ITT Numbers for 2026 – brutal realism from DfE or big risk?

Posted on April 23, 2026 by John Howson

The DfE has today published its comprehensive analysis of the school workforce, including the trainee need for 2026/27 courses. As we know, pupil numbers are falling in the primary sector, and don’t have much further to rise in the secondary sector. As a result of this fact, added to improved take up of teaching as a career, and improved retention, the DfE has significantly adjusted its trainee targets. Teacher demand and postgraduate trainee need: 2026 to 2027 – GOV.UK

I will look at some of the data in more detail in future posts on this blog, but for this post it is just the changes in trainee needs.

Subject/phase	TRAINEE NEED 2021/22	TRAINEE NEED 2025/26	TRAINEE NEED 2026/27	DIFF 26/27 ON 21/22	26/27 0N 25/26	2025 ITT CENSUS	NEW TARGET MET?


Art and Design	580	680	605	25	75	872	YES
Biology	820	985	675	145	310	1489	YES
Business Studies	725	900	1200	475	300	271	NO
Chemistry	1080	730	690	390	40	864	YES
Classics	40	60	75	35	15	44	NO
Computing	840	895	565	275	330	715	YES
Design and Technology	1475	965	620	855	345	580	POSSIBLY
Drama	330	620	370	40	250	255	POSSIBLY
English	1980	1,950	1980	0	30	2069	YES
Geography	745	935	685	60	250	1035	YES
History	780	790	520	260	270	969	YES
Mathematics	2800	2,300	2000	800	300	2588	YES
Modern Foreign Languages	1505	1,460	1085	420	375	1364	YES
Music	540	565	260	280	305	367	YES
Others	1980	2,520	2035	55	485	348	NO WAY
Physical Education	1010	725	655	355	70	1466	YES
Physics	2530	1,410	810	1720	600	1086	YES
Religious Education	470	780	450	20	330	483	YES
overall TOTAL	31030	26,920	20800	10230	6120
Secondary Total	20230	19,270	15280	4950	3990	16975
Primary Total	10800	7,650	5520	5280	2130

In the table I have ignored the primary phase. The total suggested of 5,520 for the postgraduate primary sector will no doubt cause real concern. However, as the DfE helpfully point out, these are not subject to recruitment controls.

In terms of the secondary sector subjects, it is worth pointing out that the DfE has seemingly abandoned the dubious practice of adding unfilled places from the previous year into the new need total. In its place, it has opted for a more nuanced approach. As I have pointed out before, schools start the term in September fully staff, so there are no vacancies, just teachers with sub-optimal qualification teaching pupils. Unless these teachers are sacked, there are no vacancies if too many teachers are trained.

In the final column, using the data from the 2025 ITT census, I have suggested my thoughts about the possible outcome of the current round based on these need numbers. More later

How to measure headteacher turnover?

Posted on April 17, 2026 by John Howson

I have been reading the interim report on teacher turnover in 2026 from Timo Hannay et all. The survey is supported by The Gatsby foundation. Teacher Recruitment and Retention 2026 The details about headteacher turnover can be found on pages 10 and 11.

Overall, teacher vacancies are in decline. This doesn’t surprise me. A combination of falling school rolls, especially in the primary sector; better ITT recruitment meaning fewer temporary ‘out-of-field’ appointments, and the war in the Middle East possibly reducing the number of teachers thinking of moving overseas could all be contributory factors to any decline. MATs might also be offering vacancies internally before bothering to pay for external advertising. Finally, cutbacks in leadership roles as budgets come under pressure and rolls are falling may also help to explain the downturn, if indeed it is actually a downturn. In addition, some schools and MATs might have stopped the use of rolling vacancy adverts for talent banking when there was no real job.

For headteacher turnover the approach Report’s approach is slightly different. The report states:

‘We draw on Department for Education records to track changes in headteacher appointments across the academic year. SchoolDash monitors whether the named headteacher at each school has changed, providing a direct measure of headteacher turnover that complements the survey and job advertisement data presented elsewhere in this report.’ Teacher Recruitment and Retention 2026 Page 10

Not the interesting thing is the date a school notifies the DfE of a change of headteacher. Assuming the departing head’s contract expires on 31^st August, the school will possibly still have that headteacher on 1^st September, so two names may be recorded for the year. If the school changes the name on 31^st August, the following year may only record one name.

A further complication arises when there is an acting or temporary headteacher during an interregnum. This could add an extra name to the total for the year.

