Numbers granted teaching awards

Posted on August 20, 2025 by John Howson

In a previous post I looked at the prohibition from teaching work of the Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA). However, that is only a part of the work of the Agency. The other main task is to maintain the register of qualified teachers, and to grant admittance to the register. There are two main routes to registration. Obtaining QTS in England via one of the several routes available, including the assessment only route, or to seek registration for a teaching qualification awarded overseas. Various governments at Westminster have approved QTS for teachers from certain countries with acceptable teaching qualifications.

The numbers admitted via the various routes in recent years is shown in the table.

	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24	2024/25
ITT in England	37,077	32,877	26,911	25,621
Assessment only route	1,576	1,511	1,697	1,670
Wales/Scotland and Northern Ireland	1,907	1,790	1,457	1,392
OTT recognised for QTS	1,684	5,750	5,233	912
All routes	42,244	41,928	35,298	29,595

Source: Teaching Regulation Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2024-25

Those granted QTS, especially through the ITT routes in England, may not enter service in schools where QTS is a requirement. They may choose to work in the private school sector or those post-16 establishments where QTS is not a requirement. They may also move abroad. On the other hand, those granted QTS by the assessment only route and by converting teaching qualifications from outside of England are highly likely to be either working or expecting to work in a school where QTS is required for a teacher to be paid on the Qualified Teacher Scale.

Schools have aways been able to employ unqualified teachers, once called instructors, either where no qualified teacher was available or where the law did not require them to employ qualified teachers, as in some academies and free schools. That latter exemption may be changed by the current parliamentary Bill once it becomes law.

The decline in ITT registrations is partly down to reductions in the primary ITT numbers. These have declined to meet the reduced need for teachers due to the decline in the birthrate, but the fall in registrations also highlights the ITT recruitment crisis of the years immediately post the covid pandemic. Hopefully, the number of registrations will increase over the next few years as targets should once again be met in many secondary subjects.

Where did overseas teacher applying for QTS apply from?

Country	2023/24	2024/25	Difference
Australia	494	486	-8
Canada	174	148	-26
Ghana	6912	1916	-4996
Hong Kong	107	490	383
India	1762	779	-983
Ireland ROI	93	88	-5
Jamaica	281	157	-124
New Zealand	195	177	-18
Nigeria	5189	1519	-3670
South Africa	617	229	-388
Ukraine	217	131	-86
USA	706	706	0
sub total	16747	6826	-9921

All applications	18,310	12413	-5897
% list of all applications	91%	55%

The response to both a change in the rules regarding overseas trained teachers, and the evidence of a teacher shortage in England, produced a spike in applications in 2023/24 to register as qualified teachers in England from two West African countries, Ghana and Nigeria. Following the exit from the EU, numbers from most EU countries are now very low, amounting to less than 300 in 2024/25, of which 74 applications were from teachers trained in Spain.

Of the countries with the largest number of applications in 2023/24, 1,197 teachers from Ghana; 723 from Hong Kong; 550 from India; 1,309 from Nigeria and 235 from the USA resulted in an award.

Of course, granting an award did not mean that a visa would also be granted, but without these teachers many schools would have found staffing their schools even more of an issue that it actually was in September 2024.

Banning teachers

Posted on August 6, 2022 by John Howson

Between January and the start of August this year, the body charged with regulating the teaching profession announced decisions on the futures of just over 90 teachers. Outcomes have ranged from ‘No Order Made’ to indefinite prohibition from working as a teacher anywhere in England to prohibition with the opportunity to seek reregistration after a set period of time, although a return to the Register of Qualified teachers isn’t guaranteed. In passing, it should be noted that the term ‘teacher’ isn’t restricted in its use only to those on the Register: anyone can call themselves at teacher.

Men outnumbers women in those barred from teaching in these announcements, by around two to one, even though men are in the minority in the profession as a whole. The overwhelming majority of men barred from teaching were as a result of an issue to do with sex in some form or another; usually involving someone underage. More than 40 men were barred from teaching for this reason in announcements just in this seven-month period of 2022; along with just three women.

Two women were barred for misconduct associated with assessment. This low number may well reflect the nature of schooling and assessment since the start of the pandemic. Similarly, there were only two barring for financial reasons. There were however, a number of barring resulting from inappropriate behaviour towards pupils. This ranged from actual assaults to other behaviour seen to have crossed the line from what is acceptable.

Two teachers were struck-off for running an unregistered school, while there were a couple of cases of false references supplied by teachers in connection with job applications.

Not all incidents took place in or even involving schools. Teachers can be barred for incidents outside schools, including their use of social media and who they live with.

