University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Urban teacher residencies and their impact on teacher retention in high-needs school settings

(USC Thesis Other)

Urban teacher residencies and their impact on teacher retention in high-needs school settings

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Urban Teacher Residencies and their Impact on Teacher Retention in High-Needs School
Settings
by
Shemēna Rose Shivers
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
August 2022
The committee for Shemēna Shivers, 2022, certifies the approval of this Dissertation.
Committee Chair:
Dr. Morgan S. Polikoff
Committee Members:
Dr. Marsha Riggio
Dr. Wesley Smith
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022
Abstract
This dissertation analyzes the characteristics of urban teacher residencies and their approach in
recruiting and retaining high quality teachers in high-needs classrooms. The research uses
principles from Critical Race Theory and Culturally Relevant Pedagogy to assess the variables
that promote teacher self-efficacy and a willingness to remain in urban classrooms. The research
questions that guide this study seek to assess how urban teacher residencies recruit and prepare
pre-service teachers for high-needs classrooms. Similarly, the research questions aim to discover
if factors such as previous exposure, training, and culturally relevant pedagogy play a role in
teachers’ decisions to stay in high needs urban classrooms. This research will bring awareness to
methods of recruitment and training that can be used by teacher training programs, universities,
and urban school-districts to encourage teacher self-efficacy and increase teacher retention in
high-needs areas.
Keywords: [teacher education programs, urban teacher residency, culturally responsive
pedagogy, critical race theory, teacher retention, teacher attrition, high-needs, urban education]
Dedication
To my Mommie who made sure I knew that nothing is impossible and to make it happen.
To my Gammie who instilled a love for learning deep in my soul.
To Contario whose prayers pushed me to see myself as a solution to a bigger problem.
To Christopher whose fight and tenacity taught me to be and remain convinced of my
convictions.
Acknowledgements
To my Heavenly Father, your Word remains true. I worship you. I adore you. You are
wonderful. You are faithful. Ezekiel 24:14 states “

I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to
pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent; according to
thy ways, and according to thy doings, shall they judge thee, saith the Lord God.” You said in
Numbers 23:19, “God is not a man, that He should lie; neither the son of man, that He should
repent. Hath He said, and shall He not do it? Or hath He spoken, and shall He not make it good?”
This is my proof that all things work together for the good of those who love God and are called
according to his will. It is finished.
I would like to send my sincerest thanks to my committee chair, Dr. Morgan Polikoff, and
committee members Dr. Marsha Riggio and Dr. Wesley Smith. Thank you for seeing a greater
vision of my writing and pushing me to verbalize thoughts. Your support and guidance through
this process is priceless.
To my old man, thank you for stepping up. You have given me more courage than you’ll ever
know. I hope this work makes you proud.
To my sissy, there is no me without you. Not one single accomplishment could stand without
your love, support, and fervent prayers. You are my she-ro.
To Janeen whose passion for disadvantaged youth created my love for education. Everything I
have accomplished is because of the seeds you planted.
To my cohort for sticking it out. We fought on!
To (Dr.) Brandi Fletcher-Daniels, I could not have gotten through this process without you.
Thank you for being my person during this program. I am so grateful that you wouldn’t let me
quit. We’re finishing together and God gets all the glory! To the beyond my friend!
To Melrose Class of 2022, Ms. Shivers loves you so much!!! I did this because of you and for
you. We did this together! Thank you for letting me into your lives, thank you for letting me
learn with and through you. Thank you for sacrificing me as your teacher so that I could pursue
my own dreams. I pray that I’ve set a good example of what it means to push through adversity.
Of what it looks like not to give up even when that’s all you want to do. I love each and every
one of you. This dissertation was written from my heart and my passion to provide kids just like
you with every educational opportunity possible. I am immeasurably proud of us! We navigated
life through a pandemic, virtual learning, death, loss and so much more… but we made it! Let
this be a sign of the greatness that God put in you! Put Memphis on the map and show them that
great things come out of the Mound, I’m forever cheering you on.
To Lexie who fronted the first dollars for this dream, thank you for believing and investing in
me. I pray I make you proud and that your sacrifice be tangibly rewarded in this lifetime.
To Dr. Corey Reed, thank you for blazing the trail. We walked this process out simultaneously
and your leadership, prophetic words, prayers, and commitment to seeing this through with
excellence, is unparalleled. Thank you for sowing into this degree and into my spiritual
submission through this process.
To Alyssa, thank you for sitting with me, encouraging me, finishing up my sentences, making
sure I didn’t fall asleep and literally hand feeding me through this process. This is an honorary
degree that has been very much earned. I love you and am grateful for your contribution during
this process.
To Kasha, thank you for keeping my head held up when I felt like I was sinking. Thank you for
setting a quiet example of exactly how diligent a black woman can be. Thank you for showing
me how to be a student and a servant. Thank you for walking with me through the valleys and
celebrating me through the peaks. You have been such a Godsend in my life, and I hope you
know just how much I love you!
To my church, Reformation Memphis (formerly, All Nations Worship Assembly- Memphis),
thank you for speaking prophetic life into me during the hardest season of my life. From hugs to
check-ins to simply yelling “doc” across the sanctuary, your belief in me has been such a balm to
a tired soul. This degree is for all of us.
To all of my friends and family who have covered me during this process, I thank you. Blessings
to you for generations to come. Your love and encouragement paved the way for this
accomplishment. It is a win for us all.
To myself, you made it happen! You believed you could, so you did! Let this work stand as
evidence that no matter what gets thrown your way, you have everything it takes to not only
endure, but execute with authority, poise, and determination. God is my rock. Without him, I am
nothing. This process has changed me in ways I never anticipated, but in all the chaos, God’s
sovereignty has remained. I am forever grateful that God has given me the grace to pursue my
biggest dream and to see it come to fruition is most humbling.
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................................. 3
DEDICATION .............................................................................................................................................................. 4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 1 ............................................................................................................................................................... 10
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................................... 10
BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE OF THE PROBLEM ............................................................................................ 12
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM .............................................................................................................................. 13
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY ......................................................................................................................................... 14
Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................................................................... 15
TEP DESIGN: CRITICAL RACE THEORY & CULTURALLY RELEVANT PEDAGOGY ............................................ 16
OVERVIEW OF METHODS ....................................................................................................................................... 18
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................................................ 20
LIMITATIONS AND DELIMITATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 20
DEFINITION OF TERMS ........................................................................................................................................... 21
ORGANIZATION OF THE DISSERTATION ................................................................................................................ 22
CHAPTER 2 ............................................................................................................................................................... 24
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .......................................................................................................................... 24
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................... 24
DISPARITIES IN URBAN EDUCATION ...................................................................................................................... 25
DETERMINING HIGH QUALITY TEACHING ........................................................................................................... 28
TEACHER RETENTION AND ATTRITION................................................................................................................. 29
TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS ........................................................................................................................ 34
TEACHER RESIDENCY PROGRAMS ........................................................................................................................ 35
URBAN TEACHER RESIDENCIES ............................................................................................................................. 38
Residency Recruitment ...................................................................................................................................... 40
Mentor Recruitment .......................................................................................................................................... 43
CHAPTER 3 ............................................................................................................................................................... 47
METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................................................... 47
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................... 47
RESTATEMENT OF PROBLEM OF PRACTICE .......................................................................................................... 47
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY ......................................................................................................................................... 48
RESEARCH DESIGN ................................................................................................................................................. 48
Overview of Research Design ............................................................................................................................ 48
Sample ................................................................................................................................................................ 49
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................................................. 50
DATA ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................................................... 57
ASSUMPTIONS ......................................................................................................................................................... 59
LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................................................................... 59
ETHICS .................................................................................................................................................................... 59
CONTENT VALIDITY ............................................................................................................................................... 60
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................... 61
CHAPTER FOUR:..................................................................................................................................................... 62
RESULTS.................................................................................................................................................................... 62
PARTICIPANTS ........................................................................................................................................................ 62
INTERVIEW DATA FROM FORMER TEACHERS ...................................................................................................... 63
RESULTS .................................................................................................................................................................. 64
Results of R.Q.1a ............................................................................................................................................... 64
Results of R.Q.1b ............................................................................................................................................... 69
Results of R.Q.2 ................................................................................................................................................. 71
Results of R.Q.3 ................................................................................................................................................. 76
DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................................................. 79
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................... 79
CHAPTER 5 ............................................................................................................................................................... 81
DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................................................. 81
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................... 81
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................... 81
FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................................................. 83
Research Question 1a and the Quality of TEP Training ................................................................................. 83
Research Question 1b and the Quality of TEP Resources............................................................................... 84
RQ2 and Teacher Self-efficacy ......................................................................................................................... 84
RQ3 and Teacher Support ................................................................................................................................. 85
LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................................................................... 86
IMPLICATIONS ........................................................................................................................................................ 88
RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................................................. 88
CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................................................... 89
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................... 91
Chapter 1
Introduction
Teacher turnover and attrition rates continue to be one of the most pressing topics in
conversations regarding the American education system. With more than a quarter of new
teachers leaving the field within their first five years and states struggling to replace those
teachers, many states have created task forces to work with policymakers and other groups to
address the ever-growing shortage of teachers in the classroom (Education Commission of the
States, 2016). The ECS (2016) also reports that the vacancies experienced from teacher turnover
are overwhelmingly found in critical content areas such as math, science, and English. There is
an ever-growing void that is caused by the lack of high-quality teachers available to fill the gaps
when these teachers leave. Besides a lack of pay, discipline issues and the typical political issues
within the field, many teachers find it difficult to remain in schools where there are high needs,
high poverty and slim resources (Kamrath & Bradford, 2020). Many teachers report burnout
within 2-3 years, and without the proper supports, find themselves transferring to other schools
(turnover) or leaving the field altogether (attrition).
Through my studies and experiences in education over the last decade, it has become
increasingly disheartening how frequently and routinely, teachers leave the classroom. Prior to
the global COVID-19 pandemic, teacher attrition and turnover rates averaged more than 25%
annually according to the Institute of Education Sciences (2020). Based on the extreme
challenges presented during the COIVD-19 pandemic, and the mass exodus of millennials out of
the workplace, it is fair to assess that that number of teachers leaving the classroom has also
increased over the last two years (NCES, 2018). In an educational climate where schools,
districts and teacher programs have been slow to adjust to the needs and demands of 21st century
education, the shortage and mass exodus of teachers, both new and old, can be expected to
continue if there is not a major adjustment to the way schooling occurs in the United States. As a
decade-old educator, I, too, find myself added to the percentage of educators who have left the
classroom with no intention of returning. Understanding my own commitment to urban
education and my fervor for equity and change in the educational system, I find it imperative to
see what causes other likeminded educators to give up their dreams and leave the field as well.
As a means of addressing the ever-growing teacher shortage, federal funding and
initiatives have been designated to provide educational organizations with the necessities to
develop and train new teachers using residency programs. Over the last 20 years, a shift has
occurred in teacher education, with more teachers becoming certified through teacher residencies
and alternative certification programs (NCES, 2020). These residencies have succeeded in
adapting traditional education training to now include student-teaching experiences that promote
pre-service teachers’ skillset and pedagogy prior to be released into their own individual
programs. Teachers who have completed teacher preparation trainings assert that their
experiences as student-teachers made them feel more comfortable entering and remaining in the
classroom once they graduated. To speak to their need for an even greater number of teachers,
numerous metropolitan cities have created and supported urban teacher residencies, whose
specific focus is to prepare pre-service teachers to enter high-needs schools (NCTR, 2020).
These urban teacher residencies provide academic instruction, pedagogical experiences, and a
cohort style support system to train and prepare pre-service teachers for the difficulties of
teaching in high-needs schools. Graduates of urban teacher residencies have proven to be
successful, as UTR graduates’ teacher evaluations and student achievement data continue to
outscore their counterparts who have never completed a teacher residency program (Shelby
County Schools, 2020). This dissertation aims to identify and examine three specific topics: the
causes of teacher attrition, the factors that influence teacher retention, and the methods UTRs
utilize that propel their graduates ahead of their peer-colleagues in urban school settings.
Background and Importance of the Problem
Within the largest school district in the state of Tennessee, serving the highest population
of minority and disadvantaged students, Shelby County Schools (SCS) scored a 7.5/100 for
college readiness according to a recent US News and World Report study (2019). Serving more
than 110,000 students, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports SCS as one
of the nation’s top 25 largest school districts, yet it continues to struggle with student
achievement in at both the state and national level (Shelby County Schools, 2021). The National
Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reported that high-needs schools reported teacher
turnover rates at twice that of mid and low-poverty schools (2015). Barnes et al., (2007)
identified that teacher turnover and attrition rates were higher in urban school districts, which
correlated to lower student achievement in these schools. The report also concluded that students
leaving an SCS high school had a 12% and 17% proficiency rating for math and English,
respectively. With such dire numbers, the question being posed is what is happening, or not
happening in schools within Memphis, Tennessee. Along with inequitable access to quality
education, teacher turnover and attrition rates serve as a major contributor to the lack of student
growth, achievement, and college readiness. Over the last fifteen years, SCS has consistently
ranked among the lowest performing districts in Tennessee, leading to the establishment of many
educational reform initiatives such as teacher preparation and readiness programs, whose
missions and efforts are founded in improving educational outcomes through the supply and
retention of high quality and effective teachers.
In a monthly report on teacher retention published by Shelby County Schools Department
of Education (SCS), SCS reported that only 36% of teachers who were hired within the district in
2014, remained in the district (2019). Even more alarming was the declining return of novice
teachers with 30% of first year teachers choosing to leave the classroom. As was expected, the
most recent SCS report (2021), which includes 1 year and 3 months of virtual learning, shows
that the overall teacher turnover rate was 10.87%, the highest turnover rate in the last 5 years.
Similarly, the rate of new teacher turnover reached 20%, an almost 6% increase from the year
prior.
A major concern in public education is the ever-increasing teacher deficit in public
classrooms. The U.S. Department of Education (2019) determined that there has been a 30%
decrease in the number of teachers entering the classroom since 2010 and a 27.2% decrease in
the number of teacher education program completions. Tennessee has seen an even greater
decrease in the number of teacher education graduates, shrinking from 4,458 in 2008 to 2,904 in
2019, a 35% decline (i.e., a decline 8% greater than the national average). In the most recent
monthly report by the SCS Department of Research and Performance Management, it was noted
that more than 770 teacher and teacher types, vacated their positions between May and
September 2021. It was also stated that at the commencement of the 2021-2022 school year, the
teacher vacancy rate was 4 times what it was the previous year, and there were only 227 degreed
or licensed substitutes filling in the open positions. With achievement being linked to high
quality teachers and instruction, it is without reservation that there is a distressing need to for a
call to action in order to address the increasing rates of teacher turnover and attrition in
Memphis, Tennessee (Ronfeldt et al., 2013).
Statement of the Problem
A major concern in the 21st century K-12 classroom environment, is the effectiveness of
new teachers entering the field. With the specialization of education ever increasing, many
potential teachers seek out teacher education programs (TEPs) and alternative certification
programs (ACPs), in the hopes of being trained to effectively navigate and commandeer the
classroom (Redding & Smith, 2016; Van Overschelde & Wiggins, 2019). While these pre-
service teachers seek these programs in good faith, the question arises as to whether or not these
TEPs provide the true and necessary training, experiences, and content for teaching in a variety
of educational environments, specifically those in under-served and historically marginalized
communities (D’Emidio-Caston, 2019). The foundation of this research is based on determining
how well the pedagogy of urban teacher residencies (UTRs) prepare their teachers for the
classroom environment and what method these programs use in order to reduce teacher turnover
and attrition rates in urban classroom settings (Blewitt et al., 2020).
While much research has been conducted on teacher turnover and attrition rates, there has
been limited research on the impact UTRs have on the overall teacher crisis and on student
achievement. Some program-based studies have shown that teachers who graduate from UTRs
and other teacher preparation programs have higher rates of success in the classroom and often
stay for more than five years (Memphis Teacher Residency, 2021; Teach For America, 2021).
Program studies report that graduates have higher evaluation scores, student achievement data
and are also likely to remain in the classroom longer than non-program teachers.
Purpose of the Study
The focus of this dissertation is to investigate the strategies used by UTRs and to
determine their effectiveness in not only recruiting but retaining high quality teachers in schools
with historically underserved and marginalized student populations. Three specific research
questions have been developed:
1. (a) What factors contribute to teacher retention and teacher attrition in urban
schools? (b) How do teacher residency programs recruit pre-service teachers for
high-poverty, low-achieving, urban school settings (with an emphasis on
programming schematics and pedagogical approaches)?
2. How does exposure to high needs / urban environments prior to teaching
influence teacher attrition rates among preservice teachers in UTRs?
3. How do culturally responsive teaching strategies influence a new teacher’s
decision to remain in an urban school setting?
Theoretical Framework
Recognizing that K-12 education in urban settings includes much more than high quality
teaching, Ladson-Billings (1995a) introduced the theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy (CRP),
which focuses on the interdependence and interconnectedness of children’s home, culture,
community, and school experiences on their educational outcomes. Ladson Billings (1995a)
asserts that teachers with similar backgrounds to the students they teach, are more likely to be
considered believable and credible, as compared to individuals from different backgrounds. For
teachers entering the field of education and choosing to work in heterogenous communities that
differ from their own, the development of a set of social, emotional and pedological values and
practices, must be implemented in order to be considered a culturally responsive teacher.
The development of such practices cannot be done simply through basic education
courses. A culturally relevant practitioner will immerse themselves in the historical, cultural, and
socio-economical experiences of the community in which they serve (James-Gallaway & Harris,
2021). A key aspect of CRP is an educator’s ability to help their students to be academically
successful, culturally competent, and socio-politically critical (Ladson-Billings, 1995b). By
creating teacher programs that not only train individuals to work in high-needs environments, but
also requires individual integrity to develop best practices for the population in which they serve,
UTRs and other teacher training programs can address some of the issues that contribute to
teacher turnover and attrition.
Similarly, Bell (2021) identified the necessity of addressing cultural and racial
differences in urban classrooms, and how addressing those during formal teacher training
impacts the way in which teachers address the needs of the communities they serve. With 80% of
new teachers from teacher education programs identifying as white (U.S. Department of
Education, 2016), and with the majority of public-school students identifying as people of color,
there is a growing need to address the whiteness of the educational programs that are promoting
cultural relevance and social justice in their curriculum focus (Sleeter, 2017). To better identify
how the culture of whiteness impacts the urban educator and their retention in the urban
classroom, this study attempts to identify areas of strength and weakness in urban teacher
residencies pedagogies and curriculum with a focus on Critical Race Theory and Culturally
Relevant Pedagogy.
TEP Design: Critical Race Theory & Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Sleeter (2017) found that although many teacher programs promote cultural diversity and
social justice themes, much of their coursework lacks the depth and emphasis on true content that
leads to lasting paradigm shifts in the mental frameworks of pre-service teachers. This research
asserts that the use of CRT and CRP in the design and foundation of teacher training programs,
will positively impact the preparedness of graduates entering urban classrooms (Gay, 2018;
Ladson-Billings, 1995b; Milner, 2010).
As TEPs begin to reimagine and redesign their curriculum to address the needs of the
students who will be taught by TEP graduates, an emphasis on curriculum and content should be
addressed to ensure that TEP graduates feel efficacious in their ability to lead multicultural
classrooms. Gay (2018) explains that Culturally Relevant Pedagogy is meant to empower
students from diverse backgrounds, allowing them the find academic success, feel culturally
secure and experience self-edification. In order for teachers who often do not share the same
ethnic or cultural backgrounds as their students, to create spaces that allow for this form of
empowerment to exist, TEPs must present coursework and educational experiences that
emphasize the importance of CRP in the urban classroom (Darling-Hammond, 2006; Gay, 2018;
Sleeter, 2017).
Bennett et al., (2019) determined that effective urban educators are formed when teacher
training programs intentionally address cultures of whiteness that have historically created
oppressive and repressive systems for people of color. Sleeter (2017) explains that in order to
decenter whiteness in teacher education programs, educational entities must strategically plan
curriculum, experiences and staffing that promote the diversity they intend to teach. Lin et al.,
(2009) discovered that programs with less diverse staffs tended to have less diverse coursework
and less diverse experiences for their teacher-graduates. Milner (2013) also identified that much
of the same Eurocentric trends found in K-12 education is mirrored in higher education
programs, which explains why whiteness continues to permeate TEP programs, reducing the
quality of preparedness for urban teacher-graduates (Evans-Winters & Twyman Hoff, 2011).
With more than 80% of higher education professionals identifying as white, a stark
change in the type, quality and design of teacher education programs is necessary to address the
cultural normative biases that persist in education programs (Bell, 2021). The lens of Critical
Race Theory exposes some of the social and cultural foundations of racism and bias that
permeate teacher training programs, whether intentional or unintentionally, and impact all
students, as the content being taught and the way it is taught, is always skewed (Bell, 2021; Gay,
2019; Sleeter, 2017). In the context of this research, the focal point of CRT will identify areas of
racism and cultural bias in urban teacher residencies and determine methods to create more
culturally inclusive and objective educational opportunities to develop high quality teachers who
will enter high-needs urban schools (Ladson-Billings, 1995b).
Overview of Methods
In an effort to blend research methods and create a more holistic overview of the
problem, a mixed methods approach was chosen for data collection. (Denzin, 2010). By using a
mixed methods approach, generalized data can be obtained, while also highlighting and
amplifying the individual experiences of participants who would have traditionally been
underrepresented (Barnhardt, et al., 2018). Utilizing a quantitative approach, part one of the data
collection identifies how UTR graduates feel regarding the type and quality of their teacher
training. The survey questions specifically speak towards the use of culturally relevant pedagogy
and critical race theory as foundations for establishing a curriculum focused in multicultural
education and understanding (Ladson-Billings, 1995a). Using the survey questions as a
launching point for the interviews, part two of the research will assess if the findings about
programming experiences influenced or affected teachers in their decision to leave the classroom
(Bell, 2021). The interviews will help the researcher to determine trends amongst teacher-
leavers, identifying areas for UTRs to address in their future program design and construction.
The study was conducted on approximately 50 subjects working within Shelby County
Schools, the largest school district in the state of Tennessee and the 23
rd
largest in the country.
Subjects were graduates of teacher training programs with an urban focus. Participants in the
study completed an open-ended electronic survey with questions that addressed their experiences
from two perspectives: that of an individual teacher (general), and that of a graduate from an
UTR (specific). Part one of the study was a secondary data analysis of teachers’ responses to that
survey. After compiling, analyzing, and evaluating the survey data, respondents who no longer
work as teachers and who no longer work in education at all were asked to participate in short
virtual interviews. A smaller sampling of 4 individuals were chosen to participate in a short
open-ended interview.
By collecting measurable and numerical data through surveys regarding current and
former teachers’ experiences in high-needs classrooms the researcher intended to identify trends
and characteristics that influence both teacher retention and turnover rates. To gain a broader
understanding of both retention and attrition trends, and to create a more objective sampling,
teachers with various backgrounds, ages, gender identities and UTR completion dates were the
central focus of the qualitative portion of the data collection (Johnson & Christensen, 2017). It is
important to note that the only contributors to the study were individuals who completed teacher
training programs that are considered to be UTRs.
The qualitative portion of the research focused on determining how individual teachers’
experiences and outcomes were impacted by the quality of their UTRs. Specific examples and
contributing factors were identified by subjects selected for the qualitative interview data
collection. The researcher interviewed teachers who were UTR graduates and who no longer
work as teachers in the high-needs district to identify commonalities between various UTRs
programming and pedagogy. This data was analyzed to determine if there was a relationship
between pre-service teacher training and teachers’ decision to remain or leave the high needs
urban classroom. By using a grounded theory approach, the researcher developed a greater
understanding of the actions and processes that lead to high teacher turnover (Lester &
Lochmiller, 2016).
The study sample included current and former teachers who completed any graduate level
UTR prior to becoming a teacher within the high needs school district. The survey was sent out
electronically through teacher listserv, databases, and online teacher groups. After the
completion of the survey, a systematic sample was used in order to identify participants for the
interviews (Johnson & Christensen, 2017). Individuals were selected based on answering a series
of pre-determined questions during a 30-minute virtual interview.
Significance of the Study
The findings from this mixed-methods study provide educational stakeholders with
valuable input from current and former teachers. Collegiate teacher programs, UTRs and other
teacher preparation programs will find valuable information that can be used to design and
redesign curriculum that supports the use of CRT as a means of improving the outcomes of
program graduates in urban school settings. This study can also be used by local and state
educational authorities, school district leaders, and schools, to develop teacher supports and
professional development programs. Lastly, the study benefits the individual teachers, but most
importantly, students in urban school classroom settings.
Limitations and Delimitations
Because it is impossible to survey every teacher who completed a UTR and who is or was
employed within the high needs district, there will be some limitation in the number of
participants and the accuracy of the data gathered. While individual experiences from part one of
the survey will be unaffected, the findings and analysis of part two, will be based solely on the
participants of the study and may not be expressive of all the experiences of individuals who
have completed UTR programs. Also, due to COVID-19, many of the questions in the survey
may have responses that negatively impact the image of UTRs because of a lack of time to adjust
and redesign programs during the pandemic. The quality and type of individual teacher
experiences from participants who completed UTR programs in 2020 and 2021 may serve as
outliers caused by virtual learning and the adoption of alternative teaching norms during these
years. Finally, because the study is occurring within one high-needs school district, there may be
a limited number of UTRs represented in the survey data. Similarly, because school district has
contracts with local UTRs, there may be a higher percentage of respondents from those
programs, thus reducing the variability and variety of UTRs for comparison during the data
analysis. Lastly, due to the researcher’s own educational background, participation from the
researcher’s own UTR network may heavily influence the data collected.
Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this study, the following key terms are defined to give a more accurate
and comprehensive review of the research on the effectiveness of UTRs in retaining high quality
teachers, as well as the factors that impact teacher retention and attrition rates.
• Graduate/ teacher-graduate – an individual who has completed a teacher preparation
program, received a degree in a related educational field, and who possesses a teaching
certification and licensure from the state in which they completed their program.
• New / novice teacher – any teacher with less than 3 years of teaching experience.
• Pre-service teacher / resident- a teacher candidate who is participating in a teacher
residency program.
• Teacher attrition- the premature and voluntary departure of teachers from the profession
of education (Macdonald, 1999).
• Teacher residency – a 1–3-year cohort style, classroom apprenticeship for pre-service
teachers that provides academic coursework and a student-teaching opportunity to
participants. UTRs usually require residents to commit 3 years, post-academic
programming, to teaching (NCTR, 2021).
• Teacher turnover – the departure of a teacher from one school to another and/or the
transition out of the classroom into another academic role.
• Title I/ High-needs school district- any educational entity with high numbers or high
percentage rates of children from low-income families (determined by the rate of students
receiving free and reduced lunch / number of students enrolled) and is a recipient of
federally funded supplemental program monies (DOE, 2021).
• Under-performing / low-performing schools- any K-12 public school whose student
achievement data is in the bottom quartile of state testing results.
• Urban Teacher Residency- a teacher residency located in a large, metropolitan city.
Graduate of this program will work in Title I high needs school districts within the city.
Organization of the Dissertation
This dissertation will be organized into five chapters. Chapter one was written to provide
an introductory overview of the background and scope of the problem. This section explained the
historical context behind the issues within the field of education pertaining to the quality of
teachers in urban environments, as well as showcased the spectrum of causes of concern that
impact the longevity of teachers in the field, specifically in urban settings. Finally, the chapter
outlined how urban teacher residencies are being utilized to address these shortcomings, while
also needing oversight to contend with the ever-increasing need for more teachers in urban
environments.
Chapter two focuses on a review of the current literature pertaining to teacher education
programming, urban teacher residencies work towards reducing teacher shortages and the factors
that influence teacher turnover and attrition rates. This chapter is also used to relay the
conceptual framework for which the study follows.
Chapter three will cover the methodological approaches uses for this study which include
the rationale of using a qualitative research design, the chosen sample population, procedures,
data collection methods, and the instrumentations of analysis. Chapter three will also cover the
topics of trustworthiness and the credibility of the study, with documentation of the measures
used to ensure that data collection and analysis was performed using tactful and ethical methods.
Chapter four will address the data and results from the research study. In this chapter, the
data will be assessed and analyzed. Finally, in chapter five, a list of solutions will be provided
based off the evidence in the data as well as the literature. This section will address the areas in
which urban teacher residencies can support their pre-service teachers as well as outline methods
for retaining high quality teachers in urban classroom settings. The chapter will close with a
discussion of future recommendations and potential plans for implementation of the research, as
well as addressing the limiting factors of this study.

