University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Teaching in the time of COVID: secondary educators’ experiences during and after the COVID-19 pandemic

(USC Thesis Other)

Teaching in the time of COVID: secondary educators’ experiences during and after the COVID-19 pandemic

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Teaching in the Time of COVID: Secondary Educators’ Experiences During and After the
COVID-19 Pandemic

Gina Cherashore

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

May 2023

© Copyright by Gina Cherashore, 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Gina Cherashore certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Gregory Franklin
Maria Ott
David Cash, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
This research examines the ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted secondary
teachers in San Diego and Santa Maria counties. Through a series of in-depth interviews and
quantitative surveys, this study details the challenges teachers have faced in the wake of
extended school closures and the subsequent return to school amid ongoing and frequently
shifting COVID-19 protocols, the increasingly divisive political climate, challenges with student
behaviors, and student academic setbacks. This research aims to find ways in which
administrators can better support teachers to lessen the likelihood of teacher attrition and burnout
now and in the coming years as districts continue to recover from the impacts of the pandemic.

v
Acknowledgments
I am deeply grateful for the support of many people as I completed my doctoral
coursework and dissertation. I would like to thank my research partner and good friend, Abby
Clark, who pushed my thinking and patiently worked alongside me for countless meetings and
editing sessions. Her partnership made the research process both fun and engaging.
I am also extremely grateful for the support of our supervising chair, Dr. David Cash,
who has been an integral part of my doctoral experience at USC as both a professor and
supervising chair for this research. I also want to express my gratitude to our committee
members, Dr. Maria Ott and Dr. Gregory Franklin for their time and guidance through this
process; their feedback was invaluable to the completion of our research.
I could not have completed this research without the participating teachers who spent
hours of their time sharing their valuable experience and knowledge with me. Their willingness
to be candid and thoughtful in their responses is where the value of this research is derived.
I would also like to acknowledge the patience, love, and support of my family. In
particular, my husband, Will, who picked up the slack for me as I spent countless nights and
weekends working on this research. To my parents, Susie and Domenic, and in-laws Grace and
David, who are all shining examples of supportive parents who value the educational pursuits of
their children and grandchildren. And most importantly, I would like to acknowledge my kids,
Stella and Domenic, who are the motivation and purpose behind all that I do, but especially in
achieving my doctorate. I hope they grow to see this accomplishment as an acknowledgment of
the importance of education and of the impact teachers can have on future generations.

vi
Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. x
Preface ............................................................................................................................................ xi
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................. 1
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 4
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................ 5
Significance of the Study ..................................................................................................... 7
Limitation and Delimitations ............................................................................................... 7
Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................. 8
Organization of the Study .................................................................................................... 9
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ......................................................................................... 11
History of Teacher Burnout and Attrition ......................................................................... 11
Causes of Attrition and Burnout ........................................................................................ 18
Consequences of Burnout and Attrition ............................................................................ 22
The Impact of COVID-19 ................................................................................................. 26
Long-Term Federal and State Policy Solutions ................................................................. 32
Cultural Historical Activity Theory ................................................................................... 35
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 42
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 43
Purpose of Study ................................................................................................................ 43
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 43

vii
Selection of the Population ................................................................................................ 44
Design Summary ............................................................................................................... 45
Instrumentation and Protocols ........................................................................................... 47
Data Collection .................................................................................................................. 49
Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 50
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 54
Chapter Four: Results .................................................................................................................... 55
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 56
Survey Results ................................................................................................................... 57
Results for Research Question 1 ........................................................................................ 59
Discussion for Research Question 1 .................................................................................. 64
Results for Research Question 2 ........................................................................................ 65
Discussion for Research Question 2 .................................................................................. 73
Results for Research Question 2 ........................................................................................ 74
Discussion for Research Question 3 .................................................................................. 81
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 81
Chapter Five: Discussion ............................................................................................................... 84
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 84
Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................................... 85
Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................ 85
Research Question 1 .......................................................................................................... 86
Research Question 2 .......................................................................................................... 87
Research Question 3 .......................................................................................................... 90
Limitations ......................................................................................................................... 92
Implications for Practice .................................................................................................... 93

viii
Recommendations for Future Research ............................................................................. 98
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 99
References ................................................................................................................................... 100
Appendix A: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 117
Introductory Questions .................................................................................................... 118
Main Questions, Part I ..................................................................................................... 118
Main Questions, Part II .................................................................................................... 119
Closing Question ............................................................................................................. 120
Closing Statement ............................................................................................................ 120
Appendix B: MBI-ES Survey Instrument ................................................................................... 121

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Participant Demographic Information 56
Table 2: MBI-ES Mean Survey Responses 57
Table 3: MBI-ES Emotional Exhaustion Indicators 60
Table 4: MBI-ES Student Behavior Indicators 71

x
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Map 7
Figure 2: Vygotsky’s Triangle 37
Figure 3: Second–Generation CHAT Model 38
Figure 4: Third–Generation CHAT Model 39

xi
Preface
Portions of Chapters 1 through 3 were coauthored, with Chapters 4 and 5 authored
individually to reflect the separate data collection and analysis each author conducted in their
respective geographic regions. This collaborative effort reflects real-world practices and enabled
both authors to grapple with the problem of practice to create meaningful solutions for
educational leaders. To meet their objective of developing highly skilled practitioners equipped
to take on real-world challenges, the USC Graduate School and the USC Rossier School of
Education permitted our inquiry team to carry out this shared venture.
This dissertation is part of a collaborative project between two doctoral candidates, Gina
Cherashore and Abigail Clark. We created our research questions and designed our study
collaboratively, then researched two different areas of California. The problems addressed in this
study are emblematic of a phenomenon sweeping the entire nation and thus were appropriate to
research in multiple areas.

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
This research examined how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted secondary teachers in
San Diego and Santa Maria counties. Through a series of in-depth interviews and quantitative
surveys, this study detailed the challenges teachers faced in the wake of extended school closures
and the subsequent return to school amid ongoing and frequently shifting COVID-19 protocols,
the increasingly divisive political climate, challenges with student behaviors, and student
academic setbacks. This research aimed to find ways administrators can better support teachers
to lessen the likelihood of teacher attrition and burnout now and in the coming years as districts
continue to recover from the impacts of the pandemic.
Background of the Problem
Much research has examined the problem of retention and job dissatisfaction among
K-12 teachers at all stages of their careers. Findings within this topic of study rarely provide an
optimistic outlook. Even when the outcome for teachers is not attrition, they often experience
elevated levels of stress and burnout in their daily lives, making attrition a likely outcome
(Farmer, 2020). Research from 2018, just prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, found
8% of teachers were leaving the profession each year (DeMonte et al., 2016). Attrition numbers
increased by 50% for teachers in Title I schools, disproportionately impacting students of color
from low socioeconomic backgrounds (Darling-Hammond et al., 2018). These teachers have
been replaced most often with teachers who are less prepared and less qualified than their
predecessors (Darling-Hammond & Sykes, 2003). Fewer than one third of teachers who leave do
so at retirement age; however, early attrition accounts for nearly 90% of district hiring needs
(Sutcher et al., 2019). Overall, between 45% and 50% of teachers leave the teaching profession
within the first 5 years (Ingersoll et al., 2018).
2

Today, as the COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact the United States, reports of
projected levels of teacher attrition have been higher than ever, with some surveys reporting job
dissatisfaction as high as 90% (National Education Association [NEA], 2022). Steiner and Woo
(2021) found “nearly one in four teachers said they were likely to leave their jobs by the end of
the 2020-2021 school year, compared with one in six teachers who were likely to leave, on
average, prior to the pandemic” (p. 1). Part of what may contribute to high rates of dissatisfaction
in educators may be the increased emotional toll working in a “helping profession” has on
teachers and those who serve others as a career (Kutscher et al., 2013). People working in
helping professions are especially vulnerable to burnout, which is defined as a state of fatigue or
frustration when one is not receiving the expected reward from devotion to a cause or way of life
(Kutscher et al., 2013). Work-related stress, ever present in teachers’ daily lives, has
compounded with the onset of pandemic-related challenges, and consequently teachers’
compassion fatigue and burnout have reached unprecedented levels (Farmer, 2020).
These levels of dissatisfaction and a desire to leave the profession represent an increase
by nearly 40% from August 2021 (NEA, 2022). In California, teacher shortages have reached
dire levels, exacerbated by the pandemic, resulting in hiring more underprepared teachers; the
number of emergency or incomplete credentials and permits issued nationwide nearly tripled
from the 2012-2013 to the 2019-2020 school year (Carver-Thomas et al., 2022). Administrative
help in the classroom is increasingly necessary, as central office staff and site administrators are
forced to step in to relieve substitute shortages and as teachers are asked to cover classes for one
another during preparatory periods, time intended to be reserved for planning and preparing for
their own classes. Enrollment in teacher education programs also has declined continually, with a
national average decline in enrollment from 2008 to 2019 at 35%, reaching a high of 80% in
3

some states (Knox, 2022). One of the most pressing concerns is whether these problems will
continue past the duration of the pandemic, causing a long-term shortage of teachers. Based on
history, these shortages are most likely to impact students of color in higher need areas
negatively (Darling-Hammond et al., 2018).
Frequent changes in COVID-19 protocols at the national, state, and district level have left
teachers with little guidance from administrators and more established teachers who may
otherwise provide mentorship onsite. School administrators, typically charged with providing
structures for mentoring new teachers, have spent much of the past few years contacting parents
and district officials to report data and manage an increase in behavioral issues and parent
concerns (Farmer, 2020). The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, and the Children’s Hospital Association declared the sharp
decline in student mental health a national emergency (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2021)
and has been linked to increases in student behavioral problems. Students also have fallen behind
academically due to prolonged remote instruction during the 2020-2021 school year, leaving
teachers who are charged with meeting learning targets struggling to catch students up while
learning gaps widen between students of color and their White peers (Kuhfeld et al., 2020).
The surrounding community, including parents, guardians, and students, also have been
subject to frequently changing school policies and instability of school schedules. Policy
arguments about masking, distance learning, and vaccine mandates have, in some instances, pit
community members against teachers and teachers’ unions (Lovell, 2021). All these factors
created the contextual backdrop for the adversarial experience of educators teaching during the
COVID-19 pandemic and constitute a serious problem worthy of further research and
exploration.
4

As burnout and attrition are complex and dynamic problems, we examined the experience
of teachers who worked during the COVID-19 pandemic through the cultural-historical activity
theory (CHAT; Vygotsky, 1987). The goal of CHAT is to create a holistic analysis of a
constantly evolving activity theory, considering the dynamic influences and interactions of the
tools, community, rules, and division of labor on the activity of the object and subject (Foot,
2014). It allows researchers to consider the crucial role of cultural and historical influences when
analyzing phenomena in professional practices. The benefit of CHAT is that it empowers
researchers to examine these supports in the context of the multifaceted world in which new
teachers exist, one that has increased already adverse working conditions (Boateng & Donkor,
2020). As Boateng and Donkor (2020) concluded, teacher attrition is due to poor working
conditions, lack of leadership, and lack of professional development. Even before the COVID-19
pandemic, teachers were fleeing the profession at a staggering rate of about 50%, and new
numbers were released indicating 55% of teachers wanted to leave the profession as of 2022
(DeAngelis & Presley, 2011; Jotkoff, 2022). Educators reported incredibly high levels of
burnout, citing COVID-19-related policies, staff shortages, low salaries, limited mental health
resources for students, and too much paperwork, among others (Jotkoff, 2022). The range and
variety of cited issues for attrition have indicated no one issue should be prioritized; instead, a
whole system analysis is necessary.
Statement of the Problem
Teachers have been leaving the classroom at higher rates than ever before (Gallant &
Riley, 2014). Teachers also have faced monumental challenges during this time, with 25%
reporting they are likely to leave the profession by the end of 2020-2021 (Steiner & Woo, 2021).
They also have faced more complex challenges as the world has adjusted and adapted to life
5

during the ongoing pandemic and as teachers have returned to in-person learning impacted by
learning loss and changes in student behavior. The Learning Policy Institute (2019) found the
small district of Santa Maria Joint Unified High School District had a 4% attrition rate (i.e.,
teachers leaving the profession) and a 5% turnover rate (i.e., teachers leaving their specific
school or district) with the projected teacher hire hovering around 15 new hires for the coming
school year. More alarming was the percentage of new hires with incomplete credentials, which
was 67%, much higher than the state average of 34%. The San Diego Unified School District, in
turn, had a 13% attrition rate, 15% turnover rate, projected teacher hires of 828, and 36% of new
hires with an incomplete or emergency substitute credential for the 2018-2019 school year
(Learning Policy Institute, 2019). COVID-19 has impacted educators, and it is imperative to
explore how it has affected the experience and vulnerability to burnout of our nation’s educators.
In this study, we focused on secondary public-school teachers. Although all grades of teachers
are experiencing burnout, our experience and expertise in secondary education provided the
necessary background knowledge to help us to understand our participants’ experiences better.
This study examined secondary teacher experiences in Santa Maria Joint Union High School
District and several San Diego-area public schools, closely investigating their teaching
experiences during and after the pandemic and, specifically, how these impacted their burnout
and desire to leave the profession.
Purpose of the Study
Using qualitative in-depth interviews and surveys of teachers in both San Diego and the
Santa Maria Joint Union High School District, this study examined how the COVID-19
pandemic and its aftermath impacted the teacher experience. We paid attention to identifying
6

what supports administrative leadership could offer to teachers to enhance job satisfaction,
alleviate burnout, and increase retention. The research questions we sought to answer were:
1. How do secondary teachers describe their experience teaching in San Diego and
Santa Maria during and after the COVID-19 pandemic?
2. What do secondary teachers in San Diego and Santa Maria describe as factors
influencing their experiences?
3. What additional administrative support do secondary teachers in San Diego and Santa
Maria identify as helpful to improve work and life experience?
Using the theoretical lens of CHAT (Vygotsky, 1987), we examined secondary teachers
as subjects, identifying how various obstacles teachers faced during the COVID-19 pandemic
and afterward impacted their experience and subsequent actions related to possible attrition.
Functioning as both a conceptual and theoretical framework for this research study, CHAT
examines the relationship between what people think and do and the actions they take as a result
(Vygotsky, 1978). The conceptual map provided in Figure 1 uses CHAT as a tool to examine the
experiences and perceptions of secondary teachers hired during the COVID-19 pandemic and
their resulting actions, particularly as they relate to possible attrition and burnout. It was our
hope that through examination of this topic and using in-depth interviews and surveys, ways to
support these teachers may lead to higher retention rates among secondary teachers who may feel
increasingly burned out as effects from the pandemic linger.

7

Figure 1
Conceptual Map

Significance of the Study
It is the hope that this research can address the immediately pressing issue of secondary
teacher burnout and attrition, as experienced amid the ongoing pandemic and its aftermath, by
providing recommendations for action to principals and other school site administrative leaders.
Limitation and Delimitations
This study was limited to secondary teachers teaching in San Diego-area public schools
and the Santa Maria Joint Union High School District and their self-reported interpretations of
their experiences. The study was limited to teachers who agreed to be interviewed about
CHAT
Conceptual
Map
Tools
Supports (Mentorship,
Instructional Coaches,
Teacher Meetings,
Shared resources,
Feedback)
Subject
Secondary Public
School Teachers
Rules, Norms,
Conventions
COVID-19 Policies,
Curricular Expectations,
Behavioral Management
Expectations, Instructional
Expectations,
Documentation
Expectations, Salary
Schedules, Extracurriculur
responsibilities
Community
School Community,
School District
Community, Teacher
Unions, Community at
Large (parents,
students, stakeholders,
etc.)
Division of Labor
Teachers and
Administrators,
Department Heads,
Substitute Teachers
Object
Experiences
teaching during
and after the
COVID-19
pandemic
OUTCOME
Teacher burnout
and attrition
8

potentially negative experiences. Conclusions of this research study relied largely on self-
reported and self-described teacher experiences. Inherent limitations of interviews include
validity of self-reported data or experiences and the chance that teachers’ actions may be
attributed to unreported or unidentified variables (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). Comprehensive
interviews also rely largely on protocols developed by the researchers. Although we took all
precautions to limit any bias or leading in these interview protocols, it is possible some
limitations may be present related to development of these protocols, although we do not cite any
to our knowledge. Much care also was taken to corroborate findings by selecting multiple
respondents who had direct knowledge of the research topic.
Delimitations include the geographic region of secondary schools (San Diego, CA and
Santa Maria, CA), the number of teachers interviewed and surveyed, and the experiences of
teachers who are still in the field, excluding those who left the field already. This research was
conducted with the intention to provide limited generalizability to suburban public districts in
California and perhaps in other states in similar contexts. Findings in rural and urban districts
may differ due to political, economic, and social contexts.
Definition of Terms
• Attrition: In this context, attrition means leaving the teaching profession (Boe et al.,
2008).
• Burnout: Burnout is “a state of fatigue or frustration brought about by devotion to a
cause, way of life, or relationship that has failed to produce the expected reward”
(Kutscher et al., 2013, p. 12).
9

• Cultural-historical activity theory: Cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) was
designed to understand networks of interacting activity systems, dialogue, and
multiple perspectives and voices (Engestrom, 2014).
• Novice/new teachers: For this study, “novice” or “new” are used interchangeably and
refer to teachers in their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd year of teaching.
• Remote learning/virtual learning: These terms are used interchangeably to refer to
learning and teaching taking place online instead of in physical classrooms.
• Retention: Retention refers to continuous employment of teachers at one placement
school.
• Revolving door: This term explains the phenomena where “large numbers of qualified
teachers depart their jobs for reasons other than retirement” (Ingersoll, 2003, p. 3).
• School transfer/teacher migration: These terms are used interchangeably and refer to
the situation of continuing to teach but changing school of employment (Boe et al.,
2008).
• Teacher turnover: This term “refers to major changes in a teacher’s assignment from
one school year to the next” (Boe et al., 2008, p. 8) and can include school or district
transfer or changing subjects or roles.
• Teacher shortage: “Teacher shortage is commonly viewed as an imbalance between
supply and demand” (Boe et al., 2008, p. 7), specifically between school and student
demand and teacher supply.
Organization of the Study
Teaching in the Time of COVID: Secondary Educators’ Experiences During and After
the COVID-19 Pandemic is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 overviews the study and
10

introduces data to present the causes and history of teacher attrition in K–12 public schools, both
nationally and in California. Chapter 2 presents a literature review in the following areas: teacher
attrition in U.S. public schools, consequences and causes of teacher attrition and burnout, federal
and state policies and solutions, impacts on equity, COVID-19 and recent attrition increases, and
CHAT. Chapter 3 describes the methodology selected for this research study and includes
sample and population selection, interview protocols, data collection, and data analysis. Chapter
4 details the research findings. Chapter 5 includes a summary of findings, implications for
practice, conclusions, and recommendations for future research. References and appendices are
included at the conclusion of this research study.

