www.dg.dial.pipex.com439 readers since 18 Aug 2008 

James (1972)

Notes on the text
Preliminary pages Membership, Contents

Chapter 1 Introduction
Chapter 2 The third cycle
Chapter 3 The second cycle
Chapter 4 The first cycle
Chapter 5 Organisation and development of the system
Chapter 6 Summary of the report
A note of extension

Appendix 1 ATOs and other bodies supplying reports
Appendix 2 Sources of written evidence
Appendix 3 Sources of oral evidence
Appendix 4 Visits made by members of the Committee
Appendix 5 Training institutions and the teaching force 1962-70
Appendix 6 Examples of course structure for the DipHE
Appendix 7 A possible distribution of Regional Councils
Appendix 8 Training institutions: size and status
Appendix 9 List of recommendations

Index

The James Report (1972)
Teacher education and training

Report by a Committee of Inquiry appointed by the Secretary of State for Education and Science, under the Chairmanship of Lord James of Rusholme

London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office 1972
© Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland.

Preliminary pages

[pages iii - iv]

Chairman The Lord James of Rusholme

TEACHER TRAINING INQUIRY
Elizabeth House,
York Road,
London SE1
Telephone 01 928 9222 Ext 3306
14 December 1971

The Rt Hon Margaret Thatcher MP
Secretary of State
Department of Education and Science
Curzon Street House
Curzon Street
London W1

Dear Secretary of State

You appointed this Committee with the following terms of reference:

'In the light of the review currently being undertaken by the Area Training Organisations, and of the evidence published by the Select Committee on Education and Science, to enquire into the present arrangements for the education, training and probation of teachers in England and Wales and in particular to examine:

(i) what should be the content and organisation of courses to be provided;

(ii) whether a larger proportion of intending teachers should be educated with students who have not chosen their careers or chosen other careers;

(iii) what, in the context of (i) and (ii) above, should be the role of the maintained and voluntary colleges of education, the polytechnics and other further education institutions maintained by local education authorities, and the universities

and to make recommendations.'

You further expressed the intention that we should begin work early this year and the hope that we should report within 12 months.

We now have the honour to present our report. It is unanimous except for one matter on which two of our members have entered a note of reservation at the appropriate point in the text. There are also a few questions on which these members have contributed a 'note of extension' to indicate their wish to go further than the rest of the Committee, but the recommendations contained in the report are those of us all.

We have recorded in the report the names of all those individuals and organisations who have helped by submitting written and oral evidence and other material for the Committee to study, and of the various institutions which were kind enough to receive our visits. We wish to express our gratitude to all those concerned and to the members of your department and of Her Majesty's Inspectorate, who were always helpful in putting their knowledge and experience fully at our disposal.

We would like to thank in a particularly warm way our assessor, Mr Arthur Luffman, HMI, whose profound knowledge not only of teacher training but of much else made his wise contributions an integral part of all our discussions.

The novel constitution of our committee, which imposed on a fairly small number of full or part-time members the obligation to produce a report in a comparatively short time, laid a particularly heavy burden on the skill and endurance of the secretarial and supporting staff. Without the willingness and ability of Mrs Joan Greenaway to type and retype successive drafts in an apparently impossibly short time, we could not have kept within our somewhat tight programme. Finally, it is difficult adequately to express our debt to our assistant secretary, Miss Marilyn Gummer, and above all to the Secretary, Mr Richard Dellar, for their professional expertise, their tireless hard work and their unfailing patience.

Yours sincerely,

James of Rusholme (Chairman)
Elizabeth Aggett
Cyril English
Harry Judge
Patrick Milroy
James F Porter
JR Webster

Richard Dellar (Secretary).

Curzon Street
London W1
22 December 1971.

[page v]

The Lord James of Rusholme
Teacher Training Inquiry
Elizabeth House
York Road
London SE1

Dear Lord James,

Thank you for your letter of 14 December with which you sent me the Report of your Committee of Inquiry into Teacher Training. I hope you will allow me at once to thank you and the Committee for the vigour and speed with which you have conducted and completed your difficult task.

