Tag Archives: teacher supply

Do teachers lack for good career advice?

Posted on by
Reply

A quarter of a century ago, I started a career clinic on the pages of the TES when it was still part of News International. I recall going to Admiral House, their then HQ, and presenting a live webinar where teachers posed question on line, and I dictated the answer in real time to a typist and the answers then appeared on the web. Later, between 2008 and 2011, I answered over 5,000 questions in a twice weekly on-line clinic.

I recall these memories, not to boast, but to ask whether anything is now better for teachers? Do MATs help their staff with career development. Do mature entrants receive any advice about careers when they train to be a teacher, or is the emphasis from the DfE’s website onwards just about bringing them into the profession? I am inspired to ask these questions having read laments about the challenges around returning to teach in the UK after a spell abroad.

Now it maybe your partner has returned to the UK for job reasons or the geopolitical situation makes teaching overseas a risk at a particular moment I time.

Here in England, who is telling teachers what the consequences for their careers will be if the Spending Review doesn’t compensate for falling rolls across the school system, and VAT has been imposed on private schools? What does the 6,500 extra teachers mean for your career as a thirty-something teacher of English in a council area now run by Reform?

I assume that the professional associations provide support. Indeed, I used to run seminars on ‘managing your teaching career’ for one of them. But, when there is a teacher shortage, and rolls are rising, teaching posts are easy to come by. That won’t be the picture for much of the next decade, whatever government is in power.

Then there are those that want to leave teaching and either set up their own business, as consultants, curriculum content creators or just tutors. Where do they turn for advice?

Fifteen years ago, I charged £100 for a CV appraisal and a phone conversation with teachers and double that for school leaders. What might be the going rate today?

With universities facing cutbacks, should they start being entrepreneurial and offer career services to teachers? What about the big recruitment agencies that make money from schools. How much do they reinvest in the sector?

Today is an interesting day to write this post, as tomorrow is the 31st of May, the traditional date for final resignations for those leaving at the end of term. This year’s output of new teachers will be particularly aware of how successful they have been in finding a job already. If they and their colleagues haven’t found a job yet, what is someone going to do about that in the face of the huge expansion of in-school graduate apprenticeships announced recently by the DfE. How will the axing of Level 7 apprenticeships affect serving teachers and their career ambitions?

Lots of questions, but few answers. I would welcome your views and comments.

How will the Apprenticeship Levy changes affect schools?

Posted on by
Reply

Will the changes to the Apprenticeship Levy announced today affect schools? I have argued before I this blog that the Apprenticeship Levy is in fact a tax on schools, and especially primary schools, as their individual budgets often all below the threshold for paying the levy, but, unless they are small stand-alone academies, they pay the Levy. This is because they are either maintained schools, where the local authority is the employer, or they are part of MATs or other arrangements where the salary bill crosses the threshold for paying the levy.

Now, a tax may not be a bad thing per se, especially if the proceeds are used for the good of those paying it. When it was first introduced some local authorities were slow to ensure the proceeds of the Levy were used by schools, and ended up returning unused cash to HM Treasury. Hopefully, that doesn’t happen anywhere today.

The announcement by the DfE this morning of the effective abolition of the Level 7 apprenticeships, expressed by the government as: “Refocusing funding away from Level 7 (masters-level) apprenticeships from January 2026”, (DfE Press Notice) comes hard on the heels of the announcement on the 9th May for the school sector about teaching apprenticeships that said:

“postgraduate teaching apprenticeship (PGTA) courses will be slashed from twelve months to nine, aligning to the school year and getting newly trained teachers into the classroom sooner.  

Courses currently run from September to September, meaning trainees typically have to wait months before kicking off their careers, and making it challenging for schools to support apprentices while training.  

The change will be made from August this year and is expected to open up more opportunities to train to teach, as well as accelerating trainees’ journeys to the front of the classroom.” Red tape slashed to get more teachers into classrooms – GOV.UK

On the one hand, the government gives, but on the other hand it could take away in-service opportunities for teacher development where these were paid from the Levy for Level 7 courses. The outcome must not be unspent levy cash once again being returned to the government by employers of teachers and other staff working in schools.

Incidentally, school leaders should check whether the employers of those services they contract out have a policy for using the Apprenticeship Levy that they pay. If they don’t, then schools may not be receiving full value for money for their expenditure.

