Initial Teacher Training
17 October 2013
Summary
Universities are concerned about the impact of the next round of Initial Teacher Training (ITT)
allocations on their ability to sustain teacher training provision. This includes the ability to
sustain support for schools-led routes such as the School Direct programme.
Normal text is DIN-Regular, 11pt
Universities UK is calling on the government to:

Ensure sufficient core allocation is granted to universities to enable them to sustain
provision, including the support that they offer to School Direct partnerships

Provide a greater degree of security to universities as to core allocation in future years,
to enable them to plan and invest for the future

Make it easier to transfer unfilled allocation between different routes to ensure good
candidates are not turned away
School Direct Programme
1. The 2013-14 academic year is the second year of the School Direct programme, which
provides a graduate route to Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) that is managed and led by
schools. Other routes to QTS are a postgraduate route and undergraduate route led by higher
education institutions, and a postgraduate route led by consortia of schools and colleges who
are accredited providers of initial teacher training (SCITT).
2. Under the School Direct programme individual schools are given an allocation and will lead and
manage the training of trainee teachers, as well as the selection process. Lead schools must
work in partnership with an accredited provider of initial teacher training (often a higher
education institution) in providing training. They may also work in partnership with other
schools. The lead school decides upon the structure of the training and the balance of funding
between school and accredited provider
3. Some, but not all, School Direct places will offer an academic qualification (such as the PGCE)
alongside QTS. Accredited providers are accountable and responsible for the conferring of any
academic qualification and QTS.
Existing Initial Teacher Training Routes
4. Aside from School Direct, ITT is led and managed by accredited providers of ITT. Most trainees
are enrolled at higher education institutions, but a small proportion of trainees undertake
School-Centered Initial Teacher Training (SCITT) delivered by consortia of schools and
colleges accredited by the Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA). The
accredited provider is given an allocation of places and is responsible for recruiting trainees, the
structure of the course, and the selection and admissions process.
5. While provider-led ITT is led and managed in most cases by higher education institutions, it is
delivered in partnership with schools and trainee teachers spend a large proportion – often
around two thirds – of their time in these schools. Universities providing ITT work closely with
their partner schools, including on selection and admissions.
6. Newly qualified teacher’s satisfaction with their courses is at an all time high. 90% of the 201011 cohort (the latest for which data is available) rated their courses as ‘good’ or ‘very good’. The
proportion of postgraduate entrants holding a 2.i or first class degree has been increasing.
Overview of Initial Teacher Training Allocation and Acceptances 2013-14
7. The Department for Education sets allocations and recruitment targets for each route in each
year in order to manage the supply of teachers. The allocations for 2013-14 for each route are
shown below.
Route
Allocation
% of Total
Postgraduate (HEI)
20,005
51%
Undergraduate (HEI)
6,785
17%
Postgraduate (Non-HEI)
2,526
6%
School Direct
9,586
25%
Source: Initial Teacher Training Update, National College of Teaching and Learning, September 2013
8. As of the 28th of August, the allocation given to providers (the vast majority of which was
allocated to higher education institutions) for both postgraduate and undergraduate routes was
almost completely filled – 91% of the allocation. However, there had been 6,370 acceptances of
School Direct places representing only 66% of the School Direct allocation.
Parliamentary briefing
9. The overall number of acceptances is slightly below (96% of) the target allocation. However,
over-recruitment in some subjects such as chemistry, history and PE has masked larger
shortfalls in others, including key subjects such as maths and physics. Overall recruitment is
43% below target in physics and 22% below target in maths.
10. This shortfall has been caused because the allocations to higher education institutions has
been decreased in order to accommodate the School Direct programme, but the below-target
recruitment to School Direct has not compensated for this decrease.
Sustainability of University Education Departments and Courses
11. Universities UK is concerned about the impact of the next ITT allocation, to be announced in
the coming weeks, on the ability of universities to sustain teacher training provision, including
their support for the schools-led route. If the number of places allocated to universities is further
reduced some university education departments or courses could become unviable.
12. Some allocations which were sustainable in 2013-14 may well not be sustainable should the
same number be allocated for a further year. Some provision can absorb one year with a
smaller allocation but will not be sustainable if this level of allocation were to be maintained.
13. Where allocations have been reduced, some providers have needed to co-teach different
subject specialisms (eg. history, geography and social sciences being amalgamated into a
wider ‘humanities’ group). This reduces the amount of subject-specific training that can be
delivered, and may therefore reduce the ability of providers to deliver this subject-specific
training to School Direct partners.
14. Only those providers rated by Ofsted as Outstanding have been guaranteed any core allocation
for 2014-15. However, the admissions process for that academic year for universities is already
underway. Universities cannot plan for even the next year’s intake. This inability to plan from
one year to another makes it more difficult for them to make the investment necessary to
continue their own provision or support schools-led provision.
15. Universities UK is asking the Department for Education to consider carefully the ability of the
accredited ITT providers to sustain provision, in particular specialist subject-specific provision
and that of smaller education departments, in future allocations. We also suggest that a greater
degree of security of allocation is given to providers to enable them to plan strategically,
including plans to further engage with lead schools in School Direct partnerships.
Parliamentary briefing
‘Virement’ Between ITT Routes
16. There was limited opportunity in the 2013-14 admissions cycle for allocations to be transferred
(‘vired’) between different routes. We have some evidence from our members that this could
have had a particular impact upon recruitment in key subjects where recruitment at the national
level is below target such as maths, physics and modern foreign languages.
17. As outlined above, a significant number of School Direct places were not filled. While the full
reasons for this are not yet known, we know that a number of lead schools returned their
allocations unfilled.
18. The final allocation in August 2013 for HEI-led postgraduate routes was less than 500 higher
than the initial allocation in November 2012. This is in spite of the fact that a number of
universities had requested to expand their allocations, and it was clear that the target for School
Direct recruitment was not going to be met.
19. As the selection of candidates is led by schools, many of the School Direct partnerships did not
consider applications made after the school term had concluded (15 July 2013). However,
many university providers were receiving applications after this point but, having filled their
allocations, were unable to recruit from them even though they were often from good applicants
in key subjects.
20. In response to a survey conducted by Universities UK, some universities stated that significant
proportions of applications were still being received after 15 July for key subjects. Figures as
high as 37% for physics and 26% for maths were reported. Initial responses to the survey
suggest that a very high proportion of all applications received after July 15 were for maths,
physics and modern foreign languages.
21. Some other candidates were turned down by universities when their allocation had been filled,
but did not wish to undertake ITT via the School Direct route.
22. Universities UK is requesting that the Department for Education makes it easier for allocations
to be transferred between routes, so that if a university has no spare allocation but good
applicants, and School Direct schools have spare allocation and no good applicants (or doesn’t
wish to fill its allocation for other reasons), that this allocation could be transferred where the
applicant doesn’t wish to apply for the School Direct programme.
Parliamentary briefing
23. We also request that the allocations for 2014-15, and future years, are more flexible to fully
respond to the demand for allocations from universities and School Direct schools. This is
particularly important during the Summer, when most School Direct applications have closed
but many good applicants – particularly in key subjects – are still applying to universities who
may already have filled their allocation.
For further information contact Alex Leonhardt on 0207 419 5605 or
[email protected]
© The copyright for this publication is held by Universities UK. The material may be copied or reproduced
provided that the source is acknowledged and the material, wholly or in part, is not used for commercial gain.
Use of the material for commercial gain requires the prior written permission of Universities UK.
Parliamentary briefing