Special Offer from TeachVac: £400 for all teaching jobs

TeachVac http://www.teachvac.co.uk has launched its early bird rate card for 2023/24. Subscribing schools pay one fee for all their vacancies to be listed on TeachVac from June 2023 to the end of August 2024. Sign up your school today.

TeachVac is offering 15 months of matching all vacancies for one fee of just £500 for a secondary phase school, discounted to just £400 for early payment.

Primary schools pay £75, or just £50 for the one yearly payment if made now.

Nine years of experience and extensive use of AI allows TeachVac to offer all schools; both independent and state schools this offer which is substantially cheaper than other recruitment routes.

For groups of schools and agencies there are special rates.

Schools using agencies can benefit from the agency rate if their agency is registered with TeachVac.

Why use TeachVac?

As the leading monitor of the labour market for teachers – NfER used TeachVac data in their 2023 annual survey of the labour market for teachers and both tes and SchoolsWeek also consult TeachVac when they want information about the labour market for teachers – TeachVac has unrivaled data on the job market.

Schools that use TeachVac’s vacancy matching service can access information that enables them to assess the state of the market for new entrants including monthly updates on this blog.

Recruitment for both the January and September 2024 rounds are going to be challenging, parlty because of a shortage of new entrants into the profession in a wide range of secondary sector subjects.

If you need more information or would just like to chat about the offer from TeachVac then email the team at enquiries@teachvac.co.uk or telephone 01983 550408

£10,000 to attract overseas teachers

There has been a lot of chatter across social media about the government’s offer of a £10,000 tax free relocation scheme for overseas students starting ITT in certain subjects, and teachers in these subjects being offered a similar package if they will come and work in England. These incentives are to help to overcome the dire shortage of teachers in many subjects that has been well documented in the posts on this blog. There is now even a letter in The Times newspaper on the subject.

Concerns about the incentive schemes range from the issue of stripping out teachers from countries that need them even more than we do. This theme rarely, if ever, looks at whether those countries are training sufficient, not enough or even too many graduates for the local labour market. Then, there is the argument, as in The Times, that teaching is now a global occupation, as it is, but that schools in England make it difficult for those that have worked overseas to return to teach in England. That is a problem the government could fix immediately, and not by offering cash payments.

The DfE could establish a recruitment agency alongside its job board and hire well respected headteachers to interview would-be returning teachers, and certify them as suitable for employment in England. These applicants could then be matched with vacancies on the DfE job board placed by state school and TeachVac for independent school vacancies, and their details forwarded to the school.

If the schools did not take the application forward, they could be asked to explain why these teachers were not short-listed for interview or, if interviewed, not appointed. The feedback could be used to help develop the scheme, if necessary, by offering appropriate one-term conversion courses. An autumn term course, offering say £10,000 to participants that complete the course, would mean these teachers would be available to fill January vacancies. These are vacancies where schools are really struggling each year to fill unexpected departures.

Such a scheme would also stop the return of headteachers flying off to Canada and Australia in search of candidates to fill their posts, as has happened in past periods of teacher shortage.

Expanding on the re-training scheme, the government might also look at the increasing pool of teachers trained for the primary sector that are unable to find teaching posts. Could a one-term conversion course to teach Key Stage 3 in a particular subject allow them to be employed by secondary schools, and release teachers with more subject knowledge to teach Key Stages 4 & 5?

The DfE has been happy to interfere in the recruitment market with its job board, but could be much more involved than just designing the current hands-off incentive schemes and other actions such as writing to ITT providers asking them to consider applicants from around the world. This letter was at the point in the ITT cycle where providers are mostly looking to keep places for home students in case they appear. After all, who knows when the next downturn in the economy will emerge and teaching will once again be a career of interest, a sit briefly was in the early days of the covid pandemic.

Some marks to the DfE for doing something, but there are more marks to be obtained for being even more creative in solving our teaching crisis.

Four-day week for teachers?

A Labour MP has called for a four-day working week to be introduced across the public sector.

