Primary review must combat league table misery

27th October 2006 at 01:00
The newly launched primary review is long overdue, though it needs to be careful not to claim too much for its efforts. One of the least acknowledged acts of political vandalism was the abolition a decade ago of the provision for a Central Advisory Council for Education which could commission wide-ranging reports such as the Newsom report (1963) and the Plowden report (1967). In the changed educational circumstances of the early 21st century, the system badly needs such independent, wide-ranging enquiries.

Why does a charitable foundation have to fund it? And how can it be as comprehensive, authoritative and influential as its predecessor without the benefit of HMI inspection evidence and advice (now sadly lacking in Ofsted) and with an expenditure of only pound;85,000 (compared with the pound;120,000 at 1960s prices used to produce the Plowden report)?

Professor Colin Richards. Spark Bridge, Cumbria

Subscribe to get access to the content on this page.

If you are already a Tes/ Tes Scotland subscriber please log in with your username or email address to get full access to our back issues, CPD library and membership plus page.

Not a subscriber? Find out more about our subscription offers.
Subscribe now
Existing subscriber?
Enter subscription number


The guide by your side – ensuring you are always up to date with the latest in education.

Get Tes magazine online and delivered to your door. Stay up to date with the latest research, teacher innovation and insight, plus classroom tips and techniques with a Tes magazine subscription.
With a Tes magazine subscription you get exclusive access to our CPD library. Including our New Teachers’ special for NQTS, Ed Tech, How to Get a Job, Trip Planner, Ed Biz Special and all Tes back issues.

Subscribe now