鈥淔inally! After 385 days in office, Damian Hinds reveals a proper strategy (and it鈥檚 actually quite good).鈥
That was Schools Week鈥檚 front page when the recruitment and retention strategy landed in February 2019.
The new early career framework (ECF) was described as the strategy鈥檚 鈥渏ewel in the crown鈥. It entitled new teachers to two years of support.
Those involved say the ECF is one of the most successful policies of the past 10 years.
But it relied on a controlling hand from central government, which the education secretary who set the reforms in motion says 鈥渇ill me with horror鈥. Schools Week digs into the teacher development reforms鈥
The golden thread
Justine Greening first proposed the idea of a 鈥榞olden thread鈥 to 鈥渆mpower new teachers with access to the sustained high-quality training and development that every professional needs鈥.
A trained accountant, Greening says she 鈥済ot the most support and training in the early years of my career. It was a juxtaposition to teaching 鈥 when you鈥檙e suddenly thrown into those early years. I wanted to flip it, so teachers would learn from the new experiences, rather than have to cope with them.鈥
The 2017 general election put the underfunding of schools on the map, giving the Department for Education a stronger hand with the Treasury.
At the same time, teacher recruitment and retention was bubbling into a big issue. The department made the case that losing lots of teachers early in their careers was wasting money.
The solution came in January 2019. The recruitment and retention strategy, launched by then education secretary Damian Hinds, contained what was billed as the 鈥渂iggest teaching reform in a generation鈥.
The ECF was the first strand in the new 鈥榞olden thread鈥.
A new core content framework for initial teacher training providers followed in September 2020, with reformed national professional qualifications.
Giving teachers access to professional development 鈥渁t every stage of their career signalled the importance of teaching as a profession, as well as a vocation鈥, says Becky Francis, then chief executive of the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF).
鈥業t wasn鈥檛 just Nick Gibb deciding鈥
Another reason was to 鈥渟hift teacher training away from what ministers saw as the dominance of 鈥榩rogressive鈥 pedagogy, and towards 鈥榚vidence-based鈥 practice, as part of their ongoing battle with 鈥榯he Blob,鈥 recalls policy expert Loic Menzies.
鈥淭he central argument was that teachers are made and not born, and that teaching teachers how to teach, or school leaders how to lead, should follow the same science of learning principles as any other type of learning,鈥 explains Matt Hood, chief executive of Oak National Academy.
鈥淭his was a direct philosophical challenge to the dominant theory of teacher and school training 鈥 constructivism and transformational leadership.鈥
The policy landed well. A key success was getting eight leading sector bodies 鈥 including the usually hostile National Education Union 鈥 to support it.
Also key was using the EEF as 鈥渆vidence guardians鈥 to 鈥渟ign-off on what went into the ECF鈥, says one former adviser. 鈥淚t was based on the best evidence available 鈥 rather than just Nick Gibb deciding.鈥
Interim chief executive of the EEF Chris Paterson, a DfE policy adviser at the time who led on the strategy, adds: 鈥淲e were able to get people to buy into that common ground of supporting teacher professionalism.
鈥淭here was also a (very unusual) sense of shared commitment and buy-in to the idea that the policy would be reviewed and develop over time.鈥
Policymakers: 鈥榮creaming success鈥
The plan was turbo-charged in 2021 when 拢253 million was provided as part of the Covid recovery plan to deliver a target of 500,000 teacher training opportunities across the 鈥済olden thread鈥 by the end of parliament.
鈥淔rom a standing start, we got 96 per cent of schools using the full [ECF] induction programme 鈥 way beyond internal estimates 鈥 and more people enrolled on NPQs than every other year combined pre-reform,鈥 says a former DfE adviser. 鈥淚t has been the most successful thing the department has delivered over the past five years.鈥
While the number of teachers enrolling in initial teacher training (ITT) and national professional qualifications (NPQs) undershot the target, the number on the ECF overshot 鈥 meaning the government fell about 20,000 short of its target, insiders say.
鈥淕iven how ridiculously ambitious the targets were 鈥 I think it was a screaming success,鈥 says another former adviser.
