ITT January 2026: lots to ponder

On the face of it, the January 2026 data around postgraduate ITT applications and offers looks good news for the DfE, and for schools Initial teacher training application statistics for courses starting in the 2026 to 2027 academic year – Apply for teacher training – GOV.UK

By the 19th January 2026, there had been applications from 26,217 candidates. This compared with 20,771 at the January data point in 2025. Candidates applying for primary courses were up from 7,283 to 8,676: a modest increase.

For secondary courses candidate numbers this year were, 19,232 compared with 14,862 at last January’s datapoint. That looks like very good news, perhaps worthy of a Statement in Parliament.

However, it is worth delving a bit deeper into the data before putting out too much bunting. Applications from the ‘Rest of the world’ account for 8,353 of this January’s total, compared with 5,088 last January. That means that this group now account for a whopping 30% of candidates. This compares with 23% of candidates from this grouping in last January’s data.

Of even more concern, is that the numbers of candidates from the United Kingdom haven’t kept pace with the growth in overseas applicants. The growth in applicant numbers from the North of England has been especially weak; only 90 more compared with last year from the Yorkshire and The Humber region, and only 71 more from the North East.

Admittedly, the North West has seen an increase of over 400 applicants, and London, over 500 more. However, the South East only has around 140 more applicants than last year. This is around 7% more, but this percentage pales into insignificance compared to the more than two thirds increase in applicants for ‘the Rest of the World’.

The dominance of the ‘Rest of the World’ applicants as a share of the total makes commenting upon the data challenging. Normally at this time of year, I might be happy to predict those subjects likely to miss their ITT targets, based upon more than 30 years of data collection. Not knowing how the ‘Rest of the world’ applicants are spread both between primary and secondary phase, and within secondary phase by subjects adds a unique challenge to any predictions this year.

However, based upon ‘offers’, and the outcome of the 2025 ITT census, and assuming no significant change in the pattern of applications over the rest of the cycle – such as a significant weakening of the demand for new graduates or another pandemic – I am happy to make some suggestions for the outcomes based upon current trends.

I expect that Religious Education, Modern Foreign Languages, Music, Classics and the ‘other’ group will all miss their target this year.

I am not sure about biology, where offers are down by 194, but the subject reached 151% of target last year. I am also, as yet, uncertain about Geography, where offers are down, but the subject surpassed its target last year.

Despite the increase in offers, I still don’t expect Physics, Design & Technology, Business Studies and Drama to meet their targets, although on this showing they might do better than last year, assuming those with offers actually turn up when courses start: always a worry this early in the recruitment round.

On the current data, Physical Education and History, as ever, will surpass their targets. Mathematics, computing and Chemistry, should also meet their targets. I am unsure about English, where offers are down, and the subject only just beat its target in 2025.

Overall, I think that the DfE needs to consider how the statistics are presented, if a nearly a third of applicants might need a visa to train. How does this fit in with other government policies? Perhaps we can set up training courses overseas, so that these new would-be teachers from the ‘Rest of the world’ can work in the new State Schools to be established as a part of the DfE’s export drive, announced last week.  

Are more overseas English Schools a good idea?

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.

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

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.

More men looking to teach

Today, the DfE published their first round of statistics about applications to train as a teacher on courses starting in the autumn of 2026. Generally, one has to be cautious about data from ‘applications’ and ‘offer’ statistics published in November, as this is very early in the application round.

However, with more than 20 years of data underpinning my remarks, I think it possible to say something.

Firstly, applications – and candidates may submit more than one – are up from 13,159 last November to 15,572 this year. Applications from men are up from 5,072 to 6,580, while those from women are up from 7,978 to 9,031. That equates to 1,052 more women applying, or an increase of 13%, but 1,508 more men; an increase of 30%. I cannot recall a time when the rate of increase in applications from men last outpaced those from women.

Part of this increase is probably down to the large increases in applications for mathematics, up from 1,657 last year to 1,929 this year. In computing, the applications are up from 509 to 841, and in physics from 1,694 to a staggering 3,277. All these are subjects that tend to attract more male than female candidates.

