TTR0042

Written evidence submitted by York St John University

The current situation regarding teacher recruitment and retention 

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

At York St John University (YSJ) we offer both primary and secondary phase Initial Teacher Education (ITE) programmes and are considered a strong provider in the region, working with around 20 local authorities and 450 local and regional schools.  We are experiencing recruitment difficulties impacting on both our secondary and primary provision.  Reviewing evidence from student teachers, prospective candidates, current students and school partners/colleagues we consider the main factors as follows:

• Financial pressures – Bursaries for PGCEs are not available to student teachers for many secondary subject areas and are not available for those undertaking primary programmes.  Whilst the bursary system is supported in principle the difference across subjects for example, is considered unfair - particularly when there is no requirement for those qualifying for a large bursary to do even one year of teaching (hence the increase of ‘bursary tourists’).  Current student teachers have raised finance as a key concern that impacts on their ability to complete their programme and this is also impacting on their wellbeing.  Some student teachers find it necessary to undertake part time work that negatively impacts on their focus on their programmes and ability to successfully complete their programmes.  Transport costs to placement schools is regularly cited as an issue by those students not in receipt of a bursary - this has been raised with DfE colleagues at various national meetings.  Financial support for all ITE students is absolutely essential in order to recruit the student teachers necessary to ensure teacher supply.

• School placement issues – the availability of school placements is a major threat to recruitment and to the retention on our programmes. School placements are integral to all programmes (UG and PGCE) and for PGCE our students are in school for two thirds of their programme (University centred PGCE) or 4 days each week during the whole programme (School Direct).  Hence the requirement for ‘quality’ school placements and experienced mentors is essential to our recruitment.  There has been a shift to ‘school-led’ ITE over the last 10 years with the introduction of School Direct and this has put pressure on schools to be more involved in the training and education of student teachers in partnership with universities.  At YSJ we have a strong reputation for working in partnership with local and regional schools but are finding it increasingly difficult to source placements.  Schools are under immense pressure with a range of new responsibilities placed on them, for example the introduction of the Early Career Framework has meant that many mentors are now overwhelmed with supporting new entrants to the profession and many schools are reporting they do not have the capacity to provide mentoring for ITE students. These issues have been evidenced by the recently published report March 2023 – Evaluation of the national roll-out of the early career framework induction programmes.

This is a complex problem – some schools are unable to provide placements for student teachers as they do not have the capacity to support them with the demands of mentoring, and the recently introduced ITT Core Content Framework that schools have to integrate (in liaison with ITE providers). In addition, whilst government policy has been to shift teacher education to schools, there is no associated requirement for schools to engage with or support ITE.  Hence schools are not compelled to offer placements to student teachers and in the pressured contexts that schools are working in (including high-stakes impending Ofsted inspections) support for ITE placements is slipping lower down their priority list.  As the new ITT Criteria for 2024 is introduced as a result of the ITT Market Review - the situation will be exacerbated.  For example, lead mentors are required to have 36 hours of initial training and 12 hours refresher training each year, other mentors are required to have a minimum of 24 hours initial training and then 6 hours refresher training each year. In addition to their training, mentors will be required to support student teachers with 15 hours in the classroom each week (and associated tasks) and 2 hours per week mentoring (currently 1 hour).  This will place incredible pressure on schools with school partners indicating this will force them out of supporting ITE students and thus impacting very severely on our ability to recruit to programmes, with a subsequent negative impact on local and national teacher supply.

• Perception of the profession – evidence from discussions with undergraduates suggests that the continual negative reports on teaching and teachers in the media (including social media) is putting them off applying for PGCE programmes, impacting on recruitment. Media reports around teacher workload, lack of autonomy, pressures from Ofsted, behaviour issues in schools, as well as directly negative comments from government ministers, are not serving to attract people into the profession and the potential rewards of teaching (that are rarely reported). This has been amplified recently with the coverage of teacher strike action and recent publication of a DfE report  on the Working lives of teachers and leaders (April 2023) that has further illuminated the issues facing teachers. This is resulting in a shortage of people applying for ITE programmes with subsequent impact on future teacher supply.

• APPLY – the system currently used for recruiting to PGCE is problematic.  Students now have four choices of provider and can be interviewed at all of these before deciding which to choose.  This means that significant resources are used to compete for prospective student teachers as interview days throughout the year are resourced without any guarantee of recruitment – this is a problem, for example, as smaller partners serving rural and remote communities may remove themselves from ITE as this process is costly, impacting severely the teacher supply to those areas.  The previous system where candidates ranked choices in order of preference seemed to work much more effectively.

