2016 Georgia K-12 teacher and leader workforce report

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Report
Rosaline Tio
January 2017

Executive Summary
The Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Report provides a snapshot of the current K-12 teacher and leader workforce created at the request of the Alliance of Education Agency Heads (AEAH). The report also examines teacher and leader production, retention, and retirement patterns. The report incorporates data from the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE), the Georgia Professional Standards Commission (GaPSC), and the Teachers Retirement System of Georgia (TRS). The 2016 K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Report analyzes workforce, production, retention, and retirement patterns for K-12 teachers and leaders during the 2015-2016 school year.
Key findings include:
Current Status of the Workforce
o During the 2015-2016 school year, Georgia's public education workforce consisted of 110,059 teachers and 8,449 leaders.
o The majority (approximately 60%) of the teacher and leader workforce was white.
o The share of black leaders (34%) was larger than the share of black teachers (20%).
o The share of Hispanic leaders (4.4%) was lower than the share of Hispanic teachers (9.2%).
o 44% of teachers held a Master's degree as their highest earned degree, and 53% of leaders held an Education Specialist degree as their highest earned degree.
o Almost half of the teacher workforce had ten or fewer years of experience working in Georgia public education. 25% of teachers had five or fewer years of experience. Additionally, 21.9% of teachers had eleven to fifteen years of experience.
o The majority of leaders had ten or fewer years of experience working as a leader. 45% of all leaders had five or fewer years of experience as a leader, and 27.5% of leaders had between six to ten years of experience as a leader.
o High poverty schools had significantly larger shares of black teachers and leaders and significantly smaller shares of white teachers and leaders compared to low poverty schools.1
o 62.5% of all current certificate holders during the 2015-2016 school year were employed as a teacher or leader, and 13.4% of all current
1 GOSA defined high poverty and low poverty schools by identifying the top and bottom quartile of schools using free lunch direct certification percentages. The bottom quartile cut off was 23% of students directly certified, and the top quartile cut off was 51% of students directly certified. For more information on the use of direct certification percentages, see GOSA's e-bulletin.
ii

certificate holders were not employed in the Georgia public education workforce at all. o 5,908 teachers (5.4% of all teachers) were new teachers in 20152016, and 2,316 teachers (2.1%) returned to teaching after a break in service. o 1,060 leaders (12.5%) were new leaders in 2015-2016, and 45 leaders (0.5%) returned as a leader after a break in service. o Hispanics comprised a larger share of new teachers and leaders when compared to the entire teacher and leader workforce.
Teacher and Leader Production
o During the 2015-2016 school year, 19,428 teacher and leader candidates were enrolled in Georgia preparation programs.
o 75% of teacher and leader candidates were enrolled in public in-state programs, 15% were enrolled in private in-state programs, and 10% were enrolled in alternative preparation programs.
o During 2015-2016, less than 10% of students in traditional education preparation programs were employed as teachers while in the program.
o 66% of completers in traditional educator preparation programs in 2014-2015 were employed as teachers as of October 2015. 85% of completers in alternative preparation programs in 2014-2015 were employed as of October 2015.
o 42% of completers in leader preparation programs in 2014-2015 were employed as leaders as of October 2015.
Teacher and Leader Mobility
o Between 2014-2015 and 2015-2016, 5% of teachers and 2% of leaders changed school districts.
o Approximately 40% of teachers and leaders who changed school districts had five or fewer years of experience working as a teacher or leader, respectively.
o Between 2014-2015 and 2015-2016, 5% of teachers and 8% of leaders changed schools within a district.
o High poverty schools had more teachers and leaders changing schools from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016 than low poverty schools.
Teacher and Leader Retention
o 90.5% of teachers and leaders remained in their respective roles from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016.
o High poverty schools do not retain as many teachers and leaders as low poverty schools.
iii

o The retention rates for teachers and leaders with five or fewer years of experience were a few percentage points lower than the retention rates for all teachers and leaders.
Teacher and Leader Retirement o As of 2015-2016, 80% of all school and district teachers, leaders, and staff in TRS were active members.2 o 10% of all active teacher/leader/staff TRS members were eligible for retirement or a reduced retirement benefit. o Almost 50% of all active teacher/leader/staff TRS members had at least ten years of service credit, but the majority of these members were not yet eligible for retirement. o 51% of all active teacher/leader/staff TRS members had fewer than ten years of service credit.
2 Active members have made at least one contribution to TRS in the past four years.
iv

Table of Contents
Executive Summary .............................................................................................. ii
Table of Figures and Tables............................................................................... vii
Table of Abbreviations ...................................................................................... viii
Introduction ............................................................................................................9
Current Status of the Workforce..........................................................................9
2015-2016 Teacher Workforce Characteristics....................................................9 Demographics ...................................................................................................9 Certificate Analysis.........................................................................................10 Years of Experience ........................................................................................12 District and School Analysis...........................................................................12
2015-2016 Leader Workforce Characteristics ...................................................17 Demographics .................................................................................................17 Certificate Analysis.........................................................................................17 Years of Experience ........................................................................................19 District and School Analysis...........................................................................20
Comparison of Current Workforce to All Certificate Holders...........................22 Demographics .................................................................................................22 Certificate Analysis.........................................................................................23
2015-2016 Teacher New Hire Characteristics ...................................................25 Demographics .................................................................................................25 Certificate Analysis.........................................................................................26
2015-2016 New Leader Hire Characteristics .....................................................28 Demographics .................................................................................................28 Certificate Analysis.........................................................................................28 Years of Experience ........................................................................................30
2015-2016 Teacher Rehire Characteristics ........................................................31 Demographics .................................................................................................31 Certificate Analysis.........................................................................................32 Years of Experience ........................................................................................34
2015-2016 Leader Rehire Characteristics ..........................................................35 Demographics .................................................................................................35 Certificate Analysis.........................................................................................35 Years of Experience ........................................................................................36
Teacher and Leader Production.........................................................................37
Employment Patterns of Teacher and Leader Candidates and Completers .......37 2015-2016 Teacher and Leader Candidate Enrollment......................................39
Teacher and Leader Mobility .............................................................................40
Teacher Mobility ................................................................................................40 Inter-District Mobility ....................................................................................40 Intra-District Mobility ....................................................................................43 Teacher Mobility in High Poverty and Low Poverty Schools ........................45
v

Leader Mobility..................................................................................................46 Inter-District Mobility ....................................................................................46 Intra-District Mobility ....................................................................................46 Leader Mobility in High Poverty and Low Poverty Schools ..........................47
Teacher and Leader Retention ...........................................................................48 Retention of Teachers.........................................................................................48 Demographics .................................................................................................48 Certificate Analysis.........................................................................................49 District and School Analysis...........................................................................49 Retention of Recently Hired Teachers ...............................................................51 Demographics .................................................................................................51 Certificate Analysis.........................................................................................52 District Analysis .............................................................................................52 Retention of Leaders ..........................................................................................53 Demographics .................................................................................................53 Certificate Analysis.........................................................................................53 District Analysis .............................................................................................54 Retention of Recently Hired Leaders .................................................................54 Demographics .................................................................................................54 Certificate Analysis.........................................................................................55 District Analysis .............................................................................................55
Teacher and Leader Retirement.........................................................................56 Summary of Findings ..........................................................................................58 Acknowledgements ..............................................................................................61
vi

Table of Figures and Tables
Table 1: Distribution of Teacher and Leaders .................................................................................. 9 Table 2: Distribution of Teacher Races/Ethnicities ........................................................................ 10 Table 3: Distribution of Teacher Certificate Fields ........................................................................ 10 Table 4: Demographics of Teachers in Low and High Poverty Schools ........................................ 13 Table 5: Distribution of Leader Races/Ethnicities.......................................................................... 17 Table 6: Distribution of Leader Certificate Fields.......................................................................... 18 Table 7: Demographics of Leaders in Low and High Poverty Schools.......................................... 20 Table 8: Percentage of Certificate Holders Employed as Teacher or Leader ................................. 22 Table 9: Distribution of Employed Certificate Holders' Races/Ethnicities.................................... 23 Table 10: Percentage of Certificate Holders Employed by Certificate Field ................................. 23 Table 11: Distribution of New Teachers' Races/Ethnicities .......................................................... 25 Table 12: Distribution of New Teachers' Certificate Fields........................................................... 26 Table 13: Distribution of New Leaders' Races/Ethnicities ............................................................ 28 Table 14: Distribution of New Leaders' Certificate Fields ............................................................ 29 Table 15: Distribution of Teacher Rehires' Races/Ethnicities ....................................................... 31 Table 16: Distribution of Teacher Rehires' Certificate Fields ....................................................... 32 Table 17: Distribution of Leader Rehires' Certificate Fields ......................................................... 35 Table 18: Educator Preparation Program Teacher Employment .................................................... 37 Table 19: Educator Preparation Program Leader Employment ...................................................... 38 Table 20: Teacher/Leader Candidate Enrollment by Program Area .............................................. 39 Table 21: Teacher and Leader Retention........................................................................................ 48 Table 22: Distribution of Retained Teachers' Races/Ethnicities .................................................... 49 Table 23: Distribution of Retained Teachers' Certificate Fields .................................................... 49 Table 24: Distribution of Retained Recently Hired Teachers' Races/Ethnicities ........................... 51 Table 25: Distribution of Retained Recently Hired Teachers' Certificate Fields ........................... 52 Table 26: Distribution of Retained Leaders' Races/Ethnicities...................................................... 53 Table 27: Distribution of Retained Leaders' Certificate Fields...................................................... 54 Table 28: Distribution of Retained Recently Hired Leaders' Races/Ethnicities ............................ 55 Table 29: Distribution of Retained Recently Hired Leaders' Certificate Fields............................. 55 Table 30: Distribution of All Teacher/Leader/Staff TRS Members ............................................... 56 Table 31: Distribution of Active Teacher/Leader/Staff TRS Members.......................................... 57
Figure 1: Distribution of Teacher Certificate Levels...................................................................... 11 Figure 2: Years of Experience for Teachers ................................................................................... 12 Figure 3: Certificate Fields of Teachers in Low and High Poverty Schools .................................. 14 Figure 4: Certificate Levels of Teachers in Low and High Poverty Schools ................................. 15 Figure 5: Years of Experience of Teachers in Low and High Poverty Schools ............................. 16 Figure 6: Distribution of Leader Certificate Levels ....................................................................... 18 Figure 7: Total Years of Experience for Leaders ........................................................................... 19 Figure 8: Years of Experience as a Leader ..................................................................................... 20 Figure 9: Certificate Levels of Leaders in Low and High Poverty Schools ................................... 21 Figure 10: Percentage of Certificate Holders Employed as Teacher/Leader by Certificate Level . 24 Figure 11: Distribution of New Teachers' Certificate Levels ........................................................ 27 Figure 12: Distribution of Teacher Rehires' Certificate Levels ..................................................... 33 Figure 13: Years of Experience for Teacher Rehires ..................................................................... 34 Figure 14: Years of Experience for Teachers Changing Districts .................................................. 40 Figure 15: Teacher Inter-District Mobility Rate Map .................................................................... 42 Figure 16: Years of Experience for Teachers Changing Schools ................................................... 43 Figure 17: Teacher Intra-District Mobility Rate Map .................................................................... 44 Figure 18: Years of Leader Experience for Leaders Changing Schools ......................................... 46 Figure 19: Teacher District Retention Rate Map............................................................................ 50
vii

