DfE Vacancy site – some more thoughts

The DfE vacancy site has now been in operation since 2018. During that time, it has altered little in appearance. Right from the start of the site, I was critical of its features. I felt then that TeachVac and other sites could have done a better job for much less money. I posted my frustration about the site in both January and March of this year.

After another infuriating day working on the headteacher vacancies listed on the DfE’s vacancy site yesterday, I though I would take a further look at what was on offer in terms of headteacher vacancies.

First off, the DfE site told me there were, in total, 122 vacancies, if I used their pre-defined key word of ‘headteacher’. The vacancies are presented in a list order covering 13 pages. However, there are not 122 vacancies for a headteacher.  10 of the posted vacancies are either for Executive Headships of more than one school (2) or posts below a headship (8 vacancies). Indeed, one vacancy isn’t even a teaching post. So, the real total of headteacher vacancies is 112?

No, sorry, that is not correct either. This is because 10 of the vacancies, including one non-teaching vacancy, appear twice on the site. As a result, the actual number of schools advertising for a new headteacher on the DfE vacancy site at 0900 on the 25th April 2026 was actually 102. That’s 20% below that stated figure.

Now, I have nothing against multiple listings. After all, a person might miss the vacancy the first time it appeared: but why only a few random vacancies? I believe such double listings should either be removed from the site – it just requires a simple piece of coding – or the rules about the same vacancy being listed more than once at the same time should be made clear.

Where I do quibble with the DfE, is with the inclusion of posts not for a headteacher vacancy in the listings under the ‘headteacher’ category, and, as a result, their inclusion in the overall total. This is just mis-leading, and schools should be prevented from uploading such vacancies under the ‘headteacher’ listing. Again, this should not be a difficult coding exercise.

The other question is: does the vacancy site meet the needs of schools and candidates? Well, some schools still advertise their vacancy for a headteacher elsewhere. Local authority job boards for non-academy schools; the ‘tes’ as well, or in a small number of cases instead of the DfE site. Some vacancies also appear on regional websites, such as in the North East or South West.

The DfE vacancy site doesn’t accept vacancies from non-state funded schools. Candidates considering both state and private schools have to look at more than one vacancy site. Is this a good idea? I don’t think it matters at the level of headteacher posts, except perhaps for special needs schools, where the private sector is playing an increasingly important role. However, for entry level jobs, some form of aggregation might be useful, especially as candidates begin to outnumber vacancies for the first time in many years.

Does the DfE have a board or committee that reviews its vacancy site? If not, perhaps the teacher association might ask for a review. After all, they would serve their members better by operating such a site themselves. Not only would they have better data on vacancy trends to argue their case with the STRB, but they could also earn some extra income. When I suggested this to the associations in 2013, when I created TeachVac, sadly they weren’t interested.

Free School Meals and headteacher vacancies

This is the third in my series of posts based upon my thoughts on headteacher vacancies that have been posted by state schools in England so far this school year. This post is a bit more speculative than the previous two posts, as it looks at the relationship between re-advertisements of headteacher vacancies and the percentage of children on Free School Meals as recorded on the DfE’s website in the schools that have re-advertised their headship.

I have used data for all the vacancies where free school meals data are available as the baseline. New schools; nursery schools; sixth form colleges and some other schools are excluded as they don’t have free school meals pupils. Thes other schools may be small schools, or just schools that have not recorded the percentage at this point in time.

% RANGE of FSM pupilsALL ADVERTSRE-ADSPERCENTAGE
0-9.91742414%
10-19.92672710%
20-29.91933016%
30-39.91632717%
40-49.91091514%
50-59.973811%
60-69.938411%
70+16638%

I have divided the vacancies into groups in an arbitrary manner. At this stage of the year, many schools that have advertised during February and March will not yet have had time to complete the appointment process, and decide whether or not to make an appointment or to re-advertise. As a result, the data presented in the table are in no way definitive of the current recruitment round. It will not be until January 2027, when the autumn term of 2026 re-advertisements have been added that a definitive report can be produced.

