National Trends

Introduction

Teachers are the backbone of our education system. The successful education of Australia’s children and young people relies on the dedication and expertise of our teacher workforce. Data presented in this report contributes to an understanding of who Australia’s teachers are and what their workforce experiences look like, as well as how the workforce may be changing over time. This report contains interpretations of key national level data from 2020 to 2024 and raises important considerations for policymakers about factors affecting the teacher workforce in Australia, including trends in:

• Demographics and roles, to examine changes in the make-up of Australia’s teachers.
• Employment conditions, including employment arrangements, working hours, and tasks that take up teachers’ time.
• Career intentions and pressures on teachers, to help anticipate likely attrition and identify areas in which teachers require further support.

This report is updated annually as new data is released in the Data Portal.² A separate report, National Trends: ITE Pipeline, provides insights into the progression of initial teacher education (ITE) students through the ITE pipeline, and is also updated annually.

Data sources

The Australian Teacher Workforce Data (ATWD) initiative links multiple sources of data to provide information on teacher workforce supply and workforce experiences (for more information on the ATWD initiative, see here). Two key data sources are used in this report:

• Teacher regulatory authority (TRA) data: Provides a population-level view of all registered teachers,³ through the demographic and registration data supplied by TRAs. In this publication, TRA data from 2020 to 2024 is reported.⁴
• Australian Teacher Workforce Survey (Teacher Survey) data: Every registered teacher is invited annually to participate in the Teacher Survey, which is distributed by TRAs on behalf of the ATWD, typically between August and November each year (the survey period varies by state/territory). Given that all registered teachers have the opportunity to participate, the Teacher Survey provides the best available data on the experiences of Australia’s teacher workforce. For more information on the Teacher Survey, visit here.

Percentages derived from the Teacher Survey for each year come from weighted counts of individual respondents. The use of weighted data allows the ATWD to more accurately report data on the teacher workforce. It does this by correcting for the over- or under-representation of known demographics (e.g., age and gender) of registered teachers within a state and territory, and the number of responses from each state and territory.⁵ It is also important to note that data are not reported for groups which could lead to respondents becoming identifiable, or where data would be unreliable due to the small numbers of survey respondents.

Australian Teacher Workforce Survey responses

In 2024, approximately 8.5% of registered teachers participated in the Teacher Survey, as outlined in Table 1. In the 7 years the Teacher Survey has been running, around 27% of all registered teachers have participated at least once (Figure 1). As outlined in Table 1, the Teacher Survey has been available in all states and territories since 2020. Thus, this report provides data from 2020 through to 2024.

Table 1: Australian Teacher Workforce Survey responses, 2018–2024

* Total number of registered teachers was estimated for 2020–2022 as TRA data did not include WA until 2023.

Figure 1: Teacher Survey respondents

Size and structure of the workforce

All teachers must be registered to teach or hold alternative authorisation to teach if they are teaching or leading in schools. Many early childhood teachers are also registered with teacher regulatory authorities, but this is not required in non-school-based early childhood settings in Queensland, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory.

To register as a teacher, individuals must be qualified with an accredited ITE qualification (or equivalent) and meet the relevant requirements in accordance with the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. However, not all registered teachers are necessarily working in the profession, with some employed elsewhere in education or outside of the sector, and others may not be participating in the workforce at all.

In 2024:

• Most (81%) registered teachers held full registration.⁹
• Provisional registration, which is most common in the early career period, was held by 13% of registered teachers.
• A small proportion (4%) of registered teachers held an alternative authorisation to teach.¹⁰ Alternative authorisation to teach enables an individual who does not hold provisional or full teacher registration to teach in a school, under strict conditions (AITSL, 2024).¹¹

Size of the registered workforce

In 2024, the registered workforce comprised approximately 567,103 teachers. This estimate accounts for the 2.7% of registered teachers who were registered in multiple states. There were an estimated 8,865 Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander teachers nationally in 2024.¹²

The number of teachers registered in each state and territory was in line with their relative population sizes in 2024 (ABS, 2024; see Table 2). Teachers can be registered in more than one state, and the number of multi-state registrations varies across jurisdictions. Where multi-state registration is more common, such as in the NT (34.2%) and the ACT (14.2%), the number of teachers available to teach in those jurisdictions is likely to be smaller, as some of these registered teachers will be working elsewhere.

Table 2: State of registration, 2024¹³

Structure of the workforce

The ATWD provides insight into the roles of registered teachers, including where they work and who they teach. This includes both registered teachers who are actively teaching in schools and early childhood settings, and those not actively teaching (e.g., those on extended leave, or who have left the teaching profession but have maintained their teacher registration).

Based on survey responses, the structure of the workforce in 2024 indicates that 83% of registered teachers were actively employed as teachers or leaders. For more detail on the workforce structure, see Figure 2.

Figure 2: Workforce structure, all registered teachers, 2024

Key definitions:

• Teacher workforce: All registered teachers who are actively teaching in schools or early childhood settings in Australia, including those employed on a casual basis.
• Deployed workforce: All registered teachers who are attached to a school or early childhood setting in Australia via a fixed-term contract or in an ongoing/permanent position. This does not include registered teachers employed under a casual arrangement.
• School-deployed workforce: Registered teachers deployed in schools, whether working as teachers or leaders, excluding those working under a casual arrangement.
• Early childhood-deployed: Registered teachers deployed in early childhood settings,¹⁵ whether working as teachers or leaders, excluding those working under a casual arrangement.
• Classroom teacher: Registered teachers deployed in a school, who do not hold a formal leadership position, excluding those working under a casual arrangement.^16,17
• Middle leader: Registered teachers deployed in schools, who hold management/leadership responsibilities, usually in addition to teaching (e.g., head of department or subject area).^18,19
• Senior leader: Registered teachers deployed in schools who hold senior leadership roles; typically school principals (including deputy principals and assistant principals).^20,21
• Casual relief teachers: Registered teachers employed under a casual arrangement, who are working in schools or early childhood settings, or both.
• Non-deployed: Registered teachers who are not actively teaching in schools or early childhood settings – can be on extended leave (e.g., parental leave), or otherwise maintaining registration but not teaching (e.g., unemployed, retired, employed outside of teaching).
  • Of the non-deployed registered teachers in the ‘on leave’ category (i.e., 44% of non-deployed teachers, or 7.6% of all registered teachers): 29% were on parental leave, 23% were on health-related leave, 12% were on long service leave, and 37% were on leave for other reasons.
  • Of the non-deployed registered teachers in the ‘other’ category (i.e., 56% of non-deployed teachers, or 9.6% of all registered teachers): 48% were employed elsewhere in the education sector; 31% were not employed, and 22% were employed but not in the education sector.

