Category Archives: local government

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.

Selective schools and falling rolls – Part 2 Do we need a national policy?

Posted on by
Reply

Do we need a national policy on how local areas deal with falling school rolls? If so, who should decide? Local authorities – democratically elected, but with little power over academies and voluntary schools? Regional Directors – covering wide areas, and with no democratic accountability? CEOs advising the Board of Governance of MATs – unelected in both cases? Mayors, where they exist, but what about where they don’t?

My preference is for democracy, so, as regular reads might expect, I vote for local authorities, assisted by a committee from the other groups. However, some of those might not want to take challenging decisions, so they might need some guidelines for the DfE and the Labour government for them to work within.

I have looked at the ‘capacity’ and ‘number on roll’ in three councils with selective schools (Slough, Medway and London Borough of Barnet). In all three of these authorities, capacity exceeds rolls. Generally. However, selective schools exceed capacity more than they have spare places. In non-selective schools the picture is more mixed.

In pupil place planning for the future, whoever takes the decisions, there are some questions to answer, based on the evidence of the data about school rolls from schools in these three authorities.

Have all-thorough schools worked?

Has the extension of faith schools beyond a few Christian denominations and Jewish schools after 1997 worked?

What do parents think of single-sex education these days?

Have new forms of academies and free schools flourished?

What part can parental choice play in a falling rolls scenario?

What is both any economic cost, and any educational cost associated with doing nothing?

A final question. Why does the DfE not have admissions policies for three schools across the authorities; two in one authority?

As these are all urban/suburban areas, transport costs don’t matter very much for most families. I will look at selective schools in rural areas later in another post.

It is interesting that the London borough has a smaller capacity gap than either of the other unitary councils. However, the total in all three authorities conceals a wide range of outcomes. I referred to this issue in my post Are dashboards useful? | John Howson where I made clear that just looking at totals is rarely good enough. Measures of central tendency also need to be considered.

The data in this post has used ‘capacity’ and ‘numbers on roll’. Reviewing authorities will also have primary transfer numbers, and group sizes for predictions of future transfer numbers for the next 5-7 years.

If a Scrutiny Committee of an upper tier authority hasn’t considered pupil place planning in the authority recently, then I would suggest they put it on the agenda for a spring meeting, and ask for a detailed paper, even if it means going into confidential session. Not to do so, won’t make the issue go away.

Finally, why did I choose these three authorities? They are in London and South East, where there are a significant number of selective schools, and, the authorities were of a size where I could handle the data. Selective schools and falling rolls | John Howson

 I might next look at three more diverse areas (The South West, West Midlands and East of England regions spring to mind).  

Selective schools and falling rolls

Posted on by
1

Way back in history, well 2018 to be precise, I wrote a blog about selective schools during a period of rising pupil numbers. A fudge with no teeth | John Howson As the country now heads into a period of falling pupil rolls, discussed in my previous post in relation to all secondary schools, I thought that I would take a look at rolls across the selective school sector in the autumn of 2026.

The DfE uses two measures ‘capacity’ and ‘number on roll’. Capacity is defined as ‘The number of pupil places the establishment can accommodate.’ Outwood Academy Hasland Hall – GOV.UK link used as an example. In a rational system might the number on roll (NOR) be expected to be somewhere between +/- say 5% of the capacity number? In reality, in the selective school sector, currently this is not the case.

Selective schools fall into one of three groups;

within the 5% of NOR                                    69
NOR more than 5% below capacity20
NOR more than 5% above capacity74

Just over a half of selective schools are either within or below capacity, whereas 46% of these schools are more than five per cent over the DfE’s recorded capacity.

Are there any regional differences? Answering that question must acknowledge that the spread of selective schools is not even across England, with for fewer in the north and the midlands than in the south and west of England.

Regionwithin the 5% of NOR               NOR more than 5% below capacityNOR more than 5% above capacityTotal% above 5%
East of England404850%
East Midlands7631619%
London61121963%
North East00000
North West12431916%
South East244295751%
South West55102050%
West Midlands80111958%
Yorks & Humber312633%
Total67217416246%

The East Midlands has relatively few selective schools, mostly in rural areas, and most are either within or below capacity. Might this be down to transport issues, and any absence of free transport to  selective schools from rural areas? Both the North West and Yorkshire and the Humber’s regions few selective schools are mostly within or below capacity. Again, might transport be an issue?

In  London, the South East, South West, East of England and the West Midlands, at least half the selective schools are more than 50% over capacity, by DfE data.

