This study focuses on the substitute labor market in Michigan and how substitutes navigate it using a survey of a random sample of the population of substitute teachers and interviews with district administrators, principals, and substitute teachers. Leaders in varied locales and contexts report increasing problems with substitute coverage and teacher absenteeism and leveraged higher pay and community connections to address it. Substitute survey and interview data find that the most important factors in attracting and retaining substitute teachers are pay, flexibility, working conditions, the psychological rewards of teaching, and support or respect. Findings point to a segmented substitute labor market, with highly varied preferences for flexibility and pay, and suggest important parallels and differences compared with teacher labor markets.
AchinsteinB.OgawaR. T.SextonD.FreitasC. (2010). Retaining teachers of color: A pressing problem and a potential strategy for “hard-to-staff” schools. Review of Educational Research, 80(1), 71–107. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465 4309355994
BoydD.LankfordH.LoebS.WyckoffJ. (2010). The role of teacher quality in retention and hiring: Using applications to transfer to uncover preferences of teachers and schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(1), 88–110. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20545
4.
BoydD.LankfordH.LoebS.WyckoffJ. (2005). The draw of home: How teachers’ preference for proximity disadvantages urban schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24(1), 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20072
5.
BoyerC. E. (1998). Behaviors and attitudes of teachers toward substitutes: The relationship between effective practices and attitudes of inclusion. ERS Spectrum, 16(2), 43–47.
CardonP. W. (2002). A qualitative study of the perceptions of substitute teaching quality. SubJournal: For Personnel Responsible for Substitute Teaching, 3(2), 29–43.
CoverdillJ. E.OuleveyP. (2007). Getting contingent work: Insights into on-call work, matching processes, and staffing technology from a study of substitute teachers. The Sociological Quarterly, 48(3), 553–557. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2007.00088.x
10.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage.
11.
DeterdingN. M.WatersM. C. (2021). Flexible coding of in-depth interviews: A twenty-first-century approach. Sociological Methods & Research, 50(2), 708–739. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124118799377
12.
DorwardJ.HawkinsA.SmithG. G. (2000). Substitute teacher availability, pay, and influence on teacher professional development: A national survey. ERS Spectrum, 18(3), 40–46.
13.
GardnerJ. A.TorresA. C. (2025). Gaining a better understanding of teacher absenteeism: How structural and organizational factors impact a teacher's decision to be absent. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 33(38), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.14 507/epaa.33.8625
14.
GershensonS. (2012). How do substitute teachers substitute? An empirical study of substitute-teacher labor supply. Economics of Education Review, 31, 410–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.12.006
15.
GoldhaberD.LaveryL.TheobaldR. (2015). Uneven playing field? Assessing the teacher quality gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students. Educational Researcher, 44(5), 293–307. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x15592622
16.
GonzalesL. (2017). Support for substitute teachers is crucial as shortage grows. Leadership, 46(3), 14–16.
17.
GriswoldP. A. (2001). The substitute teacher: An irony of the school improvement process. Journal of School Improvement, 2(2), 33–38.
18.
GuarinoC. M.BrownA. B.WyseA. E. (2011). Can districts keep good teachers in the schools that need them most?Economics of Education Review, 30(5), 962–979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.04.001
HolmeJ.JabbarH.GermainE.DinningJ. (2017). Rethinking teacher turnover: Longitudinal measures of instability in schools. Educational Researcher, 47(1), 62–75. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x17735813
23.
JabbarH.CastroA.GermainE. (2019). To switch or not to switch? The influence of school choice and labor market segmentation on teachers’ job searches. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 41(3), 375–399. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373719857689
24.
JohnsonS. M.KardosS. M.KauffmanD.LiuE.DonaldsonM. L. (2004). The support gap: New teachers’ early experiences in high-income and low-income schools. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(61), 1–24. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ853526.pdf
KistlerH. C.DjamaoeddinB.DonohueK.PapayJ. P.SchwartzN. L. (2024). Pathways to the teaching profession: Teaching assistants’ and substitute teachers’ transitions into the teacher workforce (EdWorkingPaper No. 24-1089). Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University. https://doi.org/10.26300/cb5b-aq50
28.
KraftM. A.LyonM. A. (2024). The rise and fall of the teaching profession: Prestige, interest, preparation, and satisfaction over the last half century. American Educational Research Journal, 61(6), 1192–1236. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312241276856
29.
KraftM. A.ConklinM.FalkenG. T. (2022). Preferences, inequities, and incentives in the substitute teacher labor market (EdWorkingPaper No. 22-680). Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University. https://doi.org/10.26300/tb06-3m94
30.
LankfordH.LoebS.WyckoffJ. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37–62. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737024001037
31.
LiuJ.LoebS.ShiY. (2022). More than shortages: The unequal distribution of substitute teaching. Education Finance and Policy, 17(2), 285–308. https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00329
LoebS.ReiningerM. (2004). Public policy and teacher labor markets: What we know and why it matters. Education Policy Center, Michigan State University. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED485592.pdf
34.
LortieD. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. University of Chicago Press.
35.
MerriamS. B.TisdellE. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
36.
MerrillB. C. (2021). Configuring a construct definition of teacher working conditions in the United States: A systematic narrative review of researcher concepts. Review of Educational Research, 91(2), 163–203. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320985611
National Center for Education Statistics. (2024). Table 211.70i. Employment and average annual wage of short-term substitute teachers in elementary and secondary education industry, by state or jurisdiction: 2016, 2019, and 2022 [Data table]. U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_211.70i.asp
PattonM. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage.
41.
PolivkaA. E.NardoneT. (1989). On the definition of contingent work. Monthly Labor Review, 112, 9–16.
42.
RetkowskyJ.NijsS.AkkermansJ.JansenP.KhapovaS. N. (2023). Toward a sustainable career perspective on contingent work: A critical review and a research agenda. Career Development International, 28(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/cdi-06-2022-0181
43.
ReupertA.SullivanA.TippettN.WhiteS.WoodcockS.ChenL.SimonsM. (2023). An exploration of the experiences of substitute teachers: A systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 93(6), 901–941. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221149418
44.
SaldañaJ. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage.
TopchyanR.WoehlerC. (2021). Do teacher status, gender, and years of teaching experience impact job satisfaction and work engagement?Education and Urban Society, 53(2), 119–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124520926161
WeemsL. (2003). Representations of substitute teachers and the paradoxes of professionalism. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(3), 254–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487103054003007
ZuoG.HuegetA.SteinerE. D. (2023). Principal perspectives on school staffing struggles: Findings from the 2022 Learn Together Survey (Research Report No. RRA827-14). RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA827-14.html