Table of Abbreviations

AEAH CTAE

Alliance of Education Agency Heads Career, Technical, and Agricultural Education

EPP

Educator Preparation

Program

GaDOE GOSA

Georgia Department of Education Governor's Office of Student Achievement

RESA

Regional Education Service Agency

SWSS

Strategic Waivers School Systems

CPI

Certified Personnel

Information

ELA

English Language Arts

ESOL GaPSC PhD/EdD STEM TRS

English to Speakers of Other Languages Georgia Professional Standards Commission Doctor of Philosophy or Education Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Teachers Retirement System of Georgia

viii

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

Introduction

The Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Report provides a snapshot of the current K-12 teacher and leader workforce, production, retention, and retirement patterns. Created at the request of the Alliance of Education Agency Heads (AEAH), the report utilizes data from the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE), the Georgia Professional Standards Commission (GaPSC), and the Teachers Retirement System of Georgia (TRS). This report analyzes K-12 teacher and leader workforce, production, retention, and retirement patterns during the 2015-2016 school year.
Current Status of the Workforce

During the 2015-2016 school year, Georgia's public education workforce consisted of 110,059 teachers and 8,449 leaders employed in public schools.3

Table 1: Distribution of Teacher and Leaders

Teachers Leaders Total

110,059 8,449 118,508

92.9% 7.1% 100%

2015-2016 Teacher Workforce Characteristics
DEMOGRAPHICS4
During the 2015-2016 school year, 80% of the teacher workforce was female. The majority of teachers (60.6%) were white. Black teachers comprised the second largest share of teachers (20.2%). 9.2% of teachers were Hispanic, and 2.1% of

3 The Governor's Office of Student Achievement (GOSA) used GaDOE Fall Certified Personnel Information (CPI) data to classify educators as teachers or leaders according to job code definitions provided by the AEAH working group for this report. Teachers excluded literacy coaches, preschool teachers, and adult education teachers. Leaders included principals, PreK directors, alternative school directors, assistant principals, instructional supervisors, community school directors/coordinators, CTAE directors, and CTAE directors (extended year). If an employee served at least part of the day in a leadership role, he/she was counted as a leader. Teachers were any employees serving at least part of the day as a teacher but not serving part of the day as a leader. 4 GOSA used GaPSC self-reported demographic data for this analysis.
9

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

teachers were of other races/ethnicities.5 Additionally, 26.5% of teachers were prepared out of state.6

Table 2: Distribution of Teacher Races/Ethnicities

Race/Ethnicity American Indian Asian Black Hispanic Pacific Islander Two or More White Unknown

Count 150 872
22,248 10,155
58 1,226 66,691 8,659

Percentage 0.1 0.8 20.2 9.2 0.1 1.1 60.6 7.9

CERTIFICATE ANALYSIS

Table 3: Distribution of Teacher Certificate Fields7

Certificate Field
Early Childhood Middle Secondary English Language Arts Secondary Math Secondary Social Studies Secondary Science CTAE PK-12 Fields9 Foreign Language Gifted Special Education ESOL STEM

Count8
51,582 33,928 7,033 5,875 6,681 9,221 6,280 23,207 2,985 24,503 25,497 11,242 43,742

Percentage of Teachers Certified in Field 46.9 30.8 6.4 5.3 6.1 8.4 5.7 21.1 2.7 22.3 23.2 10.2 39.7

5 Other races/ethnicities include American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, and those reporting two
or more races. GOSA combined these races/ethnicities due to their small sample sizes. 6 GaPSC provided GOSA with an indicator for individuals with some form of documentation that
suggests that the educator was prepared outside of Georgia, but GOSA did not have data on the
specific states of origin. 7 GOSA determined certificate field categories according to the teaching certificate categories listed on GaPSC's website. 8 Teachers were double counted if they were certified in multiple fields, so counts will not add up to the total number of teachers and percentages will not add up to 100. 9 PK-12 fields include subjects such as physical education, health, the fine arts, etc.

10

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Table 3 on the previous page examines the certificate fields held by teachers during the 2015-2016 school year.10 46.9% of teachers were certified in elementary fields (grades PK-5). 30.8% of teachers were certified in middle grade fields (grades 48). 26.2% of teachers were certified in secondary fields (grades 6-12). Among the secondary fields, 8.4% of teachers were certified in a secondary science field, which was at least 2 percentage points greater than other secondary subjects. 23.2% of teachers were certified in special education fields, and 22.3% of teachers were certified in gifted fields. Additionally, about 40% of teachers were certified in a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) field. Certificate levels are determined by the highest degree one has earned. During the 2015-2016 school year, 44.2% of teachers held a Master's degree as their highest degree, and 31.8% of teachers held a Bachelor's degree as their highest degree. Figure 1 shows the distribution of certificate levels for the 2015-2016 teacher workforce.11
Figure 1: Distribution of Teacher Certificate Levels
10 GOSA used GaPSC certificate data to identify all valid certificates during the 2015-2016 school year, which was defined using GaPSC's fiscal year dates--July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016. Educators in a charter system or Strategic Waivers School System (SWSS) may or may not be required to be certified depending on the terms of the charter or SWSS agreement. 11 Teachers with no certificate level information were identified as "unknown." Some of these teachers may not be required to hold a certificate if the school system has a waiver in its charter system or SWSS contract with the State Board of Education.
11

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE GOSA defined years of experience as the number of years one has been working in the Georgia public education workforce.12 A quarter (25.1%) of the 2015-2016 teacher workforce, which is the largest share of teachers, had five or fewer years of experience working in Georgia public education. 22.7% of teachers had 6 to 10 years of experience, and 21.9% of teachers had 11 to 15 years of experience. The median number of years of experience for the 2015-2016 teacher workforce was eleven years. Figure 2 shows the distribution of years of experience for all teachers.
Figure 2: Years of Experience for Teachers
DISTRICT AND SCHOOL ANALYSIS A breakdown of teacher workforce characteristics, including demographics, certificates, and years of experience, by district is available here. Additionally, click here for a breakdown of teacher workforce characteristics by school.13 GOSA used the breakdown of teacher workforce characteristics by school to compare workforce patterns between high poverty and low poverty schools.14 For
12 Specifically, GaPSC provided GOSA with data on years of experience as defined by the number of years a person has been present in CPI since 1986, which is the earliest GaPSC can account for with CPI data. 13 The files have been redacted to exclude n-sizes that are less than 10. 14 GOSA defined high poverty and low poverty schools by identifying the top and bottom quartile of schools using free lunch direct certification percentages. The bottom quartile cut off was 23% of
12

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

this analysis, GOSA summed the teacher counts for all schools in each category to determine overall teacher counts and percentages for high poverty schools and low poverty schools. GOSA then used a t-test of proportions to determine if the differences between high poverty and low poverty schools were statistically significant.15 In terms of demographics, the share of male teachers in low poverty schools (22.8%) was statistically significantly greater than the share of male teachers in high poverty schools (15.8%). However, this may be due to the fact that a larger share of high poverty schools were elementary schools--roughly 67% of high poverty schools were elementary schools compared to 47% of low poverty schools.16 The differences in the shares of black and white teachers between low and high poverty schools were also statistically significant. 43.2% of teachers in high poverty schools were black compared to only 8.1% of teachers in low poverty schools; in addition, only 37.3% of teachers in high poverty schools were white compared to 73% of teachers in low poverty schools.

