Project

Retention, progression and career development

 

Findings from part 5 of the study

Retention overall

  • The overall picture in 2010 is of stability – in most cases few NQTs in their first two to three years of teaching had left the schools involved since 2005; and 92% of schools said that retention of NQTs was not a problem.
  • Fourteen percent of leaders in more deprived schools stated that retention of NQTs was a problem compared with 5% of leaders in the least deprived schools.
  • Primary schools were more likely to report some leaving after one year. After that, though, stability was higher in primary schools than in secondaries. Slightly higher proportions of NQTs were leaving more deprived schools compared with others.
  • There were some indications that there was greater stability in 2010 compared with 2008, with significantly higher proportions of senior leaders indicating that none of their NQTs had left after two or more years in 2010. This difference was particularly large in primary schools, where almost half of schools reported no NQTs leaving after two or more years in 2010 compared with less than 29% in 2008.
  • Where NQTs did leave, they were overwhelmingly likely to be moving on to other jobs in teaching (although this was slightly less likely in primary schools).

Reasons for leaving the school

  • The most common reasons given for NQTs leaving were promotion and contracts ending.
  • Among secondary school senior leaders 68% cited promotion as a reason for leaving, compared with 33% of primary school leaders. Senior leaders in more deprived schools were more likely to mention pupil behaviour, types of class taught and mismatch between skills and the demands of the job, although the strength of the link between deprivation and reasons for leaving was quite weak in each case.
  • In 2010, senior leaders were less likely to cite promotion as a reason for NQTs leaving (43% of leaders in 2010) compared with 2008 (51%) and also - encouragingly - they were less likely to mention pupil behaviour in 2010 (7% in 2010 compares with 12% in 2008).
  • When asked an open question regarding measures that supported retention, most responses cited ensuring staff were supported, via measures including providing a supportive environment, mentoring, induction, professional development, protected time and career opportunities. Other measures mentioned included financial incentives/permanent contracts and classroom issues especially pupil behaviour and teaching a preferred age range/subject/level.

NQT intentions relating to staying in or leaving the profession

  • Ninety-four percent of the NQTs we spoke with intended to stay in teaching in 2010, a slight increase from the 91% who intend to stay in teaching in 2008.
  • Of the teachers intending to stay, 78% intended to stay in teaching for the rest of their career, 21% for between two and ten years and only one individual intended to leave in the next year.
  • Of the 22 teachers that intended to leave, heavy workload was by far the most common reason given, with 68% of the 22 reporting this.

 

 

Findings from Part 4 of the study:

  • Only a third of third year teachers surveyed had no additional responsibility, about 40% having some kind of unpaid responsibility and 25% having some kind of paid responsibility. This overall finding masked major differences between school types here: 90% of primary teachers had some level of responsibility, compared with about half of secondary teachers, but only 16% of primary third year teachers compared with 38% of secondary teachers were paid for it. Case study data indicated that support for new responsibility - whether paid or unpaid - was important for third year teachers.

  • Most of the case study teachers planned in the longer term to become middle leaders, with a third (15) aspiring to senior leadership. The six teachers who didn't have clear plans or intended to stay in the classroom were all female and in primary or special schools. Over three quarters of the male case study respondents aspired to senior leadership, compared with 15% of female teachers. A number of third year teachers could be characterised according to their "work life orientation" - either having a career orientation (13 teachers) a personal orientation (6) or a mixed orientation (20). All nine of the male teachers for whom we could ascertain an orientation had a career orientation, whereas the female teachers were split between the three groups.

  • Looking to the future, around 40% intended to stay in their current school in the short term, 40% expected to move (mostly for promotion, although in a very small number of cases for family or personal reasons) and the rest hoped to stay or were not sure. Reasons given for leaving included promotional opportunities (cited by 56% of case study respondents), professional development (17%), relocation (11%) with smaller numbers reporting issues related to pressure, support, pupil behaviour and personal and other reasons. There were differences between senior leaders and the third year teachers, indicating that – whilst promotion is the most important reason given for leaving amongst all groups - the teachers themselves focus much more on issues of support and development in considering whether to leave their current schools.

