Tag Archives: teacher training

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.

Is the DfE’s Teacher Supply Model outdated?

Posted on by
Reply

For most of my adult life, the government department responsible for the supply of teachers, whether it was called the DfE, DES, DfEE or by another name, has used a version of the Teacher Supply Model to calculate future teacher needs, and presumably to ensure the government doesn’t waste money training too many teachers.

Training too few teachers, not as a result of the Model, but because of under-recruitment into training, has been a problem for the Teacher Supply Model (TSM) during periods of teacher shortage. Do you either add the under-recruitment to the TSM target in any one year to the next year’s TSM total, thus making it even harder to reach, or do you accept every school starts each new school year in September fully staffed, so there are no vacancies to be filled, even if additional trainees just happened to be recruited. Over the past forty years, both approaches have been tried: neither really works.

I first came across the TSM in the late 1980s when, in response to a Select Committee Report, a technical document explaining the working of the TSM at that time was published. Between the late 1980s, and a seminal announcement, also to a Select committee, by David Laws when he was the Minister of State that the TSM would be part of open government, the TSM remained largely secret, apart from one other document published in the late 1990s in repose to yet another two Select Committee reports.

Why were successive government keen to keep the TSM under wraps? Possibly because the workings allowed for an understanding of future government policy. There are three obvious areas where changes in policy can have consequences for schools and society that might create political debate: reactions to future pupil numbers, whether up or down; changes in education funding that might allow more or less funds for schools; policy changes such as extending the learning leaving age or the introduction of a new subject, such as citizenship or computing. All impact on the TSM

Governments often don’t want to signal policy changes ahead of time, especially if they might be controversial. In the first decade of this century, the secrecy around the TSM almost caught out the ITT sector when falling rolls together with improved ITT recruitment made a reduction in ITT numbers inevitable for secondary subjects, especially as there was no policy around improving staffing levels in the secondary sector, partly because of the decision over the introduction of non-contact time in the primary sector.

Planning is an essential too of any organisation, including governments, whatever extreme free-market thinkers may say. After years of following the consequences of the TSM decisions on the outcomes for the teacher labour market, I have some concerns about what happens when the TSM has been run for any particular year. The elements of the TSM have changed over the years, as explained above in relation to under-recruitment as an example. That’s not an issue for me, although the discussions with the sector may have helped prevent some changes to the TSM in mor recent times.

What is at the core of my concerns about the TSM is the length of time between the collection of the data for input into the TSM and the consequences for the real-time labour market for any September recruitment round, let alone the needs for teachers to fill any January vacancies.

I acknowledge that improved and faster data collection over time thanks to better computing capabilities has helped reduce the time taken between data collection and the effect on the labour market of the TSM output for any recruitment round. Currently, data from the 2025 School Workforce Survey, collected in November 2025, will probably influence the TSM run for the 2027 entry into training, and hence, the 2028 labour market.

At least with most trainees now on a one-year postgraduate training route, there is no longer the issue of a four-year undergraduate course to add into the mix. The November 2025 data collected, if such courses were still a significant part of the ITT scene, would not affect the labour market until 2031. A lot can happen in the intervening years.

Even with the shorter training period, there is still a time lag between data collection and the consequences of that data on the labour market.

My question is, should a further check be added once the TSM has been used to calculate ITT targets, in order to allow the comparison between the TSM target and the current reality of the labour market?

The DfE now has excellent data from several years of operating its own vacancy platform, and there are also private operators monitoring the labour market with useful vacancy data in real time. This data can be compared with the TSM output target to allow a discussion about the validity of the TSM target to current labour market needs.

Now, it may well be that the TSM number is the best fit for training needs, but as my previous post that considered the labour market data for teachers of music alongside the ITT target cut that presumably emerged from the TSM output has suggested, the addition of vacancy data does allow for a debate about whether the TSM target under or over estimates demand. Music ITT: has the government made a mistake? | John Howson

Such use of vacancy data also allows for a consideration of policy changes, such as how schools react to a change in a market where QTS still allows any teacher to teach any subject to any child, and ‘permits the use of unqualified staff. where nobody with QTS is either available or considered sufficiently expert at delivering the curriculum.  

