Understanding the Impact of Accountability on Preservice Teachers’ Decisions About Where to Teach

Should I Stay or Should I Go? Examining the Career Choices of Alternatively Licensed Teachers in Urban Schools

“…Although many teachers anticipate that the management of student learning and behavior will be their biggest problems, Haberman and Rickards (1990) found that the majority of complaints expressed by teachers who left jobs in urban schools were related to issues beyond their direct control-insufficient support from administrators and supervisors, heavy work loads, lack of parental support, clerical burdens, inadequate support staff, scarce resources and supplies, low salaries, and overwhelming class sizes. Recent studies on the perceptions of preservice teachers (Ng 2006) as well as the practices of current teachers (Costigan 2005;Eisner 2001;McNeil 2000;Stecher and Chun 2001) indicate that the high stakes nature of standardized testing and accountability also deter teachers from entering or staying in urban schools where they believe the pressures are significantly higher than other school settings.…”

Job Queues, Certification Status, and the Education Labor Market

“…That Stanley would so appreciate a principal articulating his trust is noteworthy and alludes to the conflicts and disagreements that surround teachers in disadvantaged schools (Ng, 2006). Stanley's school, for example, received much negative press in local papers for poor test results and poor graduation rates, and a supportive principal helps in such contexts.…”

“…Why teachers work in particular schools, what informs their decision-making process, is not empirically clear (Liu & Moore-Johnson, 2006;Ng, 2006). Conventionally, there are four possible explanations for the current distribution of teachers: (a) the preferences of local schools and residents; (b) the hiring practices of school districts and schools; (c) parental power within schools; and (d) teacher personal preferences (Achinstein et al, 2004;Lankford et al, 2002;Liu & Moore-Johnson, 2006;Stotko et al, 2007;Winter & Melloy, 2005).…”

“…Restricted access to such resources could negatively affect their teaching ability, and consequently, they avoid schools with weak physical capital and failing academic results (Ng, 2006). Those with a strong subject matter focus tend to seek out schools that perform well on standardized achievement tests because they believe the school has the resources to support effective teaching and that increases their own likelihood of success.…”

“…An undesirable school would be a disadvantaged school, which is if 40% or more of students qualify for the freeand-subsidized lunch program. Disadvantaged school organizations are typically low achieving with limited resources, high proportions of poor and minority students, and located in urban and rural areas (Ng, 2006;Zeichner, 2003). Disadvantaged schools as undesirable workplaces have difficulty in recruiting teachers and consequently are less selective in the hiring process (Belfield, 2005;Boyd et al, 2006;Darling-Hammond, 2000;Gerald & Hussar, 1998;Haycock, 1998;Winter & Melloy, 2005).…”