Overseas teachers in England. More or less?

Posted on November 2, 2025 by John Howson

How far have teachers from outside the United Kingdom helped keep schools in England staffed during the period when there were teacher shortages? Although it takes a great deal of research to know what and where these teachers are working in England, the DfE in its evidence to the STRB (Teachers Pay Body) did provide some interesting data about changes in numbers of these teachers by their country of origin, between the 2015/16 and 2023/24 November teacher census returns. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/evidence-to-the-strb-2026-pay-award-for-teachers-and-leaders data annex

For the purpose of this blog, countries have been divided into three groups: EEA – effectively all of Europe; countries with 20^th century links to the United Kingdon, either as current Commonwealth countries or for other historical reasons, and countries that do not fit into either of the two other groups.

Taking the EEA countries first. It might be expected that post-BREXIT the numbers their had reduced. This is true for some countries, including France and Germany, and, more interestingly, for the Irish Republic, where there was a loss of more than 900 teachers between 2015/16 census and the 2023/34 census.

EEA	2015/16	2023/24	difference
France	2210	2085	-125
Germany	645	605	-40
Ireland	3520	2595	-925
Netherlands	225	225	0
Sweden	95	90	-5
			-1095

Elsewhere in the EEA list of countries, there were more teachers in 2023/24 than in 2015/16

EEA	2015/16	2023/24	difference
Austria	60	60	0
Belgium	95	100	5
Bulgaria	100	205	105
Czech Republic	75	100	25
Denmark	65	65	0
Finland	60	60	0
Greece	260	590	330
Hungary	175	270	95
Italy	485	850	365
Malta	30	30	0
Norway	25	35	10
Other EEA	15	30	15
Poland	1155	1540	385
Portugal	255	430	175
Republic of Croatia	40	60	20
Republic of Latvia	45	80	35
Republic of Lithuania	110	160	50
Romania	350	740	390
Slovak Republic	150	180	30
Slovenia, Republic	40	60	20
Spain	1255	2100	845
Switzerland	50	55	5
			2905

There were nearly 2,000 more EEA teachers in England in 2023/24 according to these numbers. Greece, Italy and Poland between them accounting for nearly half the increase in EEA teacher numbers, and Spain alone, a further 40% of the total.

For countries with historic links to the United Kingdom there has been a marked decline in teachers from Australia, New Zealand and Canada recorded in the DfE census, and increase in teachers from Jamaica, some countries in Africa, and from the Indian sub-continent.

LINKS TO UK	2015/16	2023/24	difference
Australia	1685	1290	-395
Canada	1580	1330	-250
Guyana	60	45	-15
New Zealand	745	480	-265
Sierra Leone	85	75	-10
Trinidad & Tobago	105	95	-10
			-945

Jamaica, India and Pakistan and South Africa together account for the bulk of the increase in teachers from this group of countries.

LINKS TO UK	2015/16	2023/24	difference
Bangladesh	100	115	15
Cyprus	55	95	40
Ghana	515	665	150
India	865	1615	750
Jamaica	745	1550	805
Kenya	145	160	15
Malaysia	75	100	25
Mauritius	115	135	20
Nigeria	580	860	280
Pakistan	280	560	280
South Africa	1575	1815	240
Sri Lanka	110	165	55
Uganda	70	90	20
Zimbabwe	375	450	75
			2770

Teacher numbers from other countries not in the above two groups tend to be small in number.

Israel was the only country with fewer teachers, down from 60 to 55; a loss of just five teachers.

ROW	2015/16	2023/24	difference
Algeria	55	90	35
Brazil	60	125	65
Cameroon	70	90	20
China	145	315	170
Colombia	55	95	40
Iran	130	160	30
Morocco	55	85	30
Other ROW	955	1540	585
Russia	80	120	40
Turkey	100	170	70
Ukraine	35	95	60
USA	845	985	140
			1285

China and the USA were the only two countries providing more than 100 teachers during the period between 2015/16 and 2023/24.

As Michael Gove provided QTS to teachers trained in the USA over a decade ago, the number of teachers from the USA seems surprisingly small. However, it may not include those teaching in international schools in England that are part of the private sector.

While it is clear that a substantially more ‘overseas’ teachers were recorded in the 2023/24 census than in the 2015/26 census, their numbers alone would not have been enough to have solved the teacher supply crisis. Might they have made a difference to the percentage of teachers from some ethnic groups?

