Is Labour making mistakes on ITT bursaries?

Yesterday, the government announced the bursaries for trainee graduate teachers and support for school training through the Post Graduate Apprenticeship route (PGTA). As might be expected, the subjects covered by these inducements to train as a teacher are mostly STEM subjects, plus some other subjects, but not the arts and humanities subjects, except for geography for some reason.

SubjectBursaryScholarship
Biology£5,000
Chemistry£29,000£31,000
Computing£29,000£31,000
Design and technology£20,000
Geography£5,000
Languages£20,000£22,000
(French, German and Spanish only)
Languages£20,000
(all other languages, including ancient languages)                          
Maths£29,000
Physics£29,000£31,000

Teacher training bursaries | Get Into Teaching GOV.UK

The bursaries are paid for by the government, and the scholarships mostly by the subject associations. While I can understand the government’s desire to increase training numbers up to target in these subjects, the list does raise two important questions about what seems like a continuation of the policy of the previous Conservative government.

Firstly, are these now the subjects where targets will not be met in 2025 when the ITT census is published in December. If there are other subjects not likely to meet their ITT target, why are they not included in the list?

I produced this table for an earlier blog, but it is worth repeating here.

SubjectTarget2025/26% increase Sept on Juneaccepted Sept 25over/under target
Total Secondary19,27026%16843-2,427
Primary7,65034%98802,230
Chemistry73049%909179
Biology98536%1397412
Mathematics2,30035%2617317
Design & Technology96533%678-287
Art & Design68033%902222
Geography93533%98146
Classics6032%42-18
English1,95031%1760-190
Drama62030%273-347
Business Studies90029%235-665
Music56528%343-222
Religious Education78028%418-362
Others2,52025%360-2,160
History79023%936146
Modern Languages1,46021%1428-32
Physics1,41019%1313-97
Physical Education72517%1491766
Computing8955%761-134

Why are subjects such business studies – a perennial ITT target failure – and music and religious education not included in the bursary list? Does a Labour government not believe these subjects are worth supporting?

The second issue is around whether there will be the jobs available for trainees recruited into training in September 2026, and entering the labour market in September 2027, if on a traditional course. The more the PGTA route is funded, the fewer advertised vacancies there may be if the schools convert PGTA trainees into qualified teachers doing the same job.

The government announcement contains no discussion about the labour market for teachers, and whether ITT trainees, faced with a secondary sector where pupil numbers will be at best flat, and at worst in decline, if the decline in the birthrate together with government policies on immigration or even the threat of them help to reduce the secondary school population.

From my perspective, this announcement like a sloppy piece of work by the DfE, in what could be a rapidly changing labour market, if the intention is to ensure all subjects receive sufficient new entrants into the labour market in 2026.

However, if there is a rapid decline in graduate level entry posts as a result of AI, then the government’s stance may be vindicated, even if says nothing about equality of opportunity.

Are men returning to teaching as a career?

Further delving into the DfE research into school leadership brough to light two more interesting facts. The first is the fact that Headteachers in the secondary sector are more likely to have a Level 7 qualification than head teachers in the primary sector. 76.8% of secondary heads have a Level 7 qualification compared with 41.6% of headteachers in the primary sector.

This difference should not surprise anyone with a sense of history, as many primary headteachers trained when the undergraduate route into primary teaching was still almost as common as the post graduate route. What is more surprising is that the PGCE is classified as a Level 7 qualification. In terms of level of content, I would assume it was actually a Level 6 qualification.

In reality, with more school-based trainees, including those that completed the Teach First route, this will not be a very useful statistic in the future.

The other nugget in the data doesn’t concern leadership statistics, but men in primary classrooms. In order to account for the data on leadership, many of the tables also contain information about classroom teachers and middle and senior leaders not headteachers.

The percentage of classroom teachers in the primary school sector that are male was on the increase between 2010 and 2020, whereas in secondary schools the percentage has continued to decline.

Year% Male classroom teacher in primary sectorTotal classroom teachers
201011,3%130,800
201613.9%142,800
202014.0%144,900
Year% Male classroom teacher in secondary sectorTotal classroom teachers
201035.7%117.100
201634.3%103,900
202033.8%106,000

Data from pages 26,27 and 73 School leadership in England 2010 to 2020: characteristics and trends

Because male teachers are less likely to have a break in service than female teachers, even with maternity leave of one year, there are still higher percentages of males as headteacher in the primary sector than the percentage of male classroom teachers. However, the percentage of male headteachers has been declining, from 29% of primary sector heads in 2010 to 26.2% in 2020.

