Monthly Archives: January 2022

‘A drop in the ocean’

Posted on by
Reply

Much has been made of the government’s campaign to recruit ex-teachers back into the classroom as supply teachers to help out during the latest phase of the covid pandemic.

Here is the actual wording from the DfE about the success of the campaign by early January 2022:

Findings

• There were at least 585 ex-teachers coming forward to either Teach First, or 47 of the estimated 400-500 teacher supply agencies, between the 20th December 2021 and 7th January 2022.

• Of this total, over 100 expressions of interest have been reported by Teach First.

• A further 485 sign-ups of ex-teachers were reported by the 47 supply agencies who responded to the DfE survey.

• Given this survey response only covers a small number of agencies, this will not reflect the true total as other agencies not surveyed, or which did not respond, are likely to also have had sign-ups, and the call for ex-teachers to return is still ongoing. The true number of sign-ups since the call was launched will be larger.

Number of ex-teachers coming forward to join the school workforce (publishing.service.gov.uk) 12th January 2022

Interestingly the government doesn’t so far seem to have spent much money on the campaign. In answer to a written Parliamentary Question Robin Walker, the DfE Minister replied that:

As of 5 January, the spend relating to marketing and communications in support of the national appeal for former teachers to return to the profession is £3,882.69. This amount consists of:

  • Design work for a toolkit of assets to be used by partners of the department: £2,227.80.
  • Paid Search Advertising: £1,654.89.

Written questions and answers – Written questions, answers and statements – UK Parliament

To their credit, the government recognises that the 485 sign-ups don’t account for the whole total. Now assuming the 10% response rate can be grossed up, the national figure might be around 5,000. (The DfE footnote to editors said that ‘We estimate this number of responses represents around 10% of the agencies operating in the market. This figure is based on estimates provided by trade bodies. Agencies will vary in size and so this figure should not be taken as an indication of market share.’)

Now, we don’t know the geographical spread of these new supply teachers. We don’t know whether they are willing to work in both primary and secondary schools. We don’t know whether they will work five days a week or just for a couple of days.

We can assume that like other teachers the normal stock of supply teachers are affected by covid in the same way as the rest of the population. The 2020 School Workforce Census identified that there were 11,574 ‘occasional teachers’ in schools at the time of the census. So, and additional 5,000 to the stock is clearly a useful number. But, with a teaching force of 461,000 it only takes just over one per cent of the workforce to be absent due to covid to use up the whole of the possible new recruits to supply teaching.

Could the government have done more. Certainly, the cash spend seems low compared to other campaigns. What of unemployed history and PE teachers that completed training last summer, but couldn’t find a teaching post. Has the government worked with training providers to identify those still wanting to enter teaching and offered some support to help them do so even on a temporary basis?

No doubt as this term unfolds more information will become available about how successful the government was at helping schools to stay open, and the part the national campaign played in achieving that end compared with the actions taken locally by schools, Trusts and Local Authorities.

ITT Census Part 2 – where are the physics trainees?

Posted on by
Reply

The DfE’s ITT Census for 2021/22 was published yesterday – see previous post for the headline data (December 2021). Over time, it will be possible to mine a great deal of information form the open-source information now provided by the DfE. This post got overlooked but is still worth publishing.

Those schools signed up to the new TeachVac service Are you overpaying to advertise your teaching posts? | John Howson (wordpress.com) for a registration fee of £100 plus VAT and  maximum annual charge of £1,000 plus VAT will be able to ask TeachVac staff to match this data with regional data for their area to help predict possible local labour shortages during 2022. So, if you are a school governor, headteacher or work for a MAT or diocese do read what is on offer and go to Teaching Jobs School Vacancies – The National Vacancy Service for Teachers and Schools (teachvac.co.uk) and hit the red tab at the top labelled New Matching Service

Taking physics as an example, the DfE data shows that the 537 trainees in the census are spread unevenly across the country.

Government RegionHEISCITTGrand Total
East Midlands292150
East of England161531
London5777134
North East12618
North West581674
South East6645111
South West371047
West Midlands341347
Yorkshire and The Humber332255
Grand Total342225567
Source TeachVac from DfE ITT census 2021   
Distribution of physics trainees

Approximately 43% of trainees are located in London or the South East, with just eight per cent located with providers in the West Midlands. This can be important because London and the South East contain a significant proportion of the country’s independent secondary schools. Such schools are more likely to advertise for a teacher of physics than do most state schools.