Chapter 2
Review of the Literature
Introduction
In 2005, Richard Ingersoll reported his findings on a study of the quality of teachers in
American schools. This study brought attention to a number of the issues that currently permeate
the educational climate within the United States, especially in schools with higher populations of
underserved and disadvantaged students (Ingersoll, 2005). In a drastic contrast to the type and
quality of teachers at the end of the 20
th
century, the average, modern-day educator is less
educated, less specialized, and less prepared for the classroom and content in which they are
asked to teach. With a national shortage of teachers being exacerbated by a global pandemic, the
concerns for student achievement continue to grow, as more vacancies arise, and those that are
filled, are done so by underqualified, unprepared, and out-of-field teaching professionals
(Ingersoll, 2004). Coupled with the ever-increasing demands of the profession as well as limited
background on the content and student populations they serve, many new and replacement
teachers quickly quit or relocate to schools with less stressors. As a result, more than 25% of
teachers in urban schools are novice and lack the academic or professional prowess to navigate
teaching in urban settings (Boyd et al., 2005).
In an effort to address some of the disparities this causes in student access to quality
education and to reduce the high frequency of teacher turnover and attrition, teacher residencies
have become a staple saving grace in large metropolitan cities (NCTR, 2020). The following
review of literature will discuss current issues related to the teaching crisis in urban schools,
explore the impact of teacher education programs on the teacher shortage in urban schools,
explain the benefits of urban teacher residency programs as training for new teachers and finally,
determine the effective methodologies that increase teacher retention and student achievement in
urban schools.
Disparities in Urban Education
A study conducted by the National Center for Educational Statistics in 2013 found that
nearly 20% of the teachers who changed schools or left the field of education had fewer than 4
years of experience, contributing to increases in student disparities. Even more alarming is the
evidence that shows higher academic disparities in urban schools that can be correlated to high
teacher attrition rates, as well as the lack of high-quality teacher replacements (Boyd et al.,
2005). With student academic success and achievement being connected to the quality and
performance level of teachers, it is without question, a necessity to determine the factors that
cause students in minority and impoverished areas, to consistently be subject to schools with
high teacher turnover and attrition rates (Donaldson, 2009). In order to produce and maintain
high quality teachers, it is essential to enhance their professional learning, beginning prior to and
throughout the duration of their educational careers (Ingersoll, 2004; Sykes, 1999). While there
is already evidence of teacher shortages across the nation, the distribution of quality teachers
who remain in the field is highly disproportionate (Chin Lee et al., 2019). which high-quality
teachers more likely to choose to work in schools with few socioeconomic setbacks and
hardships, further adding to the educational outcome disparities found between ethnic groups in
America (Boyd et al., 2005; Donaldson, 2009; Ingersoll, 2005).
With the disparities in high-poverty areas as a deeply rooted issue within the country,
addressing the basic and equitable access to quality education is a staple topic in post-millennial
conversations about education (Freedman & Appleman, 2009). While education has historically
been seen as a lifelong career, over the last 40 years, fewer teachers are committing their lives to
the profession, instead, using K-12 teaching as a stepping-stone towards higher educational
positions, or as an interim job before settling on another career (Hess, 2009). Adding to the
issues, nearly one quarter of teachers in urban schools are underqualified to teach (Boyd et al.,
2005; Ingersoll, 2004; 2005; Ng et al., 2017). Unfortunately, due to a lack of funding, resources
and the absence of high-quality teachers willing to work in these schools, many urban students
complete their K-12 education with teachers whose credentials are provisional, emergency
requests or considered out-of-field (Freedman & Appleman, 2009; Ingersoll, 2005). Adding to
these already dire circumstances is the lack of change and adjustment to the role of teacher over
the last fifty years (Hess, 2009; Lee et al., 2019). As cities have become more populated, the
needs within communities have become more pressing, and the changing makeup of teachers
entering the field, all call for a re-examination of what teaching is and how it should be done
(Hess, 2009). Without the evolution of the roles and expectations of teachers, and the adequate
training both in colleges and school districts, urban schools will continue to see a high rate of
teacher turnover and a decline in academic performance (Lee et al., 2019; Moses et al., 2017).
Specifically in urban schools, more than one out of every four teachers serving 5 years or
less, have left the classroom completely, while their counterparts serving in suburban or rural
schools are more likely to stay altogether (Frankenberg et al., 2010). In order to address teacher
attrition rates, one must examine the causes of teachers leaving the profession. One of the most
prominent causes of teachers in urban schools having higher attrition rates, is a lack of job
satisfaction (Arnup & Bowles, 2016; Moses et al., 2017). Job satisfaction can be defined as the
positive emotional state or attitude an employee has towards their job or experience in the
workplace (Arnup & Bowles, 2016; Crisci et al., 2018). In the field of education, a number of
factors impact a teacher’s satisfaction such as increased administrative roles as a teacher, school-
based leadership, school climate, decision making, the school’s reputation and infrastructure as
well as more individualized factors such as having supportive colleagues, autonomy in the
classroom, meaningful interactions with students, intrinsic resilience (Arnup & Bowles, 2016;
Crisci et al., 2018).
One major concern for new teachers entering the field of education is their intention to
stay and their resilience about staying (Hess, 2009). New teachers’ ability to weather the storms
of their school’s working environment while navigating the new role of a teacher play a vital role
in a teacher’s decision to remain at a school and in the field altogether (Arnup & Bowles,
2016). Traditionally, teacher education programs (TEPs) served as the bridge for pre-service
teachers to gain the knowledge necessary to operate as a classroom teacher, however with the
changing climates in urban areas, these programs lack the reinforcements and revolutionized
thinking to adequately prepare teachers entering high needs urban schools and thus, impacting
teacher job satisfaction and commitment (Barnes et al., 2007; Crisci et al., 2018). Even with their
best efforts to support teachers, many TEP graduates still leave their programs feeling
underprepared to begin or remain in urban schools, reinforcing the high turnover rates
(Frankenberg et al., 2009). Furthermore, for teachers working in high needs schools in urban
environments, the task of increasing job satisfaction becomes paramount in the efforts to
improve equity and academic balance in communities that have historically been underserved.
To support new and pre-service teachers and better prepare them for teaching and the
challenges of teaching in urban schools, urban teacher residency programs (UTRPs) have been
devised, promising academic training as well as technical support, for novice teachers as they
begin their careers in urban schools (Frankenberg et al., 2009). Over the last 20 years urban
teacher residency programs have evolved to be significantly responsible for supplying
underperforming schools and districts with highly-qualified teachers, increasing the hope that
said teachers will utilize their experiences in the program to mitigate some of the dissatisfying
experiences traditional teachers have experienced in the field (Arnup & Bowles, 2016; Crisci et
al., 2018). This study will address how teacher residency programs prepare their pre-service
teachers for teaching in urban environments as well as determining what factors contribute to
teacher retention and teacher attrition in urban school systems.
Determining High Quality Teaching
There is no specific formula that determines whether or not a teacher has the perfect
internal recipe for staying in the field of education, however there are some defining factors that
are visible in those who are retained (Anderson, 2006). Though it seems as if education leads to a
revolving door of educators, three main concepts contribute to hypothesizing about the
likelihood of long-term service to urban school settings: teacher education, teacher development
and teacher retention (Anderson, 2006). With more than 60% of new teachers entering
classrooms in urban settings, it is imperative to determine whether or not these individuals are
being adequately prepared for the jobs they take on, and if not, what supports, adjustments and
transitions need to occur in order to better support teachers in these settings. A study conducted
by the Learning Policy Institute (2020) determined that students of color and students in urban
school settings were more likely to have teachers that were uncertified and/or within their first
three years of teaching. Schools that reported higher numbers of students of color also noted
nearly double the number of inexperienced teachers in their schools compared to schools with
lower populations of color (LPI, 2020).
Anderson (2006) also postulates that there are four major factors that impact teachers’
resolve towards retainment in the field. Teachers desire training and access to resources based on
their developmental needs. Teachers also need training according to their workplace context
Teachers also have needs only met by collaborating and connecting with other peers within their
schools and districts. Finally, teachers need to receiving training by experimenting with new
roles and responsibilities. By addressing teachers’ needs for support and quality training, schools
are more likely to increase teacher morale and self-efficacy, leading to higher retention rates.
Teacher Retention and Attrition
Teacher retention is an ongoing and dire issue in American education as it directly
influences and impacts student achievement in schools. Studies have shown that teacher attrition
occurs at rates of 20-30% within 3 years and up to 40% to 50% among teachers with 5 years or
less of teaching experience (Donaldson, 2009; Guha, 2016). In urban schools with higher rates of
poverty, these numbers increase to 50% from year one (Warshauer et al., 2009). Some districts
even report that their teacher turnover rate is higher than the student dropout rate (Alliance for
Excellent Education, 2008). Schools where principals provide mentoring programs for new
teachers, play a consistently predominant role in new teachers’ decisions to stay or quit their jobs
(Brown & Schainker, 2008). Smith and Ingersoll (2004) found that the more types of teacher
support and mentoring new teachers received, the less likely they were to leave teaching or
change schools. Teacher mentoring and induction programs assist new teachers in reducing
discipline problems, reduce new teacher anxiety and ultimately promote higher levels of decision
making, influence and autonomy in the classroom (Ingersoll, 2001).
Sadly, in schools with more poverty and higher minority populations, disciplinary
concerns, student truancy and an overall lack of community and school support lead many
teachers to avoid jobs in urban settings altogether or quickly leave the settings for more
favorable ones (Brown & Schainker, 2008; Ingersoll, 2004; Ng, 2003). Similarly, Moses et al.,
(2017) noted that teachers’ motivation for choosing the career of teaching falls into one of three
categories: intrinsic, extrinsic, and altruistic, with those who have an altruistic desire being the
ones most likely to stay in the field. Those who lack a strong desire to act as change agents and
who seem themselves as part of the solution of greater social problems, are usually less likely to
remain in the field, and definitely less likely to work in or stay in areas of high poverty and high
needs (Lee et al., 2019; Moses et al., 2017).
Some of the most pressing concerns that lead to high teacher turnover and attrition rates
include low self-efficacy, lack of preparation, and an overall lack of understanding of the culture,
climate, and environment that teachers enter, when choosing to teach in high-needs, urban
schools (Bell, 2021). Donaldson (2009) identified that many teachers leave the field because of
their inability to connect with their students. Ironically, few teachers report leaving because of
difficulties with underperforming pupils. Instead, many teachers leave due to lack of
administrator support, heavy workloads, and lack of quality trainings (Donaldson, 2009). When
transferring to other schools, many teachers noted that they desired to have better success with
students as well as better pedagogical techniques to utilize within their classrooms (Donaldson,
2009).
One main cause of concern about teacher turnover is its effects on student achievement.
There is a direct correlation between student achievement and teacher retention, as students are
more likely to find academic success in classrooms with teachers who have 3 or more years of
experience (Warshauer Freedman & Appleman, 2009). Unfortunately for students in urban
settings, with so many teachers leaving the schools or the field of education altogether, the
quality of teaching and developed expertise for struggling populations is minimized, leaving
students at even greater deficits than they were in before (Synar, 2010). Without the full
commitment of high-quality teachers in high needs schools, many students perpetually
experience teaching and learning inconsistencies throughout the duration of their K-12 education
(Anderson, 2006; Roegman et al., 2017).
There are many reasons to be concerned about the high level of teacher attrition in
general, and in urban schools in particular. One reason is because teacher turnover produces
substantial financial costs for education systems. The financial cost of replacing teachers who
leave the field is not simply the salary of hiring a new teacher. Instead, the financial strain
includes factors such as administrative functions, replacement costs, the communication of job
availability, pre-employment screenings, informational literature, onboarding as well as costs for
exit interviews and on the job training (Synar, 2010). Barnes, Crowe, and Schaefer (2007)
identified eight financial expenses that relate to teacher turnover at the school and district level
which include: recruitment and advertising, special incentives, administrative processing,
training for new hires, training for first-time teachers, training for all teachers, learning curve,
and transfer. Although individual school costs vary, data supports the notion that at risk schools
and those in high needs areas, have a higher expenditure rate, which repeats at regular intervals
due to high teacher turnover (Barnes et al, 2007).
The inability for a school or district to recruit and maintain high quality teachers is
financially costly, and statistically costly, as students’ academic performances fluctuate with the
type, access to and quality of teachers in their schools (Anderson, 2006; Donaldson, 2009;
Warshauer Freedman & Appleman, 2009). Each year, U.S. schools spend a total of $7.2 billion
on teacher turnover (Ingersoll & Smith, 2003; Alliance for Excellent Education, 2008). Every
time a teacher vacates their position at a school, a district can expect to spend at least $10,000 in
order to replace them (Barnes et al., 2007; Brown & Schainker, 2008; Synar, 2010). The Alliance
for Excellent Education (2007) reported that North Dakota could spend more than $8 million on
teacher vacancies, while larger states like Texas can expect to spend over $500 million annually.
Papay et al., (2017) report that urban school districts often spend between $10,000- $20,000 per
teacher needing to be replaced. Also of importance is the salary being paid to replacement
teachers who lack the background and/or expertise in the field, still resulting in an overall loss, as
student achievement does not match the level of expenditures the district must incur to replace
teachers within their schools (Ingersoll, 2004; Papay et al., 2017).
Teacher retention problems are especially acute in urban schools and schools serving
more disadvantaged students, resulting in greater financial loss for schools and districts needing
to fill vacant spots vacated by teacher turnover (Synar, 2010). Teacher attrition has important
detrimental effects on both school/district finances and student outcomes. One of the more costly
expenses of high teacher turnover, is the quality of teaching that is forfeited when a teacher quits.
In high needs areas and urban school districts, almost 50% of teacher vacancies are filled by new
or novice teachers, who, if following the trend, will also leave the school or profession within a
few years (Donaldson, 2009). One quality of longer termed teachers is their perpetual growth and
lifetime commitment to ongoing professional development (Anderson, 2006).
The causes of teacher attrition issues are multifaceted, but include unfair working
conditions, a lack of teacher autonomy, large class size, and a reduced collegial atmosphere
(Brown & Schainker, 2008). A study of New York state teachers found that 20% of top
performing teachers leave the field after one year, with that percent expanding to 34% for
teachers in low-achieving schools (Boyd et al., 2005). The same study also showed that teachers
preferred to work in schools similar to their own previous experiences in both rigor and
demographics (Boyd et al., 2005). Particularly in urban schools, nearly 20% of teachers turn over
annually due to lack of support in both curricular and social settings (Roegman et al., 2014). A
lack of community or collaboration was one of the top reasons teachers attribute to leaving
education (Donaldson, 2009; Roegman et al., 2014). With the additional stressors and constraints
of working in a high-needs content area as well as an underserved community, many teachers
found the pressure of doing it alone too much to bear and either move to schools with less
hardships or leave the field altogether (Donaldson, 2009; Roegman et al., 2014).
Outside of the general teacher retention concerns, the urban school faces a greater issue
in finding teachers who are specifically interested in dedicating their skills towards high needs
students (Taylor & Frankenberg, 2009). One quality discussed among educational leaders is the
qualities that must be possessed for one to endure a long tenure as an educator. Studies have
shown that longer termed teachers maintained an appetite for perpetual growth and lifetime
commitment to ongoing professional development (Anderson, 2006). One method to increase
pre-service teachers’ confidence and commitment to teaching in an urban classroom is their prior
experiences in urban environments, as well as their experiences with students of color and
families from low-income backgrounds (Taylor & Frankenberg, 2009). With new teachers
disproportionately teaching in urban settings, recruitment and retainment of high-quality
educators is of major importance (Frankenberg et al., 2009). For teacher candidates coming from
TEPs, assessing their pre-service commitment and influences said commitment are vital to
reducing the high number of teachers leaving the classroom (Frankenberg et al., 2009).
Frankenberg et al. (2009) identified a number of factors that impact teacher commitment to
serving in urban schools, including lack of mentoring, insufficient guidance, lack of structure,
poor leadership, and unsuitable teaching placements (Frankenberg et al., 2009). For teachers who
do remain in the profession, yet transfer to other schools, nearly 70% move to suburban schools
with lower minority populations and lower rates of poverty (Frankenberg et al., 2009).
When identifying a commitment to urban education, one stance is that an individual is
exhibiting a high level of desire to work in schools willingly and intentionally in large cities
(Frankenberg et al., 2009). As the demographics of cities change, it should also be noted that
large cities have increasing populations of people of color and individuals from low
socioeconomic backgrounds (Frankenberg et al., 2009). The expectation for teachers choosing to
work in urban schools is that not only will they teach, but play integral roles changing/
redefining school culture, increasing students’ academic performance and addressing the
educational gaps students of color have compared to their suburban peers (Frankenberg et al.,
2009; Lee et al., 2019). In their study of motivation of urban teachers, Lee et al., (2019)
identified that teacher candidates who saw their role as teacher as an opportunity to uproot and
dismantle justice, were more like to remain in teaching, as well as more likely to choose urban
settings to serve in. Also worth noting is that teachers whose personal demographics differ vastly
from the communities in which they serve, studies have shown that white teachers are far less
likely to remain in urban schools where they are the minority faculty and/or student population
(Frankenberg et al., 2009). For black teachers and other teachers of color, racial diversity rarely
played a role in their job satisfaction or commitment to teach (Frankenberg et al., 2009).
Teacher Education Programs
Traditional education programs focus on the basics of learning content and best practices
for classroom instruction (Lowe, 2012). Historically, a good teacher was seen as one who wrote
creative lessons, came to class fully prepared and maintained high quality teaching strategies to
engage their students (Summers et al., 2005). Traditional teacher programs also focus on
methods of engagement, the development of higher order thinking skills as it pertains to content
retention, as well as developing clear and focused methods to address misconceptions and areas
needing improvement (Lingard et al., 2005). However, while these strategies and academic
focuses are important, within urban classrooms where high poverty, lack of resources and social
emotional health are limited, being a good teacher requires much more than a love for teaching.
Much of the expectations for teaching has remained the same over the last hundred years (Hess,
2009).