The alternative way of measuring headteacher turnover is to record and count actual vacancies. This isn’t as easy as it one was, as headteacher posts don’t need to be advertised nationally. However, it is a fair bet that between them, the DfE vacancy site and the ‘tes’ probably pick up almost all state school headships. Those these two sites miss are either only advertised within MATs or placed on regional job boards, as in the North East.

I started tracking headteacher vacancies in the 1980s, and for my latest analysis see the post Headteacher vacancies – a changing trend in advertising date? | John Howson and the two posts that follow that one. Recording vacancies can offer a wealth of data that just recording changes in names misses. I recall a meeting with Mr Hannay when I was running TeachVac. Our method visually looked at the vacancies our AI located and input the information. What we learnt, and it still holds true, is that for real monitoring each vacancy needs a unique identifier that stays with the vacancy from the start of the recruitment process to the person appointed joining the school staff. I remain ever hopeful of such a change.

Holiday advice – no use for teachers

Posted on April 13, 2026 by John Howson

Teachers are returning to school after the pupils’ Easter Break. I doubt whether most teachers will have enjoyed a completely school-free break, and some may even have been running revision classes for their Year 11 and Year 13 pupils. However, the break is a period for some down time away from the routine of classroom life. Perhaps some teachers will also have been told how fortunate they are to have such long holidays, and what a ’cushy’ job they have.

As I pointed out in my most popular blog post ever, teacher don’t have long holidays, and they don’t have control over them either. How much holiday do teachers have? | John Howson

Additionally, teachers’ terms and conditions, with regard to holiday entitlement, have not really changed since I started teaching way back in 1971.

As a result, this extract from a news site would rile me if I were still a teacher.

The Government states on the website : “If a bank holiday is on a weekend, a ‘substitute’ weekday becomes a bank holiday, normally the following Monday. Your employer does not have to give you paid leave on bank or public holidays. Bank holidays might affect how and when your benefits are paid.”

So, if you want to swindle extra time off, booking December 29-31 off work will result in 10 days off in 2026, with just three days booked as holiday. Across 2026, careful planning allowed workers to turn 28 days of annual leave into as many as 63 days off by aligning bookings with weekends and bank holidays

These leave strategies are becoming increasingly popular among employees, particularly as more workers look to maximise rest without exceeding their allowance. The key, however, is acting early. UK will get a 3-day working week at the end of the year – here’s when and why

None of this advice is of any use to teachers or their support staff colleagues on term-time only contracts. Now they are not alone in have fettered holiday times, but I think the days when large numbers of workers had to take their annual holiday during ‘wakes weeks’ has declined over time, as a manufacturing base has become a less important part of national life.

I have long believed that at some point there will need to be a review of teachers’ pay and working conditions. This will become more urgent if AI doesn’t remove jobs from the workplace, but allows exiting workers to work fewer hours each week.

Of course, teachers that don’t like the current contracts can either look for work overseas or turn to tutoring where one’s working hours are very much a matter of personal choice: easier to do if you are a mathematics teacher, possibly less so if you teach history?

If I was a union rep in a school, I might ask about the holidays the professional staff of the Association are entitled to, and compare it with my own experience.

Teacher Turnover- Is England doing better than the USA?

Posted on April 12, 2026 by John Howson

An interesting report crossed my desk a the end of last week. Teacher Turnover in the United States: Who Moves, Who Leaves, and Why | Learning Policy Institute This study, by Tiffany Tan, Wesley Wei, Desiree Carver-Thomas, and Emma García was produced the Learning Policy Institute, and first appeared in mid-March.

Key findings were that;

Teacher turnover remains high nationally. Between 2020–21 and 2021–22, 15.1% of U.S. teachers moved schools or left the profession: 8.0% moved schools, and 7.1% left teaching. Turnover rates have been largely stable over the past 2 decades but are now about 27% higher than in the early 1990s—an increase driven primarily because the rates of teachers leaving the profession increased by more than 50%.

Most teacher turnover was voluntary and preretirement. Nearly 3 in 4 teachers (74%) who moved or left did so voluntarily for reasons other than retirement. This percentage is higher than it was 10 years ago, when 67% of teachers left their schools voluntarily and preretirement.

Nearly half of teachers who moved schools stayed within the same district, and almost 40% of those who left teaching remained in the education sector. Among movers, 36.5% of teachers moved to a different district in the same state, while 17.3% moved to a different state. Of those who left teaching, 31.2% retired, whereas 13.1% took jobs in other sectors.

Teacher turnover rates vary across groups of teachers.