Many of the remaining selective schools are also in London and the South East, and they are the state schools most likely to advertise for a teacher of physics rather than a teacher of science. If just a quarter of the trainees in London and the South East opt to teach outside the state sector, this reduced the pool national to little over 500 trainees many of whom will be on school-based courses and not looking for a job on the open market.

A slightly different picture emerges for design and technology

Row LabelsHEISCITTGrand Total
East Midlands231033
East of England131629
London204363
North East4711
North West16521
South East212142
South West211132
West Midlands52961
Yorkshire and The Humber252449
Grand Total195146341

Source TeachVac from DfE ITT census 2021

Here the North West looks like an area where recruitment will be a real challenge whereas the West midlands seems relatively, and it is only relatively, better off for teachers of this subject. However, we know nothing about specialisms with the subject.

This type of information is key to sensible recruitment planning and should play an important part in discussions about the working of the leveling up agenda in education at the level of the school.

Recruitment 2022: a rough ride to come

Posted on by
1

Can you tell anything about the 2022 recruitment round for teachers in England based upon just four days of vacancy data? One of the advantages of a job board such as TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk is the it has sufficient cumulative data on vacancies that can be allied with data about the numbers of teachers on preparation courses to be able to provide some helpful comments on the labour market, even after just four days of data.

For those that are sceptical of such a claim, consider sampling theory. A simple example is to assume a bowl of soup. A small spoonful will tell you whether or not the bowl if full of hot soup. Now scale up to a vat size container. Will a small sample tell you the same answer for the whole? Now purists might maintain that the bottom of the vat could be hotter than the top; I would agree. Taking that comment to vacancy data means that the comments for England as a whole might well include differences across the regions. Such an objection is true, and that is why each month TeachVac produces regional data for most secondary subjects and the primary sector. But it doesn’t invalidate sampling as a useful tool.

Anyway, back to our sample of 2022, and what I think it tells schools about the recruitment round this year. The first point is that it confirms what was being said at the end of 2021, appointments for September 2022 will be more of a challenge almost across the board as the 2020 bounce in interest in teaching as a career drops out of the supply side.

How bad will 2022 be? Well, nothing of concern in art, PE and history. Indeed, schools might well be starting to consider whether they can make use of an extra history teacher and perhaps an extra PE teacher to make use of the best of the trainees with second subject expertise in the pool of jobseekers.

At the other end of the scale, the usual suspects of design and technology where there will be real issues with recruitment have been joined this year by geography, modern languages and English. In the case of the latter two subjects this is partly because of the number of trainees on courses that will either already have placed them in the classroom or make it likely that they won’t be looking on the open market for a teaching post. Independent schools should take especial note of this fact when considering how easy it will be to recruit a teacher.

Most of the other subjects have seen the size of their ‘free pool’ decline this year compared with 2021, and that will have implications for January 2023 appointments. Such vacancies may be hard to fill in many subjects in those parts of England where recruitment is a challenge; namely London and the Home Counties.

Schools that have signed up to TeachVac’s £1,000 maximum annual recruitment package will receive regular updates on the state of the labour market, including local knowledge. On registration, and at no cost, schools receive a detailed report on the labour market.

Recruiters tell me that TeachVac is ‘too cheap’ to succeed because nothing that cheap could be any good. My principle in founding the job board was to show that recruitment advertising need not cost a lot of money. I still believe that to be true. Do you?

Why are teacher struck-off?

Posted on by
Reply

Anyone looking for a depressing read need go no further than a perusal of the reports of hearings at the Teacher Regulation Agency Teaching standards, misconduct and practice – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) regarding teacher misconduct.

The Agency decisions are ratified by a civil servant called a ‘decision maker’ on behalf of the Secretary of State. The teacher has a right to appeal to the High Court within a limited timeframe following the decision.

 In the period between the start of August and the end of December 2021, the Agency heard nearly 50 cases. Almost threequarters of the hearings were regarding male teachers. This despite the fact that there are far fewer male teachers than female teachers in the profession.

The Agency can hear cases relating to actions by teachers both inside and outside schools where the actions might be deemed unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute and breach acceptable standards required of a teacher as a professional. This included being found guilty in a criminal court or even being cautioned by the police. Teachers can also be working in the state or private school sectors.

