Category Archives: education

Missing from the budget

Posted on by
Reply

Education didn’t really feature in the budget.

I had hoped that there might be help for 16-18 year-olds in rural areas to access education. Instead, the Chancellor announced that he would help families with younger children through the Bus Fund.

Line 67 Bus Travel: Fund free bus travel for children aged 5-15 in England  from 1 August 2026 until 31 August 2026.

I am sorry he didn’t pick up on the 16-18 issue in rural areas, as it is something I have been campaigning about for years now.

The Chancellor also announced a cut in Red Diesel: Reduce duty rates by 3.7p-per-litre from 15 June 2026 to 1 July 2027 Will that help local authorities with their school transport bills? Sadly, I k not. Another missed opportunity?

Other mentions about education in the budget needed hunting out.

6.122 Books for children – The government will provide £5 million a year for three years from 2027-28 to increase the provision of books for pre-school children, supporting organisations such as the Dolly Parton Imagination Library and BookTrust.

Saldy, that won’t buy many books. For example, if 100,000 children qualified, they would receive £5 worth of books each. Hopefully, the books will circulate, so each child will have access to many books per year. But that approach increases overheads, so I am surprised not to see a match-funded scheme that could leverage more cash for the project.

6.124 School Physical Education (PE) & Sport funding – Funding to the Department for Education will increase by £60 million per year to contribute to the cost of new PE & Sport partnerships, due to be rolled out in England in 2027.

No mention of uprating the music grant by inflation. The grant hasn’t been uprated since 2014, along with a couple of other grants in the DfE’s budget.

Capital spending on education projects is likely to fall as the Treasury raids capital budgets to help fund extra defence spending. The capital spending ‘outurn’ in 25/26 was £6bn, and is expected to £8.1bn in 26/27, before falling back to £7.5bn for the next three years to 2029/30. Hope possibly for schools still awaiting the  removal of ‘bad concrete’, but not much sign of a replacement policy for schools that are time expired, especially as s costs have been increasing due to inflation.

Teachers will be glad to know that on page 34 of the Budget book the government is aware that

‘ DfE’s AI lesson-planning tool is saving teachers an average of around three hours a week, reducing administrative burdens and freeing up more time for teaching and other school responsibilities.’ Budget 2026 – Breathing Space for today, Fresh hope for the future

Overall, a very dull budget for education that will give little confidence to the sector.

Finally, the retention of business rates is good for many communities, but not for university towns such as Oxford, where students don’t pay Council Tax, and the universities often avoid business rates. Hopefully, the overnight levy will at least allow some income from conference visitors and tourists to the city.

EHCP requests and falling rolls

Posted on by
1

Have requests for EHCPs passed their peak? It might be expected that where a local authority was starting to witness a shrinking school population that this might also be noticeable in a decline in requests for an EHCP.

I have tested out this these for the London boroughs, based on the DfE’s data on total requests for an EHCP for each year from 2019 (pre-covid) to 2025, (the latest set of annual data published). Release home – Education, health and care plans – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

Column 2 shows the growth in request over the period from 2019 to 2026 (in one case a small decline) Column 3 shows the percentage increase over the period, ranked from smallest percentage increase to the largest. Column 4 is my interpretation of whether the borough is an inner London or an outer London borough

LA2013-2019% increasesubregion
1-3-38%inner
2345%inner
3129%inner
48418%inner
511521%inner
619523%outer
77236%inner
88537%inner
921039%outer
1010041%outer
1117842%outer
1211447%outer
1340055%outer
1429757%outer
1524358%outer
1629865%inner
1727665%outer
1819568%inner
1932172%inner
2035273%outer
2131380%outer
2215786%inner
2314687%outer
2453491%outer
2548895%inner
2629297%outer
27497101%outer
28395101%outer
29392105%outer
30501110%inner
31432115%inner
32345117%outer
33376133%outer

Thirty-two boroughs showed an increase in requests over the period between 2019 and 2025. Increases ranged from less than 10% in each of two inner London boroughs to seven boroughs with increases of more than 100% increase over the period between 2019-2025 (5 outer London boroughs and two inner London boroughs).

In 14 of the boroughs, the number of requests received by the borough in 2025 was not the highest for any years during the period between 2019-2025. Is that enough to suggest a trend? Possibly so, especially if the key point for many requests for an EHCP is around the transfer point form primary to secondary school.