In 2024, the proportional breakdown of the school-deployed workforce, middle leaders and senior leaders is shown in Figure 3:²²

Figure 3: Sector, school type, and regionality breakdown, school-deployed workforce and leaders, 2024²³

Sector	School-deployed workforce	Middle leaders	Senior leaders
Government schools	62%	50%	76%
Independent schools	20%	26%	11%
Catholic schools	18%	24%	13%

School type	School-deployed workforce	Middle leaders	Senior leaders
Primary schools	40%	22%	59%
Secondary schools	31%	45%	23%
Combined level schools	28%	32%	18%

Regionality	School-deployed workforce	Middle leaders	Senior leaders
Major cities	72%	73%	67%
Inner regional	18%	17%	20%
Outer regional	8%	8%	9%
Remote/very remote areas	2%	1%	4%

Subgroups

This report focuses on the following subgroups:

• The teacher workforce, to encompass all teachers actively teaching, whether deployed in schools or early childhood settings, or working on a casual basis.
• School-deployed classroom teachers, as the largest group within the teacher workforce (51%).
• School leaders, as a large group (a quarter of the teacher workforce), who have markedly different workplace skills and experiences to classroom teachers. Data on both middle leaders (17% of the teacher workforce) and senior leaders (8% of the teacher workforce) in schools is provided.
• Other subgroups include those deployed in early childhood settings (8% of the teacher workforce),²⁴ the school-deployed workforce in different regionalities (major cities, inner regional, outer regional, remote/very remote), casual relief teachers, early career teachers (those in their first five years of teaching²⁵), and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander teachers (1.6% of the teacher workforce). These subgroups are only reported where sample sizes are large enough, and so reported subgroups vary across sections.
• Where appropriate, details are also provided separately for teachers in primary, secondary, or combined schools. For more information, see the Data Portal.

Demographics

Teacher workforce^🛈

Most of the teacher workforce are women (76% in 2024), and this has been relatively stable over time. The age distribution of the teacher workforce has also remained relatively stable. Figure 4 shows:

• In 2024, ~38% of the teacher workforce were aged under 40, ~36% were aged between 40 and 55, and 27% were aged over 55.
• The proportion of the teacher workforce in each 5-year age band was very similar across those aged in their 20s,²⁷ 30s, and 40s (12–13% in 2024).
• In 2024, 10% of the teacher workforce were aged 65 or above, and therefore approaching (or exceeding) retirement age.²⁸ This proportion has increased a little over time, with those aged 69 or older making up 5% of the teacher workforce in 2024, compared to 3% in 2020.

Figure 4: Age distribution, teacher workforce, 2020–2024²⁹

Subgroups

Table 3 shows the 2024 age and gender breakdown for classroom teachers in schools, teachers deployed in an early childhood setting, early career teachers,³⁰ casual relief teachers, and the school-deployed workforce in different regionalities.

Table 3 shows:

• A higher proportion of casual relief teachers were in the older age brackets, with around 40% aged over 60 (23% aged 60–68, 18% aged 69+).
• Those deployed in early childhood settings tended to be younger, with only a quarter (26%) aged 50 and above.
• Most early career teachers were young, with almost half (48%) aged under 30. However, a little under a quarter (22%) of those in their first five years of teaching were aged 40 or above, demonstrating there are mid-career changers entering the profession.
• The reasons for these age-related patterns likely overlap with those for patterns related to years of experience in the teaching profession, explained below.
• The gender composition is comparable for all subgroups in Table 3 except those deployed in early childhood settings, who were almost all women (96%).

Table 3: Age and gender, workforce subgroups, 2024³¹

*School-deployed workforce

Leaders

In terms of gender, men are proportionally over-represented in school leadership roles – in 2024 men comprised 24% of the teacher workforce, but 30% of school leader roles. Middle and senior leaders are generally older than the overall teacher workforce. As shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6:

• Over half (58% in 2024) of middle leaders were aged between 30 and 49, while nearly two-thirds (64%) of senior leaders were aged between 40 and 59.
• A smaller proportion (~9%) of senior leaders were aged 34 or under, compared to 16% of middle leaders.
• Senior leaders were somewhat more likely to be aged 60 and over (17%), relative to middle leaders (13%).
• While the age profile of leaders has remained relatively constant from 2020 to 2024, there has been a gradual decline in the proportion of younger middle leaders (those aged 34 or under).

Figure 5: Age distribution, middle leaders in schools, 2020–2024³⁵

Figure 6: Age distribution, senior leaders in schools, 2020–2024³⁶

Experience levels

In this report, ‘years of experience’ is taken as the years since a person first commenced in the teaching profession. This does not account for time spent away from teaching during that period (e.g., for teachers who have taken extended leave), and so ‘years of experience’ may overestimate the actual number of years a teacher has spent actively teaching.

Teacher workforce^🛈

The teacher workforce is highly experienced. As shown in Figure 7:

• In 2024, 65% of the teacher workforce had at least 10 years’ experience.
• Early career teachers – those in their first five years of teaching – comprised 22% of the teacher workforce.
• The proportions in each experience bracket remained relatively stable over the 2020–2024 period, with a minor increase in more experienced (and a decrease in less experienced) teachers in 2021.³⁸

Figure 7: Years of experience distribution, teacher workforce, 2020–2024

Subgroups

While the general trends for the workforce subgroups are similar to those for the overall teacher workforce, Table 7 shows:

• The proportion of early career teachers was notably larger for those deployed in early childhood settings (35%).
• Examining regionality distributions shows a higher proportion of early career teachers working in remote/very remote settings (28%) compared to those in less remote locations (15–21%). This may reflect new graduates’ difficulty in finding permanent employment in major cities and/or their willingness to make use of incentives³⁹ to work in rural areas.
• Casual relief teachers tended to fall into either the very experienced (24% had 40+ years’ experience) or the least experienced brackets (26% were early career teachers). This likely reflects a combination of highly experienced casual relief teachers taking casual roles as a way of transitioning to retirement, and less experienced casual relief teachers taking on casual roles either by choice or necessity before transitioning to more permanent employment.

Table 7: Years of experience distribution, workforce subgroups, 2024⁴⁰

* School-deployed workforce

Leaders

School leaders – particularly senior leaders – generally have more years of experience than the broader teacher workforce. As shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9:

• In 2024, a smaller proportion of middle leaders were in their early career period, with higher proportions in the 10–19 and 20–29 year experience brackets than the wider workforce.
• For senior leaders, only a small proportion had under 10 years’ experience, with higher proportions in each of the 10–19, 20–29, and 30–39 year brackets than the overall teacher workforce.
• The broad experience profiles of leaders remained relatively stable over the 2020–2024 period. However, in comparison to 2020, there may be a trend for a lower proportion of less experienced middle leaders, with a higher proportion of mid-career middle leaders (with 10–19 or 20–29 years’ experience).