Lib Dem-run South Cambridgeshire District Council’s cabinet will meet today to approve the continuation of the trial for all desk-based staff as well as extending it to cover caretakers and binmen. 

These are just two of the headlines from an article that I read this morning. What would be the implications for teachers of the introduction of a four-day week? The answer depends upon whether the same amount of face-to-face contact with pupils was maintained as at present and whether that was contact time spread over four or five days? What effect would four longer school days have on pupils, especially younger pupils? After all, some early years settings already offer wrap around care that is much longer than the traditional school-day.

What would the psychologists and those that study brain development in children have to say about putting five days of work into four? Perhaps a model would develop of four days of taught time and the fifth for ‘homework’ or supplementary activities.

On the plus side, parents also working a four-day week would have an extra day with their children: on the downside, parents whose working week did not coincide with the school four-day week would have to deal with the need for extra childcare.

Any change would come with a cost both to individuals and to the State. If there wasn’t sufficient funding, schools might be tempted to cram the teaching into four days and use the fifth day to generate income from their school sites and playing fields.

In a sector struggling to recruit enough teachers at present, would a four-day week make the profession more or less attractive to potential teachers. Certainly, if the bulk of graduate careers moved to a four-day week, teaching, already operating an employer-driven form of flexi-time, might be unattractive without some other boost to conditions of work.

A four-day working week might be a real challenge to the private school sector, where the additional costs would most likely have to be passed on to parents through increased fees. An increase of this magnitude might drive more parents back into the state sector, upping the cost of state education to the government. Add VAT on to the costs, and such numbers switching might increase still further.

During the Corbyn era, Labour proposed four additional bank holidays for workers; all during school holidays, so teachers would have seen no benefit from them. The implications for the teaching profession and others working in schools of the widespread introduction of a four-day working week do need to be considered.

However, I don’t think that the present model of schooling will continue as it has for the past 150 years. The AI revolution may well turn out to be as profound for society as the microchip revolution that started in the 1970s and transformed the world of work beyond recognition in many areas, but only to a limited degree in schools.

 Technology and its interaction with the process of schooling has further to go in the future. Perhaps the pressure for a four-day working week for humans might be the catalyst for major changes in schooling?

Is the job boom for teachers ending?

After three months of record numbers of vacancies for teachers being recorded by TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk April saw something of a slowdown in the pace of advertised vacancies. No, there wasn’t an overall decline compared with the record set for April in 2022, but the rate of increase, as the table makes clear, was less then during the first three months of 2023. Nevertheless, the monthly total of 8,557 was a new record for the period since 2018, the year when TeachVac first started analysing monthly trends in vacancies.

201820192020202120222023
January358248186497207962697807
February301041746318389646289056
March42156185681160391051612289
April477760224432511084618557
May632778454375674114211
June22233296188627955968
July6129085807051812
August377390287315794
September17722718195629604711
October25693745223231315106
November23052897197733925063
December13822090121421773112
Source: TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk

There may have been special factors restricting the number of vacancies in April this year. The holiday period always has an effect on the April vacancy numbers and this year there may have been an effect due to the industrial action affecting many schools.

The interesting question is what will vacancies be like during May in 2023? Traditionally, May is the peak month for classroom teacher vacancies in the secondary sector. It is too early to predict what will happen in 2023, and the effect of the coronation and the extra bank holidays in addition to the hardening of the industrial unrest in the profession might affect the profile of vacancies this month.

Nevertheless, schools do need to be fully staffed for September, and there are fewer new entrants than in recent years, as this blog has pointed out in recent posts. Should serving teachers decide to quit, in greater numbers than last year, for whatever reason, then vacancies will remain buoyant. But, should the effect of the cost-of-living crisis and increased rents and mortgages in particular deter teachers from leaving, especially if they think that in doing so, they might miss any one-off payment for back pay, then perhaps the 14,000 recorded vacancies of May 2023 might not be bettered this year.

Within the overall national picture there are examples to be found of both significant increases such as for IT teachers in London, although that was balanced by a decrease in demand for such teachers from schools across the South East. Maths teachers were in demand in the North Wet, but not in the North East during April, and Science teachers were wanted in the Yorkshire and The Humber region, but less so in the West midlands than in April 2022.