In the secondary sector, the percentage of male headteachers declined from 62.1% in 2010 to 59.9% in 2020, suggesting that the glass ceiling is still proving difficult to breakthrough after an initial growth in the percentage of female head teachers during the first decade of the century.

Looking back in history, in both 1989 and 1996 male applicants accounted for 36% of PGCE applicants in both years. This was down from 43% of applicants recorded in 1983. In 1995 men accounted for just 16.1% of applicants to primary PGCE courses (Source Howson, Education Review, Summer 1996, Volume 10 Number 1 pp 36-40)

According to the latest DfE data for applications to postgraduate ITT training in the 2024-25 round, released in September 2025, male candidates made up 44% of all applicants, up from 39% the previous year.  However, the DfE do not release gender data for either sectors or subjects, as was the case with the GTTR data. Nevertheless, the 2024-25 percentage of 44% male applicants is very similar to the 43% recorded in 1983.

It would be interesting to know whether male candidates receive offers at the same rate as female candidates, especially if only candidates domiciled in England are considered. However, that data isn’t in the monthly releases from the DfE.

Perhaps the low point in male interest in primary school teaching has been reached, but with training numbers on the decline, the balance between applications and offers does need to be monitored, and preferably shared with the sector to ensure discussion about any future trends.  

How easy is it for a mature entrant to become a headteacher?

The recent DfE research into promotions provides some food for thought School leadership in England 2010 to 2020: characteristics and trends

Page 69 of the report contains the following paragraph.

‘Teachers may enter a leadership grade more than one step above their current grade or may enter a leadership grade after being outside the system. These non-sequential promotions make up a significant minority of promotions. In primaries schools, for example, for every 100 senior leaders in 2016 who were heads in 2020, 12 classroom teachers, 12 middle leaders and 11 system entrants also became heads. In secondary schools, for every 100 senior leaders from 2016 who were heads in 2020, 3 classroom teachers, 5 middle leaders and 5 system entrants also became heads. Non-sequential promotions appear to be more common in primary schools, where leadership roles are more limited and ‘linear’ progression may be more difficult.’

Interestingly no mention is made in the text of the position in special schools, a disturbing oversight in view of the current concerns about SEND.

Following on from the text there is a histogram of ‘The Grade occupied by 2020 heads in 2016, split by school phase in 2020, in terms of FTE’.

GradePrimarySecondarySpecial
Head645252
Senior Leader263932
Middle Leader314
Classroom Teacher313
System Entrant369

There is no mention in the text of the fact that in many small primary schools there may be no senior leader, so any internal appointment would inevitably come from either a middle leader or classroom teacher.

What is interesting is the fact that almost one in ten headteachers in special schools in 2020 were system entrants in 2016. Where did these entrants come from, were they from special schools outside the state sector or did they bring other expertise to the post of headteacher.

How long does it take to become a headteacher?

In view of the fact that most headteachers seem to be appointed as a result of ‘linear’ progression through the different grades, especially in secondary schools, how long does it take to reach headship?

Is there an age or length of service by which, if a teacher has not reached assistant head grade, they unlikely to ever make it to a headship? If so, do mature entrants that become teachers after the age of thirty face a promotion ceiling in their careers? Is the position different in primary schools, with their flatter leadership teams, than in secondary schools with assistant, deputy and headteachers roles, often now overseen by an executive head.

The DfE research showed that in 2010, headteachers had a median of 27 years since qualification, and that this reduced to 23 years in 2016 and then rose slightly to 24 years in 2020. The median years of experience of senior leaders reduced from 18 years in 2010 to 17years in 2014 where it remained until 2020. The reduction between the upper quartiles for years since qualification was greatest for senior leaders, 24 years since qualification in 2020 compared with 30 years in 2010. There was virtually no change in the lower quartile between 2010 and 2020, for example, this was 13 years since qualification for senior leaders in both 2010 and 2020.

As this data covers both primary and secondary schools, it is difficult to know whether promotion is faster in the smaller primary schools, if you are lucky with turnover, that in large secondary schools with many more layers of leadership. Clearly, some mature entrants achieve headship, but the message must be that if you want promotion as a mature entrant, start your journey quickly and use the skills you have brought to the profession from your former career. A decade ago, I wrote this blog about the career of Mrs Clarke who went from volunteer to headteacher in the same school. Congratulations Mrs Clarke | John Howson

Sadly, the research is silent about entrants from different subject backgrounds. Do historians and geographers, generally joining smaller department, find progress to a headship easier than teachers of English and mathematics where there may be several grades of middle leadership within the department?

