The key to workforce retention and teacher quality is simple. Focus on productivity. Do more of what saves time and do less of what wastes time.
Provide high-quality curriculum materials directly to both teachers and students to reduce the “planning cottage industry.” Ensure resources are widely accessible to minimise time spent on photocopying, and close the gap between NAPLAN standardisation and the absence of consistent, school- and year-level summative assessments in core subjects.
Invest in strong knowledge management within schools and across specialist disciplines so that the most valuable materials are easy to access and share. Prioritise retaining and building school-based expertise—last year’s successful Year 4 Garden unit, for example, is often more immediately useful than external repositories filled with generic (even great generic) content.
Protect and increase face-to-face teaching time by improving productivity. Remove activities that waste teachers’ time, including ineffective professional development, unproductive staff meetings, overly complex team-teaching models that require excessive coordination, and the collection of data that is never meaningfully used.
Critically evaluate the effectiveness and cost-benefit of Individual Learning Plans to determine whether they deliver real impact.
Reduce unnecessary curriculum churn by limiting changes to those with a clear purpose and demonstrated benefit. Avoid cyclical reviews and politically driven “add-ons” that expand workload without improving outcomes.
End centralised pedagogy mandates that impose constant new approaches on teachers, creating unnecessary workload and fatigue.
Remove administrative burdens, including requirements for teachers to collect student demographic data unless it serves a clear educational purpose.
Eliminate the requirement for Victorian teachers to fund their own registration, and reduce excessive professional development compliance and record-keeping obligations.
Address the decline in teacher salaries relative to Average Weekly Earnings.
Adopt proven performance and professional development practices from other industries to support teacher growth in a practical and meaningful way.
Above all, apply a simple principle: if a process or practice does not add value, stop doing it. Teaching time in the classroom is where the greatest impact lies—streamline everything else to improve productivity, teacher wellbeing, and student outcomes.
Google backgrounder
The Australian teacher workforce has undergone a significant transformation over the last 50 years, shifting from a younger, more gender-balanced profile to one that is increasingly mature, feminised, and under supply pressure. [1, 2, 3, 4]
📉 Gender Composition (The “Feminisation” Trend)
The most consistent trend since the early 1970s has been the steady increase in the proportion of female teachers.
- 1970s: Roughly 59% of teachers were female, with a stronger male presence in secondary schools (around 41%).
- Present (2024–2026): Women now comprise over 72% of the full-time equivalent (FTE) teaching workforce.
- Sector Split: This is most pronounced in primary schools, where roughly 82% of staff are female, compared to 61.5% in secondary schools. [2, 5]
⏳ Age and Experience (An Ageing Workforce)
Teachers are significantly older today than they were 50 years ago, creating a looming “retirement cliff.” [2, 4]
- Median Age Shift: In 1981, the median age for a female teacher was 32; by 2021, it had risen to 42. For males, it rose from 35 to 44 in the same period.
- Mature Profile: Currently, roughly 37% of teachers are aged 50 or older, and nearly 17% are over the age of 60 and approaching retirement.
- Experience: The workforce remains highly experienced, with 66% of teachers having more than 10 years of classroom experience. [3, 4, 6, 7, 8]
Supply and Shortages (A Recurring Cycle)
Teacher shortages are not a new phenomenon but have become more “systemic” in recent years.
- Historical Shortages: In the 1970s, Australia faced such a severe shortage that it actively recruited thousands of teachers from the United States, UK, and Canada.
- Modern Crisis: Current shortages are driven by high attrition and declining graduate numbers. In 2024, the percentage of secondary teachers in schools with “qualified teacher shortages” reached 42%, a three-fold increase since 2018.
- Attrition Intent: Approximately 35% of current teachers intend to leave the profession before retirement, primarily citing workload and burnout. [9, 10, 11, 12]
🏛️ Employment and Workload
- Workload Intensification: Full-time teachers now report working an average of 50 hours per week, with roughly 15–21 hours consumed by administrative tasks and marking.
