DfE Vacancy site – some thoughts

Posted on March 22, 2026 by John Howson

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

Posted on March 8, 2026 by John Howson

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

SE	7	99	7%
SW	8	103	8%
WM	9	108	8%
YH	13	118	11%
NW	15	125	12%
EM	11	94	12%
L	15	99	15%
EE	19	110	17%
NE	4	31	13%
ENGLAND	101	887	11%

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.

Are teacher vacancy rates slowing?

Posted on June 18, 2023 by John Howson

Were there really more teacher vacancies this May than during May 2022? There have been some suggestions that the answer is yes. I have seen an increase of seven per cent suggested. However, I am more cautious in suggesting any overall increase in vacancies.

Yes, there have been increases in some subjects, in some regions of England, but measuring a basket of 11 secondary subjects, no region recorded across the board increases in all subjects. In the primary sector, only the North West recorded any increase in vacancies, with a decline compared with the May 2022 number of vacancies in all other regions.

The North West and West Midlands recorded the largest number of secondary subjects with an increase in vacancies. The South East and Yorkshire & The Humber regions, the largest number of subjects where there was a decline on the May 2022 number of recorded advertisements for a classroom teacher or promoted post, according to TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk where the data was compiled from their database of recorded vacancies.

So, why might there be a discrepancy in views about vacancies? One reason may be the treatment of repeat advertisements. I have long advocated a unique job number for each vacancy that accompanies it until it is either replaced by a different vacancy or the post is filled. Schools can be tardy at removing vacancies after the closing date, even when the post has been filled. TeachVac considers each vacancy it records and uses its own AI to decide whether to ask a human to review the vacancy, record it as a new vacancy, or discard it. This may account for some of the difference with other commentators.

TeachVac as a job board looks at teaching vacancies across both state and private schools. There is more work to be undertaken to see whether the slowdown has affected private schools more than state schools? The South East, a region with a high proportion of private schools, does seem to have seen more of a decline in vacancies than other regions. The Yorkshire and The Humber region had a strong year in 2022, so the decline in vacancies across that region may be a reaction to the number of vacancies recorded last year.

There is another possible explanation for any slowing of vacancies or even a downturn. In some subjects, notably design and technology, schools may finally have accepted that there is no point in advertising vacancies in the traditional manner, and either stopped advertising or moved to using an agency – hopefully on a no find no fee basis – or resorting to social media and other methods of recruitment advertising.

Of course, the uncertainty about pay levels for September may also now be causing schools, especially in areas where pupil rolls are not rising as fast as they have been, to become more cautious in their attitude to recruitment for September. Better to have unfilled vacancies and offer existing staff a new role than look forward to possible redundancies because of a lack of cash.

Looking at the TeachVac data for the first half of June, our recorded vacancies are still below those of 2022, except in England and Music, two subjects that largely resisted the downward trend in May.

There is more research to be undertaken, but perhaps the rise in mortgage rates is affecting the number of teachers either leaving the profession or in a position to take a maternity leave break that would require their job to be covered. Time will tell.

Bad news for January vacancies

Posted on June 3, 2023 by John Howson

The May 31^st date for teacher resignations has come and gone. This year it has excited some interest in the press, as they have finally caught on to the thread this blog has been running ever since the DfE’s ITT census was published last September: namely, this this was going to be brutal recruitment round, and that there would not be enough teachers to meet the demands from schools seeking to fill vacancies for September 2023.

So far this week TeachVac has provided data for both tes and schoolsweek, and had calls on the subject from national newspapers as well. One group that has been conspicuously silent has been the House of Commons Select committee on Education that instituted an inquiry into teacher recruitment and retention on the 20^th March, and required evidence by the 21^st April: since when silence. I know that the Committee normally meets on a Monday, and that there have been a lot of Monday bank holidays, but not to even have considered whether any of the evidence was worth publishing for more than a month does seem a little strange.

Anyway, this blog isn’t about the Select Committee, but about schools faced with unexpected January vacancies. Last year, between the 1^st November 2022 and the end of December, secondary schools posted 7,857 vacancies according to TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk That was a 53% increase in the number of vacancies recorded during this period when compared with the same period in 2021. Geography teachers were particularly in demand.

