Tag Archives: learning

Happy 14th birthday, and my thanks to WordPress

Posted on by
Reply

Dear Reader,

Today, Sunday 25th January 2026, marks the 14th birthday of this blog, so thanks for taking the time to read what I have written since January 2013.

Copilot tells me that 96% of blogs started in January 2013 have fallen by the wayside by 2026: but can you believe everything AI tells you?

 Sadly, WordPress doesn’t publish such statistics, but it would be interesting to know how many have persevered with what is now a somewhat outdated form of communication. Unlike others, I haven’t switched to creating a podcast, although I did experiment with one way back in 2007; but that’s another story, as is the online chatroom, pioneered with the TES back in 2003.

By the time of its 14th birthday, this blog has had over 180,00 views by more than 97,000 visitors according to WordPress of the 1,59 posts that I have written since the blog started in 2013.

The most popular has been the one on ‘how much holiday do teachers really have’, with more than 6,100 views since it first appeared on the 20th May 2022.

Of course, at the opposite end of the scale, there are many posts where I have been the only person to have read what I wrote, according to WordPress. However, on Christmas Day, 2022, someone downloaded all the posts up to that date: hopefully, they also read them.

Between October 2023 and May 2025, while I was the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services on Oxfordshire County Council, I took a holiday from posting on the blog,

Since, I started writing posts again in May of 2025, after ceasing to be an elected politician, readership has been slowly increasing, to now reach double what it was at its low point. This is mostly thanks to readers from around the world once again deciding to view what I write.

So, what do I write about? Mostly education; frequently teacher supply matters – a research interest of mine for more than 40 years, if you start when I began counting vacancies for headteachers. My interest in ITT data goes back to 1987, when as a new senior leader in a School of Education I was faced with dealing with the consequences of an 100% over-recruitment on a primary PGCE.

I am most proud of the wok on Jacob’s Law, to ensure all children have a school place even if they move home mid-year, as often happens when a child is taken into care. No school with spare places should ever refuse such a child a place. What to do if they are bright enough for a grammar school place when moving from a comprehensive system is a question the government still needs to address.

The blog will continue into its next year, but as I approach my 80th birthday in 2027, perhaps the blog won’t make its 20th birthday: who knows. And, finally another reason for not producing a podcast; you cannot see the data tables, include din many of the posts.

Thanks for reading, and a happy birthday.

Higher Education still matters in ITT

Posted on by
Reply

Just over a decade ago, it seemed possible that higher education might no longer have a future in teacher training. The talk was all about schools, and training teachers where they were needed, rather than on university campuses that weren’t necessarily located in the places where teachers were required by schools.

Indeed, even as long ago as the mid-1990s, when School Centred Initial Teacher Training (SCITT) first rally started, many of the early SCITTS were located where higher education provision was lacking, such as along the north bank of the Thames estuary.

Looking back to 2013, and you can find this post in my Book*, there seemed a real threat to the future of higher education continuing with ITT. Sadly, we lost the Open University, with its mature entrant focus, and a couple of other providers at that time.

Fortunately, the decision by Ministers to ignore the Teacher Supply Model targets in 2013, and overinflate the number of ITT places allocated, compared with the predicted need for teachers by schools, offered higher education a lifeline, while a rethink took place behind the scenes.

Fast forward to the present day, and we have seen postgraduate routes now dominate both secondary and primary ITT. Despite the High Potential route (think Teach First) and the salaried schemes that replaced the former Employment-based route of the GTTP, fee-based training still dominates the landscape for ITT.

What will happen in the future for ITT if the present murmuring about graduate debt becomes an issue, and graduate reject the idea of adding a fourth year of debt at high interest rates to their ‘graduate tax’, is an issue for another post.

What is interesting is the present balance between higher education and SCITTS in the postgraduate fee-paying ITT market. Helpfully, the DfE has some data in the annual ITT census.

202223202324202425202526increase candidates% increase candidates
in cycle accept ratePG fee-fundedHEI58%46%41%43%
PG fee-fundedSCITT47%41%45%47%
candidatesPG fee-funded HEI31,02036,51439,91041,17010,15033%
PG fee-funded SCITT16,33419,05620,54721,8275,49334%

There are several interesting points about this Table. Both routes have seen an increase in candidates between the 2022/23 cycle and the 2025/26 cycle – the present group of postgraduate trainees currently preparing to be a teacher.