11

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Teacher burnout and attrition in U.S. public schools are long-studied and persistent
problems; both problems deeply connected and the latter costing schools thousands of dollars
and depriving U.S. schoolchildren of stability and learning (Darling-Hammond & Sykes, 2003).
Teachers continue to experience high levels of burnout and teacher attrition, despite many
solution-oriented policies and programs instituted over the years. It is imperative to study the
secondary teacher experience during the COVID-19 pandemic to provide recommendations for
reducing new teacher attrition and enhancing their educator experience. This literature review
examines the history of teacher attrition and burnout, paying special attention to secondary
teachers’ experiences during the pandemic and its aftermath. First, it explores burnout and other
causes of attrition as well as some well-known policies and solutions in California. Then, the
chapter examines the impact of teacher attrition on equity in schools as well as emerging trends
in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, it details cultural-historical activity theory
(CHAT) as the theoretical framework grounding this dissertation.
History of Teacher Burnout and Attrition
To understand better the current context of how teachers experience burnout and attrition
in their field, it is necessary to look at how these problems have been discussed and treated
historically. The following sections discuss the history of attrition and burnout as related to
schoolteachers throughout the 20th century and into the 21st century.
Attrition
Teacher attrition is an established and well-studied problem. Educators, politicians, and
researchers have been raising a cry of alarm for decades over teacher shortages and their adverse
experiences as well as the consequences these problems pose for our national education system.
12

Discussion surrounding the mounting challenges teachers face began early in the 20th century,
with focused research beginning to take place in the 1950s and 1960s (Murnane, 1981). As early
as 1959, Bain and Mason conducted a national study examining teacher turnover and found
10.9% of teachers left the classroom in 1958. Research continued into the following decades
with many large-scale studies exploring teacher attrition and retention rates, such as one finding
that teachers in Oregon often do not make it to their 5th year of teaching, instead finding
alternative occupations. Research in Missouri concluded both age and sex determined retention
rates; men and more veteran teachers fared better than female and more novice teachers
(Charters, 1970). Both Whitener’s (1965) and Charters’s (1970) studies determined sex to be a
factor in the staying power of teachers. By 1978, Mark and Anderson found a similar survival
curve to Charters (1970) but found very little difference between male and female teachers. The
idea that researchers found this topic pressing and relevant to society in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s,
and beyond emphasizes how long-standing teacher attrition is as a national problem. As this
research was conducted, the conversation surrounding this phenomenon was becoming
increasingly concerned with the difficulties facing teachers, especially how overwhelming the
work was to new teachers (Dropkin & Taylor, 1963). Researchers in the second half of the
century spent much time examining the very problems dominating the public narrative today.
Teacher attrition was still a problem in the 1980s, but an additional element to the
national dialogue was concern that the nation’s public schools did not employ highly qualified
teachers. This was notably a popular talking point when the Reagan administration released their
infamous report entitled, A Nation at Risk: An Imperative for Educational Reform, suggesting
seven ways to “improve teacher preparation and make teaching a more rewarding and respected
profession” (U.S. National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p. 24). The idea that
13

there was a surplus of inferior educators in the nation’s schools was also echoed by research
claiming teacher shortages in the 1950s and 1960s drove schools to accept lesser qualified
applicants, and the 1980s saw the results of these hiring decisions in their now veteran teachers
(Murnane, 1981). Darling-Hammond (1984) also predicted an oncoming crisis regarding a lack
of qualified educators, citing reasons such as low salary, low professionalism, bureaucratic over
management, lack of input, and less than ideal working conditions as some reasons for the
coming shortage of qualified teachers. Although the preoccupation with under-qualified teachers
was new, the central problem of teacher attrition remained.
This trend was echoed throughout the years as the annual teacher turnover rate had
increased to 1 in 4 teachers by 2001; by 2018, teachers were leaving the profession in droves,
hitting the highest attrition rate recorded in 20 years (Boe et al., 2008; Hackman & Morath,
2018). In the first month of 2018 alone, public school teachers quit at an average rate of 83,000
per 10,000 a month (Hackman & Morath, 2018). The Alliance for Excellent Education released a
report in 2014 finding, since the mid-1980s, the expansion of the teacher workforce has been
accompanied by increased turnover of teachers, especially new teachers. This new teacher
attrition has had consequences that have rippled through school systems, putting further stress
and responsibility on veteran teachers’ shoulders, making their jobs increasingly unbearable and
unsustainable. Interestingly, Darling-Hammond and Sykes (2003) found the nation does not
necessarily have a shortage of teachers but rather a maldistribution of teachers in both specific
communities and specific content areas. This maldistribution has only increased in recent years
as the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated teacher shortages in critical areas and subjects.
Since 2003, new research has shown, between 2009 and 2015, enrollment in teacher preparation
programs has fallen by 35%, and the number of people who successfully complete their teacher
14

preparation programs to 18% (DeMonte et al., 2016). Although there may be a maldistribution of
teachers, there is also a shortage of people who are interested in teaching careers or who want to
stay in the field for the entirety of their career.
To meet the rising need of schools, new administrations through the decades have passed
reform after reform, and still the nation’s teachers leave the classroom at higher rates every year.
Especially troubling, data reveal novice teachers leave within their first few years of teaching,
showing “after just five years, between 40 and 50% of all beginning teachers have left teaching
altogether” (Ingersoll, 2003, p. 13). Data collected in the 21st century have shown unequivocally
that attrition rates are high and are only growing (Johnson & Kardos, 2008). These data have
driven many variations of national education reform; consequently, researchers, policy experts,
and schools have worked hard to change the new teacher experience (Boe et al., 2008). However,
as the world evolves, so too must the approach to teacher retention.
Burnout
One of the leading causes for decades of increasing teacher attrition is a mental condition
that has broadly been dubbed “burnout.” High levels of burnout, specifically high levels of the
emotional exhaustion measure of burnout, is strongly correlated with career decisions such as
teachers leaving their school or the profession (Gilmour et al., 2022). Burnout was first noted as
a social problem, then written about primarily by practitioners using clinical description in the
1970s, with the emphasis finally shifting to systematic research and assessment of burnout in the
1980s (Maslach et al., 2016). There is a plethora of definitions of burnout (Dworkin, 1987;
Maslach et al., 2016), but the definition popularized by the psychiatrist Freudenberger (1974),
known as the founder of the concept of burnout, is that burnout is “becoming exhausted by
15

making excessive demands on energy, strength, or resources” (p. 159) and results in the subject
experiencing burnout becoming inoperative in their position.
Freudenberger was part of the first wave of burnout research relying mainly on clinical
description, called the “pioneer phase” (Maslach & Jackson, 1981). Freudenberger investigated
burnout and how it manifests in clinical staff, noting although burnout can happen to anyone in
any line of work or lifestyle, it is prevalent among clinical staff who have a responsibility to
society, their patients, and their own personal needs (Freudenberger, 1974, 1975; Heinemann &
Heinemann, 2017; Kutscher et al., 2013). Occupations contending with all these responsibilities
as an accepted facet of their work later came to be known as “helping professions” and include
professions in fields such as medical, education, and therapy (Kutscher et al., 2013).
Freudenberger wrote extensively about the physical, mental, and emotional symptoms associated
with burnout, noting the physical symptoms include exhaustion and fatigue, frequent illnesses,
headaches, sleeplessness, and shortness of breath, whereas the emotional signs of burnout are
emotional displays, quickness to anger or irritation, depression, and suspicion and paranoia. The
suspicion and paranoia may manifest as either a victimization complex or overconfidence, in
which one takes unnecessary risks either in their personal or work lives (Freudenberger, 1974).
The mental signs display as boredom or stubbornness, rigidity, or inflexibility that resist change
(Freudenberger, 1974). These symptoms are echoed in later themes of burnout research
(Kutscher et al., 2013; Madigan & Kim, 2021; Maslach & Jackson, 1981).
Maslach, a social psychology researcher, also published seminal works on burnout in the
1970s, then later began to investigate the problem in a more empirical way (Kristensen et al.,
2005; Maslach et al., 2017). Maslach’s work served as a cornerstone of the second wave of
burnout research and assessment, and within this research a more specific definition of burnout
16

emerged, described as “a syndrome of emotional exhaustion and cynicism that occurs frequently
among individuals who do ‘people-work’ of some kind” (Maslach & Jackson, 1981, p. 99).
Maslach invented a tool called the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), which allowed burnout
researchers to quantify experiences and elements of burnout in different professions (Maslach &
Jackson, 1981). Maslach noted three core elements of burnout syndrome: (a) increased feelings
of emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalization, and (c) decreased feelings of personal
accomplishment. The MBI was designed to measure these aspects of burnout syndrome and
became one of the most widely accepted tools used in burnout research, considered the gold
standard in measuring burnout (Maslach et al., 2017; Williamson et al., 2018).
The MBI has received criticism like any other research tool. One critique included the
length (22 items), which may be lengthy to administer in a wide-scale, multifaceted study (West
et al., 2012). The MBI also faced criticism for its proprietary nature because it requires licensure
to administer and researchers’ inability to access the full survey because it is not in the public
domain (Williamson et al., 2018; Kristensen et al., 2005). Other comments noted there is a lack
of an established level of burnout correlating with negative outcomes, especially because the
MBI is supposed to result in three distinct scores for each of the subscales instead of one overall
burnout score (Kristensen et al., 2005), and the three categories used to define burnout
(emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and decreased feelings of personal accomplishment)
do not necessarily translate into target areas for intervention (Williamson et al., 2018).
Kristensen et al. (2005) further argued Maslach’s definition of burnout and the consequent MBI
both revolve around the idea that burnout happens to workers in human service occupations only,
which is troubling because it makes it difficult to use the MBI to test workers from other
occupations using the tool and the definition. There are now several different versions of the
17

MBI, such as the MBI designed for educators, that was used in this study. Kristensen et al.
argued the three subscales represent distinct experiences and feelings and therefore should be
studied separately. Finally, they reported their respondents took issue with how some of the
questions are phrased on the MBI, such as, “I feel as though I treat some students as if they were
impersonal objects,” wording perceived as harsh or extreme that evoked negative reactions from
respondents. These criticisms of the MBI have been met with mixed responses, especially
regarding criticism of its theoretical underpinnings, and the response that the MBI has been well-
studied for validity (Schaufeli & Taris, 2005). Studies on the validity of the MBI can be found in
Chapter 3 of this study. The commentary most widely agreed upon is that the length of the
survey is too long, and its limited availability poses challenges for researchers (Schaufeli &
Taris, 2005; Williamson et al., 2018).
As research on burnout became more prevalent with the expansion and availability of
relevant empirical research, researchers began to narrow their investigations to examine how
burnout affects specific helping profession populations, or the aforementioned “people-work”
(Maslach & Jackson, 1981). Thus emerged a body of knowledge centered specifically around
burnout within the education field. Belcastro and Gold (1983) conducted an early study of 428
teachers in public schools in Southern Illinois and, using the MBI, found more than 11% of
teachers were burned out and complaining of somatic and psychological symptoms. Mental
health research historically has been controversial; thus, it was telling to find links between
burnout and physical symptoms. Burnout research in the education field continued, and, in 2022,
U.S. K-12 workers had the highest burnout level of all industries nationally, with 52% of
teachers reporting burnout (Marken & Agrawal, 2022).
18

Causes of Attrition and Burnout
Due to decades of research and discussion surrounding attrition and burnout, there is a
large body of knowledge surrounding the causes of attrition and burnout. Much of this
knowledge is still relevant today, but a new perspective should be applied to this research
considering a rapidly changing sociocultural and sociopolitical landscape surrounding the
ongoing COVID-19 pandemic (Newberry & Allsop, 2017). For this study, the factors explained
in the following sections represent causes of both teacher burnout and attrition. The terms are not
mutually exclusive and indeed are highly related. Although attrition is not always an outcome of
burnout, similar factors spur feelings of dissatisfaction that lead to experiences of burnout and/or
attrition (Madigan & Kim, 2021).
Traditional School Conditions
School climate, school conditions, working conditions, and professional environment are
a few of the terms that have been used to describe one of the strongest factors impacting whether
teachers stay or leave their school and the profession (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2014;
Johnson & Kardos, 2008; Loeb et al., 2005). All these terms allude to the same idea; everything
that happens in a school contributes to or takes away from the school culture and the satisfaction
and success of all stakeholders. “School conditions” is a broad term that includes tangible and
intangible instructional resources, physical facilities, availability of technology, quality of
professional development, parental involvement, testing requirements, curriculum expectations,
work relationships, discipline and behavior issues, and more (Farmer, 2020; Loeb et al., 2005;
Newberry & Allsop, 2017). School conditions vary greatly in different areas and different
schools and impact both teacher attrition and teacher turnover, potentially contributing to a
“revolving door” of teachers coming in and out of schools (Ingersoll, 2003).
19

Student Behavior
One of the most significant school conditions causing teacher stress and burnout is
student behavioral issues (Hastings & Bham, 2003). Teachers who struggle with managing
student behavior in the classroom often report high levels of burnout (Gilmour et al., 2022).
Discipline is ranked consistently as one of the most severe challenges teachers face, and new
teachers are especially vulnerable to the stress and burnout this challenge evokes (Weinstein &
Evertson, 2013). Poor student behavior is a central part of the narrative of the troubles of public
school in the United States, and a significant factor in teacher burnout and attrition.
Salary
An oft-touted complaint of the teacher industry is low salary relative to hours worked and
required demands on emotional and physical investment (DeMonte et al., 2016; Newberry &
Allsop, 2017). Some research has shown poor salary is the strongest reason for teacher attrition,
as 54% of teachers involved in teacher turnover, whether that be moving schools or attrition from
the profession, cite salary as their main reason for leaving (Ingersoll, 2003; Johnson & Kardos,
2008). Research showed most teachers are paid less than professionals with comparable
education, with the pay discrepancy widening at each higher degree earned (Johnson & Kardos,
2008). Low salary makes teaching a relatively unappealing career to embark on in the first place
and more difficult to stay in when faced with other obstacles.
Administrative Support
An exploration of teacher attrition during the COVID-19 pandemic found three
fundamental causes of attrition: poor working conditions, lack of professional development, and
poor leadership (Boateng & Donkor, 2020). Lack of professional support manifests in many
ways, including a lack of mentoring, not feeling valued in school decision making, and feeling
20

overwhelmed by the teacher workload (Kelchtermans, 2017; Newberry & Allsop, 2017).
Teachers’ complaints often have included lack of professional support as one of the primary
reasons for dissatisfaction, with as many as 43% of teachers citing poor administrative support as
one of their top reasons for leaving (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2014; Ingersoll, 2003;
Loeb et al., 2015; Newberry & Allsop, 2017).
Inversely, administrative support is one of the key elements in teacher retention (Becker
& Grob, 2021; Grissom & Bartanen, 2019). Research showed principals who are aware of their
teachers’ needs, are proactive, and are lifelong learners impact teacher retention positively
(Brown & Wynn, 2009). It also showed the impact of administrative support was more strongly
felt when principles strategically supported high-performing teachers and did not retain low-
performing teachers (Grissom & Bartanen, 2019). The principal’s responsibility is to create an
environment of effective collaboration and communication with their high-performing teachers
to promote teacher satisfaction and consequent retention (Leithwood et al., 2004). In the absence
of this culture, teachers fail to feel that administrative support.
Collaborative Structures
One distinct way in which teachers feel unsupported professionally is through isolation or
working in “egg-crate” schools in which teachers are dropped in their respective classrooms and
do not collaborate with other staff and rarely change their routine as they assume responsibility
for a group of students throughout the year (Kardos & Johnson, 2008). Teachers are expected
from the beginning to be independent and expert, with mentoring programs often operating in a
superficial or ineffective manner (Kardos & Johnson, 2008), resulting in a feeling of both
physical and emotional isolation, both of which are detrimental to teachers’ long-term health and
commitment to the classroom (Kelchtermans, 2017; Newberry & Allsop, 2017). Teachers, like
21

all others, want and need to feel emotionally connected and supported to their community. When
teachers feel isolated, they fail to thrive, and this becomes a driving force behind attrition and
burnout.
Contemporary School Conditions
School conditions have grown beyond the traditional demands of a public-school
workplace. All the traditional demands still exist, such as lesson planning, grading, managing
behavior, collaborating with colleagues and parents and guardians, but more demands are added
every year according to the sociopolitical climate.
High Stakes Testing
With the adoption of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and the Every Student
Succeeds Act of 2015, high stakes testing continues to be emphasized in the school system and
test-based accountability policies account for much stress in teachers’ lives (Farmer, 2020;
Kelchtermans, 2017) with contested benefits (Brewer et al., 2015).
COVID-19 Policies
In recent years, school conditions include COVID-19 policies such as masking, social
distancing, contact tracing, and vaccination policies. Personal health concerns added to the
anxiety of adhering to mandated policies as well as to the regular responsibilities of a
schoolteacher (Diliberti et al., 2021). Unclear expectations, lack of effective communication, and
rapidly shifting policies related to the environment of teaching in a pandemic have further
exacerbated teacher burnout (Galazka & Jarosz, 2021).
High-Trauma Situations
As members of a civilian workforce, teachers face a unique need to plan and prepare for
highly dangerous situations such as active shooters. School shootings have become an
22

increasingly visible threat, and teachers often are required to participate in training from local
law enforcement, active shooter lockdown practices, and other preparatory requirements
normally beyond the scope of a typical civilian job role. Both the events and consequent disaster
preparation expose children and adults to high-trauma situations (Farmer, 2020). In addition to
stress, teachers experience the burden of secondary traumatic stress inherited from students
coping with high amounts of stress in their own life (Farmer, 2020), increasing the likelihood of
suffering from compassion fatigue, which is “job burnout and secondary traumatic stress
stemming from vicarious exposure to client trauma” (Hupe & Stevenson, 2019, p. 1).
Compassion fatigue, in turn, is associated with increased job efficacy-cynicism and
psychological detachment, key elements of burnout (Hupe & Stevenson, 2019; Maslach &
Jackson, 1981). These types of trauma-inducing circumstances culminate in high levels of stress
and compassion fatigue, leading to teacher burnout.
Consequences of Burnout and Attrition
Teacher burnout adversely affects the teacher workforce in many ways, both internally
and externally (M. Chang, 2013). Externally, the impacts of burnout are measurable by high
attrition rates and teacher shortages. In the United States, nearly 25% of teachers leave the
profession before their 3rd year, and nearly 50% leave within the first 5 years of teaching
(Carroll, 2007; Ingersoll, 2003). Inside the classroom, teacher burnout and fatigue may lead to
ineffective teaching and harm to student learning and school culture (Olivier & Venter, 2003).
Understanding the effects of teacher burnout and attrition is critical to finding policy solutions to
address issues impacting teacher satisfaction and retention. Teacher attrition rates vary by state,
region, and subject. Data from the NCES Schools and Staffing Surveys found the highest
attrition rates in the U.S. South, particularly among low socioeconomic schools serving a
23

majority of students of color, with math, science, special education, and English language
development suffering the most (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017). This is critical to
consider when examining the impacts attrition has both broadly and by student group.
Data from 2019 showed the relatively high rate of teacher attrition had been the main
factor in teacher shortages across the United States prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, accounting
for nearly 90% of teacher demand annually, with the same study finding less than one third of
teacher attrition is the result of retirement (Sutcher et al., 2019), resulting in resources diverted
from student-centered programs to recruiting and training new teachers.
Much has been discussed about the causes of teacher burnout and subsequent attrition
and relevant data points, but the root of the problem is the impact high burnout and attrition rates
have on students and their communities. The COVID-19 pandemic has only worsened already
troubling trends, increasing rates of teacher dissatisfaction and attrition to alarming rates.
Because of this, understanding the impact of burnout and attrition on students is imperative. next,
we describe what the research has identified as the main negative impacts associated with high
teacher burnout and attrition rates.
Staffing Shortages
Educator shortages predate the pandemic, particularly for substitute teachers and in high-
attrition subjects such as math, special education, science, and bilingual education. However,
these shortages have grown alarmingly since 2020 and now include additional support staff such
as food service workers, bus drivers, and school nurses. Recent research from the NEA (2022)
found there were nearly 600,000 fewer educators in 2022 than just prior to the start of the
pandemic. Nationally, the ratio of hires to job openings for the 2021-2022 school year was 0.57
hires for every opening position (NEA, 2022). Other data found nearly 75% of teachers have had
24

to fill in for colleagues or take on other duties due to these shortages, and 80% of teachers
reported unfilled job openings led to more work obligations for the educators who remained on
staff (NEA, 2022). For districts and school administrators, this means more financial resources
and time must be spent on recruiting, hiring, and training new teachers who are statistically
likely to leave within the first few years of being hired. This lack of more permanent staff means
difficulty in building an established school culture and maintaining progress, as time and
resources become continually diverted to hiring and training year after year.
Equity Issues
Although schools nationwide suffer from low teacher retention rates and challenges
filling positions in high-needs content areas and certain geographic locations, schools serving a
high percentage of students of color, students with special learning needs, and those in low-
income areas suffer even worse rates of retention.
Special Education
Although teacher burnout and attrition impact students of all socioeconomic and racial
backgrounds, it impacts students and teachers of color in Title I schools, special education
teachers, and English language development teachers most negatively, where gaps in
achievement are already widest. Research from 2013 indicated nearly 20% of teachers in special
education either moved schools or left the profession that year (Kena et al., 2014), in addition to
another 10% of special education teachers who moved into general education setting that same
year, totaling a loss of 30% of the overall special education teaching staff in 1 year alone.
Kersaint et al. (2007) noted one significant reason for such high turnover and attrition in special
education is high levels of emotional stress, emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and
feelings of low levels of personal accomplishment.
25

Remote Learning
Remote learning has created further inequities. In a 2020 survey of nearly 6,000 teachers
across 194 schools, researchers found teachers estimated only 60% of students were engaged in
remote learning, with wide gaps in perceived engagement along racial and socioeconomic lines
(Kraft & Simon, 2020). The same study found teachers working in high-poverty schools and in
schools serving a majority of students of color reported their students had more difficulty
engaging in school and remote learning. Students of color were less likely to have access to the
internet and technology needed to engage in remote learning. Additionally, teachers who had
over 20 years of teaching experience were more than 3 times as likely to report feeling unable to
use the technology required to effectively teach remotely, meaning older teachers were at a
distinct disadvantage (Kraft & Simon, 2020).
Title I Schools and Teachers of Color
Research showed Title I schools suffered the most from teacher attrition and turnover, or
loss of a teacher from one school or district to another. Turnover rates are 50% higher for
teachers in Title I schools, and 70% higher for teachers in schools serving the largest
concentration of students of color (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017). Teachers of
color, who disproportionately teach in high-minority, low-income schools, are also more likely
to leave the profession than their White counterparts (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond,
2017). Additionally, the average cost to replace a teacher in an urban district is estimated to be
around $20,000, so Title I schools are forced to divert significant financial resources to
continually replacing lost teachers. As schools struggle to keep up with teacher demand,
positions are increasingly filled with underprepared teachers who are not fully credentialed,
usually interns or teachers on emergency substitute credentials or waivers. The number of
26

teachers in the field who are not fully credentialed has tripled in California from 2013 to 2020
(Carver-Thomas et al., 2022). High-poverty schools suffer the most from the shortage of
credentialed teachers (Garcia & Weiss, 2019).
The Impact of COVID-19
Teaching was a challenging career with high levels of burnout and attrition prior to the
COVID-19 pandemic, and became more stressful as concerns about safety, learning loss, and
remote instruction became a central focus for teachers who were already stretched thin. As a
more recent phenomena, the impacts of COVID-19 on teacher burnout and attrition are less
studied. Although we know reported numbers of teacher dissatisfaction are higher than ever,
what is less clear is how this will impact attrition in the long term, or how many of the teachers
reporting burnout will subsequently leave the profession.
Teacher Stress and Burnout
Results from a 2021 survey distributed through RAND’s American Teacher Panel and
authored by Steiner and Woo (2021) suggested teachers are experiencing additional stressors
during school years impacted by the pandemic. The two most cited stressors for teachers were
mode of instruction, specifically remote learning, and health concerns, with pandemic-related
teaching conditions, such as technical problems related to remote teaching, linked to an increase
in stress, depressive symptoms, and burnout. Further compounding the issue, one in three
teachers identified as being sole caretakers of children while teaching remotely. Because of these
stressors and others, one in four teachers surveyed reported a desire or intention to leave their job
by the end of the 2021 school year, a higher rate than any other group of employed adults
nationally (Steiner & Woo, 2021). Those who identified themselves as “likely leavers” to the
teaching profession indicated there was little that could be done to prevent their likely attrition.
27

In California, in the last 6 months of 2020, there was a 26% increase in teacher retirements, and
by the end of the 2020-2021 school year, that number had risen an additional 8% (Wolfe, 2021).
In another survey of over 1,000 former teachers, Diliberti et al. (2021) found almost half
of public-school teachers who voluntarily stopped teaching after March 2020 did so because of
the COVID-19 pandemic. Stress was the most common reason for leaving; it was almost twice as
common a reason as insufficient pay. As teachers leave the classroom in higher numbers than
ever before, administrators are forced to hire unlicensed educators to fill vacant positions
(Bryner, 2021). Research has shown teachers who are not licensed fully are less effective than
fully credentialed teachers.
Learning Loss
A 2021 research study from McKinsey & Company examining the impact of unfinished
learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic will have drastic consequences if steps are not taken to
remediate learning loss (Dorn et al., 2020). The authors’ analysis suggests today’s students may
earn up to $60,000 less over their lifetime due to pandemic-related learning loss, impacting the
U.S. economy anywhere from $128-$188 billion every year once this cohort of students enters
the workforce. The same study found students, on average, are 4 months behind in reading and 5
months behind in math, which equates to over half the school year. Although all students
experienced some degree of unfinished learning, students of color and low-income students
suffered the most. Black students at majority Black schools finished the 2020-2021 school year
6 months behind in both reading and math, and students at majority White schools were 4
months behind in math and 3 months behind in reading.