Whether in the autumn of 2023 it is the 7,857 vacancies of 2022 or just the 5,136 of 2021, schools will struggle to fill these vacancies, regardless of the subject. Some schools will struggle more than others. Indeed, previous analysis by TeachVac of the data, as reported on this blog, has shown that secondary schools with high percentages of pupils on free school meals tend to place more adverts for teachers than either private schools or state schools with low numbers of pupils claiming free school meals.

What can be done to help? If, as seems likely to be the case, there are more primary school teachers looking for jobs this year than there are posts available, could there be a one-term conversion course established for the autumn term, along the lines of the subject conversion courses for those lacking the full qualifications to enter ITT in a particular subject.

The primary to secondary course would be different in that the teachers would be qualified. For such a course to work the teachers would probably need to be paid a salary that made it worth their while taking part in the course. If the DfE wanted to recoup their costs they could offer schools a teacher that completed the course for the price of a recruitment advert or the amount a school would spend with an agency to find a teacher.

Such teachers could teach Key Stage 3 based upon their A level subjects and release existing teachers to cover Key Stages 4 & 5, and examination groups left without a teacher by the vacancy created or indeed left unfilled from September.

There is little time to organise such a programme, but the alternative is to saddle schools with the need to spend lots of cash chasing teachers that aren’t there in vain attempts to fill their vacancies.

Note: As a director of TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk I am an interested party in the operation of the recruitment market. However, TeachVac’s £500 offer for listings of all vacancies for 15 months until August 2024 is substantially cheaper than other sites, especially for non-state schools that cannot access the DfE’s job board.

Are schools wasting £30 million pounds of public money?

Posted on May 2, 2021 by John Howson

TES Global, the largest supplier of paid-for teacher recruitment advertising in the field of education has just published their accounts for the year ending 31^st August 2020. Those so far published are for TES Global Limited. Those for TES topco are yet to appear. The published accounts can be found on the Companies House page, by searching under TES Global.

The accounts for the year to 31^st August 2020 included almost six months of the pandemic, so it is not surprising that turnover from continuing operations fell by around £2 million to £59.2 million. Thanks to interest receivable and other income of £25.3 million, the Group made an overall profit of £22.3 million. Without that income there would have been a loss of around £3 million; this despite cutting the wages and salary bill from just under £14 million to around £9.5 million, and slashing headcount from 235 to 191.

The sale of the TES owned Teacher Supply Business in December 2020, for a total consideration of £27 million including upfront cash of £12.5 million, will no doubt further help to strengthen the balance sheet. However, the income from those businesses were, presumably, included in these accounts.

Of interest to me, as Chair of TeachVac, and no doubt civil servants at the DfE running the DfE teacher vacancy site, was how the TES was doing serving the teacher recruitment market, and how much cash was it securing from state-funded schools for recruitment advertising, all of which is now on-line, like both TeachVac and the DfE sites.

As the TES has been pursuing a policy of persuading schools to pay an annual subscription for several years now, rather than point of sale advertising, the TES Group income has been less affected by the downturn in vacancies during the pandemic than it would have been if each advert had been paid for individually. A quick calculation from the published accounts suggests that while overall revenue fell by 4%, advertising revenue continued to benefit from the switch to subscriptions. Such income rose from £37.6 million the previous year to £42.4 million in 2019-2020. Traditional advertising income fell from £17.7 million to £10.9 million during the same period.

The TES has some 1,000 international schools and presumably schools elsewhere in the United Kingdom, as well as non- state-funded schools that contributed to the £42.4 million of revenue. A generous estimate might suggest perhaps £35 million was paid by state-funded schools in England in subscription income in 2019-2020 to the TES.