We should encourage mature entrants, but make it clear that those joining after the age of thirty may find career progression more of a challenge, especially where governing bodies value length of service rather than skills and expertise for the role. No doubt MATs with more professionals involved in promotion decisions will be more open to those entering teaching later in life.

Are headteachers really staying less time in post?

As someone that started collecting data about the turnover of head teachers way back in the 1980s, and added deputy headteacher posts in the 1990s, and when the Assistant head grade was created added those to my dataset, the latest research from the DfE on leadership turnover is very welcome. School Leadership retention, Reporting year 2024 – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

However, it comes with a health warning. The methodology section contains the following

Exploratory analysis of Teacher Pension Scheme (TPS ….. suggests that the number of head teachers still in service but not being reported in the School Workforce Census has been increasing in recent years, substantially impacting the trends seen in this release. School Leadership retention: methodology – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

This warning needs to be borne in mind when considering the trends of length of service in post. The DfE data also excluded headteachers on a temporary contract, and those over 50 where retirement is likely to be their next career move.

On the face of it headteachers are spending less time in post.

Primary
Year of CensusBase% 1 Year% 5 year
201197493.7%78.8%
2012107592.4%77.0%
2013117791.1%76.4%
2014130290.2%73.3%
2015131190.5%74.4%
2016134989.6%73.9%
2017140487.8%71.6%
2018126288.3%70.0%
2019121990.2%70.0%
202096689.2%z
2021111489.2%z
2022141488.9%z
2023127389.7%z
20241199zz

Primary head teachers in post one year after appointment seem to be around 4% less for those appointed in 2023 compared with the class of 2011. After five years, there is around an 8% decline from nearly 79% to 70%, although we have yet to see the effect of covid on turnover.

Secondary 
Year of CensusBase% 1 Year% 5 year
201124091.2%65.0%
201228991.0%64.7%
201332787.2%62.1%
201437885.4%61,4%
201538486.7%62.0%
201643084.7%60.5%
201743784.9%63.6%
201844085.0%60.2%
201942187.6%62.5%
202031790.2%z
202132983.9%z
202240484.9%z
202341685.6%z
2024419zz

For the secondary sector, turnover after one year has increased by nearly six per cent, and by around 5% after five years. In this respect, secondary teacher seems more likely to stay in post longer.

This is not surprising, as an appointment to a secondary headship historically was less likely to lead to another appointment, whereas in the primary sector many heads were first appointed to a small school and then took a subsequent headship in a larger school.

However, the defining feature of the period under discussion is the transfer of a large number of schools from maintained school status to becoming an academy. The next decade will help explain where that period of change was a temporary change in turnover rates or the creation of a new landscape where headteachers move more frequently.

The DfE research also has analysis on whether headteachers remain in any posts in a school within the sector. Again, secondary heads are more likely, (as retirements are excluded), to remain in a secondary school, whereas primary teachers are now less likely than in 2011 to remain in a school. It would be interesting to know where those teachers are now employed, and whether they are still working in education.

No doubt the pressure on the primary sector has been harder for heads to deal with than for their secondary colleagues since many primary schools do not have the same range of support staff as their secondary colleagues. Many more may have also had to content with the outcomes of an ofsted visit.  

This is a useful dataset, but it should be made more comprehensive by ensuing all MATs complete the School Workforce Census and that new categories of posts, such as Executive Headteacher, are captured within the census.

Do children attend school?

The latest DfE repot of parent and student views contains some data that are at odds with the general perception of schooling. The data on attendance in the ‘voice’ results are so at odds with the general perception that it raises questions about who completes this sort of questionnaire. Parent, pupil and learner voice: May 2025 – GOV.UK

Generally, the perception is that fewer children are attending school on a regular basis. But here is the DfE’s evidence from their survey.

Across previous academic years, the proportions of pupils and learners who said they had been to school every day or most days were:

WaveKey stage 3 pupilsKey stage 4 pupils16-19 pupils and learners
2025-0596%95%84%
2025-0395%93%92%
2024-0997%96%
2024-0395%95%
2023-1296%94%

And for the parents the data are even more out of line with reality

Across previous academic years, the proportions of parents who said that their child had been to school every day or most days were:

WavePrimary parentsSecondary parentsSpecial parents
2025-0599%95%93%
2024-0998%96%91%
2024-0398%95%93%
2023-1299%95%91%

Would that 99% of primary pupils attended school that often. The reduction of only one per cent for the secondary sector parents between September 2024 and May 2025, from 96% to 95% even with sample sizes of more than 3,000 for both pupils and parents does seem a little out of line with the views coming from schools more generally about attendance.

