I think Mr. Sallee is on to something. Several years ago I worked in the BCPSS Dept. of Professional Development in a mentoring program that went into the schools with the highest teacher attrition and tried to both improve the teaching and keep teachers. One of my duties was to do exit interviews with teachers who chose to leave. When asked, "Why did you quit?" many teachers gave answers about pay, as John-John mentioned in his original post. However, if you probed a bit and asked about what happened right before a teacher decided to quit, you very often heard a story about an administrator treating a teacher in an extraordinarily unprofessional manner. I don't mean this as a knock on all administrators -- this program was in some of the worst-performing schools in the city, so it was a skewed sample. However, I concluded that teachers leave when they feel that they are treated unprofessionally, especially when this leads them to believe that they cannot do what they think is necessary to make a difference in the lives of children. For example, this feeling was especially prevalent at schools that used scripted curricula -- how can you feel like a professional when you are told just to read from the script? So while money is an issue (and I certainly think teachers deserve more), most teachers were willing to trade some of the money for a career in which they thought they could make a difference. If they decide they can't, especially if they work under a principal who they feel stops them from making a difference, that's when they leave.

Eric is absolutely correct! This year in my school there is a cadre of inexperienced APs who are unchecked by the principal and are flexing their administrative muscles by berating, harassing and talking down to teachers. Today's announcements provided a prime example when an AP told TEACHERS to "be on your best behavior" because there would be members of the media in the building. We are sick and tired of being treated like naughty 4-year olds. In spite of the challenges my previous years here, this is the first year when I've heard a significant number of teachers making plans to leave.

I agree-SO much of a school's success rides on the principal. I really think that is where the school system should be focusing its efforts. My son will be starting kindergarten next year and we have been visiting Baltimore city public schools-I have seen some great schools-they are out there believe me. A great principal can make a huge difference. If it was up to me, I would can almost everyone at North Avenue, hire incredible principals and give them the authority to make their schools great. The beauty of the charter school movement, no matter how you feel about it, is that principals get so much more control, and a charter school with a bad principal plain old won't make it.

Absolutely correct for all of the above. Strong principal who cares more about what is actually happening in their schools and what the teachers think and feel, and things happen positively for the students.

On the reverse side, what we have here now are dropping levels of morale because their is so much fear and anticipation of reform driven by Dr. Alonso-- principals are afraid to be "caught" doing something wrong, so it is cascading downwards throughout the building. This perspective from one of the saner, "better" schools; I can only imagine how it feels in poor performing units.

Autonomy is a big plus. Highly educated, highly skilled, highly qualified teachers can and do achieve results, but sometimes are saddled with an environment that makes it difficult to get the job done.

I find that even the poorer teachers I work with were once pretty good-- they're just tired of pushing a noodle up the hill of a culture of suspicion, ineptitude, authoritarianism and low expectations.

Minor thought (and I'm slowly coming to the realization that these blogs are just killing my productivity level...): there is an inherent problem in "trying not to get caught doing something wrong." The moment that thought process starts, it's clear priorities are no longer on student achievement. When I was a teacher I certainly fell into that trap - i.e. I'm just going to skip grading these quizzes to get these grades in just so I don't get a memo that I turned the scantron sheet in late. In the market-economy world of teaching - cover your behind = transaction cost. Higher transaction costs = diminished efficiency = suffering student achievement. Bottom line, "watching my back" principals need to either 1) be given the autonomy to make individual choices for their school community or 2) be given an early retirement. In the education industry, when keeping your job is more important that producing results (successful students) it's time to move on.

I teach middle school in the City schools, and I stay for my students. I enjoy interacting with them; on most days, this overrides any difficulties I have with the overwhelming paperwork and long hours.

I second everyone who is talking about administration. The staff at my school is:
-berated over the intercom
-blamed for any and all student misbehaviors
-assaulted by students with no administrative interventions
-screamed at in front of children
-treated like criminals if we ask for things like chalk or paper
-forced to have lesson plans approved beforehand (or given lessons we must use)
-told to "stop talking to each other so much" (but yet, collaborate more?)

I didn't go to college for many years to come into a building and be treated just like the 8th graders I teach. I'd rather get paid less and feel like a professional.

I agree with Bill - success for students is the reason that we all got into this field in the first place. The issue that I am finding is that different people define success in different ways. For me, success is when I can ask my students a question about something I have taught (for the record, I teach government, which is a tested subject area) and they can answer my question and we can have an intelligent discussion. For my administrators, success is when the test scores go up. The problem is, these things don't always go hand in hand: A student can know the content and not do well on the test because they have poor vocabulary skills (unfortunately I have too much content to cover to be able to teach them non-content vocabulary, or to teach students to read effectively) or because some of the "logic trap" questions (Which of these is NOT the answer, Which is best, etc) foul them up because they don't have the kind of problem solving skills needed to work through them. I do what I can to help them acheive better test scores, but at the end of the day, my real goal is that they will understand how government works. After all, we are raising the next crop of voters and politicians. So, to make a very long story short, the main thing that has made me re-think my career decision is that my goals as a teacher (making sure that my students leave me with an understanding of the content that I teach) is not in line with the main goal of the administration (numbers).

There needs to be more incentives for teachers to remain in the field. Many incentives are given to attract young teachers into teaching but are not given to them to keep them in teaching. If things do not change, BCPSS will be a school system comprised overwhelmingly with inexperienced teachers.

As a teacher with a few years under my belt, I do not worry about "survival" as much and can focus on the individual needs of all of my students. The first few years are kind of like boot camp. You just have to make it through everyday.

The number one way to keep teachers in the field is more money. Teachers are underpaid. I know that being a teacher is being a public servant but salaries have to be at least somewhat competitive with the private sector. Bonuses need to be given to teachers who stay in the system. The salary step increases should not stop at step 21. Young teachers teach because it provides them with a livable salary and pays for much, if not all, of their graduate level coursework. These teachers get their degrees and then leave to make more money. It's as simple as that.

The other major reason why teachers do not remain in the field is lack of support. Teachers are people and do not like to be treated like garbage. Just because it's kids who are yelling at you, cursing at you, being completely insubordinate, etc. does not mean it's ok. Teaching at most of the city schools has become nothing more than babysitting. People do not get college degrees and enter the teaching field to be treated like a piece of you know what. Kids need to be disciplined and if that does not work then those troubled kids need to be removed and placed in alternative setting. A few bad seeds should not be allowed to spoil the bunch but that happens all too often. Let's not let these problematic kids cause teachers to leave teaching while ruining the education of all of the other teachers at the same time.

And to think, I left a $100,000 job to go into teaching (idiot!), managing $multimillion$ dollar businesses.

I can get frustrating to see people who cannot even manage to get to school on time.

I think it's pretty clear that there are a few common threads going on here.

The teachers responding to this post all appear to feel that they are being treated as somehow less than the professionals they are. People who have been around longer are burned out before their time. The job doesn't pay much, but how important that is comes down to an individual decision. Unfortunately, that decision works itself down to "How much is it worth to me to take this abuse?"

Scripted curricula are an interesting animal because there are definitely teachers out there who want that sort of thing. Nearly all of them are new. These are usually the same people who complain about its being too constraining a few years down the road.

Any qualified teachers who feel like their administration is treating them poorly please remember that Charter and New School's are almost always looking for great, hardworking teachers. I came to one such school after 9 years in the system and have never looked back.