Table 4: Demographics of Teachers in Low and High Poverty Schools

Subgroup
Female Male American Indian Asian Black Hispanic Pacific Islander Two or More White

Percentage of Teachers in Low Poverty Schools
77.1 22.8 0.1 0.9 8.1 9.0 0.0 1.1 73.0

Percentage of Teachers in High Poverty Schools
84.0 15.8 0.1 0.5 43.2 9.7 0.1 1.1 37.3

students directly certified, and the top quartile cut off was 51% of students directly certified. For more information on the use of direct certification percentages, see GOSA's e-bulletin. 15 GOSA defined statistically significant as p < 0.05. 16 Since GOSA could not access 2015-2016 enrollment information while compiling the report, GOSA identified school grade clusters using 2014-2015 enrollment data.
13

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Figure 3: Certificate Fields of Teachers in Low and High Poverty Schools17
When analyzing certificate fields held by teachers, a larger share of teachers in high poverty schools were certified in elementary grades, while a larger share of teachers in low poverty schools were certified in secondary subjects; however, this is also likely due to differences in the distributions of elementary, middle, and high schools between low poverty and high poverty schools. The proportion of teachers with gifted certification in low poverty schools (29.8%) was more than double the share of gifted certified teachers in high poverty schools (13.2%). Additionally, the share of teachers certified in STEM subjects was about 8 percentage points higher in low poverty schools (41.7%) than high poverty schools (33.3%). The share of teachers certified in special education was also somewhat higher in low poverty schools (23%) than high poverty schools (20.6%). On the other hand, the proportion of teachers with ESOL certification was slightly higher (about one percentage point) in high poverty schools than low poverty schools. Figure 3 compares the percentage of teachers certified in each field category in high poverty and low poverty schools.
17 An asterisk denotes a statistically significant difference in percentages using a t-test of proportions (p < 0.05).
14

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
In terms of certificate level, high poverty schools had a statistically significantly smaller share of teachers with Master's degrees as their highest earned degree (43.6% compared to 45.5% in low poverty schools). Additionally, high poverty schools had a statistically significantly larger share of teachers with Bachelor's degrees as their highest earned degree (34% compared to 30.4% in low poverty schools). Thus, more teachers in low poverty schools had higher certificate levels compared to teachers in high poverty schools.
Figure 4: Certificate Levels of Teachers in Low and High Poverty Schools18
18 An asterisk denotes a statistically significant difference in percentages using a t-test of proportions (p < 0.05).
15

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
When analyzing years of experience, the share of teachers with five or fewer years of experience was about five percentage points larger in high poverty schools than low poverty schools. Additionally, the share of teachers with eleven to twenty years of experience was slightly lower in high poverty schools than low poverty schools. However, though the share of teachers with twenty-six or more years of experience was small, this proportion of teachers was slightly larger in high poverty schools. Thus, high poverty schools had a larger share of teachers with very little experience or a lot of experience.
Figure 5: Years of Experience of Teachers in Low and High Poverty Schools19
Finally, a statistically significantly larger share of teachers in low poverty schools were prepared out of state--29.4% compared to 24.9% in high poverty schools.
19 An asterisk denotes a statistically significant difference in percentages using a t-test of proportions (p < 0.05).
16

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

2015-2016 Leader Workforce Characteristics

DEMOGRAPHICS

In contrast to the teacher workforce, only 68% of the leader workforce were female. The percentage of leaders who were male (31.8%) was much higher than the percentage of teachers who were male (20.3%).

The majority of the leader workforce was also white (56.9%). However, the share of leaders who were black was larger than the share of black teachers; 34.2% of leaders were black compared to 20.2% of teachers. On the other hand, the percentage of Hispanic leaders (4.4%) was lower than the percentage of Hispanic teachers (9.2%).
Table 5: Distribution of Leader Races/Ethnicities20

Race/Ethnicity American Indian Asian Black Hispanic Two or More White Unknown

Count 13 39
2,893 372 104 4,808 218

Percentage 0.2 0.5 34.2 4.4 1.2 56.9 2.6

Additionally, 30.6% of leaders were prepared out of state, which is larger than the share of teachers who were prepared out of state (26.5%).

CERTIFICATE ANALYSIS
Table 6 on the following page examines the certificate fields held by leaders.21 81.7% of leaders held leadership certificates during the 2015-2016 school year. Many leaders also held certificates in multiple other teaching fields. When analyzing the teaching certificates held by leaders, 37.6% of leaders held a

20 Pacific Islanders were excluded because n < 10. 21 The leadership certificates include educational leadership tiers I and II certificates and other certificates associated with the CPI job titles for leaders such as instructional supervision and director of CTAE or special education. The remaining certificate fields are the same types of certificates held by teachers. Educators in a charter system or Strategic Waivers School System (SWSS) may or may not be required to be certified depending on the terms of the charter or SWSS agreement.
17

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

certificate in a STEM subject. 18% of leaders were gifted certified, and about 15% of leaders held a certificate in special education.

Table 6: Distribution of Leader Certificate Fields

Certificate Field
Leadership Early Childhood Middle Secondary English Language Arts Secondary Math Secondary Social Studies Secondary Science CTAE PK-12 Fields Foreign Language Gifted Special Education ESOL STEM

Count22
6,899 3,189 3,160 602 435 692 1,048 541 1,557 129 1,520 1,241 543 3,179

Percentage of Leaders Certified in Field 81.7 37.7 37.4 7.1 5.1 8.2 12.4 6.4 18.4 1.5 18.0 14.7 6.4 37.6

Figure 6: Distribution of Leader Certificate Levels

Over half of all leaders (53.3%) held an Education Specialist degree as their highest earned degree. Additionally, 18.4% of leaders held a PhD/EdD as their highest
22 Leaders were double counted if they were certified in multiple fields, so counts will not add up to the total number of leaders and percentages will not add up to 100.
18

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
earned degree, and 23.8% of leaders held a Master's degree as their highest earned degree. All leaders had a certificate level above a high school diploma. Figure 6 displays the distribution of certificate levels for all leaders.23
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
In general, leaders had more total years of experience in the Georgia public education workforce than teachers. The largest share of leaders had between 16 to 20 years of experience (25.2%), and only 5% of leaders had less than 5 years of experience. The median total number of years of experience for leaders was seventeen years.
Figure 7: Total Years of Experience for Leaders
However, when analyzing years of experience as a leader specifically, the patterns are quite different.24 About 45% of leaders had five or fewer years of experience, compared to about 25% of teachers with five or less years of experience. More than a quarter of leaders (27.5%) had between 6 to 10 years of experience. Leaders had a median of five years teaching and six years serving as a leader. Thus, although leaders have more experience working in Georgia public education in any role, the majority of leaders have less than ten years of experience serving as a leader.
23 The n-size for Associate's degrees was too small to report. Leaders with no certificate level information were identified as "unknown." Some of these leaders may not be required to hold a certificate if the school system has a waiver in its charter system or SWSS contract with the State Board of Education. 24 GOSA used data provided by GaPSC on the total number of years an employee served as a leader as defined by CPI job code to analyze years of experience as a leader.
19

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Figure 8: Years of Experience as a Leader

DISTRICT AND SCHOOL ANALYSIS

A breakdown of leader workforce characteristics, including demographics, certificates, and years of experience, by district is available here.

The percentage of female leaders was statistically significantly greater in high poverty schools (71.3%) than in low poverty schools (66.6%). Similar to the teacher workforce, there were statistically significant differences in the percentages of black and white leaders in high and low poverty schools. 65.8% of leaders in high poverty schools were black compared to only 15.3% of leaders in low poverty schools. Furthermore, only 26.1% of leaders in high poverty schools were white compared to 74.8% of teachers in low poverty schools.
Table 7: Demographics of Leaders in Low and High Poverty Schools25

Subgroup
Female Male Black Hispanic Two or More White

Percentage of Leaders in Low Poverty Schools
66.6 33.3 15.3 4.8 1.7 74.8

Percentage of Leaders in High Poverty Schools
71.3 28.5 65.8 3.8 1.3 26.1

25 Excluded races/ethnicities had n-sizes too small to report.

20

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
The comparison of certificate levels for leaders in high poverty and low poverty schools revealed different patterns than the teacher workforce comparison. When analyzing the leader workforce in high poverty and low poverty schools, the share of leaders with Bachelor's and Master's degrees as the highest earned degree was larger in low poverty schools than high poverty schools (5.8% compared to 3.6%, and 27.6% compared to 22.3%, respectively). The percentage of leaders with an Education Specialist degree as the highest earned degree was the same in low poverty and high poverty schools (51.6%). However, the percentage of leaders with a PhD/EdD as their highest earned degree was statistically significantly greater in high poverty schools than low poverty schools; 22.3% of leaders in high poverty schools held PhD/EdDs as their highest degree compared to only 14.6% in low poverty schools.
Figure 9: Certificate Levels of Leaders in Low and High Poverty Schools26
No statistically significant differences exist between low and high poverty schools in the levels of years of experience working in Georgia public education or serving as a leader. However, similar to the teacher workforce, a statistically significantly larger share of leaders in low poverty schools were prepared out of state (34.1%) compared to leaders in high poverty schools (29.6%).
26 An asterisk denotes a statistically significant difference in percentages using a t-test of proportions (p < 0.05).
21

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

Comparison of Current Workforce to All Certificate Holders

The report compares the current teacher and leader workforce to all current certificate holders in order to analyze the percentage of all certificate holders that were actually employed as teachers or leaders during the 2015-2016 school year. GOSA defined all current certificate holders for the 2015-2016 school year as anyone with a valid certificate between July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016.27 As such, there were 189,468 valid certificate holders during the 2015-2016 school year.28
Table 8: Percentage of Certificate Holders Employed as Teacher or Leader29

Employed as Teacher Employed as Leader Employed as Teacher or Leader

Count of All
Certificate Holders 109,855 8,432 118,287

Percentage of All Certificate Holders
58.0% 4.5% 62.5%

Table 8 shows the percentages of all certificate holders employed as either a teacher or leader. 62.5% of all current certificate holders were employed as either a teacher or a leader during the 2015-2016 school year. 13.4% of all current certificate holders were not employed in the Georgia public education workforce at all during the 2015-2016 school year.30

DEMOGRAPHICS

Males have a higher percentage of certificate holders who are employed as teachers or leaders than females. 71.9% of male certificate holders were employed as a teacher or leader compared to 60.6% of female certificate holders. However, there were more than four times as many female certificate holders as male certificate holders.

