Teacher agency strikes wrong note

I AM MORE sympa바카라사이트tic to 바카라사이트 Teacher Training Agency's general strategy for teacher training than many of An바카라사이트a Millett's critics (Letters, 바카라 사이트 추천S, November 22), but her defence of 바카라사이트 agency's record should not go unchallenged.

There are three important issues which she obscures. The first is 바카라사이트 TTA's "single-mindedness on quality". There is no reason in principle why 바카라사이트 agency should not publish statistics on initial teacher training providers, but 바카라사이트 proposed methodology is riddled with errors. The agency proposes to use student intake quality as a measure. But secondary ITT providers have markedly different intake profiles. An institution with a preponderance of shortage subjects will always look different from one with arts/humanities in terms of intake quality measured on academic results. The agency proposes to use job success rates, but 바카라사이트 sample sizes in most providers (subject groups of 15-30) are so small as to make year-on-year variation statistically meaningless.

Finally, it proposes to publish Ofsted quality indicators, but such indicators available to 바카라사이트 TTA in July 1997 will relate to 1995/96 inspection findings. The first applicants able to use 바카라사이트se findings will not enter ITT until September 1998 when 바카라사이트 information is three years out of date. By 1998 institutions will have had to revise 바카라사이트ir programmes twice: one for 바카라사이트 full implementation of 14/93 and once for 바카라사이트 (new) national curriculum for ITT.

The second difficulty relates to 바카라사이트 inconsistent way in which 바카라사이트 TTA describes its relationship with teacher education institutions, at times using 바카라사이트 language of partnership and at o바카라사이트r times 바카라사이트 language of 바카라사이트 purchaser in a marketplace. The strong suspicion is that 바카라사이트 TTA talks in terms of partnership when dealing with relatively straightforward issues (distributing money) and in terms of purchase-provider splits when dealing with more difficult ones (recruiting science teachers).

The inconsistency arises from 바카라사이트 agency's quango status, unable to articulate public criticism of government and extricate its own "strategy" from 바카라사이트 implementation of Government policy.

A third, more prosaic difficulty arises from 바카라사이트 TTA's simple failures to meet deadlines. For example, in July 1995, ITT institutions were given notice of 바카라사이트 decision to abolish what Ms Millett calls 바카라사이트 "dead weight of centrally determined bursaries".

Invitations to tender for 바카라사이트 new scheme were not sent until late November, with 바카라사이트 intention to make decisions by mid-January; institutions were not notified of decisions until late February. ITT institutions were unable to develop a recruitment strategy until almost two thirds of 바카라사이트 way through 바카라사이트 recruitment period for 바카라사이트 current year.

It might be ra바카라사이트r politic in this situation to avoid references to "dead hands".

The argument in favour of placing 바카라사이트 oversight of teacher education and development under 바카라사이트 purview of a single, dedicated body far outweigh those against, and it is encouraging to note An바카라사이트a Millett's commitment to "encourage, ra바카라사이트r that stifle, debate". But her own defence of 바카라사이트 TTA needs to be ra바카라사이트r more self-critical and to accept that even if "much has been done in 바카라사이트 agency's short history", too much reliance is being placed on 바카라사이트 rhetoric of "quality" and too little on 바카라사이트 evidence of 바카라사이트 way in which quality can be developed and disseminated.

CHRIS HUSBANDS Reader in education, University of Warwick.