28

Student Behavioral Issues
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on student behavior. Research
showed disruptions caused by the pandemic, such as school closures and transitioning to remote
learning, led to increased levels of stress and anxiety among students (Schwartz et al., 2021). The
social isolation and lack of structure associated with remote learning also have been linked to
negative behaviors such as aggression and noncompliance (Lopez, 2020).
A report from the National Center for Education Statistics (Irwin et al., 2022) found
nearly 90% of public schools reported the COVID-19 pandemic impacted students’
socioemotional development negatively during the 2021–2022 school year. The same report
found 84% of public schools agreed or strongly agreed students’ behavioral development was
impacted negatively. Survey respondents reported student misconduct, rowdiness outside the
classroom, acts of disrespect (e.g., verbal abuse toward teachers and staff), and use of electronic
devices during class time were likely most closely linked to the COVID-19 pandemic’s
aftereffects.
Additionally, data showed chronic absenteeism at least doubled since pre-pandemic
levels (H. Chang et al., 2022). Teacher absences also increased in the last school year, often
leaving classrooms covered by administrators and nonteaching personnel. Ninety-nine percent of
schools surveyed reported challenges in finding substitutes to cover classes.
Student Mental Health
A 2021 survey of over 15,000 parents across every state in the United States found 35%
of parents said they were very or extremely concerned about their child’s mental health, with a
similar percentage worried about their child’s social and emotional well-being (Gramlich, 2023).
Parents also reported increases in clinical mental health conditions among children, with a
29

notable increase in anxiety and depression. The American Academy of Pediatrics (2021)
supported this finding with a joint report from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry and the Children’s Hospital Association, declaring the decline in child and adolescent
mental health a national emergency, linking it to an increase in behavioral problems in schools.
Similarly, the shift to remote learning and the implementation of social distancing measures have
limited opportunities for in-person socialization, leading to feelings of loneliness and isolation
among many students, increasing feelings of social rejection (Sikali, 2020). Closures of schools
and other educational institutions also disrupted extracurricular activities and social events in
which students may have participated, further limiting socialization opportunities. Teachers are
likely to feel the impacts of these findings as mental health struggles impact students’ behavior,
social-emotional wellness in the classroom, and ability to focus.
Negative Media Portrayal of Teachers
Media coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic has often portrayed educators in a
negative light, focusing on challenges and difficulties rather than resilience and innovation and at
times portraying educators as lazy (Asbury & Kim, 2020). Additionally, another study found
media coverage during the pandemic often has portrayed teachers as being solely responsible for
the challenges of remote learning without recognizing the systemic and structural issues that also
play a role (Nerlino, 2021). This type of coverage can lead to increased stress and anxiety among
educators, who already have a difficult job. These findings suggest the media’s portrayal of
educators during the COVID-19 pandemic has often been negative, which can have a negative
impact on educators’ well-being.

30

Declining Sense of Teacher Self-Efficacy
Teacher self-efficacy, or the belief in one’s ability to effectively teach and make a
difference in student learning, has been identified as a critical factor in teacher effectiveness
(Barni et al., 2019). Research showed teacher self-efficacy was related to several positive
outcomes, including increased student achievement, reduced teacher burnout, and improved
teacher retention (Bandura, 1997). The COVID-19 pandemic has presented unique challenges for
teachers, including the need to adapt to new technologies and teaching modalities. These
challenges may have implications for teacher self-efficacy, with some research suggesting the
transition to remote learning may lead to decreased teacher self-efficacy (Pressley & Ha, 2021).
2022-2023 School Year Teacher Shortages
Across the country, teacher shortages for the 2022-2023 school year are more severe
than ever before. The Nevada State Education Association estimated nearly 3,000 teaching jobs
remain unfilled across the state as of August 2022 (Natanson, 2022). In Illinois, the Illinois
Association of Regional School Superintendents reported 88% of schools were having problems
with teacher shortages, with over 2,000 job openings either empty or filled with a “less than
qualified” hire. In Houston, the city’s largest five school districts report anywhere between 200
and 1,000 unfilled positions as of August 2022 (Natanson, 2022). Temporary solutions to the
current teacher shortage are further frustrating more veteran teachers who have their full
credentials and often advanced degrees in education. Makeshift solutions to the shortage around
the country vary from state to state. In Florida, a law that took effect on July 1, 2022, allows
military veterans with no teaching background or experience to fill vacancies without a
bachelor’s degree, and in Arizona, a similar law allows college students with unfinished degrees
to take teaching jobs (Phan, 2022). In response to the teacher shortage, Randi Weingarten,
31

president of the American Federation of Teachers noted the shortage is due to a combination of
problems related to the political climate in the United States and aftereffects of COVID-19.
Weingarten also noted a confluence of factors related to pandemic-related exhaustion and stress,
low pay, and a sense that educators are not respected by parents and politicians.
Many short-term solutions, such as those listed previously, and others including
increasing class sizes, widening the pool of candidates who qualify as educators despite a lack of
credentials or relevant experience, and offering an increase in pay to substitutes who are filling in
long term for full-time teachers, is likely to harm students by diminishing the quality of
education they receive (Natanson, 2022).
Loss of Collaborative and Community Structures
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on schools and their communities,
leading to the loss of traditional school culture and community. The National School Climate
Center (Kosciw et al., 2020) found the shift to remote learning resulted in a loss of social
connections and a sense of belonging among students. The study surveyed a sample of over
2,000 students and found over half of respondents reported feeling lonely or isolated while
learning remotely. Additionally, many students reported feeling disconnected from their school
community and a lack of engagement in extracurricular activities. Furthermore, the shift to
online learning has led to a lack of access to traditional school culture such as school events,
sports, and other activities, which help students connect to their school community. These
findings suggest the COVID-19 pandemic has had a detrimental impact on school culture and
community, highlighting the importance of finding ways to support students’ social and
emotional well-being during these challenging times (Kosciw et al., 2020).

32

Remote Work
Importantly, although remote learning provided distinct disadvantages to traditional
student learning, some teachers may have experienced unexpected effects from the distance
learning model many school districts used during the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence suggested
more people working from home may have an equalizing effect on households; instead of
women primarily conducting domestic duties, men working from home may pitch in more
(Felstead, 2022). Further, employees who work remotely reported high levels of job satisfaction
(Felstead, 2022), perhaps due to the ease and convenience of being in one’s own home.
However, research also suggested people have had more problems maintaining a healthy work-
life balance when they are always “plugged in” at home (Felstead, 2022) and using the
aforementioned technology that was mandatory to teach effectively during the pandemic. As this
knowledge regarding employees’ responses to remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic is
still developing, the existing research is minimal.
Long-Term Federal and State Policy Solutions
Existing literature provides a multitude of policy suggestions for stemming teacher
attrition at the federal, state, and district level. Many of these policies are still relevant in the
post-COVID-19 climate but now are more pressing than ever. A review of the literature provides
three key categories of policy suggestions to mitigate attrition: compensation, teacher preparation
and support, and the impact of school leadership. Next, we discuss each of these in more detail.
Compensation
Compensation is consistently mentioned across the literature as one way to reduce
teacher attrition (Kolbe & Strunk, 2012). Most research has suggested providing compensation
packages that are competitive with those of other occupations requiring similar levels of
33

education (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017). At the federal level, offering service
scholarships and loan forgiveness programs can help to reduce the debt burden from teacher
preparation programs. Recent research indicated teachers are often moonlighting, or working
second jobs in their off hours, to supplement their teaching income (Garcia & Weiss, 2019). The
likely influence of a large “teacher pay gap,” or how much less teachers earn than their
comparably educated peers in other professions, is weakening the attractiveness of education as a
profession and contributing to rising attrition (Garcia & Weiss, 2019).
Teacher Preparation and Support
Teacher preparation programs may be a way to tackle the teacher shortage problem in a
more proactive manner. Indeed, even pre-pandemic teacher preparation programs saw a
significant decline in enrollment (DeMonte et al., 2016), a condition only exacerbated by the
pandemic (Giffin et al., 2021). As such, policy work around teacher preparation has emerged as a
potential solution to the teacher shortage problem. Recent research suggested school districts
should form partnerships with teacher preparation programs to engage teacher candidates early
on and create opportunities for them to begin work in their future districts (Giffin et al., 2021).
Carver-Thomas and Darling-Hammond (2017) recommended several policies focused on high-
retention pathways into teaching specifically for high-needs communities, including creating
teacher residency programs where residents train for entire year under a master teacher while
earning both a credential and master’s degree from partnering universities, along with several
other perks. They also suggested “grow your own” teacher preparation models where programs
recruit local members of the communities as well as high-quality mentoring and induction
programs. Much recent research has focused on programs that create more cohesive and local
pathways toward teaching in community school districts.
34

Mentoring Programs
Several mentoring and induction programs have been piloted in various schools, with
mixed success (Brill & McCartney, 2008; Kardos & Johnson, 2008; Lovo et al., 2006).
Mentorship programs are appealing to school districts because they are lower cost than raising
salaries (Brill & McCartney, 2008), yet research has shown they can improve retention as well as
be effective in helping teachers to reflect on and refine their teaching practices (Brill &
McCartney, 2008; Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017; Christiansen & Ramadevi,
2002). However, one study looked closely at characteristics of mentor-mentee matches and their
interactions to examine mentoring experiences across three states and found 78% of new
teachers are matched with mentors; however, many mentorships are poorly matched, and
mentees have very little interaction with mentors (Kardos & Johnson, 2008). Additionally, the
study found that between high-income and low-income schools as well as STEM teachers and
other content area teachers, with STEM teachers and low-income schools experiencing less
desirable matches and less interaction (Kardos & Johnson, 2008). This research suggested
although mentorship programs can be effective, if they are not carefully planned and executed,
with the appropriate amount of ongoing coaching and time allotted, they fail to live up to their
purported benefits. The quality of the mentoring relationship matters greatly (Day, 2017).
School Leadership
Principals and district-office staff are hugely impactful to teacher job satisfaction and
retention. Job-related stress was identified as the number one reason teachers left the profession
in 2021, with more than twice as many teachers naming stress as the reason for their attrition
overcompensation (Diliberti et al., 2021). School and district leadership can help mitigate the
impacts of stress in several ways.
35

Behavior Support
A 2021 study of nearly 700 teachers found a strong positive correlation between ability to
manage student behaviors and teacher well-being outcomes, linked to higher levels of teacher
retention (Herman et al., 2021). With a sharp increase in student behavioral issues, 70% of
teachers surveyed by the National Center for Education Statistics (Irwin et al., 2022) said more
training is required to support students’ social-emotional development and help curb behavioral
issues. Providing continuing professional development addressing classroom management
strategies could help increase feelings of job effectiveness for teachers, particularly because of
high post-pandemic behavioral issues among students.
Interpersonal Relationships
A study conducted in 2021 on teacher retention found one of the strongest predictors of
retention is if principals can maintain trust both individually with teachers and schoolwide (Price,
2021). Developing a culture of trust can improve commitment among teachers and avoid attrition
even when implemented for only a year. Principals should strive to develop quality relationships
that uphold trust and environments conducive to commitment. When leaders fail to establish an
environment of trust and commitment, challenges that arise during the school year become more
difficult to overcome.
Cultural Historical Activity Theory
Our research was grounded in the cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT). CHAT
allowed us to analyze the factors impacting teacher burnout and potential attrition holistically,
providing a framework to investigate these factors while acknowledging they are embedded
within a cultural context.

36

Background
CHAT is an evolving theoretical framework that has several features. It primarily
analyzes human activity on three levels: (a) activity based on their motives and which objects
toward which they are motivated, (b) actions based on their goals, and (c) operations based on
the conditions where they are carried out (Postholm & Vennebo, 2019). When discussing human
activity, CHAT does not refer to brief events but rather an evolving, complex structure of
collective human action (Roth & Lee, 2007). CHAT involves the ideas of goals and goal-directed
action as a part of human activity systems (Postholm & Vennebo, 2019). It rests on several
central tenets, including the ideas that the human activity is mediated by things like tools, signs,
and language, that the activity and the things that mediate it emerge through social interaction,
and that humans internalize concepts that then allow cultural reproduction (Foot, 2014; Postholm
& Vennebo, 2019). CHAT is an answer to theories that treat learning and cognition as isolated
from cultural context (Engestrom, 2014) and “addresses the troubling divides between individual
and collective, material and mental, biography and history, and praxis and theory” (Roth & Lee,
2007, p. 191).
CHAT originally sprang from work on social constructivism, sociocultural theory, and
activity theory conducted by Vygotsky and subsequently by his students, including A. N.
Leont’ev, all of whom were operating in the Soviet Union and influenced by Marxist philosophy
(Engestrom, 2014; Grimmett, 2014; Postholm, 2019; Roth & Lee, 2007). It rests on original
social constructivist theory, which posits learning occurs first on a social level and then is
internalized (Postholm, 2019) and aims to explain human behavior rather than simply describing
it (Grimmett, 2014). The first–generation model of the theory is a basic visualization of how
relationships function in human activity. Figure 2 shows Vygotsky’s (1978) first generation of
37

the theory, wherein a relationship is drawn between stimulus (S) and response (R) and an
auxiliary stimulus (X), which mediates the interaction.
The second–generation model of CHAT introduced the idea of division of labor, which
inherently acknowledges collective activity and overcomes the limitation of the first generation,
which was its focus on individuals alone as focus of analysis (Postholm & Vennebo, 2019; Roth
& Lee, 2007). It also introduced more triangles within the model to represent an activity system
(Engestrom, 2014; Postholm & Vennebo, 2019). Figure 3 represents the second generation of
CHAT (Postholm & Vennebo, 2019) and shows how the simple dynamics between stimulus,
auxiliary stimulus, and response was expanded to include a dynamic activity system where
several different stimuli (e.g., artifact, rules, community, division of labor) are included to
explain the outcome or activity.

Figure 2
Vygotsky’s Triangle

38

Figure 3
Second-Generation CHAT Model

Engestrom (2014) had influence on the second generation of CHAT and developed the
third generation of CHAT. Figure 4 shows the third generation of CHAT, representing a network
of activity systems instead of just one (Engestrom, 2014; Postholm & Vennebo, 2019). There is
the classic analysis of different stimuli in the context of both activity systems and special
attention paid to their respective contributions to the same outcome. It includes multiple
interacting activity systems to overcome limitations of perspective and subjectivity inherent to
the second–generation mode (Engestrom, 2014). It rests on the idea that all activity systems are
part of a network of activity systems that comprises human society (Roth & Lee, 2007).

39

Figure 4
Third–Generation CHAT Model

Our study used the second-generation CHAT model, as we looked at each of our school
districts as our activity system; therefore, we conducted separate analyses of the interactions and
stimuli within each of our activity systems. The third-generation CHAT model did not suit our
purposes because we each analyzed one activity system.
Application to School Research
CHAT emerged as an effective way to study schools and varying sizes of systems within
schools (Foot, 2014), because the theory “forms the basis for development towards a future
collective object which is constructed according to historical and contemporary analysis of a
practice” (Postholm & Vennebo, 2019, p. 13). Therefore, it is well suited for use by educational
leaders as they develop their schools toward their future goals while allowing for the necessity of
both historical and contemporary analysis. Schools are storied beasts; as such, neither their
culturally constructed past nor their present should be neglected in thorough analysis (Foot,
2014).
CHAT can operate both as a theoretical framework and a method to studying schools
(Postholm & Vennebo, 2019) as it does in this study. It not only framed our thinking but
40

provided a map to the factors and stimuli we should be investigating as we strived to more fully
understand why teachers are more burned out and attrition rates are higher than ever. The theory
is particularly helpful when analyzing chronically stressed institutions because it can expose
systemic contradictions that exacerbate the stress of the staff (Foot, 2014).
To use CHAT as a research approach as well as a theoretical framework, Engestrom
(2014) developed a research method titled developmental work research (DWR; Postholm,
2019). DWR as a methodology promotes positive change in practice using collaboration
(Postholm, 2019). In DWR, the researcher is referred to as the “formative interventionist
researcher,” and they work with practitioners to understand system practices, mirror those
practices, and suggest new ideas to provoke change (Postholm, 2019). Although we did not work
with the teachers we interviewed, we hope our interpretations of our data and consequent
suggestions provoke school leaders to make positive change.
Criticism
Some researchers have critiqued the activity theory as represented in the CHAT triangle
model as being too static and rigid; however, a contrasting viewpoint is that CHAT encourages
optimism as it views each action as potentially transformational instead of static by imbuing each
action with the power to change circumstances (Roth, 2004).
Another criticism of CHAT is that the contemporary version of the theory ignores
dialectical thinking (Langemeyer & Roth, 2006). Vygotsky’s original work on activity theory
had dialectical roots because it sought to understand the connections between physiological and
psychic phenomena, individual and societal dimensions, and it used holistic perspectives
(Langemeyer & Roth, 2006). Scholars argued the current understanding of CHAT undermines its
potential of human development because it is treated as an instrument to meet the shortcomings
41

of other theories instead of a way of thinking to challenge paradigms around traditional research
practices (Langemeyer & Roth, 2006).
Conceptual Map
For this study, we used the CHAT model both as our theoretical framework and as a
model for our conceptual map (see Figure 1). We used CHAT as a tool to examine the
experiences and perceptions of secondary teachers hired during the COVID-19 pandemic,
particularly as they relate to possible attrition and burnout. Use of this conceptual map allowed
us to consider different elements of a teachers’ professional life to understand their lived
experiences. The map defines the studied subject as secondary public-school teachers, the object
as teachers’ experiences teaching during and after the pandemic, and the outcome as teacher
burnout and attrition. It includes tools as teacher supports such as mentors, instructional coaches,
teacher meetings, shared resources, and feedback. It defines community as the school community
but also the school district community, teacher unions, and the community at large, including
parents and students, as communities that could influence a teacher’s experience. It
acknowledges division of labor as being a balance between teachers, administrators, department
heads, and substitute teachers. It also defines the rules, norms, and conventions as COVID-19
policies, curricular expectations, behavior management expectations, instructional expectations,
documentation expectations, salary schedules, and extracurricular responsibilities. The double-
ended arrows pointing to each factor represent the complex and entwined nature of studying an
individual’s lived experience–interactions do not exist in a vacuum. They are influenced by any
number of factors. This map serves as the starting point toward designing our study specifically
to analyze teachers’ experiences holistically, as the CHAT model demands.
42

Conclusion
This literature review provided a foundation upon which to frame our findings. This
chapter detailed the relevant research on the history of teacher burnout and attrition as well as the
causes, consequences, and contemporary landscape of these phenomena. It also discussed
emerging research on the impact of COVID-19 on the field of education and the state and federal
policies and solutions that have been enacted and proposed in reaction to teacher burnout and
attrition. Finally, it delved into CHAT, which we used as our theoretical framework and to
inform our conceptual map. Chapter 3 discusses the unique methodology we designed and used
to conduct our research. In Chapter 4, we present our data and analysis. Chapter 5 contains a
discussion of findings, implications for stakeholders, and recommendations for future research.