However, it is interesting to see that six of the 16 schools with the highest percentages of children with Free School Meals entitlement have already re-advertised the vacancy for their headship.

What I have yet to do is to look at the national total number of schools in each band, to see whether certain bands have a higher turnover overall. However, there are so many different possible intervening variables that such an exercise will need to wait until the end of the school-year, and possibly the autumn to be worth considering.

Nevertheless, as previous posts have made clear, there are some school types that are likely to have a higher rate of re-advertisement than others, and it will be interesting to see by the end of the recruitment round whether or not there is any correlation within groupings such as, for instance, Roman Catholic Schools in the North West of England or small primary schools in coastal areas and the free school meal percentage of schools that re-advertise their headship.

Is this data of any use to policymakers, and if so, what should be the outcome. In the past, during the coalition government there were suggestions for intervention in helping challenging schools recruit new leaders. Nowadays, I assume that is left to multi-academy trusts and diocese, and those local authorities that still take an interest in schooling to intervene. The other interesting question is, do schools with high levels of free school meals pupils retain headteacher for shorter periods of time than other schools?

Headteacher vacancies – a changing trend in advertising date?

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.

DfE Vacancy site – some thoughts

A great deal of research can be boring to do. That’s certainly true of my research into the labour market for teachers that I first started way back in the early1980s. Currently, I am tracking advertisements for headteacher vacancies in England.

The DfE is running a series of adverts on platforms such as LinkedIn extolling the virtue of advertising on their free vacancy site and claiming almost complete coverage of vacancies.

It is certainly true that the DfE site contains the majority of the headteacher vacancies in state schools in England, but I am not sure whether it has as complete a coverage as it maintains. One wonders what the Advertising Regulatory Body would make of such an unsubstantiated claim? It certainly would be allowed for beauty products.

The DfE site also has a number of idiosyncrasies. For headteacher vacancies, the most significant is the repetition of certain vacancies, a factor that inflates the total number of vacancies.  For instance, today, the DfE site suggests that there are 185 vacancies listed (1130 on 22.3.26). In reality there are only 160 schools advertising for a headteachers on the site. The other listings are repeats, or in one case a double repeat, with the vacancy appearing three times in all.

Does this repetition matter? It does if anyone is just counting the total of vacancies listed, as that would inflate the turnover of headteachers. Such simple counting would also need to also take into account the length of times each vacancy is listed. This can range from four weeks to a couple of days. Why some vacancies only appear for a short length of time is an interesting question. Do these schools have a candidate in mind, and hence don’t want other applicants?

Then there is the issue of genuine re-advertisements, where a school advertised, but failed to make an appointment. If counting the number of schools seeking a headteacher, then these re-advertisements need to be discarded.  To do so, needs a regular analysis of the whole list of vacancies, as there is no easier way to identify such schools. There is also an irritating practice from some MATs of not identifying the school where the vacancy has occurred. Some MATs also avoid information about the starting salary: I think that this is a mistake, since their idea of generous, may not be the same to MATs as to candidates, and it is embarrassing to find this out at interview stage.  

What of the schools whose headteacher vacancies appear more than once in the same list? Many are newly advertised vacancies; some are re-advertisements, but in each of these groups there seem little logic to the schools listed. At present, there are no schools in either the West Midlands or London regions with double entries. However, of the 25 schools with double entries, six each are in the South East and East of England.  

At the end of the school-year it will be interesting to see whether some MATs, local authorities or dioceses fare worse when it comes to making an appointment of a headteacher. There are some obvious candidates already appearing after just six months of the school-year.

What the first 1,000 headteacher adverts tell us

Between the DfE vacancy site – the DfE claims 98% of schools now use their site – and other leading job boards, I have collected details of 1,000 vacancies for headteacher posts advertised since the start of August 2025.

In the past, the three months from January to March were the most active months for headteacher vacancies, and that may well prove to be the case in the 2025/26 school year.

If the present level of vacancies continues as expected, then the annual total for headteacher vacancies will be around the 1,500 mark for 2025/26. The exact number will depend upon the number of schools that fail to make an appointment after advertising a vacancy and re-advertise.

