Memorandum submitted by the National Union
of Teachers
This memorandum sets out some questions which
arise from the HMCI Annual Report for 2002-03. It is a detailed
report and the questions set out below are not inclusive. There
are other, equally pertinent, questions that arise from the report.
COMMENTARY
1. HMCI warns: "we should be cautious
about expecting everything to improve continuously, but this apparent
plateau is a cause for concern. We must ask what needs to be done
to restore momentum". (Page 2)
— Could HMCI expand on the apparent
tension between this and the Government's exhortations to schools
to demonstrate continuous improvement?
— How does this judgement fit in with
reported continuing improvements in the quality of primary teaching
and leadership?
2. HMCI states: "To pick up a theme
that I raised last year, it is right to say that satisfactory
teaching is a general measure of acceptable competence. However,
it is not a powerful enough engine to drive continued progress".
(Page 2)
— On what evidence base and using what
mechanisms, did HMCI move from raising the question of "satisfactory
being good enough" in last year's Annual Report to stating
it is not in this year's report?
— If satisfactory teaching represents
"acceptable competence" in HMCI's commentary, why is
it being used to classify schools as "unsatisfactory"
in the new Section 10 inspection framework?
— Would HMCI comment on the tension
between this view and the caution he expressed above about expecting
everything to improve continuously?
— As pointed out in Ofsted's recent
report on the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies (NLNS),
many teachers' and schools' adherence to methods and materials
formulated centrally may have an adverse effect on the quality
of teaching. In HMCI's view, would strict adherence to NLNS materials,
for example, represent satisfactory teaching?
— Would HMCI agree that the description
of teaching as "only satisfactory", for example in paragraph
44, is demoralising and undermines the efforts made by teachers?
Would HMCI agree that such comments reflect the new Section 10
inspection framework, rather than the one which was used to conduct
inspections in 2002-03, on which this Annual Report is based?
3. HMCI states: "We cannot afford
and our children do not deserve a two-tier curriculum".
(Page 2)
— HMCI says that combining a rich and
broad curriculum with high standards "is proving to be
a tall order" for many schools, yet the Government continues
to use the 2002 Ofsted report on the curriculum in primary schools
as evidence to refute such claims. Would the HMCI agree that the
Ofsted curriculum report features a minority of schools which
have "bucked the trend" and that the HMCI Annual Report
gives a more accurate picture of the curriculum in primary schools
in general?
— To what factors does HMCI attribute
the widening gap between achievement in the core and the foundation
subjects?
— How optimistic is HMCI that the Primary
Strategy will redress the balance between achievement in the core
and foundation subjects?
4. HMCI believes that: "There is
scope, though, for more focused evaluation of how pupils are progressing
and, for this, alongside other assessment information, to guide
teaching so that it is more securely tailored to pupils' needs".
(Page 4)
— Would HMCI expand on what he describes
as "more focused evaluation" and "other assessment
information"?
— Does HMCI envisage that summative
assessment information would be used for formative purposes? If
so, how?
— Would HMCI agree that the use of
Assessment for Learning could have a significant impact in ensuring
that teaching was more closely aligned to pupils' needs?
5. HMCI notes the difficulty of recruiting
experienced teachers to "the most difficult and deprived
areas" and also emphasises the importance of good or
better teaching in such schools. (Page 4)
— Would HMCI agree that schools in
the most difficult and deprived areas are being penalised for
being unable to recruit experienced teachers?
— What strategies would HMCI suggest
such schools employ to recruit experienced teachers, given the
financial constraints many schools are experiencing currently?
— Would HMCI agree that the cancellation
of the DfES sabbatical scheme for experienced teachers working
in schools in challenging circumstances is unlikely to assist
schools' recruitment and retention efforts?
6. In addition to recruitment difficulties,
on page five HMCI refers to a wide range of other factors which
inhibit the progress made by schools in deprived areas, such as
physical and cultural isolation, the high mobility of pupils and
lack of parental support.
— Whilst acknowledging the "significant
contribution" made by the quality of leadership in such
schools, would HMCI agree that there are some socio-economic factors
which impact on pupil performance that can only be mitigated,
rather than tackled fully, by school leaders?