27 GOSA chose these dates because they align with GaPSC's fiscal year. 28 The total number of valid certificate holders includes those with certificates in fields that do not necessarily correspond specifically to a teacher or leader job code definition (e.g. service personnel). 29 A small number of teachers and leaders identified using CPI data did not match to the certificate data provided by GaPSC, likely due to reporting errors or educators not being certified under conditions of a district's charter system or SWSS contract. Thus, GOSA used the total number of teachers or leaders identified in CPI data who matched to GaPSC certificate data to calculate these percentages. 30 GOSA determined this percentage by calculating the number of current certificate holders who were not present in the Fall 2016 CPI data.
22

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

White certificate holders had slightly higher shares of certificate holders who were employed as a teacher or leader when compared to other races/ethnicities. 65.7% of white certificate holders were employed as a teacher or leader. Among all other races, approximately 60% of certificate holders were employed as a teacher or leader during the 2015-2016 school year.

Table 9: Distribution of Employed Certificate Holders' Races/Ethnicities

Race/Ethnicity
American Indian Asian Black Hispanic Pacific Islander Two or More White

Percentage of Certificate Holders Employed as Teacher/Leader 60.4 59.4 59.4 59.7 63.8 61.1 65.7

CERTIFICATE ANALYSIS

Table 10: Percentage of Certificate Holders Employed by Certificate Field

Certificate Field
Early Childhood Middle Secondary English Language Arts Secondary Math Secondary Social Studies Secondary Science CTAE PK-12 Fields Foreign Language Gifted Special Education ESOL STEM Leadership Other Fields31

Percentage Employed as
Teacher 75.9 75.5 75.2 79.2 76.5 76.5 75.1 78.5 81.0 84.6 76.7 80.7 77.3 39.0 57.9

Percentage Employed as Leader
4.7 7.0 6.4 5.9 7.9 8.7 6.5 5.3 3.5 5.2 3.7 3.9 5.6 34.3 5.0

Percentage Employed as Teacher or Leader
80.6 82.5 81.6 85.0 84.5 85.2 81.5 83.7 84.5 89.8 80.4 84.6 82.9 73.3 62.9

31 Other fields include service fields that do not align with the job code definitions used for identifying teachers and leaders (see footnote 1).

23

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
The certificate field with the highest percentage of certificate holders employed as a teacher or leader was gifted certification; about 90% of all gifted certificate holders were employed as a teacher or leader. However, only 80% of special education certificate holders were employed as a teacher or leader. Approximately 85% of ESOL certificate holders were employed as a teacher or leader. Additionally, 82.9% of those holding certificates in a STEM subject were employed as a teacher or leader. Among the secondary fields, about 85% of secondary math, science, and social studies certificate holders were employed as a teacher or leader, which was slightly higher the percentage of secondary English language arts certificate holders who were employed (81.6%). Only 73.3% of leadership certificate holders were employed, with 34.3% of leadership certificate holders employed as a leader and 39% employed as a teacher. Figure 10 below shows the percentage of certificate holders employed as a teacher or leader by certificate level.32 Certificate holders with a Master's degree as their highest earned degree were the largest share of certificate holders employed as a teacher or leader (78%). Only 67.4% of certificate holders with PhD/EdDs as the highest degree earned were employed as a teacher or leader; of these certificate holders, 43.9% were employed as teachers and 23.6% were employed as leaders.
Figure 10: Percentage of Certificate Holders Employed as Teacher/Leader by Certificate Level
Under GaPSC's certification system, educators can hold different types of certificates, each with their own conditions. Certificates are classified into two main categories--renewable and non-renewable. Non-renewable certificates are valid
32 Certificate holders with a high school diploma or Associate's degree comprised less than one percent of all certificate holders, so they were excluded from the analysis.
24

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

for only one to five years depending on the certificate type.33 79% of renewable certificate holders were employed as teachers or leaders during the 2015-2016 school year, and 52.3% of non-renewable certificate holders were employed as teachers or leaders. Waiver certificates are included under the non-renewable category. Waiver certificates are unique in that they are issued at the request of an employer to educators who have not satisfied all certification requirements and are thus only valid for one year. 68.3% of all waiver certificate holders were employed as a teacher or leader during the 2015-2016 school year.
2015-2016 Teacher New Hire Characteristics
During the 2015-2016 school year, 5,908 teachers were new hires to the teacher workforce, which represented 5.4% of the entire teacher workforce.34

DEMOGRAPHICS

The gender breakdown of new teachers was similar to the gender distribution of the overall teacher workforce. 77.1% of new teachers were female.

Hispanic teachers comprised a larger share of new teachers than the entire teacher workforce during the 2015-2016 school year; 17.9% of new teachers were Hispanic compared to only 9.2% of the entire teacher workforce. In contrast, white teachers comprised a slightly smaller share of new teachers than the entire teacher workforce, as 51.1% of new teachers were white compared to 60.6% of the entire teacher workforce. The percentage of new teachers who were black was similar to the overall share of black teachers in the workforce.

Table 11: Distribution of New Teachers' Races/Ethnicities

Race/Ethnicity
Asian Black Hispanic Two or More White Unknown

Percentage of All Teachers
0.8 20.2 9.2 1.1 60.6 7.9

Percentage of New Teachers
1.5 20.6 17.9 1.5 51.1 7.4

33 For more information on the different types of certificates and GaPSC's tiered certification system, visit GaPSC's website. GOSA classified certificate types into renewable and non-renewable according to GaPSC's classification rules. 34 New teacher hires were defined as teachers whose initial year present in CPI data was 2016.
25

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

Furthermore, 31.6% of new teachers were prepared out of state, which is 5 percentage points higher than the share of all teachers who were prepared outside of Georgia.

CERTIFICATE ANALYSIS

The percentages of new teachers with gifted, special education, or ESOL certification were lower than the percentages for all teachers. Only 2.7% of new teachers held gifted certification. Nevertheless, 19.6% of new teachers were certified in special education, and 8.1% of new teachers were certified in ESOL. Although the percentage of new teachers certified in elementary or middle grades was lower than the percentage of all teachers, the percentage of new teachers certified in secondary fields was similar to the percentage of all teachers. Additionally, 30.2% of new teachers were certified in a STEM subject.

Table 12: Distribution of New Teachers' Certificate Fields

Certificate Field
Early Childhood Middle Secondary English Language Arts Secondary Math Secondary Social Studies Secondary Science CTAE PK-12 Fields Foreign Language Gifted Special Education ESOL STEM

Percentage of All Teachers
Certified 46.9 30.8 6.4 5.3 6.1 8.4 5.7 21.1 2.7 22.3 23.2 10.2 39.7

Percentage of New Teachers
Certified 38.8 17.6 7.0 5.6 6.2 6.9 5.0 16.7 3.1 2.7 19.7 8.1 30.2

26

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Figure 11: Distribution of New Teachers' Certificate Levels35
Unlike the overall teacher workforce, the majority of new teachers in 2015-2016 held a Bachelor's degree as their highest degree earned (64.3%), which is double the proportion of all teachers with a Bachelor's degree as their highest degree earned (31.8%). Additionally, 30.6% of new teachers held a Master's degree as their highest degree earned, compared to 44.2% of all teachers with a Master's degree as their highest earned degree.36 The sample sizes for the breakdown of new teacher workforce characteristics disaggregated by school and district were too small to report.
35 Teachers with no certificate level information were identified as "unknown." Some of these teachers may not be required to hold a certificate if the school system has a waiver in its charter system or SWSS contract with the State Board of Education. 36 Many new teachers are likely Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) completers, whereas many of the 44.2% of all teachers with a Master's degree are likely veteran teachers with a Master of Education (M. Ed.) degree.
27

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

2015-2016 New Leader Hire Characteristics
During the 2015-2016 school year, 1,060 leaders were new leader hires, or educators serving as leaders for the first time, representing 12.5% of the entire leader workforce.37

DEMOGRAPHICS

Females comprised a larger share of new leaders than the entire leader workforce. 74.8% of new leaders were female compared to 68% of all leaders.

Additionally, compared to the entire leader workforce, new leaders had a slightly larger share of Hispanic leaders and leaders of other races/ethnicities.38 7.7% of new leaders were Hispanic compared to 4.4% of all leaders, and 3.3% of new leaders were of other races/ethnicities compared to 1.9% of all leaders. The white share of new leaders was slightly lower than the share of all leaders; 48.2% of new leaders were white compared to 56.9% of all leaders.
Table 13: Distribution of New Leaders' Races/Ethnicities39

Race/Ethnicity
Black Hispanic Other White Unknown

Percentage of All Leaders
34.2 4.4 1.9 56.9 2.6

Percentage of New Leaders
32.8 7.7 3.3 48.2 8.0

Similar to new teachers, a larger share of new leaders also came prepared from out of state (36.3%) when compared to the entire leader workforce (30.6%).

CERTIFICATE ANALYSIS

Approximately half (50.6%) of new leaders held a leadership certificate, which is much lower than the percentage for all leaders. However, the shares of new leaders with gifted, special education, and ESOL certification were greater than the shares of all leaders. 27.4% of new leaders were gifted certified compared to 18% of all
37 New leader hires were defined as leaders whose initial year in CPI data as a leader, which was identified by GaPSC using job codes, was 2016. 38 Other races/ethnicities include American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, and those reporting two or more races. GOSA combined these races/ethnicities for analysis due to small sample sizes. 39 Some races/ethnicities were not reported because n < 10.

28

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

leaders. 20.3% of new leaders were certified in special education compared to 14.7% of all leaders. 11.4% of new leaders held ESOL certification compared to 6.4% of all leaders. Finally, the percentage of new leaders certified in a STEM subject (42.1%) was also greater than the percentage of all leaders (37.6%).