43

Chapter Three: Methodology
Close to 50% of teachers leave teaching within their first 5 years of teaching (Ingersoll,
2003), with an additional 13% of teachers moving or leaving their school site each year (Alliance
for Excellent Education, 2014). Teachers are subject to intense workplace stress every day, at
times leading to burnout and consequent attrition from the profession (Diliberti et al. 2021;
Farmer, 2020). Historical reasons for burnout and attrition range from poor workplace
conditions, poor leadership, poor school climate, lack of competitive salary, to lack of
professional development, among others (Boateng & Donkor, 2020; DeMonte et al., 2016;
Newberry & Allsop, 2017). With the onslaught of the COVID-19 pandemic, new stressors have
been added to those already existing and feelings of burnout intensified. Recent research found 1
in 4 teachers were considering leaving by the end of the 2020-2021 school year compared to 1 in
6 pre-pandemic (Steiner & Woo, 2021).
Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of COVID-19 and its aftermath on
teacher dissatisfaction and burnout to propose thoughtful recommendations for administrators to
improve teachers’ working conditions. Prior research showed teachers experience an attrition
rate of nearly 50% within the first 5 years of teaching (Ingersoll et al., 2018), with burnout and
stress being two of the leading causes (Farmer, 2020). This research sought to determine whether
increases in stress, burnout, and subsequent attrition may occur due to pandemic-related factors
impacting the teacher experience and how they may be mitigated.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided the study:
44

1. How do secondary teachers describe their experience teaching in San Diego and
Santa Maria during and after the COVID-19 pandemic?
2. What do secondary teachers in San Diego and Santa Maria describe as factors
influencing their experiences?
3. What additional administrative support do secondary teachers in San Diego and Santa
Maria identify as helpful to improve work and life experience?
Selection of the Population
We first surveyed secondary teachers in three San Diego-area public districts, San Diego
Unified School District, San Dieguito Unified School District, and High Tech High Charter
District, and the Santa Maria Joint Union High School District (SMJUHSD). Survey participants
were all full-time secondary teachers with no further qualifying factors. From a link on the
survey, respondents filled out an optional form with their name and contact information,
indicating they were interested in participating in an additional interview process. Interview
participants then were selected based on their consent to participate in a follow-up interview.
To conduct this study, we used sampling methods to suit each of our contexts. Twenty-
five secondary teachers from both the San Diego districts and SMJUHSD were surveyed;
subsequently, five secondary teachers from each survey group were interviewed. Small,
purposeful sample sizes allowed us to gather more in-depth information, specifically focusing on
secondary teachers’ experiences working during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. No
limitations were placed on gender, race, age, or ethnic background because we are interested in
understanding the experience of teachers as whole, except for Abby’s exclusion of English
teachers from her population because she is an English teacher at a school in the district and
wished to place more distance between participants and herself to protect the validity of the
45

study. Abby used purposeful sampling wherein cases for study are selected based on their ability
to yield rich information (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017), specifically convenience sampling
because she studied the school district where she is employed, as well as because it was the most
accessible, convenient, and representative sample (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Because data
collected spanned multiple public-school districts in the San Diego area, Gina’s quantitative data
collection used a snowball sampling approach, which relied on sending survey information and
links to teachers who forwarded the information to other secondary teachers at their school.
Design Summary
This study relied on two sets of data collection in stages. First, a quantitative, closed-
ended survey was sent to 25 secondary teachers in San Diego and SMJUHSD. The survey
focused on burnout indicators and allowed us to both collect data to understand general feelings
of burnout in our populations and to identify participants for interviews who volunteered their
contact information. Five teachers volunteered to participate in more in-depth, semistructured,
qualitative interviews. There were no specific parameters set for participation in in-depth
interviews; participants only had to be secondary teachers working full time in public schools.
Participation in the interview process was voluntary. Using both the survey instrument and the
qualitative interviews allowed us to gain a more complete picture of stressors related to the
teaching profession generally, and then more specifically related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Use of both data sets allowed for additional depth of information to better describe the
experiences of teachers.
This research followed Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) framework of a research study. The
research problem and purpose of the study are outlined in Chapter 1, and a review of existing
46

literature follows in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 addresses data collection and methodology, and
Chapters 4 and 5 provide data reporting, analysis, and interpretation.
Methodology
This study provides both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods to
understand more deeply the experiences of teachers working during the COVID-19 pandemic
through a phenomenological approach. This approach allows us to more closely examine the
essence of teachers’ experiences to produce a systematic description of meaning (Lochmiller &
Lester, 2017). Phenomenological research is unconcerned with precise, quantifiable data, but
rather gaining a deeper understanding of the meaning of everyday phenomena (Vagle, 2018). As
van Manen (2016) wrote, “A phenomenology of practice does not aim for technicalities and
instrumentalities—rather, it serves to foster and strengthen an embodied ontology, epistemology,
and axiology of thoughtful and tactful action” (p. 15). In the context of this study, it is useful to
approach studying teachers’ experience through this lens as we try to make sense of their
worldview and how they might be supported. We used this approach with our research questions
and conceptual map to craft our interview protocol and later interpret and analyze our data to
ensure our study elicited data about teachers’ authentic, subjective experiences (Vagle, 2018).
The first set of data collected were from a close-ended, quantitative survey called the
Maslach Burnout Inventory for Educators (MBI-ES). Data collected from this inventory were
used to measure burnout in participating teachers on three subscales: emotional exhaustion,
depersonalization, and personal accomplishment. There is no one score proving a person is burnt
out, but scores can be determined using an absolute value approach, meaning they are considered
burnt out based on where they fall on the 7-point scale. A score of 3.5 or higher on the emotional
exhaustion and depersonalization subscales, and/or a score of 3.5 or lower on the personal
47

accomplishment subscale, would indicate the participant feels these subscale feelings are true for
them 50% of the time, a relatively high amount of time to be experiencing these debilitating
feelings. The survey provided valuable data related to the extent of teacher burnout. Information
from the survey then was used to develop interview protocols to explore themes related to
burnout and more specifically to COVID-19 and related resulting stressors. Because the MBI-ES
survey instrument was developed before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and did not
address burnout factors related to COVID-19 specifically, in-depth interviews were conducted to
provide additional data, allowing us to understand the impact of the pandemic on burnout
indicators. Interview protocols were semistructured to allow for flexibility, and follow-up
questions were tailored to participant response (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). All research questions
were addressed in both the interview protocols and survey instrument.
Validity
We triangulated our findings through an analysis of survey data, interview responses, and
an extensive review of existing literature. Additionally, member checks were conducted to
ensure credibility of qualitative findings, with interview participants reviewing findings in
Chapter 4 before publication. Internal validity was established by writing memos to ourselves
during the data analysis and interpretation process to allow for increased reflection and
transparency (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). The psychometric properties of the MBI quantitative
survey instrument were studied and found to be both valid and reliable by outside peer-reviewed
studies, which is further detailed in the following section on validity and reliability.
Instrumentation and Protocols
Quantitative Instrument
48

Data to fulfill the quantitative component of this study were collected through a notable
survey instrument known as Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) to aid us in discovering traits and
characteristics about teachers identifying as vulnerable to burnout (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Within this inventory, there are several different surveys to suit different populations. We used
the MBI for Educators (MBI-ES), which relies upon three categories, or “burnout scales” to
determine the extent the surveyed educator is vulnerable to feelings of burnout (see Appendix
B). The three categories include: (a) emotional exhaustion, defined as “feelings of being
emotionally overextended and exhausted by one’s work”; (b) depersonalization, defined as “an
unfeeling and impersonal response towards students”; and (c) personal accomplishment, defined
as “feelings of competence and successful achievement in one’s work with students” (Maslach et
al., 2016, p. 31). Interestingly, the MBI-ES was adapted from the MBI for Human Services,
which is the original instrument, but they are similar in theoretical nature as both education and
human services are classified as “helping professions.” Employees in these helping professions
are known for being vulnerable to burnout, and MBI was designed to assess this syndrome
(Kutscher et al., 2013).
The MBI-ES consists of 22 close-ended questions, each designed to address one of the
subscales. Each item is a statement, and the respondent indicates the frequency to which they
experience that feeling using a 7-point, fully anchored response format (Maslach et al., 2016). To
preserve the survey’s validity, the word “burnout” is not featured on or within the survey to
avoid answers that are weighted toward preconceptions respondents may hold about the term. It
is designed to take 10-15 minutes to complete. The survey was administered in a Google Form
template, distributed via a link in an email.

49

Qualitative Instrument
To collect rich, qualitative data for our study, we conducted five in-depth interviews with
participants who volunteered their information by following a link included in the survey that
allowed them to input contact information. Interview questions were designed to answer the
three research questions in considerable depth, adding detail and diversity to quantitative data
collected about participants’ feelings of burnout while teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic
(see Appendix A; Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). We offered participants a choice of whether they
wanted to participate in face-to-face interviews or interviews conducted over the Zoom video-
conferencing software program, with the understanding that although face-to-face interviews are
ideal (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017), modern communication is often conducted online and could
be a more convenient and comfortable choice for our participants.
Data Collection
Data collection was accomplished in a series of steps, led by purposeful sampling of
participants. We first identified which target population would have the most in-depth
knowledge pertaining to our research questions. This allowed us to narrow our response pool to
high school teachers working in San Diego and SMJUHSD. After identifying a target population,
we followed district protocols for permission to conduct research in partnership with San Diego
schools and SMJUHSD. For Gina, this process consisted of emailing the survey to department
chairs within each district, who then distributed it to teachers at their school sites, using a
snowball sampling technique. For Abby, this process consisted of contacting her principal and
the SMJUHSD director of student services and providing them with a copy of the MBI-ES and
research information sheet. She met with them to explain her research and answer any questions.
They received approval from district leadership and allowed her to email the survey to all
50

teachers at her school site using convenience sampling. Some teachers then emailed the survey to
teachers at other school sites in the district, allowing her to access data from teachers at multiple
school sites. The survey was closed for responses after we each received 25 responses. The
survey allowed participants to volunteer their contact information if they were interested in
participating in a follow-up interview.
Interviews were then conducted over a period of 3 weeks. Interview protocols consisted
of 12 questions and lasted for approximately 45 minutes. Gina held interviews off campus during
non-school hours to ensure confidentiality of participants and data were stored securely after
collection. Because Abby interviewed teachers in her district, she held interviews during the
lunch hour and after school on campus in individual teachers’ classrooms, except for one teacher
who chose to do a Zoom interview. After interview data were collected and coded, member
checks were conducted to ensure credibility of our results and follow-up emails were sent to
participants as necessary for clarification of responses.
Data Analysis
This study used a phenomenological approach, incorporating both quantitative data from
the surveys and qualitative data from the interviews to provide a rich description of the
experiences of teachers. All survey items and interview protocols were linked to the research
questions, which also guided data analysis for this study.
To analyze data collected from the MBI-ES, we calculated the averages of the
participants’ self-reported scores on the emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal
accomplishment burnout subscales. Data from survey collection were used to identify burnout
trends among educators teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic and whether they self-
identified as experiencing burnout. Interview participants were identified through a contact form
51

they voluntarily completed after accessing the link on the survey. Interview questions sought to
examine more closely the causes of burnout, as the survey data only identified whether burnout
was occurring, but not the causes. Interviews were semistructured. All interviews were recorded
and later transcribed. Each researcher analyzed data separately in an inductive manner as is
appropriate for the phenomenological approach we used because our goal was to generate theory
from collected data (Williams & Moser, 2019). Data analysis was accomplished by reviewing
transcriptions to determine broad codes, then more specifically going line by line to identify a
secondary set of codes, then categorizing codes, and then finally determining themes based on
the categorization of codes (Williams & Moser, 2019). Interview findings were then used to
populate the CHAT framework to identify how factors related to burnout and the COVID-19
pandemic intersected to impact secondary public-school teachers’ experience. We then wrote
separate reports discussing the findings from each data source within the separate districts.
Reliability and Validity
Throughout the study, we used a variety of methods to ensure we were adhering to the
highest levels of ethical practice when conducting research. To increase our reliability and
validity when conducting our quantitative research, we relied on a well-known burnout survey
instrument, the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), specifically the MBI for Educators (MBI-
ES). The MBI has multiple different versions tailored for different professions and has been in
use since 1981. Since then, many studies have examined the MBI-ES and have found acceptable
internal reliability estimates (Maslach et al., 2016). The MBI uses subscales to measure three
core aspects of burnout: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment.
The subscales’ reliability has been studied by measuring the internal consistency estimates using
Cronbach’s coefficient alpha; multiple studies found appropriate reliability for all three
52

subscales, with consistent findings of a slightly lower reliability when measuring
depersonalization (M. Chang, 2013; Iwanicki & Schwab, 1981; Kokkinos, 2006). Separate
studies have investigated the internal validity of the MBI-ES, exploring the relationship between
burnout scales and different aspects of teachers’ work experiences. They found strong
correlations between teachers’ working conditions and the aforementioned subscales, notably in
examples such as student behavior associated with increased emotional exhaustion (M. Chang,
2013) and decreased personal accomplishment (Lambert et al., 2009). Other studies explored
longer term outcomes, inspecting the correlation between burnout scale scores and predicted
burnout outcomes, such as Hoglund et al.’s (2015) findings illustrating a correlation between
feelings of burnout and less improvement in the teacher-student relationship and lower literacy
skills. This body of work has contributed important findings surrounding burnout in education
and provides evidence to the solid reliability and validity of the MBI-ES.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Much attention was paid to ensuring the credibility and trustworthiness of our design and
methods. We triangulated our data by examining survey results, interview data, and a large-scale
literature review to substantiate emerging findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Prior to data
collection and analysis, we developed the interview protocol based on our conceptual map and
with an eye toward eliminating potential bias in our questions, because we are vulnerable to that
pitfall with our mutual backgrounds as classroom educators. Subsequently, to enhance
credibility, we used member checks by sending follow-up emails to our interview participants to
solicit their feedback on our emerging findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). We conducted
member checks both to eliminate any misunderstanding or misinterpretation and to identify
potential bias in our interpretation (Maxwell, 2013). Following qualitative best practice, we
53

engaged in writing memos to ourselves during the data analysis and interpretation process to
allow for increased reflection and transparency (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). We also ensured we
reached a point of saturation in findings when conducting interviews, only concluding the
literature review and interview collection process when the same information was repeated in
multiple texts and interview sessions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Furthermore, we understand it
is critical to acknowledge our positionality within each step of our research process and therefore
took time to engage in reflexivity at the onset of our study (Agee, 2009; Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). More detailed discussion of our positionality follows.
Positionality of Researchers
Positionality of Abigail Clark
As a White, female classroom teacher, I hold beliefs about educators and the educational
system that are necessary to recognize to acknowledge how my role as a researcher affects or
may have been affected by this study. My experience as a classroom teacher means it would be
easy to relate others’ experiences as classroom teachers to my own, but this would be a mistake
and would reduce the trustworthiness of our research. I can only represent my own experience
and have to acknowledge others’ positionalities and singular experiences fall in a vast range. As
someone who has experienced aspects of educator burnout and stayed in the profession, it might
make me prone to undervaluing someone else’s depth of intensity with feelings of burnout.
When conducting this research, it was imperative I honor others’ feelings and choices while
navigating the challenges of burnout. Finally, I am a classroom teacher in the district in which I
conducted research, and therefore needed to be conscious of excluding any preconceptions or
biases about school environments from my analysis.

54

Positionality of Gina Cherashore
I have worked in education in several different contexts since 2011. I have taught at the
middle school, high school, and now higher education levels. My past experiences in education
have shaped my research interests in teacher satisfaction and attrition, as does my positionality as
a White, female, educator and mother who has worked to balance both family and a teaching
career. As someone who temporarily left the profession to care for two young children, I
understand what it is like to feel as though continuing to teach is at odds with economic and
family needs. Because of my experiences, I took additional care to ensure continued self-
reflection of my own biases and have sought the oversight of other experienced educators and
researchers to ensure interview protocols and analysis and interpretation of data were credible.
Our study was designed to highlight our interview participants’ narratives, and it was our goal to
tell their stories as authentically as possible. To this end, we allowed participants to review our
data prior to finalizing our research to ensure the credibility and authenticity of findings.
Summary
This study used a qualitative design, incorporating both a close-ended survey and in-
depth qualitative interviews to elicit the richest data possible to address our research questions. It
used a phenomenological approach through the lens of the CHAT to explore the experiences of
secondary teachers who self-identified as vulnerable to burnout in San Diego and Santa Maria
school districts as well as investigating what supports could alleviate experiences of burnout and
increase job satisfaction. Chapter 4 presents findings from these school districts, and Chapter 5
discusses the findings and presents recommendations.

55

Chapter Four: Results
This study examined teachers’ experiences during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic,
both during remote learning and the subsequent return to in-person teaching. This study also
examined how administrators can mitigate negative teacher experiences associated with the
pandemic and its aftermath.
This study and data collection process was guided by the following questions:
1. How do secondary teachers describe their experience teaching in San Diego during
and after the COVID-19 pandemic?
2. What do secondary teachers in San Diego describe as factors influencing their
experiences?
3. What additional administrative support do secondary teachers in San Diego identify
as helpful to improving their work and life experience?
This chapter focuses on results within San Diego County, with data collected from
several San Diego-based public schools. In addition to a detailed discussion of interview
responses, Chapter 4 also examines in greater detail the results of the Maslach Burnout Index
Survey for educators, which provided a broader overview of teachers’ experiences based on three
categories: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal achievement.
The research results are presented next, organized by research question. For each research
question, there is a brief review of relevant literature and a preview of results. Results are
presented in three or four themes that emerged related to each question. Finally, a summary of
results related to each research question is presented, with a cumulative summary presented at
the end of the chapter.
56

Participants
All survey and interview participants were secondary teachers teaching at either the
middle or high school level in public schools located within San Diego County. Teachers had to
have their own classroom and have been teaching full time for at least 1 school year between the
years 2019 and 2022 to participate in an interview; survey participants only needed to be
teaching in a secondary classroom in San Diego with no required length of teaching. Twenty-five
participants completed the Maslach Burnout Survey for Educators (MBI-ES), discussed in
greater detail next. Because this survey was anonymous, no identifying data were collected from
participants.
In-depth interviews were conducted with five volunteers identified based on their survey
completion and subsequent volunteering of identifying information for a follow-up interview. All
five participants were teachers at San Diego public schools, one of whom teaches at a public
charter. Table 1 provides additional information to provide a fuller contextual understanding of
participants’ backgrounds.

Table 1
Participant Demographic Information
Teacher pseudonym Sex Age Years teaching
Willa F 43 19
Lucy F 44 20
Sean M 35 2
Jennifer F 41 20
Veronica F 38 18
57

Survey Results
Survey responses were analyzed prior to coding and analyzing interview responses.
Results were analyzed separately based on three categories: emotional exhaustion,
depersonalization, and personal achievement. In this study, only one subcategory, emotional
exhaustion, resulted in a mean burnout score of 3.477, which indicated a significant degree of
burnout among participants (n = 25). Table 2 provides mean survey responses by category. A
higher score indicates burnout for both the emotional exhaustion and depersonalization
categories, and a lower score indicates burnout for the personal achievement category.
The 9-item emotional exhaustion (EE) scale assesses feelings of being emotionally
overextended and exhausted by one’s work. For this scale, higher scores correspond to a greater
experienced burnout, with a score of 6 representing the highest (most measurable burnout) and 0
representing the lowest (no measurable burnout). For this study, a cutoff score of 3.5 or above
was used for this category to indicate some degree of burnout. Sixty-nine percent of respondents
scored at or above that cutoff, indicating emotional exhaustion. These corroborated findings are
further discussed in Research Question 1.