It is interesting to compare this survey with the NfER’s recent Report on the School Workforce in England

School teacher retention has improved slightly in recent years, with the leaving rate falling from 10.6 per cent in 2016/17 to 9.5 per cent in 2021/22 and nine per cent in the most recent data. This has contributed to lower ITT recruitment targets and increased teacher numbers overall. The exit rate of first-year early career teachers who left within one year between 2023/24 and 2024/25 was 10.3 per cent, the lowest rate since the data began. (page 11)

The NfER conclusion seems much more optimistic than that of the US Report from LPI.

In contrast to previous NFER reports on the teacher workforce, the flows of teachers into and out of the labour market look reasonably healthy for the future of teacher supply. Recruitment is improving, even in some subjects which have seen persistent shortages. Teachers were less likely to leave the workforce last year compared to any year since 2010/11, outside of the pandemic. The early career teacher retention rate is the best on record. Teachers’ working hours are steadily coming down on average and the proportion of teachers who report having an acceptable workload has improved somewhat. Some progress has also been made in the competitiveness of teachers’ pay. Most teachers’ have received a pay increase of at least four per cent for each of the last four years, which has been higher than inflation over the period and even closed the gap – albeit only partially – that had opened up between teacher pay growth and average earnings growth since 2010/11. The increase in job insecurity and slowdown of job opportunities in the wider labour market is also likely to be a key factor driving recent trends (page 24) https://www.nfer.ac.uk/media/idcdsseo/the_school_teacher_workforce_in_england_annual_report_2026.pdf

This may be because the pupil population in England is in decline. The consequences are that there are fewer opportunities for teachers to move to different schools, and more teachers stay put. There is also less pressure on training numbers, so teaching looks like a more competitive occupation. While the economy and technology changes, such as the fear of the AI effect on graduate jobs may also be working to make teaching look more attractive as a career path in a more challenging graduate labour market.

However, I wonder whether many of the issues reported in depth in the LPI Report, such as the higher turnover of Black teachers; more turnover of teachers in certain subjects, and in certain types of school, may also be features of the labour market for teachers in Egland. Certainly, we know that teachers from ethnic minority backgrounds fare less well in teaching than those from the majority ethnic community, as I have discussed in past posts. I suspect many of the other concerns raised by the LPI Report may also have credence in England were the data to be examined in that level of detail.

For issues around ethnicity and teachers in England, see my previous blog posts

Ethnicity issues remain for new teachers | John Howson

Slow progress on ethnic minority headteacher numbers | John Howson

Falling rolls -who dictates the outcomes for schools: Parents or planners?

Posted on April 11, 2026 by John Howson

How do you deal with the issue of falling rolls in our schools? A senior politician recently told me that there was no way they would reduce the admission number for a successful school, because the parents wouldn’t stand for it.

Interestingly when Mrs Thatcher widened the concept of parental choice in section 6 of the 1980 Education Act, the civil servants left a ‘get out’ clause allowing local authorities to override their ‘duty to meet the expressed parental preference’ because it was ‘prejudicial to the efficient use of resources’. Back in those days, the notion of parental power was very much in its early days.

Now the politician I spoke with was only voicing the approach any retailer might take to falling sales; cut out the loss-making branches and strengthen those that make a profit. ‘Let the weakest go to the wall’, a dictum many learnt in school when studying their Skaespeare.

But, should public services operate in the same fashion? It’s worth remembering that parents are required to educate their children, and the State is the default provision for those that don’t, won’t or in most cases cannot do so in any other way.

How the State has responded to that demand from parents for schooling has changed over time. A reader reminded me of the Liberal Democrat position, as expressed by Nick Clegg during the coalition government that perhaps took parent power to the ultimate. I wrote then a blog post entitled Private education, but State Funded? | John Howson This might have been a good idea at the start of a decade of rising school rolls, but does it hold good when rolls are falling?

I guess it depends upon where you live. In a densely packed urban area, with many schools within easy distance of each other, survival of the fittest might seem logical even if the fittest was a Church School and didn’t have many pupils on free School Meals. However, even in urban areas, change is rarely easy, and often messy, and the current funding formula for schools doesn’t help.

Schools below capacity often run at a deficit, so should academy trusts prop these schools up with cash from other schools that don’t spend all their income? Perhaps that’s why parent power – or at least parent governors – don’t exist in most academies, in case they rumbled what was happening.

In less urban areas, the issue is more complex. Consider the following case study. Imagine a town and its locality with 5 primary schools where there is little or no house building, and post-covid relatively little movement in the housing market. The current position for one such town

is shown in the table below.