Table 14: Distribution of New Leaders' Certificate Fields

Certificate Field
Leadership Early Childhood Middle Secondary English Language Arts Secondary Math Secondary Social Studies Secondary Science CTAE PK-12 Fields Foreign Language Gifted Special Education ESOL STEM

Percentage of All Leaders
Certified 81.7 37.7 37.4 7.1 5.1 8.2 12.4 6.4 18.4 1.5 18.0 14.7 6.4 37.6

Percentage of New Leaders
Certified 50.6 38.4 38.5 8.7 6.7 8.3 10.7 7.3 18.7 2.5 27.4 20.3 11.4 42.1

Figure 11: Distribution of New Leaders' Certificate Levels

When compared to the overall leader workforce, the majority of new leaders held either a Bachelor's or Master's degree as their highest earned degree (51.1%), whereas the majority (53.3%) of the leader workforce held an Education Specialist
29

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
as their highest earned degree. However, 39.5% of new leaders still held an Education Specialist degree as their highest earned degree. 9.1% of new leaders held a PhD/EdD as their highest earned degree, which was half the proportion of the entire leader workforce with a PhD/EdD (18.4%).
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE When comparing the experience levels of new leaders to the entire leader workforce, new leaders did not have as much experience working in Georgia public education. 23.7% of new leaders had 5 or fewer years of experience in Georgia public education, compared to only 5.1% of all leaders. Over half of new leaders had ten or fewer years of experience, whereas almost half of all leaders (48.5%) had between eleven to twenty years of experience. The median number of years of experience for new leaders was 10 years compared to 17 years for the entire leader workforce.
Figure 12: Years of Experience for New Leaders40
40 The more than thirty years of experience band was excluded because the n-size for new leaders was too small to report.
30

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

2015-2016 Teacher Rehire Characteristics
The report also examines teacher and leader rehires, or educators who returned to the classroom in 2015-2016 after at least one year of absence during the previous school year.41 During the 2015-2016 school year, 2,316 teachers were rehires, which represented 2.1% of the entire teacher workforce.

DEMOGRAPHICS

The distribution of male and female teacher rehires was similar to the gender distribution of the overall teacher workforce. 77.5% of teacher rehires were female.

Similar to new teachers, Hispanic teachers comprised a larger share of teacher rehires than the overall teacher workforce as well. 14.4% of teacher rehires were Hispanic compared to 9.2% of all teachers. The share of teacher rehires who were black was also larger than the share of all teachers; 25.5% of teacher rehires were black compared to 20.2% of all teachers. Additionally, only 42.3% of teacher rehires were white compared to 60.6% of all teachers. However, 15.3% of teacher rehires did not have any race/ethnicity data available for this report.
Table 15: Distribution of Teacher Rehires' Races/Ethnicities42

Race/Ethnicity
Asian Black Hispanic Two or More White Unknown

Percentage of All Teachers
0.8 20.2 9.2 1.1 60.6 7.9

Percentage of Teacher Rehires
1.0 25.5 14.4 1.4 42.3 15.3

Finally, 32.9% of teacher rehires originally received teacher preparation outside of Georgia, which is greater than the percentage of all teachers who received teacher preparation outside of Georgia (26.5%).

41 GOSA defined teacher rehires as teachers who were not present in 2014-2015 CPI data at all, but were present in Fall 2016 CPI data as a teacher. 42 American Indian and Pacific Islander were excluded because n < 10.
31

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

CERTIFICATE ANALYSIS

The percentage of teacher rehires certified in elementary grades (40.9%) was six percentage points lower than the percentage of all teachers; however, the percentages of teacher rehires certified in middle grades or secondary subjects were similar to the shares of all teachers. The percentage of teacher rehires who were gifted certified was less than half the percentage of all teachers who were gifted certified; only 10.4% of teacher rehires were gifted certified. The share of teacher rehires certified in ESOL was also slightly smaller when compared to all teachers. However, the percentage of teacher rehires certified in special education was slightly larger for teacher rehires than all teachers--26.4% of teacher rehires were certified in special education compared to 23.2% of all teachers.

Table 16: Distribution of Teacher Rehires' Certificate Fields

Certificate Field
Early Childhood Middle Secondary English Language Arts Secondary Math Secondary Social Studies Secondary Science CTAE PK-12 Fields Foreign Language Gifted Special Education ESOL STEM

Percentage of All Teachers
Certified 46.9 30.8 6.4 5.3 6.1 8.4 5.7 21.1 2.7 22.3 23.2 10.2 39.7

Percentage of Teacher Rehires
Certified 40.9 30.6 6.9 5.3 6.5 8.8 6.1 17.7 3.3 10.4 26.4 7.8 38.5

32

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Figure 12: Distribution of Teacher Rehires' Certificate Levels
In terms of certificate level, 44.1% of teacher rehires held a Master's degree as their highest earned degree, which was the same proportion for all teachers. The percentage of teacher rehires with a Bachelor's degree as their highest earned degree was four percentage points greater than the share of all teachers. Only 12.3% of teacher rehires held an Education Specialist degree as their highest earned degree compared to 20.5% of all teachers. However, 3.2% of teacher rehires held a PhD/EdD, which was slightly greater than the share of all teachers (2.6%). Nevertheless, it is important to note that about 5% of teacher rehires did not have any reported certificate level information.43
43 Due to reporting errors, some teacher rehires identified using CPI data did not match to the certificate data provided by GaPSC which explains why this information is missing. Some of these teachers may not be required to hold a certificate if the school system has a waiver in its charter system or SWSS contract with the State Board of Education.
33

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE When comparing the total number of years of experience in Georgia public education between teacher rehires and all teachers, a greater proportion of teacher rehires had ten or fewer years of experience. 68.7% of teacher rehires had ten or fewer years of experience, compared to 47.8% of all teachers. Thus, in general, teacher rehires had fewer years of experience than the entire teacher workforce. However, 4.7% of teacher rehires had more than thirty years of experience compared to only 1.6% of the entire teacher workforce, indicating that there are some teacher rehires with a lot of experience working in education who may have just taken a break.
Figure 13: Years of Experience for Teacher Rehires
34

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

2015-2016 Leader Rehire Characteristics
Out of 8,449 total leaders in 2015-2016, only 45 leaders were leader rehires, which represented 0.5% of all leaders.44

DEMOGRAPHICS

The gender distribution of leader rehires was similar to the distribution of all leaders. 62.2% of leader rehires were female, which was slightly lower than the percentage of all leaders who were female (68%).
Given the small sample size of leader rehires, most leader rehire race/ethnicity subgroups were too small to report. Nevertheless, 37.8% of leader rehires were black, which was slightly larger than the share of all leaders who were black (34.2%). Additionally, only 44.4% of leader rehires were white, which was much smaller than the share of all leaders who were white (56.9%).
The percentage of leader rehires who were prepared out of state (28.9%) was just slightly lower than the percentage of all leaders prepared out of state (30.6%).

CERTIFICATE ANALYSIS

Due to the small sample size of leader rehires, it is difficult to draw any conclusions about any certificate field patterns for leader rehires. In general, the percentage of leader rehires certified in elementary, middle, and secondary grades was lower than the percentage of all leaders. However, 86.7% of leader rehires were certified in leadership, which was slightly higher than the percentage of all leaders.

Table 17: Distribution of Leader Rehires' Certificate Fields

Certificate Field
Leadership Elementary Middle Secondary45 STEM

Percentage of All Leaders Certified
81.7 37.7 37.4 25.2 37.6

Percentage of Leader Rehires Certified 86.7 26.7 24.4 20.0 22.2

44 GOSA defined leader rehires as leaders who were not present in 2014-2015 CPI data at all, were present in Fall 2016 CPI data as a leader, and whose initial CPI year as a leader was not 2016, indicating that 2015-2016 was not their first year serving as a leader. 45 GOSA calculated the number of leaders and leader rehires certified in any secondary subject for a general secondary field category.

35

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
No leader rehires had below a Master's degree as their highest earned degree.46 In general, the percentages of leader rehires holding a Master's, Education Specialist, or PhD/EdD as their highest earned degree were very similar to the percentages for all leaders. The largest share (48.9%) of leader rehires held an Education Specialist degree as their highest earned degree.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Again, due to the small sample size of leader rehires, findings on patterns in years of experience for leader rehires are limited. Nevertheless, the largest share of leader rehires (26.7%) had between 26 and 30 years of experience working in Georgia public education, which is greater than the share of all leaders with that amount of experience (11.2%). The median number of years of experience as a leader for leader rehires was 8 years compared to 6 years for all leaders. Though these differences are minimal, these findings may indicate that some leader rehires have a lot of experience working in Georgia public education and are returning as a leader after a break.
46 GOSA did not have certificate level data on four leader rehires.
36

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

Teacher and Leader Production

In addition to analyzing patterns of the current teacher and leader workforce during the 2015-2016 school year, this report also examines the teacher and leader pipeline to the workforce using GaPSC educator preparation program (EPP) participant data to identify patterns in teacher and leader production.47
Employment Patterns of Teacher and Leader Candidates and Completers

Table 18: Educator Preparation Program Teacher Employment

Traditional Alternative

Source
2015-2016 Still Enrolled 2015-2016 Completer 2014-2015 Completer 2015-2016 Still Enrolled 2015-2016 Completer 2014-2015 Completer

Count of EPP
Teaching Candidates48
8,695 3,555 4,092 1,401 405 538

Number Employed as Teachers as of October
2015
563
276
2,689
886
387
457

Percentage Employed as Teachers as of October
201549
6.5
7.8
65.7
63.2
95.6
84.9

Table 18 shows the number of teachers who completed or were still enrolled in an educator preparation program in the current and previous year that were employed as teachers as of October 2015. 66% of teachers who completed a traditional preparation program in 2014-2015 were employed as teachers as of October 2015. Of the teaching candidates who were still enrolled or completed a traditional preparation program in 2015-2016, less than ten percent were employed as teachers.