Table 2
MBI-ES Mean Survey Responses
MBI-ES Scales
Emotional exhaustion Depersonalizaton Personal achievement
Mean score 3.48 1.73 4.59

Note. A cutoff score of 3.5 was used to indicate burnout.
58

The 5-item depersonalization (DP) scale measures an unfeeling and impersonal response
toward recipients of one’s service, care, treatment, or instruction. For this category, higher scores
correspond to greater degrees of experienced burnout. A cutoff of 3.5 or above was used for this
category to indicate burnout. Not surprisingly, teachers showed very low levels of burnout in this
category with a mean of 1.73, which aligns with interview responses in which teachers describe
empathy and understanding for students and the struggles they faced during and after remote
learning. No individual survey participants received a score indicating burnout in this area.
The 8-item personal accomplishment (PA) scale assesses feelings of competence and
successful achievement in one’s work with people. For this category, lower scores correspond to
greater levels of burnout. A cutoff of 3.5 or lower was used to indicate burnout in this area. This
category indicated the most contradictory results when compared to interview data with a mean
score of 4.59, indicating a nonsignificant level of burnout among participants. When examining
interview data, although no participants reported feeling incompetent in their work, as described
in survey questions, several indicated feeling the feedback received from students was not
commensurate with the additional level of work spent preparing and delivering lessons both
during remote learning and upon returning to in-person learning, indicating some level of
decreased personal accomplishment. This contradictory result may be due to several conditions.
First, the MBI-ES did not measure whether teachers felt perceived levels of effort were met with
commensurate levels of positive feedback from students or a sense of personal accomplishment.
Another possible cause of the discrepancy in this result is the use of what some may consider as
harsh language or phrasing in the MBI-ES survey instrument such as, “I treat some students as if
they are impersonal objects.” Some participants may feel uncomfortable responding to such a
question, as it likely evokes a strong negative reaction (Kristensen et al., 2005).
59

Results for Research Question 1
The study’s first research question explored more in-depth the general experiences of
teachers during the pandemic and how they describe those experiences. Research Question 1
addressed the question: How do secondary teachers describe their experience teaching in San
Diego during and after the COVID-19 pandemic?
Responses to this question included both positive and negative aspects of self-reported
experiences, with some teachers expressing logistical advantages of working from home, and all
participants citing at least some negative experiences associated with remote learning and
challenges managing issues related to the pandemic, specifically negative student experiences
and learning loss. Several themes emerged, including a declining sense of personal achievement
and meaningful impact, negative impacts on students, and advantages of working remotely.
Declining Sense of Achievement and Meaningful Impact
One significant theme that emerged during interviews was teachers describing a sense
that their work during the COVID-19 pandemic had a less meaningful impact and contributed to
an overall decline in their sense of self-efficacy and achievement. Several teachers noted their
increased workload was not commensurate with a positive impact on student engagement or
achievement, leading to feelings of frustration and even helplessness. Jennifer noted:
I’ve never worked that hard in my entire life, and had my work not be meaningful or
well-received if that makes sense. My lessons were never going to be as engaging as
TikTok or Instagram or anything that they’re used to seeing on a computer, no matter
what I did.
Lucy shared a similar experience:
60

I don’t mind working hard when I get feedback, but I would reflect after a lesson and
think, “Well, that was just alright. I survived.” So, there was this general feeling that all
my sacrifices weren’t adding up to an output that was worth the sacrifice.
Survey results supported the finding that participants experienced significant emotional
exhaustion associated with additional work and less meaningful results. Questions corresponding
to emotional exhaustion are in Table 3. This scale assessed teachers’ feelings of emotional
overextension, which can present as an initial aspect of educator burnout, with teachers
describing feelings of fatigue and tiredness (Maslach, 2018). When these feelings become
chronic, educators find they can no longer give themselves to students as they once could.

Table 3
MBI-ES Emotional Exhaustion Indicators
MBI-ES survey items related to emotional exhaustion indicators Mean response
I feel emotionally drained from my work. 3.94
I feel used up at the end of the workday. 4.76
I feel fatigued when I get up in the morning. 3.88
Working with people all day is really a strain for me. 2.35
I feel burned out from my work. 3.94
I feel frustrated by my job. 3.70
I feel I’m working too hard on my job. 4.06
Working with people directly puts too much stress on me. 1.76
I feel like I’m at the end of my rope. 2.88

Note. Higher scores indicate emotional exhaustion, with a cutoff of 3.5 or above indicating a
significant degree of emotional exhaustion. The highest possible score is 6.
61

Research showed, as part of a helping profession or one focused on serving others,
teachers particularly are vulnerable to feelings of job dissatisfaction and fatigue when they do not
receive the expected reward from devotion to their work (Kutscher et al., 2013). Working
conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic and remote instruction simultaneously increased
teacher workload while decreasing teacher perception of producing a meaningful impact, leading
to a lowered self-efficacy and increased exhaustion. Several teachers noted high levels of fatigue,
an early indicator of burnout. Willa said, “I just don’t have another 20 years of this in me. I’m so
tired, and I’m tired in a way I’ve never been. The joy is gone from teaching right now.” Veronica
felt similarly, saying, “I feel like teaching just drains your life because you are giving so much
and you’re so tired. There’s no balance.”
Negative Impacts on Students
Teachers’ remarks regarding student experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic were
overwhelmingly negative. Teachers expressed feeling responsible for the experiences of students
with a concern for long-term impacts on their learning and overall well-being. Willa expressed
the concern that impacts on students would likely be long lasting and that the challenge to
mitigate learning loss and other effects would fall largely to teachers, saying:
We are the ones dealing with the aftermath and all the repercussions that we’ll experience
with this entire generation of kids. There’s a whole generation of kids who lost high
school or who lost early childhood development, who lost their middle school years.
There’s so much that has been lost and damaged and we are the ones dealing with the
aftereffects of it.
Other teachers noted remote learning and the systems in place to support it were
generally ineffective, with few accountability systems in place for students. Several teachers
62

noted their schools did not immediately provide computers to students, making it difficult to
effectively assess student learning, gauge accurate attendance, or respond meaningfully to
student questions. Every interviewee reported problems with student engagement via Zoom, with
reflections such as, “Kids were able to have cameras off, they were lying in bed, it was just
impossible,” and “I got to know students’ avatars, or their ceiling fans; their cameras were
usually off.”
The findings described in this section are supported by a growing body of research
regarding the impacts of COVID-19 on adolescent students. Research shows a multitude of
negative effects from school closures and remote instruction on students, most significantly on
their mental health and academic performance. The Journal of Adolescent Health reported
significant negative impacts on student mental health and well-being, including an increase in
symptoms of anxiety and depression (Jones et al., 2020). Additionally, the pandemic has
contributed to a decline in academic performance for all groups of students, with one study
showing the negative impacts were particularly extreme for students already struggling
academically prior to the pandemic. Students experienced a further decline in their academic
performance likely due to disruptions in their learning environment and lack of access to in-
person support services (Brown et al., 2021).
Advantages of Remote Work
Although there was an overall sense that remote learning was negative for students’
learning and engagement, some teachers reflected on the advantages of working from home,
noting that it gave them the opportunity to engage in acts of self-care they are otherwise unable
to when working on site. Two subthemes emerged in this category: advantages of home as a
physical work environment, and schedule flexibility leading to increased self-care.
63

Physical Environment
Personal health concerns have been an added anxiety for teachers amid the ongoing
pandemic (Diliberti et al., 2021). Teachers expressed feeling working from home was safer, both
physically and from a health perspective, alleviating much of the anxiety surrounding health and
safety during the pandemic. Regarding working from home being more physically safe, Jennifer
said, “You know, as morbid as it sounds, we didn’t have that worry of safety, or gun violence.”
She also commented on how significant an impact her improved health made on her quality of
life. She noted, “I didn’t get sick one time the entire time we were remote. That’s something
subtle but it makes a big difference in quality of life.”
Schedule Flexibility Leading to Increased Self-Care
Several teachers remarked on their ability to design a more flexible work and leisure
schedule while working remotely, enabling them to participate in acts of self-care they otherwise
could not while working full time on site and providing more work–life balance. Veronica
described her remote schedule as beginning at 4 a.m. to finish preparatory work by the early
afternoon, enabling her to spend time with her young child. Another noted she could participate
in online yoga classes prior to conducting remote class, an advantage to working remotely she
otherwise could not have enjoyed. Jennifer, who also served as her department’s chair, recalled a
meeting with a coworker who has young children upon their return to in-person teaching who
said she planned to leave the profession if her schedule changed the following school year. She
said:
If we had childcare on campus, or you know, more flexible scheduling for when classes
are and guaranteed flexible scheduling for parents, that would make a huge difference. I
64

have a teacher in my department who says that she’s going to leave the profession next
year if she doesn’t get the schedule that she has this year.
Discussion for Research Question 1
Responses to Research Question 1 revealed several considerations. First, teachers largely
felt remote learning was insufficient for students of this age group (Grades 6 through 12) and
contributed to significant learning loss and social challenges. Teachers expressed feeling less
able to engage students and that the student experience, overall, was negative despite their best
efforts. Perhaps most notably, teachers expressed feeling the tradeoffs and sacrifices they were
making to prepare and deliver lessons were not commensurate with positive feedback they
received from students or a personal sense of accomplishment, reiterating findings from previous
literature that teachers, as members of a helping profession, require positive feedback to feel
satisfied in their jobs.
Some teachers described positive aspects of working from home such as flexibility in
their schedule and ability to participate in acts of self-care. These were described as greatly
improving their quality of life and, if incorporated into the normal school year, may increase job
satisfaction and retention.
Looking at quantitative survey data, 69% of participants responded above the 3.5
threshold for burnout on the emotional exhaustion scale, indicating high levels of fatigue.
Although many factors contribute to feelings of burnout, this is a reliable indicator that teachers
are feeling overwhelmed in response to a variety of factors. Research Question 2 examined in
greater detail the most influential factors leading to feelings of burnout and exhaustion amid the
ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
65

Results for Research Question 2
Research Question 2 asked the following: What do secondary teachers in San Diego
describe as factors influencing their experiences during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic?
Research Question 2 examined influences of teachers’ experiences teaching both remotely and
upon returning to the classroom. Recent research showed teachers were largely unsatisfied in
their jobs, with one in four reporting a desire or intention to leave their job as of 2021, a rate
higher than that of any other group of employed adults in the United States (Steiner & Woo,
2021). This sentiment was confirmed by several interview participants, who noted a desire to
leave the profession either within the next year or before retirement. Themes emerging from this
question included: unreasonable expectations from administrators, negative portrayals of
educators in the media, changes in student behaviors, and loss of community and collaborative
structures.
Unreasonable Academic Expectations From Administration
Several teachers remarked on challenges related to unreasonable expectations from
administrative leaders for both teachers and students. Students have fallen behind academically
due to prolonged remote instruction during the 2020–2021 school years, leaving teachers who
are charged with meeting learning targets struggling to catch students up while learning gaps
widen (Kuhfeld et al., 2020). Several teachers expressed a disconnect between what students and
teachers could do with the resources available to them upon their return to the classroom and
what administrators expected or were emphasizing as important. Sean expressed feeling his
administrators were overly focused on getting back to standards-based learning:
When we have our meetings, our principal has been talking about getting back to content,
[as opposed to] making sure that Maslow’s needs are met, and that they’re safe and
66

healthy and in school. We’re now making the shift back to content and, you know,
instruction, which I think is a little difficult, because you have to have both, and they
missed so much time and development. We’re at a point in education where we possibly
need to reevaluate what our standards are, and if we’re going to adhere to them,
especially when it comes to things like testing. How closely are they going to look at
state testing when kids are not at that level after having missed 2 years?
Teachers also noted, despite a push from administrators to get back to content, students
were largely unprepared to do so. Jennifer said:
The academic rigor and ability to critically think and sit with discomfort and the
unknown has dwindled. I don’t think it’s gone, but it’s different. And I think as teachers
we need to be able to meet students where they are.
National standardized test scores released for the 2020–2021 school year showed
declining results in both math and reading (U.S. Department of Education, 2022), likely putting
pressure on administrators to address declining scores, which potentially explains the push to
focus on standards-based learning.
Negative Portrayals of Educators in the Media
One theme to emerge was surrounding the current sociocultural and sociopolitical
environment and the portrayal of educators in the media. Research showed criticisms of teachers
during the pandemic have increased, often amplified through social media and other forms of
public discourse, leading to increased stress and backlash for teachers (NEA, 2020). Willa
described what she perceived as a progression of educators first being identified as “saviors”
followed by anger that they were not doing enough to maintain in-person learning. She said:
67

The narrative from society that at first we were heroes and everyone’s like, “I don’t know
how teachers do this—oh my god, teachers should be paid a million dollars.” And then,
within a week, it was like, “I have to watch my own kids at home? Fuck this. Teachers
aren’t doing enough.” And we were like, “We’re not doing enough? Are you kidding?”
Especially teachers who had their own kids at home. It just felt like we were being so
abused, not just from our own schools, but from like, America. Just the culture of what
America thinks about teachers, you know, and to go from being heroes in a second to
being villainized. And, also just the reality of like, we could single handedly be
responsible for the collapse of society, if all of us walk away, literally.
Lucy expressed a similar sentiment, saying, “The current political situation is just questioning so
much about what teachers do, and talking pretty negatively about teachers. It came at a time
when I was already feeling like I couldn’t keep doing it.” Another teacher also shared reflections
about students eager to film or otherwise record perceived mishandling of situations by teachers
to cause punitive action, adding to a feeling of being policed for perceived wrongdoing by
students and parents.
The return to in-person learning also coincided with a controversial political debate in the
social sciences, in particular the teaching of critical race theory in public schools. Lucy attributed
this broader political debate to parents fearing teachers were “indoctrinating” students. She said:
There is a lot of talk in some circles about teachers indoctrinating students right now.
And I know that funny little joke that flies around in teacher circles is, “Indoctrinate
them? I can’t even get them to . . .” and then fill in the blank: put their phones away, turn
in their homework, wear deodorant, you know, whatever. I hope everyone will remember
68

that most teachers got into this profession because they love young people and helping
young people and contributing to the community and that there’s not an ulterior motive.
Willa noted some of the frustration educators are experiencing may come from a societal
perception that the COVID-19 pandemic and related challenges were largely over but that
teachers were still struggling with the pandemic’s aftereffects. She said:
I think that just the tone, right now, I think that people feel the pandemic is over. People
don’t have to wear masks in school anymore, so it’s done. And our reality as teachers is
much different. If anything, we are feeling it harder now than we did at the beginning of
this thing. And so, there’s that empathy piece that’s missing there, you know, the
recognition of the fact that we are the ones dealing with the aftermath.
Changes in Student Behavior
Teachers identified one of the most significant challenges they faced during and after
remote instruction as adjusting to changes in student behaviors, largely negative and mostly
pertaining to shifts in interpersonal social behaviors and low academic engagement. One study
showed students’ disruptive behavior causes teachers to feel a decline in self-efficacy, which
leads to experiencing feelings of lower personal accomplishment, greater depersonalization, and
increased emotional exhaustion (Maslach, 2018). The ability to manage student behaviors is also
critical to positive feelings of accomplishment. A 2021 study of nearly 700 teachers found a
strong positive correlation between ability to manage student behaviors and teacher well-being
outcomes, linked to higher levels of teacher retention (Herman et al., 2021).
In this study, teachers cited a greater reliance on phones and technology, along with
increased challenges in social communication and interaction, as leading to a decline in
engagement both during remote learning and following the transition back to in person learning.
69

The two themes that emerged in this category were negative interpersonal social behaviors and
student apathy due to what teachers perceived to be a response to trauma caused by the
pandemic.
Negative Social Behaviors
One of the most notable themes in teacher responses was a perceived negative shift in
students’ interpersonal social behaviors. Veronica said, “Coming back, I felt like they did not
know how to interact with each other. It was just so weird that they like, totally forgot how.”
Sean shared a similar experience with his students once they returned to school in person:
I noticed a lack of social skills with students. The ability to talk to each other, the ability
to interact with each other. I see kids who are more shy than they typically would be. I
see other kids overcompensating for their lack of social skills, with hands or touching or
yelling, or you know, the simplest things like voice modulation and controlling their
temper.
Lucy’s experience with students was similar, with a notable increase in reliance on phones and
technology. She said, “I feel like I was seeing students have more trouble relating to each other
last year. There was more of a reliance on their phones, when any free time was given, it was
phones if they were accessible.”
Although many teachers reflected on challenges with students interacting with one
another, Jennifer also noted many students had seemingly forgotten classroom norms necessary
for effective learning, saying, “I’ve never in my 19 years of teaching had a class consistently talk
while I’m talking. And this year, specifically, their conversations just continue as if I’m like a
YouTube video playing in the background.” Willa shared a similar experience with her students:
70

When we first came back after a whole year of not being in school, we started seeing kids
who, behaviorally, kind of lost all their educational systems, in just forgetting what it
feels like to be in school, and to have other adults to report to besides their parents. There
was a lot of pushing back against authority and pushing boundaries.
Student Apathy and Trauma Responses
Teachers also described what they perceived to be signs of apathy among students. Sean
said, “A lot of these students have given up. Students have a deficit mindset that they can’t learn
because of either conditions at home or because they’ve missed so much in 2 years and they
can’t catch up.” Similarly, Willa said:
There were a lot of kids who were completely apathetic. We had kids showing up in their
pajamas, sleeping, not turning in work, there was a lot of lethargy in the aftermath of
being at home for a whole year.
Willa also remarked on what she perceived to be a general lack of acknowledgment for
what students had been through. She said, “A big piece of this is that we have failed to
acknowledge how much we asked of our kids. They’ve lived through trauma, and they’re still
living through the aftereffects of that trauma.” Research supported the idea that students,
particularly middle and high school students, struggled with their mental health at alarming rates
after experiencing some degree of social isolation for extended periods of time during school
closures (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2021).
In addition to the stress these negative behavioral shifts put on teachers, they also
experienced the burden of secondary traumatic stress from students coping with high amounts of
anxiety in their own life (Farmer, 2020). This increased the likelihood of teachers suffering from
compassion fatigue, described as “job burnout and secondary traumatic stress stemming from
71

vicarious exposure to trauma” (Hupe & Stevenson, 2019, p. 1). Compassion fatigue, in turn, is
associated with increased job efficacy-cynicism and psychological detachment, key elements of
burnout (Hupe & Stevenson, 2019; Maslach & Jackson, 1981).
Despite describing increased challenges related to student behavioral issues, survey
respondents indicated still feeling confident in their ability to manage challenging student
behaviors, empathize with challenges students have faced, and care deeply for their students’
well-being. Table 4 provides MBI-ES survey responses related to teacher and student
interactions, showing teachers felt they could deal effectively with student problems, were
making a positive influence on students, and could influence student behavior and outcomes
positively.

Table 4
MBI-ES Student Behavior Indicators
MBI-ES survey items related to Student Behavior Mean response
I can easily understand how my students feel about things. 4.88
I feel as though I treat some students as impersonal objects. 0.82
I feel very effectively with the problems of my students. 4.18
I feel I am positively influencing people’s lives through my work. 5.12
I don’t really care what happens to some students. 0.94
I can easily create a relaxed atmosphere with my students. 4.94
I feel exhilarated after working closely with my students. 4.35

Note. Higher scores indicate more affirmative responses, with a highest possible score of 6.
72

Loss of Community and Communal Norms
Another way teachers expressed feeling unsupported professionally was the lack of
collaborative structures, forcing them to work in “silos,” in which they were isolated in their
respective classrooms and did not collaborate with other staff (Johnson & Kardos, 2008).
Teachers remarked on an increase in these working conditions, citing challenges in maintaining a
sense of community and school culture in addition to declining collaborative structures during
remote learning. Jennifer remarked on her department’s lack of meetings, saying, “Before
COVID, we met as a department at least four times a year. Now, after we’ve come back to
teaching in person, we haven’t met once in over a year.”
Upon returning to in person teaching, teachers felt a general sense that there was not a
great enough focus on rebuilding community and culture. Willa noted, “We are now trying to
have a culture reset, to get back to a place where we care about each other again, where the kids
care about our school culture, because it’s that piece that was lost.” Lucy discussed her challenge
getting students to follow classroom norms and procedures due to a loss of community and
norms upon their return to in person learning. She said:
Generally, in a school year, I would see that the first month or two was a training time of
just everybody getting used to everybody else and figuring out the, you know, the
routines, the procedures, and then we would hit that stride. Last year, it probably took till
January. By December I was thinking it was never going to happen and that maybe I had
kind of lost my groove.
Some teachers talked about ways they were attempting to cope with the lack of
community by forming their own communities, with Lucy saying, “Me and other teachers try to
73

keep each other encouraged. We’ve formed various social media ways to keep in touch because
the struggle is real.”
Jennifer also discussed challenges she observed among those around her, noting an
increase in what she described as “alarm bells” from teachers with whom she worked closely.
She said:
And I mean, just in my orbit of teachers, which is like a 100-foot radius of where we are
right now, we had a counselor have a major meltdown last week, a young teacher cry in
front of students, and another young teacher walk out of the classroom in total frustration.
That’s three people in my orbit in the last 7 days that I see as ringing alarm bells, that
something underlying is really frustrating [them].
Discussion for Research Question 2
Themes that emerged from Research Question 2 support much of the existing literature
related to burnout and attrition but with feelings of frustration amplified due to conditions related
to the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath. Teachers felt a lack of community, with remote
learning posing a challenge to maintaining social and cultural norms surrounding expectations in
school and in the classroom. Student behavioral problems ranked as one of the most significant
and challenging shifts teachers saw upon returning to in-person teaching and learning, impacting
their experience in the classroom and their ability to engage students in learning. Teachers also
noted a perceived increase of apathy in students in addition to challenges related to
communicating with peers. This is supported by a July 2022 study from the National Center for
Education Statistics that found nearly 90% of public schools reported the COVID-19 pandemic
had a negative impact on students’ social and emotional development during the 2021–2022
school year (Elias & Sharp, 2022). Several teachers noted administrators pushed a return to
74

content and standards-based learning, despite what teachers perceived to be significant hurdles to
such instruction. This is also likely due to the decline in test scores and pressures placed upon
administrators to “make up” for learning loss occurring during the 2020-2021 school year.
Administrators were not wrong to be concerned, with a 2021 research study from McKinsey &
Company finding the impact of unfinished learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic will have
drastic consequences if steps are not taken to remediate learning loss (Dorn et al., 2021).
However, it would be prudent to reconsider their approach with a focus on rebuilding communal
norms before a full return to more typical standards-focused learning.
Teachers also expressed hope that their humanity and the challenges posed by the
circumstances of COVID-19 will be recognized. Lucy said, “Ultimately, teachers are people.
We’re human. So that kind of goes back to educating people about what the realities of education
are like. We can do a lot if we’re given the right resources and if we’re trusted.”
Results for Research Question 2
Research Question 3 asked the following: What additional administrative supports do
secondary teachers in San Diego identify as helpful to improving their work and life experience?
Research Question 3 examined more closely what school leadership can do to improve the
teacher experience in response to the COVID-19 pandemic or other future events resulting in
extended school closures and subsequent learning loss. An exploration of teacher attrition during
the COVID-19 pandemic found three fundamental causes of attrition: poor working conditions,
lack of professional development, and poor leadership (Boateng & Donkor, 2020). Teachers’
complaints often included lack of professional support as a primary reason for dissatisfaction,
with as many as 43% of teachers citing poor administrative support as a top reason for leaving
(Alliance for Excellent Education, 2014; Ingersoll, 2003; Loeb et al., 2015; Newberry & Allsop,
75