The recommendations handed down after a hearing can range from the ‘not proven’ to ‘No Order Made’ – where the publication of the findings is considered adequate admonishment as an outcome, to either an ‘Order’ where after a specific time period the teacher may apply for reinstatement as a teacher or an ‘Order with an indefinite ban’ allowing for no return to the profession and is usually couched in the following terms

“… prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. Furthermore, in view of the seriousness of the allegations found proved against him, I have decided that ….  (named person) shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach.”

The teacher’s date of birth is provided and gender can be inferred from the name on the report of the hearing. Where the misconduct occurred on school premises, the school is named in the report of the hearing in most cases. Although in certain circumstances it may be redacted.

Cases seem to fall into three groups – sex related, where an indefinite ban would seem to be the most likely outcome. A very high proportion of the male teachers that came before the Agency were there for behaviour involving inappropriate behaviour. In far too many cases this involved a child that was often a pupil at the school.

The second group of cases involves irregularities either in examination procedures or financial matters. The case of three senior staff at one school involved the latter and the issue of off-rolling and census numbers. Most of these cases seem to result in bans of between two to five years. There seem to be fewer of such cases than might have bene expected although that may be due to the circumstances of assessment over the past two years.

Cases of personal conduct seem to result in an indefinite ban where there is dishonesty in areas such as application forms, but a wider range of penalties where the matter is possession of a Class A drug for personal use or failing to report a relationship with someone on the Sex Offenders Register. Bringing such a person onto school premises may be seen as an aggravating factor.

Panels seem to recognise the challenges of working in settings such as PRUs, especially for young teachers with little support, and the cases where they relate to handing of pupils may result in a ‘No Order’ outcome, but just the possible glare of publicity that might result from the publication of the hearing outcome being seen as sufficient deterrent.

As a proportion of half a million professionals working as teachers these cases represent a very small percentage summoned for unprofessional behaviour. However, the high incidence of cases involving inappropriate behaviour with children does mean that both training in the standards expected is necessary for new teachers, and the recognition by all that any teacher might face situations where they put themselves at risk of losing their professional status and their employment if their conduct falls below an accepted standard.

TeachVac welcomes new tes owners

Posted on by
Reply

This is an interesting way to start 2022. Just three years since the tes last changed hands, its ownership looks to be on the move again. This would make the third set of owners of the tes since TeachVac was set up in 2013 to challenge the high cost of teacher recruitment in a changing world, where technology should have been driving down costs and thus reducing prices to schools. www.teachvac.co.uk According to the press release 86c854e3-7a1d-4402-9f20-32868488d2c6 (gcs-web.com) dated the 7th December the new owners should be the current management team at the tes and ONEX, a Canadian Venture Capital Group. My best wishes to them.

When the Providence Group bought the tes in 2018, I expressed surprise at the purchase, so I am not now surprised that after slimming down the business by: exiting the supply teacher market; ending coverage of the further education sector; shifting its office functions out of London and axing the print edition among other changes, Providence finally put the business up for sale.

Based on the cost structure of TeachVac, there is a profitable company lurking inside the tes, but not while it is saddled with a large slug of overhanging debt that needs to be serviced. The terms of the expected change of ownership are not revealed in the press release, but too much debt will cripple the success of the new venture. Still, it is good to see the management team taking a share of the risk, and bringing at least a part of the ownership back into the UK from North America.

Today’s Sunday Telegraph business section has an article by Matt Oliver discussing the problems the tes faces when government tries to do the same job through its own free web site for vacancies. This blog discussed such an issue in relation to both TeachVac and the TES in April 2019 DfE backs free vacancy sites | John Howson (wordpress.com) I am sorry that Matt Oliver didn’t either mention TeachVac or try to speak with me about the way the market operates, as other journalists have done on a regular basis.

Perhaps either the Education Select Committee or the Public Accounts Committee at Westminster will use Matt Oliver’s article as a reason to mount an inquiry into the teacher recruitment market. After all, the later, using National Audit Office data, called for the DfE to reduce the cost of teacher recruitment: the very reason that TeachVac was established and has flourished. Does Nationalisation always work? | John Howson (wordpress.com)

This blog has always asserted that schools have been paying too much for recruitment advertising and has been prepared to back that judgement with the development of the successful TeachVac job board. The apparent lack of interest on the part of professional associations and others connected with education to address the means of removing unnecessary expenditure from schools by slashing recruitment advertising costs has been an enduring disappointment to me. Perhaps 2022 with be the year that all this changes?