Category Archives: Uncategorized

ITT: subjects recruiting from UK graduates still in trouble

Posted on by
5

The DfE’s June data on the current round of applications and offers for postgraduate ITT courses still revels that the 2026 round is separating into two distinct sections. Subjects where applications are likely to come from anywhere in the world are either already meeting their Teacher Supply Model target for 2026 entry, or should do so on the current trajectory. Subjects where home recruitment is likely to dominate applications seem more at risk of missing their targets.

SubjectTarget 2026/27offer May 2026Fill: May viewJune offersFill: June view
Chemistry6901015YES1199YES
Biology675474PROBABLY542POSSIBLY
Mathematics20002169YES2495YES
Design & Technology620481YES562YES
Art & Design605527YES601YES
Geography685407POSSIBLY455NO
Classics7540NO43NO
English19801418PROBABLY1586POSSIBLY
Drama370253PROBABLY283PROBABLY
Business Studies1200270NO301NO
Music260192POSSIBLY215PROBABLY
Religious Education450269POSSIBLY308NO
Others2035418NO456NO
History520872YES974YES
Modern Languages10851107YES1214YES
Physics8101342YES1466YES
Physical Education6551298YES1405YES
Computing565686YES794YES

Based upon ‘offer’ recorded in the June update from the DfE, and with just three more reports to come before courses commence, I have made four downgrades and one upgrade to my expected outcomes for the current recruitment round.

I have downgraded expected outcomes for, biology, geography, English and Religious Education, including reducing Religious Education to a ‘No’. however, I am aware that there is a vigorous advertising campaign currently underway by the Religious Education sector, reminiscent of the RETRI initiative led by Dr John Gay a quarter of a century ago. Success in attracting new applicants could mean that it would be possible to hit the target for Religious Education. I do wonder why more subject groups don’t invest in advertising the benefits of becoming a teacher.

If science graduates discover there is space for those with some biology, then that subject might reach its target. Music looks likely to meet the target, but that target, in my opinion, has been set far too low to meet demand from schools, especially with the DfE’s latest initiative on extra-curricular activities for all, including within the scope, music. It will be difficult to achieve success in music without more teachers. However, meeting the low target will justify the removal of the bursary for music ITT.

Applications from outside of the United Kingdom represented 25% of all applications this June compared with 18% in the data for June 2025. If all non-Uk applicants had applied for secondary sector courses, then they would currently account for more than a third of applicants across all subjects, compared with a quarter in June 2025.

More evidence of the lack of interest in teaching from hone-based students comes from the fact that the number of graduates in the age group ’21 and under’ applying for courses is only 115 higher this June at 3,685 compared with an increase in applications of nearly 2,000 from the ’30 to 34’ age grouping.

The increasing interest in teaching from men continues, with applications up from 16,796 in June 2025 to 21,774 this June! It would be useful to know more about where this increase is focussed, and what the implications might be for the sector.

As ever, the DfE continues not to share ethnicity data with the sector. With so many overseas applicants at present, is that a helpful omission from the dataset?

Higher Education continues to bear the brut of the increase in applications, with ‘partner led’ and ‘salaried’ routes static, and only a small increase in applications to SCITT courses. However, PG teaching apprenticeships have seen a healthy increase in applications from 6,328 to 10, 493. However, offers are little changed at 1,066, compared with 966 in June 2025.

Perhaps because of the arrival of the postgraduate apprenticeship route, offers for the ‘salaried route was only 266 this June, compared with 518 in June 2025. Mr Gove’s brave new world of 15 years ago now looks like a distant dream, as higher education continues to take the bulk of applications, proving the resilience of the sector in the face of determined onslaughts during the coalition government to remove its dominance from the training of new graduate teachers.

With the end of the school term rapidly approaching, the next three months traditionally see relatively few new offers: will this year be any different, especially given the press comments about graduates unable to find work, or does teaching still look like an unattractive carer to debt strapped UK graduates?

With falling rolls affecting job prospects after training  and the acquisition of more student debt, and a possible below inflation pay settlement, the signs for increased interest in teaching as a career during the rest of the recruitment round are not good.

Falling rolls in London: much worse than the rest of England

Posted on by
1

In my last post on this blog, I looked at the worsening of primary PTRs across much of the DfE’s ‘Inner London’ area. Falling Rolls: Is the funding formula making matters worse? | John Howson

This post looks how ‘Inner London boroughs have fare compared with the rest of England over those three years?