To some, extent the degree of re-advertising that occurs will depend upon the mix of schools seeking a new headteacher, and the size of that sub-pool. However, the larger the number in the pool, the easier it is to predict trends.

What can be deduced from the first 1,000 vacancies this school year?

As expected, primary schools dominate the list, accounting for 628 of the first time vacancies, and 64 of the re-advertisements – a re-advertisement rate of 10%. Secondary schools accounted 182 first time vacancies, and 16 re-advertisements, a rate of nine per cent, and higher than I would have expected.

In view of the concerns over SEND, it is unfortunate that the 72 first time vacancies for headteachers of special schools have already produced some 21 re-advertisements, a rate of 29%, including a couple of schools that have re-advertised twice.

Interestingly, none of the 13 First schools, and none of the 21 infant schools with a recorded vacancy has seen a re-advertisement to date. In the past such vacancies have proved challenging to fill. This is still the case for junior schools headteacher vacancies, where the 38 vacancies have already generated four re-advertisements.

Nationally, the re-advertisement rate overall stands at 11%. However, that percentage already masks some regional differences.

Region RE-ADVERTISENTS 1ST ADVERT % RE-ADVERTISMENTS

SE7997%
SW81038%
WM91088%
YH1311811%
NW1512512%
EM119412%
L159915%
EE1911017%
NE43113%
ENGLAND10188711%

The percentage for the North East is affected by two special schools that have re-advertised. London, and the area to the north and east of the capital has seen the highest level of re-advertisements so far, although re-advertisement rates for schools to the south and west of the capital are, to date, much lower.

Faith schools have found recruiting a new headteacher more challenging than non-faith schools. Church of England schools have a re-advertisement rate of 13%, and Roman Catholic schools, one of 16%, compared with the overall rate of 11%.

I had wondered, with vacancies being viewed on-line these days, whether it was a smart move to advertise a vacancy in December, as perhaps candidates might use the holiday period to start job-hunting.

An analysis of the 136 vacancies tracked as appearing for the first time in December, shows that 19 schools, or 14%, have had to readvertise their vacancy, so although no longer expensive in terms of placing a vacancy on the DfE website, ‘the early bird does not always seem to catch the worm’.

Finaly, the highest starting salary recorded so far is £140,000, and 90 schools have offered a starting salary of more than £100,000. At the other end of the scale, the lowest starting salary in an advertisement for a headteacher was £51,773.

Despite staring salaries in excess of £100,00, some 14 of these schools have re-advertised their vacancy for a headteacher. Money, it seems may not be enough to attract a suitable applicant for some schools.

How easy is it for a mature entrant to become a headteacher?

The recent DfE research into promotions provides some food for thought School leadership in England 2010 to 2020: characteristics and trends

Page 69 of the report contains the following paragraph.

‘Teachers may enter a leadership grade more than one step above their current grade or may enter a leadership grade after being outside the system. These non-sequential promotions make up a significant minority of promotions. In primaries schools, for example, for every 100 senior leaders in 2016 who were heads in 2020, 12 classroom teachers, 12 middle leaders and 11 system entrants also became heads. In secondary schools, for every 100 senior leaders from 2016 who were heads in 2020, 3 classroom teachers, 5 middle leaders and 5 system entrants also became heads. Non-sequential promotions appear to be more common in primary schools, where leadership roles are more limited and ‘linear’ progression may be more difficult.’

Interestingly no mention is made in the text of the position in special schools, a disturbing oversight in view of the current concerns about SEND.

Following on from the text there is a histogram of ‘The Grade occupied by 2020 heads in 2016, split by school phase in 2020, in terms of FTE’.

GradePrimarySecondarySpecial
Head645252
Senior Leader263932
Middle Leader314
Classroom Teacher313
System Entrant369

There is no mention in the text of the fact that in many small primary schools there may be no senior leader, so any internal appointment would inevitably come from either a middle leader or classroom teacher.

What is interesting is the fact that almost one in ten headteachers in special schools in 2020 were system entrants in 2016. Where did these entrants come from, were they from special schools outside the state sector or did they bring other expertise to the post of headteacher.

