Teacher retention statistics show a profession with substantial movement between schools, exits from teaching, and wide differences by experience, preparation route, and location. In the United States, 15.1% of teachers moved schools or left teaching between 2020–21 and 2021–22. More recent figures from Washington, D.C., North Carolina, and state-specific studies show why a single national retention number does not capture the full picture.
Table of contents
- National teacher turnover
- Why teachers move or leave
- Certification and school context
- Tennessee retention by effectiveness
- North Carolina attrition and vacancies
- Washington, D.C., retention patterns
- Texas preparation-route retention
National teacher turnover
The Learning Policy Institute reported that 15.1% of U.S. teachers either moved schools or left the profession between 2020–21 and 2021–22. The figure combines two different outcomes: 8.0% moved schools, while 7.1% left teaching. That distinction matters for school leaders. A teacher who changes schools remains in the profession, while a teacher who leaves teaching represents a larger loss of classroom experience.
The same Learning Policy Institute analysis found that teacher turnover was about 27% higher than in the early 1990s. Teacher leaving-the-profession rates had increased by more than 50% since the early 1990s. These are historical comparisons, so they should be read as reported comparisons across periods rather than as a claim that every later teacher had the same reason for leaving.
Among teachers who moved schools or left teaching, nearly three in four, or 74%, did so voluntarily for reasons other than retirement, according to the Learning Policy Institute. Voluntary movement therefore made up most of the reported mobility and departure in that period, although voluntary does not necessarily mean unrelated to working conditions, compensation, leadership, or personal circumstances.
School movers were not all relocating in the same way. Of teachers who moved schools, 36.5% moved to a different district in the same state, and 17.3% moved to a different state. The remaining movers changed schools through other forms of movement captured by the report. These percentages describe the destinations of movers, not the share of all teachers who crossed district or state lines.
Teachers who left teaching also followed different paths. The Learning Policy Institute reported that 31.2% of teachers who left teaching retired, while 13.1% took jobs in other sectors. Retirement was therefore a substantial route out of the classroom, but it did not account for every departure.
Why teachers move or leave
Retention depends partly on teachers’ preparation and certification status. Between 2020–21 and 2021–22, 20.1% of teachers without full certification left their schools, compared with 14.7% of fully certified teachers, according to the Learning Policy Institute. These figures measure leaving a school, so they should not be treated as a direct measure of leaving the profession.
The gap between the two groups was 5.4 percentage points in the reported period. It suggests that certification status was associated with different school-leaving rates, but the statistic alone does not establish why teachers left or whether certification caused the difference. Experience, assignment, labor market conditions, and school context may also matter.
Teacher retention also varied by the racial composition and income characteristics of schools. The Learning Policy Institute found that teacher turnover was 35% to 37% higher in schools with the largest concentrations of students of color and low-income students. This is a school-context comparison, not a statement that students caused turnover. It identifies a stronger turnover pattern in schools serving particular student populations.
The same source reported a 16.6% turnover rate for teachers of color, compared with 14.7% for White teachers. Black teachers had an 18.1% turnover rate, also compared with 14.7% for White teachers. The difference between Black and White teacher turnover was 3.4 percentage points, while the difference between all teachers of color and White teachers was 1.9 percentage points.
These comparisons are useful when considering staffing stability and representation together. A school can lose experienced teachers while also losing teachers who reflect the students and communities it serves. Retention plans should therefore examine both the overall rate and which groups are most likely to move or leave.
Tennessee retention by effectiveness
The Tennessee Teacher Retention report examined retention across effectiveness levels and districts. Between 2011–12 and 2012–13, Tennessee lost 1,253 Level 5 teachers. The report defined highly effective teachers as those rated Level 4 or 5 and found that these teachers were retained at a higher rate than teachers rated Level 1, 2, or 3.
That broad pattern did not mean every highly effective teacher stayed. About 500 early-career teachers who earned a Level 4 or 5 rating in 2011–12 did not teach in Tennessee in 2012–13. The report also showed that Level 5 minority teachers were retained in public schools at 90.4%, compared with 95.2% for Level 5 teachers overall. Early-career Level 5 teachers had a 93.4% retention rate.
