‘PedXing’, and ‘this way for the nuclear bunker’

August is known as the silly season. It is also the holiday season in the northern hemisphere. So, perhaps not surprisingly, this blog is having a bit of a holiday from writing just about education.

This post is being written from Dubai, so why the headline? Well, when I first visited the USA ,in the summer of 1968, these were the two signs that I saw that stuck in my mind. The first, because we have no word sign for pedestrian crossings in the United Kingdom at that time, the transport Ministry preferring pictograms. The second because, although only a couple of years after the Cuban Missile crisis, there were no signs in Britain of what people should do if the threat of nuclear war became a reality. Were the British just more phlegmatic, or just further away from the action? I suppose an ICBM from the USSR could have hit New York, and in the UK were were still more concerned about the threat of a conventional war. In the late 1960s, the British Armed forces still had over 50,000 troops stationed in Germany in case of a threat from the East.

As an aside, that threat in the summer of 1968, while I was in North America, came when Russian troops invaded what was then Czechoslovakia and put an end to the ‘Prague Spring’. In the USA, the threat turned out to be internal, not least to the Democratic Party with assassinations, and the riots outside the Democratic Party’s convention in Chicago.

But, back to the point of this post. After three days in Dubai and a visit to Fujairah, another Emirate in the UAE on the Gulf of Oman, I have seen no signs of either anxiety about what has been happening in the Gulf for the past six months, nor any warning to the population of what to do if there was a drone or missile attack. All feels exactly as it has been on my other visits to Dubai, the last of which was a recently as 2024. The building boom goes on, with ever more extravagant design for high rise buildings: bits chopped ot, bridges connecting two buildings at a high level, and almost any other non-functional design you can image, and a few you probably cannot.

To add an education note; the UAE, and especially Dubai is an important location for British-style schools, many independent schools have offshoots here, free from the demands of the VAT-person. There is also the offshoot of one state school: something I wrote about earlier. see What is the role of the State in schooling? | John Howson There are also many schools for the nationals from the Indian sub-continent that make up much of the workforce in Dubai where employees have been able to bring their families.

i did wonder whether I should have tried to export Drone Football as a new game on the back of the World Cup, but this was a holiday, so perhaps that’s for another time. If you are interested, drop me a note in the comments and I will put you in touch with the organisers of the game in Oxfordshire.

Mbacc a pipedream without the teachers

In the previous post, I considered trends in teacher supply into state secondary schools for three subjects listed as a part of the Prime Minister’s proposed MBacc. If such a qualification is to be rolled out nationally, then there will either need to be more teachers in schools in certain subjects or more young people will need to be diverted into further education, perhaps at 14 rather than 16. However, even that strategy won’t solve the music and performing arts dilemma regarding the number of teachers’ issue. Abolishing the bursary for music looks even more unfortunate in the light of the MBacc announcement.

How about the wider primary and secondary sectors?

 In line with falling pupil numbers, there has been a reduction in trainee numbers in the primary sector. This has resulted in fewer numbers obtaining QTS, and even fewer of those working in the state primary school sector. The 5,882 recorded working in state schools of the 2024/25 cohort should increase as the data is refined, but it is still likely to be only halfthe number of just four years previously, when more than 10,000 new teachers were working in the primary sector at some point in the 16 months after obtaining Qualified Teacher Status (QTS).

Fortunately, those newly qualified teachers not obtaining a teaching post in England, might be able to look overseas for work. With VAT on fees for private school pupils in England, the independent sector is unlikely to offer must of an alternative to the state sector over the next few years; at least until there is some upturn in the birthrate.

I hope that course providers will take note of this data, and not over-recruit to courses in the future, as burdening students with more debt and a restricted chance of securing a teaching post is not really fair on the students.

In the secondary sector, the overall position hides some variations between subjects.

The percentage obtaining QTS among secondary trainees has been falling; from some 95% before covid, to 92-93% in the years since. The overall percentage hides a much greater change in the numbers obtaining QTS, from a Covid high of 19,070 to a low of 12,820 only two years later. Covid may have brought forward the decision to teach that might otherwise have been delayed until a future year.

Fortunately, 2024-2025 saw the number obtaining QTS much closer to pre-Covid levels. With falling rolls, the overall number of trainees, if not the mix within subjects, may be satisfactory for the DfE.