- Stability: Despite the “gig economy,” teaching remains relatively stable; 69% of the workforce are on ongoing (permanent) contracts, though this drops to only 48% for early-career teachers.
- Administrative Growth: Over the last decade, non-teaching administrative and specialist roles have grown at roughly three times the rate of classroom teachers to handle compliance and student wellbeing demands. [13, 14, 15, 16, 17]
⚖️ 50-Year Summary Table
| Metric [18] | 1970s Profile | 2026 Profile |
|---|---|---|
| Gender (Female %) | ~59% | ~72% |
| Median Age | ~32-35 | ~42-44 |
| Primary Recruitment | Local & International (US/UK) | Domestic Graduates & Skilled Migration |
| Top Workload Driver | Face-to-face instruction | Compliance & Administration |
[7] https://research.acer.edu.au
[11] https://apo.org.au
[12] https://ministers.education.gov.au
[18] https://ministers.education.gov.au
The history of Australian teacher salaries relative to Average Weekly Earnings (AWE) shows a significant long-term decline in the relative economic status of the profession.
Fifty years ago, a teacher’s salary was a gateway to the upper-middle class; today, it has compressed toward the national average.
📉 The Relative Decline (1975–2025)
In the mid-1970s, a teacher’s salary was substantially higher than the average worker’s. Over the following decades, this “premium” has steadily eroded.
- 1975: A mid-career teacher earned approximately 140% to 150% of AWE.
- 1995: The ratio slipped to roughly 120% of AWE.
- 2025: A mid-career teacher (at the top of the scale) now typically earns roughly 105% to 110% of AWE.
⏳ Historical Timeline
1. The “Golden Age” (1970s)
- Salary Status: Teaching was one of the most stable and well-paid professions for university graduates.
- AWE Context: Because a smaller percentage of the total workforce held degrees, the “graduate premium” for teachers was high.
2. The Era of Compression (1980s – 1990s)
- Enterprise Bargaining: The shift to enterprise bargaining meant salary increases were often tied to “productivity offsets” (larger classes or more admin) rather than maintaining parity with other professions.
- Professional Creep: Other sectors (Finance, Tech, Law) saw rapid wage growth that far outpaced the public sector, making teaching less competitive for high-achieving graduates.
3. The “Flatline” (2000s – 2020)
- Wage Caps: Most states (notably NSW and Victoria) implemented 2% to 2.5% annual wage caps.
- Inflation Impact: For much of this period, teacher salary growth barely tracked the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and fell behind the growth of AWE in the broader private sector.
4. The Recent Correction (2023 – 2026)
- Market Adjustment: Facing a workforce crisis, states have broken their own wage caps.
- NSW Example: In 2023, NSW implemented a historic pay rise (up to 12% for some), briefly “re-basing” teacher pay higher against AWE to stem the exodus of staff.
- Current Standing: While these jumps have helped, they have primarily returned teachers to their 2010 relative standing, rather than the high levels of the 1970s.
⚖️ Graduate Entry Comparison
The “Starting Salary” for teachers remains relatively competitive, but the lifetime earnings trajectory is where the gap is widest.
- Entry Level: A graduate teacher starts at roughly 95% of AWE, which is competitive with many other graduate roles.
- The Plateau: Most teachers reach the “top of the scale” within 10 years. In many other professions, AWE continues to rise as experience grows, whereas a teacher’s relative earnings often stagnate unless they move into school leadership.
🏛️ Summary Table: Top-of-Scale Teacher vs. AWE
| Year | Est. Teacher Salary (Top) | Est. Annual AWE | Ratio (% of AWE) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1975 | ~$13,500 | ~$9,200 | ~146% |
| 2000 | ~$48,000 | ~$41,000 | ~117% |
| 2025 | ~$120,000 | ~$105,000 | ~114% |
In the current 2024–2026 enterprise bargaining cycle, teacher salaries across the eastern states have seen their most significant “market corrections” in decades to combat the workforce crisis. NSW currently leads the country in raw salary, while Victoria and Queensland have focused on different “allowance” and “workload” trade-offs.