Does the  distribution of the boroughs suggest that inner London boroughs have a smaller percentage of pupils requiring an EHCP, or perhaps a smaller percentage of parents initiating the process of requesting an EHCP? It would be helpful to rerun this exercise for particular types of EHCP and the age of the child at which they were requested. Might this deeper analysis help to explain some of the differences in the percentage increases between boroughs?

It is interesting that some London boroughs with a mix of selective and non-selective schools feature among the boroughs with the highest percentage increase over the period.

If data for individual schools is not available, then measuring the percentage of the borough in each IDACII cell might provide data on any clustering. A simpler way might be to use parliamentary constituencies, but both of these measure of requests suffer from a possible ‘parental choice’ effect. The use of boroughs more closely ties requests linked to residence not to school attended.

If I have a moment, I will look at the data for the top and bottom 20 places regarded by the Children’s Commissioner in her recent report as the best and worst places for children to grow up.

Falling School Rolls: not just a London problem?

Posted on by
Reply

Over the next few years, schools across England will be forced to come to terms with falling pupil numbers. As I indicated in an earlier set of posts on this blog, falling rolls can either be managed by the market, through parental choice and selective school’s decisions on their capacity levels without recourse to other local schools, or can the reduction in numbers be managed through some form of innervation, either by the DfE or by some local body, such as a local authority or an elected Mayor.

How pressing is the problem for secondary schools at present? I have looked at a random selection of schools, almost all secondary schools, that have advertised so far in this autumn term of 2026 for a teacher with expertise in music. The usefulness of looking at music is it is a subject where any vacancy is unlikely to be covered by someone else already on the staff. This is because of the subject knowledge needed.

The data for the schools with vacancies has been compared with the DfE public database that contains columns for a school’s ‘number on roll’ and ‘school capacity’. It is not clear how often this data are updated, or when it refers to, but there don’t seem to have been any changes between the beginning of September and this week, so it may be reasonably recent.

The following table for the different regions of England reveals an interesting picture

LOCAL AUTHORITY REGION20%+ SPARE PLACES19%- 10% SPARE PLACES9% TO  5% SPARE PLACES5% SPARE PLACES TO 4% OVER CAPACITY5%+ OVER CAPACITYTOTAL
EAST ENGLAND102104
EAST MIDLANDS2233111
LONDON14211422
NORTH EAST010102
NORTH WEST021317
SOUTH EAST111036
SOUTH WEST2180011
WESTMIDLANDS12115
YORKS & HUMBER012025
ALL REGIONS81419201273

Of the 73 schools with a vacancy record – about just under 2% of secondary schools, so a reasonable opportunity sample – 41 already had more than 10% spare capacity; 20 had between 5% spare capacity and 5% over capacity, and might be regarded as working at capacity;  12 schools were more than 5% over capacity. Of this last grouping, three were selective schools, and another a highly regarded specialist school.  Seven of the 12 schools were either in London or the South East.

Of the schools with the most spare capacity, only one was in London, and the other seven were spread across five of the other regions, suggesting that parental choice might already be playing a significant part in how full to capacity certain school are even today.

Only two of the 22 schools with the most spare capacity are church schools: both are  Catholic schools. One Church of England school features in the list of most over-subscribed schools. That school is in London, and may have benefitted from a  closeness to the Elizabeth Line, and TfL’s generous transport policy for travel to and from school.

The real issues to come will be both protecting schools in rural areas that serve an area where closure would mean an excessively long journey for some pupils and ensuring all schools can offer what is regarded as the whole curriculum up to age 16. What minority subjects is it allowable for a school not to offer at Key Stage 4?

One thing is certain, many schools with falling rolls will not be recruiting because of their budgets already being under pressure. Might some schools already have dropped music, so not be included in this sample?

I hope that local politicians across England are now asking Scrutiny Committees to be looking into the position locally, and whether any action will be needed, and, if so, by whom?

Are Breakfast clubs just a new form of extended school day?

Posted on by
1

Research published by the DfE Breakfast club early adopters: final report – GOV.UK provides some interesting insights into the government’s early adopters of their plan for a free ‘breakfast club’ in every primary school.