DfE confirms secondary ITT shortfall in evidence to STRB

Posted on October 31, 2025 by John Howson

The DfE’s evidence to the STRB (pay review body for teachers) contains some useful information about the state of the teaching profess, and changes over the past decade and a half since the DfE moved the teacher census from January to November each year. Much has remained the same, across the whole time period. But, before delving into the past, it is worth looking at the table for offers on secondary subjects for 2025 that I created for an earlier post, but now with the data from Table FD4-FD6 of the STRB evidence Evidence to the STRB: 2026 pay award for teachers and leaders – GOV.UK

Interestingly, the DfE doesn’t seem to have included the offers against targets that might have help the STRB to see where shortfalls are likely once the ITT census is published in December.

Subject	Target2025/26	% increase Sept on June	accepted Sept 25 FD6 DfE to STRB	over/under target
Total Secondary	19,270	26%	16843	-2,427
Primary	7,650	34%	9880	2,230
Chemistry	730	49%	909	179
Biology	985	36%	1397	412
Mathematics	2,300	35%	2617	317
Design & Technology	965	33%	678	-287
Art & Design	680	33%	902	222
Geography	935	33%	981	46
Classics	60	32%	42	-18
English	1,950	31%	1760	-190
Drama	620	30%	273	-347
Business Studies	900	29%	235	-665
Music	565	28%	343	-222
Religious Education	780	28%	418	-362
Others	2,520	25%	360	-2,160
History	790	23%	936	146
Modern Languages	1,460	21%	1428	-32
Physics	1,410	19%	1313	-97
Physical Education	725	17%	1491	766
Computing	895	5%	761	-134

As I suggested in my previous post, despite the renewed attraction of teaching for new graduates, there are still some subjects that won’t meet their target. Interestingly, the target for recruiting primary teachers is likely to be massively exceeded this year. Whether all those trainees will find jobs next summer is an interesting question.

With the continued shortfall against targets, where do schools find their staff from, and are they appropriately qualified? The answer to the second part of the question seems to be it depends on whether the school is in Pupil Premium decile 1 or decile 10. (Table D7) The data in this table suggests that schools in decline 1 have higher teacher wastage rates; higher percentages of unqualified teachers; higher percentages of teachers with less experience of teaching and a higher percentage of lesson taught by teachers not seen as qualified in the subject they are teaching. None of this is very surprising, but if the government wants to do something to level up outcomes, then they should pay attention to these percentages.

As to where schools find their teachers to ensure they are fully staffed if there are shortfalls in the numbers emerging from training, there has been a shift in the number of teachers coming from the old dominions, and an increase in those from other members of the Commonwealth. I will discuss these changes in more detail in another blog, as well as trends in recruitment for Europe.

Finally, it is worth noting that the secondary school teacher population expressed as Full Time equivalents (FTEs) barely changed between November 2010 and November 2020, increasing by just 265 FTEs, from 218,736 to 219,001. By contrast, the primary teacher FTEs in the same period increased from 196,258 to 215,632 by November 2024, although this was below the 225,537 FTEs recorded in November 2020, before pupil numbers began to fall.

Labour’s determination to recruit new teachers doesn’t include music

Posted on October 8, 2025 by John Howson

‘Now, when I think back to my school days, when I think of the happy memories. It was all about the teachers I had along the way.

The ones who helped me succeed are the ones who made me feel like I belonged.

That’s why I am determined to help you recruit and retain more great teachers in your schools.

And to encourage more people to get into the profession, what’s why we have set out today the new initial teacher training incentive.

I want more great teachers in our schools, working their magic.

And it really is magic – what they do, what you do.

Don’t ever let anyone tell you otherwise.

And I certainly won’t let anyone tell me otherwise.

You have the wonderful power to transform lives.

To give to children the knowledge and skills they need to succeed, not just in work, but in life too.

Extract from Secretary of State for Education’s speech at RISE Attainment Conference.’ Education Secretary speech at RISE attainment conference – GOV.UK

With respect, Secretary of State, what about Music teachers? The bursary for the subject has been removed for those applying to train in 2026. This is despite the likelihood of the number of entrants to ITT courses this autumn not meeting the ITT target set by the DfE. With the cuts in music courses at universities, competition of the remaining graduates is likely to intensify as the arts sector continues to contribute to increasing the national wealth.

