TTR0009

Written evidence submitted by Dr Challoner's Grammar School / The Astra SCITT and Teaching School Hub (Buckinghamshire)

The current situation regarding teacher recruitment and retention

​​https://committees.parliament.uk/submission/#/evidence/3081/preamble

What are the main factors leading to difficulties recruiting and retaining qualified teachers?

Which subjects are most affected?

How does the situation differ across the country and across different types of schools and colleges?

What impact does this have on pupils, particularly disadvantaged pupils and those with SEND?

●        One of the key issues is the cost involved in training to teach for subjects and phases that do not attract a bursary.  The government should fully or partly subsidise the training fee for QTS.  This would have a significant impact on encouraging more people into the profession, especially those coming from university who already have significant debt.  Other professions offer more money and a greater status / career opportunities, especially in subjects such as maths and the sciences, including computer science. 

●        As we are located in south Buckinghamshire, schools in our region are covered under the fringe allowance, but schools in the north of the county are not.  Renting / buying property in the north of Bucks remains disproportionately high.  South Buckinghamshire is also expensive and close to London, where the outer / inner London weighting means that new teachers are more likely to want to work there for higher salaries. 

●        Potential trainees may also be discouraged by the potential difficulty in securing Early Career Teacher positions because of the impact of the Early Career Framework when it comes to releasing staff for training (both ECTs and their mentors).  Two local schools have reported to us that they are unable to recruit an ECT as they do not have mentor capacity in smaller departments, staff are already supporting an ECT who will be moving into ECT2.  Another school has said it is cheaper to offer a TLR for pastoral responsibility in the hope of attracting someone who is not an ECT, looking for their first promotion.

●        Smaller infant school are not able to afford the higher starting salary and the time for an ECT and Mentor to be released

●        Difficulties recruiting staff means schools relying on agency staff. These agency staff demand higher salaries, refuse to do parents evenings or marking but schools are left with no other options.  This will impact on provision for SEND pupils who need consistency and teachers who are knowledgeable about their individual needs.

What action should the Department take to address the challenges in teacher recruitment and retention?

●        Subsidise the QTS training fee for trainees by passing funding to accredited providers

●        Increase bursaries/scholarships for ITT

●        Increase wider financial hardship support for trainees during training

●        Increase support for full-time ITT marketing and recruitment personnel in providers

●        Run ongoing campaigns to encourage people to get into teaching - radio, TV and social media

●        Provide more bursaries in different subjects

●        Reduce the burden on providers by removing the ‘outstanding’ judgement for ITE Ofsted inspections.

What has been the impact of the new bursaries and scholarships announced in October?

●        The changes in eligibility criteria for bursaries in Languages (and physics) has increased applications in applicants wanting to train to teach in languages.  Also the recent introduction of relocation payments for trainees (and teachers) in these subjects.   

●        English bursary this year meant we have more English unsalaried applications.

How well does the current teacher training framework work to prepare new teachers and how could it be improved?

●        The Core Content Framework is underpinned by the same evidence base as the Early Career Framework; there is a danger that trainees will be covering the same content over three years from training to induction, especially if the ITT provider is thorough and adheres to the framework. 

●        It would be good to see greater differentiation between the CCF and the ECF, and more up-to-date evidence being introduced (currently the evidence base is limited to 2019).  This is vital when it comes to preparing new teachers for teaching in 2023 onwards, especially with the inevitable rise of Ai in education, as well as increasing issues with behaviour and wellbeing.

●        Some of the references / evidence base is not fit for purpose, especially those from overseas or with complex research studies that are not easily translatable into the classroom.   Additionally, the CCF and ECF evidence base is concerned with the processes of learning, rather than the pedagogies of teaching. 

●        The length and complexity of the framework can be confusing and overwhelming for new career entrants, although we accept it is the job of the provider to de-code and support the trainees in their navigation of the ‘learn that’ and ‘learn how to’ statements; the issue comes in schools, where mentors and leaders are not familiar with the framework and do not always have the capacity to engage with it (despite training provided).

What has been the impact of the Early Career Framework implemented in September 2021?

●        We have seen a greater number (34%) of ECTs leaving the profession over the last two years than we have seen previously. The main reasons for leaving have been the ‘pressures of workload’ and ‘additional expectations of the ECF programme which were not manageable in the ECT time given’.

●        The introduction of the ECF saw huge amounts of confusion and stress for schools with regards to the complicated registration process, lack of clarity around funding processes and where the ECF sat within statutory induction. This led to the launch of the ECF programme being received quite negatively by schools.

