Almost one in 10 teachers at some of England’s largest academy chains are unqualified, new analysis reveals

Almost one in ten teachers working in some of England’s largest multi-academy trusts are unqualified, new analysis by this website of government data reveals today.

Some 9.2 per cent of classroom professionals at the Harris Federation, England’s second-largest chain, lacked qualified teacher status (QTS) in 2023-24, Department for Education workforce data shows.

At Academies Enterprise Trust, the unqualified teacher figure was 8.8 per cent; at Ark Schools it was 7.9 per cent; and at E-Act it was seven per cent, with the average for the 50 largest academy trusts overall running at 4 per cent.

Among England’s top 10 largest academy trusts, the unqualified teacher rate was 5.5 per cent – nearly three times the rate of that within local authority maintained schools, where on average across the primary and secondary sectors the rate was just 1.87 per cent.

The unqualified teacher rate in the largest academy trusts is also substantially higher than that seen in the rest of the academies sector.

It appears that trainee teachers, including those on the Teach First programme and on some academy trusts’ own School Direct training operations, are contributing within some of the larger trusts to these statistics. Further analysis suggests that they are helping to reduce higher-than-average pupil: teacher ratios in the largest chains. These would be even larger if the trainees were not counted.

The unqualified teacher rate figures, which come after work I carried out for the Campaign for Education last year showed the large trusts had higher rates of teacher turnover than other schools, will fuel the debate about the reduction in academy “freedoms” – including on unqualified teachers – being proposed in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools bill currently going through Parliament.

The detail

For this analysis, I looked at the DfE’s “School Workforce in England” dataset, which provides national, regional and school-level information going back to 2010-11. One spreadsheet* gives school-level figures on indicators including the number of teachers** in each school, and the number of teachers without QTS in each school.

Data on the number of teachers, and number of unqualified teachers, in each school were then used to analyse relative rates of qualified teachers within each academy trust, and within different types of schools.

The analysis showed that, in 2023-24, the rate of unqualified teachers within England’s 50 largest academy trusts was substantially higher than across the academies sector as a whole, and even more so relative to the non-academy maintained sector.

Overall, there were 2,025 unqualified teachers among the 50,070 teachers working in schools within the 50 largest academy trusts. That is a rate of 4.04 per cent.

Within the 10 largest academy trusts, the unqualified teacher rate was even higher, at 5.50 per cent.

In the academies sector as a whole, the comparable figure was 3.14 per cent. Among local authority primary and secondary schools, the average was just 1.87 per cent.

Academy trusts with highest unqualified teacher rates, among England’s 50 largest trusts

Source: DfE workforce statistics, 2023-24.

The Harris Federation, England’s second-largest academy trust, had the largest absolute number of “teachers without qts” listed in the DfE’s workforce data. It also had the highest rate of unqualified teachers among England’s 50 largest chains. Some 222 of its 2,406 teachers overall were listed as unqualified.

Academies Enterprise Trust – now called Lift Schools – had 167 unqualified teachers among a teaching workforce of 1,912 staff, or 8.8 per cent. And Ark Schools had 144 unqualified teachers, among a teaching workforce of 1,834, or 7.9 per cent.  

I also looked, separately, at unqualified teacher rates by type of school control in primary schools specifically; and in secondary schools.

In primary academies, the rate of unqualified teachers was 2.5 per cent; in secondary academies, it was 4.2 per cent. The 50 largest academy chains actually had similar figures to those for the academies sector as a whole, when looked at in this way, at 2.8 per cent for primary, and 4.2 per cent for secondary. But within the 10 largest chains, the rates were substantially higher, at 4.6 per cent for primary, and 5.6 per cent for secondaries.

In local authority primaries, by contrast, the rate was only just over a third of that seen at primaries within the 10 largest chains, at 1.6 per cent; in local authority secondaries, the figure was half that seen within the 10 largest trusts, at 2.7 per cent.

