A national review of Ireland’s Youthreach education programme for early school leavers, found staff retention to be a future challenge for the programme (Smyth et al., 2019). With no previous research into staff retention in Youthreach, this study explores the unique characteristics of the programme to identify variables influencing staff intention to leave.

Teacher retention is a significant issue in many countries across mainstream education provisions. This trend is also prevalent in Ireland, with the Teachers’ Union of Ireland (TUI) (2018) finding that 46% of new-entrant teachers do not see themselves in the teaching profession in 10 years. Teacher shortages at post-primary level have been reported (O’Doherty & Harford, 2018), with Ireland’s teacher shortage figures being above the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average (OECD, 2020). Notably, steps to address teacher recruitment and retention difficulties in Ireland have been described as fragmentary, piecemeal, and potentially damaging to the Irish education system and the profession of teaching (Harford & Fleming, 2023).

Unlike teacher shortage issues in mainstream settings, little research has been undertaken in alternative “second-chance” education settings such as Youthreach. Noting that a decontextualised study of teacher attrition and retention has little value for understanding and dealing with the issue (Kelchtermans, 2017), it is important to explore the factors most relevant to the Youthreach context.

Youthreach is a Further Education and Training (FET) provision, providing fulltime education and training for 15-20 year-olds with learning, emotional, and behavioural difficulties (Department of Education and Skills [DES], 2010). Students in Youthreach tend to present with high levels of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) (Gordon, 2017), with four or more ACEs found to increase the risk of physical disease, depression, drug abuse, and suicide risk (Hughes et al., 2017).

With up to 70% of students in Youthreach presenting with special educational needs (Gordon, 2017), many Youthreach students require additional support to succeed in reaching their potential. The diverse academic, social, and emotional needs of students with emotional and behavioural difficulties require classrooms to be staffed by experienced special education teachers (SETs) with the prerequisite skills and knowledge (Adera & Bullock, 2010).

The designation of Youthreach centres as Centres of Education (DES, 2010) rather than as schools has resulted in many educators in Youthreach not having a requirement to be registered teachers as per Section 30 of the Teaching Council Act (2001). This means that there is no prerequisite training, qualifications or experience required for two-out-of-three employment grades in Youthreach. This variation in roles and professional standing was highlighted by Smyth et al. (2019) as contributing to the logistical and operational issues.

As student-staff relationships are key to early school leavers re-engaging with education in Youthreach (McGrath, 2006), understanding how best to recruit and retain stable staff teams of motivated and skilled educators is vital.

With no previous research undertaken to guide staff recruitment and retention strategies for Youthreach, this study set out to explore the programme’s unique characteristics to better understand how these may influence staff retention.

This study was driven by the research question, “What are the contributing factors to staff retention difficulties in Youthreach?”, with the following qualitatively and quantitatively orientated specific research questions:

1. How prevalent is the intention to leave among current Youthreach staff? (Quantitative)

2. What factors contribute towards staff intention to leave in Youthreach? (Qualitative & Quantitative)

3. What factors mediate staff intention to leave in Youthreach? (Qualitative & Quantitative)

An exploratory sequential mixed-method design (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018) was used to answer the research questions. Qualitative data informed the development of a second quantitative phase. Reflecting the exploratory mixed-methods design, three phases of analysis were conducted: qualitative, quantitative, and an integration phase that connected the two strands of data to answer the research questions more comprehensively. Qualitative Phase The qualitative phase utilised purposive sampling (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2003), selection criteria requiring staff who had left Youthreach in the previous five years to ensure relevance and recall of the experience. Semi-structured interviews with participants developed a context-specific understanding of Youthreach from a staff perspective. The interview guide comprised 13 questions ordered into three categories of inquiry: Pre-Service, In-Service, and Post-Service. Thematic Analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2013) was used to analyse the interview data. After the candidate themes were recognised, a review was conducted to ensure data representation and research question relevance. A thematic map of emerging themes from qualitative phase analysis included Intention to leave, Work Commitment, Job Satisfaction, Role Stress, Burnout and Role Equity. Quantitative Phase Existing scales measuring the constructs of interest to the current study were identified through the qualitative phase. Drawing on established scales within existing literature was intended to yield more accurate measurement of the constructs of interest (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018). Correlation coefficients were measured to assess the strength of the relationships between variables. A hierarchical multiple regression analysis (Pallant, 2016) allowed the strength of association between a set of independent variables and staff Intention to Leave to be measured simultaneously. The hierarchical approach allowed for the introduction of variables sequentially informed by the qualitative phase and literature review findings. a Sobel test (Preacher, 2019) was used to test the mediating effect of Work Commitment and Job Satisfaction between other independent variables and Intention to Leave. The 180 survey respondents represented a response rate of 19.7% of the 912 current Youthreach staff (DES, 2015), using a confidence level of 95% this provided a margin of error of +/-6.55%. Integration Phase A joint display of findings allowed the research questions to be answered numerically and narratively, facilitating a deeper level of analysis. Under key themes and variables survey findings, regression analysis and participant quotes provide a depth and breadth of understanding of the staff retention challenges facing the Youthreach provision.

