The defence* review: does it matter to schools?

I have just finished reading Michael Lewis’s excellent history of the British navy from Saxon times up to the end of World War 2. The final chapter of the book caused me to think whether the announcement of a ’defence spending review’ earlier this week was actually an ‘armed forces spending review’ rather than a ‘defence review’, and that the two are not the same thing.

We are an island nation, even if we now have an umbilical cord to Europe under the narrow seas of the Dover Strait. Lewis made the point, even more valid today, that in WW2 we, as a nation, imported much of the food we eat, and a great deal of our energy, especially for transport and heating purposes. Indeed, we now import higher percentages of the latter than during WW2, because of the understandable phasing out of coal as an energy source.

The loss of oil tankers, sunk in significant numbers during the Battle of the Atlantic, and crewed by very brave sailors despite the terrible risks they faced, nearly had serious effects on the winning of the war by the allies.

Interestingly, Lewis also pointed out that our submarine attacks in the Mediterranean affected German supply lines to North Africa, and may have helped influence the outcome in that theatre of war.

 So, would a defence review take the logistics issue into account? In the short-term, is reopening North Sea gas and oil wells good for defence or are they too vulnerable to attack by drones flown by an enemy to be reliable in any future conflict?

Should we really be giving up on renewables now, as some on the right of British politics seem to think that we should, or is that being unpatriotic?

Use locally based renewables, such as solar and PV panels on rooves, and using them to power batteries for heating, air con or recharging vehicles saves on imported fuel, and reduces the task of our armed forces in protecting commerce generally, and especially the vulnerable tanker fleet. The recent war in the Middle East has made the power of fuel in a conflict abundantly clear.  

Is it now being a patriot to call for a move away from imported oil and gas, with a move to a mix of locally source renewable energy?

Regular readers will know that I have advocated the use of renewable in schools ever since the early days of this blog. I first advocated renewables way back in 2007 in a chapter I wrote in a book for the left of centre wing of the Liberal Democrats. 900th post: Solar or PV? | John Howson There is still much left to be done in respect of renewable energy and schools. I wonder if every school could have the challenge of ensuring at least one classroom linked to an air-to-air heat pump to provide aircon in heatwaves and extra heating in winter by September 2027? Energy policy for schools | John Howson

  • *Defense for those readers whose governments prefer Ministries of War rather than of Defenc[s]e

Oxfordshire and the defence dilemma

Defence* and education are both important public services in Oxfordshire. The county plays home to Brize Norton – the largest RAF base in Britain; RAF Benson; Dalton and Vauxhall Barracks, plus MOD Bicester, and for good measure a University OTC plus cadet forces that also include naval elements.

There is also Shrivenham, the national Defence Academy, plus elements of the reserve forces. So, a real presence from our armed forces, even if not as significant as in West Surrey, Hampshire and Wiltshire.

Apart from its schools and colleges, both state -funded and private, the county hosts two universities and lots of enterprises selling into the education market, including a thriving publishing sector.

As a result, of the county’s engagement with both sectors, today’s announcement of shortfall in defence funding may well have implications for the education sector across the county if the gap in funding defence spending is to be closed by raiding the budgets of other government departments.

The government already has a win with falling pupil numbers. This decline will release funding from education if the remaining pupils and students remain funded only at their present levels, even if inflation is taken into account.

However, there will be other implications for the education sector if the defence funding gap is to be closed, and possibly even more funding to be found for that sector, the announcement of new rules for CEOs pay in academy trusts Government plans NHS-style rules for academy CEO pay will be a shot across the bows of many MATs. I have written about this issue several times on this blog. See The pay of senior staff in academies | John Howson as an example.

I would go further and ask why there are so many MATs, each with a CEO. In Oxfordshire, the 2025 accounts for MATs operating schools in the county revealed a salary bill for the highest paid -excluding large national MATs with outrageous salary bills – of some £3.9mn for the highest paid employee of each Trust. Cut the number of trusts to say, 5, the equivalent of the former 5 divisional directors under local authority management of schools, and perhaps more than £1mn might be saved. Multiply that across England and the saving mounts up.

Then there is small sixth forms. I wrote about this issue earlier this year in a post Are small sixth forms a good idea? | John Howson This is a hard area to tackle, but with falling rolls is the current arrangements in a county such as Oxfordshire best for both the country’s finances and the outcomes for students, especially if we need more cash for our defence?

If sixth forms eat up cash, what about small schools? I favour keeping schools, and especially primary schools, in their communities. Oxfordshire has been excellent at supporting village schools, but could rationalisation save money or would the additional transport costs outweigh the savings?