Aword of warning, before one becomes too carried away; applications from the Rest of the World are up from 3,540 last November to 5,120 this November. Might this account for part of the increase in male applicant in these subjects? Sadly, that cannot be determined from the published data.

Final year undergraduates are not yet swarming into teaching. No obvious concerns about loss of graduate jobs to AI from the 21 and under age group, where applications are actually down by 34 from 1,276 to 1,242. Presumably, studies still take precedence over job hunting.

However, there is a big increase in the 22-24 age group applying for teaching: up from 3,349 to 3,658 with nearly 200 of this increase from 22 year olds. Maybe summer 2025 graduates that are still job hunting are turning to teaching? There is little difference in interest in teaching from those over 45 years old. However, there has been a big jump (210) in interest from the 40-44 age group.

SCITTs is the only route to have seen fewer applications than in November 2025. This may reflect the fact that the SCITT route maty be less well-known to overseas applicants. Both teacher degree apprenticeships and PG teaching apprenticeships have seen significant increases in applications. It would be interesting to see this table by phase and subject.

On ‘offers’, it much depends upon how providers handle early applications. However, there is a trend with mathematics, computing, chemistry and physics all recording the highest ‘offer’ levels since 2013/14, whereas music has the lowest offer level since 2020/21. Most other subjects are close to where they would be expected to be, although biology, PE and geography are below where they might expect to be. PE probably over-recruited to current courses, and I would expect more caution there this year.

So, overall, a good start that should presage a good recruitment round unless something unforeseen happens.

Open college for A Level physics?

A Labour government pioneered the Open University. Today, another Labour Prime minister will announce what amounts to a type of Open Hospital, where consultations will be on-line after referral.

So far, the DfE seems to be lagging behind in using the on-line technology for the benefit of those unable to study subjects they are interested in studying but are unable to do so, whether because of teacher shortages, or indeed, other reasons.

How about starting with an open college programme for A level physics?

Now the idea of on-line learning isn’t a new one. Indeed, there are already providers out there offering ‘A’ Level Physics on-line, and the idea of correspondence learning has a long and valued history in this country.

However, the State has not traditionally been involved at the delivery level. Perhaps it is time to change that approach. The shortage of teachers of physics means some children either aren’t offered the opportunity to study the subject at ‘A’ Level or are being taught by great teachers but sometimes with sub-optimal subject knowledge and qualifications. Good teaching can overcome these challenges, but some young people may still miss out.

Integrating a national offering through an on-line college would not be without its own problems. Either the on-line timetable drives all other timetabling, or in order to allow everyone access the modules would need be both recorded and delivered live more than once a week.

Practical sessions could be arranged for weekends and holidays, when resources are currently being under-used or not used at all. These sessions would also allow for group learning to take place, although a weekend would not be the same as a summer school.

Initially, any scheme should be offered free to candidates enrolled through a school or college, and the DfE should pick up the production costs. Home schoolers would be offered a competitive fee package.

The college course could also be tailored to help schools that face unexpected staffing challenges, either in-year or between years. I am not sure whether there is currently any evidence about underperformance due to staffing changes and staff sickness.

Would the Institute of Physics lead on such a project? They would seem the obvious candidate to provide the subject expertise. The DfE already has the expertise on advertising and enrolment, gained from nearly a decade of handing applications for teaching courses.

I am sure that there are international examples of this type of work. The obvious one was that of the School of the Air in Australia, where I drooped into the visitor centre last summer. There is also the vast amount of knowledge gained during the covid pandemic that risks being lost as ‘business as usual’ now seems to be the policy. Perhaps BETT could take a theme for the show each year. One year might be, ‘making the best of on-line learning’.

This is very much a thought piece, and I would welcome comments, such as ‘already doing this, but needs wider awareness’ to ‘teaching must always be face to face, and the shortage of teachers of physics is not an issue: move the students to the teachers.’

Is it fashionable to become a teacher once more?