2017). Administrators have, undoubtedly, also struggled tremendously during and after the
COVID-19 pandemic. This research question intended to inform administrators how to address
teacher discontent to avoid additional challenges related to attrition and teacher dissatisfaction. It
is crucial that administrators consider their approach to leadership considering recent challenges
related to the pandemic and its aftermath. This question resulted in several themes regarding
administrative leadership: communication and visibility, clarity of mission, purpose, and
expectations, community rebuilding, and district policy considerations such as compensation and
recognition of effort.
Communication and Visibility
Several teachers commented on the importance of both the visibility of administrators
and emphasis on prioritizing effective and clear communication, both during remote learning and
upon a return to in-person learning. Some teachers expressed discontent with either the amount
or effectiveness of communication from administration. Lucy shared:
I don’t know, there was a lot of confusion. There was a lot of communication that didn’t
communicate much, which is worse, I don’t know, is it worse than no communication at
all? Maybe not. But it’s hard to get a whole bunch of emails that take time to read, and
then still not get the information. So maybe I was naive in what I was hoping for, but I
kind of wished our administrators had been able to run interference for us a little bit more
than they were with maybe explaining to families what the realities were.
Lucy also shared the importance of visibility of administrative support, saying, “I can
say, from my teacher perspective, I felt unsupported largely. And maybe there were steps our
administrators were taking, but we couldn’t see them.” She also emphasized the importance of
effective communication families can understand and with which they can engage, stating,
76

“Outreach and communication by administrators to the community should be done in a way
that’s compelling and enjoyable that families want to listen to.”
Several teachers shared positive experiences of support and communication they received
from administrators. Jennifer reflected on an increase in department meetings:
It went from meeting as departments once a month, pre-COVID to weekly department
chair meetings. And at first felt a little like being micromanaged or, you know, just kind
of tedious, but it was actually really helpful in keeping up communications.
Sean shared one of the most helpful ways his principal increased his perception of feeling
supported was by communicating consistently and in a visible manner to teachers and students.
He shared an anecdote about his principal walking the hallways during each passing period
ensuring students were getting to class on time and coming into classrooms during instructional
time to ensure teachers were feeling supported. Sean described his principal as being “in the
trenches” with the teachers, something he said made him feel supported. He said, “I don’t feel
like when I’m talking to my [current] principal that I’m talking to, you know, some shadow
that’s behind a desk that will get back to me in time and maybe is considering my thoughts or
concerns.”
Clarity of Mission, Purpose, and Expectations
Another pattern that emerged was the importance of administrators communicating with
a clear mission, purpose, and expectations. Teachers discussed how helpful consistency and
structure was considering frequently changing protocols and expectations during remote
instruction. Sean shared, “Our meetings always have intent and purpose, no teachers are thrilled
about meetings, but it’s nice to have our principal say, ‘Okay, here’s our structure. This is what
we’re looking at, this is what we need to do.’” Jennifer also shared how helpful it was that her
77

assistant principal standardized expectations for online learning structures, creating a sense of
predictability despite constantly shifting COVID-19-related protocols and expectations. She said:
[Our assistant principal at the time] was so good about standardizing how we use Google
classrooms. He was so good about streamlining all the different processes. So, everything
looked the same and the expectations were the same across the board. We knew what to
expect and there was certain degree of predictability there.
Sean also reflected on the differences in administrative leadership from his previous school to his
current, sharing there was a general sense of dissatisfaction in leadership at his previous school.
He, along with another coworker who had worked at the same school for more than a decade,
both left for positions at a different school because of a lack of direction provided by leadership
during the pandemic. He shared:
I left [my old school] because of a lack of leadership, a lack of direction of what the
school wanted, you know, you can have as many value statements and mission statements
as you want, but at the end of the day it’s a series of words, right? And it didn’t have
much relationship with reality.
Veronica shared her frustration with what she perceived to be a lack of clarity in expectations
from administrators regarding procedures related to behavioral issues, especially cell phone
usage. This led to frustration as students became more reliant on their phones throughout the
school year. She said:
[Our administrator] told us to be patient with the process of coming back, that we should
be very flexible with students, but I feel like at the same time that it was probably not
very good because it made me afraid [to have certain classroom rules]. And it ended up
78

being really hard for me at the end because they were just on their phone all the time and
distracted, but at that point it was too late for me to change things.
Community Focus and Rebuilding
A focus on rebuilding community and school culture came up consistently throughout
interviews. Remarks related to community rebuilding were often mentioned in association with
unreasonable expectations from administrators, discussed in Research Question 2. Teachers
noted a desire for their administrators to focus less on what they perceived to be traditional
administrative duties and tasks, like test scores, and increase their attention on rebuilding school
community and norms in the wake of lengthy school closures and what they perceived to be a
loss of school culture. This is supported by research that highlights the importance of
administrators taking time to build community and trust. A study conducted in 2021 on teacher
retention found one of the strongest predictors of retention is if principals can maintain trust both
individually with teachers and schoolwide (Price, 2021). Developing a strong community can
improve commitment among teachers and avoid attrition even when implemented for only a
year. When leaders fail to establish an environment of trust and commitment, challenges arising
during the school year become more difficult to overcome.
Willa shared feeling a stronger focus on community rebuilding should be a priority for
her administrators:
We need to make our school a place that [teachers] want to stay. That means treating
them well, building the culture, focusing on the student culture, so that teachers aren’t
feeling beat up and run over every day, you know, and really working on the repair work
of it, culturally, because I think administration focuses on numbers, and they don’t
79

necessarily focus on the business of what schools do, which is building humans. We need
to focus on the humanity of this work now.
Veronica shared feeling like fostering relationships between students and teachers was a
critical part of the community rebuilding process. She said, “Activities that help students
understand each other and connect with each other make a huge difference in the classroom
environment.” She also shared her district began a diversity, equity, and inclusion program last
year focused on teachers getting to know one another and their students to foster a stronger sense
of community. She said:
[Before this program], I felt like we never knew anything about each other. I felt very
disconnected from [our school]. Now we have a lot of community building activities,
building relationships. We meet every Wednesday and really take the time with each
other. You know, those things, all that helps, I think, to build that connection.
Lucy also discussed one way her administrator helped her to feel more connected to her
coworkers and school was by encouraging them to reflect on their purpose as educators. She
said, “Our principal is good at setting a positive tone. To have teachers and staff ask the question,
‘Why? Why do I teach? Why do I do what I do?’ and I’ve really found that to be inspiring.”
District Policies: Compensation and Recognition of Effort
Several teachers remarked on policies related to compensation and recognition of effort.
Research has shown low salary is the strongest reason for teacher attrition, with 54% of teachers
citing salary as their main reason for leaving (Ingersoll, 2003; Johnson & Kardos, 2008).
Teachers are paid less than professionals with comparable education, with the pay discrepancy
widening at each higher degree earned (Johnson & Kardos, 2008). Willa discussed feeling torn
between caring about the work she does but feeling her pay was insufficient to support her cost
80

of living despite going above and beyond what her contract required for the betterment of her
students. She shared:
We felt like we were just getting attacked every day, you know, with nothing, no thank
you, no compensation, nothing, you know, so it felt like we were up against a lot. And we
were looking at this pay scale that went nowhere. And meanwhile, we stay, because we
love our community, we love our colleagues, we love our kids. And I didn’t want to walk
away from that. But also, I’m working every day with this very palpable knowledge that I
am, like, 20 grand underpaid, and that I’m doing work for free for these people.
Jennifer felt similarly, saying:
I think also, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the economy and inflation. And I think
that that’s a huge factor in that increase of people wanting to leave the profession,
because every other industry is keeping up with inflation and teaching is not.
Lucy also commented on the importance of administrators who can understand and
empathize with what teachers experience on a day-to-day basis when making decisions related to
policies guiding the school day. She said:
I think having administrators who have had classroom experience is vital. Because
there’s a big, I don’t know if it’s a misperception, but a lack of awareness about what a
typical teaching day is like. I and many of my colleagues, you know, we joke about how
we don’t eat lunch. We don’t use the restroom. There is no downtime [during the school
day] and a lot of people don’t know that. A lot of decision makers don’t know that they
are making decisions that will potentially negatively impact educators, and it’s teachers
who are interfacing with the students every day.
81

Discussion for Research Question 3
The COVID-19 pandemic has presented unprecedented challenges for school
administrators. As leaders of their schools, principals have had to make difficult decisions about
how to keep students and staff safe while also acting as a source of support for teachers and the
school community. The role of the school principal in teacher retention is well established in the
literature and supported by this study’s findings. School leadership has a strong impact on
teacher retention, with effective principals creating a positive work environment that encourages
teachers to remain in their positions (Liethwood & Riehl, 2003). Teachers are more likely to stay
at a school where they feel supported and valued by their principal (Murphy & Louis, 2007). One
study also showed effective communication between school administrators and teachers can lead
to improved teacher satisfaction and retention (Hoy & Miskel, 2008). Teachers interviewed for
this study supported this idea, confirming the importance of effective school leaders who were
visible, communicated effectively, acknowledged their efforts, and provided structure and a clear
vision for the school’s direction. Although these aspects of effective school leadership were
important prior to the pandemic, participants felt they became even more significant given the
current sociocultural and sociopolitical environment in which they need additional support and
communication.
Summary
Key findings from this chapter focus on three areas of research: the experience of
teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic and the return to in person learning, the main causes
teachers attribute to influencing their experiences, and ways school administrators can help
increase teacher satisfaction amid challenges related to the pandemic and its ongoing impacts on
teaching and learning. Teachers described their experience during remote learning and the
82

subsequent return to teaching in person as challenging, largely due to the negative experiences of
students, who struggled to remain engaged and on task during remote learning. Some teachers
enjoyed the flexibility of remote work, with an increase in their ability to participate in acts of
self-care and time management.
Research Question 2 focused on what teachers identified as being most impactful to their
experiences. Teachers noted several elements as being particularly influential during both remote
learning and their return to in person. Student behavioral issues were a top factor of challenges
teachers experienced, with participants perceiving students as struggling to relate to one another
socially, an increased reliance on phones and technology, and difficulty focusing during class.
Despite struggles with behavioral issues, survey data support the conclusion that teachers feel
able to manage their classroom effectively and participants displayed an empathy for the
experiences of students, referring to the pandemic as “traumatic” for students. Other aspects
influencing teacher experiences included a decline in collaboration and communication with
coworkers, loss of communal structures and classroom norms, and criticisms of teachers in the
media.
Research Question 3 addressed ways administrators can mitigate negative teacher
experiences amid the ongoing effects of school closures. Teachers noted the importance of
effective communication with school stakeholders and administrator visibility on campus.
Several teachers also noted a desire for their administrators to focus more on rebuilding school
culture and allowing teachers to spend more time emphasizing rebuilding community and norms,
rather than push a return to intensive standards-based learning and a focus on test scores.
Teachers also mentioned district policy-related issues such as teacher pay. Lastly, salary has
been one of the most significant causes of teacher attrition and continues to be a key discussion
83

among teachers considering increased challenges and workload during the pandemic and a
nationwide educator and substitute shortage.

84

Chapter Five: Discussion
Chapter 5 summarizes findings as related to implications for practice within the
educational community. Key research findings are discussed to inform current and future
educational leaders of the leadership practices necessary for improving teacher satisfaction and
retention during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its likely long-term effects on teacher
satisfaction and retention. This research also sought to inform educational leaders who may
experience future extended school closures. Additionally, recommendations for continued
research are made to expand upon the findings of this study.
Introduction
This study focused on examining the teacher experience during the ongoing COVID-19
pandemic, both during remote instruction and upon the return to in-person instruction. Three
questions guided this study:
1. How do secondary teachers describe their experience teaching in San Diego during
and after the COVID-19 pandemic?
2. What do secondary teachers in San Diego describe as factors influencing their
experiences?
3. What additional administrative support do secondary teachers in San Diego identify
as helpful to improving their work and life experience?
Data were collected using two methods; first, an anonymous quantitative survey was
given to assess levels of burnout among secondary teachers in public schools in San Diego
County (n = 25). The survey instrument was most useful in providing data to answer Research
Questions 1 and 2 and was analyzed based on three categories of burnout: emotional exhaustion,
personal achievement, and depersonalization. Survey participants were given the option to
85

voluntarily provide their contact information for individual participation in semistructured, in-
depth interviews regarding their experiences during the pandemic. Five participants were
subsequently interviewed after providing their information. Interviews were recorded,
transcribed, and then coded thematically. Each question resulted in three or four themes, which
will be discussed in greater detail in the following sections. Upon completion of Chapter 4, all
interview participants were provided a copy of the results to ensure their experiences were
represented and discussed accurately. No subsequent changes were made based on their review
and all agreed the findings represented the experiences they described accurately.
Theoretical Framework
This study used cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) as its guiding theoretical
framework (Vygotsky, 2987). CHAT was designed to understand networks of interacting activity
systems, dialogue, and multiple perspectives and voices (Engestrom, 2014). For this study,
teachers were identified as the “subjects” facing various obstacles during the ongoing pandemic.
These obstacles could or could not lead to burnout and attrition, based on the actions teachers
chose to take in response to various obstacles and input. The intent of this study was to identify
ways administrators could impact teachers’ responses to these obstacles positively to improve
their experience and thus reduce the risk of burnout and attrition.
Summary of Findings
Overall findings suggested teachers faced struggles related to the effects of the pandemic
and remote instruction, notably a decline in self-efficacy and a perception that their increased
effort was not producing desired or meaningful results. Findings also suggested enhanced
challenges with student engagement and social behaviors, a loss of school culture and classroom
norms and structures, and mounting pressure from administrators to address academic learning
86

loss. Eleven themes emerged related to the study’s three research questions. The following
section presents a summary of findings related to existing literature and current practice.
Research Question 1
Research Question 1 addressed the question: How do secondary teachers describe their
experience teaching in San Diego during and after the COVID-19 pandemic? Three key themes
emerged from this question: (a) declining sense of achievement and meaningful impact, (b)
negative impacts on students, and (c) advantages of remote work.
Interviews revealed teachers experienced a declining sense of personal achievement and
meaningful impact. Teachers described working longer hours under more challenging
circumstances while receiving less rewarding feedback from students. Survey data supported the
finding that teachers felt emotionally exhausted and overworked, with nearly 70% of teachers
self-identifying as experiencing some degree of burnout. As members of a helping profession
whose primary focus is serving others, teachers are particularly vulnerable to feelings of
dissatisfaction and fatigue when their work output is not met with rewarding results, as interview
participants described (Kutscher et at., 2013). This, coupled with the survey findings indicating
levels of emotional exhaustion and overextension, can indicate the beginnings of more severe
burnout and subsequent attrition of teachers if not addressed by school leaders (Maslach, 2018).
Teachers also spoke at length about the negative impact the pandemic and remote
instruction had on students’ academic and emotional well-being. Teachers described feeling
responsible for students’ negative experiences and concern for the long-term impacts to students’
mental health and academic progress. Teachers described students as lacking engagement and
accountability during remote learning and subsequently struggling to adjust to a return to in-
person learning. These findings are supported by growing research on the impacts of the
87

pandemic on secondary students, which showed a multitude of negative effects from school
closures on student mental health and well-being, notably an increase in anxiety and depression
(Jones et al., 2020). Data also showed students experienced academic declines nationwide,
producing significantly lower scores in both math and science on national standardized
assessments (National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2022). Teachers expressed grave
concerns regarding the long-term impacts of these declines in student mental health and
academic progress and their ability to mitigate these effects.
Although teachers largely spoke of the pandemic, remote instruction, and the subsequent
return to in-person instruction as negative, some teachers remarked on the advantages of working
remotely. Teachers described enjoying the freedom to develop their own schedules, participate in
acts of self-care, and avoid illnesses often contracted from in-person teaching. Personal health
concerns have added anxiety for teachers amid the ongoing pandemic (Diliberti et al., 2021), and
teachers interviewed for this study described their ability to work remotely as eliminating this
concern and improving their quality of life by allowing for more work-life balance and flexibility
in scheduling.
Research Question 2
Research Question 2 addressed the question: What do secondary teachers in San Diego
describe as factors influencing their experiences during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic?
Research Question 2 looked more closely into what factors most impacted teacher experiences
during the pandemic. Teachers nationwide are largely unsatisfied in their jobs, with 1 in 4
reporting a desire or intention to leave their job as of 2021, representing a higher rate than that of
any other group of employed adults in the United States (Steiner & Woo, 2021). In-depth
interviews conducted with participants sought to understand the reasons behind this
88

dissatisfaction to better inform school leaders how to increase job satisfaction and retention. Four
key themes emerged from this question: (a) the impact of negative discourse and media
portrayals of teachers, (b) negative shifts in student behaviors, (c) unreasonable expectations
from administrators, and (d) loss of community and school culture.
Research showed criticisms of teachers during the pandemic increased, often amplified
through social media and other forms of public discourse, leading to increased stress and
backlash for teachers (NEA, 2020). Teachers interviewed for this study corroborated this finding,
stating they felt the tide turned swiftly against teachers during prolonged school closures.
Teachers who initially felt supported and lauded as heroic by the public remarked this narrative
was short lived, and they felt villainized amid constantly shifting pandemic-related policies and
protocols on school campuses. Teachers also described perceiving public distrust, as political
arguments surrounding controversial issues such as critical race theory increased in the public
discourse, creating an environment where teachers described feeling policed by parents and
students looking to uncover ulterior motives or other missteps. Overall, teachers interviewed for
this study expressed frustration and exhaustion over the shifting political discourse, noting most
teachers are in the profession to help students and do not have ulterior motives.
Another contributing factor to teacher dissatisfaction is significant shifts in student
behaviors. Research examining the impacts of COVID-19 on student mental health is grim,
finding middle and high school students are struggling with their mental health at alarming rates
after experiencing some degree of social isolation for extended periods of time during school
closures (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2021). Perhaps because of this, teachers noted
students struggled to interact effectively with peers, often resorting to looking at their phones
instead of interacting with each other during discussions. Teachers also noted significant declines
89

in engagement with content, noting students frequently talked over them or were otherwise
distracted during instruction at noticeably higher rates than before the pandemic. Teachers
surmised these behaviors were connected to the lack of classroom supervision students
experienced during remote instruction, when they were free to browse the internet or social
media during remote instructional time with few immediate repercussions. This is significant
because a study showed students’ disruptive behavior caused teachers to feel a decline in self-
efficacy, which led to feelings of lower personal accomplishment, greater depersonalization, and
increased emotional exhaustion (Maslach, 2018).
Teachers also noted struggling to keep up with what they perceived to be unreasonable
expectations from administrators upon returning to in-person instruction. Students fell behind
academically due to prolonged remote instruction during the 2020-2021 school years, leaving
teachers charged with meeting learning targets struggling to catch students up while learning
gaps widen (Kuhfeld et al., 2020). Administrators also undoubtedly are under pressure to bring
up standardized test scores, which fell in the wake of the pandemic. Perhaps because of this,
teachers described feeling increasingly forced to focus heavily on standards-based instruction,
despite what they describe as students who were both unable to engage in the learning and were
far below grade level. Teachers described a desire to refocus on classroom norms and rebuilding
school culture to better facilitate a shift back to more traditional, standards-based instruction in
which students could be successful.
Lastly, teachers noted a decline in communal structures and school norms both during
remote instruction and upon returning to the classroom. Teachers described inconsistent
meetings with coworkers, loss of collaborative structures, and a sense that the school culture had
been lost over the course of the pandemic, making student engagement and participation a
90

challenge. The shift to remote learning has resulted in the loss of important social connections
and a sense of belonging among students and teachers, who report feeling increasingly lonely
and isolated (National School Climate Center, 2020).
Research Question 3
Research Question 3 addressed the question: What additional administrative supports do
secondary teachers in San Diego identify as helpful to improving their work and life experience?
Research Question 3 examined more closely what school leadership can do to improve the
teacher experience in response to the COVID-19 pandemic or other future events that may result
in extended school closures. Administrators play a key role in teacher job satisfaction and
retention; research conducted after the onset of the pandemic showed teachers identified poor
administrative leadership as one of the fundamental causes of attrition (Boateng & Donkor,
2020). Teachers interviewed for this study confirmed this finding, identifying administrators as
significantly impacting their work experience. Four themes emerged from this inquiry that can
help to inform administrator practice moving forward: (a) administrator communication and
visibility; (b) clarity of mission, purpose, and expectations; (c) a focus on rebuilding community;
and (d) district policies such as compensation and recognition of effort.
Several teachers remarked on the confusion and lack of clear communication they
perceived after the onset of the pandemic. Teachers noted they were frequently unclear of what,
if anything, was communicated to families and felt they were left out of crucial communications
with stakeholders. Other teachers noted they received communication that “didn’t communicate
much at all,” noting long emails left them feeling overwhelmed and confused about expectations.
Teachers also described a desire to feel their principals were “in the trenches” with them and
91

hoped for more administrative visibility on campus as well as increased administrative
interaction with both teachers and students.
Similarly, teachers noted the importance of establishing and communicating a clear
mission, purpose, and expectations for teachers and students. Teachers were grateful for clear
structures their administrators established during remote instruction, such as standardizing forms
for remote learning and Google Classroom, that kept expectations across departments consistent.
Teachers noted this also benefited families and students, because standardizing forms and
systems allowed them to know where to access resources for all coursework given formatting
remained the same schoolwide. Teachers also expressed gratitude for administrators who led
purposeful and streamlined meetings, with most describing an increase in meeting frequency and
an increase in what they perceived to be purposeful and important meeting content.
Rebuilding community norms and school culture was identified as a priority for teachers,
who reflected on the loss of community and school culture upon returning to campus and
descried a desire for increased support from their administrators in reestablishing a sense of
school community and culture. The importance of establishing community is supported by
current research on the topic, with a study identifying administrative support in developing a
culture of trust as a lead indicator of teacher retention (Price, 2021). Teachers interviewed for
this study also expressed a desire for administrators to prioritize rebuilding community before
pushing academic gains, noting that without the foundation of community and a strong school
culture, teachers did not think students could succeed academically. Teachers also noted the
importance of recognizing students had been through trauma and needed to feel safe and secure
in their school environment before refocusing on standards.
92