London, has the highest percentage of selective school more than 50% over capacity at  63%, followed by the West Midlands at 58%. Both regions have few, if any, schools with selective school operating at more than 5% below capacity. Whether the urban nature of these regions males a difference isn’t clear, but the North West also has few schools operating below capacity.

The next piece of research is to consider the urban/rural nature of selective schools below capacity and whether the lack of free transport might be affecting these schools?

However, the big question is who will lose cash as pupil rolls fall? Will over-capacity selective schools reduce their rolls, and either stop hiring or make staff redundant or will non-selective schools have to bear all the loss of income resulting from falling rolls under the present pupil led funding system?

This is where the importance of pupil place planning becomes clear. What will a Labour government do? Favour selective schools or ensure they return to capacity?

This is an interesting question that needs airing, especially as this Labour government seem as unwilling as the last to design a secondary school system fit or all pupils.  

Falling Rolls: a matter of urgency, but whose?

Posted on by
Reply

In 1977, Haringey council’s Chief Education Officer produced a plan to deal with falling school rolls: it was to cost him his job. His mistake was to be too far ahead of public opinion, for in 1980, school closures, and a reorganisation as a result of fewer pupil numbers became inevitable in Haringey. Among the changes was the closure of the secondary school in Tottenham where I had worked from 1971 to 1977.

This example from history is important for two reasons: firstly, we are living through another period of declining pupil numbers, and secondly, the mechanism for system planning is much weaker today than it was in the 1970s.

In the 1970s, education was often described as a ‘national system locally administered’. Boroughs, such as Haringey, had within the past decade received approval from the government at Westminster to introduce a comprehensive form of secondary schooling. Local planning ratified by government could be seen as normal practice, although not all schools were maintained schools and churches, city livery companies such as the Drapers and the Stationers, as well as other charities had a strong interest in the running of schooling in the borough. However, the ability of the local council to determine how schooling was managed across the borough was not really in question.

How different the world is today, a rump of maintained schools sits alongside the remaining voluntary schools and the block of academies, whether stand-alone of gathered together in Trusts or Committees in local authorities many facing an uncertain future.

Local authorities notionally still have responsibility for pupil place planning, but devolved budgets, powerful Schools Forums and the differing policies of academies and their trust leaders mitigate against local authorities being able to successfully plan the local school system, especially when for the past decade the focus has been on opening new schools.

Overlaying the weak position of local government is another difference from that faced by Haringey’s Chief Education Officer in the 1970s: parental choice: first enshrined in Section 6 of the 1980 Education Act, and now taken for granted.

To view the current  position, I have taken a random sample of secondary schools that have so far this school-year advertised for either a new headteacher or a teacher of music. In both cases, I have looked at DfE data on the notional roll and the actual roll, as shown on the DfE’s public website on 6th October 2026.

The results are interesting.

regioncapacityrolldifference
SE1440759-681
L1150795-355
WM785445-340
NW700364-336
SW1050714-336
L13301092-238
NW12001023-177
SE15601409-151
NE13501201-149
L12601115-145
EM625486-139
YH17501616-134
EE12101084-126
NW750661-89
SW1050990-60
L315272-43
L455436-19
WM11001084-16
EM860847-13
YH710699-11
L10071000-7
NW900894-6
L14501445-5
L121312141
SE4804822
L1164119127
WM60463228
L990102838
WM1253130653
EM1383145471
L12001302102
WM14141524110
L11401271131
SE12191354135
NW9891157168
EM13321809477

There are some very large differences between the ‘capacity’ as shown on the DfE site and the number on roll shown on the same site. There are 13 schools with more than 100 empty places, only three in London.

On the other hand, there are six schools with more than 100 over capacity, two of which are in London.

This was a random sample, so I wondered what might be the implications in selective systems if selective schools were taking more than their ‘capacity’ on other schools and their budgets. I will do a bit of research to find out and report back.

However, it does seem that there is a serious question around effective pupil place planning and the consequences of not doing anything on some children’s learning in the future, if schools are losing income while others are still over-capacity.

No song for Labour?

Posted on by
Reply

Traditionally, the Labour Party conference used to end in song. Historically, it was the Red Fag that was belted out by delegates, many of whom had learn to sing both in school and in church, chapel or other place of worship. Go to a funeral or a wedding these days, and singing is often either desultory or non-existent, except for a few brave souls. Partly, this is down to the decline in attendance at organised worship, but partly, especially for weddings, it may be down to the decline in music teaching in schools.

