← Back to Resources

Recruiting and Retaining Teachers in Rural Schools: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Study authors: Evan Rhinesmith, J. Cameron Anglum, Aaron Park, and Abigail Burrola

ERRE Research Brief | 2026-005

Why It Matters

Rural districts face staffing conditions that broad teacher labor-market evidence may overlook. This review synthesizes rural recruitment and retention research and identifies gaps in policy evaluation.

Data and Sample

This systematic literature review examines research on teacher recruitment, retention, mobility, and turnover in rural schools over approximately four decades. The evidence spans varied local contexts and methods rather than a nationally representative sample of teachers.

Key Findings

  • Geographic and professional isolation and small local labor pools can complicate rural teacher recruitment.
  • Community ties, working conditions, compensation, mentorship, and professional development recur as themes in recruitment and retention.
  • Rigorous evaluations of specific rural staffing policies and programs remain scarce, limiting conclusions about which approaches work.

Policy Implications

  • Design recruitment and retention strategies around local rural conditions and community assets.
  • Consider locally rooted pathways, mentoring, and financial supports as candidates for context-sensitive policy design, not universally proven solutions.
  • Invest in evaluations that identify effective approaches and the settings in which they can be sustained and scaled.
Topic
Recruitment; Retention
Subtopic
Rural Education; Working Conditions; Compensation and Financial Incentives; Teacher Support and Professional Development
Education level
K-12 Education

Full Citation

Rhinesmith, E., Anglum, J. C., Park, A., & Burrola, A. (2023). Recruiting and retaining teachers in rural schools: A systematic review of the literature. Peabody Journal of Education, 98(4), 347–363. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956x.2023.2238491

Acknowledgment and Disclaimer

This brief was produced with support from the Walton Family Foundation. The ERRE Center summarizes the original research; any errors in this summary are the responsibility of the center. The findings and interpretations presented do not necessarily reflect the views of the center or its funders. Readers should consult the original paper for complete findings and details.