Impact of trainee teachers on these figures

Some of the larger chains have significant teacher training operations. I wondered if this could explain, at least in part, their higher non-QTS rates, if the trainees being counted as teachers within these school-by-school workforce figures.

I asked for responses from large chains with high non-QTS rates (see further detail below). One, Ark Schools, came back with an interesting answer. This suggested that, for it, trainee teachers were significant, within these figures.

Ark told me: “The proportion of non-QTS teachers in Ark is higher than average, as we place huge importance on learning and development and strategically invest in early career teacher development as a key talent pipeline. 

“Our 2024 data on non-QTS teachers shows that over half (52%) of our non-QTS teachers are our own trainees on our flagship Ark Teacher Training programme, 20% are trainees from the Teach First programme, 6% are teachers who qualified overseas and are currently working towards QTS status and 5% are GTAs working towards QTS status.  The remainder include unqualified teachers in bespoke roles, such as a Science Nurture teacher, a specialist Art teacher and a Music Technician, who support in further enriching the experience that we offer to pupils at Ark.”

The government’s rules for the school-level data which is counted within its workforce statistics indicate that some trainees would be included in the statistics as unqualified teachers, but not all of them.

Specifically, if trainee teachers are employed by the school – technically, on a “salaried” School Direct or Teach First route – then they count. They will also spend up to 90 per cent of their time teaching. If they are training but paying tuition fees, “fee-funded” School Direct, for example, they are not counted.

Data from the government’s Initial Teacher Training census for 2023-24 show that Ark had 29 School Direct trainees that year. Some eight of these were on the salaried route, so would be counted as unqualified teachers in the workforce statistics, with the remaining 21 “fee-funded” and therefore not counting. However, the trust also had 123 people on a “postgraduate teaching apprenticeship” route, which also appears to have the individual employed on the unqualified teacher scale, and thus, it appears, counting towards the workforce figures.

The Harris Federation appeared not to have data published in the 2023-24 ITT census. But, for 2022-23, it had only 23 teachers on the salaried School Direct route (with 103 on the “fee-funded” route and so not counting in the workforce figures). It did not have any apprenticeships listed.

Of the other largest 10 academy trusts, I could only find one, Ormiston Academies Trust, with any trainees listed as on the School Direct salaried or apprenticeship routes, and in that case only two trainees were in these categories***.

Further analysis: pupil: teacher ratios

The counting of trainee numbers within the workforce statistics may have had some impact on the figures for the larger chains, then, although in most cases this appears relatively limited.

However, another way of looking at the data is to consider whether, if trainees are being counted as unqualified teachers, chains are then using them to supplement already reasonably healthy pupil:teacher ratios, or if they are in effect being used to cover the gaps within an already relatively overstretched teaching workforce.

In other words, are any unqualified teachers effectively being used as “supernumerary”: extra bodies to put in front of pupils, in the case of academy trusts which are already relatively well-staffed, at classroom level? Or are they covering for gaps in relatively under-staffed schools?

Close analysis of the data shows that, in fact, non-qualified teachers are being used to cover for gaps in the classroom which are unfilled by qualified teachers, within the largest trusts, relative to the situation in other schools. Indeed, even with unqualified teachers used at a larger rate in the big chains than elsewhere, pupil:teacher ratios overall - ie even with unqualified teachers included -  are higher in the big chains than they are elsewhere in the academies sector; and higher again than in the maintained sector.

In detail, in local authority maintained primary schools, the ratio of pupils to qualified teachers in 2023-24 was 20.8:1. In primary academies as a whole, it was 21.7:1. In primary academies within the 50 largest trusts, it was 22.3:1. And in primary academies within the 10 largest trusts, it was 22.6:1.

So local authority primaries had nearly two pupils per qualified teacher fewer than was the case with primary academies within the 10 largest trusts.

Therefore, in the primary sector, it is not the case that the big trusts are putting unqualified staff into schools to add to a situation where they were already as well-stocked with qualified staff as other schools. In fact, they are being used to cover gaps.