💰 Salary Comparison (2025–2026 Rates)
Most teachers reach the “top of the scale” within 8 to 10 years of service.
| State | Graduate (Entry) | Top of Scale (Proficient) | Key Salary Driver |
|---|---|---|---|
| NSW | $85,000 | $122,100 | Largest one-off rise in 2023; scrapped 2.5% cap. |
| Victoria | $79,228 | $118,653 | 1% increases every 6 months + $5,600 bonus. |
| Queensland | $84,206 | $117,144 | Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) payments. |
🏛️ Workforce & Contractual Differences
Each state has taken a distinct path to address teacher retention and administrative burden.
- New South Wales (The “Salary Leader”):
- Focus: Direct pay to attract staff back from other sectors.
- Workload: Aiming to reduce administration by 5 hours per week, but face-to-face teaching hours remain among the highest in the country.
- Victoria (The “Conditions Leader”):
- Focus: Reducing face-to-face teaching hours.
- Workload: Victorian teachers received a 1.5-hour reduction in weekly teaching time (moving to 21.5 hours in primary and 18.5 hours in secondary) to provide more planning time.
- Queensland (The “Retention Leader”):
- Focus: Financial protection against inflation.
- Allowances: Introduced “Cost-of-Living” lump sums (up to 3% extra) if inflation exceeds wage rises. They also offer the most generous regional and remote allowance packages.
📊 Administrative and Support Staff
How each state handles the “non-teaching” work that contributes to burnout:
- Victoria: Heavily relies on Education Support (ES) staff. Victoria has the highest ratio of ES staff to teachers, used specifically to manage “Inclusion” and disability paperwork.
- NSW: Has a large non-school-based teaching service. These are qualified teachers who work in central offices on curriculum and policy rather than in classrooms.
- Queensland: Recently announced the hiring of an additional 6,000+ frontline staff, including “School Wellbeing Professionals,” to take the mental health load off classroom teachers.
⚖️ Summary of “The Deal”
- Go to NSW if: You want the highest base salary and highest superannuation potential.
- Go to Victoria if: You value less time in the classroom and more time for planning and collaboration.
- Go to Queensland if: You are interested in regional service with significant financial bonuses and protection against inflation.
The increase in teacher planning time across Australia—often referred to as Release from Face-to-Face (RFF) or Scheduled Class Time (SCT) reduction—is being driven by a systemic effort to address the teacher workforce crisis.
As of 2026, state governments are using additional planning time as a primary lever to reduce burnout and improve retention in a highly competitive labour market.
📉 Addressing the “Administrative Creep”
The most direct driver is the recognition that administrative tasks have “crowded out” actual lesson preparation.
- Compliance Burden: Teachers now spend an average of 4.7 hours a week on paperwork alone—the fourth highest in the OECD.
- “Planning the Plan”: Much of the new planning time is explicitly “quarantined” to allow teachers to manage data entry, OHS reporting, and complex personalised learning plans for diverse classrooms.
- Audit Results: A landmark NSW audit identified over 300 administrative tasks currently performed by teachers, prompting a commitment to cut 5 hours of admin per week. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
🛠️ Strategic State Initiatives (2024–2026)
Different states have codified these time increases into their latest enterprise agreements:
- Victoria (The “Lowest Hours” Model): Under the 2022 agreement (active through 2026), Victoria implemented a “landmark” reduction in face-to-face hours. Primary teachers moved to 21 hours and secondary to 18.5 hours per week. This gives Victorian teachers the highest amount of planning time in the country.
- NSW (Curriculum Reform Release): To manage the rollout of a massive new syllabus, NSW provides centrally funded release time. In 2026, this includes an extra 0.15 to 0.375 FTE release for primary executive staff to help lead curriculum implementation.