Demand for primary classroom teachers was weak in April. Leaving aside the special circumstances of April 2020, the recorded vacancies were the lowest seen since before 2018 across England as a whole, with demand across the South East being especially weak this April.

Anyone interested in more granular data by local authority or other filter is welcome to ask for a special report from TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk Prices are reasonable and include a breakdown by state and private schools as well as by academies and maintained schools.

Bit late for ITT targets

The DfE has finally published the ITT targets for courses starting this autumn. Postgraduate initial teacher training targets: 2023 to 2024 – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)  In addition, they have also supplied details of the Teacher Supply Model that allows the workings behind the calculation of the targets to be discussed. This is a welcome return to open government after a few years of limited information on the thinking behind the numbers.

Two points arise from the announcement. Firstly, it is incredibly late in the recruitment round. For most subjects that fact won’t matter because the targets aren’t going to be met. But what will happen in Classics and physical education where there are currently more offers than places in the target? Will potential trainees have their offers withdrawn? Will providers recruit over target, and will there be any consequences for doing so? Will the DfE look at overall recruitment by a provider rather than on a subject-by-subject basis?

The DfE’s decision may well influence how providers approach the business of making offers in future rounds. Historically, these targets were issued in the autumn so that providers knew their allocations before they had started to make many offers. Such an approach is much more sensible than announcing the target after Easter, more than half-way through the recruitment cycle. In the past, there were also indicative targets for future years. This helped providers manage their workforce planning.

The more alarming feature of these targets is the addition of the under-recruitment from earlier rounds. I have addressed this issue before. Schools do not start each new year sending children home because they couldn’t recruit enough teachers. They botch, by recruiting those teachers that they can, and adjusting the timetable and the underlying curriculum to fit the staff they have recruited. There are as a result not the vacancies there were in the training cycle.

Suppose there was an unexpected economic slowdown because of US bank failures and teaching suddenly recruited to these new targets? Would these additional trainees find jobs in 2024. The answer is we don’t know because the demands on school funding, especially for staff costs are not yet known, but it would seem unlikely. So, if a school has employed a biologist to teach physics and were offered a physics teacher for 2024 would they sack the biology teacher? Or let the physics teacher wait for an opening to arise?

Adding unfilled places to future targets has been tried in the past, and didn’t work. I am surprised to see it being used again this year.

As a result of the increase in targets in many secondary subjects – and it isn’t clear whether these targets include Teach First numbers or not – the April offer numbers represent only a small fraction of the DfE’s target number in many subjects, as the data in the table reveals.

SubjectOffers as a % of target
Business Studies12
Others12
Physics13
Design & Technology14
Computing20
Music20
Modern Languages24
Religious Education27
Total33
Geography35
Art & Design36
Chemistry39
Mathematics41
English42
Biology46
Drama65
History80
Physical Education170
Classics192
Source: TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk

History and drama may well meet their targets, but all other subjects probably won’t. Will the DfE add any shortfall on these targets onto those for next year, making the totals even higher and harder to achieve?

Finally, how will these target numbers play out with the newly accredited providers? Are the institutions going to take the extra numbers or might the loss of some providers be a matter for regret?

Warning signs on ITT recruitment

The DfE is holding a webinar for teachers looking for a job this afternoon. I suspect that it may well be full or primary teachers and trainees, plus some history and PE teachers. Anyone else still looking for a teaching post for September either has only just started or may need more than a webinar to help them find a job. TeachVac www.teachvac.couk along with other services does offer one to one advice sessions.

However, based upon the applications data for 2023 postgraduate courses released today, the DfE might be better advised chasing up more applicants for next year. April can be a tricky month to assess the status of the applications round for any year because of Easter and other faith festivals. However, some trends are becoming clear.

The increase in applications, as reported previously, is being driven by an increase from those recorded as from the ‘rest of the world’. Thus, of the 2,601 recorded increase in applicants compared with April last year, some 2,014 are shown as from ‘rest of the world’.

