findings Science Teachers as Public Health Educators: How Has the COVID-19 Pandemic Reshaped the Roles and Experiences of K-12 Science Teachers? (COVID 2022)
Findings
Sources of Information About COVID
To find out where teachers accessed information about COVID, the survey asked them what media sources they consulted. Findings regarding which sources of information were used by teachers at each grade band are described in this section of the report.
Table 2 shows which sources teachers relied on to a substantial extent (i.e., those responding 3 or 4 on a four-point scale ranging from 1 “Not at all” to 4 “To a great extent”). About three-quarters of teachers across grade bands reported using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website to a substantial extent. The rest of the sources were used by about half or less of all teachers. Interestingly, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and World Health Organization (WHO) websites were used substantially by about half of secondary teachers, but only a third of elementary teachers. On the other hand, nearly half of elementary teachers used resources provided by their school district, while only a fifth of secondary teachers reported the same.
Large percentages of teachers at each grade band relied on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website as a source of information about COVID. Secondary teachers also commonly accessed other health information websites, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and World Health Organization (WHO).
Elementary teachers were more likely than secondary teachers to turn to local/national news and personal conversations/social media for information about COVID. Secondary teachers used health/science organization websites more often.
Subsets of items shown in Table 2 were combined into three composite variables: (1) local/national television news stations, (2) health/science organization websites, and (3) personal conversations/social media. As can be seen in Table 3, the composite means suggest that teachers across grade bands used each of these types of sources for information about COVID to minimally to moderately. However, there were some differences by grade band. Elementary teachers were more likely to consult local/national television news than high school teachers (mean scores of 44 vs. 37). Elementary teachers were also more likely to use personal conversations and social media than their middle and high school counterparts (mean scores of 38, 29, and 31, respectively). On the other hand, middle and high school teachers were more likely than elementary teachers to use health/science organization websites (mean scores of 46, 47, and 40, respectively).
Equity analyses revealed some differences in the extent to which teachers consulted various forms of media for information about COVID.
The three composite variables related to teachers’ sources of information about COVID (shown in Table 2) were examined by equity factors. As can be seen in Table 4, there were few differences across equity factors for each composite. One notable difference, however, is that teachers in high-poverty schools were more likely to consult health/science organization websites than teachers in low-poverty schools (48 vs. 42). In addition, teachers in urban schools were more likely than those in suburban or rural areas to use personal conversations and/or social media as a source of information (mean scores of 34, 30, and 30, respectively).
Teaching About COVID
The survey asked teachers if they addressed COVID in their science instruction during the 2021–22 school year. Examples of addressing COVID might include class discussions, formal lessons, student presentations, or current event coverage. Teachers who addressed COVID were also asked how much class time they devoted compared to the previous school year, what specific topics of the virus/disease were addressed, and what instructional materials were used. These data are discussed in this section of the report.
Large proportions of teachers at each grade band devoted class time to COVID.
As can be seen in Table 5, over 70 percent of teachers at each grade band reported addressing COVID in their classes. However, middle and high school teachers reported covering the topic more than elementary teachers (82, 82, and 71 percent, respectively).
While a majority of all teachers addressed COVID, those in high-poverty schools did so more than their low-poverty counterparts.
Table 6 shows percentages of teachers who addressed COVID by equity factors. Large percentages of teachers addressed COVID across equity factors, with the only significant difference being that teachers in high-poverty schools addressed COVID more than those in low-poverty schools (83 vs. 70 percent).
Teachers spent less time addressing COVID during the 2021–22 school year than they did in the 2020–21 school year.
Teachers who addressed COVID were asked to compare the time they spent on the subject in the 2020–21 and 2021–22 school years. As can be seen in Table 7, the majority of teachers at each grade band spent less time addressing COVID in the 2021–22 school year than they did in the 2020–21 school year (when COVID was much more prevalent and surrounded by a lot of uncertainty). There are significant differences between the distributions of responses for each grade band, likely due to smaller percentages of high school teachers spending much less time covering the topic.