In total, the five schools had 857 pupils on roll, but with a capacity for 1141, so were operating at 75% capacity. Intake for the latest year was lower at 66% of capacity.

	TYPE	CURRENT ROLL	CAPACITY	% CAPACITY	Places offered – latest
SCHOOL 1	RC	118	210	56	13/30
SCHOOL 2	CofE	299	315	95	45/45
SCHOOL 3	COMMUNITY	178	210	85	16/30
SCHOOL 4	ACADEMY	130	196	66	15/30
SCHOOL 5	COMMUNITY	132	210	63	18/28

Schools 1-3 are in the town, and schools 4-5 are within easy travelling distance. The obvious answer might be to close one of schools 4-5, but that would create additional transport costs for the local authority; to be paid from Council Tax.

Closing the RC school is not possible, as the exiting pupils cannot be accommodated at the other two schools, as they have insufficient spare capacity, and the need would be for an additional 70 places over the current capacity. Should the RC school numbers fall further to less than 100-110, and intakes not increase at the other two town schools, it would be possible to close the RC school if each of the other two schools in the town could take an extra class. However, the restricted nature of their sites may that possibility unlikely.

What happens if the RC school remains open, and starts to run a deficit budget and, as a consequence, either the diocese eventually decided to turn the school into an academy or it is judged inadequate by ofsted, and forced to become an academy. Could the diocese transfer funds from other schools to keep the school open?

What of the future for schools 4 & 5 if they are faced with the same scenario of starting to operate on deficit budgets, and the risk to the local authority with regard to school 5 at a time of great pressure on the authority’s budget.

Should someone create a plan for the future. If so, who? The local authority, the Regional School Director, the DfE? Or does the desire of the parents for one particular school eventually affect the other four schools, and the market decides? Discuss.

For those that want to consider the issue further, I wrote a play around a school facing falling rolls in its locality to try to tease out some of the issues. You can access it at C:\Users\dataf\OneDrive\Documents\FallingRollsPlay.docx or by requesting a copy by using the comment section

Reader might also like this post from a decade ago. My concern about the future of small schools isn’t new. Are small schools doomed? | John Howson

Free School Meals and headteacher vacancies

Posted on April 9, 2026 by John Howson

This is the third in my series of posts based upon my thoughts on headteacher vacancies that have been posted by state schools in England so far this school year. This post is a bit more speculative than the previous two posts, as it looks at the relationship between re-advertisements of headteacher vacancies and the percentage of children on Free School Meals as recorded on the DfE’s website in the schools that have re-advertised their headship.

I have used data for all the vacancies where free school meals data are available as the baseline. New schools; nursery schools; sixth form colleges and some other schools are excluded as they don’t have free school meals pupils. Thes other schools may be small schools, or just schools that have not recorded the percentage at this point in time.

% RANGE of FSM pupils	ALL ADVERTS	RE-ADS	PERCENTAGE
0-9.9	174	24	14%
10-19.9	267	27	10%
20-29.9	193	30	16%
30-39.9	163	27	17%
40-49.9	109	15	14%
50-59.9	73	8	11%
60-69.9	38	4	11%
70+	16	6	38%

I have divided the vacancies into groups in an arbitrary manner. At this stage of the year, many schools that have advertised during February and March will not yet have had time to complete the appointment process, and decide whether or not to make an appointment or to re-advertise. As a result, the data presented in the table are in no way definitive of the current recruitment round. It will not be until January 2027, when the autumn term of 2026 re-advertisements have been added that a definitive report can be produced.

However, it is interesting to see that six of the 16 schools with the highest percentages of children with Free School Meals entitlement have already re-advertised the vacancy for their headship.

What I have yet to do is to look at the national total number of schools in each band, to see whether certain bands have a higher turnover overall. However, there are so many different possible intervening variables that such an exercise will need to wait until the end of the school-year, and possibly the autumn to be worth considering.

Nevertheless, as previous posts have made clear, there are some school types that are likely to have a higher rate of re-advertisement than others, and it will be interesting to see by the end of the recruitment round whether or not there is any correlation within groupings such as, for instance, Roman Catholic Schools in the North West of England or small primary schools in coastal areas and the free school meal percentage of schools that re-advertise their headship.

Is this data of any use to policymakers, and if so, what should be the outcome. In the past, during the coalition government there were suggestions for intervention in helping challenging schools recruit new leaders. Nowadays, I assume that is left to multi-academy trusts and diocese, and those local authorities that still take an interest in schooling to intervene. The other interesting question is, do schools with high levels of free school meals pupils retain headteacher for shorter periods of time than other schools?