Sickness or study leave were the two reasons given most frequently for absence by pupils and learners, followed by other reasons, where 16-19s had the highest percentage at 30%. Interestingly, 6% of the 16-19 cited the cost of travel, something this blog has highlighted as an issue.

Percentages for bullying s a reason for absence were low, at 5% of KS3, and 3% of KS4 pupils, compared with one per cent of KS3 parents, but 8% of KS4 parents: a big difference between pupil and parent responders.

Similarly, only 4% of KS3, and 3% of KS4 pupils, cited suspension or exclusion as reasons for missing school. Interestingly no parents of KS3 pupils, but 5% of KS4 pupils, cited suspension or exclusion as a reason for missing school.  

Tables 8 & 9 of the Technical Document on the Methodology contain the information about the percentage of parents and pupils that completed each wave, although no other information about their characteristics is forthcoming. This is despite the careful sampling frame developed to take account of a large number of different variables.  Parent, Pupil and Learner Voice Technical Report: September 2025

This does raise the question around who completes questionnaires and might the missing groups have had different responses? I cannot help but wonder whether the issue of response rates might have been more prominently discussed.  However, we all know persuading those sent questionnaires to return them is always a tricky task, so any responses are better than none.

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.’

OECD’s review of education: 2024

OECD’s latest Education Indicators at a Glance 2024 has recently been published Education at a Glance 2024 | OECD Within the publication is an interesting section of teachers and teacher shortages.

Compared with most countries where data are analysed in the study, the United Kingdom has a better-balanced age profile for its teaching force.  With primary teachers under 30 at 20% of the workforce, compared with the OECD average of 12%, the UK doesn’t quite top the list. Luxembourg has 27% of primary teachers below the age of 30. But the UK is in the top 5% of countries.

As a result of the high percentage of younger teachers in the United Kingdom there is a relatively smaller proportions of teachers under the age of 50. In the primary sector it is 16%, compared with 34% across the OECD. For the lower secondary sector, the UK percentage is 19% compared with 36% for the OECD average. As a result, the United Kingdom faces less of an issue with regard to teacher retirements over the next decade than in many other countries. However, there is a need to ensure that younger teachers do not leave the profession as that would nullify the gain on lower retirement numbers.

Teachers in the United Kingdon have some of the worst pupil teacher ratios in the OECD, and certainly in Western Europe, within the school sector. The data in the OECD book supports my blog posts at various times in recent years, such as: Worst Secondary PTRs for a decade | John Howson and by my longitudinal study of changes in PTRs over the past 50 years available through Oxford Teacher Services

Another interesting feature of the OECD tables about teachers and teaching is the gap between classroom teachers’ pay and that of school leaders. This seems larger in the United Kingdom than in many other OECD countries – perhaps that’s why there are still so many older teachers in service if they are being well paid compared with younger classroom teachers.

Although this blog has concentrated on some of the OECD’s data about teachers, the key sections of Education Indicators at a Glance this year are around equity and the levels of education studies by different groups within societies across the OECD landscape.

One of the key messages from the book’s editorial is that

High quality education systems, with fair access for children from all social and economic backgrounds, can be a means to lift people out of poverty and empower students to reach their full potential.

There has been good progress in educational attainment and outcomes, for example, with a significant drop in the share of 25–34 year-olds without an upper secondary qualification, which has decreased from 17% in 2016 to 14% in 2023, in many countries.

However, challenges remain in achieving equality of opportunity. The 2024 edition of Education at a Glance, with a spotlight on equity in education, finds that family background, for example, remains a strong influence on education outcomes.

Fewer than 1 in 5 adults, whose parents did not complete upper secondary education, have university degrees or another form of tertiary qualification. And children from low-income families are, on average in countries with available data1, 18 percentage points less likely to be enrolled in early childhood education and care before the age of 3.’ Page 8

This is an important set of messages in the week of the Labour party Conference.

SEND, fuel duty and the Apprenticeship Levy  

SEND was identified as one of their 3 top priorities by 60% of a random sample of 100 delegates at the recent Lib Dem Conference. 45% ranked it first and 15% second, often behind funding in general.

This result isn’t a surprise to anyone in education, although falling rolls doesn’t yet seem to have worked its way up the political agenda to be a top priority for councillors and activists. I am sure that will change.

Anyway, as regular readers know, before the summer break I expressed concerns about the SEND deficit many local authorities are facing, only to have the end date for the ‘statutory override’ kicked down the road from March 2026 to March 2028 two days after my blog appeared. I m sure there is no link between the two, just great timing on my part.