The danger is that this increase is masking some worrying trends. The number of applicants under the age of 25 continues to be below the number recorded last year by around 400 applicants, or more than 2%.

More concerning are the nine secondary subjects where offers are at their worst level since before 2016/17. Of the other secondary subjects, most are still below the offers at April in the 2020/21 cycle. Only geography and design and technology are back to offer levels in earlier years. For geography it is the best April since 2018/19, and for design and technology, the best since 2016/17, although even at the current level the target won’t be met for this year.

The sciences and modern foreign languages are the subjects where the greatest improvements in offers can be identified. So, perhaps the bursary and scholarships are making a difference. However, there is not the data to see the extent to which these extra offers are being made to ‘home students’ or those from overseas.

The increase in applicants is significantly affecting universities, faced with nearly 8,000 more applications so far this round: a 20% increase in workload. The total number of applicants rejected has increased from 3,727 in April last year to 5,612 this April. Nearly 300 more applicants have also withdrawn their applications.

Another worrying sign is the decline in applicants domiciled in London and the South East regions where demand for teachers is always the highest.

Unless there is an increase in home applicants over the next couple of months this round is beginning to look as if the outcome will be grim for providers trying to fund courses with limited numbers of students, and for schools seeking teachers in September 2024 and January 2025.

Hopefully, the resolution, when it comes, of the pay and conditions dispute between the teaching associations and the government will include provisions to encourage more graduates to choose teaching as a career. Paying their fees might be a useful concession.

Why do some schools suspend more pupils than other schools?

The levelling up debate seems to have somewhat been overshadowed recently by the concerns about Ofsted, and the issues with worker’s pay and conditions. However, the problem of how to increase success rates for some schools hasn’t disappeared.

As I have written before on this blog, the lack of any local ability to intervene in the absence of government funding stream for levelling up, means that improvements are often haphazard, if they even happen at all. Academy chains could shunt pupils out of their schools, and leave others to cope, and failing schools have limited support outside of opportunity Areas or other places with special funding.

For a long period of time, part of Oxford city – that city of dreaming spires – has been divided into two; the generally, affluenct and successful North and West of the city, and less well-off south and east, as the ONS data from the 2021 starkly reveals. Not so much a case of the wrong side of the tracks, but the wrong side of the river Cherwell – not, note, the river Thames.

As a result, it is perhaps not much of a surprise to find that two of the state-funded secondary schools within the city – both located in the south of the city – have places in the top 200 secondary schools by the rate of suspensions during the Spring term of 2021/22 school-year. Fortunately, neither is in the top 100 schools, and for both they are probably faring better than they were a few years ago.

This an issue that the government’s Social Mobility Commission Social Mobility Commission Quarterly Commentary: March 2023 – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) might wish to explore in some detail.

Five of the 20 local authorities with the most schools in the top 200 secondary schools are authorities with selective secondary schools. One is a south coast unitary with a disproportionately large number of its non-selective schools in the list of the top 200 schools. Like Oxfordshire, it is an authority unlikely to attract extra funding for its schools under levelling-up, but there must be an issue to explore as to why so many of its schools are in this list?

A few years ago, University Technical Colleges used to feature strongly in this type of list, but closures and presumably some better understanding of transfer at fourteen has reduced their number to four, two of them being the only schools in their authority in the list.

The extent to which feeder primary schools for these 200 schools also feature in the list would be an interesting exercise to undertake. Also, it might be interesting to ask why one county has only one school in the list, whereas an adjacent unitary has three schools?

There is something of a north-south divide in the list and relatively few schools in London are in the list: an interesting turnaround from the last century, when I am sure that there would have been more of the capital’s secondary schools in the list. No doubt, the strength of some of the academy chains located in the capital has made a difference.

Merry-go-round of Ministers has repercussions

I am grateful to freelancer and former TES journalist, Adi Bloom, for this interesting fact

Between the start of July and the end of October last year [2022], there were four new education secretaries, as well as a succession of junior ministers. And, between them they held 133 events labelled “introductory meeting to discuss the organisation following the ministerial reshuffle”.

