Tag Archives: teacher supply

Fewer ethnic minority graduates achieved QTS

Posted on by
Reply

The absolute number of postgraduate trainee teachers from a non-white background is slowly creeping up.  Release home – Initial teacher training performance profiles – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

The latest data, plus the data for the previous year are shown in the table.

However, the percentage of non-White trainees dropped from 75% of the total in 2023/24, to 72% of the 2024/25 trainee total.

The percentages teaching in state schools within 16 months of obtaining QTS dropped for all groups, but the decrease was largest, in percentage terms, for the Black/African/Caribbean Group, down from 74% to 67%. This is a real disappointment, and merits further investigation as to where the decline has occurred? This is a group of graduates that have regularly found obtaining a place on a teaching course more challenging than for graduates from other ethnic groups, and especially the ‘White’ majority grouping.

Despite the much larger number of White trainees, they achieved a higher percentage teaching in state schools than for any ethnic group, once again, in the latest data.

Numbers not obtaining qualified teacher Statues (QTS) also increased for all groups. Was this due to increased numbers dropping out of their course or an increase in trainees being failed at the end of the course?

More than thirty years ago, I highlighted the issues faced by graduates from minority ethnic groups desirous of entering teaching, and I have written several blogs on the topic, including  Ethnic minority trainee teachers: still huge regional differences in trainee numbers | John Howson

The ethnicity of the teaching profession is an area the new Secretary of State might want to ask officials to investigate. The diversity of our student population should be matched by a similar diversity in the teaching workforce, as I am sure it is among the non-teaching staff in our schools.

At the same time, it would be worth asking whether it is harder for men from ethnic minorities than for women from these groups to enter teaching?

As an aside, it would be helpful if ethnicity was added to gender data in the DfE’s monthly statistics on applications to train as a teacher by graduates.

Mbacc a pipedream without the teachers

Posted on by
1

In the previous post, I considered trends in teacher supply into state secondary schools for three subjects listed as a part of the Prime Minister’s proposed MBacc. If such a qualification is to be rolled out nationally, then there will either need to be more teachers in schools in certain subjects or more young people will need to be diverted into further education, perhaps at 14 rather than 16. However, even that strategy won’t solve the music and performing arts dilemma regarding the number of teachers’ issue. Abolishing the bursary for music looks even more unfortunate in the light of the MBacc announcement.

How about the wider primary and secondary sectors?

 In line with falling pupil numbers, there has been a reduction in trainee numbers in the primary sector. This has resulted in fewer numbers obtaining QTS, and even fewer of those working in the state primary school sector. The 5,882 recorded working in state schools of the 2024/25 cohort should increase as the data is refined, but it is still likely to be only halfthe number of just four years previously, when more than 10,000 new teachers were working in the primary sector at some point in the 16 months after obtaining Qualified Teacher Status (QTS).

Fortunately, those newly qualified teachers not obtaining a teaching post in England, might be able to look overseas for work. With VAT on fees for private school pupils in England, the independent sector is unlikely to offer must of an alternative to the state sector over the next few years; at least until there is some upturn in the birthrate.

I hope that course providers will take note of this data, and not over-recruit to courses in the future, as burdening students with more debt and a restricted chance of securing a teaching post is not really fair on the students.

In the secondary sector, the overall position hides some variations between subjects.

The percentage obtaining QTS among secondary trainees has been falling; from some 95% before covid, to 92-93% in the years since. The overall percentage hides a much greater change in the numbers obtaining QTS, from a Covid high of 19,070 to a low of 12,820 only two years later. Covid may have brought forward the decision to teach that might otherwise have been delayed until a future year.

Fortunately, 2024-2025 saw the number obtaining QTS much closer to pre-Covid levels. With falling rolls, the overall number of trainees, if not the mix within subjects, may be satisfactory for the DfE.

