I was delighted to read the Institute of Physics new 10-year plan for the teaching of physics in schools in England The physics teacher shortage and addressing it through the 3Rs: Retention, Recruitment and Retraining (England) As is to be expected from the IoP, this is a thoughtful and well argued report.
Some of the finding in this new report mirror those in the report published in January 2002 by Northumbria University, and funded by the then TTA. The Northumbria study, interestingly called ‘Supply, Recruitment and Retention of Physics Teachers’ was authored by Prof. Hilary Constable, and I was a part of the team that undertook the research underpinning the report.
Many of the conclusions in the IoP report sould apply to the whole teacher supply landscape. It is just that the labour market for teachers of physics, especially in non-selective state schools, is an extreme example of 30 years of failure to provide schools with the staff needed for the National Curriculum.
It is worth recalling that in the 2006 budget speech, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer mentioned 3,000 trainee science teachers needed as a part of the Science and innovation investment framework 2004-2014. So, the problem has been known for decades, the will to solve it has seen less drive behind it. I sincerely hope that the government takes the recommendations of the IoP report on board.
As someone that has studied the leacher labour market for more than 30 years, the idea of exit interviews has always seemed to me to be a missing a part of the picture. The DfE has wave studies with school leaders, teachers, pupils and parents, but not it seems leavers. I would be happy to manage a trial with the MATs and local authority HR department in one authority, to collect data. The Northumbria study did collect some data from early leavers, workload, the desire only to teach physics and a return to studying appear to be some of the common features of the findings. I guess, not much has changed.
If I have a quibble with the IoP report, it would be on the table of salaries in the report. My guess is that financial services salaries are skewed by a ‘London’ effect and the teaching salary doesn’t fully record any incentives received by qualified physics teachers. I would also like to have seen how many of those with QTS are in Sixth Form Colleges and independent schools?
The idea of retraining is a sensible use of resources, as are subject knowledge enhancement courses for those considering becoming a teacher of physics, but lacking a degree specifically in the subject.
Overall, what the report demonstrates is the lack of a comprehensive strategy for the staffing of our schools and, since the demise of the TTA and its successors, no real centre for policy discussions. One wonders what the Chartered College of Teaching is doing in this field? The demise of the APPG for the Teaching Profession, supported by Chris Waterman for many years, left a vacuum for debate about teacher supply, even if Ministers chose not to listen. Hopefully, after this report, the secretary of State will act.
John Howson 
Can’t agree with you more. The lack of exit interview means that we don’t know the real reason why people leave. The assumption has always been that it is about pay and better job prospects elsewhere.
Thanks. I did for 10 years survey why school leader posts were advertised but could never find the funding for exit interviews to canvass what the leavers said about leaving.
John Howson
I am going to spend some time going through the report more thoroughly, but I think the IoP has done about as good a job as they could. However, getting those proposals into circulation would be difficult even under favourable circumstances, which these are definitely not. Their biggest problem lies on p38.
“Develop mechanisms for supporting senior leaders to improve retention in schools.”
This proposal assumes a number of things, not least the fact that senior leaders are interested in improving retention in general, and Physics in particular. I can assure you that this is often not the case.
Inter- and intra-departmental competition is fierce in secondary schools, and the volume and intensity of politics boggles the mind. All of this politics tends to overshadow retention, well-being and even sometimes academic results. Many people working in a school are indifferent to the plight of the Physics department, and some are actively malevolent. The problems come when these are the same people you need to persuade to arrange high-quality training placements and fair timetables, as per some of the IoP’s very reasonable suggestions.
If the report’s recommendations are to bear fruit, they will need to be rigorously enforced at the school level. Otherwise, they will be harpooned by the Head of Science, or the Head of Teaching and Learning, or the Head of School, or whichever entity in that particular school thinks they stand to benefit from a weak or demoralised Physics department.
I know what I am saying might seem counterintuitive, especially to those who have never worked in education. And all of the above can apply to other departments, of course. There is a degree of survivorship bias at work; people whose departments are treated well are less likely to leave the school or the profession. People talking about good schools and bad schools usually don’t realise just how much the experience within a school can vary, depending on which subject you teach.
Looking at my own experiences, never in 10 years did I work for a school that was supportive of my teaching work. In fact, the relationship was usually the reverse; I would attempt to provide a good Physics education to my students, and the school would try to stop me. And so, like many Physics teachers before me, I decided in 2023 to leave the profession. This was despite having reached the position of Assistant Head in my last school. I had a fair bit of influence, and I did my best to shield myself and other staff from the more outrageous decisions coming down from on high. But there were bad actors above me in the chain of command, and my workload was still every bit as bad as it had been when I joined the school, or when I started my NQT a decade previously.
As I always used to say:
“Schools love the idea of a Physics teacher, but they have no idea what to do with a real one, except work them right back out of the door.
James, Many thank for this perceptive post. It is up to the DfE, MATs, diocese and where they still have any influence, local authorities to push retention and support physics. As the IoP said, I also think we need exit interviews to capture view of those that leave a school, even if to go to another school.
John Howson