Yesterday, I was told of an initiative to revive school choirs https://www.cloreduffield.org.uk/clore-school-choirs-and-singing-programme

However, it will take more than a few philanthropic gestures to revive music in our schools. The subject has now reached a crisis point in state schools across England. I don’t expect the number of new trainees to meet the DfE’s target this autumn. Sadly, It is not as if missing the ITT target in music is something new.

ITT census% of target recruited
2019/2080
2020/21122
2021/2271
2022/2362
2023/2427
2024/2540
2025/2565

My expectation for the 2025/26 outcome is somewhere between 80-85% based upon September acceptance numbers through the DfE recruitment to ITT portal data published yesterday – see my previous two posts for more details.

The improvement to around 80% is because the target for this September has been reduced by the DfE from a high of 820 trainees needed in 2024/25, to a new low of 260 two years later for the 2026/27 intake.

ITT target2021/222022/232023/242024/252025/262026/27
Music540470790820565260

In part, the reduction in the target is the result of not adding unfilled places in one year to the target for the next year. That was a policy I have always said, since it was tried in the 1990s, was a mistake. Schools cannot absorb more than a certain number of teachers each year, and they always start the autumn term fully staffed for the timetable that they have produced.

Change the timetable, and cut an examination subject, and a school is unlikely to offer it the following year in its options package, especially if it might not recruit a teacher needed to teach the subject, and someone else might need to make way for the restoration of the subject to the timetable. Once gone, it is hard to recover without a change in policy.

Of course, falling rolls will mean a reduction in demand for teachers, assuming school funding doesn’t improve – quite likely, and that retention remains at current levels – also likely with a faltering graduate job market. But is the cut to 260 places for music, a cut that would certainly justify the removal of the bursary sensible? The DfE seem to think so, after having run the Teacher Supply Model, based upon current input data. I am less sure.

So far in 2026, there have been over 500 vacancies for teachers of music and heads of department, so by year-end in December that total might have increased to somewhere between 550-600 vacancies across the year in state schools.

How does that compare to possible supply? In 2025/26 the ITT census recorded 367 music trainees. Allowing for wastage, both in-course and post-course that might reduce the available number to less than 300 or about 50% of vacancies, leaving the other 300 to be filled from returners or other sources.

MusicITT census
2013/14380
2014/15375
2015/16355
2016/17355
2017/18295
2018/19300
2019/20320
2020/21483
2021/22390
2022/23301
2023/24214
2024/25345
2025/26367
estimate2026/27240

With the reduced target of 260, the likely outcome, based on the September offer number is for around 230 trainees at the end of the year, with less than 200 available to work in the state sector in 2027, based on past trends.

Vacancies would need to fall by around 200 in 2027 for that number of new teachers to take up half the vacancies. If vacancies were to remain at 600, admittedly an upper estimate, then new entrants to the labour market might only be able to fill a third of vacancies. This would be grim news, and leaves me with two conclusions

The Teacher Supply Model has cut targets too far too soon

The removal of the bursary has affected recruitment, but the effect has been masked by the cut to the ITT target.

In the real world, unless I am wrong, fewer children will study music from September 2027/28 onwards – that’s the next school-year.

Is that what the government wants? I don’t know, but I do know that there is a risk of music disappearing as an examination subject unless more music teachers are recruited.

I was told, an unverified number, of just 190 entries in the North East Region for music at A level this summer. How many of those were from private schools? I will see what I can find out from the published statistics.

Music is changing, but that change won’t happen nor will music continue to support growth in the economy through orchestras, popular music and other trends if we let music die in the majority of state schools.

A world where music is created by Artificial Intelligence and not by humans, will be a less enjoyable place in which to live.

The ITT Census versus September acceptances

Posted on by
Reply

In my previous post, I said at the end of the post that  I would look at what any differences between the August ITT acceptance data issued by the DfE earlier today, and the ITT census to be issued in December 2026 might be, by looking at the difference between those accepted in September 2025 and the ITT Census of December 2025.

In reality, this task has proved something more  of a challenge that I had expected. This is mostly because of the late announcement of the targets for September 2026. These were not announced until April 2026, by which time many subjects had already made offers in excess of the new, and lower, targets. The fact that the targets for 2026 were in many subjects drastically reduced has made the analysis almost impossible.

Because of the reduction in the targets, it is possible that the outcome of the 2026 ITT Census could be the best year in terms of hitting targets since 2012, especially once Teach First and any other non-DfE portal recruitment is factored into the census.