Figure 8: Years of experience distribution, middle leaders, schools, 2020–2024⁴¹

Figure 9: Years of experience distribution, senior leaders, schools, 2020–2024

Examining years of experience profiles of the school-deployed workforce by role offers insights into career trajectories. Figure 10 presents the proportion of classroom teachers, middle leaders, and senior leaders within each experience bracket. This shows:

• Almost all (92%) early career teachers in 2024 were classroom teachers.
• Some leadership roles are taken up by teachers in the early phase of mid-career, with 27% of those with 6–9 years’ experience in a middle or senior leadership role.
• Middle leaders made up approximately a quarter of the workforce at each experience bracket (except 1–5 years), peaking at 28% of those in the 20–29 years’ experience bracket.
• While the proportion of middle leaders shows a sharp increase from 1–5 years’ experience to 6–9 years’ experience, senior leaders show a more gradual change as teachers progress in their careers, peaking in the 30–39 years bracket.

Figure 10: Years of experience by role (classroom teacher, middle leader, senior leader), schools, 2024

Employment arrangements

Teachers can be employed under a variety of contract types, such as ongoing/permanent, fixed-term of one year or less (short), fixed-term of more than one year (long); alternatively they may be employed under a casual arrangement (typically as a casual relief teacher).

Teacher workforce^🛈

As shown in Figure 11, most of the teacher workforce are employed on ongoing contracts, and this proportion increased a little from 2020 to 2024. In contrast, the proportion on short-term contracts decreased over the same period. The proportion of the teacher workforce on long fixed-term contracts and employed on a casual basis have remained relatively stable over time.

Figure 11: Contract types, teacher workforce, 2020–2024⁴³

Subgroups

As casual relief teachers are often not attached to a particular location or setting, the proportion of casual relief teachers within most teacher workforce subgroups cannot be accurately determined, with the exception of early career teachers. These data show that new teachers entering the workforce commonly take on casual or fixed-term contracts before moving to permanent roles:

• 19% of early career teachers in 2024 were casual relief teachers, with 27% on fixed-term contracts, and 54% on ongoing contracts.
• Early career teachers with 1–2 years’ experience have lower rates of ongoing contracts (40% in 2024), increasing to 66% for those with 3–5 years’ experience.
• Casual contracts were relatively common for early career teachers with 1–2 years’ experience (27%), decreasing to 12% for those with 3–5 years’ experience.
• Fixed-term contracts were more common for early career teachers with 1–2 years’ experience (32%) than for those with 3–5 years’ experience (22%).

Table 8 shows the breakdown of contract types (excluding casual contracts) for the other teacher workforce subgroups. In 2024:

• Ongoing contracts were held by most teachers, across settings and locations.
• Ongoing contracts were particularly common (92%) for those deployed in early childhood settings.
• Ongoing contracts were less common for those in remote/very remote locations (70%), with 15% of teachers on long fixed-term contracts.

Table 8: Contract types, deployed workforce subgroups, 2024⁴⁴

* School-deployed workforce

Leaders

As shown in Figure 12, most middle leaders and senior leaders were employed on ongoing contracts in 2024. This has remained stable across the 2020 to 2024 period.⁴⁵ Senior leaders were slightly more likely to be employed on a long fixed-term contract than middle leaders, though the proportion employed on fixed-term contracts was low for both groups.

Figure 12: Contract types, middle and senior leaders, schools, 2020–2024⁴⁶

Contracted full-time equivalency (FTE)

Teacher workforce^🛈

As shown in Figure 13, most of the teacher workforce were employed to work full-time hours in 2024, and this was stable across the 2021 to 2024 period. For those contracted for part-time hours, there was a relatively even split between those contracted for around 4, 3, or fewer than 3 days per week.⁴⁸ While casual relief teachers are not generally contracted for a particular time fraction, they are included in this section to show the FTE fraction they reported being employed to undertake.

Figure 13: Contracted FTE, teacher workforce, 2021⁴⁹–2024⁵⁰

Subgroups

The majority of teachers in all listed subgroups, except casual relief teachers, were contracted for full-time hours in 2024. For most subgroups, data is not available for the separate proportions of those working 3, 2, or fewer than 2 days per week. As shown in Table 9:

• Full-time contracts were particularly common for the school-deployed workforce in remote/very remote locations (84%). This may reflect the difficulty in recruiting and retaining staff in remote/very remote schools – part-time positions could be more difficult to fill in areas where there may be teacher shortages.
• Full-time contracts were also relatively common for deployed early career teachers (82%).⁵¹
• Those deployed in early childhood settings were relatively more likely to be on part-time contracts.
• 27% of casual relief teachers were contracted to work full-time hours, underscoring the crucial role casual relief teachers play in ensuring classrooms are fully staffed with teachers.
  

Table 9: Contracted FTE, workforce subgroups, 2024

* School-deployed workforce

Leaders

Most middle and senior leaders were employed to work full-time hours, and this was also stable across the 2021–2024⁵³ period (see Figure 14). For the small proportion of leaders on part-time contracts, most were contracted for around 4 days per week.

Figure 14: Contracted FTE, middle and senior leaders, schools, 2021–2024⁵⁴

Working hours

Teachers’ workloads vary across the year, and some work is undertaken during school holiday periods.

In the Teacher Survey, teachers report the number of hours they tend to work in a typical week, during term.⁵⁵ They also report their hours during between-term holidays, excluding the 6-week summer holidays.⁵⁶ As a result, two estimates of teachers’ working hours are described below; weekly hours during term-time and weekly hours accounting for between-term holidays (46-week average).⁵⁷

It is important to note that it can be difficult for survey respondents to estimate the average time spent working in any given week, over a year. There are a range of reasons for this, including:

• Responses may be heavily influenced by the most recent working weeks.
• If teachers complete some tasks at home, such as marking or lesson planning, it can be difficult to distinguish the specific hours spent on work versus other non-work tasks.
• If weekly hours vary substantially, with very long hours during report-writing periods and shorter hours during student exam periods, it can be difficult to accurately estimate a ‘typical week’.

However, while the hours given might be over- or underestimated, they offer insight into how teachers perceive their workloads and provide an idea of how many hours of work are being undertaken outside of class times. Additionally, any over- or underestimation is unlikely to impact change over time.

Defining weekly hours

The difference between the weekly hours metrics provides information about the hours worked during between-term holiday periods and the balance of work across a teacher’s year. For the median hours to decrease when holiday periods between terms are accounted for indicates that teachers do work in school holiday periods, though substantially fewer hours compared to during school term. The reduction in working hours during term breaks is likely due to a combination of the absence of face-to-face teaching (which accounts for much of a teacher’s typical term week), along with the non-teaching tasks undertaken during these periods demanding fewer hours than during-term tasks.