However, post-covid the state school sector lost around five and a half thousand teachers compared with the pre-covid numbers f new teachers entering state schools. To what extend these missing teachers have been replaced by new entrants through the ‘assessment only’ route, isn’t clear from the data.

In the most recent year, 2024-2025, what of the percentages in state schools by secondary subjects?

The low percentage of those qualifying for QTS in Classics instate schools, is perhaps not a surprise given the percentage of state schools that teach the subject. The fact physical education is in second position in the table, with just 59% of those obtaining QTS in state schools should not be a surprise to anyone familiar with the number of trainees recruited and the DfE’s target for the subject.

Only in English and mathematics were there more than 1,000 new teachers working in schools. Given the requirement to teach these subjects to all pupils up to Year 11, and for some in Years 12 & 13, even these numbers may be insufficient. The 234 music, and 133 business studies teachers, and the 321 religious education new entrants, are almost certainly not enough to allow the subjects to thrive in our schools, even before the desire to widen the curriculum to include more MBacc students, and fewer EBacc students.

Alongside the conversation about the curriculum, and the desire of the Prime Minister to make it more relevant for work in the 21st century, there really needs to be a conversation about how the curriculum changes can be properly staffed, so that all pupils receive a high quality education taught by teachers qualified in their subject, and not just a page ahead of the AI generated lesson plan.

Data from: Initial teacher training performance profiles: 2024 to 2025 – GOV.UK

MBacc and teacher supply

The DfE ITT performance tables issued today allow me to write a quick post about the MBacc and the supply of newly qualified teachers over the past few year. Initial teacher training performance profiles: 2024 to 2025 – GOV.UK

Number for three key subjects are limited, as the table makes clear

Achieved QTS and teaching in a state school within 16 months of QTS

ITT YearBusiness StudiesDesign & TechnologyMusicTotal
2017/18106240220566
2018/19134236212582
2019/2020125341224690
2020/212254543371016
2021/22199292289780
2022/23155346227728
2023/24135441171747
2024/25133456234823

 Numbers have increased over recent years, and may still increase further as more data is accumulated for the most recent years. However, apart from the covid bounce, they still remain low as a percentage of state schools.

With more than 500 vacancies for teachers of music this year, even if half are filled by returners, there would not be enough trainees in any years, except for the ‘covid years’ to cover vacancies.

Free bus transport to age 16: a mistake?

Rumours are flying around that our new Prime Minister wants to mandate free bus travel for everyone up to the age of sixteen. This would just leave those between 18 and some point in a person’s 60s paying for public transport.

Why do I question whether this policy is a mistake? Not because I think it is wrong, it isn’t, although it suffers from the same issues as any other universal benefit, by including those that could pay for the service, as well as those that benefit. Still, that issue can be dealt with through general taxation, something our previous Prime Minister never seemed to realise when creating the Winter Fuel Allowance debacle that set him on the road to the end of his premiership.

In the case of free bus travel, could this be someone that Mr Burnham has looked at through the lens of an urban mayor, with little lifetime experience of rural areas?  

Free bus transport should be extended to age 18, not stop at 16, in order to come into line with the official, but not statutory, learning leaving age. If David Blunkett is advising Mr Burnham, he should be pressing this case as a former distinguished Secretary of State for Education.

If Mr Burnham wants to reduce the number of NEETs, making them pay to travel to college after Year 11 won’t help his case, especially in rural areas, where there may not even be a bus service. If Mr Burnham is to be a Prime Minister for the country, and not just a Labour Prime Minster, then he must understand the needs of all young people, regardless of where they live.

I have suggested before, that 16-18 year olds in rural areas wanting to go to college, where there is no possible bus route, face a real deterrent. My advice was to remove motor Insurance tax from vehicles taxed in the name of a 16-18 year old, and for their sole use.

Mr Burnham should also make it clear how any policy about free bus travel would link to parental choice of schooling? Again, free travel in urban areas means parental choice is not an issue, but it is in rural areas where free travel to the ‘nearest school’ has been the norm since 2014.  

