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

Log-in as an existing print or digital subscriber

Forgotten your subscriber ID?


To access this content and the full TES archive, subscribe now.

View subscriber offers


Get TES online and delivered to your door – for less than the price of a coffee

Save 33% off the cover price with this great subscription offer. Every copy delivered to your door by first-class post, plus full access to TES online and the TES app for just £1.90 per week.
Subscribers also enjoy a range of fantastic offers and benefits worth over £270:

  • Discounts off TES Institute courses
  • Access over 200,000 articles in the TES online archive
  • Free Tastecard membership worth £79.99
  • Discounts with Zipcar,, Virgin Wines and other partners
Order your low-cost subscription today