It is not as if missing the ITT target in music is something new.

ITT census	% of target recruited
2019/20	80
2020/21	122
2021/22	71
2022/23	62
2023/24	27
2024/25	40
2025/25	65

Source: DfE ITT censuses

Presumably, the DfE is hoping that the AI revolution that will remove many existing graduate entry level jobs, will create a similar situation to the covid pandemic that drove graduates back to choosing teaching as a career. Will this be true? Only if the universities are producing the same number of new graduates, since potential career changers may already be in jobs less threatened by AI?

The text of this 2024 article suggests that new graduates in music may be harder to find than in the past Full scale of university arts cuts emerges – Arts Professional

My message is simple, the bursary should not have been removed for music, and possibly other arts subjects as well. However, the DfE should monitor applications for September 2026 training and, if by February, they are showing a failure to meet the target again in 2026, then the bursary should be reintroduced.

By the way, I have a simple formula for monitoring applications against target that I used for over a decade when UCAS managed the ITT application process. I might start using it again when the 2026 applications are revealed each month.

My reason for picking on music for this post is that I have just been invited to take over the role of Chair of Oxfordshire’s Music Hub Board.

Is Labour making mistakes on ITT bursaries?

Posted on October 7, 2025 by John Howson

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.

Subject	Bursary	Scholarship
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.

Subject	Target2025/26	% increase Sept on June	accepted Sept 25	over/under target
Total Secondary	19,270	26%	16843	-2,427
Primary	7,650	34%	9880	2,230
Chemistry	730	49%	909	179
Biology	985	36%	1397	412
Mathematics	2,300	35%	2617	317
Design & Technology	965	33%	678	-287
Art & Design	680	33%	902	222
Geography	935	33%	981	46
Classics	60	32%	42	-18
English	1,950	31%	1760	-190
Drama	620	30%	273	-347
Business Studies	900	29%	235	-665
Music	565	28%	343	-222
Religious Education	780	28%	418	-362
Others	2,520	25%	360	-2,160
History	790	23%	936	146
Modern Languages	1,460	21%	1428	-32
Physics	1,410	19%	1313	-97
Physical Education	725	17%	1491	766
Computing	895	5%	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.

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

Posted on October 3, 2025 by John Howson

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’.

Grade	Primary	Secondary	Special
Head	64	52	52
Senior Leader	26	39	32
Middle Leader	3	1	4
Classroom Teacher	3	1	3
System Entrant	3	6	9

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.

Has teaching become an attractive career again: Part 2

Posted on September 24, 2025 by John Howson

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.

Subject	Target2025/26	% increase in Offers Sept on June	accepted Sept 25	over/under target
Total Secondary	19,270	26%	16843	-2,427
Primary	7,650	34%	9880	2,230
Chemistry	730	49%	909	179
Biology	985	36%	1397	412
Mathematics	2,300	35%	2617	317
Design & Technology	965	33%	678	-287
Art & Design	680	33%	902	222
Geography	935	33%	981	46
Classics	60	32%	42	-18
English	1,950	31%	1760	-190
Drama	620	30%	273	-347
Business Studies	900	29%	235	-665
Music	565	28%	343	-222
Religious Education	780	28%	418	-362
Others	2,520	25%	360	-2,160
History	790	23%	936	146
Modern Languages	1,460	21%	1428	-32
Physics	1,410	19%	1313	-97
Physical Education	725	17%	1491	766
Computing	895	5%	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?

Posted on September 22, 2025 by John Howson

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.

Will university course cuts mean fewer teachers?

Posted on September 13, 2025 by John Howson

Estimates are doing the rounds on social media about the number of places on courses in universities already lost through cuts and course closures. Do the cuts matter? Of course, it depends upon what you want from the higher education sector?

Personally, being entirely selfish, I want enough graduates to be able to staff our schools in the future. I am hopeful that HEPI, or even the DfE are monitoring both the cuts to courses that have already taken place and any that are proposed for possible implications around recruitment into teacher training and then on into teaching.

I have seen at least one post suggesting that the cuts to courses already introduced are disproportionally in higher education institutions with more teaching than research. Twenty years ago, I conducted a survey for the then TTA about attitudes towards teaching as a career amongst final year students. A large number of students expressing an interest in teaching came from higher education institutions with a higher profile for teaching than research. If that is still the case, then where cuts take place will matter.