Some of the comments in the Report’s Executive summary suggest that food is not the real benefit to most families of such ‘breakfast clubs’, but an extension of the wrap around care offered by schools.

‘Parent awareness of provision was high (92%), primarily through school newsletters (36%) and apps (19%). The free breakfast club usage reflected family circumstances: 69% of aware parents reported their child attends, with higher rates among full-time employed parents (79%) and lower among free school meal eligible families (66%).

Enabling employment emerged as the primary motivation for use (53%), followed by child enjoyment (43%) and easier drop-offs (35%).

The free breakfast club sits within existing family routines rather than replacing them entirely. Nearly three-quarters (74%) of families report that their child usually has breakfast at home, though breakfast club users are less likely to eat at home than non-users (74% vs 94%). Current before-school arrangements varied considerably: 45% of families used the free breakfast club for childcare, whilst 41% had a parent or carer at home.’

All from the Executive summary, but with some re-ordering.

One comment that really interested me was that ‘Pupils exercised considerable autonomy in choosing what to eat, which activities to pursue, and how to interact socially, distinguishing free breakfast clubs from structured classroom time. Pupils showed strong engagement with both food and activities, although some attended primarily for social interaction and play.’

Clearly, there are some users of the ‘clubs’ that are there for the food. But, does this justify a universal service, especially with primary schools starting at so many different age groups from age 2 to age 5.

An interesting finding was that ‘Participation rates are higher among families not eligible for FSM (74%) compared to FSM-eligible families (66%), and among parents in full-time salaried employment (79%). The type of provision accessed varies by family circumstances. Most families (70%) exclusively use free breakfast club provision, whilst 16% combine free and paid provision, and 13% use only paid provision. Parents not currently employed are most likely to solely use the free provision (90%), whilst families with higher incomes are more likely to use paid provision either exclusively or in combination with free offerings.’ (page 48)

Also of interest was the higher take-up by parents of children with SEND

‘Parents of children with SEND demonstrate slightly different usage patterns, being more likely to send their child to breakfast clubs every weekday (49%) compared to parents of children without SEND (42%). This higher frequency of attendance aligns with findings from parent interviews, where parents of children with SEND describe breakfast clubs as particularly valuable for providing calm, structured morning transitions.’ (page 51)

In the interviews with parents, there was little mention of the attraction of the ‘free breakfast, only accounting for 8% of one of the top three choices, leading the report to state that:

‘Interviewed parents recognise the provision serves multiple purposes including providing childcare support, facilitating work routines, offering socialisation opportunities, alleviating financial pressures, helping their children settle into the school environment, and building confidence. This multifaceted nature of the breakfast club makes it valuable to families across diverse circumstances.’ (page 53).

If the aim of the government was to encourage more employment among families with primary aged children, then the pilot seems to have been a success. But are they really ‘breakfast clubs’? The report’s recommendations acknowledge this issues:

‘Strengthen the programme narrative beyond breakfast provision. The evidence demonstrates that free breakfast clubs deliver multiple interconnected benefits that extend beyond food provision. The Department should consider strengthening the programme branding and communication strategy to reflect this broader value proposition. Rather than “breakfast clubs,” consider terminology such as “before-school clubs” or “morning clubs” that better captures the comprehensive nature of the provision. This re-emphasis should emphasise the programme as offering a supported transition into the school day (‘soft start’) that can foster pupils’ social development and cross-age relationship building while providing an opportunity eat a nutritious breakfast. To appeal to parents, it should also focus on the free breakfast club as enabling parental employment and reducing household stress. This positions the free breakfast club as one component of a holistic morning experience. This shift in narrative would help address the 49% of non-users who cite “lack of need” by demonstrating relevance beyond food provision alone’. (page 89)

More concerning to me is the fact that ‘FSM-eligible families (who show lower usage despite potentially greater need)’. Should helping these children to make use of the ‘clubs’ better fulfil the ‘breakfast club’ part of the original mission of such clubs?

The data for this sample was limited, and it was based upon an opt-in approach. I would be concerned if across England children eligible for free school meals were making less use of the free food on offer before school and also not joining in on what now looks more like an extended school day than an initiative to help families with their food bills.

Is the trade-off between extra childcare and more employment possibilities, especially for women worth the cost? I guess the government decided the answer to that question before it set up the pilot programme ahead of a national roll out.

