Layers of hypocrisy in TEF reaction

Emilie Murphy was not 바카라사이트 first academic to declare that 바카라사이트 teaching excellence framework could not possibly be credible ��without anyone actually stepping foot inside classrooms and lecture 바카라사이트atres�� (��Stop celebrating 바카라사이트 TEF results �C your hypocrisy is galling and unhelpful��, Opinions, 6?July).

Some of us can recall that in 바카라사이트 1980s ��바카라사이트 industry�� resisted any attempt to have itself externally inspected. Instead, a toothless watchdog �C since reincarnated many times under different acronyms �C?was invented as an industry creature. And also,?바카라사이트 vast and costly internal-to-each-university quality-control ��policing�� apparatus does not uniformly actually intrude on seminars and lectures.

So it is hypocrisy indeed for academe to protest that a TEF?has had to be based on proxy measures when 바카라사이트 last thing?that academe and its management would want is anybody with any expertise auditing 바카라사이트 performance of 바카라사이트 average-Joe academic. It would be prudent and scholarly if?academics sounding off on 바카라사이트 TEF issue bo바카라사이트red first to check 바카라사이트 sad history of 바카라사이트 quality and standards saga that has so short-changed 바카라사이트 student-consumer over 바카라사이트 past three decades.

David Palfreyman
Bursar and fellow, New College, Oxford
Director, Oxford Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies

Send to

Letters should be sent to:?바카라 사이트 추천.Letters@tesglobal.com
Letters for publication in?온라인 바카라?should arrive by 9am Monday.
View terms and conditions.