Each of the research questions is set out below with a brief summary of key findings. The study findings and recommendations should benefit other educational setting serving the needs of at-risk young people. The methodological framework of this study may lend itself to other studies seeking to understand teacher retention challenges within unique contextual and cultural settings. How prevalent is intention to leave amongst current staff? Data analysis indicated that 28.9% of current Youthreach staff reported higher levels of Intention to Leave. While five of the six interview participants who previously left Youthreach stated that they had the intention to leave for one to two years before leaving, exhaustion and ‘apathy’ resulting from burnout contributed to a delay in acting upon the intention to leave. What factors contribute towards staff intention to leave? In the final regression model with an adjusted R² of 0.41, Burnout, Role Equity, and Work Commitment retained a statistically significant relationship with respondents’ Intention to Leave. Higher levels of Burnout were reported by 54% of survey respondents, with four of the six interview participants making direct reference to Burnout as a concern during their time in Youthreach. With a positive standardised coefficient of .31 within the regression model, each standard deviation increase in Burnout (.59) accounted for .31 increase in standard deviation in Intention to Leave (1.92). The statistical and thematic analysis of the study data provide insight into the complex nature of Burnout, Role Equity and Work Commitment within the unique cultural setting and context of Youthreach. What factors mediate staff intention to leave? The mediating qualities of Work Commitment and Job Satisfaction were shown via Sobel tests. These mediating variables were shown to reduce the effects of retained regression model independent variables of Burnout and Role Equity on Intention to Leave.

Adera, B. A., & Bullock, L. M. (2010). Job stressors and teacher job satisfaction in programs serving students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 15(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632750903512365 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. SAGE. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (Third edition, international student edition). Sage. Department of Education and Skills. (2010). An Evaluation of Youthreach: Inspectorate Evaluation Studies. www.cedefop.europa.eu/files/3_2_3a_evaluation_youthreach_en.pdf Department of Education and Skills. (2015). Aggregate 2015 Survey Data for VTOS Youthreach. Gordon, M. (2017). A Profile of Learners in Youthreach. National Educational Psychological Service. http://www.youthreach.ie/wp-content/uploads/A-profile-of-learners-in-Youthreach-NEPS-research-study-report.pdf Harford, J., & Fleming, B. (2023). Teacher supply in Ireland: Anatomy of a crisis. Irish Educational Studies, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2023.2222709 Hughes, K., Bellis, M. A., Hardcastle, K. A., Sethi, D., Butchart, A., Mikton, C., Jones, L., & Dunne, M. P. (2017). The effect of multiple adverse childhood experiences on health: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet. Public Health, 2(8), e356–e366. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(17)30118-4 Kelchtermans, G. (2017). ‘Should I stay or should I go?’: Unpacking teacher attrition/retention as an educational issue. Teachers and Teaching, 23(8), 961–977. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1379793 McGrath, B. (2006). ‘Everything is different here...’: Mobilizing capabilities through inclusive education practices and relationships. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 10(6), 595–614. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110500271425 O’Doherty, T., & Harford, J. (2018). Teacher recruitment: Reflections from Ireland on the current crisis in teacher supply. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(5), 654–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2018.1532994 OECD. (2020). TALIS 2018 Results (Volume II): Teachers and School Leaders as Valued Professionals. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/19cf08df-en Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (6th edition). McGraw Hill Education. Preacher, K. J., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2019). Calculation for the Sobel test: An interactive calculation tool for mediation tests [Computer software]. Quantpsy.Org. http://quantpsy.org/sobel/sobel.htm Smyth, E., Banks, J., O’Sullivan, J., McCoy, S., Redmond, P., & McGuinness, S. (2019). Evaluation of the National Youthreach Programme. ESRI. https://doi.org/10.26504/rs82 Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. SAGE. Teachers’ Union of Ireland. (2018, April 2). ‘46% of new entrants to not see themselves in profession in ten years’ time’. www.tui.ie/press-releases/46-of-new-entrants-to-not-see-themselves-in-profession-in-ten-years-time-new-tui-survey-highlights-damage-of-pay-discrimination.12488.html Teaching Council Act, (2001). http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2001/act/8/enacted/en/pdf