Out goes rational debate, in comes emotive argument. Bill Boyle’s letter (“Fact, fact, fact! Who put the philistines in charge?â€, 22 June) cites “no action†in the face of his reports while I was head of research at the Qualifications and Curriculum Agency. Read one way, his letter suggests that all that research was ignored at the time. That’s nonsense, and he knows it. Read another way, his letter suggests that the current review has ignored such research on narrowing. Of course it hasn’t; statutory breadth is not under attack in the current review. Good researchers check their facts - in this case polemic has ridden roughshod over reality.
Tim Oates, Group director, Cambridge Assessment.
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.
