Can schools get the staff for Burnham’s technical pathways?

Andy Burnham’s government must have a teacher supply strategy and plans to resource schools to deliver his plan for “technical pathways” from age 14, experts have warned.

The prime minister has laid out plans for new pathways for 14 to 16-year-olds from September 2028.

But sector leaders described the timeline as “exceptionally ambitious”, warning establishing a high-quality teaching workforce and specialist facilities will take “time and significant investment”.

Under Burnham’s plans, pupils will be able to combine core academic subjects with technical education, employer projects and workplace experience from year 10.

It is expected to emulate the Greater Manchester Baccalaureate or “MBacc”, introduced in the region while Burnham was mayor.

Where will the workforce come from?

Mary Bousted, Labour peer and Teaching Commission chair, broadly supports the reforms, feeling them “very necessary” to boost outcomes for pupils who struggle to flourish academically.

But she questioned where the teaching workforce for technical courses “will come from”.

“You can’t assume that teachers know how to teach within that vocational environment.”

She dismissed suggestions primary teachers – demand for whom is falling amid declining rolls – could retrain to teach vocational courses, calling this “a big stretch”, stressing the importance of industry experience.

Jude Hillary, co-head of policy and practice at the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER), said introducing new technical pathways at pace “will present significant challenges, particularly given existing workforce pressures” and ongoing SEND reforms.

Recent figures show the school workforce is shrinking, at both primary and secondary level. However, teacher demand is also falling as pupil rolls continue to decline.

Hillary said Burnham’s plan will require “careful planning, sustained investment and close collaboration with schools, colleges, and employers”.

She warned that for schools and colleges, “access to the specialist expertise, resources and support they need will be essential”.

Timeline ‘ambitious’

Emma Hollis, CEO of the National Association of School-Based Teacher Trainers, said (NASBTT), agreed Burnham’s plans raised “significant” workforce questions.

“The proposed September 2028 timetable feels exceptionally ambitious,” she said.

“Developing qualifications, creating training routes, recruiting teachers, building partnerships and providing specialist facilities and equipment will all take time and significant investment.

“Without a clear long-term workforce plan and dedicated funding, there is a risk that schools and ITT providers will be asked to deliver specialist courses without the staff, expertise or resources needed to do them well.”

Hollis also blasted the nature and timing of the education reform announcement as “extremely disappointing”.

“Launching a key education-related policy during the school holidays, with limited detail and seemingly without any meaningful consultation with the people and organisations who will be expected to make it work does not feel much like the ‘politics done differently’ we were promised, whatever the merits of the policy itself.”

New teacher training pathways needed?

It is also currently unclear what qualifications those teaching new technical courses will be expected to hold, and whether they will need qualified teacher status (QTS).

If so, Hollis said new training routes would need developing, “as many of the proposed technical areas do not currently sit within established secondary ITT subjects.” This would require “time, resource and extensive funding”.

She also queried whether new technical teaching opportunities at secondary – where salaries are typically higher than in colleges – could lead to attrition of the FE workforce.

“There is a risk that scarce expertise is moved from FE into schools rather than the overall workforce being expanded,” she said.

“Partnerships between schools, colleges, training providers and employers may be a more realistic part of the answer but this will be a complex area to negotiate and there is a risk that the timescale proposed will create a barrier to this being done well.”

Is industry the answer?

Bousted agreed the sector could “look to a mixed model of provision” with industry experts helping teach courses as well as teachers.

Sam Twiselton, emeritus professor at Sheffield Hallam University, spoke of a “brilliant opportunity for schools to work with employers” both in designing curricula and helping establish a workforce.

But Hollis said recruiting suitable teaching candidates from industry could prove challenging.

“Someone may have extensive expertise in their industry without fitting neatly into existing teacher training entry routes. Equally, industry expertise alone does not automatically prepare someone to teach.

“We will need properly funded [training] routes that recognise occupational experience while also providing strong preparation for teaching.”

According to Julie McCulloch, chief executive of the Education Policy Institute, “if implemented poorly, an over-focus on the needs of the local economy and on greater student choice below the age of 16 could have the opposite effect on social mobility from the one intended.”

Teacher workforce expert John Howson warned on his blog that “Burnham must be careful not to announce a policy he cannot deliver nationally without a strategy for teacher supply.

“Otherwise the very schools he seeks to help may be the ones that cannot recruit the teachers in a market where supply nowhere near meets demand on a national scale.”

Schools serving disadvantaged areas typically struggle more than those in affluent areas, to recruit and retain teachers.

Would schools have the space?

It is not yet clear where technical courses would be delivered.

If taught directly in schools, Bousted questioned how they would find the space and resources needed – particularly with no extra funding announced.

A recent Teaching Commission report found “real concerns” about the capacity of schools to accommodate more practical subjects, as many spaces for practical learning have been repurposed.

Thirty-seven per cent of teachers polled said their school did not have physical space to offer food and nutrition, while 25 per cent said they had no space for drama, or design and technology.

It has been suggested FE colleges could be responsible for carrying out the training directly, though Bousted said this could pose its own issues, due different safeguarding requirements for 14-year-olds.

“If you want to develop vocational and technical education on this scale… you’re going to need to fund it,” she added.

DfE must step up

Howson called for new education secretary Lucy Powell “to take ownership of the policy.”

This was echoed by Bousted, who questioned how the plans will fit in alongside major reforms to the curriculum and SEND system.

“The danger is all three suffer from overload and incoherence,” she said.

“The DfE now needs to show leadership in how schools are meant to encounter these reforms and implement them.

“The DfE cannot just leave this to MATs and schools to get on with it. They’ve got to show some leadership in enabling schools to do this well.

“The sector will be looking to them for guidance, support, and really fighting for significant extra funding to support these reforms.”