How will the news affect higher education departments working with pre-service and in-service teachers, and others in the education field? If there is a move away from courses where trainees pay fees towards an employment-based apprenticeship with a salary and associated benefits that might reduce interest in higher education courses. If the removal of Level 7 apprenticeships cuts enrolment on higher degrees that could be a double whammy, coming just at a time when training targets are being affected by falling pupil numbers.  This may not be an easy summer for those responsible for training teachers, even if interest in the profession is once again on the increase.

Is the teacher supply crisis over?

Posted on by
Reply

“As part of our Plan for Change, we are already seeing green shoots, with two thousand more secondary school teachers training this year than last and more teachers forecasted to stay in the profession.” DfE Press Release 22nd May 2025

Good news is always worth repeating, so the release continues later:

There are encouraging signs that this is working with two thousand more secondary school teachers training this year than last, a 25% increase in the number of people accepting teacher training places in STEM subjects, and more teachers forecasted to stay in the profession.  DfE Press Release 22nd May 2025

Good to see the DfE confirming the data showing the improvement in teacher supply, at least at the national level. The secondary trainee numbers increased from 13,000 in 2023 to 15,000 in 2024. This was a substantial increase on the previous year. With targets lowered for 2025 entry in some subjects, and the primary sector, perhaps the sector can breathe a small sigh of relief, at least for the rest of this decade?

For those that missed it, here’s what I said on LinkedIn in April

What do English and Classics have in common? They are the only two subjects where ‘offers’ on PG ITT courses are still below those of April last year. As I predicted last month, the decade long teacher supply problem may be finally coming to a end. Falling school rolls; underfunded pay settlements squeezing PTRs – watch for my analysis of PTRs from 1974 to 2024, coming soon – and a tightening labour market in graduate level jobs for new graduates all mean good news for the DfE. The task then is to hang on to those teachers already in the system; a 4% pay rise will help here. Around 1,300 of the additional applications this year are from those under-24: just what is needed for the long-term health of the profession. Even better, most of the additional applications are coming from within the UK, with RoW applications 1,000 lower than last April. too early to crack open the champagne, but could make the research the DfE are going to commission on the workforce interesting. Also, need for help with teachers looking for jobs writing their letters of application and careers advice.

And what I said on LinkedIn in March

The ITT numbers for March 2025 are interesting. The gentle trend downwards in primary, and upwards in secondary applications (in most subjects) continues. The former is of concern, the latter is not enough to see all vacancies filled in 2026, even with the expected cuts schools are facing in their workforce between now and then. Dig a little deeper, and a couple of interesting facts emerge: a third of applications come from just two areas, London and the rest of the world.
The second fact is that career changers numbers are on the decline, but new graduate numbers are once again on the increase. This is entirely to be expected with a labour market where jobs for new graduates may be harder to come by this year, and those in work are less likely to take the risk of becoming a teacher with no job guarantee at the end of your training; a fresh student loan to repay, and a loss of earning for a year. If we do see a real downturn in the job market, then expect the decade long crisis in teacher supply to disappear. At present, the jury is out on this point. The question mark about interest in English and drama continues this month, with ‘offers’ in English some 200/300 where they might be expected to be. Generally, it is the arts and humanities where there has been little growth (art and design excepted) in interest. Despite the continued decline in applications to train as a primary sector teacher, it looks as if all the growth in applications to train as a secondary teacher have come from women.

Are teacher redundancies inevitable?

Posted on by
Reply

The blunt answer is probably yes. Falling rolls, and a pupil driven National Funding Formula mean that even if a pay settlement is fully funded, some schools won’t be able to cover their present levels of expenditure with fewer pupils.

In the past 50 years, during periods when school rolls were falling, some redundancies took place, but new entrants from ITT often bore the brunt of the disappearing jobs. I recall doing a radio interview around 2010 about new teachers stacking shelves in Tesco because they couldn’t find a teaching post. For some primary school trainees, it might yet come to that state of affairs again.

The key issue for the next few years is, how will HM Treasury react to falling rolls when it sees funding for schools is now largely pupil driven. The creation of a National Funding formula so heavily tied to pupil numbers was a big risk. It was easy enough to turn a blind eye at the time the Formula was being created, as rolls across the country were on the increase. However, those of us with a longer vision could foresee that when rolls were falling, school budgets would quickly come under pressure. With staffing the largest component of school spending: less cash means less staff, even when there was the buffer of high levels of reserves accumulated for a ‘rainy year’.