I am arranging for the Report to be published as soon as possible so that the important issues it raises can be widely considered and debated as a prelude to the consultations that I have promised before I reach any decisions. I shall be initiating these consultations in due course.

Yours sincerely
Margaret Thatcher

Membership of the Committee

The Lord James of Rusholme (Chairman), Vice-Chancellor of the University of York.
Miss E Aggett, Headmistress of Eveline Lowe Primary School.
Mr CR English, Direotor General of the City and Guilds of London Institute.
Dr HG Judge, Principal of Banbury School.
Mr CP Milroy, Chief Education Officer for Gloucestershire.
Mr JF Porter, Principal of Berkshire College of Education.
Professor JR Webster, Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Education, University College of North
Wales, Bangor.
Mr AGJ Luffman, HMI, Assessor.

Secretaries

Mr R Dellar, Secretary. Miss ME Gummer, Assistant Secretary.

The estimated cost of the production of the report is £40,185, of which £2,940 represents the estimated cost of printing and publication, £30,575 the cost of administration and £6,670 the travelling and other expenses of members.

Contents
[pages vii - viii]

Chapter 1 Introduction paragraphs 1.1 to 1.9

Principles of the report 1.2
Background of the report 1.3 to 1.8
Plan of the report 1.9
Chapter 2 The third cycle 2.1 to 2.38
The needs of the third cycle 2. 6 to 2.20
Institutional requirements and implications 2.21 to 2.37
  Implications for the schools 2.21 to 2.25
  Implications for FE colleges 2.26 to 2.28
  Professional centres 2.29 to 2.34
  Other resources and facilities 2.35 to 2.36
  Administration and finance 2.37
Conclusion 2.38
Chapter 3 The second cycle 3.1 to 3.53
Present objectives and problems of teacher training 3.2 to 3.10
Principles for the reform of pre-service training and induction 3.11 to 3.23
  First year of the second cycle 3.13 to 3.19
  Second year of the second cycle 3.20 to 3.23
Implications of a changed system 3.24 to 3.52
  Qualifications for entry to the second cycle 3.26 to 3.28
  Special courses in the second cycle 3.29 to 3.31
  Teachers for further education 3.32
  Terminology and second cycle awards 3.33 to 3.37
  Planning and organisation ofthe second eycle 3.38 to 3.40
  Implications for existing institutions 3.41 to 3.52
Conclusion 3.53
Chapter 4 The first cycle 4.1 to 4.24
Degrees as first cycle qualifications 4.3
Diploma in Higher Education as a first cycle qualification 4.4 to 4.7
Structure of the diploma course 4.8 to 4.17
Currency of the diploma 4.18 to 4.24
Chapter 5 Organisation and development of the system 5.1 to 5.47
The need for change 5.2 to 5.21
Constitution and powers of regional and national agencies 5.22 to 5.32
The financing of the colleges of education 5.33 to 5.35
Possible development of the system 5.36 to 5.39
Action to be taken in the immediate future 5.40 to 5.43
The situation in Wales: a note by one of our members 5.44 to 5.47
Chapter 6 Summary of the report 6.1 to 6.26
Education and training 6.2 to 6.16
Administration, finance and the validation of awards 6.17 to 6.20
Some wider questions 6.21 to 6.24
Questions of cost 6.25 to 6.26
A note of extension

Appendices

1. Area training organisations and other bodies from whom reports were received of the reviews undertaken in response to Mr Edward Short's letter of 19 February 1970
2. Sources of written evidence
3. Sources of oral evidence
4. Visits made by members of the Committee
5. Growth of training institutions and of the teaching force 1962-70
6. Examples of course structure for the DipHE
7. A possible distribution of Regional Councils
8. Training institutions: size and status
9. List of recommendations
Index

Notes on the text | Chapter 1