Might there be another December general election?

Posted on by
Reply

The present opinion polling might make the possibility of a snap December general election more likely, especially if the Burnham Bounce continues, and both Reform and the Green Party drift downward in the polls. As a result, other Parties will be probably putting together a skeleton manifesto, just in case an election is called.

Here are my suggestions about an education section of a manifesto to the Liberal Democrats, the Party I support. These are my own views, and some are more controversial than others.

Raise free travel to school from 16 to 18

At present there is free travel to nearest school if over three miles, up to age 16. In London,  young people aged 16-17 can get free and discounted travel on all our transport services with a Zip Oyster photocard. 16+ Zip Oyster photocard – Transport for London In Birmingham, 16-18s get discounted tickets to and from an education establishment in term-time. In Manchester, Our Pass gives 16-18 year olds free bus travel* across Greater Manchester and Our Pass is not just a bus travel card – cardholders will have access to lots of opportunities, experiences and benefits.

Young people living outside the large urban areas deserve the same rights to access education.

An expert teacher in every classroom

Parents and pupils expect their teachers to be properly trained. Many are not, especially in schools in rural areas and disadvantaged areas where teacher recruitment is challenging. The policy would only grant certification (QTS) for limited areas, where a teacher has the appropriate knowledge and qualification. A school could use a teacher to cover a vacancy or long-term absence, but such teachers, if not qualified, would need emergency accreditation. This would last for no more than two school-years. During that time, the staff member would be expected to undertake appropriate certification through professional development paid for by the school. The DfE would be expected to publish a report to parliament each year on the use of uncertified teachers by schools. The term ‘teacher’ would be come a recognised reserved occupation term, in line with the situation on other professions

Free School lunches to eleven

All primary school children, and those in middle schools, would be entitled to a free school lunch. This extends the policy of free school meals for infant school pupils introduced by the coalition and announced at the Lib Dems Conference in Glasgow.

Renewable energy for all schools

Local areas would be offered matching funding for solar, wind and heat pump installations with the remainder of the funding coming from a ‘social’ bond’ open to local residents in the first instance.  Rural schools would be encouraged to become energy resilience hubs for their local community, providing emergency power sources when the grid isn’t functioning because of storms, flooding or other reasons. Rural areas already generate power for other parts of the country. This scheme would ensure a local payment scheme. As well as providing power for the school.

The curriculum

Any curriculum change would be fully staffed. The curriculum would ensure all pupils received the basic skills and knowledge, supported by funding to ensure all pupils, even with special needs, can achieve their maximum potential. The secondary school curriculum would reflect that fact that young people entering school in 2026 will be working into the 2080s.

Testing

Public examinations at sixteen would be replaced by cheaper national tests based upon sampling techniques. Pupil’s progress should not be determined by rigid rules. There would be a focus on raising standards by ensuring well-qualified teachers.

Testing for national standards would be retained at the end of Key Stage 2 and Foundation Stage to help identify the best use of resources.

School Funding

In a period of declining school rolls, and parental choice, funding schools on a per-pupil basis risks under-funding disadvantaged schools. This is especially the case in areas where there are selective schools. Many of these schools are over-capacity, while the non-selective schools are required to function well below capacity, and with less funding as a result.

All schools should be funded to a level where they can deliver an appropriate curriculum. Improvements in technology should allow for actual salary funding for schools, rather than the average salary funding that disadvantages some schools with experienced staff, but falling rolls.

There is a case to be made for a universal secondary school and college system to meet the needs of all 11-18 year-olds

Effective post-sixteen education

Consideration would be given to how pupils could be offered a choice of routes and subjects that best meet their needs in a planned manner. With falling rolls, not all schools and colleges would be able to offer and effective curriculum for all.

Enjoying school

Most primary school children enjoy school, but attendance and enjoyment both drop off between the ages of 11-16. The current DfE opinion polling would be widened to take more account of the views of young people, and the challenges they face in a rapidly changing society where they will be voters before they complete their education, if the voting age is reduced to 16, as we support.

Every child has a right to education

The state does not require children to attend school, but to be educated. Home Schooled children often receive a good quality education, but along with those educated in private schools there should be a system of inspection and support. No child should ever be without a school. A virtual school for pupils either moving into an area or excluded from a school should enrol such pupils from day one to ensure no break in their education. Much can be learnt from the best of the virtual schools for looked-after young people.