However, the big transfer of cash from education to defence would be due to decisions on the pay of those working in the education sector and the funding of the sector as a whole that are taken at the national level.

Will funding return measures, such as Pupil Teacher Ratios, return to levels last seen 50 years ago when spending on defence was a higher proportion of GDP than today. What that might mean across England was laid out in my review of PTRS. (PDF) PTRS OVER TIME: A REVIEW OF PUPIL TEACHER RATIOS BETWEEN 1974 AND 2024 AND TWO PERIODS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT RE-ORGANISATION PTRS OVER TIME: A REVIEW OF PUPIL TEACHER RATIOS

It is difficult to see anything other than challenging times ahead for education in Oxfordshire if the government is serious about more funding for defence.

 Of course, the government could just put up taxes.

*Defense for those with a Ministry of War

Hope over expectation: my view of today’s report on white working class children

How good are the recommendations into today’s report on the education of White working-class children? Based on my analysis of this one recommendation from the report; not universally very good The Inquiry into White Working Class Educational Outcomes Here is one specific recommendation:

Government should encourage and support more deliberate action to ensure that the highest performing primary and secondary schools admit and support a fair share of disadvantaged pupils, particularly in areas with significant white working class populations. Too often, the highest performing schools within local areas serve intakes that are significantly less disadvantaged than the communities around them. This should include clearer guidance and encouragement for schools and trusts to prioritise disadvantaged pupils within existing admissions rules, alongside stronger expectations that high-performing schools demonstrate how they are contributing to inclusion and fair access locally. Local authorities should also play a stronger role in supporting fair access, admissions coordination and inclusive place planning, building on their existing statutory responsibilities in this area.”

‘more deliberate action’ – What does this mean, since it doesn’t spell out any actions? Obviously, it means support for selective schools, as they are the highest performing secondary schools, and nowhere are they mentioned, so is the report endorsing the status quo. A selective school currently seeking a new headteacher has less than 7% of its pupils on free school meals according to the DfE website.

‘admit and support a fair share of disadvantaged pupils’ – What is being recommended for school with entry tests? And what is a fair share? Similar to the balance of the catchment area? But the location of schools is often based on history rather than current place concerns?

And for non-selective schools, how do you override parental preference and faith-based requirements?  Probably, through the school funding mechanism to encourage change in admissions criteria.

I would have liked to see some specific recommendations. A case study of how a successful school has already used the admissions rules would have been insightful.

‘stronger expectations that high-performing schools demonstrate how they are contributing to inclusion and fair access locally.’  Everyone knows what schools do to ‘expectations from government’.

‘Local authorities should also play a stronger role in supporting fair access, admissions coordination’ Ha, Ha, ha. It has taken two years of a Labour government to get local authorities the ability to control in-year admissions for academies and free schools (Clause 52 of 2026 Act). Will government back closure of faith schools if it is the best outcome for place planning: we shall see.

And what of transport in rural areas? At present transport to selective schools is not free in most areas outside London and the other conurbations, as it is seen as a parental choice, something I campaigned about in the 2024 general election in Weald of Kent and raised in Castle Point about schools on Canvey Island during the previous General Election.

I would have liked a much more radical approach to policy recommendations, as in the section on teachers, where a revision of the apprenticeship system is advocated. Trainees should also understand what teaching in schools in working lass areas is like. Of course, if the recommendation above is actioned, some schools will look very different, as some might lose successful pupils to selective schools and be even less educationally comprehensive. Will teachers want to teach in such schools without more incentives?

Sadly, with an Education Act passed in the last session of parliament, even a new Prime Minister may find it difficult to fsecure time for more reforms, so what will happen will probably only be within the current rules and framework.

I wonder what changes we will see by the end of this parliament: I am not holding my breath, at least for the secondary school sector. In the Early Years field, I am much more hopeful because there is an acceptance that closing chidrens’ centres a decade ago was not a wise policy move.  

Still, any report that puts these issues back on the table for a little while and creates discussion cannot be all bad.

DfE Vacancy website: two irritations

For years one of the features of the DfE’s vacancy website that has irritated me is the seemingly random repeating of vacancies. The example below, seen this morning, is an extreme example of this tendency, with the two adverts for the same vacancy appearing next to each other on the same page. I never know whether this is either a coding glitch that has existed since the site became active or a deliberate attempt to ensure some vacancies are repeated in case viewers missed them on their first appearance in the listing or search. Either way, putting the two versions next to each other doesn’t seem to me to be sensible.

