CONTRIBUTORS
Revising the story: gender, flexibility, and the teaching workforce
Managing Director of Class People and regular contributor for Education Today, NAOMI HOWELLS, discusses the gender imbalance in teaching.
What happens when one group of people make up the majority of an entire profession? Women make up the majority of teachers in the UK. They shape the lives of millions of young people and keep a profession that is at the heart of our communities going.
About three-quarters of teachers in England today are women. The imbalance is even worse in early years and primary education, where about 85% of teachers are women. For decades, this gender profile has stayed pretty much the same. But few people talk about the real effects this has on the workforce and how the system quietly adapts to them.
When my mother became a single parent over 20 years ago, she started Class People because she needed a different job than the usual full-time classroom role. She was trying to find a way to stay in the teaching profession while also dealing with the realities of family life. That was possible through supply teaching. It let experienced teachers, many of whom were women, stay in touch with the classroom without having to commit to a permanent position.
This wasn’t just useful at the time; it was also forward-thinking. But after more than 20 years, it’s worth asking if the story has really changed. People often talk about the need for supply teachers in terms of teacher shortages these days. In reality, everyday work patterns often have an effect on supply and demand.
Schools often use supply teachers to fill in for teachers who are on maternity leave, who are slowly returning to work, who are sharing a job, or who are working part-time. These arrangements are not an issue; they represent a profession striving to assist educators during various life stages.
But they also show a structural truth: when most of the people who work together are at the same stage of life and have the same responsibilities, the system has to change to fit those patterns. In education, that change often comes in the form of supply. Of course, society has changed a lot in the last twenty years. Policies like shared parental leave mean that mothers are no longer the only ones responsible for taking care of children. Younger generations also expect more flexibility in their jobs, no matter what their gender is. But teaching is still one of the most gender-biased jobs in the UK. Only about 25% of teachers in England are men, and that number drops to about 14% in primary schools. A lot of primary schools don’t have a single male teacher in the classroom.
Why does this imbalance persist? Teaching, especially in early childhood and primary education, has historically been characterised as a nurturing profession and culturally linked to women. Comparing salaries to those of other graduate jobs may also affect hiring. Research in female-dominated professions indicates that men who enter these fields often advance more rapidly into leadership positions, a phenomenon known as the ‘glass escalator’.
The real problem may not be opportunity, but how people see things. On the surface, giving teachers more options is a good thing. Schools are more and more open to job sharing, part-time work, and phased returns to work. Supply teaching is still a good way for teachers to stay connected while taking care of their families or other responsibilities. These changes show that the profession is trying to change with society. But are we just treating the symptoms of a heavily gender-skewed workforce instead of getting to the bottom of the problem? Job sharing, flexible hours, and supply cover are all good ideas. But they are mostly there because one demographic group still makes up most of the profession. If there were more men and women, people at different stages of life, and different career goals in teaching, would the same structural pressures still be there?
It’s an uncomfortable question, but it might be an important one. Because flexibility might help keep the system going, but it doesn’t always bring it back into balance.
16
www.education-today.co.uk
What makes an effective inclusion base?
EMMA SANDERSON, our regular contributor and Managing Director of Momenta Connect, part of Outcomes First Group, shares her thoughts.
A key feature of the government’s proposed SEND reforms is that every secondary school will have an inclusion base providing targeted support within mainstream settings. The challenge is not simply creating the space, but ensuring the base strengthens inclusive practice across the whole school.
Inclusion, not separation. A successful inclusion base must support inclusion rather than create separation. The aim of these hubs is to enable more SEND pupils to succeed in mainstream education while remaining connected to their peers. Inclusion bases should therefore operate as flexible resources rather than isolated units. Pupils may access them for short interventions, regulation support or specialist teaching, but their primary identity remains as members of the wider school community. Clear systems will allow pupils to move between mainstream classrooms and the base without stigma or barriers. A graduated model of support. Alignment with the emerging tiered model of SEND support is essential. The government’s proposed framework includes targeted, targeted-plus and specialist support, reflecting the need for provision that responds to differing levels of need. A successful inclusion base will offer support across these levels. This may include small-group interventions such as literacy or study support, more structured programmes delivered alongside specialists, and intensive provision for pupils with complex needs. Designing provision around a graduated model ensures support is proportionate, flexible and responsive.
Access to specialist expertise. Effective inclusion bases also act as centres of expertise. Schools will need to work alongside professionals including educational psychologists, speech and language therapists and occupational therapists. Inclusion bases offer a hub for visiting specialists, assessments, advice and collaborative planning. Crucially, it should function as a knowledge centre, ensuring specialist insight informs classroom practice and helps teachers adapt for a wider range of learners.
Partnerships with specialist settings. Developing expertise across all areas of SEND can be challenging for mainstream schools. Inclusion bases help strengthen partnerships with specialist settings and organisations. Collaboration with special schools, resource bases or alternative provision providers supports joint training, staff development and shared approaches to meeting complex needs. These partnerships allow mainstream schools to access established expertise while helping pupils remain connected to their local school community wherever possible.
Skilled staff and distributed expertise. The success of an inclusion base depends far more on people than on physical infrastructure. Effective provision usually includes a highly skilled SENCo, specialist teachers and well-trained support staff.
However, expertise should not sit only within the base. Its role should include coaching staff, modelling inclusive strategies and supporting professional development so that every teacher becomes able to meet diverse needs.
Strong systems for planning and review. Finally, effective planning and accountability systems are essential. Individual Support Plans for SEND pupils create an opportunity to strengthen coordination across the school. Inclusion bases should act as the organisational centre for these plans, bringing together information about needs, provision and outcomes. Regular review processes ensure interventions remain purposeful and that pupil progress is carefully monitored. When thoughtfully designed, inclusion bases become more than rooms or units. They act as strategic drivers of inclusive practice, enabling mainstream schools to meet a wider range of needs while ensuring every pupil feels they belong.
April 2026
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44