Inspection

Ofsted needs reform, but to underpin a national assessment of schools there needs to be a local framework of advisors and inspectors that can support and encourage teachers and school leaders. No school should be surprised by any national assessment if it has been working effectively with  local teams drawn from school middle and senior leaders. Such teams also provide a career path for those interested in progressing carers in teaching and learning and not school leadership.

An education system for all

Falling rolls, a fractured operating system of academy trusts, local authorities and dioceses does not make for an effective local education system. Decisions are haphazard, and may create competing and poorly funded outcomes. In the short-term the current Schools Forums would be reconstituted as a local education planning forum to ensure resources are not wasted, and young people can receive the best outcomes from their time in education.

A new deal for teachers

Teachers’ contracts have barely changed in the last 60 years, apart from the directed working time of 1,265 hours for those not on the leadership scale. While other graduates now expect four weeks paid holiday, up to 10 public holidays, and not to work between Christmas and after New Year, teachers still work an employer-driven flexi-time, where periods when children are not in school are expected to compensate for long-hours worked during term-time. Such an imbalance makes recruiting staff, and especially graduates challenging and needs a comprehensive review by the School Teachers Review Body (STRB).

Funding schools for needs not pupil numbers

Posted on by
Reply

Following on from yesterday’s post about the report from the Children’s Commissioner on children growing up, I talked this morning to a head teacher about some of the issues which faced them on a daily basis. According to the Children’s Commissioners report, their school is in an advantageous area for growing up. https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/resource/the-childhood-lottery-the-hardest-places-to-grow-up-in-england/

Yesterday’s report worries me because small pockets of deprivation within areas singled out as successful by reports such as that from the Children’s Commissioner may not have the mechanism to deal with their localised problems.

The school whose headteacher I was talking to is part of MAT, along with another school in the same postcode. Across that postcode, are two maintained schools, (one VA/one VC), and schools in three other multi-academy trusts, one with six schools, one with three schools and two MATs with two schools each.

How do you manage strategy for the area in such circumstances. No doubt health and social services can have area boards, but who has the power to bring together schools to work out a common approach to local issues?

Probably not at present the local authorities, both upper and lower tier, although through its Children’s Services the upper tier authoritiy does manage, social services, youth services and youth justice. Should it once again be given strategic powers for local areas? Central government has tried such an approach with ideas ranging from Blair’s Education Action Zones (EAZs) to the Conservative government’s Opportunity Areas policy. Most of these failed to improve education outcomes for the localities where they intervened. Would a more local approach have succeeded? Certainly not without resources.

I am led to wonder whether the present funding formula for schools is fit for purpose during a period of declining rolls.  Pitting schools against schools to recruit pupils doesn’t guarantee schools the resources necessary to ensure pupils achieve outcomes: some pupils need more resources than others. This was recognised with the Pupil Premium, but seems to have been overlooked in terms of the failure of local decision-making that has resulted from a fractured system of decision-making.

One example quoted to me was how trauma in pupils is addressed. This might arise because a parent was handed down a prison sentence, and the family name appeared in the local paper. How traumatic is that for a nine-year-old. Then, there are those living in overcrowded flats, sometimes in tower blocks. How traumatic is that to a seven-year-old.

All too often the simple administrative solution is to  create an EHCP for the child rather than to work with the school on funding to deal with the in-school issues resulting from the trauma, and to work to reduce exclusions that might result, even with an EHCP, and support better learning outcomes. Of course, all staff in all agencies are working under great pressure, so shortcuts can be an easy solution.

My thesis is that schools in a locality should once again be part of a system that acknowledges their needs, and that across a large administrative area, needs between schools may be different. Money is a help, but also a common set of values is also important.

What worries me is that a high percentage of schools in challenging areas are church or faith-based schools. What part are faith leaders playing in making sure that the schools they are responsible for serve their communities as effectively as possible. In the same vein, what part do local politicians play in ensuring the best outcomes for their residents?

Nationally as the Children’s Commissioner identified in her report, we need funding for targeted areas, but, in addition, we also need vision and the will to effect change on the part of both local and national politicians.  We need to create a school system capable of dealing with the challenges of all our children whether they are growing up in challenging area within a mostly great place to live or one of England’s deprived communities.

