An evaluation of a trial which forgives student loan repayments for teachers in shortage subjects and supply cold spots has found no 鈥渟trong evidence鈥 that it aids retention. by CFE Research into the teacher student loan reimbursement scheme found its influence on teachers鈥 career choices was 鈥渟ubtle鈥, and that its impact was 鈥渓imited鈥 for staff who had concerns over workload and their work-life balance. Proposals to forgive teachers鈥 student loan repayments were first promised in the Conservatives鈥 2017 general election manifesto. A pilot in 26 areas was announced later that year. Teachers who qualified between 2013 and 2021 and spend at least half of their time teaching languages, biology, chemistry, computing or physics are eligible to claim back repayments for up to 11 financial years into their teaching careers. But a statistical analysis conducted by the DfE “did not find strong evidence of anyeffect of receiving [loan forgiveness] on teacher retention”. There was a 鈥渟mall difference in year-on-year leaver rates鈥 between those whose loans were forgiven and those whose loans were not. But the 鈥渟ize and variability of the pilot, with additional variability caused by the Covid pandemic, meant that the analysis was not sufficient to determine whether this was due to a real effect of the pilot, or random variation鈥. The evaluation looked at impact on teacher recruitment and retention, and relied on a survey of teachers and interviews with teachers and heads alongside the statistical analysis. Only a third of those surveyed said financial incentives motivated them to continue in teaching, and 17 per cent were 鈥渧ery motivated鈥 by them. Cash boost can’t counteract workload woes However, the influence of loan reimbursement also increased with the amount. Thirty-two per cent of survey respondents said an annual forgiveness of 拢1,656, or 拢138 per month, would be 鈥渧ery influential鈥 on their decision to remain a teacher, compared to 6 per cent who said the same for a 拢312 annual, or 拢26 monthly reimbursement. Respondents who said teaching did not offer a good work-life balance and that workload was unmanageable were less likely to say they would remain in the profession, with these factors 鈥渟tatistically related to the likelihood to leave teaching within five years鈥. 鈥淭herefore, [loan forgiveness] appears limited in how it counteracts these factors in these specific circumstances.鈥 Forgiveness had 鈥渟ome influence on retaining teachers who thought their workload was manageable and amongst those more concerned about their student debt鈥. The evaluation found individuals entered teaching for 鈥渕any reasons鈥, with financial incentives just 鈥渙ne factor amongst many鈥. In 2019, just 7 per cent of trainees said loan forgiveness would 鈥渟trongly influence鈥 which subject they would teach. The evaluation 鈥渃onsistently found altruistic motivations had a stronger influence on teacher recruitment鈥. Bursaries best cash incentive, but teachers have other motivations At every stage of the evaluation, teachers said they were 鈥渕otivated to teach because they loved their subject and wanted to make a difference to children鈥檚 lives鈥. Bursaries, which pay more money at the beginning of teachers鈥 careers, were noted as the 鈥渕ost influential financial incentive for teachers entering the profession鈥. In 2019, 24 per cent of teachers interested in loan forgiveness said they would consider moving to an eligible school if they could commute. Fourteen per cent said they would move to an eligible area if it was like their current home. The scheme 鈥渆xerted influence alongside other teaching and lifestyle factors when making choices about next steps鈥. The survey found 33 per cent of eligible teachers in pilot areas who did not claim were not aware of the scheme. Many headteachers also reported 鈥渓ittle knowledge鈥 of the programme apart from the general concept. This meant they 鈥渃ould not alert prospective teachers to benefits like TSLR as part of recruitment鈥. Headteachers also 鈥渙ften said they promote targeted financial incentives discretely鈥, because 鈥渕ost thought that such incentives can be divisive within the school鈥. 鈥淭hey explained that teachers who are not eligible for these incentives work just as hard as those who are eligible, which can cause issues amongst staff. On balance, interviewed headteachers did not see [loan forgiveness] as a primary recruitment or retention tool.鈥
D knights 20 January 2024 I have sent many letters to the education ministers asking clearly as to why teachers after decades are still paying hundreds of pounds a month to have trained. With interest rates now at 9% on the debt, salary increases are pointless. Teachers that have continued to take additional post grad qualifications to support the needs of the students, now have to pay over 400拢 a month for two student loans. It is not sensible to do this as the work load increases but the money really doesn鈥檛 as it merely settles the interest. In addition to the appalling behaviour experienced , working hours and traveling- this leads a sensible person to ask why? Student loans should be forgiven after 7 years. Not exploitation of teachers to pay interest on training that is needed to understand such an important job. Why has this not be completed?