Headteacher

Bordesley Green Girls’ School & Sixth Form, Birmingham, B9 4TR

Full-time equivalent salary

L33 to L39

School type

Local authority maintained school, ages 11 to 18

Working pattern

Full time

Closing date

30 June 2026 at 9am

Visa sponsorship

Visas cannot be sponsored

Headteacher

Bordesley Green Girls’ School & Sixth Form, Birmingham, B9 4TR

Pay scale

L33 to L39

School type

Local authority maintained school, ages 11 to 18

Working pattern

Full time

Closing date

30 June 2026 at 9am

Visa sponsorship

Visas cannot be sponsored

Another irritation of the DfE vacancy site, as far as I am concerned, is that a search on the term ‘headteacher’ can result in random vacancies for other posts appearing in the search, such as this on today for an ‘assistant principal’. This is not an issue at this time of year when there are few vacancies on the site, but is more of an issue when there are a couple of hundred vacancies to consider.

Assistant Principal – Behaviour and Alternative Provision

More than one location, Archway Learning Trust

Full-time equivalent salary

From £67,898 to £75,049 per annum

School type

1 academy, None, ages 11 to 19

Working pattern

Full time

Closing date

6 July 2026 at 9am

Visa sponsorship

Visas cannot be sponsored

Both the issues mentioned here may cause problems for AI generated searches aimed at counting the number of vacancies for particular post.  The search mechanism would need to be very sophisticated to cope with such anomalies.

This is the reason why, at present, I still spend a couple of hours a week studying the list of vacancies. I would be delighted if anyone would provide me with a foolproof automated regime to collect vacancies, because forty years of collecting headteacher vacancies has taught me that it is not a straightforward exercise.

Later next month, when I come to write my annual report of the 2025/26 school-year and headteacher vacancies, I will discuss some of those issues in more detail, including ‘what is an Executive headteacher’ and do we need a definition?

Meanwhile, I have collected data on just under 1,400 nursery, primary, secondary and special schools that are state-funded and located in England and have advertised for a head teacher since 1st August 2025.

Since January, I have also been collecting data about vacancies for teachers of music in state-funded secondary schools. Next year, I might expand that to include private schools so that I can understand the completion for teachers across both sectors.

Watch our for the report that will be published either in Late July or August this year.

Falling rolls in London: much worse than the rest of England

In my last post on this blog, I looked at the worsening of primary PTRs across much of the DfE’s ‘Inner London’ area. Falling Rolls: Is the funding formula making matters worse? | John Howson

This post looks how ‘Inner London boroughs have fare compared with the rest of England over those three years?

I think it is fair to say that London as a whole really has seen a significant downturn in primary pupil numbers. There are 22 local authorities where primary pupil numbers as published by the DfE have reduced by 5% or more between 2023/24 and 2025/26. Of these, 13 are London boroughs, and six – seven if Newham is included – are Inner London boroughs.

Seven of the top 10 places for the largest percentage decline in primary pupil numbers are filled by London boroughs. The other three places are taken by the Isle of Wight, Rutland and Torbay, three of the smallest unitary authorities in England.

Birmingham, Manchester and Leicester are the only large cities in the table. They fill three of the four bottom places for local authorities with a decline in pupil numbers of five per cent or more, along with Hillingdon in West London.

At the other end of the table, there are few London boroughs with less than a two per cent decline in their primary pupil populations.


London boroughs at this end of the table seem to be mostly outer London boroughs on the fringe of the metropolitan area. By contrast, there are seven county councils in the list of lowest declines in pupil numbers. This number increases to eight, if the Staffordshire figure, of an increase in pupil numbers, is correct.

The London boroughs will have the numbers in reception for each year, and will know how much worse the decline is likely to become over the next few years. More school closures look inevitable unless the funding model is changed to protect schools with declining rolls.

Not to protect the school estate in London is to assume that there will never be an upturn in pupil numbers. In cities, closing schools and selling off the site for housing means that in any upturn land may not be available for any new schools needed for the extra pupils. This is where thinking for the longer-term is important. During the last downturn of this size, most schools in London remained open, although some, such as Stamford Hill Infant and Junior School in Haringey, where I attended in the 1950s, did eventually close. Interestingly, the one form entry St Anne’s Church of England Primary School, close to Stamford Hill School that wasn’t actually in Stamford Hill, is still open.

However, this is not the post to discuss whether or not, in a more secular society, faith run schools should be closed where an alternative non-faith school can absorb the pupils. But this is an issue to debate, especially in urban areas.

In villages, the church-run school may still be the only school available, and that raises a much larger question about who should run state funded schooling? As the Wesleyan Methodists put it when faced by the 1902 Act, and decisions on whether to open state-funded secondary schools; are our teachers, teachers of children or teachers of Methodist children?

Teacher Turnover- Is England doing better than the USA?