The current model of teacher education programs was developed with the belief that
teaching was a lifelong career choice, with typical college graduates had only a handful of jobs
within their career (Hess, 2009; Jagla, 2009). Over the last 40 years, the demands of public-
school education have vastly changed along with the age and population of people entering the
field of education (Hess, 2009). With the increased need in varied skillsets in the classrooms,
many teachers have felt unprepared or unequipped for the needs of the 21
st
century urban
classroom, and have left the field (Jagla, 2009; U.S. Department of Education, 2003). In an effort
to avert the mass exodus of teachers from the field, teacher residency programs were formed to
address the gaps and needs of teachers in large cities (Marshall & Scott, 2015; Jagla, 2009).
Teacher Residency Programs
The inception of teacher residencies occurred to address the growing turnover rate of
teachers and the increase of student failures in urban schools (Marshall & Scott, 2015; Maxson et
al., 2000). A secondary concern was the reduction of new teachers entering the profession as the
number of teachers retiring continued to grow (Marshall & Scott, 2015). With more than one-
third of current teachers reaching retirement age in the near future, there has become an
increasing necessity for replacing high quality teachers who will be leaving the field soon
(Marshall & Scott, 2015). Teacher residencies have also been used to address the high turnover
rates of teachers working in urban environments (Hess, 2009; Roegman et al., 2014). A pillar of
the teacher residency is a shift in focus from the traditional young, recent college graduate
entering public education, to a more advanced, mature, and transitional population of adults
seeking more fulfillment in their careers (Barnes et al., 2007; Donaldson, 2009; Guha et al.,
2016; Hess, 2009).
Teacher residencies address the need to recruit teachers to high-needs and public-school
classrooms, and often utilize the incentives of stipends, educational waivers and oftentimes
housing to attract high quality professionals (Guha et al., 2016). The teacher residency program
model is a combination of the traditional teacher preparation program as well as alternative
teacher programs (Marshall & Scott, 2015). Mirroring the model of medical residencies, the
teacher residency program model prepares prospective teachers by providing them with a 1:1
mentor teacher in whose classroom the prospective teacher spends a year honing their skills,
while also completing coursework to substantiate their in-class pedagogy (Marshall & Scott,
2015).
Occupational psychology theories suggest that urban teacher preparation programs can
increase the retention of their alumni in high needs schools by deliberately cultivating passion for
the communities they will eventually teach in (Donaldson, 2009). Individuals who are committed
to their jobs are more likely to remain in them. When identifying teachers to teach in high needs
and urban schools, individuals who attended urban-focused teacher prep programs felt more
prepared to teach and navigate the schools they were placed in (Donaldson, 2009). Outside of
simply having passion for urban settings, the ideal teacher-candidate will have received
preparation for diverse populations and be willing to utilize pedagogy and practices that are
culturally relevant and responsive (Frankenberg et al., 2009).
Freedman & Appleman (2009) noted that teachers choosing to continue working in high
needs areas, maintained a disposition towards hard work and persistence. Taylor and
Frankenberg (2009) identified that although the initial decision to teach comes from the pre-
service teacher’s personal experiences, TEPs are responsible for reinforcing the importance of
that initial commitment. Specifically, in TEPs that are geared towards urban settings, addressing
the deficits and lack of experience many pre-service teachers have in low-income environments,
is vital to building teacher self-efficacy for their school placements after graduation (Bell, 2021;
Taylor & Frankenberg, 2009). Focus and emphasis on diversity-focused coursework helps
determine teachers’ commitment to service in urban schools (Taylor & Frankenberg, 2009).
By creating and fostering an environment for pre-service teachers to continually reflect
and address their roles as change agents, TEPS play the largest role in developing or
discouraging pre-service teachers’ decision to and later commitment to urban school settings.
Although still very controversial, it is the role of the TEP to prepare pre-service teachers for the
realities of teaching in the urban environments they believe they are interested in (Taylor &
Frankenberg, 2009). Evans-Winters & Twyman Hoff (2011) argue that a leading cause of
teacher unreadiness stems from professional and educational environments that do not utilize
their spaces to promote and encourage a critical analysis of race in their curriculum. By
presenting teacher candidates with clear and realistic viewpoints and experiences of urban school
settings, there is a reduction in teachers entering urban schools, however this reduction is
balanced by those do choose to teach and feel efficacious enough to remain in their school or
local community (Evans-Winters & Twyman Hoff; Frankenberg et al., 2009; Taylor &
Frankenberg, 2009;).
A New England study of a year-long graduate teacher program noted that as candidates
gained more exposure, experience and support in urban settings, their willingness and
commitment to teach in these settings increased by more than 30% (Taylor & Frankenberg,
2009). With more than 65% of new teachers being white, candidates’ ethnicity, prior urban
experience, and prior teaching experience, all significantly impact their decision to teach and
remain in an urban school. When paired with an urban TEP that emphasizes the realities and
expectations within these environments, teachers opting into these schools do so with a higher
self-efficacy than individuals who did not attend a TEP or whose TEP was not centralized
around a specific demographic (Taylor & Frankenberg, 2009).
In order to address these teacher disparities, TEPs have an opportunity to build and
develop the skills and dispositions necessary for teacher-candidates to successfully navigate
teaching in high needs and urban schools (Frankenberg et al., 2009). Freedman & Appleman
(2009) identified various reasons teachers choose to stay in high poverty, urban schools. If
teachers came through a TEP, many identified with the mission and goal of their school which
was reinforced by their workplace environment (Freedman & Appleman, 2009). Having
coursework and curriculum that emphasizes both the practical and the academic, was reported to
lead teachers from urban TEPs to feel more prepared and connected when they enter the
classroom (Freedman & Appleman, 2009).
Urban Teacher Residencies
In an effort to bring more awareness and support to major urban cities, the Obama
administration provided grants to teacher residencies addressing the needs in urban school
districts (Marshall & Scott, 2015; NCTR, 2020). Since 2004, more than 40 urban teacher
residencies have been created and are currently functioning across the United States (Gatti,
2019). Urban Teacher Residencies (UTRs) are considered residency programs that have the
intent and purpose to train and certify teachers by using a method of classroom experiences,
mentorship, and graduate (master’s level) classwork (City Year, 2018). UTRs are different from
many other residency programs as they utilize a 3–5-year approach to training and equipping
their teachers (City Year, 2018; National Center for Teacher Residencies (NCTR), 2020). UTRs
separate themselves from traditional teaching programs by focusing on five pillars: culturally
responsive recruitment and equitable selection, rigorous selection, and support of mentors,
intense pre-service which focuses on the skills needed for high-needs schools, aligned induction
support and strategic hiring (NCTR, 2020).
A major success of urban teacher residency programs is their ability to reduce teacher
attrition rates in urban schools, with 86% of graduates remaining in the field after 4 years
(UTRU, 2014). A 2017 NCTR report stated that over 91% of urban teacher residency graduates
were teaching in Title I schools. It was also noted that the principals of the schools in which
UTR graduates worked, identified that UTR graduates outperformed a typical new teacher and
had increased student achievement and learning within the school (NCTR, 2020). Teachers who
reported being trained through a teacher residency program were 91% more likely to stay in the
field of education, and more than 80% as likely to stay in an area of high needs (Roegman et al.,
2017). In cities where urban teacher residencies are found, a greater percentage of teacher
retention occurs as well as an increase in student achievement (Sorenson & Ladd, 2020;
Warshauer Freedman & Appleman, 2009). While teachers offer a number of reasons why they
stay in urban school settings, urban teacher residency graduates report feeling a sense of mission,
training that was reflective of their environment, ongoing support from their cohort and
professional network, as well as a positive disposition of persistence and determination
(Warshauer Freedman & Appleman, 2009).
Urban teacher residencies are geared towards training and retaining highly qualified
educators in urban schools (UTRU, 2014). Specific to urban residencies is the extended pre-
service requirement that places pre-service teachers under the tutelage of a veteran teacher within
the community they will be teaching in (Marshall & Scott, 2015). A standout characteristic of
UTRs is their emphasis on recruitment of diverse candidates (NCTR, 2020). UTRs intend to
recruit teachers with comparable backgrounds and experiences of the communities their serve in
an effort to support student learning while also empowering teacher community (NCTR, 2020).
Residency Recruitment
One of the hallmarks of UTRs is their focus on developing prepared, effective, diverse,
and culturally responsive educators, with the mission of disrupting the historical inequities in
American education (NCTR, 2020). When identifying potential teachers for UTRs, many
recruiters seek out individuals who not only have a passion to teach, but those who are internally
motivated to play an active role in social justice by acting as mentors, leaders, and role models
for the communities they are called to (Lee et al., 2019; Watt & Richardson, 2008). Individuals
choosing to work a career in urban schools often see education as one solution to a multi-faceted
problem of historical inequities and injustices in predominantly underserved communities (Lee et
al., 2019).
UTRs have mastered the art of preparing pre-service teachers for not only the classroom
environment, but the community in which they will work in. In an effort to diversify the teacher
workforce and to provide students with various educational experiences, the UTR model has
become a staple in large cities. With nearly 45% of teacher- residents identifying as people of
color, nearly 15% of residency graduates get placed in high-needs areas such STEM (Guha et al.,
2016). A key aspect of teacher residencies is the placement of pre-teacher candidates in
classrooms similar to the ones they will teach in, to act as an apprentice teacher under the
leadership of a master teacher (Marshall & Scott, 2015). By utilizing the support of a master
teacher and by providing the pre-teacher candidate with a complete overview of what they will
experience in their own classroom. Unlike traditional teacher programs that only focus on the
basics of education and content mastery, urban teacher residencies ensure their pre-teacher
candidates understand the complexities of the communities they will work in, as well as the
strengths and weaknesses of their schools they will be placed in (Marshall & Scott, 2015). By
sharing candid information and background on urban schools, UTRs are able to successfully
recruit and maintain high quality candidates that feel better equipped for the classroom (Marshall
& Scott, 2015). The recruitment strategies of UTRs are of extreme importance, as they have
become the main supplier of teachers in many school districts around the country (Marshall &
Scott, NCTR, 2020). One way for urban communities to attend to the high numbers of attrition,
is by mirroring the alluring qualities that many UTRs possess. The NCTR states that much of
their success is based on specific programming modules which include partnership and
development, program management, financial modeling, recruitment and selection of residents
and mentors, residency curriculum development and post-residency planning for strategic hiring
and inductions (2020).
Teacher residencies vary between 1-5 years, with most allowing for the opportunity for
pre-teacher candidates to earn a degree, licensure, and potential employment opportunities (City
Year, 2018; Marshall & Scott, 2015). Another staple attribute of teacher residencies is the
selective recruitment to produce the most efficient and effective teachers serving in high needs
areas (REL, 2017). Especially in more urban areas where the teacher retention rates are lower,
UTRs use a plethora of assessments in order to determine a candidate’s potential for success in
the program as well as in the classroom post-graduation (REL, 2017). UTRs foundation relies on
several key aspects and principles to attract and maintain potential teacher candidates including,
closely aligned relationships between education theory and classroom practices, resident
teaching experience with a mentor teacher, cohort model of professional and community
learning, as well as creating and post-residency supports for differentiated needs (CTQ, 2008;
Marshall & Scott, 2015).
Successful UTRs report a number of key characteristics that impact their success in
recruiting and maintaining high quality teachers. The first step in a successful residency is based
on the selection of residents and mentors (UTRU, 2014). One of the staple identifiers of a teacher
candidate who will remain in education, is their commitment to the role of teacher as change
agent within local schools and communities. With more than 80% of new teachers entering the
field identifying as White, but more than 50% of school aged children identifying as ethnically
diverse, the necessity for establishing a pre-service teacher’s intentions and commitments is
imperative for a UTR to promote and maintain high quality teachers in areas with the most need
(Aronson, 2020). Understanding their necessity in the fight to dismantle systems of oppression
and institutionalized disparities, addressing concerns about what teachers know and believe
about race is a hallmark of UTRs recruitment processes (Aronson, 2020).
With a focus on recruiting from a strong and diverse pool of applicants, UTR programs
report using culturally responsive strategies and intentionally designed recruitment methods to
gain the attention and commitment of potential teacher candidates (NCTR, 2020). With this
focus, UTRs boast higher recruitment numbers of people of color than traditional teacher training
programs (NCTR, 2020).
Another notable pillar of the UTR model is the look-for regarding a teacher candidate’s
ability to produce high academic performances from students, as well as their ability to receive
and apply constructive criticism (Marshall & Scott, 2015; UTRU, 2014). Pre-teacher candidates
must demonstrate a high academic knowledge of content, and also possess the personality traits
that are most efficient in training such as perseverance and problem solving (CTQ, 2008; UTRU,
2014). The NCTR (2014) identified that a candidate’s ability to received structured coaching and
feedback is imperative to their success in the program but is also a signifier of their future
retention in the field (NCTR, 2014b).
Mentor Recruitment
Similarly, the selection for teacher mentors is just as meaningful and important to the
success of pre-service teachers. With pre-service teachers spending a year or more shadowing,
mirroring and implementing teaching strategies and styles similar to what is modeled to them,
UTRs must be even more selective about the master teachers they implore to act as guides during
the duration of the residency (CTQ, 2008, UTRU, 2014). Mentor teachers must be reflective,
able to discuss challenges and successes with their resident, and also maintain a high level of
rigor and expectation in the classroom (CTQ, 2008; UTRU, 2014). The relationship between
mentor and resident plays a vital role in the success of the resident, as they will spend four days
per week in a classroom, implementing what they learn in their own academic studies.
The selection process of candidates is also an influential factor in another characteristic
of UTRs. To address the concern of community and lack of support in schools, UTRs ascribe to
a cohort-model for their programs (CTQ, 2008). Pre-teacher candidates will work and sometimes
live exclusively with other individuals in the same program, pursuing the same outcome. During
the selection process, pre-service candidates are screened for a number of social and emotional
variables, to assess their ability and likelihood to succeed in a cohort-style program. (Marshall &
Scott, 2015; UTR, 2014). Residents find themselves immersed in groups and collaboration,
which allows for the sharing of experiences and support during the residency period (CTQ,
2008). The cohort teacher residency model is a staple in the UTRs, which create programs that
utilize community-based learning and design to support the challenges of teaching in urban areas
(CTQ, 2008; Guha et al., 2016).
What makes UTR even more vital is their focus on the particulars related to their city
(Kapadia Matsko & Hammerness, 2014). Understanding that the needs within the communities
served, the sociopolitical context of the schools and the overall background environment of the
schools play a major role in a teacher’s ability to relate and find resolve in the classroom
(Kapadia Matsko & Hammerness, 2014). Rather than taking a cursory overview of the struggles
in education, urban teacher residencies place more emphasis on the where and why versus the
how. By spending time in the communities they will serve in, learning the historical context of
education and race in the cities and also learning strategies to address deficits found in education,
post-residency graduates are more prepared and less culture-shocked when they are responsible
for their own classroom (Kapadia Matsko & Hammerness, 2014).
Curriculum and Professional Development
In order to adequately prepare and retain high-quality teachers in schools with high needs
in low socioeconomic areas, UTRs utilize a context specific approach to ensure the pre-service
teachers have access to the skill and tools necessary for the environments they will be exposed to
upon completion of their programs (Hammerness & Craig, 2016). In addition to the basic
foundation of teacher preparation, UTRs also focus on concepts in multicultural teacher
education, culturally relevant pedagogy and the relationship between culture and learning
(Hammerness & Craig, 2016; Kapadia Matsko & Hammerness, 2014). Unique to each city that
utilizes an UTR is the theoretical framework about the context that is specific to that location. In
general, curriculum and professional development opportunities are built around four key areas”
schools and classrooms, communities and neighborhoods, the local school district and finally the
state and federal level (Hammerness & Craig, 2016). Unlike more generalized teacher programs,
UTRs focus their attention on the three local spheres of influence, ensuring that pre-service
teachers have a deep understanding and appreciation for the specific nuances and needs of the
particular communities and demographics they will serve in (Hammerness & Craig, 2016;
Hammerness et al., 2016). Graduates of UTR programs express how their exposure to context
specific issues and areas of concern helped them to better understand the work that they would
be doing, as well as making them feel more prepared for the cultural environments they would
teach in (Hammerness & Craig, 2016; Hammerness et al., 2016).
Nearly 30 years have elapsed since Haberman (1995) explored the effectiveness of
student teachers’ experience in the types of classrooms they will work in. When faced directly
with the needs and decisions that make the difference within the immediate learning
environment, having the exposure and opportunity to grow, learn and fail with the support of a
mentor, provides a safe space for pre-service teachers to find themselves as leaders in the
classroom (Haberman, 1995; Hammerness et al., 2016; Hammerness & Craig, 2016). Many pre-
service teachers report that having the opportunity to identify their own style, goals, and ways of
interacting in the classroom made them more comfortable, making them feel more efficacious in
their jobs (Hammerness & Craig, 2016; Roegman et al., 2017).
Professional development and preparedness for the academic and socioeconomic
landscape a new teacher will enter into upon the completion of their program is also an area
where UTRs separate themselves from other teaching programs (NCTR, 2020). According to the
NCTR (2020), the design of the urban teacher residency supports continued learning and
professional development for graduates, after the completion of their studies. This commitment
to post-graduate development, plays an integral role in many UTR graduates’ self-efficacy in the
classroom as well as skills and content knowledge (Guha et al., 2016; Podolsky et al., 2016).
Roegman et al., (2017) found that UTR graduates who received high-quality professional
development through their residency program, and those who had access to hands on context-
specific experiences, remained in the classroom for more than five years, as well as remained in
high needs schools. By addressing the context-specific concerns that post-service candidates will
experience upon completion of the program, candidates develop stronger ties to their
communities, and are more likely to utilize high-quality problem-solving skills when faced with
problems in their classrooms, schools, and local communities (Hammerness et al, 2016;
Roegman et al., 2017).
Understanding the importance and necessity of teachers, particularly in urban school
settings, the high turnover and attrition rate of new teachers leaves much concern towards the
level of equipping and the level of professionalism across the field (Manuel & Hughes, 2006).
When teachers quickly turnover and are then replaced by underqualified, underprepared, and
uncommitted fill-ins, handicaps the wealth of knowledge available within schools, as well as the
amount of intellectual grit and capital that comes from having tenured and seasoned teachers in a
classroom (Manuel & Hughes, 2006; Moses et al., 2017).

