Tag Archives: teaching

Are teachers better paid?

Posted on by
Reply

Way back in 2014 I wrote a post that attracted a significant number of views Be a teacher: earn £12-15 per hour? | John Howson (More than 1,500 in the month it appeared, and many more since).

As August is often a slack time for new data, I thought it would be interesting to see how teachers have fared financially since I originally wrote that post in 2014.

Interestingly, the government view of teachers no doubt helps to define the profession in the public mind, and that of some journalists and commentators, as one that doesn’t need to work very hard to earn a living. Hence the following statement for ‘Employee Earnings in the UK: 2025’

  1. Full-time is defined as employees working more than 30 paid hours per week (or 25 or more for the teaching professions). Employee earnings in the UK – Office for National Statistics

I don’t find that helpful, even though it is the minimum and it flies in the face of the DfE’s own diary research. See Working lives of teachers and leaders wave 4: qualitative report – GOV.UK and Working lives of teachers and leaders wave 4 research report page 24 that contains the following:

Hours worked

Teachers and leaders both reported working fewer hours on average in their most recent full week of work in 2025 compared with all previous years (Figure 3.1).

Average weekly working hours were as follows:

• leaders: 55.5 hours, down from 56.6 in 2024, 57.4 in 2023 and 56.8 in 2022

• teachers: 46.9 hours, down from 48.1 in 2024, 49.4 in 2023 and 48.7 in 2022

Among leaders, this pattern was driven by those working full time in particular (56.5 hours vs. 57.6 in 2024, 58.2 in 2023 and 57.5 in 2022), while for teachers, average hours were lower among both those working full time and those working part time.

The good news is teachers, and school leaders, are working fewer hours; the bad news is that they are still working nearly a 10-hour day during term-time. Why should the government still set the starting benchmark for a full-time teacher at 25 hours?

Anyway, assuming teachers work for 195 days a year (190 with pupils and 5 other statutory working days) and ten hours a day, to include the weekends, and that make 50 hours a week, close enough to the 46.9 hours of the diary study.

In September 2026, a teacher at the bottom of the scale, on M,1 will be paid £34,069 if working outside the London pay zone. This equates to £17.60p per hour for the 1950 hours.  Now assume that the average teacher does some ‘work’ in the remaining 13 weeks. School trips, CPD, preparation for next year, turning up at school on two exam results days, reading the tes or schoolsweek each week in order to keep informed, all adds up to work. Assuming seven weeks of work at an average of two hours per day, add an extra 70 hours to the total, bringing it to 2060 hours, and a rate of £16.60 per hour. That leaves six week for holidays, similar to most other public servants if you include public holidays.

Now the minimum hourly wage in England for an adult has been £12.71p since the 1st April 2026. So, a new teacher, at the bottom of the scale starts at around £4 per hour above the minimum wage. I assume the Low Pay Commission that recommends the minimum wage likely doesn’t take into account repayment of student debt when calculating the rate for the Minimum Wage. Teachers will, in many cases have accrued four years of student debt thy need to service straightaway at the starting salary of £34,069p. For those on Plan 5, this could reduce their income by around 40-50p per hour, reducing the hourly rate to just over £16.00p.

Is it time to review the Teachers’ Pay and Conditions to make much clearer what teachers being paid to do, and what they should either expect additional payments for undertaking the work, or genuine time off in lieu. No longer can teaching operate some unofficial form of ‘employer-driven flexitime’ that is little changed from when I joined the profession as a teacher in 1971.

Finally, anyone being pay on the Unqualified Teacher rate at the bottom of the scale, might be receiving a salary much closer to the Minimum Way. If they have an annual contract that means they need to work similar hours to their qualified colleagues, then they might even be being paid below the Minimum Wage: perish the thought.

So, enjoy August and ask yourself, are you being paid for the time you are spending on school work and furthering your career? How much might you charge per hour for tutoring?

Fewer ethnic minority graduates achieved QTS

Posted on by
Reply

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mbacc a pipedream without the teachers

Posted on by
1

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

How about the wider primary and secondary sectors?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ITT: more home applicants still needed in some subjects

Posted on by
Reply

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lucy Powell: a bad start

Posted on by
1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Are state school headteachers overpaid?

Posted on by
Reply

Do you think headteachers are overpaid. After all, some can now earn in excess of £150,000. Indeed, in September 2027, the top of the scale for the highest paid headteacher will be £163,629, plus any additional uplift as a bonus, or health insurance, or any other non-cash benefits. On top of the salary there is the contributable pension benefit, and employer driven flexitime for leave. However, the latter might be more of disincentive rather than a benefit. (see Holiday advice – no use for teachers | John Howson )

Well, a basic salary of £163,629 for leading a large school in inner London is a lot of money. But what about at the other end of the scale. A new headteacher responsible for the smallest school could start on as little as £62,438 in September 2027. In reality, the starting salary is more likely to be slightly more than that basic figure.

How does the salary for a headteacher of a small school compare with the salary of teachers not on the Leadership Scale? In September 2027, it will be possible for a teacher to earn £54,421 outside the London area without any additional allowances. This is a difference of £8,017 or less than 20% to the salary of a headteacher of a small school.