The small group that really needs a change in policy to align with the principle of free bus travel to 18 are those young people living in rural areas with selective schools. Kent, springs to mind, along with Essex, Buckinghamshire and Gloucestershire.

In these areas, taking the selection test for secondary school is seen as a parental choice, and doesn’t therefore qualify for free transport. This is an attack on the less well off working and living in rural areas. If Mr Burnham wants to mandate free transport for all to age 16 or, as I prefer 18, anyone living in a rural area and passing the selection test for a selective school should be provided with free transport.

Of course, Mr Burnham could be really brave, and reintroduce the 1976 Education Act, associated with the late Shirely Williams, and require all secondary schools to be non-selective, except in few isolated cases of national schools for certain talents in music, ballet and dance. Mr Blair’s government never saw the need to make that change, but, perhaps, Mr Blunkett might now have his opportunity to make the change with such a large Labour majority at Westminster.

Free transport to 16, is good, but not good enough, please, make it free transport to 18, at least to an approved education facility.

Train to be a teacher: worth the risk?

The DfE today published their annual look at trends in the school population. Release home – National pupil projections – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK The school population is principally affected by changes, either upwards of downwards, in the birth rate. Changes in migration also plays a small part, but can be more important in certain locations. Thus, the reduction of the number of families accompanying students will affect some university towns more than the overall numbers.

As these are projections from the DfE are based on data from The Office for National Statistics (ONS), they are the result of considerations of various factors, of which changes in the birth-rates is the most significant. The gloomiest set of predictions are shown in the table below.

On these assumptions, the primary and secondary school sectors will lose 473,00 and 249,000 pupils respectively between 2026 and 2031. This is a total reduction of more than 700,000 in a school population of 7.8 million at the start of the period. By 2032, the school population may dip below seven million for the first time in a long while.

As the chart shows, the school population is heading for its lowest number this century. The key question is whether or not, by the end of the 2030s, the school population will fall back to a level not seen since the mid-1980s. On current trends that outcome seem very likely.

My guess is that HM Treasury will use the ‘population dividend’ to reduce spending on schooling by clawing back the funding for the missing pupils. Over the period to 2031, this might account for some £5billion available for social services and defence, yet still leave a bit over for improving school funding slightly.

Fewer children mean fewer teachers, and we have already seen the DfE slash targets for ITT. This will likely reduce the number of providers at some point, as some providers will be unable to operate effectively, both financially and in terms of group sizes, and will exit the market.

Falling rolls also mean fewer vacancies, if numbers leaving the profession remain at a constant rate in relation to pupil numbers. Falling rolls also likely mean fewer promotion opportunities, so more teachers may stay put in their current post. With the current age profile for the profession, there is also no sign of a retirement boom to help turnover.

Were the falling pupil numbers to mean a wholesale closure of small primary schools, then that might further reduce the promotion opportunities for teachers in the primary sector.  

If the sector keeps to government ITT targets, then most trainees should find a teaching post – we will know the latest details for employment rates at the end of the month when provider profile data are released – but in the primary sector, where over-recruitment into ITT has been the norm, and in some secondary subjects, too many teachers may be chasing too few vacancies.

So, is it worth the risk of taking on extra student debt to train as a teacher? Certainly not, if you can find a route that offers a salary, and a better chance of a teaching post after training. Otherwise, there is a risk to assess.

I would advise all potential teachers to quiz providers offering them a place on an ITT course about the provider’s track record of employment for their specific course, and not just the overall rate into employment.

Of course, a teaching qualification can lead to a teaching career anywhere in the world, it might just be harder to find a job in England, and certainly in parts of London.

London schools and challenging pupils: better outcomes than elsewhere?

Yesterday, I wrote a blog post about the rate of exclusions and suspensions from schools in London and the other regions of England of pupils eligible for Free School Meals as a part of a series about whether better funded schools were able to keep more of their pupils in schools. As promised in that post, I have also looked at the position with regard to the main ethnic, groups and a few of the less considered sub-grouping. Are London schools overfunded? | John Howson

As the following table shows, the picture for London is much more mixed with respect to the different ethnic groupings than for pupils eligible for Free School Meals.

London had the lowest rate of suspensions for five ethnic groups in the primary school sector, and four in the secondary school sector.

