Teacher self-efficacy and principal support: Key factors in retaining Ohio  educators during the Great Resignation

Ariel A. Hayes; Karen H. Larwin

doi:10.59400/fes2387

Teacher self-efficacy and principal support: Key factors in retaining Ohio educators during the Great Resignation

Ariel A. Hayes
Cleveland Metropolitan School District,Cleveland,OH 44114,USA
Karen H. Larwin
Education Leadership/College of Education,Youngstown State University,Youngstown,OH 44514,USA

Article ID: 2387

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59400/fes2387

Keywords: teacher attrition, teacher retention, teacher shortages

Abstract

Teacher retention continues to represent a significant challenge for educational systems in the United States,particularly following the disruptions associated with COVID-19 and the Great Resignation.This quantitative study examined the relationship between teacher self-efficacy, perceptions of principal support, and educators’intentions to remain in the profession among 146 public and community school teachers in Ohio.Participants completed the Teachers’Sense of Efficacy Scale and an adapted Principal Efficacy Scale,along with demographic and retention-related survey items. Results indicated that the pandemic and broader workforce instability substantially influenced educators’professional outlooks,with many respondents reporting consideration of career changes or departure from PreK–12 education. Teachers who reported stronger self-efficacy beliefs, particularly in student engagement,instructional strategies,and classroom management,were significantly less likely to consider leaving the profession. Similarly, educators who perceived higher levels of principal support, especially in instructional and moral leadership domains, demonstrated stronger retention-related attitudes. Significant grade-level differences also emerged,with secondary educators reporting lower perceptions of principal support than elementary educators. Although most respondents endorsed higher salaries and retention incentives as beneficial, financial considerations alone did not emerge as the strongest predictors of retention intentions. Findings suggest that improving teacher retention requires comprehensive strategies that extend beyond compensation and address leadership quality,professional support systems,workplace conditions,and opportunities for teacher growth and efficacy development.

Published

2026-02-15

How to Cite

Hayes, A. A., & Karen H. Larwin. (2026). Teacher self-efficacy and principal support: Key factors in retaining Ohio educators during the Great Resignation. Forum for Education Studies, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.59400/fes2387

Download Citation

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): In Progress

Section

Article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

[1]Noel TK, Finocchio B. Using theories of human, social, structural, and positive psychological capital to explore the attrition of former public school practitioners. International Journal of Educational Research Open. 2022; 3: 100112. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedro.2021.100112

[2]Nguyen TD. Examining the Teacher Labor Market in Different Rural Contexts: Variations by Urbanicity and Rural States. AERA Open. 2020; 6(4): 2332858420966336. doi: 10.1177/2332858420966336

[3]Sorensen LC, Ladd HF. The Hidden Costs of Teacher Turnover. AERA Open. 2020; 6(1): 2332858420905812. doi: 10.1177/2332858420905812

[4]Ingersoll RM, Merrill E, Stuckey D, et al. Seven Trends: The Transformation of the Teaching Force. Consortium for Policy Research in Education at University of Pennsylvania; 2018. Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED593467.pdf

[5]Mason S, Matas C. Teacher Attrition and Retention Research in Australia: Towards a New Theoretical Framework. Australian Journal of Teacher Education. 2015; 40(40). doi: 10.14221/ajte.2015v40n11.3

[6]Elsayed MAA, Roch CH. Former Teachers: Exits and Re-Entries. Educational Policy. 2023; 37(2): 279–307. doi: 10.1177/08959048211019972

[7]Glazer J. Learning from those who no longer teach: Viewing teacher attrition through a resistance lens. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2018; 74: 62–71. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2018.04.011

[8]Räsänen K, Pietarinen J, Pyhältö K, et al. Why leave the teaching profession? A longitudinal approach to the prevalence and persistence of teacher turnover intentions. Social Psychology of Education. 2020; 23(4): 837–859. doi: 10.1007/s11218-020-09567-x

[9]Madigan DJ, Kim LE. Towards an understanding of teacher attrition: A meta-analysis of burnout, job satisfaction, and teachers’ intentions to quit. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2021; 105: 103425. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2021.103425

[10]107th United States Congress. H.R.1 - No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. 107th United States Congress; 2002. Available online: https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/1

[11]National Center of Education Statistics. Spotlight on American Education Week, Part 2: Appreciating Public School Educators with the National Teacher and Principal Survey (NTPS). Institute of Education Sciences; 2020. Available online: https://ies.ed.gov/learn/blog/spotlight-american-education-week-part-2-appreciating-public-school-educators-national-teacher-and

[12]Lawrent G. Sources of Teacher Efficacy Related Attributes Alongside Bandura’s Perspectives. Journal of Education. 2024; 204(1): 3–12. doi: 10.1177/00220574221094238

[13]Merrimack College. First Annual Merrimack College Teacher Survey: 2022 Results. EdWeek Research Center; 2022.

