Skip to main content
Log in

Country effects on teacher turnover intention: a multilevel, cross-national analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Educational Research for Policy and Practice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study provides in-depth analyses of how country contexts along with working conditions might relate to teachers’ turnover intentions. Using a large sample of teachers and schools from 32 OECD countries, the study estimates a set of three-level HLM models of turnover intention. The findings reveal that teacher turnover intentions vary significantly across countries and across schools within countries. This variation is a function of teacher-, school-, and country-level factors. The analysis of cross-level interactions indicates that the country contexts might have moderated the nature or strength of the relationships between working conditions and teacher turnover intention.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akiba, M., Chiu, Y., Shimizu, K., Liang, G., et al. (2012). Teacher salary and national achievement: A cross-national analysis of 30 countries. International Journal of Educational Research, 53, 171–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, R., Burgess, S., Mayo, J., et al. (2018). The teacher labour market, teacher turnover and disadvantaged schools: New evidence for England. Education Economics, 26(1), 4–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allensworth, E., Ponisciak, S., & Mazzeo, C. (2009). The schools teachers leave: Teacher mobility in Chicago public schools. Consortium on Chicago School Research. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED505882.pdf.

  • Ávalos, B., Valenzuela, J. P., et al. (2016). Education for all and attrition/retention of new teachers: A trajectory study in Chile. International Journal of Educational Development, 49, 279–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbieri, G., Rossetti, C., Sestito, P., et al. (2011). The determinants of teacher mobility: Evidence using Italian teachers’ transfer applications. Economics of Education Review, 30(6), 1430–1444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonhomme, S., Jolivet, G., Leuven, E. (2016). Job characteristics and labor turnover: Assessing the role of preferences and opportunities in teacher mobility 126(594), 1342–1371.

  • Borman, G. D., & Dowling, N. M. (2006). Longitudinal achievement effects of multiyear summer school: Evidence from the teach Baltimore randomized field trial. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28(1), 25–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, S., Green, C. P., & Leeves, G. (2006). The role of pecuniary and non-pecuniary factors in teacher turnover and mobility decisions. Available at SSRN 926319.

  • Brill, S., & McCartney, A. (2008). Stopping the revolving door: Increasing teacher retention. Politics & Policy, 36(5), 750–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Britton, J., Propper, C., et al. (2016). Teacher pay and school productivity: Exploiting wage regulation. Journal of Public Economics, 133, 75–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooke, N. (2016). High-stakes accountability using teacher salary incentives in Brazil: An update.http://digibug.ugr.es/bitstream/handle/10481/44611/rev203art7.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

  • Bryan, M. L., Jenkins, S. P., et al. (2015). Multilevel modelling of country effects: A cautionary tale. European Sociological Review, 32(1), 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, P. F., Schuck, S., Aubusson, P., Buchanan, J., Louviere, J. J., Prescott, A., et al. (2013). Why do early career teachers choose to remain in the profession? the use of best–worst scaling to quantify key factors. International Journal of Educational Research, 62, 259–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2014). Teaching around the world: What can TALIS tell us. Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education, Stanford, CA. https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/teaching-around-world-what-can-talis-tell-us_3.pdf.

  • Bushaw, W. J., & Lopez, S. J. (2011). Betting on teachers. Phi Delta Kappan, 93(1), 9–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnoy, M., & DeAngelis, K. (2002). The teaching workforce: Concerns and policy challenges. In Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (Ed.), Education policy analysis.