So, what might local authorities do. Two suggestions, one possible and one for consideration. Local authorities need to check that they are spending all the Apprenticeship Levy raise by them in its present form. They should not be returning any unspent cash, raised from maintained schools to HM Treasury. Apprenticeships across the SEND landscape can be a good investment, and certainly a better use of the cash than sending it back to Westminster. Hopefully, all local authorities are now making full use of the Levy cash collected.

My second suggestion needs some work. At present, SEND transport is a massive cost to many local authorities. The recent NI hike won’t have helped, and should be recognised in the funding for the High Needs Block. If not, it is a tax on SEND, and indeed education as a whole.

The other tax is Fuel Duty. Unlike VAT, I don’t think it is recoverable by local authorities, despite making up around 50% of the price of fuel at the pump. Assume a taxi does two journeys a day for 190 days a year, and uses a litre of diesel for each journey with a SEND young person. That’s around 380 litres a year. As 400 is an easier number to use, let’s round it up to that number. To compensate, let’s say diesel is £1.30 per litre. This puts the fuel cost at £520 per taxi per year. Ten taxis, £5,200; 100 taxis: £52,000. Now assume 50% fuel duty and the possible saving mount up.

Agriculture has long had a red diesel scheme to cut fuel costs.  Education should not be paying income from the High Needs block back to HM Treasury in tax. Like business rates, a fuel rebate scheme should be in place where local authorities certify fuel purchased, and receive a rebate of the duty.

However, this might incentivise the use of fuel-inefficient vehicles, so the scheme should be predicated on a growing percentage of vehicles being electric, and thus not requiring the rebate. Vehicles could also be required to be less than five years old, and with a minimum miles per litre outcome.

Such a scheme won’t solve the problem, but every little helps, and it might encourage the use of electric taxis that are both cleaner for the environment and, until the government changes the rules, less costly in tax paid by local authorities.

Has teaching become an attractive career again: Part 2

Following on from my initial analysis of September’s data on postgraduate teacher preparation course applications and offers, outlined in the previous post, I have now looked at the data in more detail.

The table below looks at the DfE target for entry into courses in autumn 2025 plus the increase in ‘offers’ made between the June and September data runs this year. The number shown as ‘accepted’ in September is then compared with the ‘target to show any possible over-recruitment or ‘shortfall’ there might be in each subject and phase. The latter would be bad news for schools seeking to recruit into those subjects both next September, and in January 2027.

SubjectTarget2025/26% increase in Offers Sept on Juneaccepted Sept 25over/under target
Total Secondary19,27026%16843-2,427
Primary7,65034%98802,230
Chemistry73049%909179
Biology98536%1397412
Mathematics2,30035%2617317
Design & Technology96533%678-287
Art & Design68033%902222
Geography93533%98146
Classics6032%42-18
English1,95031%1760-190
Drama62030%273-347
Business Studies90029%235-665
Music56528%343-222
Religious Education78028%418-362
Others2,52025%360-2,160
History79023%936146
Modern Languages1,46021%1428-32
Physics1,41019%1313-97
Physical Education72517%1491766
Computing8955%761-134

The data is interesting. There has indeed been a surge in ‘offers’ made in many subjects between June and September. Chemistry leads the way, with a 49% increase in ‘offers’ between June and September. This is followed by Biology (36%), mathematics (35%) and art and design (33%)

Other art subjects have seen significant increases in ‘offers’ of between 28-33%, but that has not been enough to ensure targets will be met this year.  In some subject, notably history and geography, targets were close to being met by June, so few new offers have been made. This is not seemingly the case in PE, the targets had been met by June, but 17% more offers have been made between June and September. Overall, this suggests a late surge in interest in teaching as a career.

Of more concern is the situation in Classics, English, drama, business studies and music, plus religious education and the catch-all ‘other subject’s where targets will be missed, even though ‘offers’ have increased significantly for the time of year. The DfE needs to assess how the market is changing in regard of who wants to be a teacher.

Because of the complication of applications from outside of the United Kingdom, it won’t be until the ITT Census is published in December that the full picture on recruitment into ITT will emerge.

However, civil servants cannot assume, ‘more of the same’ is what is needed in what may be a changing market, where for some teaching now looks more attractive as a career.

In changing times, the amount of data available can be helpful in assessing what is happening. In the previous post, I suggested some data points that it would be useful to have regional and provider level data during the recruitment round, especially in relation to the probability, based on previous years’ data, of those applying from outside of the United Kingdom taking up a place if offered one.

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.