[14]Metlife. The Battle Against Burnout: What Public School Systems Can Do To Keep the Best and Brightest. Metlife; 2008.

[15]Noonoo S. The Mental Health Crisis Causing Teachers to Quit. EdSurge; 2022. Available online: https://www.edsurge.com/news/2022-05-02-the-mental-health-crisis-causing-teachers-to-quit

[16]Goldhaber D, Theobald R. Teacher Attrition and Mobility in the Pandemic. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2023; 45(4): 682–687. doi: 10.3102/01623737221139285

[17]Garcia E, Weiss E. U.S. Schools Struggle to Hire and Retain Teachers: The Second Report in the Perfect Storm in the Teacher Labor Market Series. Economic Policy Institute; 2019. Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED598209.pdf

[18]Cooper D, Hickey SM. Raising Pay in Public k-12 Schools is Critical to Solving Staffing Shortages: Federal Relief Funds can Provide a Down Payment on Long-Needed Investments in the Education Workforce. Economic Policy Institute; 2022. Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED617610.pdf

[19]Wiggan G, Smith D, Watson-Vandiver MJ. The National Teacher Shortage, Urban Education and the Cognitive Sociology of Labor. The Urban Review. 2021; 53(1): 43–75. doi: 10.1007/s11256-020-00565-z

[20]Newburger JC, Beckhusen J. Average Teachers’ Earnings Declining, Lower Than Similarly Educated Workers. United States Census Bureau; 2022. Available online: https://okwnews.com/news/average-teachers-earnings-declining-lower-than-similarly-educated-workers/

[21]Darling-Hammond L. Teacher education around the world: What can we learn from international practice? European Journal of Teacher Education. 2017; 40(3): 291–309. doi: 10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399

[22]National Education Association. NEA 2021–2022 Teacher Salary Benchmark Report. National Education Association; 2023. Available online: https://www.nea.org/sites/default/files/2023-04/2021-2022-teacher-salary-benchmark-report_0.pdf

[23]Bernardo R. Best and Worst States for Teachers. WalletHub; 2015.

[24]Zavelevsky E, Lishchinsky OS. An ecological perspective of teacher retention: An emergent model. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2020; 88: 102965. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2019.102965

[25]Dunn AH, Downey CA. Betting the House: Teacher Investment, Identity, and Attrition in Urban Schools. Education and Urban Society. 2018; 50(3): 207–229. doi: 10.1177/0013124517693283

[26]Edwards W, Magill KR. Rethinking the educational ecology in the wake of COVID: Intellectual solidarity, teacher prestige, and educational humanization. Policy Futures in Education. 2023; 21(2): 220–238. doi: 10.1177/14782103221101762

[27]Amitai A, Van Houtte M. Being pushed out of the career: Former teachers’ reasons for leaving the profession. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2022; 110: 103540. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2021.103540

[28]Lindqvist P, Nordänger UK. Already elsewhere—A study of (skilled) teachers’ choice to leave teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2016; 54: 88–97. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2015.11.010

[29]Ford TG, Olsen J, Khojasteh J, et al. The effects of leader support for teacher psychological needs on teacher burnout, commitment, and intent to leave. Journal of Educational Administration. 2019; 57(6): 615–634. doi: 10.1108/JEA-09-2018-0185

[30]Redding C, Nguyen TD. Greener than ever? A look at the newest teachers in our public schools. Phi Delta Kappan. 2021; 103(3): 8–12. doi: 10.1177/00317217211058506

[31]Clark S, Newberry M. Are we building preservice Teacher self-efficacy? A large-scale study examining Teacher education experiences. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education. 2019; 47(1): 32–47. doi: 10.1080/1359866X.2018.1497772

[32]Du Plessis AE, Wang J, Hoang NTH, et al. New lenses to understand beginning teacher workforce concerns: Developing and justifying scale items for measuring beginning teachers’ and school leaders’ perceptions. International Journal of Educational Research. 2019; 98: 206–223. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2019.08.017

[33]LaBerge ML. The Use of Improvement Science by a Principal to Increase Teacher Satisfaction and Teacher Retention Rates in an Elementary School Setting [PhD Thesis]. Clemson University; 2021. Available online: https://open.clemson.edu/all_dissertations/2835/

[34]Bottiani JH, Duran CAK, Pas ET, et al. Teacher stress and burnout in urban middle schools: Associations with job demands, resources, and effective classroom practices. Journal of School Psychology. 2019; 77: 36–51. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2019.10.002

[35]Ohio Department of Education and Workforce (ODEW). Facts and Figures: Ohio’s Education Landscape. ODEW; 2023.