The TSM isn’t outdated, just, in my opinion, no longer enough by itself to ensure an orderly labour market for teachers.

Why is this important, it is because the market does play a part in determining how shortages are dealt with. Where are the qualified teachers of physics teaching? How much more do schools with high levels of free school meals have to spend on recruitment than a school with fewer such pupils? Important questions around the staffing of the nation’s schools.

I read the Fed report on education issued yesterday National Education Report 2026 – FED and believe that the supply of teachers and school leaders is still at the heart of any effective system of education.

How any government determines teacher supply is a vital decision affecting the lives of many young people. Ensuring every child has the best possible teachers throughout their whole school-life is equally as important as whether or not they are banned from social media, but much less often discussed.

I think that teacher supply issues should be much higher up the education agenda, but I would, wouldn’t I, having spent a career worrying about teacher supply matters.   

Music ITT: has the government made a mistake?

Posted on by
2

New entrants to postgraduate teacher preparation courses in music in 2026 will not receive a bursary. Instead, they will be need to rely upon either student loans or other funding. How has this change affected applications to train as a music teacher?

The news is not good. The June data for applications is the second worst number since the 2013/14 round more than a decade ago. Only the 2023/23 round post covid that was a terrible round across all subjects, has recorded a lower figure for applications than June 2025. In context, the June number of offers, a better measure than applications, is not far short of half the level seen in the covid year of 202/2, and around 25% below what might be expected in a usual round.

Worry, not because the government has decided that falling rolls over the next few years will mean fewer teachers of music need to be trained. Reducing the target from a requirement of 565 teachers of music in 2024/25 to just a requirement of 260 new trainees in 2025/26 suggests either the previous targets were way out of line or a need to justify the removal of the bursary by setting a target that can be met. After all, it would be unfortunate to remove the bursary as unnecessary, but still miss the target.

So, what of demand from state schools for music? Since January, and the start of the recruitment round for September 2026, I have recorded some 530 schools advertising for a teacher or music. Allowing for the fact that perhaps 100 had a TLR attached, so were not ideal for newly qualified teachers, this suggests 400 posts for newly qualified teachers so far. Add in perhaps another 100 autumn term vacancies and overall demand might be in the range of 400-500 posts or 500-600 posts overall.

The DfE expects about half of vacancies to be taken by existing teachers or returners each year. The exact number depends upon where the demand is and how it relates to supply. But, sticking with the 50% figure means a demand for around 250 to 300 new entrants each year.

Now, with falling rolls be might reduce that number by 10% to 225 to 270 as a requirement. On the face of it, the new target of 260 look risky but manageable. However, it must include two assumptions: all those that are offered eventually complete their courses and of ‘completers’, all join the state secondary school sector.

Both, based upon past trends are unrealistic assumptions. Being generous, 90% of those offered places complete the course. This suggests an output of 236 against a target of 260. Rounding up to 240 new entrants, this mean the new target is still not way of demand.

However, not all ‘completer’s join state schools. Some don’t enter teaching at all; some join Sixth Form Colleges or primary schools; some join the independent sector and some may decide to work overseas in the growing international school market. The 2025 data Less than 400 teachers of physics entered service in 2023/24 | John Howson based upon 2023/24 entry patterns showed that 80% of those gaining a QTS on a music ITT course entered teaching in a state-funded school. This includes both primary, secondary and special schools.

Assuming the 80% as a baseline – the next set of data should be out next month – our total of 240 reduced to less than 200. That number is starting to look as if the cut to music ITT places has been too savage.

A cynic might suggest, but I never could, the target was reduced to ensure it would be met and to save face over the removal of the bursary.

Whatever the reason, the DfE has now risked demand continuing to outstrip supply and this to affect the teaching of music in the nation’s secondary schools. With the recent announcement of the programme to ensure ‘Every child to get access to enriching activities to build skills and confidence for life’, the new target looks even less sensible  Every child to get access to enriching activities to build skills and confidence for life – GOV.UK.