Many of the higher education providers where teaching is really important are located in urban areas, and have strong roots in their local communities. This is also important if, as used to be the case, a large number of new graduates went on to train as teachers at the same university, or in the same area, as they studied for their first degree. I wonder whether anyone is monitoring this trend?

Of course, there are schemes, of which Teach First is one example where they have recruited students into teaching from research intensive institutions without a local link to teacher training, such as LSE, Imperial College and Royal Holloway College in the London area.

However, it would be interesting to hear from university careers services about the views of current students about where they are willing to train as a teacher: is locality important or are other factors affecting decision-making, such as the cost of living for students in some areas.

I always thought it was a shame that the Open University quit teacher training. Not only did the OU bring access to a large number of mature students, but by starting it ITT course in January, it both offered a different staring point for those that decided they wanted to teach after courses starting in September had closed, but also by ending their courses when they did, the OU also provided new entrants to fill those vacancies that occur in January or even at the start of the summer term.

Taking a longer-term view, when the current reduction in the school population works its way into higher education, where and what courses those students’ study will be even more important for the labour market for teachers.

Fortunately, we now have the apprenticeship routes into teaching. Should we be diverting future teachers from experiencing the university rite of passage and replacing it with the world of work? I am sure that there is an interesting debate to be had on that topic.

‘Stuck’ schools – who teaches in these schools?

Posted on September 9, 2025 by John Howson

The DfE has today updated the ad hoc data about schools eligible for RISE support. Schools in the RISE programme are those with support from the Regional Improvement for Standards and Excellence advisers and teams. According to the data, some 50 schools have been eligible for the programme for 11 years or more. Schools eligible for RISE intervention – GOV.UK

To become eligible for RISE a school must be a ‘stuck’ school.

A ‘stuck’ school is defined as a state-funded school that was graded Requires Improvement – or equivalent – at its most recent Ofsted inspection and was also graded below Good at its previous Ofsted inspection.

Where inspections have been completed subsequent to the removal of single headline grades in September 2024 (and in the interim before report cards are introduced), for the definition of stuck schools and for the purpose of its intervention policy, DfE treats a sub-judgement of Requires Improvement for leadership and management and/or quality of education for a school inspected in 2024/25 academic year as equivalent to a previous single headline grade of Requires Improvement.

Following the introduction of Ofsted school report cards, the definition of stuck schools will be updated to “schools which receive a ‘needs attention’ grade for leadership and governance, which were graded below good, or equivalent, at their previous Ofsted inspection”.

At 30 June 2025 there were 639 stuck schools, and 292,000 pupils in those schools.

Of those:

372 are primary schools, 235 are secondary schools, 21 are special schools and 11 are pupil referral units
90 are local authority maintained schools and 549 are academies or free schools (although some of these were not academies at the time of their most recent inspection)
Across the spring, summer and autumn RISE cohorts, 396 academies and local authority maintained schools have been identified for targeted RISE intervention. As of 31 July 2025, 377 schools remain in the programme, 349 of which are stuck and 28 of which are academies in a category of concern.
Of the remaining stuck schools, some have changed responsible body since their most recent inspection and are therefore not eligible. Others will be considered for inclusion in later cohorts.

On average, as at 30 June 2025, the 639 stuck schools were graded by Ofsted as below Good or equivalent for 5.6 years.

The 372 primary schools that are stuck have been rated below Good or equivalent for an average of 4.7 years.
The 235 secondary schools that are stuck have been rated below Good or equivalent for an average of 6.9 years.
On average, as 31 July 2025, the 377 schools in receipt of targeted RISE intervention from the RISE advisers and teams, were graded by Ofsted as below Good or equivalent for 5.8 years. Of these, 50 were below Good for more than 11 years.

As might be expected, ‘stuck’ schools as a group exhibit lower outcomes and higher absence and suspension/exclusions than other school of a similar type.

This data concentrates on pupil outcomes. What I think would be more interesting is information about staffing. How often has the headteacher changed during the past decade in a ‘stuck’ school. What is the turnover of teaching staff, and how many are ‘unqualified’ or on programmes to become qualified compared with other local schools?

