Teacher supply is one of the most pressing concerns in education.

At a local level, recruitment and retention is a “hardy perennial” near the top of every school leader’s agenda, and, at a national level, it is a significant concern for education departments around the world.

The scale of the problem globally is significant. It is estimated that the number of teachers required in English-speaking schools around the world will almost double over the next 10 years - entailing the recruitment of an additional 505,000 teachers by 2030, according to ISC Research.

In this context, the introduction of a model where international schools can “grow your own” is most welcome.

The challenge for the UK government is to come up with a model that encourages graduates to join the profession and strikes a balance of maintaining professional standards without putting excessive barriers in the way. The aim of the iQTS consultation sets out to explore how to do this.

International schools: The iQTS and teacher recruitment

The two most important questions addressed in the Department for Education consultation are about the two key factors of the “validity” and “portability” of the new iQTS qualification.

Anyone considering the qualification will ask, “Where does iQTS allow me to teach?”

The consultation flirts with two options:

• An iQTS that qualifies teachers to teach in international schools.
• An iQTS that allows international teachers to return to teach in the UK.

Option 1: An international QTS

One option that is explored in the consultation is whether the iQTS is simply a new international standard for teacher competence.

From the perspective of the international community, there are many “lessons learned” here from the roll-out of various iPGCE courses available around the world. At present there is a two-tier clear distinction between those iPGCE courses that come with QTS and those that don’t.

Whilst the iPGCE with QTS is almost universally accepted, different jurisdictions view the iPGCE without QTS in very different ways.

For example, it qualifies for a teacher visa in the UAE, but not in Hong Kong. Looking ahead, whatever form the iQTS takes, the UK government needs to “sell” its importance to governments around the world to ensure its uptake, adoption and validity.

But not tying the iQTS to UK standards gives greater scope for flexibility in the content and delivery of the qualification, and the consultation explores this.

For example, it asks whether the delivery of the iQTS should be allowed to be wholly online (“Do you agree that ITT providers should have the freedom to be flexible in how they deliver iQTS, including no limitations on online/distance learning?”); or in a local language (“Do you agree that the delivery language should be English?”).

The consultation also explores the option to adapt the qualification to accommodate the local context (“How should we balance English and international teaching standards?”).

This approach may be very helpful for schools operating in countries where there is an explicit local national curriculum and where there is a strong regulatory regime in place.

A flexible model may also accommodate those regions where UK values are in conflict with local legislation - for example, the place of LGBTQ education in many Middle Eastern countries.

Option 2: The return ticket - a universal UK QTS model

Perhaps the most important question on the consultation is, “Do you think there should be any circumstances in which completing iQTS should lead to English QTS?”

Given the general teacher shortages in the UK, it would seem to be very short-sighted if the government does not put in place a pathway for teachers with iQTS to return easily to work in schools in the UK.

Extending the portability of the iQTS to the UK would likely lead to a significantly greater uptake of the new qualification, but it would require a high level of quality assurance be in place.

Possible mechanisms for quality assurance are explored in the consultation:

• “Do you agree that provision of iQTS should be limited to accredited English ITT providers?”
• “Do you agree that the inspection of iQTS provision should be as rigorous as the inspection of English ITT?”

The greatest challenge in achieving a universal QTS model will fall to those responsible for quality assurance. 

Given the huge diversity of provision and quality amongst English-speaking British curriculum schools around the world, it may prove too difficult to ensure the same level of standardisation that is possible in the UK.

Here the model of BSO inspections may be helpful, which provides a set of standards that are shared between UK and British international schools.

Perhaps one way to achieve standardisation would be only to allow schools with a current BSO Inspection rating to offer placements for the iQTS.

We have come a long way from the days when, in practice, the BEd and PGCE were the only routes into the profession.

While the introduction of on-the-job pathways is most welcome, the complexity is confusing for schools and regulators alike.

The launch of the iQTS is an opportunity to provide much-needed clarity about whether a teacher is qualified to work in a UK curriculum school, be that in the UK or internationally. We in the international sector should ensure that we make our voice heard.

The DfE’s consultation on Introducing International QTS is open until 3 May and can be accessed online. 

Mark S Steed is the principal and CEO of Kellett School, the British School in Hong Kong; and previously ran schools in Devon, Hertfordshire and Dubai. He tweets @independenthead