I haven’t seen any campaign from the sector asking the government to revisit the target, but perhaps there should be in light of these numbers unless falling rolls are going to affect the demand for teachers of music more than I have calculated.

I would welcome any comments on the data.

ITT: subjects recruiting from UK graduates still in trouble

Posted on by
5

The DfE’s June data on the current round of applications and offers for postgraduate ITT courses still revels that the 2026 round is separating into two distinct sections. Subjects where applications are likely to come from anywhere in the world are either already meeting their Teacher Supply Model target for 2026 entry, or should do so on the current trajectory. Subjects where home recruitment is likely to dominate applications seem more at risk of missing their targets.

SubjectTarget 2026/27offer May 2026Fill: May viewJune offersFill: June view
Chemistry6901015YES1199YES
Biology675474PROBABLY542POSSIBLY
Mathematics20002169YES2495YES
Design & Technology620481YES562YES
Art & Design605527YES601YES
Geography685407POSSIBLY455NO
Classics7540NO43NO
English19801418PROBABLY1586POSSIBLY
Drama370253PROBABLY283PROBABLY
Business Studies1200270NO301NO
Music260192POSSIBLY215PROBABLY
Religious Education450269POSSIBLY308NO
Others2035418NO456NO
History520872YES974YES
Modern Languages10851107YES1214YES
Physics8101342YES1466YES
Physical Education6551298YES1405YES
Computing565686YES794YES

Based upon ‘offer’ recorded in the June update from the DfE, and with just three more reports to come before courses commence, I have made four downgrades and one upgrade to my expected outcomes for the current recruitment round.

I have downgraded expected outcomes for, biology, geography, English and Religious Education, including reducing Religious Education to a ‘No’. however, I am aware that there is a vigorous advertising campaign currently underway by the Religious Education sector, reminiscent of the RETRI initiative led by Dr John Gay a quarter of a century ago. Success in attracting new applicants could mean that it would be possible to hit the target for Religious Education. I do wonder why more subject groups don’t invest in advertising the benefits of becoming a teacher.

If science graduates discover there is space for those with some biology, then that subject might reach its target. Music looks likely to meet the target, but that target, in my opinion, has been set far too low to meet demand from schools, especially with the DfE’s latest initiative on extra-curricular activities for all, including within the scope, music. It will be difficult to achieve success in music without more teachers. However, meeting the low target will justify the removal of the bursary for music ITT.

Applications from outside of the United Kingdom represented 25% of all applications this June compared with 18% in the data for June 2025. If all non-Uk applicants had applied for secondary sector courses, then they would currently account for more than a third of applicants across all subjects, compared with a quarter in June 2025.

More evidence of the lack of interest in teaching from hone-based students comes from the fact that the number of graduates in the age group ’21 and under’ applying for courses is only 115 higher this June at 3,685 compared with an increase in applications of nearly 2,000 from the ’30 to 34’ age grouping.

The increasing interest in teaching from men continues, with applications up from 16,796 in June 2025 to 21,774 this June! It would be useful to know more about where this increase is focussed, and what the implications might be for the sector.

As ever, the DfE continues not to share ethnicity data with the sector. With so many overseas applicants at present, is that a helpful omission from the dataset?

Higher Education continues to bear the brut of the increase in applications, with ‘partner led’ and ‘salaried’ routes static, and only a small increase in applications to SCITT courses. However, PG teaching apprenticeships have seen a healthy increase in applications from 6,328 to 10, 493. However, offers are little changed at 1,066, compared with 966 in June 2025.

Perhaps because of the arrival of the postgraduate apprenticeship route, offers for the ‘salaried route was only 266 this June, compared with 518 in June 2025. Mr Gove’s brave new world of 15 years ago now looks like a distant dream, as higher education continues to take the bulk of applications, proving the resilience of the sector in the face of determined onslaughts during the coalition government to remove its dominance from the training of new graduate teachers.

With the end of the school term rapidly approaching, the next three months traditionally see relatively few new offers: will this year be any different, especially given the press comments about graduates unable to find work, or does teaching still look like an unattractive carer to debt strapped UK graduates?

