, the results of this
study might inform the district’s future research in special education teacher preparation,
satisfaction and motivation, as well as different types (administrative, colleague) and levels
(induction and mentoring) of support. Students identified with special needs are the victims of
special education teacher attrition; therefore, it is the legal and ethical obligation of Hawaii’s
education leaders to further investigate and identify solutions for this persistent problem.

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 116
References
Babione, C., & Shea, C. (2005). Special education mentoring within the context of rural schools.
Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24(2), 3-9.
Barnes, G., Crowe, E., & Schaefer, B. (2007). The cost of teacher turnover in five school
districts: A pilot study. Arlington, VA: National Commission on Teaching and America’s
Future.
Bay, M., & Parker-Katz, M. (2009). Perspectives on induction of beginning special educators:
Research summary, key program features, and state of state-level policies. Teacher
Education and Special Education, 32(1), 17-32.
Berry, A. (2012). The relationship of perceived support to satisfaction and commitment for
special education teachers in rural area. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 31(1), 3-14.
Billingsley, B. S. (1993). Teacher retention and attrition in special education and general
education: A critical review of the literature. The Journal of Special Education, 27, 137-
174.
Billingsley, B. S. (2004a) Promoting teacher quality and retention in special education. Journal
of Learning Disabilities, 37(5), 370-376.
Billingsley, B. S. (2004b). Special education teacher retention and attrition: A critical analysis of
the research literature. The Journal of Special Education, 38(1), 39-55.
Billingsley, B. S. (2007a). A case study of special education teacher attrition in an urban district.
Journal of Special Education Leadership, 20(1), 11-20.
Billingsley, B. S. (2007b). Recognizing and supporting the critical roles of teachers in special
education leadership. Exceptionality, 15(3), 163-176.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 117
Billingsley, B. S., Bodkins, D., & Hendricks, M. B. (1993). Why special educators leave
teaching: Implications for administrators. Case in Point, 7(2), 23-38.
Billingsley, B., Carlson, E., & Klein, S. (2004). The working conditions and induction support of
early career special educators. Exceptional Children, 70(3), 333-347.
Billingsley, B. S. & Cross, L. H. (1992). Predictors of commitment, job satisfaction, and intent to
stay in teaching: A comparison of general and special educators. The Journal of Special
Education, 25, 453-471.
Billingsley, B., Pyecha, J., Smith-Davis, J., Murray, K., & Hendricks, M. B. (1995). Improving
the retention of special education teachers: Final report. Prepared for Office of Special
Education Programs, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, U.S.
Department of Education, under Cooperative Agreement H023Q10001. Retrieved from
ERIC database. (ED379860)
Blanton, L., Sindelar, P. T., Correa, V., Hardman, M., McDonnell, J., & Kuhel, K. (2003).
Conceptions of beginning teacher quality: Models of conducting research. (COPSSE
Document Number RS-6). Center on Personnel Studies in Special Education, University
of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Boe, E.E. (1990, November). Comprehensive retention and attrition model (CRAM). Paper
presented at the Research Forum on Differing Approaches to Defining and Measuring
Personnel Supply and Demand, Washington, DC.
Boe, E. E., Barkonic, G., & Leow, C. S. (1999). Retention and attrition of teachers at the school
level: National trends and predictors. Center for Research and Evaluation in Social
Policy, University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 118
Boe, E. E., Bobbitt, S. A., & Cook, L. H. (1997). Whither didst thou go? Retention,
reassignment, migration, and attrition of special and general education teachers in
national perspective. The Journal of Special Education, 30(4), 371-389.
Boe, E. E., Bobbitt, S. A., Cook, L. H., Barkanic, G., & Maislin, G. (1999). Teacher turnover in
eight cognate areas: National trends and predictors. Center for Research and Evaluation
in Social Policy, University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania
Boe, E. E., Bobbitt, S. A., Cook, L. H., Whitener, S. D. & Weber, A. L. (1997). Why didst thou
go? Predictors of retention, transfer, and attrition of special and general education
teachers from a national perspective. The Journal of Special Education, 30, 390-411.
Boe, E. E., & Cook, L. H. (2006). The chronic and increasing shortage of fully-certified teachers
in special and general education. Exceptional Children, 72, 443–460.
Boe, E., Cook, L., & Sunderland, R. (2008). Teacher turnover: Examining exit attrition, teaching
area transfer, and school migration. Council for Exceptional Children, 75(1), 7-31.
Bozonelos, J. (2008). Retention in special education: Reducing attrition through supportive
administrative interventions. The International Journal of Learning, 15(1), 149-156.