But just as key to the policy was its implementation.
The model involved whittling 700 teaching schools down to 80-odd teaching school hubs 鈥 with only the highest-performing meeting strict criteria. These hubs would work with a handful of lead providers to turn the frameworks into a curriculum. Ofsted was charged with inspecting quality.
鈥淲e focused on building a system, rather than an individual programme,鈥 says another adviser. 鈥淭hat is just light years away from the usual DfE approach.鈥
But it hinged upon 鈥渧ery tight control鈥 from central government. 鈥淚t is the only way to have a really precise impact from Whitehall on the system,鈥 adds the ex-adviser.
Becks Boomer-Clark, chief executive of the Academies Enterprise Trust, adds: 鈥淲e now have a framework which is understood, delivery infrastructure across the country and, most importantly, a shared entitlement for teachers which is the envy of many countries across the world.鈥
Teachers: 鈥榳orkload getting in way鈥
But what was the view from the frontline?
Teacher Tapp found discontent in areas, including training being too prescriptive and heavy workloads, with mentors using weekends to complete their training. One in five new teachers said it was less likely to make them stay in the profession.
Nearly half of primary heads in 2022 said they would consider taking fewer new teachers because of the commitments associated with the reforms, despite funding for the timetable reduction.
As an Ofsted review put it, teacher workload was 鈥済etting in the way鈥.
The DfE鈥檚 evaluation of the scheme鈥檚 second year found while provider-led training was 鈥渞ated highly鈥, there were 鈥渇rustrations around perceived inflexibilities鈥 and a 鈥渓ack of tailoring of content鈥 to teachers鈥 needs and school context.
Becky Allen, the co-founder of Teacher Tapp, says: 鈥淚t wasn鈥檛 liked because it was seen as a burden and it was delivered, at least initially, in a very non-subject specific way.
鈥淭hat鈥檚 what happens when you try to do stuff in a hurry. Ideally, you鈥檇 bring things in more slowly and get them right 鈥 like developing courses for individual subjects, or just for primary.鈥
But Tom Rees, chief executive of the Ormiston Academies Trust, who oversaw delivery of the ECF whilst working at Ambition Institute, says 鈥渕ost criticism came from people not with any direct involvement in the programmes themselves, and often those with a market interest or particularly ideological position.
鈥淭he perspective we cared most about, was the early career teacher themselves and their experience was overwhelmingly positive鈥.鈥
And Menzies says 鈥渟ometimes in politics, there鈥檚 a short window of opportunity in which there鈥檚 some cash and political will available. There鈥檚 a risk of making perfect the enemy of good. At least the big move has been made now and the door is opened for further refinement.鈥
In practice, that commitment to 鈥榬eviewing as you go鈥 allowed ministers to take stock and tweak 鈥 with some key changes already made, including rolling the ITT and ECF frameworks into one.
Retention worse than before
If the ECF is judged on retention, then the jury is well and truly still out. Of the 2022-23 ECT cohort, 88.8 per cent were still in the profession one year later. This compares to 87.6 per cent in 2020, pre-ECF 鈥 although covid makes comparisons difficult.
It鈥檚 also an improvement on the 87.2 per cent in the first year of the ECF.
But Jack Worth, lead economist at the National Foundation for Educational Research, says the 鈥渆merging evidence on its impact is that it has not led to transformed levels of ECT retention鈥.
Just 79.3 per cent of teachers on the first ECF national cohort were still in the profession two years later, similar to the previous cohort.
The wider recruitment and retention strategy was an 鈥渦tter failure. There was nothing to say 鈥榯his is the gap 鈥 and this is how we鈥檒l close it鈥,鈥 says a former official.
鈥淎nd that鈥檚 because they knew the strategy wouldn鈥檛 do that. There was nothing radical on Ofsted, teacher pay or workload 鈥 all the things evidence suggests would make a big impact.鈥
Three of the policies 鈥 including a 鈥楳atch.com-style鈥 website for teacher job shares and piloting sabbaticals for experienced staff 鈥 were quietly dropped.