With falling rolls affecting job prospects after training  and the acquisition of more student debt, and a possible below inflation pay settlement, the signs for increased interest in teaching as a career during the rest of the recruitment round are not good.

UCET’s changing of leadership: a rare event

Posted on by
Reply

I have been rather tardy in posting my appreciation of the work of James Noble-Rogers, as executive director of UCET (The Universities Council for the Education of Teachers). James was only the second Executive Director the organisation has had so far, taking over from Mary Russell, its first director, after she had presided over the coming together of UCET and PCET, the universities high education teacher training organisation that merged with the polytechnics and colleges organisation, after those institutions became universities in the 1990s to form UCET as it is currently constructed.

James was recruited to his post at UCET from the civil service. I first knew him when I served at the then Teacher Training Agency between 1996 and 1997, in the role of advisor on teacher supply, an interest I retain until this day. James was working on ITT numbers in the DfE, and was a natural fit to take over from Mayr on her retirement. However, I suspect that many were surprised to see a civil servant, and not an academic, appointed to the role. Appointing James was an inspired move.

Afte leaving the TTA in 1997, I worked closely with UCET, and James, for about a decade while he steered UCET through the problems of firstly, falling interest in teaching as a career, and then the boom after the 2008 economic crisis that lead to, in my view, the mis-guided decision by Ministers to axe the training grant and require the payment of tuition fees for graduates when Michael Gove became Secretary of State. These moves contributed to the teacher supply crisis that I foreshadowed on this blog in my 2013 posts (see Howson: Teachers, Schools and views on Education – available from Amazon as an eBook).

The early years of the coalition were a challenging time for colleagues working higher education preparing new teachers and providing INSET. Some will recall the ‘blob’; others, the issue of recruitment controls that nearly caused several universities to consider pulling out of ITT/ITE.

James remained resolute in supporting the higher education community’s central involvement in teacher preparation and development, the position it still holds today, while recognising the emerging partnership with schools that through SCITTS were providing their own version of teacher preparation. At the same time, Teach First was creating another route into teaching.

The last decade after 2016, brought new changes, the effect of the covid pandemic, plunging interest in teaching from home students and the growth, in recent years, of applicants from around the world.

As I became more involved in local government politics after 2013, I lost regular contact with UCET, and stooped attending their annual conference.

Even to, I am delighted to be able to recall my association with James, and the long service he rendered to UCT over more than a quarter of a century. I hope that as with his predecessor, his work will be acknowledged formally by the State.

I enjoyed the time when I worked with James, and wish him well in the next stage of his life. I am delighted to see that he is still offering his support, advice and knowledge that few others can rival.

UK graduates not yet rushing into teaching

Posted on by
Reply

There has been a lot of talk about how challenging graduates are finding the job market at present. Is this ‘difficult’ job market for graduates showing up in renewed graduate interest in teaching as a career? The DfE has published the latest (April 2026) data about application to teacher preparation courses as a 20th April 2026. Initial teacher training application statistics for courses starting in the 2026 to 2027 academic year – Apply for teacher training – GOV.UK

While there has been a modest increase in applications to be a teacher for most areas of the United Kingdom – the North East, Northen Ireland and Wales excepted – the biggest increase continues to be from the ‘rest of the world’ grouping, up by a massive 42% on April 2025. Only three regions in England have percentage increases in double figures: the East Midlands, London and the North West. The South East, South West and Yorkshire and The Humber regions have increases in applicants of less than five per cent.

AreaApr-26Apr-25Difference% Diff
EM2427206236515%
EE283126302017%
LON6504571179312%
NE10681108-40-4%
NW4106359551112%
SE397538171584%
SW216720661015%
WM336231202427%
YH28082720883%
292482682924198%
  
EEA582528549%
NI447473-26-6%
RoW122517096515542%
SCOT20319673%
WALES384418-34-9%
UNKNOWN106120-14-13%
139738831514237%

Increases at this level do not yet suggest a significant switch to teaching in large numbers. Indeed, the increase in England as a whole is just 2,419 extra applicants, or 8%.