As outlined above (Table 9, Figure 14), most teachers and leaders are employed to work full-time hours, and those who are employed to work on part-time or casual contracts vary in relation to how many days/hours per week they are contracted to work. As a result, this section focuses on the working hours of full-time, school-deployed teachers and leaders.⁵⁸ Working hours are also reported separately for primary, secondary, and combined schools, to examine whether there are specific trends in any particular setting.

School-deployed classroom teachers

Many full-time classroom teachers report working long hours. As shown in Figure 15 and Figure 16, in 2024:

• Across all school types, ~94–95% of all full-time teachers reported working 40 hours or more during term time.
• Some teachers reported working very long hours – up to 60 hours or even more.
• Across all school types, more than half (~56% in each case) of all full-time teachers reported working between 45 and 59 hours per week.
• When between-term holidays were accounted for, the distribution of working hours shifted down by around 5 hours.

Figure 15: Self-reported working hours during typical term weeks, full-time school-deployed classroom teachers, 2024⁵⁹

Figure 16: Self-reported working hours accounting for between-term holidays, full-time school-deployed classroom teachers, 2024⁶⁰

Figure 17 and Figure 18 show the median of weekly working hours across the 2020–2024 period. Additional information (showing typical range of hours around the median) is reported in the Appendix. Figures 17 and 18 show:

• In 2024, teachers in each school type reported working a median of 50 hours per week.
• Median working hours during term have been consistent across time for full-time teachers in secondary and combined schools, but have decreased by 5 hours since 2020 for primary teachers.
• In 2024, the median hours including between-term holidays was 46 hours, consistent across each school type.
• For secondary teachers, while the reported weekly hours during terms remained consistent over time, weekly hours including holiday periods decreased by 2 hours between 2021 and 2024. This suggests secondary teachers spent less time working during holiday periods in 2024 (and 2023) than in previous years.

Note that in the following figures, the median hours for different school types overlap, and so some lines in the figures are obscured.

Figure 17: Median self-reported weekly working hours during term weeks, full-time school-deployed classroom teachers, 2020–2024

Figure 18: Median self-reported weekly working hours accounting for between-term holidays, full-time school-deployed classroom teachers, 2021–2024

Leaders

Figures 19 to 22 show the median of weekly working hours across the 2020–2024 period, for middle and senior leaders. Additional information (showing typical range of hours around the median) is reported in the Appendix. Figures 19 to 22 show:

• For middle leaders, in 2024 the weekly hours during school term ranged from a median of 50 (primary) to 52 hours (secondary and combined).
• After including between-term holiday weeks, the median weekly working hours decreased by 3 hours for middle leaders, shifting the median to 47 (primary) or 49 hours (secondary and combined).
• For senior leaders, in 2024 the weekly hours during school term ranged from a median of 56 (primary and secondary) to 57 hours (combined).
• After including between-term holiday weeks, the median weekly working hours decreased by 3 (primary and secondary) or 4 hours (combined) for senior leaders, shifting the median to 53 hours for all school types.
• Across the 2021 to 2024 period for middle leaders, the median of weekly hours during term decreased by 3 hours (secondary and combined) or 5 hours (primary). Over the same period, weekly hours including school holidays decreased by 1 hour (combined) or 3 hours (primary and secondary).
• For senior leaders, across the 2021 to 2024 period, the median of weekly hours during term decreased by 3 (combined) or 4 hours (primary and secondary). Over the same period, weekly hours including school holidays decreased by 1 (secondary) or 2 hours (primary and combined).

Figure 19: Median self-reported weekly working hours during term weeks, full-time middle leaders, 2021–2024

Figure 20: Median self-reported weekly working hours during term weeks, full-time senior leaders, 2021–2024

Figure 21: Median self-reported weekly working hours accounting for between-term holidays, full-time middle leaders, 2021–2024

Figure 22: Median self-reported weekly working hours accounting for between-term holidays, full-time senior leaders, 2021–2024

Face-to-face teaching hours

A key component of teachers’ enterprise bargaining agreements (EBAs) are their face-to-face teaching hours. Across states and territories, those in government schools had EBAs that establish maximums between 18.5 and approximately 23 hours of face-to-face teaching per week in 2024.⁶³ Generally, the maximum face-to-face teaching hours are higher for primary than secondary school teachers.

School-deployed classroom teachers

Many teachers self-report long face-to-face teaching hours.⁶⁴ As shown in Figure 23:

• Full-time primary teachers tended to report higher face-to-face teaching hours than secondary teachers.
• 48% of full-time primary teachers, and 41% of full-time teachers in combined schools reported spending at least 26 hours per week face-to-face teaching. A smaller proportion (27%) of secondary teachers reported weekly face-to-face teaching hours of 26 hours or more.

Figure 23: Average self-reported reported weekly face-to-face teaching hours, full-time classroom teachers, schools, 2024⁶⁵

As shown in Table 10, median weekly face-to-face teaching hours have remained stable over the 2020 to 2024 period. The median face-to-face teaching hours reported by full-time secondary classroom teachers has consistently been around 4 hours less than teachers in primary or combined schools.

Table 10: Median of self-reported weekly face-to-face teaching hours, full-time classroom teachers, by school type, 2020–2024

School leaders

As expected, given their leadership-related workload, the face-to-face teaching hours of middle and senior leaders are typically less than those for classroom teachers. As shown in Table 11:

• In 2024, full-time middle leaders reported undertaking a median of 18 to 22 hours of face-to-face teaching per week. For those in both primary and secondary schools, the median is 3 hours less than that for classroom teachers, with a larger difference of 5 hours for those in combined schools.
• Face-to-face teaching hours have been stable since 2021 for middle leaders.
• The face-to-face teaching hours reported by full-time senior leaders is much higher for those in primary than secondary or combined schools. In 2024, primary school senior leaders reported a median of 18 hours per week on face-to-face teaching. When considered in the context of the leadership and management responsibilities of senior leaders, the high number of face-to-face hours for some primary senior leaders is likely contributing to workload pressures.

Table 11: Median of self-reported weekly face-to-face teaching hours, full-time school leaders, by school type, 2021–2024

Examining the face-to-face hours undertaken by specific roles within the senior leader category helps to shed light on the notably long hours that primary senior leaders report spending on face-to-face teaching. Senior leaders comprise a mix of principals, deputy principals, and assistant principals. The assistant principal role in particular can differ in definition by jurisdiction, and is often a role that encompasses both teaching and leadership duties. In 2024, the face-to-face teaching hours of primary school principals and deputy principals was 5 hours per week, and for assistant principals was 20 hours per week. That is, the relatively high face-to-face hours reported by primary senior leaders was attributable to high face-to-face hours of assistant principals. This trend did not occur in secondary or combined schools, where principals, deputies and assistant principals reported similar (low) levels of face-to-face teaching – they were similar to principals and deputy principals in primary schools.