It is interesting to compare this with the DfE evidence to the STRB earlier this year, where at paragraph 45 they stated that:

With schools spending in the region of £75m on recruitment advertising and not always filling vacancies, there are very significant gains to be made in this area. Over 75% of schools in England 14 are now signed up to use the service and over half a million jobseekers visited Teaching Vacancies in 2020. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/967761/STRB_Written_Evidence_2021.pdf

According to the latest DfE announcement, some 78% of schools have now signed up to the service https://www.publicsectorexecutive.com/articles/councils-encouraged-sign-dfes-free-teaching-vacancies-service?utm_source=Public%20Sector%20Executive&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=12340062_Newsletter%2027%20Apr&dm_i=IJU,7CHNI,AUR327,TT9F6,1

I wonder where the other £30 million of so is going – surely not to the local press or eteach and The Guardian?

Either way, that is still a lot of cash schools are spending because they don’t have enough confidence in either TeachVac or the DfE sites to allow them to take the risk of not signing up to the TES. Or is it just inertia?

If the government is serious about helping schools save this money spent on recruitment advertising for other purposes, and the cash will surely be needed in the post-pandemic world, however speedy the recovery, given the amount of public cash spent in the past twelve months. There must be a campaign to encourage teachers to use the free sites, and for schools to always ask where applicants either received notice of the vacancy or saw the vacancy that they applied for. This will allow schools to evaluate the effect of paid-for advertising and the TES subscription compared with the use of the free sites instead.

Interestingly, TeachVac reached a new high of 6,000,000 hits in twelve months at the end of April. This was despite the fall in vacancies on the site during the past twelve months as schools cut the number of teaching post advertised.

May 2021 should be the first 1,000,000 hit month for TeachVac, with corresponding highs in visitors and vacancies matched as schools return to a more normal recruitment pattern, as explained in a previous post on this blog.

DfE and Teacher Vacancies: Part Two

Posted on April 3, 2021 by John Howson

The DfE is spending more money supporting their latest venture into the teacher recruitment market. Schoolsweek has uncovered the latest moves by the government to challenge existing players in this market https://schoolsweek.co.uk/dfe-leans-on-mats-to-boost-teacher-job-vacancies-website-take-up/ in an exclusive report.

The current DfE foray into the recruitment market follows the failure of the Fast Track Scheme of two decades ago and the Schools Recruitment Service that fizzled out a decade ago. The present attempt also came on the heels of the fiasco around a scheme to offer jobs in challenging schools in the north of England that never progressed beyond the trial phase.

The present DfE site rolled out nationally two years ago this month. How successful it has been was the subject of a Schoolsweek article earlier this year. https://schoolsweek.co.uk/dfes-teacher-job-website-carries-only-half-of-available-positions/ This blog reviewed the market for vacancy sites for teachers last December, in a post entitled Teacher Vacancy Platforms: Pros and Cons that was posted on December 7, 2020.

In that December post, I looked at the three key sites for teacher vacancies in England. TeachVac; the DfE Vacancy site and The TES. As I pointed out, this was not an unbiased look, because I am Chair of the company that owns TeachVac. Indeed, I said, it might be regarded as an advertisement, and warned readers to treat it in that way.

There is an issue with how much schools spend on recruitment of teachers. After all, that was why TeachVac was established eight years ago. The DfE put the figure in their evidence to the STRB this year at around £75 million; a not insubstantial figure.

Will TeachVac be squeezed out in a war between the DfE backed by unlimited government funding and the TES with a big American backer? At the rate TeachVac is currently adding new users, I don’t think so. After all, the DfE site doesn’t cover independent schools, and in the present market I believe that most teachers want a site that allows access to all teaching jobs and not just some. That benefits both TeachVac and the TES as well as other players in the market, such as The Guardian and Schoolsweek, as well as recruitment agencies.

How much the DfE will need to spend on ensuring they cover the whole of the state-funded job market in terms of acquiring vacancies by the ‘school entering vacancies’ method is another interesting question? As is, how much will it also cost to drive teachers to using the DfE site and not TeachVac or the TES?

A view of TeachVac’s account reveals that Teachvac provides access to more jobs for teachers at less than the DfE is going to spend on promoting their site over the next few months. Such spending only makes good commercial sense if you want to remove a player from the market.