One significant increase is that of male applicants, up from 13,234 to 18,111. However, it is impossible to know how many of these extra male applicants have come from the ‘Rest of the world’ pool?

There are also large differences in the increases from ‘new 2026’ graduates and older graduate. However, the ‘Rest of the world’ effect may be skewing this data

AgeApr-26Apr-25Difference% Diff
21312629941324%
22425639682887%
23368233693139%
24282826132158%
25-29102877824246324%
30-3467634618214532%
35-3951443899124524%
40-443524286066419%
45-492012175625613%
50-54956919374%
55-59446455-9-2%
60-64158145138%
65+3733411%
unknown47-3-75%
4322335460776318%

Total applicants at 43,221 remains well below the record of 67,269 applicants for similar courses recorded by the UCAS GTTR scheme in the 2009/2010 round during the aftermath of the 2008 economic crisis. To that number must be added those that applied for school-based courses, such s the GTTP that did not recruit through UCAS, as well as the Open University, that also did not recruit through UCAS.

Higher Education – up from 24,028 to 30,104 has borne the brunt of the extra applications. SCITTs have shown little growth, up from 11,293 to 11,544, perhaps because overseas applicants are less familiar with this toute into teaching. This might also explain the lack of any increase in the ‘partner-led’ courses. Apprenticeships are on the increase, up from 4,783 to 7,894, but ‘salaried route remains static at 5,883 compared with 5,389 last year in April 2025.

Even before the DfE announcement of the ‘needs’ numbers for 2026, ‘offers were down at 20th April at 17,880, compared with 18,297 in April 2025.

I have written a separate post about the state of play with regard to ’offers’ in secondary subjects. In the primary phase, applicant numbers are up from 12,502 to 14,797, but ‘offers’ for primary courses are little changed, up from 6,992 to 7,106. However, as the DfE ‘need’ has reduced ‘need’ from 7,650 to just 5,520 for 2026, there are likely to be few if any more offers, as the ‘need’ figure is already some 1,500 below the ‘offer’ number.

So, there is no great rush towards teaching as a career from United Kingdom graduates. Whether that will change over the next couple of months as final examinations are completed, and the reality of the job market hits home, only time will tell. But, for would-be primary teachers, I expect that the  ‘bus has now left the stop’ and it was already fully laden.

Religious Education – the need for qualified teachers

Posted on by
Reply

In a recent post on this blog about the DfE’s modelling of trainee teacher needs, I wrote that

‘However, has this re-assessment of need gone too far? Based on … my own current research into vacancies for teachers of music, I think the DfE has been realistic in its approach. ‘

While, I stand by that judgement, I have also been reminded by Deborah Weston, championing on behalf of those concerned with the teaching of religious education in schools that the cutback in trainee numbers probably allows little room for the replacement of the ‘under’ or even ‘un-qualified’ teachers currently teaching religious education in our schools.

Prompted by Deborah, I looked at the trends from the Teacher Workforce surveys concerning the use of those with ‘no qualification in the subject’ teaching religious education over the period between the end of the Blair/Brown Labour government and the end of the Conservative period of government. Of course, recent years have been impacted by the covid pandemic, and its consequences, but there is a clear trend that is observable.

The chart shows the four key types of secondary schools, of which the 11-18 school line is probably the most significant.

At the end of the Labour government, partly I expect as a result of the economic crisis of 2008, the percentage of teachers of religious education with ‘no qualification in the subject’ was reducing. However, the percentage levelled out as school rolls began to increase again, and teacher supply entered into an extended period of years when teacher preparation programmes missed their targets.

There was a brief respite as a result of covid, but in the most recent years, as trainee numbers have fallen, so the percentage of teachers with ‘no qualification in the subject’ has reached levels not seen since well before 2010.

As a result, the question now is, was the DfE right to cut trainee targets for religious education from 780 last year to 450 this year? On the basis that including unfilled places from previous recruitment rounds was a mistake, as I have always maintained, then the answer is clearly, yes, the DfE have taken the correct decision.