Large percentages of teachers addressed COVID as part of their curriculum, increasingly so as grade level increases. Elementary teachers were more likely to address COVID as a standalone topic than their secondary counterparts.
Teachers who addressed COVID were also asked whether they addressed the topic as part of their curriculum or as a standalone topic. As can be seen in Table 8, the majority of teachers at each grade band addressed COVID as part of their curriculum. However, high school and middle school teachers were more likely to address COVID as part of their curriculum than elementary teachers (82, 73, and 60 percent, respectively). In contrast, elementary teachers were just as likely to address COVID as part of their curriculum as they were to address it as a standalone topic.
Regardless of grade range, nearly 4 in 5 teachers indicated that their students asked questions about COVID.
When students had questions about COVID, they turned to their teachers for answers. In fact, over three-quarters of teachers at each grade band indicated that their students asked questions about COVID (see Table 9).
There was a great deal of variation in the types of questions students asked about COVID.
The teachers who indicated that their students asked questions about COVID were asked about the nature of those questions. As can be seen in Table 10, student questions were most often centered around three topics; vaccines/boosters, personal concerns (e.g., “How do I/my family not get sick?” and “Why should we care?”), and actions to prevent transmission. As might be expected, questions around vaccines/boosters were increasingly more common with increasing grade band, while questions about personal concerns and actions to prevent transmission were more prevalent among younger students. Although students also asked questions about a variety of other topics, no other topic represented more than 10 percent of total student questions.
There was a great deal of variation in the types of questions students asked about COVID.
The teachers who indicated that their students asked questions about COVID were asked about the nature of those questions. As can be seen in Table 10, student questions were most often centered around three topics; vaccines/boosters, personal concerns (e.g., “How do I/my family not get sick?” and “Why should we care?”), and actions to prevent transmission. As might be expected, questions around vaccines/boosters were increasingly more common with increasing grade band, while questions about personal concerns and actions to prevent transmission were more prevalent among younger students. Although students also asked questions about a variety of other topics, no other topic represented more than 10 percent of total student questions.
Across grade bands, the most commonly addressed topics included ways to prevent coronavirus transmission, how coronavirus is transmitted, and what coronavirus/COVID-19 is.
Table 11 displays the various COVID-related topics that teachers indicated they addressed in their instruction. Across grade bands, over three-quarters of teachers addressed ways to prevent transmission, and over half addressed what COVID is, how coronavirus is transmitted among humans, COVID policies and procedures, and symptoms of COVID. However, there were some differences by grade band. While 74 percent of middle school teachers and 73 percent of high school teachers addressed how the virus has changed/mutated over time, only 43 percent of elementary teachers indicated that this was a topic they covered with their students. Similarly, more than two-thirds of secondary teachers addressed common misconceptions about COVID, in contrast to about half of elementary teachers.
Teachers relied heavily on units and lessons they created or collected from an online source.
Teachers who devoted instructional time to COVID were also asked which instructional materials they used to do so. The most commonly used instructional materials, across grade bands, were units or lessons that teachers created (see Table 12). However, high school teachers were more likely than middle or elementary teachers to use these self-created materials (69, 55, and 44 percent, respectively). Although used to a minimal extent overall, elementary teachers were more likely than middle or high school teachers to use lessons or resources from websites that have a subscription fee or per lesson cost (36, 25, and 12 percent, respectively).
Teachers used a wide range of commercially published resources to address COVID.
Just over half of teachers who addressed COVID used commercially published materials, materials from a website (free or paid), or another outside source (see Table 12). The survey asked those individuals to identify which materials they consulted. As can be seen in Table 13, no single resource was widely used. However, at the elementary level, 52 percent of teachers utilized Mystery Science, and 30 percent utilized Discovery Education. At the middle and high school levels, about one-third of teachers utilized the CDC’s Toolkit for K–12 schools and TedEd.