I think it is fair to say that London as a whole really has seen a significant downturn in primary pupil numbers. There are 22 local authorities where primary pupil numbers as published by the DfE have reduced by 5% or more between 2023/24 and 2025/26. Of these, 13 are London boroughs, and six – seven if Newham is included – are Inner London boroughs.

Seven of the top 10 places for the largest percentage decline in primary pupil numbers are filled by London boroughs. The other three places are taken by the Isle of Wight, Rutland and Torbay, three of the smallest unitary authorities in England.

Birmingham, Manchester and Leicester are the only large cities in the table. They fill three of the four bottom places for local authorities with a decline in pupil numbers of five per cent or more, along with Hillingdon in West London.

At the other end of the table, there are few London boroughs with less than a two per cent decline in their primary pupil populations.


London boroughs at this end of the table seem to be mostly outer London boroughs on the fringe of the metropolitan area. By contrast, there are seven county councils in the list of lowest declines in pupil numbers. This number increases to eight, if the Staffordshire figure, of an increase in pupil numbers, is correct.

The London boroughs will have the numbers in reception for each year, and will know how much worse the decline is likely to become over the next few years. More school closures look inevitable unless the funding model is changed to protect schools with declining rolls.

Not to protect the school estate in London is to assume that there will never be an upturn in pupil numbers. In cities, closing schools and selling off the site for housing means that in any upturn land may not be available for any new schools needed for the extra pupils. This is where thinking for the longer-term is important. During the last downturn of this size, most schools in London remained open, although some, such as Stamford Hill Infant and Junior School in Haringey, where I attended in the 1950s, did eventually close. Interestingly, the one form entry St Anne’s Church of England Primary School, close to Stamford Hill School that wasn’t actually in Stamford Hill, is still open.

However, this is not the post to discuss whether or not, in a more secular society, faith run schools should be closed where an alternative non-faith school can absorb the pupils. But this is an issue to debate, especially in urban areas.

In villages, the church-run school may still be the only school available, and that raises a much larger question about who should run state funded schooling? As the Wesleyan Methodists put it when faced by the 1902 Act, and decisions on whether to open state-funded secondary schools; are our teachers, teachers of children or teachers of Methodist children?

MayDay for some ITT subjects: joy for others?

Posted on by
1

Such are the wonders of modern technology that the DfE is now able to publish the monthly ITT data on a bank holiday. The data for May was generated on the 18th May, so is already a week out of date. However, it is good to see civil servants managing to keep to the regular publication date for these statistics, even though it falls on a bank holiday.

With the downgrading by the DfE in their analysis of the Teacher Supply model outputs of requirements for the number of trainees needed in many subjects, some admissions tutors can look for an easy final three months of the current recruitment round.

For others, the remainder of the time until courses start in September will still be take up with encouraging more people into teaching as a career. Worries about AI and graduate careers have not yet seemed to have driven graduates in many subjects towards teaching as a career in larger numbers than in the past.

However, there is a concern, registered by this blog in previous posts, about the dominance of certain subjects in the monthly ‘offers’ table.

Three subjects, mathematics, physics and computing make up 32% of all the offers in secondary sector subjects on the 18th May. Three other subjects (Classics, Business Studies and ‘other subjects’) have made so few offers that these subjects almost certainly won’t fill all the places available this year, based on the DfE target number for these subjects.

Another three subjects are at risk of not filling places this year unless recruitment improves after graduation in June. (Geography, Music and Religious Education). Although Biology almost certainly will fill the places on offer, I have downgraded it to PROBABLY from YES, as overall science ’offers’ already exceed the target.

The likelihood of those offered places in mathematics, physics and computing actually taking up their places needs to be closely monitored, because of this extreme distortion of the overall data by the number of offers made in these subjects.  

Looking at applications, the growth in applications is mostly from career switchers in the 25 to 49 age groups. The under 25 have only seen an increase of 1,078 in applications, compared with 2,465 for the 25-29 age group. Indeed, the youngest age group of new graduates have seen an increase of only 166 on May last year.

There has been a significant increase in male applicants, up from 14,992 to 20,003, when comparing May 2025 with May 2006. This must be the first time in many years that the increase in applications from men has been greater than the increase in applications from women.