On the face of it, acceptance rates in higher education have fallen significantly, from 58% in 2022/23 to 43%, for the current group of trainees, while SCITT acceptance rates have increased. It is worth saying, in passing that had acceptance rates not increased, the flow of new teachers into schools would have been even worse than it has been post-covid.

Is there an explanation for the fall in HEI in-cycle acceptance rates. Clearly more candidates might mean more choice, but whereas for SCITTs more candidates meant more acceptances, for HEIs it has meant the opposite. One reason for this might be the increase in overseas applicants. Such applicants might be more familiar with higher education courses rather than SCITTs, so may have disproportionally applied to universities, and that may well have affected acceptance rates. I will try to consider the data around this issue in another post.

Wha t s clear, from the data, is that unless Ministers revise their policy when falling rolls means fewer training places over the next few years, the fee-paying ITT sector for postgraduate courses will see a place for higher education. This was not the outcome many feared might be the case.

However, it will be the attitude of students to debt levels that may influence the future shape of postgraduate, and indeed all ITT, over the next few years.

If would-be trainees refuse to take on more debt, perhaps we might even see the return of the training grant, phased out in 2010 in favour of bursaries and scholarships.

If I was a policy-maker, I would be watching the signs carefully about student’s attitude to debt, especially among current undergraduates.

*Teachers, Schools and views on Education by John Howson. Available from Amazon as an e-book for £9, or as a paperback

Primary winners (possibly): Secondary losers (certainly)

Posted on by
Reply

The Institute for Fiscal Studies and the Nuffield Foundation have published the latest in their series of reports about education spending Annual reports | Institute for Fiscal Studies While the report covers the whole education sector, I am principally interested in the school sector. That sector now overlaps the early years sectors, at the lower age grouping, with many schools taking pupils below the age of five. At the 16-18 age grouping, there is an overlap between the school sector and the further education and skills sector.

The highlights for me from the latest report are: the obvious effect of the explosion of demand for SEND places. I am not sure whether this report fully captures the full cost of the increase, since the transport costs for pupils with SEND aren’t usually a part of the DfE’s budget, and certainly cannot be funded from the Central Services Block or even the High Needs Block of the Dedicated Schools Grant.

The second highlight is the reduced funding for secondary schools. These schools have seen the reduction in 16-18 funding, and a reduction of the gap between their funding and that of primary schools. I suspect the latter, over the long-term, may have been partly affected by the need to fund non-contact time in the primary sector, introduced under the previous Labour government.

The primary sector is now experiencing falling rolls, while the upper secondary 16-18 sector is still seeing pupil numbers growing. As the report says, there is a policy decision to make about falling rolls. Does government either recoup the cash not needed because there are fewer pupils, and put the consequences on schools, or does it keep the cash in the primary sector and hope to improve outcomes? I wouldn’t bet on the latter.

One element missing from the picture seems to me any discussion on the changes in school reserves. I think it is vital to know how much money is being saved by schools from revenue budgets, and whether the total per pupil is increasing or reducing. With many academy trusts ‘pooling’ reserves so funds can be used for a school in a local authority different from that of the school where the cash was accrued, a picture of trends in this area might reveal the extent of short-term pressures on school budgets. Recently, I came across a special school with a balance of £2.5 million. Is that a good use of public money?

In a graph – sadly the IFS don’t number their graphs or tables in the report: an oversight in my opinion – it sees that early years’ spending has doubled between 2010-11 and 2025-26, and primary school spending has increased by 12% over the same period. All school spending was the same per pupil in each year. This means that secondary school spending per pupil declined by three per cent over the period, and 16-18 spending by 8% – this despite the fact that schools often use their most expensive teachers with this age grouping.

Finally, I note that central spending on academies is now £510 per pupil, double the level in 2016-17. I am not convinced that this is due to a shift towards larger MATs as the report states, as this would imply there were no economies of scale possible.

 I will review this issue further when I look in detail at the 202425 accounts of a selection of MATs once all their accounts are published.

Are more overseas English Schools a good idea?