However, there are a few subjects that rely almost entirely upon the DfE portal for recruitment that we now know are very unlikely to meet even the revised target for September 2026.

These are: Business Studies; Classics, Drama; Religious Education and the catch-all ‘Other’ that includes media and communication studies, social studies, citizenship and psychology.

Although how the ‘other’ subjects grouping reaches a target of 2,035 places remains a bit of a mystery. As I have advocated elsewhere, it is now time to breakdown the ’other category’ into its component subject targets to allow for meaningful discussions about teacher supply. With around one in eight places in the ‘other’ category and the category recruiting very poorly it is time for a more meaningful discussion about the classifications used by the DfE for its IIT targets.

A reminder of how the targets have changed this year when compared to the previous year

2025/262026/27
Total26,92020,800
PrimaryTotal7,650 5,520
SecondaryTotal19,270 15,280
Art and Design680605
Biology985675
Business Studies9001,200
Chemistry730690
Classics6075
Computing895565
Design and Technology965620
Drama620370
English1,9501,980
Geography935685
History790520
Mathematics2,3002,000
Modern Foreign Languages1,4601,085
Music565260
Others2,5202,035
Physical Education725655
Physics1,410810
Religious Education780450

 Some years ago, the total was nearer 40,000 trainees, so this has been a dramatic reduction.

When were secondary trainee targets last as low as 15,280? Not for some time. I will do  a search and see if I can find out the last time the targets were this low for both primary and secondary trainees. As these targets now include almost all routes, it will be interesting to see whether when they were last this low were there no ‘off target’ numbers such as the former employment-based routes?  

Vocational education: Closing doors or widening opportunities?

Posted on by
Reply

The education of young people has had quite an airing over the past week. At the Liberal Democrats conference, Munira Wilson MP, the Party’s Education spokesperson at Westminster, gave a platform speech that foreshadowed the announcement by Lucy Powell, the Secretary of State, about post-14 vocational education.

You can see Munira’s speech on YouTube. I suggest starting at 1 hour 38 minutes into the video lib dem conference 2026 autumn saturday afternoon session – Search

In her speech, Munira raised one of the key dilemmas of education. How to promote ambition without encouraging many young people to leave their communities to seek to achieve their ambitions? Many that leave our rural and coastal communities (the source of another debate at the conference) to fulfil an educational ambition, often at university, never return.

I believe that governments should be encouraging these young people to return and set up businesses in rural and coastal communities as part of regeneration schemes.

Labour’s,  Lucy Powell’s, focus was one the perennial issue within the British education system: how to resolve classroom and practical subjects at examination level in terms of parity of esteem? Labour answer is to recreate courses for 14-16 year olds in practical subjects, such as construction, care and business. New Vocational GCSEs unveiled in major shake-up to hands-on learning for teens – GOV.UK

In 2003, I wrote a paper for the Liberal Democrats entitled ‘No child left behind’ – a phrase borrowed from US President Bush – in which I advocated a 14-18 sector. I recognised that many young people at 14 were disillusioned with school, but might be brought back into education if they were offered courses more aligned with their career ambitions. Now, I understand Munira’s point that at 14 she wanted to be a teacher, but as a graduate went into a different career. Munira no doubt already wanted to go to university at 14.

But, what of those, the Newsom 50%, Half Our Future: A tribute to Sir John Newsom’s Report | John Howson  that don’t aspire to stay in education. At what age should we help them on the path to a working life? In 2003, I suggested links with further education, and its more grown- up approach and better facilities than many schools can provide for practical courses.

Labour’s announcement this week, ahead of their conference, seemed a bit rushed. Nothing about where to find the staff to teach  these new vocational subjects in schools? Nothing about the issue of ‘norm’ referencing in examinations. How do you ‘norm reference’ the building of a wall in a construction class or the creation of a meal in a hospitality course? Trying to create national standards will be a real challenge.

Both Munira, and then Lucy Powell, did speak about the need for more work experience in schools. Again, this is something that I support wholeheartedly, but again how do we deal with the limited opportunities in our rural and coastal communities? As so often in education, it will come down to who will pay for the transport?

However, NEETs are not just an education issue. Any government that is responsible for an economy that is not producing jobs for either young people of those made redundant in their 40s and 50s, has two choices, either benefits or some form of education and training provision, if it wants to keep down the numbers unemployed. With AI likely to recreate the job scene in a new format, the issue of the relationship between education and employment isn’t going to go away anytime soon.