— Would HMCI agree that the leaders
of schools in deprived areas have to demonstrate a higher standard
of leadership and management than colleagues in schools in more
affluent areas in order to receive a satisfactory or better inspection
judgement, given the current model of inspection which focuses
solely on outputs? Would HMCI describe such arrangements as equitable?
— Does HMCI agree that the difficulty
experienced in recruiting headteachers and other senior managers
to schools in deprived areas is linked to the greater challenge
such schools offer, including Ofsted inspections?
7. Although funding has been a critical
issue for schools over the last year, it is not referred to in
either the "Commentary" or "The Work Ahead"
sections of the Annual Report.
— Why has a little prominence been
given to such an important topic in HMCI's report?
— Is HMCI planning to investigate systematically
the impact of the funding crisis on schools, using the findings
of Section 10 reports as well as HMI thematic surveys?
CHILDCARE AND
EARLY LEARNING
8. HMCI reports that growth in childcare
is largest amongst full-day care providers "while sessional
provision has decreased marginally". (Paragraph 8)
— To what does HMCI attribute this
development?
— Does HMCI believe that this growth
in full-day care indicates a decline in the amount of early education
places offered by providers?
9. HMCI notes that, in terms of funded nursery
education: "in about one in eight settings generally,
there are significant areas for improvement or the provision is
unacceptable". (Paragraph 19)
— Would HMCI expand on this finding,
in particular, any category of provider which is over-represented?
— Would HMCI agree that there is a
link between the quality of educational provision and the employment
of qualified early years teachers?
NURSERY AND
PRIMARY EDUCATION
10. HMCI comments that in the Foundation
Stage: "In communication, language and literacy, children's
speaking and listening skills are better than their early skills
in reading and writing". (Paragraph 29)
He goes on to report that: "Children
do not make sufficient progress because they are asked to record
their ideas in writing before they have had a chance to talk about
them". (Paragraph 31)
— Would HMCI acknowledge the tensions
implied in these two statements?
— Does HMCI believe that, despite guidance
from Ofsted, some inspectors still expect to see formal literacy
and numeracy teaching throughout the Foundation Stage and that
this had an impact on the overall judgements made on these two
areas of learning?
11. The Annual Report states that EAL pupils'
"progress is better in English than in other subjects
and better in the Foundation Stage than at other stages".
(Paragraph 42)
— Why does HMCI think there is this
variation, particularly across the subject areas?
— Does HMCI believe that this finding
has implications for the funding of specialist support for EAL
pupils?
12. HMCI notes that many teachers: "are
replying on existing records and assessments" rather
than using the Foundation Stage Profile. (Paragraph 56)
— Would HMCI agree that teachers are,
in fact, free to use their own methods of recording assessment,
as only the completion of the Profile at the end of the Foundation
Stage is a statutory requirement?
— Would HMCI agree that such a misunderstanding
about teachers' statutory responsibilities is likely to undermine
Foundation Stage teachers' confidence in Ofsted judgements?
— Would HMCI agree that some teachers
would prefer to use their schools' own recording systems, not
because they "lack confidence", but because they feel
them to be more useful and less bureaucratic than the Profile?
13. HMCI finds that: "The gap between
the highest and lowest performing schools at Key Stage 2 is the
same as last year, at the equivalent of about one National Curriculum
level. Prior to 2002, the difference was reducing. The rate of
improvement is broadly similar for schools having different socio-economic
circumstances". (Paragraph 37)
— To what does HMCI attribute this
development?
— Would HMCI agree with the findings
of the Assessment Reform Group that high stakes testing has a
disproportionately strong impact on the motivation of lower achieving
students, which has the effect of widening the gap between the
highest and lowest achieving pupils?
14. HMCI finds that: "Too much teaching
in the foundation subjects remain "flat" and "ordinary"
and it needs to improve to raise standards further".
(Paragraph 49)
In addition, the teaching of ICT is judged to
have: "improved more than any other subjects".
(Paragraph 47). This improvement is attributed to a number of
factors, including training and resourcing.
— Would HMCI agree that teachers' access
to professional development relating to the foundation subjects
has been limited in recent years and that resources have been
targeted generally at supporting improvements in numeracy and
literacy?
— What steps would HMCI recommend should
be taken, at national, local and school levels, to further develop
the teaching of the foundation subjects?
— Would HMCI agree that the amount
of time allotted by schools to the foundation subjects has a significant
impact on the quality of teaching and learning?