Time spent on duties

For teachers, and for leaders who undertake teaching responsibilities, work hours are split between face-to-face teaching and a variety of other tasks. Examining the time spent on various tasks may help point to duties that can be streamlined, allocated to support staff, or otherwise eased to allow teachers to focus on their most important responsibilities.

The duties outlined in this section do not necessarily cover all the duties teachers undertake, and some tasks may overlap.⁶⁷ The data presented in this section are only for full-time classroom teachers and school leaders, and not teachers and leaders in early childhood settings, or casual relief teachers.

School-deployed classroom teachers

The average weekly hours spent on each teacher duty was broadly similar for full-time classroom teachers across primary, secondary, and combined schools. As shown in Table 12:

• Across school types, most teachers reported spending an average of 0–4 hours per week on general teamwork with colleagues, extracurricular activities, pastoral care, and communication with parents or carers.
• Around one-fifth (18–19%) of teachers across all school types reported spending 10+ hours per week on administrative work, with a similar proportion of secondary (23%) and combined (21%) classroom teachers also reporting 10+ hours on marking of student work. Primary classroom teachers (11%) were less likely to report spending 10+ hours marking student work.
• Between 31% and 38% of classroom teachers reported spending 10+ hours per week on student supervision, with primary classroom teachers somewhat more likely to report spending 10+ hours on this duty. However, it must be noted that teachers may have interpreted ‘student supervision’ in different ways, as reported hours were at both the lower and higher ends (0–4 hours and 10+ hours), and some teachers may have reported their face-to-face teaching hours as ‘student supervision’.⁶⁸
• Lesson planning was reported as taking up 10+ weekly hours for between 37% and 40% of classroom teachers.

Table 12: Average weekly hours per duty, full-time classroom teachers, by school type, 2024⁶⁹

The time spent on some teacher duties may be reduced in future. In 2025, under the National Teacher Workforce Action Plan (NTWAP), guidelines for the optimal deployment of non-teaching support staff were published, indicating that school support staff can reduce teacher workload by undertaking some supervision and administrative tasks, as well as supporting classroom and behaviour management (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, 2025). Similarly, reducing the time required for planning lessons has been the focus of several proposals, largely around providing centralised, curated, curriculum resources (e.g., Hunter et al., 2022). However, reducing time for particular tasks may not reduce working hours overall, and a careful balance is needed to allow teachers to spend most time on the duties they see as most important to their role (Stacey et al., 2024).

Leaders

School leaders undertake a range of important duties to keep their schools running efficiently and effectively. Some of these duties, such as interacting with parents/carers, are common to both teachers and leaders, while other duties are more specific to those in leadership roles.

Middle leaders

Middle leaders have a diverse range of duties, often combining teaching with leadership responsibilities. In 2024, middle leaders⁷⁰ in primary, secondary, and combined schools spent the most time per week on student interactions, undertaking administrative tasks/meetings, and undertaking teaching responsibilities such as marking. As shown in Table 13:

• Most middle leaders reported spending 0–4 hours per week on parent interactions and professional learning for school staff.
• Around a third (30%) of primary middle leaders reported spending 10+ hours per week on instructional leadership, with a smaller proportion of secondary and combined middle leaders (16–18%) reporting 10+ hours on this duty.
• More than half (54–58%) of all middle leaders reported spending 10+ hours per week on student interactions.
• A slightly smaller proportion of middle leaders in primary schools (47%) reported spending 10+ hours on administration/leadership tasks and meetings compared to middle leaders in secondary (54%) or combined schools (56%).
• For middle leaders in secondary and combined schools, over half (53–62%) reported spending 10+ hours per week on teaching responsibilities such as marking and lesson planning, compared to around a third (34%) of primary middle leaders.

Table 13: Average hours spent per week on leader duties, middle leaders, by school type, 2024⁷¹

Senior leaders

Senior leaders play a vital role in the operation of their schools, undertaking a range of important duties. In 2024, senior leaders⁷² spent the most time per week on two duties: undertaking administrative/leadership tasks, and student interactions. Senior leaders also spent a notable amount of time engaging in instructional leadership tasks. As shown in Table 14:

• The majority (70–71%) of all senior leaders reported spending 0–4 per week on professional learning for school staff. Around half (50–54%) also reported spending 0–4 hours per week on parent interactions, though one-fifth (19–20%) reported spending 10+ hours per week interacting with parents.
• Primary senior leaders were more likely to report spending 10+ hours per week on teaching responsibilities (32%), compared to secondary and combined senior leaders (22% each). This aligns with the longer face-to-face teaching hours reported by primary senior leaders (Table 11).
• Around half (51–56%) of all senior leaders reported spending 10+ hours per week on student interactions.
• Over three-quarters (75–86%) of all senior leaders reported spending 10+ hours per week on administrative/leadership tasks, with secondary and combined senior leaders slightly more likely to spend 10+hours on this duty.

Table 14: Average hours spent on leader duties per week, senior leaders, by school type, 2024⁷³

Induction for early career teachers

A fundamental support for early career teachers is to provide them with a comprehensive induction (Kelly et al., 2019). During a formal induction, early career teachers build on knowledge and experiences from their initial teacher education program, helping to develop their practice.⁷⁶ Formal induction is important because it can introduce early career teachers to the school community, working culture and teaching environment, as well as provide support to enhance their pedagogy, hone their professional identity and successfully manage the challenges of their role.

Figure 25 shows the proportion of the early career deployed workforce (school-deployed and early childhood-deployed) and casual relief teachers who reported receiving a formal induction. This highlights the following:

• In 2024, 60% of deployed early career teachers reported that they had received a formal induction. This has been relatively stable since a decrease from 68% in 2020.
• A lower proportion of casual relief teachers reported receiving a formal induction (36% in 2024), and this has been consistent across the 2020 to 2024 period. This is likely due to induction being more difficult to provide for casual relief teachers, who move between schools or settings as required.
• Following a large decline from 2020 to 2021, formal induction for teachers deployed in early childhood settings was notably less common than for those deployed in primary, secondary, or combined schools in 2021. However, the difference appears to have decreased from 2022 to 2024.
• Receipt of induction varies across school type. In 2024, 64–65% of secondary or combined school deployed teachers reported receiving a formal induction, compared to 55% of primary teachers.

Figure 25: Proportion of early career teachers who received a formal induction, 2020–2024

Figure 26 shows which induction activities were experienced by deployed (in schools or early childhood settings) early career teachers who reported receiving a formal induction, highlighting:

• The only specific activities received by more than half of deployed early career teachers were an orientation program (77%) and mentoring (68%).
• While each individual induction activity was experienced by some deployed early career teachers, the low proportions overall in 2024 indicate that it is not common for teachers to receive an induction that includes all, or even most, activities.

