The curriculum proposals put forward by the Cambridge Review are independent, far-reaching and beneficial - unlike those in the supposedly independent Rose review. They are being published after almost two decades of increasingly close governmental prescription. This has impeded initiative and risk-taking at local level and has reduced initial teacher training and continuing professional development to transmission - or, at best, mediation - of government directives.
The Cambridge proposals are challenging conceptually, politically and logistically. They raise a host of questions, including some related to professional development.
Unless these questions can be tackled by all those concerned to reprofessionalise primary teaching, English primary education may settle - as it has too often had to do - for second best. And the Rose proposals are just that.
Professor Colin Richards, Spark Bridge, Cumbria.
Want to keep reading for free?
Register with Tes and you can read five free articles every month, plus you'll have access to our range of award-winning newsletters.
