Bestselling Author & Speaker on all things #Education, #Ai, #EdTech. CEO NetSupport, Multi Academy Trust Chair, DfE Advisory Board, 24 ISC Global Edrupter, DBT Export Champion, #Edufuturist, BESA EdTech Chair. FRSA.
Abstract
”This article examines one of education’s most urgent challenges: the recruitment and retention of teachers. It is a condensed summary of the research undertaken for “Kingsley, A. (2025). The Awkward Questions in Education: The Elephants in the Room from AI to Teacher Retention. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis. ” It argues that shortages are not the product of a single failing but a convergence of issues- workload, pay, status, funding pressures, and policy signals that collectively undermine the profession’s attractiveness. Drawing on UK and international research, it proposes a pragmatic, multi-pronged approach: a long-term “delta” pay strategy to close the competitiveness gap, workload reduction through system support and smarter use of evidence-informed tools, better early training and expectation-setting, structured progression that avoids early ceilings, and a national campaign to elevate the status of teaching. Taken together, these measures aim to stabilise inflow, improve retention, and strengthen leadership pipelines so the profession can thrive in the decade ahead."
A complex problem we’ve treated as simple
Teacher supply is not a single-cause problem with a single fix. It is a braided rope of incentives, expectations, economics, workload, and public narrative. We see the impact in three places: (1) insufficient inflow into training routes, (2) steep attrition in the early years, and (3) thinning pipelines into middle and senior leadership. Addressing one strand without the others creates displacement rather than resolution. The goal must be systemic: make teaching appealing to enter, humane to sustain, and rewarding to progress- financially, professionally, and socially.
The supply picture: what the numbers are telling us
England’s attrition curve is stark. Over twelve years, more than 40,000 state-school teachers left within a year of starting; roughly 11 of every 100 new recruits exit after year one, 26 by year three, and 42 by year ten [1]. Surveys point to a “dissonance” between the expectations trainees hold when applying and the realities they face once in classrooms- especially the volume and nature of non-teaching tasks [2], [3]. That mismatch is corrosive: it lowers morale, accelerates early attrition, and damages word-of-mouth recruitment into the profession.
International comparisons add nuance rather than simple answers. In the US, teacher preparation enrolments fell markedly in the 2010s, yet the overall teacher workforce outpaced pupil growth in that period [8]-[10]. The UK pattern is different: persistent recruitment shortfalls relative to targets and comparatively high exit rates point to an ecosystem mismatch - supply, workload, and pay, rather than a transient dip in interest [11], [12], [23], [24], [31].
Pay, progression, and pensions: a package that sends mixed signals
Headlines often reduce pay to a single number. In reality, what matters is the package compared with the work asked to earn it, and the trajectory over time. On entry, England’s ECT starting salary (circa £31,650 outside London) sits close to the UK median graduate salary [13], [14]. In the US, the average starting salary (c. $44,530) is higher in sterling terms, but varies widely by state [15], [16]. Australia’s published starting packages in some states sit even higher relative to comparator graduate roles [17], [18].
In the UK, however, relative pay has deteriorated over the long run. Average teacher pay in 2024 was projected by the IFS to be over 6% lower in real terms than 2010, with the drop sharper for experienced teachers (c. 11%) even as average earnings elsewhere rose [12]. That combination- near-par entry, weaker mid-career progression, and eroded competitiveness- helps to explain why recruitment lags and 1 in 10 teachers leave the state sector each year [12], [23].
Pensions complicate the picture. Employer contributions in England are unusually high compared with much of the private sector, and higher than many international systems [19]-[21], which materially increases the total package value over a career. But pensions do not pay rent in year one. For early-career attraction, cash-in-hand and workload dominate; for retention, trajectory and agency matter more.
A further structural issue is the early ceiling effect. The six-point main scale, followed by three upper-scale points, can make M6 feel like a ledge rather than a ladder. In practice, leadership ranges add further progression, but many teachers do not wish to trade scarce personal bandwidth for additional responsibility when the workload already feels stretched. Extending progression (or introducing more granular competence-based steps) would better reward mastery and tenure without forcing role-change as the only route to raise pay [22], [23].
Workload and role clarity: the hidden drivers of attrition
The evidence repeatedly returns to workload. Self-reported weekly hours hover around the mid-50s, with less than half spent on direct instruction [3]. Post-pandemic pressures on attendance, behaviour, and widening social needs have shifted further non-teaching labour onto teachers, particularly where external support services have thinned. The Education Endowment Foundation’s national survey found schools are already using most known strategies to ease workload (protected PPA, shared schemes of work, collaborative planning), yet the chief barriers to doing more come from outside the school gates: compliance demands, funding constraints, and limited agency over behaviour systems and multi-agency support [25].
Two implications follow. First, school-level ingenuity helps but cannot fully offset systemic load. Second, expectation-setting in initial teacher training must be more candid about the role as it actually is- not to deter, but to equip. Honest previews reduce dissonance and improve retention; rose-tinted recruitment does the opposite [2], [6], [33].
Image and status: the profession we ask young people to choose
Status matters. Countries where teachers are publicly esteemed Finland, Singapore, South Korea- tend to see positive associations with outcomes, recruitment, and retention [33]. In parts of Asia and many international-school ecosystems, teachers report stronger community regard than in the UK. At home, media and political narratives too often instrumentalise schools, praising in crisis, criticising in comfort, while accountability discourse frequently drowns out professional trust and autonomy. That shapes parental expectations and, ultimately, the career choices of graduates. Shifting this narrative is not cosmetic. It is a recruitment intervention in plain sight.
Funding context: why “per-pupil” headlines can mislead
From 2010 to 2019, school spending per pupil in England fell by about 9% in real terms as rolls rose faster than total spend; post-2019 increases broadly returned per-pupil funding to 2010 levels in real terms, on IFS analysis [12]. But headline parity does not equal operational relief when need has risen, most notably the growth in pupils with EHCPs, which has absorbed a large share of additional funding. For schools, the practical experience has been tighter baselines with broader responsibilities. That environment magnifies the salience of workload and suppresses headroom for professional development.
Professional growth: from events to entitlement
Effective professional development (PD) is correlated with improved teaching quality and job satisfaction, yet it remains uneven in intensity, quality, and protected time [34]. Internationally, high-performing systems treat PD as an entitlement embedded in workload models (e.g., structured time for collaborative planning, inquiry cycles, coaching). If we expect teachers to adapt to rapid curricular change and new technologies, the system must supply time and support to do the learning. Otherwise, “adaptation” simply reads as “more unpaid work.”
What would a credible, multi-year fix look like?
1) A delta pay strategy to restore competitiveness
NFER modelling suggests that keeping teacher pay merely in line with average earnings will not recover supply; adding an annual “delta” (e.g., +1-3 percentage points above average earnings growth) is more likely to improve recruitment and retention over time [31]. A 3-point delta is fiscally material (order of billions), but predictable multi-year uplifts would give schools planning certainty and improve sector signalling to graduates [12], [31].
What changes in practice
- Commit to a five-year settlement for teacher pay: average earnings growth + a fixed delta annually.
- Extend or refine progression beyond M6 to recognise advanced practice without requiring formal leadership transitions [22], [23].
2) Workload reduction through system support
Schools are already deploying most local strategies [25]. The next gains require system-level load-shedding: slimline duplicative compliance requests, narrow and clarify accountability signals, and restore multi-agency capacity (attendance, behaviour, mental health).
What changes in practice
- A standing “workload gateway” test for any new initiative: what is removed or automated to offset it?
- Nationally endorsed templates/automation for routine tasks (reports, returns, assessments) and guardrails on frequency.
- A minimum entitlement to protected planning time that is practical, not theoretical [25].
3) Honest initial training and early-career support
Close the expectation-reality gap flagged by trainers and early-career teachers [2]. Provide unvarnished previews of workload, behaviour, and administrative demands- then match that honesty with structured mentoring, phased release, and reduced contact ratios in the first two years.
What changes in practice
- National standards for ECT timetabling (e.g., limits on complex classes in year one, protected collaboration time).
- Shared, high-quality curriculum resources to reduce planning duplication at scale [25], [34].
4) Professional development as an entitlement, not a “nice to have”
Embed subject-specific PD, instructional coaching, and collaborative planning into the working week, not added on top of it. Treat PD as time-backed, evidence informed, and evaluated for impact, drawing on EEF guidance [34].
What changes in practice
- Guaranteed weekly/fortnightly PD time with defined activities and outcomes.
- Funding lines that reward schools for sustained PD programmes rather than sporadic training days [34].
5) Status and narrative: a national campaign for teaching
Policy and press shape public esteem. If we want graduates to choose teaching, we must talk about it as a skilled, consequential profession. Countries that brand teachers as “nation builders” are investing in long-term supply.
What changes in practice
- A cross-party communications compact to reduce adversarial rhetoric about schools.
- Annual public reporting that foregrounds teacher impact stories, not only accountability dashboards [33].
