Teacher Retention Begins with Better Questions: An Early Childhood Perspective on Narrative, Inquiry, and Leadership
After more than 50 years in early childhood, I believe teacher retention deserves a deeper conversation about how we organize the work. My experience as an educator, family child care provider, director, and coach shapes that position. When a teacher resigns, finding coverage is urgent. Understanding what made the position difficult to sustain deserves attention too.
I want us to ask better questions before deciding that another training will solve the problem. What responsibilities filled the educator’s day? How much opportunity did she have to exercise professional judgment? What happened when she asked for support, and which conditions could leadership actually change? My position is that retention is a shared leadership and systems responsibility. Educators have professional responsibilities, and leaders have a responsibility to create conditions in which those expectations are realistic. Narrative writing and practitioner inquiry offer ways to examine that relationship. Their usefulness depends on whether what we learn influences what we do.
What teachers’ perspectives ask of leadership
Curry’s (2025) doctoral study explored retention through interviews with 12 prekindergarten and kindergarten teachers in a Midwestern state. The themes included multiple responsibilities, relationships supporting children’s development, family collaboration, commitment, and the need for leadership support and relevant professional development. The study also produced a three-day professional development plan focused on co-teaching. These findings reflect a small, local sample and invite further investigation in other settings.
What stands out to me is the relationship between dedication and support. The responsibilities described are central to early childhood practice. Each requires time, attention, and coordination. I want leaders to examine how their schedules, staffing arrangements, and decisions support educators in carrying them out.
This is where mental load enters the conversation. Consider a hypothetical teacher who remembers a child’s sensory needs, anticipates a difficult transition, coordinates with an assistant, and follows up with a family. Her schedule may identify teaching hours without showing the decisions she is holding in mind. I would want to investigate how that responsibility is distributed and what support she considers useful. The Early Childhood Workforce Index 2024 identifies compensation, benefits, sufficient staffing, paid time for professional responsibilities, and educator input as features of supportive work environments (McLean et al., 2024). For me, these conditions belong in every serious retention discussion. Professional learning should help educators grow within a workplace that supports its application. Leaders should budget for the coverage and time that learning requires.
I also want our questions to keep children and families visible. A staffing change creates a reason to examine how familiar routines and communication are maintained. Educators can document children’s requests for reassurance, and families can describe their experiences. Those perspectives can guide a response while we examine other explanations for what we observe.
The narrative articles I want our field to write
I see narrative articles as opportunities to make educators’ reasoning visible. Henderson and Baker (2025), writing for NAEYC, describe pedagogical narratives grounded in close observation, lived experience, and reflection. That approach interests me because an ordinary moment can raise a consequential question. Drawing on Curry’s findings, I propose the following narrative article ideas to help our field investigate the conditions that support teachers and influence their decisions to stay.
One article I would develop is “The Work Before the Work.” It could follow a teacher’s preparation for a morning with children and identify the decisions surrounding materials, individual needs, and family communication. The inquiry question would be, “Which necessary responsibilities receive paid time, and which depend on educators stretching their day?” Task logs and educator conversations could guide a change in scheduling or responsibility, followed by reflection on what happened.
Another article could be “When a Teacher’s Judgment Changes the Plan.” A clearly labeled hypothetical starting point might involve an educator recommending a different transition because the existing routine is difficult for several children. The investigation would examine how leadership considers her reasoning, agrees on a trial, and reviews observations. I would also ask whose recommendations receive attention, including those of assistants, Black educators, and multilingual colleagues.
A third article, “Two Adults, One Classroom, Different Expectations,” could examine collaboration between a lead teacher and an assistant. I would investigate how they understand their roles during transitions, family communication, and support for children with disabilities. Both adults should help identify the problem and shape any shared planning agreement. Their accounts of the change would matter as much as the director’s assessment.
Family child care deserves its own narrative in “Who Supports the Educator Who Works Alone?” I would explore how a provider coordinates mixed-age care, family relationships, and business responsibilities. Questions about dependable substitutes, professional connection, and time for learning could guide the inquiry. Any proposed support would need to fit the provider’s setting and resources.
I would return to these stories after a change had been tried. Readers could learn whether the adjustment helped, created another difficulty, or required more resources. Educators should help interpret those developments and decide what deserves further investigation. That follow-up is where a narrative can become particularly useful to another practitioner.