But Jonathan Simons, a partner at Public First, says 鈥渙ther than pay, there鈥檚 not many other levers for government鈥.
鈥淪hort of a permanent weak private sector labour market and infinite money 鈥 there鈥檚 not a lot the department can do. The slightly awkward truth is we know why a lot of people leave 鈥 they don鈥檛 like their manager, or their school isn鈥檛 tackling behaviour or workload. It鈥檚 more of a school issue.鈥
Sir Hamid Patel, chief executive of Star Academies, adds the 鈥渞eal test should be how the reforms are affecting the most disadvantaged children 鈥his should be our measure of success, not how individual institutions or the adults who work in them fare.
鈥淲e must demand better, longitudinal evaluation of policy interventions on workforce reforms 鈥 there鈥檚 too much weight given to partisan opinion around because of the scarcity of high-quality impact evaluation.鈥
Central control 鈥榟orror鈥
A particular bone of contention is the central control behind the reforms.
鈥淪peaking as a chartered accountant, it fills me with horror to think that any minister in Whitehall would be deciding what that profession’s training requirements are,鈥 Greening adds.
She originally envisioned a body like the Chartered College of Teaching leading on the reforms.
鈥淚 wanted teaching to have more agency, like other professions. [That means] taking more of a role in shaping their own development. If not, it鈥檚 completely disempowering.鈥
Cat Scutt, deputy chief executive of the Chartered College of Teaching, adds the 鈥渢ight control doesn鈥檛 necessarily send out a great signal to the sector about trust鈥.
But the reforms took a more controversial turn when the ITT market review was launched in 2021, with the intent to 鈥渟lim down the sector鈥.
It forced teacher training providers to apply for reaccreditation.
鈥淧eople really didn鈥檛 like that they had to apply for their own job 鈥 and what made you successful was how closely you adhered to the new [ITT] framework,鈥 says Sam Twiselton, who sat on the government鈥檚 expert groups across the years.
鈥淭hose who had not liked [the framework] before were now incandescent. It was a big, horrible process where people would survive 鈥 or not.鈥
Training curriculum: 鈥榯he new battleground鈥
Universities had felt particularly threatened since Michael Gove and Gibb launched their assault to end 鈥渢he Blob鈥檚鈥 supposed 鈥減rogressive鈥 grip on education, with school trainers favoured.
鈥淭he ideological battleground actually wasn鈥檛 between universities and SCITTs [school-based providers] 鈥 it became [the ITT] curriculum. But it was just as threatening,鈥 says Twiselton.
The University of Cambridge initially refused to reapply, accusing ministers of 鈥減rescribing鈥 how it should deliver training.
It ended up in. But smaller SCITTs closed, or merged with bigger organisations, as a quarter of providers were culled.
Was it worth the uproar?
One adviser involved says: 鈥淭he challenge was 鈥榯his is going to kill sufficiency鈥 鈥 there wouldn鈥檛 be sufficent places available where needed. But it didn鈥檛. You could challenge whether it鈥檚 made a difference 鈥 but I think it鈥檚 focused minds.鈥
However Twiselton says it constituted 鈥渁 huge pendulum swing away from the Govian ideology [of autonomy and a school-led system] towards government controlling things鈥.
Ed Vainker, chief executive of the Reach Foundation, adds: 鈥淲hen we look at the past ten years more broadly 鈥 we鈥檝e seen a Conservative government who are supposed to be skeptical about the role of the state, playing a very prominent role in a lot of areas where they haven鈥檛 before.鈥
Gibb鈥檚 puppet institutes?
Another issue has been the few, cherry-picked sector experts inside the tent 鈥 either sitting on groups to inform the frameworks, or the same national providers being chosen to deliver the schemes. Particularly when the two overlapped.
Twiselton says it made the reforms 鈥渃liquey, group thinky and more vulnerable to being blamed when things don鈥檛 go quite as well鈥.
However a treadmill of civil servants means 鈥渋f you鈥檙e doing something that is systematic and strategic over time 鈥 like the golden thread 鈥 you need people involved from the beginning.