  • Chiu, M. M., Khoo, L., et al. (2005). Effects of resources, inequality, and privilege bias on achievement: Country, school, and student level analyses. American Educational Research Journal, 42(4), 575–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., Vigdor, J. L., et al. (2011). Teacher mobility, school segregation, and pay-based policies to level the playing field. Education Finance and Policy, 6(3), 399–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Contreras, D., Rau, T., et al. (2012). Tournament incentives for teachers: Evidence from a scaled-up intervention in Chile. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 61(1), 219–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Ree, J., Muralidharan, K., Pradhan, M., & Rogers, H. (2017). Double for nothing?. The World Bank: Experimental evidence on an unconditional teacher salary increase in Indonesia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolton, P., Marcenaro-Gutierrez, O. D., et al. (2011). If you pay peanuts do you get monkeys? A cross-country analysis of teacher pay and pupil performance. Economic Policy, 26(65), 5–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duyar, I., Gumus, S., Bellibas, M. S., et al. (2013). Multilevel analysis of teacher work attitudes: The influence of principal leadership and teacher collaboration. International Journal of Educational Management, 27(7), 700–719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Education at a Glance. (2015). OECD Indicators. http://download.ei-ie.org/Docs/WebDepot/EaG2015_EN.pdf.

  • Education at a Glance. (2017). OECD Indicators. https://www.hm.ee/sites/default/files/eag2017_eng.pdf.

  • Evans, D. K., & Yuan, F. (2018). The working conditions of teachers in low-and middle-income countries. https://www.riseprogramme.org/sites/www.riseprogramme.org/files/inline-files/Yuan.pdf.

  • Falch, T., & Strom, B. (2005). Teacher turnover and non-pecuniary factors. Economics of Education Review, 24(6), 611–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feng, L., et al. (2014). Teacher placement, mobility, and occupational choices after teaching. Education Economics, 22(1), 24–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • GTSI, Global Teacher Status Index. (2013). http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/63812/1/2013%2BGlobal%2BTeacher%2BStatus%2BIndex%2BI.pdf.

  • GTSI, Global Teacher Status Index. (2018). https://www.varkeyfoundation.org/media/4790/gts-index-9-11-2018.pdf.

  • Goldhaber, D., Gross, B., & Player, D. (2007). Are public schools really losing their best? Assessing the career transitions of teachers and their implications for the quality of the teacher workforce. Working paper 12. National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.

  • Grissom, J. A., Viano, S. L., & Selin, J. L. (2016). Understanding employee turnover in the public sector: Insights from research on teacher mobility. Public Administration Review, 76(2), 241–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haltiwanger, J., Scarpetta, S., Schweiger, H., et al. (2014). Cross country differences in job reallocation: The role of industry, firm size and regulations. Labour Economics, 26, 11–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, S. W., Borgonovi, F., Guerriero, S., et al. (2018). What motivates high school students to want to be teachers? The role of salary, working conditions, and societal evaluations about occupations in a comparative perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 55(1), 3–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., O’Brien, D. M., & Rivkin, S. G. (2005). The market for teacher quality. https://www.nber.org/papers/w11154.pdf.

  • Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., Rivkin, S. G., et al. (2004). Why public schools lose teachers. Journal of Human Resources, 39(2), 326–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A., Piopiunik, M., & Wiederhold, S. (2014). The value of smarter teachers: International evidence on teacher cognitive skills and student performance. http://edoc.kueichstaett.de/21385/1/Hanushek%2BPiopiunik%2BWiederhold_JHR_Website.pdf.

  • Hanushek, E. A., Rivkin, S. G., et al. (2007). Pay, working conditions, and teacher quality. The Future of Children, 17, 69–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A., Rivkin, S. G., et al. (2010). Generalizations about using value-added measures of teacher quality. American Economic Review, 100(2), 267–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A., et al. (2009). Teacher deselection. Creating a New Teaching Profession, 168, 172–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A., et al. (2011). The economic value of higher teacher quality. Economics of Education Review, 30(3), 466–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hargreaves, L., Cunningham, M., Hansen, A., McIntyre, D., Oliver, C., & Pell, T. (2007). The status of teachers and the teaching profession in England: Views from inside and outside the profession. Final Report of the Teacher Status Project. University of Cambridge Faculty of Education, Department of Media and Communication, University of Leicester.

  • Hargreaves, L., & Flutter, J. (2013). The status of teachers and the teaching profession: A desk-study for education international. Unpublished Manuscript, Department of Education, University of Cambridge, UK.