Posted on by
Reply

In my previous post, I mentioned the DfE’s new export drive Strategy to boost UK education abroad in major £40bn growth drive – GOV.UK This release was no doubt carefully timed to coincide with the annual BETT Show, where the best of UK technology in education, and ideas for the future, are on show.

The DfE’s announcement covered both higher education and schools. About the expansion of the latter, the release said that,

“A new Education Sector Action Group will work with the International Education Champion, UK universities, colleges and schools to help unblock barriers to trade to expand overseas.”  

And

“This strategy goes further by backing providers to expand overseas and ensure top students around the world can access a world-class UK education on their own doorsteps.”

Whilst much of the press notice is about universities and higher education in general, as a part of the export drive, further education, and the former stable of English language courses, don’t rate a mention.

Is expanding English-style schooling overseas part of the aim “to ensure top students around the world can access a world-class UK education on their own doorsteps”? It would be good to know what specifically the DfE is thinking in this regard about schools.

Should the DfE be considering what further strain on the labour market for teachers any expansion of fee-paying export-driven English schools either overseas or at home might place on the home labour market for teachers that has yet to recover from a decade of serious under-recruitment in several curriculum areas.

Might a start be a census, even in broad terms, of how many teachers trained in England are working in British schools overseas. There will also be other such teachers in other international schools, but let’s just start with the easy bit.

Does The Association of British Schools Overseas, the DfE recognised partner for overseas schools, already collect this data. If not, would it be willing to support an anonymous survey of its members, to see how many teachers trained in England are already working overseas, and what expansion in staffing these schools expect over the next few years?

A demand for 50 more physical education teachers would not be a problem for the home market to absorb, but recruiting 50 more physics teachers for schools overseas might well create problems for schools in England.

If the DfE is serious about exports, should any schools’ committee on the proposed Sector Action Group ask the DfE to consider adding an additional element to the DfE’s Teacher Supply Model to take account of the needs of the export drive by schools?

With demand for teacher training in England from some parts of the world growing significantly over the past couple of years, perhaps these overseas trainees could be licensed only to teach outside the United Kingdom in overseas schools?

Exports are good for the economy, but not if they deprive students in England of the same quality of education. Historians remember the challenges faced by the 1945 Labour government in restricting home demand to allow for exports in order to bring in much needed cash after the war.

I am sure the DfE would not want create a similar situation in schooling 80 years later.

£200 million SEND teacher training: what’s missing?

Posted on by
Reply

One should never look a gift horse in the mouth, and today’s DfE announcement of CPD worth £200 million for:

“new courses available to all teaching staff will deepen knowledge of how to adapt their teaching to meet a wide range of needs in the classroom, including visual impairments and speech and language needs.

Teachers will learn about the things we know can transform how children access education, such as using assistive technology like speech to text dictation tools and building awareness of additional needs amongst all pupils, so every child can go on to succeed. “ £200 million landmark SEND teacher training programme – GOV.UK

Is clearly to be welcomed.

If the aim by the DfE is to reach half the teaching force, plus a percentage of non-teaching staff, such as teaching assistants, the figure of £200 million might work out at around £1,000 per person per course.

Now, I guess you can get a lot of on-line self-assessed delivery for that price, but add in face-to-face tuition, with travel and ‘cover’ costs to be taken into consideration, and £1,000 per person doesn’t seem as useful a sum. So, perhaps the government only want to reach say, a quarter of the profession? The news release is silent on such matters.

I am always sceptical when a news item is released on a Friday; a good day for burying news with awkward questions attached. Unless, the White Paper on SEND, when it appears, mandates a qualification necessary to work with SEND, and an advance qualification to work in a special school or unit, these schools may still have a disproportional number of under-qualified teachers.

Is it better either to create a programme to upgrade all teachers (as in this announcement) or to focus on the training needs of those teaching children and young people in special settings, along with upgrading the diagnostic tools to identify as early as possible children that will need additional support.

As with all policies, it is a judgement call. This government has opted for the ‘spread it thin’ approach, with an eye-catching headline amount. Incidentally, is the £200mn for one year or spread over several years? I am sure a journalist will ask.

