|Date:||15 July 2016|
|Authors:||Rebecca Allen , Chris Belfield , Ellen Greaves , Caroline Sharp and Matt Walker|
Teacher recruitment and retention are increasingly challenging for schools as the pools of graduates in key subjects decline and pupil numbers grow. New IFS research released today reveals around 40% of teachers who begin their initial training are not in a state school job five years later. That means of 35,000 or so individuals training to become teachers each year some 14,000 are not teaching five years later. Initial teacher training is expensive, costing an average of £23,000 per trainee taking into account costs to government and schools. The high drop-out rate means that on average more than £38,000 is spent on training for every teacher still in post five years after completing training.
This new research, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, also shows how routes into teaching have changed in recent years, and looks at the costs, benefits and retention rates for each route. School-led routes have grown quickly, with ‘School Direct’ accounting for around one-third of trainees in 2015–16. Teach First has also expanded now accounting for 5% of entrants, although more than 40% of trainees are still trained through traditional university-led postgraduate courses.
Key findings from the report include:
“The different routes to achieving qualified teacher status in England cost the taxpayer different amounts per trainee. The longer term costs are even more varied, due to differences in retention rates across routes. Dramatic changes to the system of initial teacher training should be based on assessments of the costs of each route in comparison to the benefit it brings, which has evidently not occurred to date. Greater policy attention is also need on how to retain teachers in the long-run. ”, said Ellen Greaves, a co-author of the report.
“A significant and increasing cost of training teachers is the tax-free bursaries awarded to graduates on certain routes, which are not conditional on ever entering the teaching workforce. The effectiveness of these grants needs to be evaluated, both in terms of the quality of graduates they attract and how long these graduates remain as teachers”, said Chris Belfield, a co-author of the report.
Notes to Editors:
1. For embargoed copies of the report or other queries, contact: Bonnie Brimstone at IFS: 020 7291 4800/07730 667013, firstname.lastname@example.org
2. The Nuffield Foundation is an endowed charitable trust that aims to improve social well-being in the widest sense. It funds research and innovation in education and social policy and also works to build capacity in education, science and social science research. The Nuffield Foundation has funded this project, but the views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Foundation. More information is available at www.nuffieldfoundation.org.
3. Notes to Table 1:
a) HEI refers to Higher Education Institution
b) Central costs refers to the average costs to central government, in 2013–14. These
costs include the cost of direct grants paid to schools, providers and trainees, the cost
of providing student finance, and the cost of bursaries for trainees in priority
subjects. The average cost is calculated using the number of trainees with particular
characteristics that affect funding (such as degree class for bursary funding).
c) School costs refer to the indirect and direct monetary costs reported by schools, and
calculated from external sources, net of monetary benefits to the school.
d) Retention rate refers to the proportion of trainees that are ‘in service’ in state
schools in England the fifth year following expected ‘qualified teacher status’ date.
This is the latest possible retention rate it is possible to calculate using the data
available to us. It is not possible to observe longer-run retention rates for School
Direct, given the timing of the introduction of these routes.