This paralysis no doubt was replicated across government. Adi has written a witty piece on her LinkedIn page about the current Secretary of State’s possible icebreaker meeting with the key trade union (professional association) general secretaries of the teacher groups that readers might with to search out. In passing, I wonder whether Secretaries of State ever hold such meeting with trade unions representing the non-teaching staff in schools that now outnumber teachers?

Anyway, the essential point is whether this rapid turnover of ministers may have contributed to the government’s challenges over public sector pay. Might a Cabinet with more experience of their department, running to more than a few days tenure, have anticipated the implications of public sector pay review bodies controlling pay rises each year and a rapid an unpredicted increase in inflation better than seems to have been the case.

Might ministers, such as the Secretary of State for Education, that had been in post for some time, and thus more secure in their portfolio, have both had better relations with civil servants in order to have been able to ask questions about pay policy and recruitment and retention of the teacher workforce and have struck up some sort of rapport with teachers’ leaders? Possible as a scenario, but unlikely I grant you, but impossible with such a rapid turnover of minsters?

Much must also depend upon the character of the individual as Secretary of State, and their willingness to create inter-personal relations with key players in the education landscape. The absence of the Secretary of State from the ASCL conference, plus a relative lack of appearances in the media raises the question as to whether the present incumbent of the top job at Sanctuary Buildings isn’t one for the limelight. Some that have held the office or Secretary of State have enjoyed the public nature of their role while others, were rarely seen in public, and their stewardship goes largely unremembered.

We have now entered that phase of the life of a parliament where it becomes more of a challenge to create policy, except in areas where ministers have direct control. Intermediaries can now drag their feet secure in the knowledge that a general election is likely to be no more than 18 months away, and that the present government isn’t likely to be returned with the same majority as a present, even if it is returned at all.

Equally, ministers can leave difficult decisions to their successor to deal with. It’s worth recalling that under the coalition’s fixed term Parliament Act there would have had to have been an election this year. Perhaps the current Prime Minister might use that as an excuse for an autumn election is next month’s local elections are really frightful?

Teachers work long hours in term-time

The DfE has now published their latest school leaders and teachers’ workload survey as part of their regular series of surveys about the working lives or teachers and school leaders. Working lives of teachers and leaders – wave 1 – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

On workload the key paragraphs are that

Average working hours for leaders in both primary and secondary schools remain substantially lower than they were in the 2016 Teacher Workload Survey (TWS) but are slightly higher than those reported in the 2019 TWS.

The average working hours for teachers were significantly lower than reported in the 2016 and 2019 TWS; however, this reduction was driven by reduced primary teacher hours specifically, while working hours for secondary teachers were not significantly different to those reported in the 2019 TWS.

In a similar pattern to that found in the Teacher Workload Surveys, secondary leaders reported working longer hours than primary leaders (58.3 vs. 56.2 for primary leaders), but secondary teachers reported working fewer hours than primary teachers (48.5 vs. 49.1 for primary teachers).

There were further notable differences by sub-groups of respondents. For full-time leaders, reported average hours were:

• Higher for leaders working in primary (57.2) or secondary (58.6) school than leaders working in special schools / PRU / AP (54.7)

• Higher among leaders working at academy schools (58.4) than those working in LA maintained schools (56.6).

For full-time teachers, reported average hours were:

• Higher for teachers working in primary (53.2) or secondary (51.2) schools than teachers working in special schools / PRU / AP (48.2)

• Higher for leading practitioners (54.4) and classroom teachers (52.4) than ECTs (49.9) and unqualified teachers (46.8)

Satisfaction with workload

Most teachers and leaders disagreed that their workload was acceptable (72%) and that they had sufficient control over it (62%).

This is a slight increase on the TWS 2019, where just under seven-in-ten (69%) of those surveyed disagreed their workload was acceptable, though it is a considerable decrease on the TWS 2016, where almost nine-in-ten (87%) disagreed.

Combined, over half (56%) of teachers and leaders thought that their workload was both unacceptable and that they did not have sufficient control over it.