Is there a leadership crisis in England’s state schools?

Posted on April 4, 2026 by John Howson

First, a health warning: the percentages of schools re-advertising a head teacher vacancy reported in this post will probably not be the final figure by the end of the current school year. This is because the 289 first advertisements recorded during March 2026 have yet to contribute any re-advertisements to the total.

The data for this post are collected from both the DfE vacancy site and other key job boards twice a week, and entered by myself into the database. A re-advertisement is recorded for any headteacher vacancy re-appearing with a new closing date more than 14 days after the original closing date. This allows two weeks leeway for short-term extensions of the closing date to be ignored.

I reported on the initial outcomes for the first 1,000 vacancies in a post on the 8^th March What the first 1,000 headteacher adverts tell us | John Howson so this is by way of an Easter catch-up.

The database now has details of 1,261 advertisements for headteacher vacancies, posted by 1,110 schools.

The current re-advertisement rate for special schools stands at 27%. This is down two points from the 27% recorded in the 8^th March post. However, it is still significantly higher than any other re-advertisement rate for a sub-set of schools: the current overall re-advertisement rate for all schools is 12% of all advertisement or 14% of first advertisements. This latter percentage reflects the fact that a small number of schools have now re-advertised their vacancy more than once. In March the percentage of all adverts that were re-adverts was 11%, so on that basis, at 12%, the overall position has worsened slightly.

As reported in the 8^th March post, faith schools are more likely to appear in the list of schools that didn’t fill their headteacher vacancy at their first attempt. Based on a percentage of all adverts for the faith group, Roman Catholic schools’ re-advertisement rate currently stands at 19%, compared with 16% in the 8^th march post. If re-advertisements as a percentage of schools advertising is considered, rather than the percentage of all advertisement, the re-advertisement rate for Roman Catholic schools, including the three schools that have re-advertised twice, rises to 23%. For Church of England schools, the percentages are 13% and 15%., just one percentage point above the average for all schools.

So, is there a crisis in headteacher recruitment? As my post of yesterday (3^rd April) revealed, headteacher turnover is nowhere near the levels I recorded twenty years ago, so the volume of vacancies cannot be a reason for the current level of re-advertisements.

The mix of schools has no doubt contributed to the current level of re-advertisement by schools failing to make an appointment for their new headteacher or, in a few cases, co-headteacher on a job share.

I am wary of declaring a crisis at this stage of the year. Those that have read my book* of the 2013 blog posts know that when I called the teacher supply crisis in the early summer of that year, the DfE accused me of scaremongering. I would hate to be accused of such behaviour once more, so let me end by saying that the fate of pupils with SEND in special schools will not be helped if such schools cannot recruit headteachers.

I propose to write an interim report on the outcome for the year during August and the final version, allowing for re-advertisements during the autumn term will hopefully appear in January 2027.

*Teachers, schools and views on Education – available through amazon or on request directly from myself/

What’s in a name?

Posted on April 2, 2026 by John Howson

I was recently surprised to find that a school called John Spence Community High School in North Shields was in really an academy. I am sure the school serves its community, but I wondered how common is it for schools that are academies to use the term ‘community in their name? Well, there is Barnhill Community High School in Hillingdon, part of the Middlesex Learning Trust – itself a name that represent little more than the name of a county council abolished in the 1960s. There is also the Abbeywood Community School’ part of the Olympus Academy Trust in the Bristol area.

So, it seems that is not uncommon for schools to retain their existing name when converting to an academy. Other confusing names for schools that might catch out unwary parents, and even employers reading references include – grammar schools that aren’t selective schools – Enfield Grammar school springs to mind, but it is not alone. Indeed, Enfield is also the home of Enfield County School, located in Enfield that was once part of the county of Middlesex, and a selective school for girls while a Middlesex County Council School. Again, it is not the only school to retain the term ‘county’ in its name. At least the ‘county’ schools in Essex and Surrey can at present claim to be part of a county. Post-local government reorganisation means that they will eventually join Enfield and Edmonton County Schools as representing areas that no longer exist in any local government sense.

High School is another meaningless term for a school. Such schools can be 11-16 or 11-18, selective or comprehensive, depending on where they are located. Even more confusing to anyone moving to the Derby area could be Risley Lower Grammar CE (VC) Primary School. What on earth is a ‘lower grammar school’? Like First school, lower schools are usually school taking pupils up to the ages of eight or nine, when they are not the used to describe a site for the first few year groups of a secondary school, or even, in the case of The Basildon Lower Academy in Essex, a school for pupils in Years 7-9.