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?

Despite the bursary system there are issues recruiting to mathematics, sciences and MFL on our PGCE secondary programmes – this is reflected in the teacher vacancies in these subjects across the region. This has implications for ‘cold spots’ resulting in non-specialist teachers having to teach these subjects.  School partners report that this is particularly a problem in schools with a ‘require improvement’ or ‘inadequate’ Ofsted grading, which are more likely to be schools serving disadvantaged communities.

In addition, our school partners report that many schools are resorting to employing unqualified teachers and are becoming reliant on supply teachers – again this is mainly in areas serving communities where there is high socio-economic deprivation, meaning that the pupils in these schools are further disadvantaged. It is noted that there is a higher number of pupils with SEND in schools serving ‘disadvantaged’ communities and the absence of qualified and specialist teachers in these schools impacts on their progress and outcomes.  Pupils with Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) may not always have access to a purposefully trained teaching assistants (TAs) or qualified higher-level TAs (HLTAs) due to staffing shortages and resource issues.  In addition, there are reports that Pupil Premium funding is often not used to target specific pupils in schools, but instead used to top up school deficit budgets. These issues are compounded by a narrowing of the curriculum in some schools (particularly those serving more disadvantaged communities), due to staffing and resource issues, and limited extra-curricular programme, further limiting opportunities for pupils in these schools. 

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

After consulting with our school partners and colleagues across the region we suggest the following actions are necessary:

• The ITT Criteria for 2024 needs to be revisited as a matter of urgency (as part of the reaccreditation process).  The expectations on mentors and increased school placements (introduction on Intensive Training and Practice Placements) are undoubtedly going to lead to schools withdrawing support for ITE placements.  All our school partners are highly concerned about this.  There is no evidence the changes will improve ITE programmes, but plenty of evidence they will impact negatively on recruitment. In addition, the funding the government have allocated for providers to support the implementation of the ITT criteria is only available for one year and needs to be flexible in terms of how providers can access this.
• Funding needs to be reinstated for current School Direct partners – those who will become Lead Partners following the end of School Direct, working with accredited providers.  Many of these partners used to receive funding to support ITE work but this has ceased with all funding going to Teaching School Hubs (TSHs) in the region.  TSHs are not devolving any funding to School Direct partners and hence many are likely to become unsustainable.  Should these partners leave the ITE market, this will exacerbate recruitment and retention in those areas.
• Funding for student teachers, including the bursary system, needs to be considered in more depth.  All student teachers require support as our schools need quality teachers in all subjects and across all phases.  More equitable funding would attract more applicants to ITE programmes.
• Additional funding is needed for schools to support increased PPA (planning, preparation and assessment) time for teachers, to make workloads more manageable
• Accountability structures in schools needs to be reviewed – the current framework for Ofsted inspections and government focus on performance data is putting high levels of pressure on teachers (and pupils) and leading to teachers leaving the profession (many of our student teachers report they don’t anticipate staying in the profession for very long because of these pressures)
• A broader range of education professionals should be included on ‘expert advisory panels’ and in discussions/forums about education policy.  There has been a shift towards a very small number of influential people involved in decision making – an example of this is the ‘expert advisory panel’ for the ITT Market Review that was made up of just five people. 

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

There seems to be little evidence across our partnership that this is benefitting recruitment.  Whilst there has been an increase in applications for some subjects carrying a large bursary, many of the applicants are unsuitable and do not have appropriate qualifications (for example a candidate applying for PGCE Secondary mathematics with a degree in Wildlife and Countryside Management and their highest qualification in maths a GCSE). There are various contributing factors why people are not applying for PGCE programmes as outlined above, and all need to be addressed in order to support recruitment – funding is key, but just one of the issues.)

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

In recent years the ITT Core Content Framework (CCF) has been introduced that is intended to be just part of the ITE curriculum. In reality it is a challenge to include other things we consider essential, due to time limitations.  Teaching is a challenging, complex and intellectually demanding profession, so that ITE programmes need to draw on a broader range of research and evidence. The evidence and research advocated in the CCF is limited with understanding of what is ‘best’ practice coming from a small advisory group rather than a broad range of educational experts.  Hence the current framework should be used as a guide as opposed to being mandatory, to ensure that providers have more opportunity to expand provision to include a broader range of evidence and research.  The focus should be on teacher education rather than teacher training.