Growing up in England: The Children’s Commissioner’s Report

Posted on by
Reply

The Children’s Commissioner, Dame Rachel de Souza, has issued a comprehensive report on growing up in England. ‘The Childhood Lottery: The hardest places to grow up in England’ The Childhood Lottery: The hardest places to grow up in England | Children’s Commissioner for England The data comes from matrixes across the Commissioner’s six pillar of work

Health: health services and outcomes

Care: social care and outcomes

Community; policing, youth justice and services available to children in l where they live

Education: jobs and skills: schools and  post-16 plus educational outcomes

Family: housing, play , poverty and family life

Better world: the environment, children’s voices and citizenship

The data are for the 150+ upper-tier authorities, so London boroughs, metropolitan districts, unitary councils and the remaining shire counties. As a result, the authorities range in size from Rutland to Lancashire and Kent. Some areas are more homogenous than others: some are contiguous with health, police and other non-local government functions, while others are part of larger organisation for policing and health with policies set outside the local authority areas. Some functions are split between upper and lower tier authorities, such as housing and recreation facilities.

Despite these issues, that in some cases make the average for the authority not reflective of its different parts, and highlight some of the issues with dashboards, discussed in a recent post on this blog. Are dashboards useful? | John Howson this is a powerful report bringing together lots of useful data.

There are dangers here. Oxfordshire is ranked equal 11th with York, and the fourth best county to grow up in England. But, tomorrow, I will be at a workshop , initiated by an Oxfordshire-based multi-academy trust, aiming to improve the lives of children in the most challenging part of the county’s urban landscape. (The report classifies Oxfordshire as rural). The issues in this area would have been highlighted if district councils had been used as the data point instead of upper-tier authorities. Parliamentary constituencies, where most of this data is probably kept somewhere for MPs questions, might have been an even better and more equal frame of reference, allowing different between both Tottenham and Highgate within Haringey to have been judged separately.

Rural areas may also have a bit of a raw deal: you can’t count bus data where there are no buses. The data on childcare placement more than 20 miles from their home doesn’t discount kinship care that might be valuable, but not local in a large rural county.

However, it is easy to carp, and one cannot but praise the efforts of the Children’s Commissioner. The survey may also reveal how weakened local government has become. Take youth justice: how many councillors attend local committees to discuss approaches to this vital topic. Do cabinet members for Children’s Services even know that they often have this responsibility?

I was fortunate, when a Cabinet member, to have both a Director of Children’s Services and a Youth Justice lead that kept me informed, and allowed me to understand the importance of this area. On the other hand, the Health and Wellbeing Board was a challenge for me, as it covered so many different areas, and children’s health didn’t have a sub-committee. The fact that Oxfordshire is a Marmot County had nothing to do with me as a cabinet member for children’s services.

There are messages for politicians at all levels in this report, not only about childhood, but also into young adulthood. Sadly, many adults face the same problems, and solving those issues might also help future generations of children and young people growing up in a divided England.

Are London schools’ results slipping?

Posted on by
Reply

The DfE has today published the provisional data about attainment in the school-year 2025/26 Secondary school performance data in England: 2025 to 2026 (provisional) – GOV.UK The data provides two measures, ‘average attainment score’ and the  ‘Percentage of pupils achieving grades 5 or above in English and maths GCSEs’.  

Now, I never put a lot of store by the second of these measures, because it is heavily dependent on the ability of schools to recruit high-quality staff. I may be biased, because I didn’t meet this measure at sixteen, but did go on the good grades at ‘A’ level two years later, and thence to university and my subsequent career.

The other measure of ‘average attainment score’ isn’t perfect, but it does allow for a wider range of achievement, but the outcomes can still be affected by the ability of schools to be able to recruit teachers. Smaller local authorities, covering more homogenous communities, may also fare better in any rankings where those communities are likely to contain a higher proportion of parents engaged with their children’s schooling.

Once again, London boroughs dominate the top twenty-five authorities by outcomes for ‘average attainment score’, taking 17 of the top 25 places. Five of the other eight places are local authorities in the South East. If the Isles of Scilly – the one South West authority in the top 25 – is discounted as a special case, the other two authorities in the top twenty-five were, one in the North West and one in the East of England. Both of these authorities, along with four of the ten Outer London boroughs in the top 25, have selective schools within the authority area.