How I would turn a recurring problem into inquiry
I would begin with a concern the educators themselves consider important. “Why do teachers leave?” is a substantial question, but a team needs a manageable starting point. “What prevents our teachers from receiving their scheduled planning time?” identifies something a program can examine. Educators should also have an opportunity to revise the question when it misses their experience.
Next, I would gather a short baseline before choosing a solution. For two weeks, staff could record whether planning time occurred, what interrupted it, and how coverage was arranged. Brief conversations could add context the records miss. The purpose would be to understand the pattern well enough to select a reasonable first change.
I would make participation part of paid work. Asking educators to investigate overload requires providing time for that investigation. Assistants and relief staff should have accessible ways to contribute, and leaders should explain how information will be used. Honest inquiry depends on staff being able to describe a difficulty without having their commitment questioned. The response should follow the evidence. If coverage repeatedly interrupts planning, I would explore a protected planning period supported by a qualified relief educator. Staff would help shape the arrangement, with appropriate staffing requirements maintained. I would also ask whether the proposed solution shifts an unreasonable workload onto someone else.
Before the trial, the team should agree on what improvement would look like. Over four weeks, we could track how often planning periods occur and whether educators find them useful. We would consider coverage staff’s experiences alongside classroom teachers’ accounts. Changes in enrollment or staffing would also belong in our interpretation of the results. A successful short trial would give us a reason to continue examining the arrangement. Retention would require a longer period of observation, and a local improvement would need a careful description. I would report what happened, what educators said, and what remains uncertain. That gives readers enough information to judge whether the idea might fit their circumstances.
When writing the article, I would distinguish documented events from my interpretation. Educators should approve the use of their quotations, and identifying details need thoughtful handling. Hypothetical or composite examples should be clearly labeled. I want the finished narrative to respect the people whose knowledge made the inquiry possible.
What I expect leadership to do with what we learn
Listening should lead to a response educators can see. A director can identify the concern, explain the next action, and set a date to review progress. When resources limit the response, that explanation should include what support the program needs. Clear follow-through gives staff a way to assess whether their contributions influence decisions. I believe director preparation should include this kind of work. Leaders need practice asking questions, interpreting information, discussing competing needs, and organizing a feasible response. A documented classroom dilemma can become a professional learning experience for the whole team. Coaching can help a director examine the decisions and resources that shape the outcome.
I would also examine who gets invited into leadership. Educators need opportunities to lead an inquiry, facilitate reflection, and present what they learn. Those responsibilities can make leadership development part of daily practice, with support and recognition. The inquiry should also examine strengths. A dependable colleague, a useful planning routine, or a director’s consistent follow-through may reveal conditions worth sustaining. I want us to ask educators what helps them do their work well and why. Those answers can inform leadership development as directly as accounts of difficulty.
Some findings will require action beyond an individual program. An inquiry may reveal a need for more reliable funding, substitute support, or accessible professional learning. Documenting that need can strengthen an advocacy conversation by connecting resources to daily practice. Responsibility for improving conditions should extend to the people and institutions able to influence them.
For my writing and leadership work, I want to connect educators’ stories with questions that lead to decisions. I would begin with one recurring problem, invite the people closest to it to frame the inquiry, and return to them to assess the response. I believe their professional judgment belongs throughout that process. Each article can help us ask better questions, build better leaders, and create better systems for early childhood.
References
Curry, C. L. (2025). Teachers’ perspectives on teacher retention in early childhood programs [Doctoral study, Walden University]. ScholarWorks. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/18100/
Henderson, B., & Baker, M. (2025). Building empathy and belonging through pedagogical narratives. Voices of Practitioners, 20(1). https://www.naeyc.org/resources/pubs/vop/winter2025/intro
McLean, C., Austin, L. J. E., Powell, A., Jaggi, S., Kim, Y., Knight, J., Muñoz, S., & Schlieber, M. (2024). Early childhood workforce index 2024. Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, University of California. https://cscce.berkeley.edu/workforce-index-2024/
About the Author
Victoria Long-Coleman, Ph.D., MBA is the Founder and Principal of Early Childhood Innovations. An early childhood educator, leadership, coach, author, speaker, she focuses on strengthening educators, developing leaders, and translating research into practical approaches that improve early childhood systems.
Early Childhood Innovations
Remember your ABC’s:
ASK Better Questions. BUILD Better Leaders. CREATE Better Systems.
www.earlychildhoodinnovations.com