15. HMCI reports that: "Schools
still have difficulty measuring the effects of the work of teaching
assistants on pupils' progress in learning". (Paragraph
57)
— What Ofsted evidence exists to support
the Government's view that the use of teaching assistants to lead
(a) part of and (b) whole lessons raises standards?
16. The Annual Report states that "only
a minority of schools had a clear and well developed strategy
to meet the needs of these (EAL) pupils". (Paragraph
76)
— Does HMCI believe that the National
College for School Leadership has an important role to play in
remedying this situation and that the DfES needs to place greater
emphasis on providing schools with the appropriate management
tools to develop clear and well defined strategies to meet the
needs of EAL pupils?
17. The Annual Report states that "with
exception of RE, the contribution of different subjects to pupils'
spiritual and cultural development is not sufficiently exploited".
(Paragraph 80)
— In HMCI's opinion, is there a role
for QCA in providing clear guidance to schools on how the different
subject areas can promote pupils' spiritual and cultural development?
SECONDARY EDUCATION
18. The report recognises the contribution
of a more flexible Key Stage 4, including through "vocational"
provision, to enhancing motivation and achievement in some schools.
— Does HMCI consider that curriculum
flexibility may have any implications for reducing the future
choice of some students? Does HMCI agree with the Working Group
on 14-19 reform that there should continue to be a common core
of skills development and learning for all students?
19. HMCI has reported a small increase in
the proportion of teaching deemed to be unsatisfactory at Key
Stage 4 and has identified weaknesses at middle management level
within secondary schools.
— To what extent does HMCI attribute
such trends to difficulties of teacher supply, for example, difficulties
in recruiting and retaining teachers of Key Stage 4 subjects,
and/or difficulties in teacher retention which may contribute
to a smaller "pool" of experienced teachers who may
consider moving into middle management.
20. HMCI reports a higher proportion of
teaching which is good or better in specialist schools, when taken
as a whole, compared to schools overall.
— Has HMCI collated any evidence from
the relatively small sample of specialist schools inspected that
this trend is related specifically to specialist status, or whether
the quality of teaching in those schools might have been expected
to be higher in such schools regardless of teaching and learning?
— Has HMCI been able to collate any
evidence to suggest that issues of teacher supply, for example
the recruitment and retention of teachers, might be less problematic
than in schools as a whole and whether this might account for
any such variations in teaching quality?
— Has HMCI collated evidence to determine
whether the apparently particularly high quality of teaching in
certain types of specialist schools is attributable to a focus
on particular curriculum areas in which the school specialises,
or whether the quality of teaching in such schools is consistent
across all curriculum areas?
21. HMCI's Annual Report states that "a
very significant number of traveller children, mainly at Key Stages
3 and 4, do not attend or stay at school" and that "the
lack of engagement by traveller children in secondary education
remains a matter of serious concern". (Paragraph 106)
— Does HMCI see a role for inspection
of LEAs to highlight the issue of access and retention to schooling
for traveller pupils?
22. The report suggests that "in
many schools, teachers and teaching assistants require additional
training in working with pupils with SEN whose behaviour is particularly
challenging including those with autistic spectrum disorders".
(Paragraph 133)
— What are HMCI's views about the implications
for the training of all staff?
23. The new Ofsted inspection framework
requires inspectors to assess the extent to which schools deal
effectively with incidents of bullying, racism and other forms
of harassment such as homophobic bullying. The report finds that
"in four out of five schools, the approaches used to counter
or eliminate instances of oppressive behaviour including harassment
and bullying are good or better". Later in this section,
the report states that "evidence of oppressive behaviour,
found in one in twenty-five schools, is often the result of inconsistent
application of the school's approach by inexperienced or temporary
staff". (Paragraph 160)
— What steps does HMCI believe are
necessary to ensure that all staff teaching in schools have appropriate
training in tackling bullying behaviour among pupils?
24. The Annual Report identified that "equality
of access and opportunity is unsatisfactory in one school in twenty",
referring to both primary and secondary schools. (Paragraphs 73
and 163)
— Does HMCI agree that QCA has still
much to do to enable all schools to offer full access to the curriculum?
— Does HMCI believe that further training
opportunities should be available to schools to eliminate any
barriers to providing pupils full access to the curriculum?
— What factors does HMCI believe are
the main barriers to schools undertaking such training?