The ITT Market Review has led to upheaval in the sector without evidence it was necessary. The review has led to previously good and outstanding providers failing to secure accreditation and this will have an impact on future recruitment. The review and subsequent outcomes have undermined the ITE sector, reflecting a lack of trust by the government. Stage 1 submissions, were assessed by DfE staff with little or no experience of working in ITE. The new ITT criteria for 2024 has necessitated significant changes to ITE programmes without any evidence this will lead to improvements. Schools were not consulted about their role in the new framework (mentoring requirements and the new intensive training and practice placements) and many are now sharing major concerns around their capacity to meet expectations with many indicating they might not be able to support ITE placements in the future as a direct result of this.  Those providers successful at Stage 1 accreditation are now involved in time consuming and costly Stage 2 preparations that are largely bureaucratic and being ‘checked’ by DfE associates.  As well as this reflecting a continuing lack of trust in the sector, this is taking up significant time and resources that would be better devoted to supporting our students and partner schools. 

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

At YSJ we offer support for our students following completion of their programmes with a designated member of staff who has also completed a doctoral thesis on early career teachers (ECTs).  Evidence from this and feedback from our school partners is suggesting that schools are less likely to recruit ECTs because of the cost implications for mentoring as part of the Early Career Framework (ECF) and they are preferring to recruit staff a few years into their career who do not get the same reduction of their timetables as ECTs.   Schools are now having to support ECTs with mentoring (for an increased induction period) and this means there is less capacity for mentors to support ITE students (especially given that this takes mentors out of the classroom themselves, impacting on pupils in the schools).  There are many reports that the framework is based on a limited research base rather than including a broader range of pedagogies and mentors are finding it too restrictive (e.g., the instructional coaching model).  ECTs are reporting that much of the content is a repetition of what they have covered in ITE programmes and is not specific to their individual needs.

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

Please refer to the response given to the above question ‘What action should the Department take to address the challenges in teacher recruitment and retention?’ as this has been addressed from a teacher education perspective. 

How does teacher training in England compare internationally, and what are the benefits and disadvantages of the English system?

YSJ is represented on The International Teacher Education Research Collective (ITERC) which is an active international research group conducting studies into factors impacting teacher education in different nations. Members include teacher educators and academics from five continents. As such we have an understanding of how the English system is perceived with discussions focussed around the shift to a schools-based system for ITE when international practice situates ITE within higher education with Masters level status of teachers as an expectation.  There is a perception of lack of autonomy for teacher educators in England, for example in the curriculum (CCF) and the narrow research base this draws on.  The high stakes accountability and performance culture is considered a significant disadvantage of the English system with particular concerns around the impact of this on both teachers and pupils. 

ITERC has various research interests including the knowledge base of teacher education, the ethics of teacher education and the relationship between policy and practice. Representatives from the group are able to speak to these themes in person if required.

How do challenges in teacher recruitment, training and retention compare to those being faced in other professions/ sectors of the economy, and is there anything that can be learned from other professions/ sectors of the economy? 

It is difficult to respond to this question without full understanding of other professions and sectors of the economy.  However, it is noted by school partners and colleagues that post-pandemic shifts in relation to ways of working that are apparent in other professions are not reflected in teaching and this may impact on recruitment and retention as more flexible working arrangements are valued.

What is clear from colleagues in the sector and school partners is that the status of teaching should be improved with acknowledgement that the profession is challenging, complex and intellectually demanding.  93% of children in the country are educated in state funded schools and the teachers in those schools are instrumental in the learning journeys and outcomes for all those children – in many countries this is acknowledged with teachers afforded status and respect and the appropriate on-going support to ensure they are able to meet the needs of all children.  This is not the case in England where government policy seems to be framing teachers as mere facilitators and technicians as control over the curriculum for example is increasingly centralised. This needs to be addressed with trust placed in the educational experts within our schools and universities.

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

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

There are limited numbers of applicants to some teacher education programmes from diverse backgrounds (e.g., BAME, working class, LGBTQ+) which perhaps reflects the lack of role models from diverse backgrounds in the teaching workforce.

There is under-representation of male teachers in primary education, and in particular Early Years settings.

Research suggests that teachers with mental health conditions are particularly challenged by the demands of teaching, but also are under-supported in the profession to manage mental health and the workload – particularly for young teachers or ECTs.

There are reported issues around mentoring and (lack of) recognition for the value of different experiences, backgrounds and knowledge that are leading to some student teachers leaving programmes.

April 2023