However, post-covid the state school sector lost around five and a half thousand teachers compared with the pre-covid numbers f new teachers entering state schools. To what extend these missing teachers have been replaced by new entrants through the ‘assessment only’ route, isn’t clear from the data.

In the most recent year, 2024-2025, what of the percentages in state schools by secondary subjects?

The low percentage of those qualifying for QTS in Classics instate schools, is perhaps not a surprise given the percentage of state schools that teach the subject. The fact physical education is in second position in the table, with just 59% of those obtaining QTS in state schools should not be a surprise to anyone familiar with the number of trainees recruited and the DfE’s target for the subject.

Only in English and mathematics were there more than 1,000 new teachers working in schools. Given the requirement to teach these subjects to all pupils up to Year 11, and for some in Years 12 & 13, even these numbers may be insufficient. The 234 music, and 133 business studies teachers, and the 321 religious education new entrants, are almost certainly not enough to allow the subjects to thrive in our schools, even before the desire to widen the curriculum to include more MBacc students, and fewer EBacc students.

Alongside the conversation about the curriculum, and the desire of the Prime Minister to make it more relevant for work in the 21st century, there really needs to be a conversation about how the curriculum changes can be properly staffed, so that all pupils receive a high quality education taught by teachers qualified in their subject, and not just a page ahead of the AI generated lesson plan.

Data from: Initial teacher training performance profiles: 2024 to 2025 – GOV.UK

MBacc and teacher supply

Posted on by
Reply

The DfE ITT performance tables issued today allow me to write a quick post about the MBacc and the supply of newly qualified teachers over the past few year. Initial teacher training performance profiles: 2024 to 2025 – GOV.UK

Number for three key subjects are limited, as the table makes clear

Achieved QTS and teaching in a state school within 16 months of QTS

ITT YearBusiness StudiesDesign & TechnologyMusicTotal
2017/18106240220566
2018/19134236212582
2019/2020125341224690
2020/212254543371016
2021/22199292289780
2022/23155346227728
2023/24135441171747
2024/25133456234823

 Numbers have increased over recent years, and may still increase further as more data is accumulated for the most recent years. However, apart from the covid bounce, they still remain low as a percentage of state schools.

With more than 500 vacancies for teachers of music this year, even if half are filled by returners, there would not be enough trainees in any years, except for the ‘covid years’ to cover vacancies.

TVEI and the Manchester Bacc: same problem, same solution?

Posted on by
Reply

I hesitate to couple together Andy Burnham, our new Prime Minster, and Mrs Thatcher, one of most marmite Prime Minsters’, but they do both seem to have an interest in the role of education in preparing young people for work.

In 1982, Mrs Thatcher introduced a new scheme in what has been described in the following terms by a researcher:

The Technical Vocational Education Initiative (TVEI) was intended to instil a significant element of vocational and technical education into the curricula of mainstream schools and colleges (Williams and Yeomans, 1994). It was the first major initiative by central Government in curriculum development. The pilot was announced by then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in the House of Commons on 12th November 1982. Learning from the past Paper No. 6

The new initiative by Andy Burnham initiative is described in the following terms:

Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham said: 

“For too long the English education system has been built around the needs of just a third [sic] of young people who go to university. That means that every year, thousands go through school without a clear path into a good career. 

Our answer is the MBacc – a game-changing new plan for technical education. We’re using our devolved powers to reset the scales and give young people a clear line of sight to good jobs and the steps that will take them there. 

If we don’t make this change now, it could be the single biggest barrier to future growth – and to the life chances of young people here. The needs of our economy are changing, and right now the system is not capable of keeping pace and meeting the needs of businesses or the ambitions of the next generation.” 