And, in reality, the data show that, even factoring in unqualified teachers – which large academy chains are using at greater rates than other schools – pupil:teacher rations are still higher in the big chains.

In local authority maintained primary schools, the ratio of pupils to all teachers – qualified and unqualified - in 2023-24 was 20.5:1. In primary academies, it was 21.2:1. In primary academies within the 50 largest trusts, it was 21.6:1. And in primary academies within the 10 largest trusts, it was 21.5:1. (This last figure, admittedly, is slightly lower than the ratio in the 50 largest trusts, with the higher rate of unqualified staff in the biggest trusts accounting for this).

Similar patterns are seen in secondary schools, with local authority schools, and academies outside of the larger trusts, having lower pupil:teacher ratios than in those in the largest chains.

In local authority maintained secondary schools, the ratio of pupils to qualified teachers in 2023-24 was 16.5:1. In secondary academies as a whole, it was 17.6:1. In secondary academies within the 50 largest trusts, it was 18.2:1. And in secondary academies within the 10 largest trusts, it was 18.3:1.

And in local authority maintained secondary schools, the ratio of pupils to all teachers – qualified and unqualified - in 2023-24 was 16.1:1. In secondary academies, it was 17.0:1. In secondary academies within the 50 largest trusts, it was 17.5:1. And in secondary academies within the 10 largest trusts, it was 17.3:1.

As might be expected, some of these patterns are even more stark when considering those large academy chains which have the highest rates of unqualified teachers. The Harris Federation, for example, has a ratio of pupils to qualified teachers of 25:1 within its primary schools, compared to those figures of 20.8:1, in local authority primary schools, and 21.7:1, in primary academies as a whole. Even with the addition of unqualified teachers, the pupil:teacher ratio in Harris primaries, at 23.1:1, lagged behind that other schools.

Similarly, in Harris secondaries, the ratio of pupils to qualified teachers was 18.2:1, which is considerably higher than the 16.5:1 ratio in maintained secondary schools. Even with unqualified teachers included, Harris’s pupil:teacher ratio in its secondaries, at 16.5:1, was slightly higher than that in the secondary maintained sector (16.1:1)

I have set out tables on pupil:teacher ratios, and pupil: QTS ratios for the largest chains, compared to national averages, at the end of this piece.

Implications

In October, research I carried out for the Campaign for State Education (CASE) showed that academies within the larger academy trusts had considerably higher teacher turnover rates than did those in non-academy schools. The research also showed that teachers in the academies sector tended to be younger, less likely overall to be qualified and also to face slightly higher class sizes.

This new analysis shows that especially the largest academy trusts are staffing classrooms with relatively high rates of unqualified teachers. In general these are not super-numerary – extra bodies in classrooms to support schools already relatively highly-equipped with qualified teachers. Rather, they are covering gaps left in academy trusts which have lower levels of qualified teachers per pupil than do other schools.

My research for CASE has found that multi-academy trusts have tended to move spending away from the classroom, with higher spending on well-paid managers, and less per pupil at classroom level. This analysis adds to the sense of a relatively under-resourced frontline, within the larger trusts.

Supporters of England’s multi-academy trusts have been arguing, during the current passage of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill through Parliament, that they benefit from freedoms, including around teachers’ pay and conditions, afforded to them by academy status. But my analyses suggest that, on pay and conditions, these freedoms have coincided with the development, in the larger chains, of a greater use of unqualified staff, who tend to be younger, to go alongside those higher turnover rates. The policy seems to be seeing a move of spending away from classrooms, and towards highly-paid managers..

It is interesting that the Harris Federation, which I reported on for the Observer back in September having spoken to teachers recruited from Jamaica who complained of taking a long time to be placed by Harris on the path to qualified teacher status, had the highest rate of unqualified staff among the largest chains in 2023-24. This chain, which can boast impressive Ofsted and exam results records though is also now facing strike action in a host of its secondary schools over teachers’ pay and conditions, also spends by far the most on high-paid central managers.