●        We continue to receive feedback that the ECF training is a ‘waste of time’, ‘repetitive’ and ‘teaching mentors to suck eggs’ with ECTs and Mentors stating that they would prefer to be spending that time teaching or working with their mentor. ECTs and Mentors acknowledge the importance of CPD and being reflective practitioners but there is a true sense that they are not receiving high quality CPD through the ECF programme and would much prefer school/phase/subject specific training.

●        The ECF has fundamentally changed the role of the Mentor, whilst a lot of Mentors like the fact that they no longer are required to assess their ECT, there is real concern that because their mentoring time is completely consumed by having to cover the ECF content they have lost that natural mentoring opportunity of supporting their ECT with the time-specific/day-to-day issues outside of the ECF that ECTs need support with. We have gone from a system where the ECT would have mentor time that was completely flexible to focus on their direct needs to a scenario where the mentor is constrained in what they can discuss and this sometimes leads to demands on other colleagues to support the ECT creating extra workload for everyone.

●        The ECF programme does not support ‘non-standard’ ECTs well e.g. ECTs who start part-way through a year, are part-time, transfer from one Lead Provider to another, have a change in Mentor, are completing a reduced induction or require an extension. The complexities around onboarding them and working out where they need to start/what they need to do leads to these ECTs feeling that they are receiving a programme that is not specific to their needs.

●        One of the biggest criticisms we receive feedback on is that the ECF programme doesn’t meet the specific needs of the ECT in terms of their school/subject/phase/setting. The programme feels like a ‘one size fits all’ approach with content that is repetitive and not allowing for any development beyond the CCF. Those ECTs who have gained QTS through a SCITT often comment that their ITT training was better. Those ECTs who gained QTS through a PGCE seem to find the material more useful and a progression from what they accessed during training. ECTs and Mentors struggle with the prescriptiveness of the ECF modules they have to follow in a certain order and would much prefer if the ECT could access the modules in an order that suits their needs.

●        Due to the difficult start to the introduction of the ECF (DfE online service registration difficulties, poor communication from Lead Provider and continued concerns around the quality of the ECF) it has ‘switched off’ a lot of schools from the ECF. We have seen incredibly low attendance rates for Mentor training events. Schools are struggling to release Mentors despite the funding and Mentors are choosing not to attend training not because of when the training is but due to the poor quality of the content. A lot of schools do not see the programme as a priority over other school demands e.g school trips, school productions, clubs that the ECT/Mentor attends instead of a training event.

●        It is deflating for ECTs and Mentors to be immersed in a framework that is not ingrained in a school’s day-to-day language or improvement priorities. Year 2 ECTs are now facing the point where once they have passed induction they will transition to their school’s appraisal/performance management system which is solely based on the Teachers’ Standards and they will no longer refer to ‘learn that’ and ‘learn how to’ statements making the last 3 years of training almost redundant.

●        Another concern we have is the likelihood of schools moving to delivering their own ECF programmes using DfE materials because they feel they will be able to do it better and bespoke it more to their ECTs/Mentors needs.

Are there ways in which teacher training could be improved to address the challenges in recruitment and retention?

●        The increase in training demands post 2024 could be counter productive if it means trainees having to start their courses prior to September because of work commitments and funding issues. 

●        Overall, it is important to recognise issues to do with workload on teacher training programmes and eliminate any unnecessary burdens regarding paperwork.  

●        There was an opportunity in the 2019 EIF to identify hosting trainees as an area of best practice, but this has not been implemented, risking a shortage of trainee placements in schools becoming an issue - a major challenge to teacher recruitment! 

●        As always, funding is an issue and teacher training should be fully funded by the government in all phases and subjects, with the reduction of bursaries if needed.

●        The ITT Market Review has had a negative impact on the morale and sustainability of some ITT provision, and the sector now needs a period of support and stability.

What particular challenges exist in teacher recruitment, training and retention for teachers from different demographic backgrounds?

●        Too few role models or advocates to actively encourage and support people from diverse backgrounds to enter teaching and remain there.

●        Only 6% of school leaders identify as BAME, according to the Department for Education.  More support (e.g. impactful coaching programmes) needed for BAME teachers to progress and remain in schools.

How well does the demographic makeup of the teaching workforce reflect that of the pupils they teach?

●        In terms of ethnicity, the overall teaching workforce does not reflect the diversity of the population (almost half of schools have no BAME teachers) and particularly in North Bucks e.g. one school has a BAME staff population of around 5% whereas the student BAME population is over 50%.

March 2023