Figure 26: Deployed early career teachers’ induction activities experienced during formal induction, 2022–2024⁷⁷

As shown in Figure 27, induction experiences were similar across primary, secondary, and combined schools in 2024, though teachers deployed in primary schools tended to be more likely than those in secondary schools to receive targeted professional learning, and less likely to receive reduced face-to-face hours.

Figure 27: School-deployed early career teachers’ induction activities experienced during formal induction, by school type, 2024

Deployed early career teachers also indicated which induction activity they found the most useful. The proportion of early career teachers that ranked each activity as the most useful (of those who had received it) was as follows:⁷⁸

• Being mentored (44%)
• Reduced face-to-face teaching hours (44%)
• Observation of experienced teachers (30%)
• Orientation program (24%)
• Targeted professional learning (12%)
• Internal networking (9%)

A focus for induction programs, therefore, may be to increase the number of early career teachers receiving mentoring and allocating time for them to observe experienced teachers.

As shown in Table 16, the induction activities that early career teachers found most useful varied across school types. Primary teachers were more likely to find observing experienced teachers as a useful induction support relative to secondary or combined teachers, while secondary teachers more commonly found reduced face-to-face teaching hours useful.

Table 16: Most useful induction components, school-deployed early career teachers, by school type, 2024

Out-of-field teaching

When secondary teachers undertake their initial teacher education qualifications, they select one or more subjects to specialise in. However, teachers may be required to teach a subject/s they have not specialised in, which is commonly referred to as out-of-field teaching. Circumstances in which out-of-field teaching is required range from broad workforce issues such as difficulty in finding teachers with certain specialisations, to school-based timetabling issues such as those related to smaller schools.

School-deployed workforce in secondary schools

Figure 28 shows the proportion of those teaching in secondary schools who reported whether they had taught in their area of specialisation exclusively, for some of their subjects, or not at all. In the Teacher Survey, this question asks respondents to consider subjects they taught within the preceding two years.⁷⁹ As shown in Figure 28:

• In 2024, slightly over half (53%) of those teaching in secondary schools in the year of completing the Teacher Survey reported they had exclusively taught in-field that year and the year prior.
• The remaining half taught at least some subjects in areas outside of their specialisation (40%) or they taught entirely out of field (7%).
• From 2022 to 2024,⁸⁰ rates of out-of-field teaching remained fairly stable.

Figure 28: Out-of-field teaching, school-deployed workforce, secondary schools, 2022–2024⁸¹

Subgroups

Rates of out-of-field teaching varied across subgroups of the school-deployed workforce in secondary schools. As shown in Table 17:

• Middle leaders were most likely to teach in-field across all subgroups. This may reflect that middle leaders are often in positions such as head of department, or faculty leader, within their schools.
• Early career teachers were slightly less likely to teach completely in-field, relative to other subgroups. As early career teachers are honing their teaching skills, it may be particularly demanding for them to apply their skills to subject areas for which they are not specialised. Early career teachers who are required to teach out-of-field may become more likely to intend to leave the profession in the future (Wheeley et al., 2023).
• 17% of senior leaders taught completely out-of-field, the highest of all subgroups. This likely reflects that much of their teaching may be ad hoc, such as when a teacher is unwell and a replacement cannot be found.

Table 17: Out-of-field teaching, school-deployed workforce subgroups, secondary schools, 2024⁸²

Curriculum areas

Across curriculum areas, teachers who have completed at least one semester of tertiary study in both content and pedagogy in a subject that was taught are classified as in-field. Teachers with relevant tertiary study in either content or pedagogy were classified as teaching out-of-field but with ‘some ITE’. Teachers with no relevant tertiary study in a subject that was taught were classified as out-of-field (even if they had undertaken some professional learning).

Rates of out-of-field teaching differed across curriculum areas in 2024. As shown in Table 18:

• Across all curriculum areas, most teachers who taught a secondary subject were teaching in-field. English, performing arts, and science were the curriculum areas with the highest in-field teaching rates, ranging between 78% and 81%.
• Individual subjects within the science curriculum area – physics, chemistry, and biology – all recorded high in-field teaching rates, between 76% and 83%. Of these subjects, biology and chemistry were most likely to be taught in-field.
• The highest out-of-field teaching rates were observed across technology, arts, and mathematics, with just below one-third (30–32%) of these curriculum areas being taught out-of-field. Among these curriculum areas, out-of-field teachers teaching arts were somewhat less likely to have some relevant ITE study.

Table 18: Out-of-field teaching across curriculum areas, school-deployed teachers of secondary learners,⁸³ 2024

Career intentions

Teaching is an important and rewarding profession, yet it is also highly demanding. Teachers face increasing societal expectations in terms of what their roles should cover, and how their tasks should be fulfilled (Hunter & Sonnemann, 2022). As covered in previous sections, teachers report working long hours, across a diverse range of tasks. While these data underscore the dedication and valuable skillset of our teachers, they may also indicate the workforce is under stress. It is critical to understand how teachers are viewing their longer-term career intentions and to consider whether there are certain factors influencing their career plans. Such information can help to identify potential areas for supports or initiatives aimed at retaining the teachers we have and attracting new teachers to the profession.

The Teacher Survey captures teachers’ career intentions in three broad categories:

• Leave before retirement (the intended timeframe of departure from the profession is then also captured)
• Remain until retirement
• Unsure

It is important to note that reported intentions to leave the profession may not translate into actual attrition, particularly for those who intend to leave in the longer term (Nguyen et al., 2024). International data suggests that rates of reported intention to leave the teaching profession (when asked in yes/no format) of 30–40% may result in actual turnover closer to 10–15% over 5 years (Räsänen et al., 2020).

Across jobs in Australia, job mobility has been relatively high in recent years, particularly in 2022 and 2023, and particularly among younger workers (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2025). Just as people change jobs outside of teaching, or change careers later in life, it is likely that some teachers may exit the profession before retirement.

Teacher workforce^🛈

Figure 29 shows that in 2024:

• 30% of the teacher workforce reported an intention to stay in the profession until retirement.
• 34% of the teacher workforce were unsure of their career plans, with 36% intending to leave the profession sometime before retirement.
• 4% of the teacher workforce indicated an intention to leave the profession within one year. An additional ~16% reported intentions to leave in the relatively near future, either in 2–4 years (8%) or 5 years (8%). Given the relatively short timeframes, these groups may represent teachers who are more actively planning on changing careers and leaving the teacher workforce.
• 15% of the teacher workforce reported intentions to leave in the longer term – either between 6 and 9 years (2%) or 10+ years (6%) – or they were unsure of the timeframe (7%). While these teachers reported intending to leave the workforce before retirement, the long-term or unclear nature of those intentions may indicate a dissatisfaction or uncertainty with their career, rather than a specific plan to leave teaching.