How long does it take to become a headteacher?

In view of the fact that most headteachers seem to be appointed as a result of ‘linear’ progression through the different grades, especially in secondary schools, how long does it take to reach headship?

Is there an age or length of service by which, if a teacher has not reached assistant head grade, they unlikely to ever make it to a headship? If so, do mature entrants that become teachers after the age of thirty face a promotion ceiling in their careers? Is the position different in primary schools, with their flatter leadership teams, than in secondary schools with assistant, deputy and headteachers roles, often now overseen by an executive head.

The DfE research showed that in 2010, headteachers had a median of 27 years since qualification, and that this reduced to 23 years in 2016 and then rose slightly to 24 years in 2020. The median years of experience of senior leaders reduced from 18 years in 2010 to 17years in 2014 where it remained until 2020. The reduction between the upper quartiles for years since qualification was greatest for senior leaders, 24 years since qualification in 2020 compared with 30 years in 2010. There was virtually no change in the lower quartile between 2010 and 2020, for example, this was 13 years since qualification for senior leaders in both 2010 and 2020.

As this data covers both primary and secondary schools, it is difficult to know whether promotion is faster in the smaller primary schools, if you are lucky with turnover, that in large secondary schools with many more layers of leadership. Clearly, some mature entrants achieve headship, but the message must be that if you want promotion as a mature entrant, start your journey quickly and use the skills you have brought to the profession from your former career. A decade ago, I wrote this blog about the career of Mrs Clarke who went from volunteer to headteacher in the same school. Congratulations Mrs Clarke | John Howson

Sadly, the research is silent about entrants from different subject backgrounds. Do historians and geographers, generally joining smaller department, find progress to a headship easier than teachers of English and mathematics where there may be several grades of middle leadership within the department?

We should encourage mature entrants, but make it clear that those joining after the age of thirty may find career progression more of a challenge, especially where governing bodies value length of service rather than skills and expertise for the role. No doubt MATs with more professionals involved in promotion decisions will be more open to those entering teaching later in life.

What Lib Dems want for SEND pupils and their families

I was delighted to see the Liberal Democrats weighing in on the SEND debate by writing to the Prime minister and setting out five key principles behind any reform of the SEND system. This is what their letter to the Prime minister said:

Our five principles and priorities for SEND reform are as follows:

  1. Putting children and families first Children’s rights to SEND assessment and support must be maintained and the voices of children and young people with SEND and of their families and carers must be at the centre of the reform process.
  2. Boosting specialist capacity and improving mainstream provision Capacity in state special provision must be increased, alongside improvements to inclusive mainstream provision, with investment in both new school buildings and staff training.
  3. Supporting local government Local authorities must be supported better to fund SEND services, including through:
    1. The extension of the profit cap in children’s social care to private SEND provision, where many of the same private equity backed companies are active, and
    2. National government funding to support any child whose assessed needs exceed a specific cost.
  4. Early identification and shorter waiting lists Early identification and intervention must be improved, with waiting times for diagnosis, support and therapies cut.
  5. Fair funding The SEND funding system must properly incentivise schools both to accept SEND pupils and to train their staff in best practice for integrated teaching and pastoral care. Our five principles for SEND reform – Liberal Democrats

These principles come from a motion debated at last year’s Party conference and represent a check list against which specific policies can be measured, such as increasing the supply of educational psychologists to deal with both the annual reviews and initial assessments of EHCPs.

If there is anything missing from the list, it is the role of the NHS, and specifically around mental health and education. This is the area of need where the system has really broken down. Many of the other issues are cost related due to inflation and more young people living longer as well as increased demands from an age range of support than can now reach up to the age of 25. The issue of mental health has swamped the system and the NHS must play a part in helping define what is needed.

With the main opposition at Westminster disinterested in the issues of education that are facing most families, the Lib Dems should be leading from the front. This letter should have been sent at least a week ago.

As my earlier posts of today have shown, the Lib Dems next education campaign can be around securing enough teachers for schools in our more deprived areas. Such a campaign can take on both labour councils and Reform voters to show there is a radical alternative in the Liberal democrats.