For the extra salary, the headteacher sacrifices the limitations on their workload under pay and conditions rules, and in most cases takes on both a teaching and leadership role, usually without the support of a deputy headteacher. That doesn’t look like a very big differential to me.

How has headteacher pay changed over time?

In my 25th Annual survey of senior staff appointments in schools across England and Wales, published by the TES in January 2010, I noted the first advert with a salary of £60,000 was in the mid-1990s. In today’s money that would be £124,000. By 2008, some 60 schools were offering a starting salary of £100,000 or more. Such a salary for September 2008 would equate to a salary of almost £168,000 today. Inflation calculator | Bank of England

In 2008, the STRB recommended a starting salary for a headteacher of the smallest schools of £40,494. Today that would be worth just over £68,000 or approaching ten er cent more than their current expected starting salary in September 2027, by which time inflation will have further increased the disparity. (STRB 17th Report Part 1, page 134).

To answer the original question: are state school headteachers overpaid? It depends upon two factors, where you take the starting date, and whether there has been any grade inflation between the two measuring points.

On the face of it, secondary headteachers, have fared better than their colleagues in the smallest primary schools, especially if any extra duties and responsibilities acquired over time have been shared with the leadership team. The headteachers of the smallest schools probably don’t have a leadership team to whom they can pass on any extra work, so they may not have been fully recompensed for additional work.

When I come to review the turnover of headteachers during 2025/26, I will be paying especial attention to the salaries on offer.

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.

London schools and challenging pupils: better outcomes than elsewhere?

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday, I wrote a blog post about the rate of exclusions and suspensions from schools in London and the other regions of England of pupils eligible for Free School Meals as a part of a series about whether better funded schools were able to keep more of their pupils in schools. As promised in that post, I have also looked at the position with regard to the main ethnic, groups and a few of the less considered sub-grouping. Are London schools overfunded? | John Howson

As the following table shows, the picture for London is much more mixed with respect to the different ethnic groupings than for pupils eligible for Free School Meals.

London had the lowest rate of suspensions for five ethnic groups in the primary school sector, and four in the secondary school sector.

In respect of permanent exclusions, where rates are generally very low, and a single exclusion can affect the rate significantly, London had the lowest rate in six of the nine ethnic groups for the primary school sector and was joint equal in a seventh group. In the secondary school sector, London had the lowest rate in only two categories, but was joint lowest in another three groups- mostly were there were no permanent exclusions in this group in a number of regions, including London.

The position in special schools was somewhat different, as shown in the table.

London was not the lowest region in any ethnic grouping in ‘suspensions’ in the special school sector, and was only joint lowest in ‘permanent exclusions’. In most cases there were no permanent exclusions in these groups in any of the regions listed as ‘joint’ lowest, including in the London region. As pupils may attend some special schools from different local authorities to that where they live, and the funding for such schools is not through the  ‘School Block’ but was through the discredited ‘High Needs Block’, it is difficult to read anything into the results for the special school sector, except to say that no other region has the same level of outcome as the London region.

London schools contain a much more ethnically diverse group of pupils than schools in some other of the English regions, notably the North East and South West regions. Despite this fact, or possible because the familiarity of dealing with pupils from a wide range of different ethnic groups, often in the same classroom, and sometimes having come to school in England from war-tern or other challenging environments, have meant policies are in place to deal with situations that were less common outside the capital’s schools, London as a region still outperformed any other region in terms of being in lowest place of any region either on its own or in joint lowest position.

One can wonder: is this due to the funding being better than elsewhere? The funding formula school prevent that outcome for primary and secondary schools, if not for special schools. However, as I asked in the previous post in this series, is it the fact that funding includes a London allowance important, as the extra cash may go further if London schools employ younger, and thus cheaper teachers than in some other parts of England.

Do London schools use their cash for more classroom assistants and other staff likely to help reduce the level of suspensions and exclusions?

The data is intriguing, and worthy of more analysis than I have time to undertake. Are there also lesson to be learnt from London schools about how to reduce the number of pupils ‘kicked out’ of schools?

Finally, do academies or maintained schools exclude or suspend more pupils in different groups of pupils? What role, if any, do local authorities still play in helping keep down the levels of suspensions and exclusions? Time for me to go search the research literature.

Are London schools overfunded?

Posted on by
1

Let me be clear the answer is, of course they are not. However, as my previous post showed, there were significant differences in exclusion and suspension rates in the latest DfE data between many London boroughs and other local authorities across England. Do better funded schools exclude fewer pupils? Part 2 | John Howson with London borough having some of the lowest levels of both exclusions and suspensions.

This discrepancy between London and the rest of England, prompted me to explore the data at a regional level on two different factors: ethnicity and Free School Meals. At some point, it might be interesting to combine these two factors, but for now, they are treated as separate factors. This post deals with pupils eligible for Free School Meals. I hope, in a later post, to consider the data about ethnicity, where the are significant differences between different ethnic groups.

Firstly, here is the table for outcomes for entitle pupils for Free School Meals across primary, secondary and special school sectors.