If school types are confusing, then hopefully one can assume that all schools named after saints are church schools. Sadly, no. One of my favourite exceptions is a primary school in Watford. The school’s prospectus tell parents how the school acquired its name as follows:

“St Meryl School was built in 1951 and is situated on a large attractive site in a central position within Carpenders Park. The name of the school, St Meryl, does not indicate any affiliation with a particular religion or religious denomination; in fact, “Meryl” was the name of the builder’s wife!” st-meryl-school-prospectus-2025-2026.pdf

I made use of this idea when naming he school in my recent play about falling rolls.

However, it is now the name of schools that worries me most, but that the term ‘teacher’ is not a reserved occupation term like ‘engineer’ or ‘accountant’. Anyone can call themselves a teacher, regardless of whether they have any qualifications.

To me that is an insult to the many thousands of teachers that gave gained QTS, often at great personal expense. There is still time to insert a clause in the Bill before parliament to remedy this oversight and grant legal status for qualified teachers.

The Future of Education – a talk from 2024

Posted on March 31, 2026 by John Howson

In the summer of 2024, I was asked to lecture on the future of education. Two years on, it is interesting to see how even more relevant today the content of the talk is. Sadly, there are still no answers to many of the questions posed in my talk.

Thank you for inviting me to talk to you this evening. I arrived in Oxfordshire some 45 years ago, about the same time as the late Sir Tim Brighouse. This was only a couple of years after Prime Minister Sir Jim Callagham’s visit to Oxford, and his famous Ruskin College speech that started The Great Debate about education and schooling in England. A debate that has ultimately led us to where we are today.

Starting this talk with a look back at history reminds me that if this were a sermon, I would start with a text. Perhaps, ‘Acts Chapter 2 Verse 17’. I won’t read it out, as those that want to know what it says can look it up on their phones.

However, what I want to talk briefly about this evening is RATS -I have to say that thankfully you are spared the PowerPoint picture at this point.

However, RATS stands for:

Responsibility

Accountability

Technology

And

Schooling

RATs or ARTS is better, even if the order is wrong.

First Responsibility

Who is responsible for what in education

People still cheerfully talk of ‘Oxfordshire’s schools’ but in reality, as cabinet member, I deal with only a limited number of functions these days:

-Admissions to school, but not in-year admissions to academies

-Transport to school, but not for over 16s, as this is discretionary and there is no cash, despite raising the learning leaving age to 18, except for SEND pupils where we still support those where we can. So, a young person can receive free transport from Years 7-11 and then nothing.

-School building – we have built more new schools in the past decade than the previous 50 years. But as ever this area is highly regulated.

HR for maintained schools – this means small primary schools have to pay the Apprenticeship Levy – a tax by any other name.

School Improvement – although the £400,000 annual DfE grant ends this month and next year we are funding it from Council Tax.

-SEND – and we will spend £20 million more than the government provides us with funds in this area and end this financial year some £60 million overspent.

That overspend lead me nicely into considering Accountability

If there is confusion over responsibility, is there any clarity over accountability for our school system?

As I mentioned, Oxfordshire has overspent on SEND and by 2026 this may be as much as £140 million

Schools receive their budgets calculated on formulas where Oxfordshire as a local authority has no vote, and merely acts as the banker. Schools may end the year in surplus or in deficit

If you look at academy chains in Oxfordshire, several have schools with balances of £1 million and other have deficits nearing the same figure.

Who is accountable for these outcomes and how will they be dealt with?

If the RSD is prepared to accept academies in deficit that they add to each year, why should Oxfordshire as a local authority wipe out deficits on schools transferring to become an academy: perhaps we will explore issuing an IOU to be paid when there are no deficits in the academy sector.

Last year, council tax payer transferred £200,000 for a school becoming an academy to wipe out is deficit: that’s a lot of potholes we could have filled. At the end of this month, I expect deficits in maintained schools to top the £3 million mark: enough to mend most of our roads.

Let’s consider some other accountability issues:

Who is responsible for ensuring there are enough teachers for Oxfordshire schools? Is it schools; MATs and the dioceses; the LA or the government at Westminster?

Who is responsible for school improvement, so when ofsted comes knocking a school can be judged outstanding, as a primary school in the north of the county has been recently.

Who will deal with the digital divide?

This last question is one that that neatly brings me onto the third theme for this evening:

Technology

Since I came to Oxfordshire at the end of the 1970s there have been three waves of new technology

The microprocessor revolution of the late 1970s and early 1980s that brough BBC B, turtles, and eventually the Apple/PC dominance of our interface with IT. Indeed, my MSc thesis in 1980 was the first produced on a word processer for any course at Norham Gardens.