In the past, HM Treasury has generally allowed the spending department at Westminster responsible for schooling o keep the same funding levels, even as rolls were falling, and when schooling was a local service councils could also prop up schools from Council Tax. I doubt that such an approach will be possible this time.

Falling rolls will mean falling income for schools and hence, redundancies. Such a scenario allied to parental choice means that some popular schools will up their marketing, and ride out the crisis, but less popular schools, and I include some faith schools in that group these days, with either face closure or the need to operate with lower costs and fewer staff.

With education probably lower down the pecking order in the forthcoming Spending Review than many other departments of state, certainly below defence and the NHS, and also not scoring highly in polling with voters, I can see HM treasury wanting to clawback some of the expenditure on education necessary when rolls were higher as an alternative to tax increases.

The macro picture doesn’t look great, and the new General Secretaries of the main teacher unions are going to face a tough battle, and almost certainly industrial action against a Labour government. In such action, the losers will be those living in our most deprived communities and not the parents that can make alternative arrangements: just look back to 2020, and what happened when covid hit our schools.

We are already seeing entrepreneurs marketing courses on ‘how to recruit pupils’ to schools worried about falling rolls.

What will be done for teachers either made redundant or unable to find their first teaching post? In the 2000s, I ran a regular career clinic for the ‘tes’, and offered career guidance and seminars for those worried about their futures. Maybe, it is time for some of the bigger MATs to work together to provide a service for teachers. The first action might be to allow those facing redundancy priority look at any vacancies as they arise. With modern technology, posting jobs to a defined group before general circulation seems like a good idea, and could save on redundancy costs if redeployment is possible. Perhaps, I should restart TeachVac now I am no longer a councillor in Oxfordshire?

Are there savings to be made in education?

Posted on by
Reply

One of the tasks faced by someone no longer a councillor is to dispose of the vast accumulation of papers and reports collected over the years. While doing so it is possible to come across long forgotten articles. One such was an article that I wrote for the TES in their edition of 17th September 2010 that was headed ‘how to cut millions of pounds without harming the chalk face’.  Well, I suppose that ought to be the interactive whiteboard these days rather than the chalk face.

How relevant today are the suggestions I made at the end of a period when the Labour government led by Gordon Brown has favoured spending on education?

Back then, at a time when rolls were rising in primary schools, but still falling in the secondary sector: the opposite of the current situation, I focused firstly on the pension scheme and the cost of allowing private schools to be members of the teachers’ pension fund. I warned that uncapped salaries could risk bankrupting the scheme if there was either no cap on salaries or contributions didn’t rise.

In the event, the decision was taken to increase contributions and to ensure new entrants were on average salaries for their pensions rather than the more expensive final salary scheme previously available. However, the scheme is still massively expensive, especially as many pensioners are living longer. (note as a recipient of a public sector pension, I have an interest in anything the government does to public sector pensions).

My second suggestion was to reform teacher training to a more school-based system that required secondary schools only to train for the staff that they would need. In a period of falling rolls, it is easy for the DfE’s Teacher Supply Model that uses historical data to calculate the number of teachers needed to overestimate the needs of schools to recruit teachers. With a period of falling rolls currently facing schools, this is certainly an area where discussion might be helpful, especially after the recent announcement of more training places for graduate apprenticeships. Wasting training places, either for teachers that cannot find a teaching post in England or that start work in the private school sector, can lead to a mis-direction of funds.

Allied to the previous point of training, in 2010, I highlighted the issue of redundancies, and whether a system should be employed whereby all vacancies on offer by all state-funded schools should first be offered to those teachers facing redundancy: otherwise, the cost of redundancy payments for teachers that might then walk into another teaching post was a waste of money. How to handle the labour market for teachers during a period of falling rolls is something the DfE might still need to consider.

My concluding point related to Labour’s flagship projects. Of course, the one of those that mushroomed under the Conservative governments was the creation of Multi-Academy Trusts, each with its own chief officer and backroom staff. In Oxfordshire, there are around 20 MATs. Reducing that to say, five, could reduce central office costs, and allow the cash saved to be diverted into in-service training, and the recreation of an advisory and inspection service to stand between schools and ofsted, as well as identifying the future leaders of our schools, something the present system does not always do well. Saving just ten MAT CEO posts at £150,00 each might save around £2 million a year after on-costs have been taken into consideration.