The September 2025 data on recruitment to postgraduate teacher preparation courses was published earlier today by the DfE. Initial teacher training application statistics for courses starting in the 2025 to 2026 academic year – Apply for teacher training – GOV.UK

The numbers in themselves weren’t a surprise as the signs of recovery, almost across the board, in interest in becoming a secondary school teacher have been there for the past few moths. Indeed, I have remarked before that the teacher supply crisis of the past decade may now be at an end.

Almost across the board, both offers and numbers accepted are well up on September 2024, so that is god news for recruitment for next September.

The one ‘fly in the ointment’ is English. Here both offers – down from 2,487 last September to 2,161 this September and numbers accepted – down from 2,109 to 1,760 this September – must be a genuine cause for concern,

The questions that need answering are: is it across all age-groups or just new graduates or career switchers; is is across all regions or just some? Are there any other significant features that might need considering, such as whether a lack of financial support during training is a matter for concern.

In  other subjects, it won’t be until the ITT census is published in December that we will know how man y of those accepted actually turned up and stayed the early part of their course.

However, acceptances in maths, up from 2,251 to 2,617 and physics up from 988 to 1,313 are encouraging to see. The 30% increase in acceptance in physics might be unprecedented in recent history – the covid year apart.

The news in the arts, even apart from English is less good. RE accepted 418 (417 last year); Music 343 (322) Classics 42 (52). However, in art and design 902 (820) and history 936 (813).

It is worrying that the number accepted in the Southy West provider region fell, albeit from 1,800 to 1,799 whereas in London acceptances for training providers rose from 5,144 to 5,742.

Candidate numbers increased from those in the age-groups under-30, but either fell or were flat for candidates from the age-groups over 30. However, acceptances did not follow a similar pattern as more older candidates were accepted than last year. There needs to be a debate about the balance of new teachers necessary to provide for the leadership grade posts in twenty years’ time. Managing that issue within equality legislation is a real challenge. However, in a profession where senior leaders start as classroom teachers, it is one that should not be ignored.

How much of the interest in teaching as a career is down to the feeling that AI will remove many entry level graduate jobs is something to consider. However, if it means when applications for 2026 entry open in a couple of months’ time  that more graduates are considering teaching than in the past, I will heave a sigh of relief, as no doubt will the Secretary of State.

10-year plan for teachers of Physics

I was delighted to read the Institute of Physics new 10-year plan for the teaching of physics in schools in England The physics teacher shortage and addressing it through the 3Rs: Retention, Recruitment and Retraining (England) As is to be expected from the IoP, this is a thoughtful and well argued report.

Some of the finding in this new report mirror those in the report published in January 2002 by Northumbria University, and funded by the then TTA. The Northumbria study, interestingly called ‘Supply, Recruitment and Retention of Physics Teachers’ was authored by Prof. Hilary Constable, and I was a part of the team that undertook the research underpinning the report.

Many of the conclusions in the IoP report sould apply to the whole teacher supply landscape. It is just that the labour market for teachers of physics, especially in non-selective state schools, is an extreme example of 30 years of failure to provide schools with the staff needed for the National Curriculum.

It is worth recalling that in the 2006 budget speech, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer mentioned 3,000 trainee science teachers needed as a part of the Science and innovation investment framework 2004-2014. So, the problem has been known for decades, the will to solve it has seen less drive behind it. I sincerely hope that the government takes the recommendations of the IoP report on board.

As someone that has studied the leacher labour market for more than 30 years, the idea of exit interviews has always seemed to me to be a missing a part of the picture. The DfE has wave studies with school leaders, teachers, pupils and parents, but not it seems leavers. I would be happy to manage a trial with the MATs and local authority HR department in one authority, to collect data. The Northumbria study did collect some data from early leavers, workload, the desire only to teach physics and a return to studying appear to be some of the common features of the findings.  I guess, not much has changed.

If I have a quibble with the IoP report, it would be on the table of salaries in the report. My guess is that financial services salaries are skewed by a ‘London’ effect and the teaching salary doesn’t fully record any incentives received by qualified physics teachers. I would also like to have seen how many of those with QTS are in Sixth Form Colleges and independent schools?

The idea of retraining is a sensible use of resources, as are subject knowledge enhancement courses for those considering becoming a teacher of physics, but lacking a degree specifically in the subject.