Chapter 3
Methodology
Introduction
This chapter describes the research methods used to guide the study. Before moving
forward, a restatement of the study’s intention and importance is presented, along with the
research focus. Secondly, a rationale for the study’s methods is presented through an explanation
of the mixed-methods approach that will be used, as well as its relation to the conceptual
framework associated with the study. The subsequent pages give a detailed overview of the
setting of the study, criteria for selection of participants as well as the methods for data collection
and analysis. The chapter concludes with a review of the ethical considerations and credibility of
the study as it relates to this and future research.
Restatement of Problem of Practice
The analysis of factors contributing to the turnover and attrition rates of urban educators
stems from the ever-increasing number of highly qualified teachers leaving the classroom and
education altogether. Similarly, with higher numbers of teachers being trained through teacher
education programs and urban teacher residencies, a look at the practices of the latter is used to
assess what methods these urban residencies use to recruit and retain high quality teachers in
urban environments. This study intends to answer the following three questions:
1. What factors contribute to teacher retention and teacher attrition in urban schools? How
do urban teacher residency programs recruit pre-service teachers for high-poverty, low-
achieving, urban school settings?
2. How does exposure to high needs / urban environments prior to teaching impact teacher
attrition rates among preservice teachers in UTRs?
3. How do culturally responsive teaching strategies impact a new teacher’s decision to
remain in an urban school setting?
Purpose of the Study
The study served a dual purpose: first, to identify the factors that contribute to teacher
retention and attrition in high needs urban schools; and secondly, to determine and examine how
urban teacher residencies recruit and retain high quality teachers in urban classroom settings.
According to SCS (2021), a new or novice teacher is one with less than three years of lead
teaching experience. For the purpose of this study, a new/novice teacher was any teacher with
three years or less in a high-needs, urban school classroom. According to the TDOE Division of
Data and Research (2016), a high quality/ highly-effective teacher is one who scores a level 4 of
5 on the state growth and achievement scale, which is calculated by a teacher’s students’ scores
and growth on state tests (50%) and observation scores (50%) (TNDOE, 2021).
Research Design
Overview of Research Design
Denzin (2010) explains that in order to address a problem from multiple avenues and
disciplines, a mixed-methods approach to research can be used. It is from this notion that the
choice of both quantitative and qualitative data, a mixed-methods design was formulated for this
study. Creswell (2014) determined that quantitative research uses correlative relationships to
determine meaning between variables. On the contrary, Merriam & Tisdell (2016) determined
that qualitative focuses on determining how individuals interpret their own experiences and how
they draw meaning from those experiences. This study intended to use a quantitative survey
research method to determine factors that will explain the qualitative and experiential data
gathered through personal interviews relating to teacher attrition, retention, and overall teacher
education preparation.
The first portion of the study was quantitative, with data being produced through a short,
electronic survey. Respondents of the survey included any teacher who completed an urban
teacher residency program and worked in an SCS school. Based on these survey results, a
preliminary theory regarding the quality of UTR programs and the causes of teacher attrition was
formed. Second, to further determine the causes of teacher attrition, a series of interviews were
administered to assess individual teachers’ experiences and reasons for leaving the classroom.
Sample
For this case study, an intentional and selective sampling approach was used to select
teacher-graduates of urban teacher residencies who currently or formerly taught within the
largest school district in the state of Tennessee. The study took place in Memphis, Tennessee
where approximately 25% of teachers have completed a teacher education program and where an
urban teacher residency program has an established funneling relationship within the local school
district. According to a 2018 report by Shelby County Schools, a next steps initiative to improve
the quality and quantity of highly qualified teachers within the district, involved the direct
partnership with two programs- River City Partnership which works through the University of
Memphis teaching program, and teacher graduates from the Memphis Teacher Residency
(MTR). For the purposes of this study, the target teacher pool was any graduate of an urban
teacher residency (with preference to those who have completed MTR, as these individuals are
specifically trained with the intention to be dispatched into SCS schools upon graduation of their
program), and who currently or formerly taught within the SCS district after their completion of
the program. Potential participants were identified through listservs, word of mouth and the
organization’s website which lists all graduates from the program.
Selection of Teacher Respondents. The teacher pool that was considered for this study,
was any graduate of an urban teacher residency who currently teaches or formerly taught in a
high-needs school in the Shelby County Schools district. Any teacher who fit this category was
allowed to participate in the survey portion of the study. The survey was shared through local
teacher education groups, listserv, and email correspondence and social media sites. To broaden
the data pool, respondents were asked to share the survey link with 1-2 teachers whom they
knew fit the survey criteria as well.
From this broad group of educators, the target survey sample consisted of 109 teachers.
Following the completion of the survey and the analysis of survey data, one-hour interviews
were conducted on a sample of 4 educators who noted on their surveys that they are no longer
teaching in high-needs schools in Memphis. The interview consisted of 10 open-ended questions
that assessed the individual experiences, expectations and overall dispositions of teachers who
are no longer employed as teachers by SCS. The participant selection for the interviews was
based on respondents’ current employment status with the district. Ideal interview candidates
were UTR graduates with less than 5 years of teaching experience, who no longer work as a
classroom teacher in Memphis. The ideal interview sample was 10 of the total number of survey
participants (assuming that at least 20% of respondents were no longer teachers in SCS),
however the actual interview sample was only 4.
Instrumentation
Survey Implementation. To gain participation in the study, email threads, Facebook and
Instagram posts and local teacher listservs were used to communicate and seek out volunteer
participants. A short questionnaire outlining the requirements for participation was shared with
potential participants prior to the completion of the survey. Individuals who fit the criteria of
being urban teacher residency graduates and current or former SCS teachers were provided with
a link to complete an online consent form prior to completing the survey. The consent form
detailed information about the study such as its purpose, the procedure, reasonable risk factors
associated with participation and finally a confirmation of the participant’s understanding and
willingness to participate. A final acknowledgement that the respondents may choose to end their
participation at any time was also provided at the end of the consent form. Once participants
completed the informed consent, they were redirected to complete the online qualitative survey
questionnaire form. The study did not have a numerical limit and remained open for 2 weeks.
Survey Instrument. For the survey, a 20-question rating-scale questionnaire was used to
assess respondents’ feelings and experiences related to the three research questions. Each of the
research questions related to one of four themes: TEP training, access to resources, support, self-
efficacy. The research questions and survey questions were designed and associated with a theme
as they relate to the three-fold components of culturally relevant pedagogy: student learning,
cultural competence, and critical consciousness (Ladson-Billings, 1994). This research survey
focused on the teacher’s role and responsibility in ensuring these components through their
access to and competence in/through their teacher education programming.
RQ1a: What factors contribute to teacher retention and teacher attrition in urban
schools? The thematic focus on RQ1 assessed the causes of teacher turnover rates with a
particular interest in teacher training. This question attempted to unveil how well a teacher was
culturally and critically trained through their TEP to work in a high-needs environment.
RQ1b: How do teacher residency programs recruit pre-service teachers for high-poverty,
low-achieving, urban school settings (with an emphasis on programming schematics and
pedagogical approaches)? The thematic focus of RQ1b continued to examine the quality of the
UTR, however more emphasis was placed on the resources provided to the teacher during and
after their program. The survey questions related to this research were primarily targeting UTRs
ability to prepare teacher candidates adequately and effectively for the cultural aspects necessary
to be successful in high-needs, urban classrooms.
RQ2: How does exposure to high needs / urban environments prior to teaching impact
teacher attrition rates among preservice teachers in UTRs? RQ2 had a thematic emphasis on
teacher self-efficacy as it relates to their effectiveness. A teacher’s ability to assess their own
abilities and identify areas for future growth, are critical to the development of their cultural
competency and consciousness, ultimately impacting their decision to stay in high-needs urban
classrooms.
RQ3: How do culturally responsive teaching strategies impact a new teacher’s decision
to remain in an urban school setting? RQ3 focused on support services provided by the UTR and
how their implementation into the curriculum impacts a teacher’s decision to stay in the
classroom. As it pertains to CRP, the development of cultural competence and critical
consciousness weigh heavily on a teacher’s ability to navigate environments of social and
educational inequity.