Finally, teachers discussed the importance of recognizing their increased workload and
effort through fair compensation and scheduling policies that prioritize teacher work–life
balance. Research consistently has found low salary to be the strongest reason for teacher
attrition, so mention of salary amid the increasingly stressful pandemic environment was not a
surprising finding, particularly because teachers have been paid less than other professionals
with comparable education, with the pay discrepancy widening at each higher degree earned
(Johnson & Kardos, 2008). It is perhaps because of the additional stress, uncertainty, and
workload brought on by the pandemic that teachers are feeling the impacts of this pay difference
more acutely. Other policy-related issues (e.g., unpredictable schedules, classes taught,
challenges with childcare) were addressed as well as the important of administrators with
classroom experience.
Limitations
Conclusions of this research study relied largely on self-reported and self-described
teacher experiences. Inherent limitations of interviews include validity of self-reported data or
experiences and the chance that teachers’ actions may be attributed to unreported or unidentified
variables (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). Comprehensive interviews also relied largely on
protocols developed by the researchers. Although all precautions were taken to limit any bias or
leading in these interview protocols, it is possible some limitations may be present relating to the
developments of these protocols. Additionally, much care was taken to corroborate findings by
selecting multiple similar responses before establishing results.
Limitations related to the survey instrument include the possibility, though slim, that
teachers who were not the target participants took the survey. Because the survey was
anonymous and disseminated using a snowball approach, where teachers were asked to forward
93

the survey to coworkers, it is possible teachers outside of the intended participant audience
received and completed the survey. However, an extensive informational email describing the
eligible participants was provided, making this unlikely.
Delimitations of the study include the geographic region of secondary schools to San
Diego, California, and the number of teachers interviewed and surveyed. This research was
conducted with the intent to provide limited generalizability to suburban public districts in
California and perhaps in other states in similar contexts, with the hope of providing rich
descriptive evidence of the teacher experience surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and how it
may inform the practice of administrative leaders. Although this study’s scope was small,
inferences can be drawn based on findings that provide more general recommendations.
Implications for Practice
The intent of this research was to examine the teacher experience during the ongoing
pandemic to better inform the practice of administrative leaders with the hope of increasing
teacher satisfaction and retention amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and long-term effects
of extended school closures. This study resulted in several themes that can provide valuable
information regarding the practice of principals and their interactions with teachers. Four themes
are addressed in the following sections: (a) maintaining high levels of teacher self-efficacy, (b)
incorporating advantages of work-from-home structures, (c) communicating clear expectations
and standardizing procedures, and (d) rebuilding school community.
Maintaining High Levels of Teacher Self-Efficacy
The first implication for practice is to prioritize maintaining high levels of teacher self-
efficacy and sense of personal accomplishment. Teachers interviewed noted the increased
workload required to meet new challenges in student behaviors and to address learning loss was
94

not commensurate with positive engagement or student success, leaving them feeling the
sacrifices associated with the increased work were not worthwhile. Self-efficacy is critical to
teacher effectiveness and is linked to increased student achievement, reduced burnout, and
increased retention (Bandura, 1997). Principals should consider ways to ease the additional
workload and challenges associated with the aftermath of the pandemic. Two recommendations
for practice are provided in the following paragraphs.
The first recommendation is to provide opportunities for teachers to be rewarded
positively and recognized for their increased efforts to maintain high self-efficacy and teacher
effectiveness. Recognition can occur in a variety of ways, including asking students and staff to
formally or informally recognize teachers who have been particularly impactful, recognizing
teacher accomplishments at faculty or all-school meetings, or by informally stopping by a
teacher’s classroom to provide positive feedback. Administrators also can recognize teacher
success by retaining high-performing teachers and dismissing those who continually are low
performing; research has shown teachers feel more supported when administrators create an
environment of effective communication and collaboration by retaining only high-performing
teachers to promote teacher satisfaction (Grissom & Bartanen, 2019; Leithwood et al., 2004).
The second recommendation is to provide increased opportunities for collaboration to
share in the added workload the pandemic has created. Teachers who participated in this study
noted a general decline in their ability to collaborate with coworkers, leading to increased
feelings of isolation. Feelings of isolation are detrimental to teachers’ long-term health and
commitment to the classroom (Kelchtermans, 2017; Newberry & Allsop, 2017). Administrators
can increase opportunities for collaboration by devoting specific time during the school day for
teachers to collaborate and by developing mentorship programs that are meaningful and
95

continuous. Several teachers interviewed noted it would be particularly effective for
administrators to partner more veteran teachers with newer teachers for more effective
collaboration and can provide help to new teachers who traditionally have the highest rates of
attrition. This is increasingly important as national enrollment in teacher education programs are
declining as attrition numbers continue to rise.
Incorporate Advantages of Working From Home
The second implication for practice is to attempt to incorporate some of the advantages of
working from home into on-site instruction. Although many teachers interviewed for this
research noted remote instruction was a particularly negative experience for students, there were
advantages to educators they would like to see incorporated into onsite instruction to improve
their quality of life. Two recommendations for practice are provided in the following section: (a)
providing consistent teacher schedules year to year when possible and (b) district subsidizing of
childcare for teachers.
Several teachers interviewed for this research mentioned one of their biggest barriers to
maintaining a work-life balance was the uncertainty of course scheduling and content every year.
Teachers noted an advantage to working remotely was the ability to have increased control of
their day-to-day scheduling. Teachers with young children felt particularly challenged by their
inability to plan childcare schedules in advance of the start of the school year because the time of
their preparatory periods shifted yearly or because those on part-time contracts often did not have
reliable schedules. More veteran teachers noted yearly changes in courses taught made them feel
they were constantly just one step ahead of students and struggled to collaborate or improve their
courses over time. Although not always possible, principals can help ease these challenges by
trying to maintain consistency in teacher schedules and preparatory periods, as well as courses
96

taught, to increase satisfaction and retention. This will help teachers to minimize continual
planning and preparation for new courses or new scheduling year after year and provide
increased ability to plan for childcare needs.
Additionally, longer term solutions to childcare challenges should be considered,
including fully paid maternity leave, subsidized childcare costs, and providing additional full-
time, onsite substitutes to provide reliable coverage for teachers who are absent due to family
illness or other challenges. Teachers described each of these issues as being significant to their
job satisfaction, and although it is not possible to replicate all positive aspects of working from
home, principals may improve satisfaction by helping to provide some consistency in developing
year-to-year schedules when possible.
Communicate Clear Expectations and Standardize Procedures
The third implication for practice is communicating clear expectations and standardizing
procedures when possible. Teachers interviewed for this study indicated they appreciated the
effort administrators made to streamline processes related to coursework and organization by
using standardized forms across departments, noting increased accessibility and benefits to
students as well. Principals can help to do this by standardizing the use of virtual classroom
platforms such as Google Classroom by providing teachers with a formatting guide that clarifies
expectations and content across departments.
In addition to standardizing procedures related to classroom content, teachers also noted a
desire for more consistent policies related to classroom management and student behaviors,
particularly with cell phone usage and appropriate responses to increasingly challenging student
behaviors. Teachers noted more guidance and consistency from administrators would help to
foster clarity around behavior management and enable them to be more effective and confident
97

in responding to students and parents. Principals can help provide this clarity by establishing
clear policies and guidelines and communicating them to families and students. Principals also
can help by supporting teachers when they enforce policies. Teachers noted administrative
support and guidance is particularly important around cell phone usage, for which policies were
inconsistently enforced and unclear, leaving teachers to feel they could not respond effectively.
Focus on Rebuilding School Community
The fourth implication for practice is to focus on rebuilding school culture and
community in addition to prioritizing a return to standards-based instruction to mitigate learning
loss. One of the most significant findings from this study was the strong perception of a decline
in school culture and community after extended remote learning, and teachers expressed the
desire to rebuild both elements in addition to refocusing on academics. Teachers noted feeling
students’ academic achievement was struggling in part because classroom norms and a sense of
community were lost, and asserted allowing time for reestablishing classroom structures and
norms would improve both academic performance and engagement.
Principals can support the rebuilding of school culture and community by fostering a
healthy school environment characterized by safety and orderliness, supportive and responsive
attitudes, and a sense that teachers are part of the professional community (Krasnoff, 2015).
Principals can do this by holding regular all-school community meetings, organizing school-wide
events including students across grade levels and their families, and encouraging teachers to take
time to build classroom norms and expectations. Additionally, principals should share a clear
vision for the school community that is solution-oriented and involves the voices of the
community and key stakeholders. Principals are a key element to student success, second only to
98

teachers as the most influential school-level factor in student achievement, and their leadership is
crucial to developing a school culture and community that values learning (Krasnoff, 2015).
Recommendations for Future Research
Research related to the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on school systems is
developing rapidly, as the pandemic enters its 3rd year. This study focused exclusively on the
experience of teachers during the pandemic to identify ways to decrease attrition amid the
persistent teacher shortage. Three recommendations for further research are presented after the
conclusion of this study.
The first recommendation is to replicate this research or conduct a similar study
examining the experience of teachers within the next 3 to 5 years to identify how the long-term
effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are continuing to impact the teacher experience. One of the
most significant questions left at the conclusion of this study is whether the impacts of the
pandemic on the teacher experience reported now will persist and become a permanent state, and
how that may impact teacher satisfaction, burnout, and retention in the long term. Because
teacher retention is low nationwide with teacher shortages reported consistently, persistent
feelings of emotional exhaustion and declining self-efficacy identified by teachers in this study
undoubtedly would cause additional problems with retention and is worthy of closer
examination.
The second recommendation for future research is to examine the student experience
during the ongoing pandemic more closely to better inform the practice of teachers. Hearing
directly from students may help to identify ways teachers can address more effectively student
issues identified in this study such as mental health and wellness, feelings of isolation, behavioral
changes, and engagement. Teachers noted drastic changes to student behaviors related to social
99

isolation and remote learning, adding it caused stress for both students and teachers upon the
return to in-person learning. By better understanding the student experience, teachers and
administrators may better support students to ease challenging behaviors and increase social
interactions and engagement in the classroom.
The final recommendation for future research is to examine what school site and district
leaders are already doing to address the impacts of the pandemic and identify which are most
effective at improving the teacher experience. By interviewing both administrators and teachers,
researchers may get a fuller picture of the scope of action educational leaders have taken to
mitigate the negative effects of the pandemic and how teachers perceive those actions. This
research would also help to identify which actions are most impactful and why, allowing
administrators to focus their time, attention, and resources on the most meaningful actions.
Conclusion
This study examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the teacher experience to
inform administrative leaders of ways to increase teacher satisfaction and reduce attrition.
Findings confirmed teachers felt additional stressors related to the pandemic and extended school
closures, with interview participants noting a decline in self-efficacy and perceptions of
meaningful impact, an increase in challenging student behaviors, and a desire for administrators
to provide additional clarity of expectations amid the ongoing pandemic. Further findings
indicated teachers have a strong desire to rebuild school community and culture and redevelop
classroom norms to increase student engagement. Overall, this study concluded administrative
leaders can take action to impact teacher satisfaction positively and encourage attrition.

100

References
Agee, J. (2009). Developing qualitative research questions: A reflective process. International
Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 22(4), 431–447.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390902736512
Aldeman, C., Goldhaber, D., & Theobald, R. (2021). Examining the dimensions of teacher
turnover. National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.
Alliance for Excellent Education (AEE). (2014). On the path to equity: Improving the
effectiveness of beginning teachers. https://all4ed.org/reports-factsheets/path-to-equity/
American Academy of Pediatrics. (2021, October 19). Aap-AACAP-Cha Declaration of a
national emergency in child and Adolescent Mental Health. Home. Retrieved November
2, 2022, from https://www.aap.org/en/advocacy/child-and-adolescent-healthy-mental-
development/aap-aacap-cha-declaration-of-a-national-emergency-in-child-and-
adolescent-mental-health/
Asbury, K., & Kim, L. E. (2020, July 20). “Lazy, lazy teachers”: Teachers’ perceptions of how
their profession is valued by society, policymakers, and the media during COVID-19.
https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/65k8q
Bain, R. K., & Mason, W. S. (1959). Teacher turnover in the public schools, 1957–58. U.S.
Office of Education.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman/Times Books/Henry
Holt & Co.
Barni, D., Danioni, F., & Benevene, P. (2019). Teachers’ self-efficacy: The role of personal
values and motivations for teaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 12.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01645/full
101

Becker, J., & Grob, L. (2021). The school principal and teacher retention. Metropolitan
Educational Research Consortium.
Belcastro, P. A., & Gold, R. S. (1983). Teacher stress and burnout: Implications for school
health personnel. The Journal of School Health, 53(7), 404–407.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.1983.tb03148.x
Boateng, S. A., & Donkor, R. (2020). Causes and effects of teacher attrition in Camden School
District – New Jersey. ADRRI Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 17(7/5), 86–96.
https://journals.adrri.org/index.php/adrrijass/article/view/602/549
Boe, E., Cook, L. H., & Sunderland, R. J. (2008). Teacher turnover: Examining exit attrition,
teaching area transfer, and school migration. University of Pennsylvania, Graduate
School of Education. https://repository.upenn.edu/gse_pubs/184
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods (5th ed.). Pearson. Allyn & Bacon.
Brewer, T. J., Myers, P. S., & Zhang, M. (2015). Islands unto themselves: How merit pay
schemes undermine positive teacher collaboration. Critical Questions in Education, 6,
45–54. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1065822.pdf
Brill, S., & McCartney, A. (2008). Stopping the revolving door: Increasing teacher retention.
Politics & Policy, 36(5), 750–774. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2008.00133.x
Brown, K. M., & Wynn, S. R. (2009). Finding, supporting, and keeping: The role of the principal
in teacher retention issues. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 8(1), 37–63.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760701817371
Bryner, L. (2021). The teacher shortage in the United States. Education and Society, 39(1), 69–
80. https://doi.org/10.7459/es/39.1.05
102

Carroll, T. G. (2007). The high cost of teacher turnover [Policy brief]. National Commission on
Teaching and America’s Future.
Carver-Thomas, D., Burns, D., Leung, M., & Ondrasek, N. (2022). Teacher shortages during the
pandemic: How California districts are responding. Learning Policy Institute.
https://doi.org/10.54300/899.809
Carver-Thomas, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2019). The trouble with teacher turnover: How
teacher attrition affects students and schools. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27,
Article 36. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.3699
Chang, H., Balfanz, R., & Byrnes, V. (2022, September 27). Pandemic causes alarming increase
in chronic absence and reveals need for better data. Attendance Works.
https://www.attendanceworks.org/pandemic-causes-alarming-increase-in-chronic-
absence-and-reveals-need-for-better-data/
Chang, M. (2013). Toward a theoretical model to understand teacher emotions and teacher
burnout in the context of student misbehavior: Appraisal, regulation and coping.
Motivation and Emotion, 37(4), 799–817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-012-9335-0
Charters, W. W. (1970). Some factors affecting teacher survival in school districts. American
Educational Research Journal, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312007001001
Christiansen, R. S., & Ramadevi, S. (2002). Reeducating the educator: Global perspectives on
community building. State University of New York Press.
Clandinin, D., Long, J., Schaefer, L., Downey, C. A., Steeves, P., Pinnegar, E., McKenzie
Robblee, S., & Wnuk, S. (2015). Early career teacher attrition: intentions of teachers
beginning. Teaching Education, 26(1), 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2014.996746
103

Day, C. (2017). Teachers’ worlds and work: Understanding complexity, building quality.
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315170091
Darling-Hammond, L. (1984). Beyond the commission reports: The coming crisis in teaching.
RAND Corporation.
Darling-Hammond, L., Sutcher, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2018). Teacher shortages in
California: Status, sources, and potential solutions [Research brief]. Learning Policy
Institute.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (2003). Wanted, a national teacher supply policy for
education: The right way to meet the “highly qualified teacher” challenge. Education
Policy Analysis Archives, 11, Article 33. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v11n33.2003
DeAngelis, K. J., & Presley, J. B. (2011). Toward a more nuanced understanding of new teacher
attrition. Education and Urban Society, 43(5), 598–626.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124510380724
DeMonte, J., Holdheide, L., & Sindelar, P. (2016, October). Teacher shortages: Meeting the
demand without sacrificing quality preparation and support (State Policy and Practice
Portrait). CEEDAR Center, University of Florida. https://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2016/10/teacher-shortages-policy-and-practice-portrait.pdf
Diliberti, M. K., Schwartz, H. L., & Grant, D. (2021). Stress topped the reasons why public
school teachers quit, even before COVID-19 (Research Report No. RR-A1121-2). RAND
Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1121-2.html
DiNapoli, M. A. (2022, February 28). The federal role in tackling teacher shortages. Learning
Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/blog/federal-role-tackling-teacher-
shortages
104

Dorn, E., Hancock, B., Sarakatsannis, J., & Viruleg, E. (2020). COVID-19 and student learning
in the United States: The hurt could last a lifetime. McKinsey & Company.
https://www.childrensinstitute.net/sites/default/files/documents/COVID-19-and-student-
learning-in-the-United-States_FINAL.pdf
Dropkin, S., & Taylor, M. (1963). Perceived problems of beginning teachers and related factors.
Journal of Teacher Education, 14(4), 384–390.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002248716301400406
Dworkin, A. G. (1987). Teacher burnout in the public schools: Structural causes and
consequences for children. State University of New York Press.
Elias, J., & Sharp, H. (2022). More than 80 Percent of U.S. Public Schools Report Pandemic Has
Negatively Impacted Student Behavior and Socio-Emotional Development. Press release
- more than 80 percent of U.S. public schools report pandemic has negatively impacted
student behavior and socio-emotional development - July 6, 2022. Retrieved December
17, 2022, from https://nces.ed.gov/whatsnew/press_releases/07_06_2022.asp
Engestrom, Y. (2014). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to
developmental research. Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139814744
Farmer, D. (2020). Teacher attrition: The impacts of stress. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 87(1),
41–50.
Faster, D., & Lopez, D. (2022). School climate measurement and analysis. National School
Climate Center. https://schoolclimate.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/sc-brief-
measurement.pdf
105