[36]Tschannen-Moran M, Hoy AW. Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2001; 17(7): 783–805. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1

[37]Tschannen‐Moran M, Gareis CR. Principals’ sense of efficacy: Assessing a promising construct. Journal of Educational Administration. 2004; 42(5): 573–585. doi: 10.1108/09578230410554070

[38]Field A. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics, 5th ed. Sage; 2018.

[39]Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics, 5th ed. Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education; 2007.

[40]Whalen C, Majocha E, Van Nuland S. Novice teacher challenges and promoting novice teacher retention in Canada. European Journal of Teacher Education. 2019; 42(5): 591–607. doi: 10.1080/02619768.2019.1652906

[41]Ellerbeck S. Great Resignation Is Not over: A Fifth of Workers Plan to Quit in 2022. WeForum; 2022. Available online: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2022/06/the-great-resignation-is-not-over/

[42]Mancenido Z. How High Achievers Learn That They Should Not Become Teachers. Harvard Educational Review. 2021; 91(4): 433–456. doi: 10.17763/1943-5045-91.4.433

[43]Geiger T, Pivovarova M. The effects of working conditions on teacher retention. Teachers and Teaching. 2018; 24(6): 604–625. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2018.1457524

[44]Ohio Department of Education and Workforce (ODEW). ‘Grow Your Own’ Teacher Scholarship Program Accepting Applications in 2024. ODEW; 2024.

[45]Carver-Thomas D, Darling-Hammond L. Teacher Turnover: Why It Matters and What We Can Do About It. Learning Policy Institute; 2017. Available online: https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Teacher_Turnover_REPORT.pdf

[46]See BH, Morris R, Gorard S, et al. What works in attracting and retaining teachers in challenging schools and areas? Oxford Review of Education. 2020; 46(6): 678–697. doi: 10.1080/03054985.2020.1775566

[47]Pham LD, Nguyen TD, Springer MG. Teacher Merit Pay: A Meta-Analysis. American Educational Research Journal. 2021; 58(3): 527–566. doi: 10.3102/0002831220905580

[48]Brandenburg R, Larsen E, Simpson A, et al. ‘I left the teaching profession … and this is what I am doing now’: A national study of teacher attrition. The Australian Educational Researcher. 2024; 51(5): 2381–2400. doi: 10.1007/s13384-024-00697-1

Editor-in-Chief

Dr. Surapati Pramanik

Nandalal Ghosh B.T. College, India

eISSN

3029-2956

Publication Frequency

Quarterly

Indexing

Polish Scientific Bibliography

All the publications will be archived by the PKP Preservation Network for long-term electronic preservation.

Authors are encouraged to self-archive the final version of their published articles into institutional repositories (such as those listed in the Directory of Open Access Repositories).

Authors are also encouraged to use the final PDF version published on the website of Academic Publishing.

Scilit Database (Switzerland)

J-Gate

Open Access Library

About the Publisher

Academic Publishing insists on taking academic exchange and publication as the main line, carrying out comprehensive management based on science and technology, and fully exploring excellent international publishing resources. Within 5 years, it will form a strategic framework and scale with science (S), technology (T), medicine (M), education (E), and humanities and arts (H) as the main publishing fields. Academic Publishing is headquartered in Singapore and based in Malaysia, with the United States and China providing the main scientific and academic resources. At the same time, it has established long-term good cooperative relations with other publishing companies, scientific research communities, and academic organizations in more than a dozen countries and regions. Academic Publishing uses English and Chinese as its main publishing languages, mainly publishing books, journals, and conference papers in print and online. The vast majority of publications follow the international open access policy, providing stable and long-term quality and professional publications. With the joint efforts of the expert team and our professional editorial team, our publications will gradually be indexed by international databases in stages to provide convenient and professional retrieval for various scholars. At the same time, manuscripts we accept will be subject to the peer review principle, and cutting-edge and innovative research articles will be preferentially accepted for peer reference and discussion. All kinds of our publications are welcome for peer to contribute, access, and download.

more

Volume Arrangement

2025

2024

2023

Featured Articles

Diachronic analysis of Spanish scientific production on teaching methodologies in Primary Education: A scientometric and conceptual perspective (2000–2023)

The evaluation of science is essential to ensuring the quality, validity, and reliability of scientific results. Science needs to undergo a review process to ensure the rigorousness of scientific output. This evaluation provides a solid basis for political and economic decisions related to the design and execution of research projects, the establishment of new lines of research, or the identification of areas of specialization. This paper analyses diachronically the Spanish scientific production related to the implementation and development of teaching methodologies in primary education and indexed in the Scopus and Web of Science databases during the period 2000–2023. This analysis is carried out on the one hand, from a scientometric perspective, based on the analysis of indicators such as diachronic production, the journals with the highest scientific productivity, and the most productive institutions, and, on the other hand, from a conceptual perspective, trying to define its relationship with other areas of education. The general results of this study reveal two clear stages: the first, up to 2010, with little scientific production; and the second, from 2011 onwards, characterised by a general growth. The relationship between this field and others such as initial teacher training, ICT, and didactics is also evident.

The relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and classroom management practices in secondary schools

This study explores the intricate relationship between teacher self-efficacy and classroom management practices in secondary schools in the Mansehra district of Pakistan. Teacher self-efficacy, defined as the belief in one’s ability to manage and influence classroom environments effectively, has been identified as a critical factor influencing both teaching performance and student outcomes. The research employed a mixed-method approach, gathering data from 62 teachers and 310 students using both online surveys (via Google Forms) and physical questionnaires to ensure a diverse and inclusive participant pool. Data analysis was conducted using two complementary tools: SPSS and Smart PLS. SPSS was used for descriptive statistics and inferential analyses, such as t-tests, chi-square tests, and measures of central tendency, to offer an overview of group differences and relationships between variables. Meanwhile, Smart PLS was employed for Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), a technique suited for complex models and smaller sample sizes. This method allowed for the analysis of both direct and indirect relationships between the study variables—teacher self-efficacy, teaching practices, and classroom management. The findings reveal a significant positive correlation between teacher self-efficacy and classroom management practices. Additionally, teaching practices were found to mediate this relationship, indicating that higher levels of self-efficacy not only directly improve classroom management but also enhance teaching performance, which in turn contributes to better-managed classrooms. These results suggest that interventions aimed at enhancing teacher self-efficacy can have far-reaching effects on educational outcomes. The study highlights the need for focused teacher development programs that foster self-efficacy, thereby improving classroom management, student engagement, and overall academic success.

Artificial Intelligence in education: A comprehensive study

This comprehensive study delves into the multifaceted role of AI in education, exploring its applications, benefits, challenges, and future implications. The purpose of the study is to show how AI in education helps educators identify gaps in student knowledge and provide targeted feedback to improve learning outcomes. As a methodology, the library method and the study and review of various documents have been used in this research. The study examines the diverse range of AI technologies employed in educational settings, including intelligent tutoring systems, personalized learning platforms, educational chatbots, and virtual reality simulations. Furthermore, the study delves into the numerous benefits that AI brings to education. It highlights how AI-powered analytics and data-driven insights enable educators to gain deeper insights into student learning patterns, identify areas for improvement, and tailor instructional strategies accordingly. Additionally, AI-driven tools promote inclusivity by providing personalized support to learners with diverse needs and learning styles. Despite its transformative potential, the study also acknowledges the challenges and ethical considerations associated with integrating AI into education. Data privacy, algorithmic bias, and the digital divide are examined in detail, emphasizing the importance of responsible AI deployment and ethical guidelines. Looking ahead, the study explores the future implications of AI in education and the evolving role of educators in AI-enabled classrooms. It discusses how AI technologies will continue to evolve, offering new opportunities for collaborative learning, skill development, and lifelong education. In conclusion, this comprehensive study underscores the profound impact of AI on education and the need for thoughtful implementation strategies that prioritize equity, inclusivity, and ethical considerations. By harnessing the potential of AI, education systems can better prepare learners for the challenges and opportunities of the future.

Enhancing adult learner success in higher education through decision tree models: A machine learning approach

This article explores the use of machine learning, specifically Classification and Regression Trees (CART), to address the unique challenges faced by adult learners in higher education. These learners confront socio-cultural, economic, and institutional hurdles, such as stereotypes, financial constraints, and systemic inefficiencies. The study utilizes decision tree models to evaluate their effectiveness in predicting graduation outcomes, which helps in formulating tailored educational strategies. The research analyzed a comprehensive dataset spanning the academic years 2013–2014 to 2021–2022, evaluating the predictive accuracy of CART models using precision, recall, and F1 score. Findings indicate that attendance, age, and Pell Grant eligibility are key predictors of academic success, demonstrating the strong capability of the model across various educational metrics. This highlights the potential of machine learning (ML) to improve data-driven decision-making in educational settings. The results affirm the effectiveness of Decision Tree (DT) models in meeting the educational needs of adult learners and underscore the need for institutions to adapt their strategies to provide more inclusive and supportive environments. This study advocates for a shift towards nuanced, data-driven approaches in higher education, emphasizing the development of strategies that address the distinct challenges of adult learners, aiming to enhance inclusivity and support within the sector.