Larger percentages of teachers who participated in alternative preparation programs were employed in October 2015. 85% of teachers who completed an alternative preparation program in 2014-2015 were employed as teachers. Most teacher

47 The reporting period for program participant data collected by GaPSC follows the federal fiscal year (September 1, 2015 to August 31. 2016), so GaPSC did not receive finalized program participant data until mid-November. Thus, this report does not include all program participant data for all teachers and leaders employed during the 2015-2016 school year. GOSA will publish an addendum to this report with the updated data when available. 48 GaPSC classified programs into teaching, leadership, or service programs in the participant data. GOSA used the teaching program indicator to identify EPP teaching candidates. 49 Many alternative preparation programs such as the Georgia Teacher Academy for Preparation and Pedagogy (GaTAPP) require students to have a teaching job while enrolled, whereas many traditional programs include undergraduate students who are unable to be employed as a teacher while in the program. Due to overlapping reporting periods, certification candidates who initially enrolled in their programs after the October CPI data collection are not considered employed even though they may have been employed once they began the program.

37

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

candidates (96%) who completed an alternative preparation program during 20152016 were also employed as teachers in October 2015. Additionally, 63% of teacher candidates who were still enrolled in an alternative preparation during the 20152016 school year were simultaneously employed as teachers.

The percentage of leaders who were employed in October 2015 after completing a traditional preparation program in 2014-2015 was lower than the percentage for teachers.50 Only 42% of leaders who completed a program in 2014-2015 were employed as leaders the following year. However, the percentages of leaders who were employed as leaders while enrolled or completing a program in 2015-2016 were greater than the percentages for teachers. 32% of leader candidates who completed a program in 2015-2016, and 22% of leader candidates still enrolled in a program were also employed as leaders in October 2015.

Table 19: Educator Preparation Program Leader Employment

Traditional

Source
2015-2016 Still Enrolled 2015-2016 Completer 2014-2015 Completer

Count of EPP
Leadership Candidates
1,259
475
201

Number Employed as Leaders as of October
2015
278
150
85

Percentage Employed as Leaders as of October 2015
22.1 31.6 42.3

50 All leader candidates were enrolled in a traditional preparation program.
38

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

2015-2016 Teacher and Leader Candidate Enrollment

The report uses program participant data provided by GaPSC to examine patterns
in teacher and leader candidate enrollment during the 2015-2016 school year. All
participants who were enrolled in a program as of September 1, 2015 are included in this analysis.51

During the 2015-2016 school year, 19,428 teacher and leader candidates were
enrolled in Georgia preparation programs. Of those enrolled, 75.3% were enrolled
in a public in-state program, 15.2% were enrolled in a private in-state program, and 9.8% were enrolled in an alternative preparation program.52

In terms of program area, the largest share of candidates (26.8%) were enrolled in elementary preparation programs. The second largest share (14.3%) of candidates were enrolled in special education programs. 8.1% of candidates were enrolled in a leadership preparation program. Table 20 displays the distribution of program area enrollment for all teacher and leader candidates during 2015-2016.

Table 20: Teacher/Leader Candidate Enrollment by Program Area

Program Area
Early Childhood Middle Secondary English Language Arts Secondary Math Secondary Social Studies Secondary Science CTAE PK-12 Fields Foreign Language Special Education ESOL Leadership

Count53
5,197 1,847 726 608 701 621 370 1,321 290 2,773
44 1,576

Percentage of Candidates
26.8 9.5 3.7 3.1 3.6 3.2 1.9 6.8 1.5 14.3 0.2 8.1

51 As mentioned earlier, GOSA used September 1, 2015 because it aligns with the federal fiscal year that is used for reporting program participant data. Thus, participants who completed or withdrew from a program during the 2015-2016 school year after September 1, 2015 were still included in the enrollment analysis. 52 63 candidates were enrolled in multiple programs of different types. GOSA included these candidates in the counts for public, private, and alternative programs. 53 Candidates were double counted if they were enrolled in multiple program areas, so counts will not add up to the total number of candidates and percentages will not add up to 100.
39

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Teacher and Leader Mobility The report analyzes teacher and leader mobility across and within school districts to identify any potential patterns by examining whether a teacher or leader changed school districts or schools from the 2014-2015 school year to the 2015-2016 school year.54 The following analysis looks at teacher and leader mobility across school districts (inter-district mobility) and within school districts (intra-district mobility). Teacher Mobility
INTER-DISTRICT MOBILITY
The overall 2015-2016 teacher inter-district mobility rate in Georgia was 4.6%. 5,016 teachers moved school districts between 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. In terms of years of experience, the largest share (39.3%) of teachers who moved school districts had five or fewer years of experience.55 About 70% of teachers who moved school districts had ten or fewer years of experience. Thus, less experienced teachers appear more likely to move school districts than more experienced teachers.
Figure 14: Years of Experience for Teachers Changing Districts
54 GOSA used GaDOE CPI school and system code information to determine mobility rates. If a teacher or leader had a different system or school code from Spring 2015 CPI to Fall 2016 CPI, they were considered mobile. The mobility analysis does not include teachers or leaders who left or joined the workforce between 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. 55 For this analysis, years of experience refers to the number of years in CPI by the end of the 20142015 school year.
40

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
The map on the following page displays the teacher inter-district mobility rate for each school district in Georgia.56 Macon County had the highest teacher interdistrict mobility rate of 22.3%. Calhoun County had the second highest interdistrict mobility rate at 17.5%. Although there are no clear geographic patterns, the inter-district mobility rate map suggests that districts across middle Georgia appear to have higher mobility rates than districts in the northernmost and southernmost regions of the state. Additionally, Charlton County, Crawford County, Webster County, and Trion City did not have any teachers who changed school districts between 2014-2015 and 2015-2016.57
56 GOSA calculated the mobility rate by dividing the number of teachers who moved out of the district in 2015-2016 by the total number of teachers in the district in Spring 2015. 57 The inter-district mobility rate for these districts was zero, but this analysis does not account for teachers who left the workforce all together, so these districts do not necessarily have 100% retention. Please see the Teacher Retention section of the report for this analysis.
41

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Figure 15: Teacher Inter-District Mobility Rate Map
42

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
INTRA-DISTRICT MOBILITY
GOSA defined intra-district mobility as changing schools within the same district between 2014-2015 to 2015-2016. The overall intra-district mobility rate was essentially the same as the inter-district mobility rate at 4.6%. 5,023 teachers changed schools within the same school district from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016. The largest share of teachers moving within school districts (32.3%) was teachers with six to ten years of experience, which is different from the patterns of teachers moving across districts. Additionally, the percentages of teachers moving within districts with sixteen or more years of experience were slightly higher than the percentages for teachers moving across districts. In fact, the median number of years of experience for teachers moving within districts was 9 years compared to 7 years for teachers moving across districts. These data imply that more experienced teachers are moving within districts than across districts. However, 59% of teachers moving within districts still had ten or less years of experience.
Figure 16: Years of Experience for Teachers Changing Schools
The map on the following page shows the teacher intra-district mobility rates for each school district. The geographic patterns for intra-district mobility rates are different from the patterns for inter-district mobility rates. Stephens County had the highest teacher intra-district mobility rate as 30.4% of teachers changed schools within the district. Sumter County had the second highest teacher intramobility rate at 22.4%, followed by Terrell County with 17.4%. Although some of the districts with higher intra-district mobility rates are also located in middle Georgia, the teacher intra-district mobility map shows that districts in metro Atlanta districts appear to have higher intra-district mobility rates than other regions of the state. Sixteen districts did not have any teachers moving within the district between 2014-2015 and 2015-2016.
43

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Figure 17: Teacher Intra-District Mobility Rate Map58
58 Baker County, Glascock County, Talbot County, and Taliaferro County only have one school in the district so GOSA excluded them from the intra-district mobility analysis.
44

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
TEACHER MOBILITY IN HIGH POVERTY AND LOW POVERTY SCHOOLS
To analyze mobility patterns in high poverty and low poverty schools, GOSA calculated a mobility rate for each school and averaged the mobility rates for high poverty and low poverty schools for comparison.59 The average mobility rate in high poverty schools was 14.7%, which was more than double the average mobility rate for low poverty schools (6.5%); using a two sample t-test, this difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Similarly, when analyzing the total counts of teachers who changed schools in high poverty and low poverty schools, 14.3% of teachers in high poverty schools changed schools from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016 compared to 6.3% of teachers in low poverty schools; this difference was also statistically significant using a t-test of proportions (p < 0.05). Thus, in 2015-2016, high poverty schools appeared to have more teachers changing schools between school years than low poverty schools.
59 The school mobility rate was calculated by dividing the number of teachers who changed schools from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016 by the number of teachers in the school in 2014-2015.
45

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Leader Mobility
INTER-DISTRICT MOBILITY60
The overall inter-district mobility rate for leaders was lower than the inter-district mobility rate for teachers; only 1.6% of leaders (128 leaders) moved school districts from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016. However, similar to teachers, of the leaders who did move school districts, a large share (45.3%) of those leaders had five or fewer years of experience as a leader.61 In fact, 77.3% of leaders who changed districts had ten or fewer years of experience as a leader. Thus, leaders with less experience as administrators also appeared more likely to move school districts than leaders with more experience. Due to small sample sizes, the report does not include an interdistrict mobility map for leaders.
INTRA-DISTRICT MOBILITY
Figure 18: Years of Leader Experience for Leaders Changing Schools
The overall intra-district mobility rate for leaders was higher than the inter-district mobility rate and also higher than the intra-district mobility rate for teachers. 675 leaders, or 8.4% of all leaders, changed schools within districts from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016. Similar to the leader inter-district mobility patterns, 42.7% of leaders changing schools within districts had five or fewer years of experience as a leader,
60 The n-sizes for leader inter-district mobility rates by district were too small to report so there is no map for this section. 61 There is no graph for these findings because the n-sizes for some of the experience bands were too small.
46