  • Hayes, A. F. (2006). A primer on multilevel modeling. Human Communication Research, 32(4), 385–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendricks, M. D., et al. (2014). Does it pay to pay teachers more? Evidence from Texas. Journal of Public Economics, 109, 50–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilton, G. L. S. (2017). Disappearing teachers: An exploration of a variety of views as to the causes of the problems affecting teacher recruitment and retention in England. Bulgarian Comparative Education Society. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED574197.pdf.

  • Huisman, J., Smits, J., et al. (2009). Effects of household-and district-level factors on primary school enrollment in 30 developing countries. World Development, 37(1), 179–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iliya, A., Ifeoma, L. G., et al. (2015). Assessment of teacher motivation approaches in the less developed countries. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(22), 10–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imazeki, J., & et al. (2002). Teacher attrition and mobility in urban districts: Evidence from Wisconsin. Fiscal issues in urban schools, 119–136.

  • Imazeki, J., et al. (2005). Teacher salaries and teacher attrition. Economics of Education Review, 24(4), 431–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingersoll, R. M., May, H., et al. (2012). The magnitude, destinations, and determinants of mathematics and science teacher turnover. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34(4), 435–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingersoll, R. M., et al. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karbownik, K. (2016). The effects of student composition on teacher turnover: Evidence from an admission reform. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/147387/1/cesifo1_wp6133.pdf.

  • Kelly, S. (2004). An event history analysis of teacher attrition: Salary, teacher tracking, and socially disadvantaged schools. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72(3), 195–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, E., & Han, Y. (2002). Background report: Korea. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, E., Han, Y., Park, J., et al. (2008). Teachers’ salaries in Korea, 1985 to 2007: An in-depth analysis and policy recommendations. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy, 5(2), 89–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, R. M., Aldhafri, S., Mansfield, C. F., Purwanto, E., Siu, A. F., Wong, M. W., et al. (2012). Teachers’ engagement at work: An international validation study. The Journal of Experimental Education, 80(4), 317–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kukla-Acevedo, S., et al. (2009). Leavers, movers, and stayers: The role of workplace conditions in teacher mobility decisions. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(6), 443–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladd, H. F. (2007). Teacher labor markets in developed countries. The Future of Children, 17, 201–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazear, E. P. (2003). Teacher incentives. Swedish Economic Policy Review, 10(2), 179–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lankford, H., Loeb, S., Wyckoff, J., et al. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leigh, A., Ryan, C., et al. (2008). Estimating returns to education using different natural experiment techniques. Economics of Education Review, 27(2), 149–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leigh, A., et al. (2012). Teacher pay and teacher aptitude. Economics of Education Review, 31(3), 41–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, X. (2000). Teacher pay in 12 Latin American countries: How does teacher pay compare to other professions? What determines teacher pay? Who are the teachers World Bank, Latin America and the Caribbean Regional Office.

  • Liu, S., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., et al. (2014). Teachers’ motivation for entering the teaching profession and their job satisfaction: A cross-cultural comparison of china and other countries. Learning Environments Research, 17(1), 75–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loeb, S., & Reininger, M. (2004). Public policy and teacher labor markets. What we know and why it matters. Education Policy Center at Michigan State University.

  • Luczak, L. D.-H., & Loeb, S. (2013). How teaching conditions predict: Teacher turnover in California schools. In Rendering school resources more effective (pp. 48–99). Routledge.

  • Lukens, M. T., Lyter, D. M., & Fox, E. E. (2004). Teacher attrition and mobility: Results from the teacher follow-up survey, 2000–01. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics, US Department of Education.

  • MacBeath, J. (2012). The future of the teaching profession. Brussels: Education International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsuoka, R. (2015). School socioeconomic context and teacher job satisfaction in Japanese compulsory education. Educational Studies in Japan, 9, 41–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newmann, F. M., & Wehlage, G. G. (1995). Successful school restructuring: A report to the public and educators. Madison: Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools, University of Wisconsin.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2005). Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/education/school/34990905.pdf.

  • OECD. (2014). New Insights from TALIS 2013: Teaching and Learning in Primary and Upper Secondary Education. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264226319-en.

  • OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 results (Volume II): Policies and practices for successful schools. PISA. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264267510-en.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ondrich, J., Pas, E., Yinger, J., et al. (2008). The determinants of teacher attrition in upstate New York. Public Finance Review, 36(1), 112–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H., Byun, Soo-Y, et al. (2015). Why some countries attract more high-ability young students to teaching: Cross-national comparisons of students’ expectation of becoming a teacher. Comparative Education Review, 59(3), 523–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plunkett, M., Dyson, M., et al. (2011). Becoming a teacher and staying one: Examining the complex ecologies associated with educating and retaining new teachers in rural Australia? Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(1), 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qin, L., & Bowen, D. H. (2019). The distributions of teacher qualification: A cross-national study. International Journal of Educational Development, 70, 102084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., et al. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Resources, 37(1), 192–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rickman, D. S., Wang, H., & Winters, J. V. (2017). Relative teacher salaries and the decision to teach. Contemporary Economic Policy, 35(3), 542–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, S. (1986). The theory of equalizing differences. Handbook of Labor Economics, 1, 641–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiter, S., Tubergen, F. V., et al. (2009). Religious attendance in cross-national perspective: A multilevel analysis of 60 countries. American Journal of Sociology, 115(3), 863–895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saha, L. J., & Dworkin, A. G. (Eds.). (2009). International handbook of research on teachers and teaching (Vol. 21). Springer Science & Business Media.

  • Scafidi, B., Sjoquist, D. L., Stinebrickner, T. R., et al. (2007). Race, poverty, and teacher mobility. Economics of Education Review, 26(2), 145–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sellar, S., Lingard, B., et al. (2013). The OECD and global governance in education. Journal of Education Policy, 28(5), 710–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shenkar, M., Shenkar, O., et al. (2011). Labor conflict on the national stage: Metaphoric lenses in Israel’s teachers’ strike. Comparative Education Review, 55(2), 210–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, N. S., & Johnson, S. M. (2015). Teacher turnover in high-poverty schools: What we know and can do. Teachers College Record, 117(3), 1–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, H., Davies, N. M., Burgess, S., et al. (2012). Do teachers matter? Measuring the variation in teacher effectiveness in England. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 74(5), 629–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockard, J., & Lehman, M. B. (2004). Influences on the satisfaction and retention of 1st-year teachers: The importance of effective school management. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(5), 742–771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutcher, L, Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2016). A coming crisis in teaching? Teacher supply, demand, and shortages in the US. Learning Policy Institute.

  • Symeonidis, V. (2015). The status of teachers and the teaching profession. Education International Research Institute: Belgium. https://download.ei-ie.org/Docs/WebDepot/The%20Status%20of%20Teachers%20and%20the%20Teaching%20Profession.pdf.

  • Theobald, N. D., & Gritz, R. M. (1996). The effects of school district spending priorities on the exit paths of beginning teachers leaving the district. Economics of Education Review, 15(1), 11–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, M. M., Turner, J. E., Nietfeld, J. L., et al. (2012). A typological approach to investigate the teaching career decision: Motivations and beliefs about teaching of prospective teacher candidates. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(3), 324–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiplic, D., Brandmo, C., Elstad, E., et al. (2015). Antecedents of Norwegian beginning teachers’ turnover intentions. Cambridge journal of education, 45(4), 451–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolbert, P. S., & Moen, P. (1998). Men's and women's definitions of “good” jobs: Similarities and differences by age and across time. Work and Occupations, 25(2), 168–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2006). Teachers and educational quality: Monitoring global needs for 2015. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001457/145754e.pdf.

  • UNESCO. (2016). The world needs almost 69 million new teachers to reach the 2030 education goals. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002461/246124e.pdf.

  • Varga, M. (2017). The effects of teacher-student relationships on the academic engagement of students.

  • Vegas, E., Loeb, S., Romaguera, P., Paglayan, AS., Goldstein, N., & Ganimian, A. J. (2010). SABER-teachers: Objectives, rationale, methodological approach, and products. Washington, DC: The World Bank. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EDUCATION/Resources/Vegasetal__Teacherpoliciesaroundtheworld.draft.pdf.