So, thanks for something, but where is the cash coming from? Will other CPD be cut, or is this new money from HM Treasury: an unlikely proposition in the current cash-strapped climate faced by government.

The other question still to be addressed is around who will deliver the programme, and how will procurement ensure that the DfE obtains best value for the money?

DfE Vacancy site: fit for purpose?

Posted on by
Reply

When the Public Accounts Committee effectively told the DfE to create a vacancy website some eight years ago Teacher Recruitment | John Howson and Why is the DfE spending millions inventing a teacher vacancy service? | John Howson the present site, in its original form, was the outcome.

At the time, I pointed out to the DfE that TeachVac was already doing most of what was required, and for free. As my post above shows, the editor of the TES at the time also had something to say.

Sadly, and probably because of procurement rules – although the DfE could have sanctioned a trial of TeachVac to understand the requirements of any vacancy site – the DfE spent public money procuring a site that wasn’t fit for purpose. At least with the browser I use, the site still has significant shortcomings from the point of view of jobhunters.

Although free to use, it is not mandatory for state schools to use the DfE site, so, some do, and some don’t. This leaves jobseekers with the need to search more than one site to check for all vacancies: not a good idea at the best of times, and certainly not when falling rolls make jobs harder to come by.

The DfE site also has its idiosyncrasies. Although it tells users that jobs appear with the most recent first, that isn’t always the case.  Page two of a list may well start with a duplication of some jobs from page one, and new jobs, not recorded earlier may pop up almost anywhere in a listing.

Perhaps.it might be better to lists jobs by closing dates, as that is what matters to many jobseekers: do I have time to apply for this job?

Some vacancies appear with either very short – is there an internal candidate – or very long periods between advert and closing date. The latter schools risk losing candidates to schools that are fleeter of foot in the recruitment process, and being left with only candidates that they wouldn’t want to appoint, except in those areas where there is an over-supply of teachers.

As job hunting is such a key part of their members’ work-life, I have always been surprised that the teacher associations haven’t been more vocal with the DfE in demanding a cheap and purposeful job board, using the best of modern technology at the lowest cost to schools. Perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised, as when I tried to sell the idea of TeachVac in 2013, there was no interest.

Now I am once again researching vacancies, I can cheerfully say, mixing up TLA, technicians and other non-teaching jobs with teaching vacancies, and including random jobs like a drama post or TV and film vacancy in the music vacancy list strikes me as irritating, but perhaps it is good to persuade teachers to look beyond their original search criteria?

I am sure the DfE could make money by inviting private schools to use their site. I have seen a couple of vacancies for such schools on the DfE site, but it is overwhelmingly state schools.

Perhaps it is time for a rethink of the most cost-effective way for schools to recruit teachers and candidates to find the vacancies?

Primary schools extend their age ranges

Posted on by
Reply

Primary schools are no longer the 5-11 schools of yesteryear. Even before the present cycle of falling rolls started affecting schools, especially in London, schools across the primary sector had been extending their age range downwards into what has traditionally been seen as the province of state nursery schools and the private sector.

During our survey of headteacher vacancies for the autumn term of 2025, reported in the post   Recruiting headteachers in 2025 – a mixed picture | John Howson The age range of the school was one of the variables collected as part of the evidence base.

The data from autumn 2025 vacancies has been analysed from some 254 primary schools covering the age range up to age eleven and starting at the age of five or below that age – thus, not including infant schools, as they don’t go up to age eleven.

The table below shows the results

Age range of schoolnumberPercentage of total 
2-113614% 
3-119538% 
4-1110541% 
5-11187% 

 3-11 or 4-11 schools dominated the schools that advertised for a headteacher during autumn 2025, accounting for 80% of the total. Interestingly, there were more adverts for 2-11 schools than for the traditional 5-11 primary schools. Such downward extension of age ranges should help to answer the question, what do primary schools do with children not toilet trained? The answer, as you extend the age range downwards, and the likelihood of such an occurrence increases, must be to put in place expertise to deal with the situation as well as to seek government measures to help parents understand the importance of children being able to cope in social settings such as schools.

As more primary schools face falling rolls, and hence the probability of unused space within the school site, will these schools also extend their age range downwards to become 2-11 schools? If so, and I see no real reason why they wouldn’t do so, what will this do to the private nursery and childminder markets?