Felstead, A. (2022). Remote working: A research overview. Taylor & Francis Group.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003247050
Foot, K. (2014). Cultural-historical activity theory: Exploring a theory to inform practice and
research. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 24(3), 329–347.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2013.831011
Freudenberger, H. J. (1974). Staff burn-out. The Journal of Social Issues, 30(1), 159–165.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1974.tb00706.x
Galazska, A., & Jarosz, J. (2021). The role of educational coaching in enhancing teachers’
wellbeing during pandemic. The New Educational Review, 64(2), 39–49.
Gallant, A., & Riley, P. (2014). Early career teacher attrition as arrested development: New
thoughts on an intractable problem. Teacher Development, 18(4), 562–580.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2014.945129
Garcia, E., & Weiss, E. (2019, May 19). Low relative pay and high incidence of moonlighting
play a role in the teacher shortage, Particularly in high-poverty schools. Economic
Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/publication/low-relative-pay-and-high-incidence-of-
moonlighting-play-a-role-in-the-teacher-shortage-particularly-in-high-poverty-schools-
the-third-report-in-the-perfect-storm-in-the-teacher-labor-marke/
Giffin, J., Lachlan, L., LaTurner, J., & LeVangie, S. (2021, August). Generating solutions to
COVID-specific educator shortages: A synthesis of insights from a cross-state
collaborative. Comprehensive Care Network Regions 1 and 9 and the Center on Great
Teachers & Leaders at the American Institutes for Research.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED615878.pdf
106

Gilmour, A., Sandilos, L. E., Pilny, W. V., Schwartz, S., & Wehby, J. H. (2022). Teaching
students with emotional/behavioral disorders: Teachers’ burnout profiles and classroom
management. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 30(1), 16–28.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10634266211020258
Gramlich, J. (2023). Mental health and the pandemic: What U.S. surveys have found. Pew
Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2023/03/02/mental-health-and-
the-pandemic-what-u-s-surveys-have-found/
Grimmett, H. (2014). The practice of teachers professional development: A cultural-historical
approach. Birkhäuser Boston. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-610-3
Grissom, J. A., & Bartanen, B. (2019). Strategic retention: Principal effectiveness and teacher
turnover in multiple-measure teacher evaluation systems. American Educational
Research Journal, 56(2), 514–555. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218797931
Hackman, M., & Morath, E. (2018, December 28). Teachers are leaving their jobs at record
rates. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/teachers-quit-jobs-at-
highest-rate-on-record-11545993052
Hastings, R. P., & Bham, M. S. (2003). The relationship between student behaviour patterns and
teacher burnout. School Psychology International, 24(1), 115–127.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034303024001905
Heineke, A. (2017). The invisible revolving door: the issue of teacher attrition in English
language development classrooms in Arizona. Language Policy, 17(1), 77–98.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-016-9428-9
Heinemann, L. V., & Heinemann, T. (2017). Burnout research: Emergence and scientific
107

investigation of a contested diagnosis. SAGE Open.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017697154
Herman, K. C., Sebastian, J., Reinke, W. M., & Huang, F. L. (2021). Individual and school
predictors of teacher stress, coping, and wellness during the COVID-19 pandemic. School
Psychology, 36(6), 483–493. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000456
Hoglund, W. L. G., Klingle, K. E., & Hosan, N. E. (2015). Classroom risks and resources:
Teacher burnout, classroom quality and children’s adjustment in high needs elementary
schools. Journal of School Psychology, 53(5), 337–357.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2015.06.002
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2008). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice
(8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hupe, T. M., & Stevenson, M. C. (2019). Teachers’ intentions to report suspected child abuse:
The influence of compassion fatigue. Journal of Child Custody, 16(4), 364–386.
https://doi.org/10.1080/153794 18.2019.1663334
Ingersoll, R. (2003). Is there really a teacher shortage? Graduate School of Education,
University of Pennsylvania. https://repository.upenn.edu/gse_pubs/133
Ingersoll, M., Merrill, E., Stuckey, D., & Collins, G. (2018). Seven trends: The transformation of
the teaching force – Updated October 2018. CPRE Research Reports.
https://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_researchreports/108
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis.
American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499–534.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3202489
108

Irwin, V., De La Rosa, J., Wang, K., Hein, S., Zhang, J., Burr, R., Roberts, A., Barmer, A.,
Bullock Mann, F., Dilig, R., & Parker, S. (2022). Report on the Condition of Education
2022 (NCES 2022-144). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/ pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2022144
Iwanicki, E. F., & Schwab, R. L. (1981). A cross validation study of the Maslach Burnout
Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41(4), 1167–1174.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001316448104100425
Johnson, S. M., & Kardos, S. M. (2008). The next generation of teachers: Who enters, who
stays, and why. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, D. J. McIntyre, & K. E.
Demers (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in
changing contexts (3rd ed., pp. 445–467). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203938690
Jones, R., Smith, J., & Green, J., (2020). Adolescent mental health during the COVID-19
pandemic. Journal of Adolescent Health, 67(6), 645-652.
Jotkoff, E. (2022, February 1). NEA survey: Massive staff shortages in schools leading to
educator burnout; alarming number of educators indicating they plan to leave the
profession. National Education Association. https://www.nea.org/about-nea/media-
center/press-releases/nea-survey-massive-staff-shortages-schools-leading-educator
Kardos, S. M., & Johnson, S. M. (2008). New teachers’ experiences of mentoring: The good, the
bad, and the inequity. Journal of Educational Change, 11(1), 23–44.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-008-9096-4
Karner, M., Renaud, M., & Lewis, G. (2022). Educator Shortage Survey. https://iarss.org/wp-
content/uploads/2023/01/iarss-educator-shortage
109

Kelchtermans, G. (2017). “Should I stay or should I go?”: unpacking teacher attrition/retention
as an educational issue. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 23(8), 961–977.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1379793
Kena, G., Aud, S., Johnson, F., Wang, X., Zhang, J., Rathbun, A., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., &
Kristapovich, P. (2014). The condition of education 2014 (NCES 2014-083). U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2014/2014083.pdf
Kersaint, G., Lewis, J., Potter, R., & Meisels, G. (2007). Why teachers leave: Factors that
influence retention and resignation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 775–794.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.12.004
Knox, L. (2022, August 28). Teacher shortage tied to education programs’ enrollment drop.
Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/08/29/teacher-shortage-
tied-education-programs-enrollment-drop
Kokkinos, C. M. (2006), Factor structure and psychometric properties of the Maslach Burnout
Inventory-Educators Survey among elementary and secondary school teachers in Cyprus.
Stress and Health, 22, 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.1079
Kolbe, T., & Strunk, K. O. (2012). Economic incentives as a strategy for responding to teacher
staffing problems: A typology of policies and practices. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 48(5), 779–813. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X12441011
Kosciw, J. G., Clark, C. M., Truong, N. L., & Zongrone, A. D. (2020). The 2019 National School
Climate Survey: The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer youth
in our nation’s schools. GLSEN.
110

Kraft, M. A., & Simon, N. S. (2020). Teachers’ experiences working from home during the
COVID-19 pandemic. Upbeat.
Krasnoff, B. (2015). Leadership qualities of effective principals. Northwest Comprehensive
Center.
Kristensen, T. S., Borritz, M., Villadsen, E., & Christensen, K. B. (2005). The Copenhagen
Burnout Inventory: A new tool for the assessment of burnout. Work & Stress, 19(3),
192–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370500297720
Kuhfeld, M., Soland, J., Tarasawa, B., Johnson, E., Ruzek, K., & Liu, J. (2020). Projecting the
potential impacts of COVID-19 school closures on academic achievement (Working
Paper No. 20–226). Annenberg Institute at Brown University.
https://doi.org/10.26300/cdrv-yw05
Kutscher, A., Seeland, I. B., Wessells Jr, D. T., Cherico, D. J., Clark, E. J., & Selder, F. E.
(2013). Professional burnout in medicine and the helping professions. Taylor and
Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315826080
Lambert, R. G., McCarthy, C., O’Donnell, M., & Wang, C. (2009), Measuring elementary
teacher stress and coping in the classroom: Validity evidence for the classroom appraisal
of resources and demands. Psychology in the Schools, 46(10), 973–988.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20438
Langemeyer, I., & Roth, W.-M. (2006). Is cultural-historical activity theory threatened to fall
short of its own principles and possibilities as a dialectical social science? Outlines.
Critical Practice Studies, 8(2), 20–42. https://doi.org/10.7146/ocps.v8i2.2090
Learning Policy Institute. (2019, December 5). Understanding teacher shortages in California: A
district- and county-level analysis of the factors influencing teacher supply and demand
111

[Interactive map]. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/interactive-map-
understanding-teacher-shortages-california
Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences
student learning. The Wallace Foundation.
Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. SAGE Publications.
Loeb, S., Darling-Hammond, L., & Luczak, J. (2005). How teaching conditions predict teacher
turnover in California schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(3), 44–70.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3497042
Lopez, S. (2020). Student behavior during COVID-19: Challenges and strategies. Journal of
Educational Administration and History, 52(4), 284–298.
Lovell, C. (2021, April 28). Update: Southern California parents secure major victory over
teachers union. California Policy Center. https://californiapolicycenter.org/update-
southern-california-parents-secure-major-victory-over-teachers-union-students-returning-
to-class-thanks-to-parent-protests/
Lovo, P., Cavazos, L., & Simmons, D. (2006). From BTSA to induction: The changing role of
school districts in teacher credentialing. Issues in Teacher Education, 15(1), 53–68.
Madigan, D. & Kim, L. E. (2021). Towards an understanding of teacher attrition: A meta-
analysis of burnout, job satisfaction, and teachers’ intentions to quit. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 105, Article 103425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103425
Mark, J. H., & Anderson, B. D. (1978). Teacher survival rates—A current look. American
Educational Research Journal, 15(3), 379–383.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312015003379
112

Marken, S., & Agrawal, S. (2022, June 13). K–12 workers have highest burnout rate in U.S.
Gallup. https://news.gallup.com/poll/393500/workers-highest-burnout-rate.aspx
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of
Occupational Behavior, 2, 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030020205
Maslach C., Jackson S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (2016). Maslach Burnout Inventory: Manual (4th
ed.). Mind Garden.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Marek, T., (2017). Professional burnout: Recent developments
in theory and research. Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315227979
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE
Publications.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Moustakas, C. E. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. SAGE Publications.
Murnane, R. (1981). Teacher mobility revisited. The Journal of Human Resources, 16(1), 3–19.
https://doi.org/10.2307/145216
Murphy, J., & Louis, K.S. (2007). When leadership makes a difference: The effects of the
principal on student achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(4), 504-540.
Natanson, H. (2022, August 3). ‘Never seen it this bad’: America faces catastrophic teacher
shortage. The Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/08/03/school-teacher-shortage/
National Education Association. (2022). Massive staff shortages in schools leading to educator
burnout: Alarming number of educators indicating they plan to leave the profession
113

[Press release]. https://www.nea.org/about-nea/media-center/press-releases/nea-survey-
massive-staff-shortages-schools-leading-educator
Nerlino, E. (2021). “From heroes to scapegoats”: Teacher perceptions of the media and public’s
portrayal of teachers during COVID-19. The Educational Forum.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2023.2169874
Newberry, M., & Allsop, Y. (2017). Teacher attrition in the USA: the relational elements in a
Utah case study. Teachers and Teaching, Theory and Practice, 23(8), 863–880.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1358705
Olivier, M. A., & Venter, D. (2003). The extent and causes of stress in teachers in the George
region. South African Journal of Education, 23, 186–192.
Phan, K. (2022, August 18). Florida law lets veterans teach without degrees, not their spouses.
AP News. https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-florida-law-education-veterans-military-
degree-645106455513
Postholm. (2019). Research and development in school: Grounded in cultural historical activity
theory. BRILL.
Postholm, M. B., & Vennebo, K. F. (2019). Applying cultural historical activity theory in
educational settings: Learning, development and research. Routledge Research in
Education.
Pressley, T., & Ha, C. (2021). Teaching during a pandemic: United States teachers’ self-efficacy
during COVID-19. Teaching and Teacher Education, 106, Article 103465.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103465
Price, H. (2021). Weathering fluctuations in teacher commitment: Leaders relational failures,
114

with improvement prospects. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(4), 493–513.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-07-2020-0157
Quirk-Marku, C. (2019). Generating an approach informed by cultural-historical activity theory
to research influences affecting early career teachers’ professionalism and retention.
Teacher Education Advancement Network Journal, 11(3), 3–14.
https://ojs.cumbria.ac.uk/index.php/TEAN/article/view/571
Roth, W. M. (2004). Introduction: “Activity theory and education: An introduction.” Mind,
Culture, and Activity, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca1101_1
Roth, W.-M., & Lee, Y.-J. (2007). “Vygotsky’s neglected legacy”: Cultural-historical activity
theory. Review of Educational Research, 77(2), 186–232.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654306298273
Samaras, A., Beck, C., Freese, A. R., & Kosnik, C. (2008). Learning communities in practice (1.
Aufl., Vol. 4). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8788-2
Schaufeli, W. B., & Taris, T. W., (2005). The conceptualization and measurement of burnout:
Common ground and worlds apart. Work & Stress, 19(3), 256–262.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370500385913
Schwartz, K. D., Exner-Cortens, D., McMorris, C. A., Makarenko, E., Arnold, P., Van Bavel,
M., Williams, S., & Canfield, R. (2021). COVID-19 and student well-being: Stress and
mental health during return-to-school. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 36(2),
166–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/08295735211001653
Sikali, K. (2020). The dangers of social distancing: How COVID-19 can reshape our social
experience. Journal of Community Psychology, 48(8), 2435–2438.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22430
115

Steiner, E. D., & Woo, A. (2021). Job-related stress threatens the teacher supply: Key findings
from the 2021 State of the U.S. Teacher Survey. RAND Corporation.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1108-1.html
Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2019). Understanding teacher
shortages: An analysis of teacher supply and demand in the United States. Education
Policy Analysis Archives, 27(35). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.3696
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education
Statistics. (2022). NAEP long-term trend assessment results: Reading and Mathematics.
The Nation’s Report Card. Retrieved December 17, 2022, from
https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/highlights/ltt/2022/
United States National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The
imperative for educational reform: A report to the Nation and the Secretary of Education.
U.S. Department of Education. https://www.reaganfoundation.org/media/130020/a-
nation-at-risk-report.pdf
Vagle, M. D. (2018). Crafting phenomenological research. Taylor and Francis.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315173474
VanLone, J., Pansé-Barone, C., & Long, K. (2022). Teacher preparation and the COVID-19
disruption: Understanding the impact and implications for novice teachers. International
Journal of Educational Research Open, 3, Article 100120.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2021.100120
van Manen, M. (2016). Phenomenology of practice: Meaning-giving methods in
phenomenological research and writing (Vol. 13). Taylor and Francis.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315422657
116

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, Vol. 1. Problems of general
psychology (R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton, Eds.). Plenum Press.
Weinstein, C. S., & Evertson, C. M. (2013). Handbook of classroom management: Research,
practice, and contemporary issues. Taylor and Francis.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203874783
West, C. P., Dyrbye, L. N., Satele, D. V., Sloan, J. A., & Shanafelt, T. D. (2012). Concurrent
validity of single-item measures of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization in
burnout assessment. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 27(11), 1445–1452.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2015-7
Williams, M., & Moser, T. (2019). The art of coding and thematic exploration in qualitative
research. International Management Review, 15(1), 45–72.
Williamson, K., Lank, P. M., Cheema, N., Hartman, N., Lovell, E. O., & Emergency Medicine
Education Research Alliance. (2018). Comparing the Maslach Burnout Inventory to other
well-being instruments in emergency medicine residents. Journal of Graduate Medical
Education, 10(5), 532–536. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-18-00155
Wolfe, E. (2021, June 1). Can California withstand a teacher retirement boom? CalMatters.
https://calmatters.org/education/k-12-education/2021/06/california-teacher-retirement/

117

Appendix A: Interview Protocol
Thank you for agreeing to sit down and chat with me about your experience over the past
couple of years. The intent of this research is to gain a better understanding of your recent
experience in the classroom, and more specifically, how your experience has changed during the
pandemic.
Before beginning, I want to make sure you’re comfortable with the time required for this
interview, which should take about an hour. Does that work for you? I also want to assure you
your responses will be kept confidential. I will not share your name with anyone outside of my
research team. Although some of your responses will be shared as direct quotes, I will use a
pseudonym to protect your confidentiality and will also do my best to de-identify any of the
information you share with me, unless you specify you’d like to be attributed. I’m also happy to
share with you a final copy of this paper if you’re interested.
My goal today is to gain a better understanding of your experience as a new teacher and
all the different ways both your status as a preliminary credential holder and as a teacher during
the pandemic have impacted you over the past couple years. I also want to hear a bit about what
might help to improve your experience. I am not here to evaluate your teaching or make
judgments based on what you share. I really appreciate your time and honesty so this research
can be a meaningful contribution to the teaching community as we continue into the third school
year impacted by COVD-19.
If it’s alright with you, it would be helpful for me to capture more fully what you’re
saying by using a recorder. That way, rather than jotting notes down during our conversation I’ll
be able to better engage with and respond to what you’re sharing. The recording will be used for
my notes only and will not be shared with anyone. Are you okay with that?
118

Do you have any questions or concerns before we begin, or can I provide any
clarifications?
Introductory Questions
I’d like to start by asking you some general questions about what brought you to the
teaching profession:
1. First, tell me about your background in education.
• How did you become interested in the field of education?
• How long have you been teaching?
• Do you have a background in any other field prior to becoming a teacher?
2. What subject(s) do you teach? Do you have any additional roles at your school site?
Main Questions, Part I
I want to hear more specifics about your experience working as a full-time teacher during
the COVID-19 pandemic:
3. Can you describe your experience teaching over the past 2.5 years of the pandemic?
• Would you describe your experience as generally more positive or negative?
Why?
• Has your experience teaching full time been what you expected? If yes, in
what ways? If not, what has been different or unexpected?
4. Who or what has had the greatest impact on your teaching experience? In what ways?
5. Can you tell me a little about your current school culture? By culture I mean the way
in which school community members (admin, teachers, students) relate to one another
and support, or don’t support, each other.
6. How do you perceive the pandemic has impacted your students
119

• How do you perceive it has impacted student behavior?
• How do you perceive it has impacted student academics?
7. In what other ways has the pandemic impacted your experience?
• How has it impacted your interactions with school leadership?
• How has it impacted your interactions with parents/guardians?
• How has it impacted your interactions with other teachers?
8. Could you give me an example of a time your school community supported you
during this time, if any?
• Which teachers can access this support?
• Who is mainly providing the support?
Now I’d like to switch gears and give you the opportunity to describe some of your
survey responses. Although I do not know how you responded because responses were
anonymous, I have a copy of the survey here for your reference. I’ll give you a minute to look it
over again.
9. Are there any responses you’d like to elaborate on?
Main Questions, Part II
I want to ask you to consider for a moment your future in the teaching profession.
10. There has been a lot in the news lately about teachers who are leaving the profession
midyear or describe wanting to leave sooner than anticipated. In fact, a recent study
identified 90% of teachers are unhappy and nearly 60% are considering leaving
sooner than anticipated (Elias & Sharp, 2022). These numbers represent a 40%
increase since just last year. Does this surprise you? Why or why not?
• Do you feel as though these numbers are reflective of your experience?
120

• Why do you think teachers are feeling this way?
11. Do you see yourself continuing to teach until retirement? Why or why not? Has your
response changed since the pandemic?
12. What sort of supports do you think teachers need right now to reduce attrition? By
attrition, I mean teachers who are leaving the profession before the age of retirement.
13. In a perfect world, what support systems would you offer to teachers like you that are
navigating teaching during a pandemic?
Closing Question
14. Is there anything else you think is important or relevant for me to know regarding
your experience we didn’t address today? Is there anything you’d like non-teachers or
the wider community to know about your experience?
Closing Statement
Thank you for spending this time talking with me. I know how busy you are and that any
free time is a sacrifice. It’s been helpful to hear your experience and I appreciate how candid
you’ve been. After reviewing our interview, if I have any follow-up questions would it be OK to
email you? If you’re interested, I’d also be happy to share with you a copy of my final paper.
Again, thank you for your time.

121

Appendix B: MBI-ES Survey Instrument

122

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Teaching in the time of COVID-19: secondary educators’ experiences during and after the COVID-19 pandemic

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

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

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

Analyzing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic On K-12 southern California public school districts and understanding what district and site administrators…

PDF

A full plate: the impact of high expectations and demands on teacher recruitment and retention

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

Why are they still here: a look at employee retention amidst the COVID-19 pandemic

Asset Metadata

Creator Cherashore, Gina S. (author)

Core Title Teaching in the time of COVID: secondary educators’ experiences during and after the COVID-19 pandemic

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2023-05

Publication Date 04/19/2023

Defense Date 03/23/2023

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

Tag administrative leadership,administrative leadership and teacher retention,COVID-19,COVID-19 and impact on students,COVID-19 and teacher retention,COVID-19 policies,learning loss,OAI-PMH Harvest,remote instruction,remote learning,school climate,secondary educators,student behavior,teacher burnout,teacher job satisfaction,teacher retention,teacher shortage,teacher stress,teacher turnover

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Cash, David (committee chair), Ott, Maria (committee member), (Franklin, Gregory)

Creator Email gcherash@usc.edu,gcherashore@sandiego.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113038292

Unique identifier UC113038292

Identifier etd-Cherashore-11659.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-Cherashore-11659

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Cherashore, Gina S.

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230419-usctheses-batch-1025 (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. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

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