Unlike the English Baccalaureate, which is geared towards the subjects top universities value, each MBacc gateway will guide young people to the subjects and qualifications most valued by the city-region’s employers. The gateways draw on the latest labour market data and provide a clear line of sight to high quality jobs in Greater Manchester’s growing economy. There will also be clear MBacc pathways for those who want careers in the emergency services or the Bee Network.  Andy Burnham unveils plan to turbocharge growth in Greater Manchester with new technical education route, the Greater Manchester Baccalaureate – Greater Manchester Combined Authority Accessed 29th  July 2026 0955

Interestingly, Burnham lists the following subject as part of the MBacc.

Engineering 

Design & Technology 

Business Studies 

Drama 

Music 

Performing Arts 

Regular readers of this blog will know that many of these are subjects that have difficult in recruiting new entrants into teaching. In the case of music, this is a subject where the DfE has slashed the ITT target. Engineering doesn’t have a target, so is probably in ‘other subjects’. Design and Technology is only filing its places as, like music, the target has been reduced

SubjectTarget 2026/27July offersFill: July viewJuly AcceptedFill on accepted
Chemistry6901460YES1302YES
Biology675629PROBABLY466POSSIBLY
Mathematics20002953YES2567YES
Design & Technology620701YES630YES
Art & Design605709YES590YES
Geography685549N466NO
Classics7545NO37NO
English19801835POSSIBLY1535POSSIBLY
Drama370318POSSIBLY263NO
Business Studies1200357NO267NO
Music260266YES220YES
Religious Education450349NO294NO
Others2035508NO414NO
History5201112YES952YES
Modern Languages10851363YES1172YES
Physics8101600YES1438YES
Physical Education6551551YES1326YES
Computing565961YES808YES

Andy Burnham must be careful not to announce a policy he cannot deliver nationally without a strategy for teacher supply, otherwise the very schools he seeks to help may be the ones that cannot recruit the teachers in a market where supply nowhere near meets demand on a national scale.

Manchester is blessed, as is the North West as a whole, with more ITT places than most of the rest of England. The test of any Prime Minister is whether he can scale up a local initiative into a credible national policy? The first step would be for Lucy Powell to take ownership of the policy.

ITT: Do bursaries work?

Posted on by
Reply

Following on from the July data on postgraduate ITT preparation courses, Initial teacher training application statistics for courses starting in the 2026 to 2027 academic year – Apply for teacher training – GOV.UK  I thought that I would publish a few charts showing the number of offers made over time for key subjects. The first two are biology and chemistry

The difference this year is stark: Record offers in chemistry, and the second lowest since 2013/14 cycle for offers in biology. This suggests the presence or absence of a bursary may affect the choice of subject by some scientists that is related to the presence and amount of a bursary.

Music is a subject where the removal of the bursary has reduced the number of offers being made, although there was a slight uptick this month. Fortunately, the significant cut to the target means that there should still be enough applicants to meet the target.

Finally, geography is another subject where the target won’t be met this year. The chart shows why very clearly.

If the aim of the government is to ensure that ITT targets are met in every subject, and not just selected subjects, then there needs to be a rethink about the bursary system.

However, the bursary system is unfair to those studying other subjects in a manner that the public sector does not apply to other areas of recruitment and training.

It is time to bring teacher preparation into the 21st century: pay all trainees a living wage, and prevent over-recruitment in some subjects and the associated pressure on the Student Loan Fund.

ITT: more home applicants still needed in some subjects

Posted on by
Reply

What do geography and classic have in common? Based on the July data on numbers accepted for places on postgraduate teacher preparation courses, there won’t be enough applicants to meet the DfE target in these subjects. These two subjects are joined, in my estimation, by drama, business studies, religious education, and the catchall ‘other subjects’.

Despite some 57,765 applicants this cycle recorded in the July data, released by the DfE this morning, the teacher supply crisis cannot be said to be over until every subject has sufficient trainees to meet the DfE’s targets.  Initial teacher training application statistics for courses starting in the 2026 to 2027 academic year – Apply for teacher training – GOV.UK

The table shows my views about outcomes, based upon the July 2026 data for numbers accepted by subject. I haven’t included primary, because I don’t think there will be an issue with that sector, where acceptances for ‘general’ primary courses are up from 10,359 in July 2025 to 10,481 this July.