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
and 78% of these leaders had ten or fewer years of experience as a leader. Therefore, leaders who changed schools within the same district also appeared to have less experience as a leader. Burke County had one of the highest leader intra-mobility rates with 40.7% of leaders changing schools between school years. Whitfield County and Richmond County both had around 25% of leaders who moved schools within the district. However, for many districts, the numbers of leaders and leaders who moved within the district were too small to include in this report, so the report does not include a leader intra-mobility rate map. Additionally, many districts did not have any leaders who changed schools between 2014-2015 and 2015-2016.
LEADER MOBILITY IN HIGH POVERTY AND LOW POVERTY SCHOOLS
The average leader mobility rate in high poverty schools was 15% compared to 8.7% of leaders changing schools in low poverty schools; using a two sample ttest, this difference is statistically significant (p < 0.05). However, it is important to note that the number of leaders in a single school is small, so school mobility rates for leaders have a wide range and many schools had zero leaders changing schools. Furthermore, when analyzing the total counts of leaders who changed schools in high poverty and low poverty schools, 14.1% of leaders in high poverty schools changed schools after the 2014-2015 school year compared to 8.3% of leaders in low poverty schools; this difference was also statistically significant using a t-test of proportions (p < 0.05). Therefore, similar to teachers, high poverty schools seemed to have more leaders who changed schools from 20142015 to 2015-2016 than low poverty schools.
47

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

Teacher and Leader Retention

Teacher and leader retention patterns are important for assessing the stability of the educator workforce in Georgia, which can have implications for student achievement. GOSA considered teachers and leaders retained if they were present in their respective roles in the spring of 2014-2015 and fall of 2015-2016.62 Table 21 below shows the overall retention rates for teachers and leaders. From 20142015 to 2015-2016, 90.5% of teachers and leaders remained in their respective role between school years. The leader retention rate was 4.6 percentage points lower than the retention rate for teachers. Additionally, 1,122 teachers (1% of teachers) became leaders from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016.

Table 21: Teacher and Leader Retention

Teachers Leaders Total

Spring 20142015 Count
109,327 8,011 117,338

Fall 20152016 Count
99,317 6,904 106,221

Retention Percentage
90.8 86.2 90.5

Retention of Teachers
The following sections explore the demographic characteristics and certificate fields of all teachers who were retained from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016 to identify any patterns.
DEMOGRAPHICS
No significant teacher retention patterns by gender and race/ethnicity emerged. Approximately 91% of males and females were retained from 2014-2015 to 20152016.
Table 22 displays the retention percentages for each race/ethnicity subgroup. The retention percentage of Asian teachers was slightly lower than the percentages for all other races/ethnicities.

62 Teachers were retained if they were present in Spring 2015 CPI and Fall 2016 CPI as a teacher (defined by job code). Leaders were retained if they were present in Spring 2015 CPI and Fall 2016 CPI as a leader (defined by job code). All retention percentages use 2014-2015 counts as the denominator.
48

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

Table 22: Distribution of Retained Teachers' Races/Ethnicities

Race/Ethnicity American Indian Asian Black Hispanic Pacific Islander Two or More White

Retention Percentage 89.1 86.5 90.2 90.6 91.5 90.6 91.5

CERTIFICATE ANALYSIS

After disaggregating teacher retention data by certificate field to examine the retention of teacher talent, similar to the demographic analysis, no significant teacher retention patterns emerged. Across all certificate field categories, roughly 90% of teachers certified in each field were retained from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016. Table 23 shows the retention percentages for select broad categories of certificate fields.

Table 23: Distribution of Retained Teachers' Certificate Fields

Certificate Field Elementary Middle Secondary Gifted Special Education ESOL

Retention Percentage 91.2 90.3 90.1 91.6 91.2 91.4

DISTRICT AND SCHOOL ANALYSIS

The map below displays district retention rates to identify any potential geographic patterns in teacher retention.63 Northwest Georgia and southeast Georgia appear to have higher concentrations of school districts with high retention rates. Webster County, though a small school district, had 100% retention, and Dodge County retained 95.2% of teachers. Fulton County, one of the largest school districts, had one of the lowest teacher retention rates (71.8%).

63 GOSA calculated district retention rates by dividing the number of teachers who remained teaching in the same district by the total number of teachers in the district in Spring 2015.
49

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Figure 19: Teacher District Retention Rate Map
50

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

The average retention rate in high poverty schools was 74.5%, which was statistically significantly lower than the average retention rate in low poverty schools (84.6%; p < 0.05).64 Thus, high poverty schools did not retain as many teachers as low poverty schools.
Retention of Recently Hired Teachers
To explore whether newer teachers are remaining in the workforce over time, the report also analyzes retention of recently hired teachers, defined as teachers with five or fewer years of experience. For this analysis, GOSA looked at teachers with five or fewer years of experience as of the 2014-2015 school year who remained teaching in 2015-2016. The retention rate for recently hired teachers was slightly lower than the retention rate for all teachers; 88.6% of recently hired teachers were retained in 2015-2016 compared to 90.8% of all teachers.

DEMOGRAPHICS

Similar to all teachers, no differences existed between the retention rates of recently hired teachers by gender; approximately 89% of male and female recently hired teachers were retained in 2015-2016. However, there were some differences in retention percentages of recently hired teachers when disaggregated by race/ethnicity. The retention percentages for recently hired American Indian (61.1%) and Asian (73.3%) teachers were lower than the percentages for all other races/ethnicities, and the retention percentage for Pacific Islanders (95%) was slightly higher. However, it is important to note that the number of American Indian, Asian, and Pacific Islander teachers was smaller than the other races/ethnicities.

Table 24: Distribution of Retained Recently Hired Teachers' Races/Ethnicities

Race/Ethnicity American Indian Asian Black Hispanic Pacific Islander Two or More White

Retention Percentage 61.1 73.3 87.5 89.8 95.0 84.7 88.4

64 For this analysis, GOSA calculated a retention rate for each school and averaged the retention rates for high poverty and low poverty schools for comparison. The school retention rate was calculated by dividing the number of teachers who remained in the school from 2014-2015 to 20152016 by the number of teachers in the school in 2014-2015.
51

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

CERTIFICATE ANALYSIS

Similarly, the recently hired teacher retention percentages were relatively consistent when disaggregated by certificate field. Across all certificate fields, almost 90% of recently hired teachers certified in each field category were retained. In general, the retention percentage for recently hired teachers certified in secondary grades was slightly lower. Recently hired teachers certified in secondary math had the lowest retention percentage (83.2%). However, recently hired teachers certified in secondary social studies had the highest retention percentage (90.6%). Table 25 shows the retention percentages for recently hired teachers across certificate fields.

Table 25: Distribution of Retained Recently Hired Teachers' Certificate Fields

Certificate Field Early Childhood Middle Secondary English Language Arts Secondary Math Secondary Science Secondary Social Studies Gifted Special Education ESOL

Retention Percentage 89.3 88.4 87.0 83.2 86.6 90.6 88.7 89.9 90.4

DISTRICT ANALYSIS

The map of district retention rates for recently hired teachers almost mirrored the map of district retention rates for all teachers (see Figure 19). Atkinson County, Charlton County, and Crawford County were among some of the districts with 100% retention of recently hired teachers. Macon County, Twiggs County, and Turner County were among some of the districts with the lowest retention rate (approximately 55%) of recently hired teacher. However, these districts also had relatively small sample sizes of recently hired teachers.

52

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

Retention of Leaders
The retention rate of all leaders was slightly lower than the retention rate of all teachers--86.2% of leaders in 2014-2015 remained leaders in 2015-2016.

DEMOGRAPHICS

The retention percentage for male leaders was greater than the retention percentage for female leaders; 89.2% of male leaders remained leaders compared to 84.8% of female leaders. In terms of race/ethnicity, the retention percentage was lower for Asian leaders (77.4%), Hispanic leaders (81.4%) and leaders reporting two or more races (80.7%). American Indian leaders had the highest retention percentage of 92.3%. However, again, the overall counts of leaders who were American Indian, Asian, and those reporting two or more races were quite low.
Table 26: Distribution of Retained Leaders' Races/Ethnicities65

Race/Ethnicity American Indian Asian Black Hispanic Two or More White

Retention Percentage 92.3 77.4 87.0 81.4 80.7 87.0

CERTIFICATE ANALYSIS

When disaggregated by certificate field, the retention percentages for leaders certified in elementary grades (83.2%) and special education (82.4%) were lower compared to other certificate field categories. Table 27 displays leader retention rates across certificate fields.

65 Pacific Islander was excluded because the n-size was less than ten.
53

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

Table 27: Distribution of Retained Leaders' Certificate Fields

Certificate Field Leadership Early Childhood Middle Secondary Gifted Special Education ESOL

Retention Percentage 89.9 83.2 86.6 89.3 88.1 82.4 86.2

DISTRICT ANALYSIS

Many smaller districts had 100% retention of all leaders from 2014-2015 to 20152016. However, many smaller districts also had low leader retention rates around 50%. Similar to teacher retention patterns, Fulton County had one of the lowest leader retention rates with only 62.5% of leaders remaining in the district.66
When comparing leader retention rates in high and low poverty schools, the average leader retention rate in high poverty schools (71.4%) was statistically significantly lower than the average leader retention rate in high poverty schools (80.4%; p < 0.05). Additionally, when analyzing the total counts of leaders who were retained in high poverty and low poverty schools, 77.9% of leaders in low poverty schools remained in their schools, which was statistically significantly greater than the percentage of leaders who were retained in high poverty schools (69.8%; p < 0.05). This suggests that high poverty schools do not retain as many leaders as low poverty schools.
Retention of Recently Hired Leaders
GOSA analyzed leaders with five or fewer years of experience as a leader as of the 2014-2015 school year who remained a leader in 2015-2016. The retention rate for recently hired leaders was only slightly lower than the retention rate for all leaders. 83.1% of recently hired leaders remained leaders in 2015-2016, which was only 3 percentage points lower than the retention rate for all leaders.

