Previous Section | Index | Home Page |

**19 May 2008 : Column 164W**—continued

**Mr. Laws:**
To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the percentage increase in the cost of teachers' pay was in * (a)* 2005, * (b)* 2006 and * (c)* 2007; what estimate he has made of the percentage increase in (i) 2008, (ii) 2009 and (iii) 2010; and if he will make a statement. [203492]

**Jim Knight:**
The estimated percentage increases in the costs of teachers' pay are shown in the following table:

Teacher Paybill—England only | |

Percentage increase on previous year | |

Notes: 1 The Paybill figures include Superannuation and National Insurance costs and the pay awards given for each year. Figures were adjusted to reflect actual teacher numbers up to 2007-8. Teacher numbers for 2008-9 onwards have been assumed to be constant at 2007-8 levels. 2. Figures for 2008-9 onwards are based on recommendations in STRB 17th report for headline award and London enhancements. 3. For modelling purposes the Paybill figures employed up to 2006-07 financial year were taken from the previous year Paybill estimations. 4. From 2006-07 onwards, pay settlements are awarded on an academic year basis. Financial year costs are calculated as 7/12 of the current academic year costs plus 5/12 of the preceding academic year costs. 5. Figures show increase in overall Paybill and not changes in Paybill per teacher. |

Teachers' pay increases are based on recommendations by the independent School Teachers' Review Body (STRB). The aforementioned figures assume implementation of the recommendations in the

**19 May 2008 : Column 165W**

most recent STRB report, which for September 2008 are subject to statutory consultation, and for September 2009 and 2010 include indicative pay awards.

**Mr. Laws:**
To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the * (a)* nominal and * (b)* real growth in the teacher paybill per teacher was in each year since 1997; what estimate he has made of the (i) nominal and (ii) real growth in the paybill per teacher in each year to 2011; and if he will make a statement. [203494]

**Jim Knight:**
The estimated percentage increases in teacher paybill costs per head are shown in the following table:

Estimated teacher paybill per head —England only | ||

Paybill per head (percentage increase) | ||

Cash | Real | |

Notes: 1 There is a break in the time-series in year 2005-06 The break relates to a change in the modelling methodology for supply teachers costs. 2 The paybill figures include Superannuation and National Insurance costs and the pay awards given for each year. Figures were adjusted to reflect actual teacher numbers up to 2007-8. Teacher numbers for 2008-9 onwards have been assumed to be constant at 2007-8 levels. 3 Figures for 2008-9 onwards are based on recommendations in 17th STRB report for headline award and London Enhancements. 4 Real terms figures calculated in 2006-7 prices using 28 March 2008 GDP Deflators. From 2006-07 onwards, pay settlements are awarded on an academic year basis. Financial year costs are calculated as 7/12 of the current academic year costs plus 5/12 of the preceding academic year costs. |

**Mr. Laws:**
To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how much each local authority

**19 May 2008 : Column 166W**

spent on * (a)* teacher and * (b)* support staff redundancies in each year from 1997 to 2007; and if he will make a statement. [205990]

**Jim Knight:**
This information is not collected centrally by the Department.

**Mr. Graham Stuart:**
To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) how many officials in his Department are working on the development of the Masters level teaching qualification; and if he will make a statement; [206229]

(2) when courses leading to the Masters level teaching qualification will be provided; and if he will make a statement. [206236]

**Jim Knight:**
A number of officials in the Department are working, with colleagues at the Training and Development Agency for Schools, on the development of Masters in Teaching and Learning (MTL), as one part of their responsibilities. They will commence consultation with schools and higher education institutions on the content of the new qualification in the near future. We expect the first teachers to start the MTL in September 2009.

**Mr. Graham Stuart:**
To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of candidates failed initial teacher training in each of the last 10 years; and if he will make a statement. [206234]

**Jim Knight:**
Information about failure to complete Initial Teacher Training (ITT) courses is only available for trainees in their final year of training. The following tables show, for academic years for which data are available, the number of final year Initial Teacher Training (ITT) trainees who did not gain Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) in their final year of training, and of these the numbers and percentages who left their course before completion and where the outcome of QTS is unknown for:

1. Mainstream Initial Teacher Training (ITT) trainees

2. Employment Based ITT (EBITT) trainees

1. Mainstream final year ITT trainees | ||||||||

Number of mainstream final year trainees who have not gained QTS | Percentage of mainstream final year trainees who have not gained QTS | |||||||

Total number of mainstream trainees in their final year | Number of mainstream final year trainees gaining QT S | Known not to have completed course | Undefined outcome | Other outcome | Total | Known not to have completed course | Total | |

Notes:1. Includes trainees from Universities and other Higher Education (HE) institutions, School Centred Initial Teacher Training (SCITT) and Open Universities (OU), but exclude EBITT. 2. Numbers are individually rounded to the nearest 10, therefore may not sum. 3. ‘Other outcome’ includes final year trainees who are yet to complete their course, those with withheld QTS (including those where their skills test was not met, their standards were not met and where both their standards and skills test were not met) and those where the skill test has not been taken (include those whose standards were met and those whose standards were not met) Source:TDA performance profiles |

2. Employment Based ITT (EBITT) trainees | ||||||||

Number of EBITT final year trainees who have not gained QTS | Percentage of EBITT final year trainees who have not gained QTS | |||||||

Total number of EBITT trainees in their final year | Number of EBITT final year trainees gaining QTS | Known not to have completed course | Undefined outcome | Other outcome | Total | Known not to have completed course | Total | |

Notes:1. Includes trainees through EBITT only. 2. Numbers are individually rounded to the nearest 10, therefore may not sum. 3. ‘Other outcome’ includes final year trainees who are yet to complete their course, those with withheld QTS (including those where their skills test was not met, their standards were not met and where both their standards and skills test were not met) and those where the skill test has not been taken (include those whose standards were met and those whose standards were not met) Source:TDA performance profiles |

Index | Home Page |