Interestingly, none of the Inner London’s seven boroughs in the top 25 have selective schools by designation. However, two authorities, Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith & Fulham are relatively small authorities.

Overall, the worst performing London borough was ranked 74th (Lambeth) with Croydon the lowest ranked Outer London borough at a ranking of 70th.

As discussed elsewhere, London has traditionally been able to fund its schools to provide some of the best pupil-teacher ratios in England.  (PDF) PTRS OVER TIME: A REVIEW OF PUPIL TEACHER RATIOS BETWEEN 1974 AND 2024 AND TWO PERIODS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT RE-ORGANISATION PTRS OVER TIME: A REVIEW OF PUPIL TEACHER RATIOS

Authorities with selective schools do seem to perform well across the country. As the previous posts on pupil place planning have shown, these schools are often well over capacity, raising questions about differences between the selective and non-selective schools in these authorities.   

At the other end  of the table are many local authorities that are either urban metropolitan districts or relatively small urban unitary authorities. The isle of Wight stands out as an example of small non-urban unitary authority close to the foot of the table.

Knowsley and Blackpool and no strangers to the lower reaches of the table. Blackpool was one of the Conservative’s Opportunity Areas, eligible for additional resources and help, but is still 21.5 points adrift of the best performing London borough without selective schools.  

Finally, Cambridgeshire recorded a score of 48.9 in 38th place, whereas Oxfordshire was 67th with  a score of 46.3. Both are fully non-selective authorities serving rural areas, but dominated by a university settlement at the heart of the county. This difference raises a whole set of interesting questions about our state school system.

The answer to the question in the title is ‘no’ compared with 2024/25 when 17 of the top 25 places were also taken by London boroughs. Oxfordshire slipped from 63rd last year to 67th this year. Effectively, a standstill position. Sadly Blackpool and Knowsley both propped up the table last year, as they have done this year.

Are Primary Headteachers underpaid?

Posted on by
1

Yesterday, the BBC ran a story about graduates and repayment of their tuition fees. Of the three graduates featured: one had paid nothing of the loan off, and her interest payments were increasing; one had paid something, and one had repaid the lot, using a family loan at a lower rate of interest. Plan 2: Three friends on a decade of student loans – BBC News

What stuck me about these three graduates in their 30,s was how much they were earning. One, in private practice, earned £50K; another as a project manager working outside London earned £72K and the third in financial services earned £85K.

Now, all no doubt have responsibilities, but do they have the same level of responsibilities as a primary headteacher, even of the smallest school?

Since last summer, I have seen 36 headships advertised on a scale starting at below £60,000 and more than 270 in total with a scale starting below £70,000. Now there are pension benefits and employer-driven flexitime holidays that the graduate in private practice might not expect, but there is a freedom that self-employment brings, plus other advantages.

Of course, the bottom of the scale might not be where a headteacher start, but it does provide a guideline. Indeed, with falling rolls, I have seen some re-advertisements at a lower salary than the original advert.

In  post earlier this year, I wondered whether about primary headteacher salaries Are state school headteachers overpaid? | John Howson and I make no excuse for returning to the subject. It’s a tough job running some our smallest schools. Little by way  of support staff; mixed age classes, the same amount of DfE demands, from the annual census to attendance returns, let alone Ofsted looming.

I don’t know whether the NAHT still submit job evaluation data comparing headteachers with comparable salaries elsewhere to the School Teachers Pay Review body, and I hope that they still do, because it seems to me that secondary headteachers manging a leadership team are often rewarded with a six figure salary, primary heads managing themselves, and both teaching and providing leadership aren’t properly recompensed. And what happens when a  grumpy parent uses AI to submit a 22 page complaint, and expects  a response?

Hopefully, if the school is in an academy trust or a diocese, help will be forthcoming, but for maintained schools, it will depend upon how many staff are left supporting education in Children’s Services. Not many, in some authorities, I fear.

As I pointed out in the previous post, a teacher in a large primary school on the upper Pay spine and with a TLR (Teaching & Learning Responsibility point) might earn nearly as much a headteacher in a small school, and with the benefit of the 1265 hours worktime directive that doesn’t apply to those on the Leadership Scale, such as headteachers.

