Recovery at Reading

13th November 1998 at 00:00
The article headed "Training courses go after poor inspections" (TES, October 30) gave a wholly wrong and inaccurate impression of the position with regard to our primary initial teacher-training courses at Reading University.

Our primary postgraduate certificate in education course was inspected last year and there is a non-compliance issue involved.

Owing to prompt action and the production of a positive recovery plan, however, the withdrawal of accreditation procedure is not being activated by the Teacher Training Agency. In last year's inspection of 14 areas seen, only one, in the area of reading, was judged non-compliant and half were judged "good".

You also referred inaccurately to the Office for Standards in Education's inspection of our PGCE primary course as having criticised the "standards of literacy and numeracy among students". OFSTED's inspection assessed our trainees on their teaching of reading and number not their personal literacy and numeracy.

Roger Williams, The University of Reading Reading

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