In respect of permanent exclusions, where rates are generally very low, and a single exclusion can affect the rate significantly, London had the lowest rate in six of the nine ethnic groups for the primary school sector and was joint equal in a seventh group. In the secondary school sector, London had the lowest rate in only two categories, but was joint lowest in another three groups- mostly were there were no permanent exclusions in this group in a number of regions, including London.

The position in special schools was somewhat different, as shown in the table.

London was not the lowest region in any ethnic grouping in ‘suspensions’ in the special school sector, and was only joint lowest in ‘permanent exclusions’. In most cases there were no permanent exclusions in these groups in any of the regions listed as ‘joint’ lowest, including in the London region. As pupils may attend some special schools from different local authorities to that where they live, and the funding for such schools is not through the  ‘School Block’ but was through the discredited ‘High Needs Block’, it is difficult to read anything into the results for the special school sector, except to say that no other region has the same level of outcome as the London region.

London schools contain a much more ethnically diverse group of pupils than schools in some other of the English regions, notably the North East and South West regions. Despite this fact, or possible because the familiarity of dealing with pupils from a wide range of different ethnic groups, often in the same classroom, and sometimes having come to school in England from war-tern or other challenging environments, have meant policies are in place to deal with situations that were less common outside the capital’s schools, London as a region still outperformed any other region in terms of being in lowest place of any region either on its own or in joint lowest position.

One can wonder: is this due to the funding being better than elsewhere? The funding formula school prevent that outcome for primary and secondary schools, if not for special schools. However, as I asked in the previous post in this series, is it the fact that funding includes a London allowance important, as the extra cash may go further if London schools employ younger, and thus cheaper teachers than in some other parts of England.

Do London schools use their cash for more classroom assistants and other staff likely to help reduce the level of suspensions and exclusions?

The data is intriguing, and worthy of more analysis than I have time to undertake. Are there also lesson to be learnt from London schools about how to reduce the number of pupils ‘kicked out’ of schools?

Finally, do academies or maintained schools exclude or suspend more pupils in different groups of pupils? What role, if any, do local authorities still play in helping keep down the levels of suspensions and exclusions? Time for me to go search the research literature.

Are London schools overfunded?

Let me be clear the answer is, of course they are not. However, as my previous post showed, there were significant differences in exclusion and suspension rates in the latest DfE data between many London boroughs and other local authorities across England. Do better funded schools exclude fewer pupils? Part 2 | John Howson with London borough having some of the lowest levels of both exclusions and suspensions.

This discrepancy between London and the rest of England, prompted me to explore the data at a regional level on two different factors: ethnicity and Free School Meals. At some point, it might be interesting to combine these two factors, but for now, they are treated as separate factors. This post deals with pupils eligible for Free School Meals. I hope, in a later post, to consider the data about ethnicity, where the are significant differences between different ethnic groups.

Firstly, here is the table for outcomes for entitle pupils for Free School Meals across primary, secondary and special school sectors.

Free School Meal – entitled pupils 2024/25 All school sectors

London stands out as the lowest rate for both exclusions and suspensions of any region in England. Permanent exclusions in the North East are more than four times higher than the rate in London, and even suspensions are more than four times higher than in the London region.

Of course, London schools may use other sanctions, such as in-school suspensions, but the differences do seem stark between the regions, with London schools using less than half the rate of suspensions of schools across any other region.    

In terms of pupils not entitled to Free School Meals, the differences between London and the rest of the regions are less stark.

Free School Meal – non-entitled pupils 2024/25 All school sectors

However, London still has a ‘suspension rate’ of less than half of that in the three regions with the highest rate of suspensions. Permanent exclusion rates for pupils not eligible for Free School Meals are generally very low across England, but, even so, London, along with the South East still had the lowest rate of permanent exclusions in 2024/25.

Free School Meal – non-entitled pupils 2024/25 Primary school sector

London doesn’t quite have the lowest permanent exclusions in the primary sector for pupils not entitled to Free School Meals: the rate in the south East is 0.01 better than in London. However, London does have the lowest rate for suspensions.

Free School Meal – entitled pupils 2024/25 Secondary school sector

Even with secondary school pupils entitled to Free School Meals, London has both the lowest rate of suspensions and of permanent exclusions o any region in England. Again, whether this is as a result other in-school measures, better staffing because of funding, or some other reasons isn’t discernible for the data.  