However, in subjects such as religious education, where most pupils only study the subject for a limited period of time each week, managing recruitment is easier for schools, if qualified staff are available.

I would add that in my opinion, religious education when taught by well-prepared and knowledgeable teachers can be a really valuable subject, especially at this time in the history of our multi-cultural society, where both many different faiths are practiced, and a growing minority profess to having no faith in religion at all.

If the government cannot see their way to increase the stated need for trainee religious education teachers, providers can always over-recruit, at least to higher education courses, where government funding isn’t an issue.

In addition to pre-entry training, the DfE might also like to consider another approach to the issue of shortage of religious education teachers: upskilling those presently teaching the subject, but without an appropriate qualification.  If it is important that a subject be offered on the curriculum, it beholds government to ensure it is taught properly.  

Spending cash on upskilling will no doubt help retention, and thus save on recruitment and training costs. However, apart from in mathematics and the sciences, it hasn’t really featured as a policy objective for many years: surely that’s a mistake.

I hope that the religious affairs lobby is able to persuade the government that significantly reducing the percentage of inappropriately qualified teachers of religious education should be a key policy objective.

ITT Offers – public money being wasted?

Posted on by
1

The DfE has today published the April data on postgraduate ITT courses, as at 20th April 2026. Initial teacher training application statistics for courses starting in the 2026 to 2027 academic year – Apply for teacher training – GOV.UK

This is the first month where offers can be compared with the DfE’s required need for each subject for September 2026 courses. I have previously posted about the draconian changes to the demand in many subjects as required by the DfE that have resulted from a different approach to unfilled vacancies. ITT Numbers for 2026 – brutal realism from DfE or big risk? | John Howson

Here is my assessment of possible outcomes for September, when courses commence, based upon current offers and past trends. It will be interesting to see how my view compares with that of Jack Worth at NfER.

SubjectTarget 2026/27offer April 2026DfE identified needFILL?
Chemistry690829-139YES
Biology675398277YES
Mathematics20001752248YES
Design & Technology620382238POSSIBLY
Art & Design605449156YES
Geography685353332POSSIBLY
Classics753639NO
English19801176804PROBABLY
Drama370207163PROBABLY
Business Studies1200224976NO
Music26016199POSSIBLY
Religious Education450339111POSSIBLY
Others20353721663NO
History520736-216YES
Modern Languages1085946139YES
Physics8101140-330YES
Physical Education6551175-520YES
Computing56553926YES

In some subjects, such as history, physics!, physical education and chemistry, providers have already made more offers than required ‘need’.  This demonstrates the danger of leaving it so late in the recruitment cycle to announce estimated demand.

In the past, these numbers used to appear before Christmas. With a rolling offer system in place, rather than a defined closing date, leaving the announcement of ‘need’ until April is likely to cost someone money. Will the DfE pay bursaries to all students offered a place, even if recruitment is above the stated ‘need’? If so, that could be seen as a waste of money.

However, of more concern are the subjects where, even with the new numbers for ‘need’, there are unlikely to be enough applicants to fill all the places. Based on previous trends, classics, business studies and the ’others’ grouping will not meet their ‘need’ number. I think it is time that the ‘other’ category, with 2,035 places is disaggregated into different subjects, after all, it is now by far the largest group in the subject’s table.

I have some concern about where design and technology, geography, music and religious education will produce enough offers to meet the revised ‘need’. However, I can now see why the bursary was removed from music. I still think that was a serious error of judgement, as this is a subject where only those with appropriate subject knowledge are accepted onto courses. Music has one of the highest applications to offer ratios of any subject. Current offers are the second lowest April ‘offer’ number since 2018.

What happens in the wider economy, and graduate job market, will determine the outcome of this recruitment round. I suspect there will be a summer surge in applications, as new graduates discover how tough the job market has become. This should mean a good year for teaching course. However, many applicants may now have found they have left it too late to secure a place for this autumn. This year will really be a case of ‘the early bird that catches the worm’.

I will now delve deeper into the data for another post about the nature of applicants and applications as revealed in this month’s data.