What is the point of bursaries for trainee teachers not on routes into teaching that pay a salary? The assumption must be that an inducement, such as a bursary would help recruit more trainees, or at least keep those that want to be a teacher on their teacher preparation programme. 

Each year, the Department for Education decides which subjects will be allocated bursaries. In some subjects, the DfE also works with other bodies, such as subject associations, to offer alternative higher amounts of funding through scholarships. Both bursaries and scholarships have the advantage of being tax free to the recipients.

In the days when the Conservative government championed the Baccalaureate subjects above all others, it was understandable that subjects not included in the Baccalaureate might be regarded of less concern than those that made up the Baccalaureate, and thus that these subjects did not need bursaries, even if an insufficient number of trainees were recruited.

However, for courses operating in 2024/25 and 2025/26, the DfE did pay a bursary of £10,000 to those training to become teachers of music.

The bursary for music was not included within the list of eligible subjects for the courses operating in 2026/27. No reason was provided by the DfE for the removal of the bursary.

However, recruitment targets for music have been missed in six of the last seven years including for the current trainee group (2019/20–2025/26).

The failure to recruit to target has meant fewer music teachers in schools, and a drop in entries to public examinations. Between 2010/11, and the start of the coalition government, and 2022/23, entries for A Level music declined from 8,709 to 4,910. Interestingly, the percentage of A* and A grades increased from 24.3% to 41.6%. This might suggest that it was State schools, with their wider range of pupil abilities that saw the biggest fall in entries, as schools struggling to recruit music teachers axed examination courses that they could no longer staff.

Interestingly, a by-produce of the break-up of schools into many academy trusts might have meant that opportunities for collaboration between schools also declined after 2010, and the Academies Act.

How bad has the challenge of recruiting teachers of music been over the past few years? Were the ITT targets set by the DfE, and based upon the DfE’s own Teacher Supply Model accurate or over-optimistic in the need for teachers of music in state schools?

Data from TeachVac and dataforeducation

The table starts with the ‘pool’ of music trainees likely to be available to state schools that year and reduces it by one for every vacancy recorded during the year. The minus number is the excess of vacancies over the ‘pool ‘number

Between 2018 and 2023, only the cohort of trainees recruited during Covid, and entering the labour market in 2021, provided sufficient trainee numbers to have allowed schools to be secure in filling vacancies for September.

Of course, in addition to new entrants to teaching there are those returning to teaching or entering from other sectors, such as further education or independent schools.

As a rule of thumb, perhaps half of vacancies might be filled by new entrants, and the other half from other sources. The data in the table would suggest that in most years, if demand from private schools was also taken into account, the labour market would need to have ensured a steady supply of ‘returners’ to fill all the advertised vacancies for music teacher posts.

Each year, for January appointments, returners would have been critical for schools seeking to make an appointment, including those teachers returning to England from teaching in schools in the southern hemisphere, with a December year-end. Normally, somewhere around 100 vacancies for a January start were advertised each year between 2019 and 2022.

So, why, if there is a shortage of teachers, and the Teacher Supply Model did not seem to have been overestimated demand, was the bursary axed? Could it have been the age-old HM Treasury view that if there is a base number that would enter teacher training under any circumstances, then why pay them a bursary?

In the absence of any other explanation, it is difficult to think of any other reason than this cynical approach for the axing of the bursary for music. Put another way, Ministers just didn’t care enough about music, and weren’t aware of the contribution of all forms of music to the national wealth and our export drive to keep the bursary when it was suggested it be axed.

Sadly, the music lobby hasn’t yet changed the government’s mind. However, there is still time to do so for this recruitment round. The data showing the difference in ‘offers’ for ITT courses, between the January 2025 and January 2026 data points should, by itself, be enough to force a rethink, or a -U- turn, if you prefer it.

A decline in ‘offers’ from 91 to 70 is of serious concern, as these are the group most likely to be prepared to become a music teacher at whatever cost. My advice to Ministers: announce the bursary for music has been added to the list for entry in 2026 or watch the subject decline even further.