DEMOGRAPHICS

Similar to all leaders, the retention rate for recently hired male leaders (89.7%) was higher than the retention rate for females (80.5%). Additionally, the retention

66 Due to small sample sizes, the report does not include a map of leader retention rates by district.

54

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

percentages were also lower for recently hired Asian leaders (71.4%), Hispanic leaders (77%), and leaders reporting two or more races (72.1%), which mimics the pattern for all leaders. However, once again, leaders who were Asian or of two or more races comprised a small share of all recently hired leaders.

Table 28: Distribution of Retained Recently Hired Leaders' Races/Ethnicities

Race/Ethnicity Asian Black Hispanic Two or More White

Retention Percentage 71.4 83.9 77.0 72.1 85.1

CERTIFICATE ANALYSIS

The certificate field retention patterns for recently hired leaders also mirror the patterns seen in certificate fields among all leaders. Recently hired leaders certified in elementary grades and special education had lower retention percentages when compared to other certificate fields. Table 29 shows the retention percentages for all recently hired leaders across certificate fields.

Table 29: Distribution of Retained Recently Hired Leaders' Certificate Fields

Certificate Field Leadership Early Childhood Middle Secondary Gifted Special Education ESOL

Retention Percentage 91.2 78.6 83.6 88.0 88.0 76.8 84.7

DISTRICT ANALYSIS

The school district patterns in recently hired leader retention rates are similar to the district leader retention patterns for all leaders. Many small school districts had 100% retention of leaders while other small school districts had relatively low leader retention rates of 50%. Fulton County's recently hired leader retention rate was even lower than its overall leader retention rate; only 55.5% of recently hired leaders remained leaders in the district.

55

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

Teacher and Leader Retirement

In an effort to examine potential educator retirement patterns, the report examines available data provided by the Teacher Retirement System of Georgia (TRS). TRS serves all employees committed to education in Georgia, and its members are not limited to only teachers and leaders.67 Thus, TRS does not use the same job code definitions for teachers and leaders as the GaDOE or GaPSC. In order to capture teacher and leader retirement data, TRS provided GOSA with information on all employees classified under the GaDOE for the 2015-2016 school year. Under TRS, "GaDOE employees" include teachers, leaders, clerical staff, aides, lunchroom workers, paraprofessionals, technical support, maintenance, etc. TRS provided GOSA with membership data as of the end of the 2015-2016 fiscal year (June 30, 2016). Thus, rather than focusing only on teachers and leaders, the following analysis includes all "GaDOE members" in TRS. For the purposes of this report, these members are referred to as teachers/leaders/staff. During the 2015-2016 school year, 248,190 members of TRS were classified as teachers/leaders/staff.
Table 30: Distribution of All Teacher/Leader/Staff TRS Members

Status
Active68 Vested69 Eligible for Retirement70
Eligible for Reduced Retirement Benefit71

Count
198,992 101,100 12,134 8,332

Percentage of All Teacher/Leader/Staff
Members 80.2% 40.7% 4.9% 3.4%

The table above displays the distribution of active members, vested members, and members who are eligible for retirement for all teacher/leader/staff members of TRS. However, to gain a better understanding of potential retirement patterns, this report focuses on analyzing active members only (see Table 31).
An active member of TRS is any member who has made at least one contribution in the past four years. Of the 198,992 active teacher/leader/staff members in TRS in 2015-2016, about 10% were eligible for retirement or a reduced retirement benefit. More specifically, about 6% of active members were eligible for retirement, and about 4% were eligible for a reduced retirement benefit. Thus, as of

67 TRS members include all employees of local boards of education, charter schools, universities and colleges, technical colleges, libraries, RESAs, Board of Regents, and other associated state
agencies. 68 Active members have made at least one contribution to TRS in the past four years. 69 Members are vested when they have at least ten years of service credit. 70 Members are eligible for retirement if they are 60-years-old and have at least ten years of service
credit, or if they have at least twenty-five years of service credit at any age. 71 Members are eligible for a reduced retirement benefit if they retire prior to age 60 with 25 to 29
years of service.

56

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report

the 2015-2016 school year, 10% of active teacher/leader/staff members in TRS could potentially retire in the foreseeable future.

Table 31: Distribution of Active Teacher/Leader/Staff TRS Members

Status
Vested Vested but Not Eligible for Retirement
Not Vested Eligible for Retirement
Eligible for Reduced Retirement Benefit

Count
97,382 77,370 101,610 11,694 8,318

Percentage of All Active Teacher/Leader/Staff Members 48.9% 38.9% 51.1% 5.9% 4.2%

Almost half (48.9%) of all active members were vested, which means they had at least ten years of service credit. However, the majority of all active, vested members were not yet eligible for retirement; in other words, 38.9% of all active members were vested but not yet eligible for retirement. Additionally, 51.1% of all active members were not yet vested, which means they had fewer than ten years of service credit. Thus, as of 2015-2016, the majority of active teacher/leader/staff members in TRS did not yet have enough service credit to retire, and more than half of active teacher/leader/staff members had fewer than ten years of service credit.

57

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Summary of Findings
The K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Report aims to inform the development and implementation of educator policies in Georgia. The report analyzes workforce, production, retention, and retirement patterns for K-12 teachers and leaders in Georgia during the 2015-2016 school year. The report uncovers insightful teacher and leader workforce, production, retention, and retirement patterns.
Key findings include:
Current Status of the Workforce
o During the 2015-2016 school year, Georgia's public education workforce consisted of 110,059 teachers and 8,449 leaders.
o The majority (approximately 60%) of the teacher and leader workforce was white.
o The share of black leaders (34%) was larger than the share of black teachers (20%).
o The share of Hispanic leaders (4.4%) was lower than the share of Hispanic teachers (9.2%).
o 44% of teachers held a Master's degree as their highest earned degree and 53% of leaders held an Education Specialist degree as their highest earned degree.
o Almost half of the teacher workforce had ten or fewer years of experience working in Georgia public education. 25% of teachers had five or fewer years of experience. Additionally, 21.9% of teachers had eleven to fifteen years of experience.
o The majority of all leaders had ten or fewer years of experience working as a leader. 45% of all leaders had five or fewer years of experience working as a leader, and 27.5% of leaders had between six to ten years of experience as a leader.
o High poverty schools had significantly larger shares of black teachers and leaders and significantly smaller shares of white teachers and leaders compared to low poverty schools.
o 62.5% of all current certificate holders during the 2015-2016 school year were employed as a teacher or leader, and 13.4% of all current certificate holders were not employed in the Georgia public education workforce at all.
o 5,908 teachers (5.4% of all teachers) were new teachers in 20152016 and 2,316 teachers (2.1%) returned to teaching after a break in service.
o 1,060 leaders (12.5%) were new leaders in 2015-2016 and 45 leaders (0.5%) returned as a leader after a break in service.
o Hispanics comprised a larger share of new teachers and leaders when compared to the entire teacher and leader workforce.
58

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Teacher and Leader Production
o During the 2015-2016 school year, 19,428 teacher and leader candidates were enrolled in Georgia preparation programs.
o 75% of teacher and leader candidates were enrolled in public in-state programs, 15% were enrolled in private in-state programs, and 10% were enrolled in alternative preparation programs.
o During 2015-2016, less than 10% of students in traditional education preparation programs were employed as teachers while in the program.
o 66% of completers in traditional educator preparation programs in 2014-2015 were employed as teachers as of October 2015. 85% of completers in alternative preparation programs in 2014-2015 were employed as of October 2015.
o 42% of completers in leader preparation programs in 2014-2015 were employed as leaders as of October 2015.
Teacher and Leader Mobility
o Between 2014-2015 and 2015-2016, 5% of teachers and 2% of leaders changed school districts.
o Approximately 40% of teachers and leaders who changed school districts had five or fewer years of experience working as a teacher or leader, respectively.
o Between 2014-2015 and 2015-2016, 5% of teachers and 8% of leaders changed schools within a district.
o High poverty schools had more teachers and leaders changing schools from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016 than low poverty schools.
Teacher and Leader Retention
o 90.5% of teachers and leaders remained in their respective roles from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016.
o High poverty schools do not retain as many teachers and leaders as low poverty schools.
o The retention rates for teachers and leaders with five or fewer years of experience were a few percentage points lower than the retention rates for all teachers and leaders.
Teacher and Leader Retirement
o As of 2015-2016, 80% of all teachers/leaders/staff in TRS were active members.72
72 Active members have made at least one contribution to TRS in the past four years.
59

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
o 10% of all active teacher/leader/staff TRS members were eligible for retirement or a reduced retirement benefit.
o Almost 50% of all active teacher/leader/staff TRS members had at least ten years of service credit, but the majority of these members were not yet eligible for retirement.
o 51% of all active teacher/leader/staff TRS members had fewer than ten years of service credit.
60

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
Acknowledgements This research was conducted at the request of the Georgia Alliance of Education Agency Heads with guidance from the Georgia Professional Standards Commission, the Georgia Department of Education, and the Teachers Retirement System of Georgia.
61

2016 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader Workforce Status Report
62