Education may not feature very high in polling about issue in elections, but on a day-to-day basis it isn’t far away from the conversations in many households. From mobile phone to AI, funding for school meals to citizenship, Liberal Democrats should be calling the government to account.  

All agreed then: there is a teacher recruitment and retention crisis

The House of Commons Education Select Committee held its first oral evidence session this morning as part of its inquiry into recruitment and retention. The Committee discussed with representatives of the teacher and further education professional associations their views on the present state of affairs with regard to recruitment and retention.  

It was not a surprise to hear all the witnesses explain that the present situation in both schools and colleges represented a crisis, and that there was no solution in sight. Interestingly, nobody mentioned the effects of any downturn in the economy on teacher recruitment – not even evidencing what happened at the start of the covid pandemic when interest in ITE increased sharply. There was also no mention of teaching as a global career and the growth of UK private schools overseas as a source of jobs for teachers.

Pay, working conditions and morale all came up, and were cited as areas where the DfE needed to take action. The fact that all four professional associations are in dispute with the DfE was mentioned, but the lack of the STRB Report received relatively little consideration.

Two issues discussed in detail were the question of school leadership and how attractive it is. There was the usual discussion about how to keep good teachers in the classroom and some statements about teachers not wanting to become head teachers. There was also a discussion about how teaching behaves in relation to ‘protected’ groups in society.

Talking the first issue on leadership, it is interesting to look at the recent data from the School Workforce Survey on deputy and assistant heads working in the primary school sector in the under 49 age groups and specifically, for assistant heads, the under 39 age groups.

 AHDH
FEMALE25-2938899
30-3943522571
40-4939544123
86946793
MALE25-2911143
30-391108962
40-49674888
18931893
NON-G25-2910
30-3902
40-4900
ALL25-29500142
30-3954603535
40-4946285011
105888688

There were around 6,000 assistant heads in the primary sector under the age of 40 in November 2022. That ought to be sufficient to provide candidates for deputy headships, at least at the national level.

There are somewhere around 1,500 primary headships advertised each year. With less than 4,000 deputy heads under the age of 40 that means schools will need to draw heavily on the 5,000 primary headteachers in their 40s for many vacancies. This does leave the ratio of candidates to vacancies worryingly low, especially as the recruitment round progresses, and good candidates are appointed to vacancies. I think that there is a matter for concern here that the NAHT were wise to draw the Committee’s attention to in oral evidence.

As to minority groups, there is work to be done here to encourage men, ethnic minorities and those with disabilities to take up teaching as a career. Here are a couple of links to my blogs on the topic written in past years

Are new graduate entrants to teaching still predominantly young, white and female? | John Howson (wordpress.com)

‘We need more black headteachers in our schools’ | John Howson (wordpress.com)

This is an area where clearly the DfE seems to be paying less attention than in the past. Perhaps, it shows a consequence of the lack of a dedicated unit on teacher supply, training and professional development.

Such a unit might have helped the DfE create a coherent policy to solve the current staffing crisis in our schools and colleges that should have caught nobody unawares.

How challenging is teacher recruitment?

The staffing crisis in the NHS often receives more publicity than the festering crisis in teacher recruitment. This week, TeachVac has supplied data for articles in tes, and by the Press Association. The latter story make many local newspapers, but little impact on the broadcast media that still seems obsessed with the NHS.

Next week, TeachVac will publish its two detailed reviews: one on the labour market for school leaders and the other looking at the labour market for classroom teachers during 2022. Schools signed-up to TeachVac’s £500 recruitment deal for unlimited matches of their jobs can ask for a free copy of both reports. Copies are priced at £100 for each report to non-subscribers. www.teachvac.co.uk

Both reports comment on what is now history. January marks the start of the key recruitment round for September 2023. As part of its data collection, TeachVac, where I am chair, monitors its collected vacancies against the numbers recorded in the DfE’s annual ITT census of trainees. Of course, some of those trainees are already in the classroom on programmes that mean they will be unlikely to be job seeking for September in any large numbers. TeachVac’s index takes these numbers into account when calculating its end of week numbers.