Teacher Decision Making
One focus of the survey was identifying factors that impacted teachers’ decisions to either address or not address COVID in their instruction. Teachers were presented with an open-ended question that asked them to state the most important reason why they either did or did not address COVID. Additional items about what might have influenced this decision are also provided in this section of the report.
Across grade bands, about one-quarter of teachers chose to address COVID in their instruction because it was a relevant/current event. The most common reason why elementary and middle school teachers addressed COVID was to promote public health safety.
Teachers who addressed COVID were asked to identify the most important reason behind their decision to do so. Across grade bands, nearly one-quarter of teachers decided to teach about COVID because it was a relevant and current event (see Table 14).
At the high school level, 21 percent of teachers addressed COVID because it related to their science standards compared to only 10 percent of elementary teachers. Conversely, elementary teachers were more likely than high school teachers to address COVID to promote public health safety (34 vs. 16 percent) and help students address/process their fear/anxiety (14 vs. 6 percent).
Teachers’ reasons for addressing COVID were generally consistent across equity factors.
A subset of items in Table 14 (where the sample size was large enough to detect possible differences) were examined by equity factors, revealing only a few differences in the reasons why teachers addressed COVID (see Table 15). Teachers in high-poverty schools were less likely to address COVID because it related to science standards or to provide accurate science information than teachers in low-poverty schools. Teachers in the highest URM quartile were more likely than teachers in the lowest URM quartile to address COVID as means of protecting students and others’ health (30 vs. 18 percent).
When teachers did not address COVID, the most common reasons were that (1) it was not related to their standards/curriculum/course and (2) they feared pushback from parents/students. Elementary teachers also chose not to address COVID due to the young age of their students.
Teachers who did not address COVID were also asked to identify the most important reason behind their decision. As can be seen in Table 16, the most prevalent reason across all grade bands for not teaching about COVID was because the topic is not related to their curriculum/content.
Fear of potential parent/community pushback was also an important deterrent across grade bands (Elementary: 11 percent, Middle: 20 percent, and High: 16 percent). Additionally, 12 percent of middle school teachers and 16 percent of high school teachers indicated that they chose not to address COVID because teachers and students had fatigue around the topic (i.e., they had heard/talked about it a lot already and were not interested in discussing it further).
At the elementary level, a substantial percentage of teachers indicated that they chose not to address COVID because their students were too young (15 percent) and because the topic was already being addressed by another teacher in the school (11 percent).
There was some variation in the most common reasons why teachers decided not to address COVID based on FRL quartile and URM quartile.
Examining the most common reasons why teachers did not teach about COVID by equity factors revealed some significant differences (see Table 17). Teachers in high-FRL and high-URM schools were less likely than teachers in low-FRL and low-URM schools to decide not to address COVID due to fear of parent/community pushback (FRL: 9 vs. 30 percent; URM: 7 vs. 21 percent).
The majority of teachers agreed that they could find ways to teach about COVID if they wanted to and that they were confident in their ability to teach about COVID. Teachers also agreed that they had control over when and how to teach about COVID and whether to address the topic at all.
The survey included items intended to measure the extent to which various factors influenced teachers’ decisions to address COVID in their instruction.7 Across grade bands, nearly 80 percent or more of teachers agreed that they could find ways to teach about COVID if they wanted to and that they were confident in their ability to teach about COVID (see Table 18). Similar percentages of teachers agreed that they had control over when and how to teach about COVID and whether to teach about it. At the high school level, 68 percent of teachers agreed that the topic of COVID is well-aligned with the content standards they are required to teach, compared to 57 percent of middle grades teachers and 38 percent of elementary teachers. Conversely, few teachers agreed that they were expected to teach about COVID (12–17 percent) or that they felt social pressure to teach about COVID (13–15 percent).
Teachers’ decisions to teach about COVID were largely influenced by their perceptions of control over teaching about COVID and feelings of self-efficacy.
The items in Table 18 were combined into three composite variables:8
Control Beliefs
- It is up to me whether or not to teach about COVID.
- The decision about whether or not to teach about COVID is beyond my control.
- I am able to choose when and how to teach about COVID.