However, it will be interesting to consider the data for ‘ethnicity’ where London is one of the more diverse regions of England. This is because some London boroughs have low percentages of pupils on Free School Meals.

Does the funding of schools on a model of average salary funding model, with an additional London weighting in the National Funding Formula play any part in this data? For instance, does London employ more new teachers at below average salary rates.

Going forward, how will falling rolls affect the finances of schools in London and, hence, the possible rate of suspensions and exclusions in future years?

Do better funded schools exclude fewer pupils? Part 2

Earlier this week the DfE published the 2024-25 school-year data about temporary suspensions and permanent exclusions by schools. Release home – Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

The good news is contained in the headlines:

The rate of suspensions in the 2024/25 academic year was 10.88 (equivalent to 1,088 suspensions for every 10,000 pupils). This is a decrease from 11.31 in 2023/24. There were 913,000 suspensions in 2024/25, a decrease of 4% from 955,000 in 2023/24.

The rate and number of permanent exclusions also decreased from 2023/24 to 2024/25

The rate of permanent exclusions in the 2024/25 academic year was 0.12 (equivalent to 12 permanent exclusions for every 10,000 pupils). This is a decrease from 0.13 in 2023/24. There were 9,900 permanent exclusions in 2024/25, a decrease of 9% from 10,900 in 2023/24.

As the data are per 10,000 pupils, the outcomes are not affected by falling pupil rolls. However, since falling pupil numbers have yet really impacted on the secondary school sector, where most pupils are excluded or suspended, I wouldn’t have expected falling rolls to have had an impact in 2024-25.

A more interesting questions is whether funding for schools plays any part in the ability of schools to retain pupils rather than suspend or exclude them. Answering this question is slightly more complex than it might be because not all schools may behave in the same manner. for instance, Oxfordshire, a county I know well, has a higher rate of temporary suspensions, where it ranked 83 worst out of 154 local authorities in the 2024-25 data, compared with a ranking of 11th best of the 154 authorities for permanent exclusions.

However, as I have shown before, London schools are well funded compared with schools outside the capital. Thus, without a deliberate local policy to try to reduce either exclusion and suspensions, or indeed both, by schools outside the capital, it might be expected that London local authorities might rank as authorities with the lowest percentages of exclusions and suspensions.

The data for the rankings of London authorities in both 2023-24 and 2024-25 are shown in the table.

NUMBER OF LONDON BOROUGHS IN THE TOP 35 RANKED LOCAL AUTHORITIES
SCHOOL YEAR PERM EXCLUSIONS TEMP SUSPENSIONS
202324 19 27
202425 16 28

The figures for both years are impressive, with 28 of the London boroughs in the top 35 local authorities for the lowest temporary suspension per 10,000 pupils. However, this is not a new trend. In a previous post last year, I wrote the following:

As ever, I am struck by the funding issue. London, the best funded part of England has some of the lowest rates for exclusion and suspensions. There are 17 London boroughs in the list of the 25 local authorities with the lowest rate of suspensions in 2023/24, and 19 in the similar list for secondary exclusions. In the list of ten local authorities with the highest rates of exclusion are five authorities in the North East. I think that there may be something in this data that needs further exploration, especially as I would expect teacher recruitment to be easier in the North East than in London. Do better funded schools exclude fewer pupils? | John Howson

Once again, in the latest data, local authorities  in the north East fare badly, with five in the ten lowest rankings for permanent exclusions, and six in the ten lowest rankings for temporary suspensions.

Many London schools also have the benefit of Teach First in addition to their DfE funding. Even though they have to pay towards the Teach First trainees, the extra support is possibly another reason why London schools perform so well on this measure.

I wonder whether this issue is a concern to our incoming Prime Minister in view of the rankings for some local authorities in the north West of England.

Lucy Heller: Thank you

I suppose it was inevitable that Lucy heller would eventually leave he role in leading ARK as an organisation and its schools. Interview: Lucy Heller, CEO of Ark Schools | Tes I commend this interview with the TES magazine to anyone interested in schooling in England, and how the system works. Lucy Heller discusses many of the issues this blog has mentioned over the past 13 of the 22 years that Lucy has headed up ARK.