So, where has this growth in male applicants come from? It seems likely that the ‘Rest of the World’ grouping has provided many of these applicants, as applications from the ’Rest of the World’ increased from 7,727 in May 2025 to 12,909 in May 2026. London, where the increase has been from 6,708 to 7,534, is the only other region with a significant increase.

Perhaps, surprisingly, considering the wider job market, applications from candidates in the North East, from Wales and from Northern Ireland are all below their May 2025 levels.

The majority of applicants are for secondary subjects, so much so that there are now more than twice as many applicants for secondary subjects as for the primary sector as a whole. Candidates may be perceiving that falling rolls will make finding a post as a primary school teacher more of a challenge, and avoiding that career option.

Higher Education has been the key beneficiary, if you can use that term, of the increase in applications, up from 26,876 candidates in May 2025 to 33,0325 in May 2026. Post graduate apprenticeships, up from 5,505 to 9,184 was the only other route with a significant increase in candidate numbers. Teacher degree apprenticeships increased from 677 candidate in May 2025 to 1,534 in May 2026, not an overwhelming vote of confidence for this route into the profession.

These monthly numbers are becoming so distorted that at the headline level, used by many, they are possibly now misleading. A review of how the data are presented seems overdue.

Finally, I still think the removal of the bursary from music was a mistake. The following chart, although busy, shows ‘offers’ over the past decade. This year, is towards the bottom of the range.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 – misconduct

Posted on by
Reply

S52 of the new Act deals has made changes to the scope of teacher misconduct. Three things to note

The term teacher is still not a reserved occupation term: anyone can still call themselves a teacher., but if they do so, they will more likely now be caught by the widened provision, unless that is they are self-employed offering only tutoring. Should such tutors also be covered by misconduct regulations, or just subject to the general criminal law?

Clause 52 of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 widens the scope of those within the compass of the new section on misconduct as a teacher to include:

“a person who employs or engages a person to teach at an institution within the further education sector, an independent training provider or an online education provider.”

and hence these ‘teachers’ now become liable to be brought before The Teacher Regulation Agency for a hearing into misconduct

The legislation confirms that action outside of employment may trigger a misconduct hearing

“(3A) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a) or (b) it is irrelevant whether the conduct occurred, or the offence was committed, at a time when the person was employed or engaged to carry out teaching work or at some other time.”

That’s pretty draconian, but not surprising in view of the need for child safety.

Of course, if the on-line provider is outside the United Kingdom, then this provision won’t apply to non-British citizens. Will it apply to British citizens working outside the United Kingdom and working for an on-line provider?

Teaching work has been defined as: “teaching work” means work of a kind specified in regulations under this section (and such regulations may make provision by reference to specified activities or by reference to the circumstances in which activities are carried out).”

So now you know. It could mean almost anything. This may be important now the definition of those subject to regulation has widened.

However, the test remains:

  • that it relates to a person who has been employed or engaged to carry out teaching work in England; ……
  • that the alleged conduct is capable of amounting to unacceptable professional conduct, conduct that may bring the teaching profession into disrepute or conviction, at any time, of a relevant offence and that a prohibition order may therefore be appropriate.

Will the relevant offence list be the same for someone teaching in a further education setting as for an early years’ setting? I suspect that it will be, since certification as a teacher or lecturer in further education allows anyone to teach anything to anyone or any age.

In my opinion, this makes the need for a definition of a ‘teacher’ or ‘lecturer’ as a reserved term more important. Government could, for instance. Require anyone ‘teaching’ on-line to hold the appropriate ‘qualified’ status. A new qualification for tutoring, both in person and on-line, could be devised to help regulate the industry, at least as far as UK companies are concerned. It would then be up to parents whether they wanted to use a service on-line from overseas and using unqualified staff.

Celebrating 100,000 Blog Visitors: A Thank You to Readers

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday evening this blog received its 100,000 visitor, according to WordPress statistics. I would like to say a very big thank you to everyone that has read a post on this blog since I started it, way back in early 2013. According to Chat GPT, only 5% of blogs started in that year still survive. This blog not only survives, but is also thriving.

From time to time, WordPress suggest I make a charge to visitors to read previous posts. I have steadfastly ignored those blandishments in favour of open access for all. I am sure that policy has helped gain me extra visitors.