SubjectTarget 2026/27July offersFill: July viewJuly AcceptedFill on accepted
Chemistry6901460YES1302YES
Biology675629PROBABLY466POSSIBLY
Mathematics20002953YES2567YES
Design & Technology620701YES630YES
Art & Design605709YES590YES
Geography685549NO466NO
Classics7545NO37NO
English19801835POSSIBLY1535POSSIBLY
Drama370318POSSIBLY263NO
Business Studies1200357NO267NO
Music260266YES220YES
Religious Education450349NO294NO
Others2035508NO414NO
History5201112YES952YES
Modern Languages10851363YES1172YES
Physics8101600YES1438YES
Physical Education6551551YES1326YES
Computing565961YES808YES

The late announcement of the ITT targets may have had some effect on provider outcomes. Acceptances are down in all age groupings, save for the 22 year-olds, where the increase is a mere five more acceptances than in July last year – this difference may be down to the date the report was run: the 20th July this year.

Overall acceptances are down from 25,422 in July 2025 to 24,048 this July, a reduction of more than 1,400.

Previous posts have discussed the significant percentage of applicants listed as from the ‘Rest of the world’. This month the number accepted from the ‘Rest of the world’ group was 1,662 compared with 1,657 last July. Because of the increase in applications from this group, the percentage ‘accepted’ has dropped from 19% of the group last July, to 12% in July 2026.

Growth in the number of applications from students in the home regions, apart from London, has remained sluggish, and has actually fallen in two regions (North East and Yorkshire & The Humber).

Taken as a whole, these are a mixed set of outcomes. July is sufficiently far through the recruitment cycle to make predictions about outcomes, as already highlighted.

Despite fears of graduate unemployment, the post finals period doesn’t seem to have resulted in a significant increase in home student applicants. Home students remain the key to ensuring all subjects are able to fill their target number of places. Even with the reduction is places in some subjects, as a result of ‘falling rolls’, as indicated earlier, not all subjects will hit their targets in this cycle.

The previous Secretary of State seemed to pay little attention to teacher supply issues. I hope that the present office holder will ask her civil servants, ‘what do we need to do to assure sufficient trainees across the board, but not far too many in history and physical education; and why is there such variation from year to year in the biology and chemistry numbers, even if, this year there might be enough to fill all the ‘science’ places’.

Finally, it may be that applicants are starting to vote with their feet in favour of routes into teaching that don’t require the acquisition of further debt.

Applications by route2026 cycle2025 cycledifferenceAccepted July 2026
Partner Led1741917977-5584162
SCITT1681216867-556315
HE3371933723-411692
Salaried81697634535311
Degree apprenticeships193510798561342
Apprenticeships1194473354609234
All applications89998846155383 

However, the sector has not been able to respond to this trend, and courses incurring additional debt still dominate the routes into teaching. It is time for this to change. Incidentally, the government must now concede that higher educations till plays the dominant role in teacher preparation, something the recently appointed UCET leaders will no doubt be keen to remind the new Secretary of State about.

Lucy Powell: a bad start

Posted on by
1

I know the Secretary of State for Education has only been in post for less than a week, and is obviously learning the ropes, so perhaps the following appeared in her predecessor’s red box for sign off. Nevertheless, it doesn’t look like a good start.

Conditions of grant: intensive training and practice grant for accredited ITT providers – GOV.UK

Publishing a ‘conditions of grant’ information to ITT providers on the 23rd July for courses starting this September seems a very poor piece of management. I know this is not a new grant, but there seem to be new demands that might involve re-arranging elements of courses at extremely short notice.

Now, you can argue, ITT providers should have already incorporated these elements into their courses, and I am not aware if any warning was given to providers of the changes ahead. No doubt someone can tell me in the comments.