Where there are falling rolls, unless overheads are reduced, the cash available for teaching and learning will undoubtedly be reduced in a period where the demands on government spending for areas such as defence and policing are uppermost in the mind of a government that doesn’t want to raise taxes, and thus may struggle to find extra cash for schooling.

‘Fully funded’ often doesn’t mean what it says for school budgets

Posted on by
Reply

As usual, there is discussion about whether the recommendation of the School Teachers Remuneration Body (the STRB) about the level of increase for teachers’ salaries will be fully funded by the DfE this year. Of course, it depends upon what you mean by ‘fully funded’.  If the amount set aside by the DfE is less than the total pay bill, then clearly it won’t be fully funded.

However, even if it is ‘fully funded’ at the overall level, will that mean it will be fully funded for each and every individual school? Such an outcome is highly unlikely. Consider two schools; one has many young teachers and a high annual turnover of staff; the other, has a settled staff, mostly being paid at the top of their pay grade. Now also assume the first school is a maintained school with no top slicing, and the other part of a MAT that both top slices and pool reserves.

Are the two schools funded differently, assuming they are in the same local authority, with no differences in area cost adjustments or other factors. For the most part they won’t be, because of the working of the National Funding Formula that is largely based upon an amount per pupil.

There was less concern among school leaders about whether the pay bill was being met in full when pupil numbers were on the increase: it becomes much more an issue under the National Funding Formula when rolls are falling, and, as a result, a school’s income is set to reduce going forward.  

How did schools get into this position? In the 1990s when budgets were being devolved to schools from local authorities, schools could for the first time use their new freedoms to set their own staffing patterns.

Before the changes resulting from the Education Reform Act of 1988, local authorities set the staffing patterns for schools. Each school was allocated a Group, mostly from Grade 1 for the smallest of primary schools to Grade 7 for the largest secondary schools. Each grade had a point score, and that related to factors such as the number of promoted posts, and whether the school could employ a deputy head or heads. Special schools had their own grading that reflected their more complex staffing structure. The local authority picked up the staffing tab, much as some MATs do today.

All this central funding largely went out of the window with the devolution of funding to schools, although the salary of headteachers – especially in the primary sector – remained largely tied to the former group sizes for many years, often until the uncontrolled introduction of executive headteachers.

In these days of modern technology, it would be perfectly possible for the DfE to provide an uplift of the percentage recommended by the STRB that was related to each school’s salary bill. This would meet the need to ensure no school lost out from an average pay increase for all schools, but would have other consequences. I doubt the DfE would allow schools complete freedom over their staffing structure that they currently enjoy. Perhaps we might even see a return to the sort of structure that disappeared after schools’ gained control of their budgets: now there’s an interesting thought for a Labour government.

ITT: less good than hoped for

Posted on by
Reply

The September data on postgraduate ITT curses was published by the DfE yesterday. Initial teacher training application statistics for courses starting in the 2023 to 2024 academic year – Apply for teacher training – GOV.UK (apply-for-teacher-training.service.gov.uk) Sadly, there was no last-minute surge in offers for teaching. Although offers for primary courses should be sufficient to meet the number of places on offer, the same cannot be said for the secondary sector.

Amongst secondary courses, only English, history, geography and physical education seem likely to meet their DfE targets. Offers in mathematics this September are less than 2,000 for the first time in over a decade. In music and religious education, it is necessary to delve further back in the archives to find offer levels of 480 across the two subjects. There will be real issues with the supply of new teachers in these two subjects next year.

Although physics and design and technology have seen better offer levels than in recent years, in neither subject will the DfE’s suggested recruitment level be met. I suspect that the numbers actually starting courses this year will only be above last year’s dismal total for all secondary subjects if those with conditions pending are able to convert these conditions into recruited students, otherwise the total may be little different to the seriously low number recorded last year.

In mathematics, the number ‘recruited this year is just 1,340 compared with 1,482 last year. However, there are 516 applications listed as ‘conditions pending’ compared with only 300 in this category last year. Should these ‘conditions pending’ relate to visas and right to enter the country it is possible that the number that transfer into the ‘recruited’ column may be smaller than wished for.

The number of new graduates aged 24 or younger is considerably down on last year, a worrying sign for future leadership recruitment. Less than 5,00o men have been ‘recruited’ this year despite the total number of applicants being 16,470 compared with 11,819 last year. This means that those ‘recruited’ has dropped from 46% of applicants to just 30% this year. Such a dramatic decline must merit some form of investigation to allow providers to understand the cause of the change.