Brownell, M., Hirsch, E., & Seo, S. (2004). Meeting the demand for highly qualified special
education teachers during severe shortages: What should policymakers consider? The
Journal of Special Education, 38(1), 56-61.
Brownell, M. T., & Smith, S. W. (1993). Understanding special education teacher attrition: A
conceptual model and implications for teacher educators. Teacher Education and Special
Education, 16(3), 270-282.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 119
Brownell, M. T., Smith, S. W., McNellis, J., & Miller, M. D. (1997). Attrition in special
education: Why teachers leave the classroom and where they go. Exceptionality, 7, 143-
155.
Carlson, B., & Thompson, J. (1995). Job burnout and job leaving in public school teachers:
Implications for stress management. International Journal of Stress Management, 2(1),
15-29.
Carroll, T., & Fulton, K. (2004). The true cost of teacher turnover. Threshold, 16-17. Retrieved
from http://www.nctaf.org/documents/nctaf/CTT.graphic.pdf
Connelly, V. & Graham, S. (2009). Student teaching and teacher attrition in special education.
Teacher Education and Special Education, 32(3), 257-269.
Cook, L., & Boe, E. (2007). National trends in the sources of supply of teachers in special and
general education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 30(4), 217-232.
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16,
297-334.
Cross, L. & Billingsley, B. (1994). Testing a model of special educators’ intent to stay in
teaching. Exceptional Children, 60(5), 411-421.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers. Why it matters, what leaders can do.
Educational Leadership, 60(8), 7-13.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 120
DeMik, S. (2008). Experiencing attrition of special education teachers through narrative inquiry.
High School Journal, 92(1), 22-32.
Donne, V. & Lin, F. (2013) Special education teacher induction: The wiki way. The Clearing
House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas, 86(2), 43-47.
Dworkin, A. G. (1980). The changing demography of public school teachers: Some implications
for faculty turnover in urban areas. Sociology of Education, 53, 65-73.
Elder, C. (2004). Dismissal doesn’t have to be difficult. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield
Education.
Edgar, E. & Pair, A. (2005). Special education teacher attrition: It all depends on where you are
standing. Teacher Education and Special Education, 28, 163-170.
France, P. C. B. (2008). Factors affecting special-education teacher retention and attrition in a
School district in Virginia (Doctoral dissertation, University of Phoenix).
Frank, M. & Keith, T. Z. (1984). Academic abilities of persons entering and remaining in special
education. Exceptional Children, 51, 71-76.
Frank, A. R., & McKenzie, R. (1993). The development of burn-out among special educators.
Teacher Education and Special Education, 16, 161–170.
Fredricks, J. (2005). Why teachers leave. Education Digest, 66(8), 46-48.
Gehrke, S.R. & McCoy, K. (2007). Sustaining and retaining beginning special educators: It takes
a village. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 490-500.
Gehrke, R., & Murri, N. (2006). Beginning special educators’ intent to stay in special education:
Why they like it here. Teacher Education and Special Education, 29(3), 179-190.
Gersten, R., Keating, T., Yovanoff, P., & Harniss, M. K. (2001). Working in special education:
factors that enhance special educators’ intent to stay. Exceptional Children, 67, 549-567.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 121
Gold, Y. (1996). Beginning teacher support: Attrition, mentoring, and induction. In J. Sikula, T.
J. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of re- search on teacher education (2nd ed.,
pp. 548–594). New York: Simon & Schuster.
Griffin, C. C., Winn, J. A., Otis-Wilborn, A., & Kilgore, K. L. (2009). New teacher induction in
special education. Gainesville: University of Florida, Center on Personnel Studies in
Special Education.
Grissmer, D. W., & Kirby, S. N. (1987). Teacher attrition: The uphill climb to staff the nation’s
schools. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.
Guarino, C., Santibanez, L., & Daley, G. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of
the recent empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 173-208.
Hanushek, E. A. (2007). The single salary schedule and other issues of teacher pay. Peabody
Journal of Education, 82(4), 574-586.
Hawaii State Department of Education. (2012). Strategic Plan 2011-2018. Retrieved from
http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/DOE%20Forms/Advancing%20Education/Strategic
Plan.pdf
Hawaii State Department of Education. (2013). Employment Report. Retrieved from
http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/DOE%20Forms/State%20Reports/EmploymentRep
ort2012-13.pdf
Hawaii State Department of Education. (2014). Employment Report. Retrieved from
http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/Reports/EmploymentReport2013-14.pdf
Hawaii's Strive HI Performance System. (2015). Retrieved March 1, 2015, from
http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/VisionForSuccess/AdvancingEducation/StriveHIPer