Despite only being at the end of week 2 of 2022, I thought it might be useful to compare 2023 with 2022 at the same point. When looking at the table, it is worth recalling that in many subjects the number of trainees is lower than it was last year, so the supply side is reduced. As a result, it would take a reduction in demand for the index to improve on week 2 of 2022.

Subject13th January 202314th January 2022Difference
Computing76%90%-14%
RE80%93%-13%
Business Studies70%82%-12%
All Sciences85%92%-7%
Music84%91%-7%
Languages87%94%-7%
Mathematics87%93%-6%
English87%93%-6%
Geography87%92%-5%
Art93%97%-4%
PE96%98%-2%
D&T73%75%-2%
History97%98%-1%
Source TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk

Sadly, the reduction in trainee numbers hasn’t been offset by any reduction in demand: quite the opposite. All the subjects in the table are indicating a worse position at the end of week 2 in 2023 than at the same point in 2022; even history.

Design and technology’s apparently favourable position is due more to how badly it was faring in 2022 than to any real improvement, as it still has the second lowest index score in 2023, only business studies – the DfE’s forgotten subject – is in a worse position, and will certainly register an amber warning of recruitment challenges by next Friday.

Indeed, computing and design and technology will both also almost certainly have posted amber warning by the end of week 3! Several other subjects might have amber warning in place by the end of the month.

I am sure that the worsening trend in recruitment is why schools and MATs are signing up to TeachVac’s recruitment offer. At less than £10 per week for all a schools’ vacancies to be matched to TeachVac’s database, with no extra work required by the school than doing what it already does, must be the best deal in town. Schools not signed up with TeachVac will no longer see their vacancies matched each day. The fee for primary schools is just £75.

London teacher labour market most active

August was a more active month than normal in the labour market for teachers. Although vacancies in the primary sector were subdued, the secondary sector remained active, with nearly 800 new vacancies published during the month according to TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk

Nearly two thirds of the vacancies, 64%, were posted by located schools in London, the South East and East of England regions, with the remainder of the country accounting for only around a third of vacancies. In some subjects, the percentage was even higher, with 29 out of the 40 posts for teachers of geography listed by schools in these three regions. No such posts were tracked across either the North East or North West regions.

As might be expected, demand for teachers of history during August was limited, with just 14 posts identified. Interestingly, only two of these posts were advertised by schools in London and the three regions of London, the South East and East of England only accounted for 5 of the 14 vacancies.

TeachVac provides a regular monthly newsletter for both schools and teachers. The service is free to teachers, as is the use of the jo board to match teachers to vacancies on a daily basis.

Schools pay a nominal fee of £10 for their newsletter.

From the end of this month, TeachVac will end its free matching service for schools. To cover its operating costs, and ensure that data collection remains of the highest quality, from October schools are being asked to pay £1 for every match made between a teacher and one of their vacancies. There is an annual limit of £500 per secondary school, beyond which point remaining matches in the 12 months are free. For primary schools, the cap is set at £75. This means just 75 matches are required to hit the limit, and all further matches that year are free.

During September, TeachVac has put in place a special offer of £250 for secondary schools and just £50 for primary schools: effectively, half-price for an annual subscription regardless of the annual number of matches made during the year.

To date, in 2022, TeachVac has made 1.95 million matches between jobseekers and schools with vacancies, covering both state-funded and private schools across England. By the end of September, the 2 million matches mark will have been passed.

Schools, MATs, diocese and other groups signing up now at enquiries@teachvac.co.uk will always be placed at or near the top of the daily matching algorithm, ensuring teachers see their vacancies first. This is an added bonus on top of the half-price offer.

If you would like more information, either email enquiries@teachvac.co.uk or send me a message via the comment section.

Please circulate this post to those responsible for recruitment in schools. Sign up in September for a half-price fixed fee. If you need convincing, ask TeachVac how many matches have been made in 2022 for your school or group of schools using the email address above and the code MATCH22.