- Other people get to decide whether or not I teach about COVID.
Approval Beliefs
- It is expected that I teach about COVID.
- I feel social pressure to teach about COVID.
- People who are important to me in my profession (e.g., other teachers, principals) have asked if I am teaching or planning to teach about COVID.
- People who are important to me in my profession (e.g., other teachers, principals) think I should teach about COVID.
- People who are important to me in my profession (e.g., other teachers, principals) do not think it’s a good idea to teach about COVID.
Self-Efficacy Beliefs
- I am confident in my ability to successfully teach about COVID.
- I could currently find ways to teach about COVID if I wanted to.
- The topic of COVID is well aligned to the content standards I am required to teach.
- It is difficult for me to teach about COVID.
- I have adequate access to supports/resources/materials for teaching about COVID.
- I have sufficient time to plan/prepare for teaching about COVID.
Teachers’ perceptions of the presence of factors that may facilitate or hinder their teaching about COVID constitute control beliefs. For example, if a teacher does not have sufficient time to plan/prepare for teaching about COVID or adequate access to resources for teaching about COVID, the teacher may have low control beliefs. Approval beliefs are what teachers believe influential others will think about them if they exhibit the behavior. For example, a teacher in a school or district where administrators are supportive of addressing COVID would likely have high approval beliefs. Self-Efficacy Beliefs encompass teachers’ confidence in teaching about COVID. For instance, if a teacher thinks it will be difficult to teach about COVID, the teacher may have low self-efficacy beliefs.
As can be seen in Table 19, control beliefs (composite means ranging from 65 to 77) and self-efficacy beliefs (composite means ranging from 55 to 69) had a substantial influence on whether teachers taught about COVID, although both factors were more influential at the high school level than the middle or elementary levels. Conversely, approval beliefs had only minimal influence on teacher decision making at any grade band.
Teacher beliefs that influenced their COVID instruction varied by FRL quartile and political leaning.
Beliefs influencing teachers’ decisions to teach about COVID were also examined by equity factors (see Table 20). Control beliefs (mean scores of 73 vs. 67), approval beliefs (mean scores of 29 vs. 24), and self-efficacy beliefs (mean scores of 67 vs. 62) had a greater influence on the instructional decisions made by teachers in high-poverty schools than those in low-poverty schools. Two differences were noted when looking at these data by community type and political leaning, although the magnitude of these differences is small. Urban teachers were more likely than suburban or rural teachers to teach about COVID based on approval beliefs (mean scores of 28, 25, and 23, respectively) and self-efficacy beliefs (mean scores of 67, 64, and 64, respectively). Additionally, approval beliefs (mean scores of 27 vs. 24) and self-efficacy beliefs (mean scores of 66 vs. 63) were more likely to impact the decisions of teachers in Democratic-learning counties than teachers in Republican-learning counties.
Teacher beliefs that influenced their COVID instruction varied by FRL quartile and political leaning.
Beliefs influencing teachers’ decisions to teach about COVID were also examined by equity factors (see Table 20). Control beliefs (mean scores of 73 vs. 67), approval beliefs (mean scores of 29 vs. 24), and self-efficacy beliefs (mean scores of 67 vs. 62) had a greater influence on the instructional decisions made by teachers in high-poverty schools than those in low-poverty schools. Two differences were noted when looking at these data by community type and political leaning, although the magnitude of these differences is small. Urban teachers were more likely than suburban or rural teachers to teach about COVID based on approval beliefs (mean scores of 28, 25, and 23, respectively) and self-efficacy beliefs (mean scores of 67, 64, and 64, respectively). Additionally, approval beliefs (mean scores of 27 vs. 24) and self-efficacy beliefs (mean scores of 66 vs. 63) were more likely to impact the decisions of teachers in Democratic-learning counties than teachers in Republican-learning counties.
