The recent release of the 2025 international PISA study results has already received a lot of comment. PISA publications | OECD. This section of the OECD’s PISA Study report caught my eye, as you might imagine if would do, if you are a regular reader of this blog.

How is school life in the United Kingdom? PISA 2025 Results (Volume I): United Kingdom

Perceived shortages of human and material resources

• In 2025, 48% of students in the United Kingdom were in schools whose principals reported that instruction was hindered, at least to some extent, by a perceived lack of teaching staff (OECD average: 39%); the corresponding share for a perceived lack of assisting staff was 39% (OECD average: 39%). The prevalence of perceived teaching staff shortages in the United Kingdom did not change significantly compared to 2022. However, principals’ concerns about inadequate or poorly qualified teaching staff increased from 19% in 2022 to 31% in 2025 (OECD average: 25% in both years).
• PISA 2025 data reveal that perceived shortages of material resources remain a concern in most countries and economies. Some 24% of students in the United Kingdom attended schools whose principals reported that a lack of educational material (e.g. textbooks, IT equipment, library or laboratory material) hindered instruction, at least to some extent, and 34% were in schools where a lack of physical infrastructure (e.g. buildings, grounds, heating/cooling systems, lighting and acoustic systems) was perceived to hinder instruction. In 2022, the corresponding shares were 13% and 24%, respectively. PISA 2025 Results (Volume I): United Kingdom

So, the United Kingdom as a whole had a percentage of principals reporting that ‘instruction was hindered, at least to some extent, by a perceived lack of teaching staff (OECD average: 39%)’. I wonder what the figure might have been for just England? The difference between the United Kingdom and the OECD average was 9%. Interestingly, there was no difference for what OECD called ‘assisting staff’.

The issue became even worse when principals were asked about ‘inadequate or poorly trained staff’.  Here the concerns rose from 29% in the 2022 survey, to 31% in 2025. This compared to an OECD average of 25% in both surveys.

Does the fact that the United Kingdom has a free market for teachers, with  most vacancies advertised, and any teacher able to apply for any post  make any difference to the scores? Assuming the PISA survey has a representative sample of schools across the United Kingdom, then the presence of a significant number of private schools in England, able to recruit qualified teachers more easily that state funded schools may skew the distribution of scare resources, such as physics teachers.

By chance the Education Policy Institute has just produced a report on recruitment versus retention of teachers. Recruit or Retain. Microsoft Word – EPI_RetrainRecruit_September2026

I will discuss that report in another post.

I think the obvious outcome of the PISA findings, is that the  effect of a long period of teacher shortages. In the case of England,  from between 2014 and 2025 in some subjects, is now being recognised in international surveys, such as PISA.

Hopefully, falling rolls, a changing labour market for graduates and better pay for teachers might mean the position improves in terms of teaching by specialist teachers by the next PISA study. However, it might take longer in an open labour market to close the gap between different types of schools and schools serving different socio-economic areas.