The second technology revolution started in the early 1990s, and became part of our lives in the first decade of this century when we all embraced the internet and started exchanging emails.

This revolution had a second phase when the phones in our pockets suddenly became mini computers in their own right, and a whole new set of challenges opened up for education. This saw the surge in new social media platforms, and the current heads-down culture that pervades so much of society these days. I won’t ask how many have already googled my suggested text for this talk.

Although schools have made adaptations to accommodate these changes in technology over the past 5 decades, we still rely upon a teaching and learning strategy that has many elements that would be familiar when state education began more than 150 years ago.

In passing, I am sorry that the covid pandemic didn’t allow us to celebrate the 150^th anniversary of the 1870 Education Act in a manner that I think would have been fitting.

The 2x4x8 model of learning may not be as rigid as it once was, but secondary school ‘timetablers’ are great fans of it as a strategy.

Anyway, so much for the first two waves of technological change: what of the third and developing wave, currently described by many as the AI revolution?

Does a knowledge rich curriculum meet the needs of a generation that started school last September and possibly won’t retire from employment until the last decade of this century. Those that started school 100 years ago, around the time of the birth of the BBC and radio, retired just as the internet was becoming a viable communication strategy: what will the class of 2024 experience in their lifetimes, and how will we prepare them for adult life?

This is not to decry the role of knowledge in schooling, and especially the building blocks of literacy and numeracy. Technology has almost made handwriting redundant, except as an art form. Can technology help us deal with the learning gap at Key Stage 1 between children on Free School Meals and those whose parents have a higher degree?

If so, to return to my themes of accountability and responsibility, where does the impetus for change lie? At school or Trust level; at local authority level or nationally?

We have seen initiatives such as the Oak Academy created nationally post-covid. We also saw how Oxfordshire as a local authority dealt with covid in acting as a conduit for information.

How will the system take change forward. Who has the vision.

Perhaps parents will dictate change for us as educators?

Home schooling has increased significantly: a passing phase or signs of a new order?

I saw this week suggestions that teachers will need to be paid more if they have to work a five-day week when four days becomes the norm. It is worth noting that teachers, as a group have seen no change in their holiday entitlement over the past 50 years while all other workers have benefitted from increased time off.

So let me conclude by asking whether one might one view a model where technology, and indeed any other approach to teaching and learning, is like a table top resting on the twin legs of responsibility and accountability.

Wobbly legs can mean an insecure platform for learning, and certainly for the development in an orderly manner of how technology can change the landscape of education.

I started with the term ARTS, so my final word must be about schools.

It is right that schools and their staff must be at the heart of the landscape, but the challenge that is currently keeping me awake at night is the relationship between a national funding formula created during a period of increasing school rolls, and the current situation of falling rolls faced by many primary schools.

How will hard decisions on whether all schools survive be taken, if pupil numbers continue to decline? For instance, who decides on whether we keep primary schools in local communities or face competition between schools for pupils to keep their own school open?

What part can technology play in solving this dilemma? I don’t know, but I do know the relationship between falling rolls and school funding is not one we can duck going forward.

But let me finish on a brighter note. This week, I met with three young entrepreneurs interested in working with schools on drone technology. Indeed, they have started a series of books that might be the 21^st century version of Thomas the tank engine.

Let me introduce you to Ruby Rescue and the big fire – a tale from Drone City and possible future firefighting techniques.

I started my teaching career in Tottenham with the stewardship of 16 mm projectors; reel to reel tape recorders; an epidiascope, and little other technology but in a certain landscape for schooling.

I don’t want to dream of a past, but rather to challenge us all to set out a vision for the future landscape of education that can work for the good of all.

Thak you for listening.

Are small sixth forms a good idea?

Posted on March 29, 2026 by John Howson

In a post in January, I mused about the issue of how falling rolls might affect schools particularly if it meant less funding, where school funding is based upon a per pupil funding model. Fewer pupils = less cash. Accountability and falling school rolls. Was it different in the past? | John Howson

One of the possible solutions discussed in that post was a reform of post-16 education. In a cash-strapped school system, is it possible to justify schools with small sixth forms? Are such sixth forms in the best interest of the students?