The cash is also small beer compared with the fees for training, but for larger providers wanting to claim in excess of £40,000 the audit requirement do seem a bit onerous. Fortunately, smaller provider can self-certify, but must keep full records, adding to their burden.

These seem like sensible requirements, so the real issue is the timing. Do civil servants not understand the rhythm of the school year? Have these same civil servants considered how courses are planned, and the need to work in partnership between the ITT provider, whether school, university or private provider. Each and every school being used will need to see trainees practice adheres to the new requirements.

This will be challenging enough for secondary schools, but at least many will be back at work by the time the exam results season comes round in mid-August. However, I suspect making adjustments will be more of a challenge for primary schools involved in ITT placements. Of course, trainees won’t be in school on day one in September, but making changes at the very busy start of the school-year is not ideal.

Perhaps the new Secretary of State could consider an embargo on any new changes for the school-year being introduced more than a month before the end of the summer term or after the 30th June, whichever comes first.

It would be a shame to see any ITT provider threatened with de-accreditation for failing to meet the requirements of a grant only notified to them less than six weeks before the start of their courses, and during the middle of the key employer-driven flexitime period, when most are required to take annual leave.

Civil servants can take leave at any time, teachers and ITT staff cannot, and the DfE should respect that fact. Placing any extra requirements on schools and ITT staff at this time of year is poor policy-making in practice.

Hopefully, the Secretary of State will listen to the concerns about timing raised by schools and the ITT sector, and make sure grant requirements are not imposed during the summer holiday period, unless absolutely necessary; I don’t think this change is in that category, and the DfE should make clear any changes do not need to come into force until January 2027, allowing reasonable time for planning.

Train to be a teacher: worth the risk?

Posted on by
1

The DfE today published their annual look at trends in the school population. Release home – National pupil projections – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK The school population is principally affected by changes, either upwards of downwards, in the birth rate. Changes in migration also plays a small part, but can be more important in certain locations. Thus, the reduction of the number of families accompanying students will affect some university towns more than the overall numbers.

As these are projections from the DfE are based on data from The Office for National Statistics (ONS), they are the result of considerations of various factors, of which changes in the birth-rates is the most significant. The gloomiest set of predictions are shown in the table below.

On these assumptions, the primary and secondary school sectors will lose 473,00 and 249,000 pupils respectively between 2026 and 2031. This is a total reduction of more than 700,000 in a school population of 7.8 million at the start of the period. By 2032, the school population may dip below seven million for the first time in a long while.

As the chart shows, the school population is heading for its lowest number this century. The key question is whether or not, by the end of the 2030s, the school population will fall back to a level not seen since the mid-1980s. On current trends that outcome seem very likely.

My guess is that HM Treasury will use the ‘population dividend’ to reduce spending on schooling by clawing back the funding for the missing pupils. Over the period to 2031, this might account for some £5billion available for social services and defence, yet still leave a bit over for improving school funding slightly.

Fewer children mean fewer teachers, and we have already seen the DfE slash targets for ITT. This will likely reduce the number of providers at some point, as some providers will be unable to operate effectively, both financially and in terms of group sizes, and will exit the market.

Falling rolls also mean fewer vacancies, if numbers leaving the profession remain at a constant rate in relation to pupil numbers. Falling rolls also likely mean fewer promotion opportunities, so more teachers may stay put in their current post. With the current age profile for the profession, there is also no sign of a retirement boom to help turnover.

Were the falling pupil numbers to mean a wholesale closure of small primary schools, then that might further reduce the promotion opportunities for teachers in the primary sector.  

If the sector keeps to government ITT targets, then most trainees should find a teaching post – we will know the latest details for employment rates at the end of the month when provider profile data are released – but in the primary sector, where over-recruitment into ITT has been the norm, and in some secondary subjects, too many teachers may be chasing too few vacancies.