The answer may lie with ‘rest of the world applicants, where only 6% have been accepted this year, compared with 13% last year.

The final outcome for recruitment that will include Teach first must await the publication of the ITT Census, early in December. Although this may show a small improvement over last year’s total, there will not be enough trainees to allow the government to be able to say that it has hit its target and STEM has now really become STEAM in terms of recruitment into teacher preparation.

These figures are such as to warn schools to think carefully about recruitment for September 2024 and especially January 2025. Retention may become an important watchword in the corridors of power.

Which one is Physics

Posted on by
Reply

Ofqual have helpfully provided some data on the 2023 Level 5 results that came out today. Congratulations to all candidates on their achievements, even if they are tempered by the type of referencing system employed to suit the demands of the system.

In the past, I have looked at the A and A* percentages in Physics and Media/Film/TV Studies as an interesting contrast. This year it is also possible to look at the percentages of such grades in both 2019 (the last pre-pandemic year) and 2023. Outcomes by centre type (ofqual.gov.uk)

Cumulative percentage outcomes by centre type – grade A and above

Level 5 qualifications

Centre type  – Physics% achieving grade in 2019% achieving grade in 2023Difference 2019 and 2023
Other19.4%25.2%5.80%
Further education establishment18.4%17.2%-1.20%
Independent school including city training colleges (CTCs)42.4%47.2%4.80%
Secondary comprehensive or middle school21.7%25.6%3.90%
Secondary selective school25.8%29.2%3.40%
Free schools27.8%31.2%3.40%
Sixth form college24.3%27.0%2.70%
Academies21.1%22.6%1.50%
Secondary modern school/high school37.4%37.0%-0.40%
https://analytics.ofqual.gov.uk/apps/Alevel/CentreType/

Normally, I would ask you to work out which table was the Physics and which Media/Fil/TV Studies, but this year have added the subject titles because not all centres are represented in the Media/Film/TV Studies subject group table by the types of centres.

Centre type – Media/Film/TV Studies% achieving grade in 2019% achieving grade in 2023Difference 2019 and 2023
Independent school including city training colleges (CTCs)27.7%26.8%-0.9%
Further education establishment10.0%9.4%-0.6%
Academies11.6%12.6%1.0%
Sixth form college11.7%13.3%1.6%
Secondary comprehensive or middle school9.7%12.2%2.5%
Secondary selective school21.7%30.4%8.7%
Source ofqual data

Generally, despite the shortage of teachers of physics, the percentage of grades A and above is higher than in Media/Film/TV Studies (MFTVS) and often higher in 2023 than in 2019 except in the FE sector and secondary modern schools. This highlights the risk of using data in an uncontextualized manner.

My suspicion is that in physics it is only those likely to do well that are entered, whereas the entry policy for MFTVS may be wider, and hence there are more lower grades.

It will be necessary to investigate candidate numbers to see whether the increase in A and above grades in MFTVS in the selective schools is down to either a more selective entry policy or some other factor?

I find some of the groupings a bit odd as well. Should ‘city training colleges’ actually be ‘city technology colleges’ and why are ‘high schools’ included with secondary modern as a group when they could be any type of school? The inclusion of ‘middle schools’ in Level 5 qualifications for physics is even more odd.

So, an interesting set of statistics that not a great deal can be read into, except that there are generally more higher grades in physics than in MFTVS. Is the shortage of teachers of physics having an effect, especially in the FE sector? I cannot be sure, but as further education colleges have a lower percentage in 2023 than in 2019, there might be a case to answer, especially as the recent DfE workforce in further education study suggests that there might be fewer than 250 leading physics lecturers across the whole of the FE sector.

But perhaps outcomes might just be down to who is enrolled?

(an earlier version of this post contained a mistake in the table and the post has been corrected and updated)

The other crisis facing schools

Posted on by
Reply

In my experience, editors usually have September, and the national annual ‘return to school’ event, as a time to ask journalists to look for a school centred story. This follows on from the useful two-week period in August when there are examination results to cover in the month when there is often little news from the political scene.

This year, editors and their journalists didn’t have to work very hard, if at all, for their ‘return to school’ story. RAAC, and the school buildings saga, was a gift send. Would the story have topped the bill at any other time of year? Who knows, as it is an important issue, but more important say that a reshuffle?

What is clear, is that by focussing just on the school buildings issue, editors are missing the opportunity to take a wider look at the health of our schools. Had there not been RAAC, and the still largely hidden asbestos issue, might the staffing of our schools have been the main story this September?