In order to think more deeply about this issue, I have looked at the ‘A’ Level results from one local authority, as published on the DfE’s website. 11-16 schools are excluded, as are schools that will eventually expect to have a sixth form, but aren’t currently at that stage, and also colleges. What’s is left are the details for the outcomes on ‘A’ Level results for 34 schools, as shown in the table below

pupils entered	best 3 score	progress score	average or above
312	39.88	0.2	AA
211	35.75	0.08	A
125	40.77	-0.13
117	41.68	0.02	A
110	31.45	-0.30
107	33.24	0.00	A
96	34.34	0.00	A
94	38.3	0.17	AA
90	36.33	0.19	AA
89	35.51	-0.12	A
87	31.53	0.08	A
82	39.15	0.80	AA
82	36.42	0.07	A
79	34.57	-0.33
69	29.47	-0.21
66	35.1	0.26	AA
66	32.37	-0.10	A
65	35.64	0.03	A
64	33.39	-0.15
62	35.7	0.20	AA
59	34.69	-0.09
57	32.52	0.06	A
46	34.57	-0.33
42	33.65	-0.11	A
41	31.14	-0.46
30	14.67	-0.69
28	36.31	0.21	A
25	25.07	-0.02
22	34.85	0.70	A
14	24.52	-0.83	A
13	18.21	-0.75
9	24.52	-0.83
9	37.78	0.35	A

For comparison purposes, the average score for state schools in England was -0.03 for Progress and 35.76 for the best 3 ‘A’ Levels score. There are other measures that could be used, but these are three I chose to use for this blog post.

Nine out of the 34 schools beat the national average for ‘best score’, although another couple of schools narrowly missed the national average, so it might be better to conclude that 14 schools were either close to or exceeded the national average for ‘best score’, leaving 20 schools that were below the national average.

Progress score is a more contentious measure. Here 15 schools did less well than average. The same schools often feature in both lists. Most of these schools entered less than 100 pupils for three subjects at ‘A’ level. Some pupils might have taken either two subjects and a vocational qualification or just two subjects at ‘A’ Level.

Schools that entered more pupils for 3 ‘A’ Levels were more likely to receive an ‘average’ or ‘above average’ grade.

The data forces me to ask the question – is the current arrangements for ‘A’ Level study across these schools producing the best outcomes for students? Two subsidiary questions are; if this is the outcome close to the top of the demographic cycle, what might happen to sixth form sizes in these schools once rolls start to fall in a few years’ time? The second question is, what is the cost of tuition per pupil under the present arrangements.

To answer the latter question, let’s assume a Year 7 class of 30 for mathematics taught by a newly qualified teacher on the bottom of the Main Scale for five period a week for 40 week, and an ‘A’ Level group taught for 5 periods a week by the Head of Department, on the top of the Upper Pay spine, and with a TLR 2A in addition.

The newly qualified teacher teaches 6 classes per week for 40 weeks, while the Head of Department teaches two ‘A’ Level sets, one of which has 10 weeks examination leave in Year 13. In addition, the Head of Department teaches four classes of 30, one of which has exam leave in Year 11.

Using this data, and ignoring any other time spent on non-teaching duties, the Main Scale Teacher costs work out at 0.91p per pupil, while the Head of Department costs are £2.33p per pupil.

If the ’A’ Level groups were smaller than 15 in each year, as they well might be in some schools, then the cost per pupil increases unless the Head of Department receives a lesser amount in TLR.

In an 11-16 school, where the Head of Department might teach five classes for 40 weeks and one for 30 to allow for examination leave, the cost per pupil for the Head of Department reduces to below £2 per pupil. If the school has only long-serving teachers then the per pupil for teachers increases to nearer £1.50 per pupil.

For small schools with settled staffrooms, the difference in cost between the cost of teaching Years 7-11 and Years 11-13 may be marginal. The issue then becomes one of teaching and learning. Do small sixth forms produce as good examination results as larger sixth forms? The evidence from the table would suggest they are less likely to do so.

What of the student experience? Is it better to be either ‘a big fish in a small pool’ or ‘a small fish in a larger pool’? Has anyone ever asked students their views?

I think that there is a debate to be had about school organisation and size of school sixth forms when rolls fall, especially if school funding comes under pressure from increased government spending on both defence and welfare, and especially if we are in a recession.

As my colleagues in Haringey found out in the 1970s, such debates about changes to sixth forms can be fraught with political pitfalls for anyone suggesting change. But, is that a good enough reason not to at least discuss changes?

Note: I have only used salary costs in the modelling and not included on-costs from National Insurance and Pensions. I have also ignored premises and other staffing costs, as I assumed the to be low in a subject such as mathematics.

John Howson

Education and the numbers that affect what happens

Tag Archives: teaching