So, is it worth the risk of taking on extra student debt to train as a teacher? Certainly not, if you can find a route that offers a salary, and a better chance of a teaching post after training. Otherwise, there is a risk to assess.

I would advise all potential teachers to quiz providers offering them a place on an ITT course about the provider’s track record of employment for their specific course, and not just the overall rate into employment.

Of course, a teaching qualification can lead to a teaching career anywhere in the world, it might just be harder to find a job in England, and certainly in parts of London.

Why aren’t all trainee teachers paid?

Posted on by
Reply

My recent post about tuition fees and student loans Pay tuition fees of trainee teachers | John Howson reminded me that it is some years since I compared how trainee teachers were treated in comparison with another group of public servants undergoing training.

British Army officer training at Sandhurst is a 42-week course, slightly longer than the face-to-face component of a PGCE, but I expect that there are few PGCE students that don’t also work during their ‘holidays’, as, indeed, do most teachers.

The key difference, between a PGCE and Sandhurst, apart for the 24 hour seven days a week residential element to army training, is that all officer cadets receive the equivalent of £35,925 per year. I am not sure if this also contains possible pension contributions as well.

Even those PGCE students with bursaries cannot match that figure. The most generous bursaries according to the government website are £29,000 or £31,000 if a trainee is awarded a scholarship. Teacher training bursaries | Get Into Teaching GOV.UK Of course, unlike a salary, these should be tax free during training.

Bursaries are not available to all trainee teachers, only those that the DfE regards as training to be a teacher in a shortage subject. This blog has regularly commented on the somewhat arbitrary and haphazard nature of such designations, including the removal of a bursary for music in September 2026. By contrast, all officer cadets at Sandhurst are paid, regardless of the corps or arm they will eventually join, and whether there are sufficient trainees to staff all required roles.

By comparison, a graduate joining the civil service ‘Fast Stream’ scheme would earn £31,554 per annum, plus a pension and guarantee of employment, something also offered to successful Sandhurst graduates. Fast Stream | Civil Service Careers

I have to say that I think the civil service salary is not very generous, especially for working in central London, but it can increase substantially by year two, so perhaps, it might be seen as a training salary.

Of course, some trainee teachers can earn a salary. Teach First, with its salary, is similar to the civil service Fast Track in blending training and actual ‘real work’. Fast Track currently pays between £23-31,000 for trainees outside London, and up to 333,500 for trainees in London in their first year. Join our leading two-year, fully-funded teacher Training Programme | Teach First So, similar salary to officer cadets at Sandhurst for London trainees on Fast track, but considerably less for those on the Fast Track route outside of London.

With falling rolls, and better retention rates, the question for the Labour government is whether or not graduate teacher training should be brought into line with other public sector professions, with all trainees receiving a salary plus the guarantee of a teaching post? The latter might be a step too far, but if the government insists on setting training targets trough the Teacher Supply Model, then it should be expected to offer all trainees a teaching post.

Employing trainee teachers, would stop over-recruitment that is costing the government money through paying out student loans, for instance, to the 26% of primary trainees recruited above target last year.

A universal salary scheme for graduate trainee teachers would break the historical bond between trainees and higher education, established when the employer’s training colleges were forced into the higher education sector in the 1970s, following the Robbins Report. Of course, universities could compete to provide the courses for the government alongside other training providers. As they already do for school-based courses.

The present arrangements for graduate teacher training are no longer fit for purpose. The outgoing Prime Minister had little to say about teachers when preparing for government, other than a ‘retention bonus’. Labour’s style over substance | John Howson

I hope that the next Prime Minister, will consider the importance of the teaching workforce in achieving his goals for society. If so, looking at how we train teachers might be a place to start.