If you live with someone caught supplying drugs then you must tell the school authorities and your line manager straight away, especially if your premises is searched for drugs. Similarly, if you end up in court for almost any reason it is wise to declare the fact as soon as possible and indeed normally well before charges are brough if you are arrested and placed on bail. If you are remanded in custody, the school will likely know, as you won’t be able to turn up for work but you should still inform them.

Two issues arise from considering these judgements. Firstly, what about others working in schools that commit similar acts. Presumably, they are sacked for gross misconduct, but should there be a way of barring them from working with young people even if they are not professionals?

Secondly, there seem to be some areas where perhaps ‘sentencing guidelines’ might now help both panels and teachers to judgements. One such area is driving under the influence of alcohol. The small number of cases this year did seem to produce a range of outcomes. Aggravating factors might be ‘on school premises’ or ‘in the presence of children’ while mitigating factors could be ‘declared treatment started before the incident’ and ‘extreme stress in work and home life’. Clearly, letters of support do seem to swing the judgement about outcomes, and the weight of ‘being an excellent teacher’ should be signalled clearly in guidance.

The Secretary of State must sign-off panel judgements, with an appeal to the high court being the only further outcome. Should the Secretary of State, or in reality a civil servant, have this right of judgement of the panel’s decision or should panel outcomes only be subject to an appeal to a court?

Why are teacher struck-off?

Posted on January 6, 2022 by John Howson

Anyone looking for a depressing read need go no further than a perusal of the reports of hearings at the Teacher Regulation Agency Teaching standards, misconduct and practice – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) regarding teacher misconduct.

The Agency decisions are ratified by a civil servant called a ‘decision maker’ on behalf of the Secretary of State. The teacher has a right to appeal to the High Court within a limited timeframe following the decision.

In the period between the start of August and the end of December 2021, the Agency heard nearly 50 cases. Almost threequarters of the hearings were regarding male teachers. This despite the fact that there are far fewer male teachers than female teachers in the profession.

The Agency can hear cases relating to actions by teachers both inside and outside schools where the actions might be deemed unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute and breach acceptable standards required of a teacher as a professional. This included being found guilty in a criminal court or even being cautioned by the police. Teachers can also be working in the state or private school sectors.

The recommendations handed down after a hearing can range from the ‘not proven’ to ‘No Order Made’ – where the publication of the findings is considered adequate admonishment as an outcome, to either an ‘Order’ where after a specific time period the teacher may apply for reinstatement as a teacher or an ‘Order with an indefinite ban’ allowing for no return to the profession and is usually couched in the following terms

“… prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. Furthermore, in view of the seriousness of the allegations found proved against him, I have decided that …. (named person) shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach.”

The teacher’s date of birth is provided and gender can be inferred from the name on the report of the hearing. Where the misconduct occurred on school premises, the school is named in the report of the hearing in most cases. Although in certain circumstances it may be redacted.

Cases seem to fall into three groups – sex related, where an indefinite ban would seem to be the most likely outcome. A very high proportion of the male teachers that came before the Agency were there for behaviour involving inappropriate behaviour. In far too many cases this involved a child that was often a pupil at the school.

The second group of cases involves irregularities either in examination procedures or financial matters. The case of three senior staff at one school involved the latter and the issue of off-rolling and census numbers. Most of these cases seem to result in bans of between two to five years. There seem to be fewer of such cases than might have bene expected although that may be due to the circumstances of assessment over the past two years.

Cases of personal conduct seem to result in an indefinite ban where there is dishonesty in areas such as application forms, but a wider range of penalties where the matter is possession of a Class A drug for personal use or failing to report a relationship with someone on the Sex Offenders Register. Bringing such a person onto school premises may be seen as an aggravating factor.

Panels seem to recognise the challenges of working in settings such as PRUs, especially for young teachers with little support, and the cases where they relate to handing of pupils may result in a ‘No Order’ outcome, but just the possible glare of publicity that might result from the publication of the hearing outcome being seen as sufficient deterrent.

As a proportion of half a million professionals working as teachers these cases represent a very small percentage summoned for unprofessional behaviour. However, the high incidence of cases involving inappropriate behaviour with children does mean that both training in the standards expected is necessary for new teachers, and the recognition by all that any teacher might face situations where they put themselves at risk of losing their professional status and their employment if their conduct falls below an accepted standard.

Teacher Conduct: maintaining high standards

Posted on February 22, 2021 by John Howson

With little by way of statistics to consider, I thought that I would pay a return visit to the Teacher Regulation Agency site, and see whether they were being kept busy dealing with cases of teacher misconduct. So far, in 2021, there have been 21 judgements reported by panels appointed by the Agency, of which 6 resulted in ‘No Oder’ being made, and the remainder in ‘Prohibition Notices’ being served on teachers.