So here’s a solution. Hire TeachVac to promote the DfE site and use the data TeachVac already generates to monitor the working of the labour market. After all, that was also one of the suggestions from the Public Accounts Committee Report that spurred the DfE into action and the creation of their present attempt at running a vacancy site.

DfE and Teacher Vacancies: Part One

Posted on April 3, 2021 by John Howson

In my previous post I discussed the issue of the DfE’s vacancy site and how by viewing it a page at a time resulted in duplication of some vacancies and the inability to see other vacancies. I asked the DfE to shed light on the problem by submitting a Freedom of Information request (FOI).

I have reproduced the DfE’s response below. Essentially, the DfE site seems sound except for anyone undertaking the view of the site by the means that I selected. Since my purpose was to check how many non-teaching vacancies were listed on the DfE site, I had no other option but to use the method of viewing the site I selected.

Those using the sorting by closing date will discover another wrinkle, but I will leave you to do so if you are interested.

The DfE site has hit the headlines in a Schoolsweek exclusive https://schoolsweek.co.uk/dfe-leans-on-mats-to-boost-teacher-job-vacancies-website-take-up/ TeachVac’s contribution to the story can be found at https://schoolsweek.co.uk/dfes-teacher-job-website-carries-only-half-of-available-positions/

I will discuss the possible implications for the teacher recruitment market in my next blog. But, here is the DfE’s response to the FOI.

Thank you for your request for information, which was received on 15 March 2021 and assigned case number 2021-0017953. You requested the following information:

On the DfE vacancy site for teachers: https://teaching-vacancies.service.gov.uk/
1. How many of the published vacancies on 16th March or nearest available date with data were duplicated; and,
2. What was the number of unique vacancies on that day for teachers in institutions operating under schools regulations displayed on the DfE Vacancy site after excluding Sixth Form Colleges, other Further Education institutions and any private sector institutions and posts not requiring a teacher such as, but not exclusively, Teaching Assistant, cleaner, Examinations Officer and cover supervisor? Vacancies providing services across MATs and not linked to a specific school should also be excluded from the total provided.

I have dealt with your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“the Act”).

For context, the total number of live vacancies on Teaching Vacancies on 16 March was 1,386. As of 1 April, there are 2,330 live vacancies on Teaching Vacancies.

1. How many of the published vacancies on 16th March or nearest available date with data were duplicated?

For the purposes of this request, we have considered a ‘vacancy with data duplicated’ to be a vacancy with the same job title as another vacancy published by the same organisation which was also live on this date. The total number of vacancies meeting this definition on 16 March was 37 (2.7% of all live vacancies).

2. What was the number of unique vacancies on that day for teachers in institutions operating under schools regulations displayed on the DfE Vacancy site after excluding Sixth Form Colleges, other Further Education institutions and any private sector institutions and posts not requiring a teacher such as, but not exclusively, Teaching Assistant, cleaner, Examinations Officer and cover supervisor? Vacancies providing services across MATs and not linked to a specific school should also be excluded from the total provided.

Further Education institutions and private sector institutions are not permitted to list roles on Teaching Vacancies. Technical restrictions are in place to prevent this.

The total number of live vacancies on 16 March that were not at sixth form colleges, across a MAT or at multiple schools was 1,344 (97% of all live vacancies). Of these, the number of vacancies ‘requiring a teacher’ was 1,169 (87% of these live vacancies).

For the purposes of this request, we have defined ‘requiring a teacher’ as a listing with a job title containing the phrase ‘teacher’, ‘head’, ‘principal’ or ‘ordinat’ (as in coordinator or co-ordinator), but not containing any of the phrases ‘TA’ (in upper case only), assistant (but not in conjunction with ‘head’ or ‘principal’), ‘intervention’, ‘admin’, ‘account’, ‘marketing’, ‘admission’ or ‘care’. Structured data is not available on whether roles require a teacher, because the relevant fields are either optional for schools to complete or do not exist because they relate to vacancies that are not within the service’s Terms & Conditions. To obtain this information, vacancies have been filtered by relevant words and phrases. As a result, some teaching roles will have been excluded in counts of non-teaching roles and vice versa.