25. The Annual Report points to the fact
that "few schools in areas with small minority ethnic
populations are vigorous enough in their schools" (to
promote race equality). (Paragraph 162)
— Does HMCI agree that such schools
would benefit from clear advice from the DfES on promoting race
equality in mainly white schools which takes into account their
specific circumstances?
EDUCATION IN
SPECIAL SCHOOLS
AND PUPIL
REFERRAL UNITS
(PRUS)
26. The report finds that "half
of the schools for pupils with EBSD that were inspected had experienced
significant turbulence in their staffing". Later in the
section, the report refers to the excessive turnover of other
key staff in EBSD schools and comments that "non-specialist
staff are too often recruited to key posts where subject specialisms
are crucial for development. As a result, the specialisms of the
staff and their levels of expertise often do not meet the school's
needs". (Paragraph 264)
— Would HMCI expand on what measures
he believes are required to alleviate the recruitment and retention
difficulties identified in EBSD schools?
27. In general, special schools receive
high ratings from the Chief Inspector for the standards achieve.
— What implications does HMCI draw
from this finding for the Government's policies for inclusion?
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
STRATEGIES
28. HMCI reports that "the number
of schools made subject to special measures increased in 2002-03
and that many of these included schools which had previously been
judged as having serious weaknesses and/or were schools in challenging
circumstances". (Paragraphs 305-6 and 333-4)
— Does HMCI believe that such schools
receive sufficient support to enable them to improve? In what
way does Ofsted contribute to their improvement?
— Does HMCI agree that the Section
10 inspection framework makes it more likely that schools in challenging
circumstances will be placed in special measures due to factors
such as lack of parental support?
— Does HMCI believe that the significant
increase in the number of schools placed in special measures or
serious weaknesses categories since September 2003 may, in part,
be due to inspectors' lack of familiarity with or misinterpretation
of, the new inspection framework?
29. Difficulties with the recruitment and
retention of experienced staff for schools designated as requiring
special measures and/or serious weaknesses are identified as a
barrier to improvement by HMCI. (Paragraphs 309, 311, 318)
— Does HMCI agree that the current
process of placing schools in special measures is, in fact, counter-productive,
in that it exacerbates such schools' problems in retaining high
quality staff?
— How does HMCI believe that recruitment
and retention in special measures schools could be improved?
30. HMCI describes the wide variation in
progress made by Fresh Start schools (paragraph 327) and the "greatest
challenges" such schools face in raising standards achieved
by the previous schools, in particular "recruiting appropriately
qualified teachers and middle managers; a legacy of underachievement;
unsatisfactory behaviour and attitudes to learning; poor attendance".
(Paragraph 328)
— Would HMCI agree that the Fresh Start
initiative is not as effective in raising standards as the Government
has claimed?
— Does HMCI believe that the policy
of making all staff reapply for their posts at the new school
has the effect of de-stablising staffing and that this is counter-productive
in terms of the need for knowledge of the pupils' prior attainment
and attitudes to learning?
— How does HMCI account for the reported
weaknesses in the leadership and management of Fresh Start schools,
given the high profile of headteachers appointed to such schools?
31. The section on Education Action Zones
(Paragraphs 339-343) is critical of EAZs for lack of focus and
poor management.
The NUT-commissioned research by PricewaterhouseCoopers
in 2000 identified the lack of involvement by teachers at the
development and early implementation stage of Education Action
Zones. This was largely due to the Government's strategy of presenting
EAZs as challenging teachers' pay and conditions and working practices
and encouraging the private sector to become involved in the operation
of the Zones.
In addition, the competitive bidding process
for Zone funding meant that a variety of attention-catching initiatives
were proposed, rather than more realistic and coherent strategies
for improving pupil achievement.
— Would HMCI agree that an important
lesson of the Education Action Zone initiative is that teacher
involvement and expertise are essential in tackling the issues
of low pupil achievement and poor motivation and that one factor
in the greater success of the Excellence in Cities/Excellence
Clusters initiatives is the integral role of LEAs and teachers
in the operation in the operation of these programmes?
— Has HMCI drawn any conclusions as
to the factors which contribute to successful and sustained school
improvement strategies and those which have proved to be unsuccessful?
Has he advised the Government on these factors so that they can
inform future policy making?