Fewer children, more competition, and the ability for families to drop all their children aged between 5-11 in the same place must be a powerful selling point for state primary schools, especially if the additional children recruited to the school roll replace revenue lost to schools from falling rolls, especially at a time when the school funding formula is heavily predicated upon pupil numbers.

Are 2-11 schools evenly distributed across England? The sample of 36 such schools from the autumn term is too small to yet make a definitive judgement. To do so one would need to interrogate the DfE’s database of schools, but the results are interesting. In the 2025 survey, two regions, the North West (10) and the West Midlands (8) account for half of the 2-11 schools that advertised for a new headteacher during the autumn of 2025.

While there was no region without   any adverts from such schools, three regions, London, the East Midlands and the North East only had one school of 2-11 recorded in the survey. The East of England had two schools in the survey, and the South East, three schools. Yorkshire and the Humber and the South West regions each had five schools in the survey from the 2-11 age range.

Might extending their age range downwards be a solution to some schools in London facing possible closure from falling rolls? It is certainly a question worth asking if it can increase the schools’ income to a point where it remains financially viable and able to service its community.  

Ethnic minority trainee teachers: still huge regional differences in trainee numbers

Posted on by
1

1n the autumn of 1997, Baroness Estelle Morris, at that time a junior minister in the DfE, in the new Labour government of Tony Blair, opened a conference about recruiting more ethnic minority students to become a teacher. The conference was organised by the then Teacher Training Agency. That conference was held in East London, and was followed by two more in Leeds and Birmingham.

Fast forward to the ITT census produced by the DfE today, and ask the question: how successful has the campaign to recruit certain ethnic groups into teaching been since that first conference nearly 30 years ago? Initial teacher training: trainee number census 2025 to 2026 – GOV.UK

Looking at the group that has found most difficultly in becoming a teacher over the years – Black African/Black Caribbean – there still seem to be big challenges looking at today’s data. Whether these are because students from this ethnic grouping aren’t attracted to parts of the country where there are few of their compatriots or whether there are other reasons cannot be determined just from the numbers.

However, over 500 courses have no candidates recorded from this group in the data published in Table 12 today. Just over 900 courses have between one and four candidates from the ethnic group. A further 83 courses have the number suppressed as being too low, as it might allow an individual to be identified.

A quick review of courses with the highest percentage (over 50% of each course code) shows that 24 are courses run by providers in London; just three are from outside London, and for three the name does not provide a clue to the location.

Looking at the courses with more than 100 candidates from the Black ethnic group: four are located in London – two each from UCL and Teach First – and the fifth is a national SCITT.  

As might be expected, the University of East London, and several other London post 1992 universities, feature in the list of providers with between 25% and 50% of course numbers from the Black group, each with several courses in this percentage range. Most other pre-1992 universities and other post-1992 universities and the SCITTs in London have many of their courses in the 15%-25% group of providers. Few, if any, London providers feature in the list with zero percentage from the black group.

While it is good that courses in London do seem to be attracting applications from the Black ethnic group, there are still many courses in large parts of the country where that seems not to be the case. Does this matter? Would a ‘token’ representative on a single course in an institution be anything more than a token. Should we encourage such students to be trailblazers r should we accept that outside of the conurbations and a few university towns, graduates from the black ethnic group are still relatively rare.

I went to school in the 1960s with one of the few Black pupils in the school. He went on to become a teacher when Black teachers were even thinner on the ground than now, even in London.

So, there has been some progress, but not enough.

Teaching a global profession? What do the physics ITT numbers tell us?

Posted on by
Reply

My previous post contained the good news for the government in the headline data about their annual census of those on teacher preparation courses. Digging down into the details of the census, there is at least one worrying trend. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/initial-teacher-training-trainee-number-census-2025-to-2026

The percentage of accepted ITT candidates within each nationality group for selected subjects for 2024/25 and 2025/26

Percentage of accepted candidates
UK and Irish nationalEEA nationalOther nationality
2024/252025/262024/252025/262024/252025/26
Total88%86%5%5%8%9%
Primary94%94%2%3%4%3%
Secondary84%82%6%6%10%13%
STEM Subjects76%74%5%5%19%22%
Physics43%32%3%2%54%66%
English93%93%3%2%4%5%
Mathematics81%81%5%5%13%14%
  1. High Potential ITT (HPITT) route and undergraduate routes are not included in this data.
  2. Subject-level candidate totals will not sum to the total candidate number due to duplication caused by candidates applying for multiple subjects.

