IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ucl/cepeow/26-04.html

Why do so many people train to teach but never teach? Assessing the role of preferences and shock using longitudinal survey data

Author

Listed:
  • Sam Sims

    (UCL Centre for Education Policy & Equalising Opportunities)

  • Clare Routledge

    (UCL Centre for Education Policy & Equalising Opportunities)

Abstract

Teacher shortages are a persistent challenge across many countries, yet a substantial minority of newly qualified teachers never enter employment. Why do people invest time and money gaining a qualification but then choose not to teach? Two leading explanations are (1) that those who leave have job preferences less suited to teaching than those who stay, and (2) that those who leave experience more "reality shock" during training. This research uses two-wave longitudinal survey data from 409 trainee teachers in England (2024-2026), measuring job preferences via a conjoint experiment and reality shock via expectation-experience comparisons towards the end of training, alongside employment outcomes the following year. We find little evidence that leavers differ from stayers in their preferences. Trainees report both negative and positive shocks, and negative shock is associated with lower intentions to enter teaching, but does not predict actual entry. Our findings suggest that the search for explanations should look beyond preferences and shock, including in other countries where the same qualification-to-employment gap has been observed.

Suggested Citation

  • Sam Sims & Clare Routledge, 2026. "Why do so many people train to teach but never teach? Assessing the role of preferences and shock using longitudinal survey data," CEPEO Working Paper Series 26-04, UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, revised May 2026.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucl:cepeow:26-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec-cepeo.ucl.ac.uk/cepeow/cepeowp26-04.pdf
    File Function: Initial version, 2026
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lea Cassar & Stephan Meier, 2018. "Nonmonetary Incentives and the Implications of Work as a Source of Meaning," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 32(3), pages 215-238, Summer.
    2. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara B. & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 207-221, April.
    3. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100944, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Nicole Maestas & Kathleen J. Mullen & David Powell & Till von Wachter & Jeffrey B. Wenger, 2023. "The Value of Working Conditions in the United States and the Implications for the Structure of Wages," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(7), pages 2007-2047, July.
    5. Horiuchi, Yusaku & Markovich, Zachary & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2022. "Does Conjoint Analysis Mitigate Social Desirability Bias?," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 535-549, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sam Sims & Clare Routledge, 2025. "Understanding the decision (not) to become a teacher: evidence from survey experiments with undergraduates in the UK and US," CEPEO Working Paper Series 25-15, UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, revised Nov 2025.
    2. Tukiainen, Janne & Blesse, Sebastian & Bohne, Albrecht & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Jääskeläinen, Jan & Luukinen, Ari & Sieppi, Antti, 2024. "What are the priorities of bureaucrats? Evidence from conjoint experiments with procurement officials," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    3. Fumiya Uchikoshi & Hirofumi Miwa & Yoshikuni Ono, 2025. "Gendered Expectations for College Applications: Experimental Evidence from a Gender Inegalitarian Education Context," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 66(5), pages 1-27, August.
    4. Kim, Sung Eun & Park, Jong Hee & Rhee, Inbok & Yang, Joonseok, 2025. "What do aid recipients want? Public attitudes toward foreign aid in developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    5. Hsu Yumin Wang & Stefano Jud & Will Giles, 2025. "Does shaming make non-compliance with international court rulings costlier? Evidence from China," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(7), pages 2445-2453, December.
    6. Kelly Morrison, 2025. "Why voters (sometimes) punish repression," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(7), pages 2203-2220, December.
    7. Abby Córdova & Lucía Tiscornia, 2025. "Law enforcement at the margin of the law: Information provision and support for militarization in Mexico," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(5), pages 1428-1446, September.
    8. Burak Sonmez & Kirils Makarovs & Nick Allum, 2023. "Public perception of scientists: Experimental evidence on the role of sociodemographic, partisan, and professional characteristics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-20, July.
    9. Janne Tukiainen & Ilona Lahdelma & Mika Maliranta & Risto Rönkkö & Juho Saari, 2024. "The TikTok factor: Young voters and the support for the populist right," Working Papers 351, Työn ja talouden tutkimus LABORE, The Labour Institute for Economic Research LABORE.
    10. Joop Adema & Lasha Chargaziia & Yvonne Giesing & Sarah Necker & Panu Poutvaara, 2025. "What Drives Refugees’ Return After Conflict?," RFBerlin Discussion Paper Series 2565, ROCKWOOL Foundation Berlin (RFBerlin).
    11. Barış Arı & Burak Sonmez, 2025. "Human rights violations and public support for sanctions," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(1), pages 68-84, January.
    12. Pham, Truong & Khan, Ghulam Dastgir & Goto, Daisaku, 2026. "Would You Invest More? What Enterprises Reveal in a Randomized Experiment," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 134-147.
    13. Lukas Rudolph & Fabian Haggerty & Paul W. Thurner, 2026. "Examining public support for Ukraine’s defense against autocratic aggression," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 17(1), pages 1-20, December.
    14. Justesen, Mogens K. & Koob, Sigrid & Smid, Sina, 2025. "Clientelism and programmatic redistribution: Evidence from a conjoint survey experiment in Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    15. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    16. Non, Arjan & Rohde, Ingrid & de Grip, Andries & Dohmen, Thomas, 2022. "Mission of the company, prosocial attitudes and job preferences: A discrete choice experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    17. Bensnes, Simon & Hernaes, Øystein & King, Max-Emil M., 2025. "No Payoff from Time Off? Mandated Paid Vacation and Late-Career Employment," IZA Discussion Papers 18121, IZA Network @ LISER.
    18. Lindgren, Oskar & Jagers, Sverker C. & Lindvall, Daniel, 2026. "The impact of policy design on opposition to restrictive climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    19. Sayaka Usui & Benjamin K. Blevins, 2025. "Investing in the Future of Djibouti: A Choice-based Conjoint Analysis for Youth Employment Preferences," SAGE Open, , vol. 15(1), pages 21582440251, March.
    20. Michael J. Frith, 2021. "Analysing conjoint experiments in Stata: the conjoint command," London Stata Conference 2021 14, Stata Users Group.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
    • J45 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Public Sector Labor Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucl:cepeow:26-04. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Jake Anders (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/epucluk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.