Burdens on Teachers
Another focus of the survey was on the burdens placed on teachers due to the pandemic and how teachers were supported in navigating those burdens. Teachers were asked about how much time they spent working, various feelings that might have arisen, and challenges and unexpected benefits they encountered while teaching during the pandemic. Teachers also provided information on the types of supports they were provided. This section frequently refers to the “height of the pandemic,” which we define as the 2020–21 school year. Some tables in this section also include responses from former teachers (i.e., those who left teaching after the 2019–20 school year).
Teachers across grade levels spent a substantial amount of time on instructional and non-instructional activities during the pandemic.
To understand how teachers spent their time, both prior to and during the pandemic, they were asked to estimate how many hours they spent per week on (1) science instructional activities (e.g., preparing and teaching science lessons, managing materials, grading) and (2) non-instructional tasks (e.g., writing and answering emails; troubleshooting technology; talking with students, parents, and other teachers). As can be seen in Table 21, about 40 percent of elementary teachers reported spending 10 hours or fewer on science instructional activities across all time periods. In contrast, secondary teachers spent considerably more time teaching science than elementary teachers at each timepoint, and that amount was noticeably increased at the height of the pandemic.
When looking at the amount of time teachers spent on non-instructional tasks, differences among time points are striking. As can be seen in Table 22, prior to the pandemic, about two-thirds of teachers at each grade band spent fewer than 10 hours per week on non-instructional tasks. However, during the 2020–21 school year, only about one-quarter of teachers spent fewer than 10 hours per week on non-instructional tasks. At the other end of the scale, notable percentages of teachers spent more than 30 hours per week on tasks unrelated to their science teaching during the height of the pandemic (Elementary: 12 percent, Middle: 10 percent, High: 7 percent). These percentages rebounded only slightly during the 2021–22 school year.
COVID left teachers feeling exhausted, disconnected from students and colleagues, and overwhelmed by the amount of extra work and technology issues that were required to teach science.
Teachers were shown a list of statements that represented a range of feelings and were asked to identify if and when they experienced each one (prior to the pandemic, during the 2020–21 school year, or during the 2021–22 school year). Table 23 shows teachers’ reported feeling at the height of the pandemic, when the burdens placed on teachers were arguably at their greatest. The complete range of feelings experienced by teachers at all three time points can be found in Appendix D.
The most reported feeling among middle and high school teachers was being tired/exhausted from the additional effort that it took to teach science during COVID (83 and 82 percent, respectively). About two-thirds or more teachers at all grade bands also reported feeling disconnected from students and colleagues, overwhelmed by extra work as a result of student absenteeism, and stressed out by problems with technology. On a positive note, about 60 percent of all teachers indicated that they felt certain that they could adapt their science teaching to any circumstance, confident that they are a good science teacher, and enthusiastic about teaching science. In addition, only 10 percent of elementary teachers and about 20 percent of secondary teachers reported having little interest or enjoyment in teaching science during this time.
The height of the pandemic saw a dip in teachers’ positive feelings toward teaching science. Negative feelings, including being overwhelmed by additional burdens and frustrated by lack of support, greatly increased and have not yet returned to pre-pandemic levels.
Subsets of items in Table 23 were combined into four composite variables: (1) Positive Feelings About Teaching Science, (2) Overwhelmed by Additional Burdens due to COVID, (3) Frustrated by Lack of Support, and (4) Negative Feelings About Teaching Science. As can be seen in Table 24, composite means on the Positive Feelings About Teaching Science composite were quite high prior to the pandemic (ranging from 81 to 88) while scores on the other three composites were fairly low (ranging from 11 to 23). At the height of the pandemic, teachers’ positive feelings decreased (composite means of about 60), while scores on the other composites sharply increased. For example, in the 2020–21 school year, teachers’ feelings of being frustrated by lack of support rose to over 40 points at all grade bands. The 2021–22 school year saw mean scores on these composites begin to return to pre-pandemic levels, but the toll of COVID remains evident in their responses.
There were some differences in the feelings of teachers from less-resourced schools compared to their more affluent counterparts.