Figure 29 also shows the trends over time:

• The proportion of the teacher workforce who were unsure about their future career intentions was relatively stable across the 2020–2024 period. Similarly, the proportion of those intending to leave who were unsure of the timeframe or who intended to leave in the long-term (10+ years) remained relatively stable from 2020 to 2024.
• While the proportion of teachers intending to leave before retirement increased from 2021 to 2022, the proportion remained relatively stable from 2022 to 2024. This pattern held for those intending to leave within 2–4 or 5 years.
• A corresponding decrease in the proportion intending to stay until retirement occurred between 2021 and 2022, but held constant from 2022 to 2024.

Figure 29: Career intentions, teacher workforce, 2020–2024⁸⁵

Subgroups

Table 19 shows the career intentions of teacher workforce subgroups in 2024. While many of the subgroups follow the same general pattern as the overall teacher workforce, with a little over a quarter intending to stay until retirement, and around a third intending to leave or feeling unsure of their intentions, there were some notable variations:

• A high proportion of casual relief teachers intend to stay in the profession until retirement. In part, this may be explained by experience and age – around half of casual relief teachers are aged 50 or above, and around half have at least 20 years’ experience, with these characteristics associated with more certainty of remaining in the profession. It may also be that the flexibility or other aspects of casual work suit many casual relief teachers and so they are more likely to plan to stay in their roles long-term.
• A lower proportion of early career teachers tend to report the intention to stay, compared to the overall workforce. As outlined above, this is particularly the case for those in the later stages (3–5 years’ experience) of the early career period. This may reflect generally high rates of job mobility, where it is common for individuals entering the workforce to assume they will have more than one career in their working life. However, the intentions may also signal a need to bolster supports for teachers beginning their careers, and to ensure supports are maintained beyond the first two years, to aid in improving the retention of early career teachers (Kelly et al., 2019).
• There were no notable differences in career intentions by regionality.

Table 19: Career intentions, workforce subgroups, 2024⁸⁷

* School-deployed workforce

Leaders

The reported career intentions of middle and senior leaders were broadly similar to those for the overall teacher workforce. Table 20 shows:

• Senior leaders were more likely to report their intention to stay in the profession until retirement than other workforce groups, including middle leaders.
• Middle leaders’ intentions closely aligned with the wider teacher workforce.

Table 20: Career intentions, middle and senior leaders, schools, 2024⁸⁹

Reasons for intending to leave the profession before retirement

Teacher workforce^🛈

While experience and age are factors related to whether a teacher is likely to intend to stay in the profession until retirement, there are a range of reasons that are reported as the basis of this intention. Figure 31 shows, in 2024:

• Four of the top 5 reasons⁹² for intending to leave the profession related to either workload or wellbeing: workload, work-related stress, work-life balance, and administrative workload.⁹³
• Each of the workload/wellbeing reasons were cited by more than 60% of those intending to leave the teaching profession before retirement. No other reason was given by more than half of the teacher workforce.
• The behaviour of parents or students, insufficient pay, and the demands of professional regulation were also commonly selected.

Figure 31: Reasons for intending to leave the profession, teacher workforce, 2024

Table 21 shows the proportion of teachers intending to leave the profession who selected each reason across the 2020 to 2024 period:

• Workload, work-life balance and work-related stress have consistently been the top three reasons cited by teachers intending to leave the profession. Given that most of the full-time teacher workforce reported working long hours in 2024, it is unsurprising that teachers point to workload and stress as factors influencing their career intentions.
• While consistently the most commonly selected reason for intending to leave, the proportion of teachers who selected workload has decreased slightly from 2021 to 2024 (a decrease of 5 percentage points).
• Teachers have increasingly cited parent behaviour (48% in 2024) and student behaviour (47% in 2024) as reasons for intending to leave the profession – each increased by 5 percentage points from 2023 to 2024.
• The proportion selecting insufficient pay as a reason for leaving increased each year from 2020 (33%) to 2023 (54%), but decreased in 2024 (48%).
• Class size has gradually increased (from 31% in 2020, to 41% in 2024) as a reason teachers select for intending to leave the profession.

Table 21: Reasons for intending to leave the profession, teacher workforce, 2020–2024

*Items added in 2022

Subgroups

While the general pattern of selected reasons for intending to leave the profession before retirement were similar for the workforce subgroups, some differences exist. As shown in Figure 32, in 2024:

• Student behaviour was a particularly common reason for casual relief teachers (62%). The school culture (41%), and not enjoying teaching (31%) were also relatively more common reasons for casual relief teachers than the other workforce groups.
• Parent behaviour was a particularly common reason for senior leaders (58%), which likely reflects greater engagement with parents in more senior roles within schools, as reported in the duties section. This may also reflect that more challenging parent interactions are escalated to senior leaders.
• Insufficient support staff was more commonly selected by primary teachers (44%) than teachers in secondary or combined schools (34% each).
• Insufficient pay was more commonly selected by those deployed in early childhood settings (67%), and early career teachers (56%). The school-deployed workforce in outer regional or remote/very remote areas were less likely to select insufficient pay as a top reason for leaving (35–36%).
• For teachers deployed in early childhood settings, a higher proportion (31%) intend to leave to seek employment elsewhere in education, and a higher proportion reported changes imposed by outside (e.g., by government; 41%) or the lack of support staff (47%) as reasons for leaving, in comparison to other groups. In contrast, work/life balance (56%) and administrative workload (55%) were selected by a lower proportion in comparison to other groups.

Figure 32: Reasons for intending to leave the profession, workforce subgroups, 2024

*School-deployed workforce

^†Sample sizes for some reasons for intending to leave are small for this subgroup, and must be interpreted with caution

Non-deployed registered teachers

While the majority of registered teachers were actively teaching in 2024, 17% of registered teachers were not teaching, i.e. not deployed. As was outlined in Figure 2, 44% of the non-deployed teachers were on extended leave, and so would be expected to return to the workforce.

The remaining 56% of non-deployed teachers, representing 10% of the total number of registered teachers, may be a source of additional teacher supply if they chose to re-enter the active teacher workforce. Half (50%) of this group in the Teacher Survey left the teacher workforce in the last 2 years.

In the Teacher Survey, non-deployed teachers (excluding those who were on leave) were asked how likely they were to return to the teaching profession. As shown in Figure 35, in 2024 over half of non-teaching registered teachers said they would consider returning to the teacher workforce under the right circumstances.

Figure 35: Likelihood of considering returning to the profession, non-teaching registered teachers, 2022–2024⁹⁷

Non-teaching registered teachers were also asked what would need to change in order for them to return to teaching.⁹⁸ As shown in Figure 36, the two most commonly cited reasons were a reduction in workload, and higher salary.