Free School Meal – entitled pupils 2024/25 All school sectors

London stands out as the lowest rate for both exclusions and suspensions of any region in England. Permanent exclusions in the North East are more than four times higher than the rate in London, and even suspensions are more than four times higher than in the London region.

Of course, London schools may use other sanctions, such as in-school suspensions, but the differences do seem stark between the regions, with London schools using less than half the rate of suspensions of schools across any other region.    

In terms of pupils not entitled to Free School Meals, the differences between London and the rest of the regions are less stark.

Free School Meal – non-entitled pupils 2024/25 All school sectors

However, London still has a ‘suspension rate’ of less than half of that in the three regions with the highest rate of suspensions. Permanent exclusion rates for pupils not eligible for Free School Meals are generally very low across England, but, even so, London, along with the South East still had the lowest rate of permanent exclusions in 2024/25.

Free School Meal – non-entitled pupils 2024/25 Primary school sector

London doesn’t quite have the lowest permanent exclusions in the primary sector for pupils not entitled to Free School Meals: the rate in the south East is 0.01 better than in London. However, London does have the lowest rate for suspensions.

Free School Meal – entitled pupils 2024/25 Secondary school sector

Even with secondary school pupils entitled to Free School Meals, London has both the lowest rate of suspensions and of permanent exclusions o any region in England. Again, whether this is as a result other in-school measures, better staffing because of funding, or some other reasons isn’t discernible for the data.  

However, it will be interesting to consider the data for ‘ethnicity’ where London is one of the more diverse regions of England. This is because some London boroughs have low percentages of pupils on Free School Meals.

Does the funding of schools on a model of average salary funding model, with an additional London weighting in the National Funding Formula play any part in this data? For instance, does London employ more new teachers at below average salary rates.

Going forward, how will falling rolls affect the finances of schools in London and, hence, the possible rate of suspensions and exclusions in future years?

Do better funded schools exclude fewer pupils? Part 2

Posted on by
3

Earlier this week the DfE published the 2024-25 school-year data about temporary suspensions and permanent exclusions by schools. Release home – Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

The good news is contained in the headlines:

The rate of suspensions in the 2024/25 academic year was 10.88 (equivalent to 1,088 suspensions for every 10,000 pupils). This is a decrease from 11.31 in 2023/24. There were 913,000 suspensions in 2024/25, a decrease of 4% from 955,000 in 2023/24.

The rate and number of permanent exclusions also decreased from 2023/24 to 2024/25

The rate of permanent exclusions in the 2024/25 academic year was 0.12 (equivalent to 12 permanent exclusions for every 10,000 pupils). This is a decrease from 0.13 in 2023/24. There were 9,900 permanent exclusions in 2024/25, a decrease of 9% from 10,900 in 2023/24.

As the data are per 10,000 pupils, the outcomes are not affected by falling pupil rolls. However, since falling pupil numbers have yet really impacted on the secondary school sector, where most pupils are excluded or suspended, I wouldn’t have expected falling rolls to have had an impact in 2024-25.

A more interesting questions is whether funding for schools plays any part in the ability of schools to retain pupils rather than suspend or exclude them. Answering this question is slightly more complex than it might be because not all schools may behave in the same manner. for instance, Oxfordshire, a county I know well, has a higher rate of temporary suspensions, where it ranked 83 worst out of 154 local authorities in the 2024-25 data, compared with a ranking of 11th best of the 154 authorities for permanent exclusions.

However, as I have shown before, London schools are well funded compared with schools outside the capital. Thus, without a deliberate local policy to try to reduce either exclusion and suspensions, or indeed both, by schools outside the capital, it might be expected that London local authorities might rank as authorities with the lowest percentages of exclusions and suspensions.

The data for the rankings of London authorities in both 2023-24 and 2024-25 are shown in the table.

NUMBER OF LONDON BOROUGHS IN THE TOP 35 RANKED LOCAL AUTHORITIES
SCHOOL YEAR PERM EXCLUSIONS TEMP SUSPENSIONS
202324 19 27
202425 16 28

The figures for both years are impressive, with 28 of the London boroughs in the top 35 local authorities for the lowest temporary suspension per 10,000 pupils. However, this is not a new trend. In a previous post last year, I wrote the following:

As ever, I am struck by the funding issue. London, the best funded part of England has some of the lowest rates for exclusion and suspensions. There are 17 London boroughs in the list of the 25 local authorities with the lowest rate of suspensions in 2023/24, and 19 in the similar list for secondary exclusions. In the list of ten local authorities with the highest rates of exclusion are five authorities in the North East. I think that there may be something in this data that needs further exploration, especially as I would expect teacher recruitment to be easier in the North East than in London. Do better funded schools exclude fewer pupils? | John Howson

Once again, in the latest data, local authorities  in the north East fare badly, with five in the ten lowest rankings for permanent exclusions, and six in the ten lowest rankings for temporary suspensions.

Many London schools also have the benefit of Teach First in addition to their DfE funding. Even though they have to pay towards the Teach First trainees, the extra support is possibly another reason why London schools perform so well on this measure.

I wonder whether this issue is a concern to our incoming Prime Minister in view of the rankings for some local authorities in the north West of England.