However, writing a blog does take time and effort, and if you know a library that might like to book of the 2013 posts, some of which WordPress no longer allows access to, please suggest they buy the book either as a e-book from Amazon or as a paperback from myself through the email at: dataforeducation@gmail.com

Once this book has covered its costs, I will publish another on the 100 most read posts – with a bit of commentary as to why they might have received so much attention. To date, posts about teachers’ holiday entitlements lead by a long way. It seems like the myth of long holidays is deeply engrained in the public’s psyche.

As someone that failed their English Language examination at age 16, I never thought that I would write a column for the TES between 1997 and 2010, and this blog since 2013. Sub-editors taught me a lot, and on-line software has helped. Interestingly, I have experimented recently with turning the text of a blog post into a webinar conversation. If you ae interested, I will leave you to search the 2026 posts for an example.   

In the past, comments were more frequent that they are these days, although ‘likes’ still seem to crop up from time to time. My thanks to those that ‘like’ every post I write. I am not used to having such a fan base.

My especially thanks to, Janet D, Frank S and Sue B for their many comments. Along with teachingbattleground, they make up the most frequent commentators over the years on my posts. Frank was at school with me, and I still remember his part in TCS plays.

Where now for the blog? Well, I hope to keep it going for some time yet, as there is certainly plenty of material to write about. My special field is the labour market for teachers and, especially, headteachers, where I have more than 40 years of data from my research. Later today, I will post, as my next blog post, about how my findings compare with a report that was published yesterday. AI can do some things, but it still has much to be taught to make it even more useful as a research tool.

So, once again, thank you to my audience, whether you have just read one post, have delved into the archive as part of research for a project, or are one of the small number of regular readers.  

30th April update

A, my thanks to you, the readers for the best April ever for the blog. 2,000 readers over the courses of the month!

Thank you.

Headteacher vacancies – a changing trend in advertising date?

Posted on by
1

One of the advantages of studying the same field for more than 40 years is the opportunity to investigate interesting hypotheses.

But first, a bit of background. When I started collecting vacancies for headteacher posts in state schools in England, way back in the 1980s, an advert in the TES was virtually the only source for jobseekers, so data collection was easy. The exception was the 12 months in the 1980s when News International titles, including the TES, were affected by a strike that prevented publication.

From around 2000 onwards, the TES had both print and on-line vacancies to check for headteacher vacancies. These days the main source of data are the DfE vacancy site, at least for headteacher vacancies. Even so, some schools still advertise in the TES, and a few on regional job boards, especially in the North East region.

My first hunch, not really a hypothesis in the 1980s when I started the work of collecting headteacher vacancies was that faith schools had more difficulty recruiting a new headteacher than other schools, based upon the number of such schools re-advertising. An early analysis supported the hunch, and the challenge facing faith schools is still with us in an increasingly secular society.

My next hypothesis was that most vacancies for headteachers came as a result of retirements. For a number of years, the annual study of senior staff vacancies I conducted for the NAHT validated this hypothesis, at least for headteacher vacancies.

In the days when all schools in the state sector were linked with a local authority, headteachers retiring at the end of the school-year might inform their governing bodies of their decision to retire at the last meeting in the autumn term. The result, a rash of advertisements for headteachers in January, and the bulk of vacancies for headteacher posts were either advertised or re-advertised between January 1st and 30th April.  

As a result of the increasing number of schools that are now academies, I have created a new hypothesis. I wonder whether the absence of any real local governing body for each academy might have resulted in headteachers postponing announcement of their retirement to the Trust until a later date in the term starting in January and, as a result, advertisements for headteacher vacancies are now being skewed to the second half of the first quarter of the year, with fewer January advertisements?

Now we are in April, it is possible to consider the data, and compare the data for 2026 with 2006 and 2018 – sadly TeachVac didn’t collect headteacher vacancies in 2016, but at that time just concentrated on classroom teacher vacancies.  

The first thing to note is that there appear to be fewer headteacher vacancies advertised in 2026 compared with either 2006 or 2018.

YearJANUARYFEBRUARYMARCHTOTAL
2006TOTAL5093944421345
2018TOTAL3583803391077
2026FIRST175203289667
2026READVERT132285120
2026Total188225374787

Source Headbase 2006; TeachVac 2018; John Howson 2026

In 2006, the demography of the teaching profession was very different to that of today. Many more headteachers were approaching retirement in 2006, and often decided to retire before reaching the then official retirement age. Nowadays, there is no official retirement age, pension rules have changed significantly, and I suspect the actual number of headteacher retiring each year has decreased.

