IN his letter, "New opportunity to defend training" (TES, June 28), Richard Hill states that the measure of success of New Opportunities Fund training is the percentage of teachers taking it up. Does he not realize that the figure is so high because, first, teachers were bribed into doing it by the inadequately funded Computers for Teachers scheme; then, second, by direct threat to their career paths for not having had it? I have had the NOF training, but I would call it "NAFF" training as I learnt absolutely nothing of value. Being forced to take training makes Mr Hill's measurement of success completely invalid.
High Wycombe, Bucks