Table 1
Survey Instrument
Research Question/
Thematic Focus
Survey Question Strongly
disagree
Disagree Neither
agree nor
disagree
Agree Strongly
agree
RQ1a/TEP training 1. My TEP included
training/courses on
multicultural education.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ1a/TEP training 2. My TEP emphasized culturally
responsive teaching within the
curriculum.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ1a/TEP training 3. My TEP provided me with field
training in the type of school
environment (inner city, urban,
high needs, low income,
multiethnic, etc.) I teach in.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ1a/Resources &
Support
4. I feel confident asking for
support or additional resources
from my TEP.

1 2 3 4 5
RQ1a/TEP training,
Support
5. I felt challenged to confront
personal biases and beliefs
about urban education during
my TEP training.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ2/ Self efficacy 6. I have prior experience living or
working in neighborhoods like
where I teach.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ2/ Self efficacy 7. Prior to teaching I had positive
experiences / interactions in the
cultural demographic of people I
teach.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ2/ Self efficacy 8. My previous experiences make
me confident in teaching
students from various cultural
backgrounds.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ2/ Self efficacy 9. My personal background
positively influences my
relationships with my students
and their families.

1 2 3 4 5
RQ2/ Self efficacy 10. I have a similar background
(race, ethnicity, culture, SES,
ACES) to the students I teach.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ2/Self efficacy 11. It is easy for me to build rapport
and strong relationships with
my students and their families.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ1b/ Support, Self
efficacy
12. I feel encouraged by my current
school administration to
overcome obstacles related to
classroom management and/or
culture.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ1b/ Resources,
Support
13. My school / district provides
various supports for struggling
teachers.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ1b/3/ Resources,
Support
14. My school/ district provides
opportunities to develop my
understanding of SEL for use in
my classroom.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ1b/ Resources,
Support
15. My school/ district provides
regular professional
development for addressing the
needs of students in high needs
communities.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ3/ Resources,
Support
16. My school/ district provides
regular access to professional
development regarding hot
button topics.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ3/ Self efficacy,
TEP Training Program
17. I am confident in my ability to
implement culturally responsive
teaching practices.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ1b/3/ Training,
Resources, Support
18. I consider leaving the profession
of teaching because of a lack of
CRT or SEL resources.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ1b/ Support 19. I consider leaving the field of
teaching because of a lack of
support from school staff.
1 2 3 4 5
RQ1b/3/ Training
Programs,
Resources, Support
20. I consider leaving the field of
education because of a lack of
access to culturally relevant
teaching strategies.
1 2 3 4 5

Survey Analysis. For the quantitative portion of the study, a 20-question questionnaire
created by the researcher, consisting of Likert-style question types was presented electronically
to the participants in order to assess their experiences as graduates from urban teacher
residencies and teachers in high-needs schools in Memphis, TN. The online survey instrument
allowed the researcher to collect data from the teacher participants in an efficient method for
immediate analysis. All questions posed in the survey were created by the researcher specifically
for this study. A field study of 5 independent educators not associated with the study were asked
to review questions to ensure the lack of bias and to ensure alignment with the defined research
questions.
Demographic indicators will include the following questions:
1. What is your gender identity?
2. What is your age?
3. How would you describe your race/ethnicity?
4. What teacher training program did you attend?
5. What year did you complete your teacher training program?
6. What school(s) did you complete your residency at?
7. What school(s) have you taught at after completing your residency program?
8. How many years of teaching experience in a high-needs school do you have?
9. Are you currently employed within a high-needs school?
10. Are you currently employed as a teacher within a high-needs school?
Data gathered from the electronic questionnaire was assessed to determine if there was a
relationship between teacher education training and teacher retention. The survey was also be
used to determine which characteristics of teacher education programs support teacher self-
efficacy and overall retention in high-needs classrooms. The data from the questionnaire was
analyzed using descriptive statistics. Each survey item was associated with one of the three
research questions. These survey items then had their unweighted means determined so that an
assessment of their impact on each research factor can be assessed. The sample mean and
standard deviation for each of the research questions was reported.
After gathering and analyzing the data from the electronic questionnaire, the researcher
completed the qualitative portion of the study on UTR graduates who are no longer teaching in
high-needs schools. A 10-question open-answer interview was conducted to determine teachers’
influences and causes for turnover and attrition. An invitation to participate in a virtual interview
was provided to any survey respondent who no longer works as a classroom teacher in Shelby
County Schools or any other high-needs school district. These individuals had less than or equal
to 5 years of experience as a classroom teacher in a high-needs Memphis school.
Interview Implementation. After the data from the survey was gathered, a sub-sample was
selected for further analysis through the use of personal interviews. Using a sample of
approximately 5% of survey respondents, the interviews were conducted on respondents who
have less than five years of teaching experience and who are no longer teaching (with priority
being given to respondents who no longer work in field of education altogether). Yin (2013)
determined that one-on-one interviews are the most common and effective source of data when
conducting case studies.
Interview Questions. For the interview portion of the research, respondents participated in a
one-hour interview where they were asked to provide answers to 10 open-ended questions.
Similar to the survey instruments, these questions also aligned with the research questions and
themes. Questions from the interview were meant to gain a more detailed understanding of the
experiences of teacher-graduates of UTRs, the quality of educational preparation for high-needs
environments, and the causes and/or influences of their choice to leave the classroom. The
interviews attempted to determine if and what the correlation is between UTR programming and
teacher attrition.

Table 2
Interview Questions
RQ2/ Support,
Self efficacy
1. What obstacles impact your decision to remain in urban education?
RQ4/
Resources,
Support
2. Identify how your teacher education program can provide further supports
for teachers working with your demographic.
RQ2/ Training
Program
3. What aspects of your teacher program contributed to your classroom
readiness in a high needs school?
RQ2/4 Support/
Training
Program
4. Would additional supports from your teacher program have changed your
decision to leave the classroom? If so, what kind of supports would you
have needed?
RQ3/ Self
efficacy
5. How did your experience in an urban teacher residency impact your
classroom readiness?
RQ2/3/ Self
efficacy
6. How long have you worked in urban education?
RQ2/3/ Self
efficacy
7. How did your UTR prepare you for the socioeconomic hardships of the
community that you worked in?
RQ2/Resources,
Support
8. How did your UTR address difference in teacher/ student culture,
backgrounds, and SES?
RQ2/4/ Training
Programs/
Support
9. What supports did you receive from your UTR prior to you leaving the
classroom?
RQ2/4 Training
Programs/
Support
10. How could your UTR increase effective preparation for teachers entering
high needs classrooms?

Data Analysis
A sequential explanatory mixed-methods approach was used to support the researcher in
survey UTR graduates’ attitudes and experiences about their teacher education program and the
variables that impact their decision to remain in or leave urban classrooms. The mixed-methods
approach helped the researcher develop an understanding of how teachers’ perceptions of and
experiences in an urban teacher residency are reflected in their classroom self-efficacy and
decision to continue or stop teaching in a high-needs school environment (Englebrecht &
Savolainen, 2017). Utilizing means and averages, more concrete understanding of UTR
graduates’ experiences and allow the researcher to identify areas of improvement for future
programming success was constructed.
During Part 1 of the research, a larger scale quantitative survey research approach
provided the researcher with an overview of the experiences and beliefs of UTR graduates during
their teacher training program. This part of the study also gave an overview of potential factors
that may influence teachers to stay or leave high-needs school environments.
For a more in-depth exploration of the differences and similarities amongst UTR
graduates who are no longer teaching, Part 2 of the study was conducted in a qualitative manner
using an interpretivist research paradigm (Englebrecht & Savolanien, 2017; Mertens, 2005). The
researcher then explored how UTR graduates experienced their teacher training, but also how
well prepared the graduates felt upon completion of the program and entering into their own
classrooms.
Both survey data and interview data were coded to ensure the anonymity of participants
and to protect their privacy. The survey data was analyzed using an online software system that
separated data into specific areas of interest. Using the same code from the survey data,
interviewees maintained the same code to ensure alignment with their survey data. Using a
bracketing method of analysis, the researcher grouped data based on topic, themes, and patterns.
To determine more specific answers to the research questions, the researcher conducted
field interviews and used a narrative analysis approach to decipher the findings. According to
Vogt et al., (2014), narrative interviews can be analyzed to identify commonalities and trends
among teacher-graduates’ experiences with UTRs. The specific variables related to support, self-
efficacy, training programs and resources were used to support the investigator in identifying
patterns in interview responses, as they pertain to the methods UTRs use to recruit and retain
high quality teachers in urban schools. Similarly, the same variables were measured across
interview data to determine similarities and differences between educators who have chosen to
leave the high needs classroom environments. From this, the investigator was able to identify
trends that give feedback regarding the negative factors that cause and/or influence a teacher’s
decision to leave the classroom that they were deemed highly prepared to remain in.
The data for the study was securely stored using a private server in an online storage
cloud that was password encrypted. The data from both surveys and interviews was analyzed for
trending commonalities and patterns around the causes of teacher attrition and the effectiveness
of urban teacher residency training programs.
Limitations
The study was limited to graduates of urban teacher residency programs who also teach
or have taught in Shelby County Schools within Memphis, TN. Because of the specificity of the
population, the study was limited to a small sample size that did not allow for broad
generalization of findings. Another concern was the opportunity for respondents to share their
information amongst one another and increasing the chance of confidentiality breaches. To
reduce this possibility, respondents were asked to limit their discussion of their participation in
the study until 3 months after all surveys and interviews concluded. Lastly, the reliance of social
media and electronic communication as a means of recruitment may have skewed data due to the
specificity of the platforms being used.
Ethics
This study was conducted using the ethical standards and guidelines for protecting
participants as outlined and described by the University of Southern California (USC). Data
collection and analysis was integral, respectful, and honest. Before completion of the study, the
USC IRB was approved.
Strategies to Enhance Validity
The researcher ensured that a high level of trustworthiness and validity of the data
occurred for each participant in the study. The use of semi-structured and open-ended interview
questions allowed the researcher the ability to adjust question types to fit the nature of each
respondent. The questions formulated for the qualitative portion of the study were designed and
formulated by the researcher for the purposes of this study. Utilizing the problem of practice,
review of the existing literature and an understanding of the issues of teacher retention, attrition,
and the impact of urban teacher residencies in high-need schools, the researcher developed all
questionnaire and interview questions for this study. To maintain the anonymity and
trustworthiness of the data, concerns of confidentiality was addressed through the use of
informed consent forms and by securing all data collected in password-encrypted folders on
private computer servers.
The qualitative aspect of this research addressed individual experiences and factors of
teacher turnover or attrition within Shelby County Schools as well as their confidence in their
training from urban teacher residency programs. The interview questions were also field tested
by a group of 5 independent educators to assess the quality, validity, and research focus
alignment. Each interview was video, and audio recorded using the online platform, Zoom, and a
copy was stored for accuracy. The researcher maintained written interview notes that were used
for further analysis and review. Before publication, the researcher provided each interview
participant with a copy of the written transcript of their interview for accuracy review.
Summary
This study was designed with a dual purpose: 1) to determine the effectiveness of UTRs
in recruiting and retaining high quality teachers in high-needs schools and 2) to determine the
factors of teacher turnover and attrition in urban schools within Memphis, TN. The study used
both a quantitative survey and qualitative interviews to obtain data for further analysis.
The survey questionnaire was given to any teacher who completed an urban teacher
residency program and was employed at a high-needs school in Shelby County Schools.
Individuals who no longer worked as classroom teachers were then asked to participate in a 10
question semi-structured interview to learn about their experiences in a UTR and their reasons
for leaving the classroom. The following chapter presents the findings of the study.

Chapter Four:
Results
The purpose of this study is to gain a deep understanding of the factors affecting teacher
retention and attrition amongst graduates of urban teacher residencies working in high needs
schools in Memphis, TN. From this understanding, areas of strength and areas of improvement
may be identified in order to provide teacher training programs with suggestions to better support
the needs of diverse teacher populations in urban settings. The three research questions focus on
two crucial areas, the training and curriculum provided through urban teacher education
programs and secondly, factors of support and resources available to graduates after completing
their program.
Participants
To be considered for the study, an individual needed to be a graduate of an urban teacher
program and have taught in a high-needs, urban school. To identify specific trends within the
city of Memphis, the ideal participant would have participated and completed a teacher residency
within the city, and either currently or formerly have taught in a Memphis-Shelby County
School. All participants in this study met the criteria of being a graduate of a teacher preparation
program. 109 respondents completed the survey portion of the study. In the city of study,
Memphis, 72 teachers met the criteria of being graduates of an urban teacher residency and
served as the basis for the data for this study (Table 3). All 72 teachers completed the
questionnaire portion of the study. Of these 72, 19 identified that they no longer taught in a high-
needs school and were invited to participate in one-on-one interviews. Of the 19, 10 survey
respondents participated in interviews. The respondents included 4 teachers identifying as
Caucasian, 3 identifying as African-American, 2 identifying as multi-racial and 1 identifying as
Asian-American.
Table 3
Racial Identity of Survey Participants
Racial/Ethnic Background Percentage of Respondents # of Respondents
White 75 54
Black/African American 19 14
Hispanic/Latino 3 2
Asian

Multi-ethnic

Other
1

1

1
1

1

1

Table 4
Gender Identity of Survey Participants
Gender Identity Percentage of Respondents # of Respondents
Female 79 57
Male 21 15

Interview Data from Former Teachers
The information derived from the interviews related to all three research questions, however,
emphasis on teacher attrition and factors impacting teacher self-efficacy were the primary focus
for data collection. Of the twenty survey respondents who identified that they were no longer
teaching in a high-needs environment, four chose to participate in the voluntary interviews. All
four participants identify as women and completed the UTR program in various years.