The bill may have an impact on the use of unqualified staff, since it stipulates that, in the academies sector as currently in maintained schools, state-funded institutions can only use unqualified teachers if they are on a path towards the gaining of qualified teacher status.

Is this an unreasonable demand to make on the academies sector? Well, this certainly seems an issue worth debating: is greater “flexibility” to use unqualified teachers a positive development, or should there be greater regulation, so that more teachers are qualified?

If nothing else, these figures might provoke a deeper debate about what has gone on through the academies reforms than seems currently to be happening.

Responses

I invited nine academy trusts, among England’s largest 50, who had the highest unqualified teacher rates, to comment about this.

One of the responses, from Ark Schools, is detailed above. Only two others of the nine trusts came back with substantive responses.

Swale Academies Trust said: “A number of our unqualified teachers are supernumerary posts. Within our primary schools these will be Sport and Art instructors. Within our secondary schools we have teachers in shortage subject areas that are overseas trained and working towards QTS here.

“Across all our phases we have trainee teachers who will be classed as unqualified (not having QTS).”

An E-ACT spokesperson said: “The statistics you quote aren’t reflective of the situation at E-ACT. If Primary is separated out then we reflect the national [percentages] you state.”

I did put a figure to E-ACT which embraced both primary and secondary phases. However, at primary alone, while E-ACT’s unqualified teacher rate, at 3.0 per cent, was not too much higher than the 2.5 per cent seen across primary academies, it was nearly double that seen in local authority maintained primaries.

The E-ACT spokesperson continued: “As regards secondary, within the numbers are a high number of very well qualified overseas teachers as well as our usual intake of Teach First. Without these then our percentage is in line with what you are seeing from the national stats.”

E-ACT’s secondaries had an unqualified teacher rate of 8.4 per cent, compared to 2.7 per cent in local authority maintained schools.

A spokesperson for Unity Schools Partnership said: "We have been successful in recruiting specialists in music, sports, drama, dance which do not typically come from a qualified teacher background.  We also have a number of trainee teachers who have been on salaried routes while becoming qualified.  

"We employed internal HLTA [higher level teaching assistant] staff as unqualified teachers on fixed term contracts who are familiar with our pupils, whilst recruiting for qualified teachers rather than using agency workers who would be less familiar with our pupils. We also see some of these HLTAs go on to train as teachers.

"The improvement in standards in recent years across trust schools is based on many factors and these include the expertise of staff who both have or do not have teaching qualifications. With a greater expectation for teacher qualifications, we will look to support more colleagues carry out any necessary training to achieve the qualifications."

-The data in this piece are based on looking at the most recent year on record in the DfE’s school workforce statistics: 2023-24. I have had a brief look at the picture on all of this from earlier years. This seems to indicate that the trend towards the use of unqualified staff has accentuated in recent years. But I have not yet had time to do the full analysis. I may return to it.

* The spreadsheet containing this information is labelled “workforce_2010_2023_fte_hc_nat_” and is available from the “download all data” section of this website.

**The DfE spreadsheets give data on both the absolute number of teachers, and teachers without QTS in each school; and those numbers in terms of full-time equivalents, in each school. I used the full-time equivalents figures for this piece.

***Four of the biggest 10 trusts, Harris, Outwood Grange, Oasis Community Learning and Star Academies, came together to back a recently-created organisation called the National Institute of Teaching. This itself features in the ITT survey data. But it accounted for only 24 salaried School Direct trainees in 2023-24. A further 35 were on a postgraduate teaching apprenticeship. So, even if these trainees were counted against individual trusts, they appear not to have had a huge impact on the data.

Pupil: teacher ratios, and pupil:QTS teacher ratios, largest trusts vs the rest

Source: DfE school workforce survey, Get Information About Schools, 2023-24