formanceSystem/Pages/home.aspx
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 122
Hawaii Teachers Standards Board, (2015). Reference guide to teacher licensure. Retrieved from
http://www.htsb.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Licensure-Guide-2-2015.pdf
Henke, R. R., Choy, S. P., Chen, X., Geis, S., & Alt, N. (1997). Teachers in the 1990s: Profile of
a profession. (NCES 970460). Berkeley, CA: Office of Educational Research and
Improvement.
Hite, S. J. (2001). Reviewing quantitative research to inform educational policy processes.
Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001262/126215e.pdf
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis.
American Educational Research Journal, 37(3), 499–534.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2002). The teacher shortage: A case of wrong diagnosis and wrong
prescription. National Association of Secondary School Principals, NAASP Bulletin,
86(8), 30-33.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2008). A researcher encounters the political realm: A personal tale. Phi Delta
Kappan, 89(5), 369-371.
Ingersoll, R.M. & Smith, T.M. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on
beginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681-714.
Irinaga-Bistolas, C., Schalock, M., Marvin, R., & Beck, L. (2007). Bridges to success: A
developmental induction model for rural early career special educators. Rural Special
Education Quarterly, 26(1), 13-22.
Jarvis, M. (2002). Teacher stress: A critical review of recent findings and suggestions for future
research directions. Stress News, 14(1), 12-16.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 123
Johnson, E., Humphrey, M., & Allred, K. (2009). Online learning and mentors: Addressing the
shortage of rural special educators through technology and collaboration. Rural Special
Education Quarterly, 28(2), 17-21.
Kelleher, J. S. (2015, March 6). Hawaii gets high marks for education. Honolulu Star Advertiser.
Retrieved from
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/20150306_Hawaii_gets_high_marks_for_e
ducation.html?id=295388611
Kozleski, E., Mainzer, R., Deshler, D., Coleman, M.R., Rodriguez-Walling, M. (2000). Bright
futures for exceptional learners. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(6), 56-69.
LeCompte, D., & Dworkin, A. G. (1991). Giving up on a school: Student dropouts and teacher
burnouts. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin.
Levine, B. (2001). An examination of the factors related to the attrition and retention of special
education teachers in cobb county, georgia. (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Alabama).
Loeb, S., Darling-Hammond, L., & Luczak, J. (2005). How teaching conditions predict teacher
turnover in California schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(3), 44-70.
Loeb, S., & Reininger, M. (2004). Public policy and teacher labor markets: What we know and
why it matters. Education Policy Center, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
Littrel, P., Billingsley, B. S., & Cross, L. H. (1994). The effects of principal support on special
and general educators’ stress, job satisfaction, school commitment, health, and intent to
stay in teaching. Remedial and Special Education, 15, 297-310.
Major, A. E. (2012). Job design for special education teachers. Current Issues in Education,
15(2), 1-8.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 124
McCann, T., Johannessen, L., & Ricca, B. (2005). Responding to new teachers’ concerns.
Educational Leadership, 62(8), 30-34.
McLeskey, J., & Billingsley, B. S. (2008). How does the quality and stability of the teaching
force influence the research-to-practice gap? Remedial and Special Education, 29, 293-
305.
McLeskey, J., Tyler, N. C., & Flippin, S. S. (2004). The supply and demand for special
education teachers: A review of research regarding the chronic shortage of special
education teachers. The Journal of Special Education, 38, 5-21.
Miles, M. & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data Analysis: An expanded sourcebook.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Miller, M. D., Brownell, M., & Smith, S. W. (1999). Factors that predict teachers staying in,
leaving, or transferring from the special education classroom. Exceptional Children, 65,
201-218.
Morvant, M., Gersten, R., Gillman, J., Keating, T., & Blake, G. (1995). Attrition/retention of
urban special education teachers: Multi-faced research and strategic action planning.
Final performance report, Volume 1. Retrieved from ERIC Document Reproduction
Service. (ED338154)
Mulcahy, S. (2015, August 13). DOE priority is to hire more special education teachers.
Honolulu Star Advertiser. Retrieved from
http://www.staradvertiser.com/editorialspremium/20150813-doe-priority-is-to-hire-more-
special-education-teachers.html?id=321719022
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 125
Nance, E. & Calabrese, R. (2009). Special education teacher retention and attrition: The impact
of increased legal requirements. International Journal of Educational Management, 23
(5), 431-440.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). Teacher attrition and mobility: results from the
