A punishment for no crime

May 23, 1997

ANTHEA MILLETT makes much of her following procedures "to the letter" and maybe she did. It is the TTA procedures themselves that are unjust and unfair.

They are designed to ensure compliance but they have nothing to do with helping organisations to improve.

LSU needed more time, as its visiting Ofsted inspection team acknowledged, and support to carry out the very considerable improvements that were rightly required of it.

The college decision against appealing to TTA does not imply that it agrees with the TTA judgment. It is spurious and wrong of Mrs Millett to suggest otherwise.

The TTA's hands-off approach to LSU's recovery has brought real damage to the lives of students and staff. It has created a high degree of bewilderment among the many schools which value their relationship with the college and their role in teacher training.

The college made considerable improvements to its courses, to its teaching and to its systems in the eight months it was allowed of its three-year development plan. It would cost the TTA nothing to acknowledge this.

John Coffey, Dean of education, La Sainte Union College of Higher Education

Please login or register to read this article

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments