The workforce in England’s classrooms does not reflect the ethnic diversity of the children who learn in them. With colleagues, I have just completed an Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)-funded project looking at this mismatch, its possible impacts, why it arises and what can be done to improve the situation. In general, the existing and prior evidence on this topic has tended to be weak and partial. Much of it is only descriptive with no comparators, small-scale and tends to focus on the US where the situation is very different to England. Disproportionality and segregation England has an ethnically diverse population, but ethnic minorities tend to be clustered in particular areas to some extent. Overall, there are fewer ethnic minority (“global majority”) teachers in England, as a proportion, than ethnic minority pupils. This is especially so in London, where minority ethnic pupils are actually in a majority overall. Across England, all ethnic groups other than White British and Black Caribbean have many fewer teachers than might be expected. The situation is most extreme, and therefore perhaps the most worrying, for Black African, Bangladeshi, and Chinese pupils. Trends in disproportionality of teachers and pupils, by major ethnic group The situation for school leaders is even more extreme. This disproportion means that many ethnic minority students will never encounter a teacher, much less a leader, of the same ethnic origin. This is especially true in areas like the north east of England. South Asian origin pupils in England are the most clustered in schools with other ethnic minority pupils, while White British and Chinese pupils are the least clustered. This affects their chances of meeting or interacting with others from similar backgrounds. Clustering by poverty is similar, with Bangladeshi and Pakistani pupils going to schools with the highest levels of poverty. Impacts of disproportionality Teacher–student ethnic disproportionality matters because it can influence both educational outcomes and students’ school experiences. The lack of congruence might influence student (and staff) enjoyment of school and aspirations. Our reviews of evidence suggest that minority students dealt with by teachers from the same ethnic group tended to be punished less severely, have higher aspirations and self-esteem. They are also more likely to be identified as gifted, have positive relationships with teachers and receive higher expectations. Although evidence for improved academic attainment is generally weak and effect sizes are small, teacher–student ethnic matching appears to affect areas where teacher judgment plays a role. However, all of this evidence came from the US. It is not clear how far the findings apply to England. The differences in outcomes between major ethnic groups are largely explained by differences in poverty (FSM-eligibility), first language (other than English) and special educational needs (SEN). For example, differences in officially recorded punishments in England such as exclusions are mostly patterned by education health and care plans and special needs, especially related to behaviour. At key stage 4 (age 16), White British students are somewhat more likely to be excluded. Indian, Bangladeshi, and Black African students are least likely. However, we do not have large-scale data on aspirations and self-esteem outcomes. Therefore, the concern from US data needs to be heeded. There are clear discrepancies in the attainment outcomes of different ethnic groups of students in England. Travellers, Black Caribbean and White students make less progress at school compared to Asian origin and Black African students. The higher progress made by Chinese compared to Black-Caribbean students suggests this is not an issue of home language. The ethnicity of students and the match between the ethnicity of students and teachers disappears once poverty and SEN are accounted for. For example, the families of Black African and Indian families currently appear to be different socio-economically to families of Black Caribbean and Traveller students. As far as we can tell, the differential attainment outcomes are not due to any match or mismatch with the ethnicity of their teachers. They are more to do with patterns of poverty, first language, and especially special educational needs. As with the differential treatment of students, this is not any argument to ignore the patterns of attainment, but helps us focus on what is most likely to improve the situation. How does disproportion happen? Disparities emerge early in the teacher pipeline, not in applications to initial teacher training but in worryingly different acceptance rates across ethnic groups. Once admitted, there is little evidence of consistent ethnic disparities in achieving qualified teacher status. Where inequalities become most apparent is in securing a teaching post after qualification. Qualified Chinese and Pakistani graduates are least likely to get a teaching post in schools. This stratification is then exacerbated by lack of promotion opportunities for some, and then early leaving of the profession. Although the proportion of teachers promoted to head or deputy head is small and varies over time, it is clear that White British and Black teachers are more often promoted, while South Asian and Chinese teachers are much less likely. Chinese teachers are paid the least, whereas Black teachers are paid on average £3,000 more, even after considering age, qualifications and region. Chinese, Pakistani and Bangladeshi teachers tend to leave the profession younger, in their mid-30s, whereas White British and Black teachers leave in their mid-40s on average. What can be done? A more ethnically representative teaching workforce can expose all students to diverse perspectives, promote mutual understanding and help schools better reflect the diversity of wider society. It may be that having ethnic (and linguistic) diversity of leaders, teachers and students is more important than an exact ethnic match. Ethnic minority teachers clearly want more diversity of pupils, teachers and leaders in schools. We need to: Strengthen the pupil premium policy by channelling more funding to schools taking pupils with long-term poverty Remove drivers of segregation, such as faith-based admissions In the short-term it is important that all teachers across England are better prepared to teach in multi-ethnic classrooms. It is also crucial that stakeholders are alert to the potential for bias at each stage of the teacher career pipeline. Address low attainment directly There is also weaker evidence that we could: Address disparities in entry and qualification requirements that disadvantage minority candidates. Reduce implicit bias in recruitment and appraisal processes, including through anonymisation Foster an inclusive and supportive school culture The study is based on analysis of linked School Workforce Census and National Pupil Databases, four systematic reviews, a national survey of teachers and pupils, interviews and case studies of schools. It was conducted by Stephen Gorard, Beng Huat See, Nadia Siddiqui, Antonina Tereshchenko, Feyisa Demie, and Wenqing Chen. For a fuller summary and key references, see here.