However, the more interesting piece of data relates to the percentage of vacancies recorded each month. In 2006 and 2018, data collection did not distinguish between first advertisement and re-advertisements during the three months, but counted all but ‘repeat’ vacancies published.

The 2026 data collection exercise I conduct is based upon a collection date, accurate to within three days of a vacancy being published, and a re-advertisement data based upon a new closing date more than four weeks after the original closing date for the vacancy for a headteacher. Re-advertisements with an April closing date have been assigned to March for the purpose of this exercise on the basis of three to four weeks between vacancy being published and closing dates.

YearJANUARYFEBRUARYMARCHtotal
2006TOTAL38%29%33%100%
2018TOTAL33%35%31%100%
2026FIRST26%30%43%100%
2026READVERT11%18%71%
2026Total24%29%48%100%

Source Headbase 2006; TeachVac 2018; John Howson 2026

The data does seem to offer some support for my hypothesis, as January only accounted for 26% of vacancies in 2026 (24% if re-advertisements are included) compared with 38% in 2006, and 33% in 2018, when academies were already a feature of the school landscape.

March 2026 accounted for 48% of headteacher vacancies, compared with 33% in 2026, and 31% in 2018. In a future post, I will delve into the issue of re-advertisements that accounted for five per cent of the vacancies in March 2026.

At some point, I will compare academies and non-academy state schools to see whether their advertising patterns for headteacher vacancies in the first three months of the year vary, and will report my findings in a future post.

Reviving Music Teacher Bursaries: A Necessity

Posted on by
1

Regular readers of this blog will know of my campaign to see the music bursary restored to graduates training to be teachers of music. Recruitment to ITT is well below the same level as last year, when there was a bursary.

Music teacher shortage: the situation worsens | John Howson and more recently ITT – 9 subjects with fewer offers than March last year | John Howson

I was therefore delighted to see this speech by a Labour peer in a debate in the house of Lords on Thursday.

 Baroness Keeley (Lab) 

The review found that inequalities in music education are substantial, with music showing the widest disadvantage attainment gap of any subject, driven by unequal access to instrumental tuition and wider inequities in school and community resources. I have also raised with Ministers the fact that music teacher supply is a related problem. Since 2010, we have seen persistently high vacancy rates for music teachers. In fact, in 2023-24, that vacancy rate was among the highest of all subjects, and the Department for Education has missed its music teacher recruitment target in 12 of the past 13 years. There was a small increase in recruitment during 2024-25, after the brief return of the £10,000 bursary, but recruitment still reached only around 40% of target.

The conclusion is clear. The music teacher bursary must be restored. The Government’s opportunity mission makes it clear that we want high-quality music and arts education for every child in all state-funded schools. The curriculum review has recentred music and arts as core to a rounded education, not as optional extras, and it has challenged the narrowing of the curriculum that has squeezed music out of timetables, particularly in disadvantaged areas. Debate: Curriculum and Assessment Review – 26th Mar 2026 my highlighting

I would also welcome the comments in that debate by both Baroness Sue Garden and Tim Clement-Jones, Liberal Democrat Peers.

Despite the pressure on government finances, there really is a need to find a way to attract more graduates into training as music teachers. Any failure to do so will risk a Labour government committing the sin of removing music from out state schools, and leaving the subject residing just in the independent sector and international schools staffed by teachers trained in England.

Not only does music give great pleasure to many, it is also a major expert industry that the government ought to be nurturing. Two good reasons to reintroduce the bursary.

Of course, as Chair of the Oxfordshire Music Service Board, I have an interest to declare, but that interest isn’t contradicted by the evidence of declining enrolment, re-advertised vacancies and an apparent lack of interest in the DfE about the training of teachers of music for state schools. Presumably, they see this as a DCMS issue, since funding for music services is via the Arts Council.

Funding for teachers is, however, very much the brief of the DfE, and if they cannot find the cash for the bursary the they should urgently start work with the Arts Council to devise a scholarship scheme, such as already exists in certain other subjects. To do nothing is not an option if music is to survive in our state schools.