Predictably, those who disagreed that their workload was acceptable reported higher working hours (an average of 51.6 for those who disagreed vs. an average of 43.7 for those who agreed).

More experienced teachers and leaders were also more likely to disagree that their workload was acceptable: 66% of those who had been qualified for up to 3 years disagreed with the statement compared to 73% who had been qualified for over 3 years.

Perhaps not surprisingly, head teachers and others on the Leadership Scale were more likely to report the use of flexible working arrangements, including working at home than were classroom teachers. However, it is not clear whether the question was confined to the normal working day or at any time? As there was also a question about PPA time taken off-site that may have subsumed some home working for non-school leaders.  

Perhaps one of the least surprising findings was that teachers’ views on pupil behaviour were also correlated with school Ofsted rating31, as three quarters (75%) of those in schools with an outstanding Ofsted rating labelled pupil behaviour as good or ‘very good’, compared to just under three-in-ten (28%) of those in schools with special measures/with serious weaknesses.

This finding may correlate with higher staff turnover in schools this more adverse Ofsted ratings. Given that many schools won’t have had a rating for sometime now, this suggested the deep-seated nature of discipline issue sin some schools that are aggravated by any shortage of teachers in the system.

There are some disturbing percentages around the area of teacher well-being, but that’s for another post.

Overall, it is possible to see why teachers have joined in the general public sector display of industrial action and that although discipline isn’t the factor that it was a generation and more ago, other issues, such as marking and preparation frustrate and concern the present generation of teachers.  

22% more teaching vacancies

How challenging has the teacher labour market been during the first three months of 2023? Certainly, there has been a recorded increase in vacancies compared with the first three months of 2022 in many secondary subjects as the data in the table shows.

(Jobs Found in Date Range: 01-01 To 31-03 in Years 2022 and 2023

Government Office Region: All
Local Authority: All

Subject20222023Percentage
Art527670+27%
Business636654+3%
Classics110111+1%
Computer Science11911519+28%
Dance4241-2%
Drama358368+3%
DT16432049+25%
Economics307232-24%
Engineering70-100%
English25663392+32%
Geography10461429+37%
Health and Social Care160124-23%
History748841+12%
Humanities231388+68%
Law3231-3%
Mathematics33273942+18%
Media Studies75110+47%
MFL17362208+27%
Music647782+21%
Pastoral272370+36%
PE9061187+31%
Philosophy6356-11%
Psychology307286-7%
RE835979+17%
Science39554839+22%
–Biology310353+14%
–Chemistry438429-2%
–Physics526580+10%
SEN431445+3%
Sociology133137+3%
Total2229127190+22%
Source: Teachvac www.teachvac.co.uk

Chemistry is the only major subject to have recorded a fall in vacancies compared with the first three months of 2022, and the fall was only two per cent or just nine vacancies below 2022.

Overall, TeachVac has recorded a 22% increase in secondary sector vacancies, with English recording a 32% increase from 2,566 to 3,392 vacancies during the three months. Geography has recorded a 37% increase in vacancies and pastoral type vacancies increased by 36% compared with the first quarter of last year.

As the number of trainees entering the labour market is lower than in recent years, the next few weeks when the labour market for teachers reaches its annual peak will be challenging for many schools seeking to make appointments for September 2023, especially for schools in and around London where the competition between state and private schools for teachers is at its most intense.

This lunchtime, the BBC World at One invited three conservative supporters – one MP and two think tank commentators – to discuss the challenges facing the teaching profession. All agreed that there were deep-seated issues of both pay and conditions of work than will need to be addressed if state schools are going to stop the departure of teachers from the profession and  encourage more new entrants into teaching.  

The rejection of the current pay offer made by the government by NEU members means strikes will now continue into the summer term and the examinations season unless Ministers can squeeze more cash out of HM Treasury.

I don’t envy those trying to construct school timetables for 2023-24 school year especially in challenging schools with a high staff turnover. Ofsted should take the recruitment crisis into account when inspecting schools. TeachVac will happily offer data comparing schools being inspected with the norm for the local area.