2008-2009 teacher follow-up survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001088.pdf
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (2007). Policy brief: The high cost of
teacher turnover. Retrieved from http://nctaf.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/NCTAF-
Cost-of-Teacher-Turnover-2007-policy-brief.pdf
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (2010). Who will teach? Experience
Matters. Retrieved from http://nctaf.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/NCTAF-Who-Will-
Teach-Experience-Matters-2010-Report.pdf.
Nichols, A. S., & Sonsnowsky, F. L. (2002). Burnout among special education teachers in self
contained cross-categorical classrooms. Teacher Education and Special Education, 25(1),
71-86.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (2002), 20 USC 6301 § 1-9601.
Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS
(5
th
ed.). Berkshire, England: McGraw Hill.
Patterson, J., Collins, L., & Abbott, G. (2004). A study of teacher resilience in urban schools.
Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31(1), 3-11.
Payne, R. (2005). Special education teacher shortages: Barriers or lack of preparation? The
International Journal of Special Education, 20(1), 88-91.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 126
Plash, S., & Piotrowski, C. (2006). Impact of No Child Left Behind Act in Alabama: A review.
Journal of Instructional Psychology, 33(3), 223-227.
Public Law 94-142, Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, November 29, 1975.
Quigney, T. (2009). The status of special education teachers at the secondary level: Effects of the
“Highly Qualified Teacher” standard. American Secondary Education, 37(2), 49-61.
Rice, C., & Goessling, D. (2005). Recruiting and retaining male special education teachers.
Remedial and Special Education, 26(6), 347-356.
Schlichte, J., Yssel, N., & Merbler, J. (2005). Pathways to burnout: Case studies in teacher
isolation and alienation. Preventing School Failure, 50(1), 35-40.
Schnorr, J. M. (1995). Teacher retention: A CSPD analysis and planning model. Teacher
Education and Special Education, 18(1), 22-38.
Scull, J. & Winkler, A. M. (2011). Shifting trends in special education. Washington, DC:
Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
Sindelar, P., Brownell, M., & Billingsley, B. (2010). Special education teacher education
research: Current status and future directions. Teacher Education and Special Education,
33(1), 8-24.
Singer, J. D. (1992). Are special educators’ career paths special? Results from a 13-year
longitudinal study. Exceptional Children, 59, 262-279.
Singh, K. & Billingsley, B. S. (1996). Intent to stay in teaching: Teachers of students with
emotional disorders versus other special educators. Remedial and Special Education, 17,
37-47.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 127
SMHC (2009). Principles and Recommendations for the Strategic Management of Human
Capital in Public Education. Retrieved March 3 2015 from
www.smhc.cpre.org/resources.
Schnorr, J. M. (1995). Teacher retention: A CSPD analysis and planning model. Teacher
Education and Special Education, 18(1), 22-38.
SPSS Inc. (2013). Statistical Package for the Social Sciences [computer software]. Prentice Hall.
Stephens, T., & Fish, W. (2010). Motivational factors towards pursuing a career in special
education. Education, 130(4), 581-594.
Stronge, J., Richard, H., & Catano, N. (2008). Qualities of effective principals. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Therrien, W., & Wasburn-Moses, L. (2009). Impact of no child left behind’s highly qualified
requirements on both rural and non-rural schools in Ohio. Rural Special Education
Quarterly, 28(1), 11-18.
Thornton, B., Peltier, G., & Medina, R. (2007). Reducing the special education teacher shortage.
The Clearing House, 80(5), 233-238.
United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014). Occupational employment statistics. May 2014
National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates United States. Retrieved from
http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm
Vorsino, M. (2010, September 7). Teacher dropouts. Honolulu Star Advertiser. Retrieved from
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20100907_teacher_dropouts.html?id=102324689.
Wasburn-Moses, L. (2006). A practical proposal for special education teacher induction. Mid-
Western Educational Researcher, 19(4), 20-23.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 128
Westling, D. L. & Whitten, T. M. (1996). Rural special education teachers’ plans to continue or
leave their teaching positions. Exceptional Children, 62, 319-335.
Whitaker, S. D. (2000). Mentoring beginning special education teachers and the relationship to
attrition. Exceptional Children, 66, 546-566.
White, M., & Mason, C. (2006). Components of a successful mentoring program for beginning
special education teachers: Perspectives from new teachers and mentors. Teacher
Education and Special Education, 29(3), 191-201.
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 129
Appendix A
Hawaii Department of Education Approval Letter