- Queensland (Modernisation): Following statewide strikes in 2025, Queensland’s 2026 initiatives include “red tape reduction” and the hiring of 6,000+ support staff to take over non-teaching duties, effectively “creating” more planning time for classroom teachers. [2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
Retention as a National Priority
With roughly 35% of teachers intending to leave the profession due to workload, planning time is no longer seen as a “perk” but a survival strategy. [1, 11]
- Burnout Prevention: 2025 studies showed that 9 out of 10 Australian teachers experience severe stress. Governments are increasing planning time to make the daily workload more “humanly possible.”
- Professional Autonomy: There is a growing movement to give teachers more trust to use their planning time as they see fit, rather than filling it with mandatory meetings. [3, 12, 13, 14, 15]
⚖️ Planning Time Comparison (Weekly Face-to-Face Maximums)
| State [12, 16, 17] | Primary (Face-to-Face) | Secondary (Face-to-Face) | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Victoria | 21 hours | 18.5 hours | Lowest in Australia (as of 2024) |
| NSW | ~21.5 hours* | ~20 hours | Subject to “Extra 30-min” reform |
| Queensland | ~22.5 hours | ~20 hours | Under review in 2025–26 EB cycle |
*Includes recent incremental releases for curriculum reform. [16]
[2] https://www.theeducatoronline.com
[3] https://aeunews.bliss-staging.com
[4] https://education.nsw.gov.au
[5] https://education.nsw.gov.au
[6] https://www2.education.vic.gov.au
[9] https://education.nsw.gov.au
[10] https://alt-qed.qed.qld.gov.au
[12] https://news.aeuvic.asn.au
[13] https://theconversation.com
[15] https://www.premier.vic.gov.au
[16] https://nswliberal.org.au
[17] https://www.ieuvictas.org.au
The evolution of teacher accreditation in Australia has shifted from simple state-based registration to a highly regulated national standards framework focused on “continuous improvement” and evidence-based practice.
📜 1970s – 1980s: The Registration Era
In the mid-20th century, accreditation was largely a one-off administrative event rather than a career-long process.
- Life-long Registration: Once you graduated from a “Teachers College” and passed a probationary year, you were generally registered for life.
- State Control: Each state had its own board (e.g., the Teachers Registration Board), and moving between states often required completely re-proving your credentials.
- Focus on Qualifications: Accreditation was based on having the right “papers” rather than demonstrating specific classroom competencies.
📈 1990s: The Competency Shift
As part of broader micro-economic reforms, governments began looking for ways to define “what a good teacher looks like.”
- National Frameworks: The first attempts at national “competency standards” emerged.
- Introduction of “Steps”: Pay rises began to be linked more formally to moving through “accreditation steps” rather than just years of service.
🏛️ 2000s – 2011: The Birth of AITSL
This was the most transformative period, moving toward a single national language for teaching quality.
- 2011 (AITSL): The Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership was established. It introduced the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers.
- Four Career Stages: Accreditation was now divided into:
- Graduate
- Proficient (Mandatory to achieve within 2–5 years)
- Highly Accomplished (Voluntary)
- Lead (Voluntary)
🛠️ 2012 – 2023: Evidence & Compliance
Accreditation became a cyclical process requiring teachers to “prove” their quality every few years.
- Maintenance of Accreditation: Teachers must now complete 100 hours of Professional Development (PD) every five years to keep their license to teach.
- Portfolios: The “Proficient” level requires a massive portfolio of “evidence”—lesson plans, student work samples, and observations—to be verified by a principal.
- NESA & VIT Power: State bodies like NESA (NSW) and the VIT (Victoria) became powerful regulators with the ability to de-register teachers for failing to meet PD or “Suitability to Teach” (conduct) requirements.
🌐 2024 – 2026: Modernisation & Reform
Current changes focus on making accreditation more meaningful and less of a “tick-box” exercise.
- Streamlining: In 2025, Victoria and NSW began simplifying the “Proficient” accreditation process to reduce the massive administrative load on early-career teachers.