32. The Academies programme is one of the
Government's current strategies for improving poorly performing
secondary schools, which is in its early stages in terms of numbers
of Academies in operation.
— Will HMCI be reporting on the early
outcomes of the Academies programme in next year's report and,
if so, will that include an assessment of the impact of Academies
on neighbouring schools?
TEACHER TRAINING,
DEVELOPMENT AND
SUPPLY
33. HMCI notes, in relation to initial teacher
training, that "weaknesses arise because too much responsibility
is carried out by a small number of people. This is particularly
a problem in SCITTs". (Paragraph 359)
— Could HMCI expand on this finding,
in particular, the capacity of schools to provide high quality
initial teacher training experiences?
— What additional support does HMCI
believe is needed, at school level, to bring about the necessary
improvements?
34. The Annual Report states that "there
is wide variation in the extent to which they (providers) take
positive steps to recruit from minority ethnic and under-represented
groups". (Paragraph 361)
— Whilst funding from the TTA to support
initiatives to recruit trainees from minority ethnic days is beginning
to have some effect, does HMCI believe that much more is needed
to not only recruit minority ethnic trainees into teacher training
but also to retain them on courses?
35. The Annual Report identifies a concern
that "some aspects of inclusion, such as the teaching
of EAL pupils, do not yet have enough attention in many courses".
(Paragraph 366)
— Does HMCI agree that this aspect
of inclusion needs a specific focus from the TTA and a themed
inspection on this would help to provide key pointers for improvement?
36. In relation to primary teacher training,
the report finds that "training pays insufficient attention
to the teaching of pupils with special educational needs".
(Paragraph 363) In relation to secondary school teacher training,
the report finds that "the assessment of pupils' progress
and achievement remains the weakest element of the trainees' teaching".
(Paragraph 370)
— What implications does HMCI think
that these findings have for the development of initial teacher
training and continuous professional development programmes?
37. HMCI reports a number of concerns about
the quality of flexible post-graduate teacher training, including
initial training plans (Paragraph 381), school-based training
and quality assurance procedures. (Paragraph 382)
— To what does HMCI attribute these
weaknesses?
— How confident is HMCI in the quality
of those teachers who have undertaken this training route?
— What action does HMCI believe should
be taken to address the concerns raised in this report?
— What further action will Ofsted take
to pursue these concerns?
38. HMCI attributes post-graduate in-service
training with a number of specific benefits, including improvement
in "participants' ability to analyse their classroom practice,
facilitate school improvement and disseminate examples of effective
teaching" (Paragraph 400) and "enhanced teaching
and learning, improved curriculum planning, assessment and setting
of pupils' targets and better systems of self-review".
(Paragraph 401)
— Does HMCI believe it would be beneficial
for individual teachers and for schools if such training were
to be available to all teachers as an entitlement rather than
paid for by teachers themselves, as is the case in many schools
currently?
— Would HMCI agree that sustained,
high quality professional development, which meets teachers' and
schools' individual needs, is more effective than one-off training
opportunities which are closely linked to national priorities?
— Would HMCI expand on the quality
of in-service training in general and, in particular, on the effect
the discontinuation of a number of funding streams, has had on
teachers' access to CPD?
39. HMCI reports that "the number
of teachers in post in English schools has increased by 4,000
since last year". (Paragraph 407)
— Would HMCI confirm whether this figure
includes unqualified as well as qualified teachers?
— Given the reported increase in the
number of teachers, why are so many schools continuing to experience
difficulty in recruiting staff?
— Does HMCI agree with the findings
of Professor Alan Smithers[10]
that, although over 4,000 teachers were recorded as entering the
English education system in 2003, greater numbers of teachers
left it, resulting in a net loss of some 4,537 primary teachers
and a gain of just 20 secondary teachers?
— Can HMCI expand on the profile of
those teachers entering the system this year, in particular, whether
they are specialist teachers offering the shortage subjects listed
in paragraph 410?
LOCAL EDUCATION
AUTHORITIES
40. HMCI's confirmation of the improvements
in LEA performance is welcome. (Paragraphs 442-446) This year's
report, however, does not include reference to the different strategies
LEAs have adopted to address weaknesses identified by Ofsted,
particularly those which have contracted out their services to
private sector partners following intervention by the DfES. Many
of these contracts are still in operation or, as in the case of
Southwark, have had a highly publicised change of contractor,
during the year.