6) Leadership pipelines without burnout
We cannot fill headships from a shrinking pool. Leadership must be attractive and doable: clearer role scoping, assistant roles that genuinely share operational load, and talent pathways that recognise instructional expertise. Adjust pension/tax cliffs that inadvertently hasten senior exits [19], [20].
Anticipating objections
- “We can’t afford delta pay.” Not investing has a cost too: agency reliance, lost learning, recruitment churn, and international leakage. Long-term modelling suggests pay competitiveness is a necessary (though not sufficient) condition for supply recovery [12], [31].
- “Schools should just innovate.” Many already do. But when the barriers and enablers sit outside the school, system levers, not school heroics, are decisive [25].
- “Status campaigns are window dressing.” Status is a market signal. If we tell a generation that teaching is embattled and inflexible, they will believe us- and choose something else [24], [33].
Conclusion: start now, and stay the course
Teacher supply is solvable, but only with a plan that recognises reality: the job is big, the stakes are high, and the solutions require both money and method. A five-year settlement with a delta pay strategy, genuine workload relief, honest early-career support, entitlement-grade PD, more flexible progression, and a national status campaign will not fix everything by next summer. It will bend the curve, stabilising inflow, slowing exits, and rebuilding leadership capacity. The alternative is a managed decline that incurs significant social and economic costs in the long run. Education is the growth engine; teachers are the engineers. Let’s fund and respect them accordingly.
You can read more in “The Awkward Questions in Education” 2025, Taylor Francis / Routledge, and in particular chapter 7 😉
Kingsley, A. (2025). The Awkward Questions in Education: The Elephants in the Room from AI to Teacher Retention. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis.
References
[1] E. Peirson-Hagger, “The scale of the teacher retention crisis revealed,” TES Magazine, 21 Jun 2024. Available online.
[2] NASBTT, “The National Association of School-Based Teacher Trainers.” Available online.
[3] I. Najarro, “Here’s How Many Hours a Week Teachers Work,” EducationWeek, 14 Apr 2022. Available online.
[4] National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER). Organisation website.
[5] NFER, “Shifting career motivations are not to blame for worsening teacher shortages,” 18 Jul 2024. Available online.
[6] P. Jerrim, S. Sims, “The Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS),” DfE, Jun 2019. Available online.
[7] OECD, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Organisation website.
[8] B. Bartanen, A. Kwok, “From Interest to Entry: The Teacher Pipeline From College Application to Initial Employment,” AERJ, 60(5), 2023.
[9] K. Pennington McVey, J. Trinidad, “Nuance in the Noise: The Complex Reality of Teacher Shortages,” Bellwether Education Partners, 2019.
[10] L. Loewus, “Teaching Force Growing Faster Than Student Enrollment Once Again,” Education Week, 17 Aug 2017. Available online.
[11] Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL). Organisation website.
[12] L. Sibieta, “School spending in England: a guide to the debate during the 2024 general election,” IFS, Jun 2024.
[13] DfE, “School teachers’ pay and conditions” (STPCD). Government website.
[14] Institute of Student Employers (ISE), “What is the average graduate salary?,” 10 Nov 2023.
[15] National Education Association (NEA), “Educator Pay in America,” 18 Apr 2024.
[16] M. Ziegler, “Maps of school teacher salary averages for 2024,” LiveNOW/Fox, 26 May 2024.
[17] NSW Government, “Explore Teaching as a Career - salary of a teacher.” Available online.
[18] Dept of Education, Western Australia, “Teacher Salaries 2024.”
[19] Teachers’ Pensions, “Updates to contribution rates,” 9 Apr 2024.
[20] B. Boileau, L. O’Brien, B. Zaranko, “Public spending, pay and pensions,” IFS Green Budget 2022, Ch. 4.
[21] TRS Illinois, “Contribution rates.” 2024.
[22] TES Magazine, “Teacher pay scales 2024-25,” 29 Jul 2024.
[23] DfE, “School workforce in England - reporting year 2023,” 6 Jun 2024.
[24] D. McLean, “An image problem,” NFER blog, 5 Jun 2024.
[25] K. Martin et al., “Supporting the recruitment and retention of teachers… managing teacher workload,” EEF, 2023.
[31] J. Worth, S. Tang, “Next government needs long-term pay strategy…,” NFER, 14 May 2024.
[32] S. Sandhu, “Sir Kevan Collins… catch-up plan,” i Newspaper, 3 Jun 2021.
[33] OECD, TALIS 2018 Results (Vol. II): Teachers and School Leaders as Valued Professionals, 2020.
[34] J. Collin, E. Smith, “Effective Professional Development: Guidance Report,” EEF, 2021.