Freedom of Information Request

Posted on March 15, 2021 by John Howson

The DfE’s teaching vacancies web site has been in operation for some time now. Indeed, in the DfE’s evidence to the School Teachers Review Body (STRB) this year they state the following at paragraph 45:

We are also continuing to develop and improve our Teaching Vacancies service, which is a free, national jobs listing website designed to save schools money and deliver high quality candidates. With schools spending in the region of £75m on recruitment advertising and not always filling vacancies, there are very significant gains to be made in this area. Over 75% of schools in England 14 are now signed up to use the service and over half a million jobseekers visited Teaching Vacancies in 2020 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/967761/STRB_Written_Evidence_2021.pdf

On the face of it the site is doing well. Regular readers will know of my role as Chair of TeachVac, the job site matching teachers to jobs across England that pre-dated the DfE site. After reading the above paragraph, I wondered how the half a million jobseekers number was measured. For most of the time there has been no requirement to log-in and register to view vacancies on the DfE site, so was it just ‘hits’. In that case half a million might seem a low number over 12 months. I am not sure what the TES would claim, but TeachVac is in excess of 5 million ‘hits’ over the last twelve months and heading for 6 million for 2021.

The claim of 75% of schools registered with the DfE says nothing about how often they place vacancies on the site.

A casual glance at the around 1,500 vacancies shown as the total on the DfE site reveals a number of issues.

Firstly, not all vacancies are for teachers. Some are for teaching assistants and others for everything including cleaners, support staff, examination offers and cover supervisors. Secondly, not all vacancies are for posts in schools. Some are in Sixth form Colleges and other institutions not run under school regulations.

However, the most important issue is the number of unique posts on the DfE site. I raised this with the DfE directly recently, and have not yet had a explanation. As a result, I have tabled a Freedom of information request.

On the DfE vacancy site for teachers

How many of the published vacancies on 16^th March or nearest available date with data were duplicated.

What was the number of unique vacancies on that day for teachers in institutions operating under schools regulations displayed on the DfE Vacancy site after excluding Sixth Form Colleges, other Further Education institutions and any private sector institutions and posts not requiring a teacher such as Teaching Assistant, cleaner, Examinations Officer and cover supervisor? Vacancies providing services across MATs and not linked to a specific school should also be excluded from the total.

It will be interesting to see how long it takes to respond to the FOI request. Since the answer should be available at the press of a button, it surely should not take long for a response, even after it has no doubt had to be checked at several levels within the Department before being released.

Last week, it was reported to me that one vacancy appeared several times on the site. I have no objection to such a policy if the total refers to ‘unique’ vacancies and not to repeats of the same vacancy, as such an approach to the total might be construed as misleading as to the usefulness of the site.

As I have pointed out before, TeachVac consistently has more vacancies than the DfE site, and teachers wanting a job in either the state or private sector can find them on TeachVac, but not on the DfE site.

However, the largest mystery of all is why schools are still spending £75 million on recruitment advertising when there are better uses for the cash. Perhaps the teacher associations and those responsible for school governance and administration can tell me the answer as to why so much cash is being spent on recruitment advertising?

Pick a teacher by computer

Posted on February 8, 2021 by John Howson

There’s a story on the BBC news site today about AI being used by some companies in their staff recruitment process. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-55932977 Well, that’s nothing new. Maybe that it is just that the technology has become jazzier and snazzier that it used to be.

Way back in the 1980s, I recall a US company telling me it could select who would be a good primary school teacher on the basis of a few questions answered over the telephone. They told me it worked for selecting ice-hockey players, so would work for primary school teachers.

In the mid-1990s, during my brief period as a government adviser, I headed off another challenge to abolish interviews for all aspiring teachers, both at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Success was due to being joined in support by a prominent HMI of the day. Together we made the case for interviews, even though it was both time-consuming and costly.