  • Woessmann, L., et al. (2011). Cross-country evidence on teacher performance pay. Economics of Education Review, 30(3), 404–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woessmann, L., et al. (2016). The importance of school systems: Evidence from international differences in student achievement. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30(3), 3–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolman, P. (2010). Status of the American public school teacher, 2005-2006. ERIC.

  • World Bank. (2013). World Bank Unemployment Rate 2013, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/sl.uem.totl.zs.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lixia Qin.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This study was undertaken independently of any employment contract.

Appendices

Appendix A

Description of the participating countries

Country

Teacher

School

Female

Age

Average years of working experience as a teacher in total

Under 30

30–49

50 or more

Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates)

2184

166

59

12

76

12

13

Alberta (Canada)

1704

182

60

18

60

21

13

Australia

1882

123

59

16

47

37

17

Brazil

13,078

1070

71

18

66

16

14

Bulgaria

2894

197

81

3

50

47

21

Chile

1521

178

63

21

49

30

15

Croatia

3597

199

74

14

56

30

16

Czech Republic

3182

220

76

11

54

35

18

Denmark

1572

148

60

6

58

36

16

England (UK)

2325

154

63

21

59

20

12

Estonia

3035

197

84

7

44

48

22

Finland

2674

146

72

8

59

33

15

Flanders (Belgium)

3016

168

68

24

52

24

15

France

2770

204

66

9

65

26

17

Israel

3191

195

76

14

59

27

16

Italy

3257

194

79

1

49

50

20

Japan

3454

192

39

19

51

31

17

Korea

2814

177

68

11

62

27

16

Latvia

2074

116

89

5

52

44

22

Malaysia

2951

150

71

18

69

13

14

Mexico

3064

187

54

13

62

26

16

Netherlands

1775

127

55

17

46

37

16

Norway

2739

145

61

11

55

34

15

Poland

3783

195

75

9

68

23

17

Portugal

3548

185

73

1

71

28

19

Romania

3236

197

69

14

60

27

16

Serbia

3768

191

66

10

59

30

15

Singapore

3081

159

65

32

57

12

18

Slovak Republic

3428

193

82

11

56

32

18

Spain

3231

192

59

3

62

35

16

Sweden

3132

186

66

5

57

38

16

USA

1843

122

66

18.2

52.4

29.4

14

Appendix B

Description of the national variables

Country

Relative salary

Perceived teaching status

GDP 2012

Abu Dhabi

 

2.76

57,045

Australia

0.93

2.27

42,278

Flanders (Belgium)

0.87

2.38

39,498

Bulgaria

 

1.94

15,738

Brazil

 

1.72

14,301

Alberta (Canada)

1.05

2.41

40,588

Chile

0.73

2.04

21,099

Czech Republic

0.54

1.83

26,733

Denmark

0.92

1.85

41,524

England (UK)

0.95

2.20

34,694

Spain

1.32

1.64

31,198

Estonia

0.84

1.80

24,195

Finland

0.97

2.58

38,104

France

0.86

1.47

36,074

Croatia

 

1.65

19,946

Israel

0.85

2.20

30,600

Italy

0.65

1.66

33,668

Japan

 

2.10

35,006

Korea

1.36

2.75

29,495

Latvia

 

2.02

21,229

Mexico

 

2.49

16,144

Malaysia

 

3.11

21,897

Netherlands

0.82

2.29

42,453

Norway

0.71

2.17

62,858

Poland

0.83

1.92

22,143

Portugal

1.23

1.71

25,096

Romania

 

2.20

17,234

Singapore

 

2.73

71,475

Serbia

 

1.89

11,587

Slovak Republic

0.42

1.44

25,537

Sweden

0.82

1.44

41,840

USA

0.68

2.16

50,859

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Qin, L. Country effects on teacher turnover intention: a multilevel, cross-national analysis. Educ Res Policy Prac 20, 79–105 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-020-09269-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-020-09269-3

Keywords

Navigation