Table 5
Interview Participants
Teacher pseudonym Residency Completion Year # of Years in Urban Ed
F1 2013 8
F2 2010 4
F3 2011 12
F4 2016 5

Results
The results of the mixed-methods research study are presented below and organized by
research question. The results are presented in two to three themes that emerged related to each
question. Lastly, a summary of results related to each research question is presented with a final
summary being presented at the close of the chapter. The three research questions guiding this
study and serving as the outline of this chapter are:
1. What factors contribute to teacher retention and teacher attrition in urban schools?
How do culturally responsive teaching strategies influence a new teacher’s
decision to remain in an urban school setting?
2. How do teacher residency programs recruit pre-service teachers for high-poverty,
low-achieving, urban school settings (with an emphasis on programming
schematics and pedagogical approaches)?
3. How does exposure to high needs / urban environments prior to teaching
influence teacher attrition rates among preservice teachers in UTRs?
Results of R.Q.1a
Research Question One (a) asked What factors contribute to teacher retention and
teacher attrition in urban schools? The existing research indicates that teachers who complete a
teacher residency program have higher retention rates than those who come from other
backgrounds (Bristol & Martin-Fernandez, 2019; Donaldson, 2009). Per NCTR (2020) data on
teacher movement, the National Center for Teacher Residencies reported that teachers who
completed a teacher residency were twice as likely to remain in the classroom than a teacher who
had not completed a teacher training program. There would be a need for further longitudinal
data to determine if the research participants in this study will remain in high needs classrooms
in Memphis. This survey asked UTR graduates of a local Memphis UTR about the factors that
contribute to their retention and attrition in local schools. The interview portion of the research
was also used to gather more insight into the factors that influence individual teachers’ decisions
to stay or leave the classroom.
Overall Feelings of Positive Self-Efficacy and Classroom Readiness Among UTR
Graduates. The data from the survey identified an overwhelmingly positive belief amongst
teacher-graduates as it pertained to their readiness to enter high needs classrooms in Memphis.
When asked I feel capable of overcoming obstacles related to classroom management and/or
culture based on my experience within my TEP (see Table 6), 70% of the respondents identified
that they agreed with the statement, 13% disagreed and 17% reported a neutral response to the
statement. Similarly, when asked My TEP provided me with quality field training in the type of
school environment (inner city, urban, high needs, low income, multiethnic, etc.) I was required
to teach, 86% of the respondents expressed their agreement with the statement. It is clear from
these results, that UTRs in Memphis, develop graduates who have a strong self-efficacy and feel
prepared to teach in urban environments. These results are encouraging and identify how UTRs
continue to train and retain high-quality teachers in high needs settings.

Table 6
1. (a) What factors contribute to teacher retention and teacher attrition in urban schools?
(b)How do culturally responsive teaching strategies influence a new teacher’s decision to remain in an
urban school setting?
Question Str. Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Str.
Agree
% % % % %
It is easy for me to build rapport and
strong relationships with my students
and their families because of my
background/previous experience.
0 14 20 40 21
My personal background positively
influences my relationships with my
students and their families.
3 18 24 31 21
I feel capable of overcoming obstacles
related to classroom management
and/or culture based on my experience
within
my TEP.
6 7 17 35 28
My TEP provided me with quality field
training in the type of school
environment (inner city, urban, high
needs, low income, multiethnic, etc.) I
was required to teach in.
3 0 11 31 49
My TEP provides various supports for
struggling teachers after completion of
the residency program
4 10 8 29 42
I am / was confident in my ability to
implement culturally responsive
teaching practices.
0 4 14 40 14
I consider(ed) leaving the profession of
teaching because of a lack of training in
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy or Social
Emotional Learning.
39 15 7 7 4
I consider(ed) leaving the field of
education because of a lack of culturally
relevant teaching strategies (provided
by my TEP).
47 11 5 6 3
I feel confident asking for support or
additional resources from my TEP after
completing my training program.
4 2 10 31 47

Differing Backgrounds, Differing Confidences. Boyd et al. (2005) noted that teacher
turnover was greatest amongst teachers who did not share similar backgrounds to their students.
They also found that teachers felt most confident in environments that were similar to their own
educational experiences. The results from the survey supporting these findings. When asked My
personal background positively influences my relationships with my students and their families,
only 53% responded favorably, with nearly 25% feeling neutral and another 20% expressing
disagreement. With only half of the respondents identifying that their backgrounds positively
impacted their relationship building, it would be interesting to further research how those
relationship impacted the teachers’ resolve in their classrooms.
An interesting finding is that although only half of the respondents found their
backgrounds useful in influencing relationships with their students. According to Table 6, 69%
of respondents felt that it was easy to build relationships because of their backgrounds. A deeper
investigation of what aspects of teachers’ experiences and backgrounds were and how they
influence their classroom experience, would need to be done to gain a more concrete
understanding of how important backgrounds are in teacher retention and attrition rates.
Daniels & Varghese (2020) note that teachers who have quality experiences in the urban
environments are more likely to feel better prepared to teach in neighborhood classrooms. As it
pertained to the type and quality of field training experiences provided by the UTR, the
researcher asked My TEP provided me with quality field training in the type of school
environment (inner city, urban, high needs, low income, multiethnic, etc.) I was required to teach
in. Table 6 also shows that where 86% of respondents agreed with the statement, 2.7% disagreed
and 11% remained neutral. From the interviews, 3 of the participants noted that cultural
immersion was a major aspect of their UTR preparation that positively impacted their classroom
readiness. None of the participants expressed negative experiences from their field training, with
all explaining how working in the neighborhoods before teaching proved to be helpful in their
assimilation into the classroom.
Guha et al. (2017) explored how teacher training programs place teacher-graduates in
classrooms and can see up to 80% retention after 5 years. To determine what aspects of the
program were most beneficial to the teacher-graduates entering the classroom, the questions My
TEP included training/courses on multicultural education that was relevant/helpful to me in the
classroom as a teacher (Table 6) and My TEP emphasized culturally responsive teaching
practices throughout my residency curriculum and field experiences (Table 6) were asked.
According to both questions, the majority of respondents positively affirmed that their UTR
included multicultural education and that there was an emphasis placed on culturally responsive
teaching practice in their curriculum. As the conceptual framework for this research is founded
in CRT and CRP pedagogies, the data shows that the UTR in Memphis provides participants
with substantial access to curriculum that develops higher self-efficacy when entering high needs
classrooms. CERPI (2010) asserts that teachers with high-self efficacy are more likely to remain
in the field of teaching.
Obstacles to Remain in Urban Education. From the interviews, a more personalized
understanding of factors impacting teacher attrition was assessed. When asked the question What
obstacles impact your decision to remain in urban education? Multiple participants identified
work-life balance as one of the major issues that led them to leave the classroom. F1 stated “My
health began to fail, and it continued to get worse.” F3 explained that “My life was consumed
with work. My life revolved around school and church, and because I went to church with some
of my classmates who were also my co-workers, I was always in a school-bubble.”
Similarly, when asked to further explain how the lack of work-life balance impacted her
health, F2 stated “I was always sick. I was someone in great physical health before going into the
classroom, but I was quickly exhausted. I worked 12–15-hour days Monday-Friday and then
spent the entire weekend sleeping in an attempt to recover.” F4 also expressed similar issues with
work-life balance but stated that “administration expected things from us that weren’t possible
unless we overworked ourselves. To do all the things, participate in all the activities, prepare for
classes, attend meetings, and whatever else was asked of us, it’s impossible to do if you have a
life. There’s a reason why so many people who work in this field are single, and unmarried.
Then, if they get in a relationship or have children, you see a switch, because this type of life is
not sustainable with a family. Because I was single, it was just assumed that I could and would
dedicate my life to the school, and unfortunately, I did.” Overall, the consensus among interview
participants was a lack of balance played an integral role in their decision to leave the classroom.
Results of R.Q.1b
Research Question One (b) asked How do culturally responsive teaching strategies
influence a new teacher’s decision to remain in an urban school setting? Noel (2016) explored
how repositioning teacher education programs priorities to focus on community and culturally
responsive practices had a positive outcome on teacher self-efficacy and their overall satisfaction
with teaching in urban areas. R.Q.1b focused specifically on how an emphasis on CRT during
the teacher education training impacts teacher-graduates decision to stay in high needs
classroom.
Cultural Relevance and Teacher Success. Kapadio Matsko & Hammerness (2014)
found that teachers that were trained in programs with specific cultural relevance to the
communities they would teach in, expressed high rates of success in the classroom and overall
positive beliefs in their ability to be successful in a high needs environment. From the survey
data (see Table 6), it is clear that there is a strong relationship between teacher confidence and
the implementation of culturally relevant teaching practices during the TEP. When asked I
consider(ed) leaving the field of education because of a lack of culturally relevant teaching
strategies (provided by my TEP) only 8% of respondents agreed with the statement. Similarly,
only 11% of respondents expressed agreement when asked I consider(ed) leaving the profession
of teaching because of a lack of training in Culturally Relevant Pedagogy or Social Emotional
Learning. More than half of the respondents expressed a confidence in their ability to implement
CRP into their practices when asked, I am / was confident in my ability to implement culturally
responsive teaching practices.
From the interviews, a similar disposition was shared amongst participants. F2 found that
although she did not share the same ethnicity as her students, she grew up in a city similar to
them. She stated:
They asked me where I was from, and when they told them, they said “oh, that makes
sense now.” I was often called light-skinned because they just refused to see me as a
white woman. I often corrected them, but I also knew it was an endearing way to tell me
they accepted me.
F1 and F3 recalled having similar experiences, being easily accepted by their students based on
their personal experiences. F1 said, “I didn’t have any issues with getting along with my students
or their families. I looked like them and sounded like them, so that was an easy in for me. That
was probably one of the last things I worried about in the classroom.” F4 expressed how her
experience was much different as she did not come a background that was similar.
I came from a close-knit community on the other side of the country. I didn’t look like
my students at all, and I also didn’t look white. We had a lot of conversations about what
I was, and that was helpful in addressing some of their questions and bridging the gaps
they had about people who weren’t just black or white. I think those conversations helped
to make my transition to the classroom a lot easier.
Overall, the participants had varying experiences with cultural relevance, but all
identified how they used their similarities and differences to bridge gaps and build rapport with
their students. None identified cultural differences as an impact on their decision to stay in the
classroom.
Sustaining Teachers with Support Services. In their research, Perryman & Calvert
(2020) found data that purports that nearly 40% of teachers who left the classroom were
impacted by a lack of support. When looking at the data from the survey, more than ¾ of
respondents agreed that their TEP provided various supports after the completion of their
residency program. Likewise, 85% of respondents indicated that they felt confident asking for
additional supports and resources after the completion of their training. What was not asked but
can be implied from the data is that teacher-graduates feel comfortable asking for additional
resources when they feel that the resources, they will be provided will be supportive of the work
that they are doing in urban classrooms. This post-graduate cushion of support is vital to the
pulse of urban teachers and is a relevant influence on teacher retention in high-needs schools.
Results of R.Q.2
Research Question Two asked How do teacher residency programs recruit pre-service
teachers for high-poverty, low-achieving, urban school settings (with an emphasis on
programming schematics and pedagogical approaches)? Marshall & Scott (2015) and The
Aspen Institute (2008) indicated that successful UTRs utilized a strong combination of education
theory, culturally relevant practices, and teacher training to develop well-rounded and classroom-
ready graduates. Table 7 depicts how survey respondents agreed or disagreed with several
statements related to their training program.
Culturally Relevant Training as a Major Contributor to Strong Graduate
Outcomes. Throughout the survey data, questions relating to teacher-graduates experiences with
their program’s coursework and pedagogy were asked to determine how UTRs approach to
teacher education promotes and impacts recruitment. When asked My TEP provides regular
training/resources that address the needs of students in high needs communities an
overwhelming majority (85%) of respondents agreed that their program provided regular training
and resources that were relevant to the communities that they would eventually teach in. Another
set of questions asked, My TEP emphasized culturally responsive teaching practices
throughout my residency curriculum and field experiences and My TEP included
training/courses on multicultural education that was relevant/helpful to me in the classroom as a
teacher. These questions also received positive results with 68% and 65% of respondents
agreeing with the statements, respectively. UTRs specifically differ from traditional programs in
their simultaneous use of field experiences intertwined in the curriculum of their program,
develop both pedagogical and practical knowledge of the environments they will be working in.
Based on the data, it is apparent that teacher-graduates identified these differences and felt their
program provided substantial learning opportunities through the use of these strategies.
Areas for Growth in Personal Bias Awareness and SEL Application. According the
NCTR (2018) one of the “Six Elements of High Priority Resident Practices” is to support
students’ social, emotional, and academic needs (p.2). By implementing coursework and
curriculum that emphasize social emotional learning and the whole child learning theories, UTRs
successful provide teacher-graduates with effective tools and protocol to address three key areas
of student need. Based on the data from questions related to SEL curriculum and the addressing
of personal biases in the program (see Table 7), there is still room for improvement with the
Memphis UTR program. When asked My TEP training made me aware of my personal biases
and beliefs about urban education and provided resources to address them, only 45% of
respondents agreed that their program was successful in helping them address their personal
biases/positionalities related to urban education. This may have contributed to a similar finding
when asked My TEP provided substantial opportunities to develop my understanding of SEL for
use in my classroom. Only 47% of respondents agreed that their program provided them with
opportunities to develop their understanding and application of SEL curriculum prior to entering
the classroom. While the UTR graduates found that their program sufficiently trained and
resourced them for the overall needs and practices necessary for high-needs classroom, the
overall consensus was that the program lacked a substantial opportunity or curricular experience
to make them confident in their abilities to address their own biases that ultimately need in order
to implement SEL practices in their classrooms upon completion of their program.

Table 7
2. How do teacher residency programs recruit pre-service teachers for high-poverty, low-achieving, urban
school settings (with an emphasis on programming schematics and pedagogical approaches)?
Question Str.
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Str.
Agree
% % % % %
My TEP training made me aware of my
personal biases and beliefs about urban
education and provided resources to
address them.
4 6 20 22 21
My TEP provides regular
training/resources that address the needs
of students in high needs communities.
3 2 11 40 36
My TEP emphasized culturally
responsive teaching practices
throughout my residency curriculum and
field experiences.
4 15 13 42 20
My TEP included training/courses on
multicultural education that was
relevant/helpful to me in the classroom
as a teacher.
7 10 18 39 20
My TEP provided substantial
opportunities to develop my
understanding of SEL for use in my
classroom.
14 18 21 25 15

Recruitment methods impact pre-service teachers’ experience within the program.
Based on the interview data, the teachers expressed various opinions related to the recruitment
styles used during their cohort and how those then impacted the dynamics of the residency and
ultimately teacher turnout. When speaking with F1 about the question How did your UTR
prepare you for the socioeconomic hardships of the community that you worked in? she
explained how her UTR recruitment strategies did not closely align with their mission and
vision, and therefore impacted the preparation of pre-service teachers. F1 stated:
I don't think that we did enough work in the years that I was in residency. I don't think
that we did enough work to address the impact of white supremacy in the work that we're
doing in the neighborhoods that we're in.
When speaking directly about the type of schools her UTR recruited pre-service teachers from,
F1 said that a lot of the issues with recruitment came from executive leadership and their own
lack of diversity. F1 stated:
If you're coming in with a misogynistic, white, Christian lens, you're going to have a very
particular experience that might not be harmful to you if people are too caught up in their
own prejudice to really address you and call you out on it, but it's doing harm to them if
you're not noticing how belittling or patronizing you can be when you're interacting with
people. So, more anti-racist and anti-misogynist resources and conversations and
challenging work.
Asked the same question, F3 also discussed how limited recruitment impacted the diversity
within the UTR and thus impacted the overall effectiveness. F3 recalled a time when the lack of
diversity and overall sensitivity to major social injustices caused a rift between individuals
within the cohort that was unfortunately never repaired or fully addressed. She stated:
We had a lot of courses about pedagogy. One course, about, I guess, the cultural
components, cultural foundations, that's what it was called. It was the first class that we
took over the summer before we started in the classroom. I think it had tried to walk
through a little bit of the, I guess, way that things were designed in our country, but I
don't think it did. I think it felt very short.
All four interview respondents mentioned their experiences during this course and
offered similar overviews about the effectiveness of it although their lens varied based on their
own personal backgrounds. Both F2 and F4 explained how they did not feel immediately
impacted by the course and this particular class; however, they did recognize how both changed
the spaces and comfortability of their peers for the remainder of the program. Considering the
basis and focus of UTRs, more discussion can be made about how leadership plays a role in the
recruitment techniques used within a program and how those then manifest in the programming
schematics for residency participants.
Results of R.Q.3
Research Question Three asked, how does exposure to high needs / urban environments
prior to teaching influence teacher attrition rates among preservice teachers in UTRs? Positive
prior exposure and/or prior experience was found to be an early identifier for teacher success in
urban classrooms (Garcia & Weiss, 2019; Ladson-Billings, 1995a; Noel, 2016). When
considering the factors impacting teacher performance and overall retention rates, questions
related to teacher-graduates’ prior experiences in the communities they teach in was asked.
Prior Experience Indicates Positive Affect in Teacher-Graduates. Based on the
results from R.Q.1 related to teacher self-efficacy, R.Q.3 was developed to see if there was a
relationship between prior experience and positive teacher beliefs. When asked Prior to teaching
I had positive experiences / interactions in the cultural demographic of people I teach, 72% of
respondents identified that they had previous positive interactions. 10% of respondents indicated
that they had not had interactions and 15% identified with a neutral response. It is the belief of
the researcher that this 15% equates to individuals who have had interactions but did not identify
them as either positive or negative. When asked My previous experiences make me confident in
teaching students from various cultural backgrounds, 65% of respondents expressed their
agreement with the statement. Although the positive response was less than the previous
question, the majority of respondents still affirmed that their prior experiences working or living
in communities similar to the ones they taught in, had a positive impact on their self-efficacy in
the classroom.
Similar Backgrounds Not a Fair Method of Determining Teacher Success. When
asked about whether they shared similar adverse childhood experiences and/or socioeconomic
statuses as the student population they teach, only one-fifth of respondents agreed with the
questions I have a similar background to the students I teach. Only 40% of respondents
identified that they lived or worked in neighborhoods similar to the ones they taught in. This data
calls into question the validity that teachers with similar backgrounds to their students are more
successful than others. Recognizing that there is a plethora of literature to oppose this data
outcome, further research on the topic would be useful to determine the depth of the specific
factors that impacted this specific set of teacher-graduates. While further investigations could be
made, the data from the surveys show that teacher-graduates only needed some prior experience
with the demographic they teach, to feel positive self-efficacy towards their ability to teach in
high-needs classroom. With that said, it is also important to note that positive self-efficacy alone
cannot be used as the only marker for a high-quality and/or effective teacher. This is an
encouraging finding, as UTRs are known for their exposure to high-needs communities which
can further support the confidence and cultural development of newly recruited teacher-
candidates.