The footnote about undergraduate routes should not be of concern as there are relatively few such courses for secondary subjects, and the numbers on primary undergraduate courses have been declining over the longer-term.

Of much more concern is the decline in percentage of accepted candidates for physics from the UK and Ireland, down from 43% last year to 32% this year. This has been balanced by and increase from 54% to 66% for candidates from outside the UK and EEA areas.

As there has bene a dramatic increase in the numbers of trainees in physics, does this matter?

On these percentages, the increase in UK and Irish trainees has been from only around 185 last year to 220 this year. That seems like a very small number and worth investigating to see if I am correct?

If I am correct, then the key issue is, where will the trainees from the rest of the world be able to teach? Will the present government’s stricter policies on immigration mean that they won’t be able to teach in England, or as graduates earning a good salary will they be given visas?

Of course, they may choose to teach in the new British state sponsored selective school being established in both India and the UAE that was recently approved by the Labour government.

British Education is a global export, regardless of the PISA scores of home students, and the destination of trainees, both within the state and private systems, as well as overseas, is an important piece of information Minister should pay more attention to than they do at present.

The number of Uk trainees is likely to be boosted in physics by those training through the High Potential route (Formerly known as Teach First), However, the data for those candidates is not included in the census this year.

No doubt there is room for some interesting parliamentary questions about trainee teachers and where they come from and where they go on to teach, especially for those that receive bursaries and other financial support from the State.

Too many teachers?

Posted on by
Reply

Earlier today the DfE published their Annual Census of ITT trainees. Published each December, the census identifies the numbers on the various teacher perpetration routes and some background information about their gender, ethnicity, degree class and routes into teaching. Initial teacher training: trainee number census 2025 to 2026 – GOV.UK

The census provides a helpful indication to schools about the labour market for the following September recruitment. In this case, September 2026.

In recent years, apart for during 2020 and the response to the pandemic, trainees number in many secondary subjects have been lees than the DfE predicted numbers needed to fill vacancies. In the primary sector, falling rolls and erratic recruitment numbers have meant there has been less of a coherent pattern about the balance between supply and likely demand for teachers. Of course, much depends upon assumptions about the turnover in the labour market, and the behaviour of possible ‘returners’ to teaching when reviewing recruitment patterns.

So, what of the current 2025/26 cohort?

subject2024/252025/26
Percentage of Target at census date%%
Physical Education213202
Biology116151
Art & Design64128
Primary88126
History116125
Chemistry62118
Mathematics72113
Geography91111
English99106
Modern Languages4493
All Secondary6188
Computing3780
Physics3077
Classics24573
Design & Technology4070
Music4065
Religious Education7962
Drama4741
Business Studies1530
Other1514

The government can be pleased with some of the best recruitment levels to their targets in almost a generation – covid years excepted – but challenges still remain. Nine secondary subjects didn’t meet their target number, with business studies still recruiting poorly to teaching, along with drama and religious studies where the target was missed by a larger percentage than last year.

On the good news side, mathematic exceeded its target for the first time in a long while, and the increase to 77% of target in physics teachers is very welcome news.

There will be too many primary school teachers looking for jobs come September, and although course providers will be happy to have recruited 202% of the target for physical education trainees, this over-recruitment does beg the question as to whether recruitment controls should be once again considered as a deterrent to such significant over-recruitment?

Taken with the news, highlighted in my previous post, about attitudes to pay by serving teachers, the government can probably stop worrying abut teacher recruitment for the first time since 2012.

However, all is not good news, if the Curriculum Review is to be implemented in full, attention to recruitment in some subjects will be needed. In that respect, as already suggested by this blog in a previous post, removing the bursary from music seems like a daft idea. Yes, there was a 25% increase in outcome against target, but that still left a third of places unfilled. Music departments in schools are often small and cannot be easily covered by non-specialists, such as the spare PE teachers. Time to think again on the basis of these figures.