Overall, what the report demonstrates is the lack of a comprehensive strategy for the staffing of our schools and, since the demise of the TTA and its successors, no real centre for policy discussions. One wonders what the Chartered College of Teaching is doing in this field? The demise of the APPG for the Teaching Profession, supported by Chris Waterman for many years, left a vacuum for debate about teacher supply, even if Ministers chose not to listen. Hopefully, after this report, the secretary of State will act.

DfE wasting money on ITT

The latest data on applications to postgraduate ITT courses appeared this morning. Such are the wonders of modern technology that data generated on the 18th of August can be programmed to appear on the bank holiday Monday in order to keep up the sequence of posting the data on the last Monday of the month by the DfE. Initial teacher training application statistics for courses starting in the 2025 to 2026 academic year – Apply for teacher training – GOV.UK

As is already known, 2025 is going to be best year for recruitment to graduate teacher preparation courses since 2013, especially in many traditional shortage subjects, such as the sciences and mathematics. But it is not ’a bed of roses’ all round.

AUGUST 2025 OFFER
SUBJECT202420252025 TARGETDIFF ON 2024DIFF TO TARGET
CLASSICS665360-13-7
ENGLISH239920801950-319130
RE494491780-3-289
  
OTHERS454472252018-2048
DRAMA29833762039-283
MUSIC37840756529-158
COMPUTING642884895242-11
D&T68076496584-201
BUS STUDIES25232490072-576
 
PE16751734725591009
ART & DESIGN8711087680216407
HISTORY9631100790137310
MATHEMATICS259730042300407704
MFL149816771460179217
GEOGRAPHY9421093935151158
CHEMISTRY9201054730134324
PHYSICS128516771410392267
BIOLOGY14151600985185615

Three subjects have recorded fewer offers this year than last year. Two, classics and drama, will miss their target. In English it would be touch and go to meet the target by the date of the ITT census in early December from just this source of trainees. However, Teach First and other routes should mean that the target will be comfortably met. But, the applications patterns for 2026 will need careful monitoring.

Five subjects won’t meet their targets this year, even with Teach First. Computing should, although it hasn’t yet done so from the courses included in this dataset.  

The remaining subjects have all recorded increased offers this year and, in most cases, are way over target. This raises the question about whether or not the DfE should once again consider recruitment controls in some subjects. After all, although we will need teachers to cover the missing trainees in the group of ‘other’ subjects, will the 1,000 extra PE teachers offered places over the target have the appropriate skill sets to fill those vacancies? They are certainly unlikely to fill the music vacancies, but presumably could be offered business studies teaching.

Hopefully, the DfE will be matching up to date vacancy data with the targets generated from historical data to see what changes might be needed for 2026 entry.  After all, there isn’t money to waste in the public exchequer.

There also appears to be over supply in the primary sector

SUBJECT202420252025 TARGETDIFF ON 2024DIFF TO TARGET
PRIMARY106101140576507953755

But I wonder whether, as in some secondary subjects, some candidates are recorded holding more than one offer. Even so, this is a sizeable overshoot and may cause issues next September in some parts of the country for trainees seeking teaching posts in primary schools. Especially, if a combination of falling rolls and a reluctance to move jobs in a deteriorating labour market overall sees fewer posts advertised.

I believe that Ministers need to do some hard thinking about balancing supply and demand for teachers and the cost to the public purse.

Is VAT affecting private school results?

It might well be a bit of a stretch to believe that the effect of VAT being imposed on private schools in January 2025 is responsible for the decline in the percentage of pupils in such centres awarded Level 7 or above in GCSE level qualifications in some subjects this year, but, interestingly, there has been a decline in the percentages awarded Level 7 or above in some key subjects in such centres.

The subjects include: biology; business studies; chemistry; citizenship; drama; England; English Literature; mathematics; physics and social sciences. Most of the falls are probably not significant, being only a matter of a decimal point or two, and thus within the expected margin of error. Indeed, in most subjects the percentage gaining level 7 of above is still higher than in 2019, before covid struck.