Table 8
3. How does exposure to high needs / urban environments prior to teaching influence teacher attrition rates
among preservice teachers in UTRs?
Question Str. Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Str.
Agree
% % % % %
My previous experiences make me
confident in teaching students from
various cultural backgrounds.
4 13 15 33 31
I have prior experience living or working
in neighborhoods like
where I teach.
21 15 22 17 24
Prior to teaching I had positive
experiences / interactions in the cultural
demographic of people I teach.
3 7 15 26 46
I have a similar background to the students
I teach. (Adverse Childhood Experiences,
ACES)
31 8 39 4 3
I have a similar background to the students
I teach. (Socioeconomic Status, SES)
36 22 25 7 6

Similarities in background play a significant role in teacher self-efficacy and self-
reflection. When asked the question How did your UTR address difference in teacher/ student
culture, backgrounds and SES? all four interview respondents explained that there was limited
discussion or information shared on how to address differences, however, they noticed that
individuals who had some experience in the communities they worked in, or who had similar
backgrounds to the students they taught, felt more comfortable and had less angst when entering
the classroom.
Both F3 and F4 explained how their personal racial and ethnic identity varied from their
students, however their previous experiences prior to participating in their UTR made their
transitions into the classroom much more manageable. F2 stated:
I felt very comfortable in an urban setting. I did not grow up like in inner city, but a
metro area was not far from it. My grandfather pastored a church in the city. My dad
worked in the city, so I was there all the time, so I felt very comfortable.
F1 shared similar experiences, but also recognized that there were some differences in her
upbringing that may need to be thought through in order to be successful. She stated, “Coming
up through the black church in Atlanta, to going into multicultural churches in Atlanta and
becoming black conservatives in Atlanta, even I came in with my filters that I had to be like,
"Oh, wait. Okay. Okay." Because there were things that I was not aware of, stereotypes or
prejudices that I was carrying, that everybody comes in carrying, that I had to work through, and
I had to recognize and make decisions about which direction I'm moving in, in the way that I
treat people and the way I see people.” Based on all interviews, the trend of individual self-
awareness was reflected, which leads to the question how those who are unable to reflect in this
way successfully navigate the UTR program and become effective urban teachers, when their
training program doesn’t provide a strong foundation in doing so.
Summary
Research Question 1 asked about the factors impacting teacher attrition and how
culturally responsive teaching practices impact teachers’ decision to remain in an urban
classroom. The data showed that teachers with higher self-efficacy felt more confident and more
prepared to teach and therefore remain in urban classrooms. Trends related to commonalities and
shared background experiences, also proved to be a marker of teacher success and continuation
in high-needs classrooms.
Similarly, Research Question 2 focused on recruitment methods for UTRs. Much of the
data showed that UTRs have the desire to address major societal issues that may interfere with
teacher success, however the application of techniques, protocols and styles are still leaving
much to be desired. Subsequently, due to a number of biases, the quality of recruitment and
instruction related to major social disparities, is still a cause of separation amongst pre-service
teachers, which ultimately leads to gaps in learning, development, and overall readiness in urban
classrooms.
Finally, Research Question 3 aimed to determine how prior exposure to high-needs areas
impacted the level of teacher attrition in urban schools. Based on both survey and interview data,
the trends of limited understanding of CRP and CRT by leadership, force pre-service teachers to
rely on their own experiences and self-awareness to guide them throughout their residency
journey. While some found it manageable, many who do not share similarities with the
communities they are placed in, struggle to find balance and a state of positive ownership, which
unfortunately leads to higher rates of teacher dissatisfaction and attrition.

Chapter 5
Discussion
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to investigate the practices of urban teacher residencies and
their effectiveness in recruiting and retaining high quality teachers in high-needs schools. The
research was formulated around the following questions: What factors contribute to teacher
retention and teacher attrition in urban schools? How do teacher residency programs recruit pre-
service teachers for high-poverty, low-achieving, urban school settings (with an emphasis on
programming schematics and pedagogical approaches)? How does exposure to high needs /
urban environments prior to teaching influence teacher attrition rates among preservice teachers
in UTRs? The intention of the research was to identify common trends in the experiences of
Summary
This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of urban teacher residencies in
recruiting and retaining high-quality teachers in high-needs schools. Chapter one focused on
providing a background and foundation for the premise of the investigation. The second chapter
utilized a review of the literature to highlight culturally relevant pedagogy, a history of teacher
training programs and an overview of best practices for recruitment and retention methods.
Chapter three detailed the methodology used for the study and chapter four provided an
explanation and analysis of the data collected. Chapter five will conclude the study with an
overview of the findings, a discussion of related topics and implications of the data, and finally, a
set of recommendations for future research.
This study focused on the recruitment and retainment methods utilized by urban teacher
residencies in their effort to curb teacher turnover and attrition in high-needs urban schools. The
purpose of this study was to better understand the practices of urban teacher residencies in order
to develop strategies that best serve teacher-graduates in urban classrooms, and ultimately reduce
the alarming rates of teacher loss. The following questions were used to guide the research:
1. What factors contribute to teacher retention and teacher attrition in urban schools? How
do teacher residency programs recruit pre-service teachers for high-poverty, low-
achieving, urban school settings (with an emphasis on programming schematics and
pedagogical approaches)?
2. How does exposure to high needs / urban environments prior to teaching influence
teacher attrition rates among preservice teachers in UTRs?
3. How do culturally responsive teaching strategies influence a new teacher’s decision to
remain in an urban school setting?
The study utilized a mixed-methods research design (Creswell, 2014) to address the research
questions. The study consisted of individual surveys and interviews of urban teacher residency
graduates in the city of Memphis, TN. This mixed-methods strategy allowed for the analysis of
data for trends in UTR graduates who currently teach in the classroom, as well as individualized
data detailing the experiences of UTR graduates who have left the classroom and education
altogether. The quantitative portion of the study focused on survey data from current teachers
who completed an UTR, while the qualitative interviews allowed for a deep dive into the factors
contributing to the attrition of highly-qualified teachers in urban environments. The interviews
were used to solidify and explain some of the trends found in the qualitative data, and to identify
areas of concern that can be addressed to reduce future teacher turnover levels.

Findings
Findings from the study suggest a relationship between teacher self-efficacy, prior
experience, and overall quality of training as factors that positively influence teachers to stay in
high-needs classrooms. Findings from the interviews identify factors such as a lack of work-life
balance, toxic stress, and a lack of cultural responsiveness as factors that influence teachers to
move or leave from high-needs classrooms. The original design of the research utilized thematic
focuses to guide the scope of the research: TEP training, resources, support, and self-efficacy. An
overview of those themes will be reviewed in this section as they relate to the findings from the
data analysis.
Research Question 1a and the Quality of TEP Training
RQ1a inquired What factors contribute to teacher retention and teacher attrition in urban
schools? The qualitative portion of the research sought to narrow the scope of possible factors
and focus on the quality and type of teacher training. The data showed that there were numerous
factors, however, graduates of urban teacher residencies did not feel that the quality of their
educational program negatively impacted their decision to remain in high-needs classrooms. The
analysis also showed that UTR graduates feel more than adequately prepared to address issues in
multicultural education, and to utilize culturally responsive teaching practices. Similarly, most
indicated that they felt challenged to confront their own personal biases through their training,
coursework and interactions with their peers and instructors. Noel (2016) identified how teachers
who have significant training and a contextualized understanding of culture, community, and
identity, are more likely to be effective in the classroom, and also more likely to remain in areas
of high need.

Research Question 1b and the Quality of TEP Resources
RQ1b asked How do teacher residency programs recruit pre-service teachers for high-
poverty, low-achieving, urban school settings (with an emphasis on programming schematics
and pedagogical approaches)? Continuing to focus on TEP training, RQ1b investigated the
pedagogical approaches used to support the classroom readiness of UTR graduates. The data
analysis for survey questions related to culturally responsive teaching strategies, multicultural
approaches, and overall use of critical race theory as a foundation for developing a UTR program
were addressed. The data showed that although graduates felt their program did present them
with the opportunities to be exposed to these pedagogies, a deeper, more self-evaluative dive into
them would have been more useful in the long run. The research also showed that graduates felt
introduced to topics, but they were not completely embedded in the curriculum, which left a
varied experience in the development and maturation of their teaching practices being founded in
culturally relevant teaching.
RQ2 and Teacher Self-efficacy
Both the qualitative and quantitative portions of the research sought to examine the role
of a teacher’s self-efficacy in their decision to remain or leave high needs classroom. RQ2 asked
RQ2: How does exposure to high needs / urban environments prior to teaching impact teacher
attrition rates among preservice teachers in UTRs? Chin Lee et al., (2019) and Crisci et al.,
(2018) explored how job satisfaction is related to how effectively an individual feels they can
complete their job. They also discuss how self-efficacy can either positively or negatively impact
a teacher’s decision to remain in a high-needs classroom. Similarly, Moses et al., (2017) found
that teachers who were motivated by prior experiences and/or social justice, found themselves
more committed to working in lower performing classrooms.
From the conversations with former teachers and from survey data on current teachers,
RQ2 found that based on prior experiences, similar backgrounds, and relatability, were strong
indicators of a teacher’s self-efficacy and overall job satisfaction. Individuals who felt more
closely aligned with their student and school community populations, identified more investment
in their work and their commitment. While some who had varying backgrounds did admit to
finding the work meaningful, ultimately, the strong differences in background and lack of
cultural capital, proved to influence them out of the classroom, or to a classroom where they had
more in common with their student population.
While the scope of the survey questions focused on self-efficacy from the standpoint of
the UTR experience, prior experiences in similar communities, and/or personal ties to the
community, the data from interviews showed that self-efficacy based on teachers’ ability to
separate themselves from their work, was a major barrier to success. From the interviews, trends
related to burnout due to stress, overwork, lack of community and minimal work-life balance,
proved to physically impact the lives of teacher-graduates, who then were forced to address their
health concerns by leaving toxic environments- high needs classrooms.
RQ3 and Teacher Support
The final research question intended to explore How do culturally responsive teaching
strategies impact a new teacher’s decision to remain in an urban school setting? Specific to this
research, RQ3 focused on how external support from the TEP provided teacher-graduates with
additional resources and implementation support of culturally responsive teaching strategies,
impacted teachers’ decision to remain in high-needs schools. They survey data showed that UTR
graduates felt overwhelmingly supported by their UTR programs both during and after their
completion. Data also showed that teachers felt comfortable and confident in asking for
additional resources and support from their teacher mentors upon entering their own classrooms.
Although teachers felt supported, interview data also showed a gap in the quality of resources,
which related back to RQ1b and the utilization of CRP and other multicultural approaches to
teaching. The interview analysis showed that although teachers were provided with resources
and support, much of the foundational pedagogy of their UTR was limited in its scope of
culturally inclusive and relevant practices, when then limited the effectiveness of the support
they did receive. Also, in relation to RQ2, the interview data also showed a lack of continuity
when related to providing teachers with substantial support and resources as it pertained to them
as whole people, outside of their profession. Interviews provided insight on the lack of tangible
resources and application of self-care techniques, stress reduction and overall health and well-
being, which proved to be a significant influence on their decision to leave the classroom.
Limitations
There were a few limitations that impacted the findings of this research. The first is the
internal validity of the self-reported data in both the qualitative and quantitative portions of the
research. Secondly, the survey instrument used was developed specifically for this research, and
thus, lacked a broader audience or review prior to its use. This may have limited the scope and
depth of the analysis, as data could only be collected from the specific questions asked. The
original survey instrument was modified once during the scope of the research due to a
numerical error in the questions, and thus, the validity of the data can be called into question.
The researcher did not change any of the questions, items, or categories, however, the format of
several questions was adjusted for a more linear participant experience. Furthermore, because
this study relied on self-reported data (surveys, interviews), limitations could consist of
respondent validity. The use of triangulation was used to minimize the threat to the validity of
the findings.
Similarly, the study was conducted in an effort to identify trends and make generalized
noticings of factors impacting urban teachers’ decisions to remain in education. While the
researcher was able to determine general findings and trends among the survey participants, the
small proportion of participants in comparison to the number of UTR graduates in the city, may
account for data that is not fully encompassing of all experiences. Likewise, the researcher
intended to interview 10% of survey participants who indicated that they were no longer in the
classroom, however participation was limited when asked to share their individual experiences in
personal interviews. Because of this, the descriptive findings from the interviews cannot be used
to create generalizations about factors that impact teacher attrition levels in the city. The findings
do however allow for inferences to be made and establish the need for future research on the
topic.
Discussion
Utilizing CRP as a frame for designing and implementing a teacher residency program
requires a number of outlooks to be evaluated, considered, and reconsidered. Tricarico (2012)
discussed how the development of strong, resilient, and culturally responsive teachers stems
directly from the organizations that prepare them. When analyzing the successes of urban teacher
graduates, while some ownness is placed on the individual teacher, a major responsibility still
rests on the educational institution to provide the quality and type of education that was
promised. Marshall & Scott (2015) also noted that factors such as recruitment methods,
interview protocol, assessment type and individual assessments, can be used to predict the
success of pre-service teachers and the effectiveness of the UTR as a whole.
Implications for Future Research
This study delved into the effectiveness of urban teacher residencies and their ability to
recruit and retain high quality teachers. The study found themes that can be used to inform
educational programs, universities and school districts about the factors that impact teacher
turnover and attrition rates. Specifically, this research provides a basis for future discovery as it
pertains to the differences in programming within urban teacher residencies compared to
traditional and nontraditional teacher training. Two major implications were noted from this
study.
Implication one is the impact of teacher self-efficacy in both the personal and
professional sense. Research has often been conducted on teacher relevance, comfort, and overall
relatability within the classroom, however, there is much to be discovered about the lack of
personal self-identity within the educational community. By rethinking questions related to self-
efficacy to include self-care and separation of work and personal identities, there is much to be
addressed in the quest to reduce the high turnover rates of teachers in public schools.
A second implication is the significant impact of foundational pedagogy in teacher
training programs. With teacher-graduates seeking further knowledge by completing teacher
residencies and other teacher preparation programs, it is essential that these entities be grounded
in liberation pedagogy that not only addresses social injustices, but intentionally develops
curriculum to interrogate and dismantle systems of oppression that operate within the scope of
public education.
The conclusion of the study nodded to a continuation of this research, with each research
question as a primary focus. While the study did identify generalized information related to
teacher retention and attrition levels, the study also found that there is more to be unpacked in
relation to the causes of teacher turnover. Additional research is suggested for three key areas
related to this study.
Based on the current literature and results from this study, it is suggested that further
research be done on the recruitment methods and strategies used by teacher training programs to
find participants. Understanding the diverse populations that public schools serve, presents a
need to identify and rectify any inequities and oversights in the teacher recruitment processes.
A second recommendation is that further research be conducted to determine how self-
efficacy and overall health impacts teachers’ resilience in remaining in high needs classrooms.
From the study, the data showed that teachers who felt higher levels of stress and low levels of
work-life balance, were at higher risk of burnout and ultimately higher levels of classroom
attrition. Investigating the causes and identifying methods to better support teacher mental and
physical well-being can lead to noticeable change in the high rates of turnover in urban schools.
Finally, the third recommendation is for a study of the pedagogical development of
teacher training programs and their emphasis or lack thereof, on anti-racist practices and
culturally relevant practices. While this study addressed CRP in the terms of teacher training,
data analysis and literature show the necessity of anti-racist practices to be embedded not only in
the teacher curriculum, but throughout teacher programs altogether. Further emphasis on how to
develop culturally relevant organizations will ultimately lead to changes in program design that
will affect factors such as recruitment, pedagogy, and overall curriculum development for
teacher development programs.
Conclusions
This study confirmed that much more research should be done to determine how to
effectively retain and recruit teachers for high-needs schools. The study identified numerous
areas of progress and concern for urban teacher residencies, whose sole purpose is to address
historic inequities in disadvantaged communities. The findings suggest that prior experience,
robust and self-challenging curriculum, are helpful in supporting urban teachers in building and
maintaining their self-efficacy in urban schools. The study also found evidence to suggest that a
greater amount of emphasis should be placed on programming methods and materials that call
attention to the specific needs within urban schools, the history of inequities within urban
communities and strategies to actively dismantle academic oppression for both students and
educators. The study provides educational practitioners, teacher training programs, district
leaders other potential teacher-residents with grounding knowledge to seek out, develop and
transform the current educational climate by addressing the needs within urban school settings.