- HALT (Highly Accomplished/Lead Teacher) Push: Governments are now offering financial bonuses (up to $10,000+) to encourage more teachers to undergo the rigorous national certification for higher levels, aiming to keep expert teachers in the classroom rather than moving into management.
- Mutual Recognition: The Automatic Mutual Recognition (AMR) scheme now makes it much easier for a teacher accredited in one state to work in another without a new application.
⚖️ Summary of Accreditation Shifts
| Feature | 1976 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| Duration | Life-long (mostly) | Renewable every 5 years |
| Requirements | Qualification + Probation | Standards + PD + Evidence |
| Standard | State-based | National (AITSL) |
| Cost | Minimal | Annual fees ($100–$200+) |
The shift in teacher training has moved from local, practical-focused Teachers’ Colleges to a highly academic and regulated Master’s-level university system.
🏛️ Comparison of Teacher Training & Accreditation (1976 vs. 2026)
| Feature | 1976 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Training | Teachers’ Colleges (often 2–3 year diplomas). | Universities (4-year Degree or 2-year Master’s). |
| Entry Standards | Variable; often direct entry from school. | LANTITE (National Literacy/Numeracy test) + high ATAR/GPA. |
| Qualification | Diploma or Bachelor of Education. | Master of Teaching (MTeach) is now the preferred standard. |
| Accreditation | Life-long (following one-off probation). | Renewable every 5 years (Maintenance cycle). |
| Proficiency | Implicit; based on years of service. | Evidence-based portfolio against 7 National Standards. |
| Requirements | Qualification + Probation. | Standards + 100hrs PD + Child Safety Checks. |
| Standard | State-based regulations. | National (AITSL) Australian Professional Standards. |
| Annual Cost | Minimal or employer-covered. | Mandatory fees ($100–$200+) paid by the teacher. |
🎓 Key Trends in Teacher Training
The “academicisation” of teaching is the most significant change over the last 50 years:
- The Master’s Shift: Since roughly 2011, there has been a massive push for teaching to become a “Masters-entry” profession. This was intended to lift the status of teaching to match Law or Medicine.
- LANTITE (2016): To ensure quality, the Federal Government introduced the Literacy and Numeracy Test for Initial Teacher Education. Students cannot graduate or be accredited until they rank in the top 30% of the adult population in these areas.
- The “Clinical” Model: Modern training (especially in Victoria) uses a Clinical Practice model, where student teachers are embedded in schools more deeply and frequently than the old “practicum” blocks of the 1970s.
- Paid Internships (2024–2026): To fight the teacher shortage, “Earn and Learn” models have returned. States like Victoria now offer $30,000+ to support paraprofessionals and career-changers to complete their teaching degrees while working in a school.
The profile of people entering the Australian teaching workforce has shifted from the “traditional” school-leaver model to one increasingly dominated by career-changers and mature-age students, even as academic entry standards have tightened.
📉 ATAR and Academic Entry
There has been a 50-year tension between maintaining “high status” and filling classroom vacancies.
- The 1970s–90s: Teaching often required a high-mid ATAR (or equivalent). In the 90s, it was common for teaching to require a score in the 80s or 90s.
- The “Dip” (2010s): ATAR requirements famously slipped during the mid-2010s, with some universities accepting students with scores as low as the 50s or 60s to maintain enrolment numbers.
- The Modern Floor (2019–2026): In response, states like Victoria and NSW introduced a “minimum ATAR” (usually 70) for teaching degrees. However, only about 25% of students now enter teaching via a fresh ATAR score.
- LANTITE Impact: Since 2016, the LANTITE test has become the true academic filter, ensuring all graduates—regardless of their ATAR—rank in the top 30% of the adult population for literacy and numeracy.
⏳ The Age Shift (The “Career-Changer” Boom)
Teaching is no longer a profession people only enter at age 21.
- Age Profile: Roughly 50% of initial teacher education (ITE) students are now aged 25 or older.