This year, although physics dropped from 60.8% in 2024 to 60.0% in 2025, and mathematics from 33.5% to 32.0% – subject where percentages in the public sector schools generally increased, although they still remain well below the percentages achieved by the private sector centres. In both subjects the private sector percentage was above the 2019 outcome. In mathematics, it might be that 2024 was ‘a good year’, and 2025 is a more normal outcome?

Now, another possible explanation for the drop in percentages, if it isn’t disappearing pupils, might be that the teacher supply crisis is finally impacting private sector schools in some subjects where recruitment is challenging. This might possibly be responsible for the declines in physics and mathematics percentages.

Another possibility is a change in entry policies that allowed marginal candidates to enter, but considering the financial consequences of widening entry at a time when private sector schools might be expected to be looking for cost saving measures, this reason seems unlikely.

Since many private schools are day schools, as a result it would be interesting to know to what extent parents have invested additional funds in private tutoring and Easter revision classes for pupils where there were concerns about outcomes after any ‘mock’ examinations. However, I suspect such investment would be more likely be at ‘A’ level than at GCSE, except perhaps in English and mathematics.

There is a useful table that allows comparison between public and private sector institutions Outcomes by centre type

The outcomes for physics at Level 4 or above are interesting

Grade 4 and above in Physics GCSE %2019202320242025diff 2023 to 2025
All State Funded91.490.290.491.00.80
Independent schools inc CTCs96.896.296.495.9-0.30

The trend in state funded institutions has been upward, despite any possible issues with staffing, whereas the picture is more mixed in the private sector. However, neither percentage take account of who is allowed to take the subject and the prevalence of combined science in many state-funded schools rather than the separate sciences.

Perhaps even more interesting is how different state schools perform with different groups and the extent to which MATs can achieve good results across the Trust.

Sort out physics teacher preparation courses

The next couple of years likely to see the best recruitment levels to physics ITT courses for more than a decade. As a result, there might be a risk that everyone concerned with teacher preparation breathes a huge sigh of relief, and put the problem of the shortage of teachers of physics in the ‘job done’ bin. In my view that would be a big mistake.

Now is the time for someone, perhaps the Institute of Physics, NfER, Nuffield or Gatsby to consider a research project that looks at the pipeline of physics teachers from school to school, and notably from university to teaching. Do different courses produce different numbers of teachers of physics that stay in the profession, and become the leaders of tomorrow or just provide short-term additions to the teaching stock. How important is a middle leadership cadre?

 Mapping these outcomes both geographically and as between public and private schools, and within the public sector as between 11-16; 11-18 and post-16 institutions might create an understanding that could then lead to a debate about how every child could access high quality physics teaching on a regular basis up to Level 3.

With the improvement in mathematics in schools over recent years, there should be the possibility of increasing interest in physics, especially amongst girls. The percentage of girls taking physics is still lamentably low. This is despite 30 years of programmes such as WISE. How far has the lack of management of the scare resource that is teachers of physics held back the encouragement of more girls to study the subject?

Teaching has always looked to be a profession where there is basic pay equality. That’s fine when there aren’t shortages, but there have always been incentives and rewards from golden hellos to additional payments for working in challenging schools. What incentives work to keep teachers of physics in the profession. Is it non-pay matters, such as not having to teach ‘all sciences’ or some mathematics that is as important as pay?

If gender is an issue, what about ethnicity: of both teachers and those that study physics at school? Then there is the issue of what percentage of pupils on free school meals have access to high quality physics teaching? Is it different from those small numbers on free school melas in schools in affluent areas, compared with schools where a large percentage of pupils are on free school meals. In the latter schools, attracting a physics teacher means access for some pupils. In the former, even if there is a physics teacher do the pupils on free school meals have access to physics?

And what about pupils with SEND? What is their access to physics teaching like?

Physics could be a template for other subjects to ask the questions about, ‘what can we do to ensure we have the best system for preparing teachers, recruiting them into schools, and ensuring that they stay in the profession.’ The alternative is that we could carry on as before, and rely upon market forces to provide the Nobel Prize winner of the future.