References
Anderson, L., & Olsen, B. (2006). Investigating early career urban teachers' perspectives on and
experiences in professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(4), 359.
Anderson-Levitt, K., van Draanen, J., & Davis, H. M. (2017). Coherence, dissonance, and personal
style in learning to teach. Teaching Education (Columbia, S.C.), 28(4), 377-392.
10.1080/10476210.2017.1306505
Aragon, S. (2016). Teacher shortages: What we know. Education Commission of the States.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED565893.pdf
Arnup, J., & Bowles, T. (2016). Should I stay or should I go? resilience as a protective factor for
teachers' intention to leave the teaching profession. The Australian Journal of
Education, 60(3), 229-244. 10.1177/0004944116667620
Aronson, B., Meyers, L., & Winn, V. (2020). "Lies my teacher [educator] still tells": Using critical
race counternarratives to disrupt whiteness in teacher education. The Teacher
Educator, 55(3), 300-322. 10.1080/08878730.2020.1759743
Barnes, G., Crowe, E., & Schaefer, B. The cost of teacher turnover in five school districts: A pilot
study consultant national commission on teaching and America's future.
Bell, M. (2021). Whiteness interrupted: White teachers and racial identity in predominantly black
schools. Duke University Press.
Bennett, J. S., Driver, M. K., & Trent, S. C. (2019). Real or ideal? A narrative literature review
addressing white privilege in teacher education. Urban Education (Beverly Hills,
Calif.), 54(7), 891-918. 10.1177/0042085917690205
Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2005). Explaining the short careers of high-
achieving teachers in schools with low-performing students. The American Economic
Review, 95(2), 166-171. 10.1257/000282805774669628
Brown, K. M., & Schainker, S. A. (2008). Doing all the right things: Teacher retention issues. The
Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 11(1), 10-17. 10.1177/1555458908325045
Camacho, D. A., & Parham, B. (2019). Urban teacher challenges: What they are and what we can
learn from them. Teaching and Teacher Education, 85, 160-174. 10.1016/j.tate.2019.06.014
Centre for Educational Research and Publishing & Innovation. (2010). Educating teachers for
diversity: Meeting the challenge. OECD. 10.1787/9789264079731-en
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Crisci, A., Sepe, E., & Malafronte, P. (2019). What influences teachers’ job satisfaction and how to
improve, develop and reorganize the school activities associated with them. Quality &
Quantity, 53(5), 2403-2419. 10.1007/s11135-018-0749-y
Daniels, J. R. (2018). “There's no way this isn't racist”: White women teachers and the
raciolinguistic ideologies of teaching code-switching. University of California Press.
nfo:doi/
Daniels, J. R., & Varghese, M. (2020). Troubling practice: Exploring the relationship between
whiteness and practice-based teacher education in considering a raciolinguicized teacher
subjectivity. Educational Researcher, 49(1), 56-63. 10.3102/0013189X19879450
Darling-Hammond. (2006). Assessing Teacher Education: The Usefulness of Multiple Measures for
Assessing Program Outcomes. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(2), 120–138.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487105283796
Donaldson, M. L. (2009). Into-and out of-city schools: The retention of teachers prepared for urban
settings. Equity & Excellence in Education, 42(3), 347-370. 10.1080/10665680903034753
Dunn, A. H., & Downey, C. A. (2018). Betting the house: Teacher investment, identity, and
attrition in urban schools. Education and Urban Society, 50(3), 207-229.
10.1177/0013124517693283
Education Commission of the States, (2019). Teacher Recruitment and Retention 2019.
https://reports.ecs.org/comparisons/view-by-state/347/TN
Engelbrecht, P., & Savolainen, H. (2018). A mixed-methods approach to developing an
understanding of teachers' attitudes and their enactment of inclusive education. European
Journal of Special Needs Education, 33(5), 660-676. 10.1080/08856257.2017.1410327
Evans-Winters, V., & Twyman Hoff, P. (2011). The aesthetics of white racism in pre-service
teacher education: A critical race theory perspective. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 14(4),
461-479. 10.1080/13613324.2010.548376
Frankenberg, E., Taylor, A., & Merseth, K. (2010). Walking the walk: Teacher candidates’
professed commitment to urban teaching and their subsequent career decisions. Urban
Education (Beverly Hills, Calif.), 45(3), 312-346. 10.1177/0042085908322651
Freedman, S. W., & Appleman, D. (2009). In it for the long haul: How teacher education can
contribute to teacher retention in high-poverty, urban schools. Journal of Teacher
Education; Journal of Teacher Education, 60(3), 323-337. 10.1177/0022487109336181
Gay. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: theory, research, and practice. Teachers College
Press. https://doi.org/info:doi/
Goldhaber, D., & Cowan, J. (2014). Excavating the teacher pipeline: Teacher preparation programs
and teacher attrition. Journal of Teacher Education; Journal of Teacher Education, 65(5),
449-462. 10.1177/0022487114542516
Guha, R., Hyler, M. E., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). The teacher residency: A practical path to
recruitment and retention. The Education Digest, 83(2), 38.
Haberman, M. (1995). The dimensions of excellence in programs preparing teachers for urban
poverty schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 70(2), 24-43. 10.1080/01619569509538821
Haberman, M., & Rickards, W. H. (1990). Urban teachers who quit: Why they leave and what they
do. Urban Education (Beverly Hills, Calif.), 25(3), 297-303.
10.1177/0042085990025003005
Hammerness, K., & Craig, E. (2016). “Context-specific” teacher preparation for New York City:
An exploration of the content of context in Bard College’s Urban Teacher Residency
program. Urban Education (Beverly Hills, Calif.), 51(10), 1226-1258.
10.1177/0042085915618722
Hammerness, K., Williamson, P., & Kosnick, C. (2016). Introduction to the special issue on urban
teacher residencies: The trouble with “Generic” teacher education. Urban Education
(Beverly Hills, Calif.), 51(10), 1155-1169. 10.1177/0042085915618723
Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2004). Why public schools lose teachers. The Journal
of Human Resources, 39(2), 326-354. 10.2307/3559017
Harris, B. (2021). 17 things resilient teachers do: (And 4 things they hardly ever do). Routledge.
10.4324/9781003058649
Hess, F. M. (2009). Revitalizing teacher education by revisiting our assumptions about
teaching. Journal of Teacher Education; Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5), 450-457.
10.1177/0022487109348595
Honawar, V. (2008). Teach for America; "Teach for America teachers” careers: Whether, when,
and why they leave low-income schools and the teaching profession". Education
Week, 27(39), 4.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational
analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499-534.
10.3102/00028312038003499
Ingersoll, R. M. (2005). The problem of underqualified teachers. a sociological
perspective. Sociology of Education; Sociol Educ, 78(2), 175-178.
10.1177/003804070507800206
Institution of Education Sciences. (2020). Retention, Mobility, and Attrition among School and
District Leaders in Colorado, Missouri, and South Dakota. Retrieved 21 March 2022, from
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/central/pdf/REL_2020033.pdf.
Jagla, V. (2009). Transforming urban schools: Lessons for America from an urban teacher
residency program. International Journal of Learning, 16(9), 41-48. 10.18848/1447-
9494/cgp/v16i09/46605
James-Gallaway, & Harris, T. (2021). We Been Relevant: Culturally Relevant Pedagogy and Black
Women Teachers in Segregated Schools. Educational Studies (Ames), 57(2), 124–141.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2021.1878179
Kamrath, B., & Bradford, K. (2020). A case study of teacher turnover and retention in an urban
elementary school. Educational Considerations, 45(3)10.4148/0146-9282.2181
Klassen, R., & Chiu, M. (2011). The occupational commitment and intention to quit of practicing
and pre-service teachers: Influence of self-efficacy, job stress, and teaching context. Fuel
and Energy Abstracts, 36, 114-129. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.01.002
Ladson‐Billings, G. (1995a). But that's just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995b). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). It's not the culture of poverty, it's the poverty of culture: The problem
with teacher education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 37(2), 104-109.
10.1525/aeq.2006.37.2.104
Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A
descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37-62.
10.3102/01623737024001037
Lee, C. C., Akin, S., & Goodwin, A. L. (2019). Teacher candidates' intentions to teach: Implications
for recruiting and retaining teachers in urban schools. Journal of Education for Teaching:
JET, 45(5), 525-539. 10.1080/02607476.2019.1674562
Lee, D. M. (2005). Hiring the best teachers: Gaining a competitive edge in the teacher recruitment
process. Public Personnel Management, 34(3), 263-
270. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.1177/009102600503400304
Lowe, D. Y. (2012). Teacher perception of their initial traditional or alternative teacher training
program. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Macdonald, D. (1999). Teacher attrition: A review of literature. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 15(8), 835-848. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(99)00031-1
Marshall, D. T., & Scott, M. R. (2015). Urban teacher residencies: Indicators of successful
recruitment. New Waves, 18(2), 29-39. http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www-
proquest-com.libproxy2.usc.edu/scholarly-journals/urban-teacher-residencies-indicators-
successful/docview/1781565529/se-2?accountid=14749
Matsko, K. K., & Hammerness, K. (2014). Unpacking the “Urban” in urban teacher education:
Making a case for context-specific preparation. Journal of Teacher Education; Journal of
Teacher Education, 65(2), 128-144. 10.1177/0022487113511645
Maxson, S., Wright, C. R., Houck, J. W., Lynn, P., & Fowler, L. (2000). Urban teachers' views on
areas of need for K-12/university collaboration. Action in Teacher Education, 22(2), 39-53.
10.1080/01626620.2000.10463004
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation
(4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mertens, D. M. 2005. Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity
with Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods. London: SAGE.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2015a). Teacher turnover: Stayers, movers, and leavers.
Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/slc?tid=4
National Center for Education Statistics. (2015b). Characteristics of public school teachers who
completed alternative route to certification. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/tlc
National Center for Education Statistics. (2020). Enrollment, poverty, and federal funds for the 120
largest school districts, by enrollment size in 2018: 2017-18 and fiscal year 2020. Retrieved
from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d20/tables/dt20_215.30.asp.
National Center for Teacher Residencies. (2018). High Priority Resident Practices: Six key
practices to prepare teacher candidates for effectiveness. Retrieved from
https://nctresidencies.org

National Center for Teacher Residencies. (2020). Why NCTR’s model is better. Retrieved from
https://nctresidencies.org
Noel, J. (2016). Community-based urban teacher education: Theoretical frameworks and practical
considerations for developing promising practices. The Teacher Educator, 51(4), 335-350.
10.1080/08878730.2016.1210429
Papay, J. P., Bacher-Hicks, A., Page, L. C., & Marinell, W. H. (2017). The challenge of teacher
retention in urban schools: Evidence of variation from a cross-site analysis. Educational
Researcher, 46(8), 434-448. 10.3102/0013189X17735812
Phillip, M. W. (2013). New teacher retention in a suburban school district: A study of new teachers'
perceptions of their first-year experiences and their reasons for remaining with the school
system (Order No. 3587805). Available from ProQuest Central; ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Global; ProQuest One Academic; Social Science Premium Collection.
(1428171293). http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-
theses/new-teacher-retention-suburban-school-district/docview/1428171293/se-
2?accountid=14749
Quartz, K.H. Careers in motion: A longitudinal retention study of role changing among early-
career urban educators. Blackwell Pub. nfo:doi/
Roegman, R., Pratt, S., Goodwin, A. L., & Akin, S. (2017). Curriculum, social justice, and inquiry
in the field: Investigating retention in an urban teacher residency. Action in Teacher
Education, 39(4), 432-452. 10.1080/01626620.2017.1300956
Ronfeldt, M., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2013). How teacher turnover harms student
achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 50(1), 4-36.
10.3102/0002831212463813
Schaefer, L. (2013). Beginning teacher attrition: A question of identity making and identity
shifting. Teachers and Teaching, Theory and Practice, 19(3), 260-274.
10.1080/13540602.2012.754159
Shelby County Schools. (2019a). 2018 Annual Report. Retrieved 21 January 2022, from
http://www.scsk12.org/2025/files/2019/Annual%20Report%202019-20.pdf.
Shelby County Schools. (2019b). Destination 2025 monthly: November 2019. Retrieved 21 January
2022, from
http://www.scsk12.org/rpm/files/2019/Destination%202025%20Monthly_11%202019%20F
INAL.pdf
Shelby County Schools. (2021a). Monthly board KPIs: September 2021. Retrieved 21 January
2022, http://www.scsk12.org/rpm/files/2021/September%202021%20KPI%20Memo-
FINAL.pdf
Shelby County Schools. (2021b). Monthly board KPIs: November 2021. Retrieved 21 January
2022, from
http://www.scsk12.org/rpm/files/2021/SCBE%20Monthly%20KPIs_11%202021.pdf
Shotel, J., Freund, M., Green, C., Belknap, B., & Tindle, K. (2011). The urban teacher residency
program: A recursive process to develop professional dispositions, knowledge, and skills of
candidates to teach diverse students. Educational Considerations, 38(2)10.4148/0146-
9282.1132
Sorensen, L. C., & Ladd, H. F. (2020). The hidden costs of teacher turnover. AERA Open, 6(1),
233285842090581. 10.1177/2332858420905812
Sugarman, S. D. (2004). The promise of school choice for improving the education of low-income
minority children. Berkeley Women’s Law Journal, 19(2), 284–288.
Synar, E. A. (2010). Examination of the financial costs of teacher turnover in mid-sized urban
school districts (Order No. 3402996). Available from ProQuest Central; ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global; ProQuest One Academic; Social Science Premium
Collection. (305213192).
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-
theses/examination-financial-costs-teacher-turnover-mid/docview/305213192/se-
2?accountid=14749
Taylor, A., & Frankenberg, E. (2009b). Exploring urban commitment of graduates from an urban-
focused teacher education program. Equity & Excellence in Education, 42(3), 327-346.
10.1080/10665680903032344
Tennessee Department of Education. (2016). Equitable Access to Highly Effective Teachers for
Tennessee Students. Division of Data & Research.
https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/education/reports/equitable_access_web.pdf
Tennessee Department of Education (2021). Accountability: 2020-21 Teacher evaluation guidance:
Growth and achievement scores. https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/education/2020-21-leg-
session/Accountability%20Teacher%20Evaluation%20Guidance%20-%20508%20(1).pdf
Tricarico, K. M. (2012). Perspectives and practices of graduates of an urban teacher residency
program Available from Social Science Premium Collection. (1697501113;
ED554625). http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-
com.libproxy1.usc.edu/dissertations-theses/perspectives-practices-graduates-urban-
teacher/docview/1697501113/se-2?accountid=14749
United States Department of Education. (2018). Title I, Part A Program. Improving Basic Programs
Operated by Local Educational Agencies (Title I, Part A. (2018). Retrieved 21 March 2022,
from https://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/index.html.
U.S. News and World Report (2019). High Schools in Shelby County District. Retrieved from
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/tennessee/districts/shelby-county-
113060.
Vogt, W. P., Vogt, E. R., Gardner, D. C., & Haeffele, L. M. (2014). Selecting the right analyses for
your data: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (1st ed.). Guilford Publications.
Winslow, P. (2020). Exploring teacher attrition among lateral entry novice teachers: A mixed
methods investigation (Order No. 28093593). Available from ProQuest Central; ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global; ProQuest One Academic; Social Science Premium
Collection. (2459429375).

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This dissertation analyzes the characteristics of urban teacher residencies and their approach in recruiting and retaining high quality teachers in high-needs classrooms. The research uses principles from Critical Race Theory and Culturally Relevant Pedagogy to assess the variables that promote teacher self-efficacy and a willingness to remain in urban classroom. The research questions that guide this study seek to assess how urban teacher residencies recruit and prepare pre-service teachers for high-needs classrooms. Similarly, the research questions aim to discover if factors such as previous exposure, training and culturally relevant pedagogy play a role in teachers’ decisions to stay in high needs urban classroom. This research will bring awareness to methods of recruitment and training that can be used by teacher training programs, universities and districts to encourage teacher self-efficacy and increase teacher retention in high-needs areas.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Examining teacher retention and attrition in novice teachers

PDF

Examining teacher pre-service/credential programs and school site professional development and implementation of culturally relevant teaching of BIPOC students

PDF

California teacher residency leaders’ understanding and implementation of the characteristics and evidence of an effective teacher residency

PDF

A document analysis of the math curriculum on teachers pay teachers

PDF

The importance of Black and Latino teachers in BIPOC student achievement and the importance of continuous teacher professional development for BIPOC student achievement

PDF

Black@: using student voices to dismantle colorblindness and inspire culturally relevant pedagogy in southern independent schools

PDF

Teachers in continuation high schools: attributes of new teachers and veteran teachers in urban continuation high schools

PDF

The lived experiences of Latino Male Elementary School Teachers

PDF

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

PDF

The importance of teacher motivation in professional development: implementing culturally relevant pedagogy

PDF

Implementation of restorative justice in schools from a teacher's perspective

PDF

A comparative study of self-efficacy, outcome expectancy, and retention of beginning urban science teachers

PDF

Preservice teacher perspectives: impact of culturally responsive pedagogy and implications of Eurocentric, whitewashed roots on United States education

PDF

Cultivating culturally competent educators

PDF

The impact of COVID-19 and how teachers can intervene to improve student learning

PDF

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

PDF

Assessing the needs of teachers when creating educational technology professional development for an urban charter school district: an innovation study

PDF

Teacher curriculum supplementation as phenomenon and process

PDF

A qualitative examination of PBIS team members' perceptions of urban high school teachers' role in implementing tier 2 schoolwide positive behavior supports

PDF

Dominicana: lived experiences of Dominican women working in the urban K–12 system

Asset Metadata

Creator Shivers, Shemēna Rose (author)

Core Title Urban teacher residencies and their impact on teacher retention in high-needs school settings

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-08

Publication Date 07/19/2023

Defense Date 08/09/2022

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

Tag alternative teacher training,critical race theory,culturally responsive pedagogy,high-needs schools,OAI-PMH Harvest,teacher attrition,teacher education programs,teacher residency,teacher retention,Teacher Training,Urban Education,urban teacher residency

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Polikoff, Morgan (committee chair), Riggio, Marsha (committee member), Smith, Wesley (committee member)

Creator Email shem.shiv@gmail.com,shivers@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113282004

Unique identifier UC113282004

Identifier etd-ShiversShe-12115.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-ShiversShe-12115

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Shivers, Shemēna Rose

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230721-usctheses-batch-1071 (batch), 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 author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

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

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu