Education CommitteeFurther written evidence submitted by NASUWT

The NASUWT’s submission sets out the Union’s views on issues relating to recruitment into School Direct initial teacher training programme for the academic year 2013–14. The submission is informed by the Union’s regular engagement with its teacher and school leader members and organisations involved in the delivery of initial teacher training.

General issues related to the School Direct programme are addressed in the evidence submitted by the NASUWT to the Committee’s follow up Inquiry to its report, Great Teachers: attracting, training and retaining the best.

The NASUWT is the largest union representing teachers and headteachers in the UK.

Recruitment into School Direct

1. The Committee will be aware of concerns expressed by established providers of higher education institution (HEI)-centred initial teacher training (ITT) that the decision by Ministers to support development of the School Direct programme by diverting funding away from HEI-led provision is leading to significant under recruitment into ITT courses, particularly in key shortage subjects.1

2. It is evident that there have been significant issues in relation to recruitment into ITT since the introduction of the School Direct programme. The most recent figures from the Graduate Teacher Training Registry (GTTR) confirm that the total number of applications for higher education-led ITT fell this year by 6.5%, from 35,227 applicants for courses starting in 2012 to 32,931 for courses starting in 2013.2

3. However, in noting assertions by the Department for Education (DfE) that recruitment into ITT during this period has increased, it should be recognised that the DfE has sought to conceal this decline by including in its figures 3,509 applicants for its School Direct programme who did not apply for teacher training through any other route and who were therefore not included in the GTTR ITT application data.3

4. The Committee will be concerned to note that applications for mathematics courses, despite significantly increased financial incentives, declined by over 10%, applications for English fell by 16%, while applications for other English Baccalaureate (EBacc) subjects also declined; for example, history by 5.1% and geography by 22%. The impact on subjects located outside the EBacc has been even more striking. For example, applications for design and technology fell by 44%, art by 16% and music by 13%. Primary teacher training applications also fell by 3%.4

5. While the Union does not discount the potential impact of other factors on levels of ITT recruitment, including the state of the wider graduate labour market and the degree to which Coalition Government policies have influenced perceptions among graduates of the attractiveness of teaching as a career option, concerns raised by HEI providers of ITT that School Direct has had a negative impact on levels of recruitment will be of profound concern to the Committee and therefore justify its decision to investigate these issues further.

6. The NASUWT therefore believes that notwithstanding the evidence that may emerge from the Committee’s short Inquiry into the impact of School Direct on recruitment into ITT, the complexity and potential significance of this issue warrants a more detailed investigation by the Committee into the implications of this policy on maintaining adequate levels of teacher supply in future.

7. In particular, the NASUWT draws the attention of the Committee to legitimate concerns that Schools Direct training programmes are less rigorous than those provided by other established routes, given that there are no clear expectations about the degree of HEI involvement in the training provided through School Direct or any guarantee that a teaching qualification will be awarded to School Direct trainees at the end of the programme. These concerns and their potential implications for future teacher quality are considered in further detail in the Union’s response to the Committee’s concurrent Inquiry on general issues related to School Direct and the establishment of a College of Teaching.

8. In considering levels of recruitment into School Direct, the Committee will note that the Schools Direct programme involves an “expectation” that trainees will be employed in their placement schools upon completion of their training. This is likely to have been seen by potential trainees as a powerful incentive to apply for the Scheme. However, there is, in reality, no guarantee of post-training employment, generating, therefore, a genuine risk that the credibility of School Direct will be undermined in future if it becomes clear that expectations of employment are not realised in practice.

9. The NASUWT is further concerned by reports that the high priority given by Ministers to maximising recruitment levels into School Direct programmes has led to applicants for alternative courses of ITT being subjected to direct and significant pressure to transfer their application to School Direct. The use of such practices can only be regarded as wholly unacceptable as they may involve applicants selecting School Direct on the basis of subjective and incomplete information and guidance. The Union therefore recommends that the Committee investigates fully the appropriateness School Direct recruitment activities of the National College for Teaching and Leadership in this respect.

10. In taking forward its work in this area, the Committee will wish to have regard to the demographic profile of applicants for School Direct and that of those selected to participate in the programme when this information becomes available. The NASUWT is concerned that those responsible for the management of School Direct at school level may be more concerned with selecting applicants they identify as best placed to meet specific needs in their schools and might therefore underemphasise important system-wide recruitment priorities, including the recruitment of trainees from groups under-represented in the teaching workforce.

July 2013