Pay tuition fees of trainee teachers

Posted on by
1

The House of Commons Treasury (Select) Committee today published its report into university tuition fees. One of its conclusions was that;

2. 3. 4. The student loans system is complex. The terms and conditions of loans must be examined within the context of the entire system. The overall level of subsidy provided by the state to the individual is the defining factor in how the loan then operates. (Conclusion, Paragraph 17) Although the government claimed that its subsidy is in the region of 30% to 40%, we saw evidence indicating that individual contributions from students graduating today could be as high as 95%. That was not what the government or Parliament intended, when Parliament agreed the Plan 2 legislation. Society benefits from individuals going to university. Therefore, society should contribute to the cost of an individual’s higher education. We agree with Sir Philip Augar that the split between state and individual should be around 50:50. Terms and conditions matter. Even a very clever system that strikes a generally acceptable balance between the taxpayer and individual contributions will not be sustainable in the long term, if individual terms and conditions within that system are deemed economically or politically intolerable by stakeholders or loan holders. (Conclusion, Paragraph 18)

Student loans: Broken and unfair? My highlighting in bold

Reading that conclusion made me wonder how much should someone wanting to be a teacher expect to pay in tuition fees and interest on the loan in order to enter the profession?

Does it matter that a twenty two year old will pay far more in tuition fee repayments, due to interest costs, than someone entering teacher training in their thirties from a high paying job in London with their original undergraduate loan paid off? The twenty two year old will likely be paying interest on their combined undergraduate and ITT tuition fees for their whole teaching career.

Does it matter that if you are on Teach First, a graduate teaching apprenticeship, or some other route that pays a salary, you will incur no extra student debt training to become a teacher? Should there be equity between routes into teaching?

Yesterday, in my post about teachers’ pay, I revealed how poorly teachers were paid compared with many other graduate professions. Are teachers paid a fair wage for being a graduate? | John Howson

Now for a bit of history. When the Labour government took power in the summer of 1997, and decided to introduce tuition fees for courses including postgraduate ITT courses, I was still working at the then Teacher Training Agency, as its Chief Professional Adviser on Teacher Supply.

Frank Dobson, as Secretary of State for Health was adamant that trainee nurses should not pay tuition fees, although I need to remind myself whether or not he took the same line about the professions allied to medicine and for trainee doctors.

David Blunkett, as Secretary of State for Education, took the line that undergraduate trainees should pay tuition fees, but that the State would effectively pay the fees of those on approved postgraduate courses leading to QTS. One consequence of this decision, a decision that I recall discussing with a senior civil servant at the Department, was the decline in undergraduate ITT, especially for secondary subjects: it still lingers on for would-be primary school teachers.

One of the more pernicious and short-sighted decisions of the coalition government that emerged after the 2010 general election was to remove the payment of tuition fees by the government for postgraduate ITT courses.

I have always opposed that decision. A better solution would have been to rebate the tuition fee once a teacher started working for the State. To make it fair, it would have been necessary to ensure all those gaining QTS, and having paid tuition fees, were offered a teaching or other government funded post. Those working for private school or outside teaching would still have had to repay their loans.

In the light of today’s Treasury Committee’s conclusion that they, ‘saw evidence indicating that individual contributions from students graduating today could be as high as 95%.’, I believe that the current Secretary of State should either revert to the pre-2010 situation or find some other way of relieving trainee teachers of the burden of tuition fee debt.

Sadly, I think there is little that can be done for previous generations of teachers still weighed down with tuition fee debt, except perhaps a deal with mortgage companies to allow the debt to be transferred to extend a mortgage to repay the capital and allow the remaining debt to be paid at a lower rate of interest than the government charges.

Alternatively, schools, MATs and local authorities might look at ways of taking over the debt at a lower interest rate.

I think it says something about the teaching profession, and its professional associations that the issue of the burden of tuition fees for teachers has not been a higher priority.

Perhaps the present evidence from the STRB and Treasury Reports might persuade the professional assoiations into action on behalf of their members.

Action from the Liberal Democrats, my Party, and a participant in the 2010 decision to make trainee teachers pay fees, would also be welcome; I am not holding my breath.