It is, of course, fitting that Lucy Heller should give an interview to the TES, as it was while she was working there that I first met with her, when she was running the paper, and I was writing my weekly column on some aspect of data. At that time, I was also advising those running the TES abut the implications for their business model of the switch from print to on-line recruitment advertising, and the threat to their whole way of life. The rest, as they say, is history.

Lucy Heller went to ARK schools when they had a small part to play in the education scene, and has overseen both its growth and its reputation as an organisation, not least its reputation for hiring those that have subsequently helped shape the whole system of schooling.

Regular readers will know of my preference for a local democratic involvement in the organisation and development of state-schooling. That preference does not blind me to the fact that local government these days is more concerned with children’s social services than with education, and that most of our leaders and thinkers about schools and education are now leading multi-academy trusts.

Politicians not in power, and those not running schools, each have more freedom to be more open in what they say than those that are actually operating the system, so, even though we have had to wait until her departure, Lucy Heller’s interview marks an important point in the discourse about our school system.

I entirely agree with Lucy Heller’s comment in the interview that;

There has always been a tension between the narrative politicians have leaned into about headteachers being at the centre of the system and central government’s desire to manage the detail of school life,” she says. “It is a very hard balance to strike – it would be good if government spent less time thinking about how schools should be run day to day and more about how they manage the system as a whole.

As a nation we are not good about both system leadership and understanding the role of government in policy-making. MATs can play an important role in helping keep governments aware of policy outcomes: a role once fulfilled by local authorities and their chief education officers. Lucy Heller had played that role with vision, and without seeking the limelight others might have sought.

I hope that Lucy’s public service will be appropriately recognised, and I am sure that there is more to come as Lucy moves on to the next challenge.  It has been privileged to have known Lucy Heller, and I wish her well for the future.

Don’t let this government kill off music in state schools.

Regular readers will know that I have been championing the need for more teachers of music in our schools, and the government’s actions in first, cutting the bursary for these trainee teachers, and then halving the target number of trainees that they will fund. Now comes news of yet another year of funds not uprated for inflation that will mean cuts to services. Even more ominously there is talk by civil servants of the need to prepare and ‘exit strategy’.

Last evening, I attended a wonderful performance of pupils from both local state secondary and primary schools across Oxfordshire joining with the world-class Gabrieli Consort & Players to perform Purcell’s Dido and Aeneas in the Silk Hall at Radley College. This is a great example of making elite-level musical experiences genuinely accessible to all children, including those from more disadvantaged backgrounds.


As we know, singing together fosters a profound sense of belonging.
However, as one of the key players behind arranging the event has noted ‘we cannot ignore the stark reality behind the scenes, core revenue funding for music services across local authorities has faced severe real-terms cuts. Children in under-served areas will be the first to lose out and music will once again become an exclusive luxury for the privileged few.’ I absolutely agree.

Programs like Gabrieli Roar from the Gabrieli Trust that facilitated the Radley performance, show us what is possible. About Gabrieli Roar – Gabrieli Consort & Players

Let’s celebrate the exceptional performance witnessed at Radley last night, plus the event tonight in Oxford’s Sheldonian Theatre with a different group of young musicians, but let’s also keep fighting for sustained, robust core funding for music education in our schools and with our young people.

Cuts to the ITT bursary for trainee teachers, cuts to teacher training numbers, this despite a shortage of teachers of music teachers in state schools, and the recent grant announcement that once again music funding from government hasn’t increased to cover inflation, all show a government across both DCMS and the DfE that isn’t successfully challenging the Treasury to support music in schools.

The government has an aim to channel cash into after school activities, doing so through music service is a quick win, as the infrastructure for delivery already exists, and there is no battle over a teacher’s 1,265 hours contract.

If you have any influence with policy-makers, please ask them to review and increase funding for music services, with a focus on helping engage disadvantaged groups in society to benefit from music of all genres, through both engaging as players and listeners.

I grew up in Tottenham, where school music thrived in the 1950s, and still does through Haringey’s Music Service. Let’s ensure music can still be for all in the future, and not just for those able to pay to unlock the enjoyment of both singing and playing an instrument.