The Tennessee figures make it possible to compare several retention groups directly:
| Tennessee group | Reported retention rate or count | Period |
|---|---|---|
| Level 5 teachers overall | 95.2% | 2011–12 to 2012–13 |
| Early-career Level 5 teachers | 93.4% | 2011–12 to 2012–13 |
| Level 5 minority teachers | 90.4% | 2011–12 to 2012–13 |
| Level 5 teachers lost | 1,253 | 2011–12 to 2012–13 |
| Early-career Level 4 or 5 teachers not teaching in Tennessee | About 500 | 2011–12 to 2012–13 |
District-level results were also uneven. District retention rates tended to fall between about 85% and 95%, and most Tennessee districts retained more than 90% of their Level 5 teachers. However, 18 Tennessee districts retained fewer than 90% of their Level 5 teachers. In addition, 37 districts retained Level 1, 2, or 3 teachers at a higher rate than Level 4 or 5 teachers. The statewide pattern therefore did not apply uniformly to every district or rating group.
North Carolina attrition and vacancies
North Carolina’s 2024–25 figures provide a more recent view of attrition and staffing needs. The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction reported that teacher attrition increased by less than a quarter of a percentage point over the previous year. Attrition ranged from 14% to 18% for teachers with 0–5 years of experience and from 15.5% to 25% for veteran educators.
The ranges show that early-career and veteran attrition overlapped, but the reported upper end was higher for veteran educators. They should not be reduced to one statewide average because the source presents experience-group ranges rather than a single comparable rate.
North Carolina also reported how recently hired teachers entered the profession. Nearly one-third of teachers hired between March 2024 and March 2025 were prepared through the residency route. A further 27.23% of those newly hired teachers were prepared through a traditional pathway. These are preparation shares among newly hired teachers, not retention rates for either pathway.
Vacancy data adds a separate measure of staffing pressure. Under North Carolina’s broadened definition, the teacher vacancy rate was 7.4% in 2024–25, compared with 7.6% in 2023–24. The reported decline was 0.2 percentage points. A vacancy rate measures unfilled positions, while attrition measures teachers leaving or moving out of a defined group; the two indicators should not be treated as interchangeable.
Washington, D.C., retention patterns
The OSSE DC Educator Retention Brief reported that in 2025–26, 86% of teachers were retained as teachers in D.C., while 78% were retained in the same school where they had taught in the prior year. Same-school retention rose from 76% in 2024–25 to 78% in 2025–26. The brief also reported that overall teacher retention rose from 87% in 2024–25 to 88% in 2025–26.
The difference between being retained as a teacher in D.C. and remaining in the same school illustrates why retention has more than one definition. A teacher can remain in the district while changing schools. In 2025–26, same-school retention was 82% for DCPS teachers and 74% for public charter school teachers, according to the OSSE brief.
Effectiveness was associated with different departure likelihoods in the D.C. figures. Ineffective public charter teachers were 43% likely to depart D.C. schools, compared with 23% for ineffective DCPS teachers. These percentages describe the reported likelihood of departure for the two groups; they are not general departure rates for every teacher in those sectors.
Experience also mattered. D.C.’s 2025–26 teacher retention rate was 92% for teachers with more than 10 years of experience and 80% for teachers with 0–1 year of experience. The 12-percentage-point difference shows the larger retention challenge among the newest teachers in this comparison.
The same brief reported that 83% of principals were retained as principals in D.C. in 2025–26, and 81% were retained in the same school. Those principal figures are related leadership indicators, not teacher retention rates.
D.C. vacancy figures provide additional context. On October 6, 2025, D.C. had 9,232 total teacher FTEs and 194 vacant teacher FTEs. The reported 2025–26 teacher vacancy rate was 2%, down from 6% in 2021–22. The FTE counts are a point-in-time measurement, while the retention percentages describe movement across an academic year.
Texas preparation-route retention
Texas data from the Teacher Retention by Preparation Route report shows a difference in one-year retention by preparation route. In 2021–22, alternative-route teachers had an 87.4% one-year retention rate, while undergraduate-route teachers had a 92.2% one-year retention rate.
The reported difference was 4.8 percentage points in favor of the undergraduate route. Because these are one-year retention rates, they describe whether teachers remained under the report’s definition for the following year. They do not establish that preparation route alone caused the gap, and they should not be compared directly with D.C.’s same-school retention rate or the national school-leaving rate without accounting for the different geography, period, population, and measure.
Taken together, the available statistics point to several distinct retention questions: whether teachers stay in teaching, stay within a state or district, remain in the same school, or continue after entering through a particular route. Nationally, 8.0% moved schools and 7.1% left teaching between 2020–21 and 2021–22. In D.C., 78% remained in the same school in 2025–26, while 86% remained teachers in the district. In Texas, one-year retention was 87.4% for alternative-route teachers and 92.2% for undergraduate-route teachers in 2021–22. Each figure is most useful when its definition, measurement period, and geography remain visible.