Demand for SEND places

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday, I wrote about the forecast decline in primary and secondary school places. In the past, less attention has been paid to the need for places for pupils with SEND. However, possibly as a result of the rapid growth in EHCPs, and hence the demand for specialist provision, the DfE has started trying to forecast what it has termed ‘the Local authority pupil forecasts for ‘Local authority specialist provision for pupils’.

This exercise was always going to be something of a challenge since it is taking place against falling pupil numbers, especially in the primary sector, but increasing demand for EHCPs. However, if demand for EHCPs continues to increase, it won’t necessarily mean a demand for more special school places, because some of the increased demand is likely to be met by specialist provision within schools as ‘specialist bases’ are created, often using the spare capacity arising from falling rolls.

At present the DfE data shows that the current stock of special schools is operating at over-capacity by some 10,000 places. At the top of a demographic cycle, such pressure would not be surprising, as schools often take ‘bulge’ classes for a couple of years using temporary buildings rather than built new schools that might not be needed as rolls fall. Whether that is the correct approach in the present circumstances for the special school sector is unclear from the DfE’s data published yesterday. School capacity in England: academic year 2024 to 2025 – GOV.UK

An analysis of local authority data around provision of specialist provision for the period up to the end of the decade reveals large differences across the country in projected need. At one end of the spectrum, three local authorities are projecting grow of in excess of 1,200 places each in the primary sector. At the other end of the spectrum, twenty-four authorities are predicting a reduction in need, with one ‘Reform’ led county predicating a need for 500 fewer places. Interestingly, the adjacent unitary authority is predicting an increase of over 100 places.

Oxfordshire, whose primary and secondary place forecasts were discussed in my previous post is predicting only a very small increase in the number of primary places.

These significant differences don’t seem to be related to either the underlying pupil population or the trend in pupil numbers in the primary sector. This raises issues about how reliable the current forecasting around the demand for SEND places is for policy-makers. Accurate data are important, because of the cost of provision in the SEND sector.

Data on provision of places are also important in helping identify workforce needs. It seems odd that the DfE doesn’t seem to have a unit that brings together trends in pupil numbers and the demand for both places and people to educate the projected school population.

If the DfE did have such a unit then it might look at the costs of small sixth forms and of central overheads by different MATs. It might also look at the issue of small primary schools, and how they might be protected in rural areas, but possibly amalgamated in urban areas. Is a one-from of entry school viable in London?

Hopefully, the data published yesterday will create some debate around the important, but often overlooked, issue of pupil place planning, and the future shape of schooling in the modern age.

ITT: What the poster doesn’t say

Posted on by
Reply

I saw several of these posters on York railway station this weekend.

The station seems like a good place to advertise, as York has a large number of university students passing through the station, but I hope the course organisers managed to negotiate a good deal, given the number of posters I saw in and around the station.

I thought the poster lacked a ‘call to action’. Just adding a QR code isn’t enough for me. Why not an arrow to the QR code with ‘click here for more details?’ As it is, the QR code is just sitting there, not doing much.

If I saw the poster, as a possible teacher, two things I might want to know, but are not told, are ‘how much does the training cost’ and ‘will I be guaranteed a job if I am successful?’

I guess the answers to both questions might be so off-putting as to be sensible to leave off the poster. However, as this was York, the starting salary and some idea of what top salaries in teaching are these days might have been a pull factor.

The DfE is currently spending money – not sure how much – promoting their vacancy website as the place to go to for teaching jobs. Might they also want to create a generic poster for railways stations in other university towns to encourage graduates to think about teaching as a career, rather that leaving it ITT providers to do so?

Finally, I am now sure about the strap line of ‘inspiring tomorrow’s teachers today’. It is certainly a catchy phrase, but it doesn’t do much for me.

While in York, this past weekend, I summated one of the amendments to the Lib Dem conference motion on tuition fees. The amendment called for student debt forgiveness for those that work in the public sector for ten years. In my speech, I also suggested the idea of Tuition Fee credits for student on Free School Meals for the whole of their secondary school career.

Sadly, I didn’t have time to remind conference that between 1997 and 2010, graduates training to be a teacher on programmes such as those run by Exchange Teacher Training had their tuition paid by the government. Personally, I believe that both trainee teachers and medics should have their fees for post first degree study paid by the government or at least repaid as soon as they start work in state-funded locations. After all, we pay army offices during their training, why not teachers and medics?