- Post-Graduate Entry: The fastest-growing entry pathway is the Master of Teaching, which requires a previous degree. This has pushed the “entry age” for many new teachers into the late 20s and 30s.
- “Earn and Learn” Models: In 2024–2026, programs like Teach For Australia and Victorian employment-based degrees have surged. These attract professionals from engineering, law, and trades (aged 30–50) who receive a salary while they study.
🛠️ Prior Experience
The modern “new teacher” often brings significantly more life experience than their 1970s predecessors.
- Out-of-Field Skills: New entrants frequently arrive with a “first career” in a specialized field. This is particularly prevalent in Secondary STEM and Applied Learning (Vocational).
- Paraprofessional Path: A major trend in 2026 is Education Support (ES) staff and Teacher Aides upgrading to teaching degrees. These entrants have years of classroom experience before they ever “officially” start teaching.
- The “Soft Skill” Gap: While career-changers bring maturity, research suggests they are more sensitive to work-life balance and are more likely to leave within the first 5 years if the administrative load is too high, compared to younger “career-long” teachers.
📊 Summary of Entry Trends (1976 vs 2026)
| Metric | 1976 Profile | 2026 Profile |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Entry Path | Year 12 School Leaver | Post-Graduate / Career Changer |
| Entry Age | ~18 | ~25–35 (Avg) |
| Academic Filter | High School Results | LANTITE + Degree GPA |
| Previous Experience | Minimal | Diverse (corporate, trades, ES) |
| Motivation | Long-term career stability | Purpose-driven / Career pivot |
The trend for ATAR (or equivalent) entry requirements has shifted from a period of high status to a significant “market dip” in the mid-2010s, followed by the current era of mandated minimums and alternative pathways.
📉 ATAR Entry Trends: A 50-Year Overview
| Era | ATAR / Percentile Trend | Context |
|---|---|---|
| 1970s – 1980s | High-Mid (75–85) | Teaching was a “top-tier” choice for women and a stable path for men; quotas were strict. |
| 1990s – 2005 | Steady (70–80) | Requirements remained stable; university “demand-driven” funding had not yet arrived. |
| 2010 – 2017 | The “Dip” (50–65) | Universities lowered entry scores to fill places during a period of uncapped enrolments. |
| 2018 – 2026 | The Floor (70+) | Governments introduced mandated minimums to restore professional status. |
🔍 Key Historical Shifts
1. The “Demand-Driven” Crisis (2010–2017)
The most controversial period in teacher entry occurred when the Federal Government uncapped university places.
- Declining Scores: Some universities admitted students with ATARs as low as 40 or 50.
- Media Backlash: This led to a “crisis of confidence” in teaching, with public perception suggesting the profession was becoming a “fallback” option.
2. The Victorian & NSW “Floor” (2019–Present)
In response to the dip, state governments implemented strict academic hurdles:
- Mandated 70 ATAR: In Victoria, since 2019, the average ATAR for school-leaver entry must be at least 70.
- Alternative Checks: For those with lower ATARs, universities must now use non-academic selection (like the CASPer test) to assess suitability.
3. The Decoupling of ATAR (2024–2026)
As of 2026, the ATAR is becoming less relevant as a measure of the workforce because:
- Alternative Pathways: Only about 1 in 4 new teachers enter via a fresh Year 12 ATAR.
- Post-Grad Dominance: Most entrants now enter via a Master of Teaching, where their previous degree GPA matters more than their high school score from a decade ago.
- LANTITE: Regardless of their ATAR, all entrants must now pass the LANTITE (Literacy and Numeracy Test) before graduating, effectively creating a “standardised ATAR” for the adult population.
⚖️ ATAR vs. Workforce Reality (2026)
- The “Elite” Push: Programs like Teach For Australia specifically target high-achievers with ATARs of 90+ and previous career success.
- The “Experience” Push: Simultaneously, “Earn and Learn” models value industry experience (e.g., a plumber moving into Tech teaching) over an academic score achieved 20 years prior.
Mel Yuan for Brunswick 
Leave a comment