Despite the huge imbalance between men and women in the teaching profession, almost exactly the same number of men and women have been the subject of hearing so far in 2021. However, four men compared with two women have had ‘No Order’ outcomes. Although many of these involved behaviour deemed unacceptable, in relation to the teacher standards, the level of infringement and the past history of the teacher seemed to justify the panel making a ‘No Order’ decision that was supported by the Secretary of State.

Teachers need to be aware that their private life, and who they live with matters in maintaining appropriate professional standards. There were a number of ‘Prohibition Orders’ made this year as a result of a teacher having a sex offender at their premises, and not reporting the fact to the school authorities.

A number of teachers also failed to either keep up their safeguarding training or to report incidents where a vulnerable child might have been at risk and as a result these teachers incurred a ban from teaching, including a headteacher.

A criminal conviction for an offence including a ‘Class A’ drug also lead to a ‘Prohibition Order’ against a teacher. Teachers also need to ensure that they don’t conceal incidents in their employment record when applying for a teaching post.

Sadly, the most common reason for banning a person from the teaching profession remains the development by a teacher of a relationship with a pupil or former pupil. This has been the most common reason so far in 2021 for male teachers being banned. In one case, the incident was ‘historic’ and related to events more than a decade ago and at a different school to where the teacher was working when the incident came to light.

Interestingly, there seem to be fewer contested hearings this year. It may well be that the length of time since the commission of the behaviour cited plus the weight of evidence makes it no longer worth a teacher contesting a hearing where case law would suggest the outcome was a ‘Prohibition Order’. Indeed, one suspects that many of these teachers will have left the profession for other work after being dismissed by their school.

I have long maintained that, if there are going to be these exacting standards for professional life that a teacher must adhere to, then the quid pro quo should be that the term ‘teacher’ is a reserved occupation. The fact that anyone can call themselves a teacher, presumably even if banned by the Teacher Regulation Agency, is an anomaly that needs correcting.

Requiem for an Agency

Posted on December 12, 2018 by John Howson

This week saw the final rites for the National College of Teaching and Leadership with the publication on the 5^TH December of their final annual report and accounts before the College disappeared from the scene and its functions were re-absorbed into the Department for Education. You can read the report at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nctl-annual-report-and-accounts-2017-to-2018

Thus ends an era that started with the Teacher Training Agency in the mid-1990s, when QUANGOs were fashionable (Quasi Autonomous Non-Governmental Organisations for those that don’t remember the initials). Tony Blair created a National College and for a period of time mandated that all new head teachers should hold the National Professional Qualification for headship (NPQH). Then came a period of amalgamation and eventually a change in attitude to how government is run. While Regional School Commissions became fashionable, the arm’s length body for the teaching profession that the NCTL was becoming after the demise of the General Teaching Council didn’t fit in with the emerging agenda of the control of schools from Westminster.

As someone that worked at the then Teacher Training Agency for 1997-1998, I can see that the relationship between the Department and its satellite bodies was always fraught with problems. Teach First was a Department creation and for many years the employment-based routes were administered from Sanctuary Buildings or its Manchester outpost rather than by the TTA or its successors.

The quasi arm’s length functions that remain are now under the auspices of the Teacher Regulation Agency. However, even that agency has to see its decisions on disciplining teachers signed-off by a civil servant on behalf of the Secretary of State.

So what did the NCTL do in its final year? The list of tasks in the annual report covered:

provided over £286 million funding in the form of bursaries and grants, in order to incentivise recruitment to initial teacher training;
ensured that most of the teacher trainees required to meet the needs of schools in England were recruited;
delivered a national teacher recruitment marketing campaign;
developed and funded a range of routes into teaching;
improved National Professional Qualification (NPQ) provision;
continued to support participants still to be assessed on the previous NPQ programmes;
provided targeted support for continuing leadership professional development;
increased the number of teaching schools and system leaders;
managed the awarding of Qualified Teacher Status to individuals following an accredited ITT course in England & Wales and overseas; and
managed referrals of allegations of serious misconduct against teachers to consider whether individuals should be prohibited from teaching in any school in England.

On all these task, Minister will now have nowhere to hide. This will be especially true if recruitment into the profession falls short of targets set by the Teacher Supply Model. Ministers will now have nobody else to blame but themselves for any shortfall.

In the accounts at the back of the report is the figure spent on advertising and publicity by the NCTL. In the 2016/17 financial year, this was £14.4 million. In 2017/18, the expenditure had increased to £20.4 million, and increase almost £6 million. So, at least one industry is benefiting from the teacher recruitment crisis.

John Howson

Education and the numbers that affect what happens

Tag Archives: teacher regulation