This is a much more difficult story to sell, as except in rare cases such as a special school reported to the DfE in the summer, schools don’t send children home for a lack of teachers. Instead, they cut subjects from the curriculum – I have been told of a school that is no longer offering languages in the sixth from this September; increase class sizes; reduce non-contact time for teachers and, most commonly, employ what might be considered as under-qualified teachers to teach some groups.

Because anyone with Qualified Teacher Status can teach anything on the curriculum, it isn’t easy to identify the problem, as schools, quite rightly, don’t advertise any shortcomings in the staffing of their timetable. However, extrapolating from the last School Workforce Census that provided a baseline, and adding in the results of new entrants being below the targets set by the DfE through the Teacher Supply Model, it seems clear that some schools are not properly staff this September.

Does this matter? Like the lack of a schools’ database on building issues, we don’t know whether some young people are missing grades in those public examinations we celebrate each August because of staffing issues last year or even earlier in their school lives.

This blog has charted re-advertisements of teaching post against free school meal rates in schools. I wrote a blog on this issue last month, just before the exam results season started Are we levelling up? | John Howson (wordpress.com) I won’t bother to repeat what I said then, but it would be interesting to look at examination results in specific subjects at different centres with different levels of staff turnover for a period of three to five years, to see if there is any measurable effect of staff turnover on outcomes, including entry policies.

My hunch is that it is difficult to create a ‘normal’ distribution curve for results subjects such as ‘A’ level physics if many schools cannot offer the subject, and those that do only enter those likely to be successful candidates.

Editors might like to pencil in a story for January 2024, when secondary schools facing unexpected vacancies will find recruitment even more of a challenge than for this September. What might be the effects on their results in Summer 2024 of an unexpected vacancy, especially if they started the school year this September with both a RAAC and a staffing crisis?

Physics: Better. Arts: worse

Posted on by
Reply

Despite today being a bank holiday, the DfE obligingly published the monthly ITT data on applications and offers for postgraduate courses. Initial teacher training application statistics for courses starting in the 2023 to 2024 academic year – Apply for teacher training – GOV.UK (apply-for-teacher-training.service.gov.uk)

Perhaps not surprisingly, little has changed since the last set of figures published at the end of July. With courses about to start in a matter of weeks, there are likely to be few more surprises left in this round. On the basis of the data, secondary subjects can be grouped into three sets: those subjects with higher offers this year than at any time since 2019/2020, or in the case of physics, since 2015/16; those subjects where ‘offers’ this year are above the number at this point in 2022, and those subjects where the offers this year are below the number in August 2022.

In the first category are: physics -the subject has recorded 729 offers, the highest August number since the 840 of August 2016. However, this is still not a high enough number, even if all those offered actually turn up, to meet the DfE’s target. Also, in this group of subjects are; geography, design and technology and biology. The offers in design and technology will still not be sufficient to come anywhere near meeting the DfE’s target.

In the middle group, of subjects better than last year, but worse than 2021, are: mathematics, English, computing and chemistry.

In the group where this year’s offers are below last year are: art and design, religious education, physical education, music, history and business studies – in this case almost the same as last August.

In the case of music, the 232 recorded offers are the lowest recorded in recent years. This is despite a high conversion rate of 21% of applications into offers.  In religious education, the 259 recorded offers are also the lowest level of offers in recent years in this subject. In both these subjects, this level of offers will not be enough to satisfy the demand for teachers in a normal recruitment round. By comparison, only eight per cent of physics applications have been converted into offers, and in biology the percentage is 13%.

Compared with last year, most of the increase in candidate numbers has come from those age 24 or above. The youngest age groupings of 21-23, have seen an increase of 400 from 10,116 to 10517. By contrast, the 40-44 age grouping alone has increased from 2,477 to 3,621, an increase of more than 1,100 applicants.

As reported previously, when compared with two years ago, the largest increase in candidates is the group applying from ‘the rest of the world’, up from 3,216 to 8,406, an increase of more than 5,000. By contrast, the East of England number two years ago was 3,495 and this year it is 3,440.  The South East numbers are: 4,651 two years ago, and 4,825 this year: a meagre increase.

This data suggests that schools will find recruitment in some subjects that they have not been concerned about in the past, may well become difficult during the 2024/2025 recruitment round unless the consequences arising from the pay settlement depress demand below that seen in the past two years.