I would not want the DfE to suggest the automated route for teacher selection be used by the new Institute of Teaching its role in both initial teacher training preparation and professional development. Imagine being judged as to whether you could be funded for a professional development course on the basis of playing a computer game.

Well, I suppose, if you think about the concept, it not all that different to how some schools and local authorities still select pupils for secondary schools at age eleven. Interestingly, we haven’t heard much about deprivation and the pandemic on the selection of pupils at age eleven, especially in the Home Counties that still cling in some areas to the Victorian notion that pupils’ life chances can be determined at age eleven.

Of course, when there are a lot of job applications, as during a recession, there is a tendency to use tactics to save time in the recruitment process. In the early days of postcodes, I recall two headteachers behaving differently. One rejected every application with a postcode as being pedantic: the other rejected everyone without such a code as not being thorough. Candidates had no idea which approach was going to see them through the next stage.

Still, the increase in applications for teaching posts, reported recently by NfER, is something this blog predicted at the start of the pandemic. Interestingly, vacancies for teachers so far in February are higher than they were in January, but the total for the year is still down on last year.

Judging by the vacancies on the DfE site, support staff vacancies are down even more than those for teachers. I suppose there is less need for classroom assistants and cover supervisors while pupils largely remain at home. Senior posts, such as those for finance officers and business managers are still cluttering up what is badged as a teacher vacancy site.

Despite persuading a few morel local authorities to link their job boars to the DfE site, it still carries far fewer vacancies than TeachVac www.teachac.co.uk and is of no use to teachers that want a post in an independent school.

Teacher Vacancy Platforms: Pros and Cons

Posted on December 7, 2020 by John Howson

In this post, I look at the three key sites for teacher vacancies in England. TeachVac; the DfE Vacancy site and The TES. Now this is not an unbiased look, because I am Chair of the company that owns TeachVac. Indeed, it might be regarded as an advertisement, so treat it in that way if you read on.

TeachVac is in the process of filing its accounts for the year to June 2020 with Companies House. The DfE doesn’t file accounts, and the TES has filed accounts up to the end of August 2019, with a forward comment about the possible effects of the covid pandemic in the year to August 2020.

All three sites cost teachers nothing to use during the last year. However, the DfE site only offers vacancies in state schools, and only a proportion of those schools. TeachVac estimates that in 2020 the DfE proportion of vacancies for teaching posts never rose above 40% of the vacancies open to teachers across both state and private schools. So, the DfE is worthwhile if you only want a job in a state-funded school. Both TeachVac and the TES offer vacancies in state and private schools, although TeachVac doesn’t cover all private schools with pupils below the age of eleven. The TES coverage depends upon those prepared to pay to advertise vacancies on their platform.

Both TeachVac and the DfE site have no direct financial cost to schools. However, the DfE site does require schools to input vacancies into the site. This is optional for TeachVac, and most schools are happy to rely upon the automatic vacancy collection process operated by TeachVac. The TES has a number of options, all require schools to pay for their vacancies to appear on the TES job site and be matched with teachers.

TeachVac also offers users a monthly newsletter on the state of the market for teachers.

The operating cost for TeachVac in 2019/20 was just £1.10 per vacancy processed. Neither the DfE nor The TES publishes a similar figure, but the TES accounts would suggest their cost per vacancy is much higher than that of TeachVac. To find out the cost of the DfE site would need a parliamentary question.

So, are teacher associations, governors and school business managers and those responsible for local authorities, diocese and MATs recommending TeachVac as the most cost effective means of displaying and matching vacancies? Of course not.

Are they recommending teachers to use Teachvac, some are, others aren’t. Course leaders preparing teachers are now recommending TeachVac as a place for trainees to look for their first vacancy. Those trainees are sticking with TeachVac to find subsequent jobs and promotion opportunities.

I am proud of the achievements of the TeachVac team in driving down costs of vacancy advertising. Next the team will start to look at other parts of the recruitment journey to see if there are saving to be made in other areas as well.

Incidentally, if anyone wants to sponsor the TeachVac site, my investors are always open to discussions.

John Howson

Education and the numbers that affect what happens

Tag Archives: DfE vacancy site