Whose methods are 'poor' now?;Letter

19th June 1998 at 01:00
Chris Woodhead reiterates the view that ". . . the roots of education failure lie in poor teaching methods . . .". But how did "poor teaching methods" arise in the first place?

Until 10 years ago - even after the first national curriculum - it was common to find school inspectors promoting the view that non-subject-based topic teaching was the only valid primary teaching style; that teachers should avoid direct teaching - especially whole-class teaching - and become "enablers" of pupils managing their own learning.

These methods are now regarded as "poor". They were adopted, though, by inspectors who presumably believed in them at the time, and by teachers who trusted them. A good many inspectors must now be upholding the opposite of what they preached 10 years ago.

Chris Woodhead deserves the profession's scorn - not for wanting to root out poor methodology, but for sustaining the lazy tabloid myth that teachers are always to blame for it. Roy Hattersley details the effects on morale in the profession on the same page.

Michael Hurdle

Primary deputy headteacher 7 Farm Lane Send Woking, Surrey

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, Buyagift.com, Virgin Wines and other partners
Order your low-cost subscription today