— Does HMCI draw any conclusions on
the Government's policy of involving the private sector to deliver
LEAs services? Does he envisage that this option will be used
in the future?
— Does HMCI plan to undertake an analysis
of the effectiveness of the different methods LEAs have adopted
to address weaknesses such as outsourcing and joint venture partnerships
with private providers, partnership and secondment arrangements
with more successful LEAs, stakeholder boards and education trusts?
Would such an analysis include a value-for-money element undertaken
by the Audit Commission?
41. HMCI states that "in almost
half of the LEAs inspected, education development plan targets
for Key Stage 2 are unrealistic". (Paragraph 447)
— Why does HMCI believe so many LEAs
have over-estimated schools' potential performance?
— Does HMCI agree that the linkage
of schools' performance, as measured by National Curriculum Key
Stage 2 tests, with LEAs own performance indicators has had an
impact on LEAs' target setting?
— To what extent have LEAs taken schools'
own targets into account when setting targets?
— Does Ofsted have any evidence of
LEAs bringing excessive pressure to bear on schools in order to
meet overly ambitious targets?
42. This section on minority ethnic pupils,
including traveller pupils (Paragraph 455) states that "in
a few LEAs, a clearer priority to providing support for these
pupils and closing the gap between the attainment of pupils from
different ethnic groups is evident".
— Does HMCI agree that to ensure that
the majority of LEAs prioritise closing the gap between the attainment
of pupils from different ethnic groups, a clear emphasis on this
is needed in the inspection of LEAs?
43. In relation to pupils with SEN, the
report states that "few LEAs have effective systems for
monitoring the use of devolved funding in schools or for demonstrating
changes in pupils' level of achievement". (Paragraph
467)
— Is HMCI concerned about the increasing
devolution of SEN funding away from LEAs to schools?
44. The NUT views with concern HMCI's finding
that "in a quarter of all LEAs inspected, support (for
measures to combat racism) was unsatisfactory, . . . (and) not
all LEAs have yet established systems for reporting racial incidents
that are used consistently. Some LEAs, including those with significant
numbers of pupils from minority ethnic backgrounds, still do not
have appropriate mechanisms for consulting with representative
groups". (Paragraph 477)
— Does HMCI agree that these LEAs are
in breach of their duties to meet the requirements of the Race
Relations (Amendment) Act and that more robust advice from the
DfES is needed, including appropriate resources to enable LEAs
to develop good practice?
QUALITY AND
SERVICE
45. HMCI notes that the proportion of complaints
by schools increased slightly over the year (Paragraph 500) and
that, of the formal complaints, "about half were partially
upheld and the remainder were not upheld". (Paragraph
500)
— To what does HMCI attribute this
growth in complaints. Was there any discernible trend?
— Could HMCI confirm that no formal
complaints were fully upheld?
— Of those complaints which were partially
upheld, was there any particular aspect of the inspection process
which complainants had in common?
46. HMCI reports that "all inspectors
were trained and assessed in the new inspection arrangements that
came into effect in September 2003". (Paragraph 514)
However, page 32 of the Winter 2003 edition of "Update",
the Ofsted publication for inspectors, makes it clear that a number
of inspectors are yet to undertake or complete this training and
that, in addition, a number of misunderstandings have arisen as
a result of the new inspection framework.
— Could HMCI confirm that all inspectors,
undertaking Section 10 inspections since September 2003, have
completed training in the new inspection arrangements?
— Could HMCI describe the monitoring
and quality assurance mechanisms which are being used to check
inspectors' understanding of and compliance with the new inspection
framework? Does HMCI envisage further training opportunities will
be offered to inspectors?
47. HMCI states that "the number
of inspection providers has decreased by almost half from 120
in 1997-98 to 69 in 2002-03" as a result of Ofsted requiring
"greater business efficiencies and more flexibility".
(Paragraph 526)
— Would HMCI agree that there is a
danger that the number of inspection providers will continue to
decline, leading to a monopoly of inspection by relatively few
providers?
— What advantages and disadvantages
does HMCI believe the current system of competitive tendering
brings to the inspection process?
February 2004
10 Smithers, A and Robinson, P, The Reality of School
Staffing, Centre for Education and Employment Research, University
of Liverpool/National Union of Teachers, 2003. Back
|
