Much of the research on the high turnover rates during teacher induction assumes that teachers are retained or pushed out of the profession by a particular and static set of factors, either internal in the individual or external in the working conditions (Guarino et al., 2006). In our study we take a different approach, conceiving of turnover (or retention) as the outcome of a decision-making process that reflects the meaningful interactions between individual and context. While not denying the possible relevance of personal characteristics or formal working conditions, we assume that a proper understanding of teacher turnover requires the acknowledgement of ECTs‘ discretionary agentic competences of decision making. The paper starts by building the case for this conceptualisation of attrition/retention drawing on the concept of interpretative negotiation that was developed in recent research on school development and educational innovation (Kelchtermans, 2017; Vermeir & Kelchtermans, 2021). Next, we present the findings of a longitudinal single case study of a Czech primary school teacher, who first decided to leave the profession, later reconsidered her choice and returned to the job, yet eventually left again over the time span of three years. Since this type of career dynamics over time in teacher induction has received only limited research attention (Grissom & Reiniger, 2012; Moyer, 2022), we purposefully selected this case study from a larger study, which reconstructs career trajectories of Czech primary school teachers who decided to quit teaching. The data for the case were collected in line with the narrative-biographical research tradition, drawing on multiple semi-structured interviews (Seidman, 2013), complemented by an interpretative analysis of relevant documents (teacher portfolio and school documentation). The data analysis consisted of reconstructing the career story around its key moments and phases, and subsequently elaborating the story through the lens of Kelchtermans’ personal interpretive framework (2009). In this specific case, an interplay between the task perception and self-esteem was found to create a vicious cycle of doubts, subsequently lowering the teacher’s job motivation. Negotiation between this teacher and the work conditions led to dissonance, and to an ambiguous relationship to the profession, causing her to quit and return repeatedly. In the discussion we address the consequences of these findings for future research and theory development on teacher attrition and retention during the induction phase, as well as for the necessary rethinking and redesign of effective support to prevent teacher attrition

Guarino, C. M., Santibañez, L., & Daley, G. A. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of the recent empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 173–208. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076002173. Grissom, J.A. & Reininger, M. (2012). Who Comes Back? A Longitudinal Analysis of the Reentry Behavior of Exiting Teachers. Education Finance and Policy, 7, 425–454. Moyer, A. (2022). Has “Who Comes Back” Changed? Teacher Reentry 2000–2019. Educational Researcher, 51, 544-546. Kelchtermans, G. (2017). ‘Should I stay or should I go?’ Unpacking teacher attrition/retention as an educational issue. Teachers and Teaching: Theory & Practice, 23, 961-977. Kelchtermans, G. (2019). Early Career Teachers and Their Need for Support: Thinking Again. In: Sullivan, A., Johnson, B., Simons, M. (eds) Attracting and Keeping the Best Teachers. Professional Learning and Development in Schools and Higher Education, vol 16. Springer, Singapore. Seidman, I. (2013). Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences. New York: Teachers College Press Vermeir, K. & Kelchtermans, G. (2022). Unpacking the support practices of educational advisors: congruency, loyalty, legitimacy, and urgency. Journal of Educational Change, 23, 473–495.