I sincerely hope that the School Teachers Pay Review body will consider the issue of the demands of being a headteacher, and the remuneration it deserves. If it doesn’t, I suspect many primary headteachers would make excellent project managers, and not have to work evening and weekends. And, of course they wouldn’t have to deal with staff, parents and pupils.

A headteacher role is a great job, but it needs rewarding appropriately, and not just a sum based upon pupil numbers alone.

Applications to teach: a review of the data

Posted on by
Reply

When I started this blog, way back in 2013, universities were out of favour with the government as a route to train teachers. Indeed, Mr Gove once famously used the term ‘blob’ Am I a blob? | John Howson Now, he was referring to local government, but he might just as well have been fingering university departments of education, such was his dislike of their approach to preparing teachers. He much preferred schools as the location for those learning to become a teacher.

Some years later, this blog reviewed the balance between applications to different routes into teaching. I expressed my views in a post in .  A thank you to Schools of Education | John Howson

In that post, I reviewed the percentages for applications in May over four years, as derived from the then UCAS monthly data reports. This was before the DfE took over recruitment through their portal

So here are the percentages for applications in May over the four years reported in that post and as derived from the then UCAS monthly data reports.

Primary2015201620172018
HE51454847
SCITT89910
SDFEE24272525
SDSAL17191818
Secondary2015201620172018
HE51475052
SCITT8101112
SDFEE29312928
SDSAL121297

I thought it might be interesting to see what has happened since the years of the covid pandemic. (I don’t have 2018-2020 data easily to hand). The monthly data for applications is no longer split between primary and secondary, one of a few unhelpful changes to the data presentation. But, at least, there is still monthly data available, and that data has provided fertile grounds for this blog over the years.

The first point to note, when comparing the two tables, is the change in categories, with the ‘Fee’ route disappearing and the ‘Lead Provider’ route replacing it. The ‘teaching degree apprenticeship’ has also appeared, and is now in its second year of applications. Will its significance grow over the next few years?

ALL20222023202420252026
HE4841384042
SCITT1418162017
Fee Route28
SALARIED671198
LEAD PROV030282119
PG T APP457812
T DeGRE APP00012

It is also worth noting that these are percentages. As a result, they hide the fact that in the period covered by the earlier table, pupil rolls were on the increase, and thus more teachers needed to be trained. Will falling rolls, fewer teachers need to be trained currently. Whether that has affected the view of teaching as a career, is of no immediate concern in this post, as the  basis is the percentages applying for each route.

Apprenticeship have now secured a strong foothold in the minds of would-be teachers, accounting for 14% or nearly one in seven applications by the end of May 2026. School Centred Courses (SCITTs) have been around for more than 30 years now. In May 2025 they accounted for 25% of applications, but have fallen back in 2026 to 17% this May.

The various salaried routes saw an increase in applications after covid, but, possibly because of the graduate apprenticeship route, their percentage seems to be in decline from the 11% of applications reached in May 2024 to eight per cent in 2026.  

Seemingly, higher education is the main loser; down from 48% in 2022 to 42% in May 2026. This is nine percentage points below its position in May 2015, when higher education accounted for 52% of applications. I suspect that a significant percentage of the decline is down to fewer primary places being on offer in the past few years. As those courses normally ‘fill’ with offers early in the cycle, fewer places will have generated fewer applications. The four-percentage point gain over the past two years, may be down to an increase in ‘rest of the world’ applicants who may know more about universities than the other routes on offer. The DfE no doubt has that data, but it is not shared in the monthly statistics.

Where to place the Provider Led courses? Are they a direct transfer from the former School Direct Fee route, or something different. Either way, either their popularity or their availability to applicants,  has seen their percentage decline quite steeply in recent years.

The data in this post is based upon trends in applications. At some point in the future, I will look at trends in ‘offer’ and actual attendance, as measured by the ITT Census, produced each December by the DfE. The post also uses the month of May data, not the endo f the round .This is because by May some subjects and the primary sector are often not accepting any more applications, so May is a good time to review the application round when the majority of courses have been accepting applications.

For now, the universities are still the leading route into teaching, but will vice chancellors still want to play in this game as they consider their financial futures, especially if targets, and thus income will be reducing because of falling rolls? Smaller groups are often uneconomic, and subsidy is not the name of the game in higher education at present. Interesting times.