鈥淭he civil service wasn鈥檛 able to do that 鈥 but we did get things done in a way we otherwise wouldn鈥檛.鈥
The government has also relied on big national providers such as the Ambition Institute or the National Institute of Teaching to deliver the programmes.
Sources say the latter was apparently born from an idea by Gavin Williamson, the former education secretary, to put Katharine Birbalsingh, who leads Michaela School in north London, in charge of ITT. It didn鈥檛 progress and instead the institute was set up to become an 鈥渆xemplar鈥 of teacher training.
But David Spendlove, professor of education at the University of Manchester, says 鈥渉olding the power to award contracts to providers gives the government unprecedented leverage to manipulate this 鈥榤arket鈥欌.
鈥淲e are witnessing the structural reconfiguration and transformation of teacher development in favour of outsourcing to tight-knit, ideologically aligned organisations, operating under the 鈥榬espectable鈥 cover of low-cost imitation puppet institutes.
鈥淭he decade-long attack on academics led by obdurate minister Gibb makes little sense if it isn鈥檛 precisely and cynically about control.鈥
Some are also concerned over the conflict of people writing the frameworks belonging to the big providers, who then went on to make financial gains by winning contracts to deliver them.
But Marie Hamer, the executive director of strategy and impact at Ambition Institute, the largest ECF provider, and who was involved in writing the frameworks, says the system meant roll-out could be done 鈥渁t scale, without any cold spots 鈥 and in the middle of a pandemic.
鈥淭here was quality oversight which meant we were really confident of consistency and that every new teacher would get to become good on these core set of skills.鈥
What next?
Labour has promised to stick with the ECF 鈥 perhaps a sign of success in itself 鈥 although it plans to 鈥渦pdate鈥 it.
But the last government scaled back its funding for NPQs, leaving Labour with a decision as to whether they make use of the existing infrastructure to roll out its promised “teacher training entitlement鈥.
鈥淧eople have accepted the concept [of the golden thread] is a good thing, even if they don鈥檛 like the details. But now is the time to loosen it up 鈥 and give back more ownership and agency to teachers,鈥 says Twiselton.
鈥淚f we don鈥檛, we鈥檒l end up with this really dry, dusty thing that, at its worst, might be adding to the retention problem because it鈥檚 seen by teachers as 鈥榶et another thing I鈥檝e got to do, and nobody鈥檚 trusting me either鈥.鈥
She also urged central government to hand some of its power to a professional body such as the CCT.
鈥淭hat鈥檚 what happens in other professions. Where we went wrong was having a small number of sometimes quite junior civil servants having to make really expert judgments that they were just not equipped to make, like closing ITT providers.鈥
But Rees says sector bodies or groups are open to 鈥渃apture by market and ideological interests, rather being independent or representative of the interests of trainee teachers or pupils.
鈥淕iven that education is so political, a lot of perspectives are ideological and so DfE probably does have to play more of a role until we have a stronger system architecture.鈥
Scutt wants a wider review into 鈥渨hat teacher job roles look like鈥 to ensure there are pathways that encourage people into mentoring roles 鈥 and recognise and reward expert teachers for staying in the classroom.
Melanie Renowden, chief executive of NIOT, adds the 鈥減rofound challenges 鈥 clearly indicate we need a new approach to making teaching an attractive profession鈥.
鈥淭he school system needs a long-term workforce plan so it can focus on retention, the employee offer, professional development and leadership pipelines as well as recruitment,鈥 she adds. 鈥淥ther complex sectors, like the NHS, are working to build plans that span decades, not just years.鈥
A huge drop in pupil numbers could lessen the stress on teacher numbers.
But Allen says that if you believe there鈥檚 a bigger, systemic problem 鈥 鈥渨hich is that teachers in England do not stay in the profession as long as they do in other countries鈥 鈥 then the 鈥渨hy鈥 had to be taken seriously.
鈥淯ltimately, this isn鈥檛 anything to do with teacher development 鈥 it鈥檚 accountability, workload and behaviour of pupils.鈥