Teachers’ feelings composites at the height of the pandemic were analyzed by equity factors, revealing a few differences, as shown in Table 25. Interestingly, teachers in high-FRL schools, high-URM schools, and Democratic-leaning counties had lower scores on the Overwhelmed by Additional Burdens due to COVID composite compared to teachers in low-poverty schools, low-URM schools, and Republican-leaning counties. Additionally, teachers in schools in high-URM school reported feeling more frustrated by the lack of support than those in schools in the low-URM schools.
Transitioning to remote/hybrid instruction and the inability to utilize hands-on or group learning were among the biggest challenges science teachers faced during the pandemic.
The survey solicited open-ended descriptions of teachers’ biggest challenges related to science teaching during the pandemic. As shown in Table 26, remote/hybrid instruction, which encompasses the various modes and timing of instruction and the effort involved in switching between those modes, was one of the most common challenges across grade bands (12–14 percent of responses).
Inability or limited ability to utilize hands-on learning/group work – mainstays of science instruction that were either found to be unsafe due to increased risk of virus transmission or were logistically impaired by other COVID-related complications – was another common challenge, particularly at the elementary level and among former teachers.
About 10 percent of responses from secondary and former teachers also mentioned lack of student engagement or behavioral issues arising from students being socially and emotionally behind as a challenge. However, this was a less common challenge at the elementary level (5 percent of responses).
The pandemic brought about a variety of unanticipated benefits. Teachers reported that they adapted to new technologies and learned new skills as a result of the rapid shift to online learning. Teachers also discovered and created new materials or resources that could be used in various instructional arrangements.
Teachers were also presented with an open-ended item that asked them to list unanticipated benefits they experienced related to teaching science during the COVID pandemic. As can be seen in Table 27, increased technology skills and access (12–19 percent of responses) and the opportunity to discover and create new materials/resources (9–15 percent of responses) were the two most common benefits, though elementary teachers were less likely than secondary teachers to cite the former, and middle school teachers were less likely than elementary or high school teachers to cite the latter. Notably, both types of benefits involve teachers incorporating teaching modalities and resources in ways that they had not before the pandemic.
Increased student interest/literacy in science was also mentioned as a benefit of the pandemic (5–10 percent of responses). Additionally, teachers pointed to other benefits for students (4–10 percent of responses), which includes such things as increased individualized instruction and attention from teachers and families.
A majority of teachers reported having access to mental health services in their schools during the pandemic, but only about 1 in 3 teachers actually received mental health support.
The survey asked teachers (1) if they had access to mental health professionals in their school (e.g., school counselors or social workers) during the pandemic and (2) if they received support from these individuals. As seen in Table 28, the majority of elementary, middle, and high school teachers had access to mental health professionals. However, only about one-third reported receiving support. Looking specifically at former teachers, roughly two-thirds reported having access to support from mental health professionals during the pandemic and only one-quarter received support.
Access to and receipt of support was generally equitable.
Teachers’ access to and receipt of support from mental health professionals was also analyzed by equity factors (see Table 29). Only one difference was noted. Teachers in Democratic-learning counties were more likely than teachers in Republican-leaning counties to have access to support, though teachers received support at similar rates regardless of political leaning of the county.
When teachers received support, it was most often focused on helping connect students to mental health services or resources. Teachers also received support for their own mental health.
Teachers who indicated that they received support were asked about the nature of that support. Table 30 reports the percentage of teachers who received each type of support to a substantial extent (i.e., rated “Moderate” or “To a great extent” on a four-point scale ranging from “Not at All” to “To a great extent”). About three-quarters of teachers at each grade band received assistance with the process of referring students to the school counselor/social worker/mental health professional for additional social-emotional services. More than 60 percent of teachers were provided with resources for supporting the mental health of students and their families. Additionally, teachers received support for their own mental health, including personal check-ins (46–49 percent) and access to resources (36–46 percent).
7 These items are aligned with the Theory of Planned Behavior. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
8 These composite definitions are aligned with the Theory of Planned Behavior. Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
Teacher Retention in the Profession
The survey asked teachers to reflect on the extent to which they had considered leaving the profession since the onset of the pandemic. Additionally, teachers were asked about factors that both influenced their thinking about leaving and their decision to stay. These data are discussed in this section of the report.