  • Turning to retention in the school, we also asked our case study interviewees about reasons why third year teachers might stay in their current schools. As with reasons for leaving, being given promotion/responsibility was the most common reason given for staying, i.e. preventing early career teachers leaving (45% of respondents). The other reasons related more to the broader feel of the school and are rather different when compared with reasons given for leaving – support (26%), development (38%), enjoyment (20%), colleagues (13%), school ethos (11%) were all seen to be important for significant numbers of respondents. Again, there were some differences between senior leaders and third year teachers here. Senior leaders were more likely to cite promotion, development and support as reasons to stay, whereas teachers themselves – whilst also seeing these issues as being very important – were not as likely to cite them. For teachers, the support of colleagues and the team and – most strikingly – being settled were important factors not emphasised as often by leaders.

  • We examined patterns in relation to school deprivation as measured by entitlement to school meals, and found some patterns. In particular respondents in schools with more deprived catchments were much more likely to cite enjoyment, the headteacher, support, and team and colleague as being important factors in deciding whether to stay in a school. They were less likely to cite the school being a good training ground compared with others. This indicates that teachers working in such schools may have differing priorities compared with others.

  • Looking to retention in teaching, around 70% of the third year case study teachers saw their long term careers in teaching, with none definitely intending to leave in the short term.

 

Findings from Part 3 of the study:

  • There was a strong expectation within primary schools that second year teachers would take on additional responsibilities. This expectation was not shared by secondary schools.

  • Views on the promotion of second year teachers were not divided by type of school; rather readiness for promotion was seen to depend on individual characteristics.

  • Primary teachers tended to describe their future plans as leaving their school for promotion only if no opportunities arose where they currently work. In contrast, secondary teachers spoke of seeking promotion per se irrespective of location.

  • Seeking promotion to gain experience and new challenges rather than for career development was also important for a small number of teachers.

 

Findings from Part 2 of the study:

  • It is difficult to make the case, based on the case study data analysed and presented above, that there is a serious, widespread problem with retention. Most schools felt that there was either no problem or that problems were related to a limited number of issues, and most saw that providing good quality support and development opportunities in a friendly environment was the key to retaining staff for the first few years of their careers. Beyond that, it is likely that most NQTs will look to move on (internally or externally) for promotion or other challenges. Also, many schools recognised that keeping staff in the longer term was not necessarily in the school’s or teacher’s interests.


  • NQTs supported these views, in the main. Most intended to stay in teaching, and looked forward to promotion internally or externally at some point, in some cases to very senior positions. A very small number were considering leaving the profession, with two (out of 25 interviewed) fairly sure they would do so. Schools did not necessarily see this as a problem in itself: schools no more wanted to retain staff unsuited to the school or the job than the NQTs.


  • In a minority of schools, there was a more or less serious problem with retention of NQTs, and these schools were some of those facing the most challenging circumstances. One of the two NQTs that were clear they wanted to move on was also working within a challenging environment. This supports other research which indicates that it is clear that it is more difficult to retain staff for such schools, yet it is also true – as we see from our study – that these schools often work very hard to develop innovative and thoughtful strategies to retain their most valuable resource. In the next stages of the study, we intend to investigate such strategies in more depth.

 

Findings from Part 1 of the study

Points from the literature review

  • There is a problem in retaining teachers and this problem affects secondary schools more than primary schools.
  • More advantaged schools have better retention of teachers.
  • Leavers may not leave the profession permanently but may move in and out of teaching.
  • Reasons for leaving the profession are commonly workload and pupil discipline with financial issues (salary, housing costs etc) more problematic in London than other areas.
  • More teachers are leaving because they are on short term contracts.

 

Discussion of the Part 1 survey findings

The points from the literature review that are supported by the findings are that reasons for NQTs’ leaving are short term contracts, workload and pupil discipline, although financial reasons did not emerge in the findings. However, the findings indicate that there is no great problem in retention, although it does support the literature review in that there is even less of a problem in primary than secondary schools. The indications are also that where NQTs do leave, they do so mainly to go to other teaching jobs, i.e. they are not lost to the profession.
(pointersee Induction: School case study 1 and School case study 2)

Clearly a major question is, if the indications from elsewhere are that there is a problem, why did this survey not pick this up? From the standpoint of NQT responses this might be explained by this being at the initial stages of the study when our sample are in their first year of teaching, and the indications are that NQTs are unlikely to leave until they achieve full QTS. This does not explain, however, the responses of SLTs, who were asked to report on the last 5 years.

Perhaps there is no serious problem in retaining NQTs. Perhaps, and this issue is picked up in the preceding section, this was a self selecting sample of schools that are good at retaining NQTs. The written comments about what encourages retention leans one to consider that this might be a possibility.