Until it is possible to match data about staffing to outcomes, we are not likely to learn anything new. I started my career in the 1970s in a school that undoubtedly would now be one of the 50 with eleven years of issues with performance. Staffing was always an issue throughout the seven years I spent at the school. Not surprisingly, when falling rolls became an issue, it was one of the schools to be amalgamated out of existence. I wonder whether that will be the fate of some of these schools over the next few years?

I am also remined of the book edited by Paul Marshall in 2013, and call ‘The Tail’ that discussed the issue of under-performance in schools across England. In the introduction he wrote that:

‘.. for good teachers to be deployed in the most challenging schools… reforms to the delivery and accountability of child and adolescent mental health services; and perhaps new types of dedicated provision for the tail.’ The Tail page 17.

No doubt RISE was one outcome, and it would also be interesting to know if any of the 50 schools with the longest eligibility have had access to support from the Teach First programme? We know almost everything there is to know about the pupils, but nowhere near enough about the teachers. Time for a rethink on the workings of the labour market for teachers?

Back to the GTP? (Graduate Teacher Programme)?

Posted on September 3, 2025 by John Howson

The latest DfE notice updating those interested in tendering to run the Future High Potential Initial Teacher Training (HPITT) Programme ahead of the formal tender notice, to be issued on the 15^th September raises some interesting questions.

The current brand name for the programme is Teach First. Since 2016, the programme has been subject to funding by the DfE following a tender process. Teach First started as a programme aimed at attracting teachers for schools in London that were facing recruitment issues. The need to improve outcomes in disadvantaged areas was also a part of the mission, as was attracting those that might not have thought of teaching as a career, but might be prepared to spend two years in the profession.

In the early years of Teach First there was the government alternative national employment-based route into teaching through the Graduate or Registered Teaching Programmes (GTP or RTP).

The information in the latest DfE document Future High Potential Initial Teacher Training (HPITT) Programme – Find a Tender feels as if the aim is to produce two coherent national programmes for employment-based routes into teaching. However, the document doesn’t seem to make clear the geographical intentions of the programme, preferring to reflect on schools and pupils instead.

i Support schools serving low-income communities with high numbers of disadvantaged and / or low attaining pupils (i.e. Eligible Schools) in England to recruit the teachers they need to help improve outcomes for pupils

ii. Target high-quality candidates with a 2:1 degree or above, who would be otherwise unlikely to join the profession or work in an Eligible School and who have the capability to be highly skilled teachers and emerging leaders, and who are passionate about making a meaningful impact, in these schools.

iii. Contribute to recruitment in specified subjects but with flexibility to meet the specific recruitment needs of schools.

The fact that only 1,000 places will be funded will make the geographical aspects of the contract a key feature. Do you offer the HPITT where the candidates will be or where the schools are located, given the programme is aimed at those that who would be otherwise unlikely to join the profession or work in an Eligible School. The latter point offers a high degree of flexibility, and it is interesting there is no mention of performance criteria or even what specifically constitutes an Eligible School.

Spread across nine regions, and both the primary and secondary sectors, a national scheme looks challenging to administer within the current funding offer specified in the documents. The programme might need either the support of a charity or a private sector firm willing to operate the scheme for the benefits it brings in working in the teacher recruitment market.

The phrases about recruitment data are, of course, music to my ears. TeachVac pioneered identifying schools with recruitment issues over a decade ago. Those that have read my recent posts about headteacher vacancies in August will know that I still retain a key interest in this area. There are a multitude of posts on this blog about recruitment. Here is a link to just one of them. Some trends for 2019 in teacher recruitment | John Howson

The document asks for the following:

Develop and maintain strong partnerships with schools and other partners in areas with the greatest teacher recruitment challenges to understand and meet the needs of schools in terms of teacher recruitment and provide sufficient high-quality employment-based placement opportunities.

If any bidder wants to ask for my advice on how to understand the data about where the real recruitment challenges are, then I would be happy to advise.

The programme although entitled HPITT also includes some leadership work. This is presumably a carry-over from the current Teach First work, but I wonder whether there really ought to be two different contracts as the programmes are very different in scope.

The scope of the tender for the HPITT programme looks very much like evolution not revolution, but perhaps the DfE would have been better aiming for the latter if it really wants to improve standards in the worst performing schools in England.

John Howson

Education and the numbers that affect what happens

Tag Archives: teacher supply