Principal Support Shields Teachers From Stress, but Student Violence Still Drives Them Out

A sweeping national study of American teachers has confirmed something educators have long suspected: having a principal who listens, communicates openly, and stands behind staff when discipline problems arise makes a real difference in how safe, supported, and committed teachers feel. But the research also delivers a sobering caveat. When student violence reaches high levels, even the most supportive school leadership cannot fully protect teachers from the stress, anxiety, and desire to flee the profession that victimization produces. Support, the findings suggest, is necessary but not sufficient.

The study, led by Andrew Perry, a senior lecturer in educational studies at The Ohio State University, together with co-author Eric Anderman, a professor of educational psychology and vice provost for regional campuses, drew on national survey data collected during the 2020–21 school year. The dataset covered 5,550 teachers spanning pre-kindergarten through 12th grade and was conducted in collaboration with the American Psychological Association’s Task Force on Violence Against Teachers and School Personnel. The results were published in the peer-reviewed journal Educational Researcher, adding a rigorous quantitative foundation to a growing body of work on why teachers stay in classrooms and why they walk away.

The researchers zeroed in on a specific and consequential outcome: teachers’ intentions to transfer schools or quit teaching altogether. That focus matters because intentions are a powerful predictor of behavior. Prior research indicates that roughly one-third of educators who say they want to leave actually do so within a year, meaning that every measure of turnover intention represents a leading indicator of real attrition. With schools across the United States contending with an ongoing teacher shortage, understanding what pushes intention into action has taken on genuine urgency for policymakers and administrators alike.

At the heart of the study is a carefully defined concept of administrative support. The researchers did not measure vague feelings of goodwill. Instead, they focused on transparency and communication, such as whether teachers feel safe and comfortable raising matters of discipline with their principals, and on a broader belief that school administrators will back teachers up when a disciplinary incident occurs. This operational definition captures the day-to-day relational fabric of a school: whether the adults in charge are perceived as allies who will act, or as authorities who may look the other way.

The scale of student victimization reported in the sample was striking. Forty-four percent of educators said they had experienced victimization from students, and up to 80 percent reported facing verbal or threatening aggression. Against that backdrop, the statistical analysis revealed a clear pattern: supportive leadership is widely protective against teacher burnout, but student-directed violence acts as a critical tipping point. At high levels of violence, the protective benefits of principal support were systematically weakened, eroding the very mechanism that administrators rely on to keep their staff engaged and committed.

Perry said the results matched the team’s expectations. “Our hypotheses were largely supported by the study. What we expected to find, we found,” he said. “Support is beneficial and necessary, but not sufficient. You have to have it, but in the face of victimization, support alone is not enough.” The finding reframes a common assumption in school improvement efforts, namely that better management and warmer relationships between principals and teachers can compensate for a hostile classroom environment. The data indicate they cannot, at least not when violence is pervasive.

The study also sheds light on the nature of the violence itself. Prior research shows that teachers on the front lines of schools are most susceptible to non-physical violence from students, including verbal threats, obscene remarks, and slurs. Perry described this as “a demoralizing, sobering day-to-day reality” and noted the corrosive effect of feeling abandoned. “If a teacher feels they are in an environment where this stuff is ignored, and they have nobody to turn to, it becomes toxic to their well-being, and they want to get away,” he said. In other words, the absence of support amplifies the harm of victimization, even if the presence of support cannot fully neutralize it.

One of the study’s more unexpected findings concerned grade level. Elementary school teachers reported being victimized more often than their secondary school peers, a pattern Perry attributes to younger children’s lower capacity for self-regulation, which makes them more likely to lash out through hitting, biting, throwing objects, or screaming. “Teachers sign up for the job, but dealing with young children presenting these behaviors is challenging,” he said. “School principals being present and showing support is a necessary component, but systematic strategies are required alongside it.” The observation complicates popular assumptions that classroom danger is primarily a secondary school problem.

The new findings build on earlier work by Perry and colleagues. In a 2024 paper published in the journal School Psychology, the team evaluated the strategies schools actually use to prevent violence and reached an unfavorable verdict on two of the most common approaches. Zero-tolerance policies and so-called school hardening measures, such as upgraded physical security and surveillance systems, do not work, the researchers found. “The most effective strategies are restorative, prevention-based approaches that build a climate of mutual respect, safety and integrity,” Perry said. That conclusion points toward investments in relationships and school culture rather than hardware and punitive rules as the most promising route to safer classrooms.

The broader implications extend well beyond individual school buildings. “Violence against teachers is real, pervasive and impactful. When teachers are victimized, they want to leave,” Perry said, warning that attrition triggers cascading consequences: schools lose experienced veteran teachers, replacing them is expensive, and students end up with less experienced instruction. The researchers concluded that administrators do influence teachers’ perceptions of school safety, their anxiety and stress, and their retention intentions, but that administrator support must be combined with positive and clear discipline policies, effective violence prevention initiatives that include all stakeholders, and systemic improvements in school culture and climate. “Teachers are human beings who need support not only from principals, but from parents and the public as well,” Perry said. The study was supported by the American Psychological Association, with additional co-authors including Linda A. Reddy of Rutgers University, Andrew Martinez of Hunter College, Susan D. McMahon of DePaul University, Ron A. Astor of the University of California, Los Angeles, Frank C. Worrell of the University of California, Berkeley, and Dorothy L. Espelage of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Subject of Research: How principal support and student victimization affect teacher stress and retention

Article Title: Principal support helps teachers, but isn’t enough to stop turnover from classroom violence

Article References: Principal support helps teachers, but isn’t enough to stop turnover from classroom violence. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: teacher retention, principal support, school violence, student victimization, teacher burnout, Educational Researcher, Ohio State University, American Psychological Association, school discipline, teacher shortage, school climate, violence prevention