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 130
Appendix B
Aloha School District Special Education Teacher Survey

Part I

1. Sex:
a. Male
b. Female

2. Ethnicity:
a. Caucasian
b. African American
c. Hispanic
d. Asian
e. Native Hawaiian
f. Mixed

3. Degree Level:
a. Less than a Bachelors
b. Bachelors
c. Masters
d. Doctorate

4. Years of Teaching Experience:
a. Less than 4 years
b. 4 to 7 years
c. 8 to 12 years
d. 13 to 20 years
e. 21 or more years

5. Current or most recent work assignment in Aloha School Districts’ special education:
a. Elementary
b. Middle School
c. High School

6. Type of Certification
a. Special education
b. General education
c. Alternative

7. Are you currently teaching in your area of certification?
a. Yes
b. No
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 131
Part II
How satisfied are you with the way the Aloha School District addresses each of the
following items:

For each item, please use the following scale:

1 – Not very satisfied
2 – Somewhat satisfied
3 – Satisfied
4 – Very Satisfied

Delivery of special education services 1 2 3 4

Variety of delivery models 1 2 3 4

Expectations regarding inclusion/collaboration 1 2 3 4

Clarification of teaching expectations 1 2 3 4

Evaluation of teaching methods 1 2 3 4

Evaluation of student outcomes 1 2 3 4

Part III
How satisfied are you with the way that your school addresses each of the following
items?

For each item, please use the following scale:

1 – Not very satisfied
2 – Somewhat satisfied
3 – Satisfied
4 – Very Satisfied

School vision and mission 1 2 3 4

Educational goals 1 2 3 4

Quality of education 1 2 3 4

Teacher morale 1 2 3 4

Sharing of information by local administration 1 2 3 4

Paperwork responsibilities 1 2 3 4
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 132
Part IV
Prior to your employment in the Aloha School District, how adequate was your
training in the following areas?

For each item, please use the following scale:

1 – Not very adequate
2 – Somewhat adequate
3 – Adequate
4 – Very Adequate

Curriculum planning 1 2 3 4

Behavior Management techniques 1 2 3 4

Implementing modifications 1 2 3 4

Working as part of a team 1 2 3 4

Preparing Individual Education Plans (IEPs) 1 2 3 4

Conducting IEP reviews 1 2 3 4

Assessing student achievement 1 2 3 4

Writing eligibilities 1 2 3 4

Interpreting assessment results and using 1 2 3 4

Information in planning instruction

Implementing the Individuals with Disabilities 1 2 3 4

Education Act (IDEA)

Implementing the NCLB requirements 1 2 3 4
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 133
Part V
How important would be the following in your decision to terminate employment
within the Aloha School District?

For each item, please use the following scale:

1 – Not very important
2 – Somewhat important
3 – Important
4 – Very Important

Relocating as a result of spouse’s job 1 2 3 4

Care of children or other family members 1 2 3 4

Pursuing graduate studies 1 2 3 4

Personal reasons 1 2 3 4

More money/better benefits elsewhere 1 2 3 4

Better working conditions elsewhere 1 2 3 4

Change of career 1 2 3 4

NCLB 1 2 3 4

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 134
Part VI
A number of issues have been identified in previous studies as contributing to a
shortage of special education teachers. FIRST, indicate whether these issues were a
problem in your last work setting as a Aloha School District special educator.

For each item, please use the following scale:

1 – Not a problem
2 – Somewhat of a problem
3 – A problem
4 – Very much a problem

Lack of administrative support and guidance 1 2 3 4

Lack of administrative knowledge of special education 1 2 3 4

Lack of collegial support 1 2 3 4

Inadequate preparation or staff development 1 2 3 4

Limited opportunities to provide input 1 2 3 4

Excessive paperwork 1 2 3 4

Class size/caseload size 1 2 3 4

Inadequate planning time 1 2 3 4

Lack of parent and/or community support 1 2 3 4

Stress from demands of the job 1 2 3 4

Wide diversity of student needs 1 2 3 4

Demands associated with IDEA compliance 1 2 3 4

Demands associated with NCLB compliance 1 2 3 4

SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 135
SECOND, indicate how influential these issues were or would be on your decision to leave
your position.