The vast majority of teachers have stayed in the profession due to enjoyment in working with students and their passion for teaching/content.
Teachers who have persisted in the profession were asked why they have stayed (see Table 31). Over 90 percent of teachers across grade bands cited enjoyment in working with students and passion for teaching/content as reasons for staying. Income/job security was also mentioned by 68–75 percent of teachers as a reason why they have stayed.
Reasons teachers have stayed in the profession are generally consistent across equity factors.
Reasons why teachers have stayed in the profession were analyzed by equity factors (see Table 32). A few differences were noted. Teachers in high-FRL, high-URM, urban, and rural schools were more likely than teachers in low-FRL, low-URM, and suburban schools to stay in the profession due to optimism that teaching conditions will get better (FRL: 50 vs. 34 percent; URM: 51 vs. 40 percent; Urban: 50 percent, Rural: 44 percent, and Suburban: 36 percent).
Since the onset of the pandemic, the extent to which teachers have considered leaving the profession has drastically increased. However, there were no differences by equity factors.
As can be seen in Table 33, the extent to which teachers have considered leaving the profession has drastically increased since the onset of the pandemic. In fact, 1 in 5 teachers in each grade band considered leaving the profession to a great extent at the height of the pandemic. These percentages increased to nearly 1 in 3 during the 2021–22 school year. However, as can be seen in Table 34, there were no significant differences by equity factors.
Half of science teachers reported being at least somewhat likely to leave the profession within the next two years.
As can be seen in Table 35, about half of teachers at all grade bands reported that they are at least somewhat likely to leave teaching within the next two years. There are no significant differences among grade bands.
The stress of teaching, demands of teaching on their time, and student behavior are among the most common factors contributing to teachers leaving or considering leaving the profession.
Teachers that left or considered leaving the profession were asked what factors had influenced or were influencing their decision. As can be seen in Table 36, approximately 75 percent of current teachers across grade bands indicated that the stress of teaching factored into their thinking about leaving the profession. This sentiment was echoed by former teachers, 60 percent of whom left teaching due to stress. The demands of teaching on their time (56–67 percent) was another common reason why teachers either left or considered leaving the profession. Over two-thirds of current teachers also pointed to student behavior as a reason why they were considering leaving the profession. However, only about one-quarter of former teachers indicated that student behavior was a factor in their decision to leave. Other common reasons for leaving or considering leaving the profession included dissatisfaction with the way things are run at school, insufficient pay, and inadequate support from the school or district.
Reasons why teachers considered leaving the teaching profession varied by FRL, URM, and pollical leaning.
A subset of factors that influenced teachers’ decisions to consider leaving the profession were analyzed by equity factors. As can be seen in Table 37, several differences were apparent. Teachers in high-poverty schools were less likely than teachers in low-poverty schools to consider leaving teaching due to challenges of remote/hybrid instruction (27 vs. 37 percent). However, teachers in high-poverty schools were more likely to consider leaving teaching than teachers in low-poverty schools due to inadequate support or involvement from parents/guardians (47 vs. 37 percent). Teachers in high-URM schools were more likely than teachers in low-URM schools to consider leaving the profession due to challenges of in-person instruction (50 vs. 37 percent). Teachers in Republican-leaning counties were more likely to consider leaving the profession than teachers in Democratic-leaning counties due to student behavior (75 vs. 63) and inadequate support or involvement from parents/guardians (50 vs. 38 percent).
About half of teachers who left the profession did so because of reasons related to the COVID pandemic.
Teachers that left the profession were asked when, how, and why they stopped teaching. As can be seen in Table 38, more than half of teachers left the profession at the end of 2020–21 school year, which was the height of the pandemic. Forty percent of teachers resigned, and at least 25 percent either took an early or scheduled retirement. Interestingly, just under half of teachers left mainly because of reasons related to the COVID pandemic.