Figure 36: Reasons that could influence returning to the profession, non-teaching registered teachers, 2022–2024

Registration discontinuation

When teachers leave the profession, either due to retirement or other reasons, they may opt to discontinue their registration immediately, or maintain it despite no longer working in schools or early childhood settings. While some of the latter group may return to teaching after several years, others may never return to the profession. Of the 2024 survey respondents who reported that they were not currently working in the teaching profession and not on leave (9.6%), 50% reported that they left the profession 3 or more years ago (but were still registered). This highlights that the actual rate of attrition is likely higher than the rates of discontinued registration.

One metric available to the ATWD connects currently registered teachers (i.e., registered in 2024) with the year they graduated from their ITE degree. Examining the proportion of those from each year of graduates who remained registered in 2024 provides an indirect estimate of the proportion of teachers who leave the profession (i.e., are no longer registered) each year. However, as noted above, the actual rate of attrition is likely higher than this estimate.

Additionally, to provide an overview of the proportion of those who leave the workforce by career stage, the experience brackets of Teacher Survey respondents who indicated they were no longer working as teachers (but are still registered) are reported. Those with more years’ experience were more likely to have left the profession in 2024 (likely due to retirement).

Registration discontinuation by year of ITE graduation

The ATWD has unique access to Australia-wide teacher registration data and can, therefore, analyse the number of ITE graduates⁹⁹ from each graduate cohort who remain registered as teachers at future points in time.

Figure 37 shows the proportion of teachers who graduated in each year from 2007 to 2023 who were still registered in 2024.¹⁰⁰ This shows:

• Of those who graduated in 2023, approximately 95% were registered as teachers in 2024. In other words, it appears that 5% of 2023 graduates were not registered as a teacher in the year after graduation. Some may become registered at a later time point. Discontinuation of registration is the difference from this 95%.
• For the cohort of graduates who would have been at the end of their five-year early-career period in 2024 (i.e., 2019 graduates), 93% remained registered. If similar proportions of each graduate cohort do not enter the teacher workforce (~5%), this indicates that around 2% of the 2019 graduate cohort ceased registration during their early career period.
• Examining much earlier graduate cohorts shows that of those who graduated in 2007, 76% were still registered as teachers in 2024.
• The proportion of ITE graduates who remain registered as teachers decreased by an average of approximately 1.2 percentage points per year. While this is a little lower than the 2–5% of the teacher workforce who indicated an intention to leave the profession within one year across the 2020–2024 Teacher Surveys (see Figure 29), the difference might be attributable to some teachers maintaining their registration after leaving the workforce.¹⁰¹

Figure 37: Proportion of ITE graduates registered as teachers in 2024 per year of graduation, 2007–2023

Experience levels of teachers who reported leaving the profession in 2024

Examining the years of experience of those who leave the teacher workforce is one way to estimate whether attrition is disproportionate at certain career stages (for example, for those who have reached retirement age, or teachers in their early career period). This section provides information on those who indicated in the Teacher Survey that they had stopped working as a teacher in 2024. This group of respondents were still registered as teachers, but were either working elsewhere or not working, and indicated that they had recently stopped working as a teacher. While these teachers may go on to discontinue their registration in 2025, and thus become part of the ~1.2% of teachers who discontinue registration each year (Figure 37), it is also possible that they will maintain registration for a longer period, or even return to teaching. It is unknown whether this relatively small group of registered but not practising teachers, who chose to participate in the Teacher Survey, are representative of teachers who exited the profession in 2024. However, examining the spread of career stages of this group may provide some insight into the spread of career stages of all teachers who stopped teaching in 2024.

The experience profile of this group of teachers largely matched the overall teacher workforce in terms of years’ experience. For example:

• As outlined in Figure 7, 22% of teachers were in their early career period in 2024. Of the teachers who indicated in the Teacher Survey that they had stopped teaching in 2024, a similar 24% were early career teachers.
• A similar pattern follows for those with 6–9 (13% of teacher workforce) or 10–19 years’ experience (27% of teacher workforce), with very similar proportions (differing by up to ~1%) in the teacher workforce and in the pool of teachers who stopped teaching in 2024.
• For those with 20–29 or 30–39 years in the profession, a slightly lower proportion of teachers were in the pool of those who exited the profession in 2024 than were in the teacher workforce. For example, 14% of the teachers who indicated in the Teacher Survey that they had stopped teaching in 2024 had 20–29 years’ experience, yet 18% of the overall teacher workforce were in this experience bracket.
• A different pattern was evident for highly experienced teachers with 40+ years in teaching, who exited at higher rates (likely due to reaching retirement). In 2024, 9% of the teacher workforce had 40+ years’ experience, and of the teachers who indicated in the Teacher Survey that they had stopped teaching in 2024, 16% had 40+ years’ experience.

This shows that teachers choose to stop teaching at varied stages in their career, broadly in proportion to how many teachers there are in each career stage, and it may be that this pattern follows through to those who discontinue registration or otherwise permanently leave the teacher workforce.

Conclusion

Data presented in this report show that Australia has an experienced and dedicated teacher workforce. There is relative stability in the make-up of our teachers in relation to demographics, experience, and employment conditions, with only minor shifts seen in some variables over the 5 years from 2020 to 2024.

Data revealing long working hours and an increase in teachers’ intentions to leave the profession before retirement indicate a workforce under some stress. However, findings also highlight potential areas in which to target strategies that may help decrease the pressure on teachers. For instance, hours spent on administration may be disproportionately contributing to overall working hours, and therefore may be worthwhile targets to decrease workload. Both workload and administrative workload were in the top 5 reasons that teachers considered leaving the profession. Governments across Australia are enacting various initiatives and policies targeting such issues. The low rates of induction for some groups of new teachers may also point to another area in which to target initiatives, with the aim of improving new teachers’ transition to the workforce.

A particular value of the ATWD is the collection of data over consecutive years, and the unification of various important data sources. This allows for trends in key markers of workforce experiences and pressures to be monitored over time. The ATWD will continue to collect and report on such markers to examine the impact of various policies, such as those arising from the National Teacher Workforce Action Plan, in the coming years.

Appendix

Table 22: Self-reported weekly working hours distributions, full-time classroom teachers, primary schools, 2020–2024

Table 23: Self-reported working hours distributions, full-time classroom teachers, secondary schools, 2020–2024

Table 24: Self-reported working hours distributions, full-time classroom teachers, combined schools, 2020–2024

Table 25: Self-reported working hours distributions, full-time school leaders, primary schools, 2020–2024

Table 26: Self-reported working hours distributions, full-time school leaders, secondary schools, 2020–2024

Table 27: Self-reported working hours distributions, full-time school leaders, combined schools, 2020–2024