An interesting report crossed my desk a the end of last week. Teacher Turnover in the United States: Who Moves, Who Leaves, and Why | Learning Policy Institute This study, by Tiffany Tan, Wesley Wei, Desiree Carver-Thomas, and Emma García was produced the Learning Policy Institute, and first appeared in mid-March.

Key findings were that;

Teacher turnover remains high nationally. Between 2020–21 and 2021–22, 15.1% of U.S. teachers moved schools or left the profession: 8.0% moved schools, and 7.1% left teaching. Turnover rates have been largely stable over the past 2 decades but are now about 27% higher than in the early 1990s—an increase driven primarily because the rates of teachers leaving the profession increased by more than 50%.

Most teacher turnover was voluntary and preretirement. Nearly 3 in 4 teachers (74%) who moved or left did so voluntarily for reasons other than retirement. This percentage is higher than it was 10 years ago, when 67% of teachers left their schools voluntarily and preretirement.

Nearly half of teachers who moved schools stayed within the same district, and almost 40% of those who left teaching remained in the education sector. Among movers, 36.5% of teachers moved to a different district in the same state, while 17.3% moved to a different state. Of those who left teaching, 31.2% retired, whereas 13.1% took jobs in other sectors.

Teacher turnover rates vary across groups of teachers. 

It is interesting to compare this survey with the NfER’s recent Report on the School Workforce in England

School teacher retention has improved slightly in recent years, with the leaving rate falling from 10.6 per cent in 2016/17 to 9.5 per cent in 2021/22 and nine per cent in the most recent data. This has contributed to lower ITT recruitment targets and increased teacher numbers overall. The exit rate of first-year early career teachers who left within one year between 2023/24 and 2024/25 was 10.3 per cent, the lowest rate since the data began. (page 11)

The NfER conclusion seems much more optimistic than that of the US Report from LPI.

In contrast to previous NFER reports on the teacher workforce, the flows of teachers into and out of the labour market look reasonably healthy for the future of teacher supply. Recruitment is improving, even in some subjects which have seen persistent shortages. Teachers were less likely to leave the workforce last year compared to any year since 2010/11, outside of the pandemic. The early career teacher retention rate is the best on record. Teachers’ working hours are steadily coming down on average and the proportion of teachers who report having an acceptable workload has improved somewhat. Some progress has also been made in the competitiveness of teachers’ pay. Most teachers’ have received a pay increase of at least four per cent for each of the last four years, which has been higher than inflation over the period and even closed the gap – albeit only partially – that had opened up between teacher pay growth and average earnings growth since 2010/11. The increase in job insecurity and slowdown of job opportunities in the wider labour market is also likely to be a key factor driving recent trends (page 24) https://www.nfer.ac.uk/media/idcdsseo/the_school_teacher_workforce_in_england_annual_report_2026.pdf

This may be because the pupil population in England is in decline. The consequences are that there are fewer opportunities for teachers to move to different schools, and more teachers stay put. There is also less pressure on training numbers, so teaching looks like a more competitive occupation. While the economy and technology changes, such as the fear of the AI effect on graduate jobs may also be working to make teaching look more attractive as a career path in a more challenging graduate labour market.

However, I wonder whether many of the issues reported in depth in the LPI Report, such as the higher turnover of Black teachers; more turnover of teachers in certain subjects, and in certain types of school, may also be features of the labour market for teachers in Egland.  Certainly, we know that teachers from ethnic minority backgrounds fare less well in teaching than those from the majority ethnic community, as I have discussed in past posts. I suspect many of the other concerns raised by the LPI Report may also have credence in England were the data to be examined in that level of detail.

For issues around ethnicity and teachers in England, see my previous blog posts

Ethnicity issues remain for new teachers | John Howson

Ethnicity issues remain for new teachers | John Howson

Slow progress on ethnic minority headteacher numbers | John Howson

Why Music Teacher Bursaries Matter for Education

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?

Pool 
MusicJanFebMarchAprilMayJuneSeptOctNovDec
251201922718511655-57-104-253-172-196-215
25620202051467724-59-86-117-144-162-171
4162021390358303243161117784514-9
315202225620811912-128-214-305-352-395-422
228202315681-3-126-278-356
2024
2025
3302026265  

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.

 2026 ENTRY TO PG ITT
 MUSIC
2025 TARGET565
OFFERS JANUARY 202670
OFFERS JANUARY 202591
TOTAL OFFERS 2025416
DIFFERENCE 2025 TOTAL AND 2025 January OFFERS325
PROJECTION for 2026395
ESTIMATED SHORTFALL170

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.

Happy 14th birthday, and my thanks to WordPress

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.

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

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?

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?