Recruit, Retain, Respect

A few years ago, I enjoyed the pleasure of helping found a (now) university sponsored program at my baccalaureate alma mater. I learned a very valuable lesson about selling an idea to a university's administration. Simply, my presentation required an emphasis on how the program would help the university recruit and retain top talent among students and staff. The moral, social, and academic benefits of the program were important, but those alone were not going to see this program officially supported. In the end, only the promise of positive, and lucrative, numbers mattered.

Fast forward a couple of years, a few hundred miles, and a wealth of experience later, and I'm finding this particular lesson remains true- this time within the context of K-12 public charter schools. At least, this is the principle in theory.

 But, the principle in theory must ultimately bow to the principal running the show.



I want to pose a hypothetical example.

A school in question looks amazing on paper, and for the casual observer, looks great in person. With upwards of 90% of students qualifying for free and reduced lunches, the school continually makes AYP  and earns a state rating of "A." Administrators and various sections of the school are lauded in the local press and given national awards. The decade old program goes from a few closely knit teachers and a visionary administrator in a much-criticized experiment to a well-oiled, education machine. And therein, I believe, lies the problem with our fictional school.

Despite its sterling reputation, this institution regularly faces a high rate of self-initiated turnover. The reasons most often given: poor return-on-investment from the school for the amount of work required by the school and an incredibly lackadaisical discipline policy. Between the latest school years, the institution turned over 15+ full time teachers and adjunct faculty. During the current school year, the school has lost a third of that again with only one teacher removed by the school.

WHY?

One, I would be extremely surprised if more than 1 or 2, if any, teachers even made $64,000 at this school. 

Two, the school day begins at 7:30, at the latest and ends at 4:30, at the earliest. 

Three, the average base pay probably being slightly more than half of the above amount and a bonus system requiring Deep Blue and a degree in Calculus to figure out makes for teachers unable to meet their full potential due to having to figure out how to make it paycheck-to-paycheck.

Four, little to no career advancement pipeline exists in a one-school, longevity-based leadership system.

I could go on, but I digress. 

Essentially, when administrations stress recruitment far more than retention, a perpetual recruitment cycle is exactly what will emerge. When retention efforts are based more on fear (i.e. loss of bonuses for leaving, its-a-tough-economy-so-they'll-stay philosophy) than on positive reinforcement, schools should not be surprised  at large numbers of teachers showing pride in themselves and the quality of their work by walking away for a better deal... or at least a better environment.

So, how do we stop this ugly trend of teacher attrition in schools like our fictional example?

We focus on the third "r," respect. Recruitment and retention are important. But, I am convinced that schools will experience an abundance of both when they show an undeniable respect for their teachers. When administrators become more partners than managers, when teachers are collaborating instead of competing, when the return-on-investment concerning teacher remuneration and appreciation sets the bar for competing  schools ridiculously high, then schools will find themselves swimming in success that needs no spin or hypothetical. They'll find a selling not simply "winning" formula.