For each item, please use the following scale:

1 – Not very influential
2 – Somewhat influential
3 – Influential
4 – Very influential

Lack of administrative support and guidance 1 2 3 4

Lack of administrative knowledge of special education 1 2 3 4

Lack of collegial support 1 2 3 4

Inadequate preparation or staff development 1 2 3 4

Limited opportunities to provide input 1 2 3 4

Excessive paperwork 1 2 3 4

Class size/caseload size 1 2 3 4

Inadequate planning time 1 2 3 4

Lack of parent and/or community support 1 2 3 4

Stress from demands of the job 1 2 3 4

Wide diversity of student needs 1 2 3 4

Demands associated with IDEA compliance 1 2 3 4

Demands associated with NCLB compliance 1 2 3 4

Do you intend to leave the field of special education within the next 5 years?

1. Yes

2. No
SPED TEACHER ATTRITION IN A HAWAII SCHOOL DISTRICT 136
Please use the space below to list any additional reasons why you would stay in the Aloha
School District or why you would leave the Aloha School District special education for
general education and/or a different school system.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study focused on the attrition of special education teachers from the Aloha School District (ASD) located on the island of Oahu, Hawaii. This quantitative study surveyed 299 special education teachers to identify personal and work-related factors that influence attrition. Statistical analysis of personal factors revealed that type of certification, specifically special education certification, was a positive predictor of intent to leave. Other personal factors such as sex, ethnicity, degree level, years of teaching, teaching assignment, and whether a teacher was teaching in their area of certification were not found to be predictors of intent to leave. Statistical analysis of work-related factors indicated that stress is a positive predictor of intent to leave the special education teaching position. Work-related factors such as salary, administrative support, colleague support, induction/mentoring support, paperwork, and job satisfaction were not found to be predictors of intent to leave. Analysis of the open-ended questions suggests that stress, administrative support, paperwork demands, salary, and the opportunity of a new career with better salary and less stress were also factors influencing participants’ intent to leave special education. Findings highlight stress and type of certification as factors that influence ASD special education teacher attrition. The results could provide valuable insight for ASD’s district leadership and school administrators. The results may inform the district’s future research in special education teacher preparation, recruitment and retention strategies, satisfaction and motivation as well as different types (administrative, colleague) and levels (induction and mentoring) of support.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Special education teacher attrition in a Hawaii school complex area

PDF

Understanding science and math teacher retention in Hawai‘i public schools

PDF

Beginning teachers’ perceptions of induction program support

PDF

The voices of teacher attrition: Perceptions of retention and turnover at an international school in Thailand

PDF

The relationship between employee value propositions and teacher employment decisions

PDF

Examining mathematics anxiety and mathematics teaching self-efficacy of elementary school teachers in a Hawaii school district

PDF

Examining teacher retention and attrition in novice teachers

PDF

Influencing teacher retention: an evaluation study

PDF

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

PDF

Urban teacher persistence: self-efficacy, affect, and values

PDF

The effect on teacher career choices: exploring teacher perceptions on the impact of non‐instructional workload on self‐efficacy and self‐determination

PDF

An analysis of the rise of special education legal costs in one Southern California suburban district

PDF

A gap analysis on improving teacher retention in kindergarten: a case of a private kindergarten in Hong Kong

PDF

Reducing the education debt through supporting African American and Latinx teacher longevity

PDF

The influence of teacher characteristics on preference for models of teaching

PDF

Teacher retention in an urban, predominately Black school district: an improvement study in the Deep South

PDF

Factors that influence the ability of preservice teachers to apply English language arts pedagogy in guided practice

PDF

Administrators' role in supporting teachers through feedback

PDF

Critical factors impacting the exodus from teaching ranks: an evaluative study of an independent Christian school

PDF

Changing nature of preservice teacher concerns in an accelerated, graduate-level teacher education program

Asset Metadata

Creator Geiling, Kristin Liana (author)

Core Title Factors influencing special education teacher attrition in a Hawaii school district

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 02/24/2016

Defense Date 01/21/2016

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

Tag Hawaii special education,Hawaii special education teacher attrition,OAI-PMH Harvest,retention,Special Education,special education attrition,special education retention,special education teacher attrition,special education teacher shortage,special education teacher turnover,teacher attrition,teaching position transfers

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Keim, Robert (committee chair), Brummel, John (committee member), Tobey, Patricia (committee member)

Creator Email kgeiling@usc.edu,msgeiling@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-215549

Unique identifier UC11279370

Identifier etd-GeilingKri-4164.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-215549 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-GeilingKri-4164.pdf

Dmrecord 215549

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Geiling, Kristin Liana

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