Newsom (1963)

Notes on the text
Preliminary pages Membership, Contents, Introduction, Principal recommendations

Part 1 Findings
Chapter 1 Education for all
Chapter 2 The pupils, the schools, the problems
Chapter 3 Education in the slums
Chapter 4 Objectives
Chapter 5 Finding approaches
Chapter 6 The school day, homework, extra-curricular activities
Chapter 7 Spiritual and moral development
Chapter 8 The school community
Chapter 9 Going out into the world
Chapter 10 Examinations and assessments
Chapter 11 Building for the future
Chapter 12 The teachers needed

Part 2 The teaching situation
Chapter 13 What should secondary imply?
Chapter 14 An education that makes sense
Chapter 15 Attainments and achievement
Chapter 16 The subjects and the curriculum
Chapter 17 The practical subjects
Chapter 18 Science and mathematics
Chapter 19 The humanities
Chapter 20 School organisation and staff deployment

Part 3 What the survey shows
Chapter 21 The 1961 survey
Chapter 22 The boys and girls
Chapter 23 The work they do
Chapter 24 The men and women who teach them
Chapter 25 The schools they go to

Acknowledgements

Appendix I List of witnesses
Appendix II Sex education
Appendix III Deployment of teachers
Appendix IV Letter to Minister on teacher training
Appendix V Statistical detail

Index

A report of the Central Advisory Council for Education (England)

London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office 1963
© Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland.

Appendix IV Copy of letter sent to the Minister on the training of teachers
[pages 277 - 278]

7 February 1963

My Dear Minister

As you are aware, the Central Advisory Council are shortly to report to you on the education between the ages of 13 and 16 of children of average and below-average ability. At the last meeting of the Council we discussed in particular the form of training most suitable for the teachers of such children. We were aware that this matter, which is of such importance to us, must also concern the Committee now sitting under Lord Robbins, and as we were so emphatic and united in our views, I as Chairman felt it to be a matter of urgency that I should inform you of them in the hope that if you think fit you will pass them on to Lord Robbins and his Committee.

We were unanimous in our opinion that an intending teacher whose personal and professional training are carried on together over a span of at least three years is much more likely to become a successful teacher of less able children than one who completes a degree course in a special subject and follows it with a year of training.

Briefly, we believe experience to show that 'concurrent training' and 'consecutive training' tend to produce different kinds of teachers. The former, because it entails a prolonged study of child development over a three-year period coupled with a study of a range of subjects, is more likely to produce teachers who succeed with the less able child. The latter tends to produce teachers who, having studied an academic subject in depth, are anxious to impart it to children sufficiently able to master it and derive satisfaction from it.

We do not deny that there is a considerable overlap between these categories, but, whereas the teacher trained to deal with the less able child will have little difficulty with the more able in his early years, the teacher who is trained in the expectation of presenting his subject to the more academically minded children is likely to be ill-equipped, discontented, and consequently less competent in teaching his subject (or, as is so often the case, some other subject) to slower children.

We are, of course, aware that within the resources at present being applied to teacher training the country's need for primary school teachers has led to a limitation for the time being of the number of secondary school teachers trained by the three-year colleges. We are deeply concerned lest what we hope will be a temporary expedient should be assumed to have educational merit on which long-term proposals for training might be based.

In informing you of these matters I am, of course, well aware that the National Advisory Council on the Training and Supply of Teachers is the proper body to advise on teacher supply. Since, however, the kind of training most likely to produce the best teachers for a large proportion of secondary school pupils is an issue of fundamental importance to our present concerns as a Council, I hope you will find it possible to submit our views, on which we are unanimous, to Lord Robbins and his Committee at this stage in their deliberations.

There is perhaps just one final point which I ought to make. We are concerned less with existing institutions than with types of training. It may well be that new patterns of training will emerge in the newer universities or in existing colleges. What we do believe, however, is that the longer study of teaching problems coupled with the study of a wider range of subjects generally speaking produces better teachers of the less able children than a more specialised course followed by a markedly shorter period of training.

Yours sincerely
John Newsom

The Rt Hon Sir Edward Boyle Bt MP
Minister of Education
Ministry of Education
Curzon Street House
W1