Bullock (1975)

(page numbers in brackets)

Notes on the text

Preliminary pages (i-xxxvi)
Foreword, Membership, Contents, Introduction

Part 1 Attitudes and Standards
Chapter 1 (3-9)
Attitudes to the teaching of English
Chapter 2 (10-35)
Standards of reading
Chapter 3 (36-44)
Monitoring

Part 2 Language in the Early Years
Chapter 4 (47-50)
Language and learning
Chapter 5 (51-74)
Language in the early years

Part 3 Reading
Chapter 6 (77-96)
The reading process
Chapter 7 (97-114)
Reading in the early years
Chapter 8 (115-123)
Reading: the later stages
Chapter 9 (124-138)
Literature

Part 4 Language in the Middle and Secondary Years
Chapter 10 (141-161)
Oral language
Chapter 11 (162-187)
Written language
Chapter 12 (188-193)
Language across the curriculum

Part 5 Organisation
Chapter 13 (197-212)
The primary and middle years
Chapter 14 (213-219)
Continuity between schools
Chapter 15 (220-237)
The secondary school
Chapter 16 (238-242)
LEA advisory services

Part 6 Reading and Language Difficulties
Chapter 17 (245-265)
Screening, diagnosis and recording
Chapter 18 (266-276)
Children with reading difficulties
Chapter 19 (277-283)
Adult literacy
Chapter 20 (284-295)
Children from families of overseas origin

Part 7 Resources
Chapter 21 (299-313)
Books
Chapter 22 (314-327)
Technological aids and broadcasting

Part 8 Teacher Education and Training
Chapter 23 (331-346)
Initial training
Chapter 24 (347-356)
In-service education

Part 9 The Survey
Chapter 25
I Introduction (359-365)
II Primary Commentary (365-402)
III Secondary Commentary (402-443)
IV Questionnaire Tables (444-502)
V Technical Notes (502-510)

Part 10 Sumary of Conclusions and Recommendations
Chapter 26 (513-560)
Conclusions and recommendations

Appendix A (561-576)
Witnesses and sources of evidence
Appendix B (577-584)
Visits made

Glossary (585-595)
Index (596-609)

Report of the Committee of Enquiry appointed by the Secretary of State for Education and Science under the Chairmanship of Sir Alan Bullock FBA

London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office 1975
© Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland.

Preliminary pages

[title page]

[page ii]

[page iii]

This Report deserves to be widely read. All our education depends on the understanding and effective use of English as does success in so many aspects of adult life.

The Report concerns all who have responsibilities in education. Many recommendations are addressed to schools and teachers and call for a change of approach and redirection of effort rather than for additional resources. As the Committee acknowledges, recommendations with financial implications must be subject to current constraints; for the time being action on those which would involve additional resources must be postponed. Within this limitation I hope that local authorities and teachers at all levels will look carefully at the recommendations which concern them, as my Department will at those which concern the Government.

We are all greatly indebted to Sir Alan Bullock and his colleagues. They have given us an authoritative statement which will be of value as a basis for further discussion and development for many years to come.

REG PRENTICE

DECEMBER 1974

[page v]

9 September, 1974

Dear Secretary of State,

I have the honour to present the Report of the Committee set up by your predecessor, Mrs Thatcher, in 1972 to inquire into the teaching in the schools of reading and the other uses of English. As the Committee's Chairman I should like to place on record the great help I have received from Dame Muriel Stewart, who has acted as Vice-Chairman throughout the inquiry. The Committee's debt to its Secretary, Mr R Arnold, HMI, is acknowledged in the Introductory chapter. I should like to express here my personal appreciation of the assistance he has given to the Chairman and of the close cooperation in which we have worked.

Yours sincerely            
ALAN BULLOCK    
(Chairman)

The Rt. Hon. Reg. E. Prentice, JP, MP.

[page vi]

Sir Alan Bullock, FBA (Chairman), Master of St Catherine's College and Vice-Chancellor, University of Oxford.

Sister Basil Burbridge, Headmistress, St Margaret Mary Junior and Infant School, Carlisle.

Professor JN Britton, Goldsmiths' Professor of Education in the University of London.

Mr Alastair Burnet, Editor, The Economist.

Miss J Derrick, Senior Lecturer, Language Teaching Centre, University of York.

Mr JJ Fairbairn, Head of Education Department, St John's College, York.

Mr HK Fowler, Chief Education Officer, Derbyshire.

Mr Stuart Froome, Headmaster, St Jude's CE Junior School, Englefield Green, Surrey.

Mr David Gadsby, Managing Director, A & C Black Ltd, Publishers.

Mr CR Gillings, Headmaster, Midhurst Intermediate School, West Sussex (resigned 1 September 1973 on appointment to HM Inspectorate).

Mr WK Gardner, Lecturer, School of Education, University of Nottingham.

Mrs DMR Hutchcroft, OBE, Headmistress, Saltford Primary School, Bristol.

Miss AM Johns, Headmistress, Henry Fawcett Infant School, London SE11.

Mr D Mackay, Adviser/Warden, Centre for Language in Primary Education, Inner London Education Authority (resigned 1 November 1972 on appointment to a post in the West Indies).

Mr Michael Marland, Headmaster, Woodberry Down Secondary School, London N4.

Professor JE Merritt, Professor of Educational Studies, Open University.

Mr AJ Puckey, Primary Adviser, Nottinghamshire LEA.

Mrs V Southgate Booth, Senior Lecturer in Curriculum Studies, School of Education, University of Manchester.

[page vii]

Dame Muriel Stewart, DBE, Chairman, Schools Council.

Professor J Wrigley, Professor of Curriculum Research and Development, University of Reading; Director of Studies, Schools Council.

Mr R Arnold, HMI, Secretary.

Mrs GW Dishart, Assistant Secretary.

Appointments shown are those held by members at the time the Committee was constituted.

The estimated cost of the production of the Report is £95,900, of which £14,700 represents the estimated cost of printing and publication, £68,700 the cost of administration, and £12,500 the travelling and other expenses of members.

[page ix]

INTRODUCTION: The scope and nature of the Inquiry; and acknowledgements

PLAN OF THE REPORT

[page x]

[page xi]

[page xii]

[page xiii]

[page xiv]

[page xv]

[page xvi]

[page xvii]

[page xviii]

[page xix]

[page xx]

[page xxi]

[page xxii]

[page xxiii]

[page xxiv]

[page xxv]

[page xxvi]

[page xxvii]

[page xxviii]

[page xxix]

[page xxx]

[page xxxi]

The decision to set up the Committee of Inquiry was announced shortly after the publication of the NFER Report 'The Trend of Reading Standards', and it was understandable that it should be widely regarded as an inquiry solely into reading. This was reflected in much press and public comment and in many of the letters we received. In fact it will be seen from our terms of reference that reading was not singled out for special attention but was placed in close association with other language skills within the context of teaching the use of English:

'To consider in relation to schools:
(a) all aspects of teaching the use of English, including reading, writing, and speech;
(b) how present practice might be improved and the role that initial and in-service training might play;
(c) to what extent arrangements for monitoring the general level of attainment in these skills can
be introduced or improved; and to make recommendations.'

It was obvious that we should have to consider some limits to our field of inquiry. We therefore decided to go as far as, but not beyond, the statutory age for leaving school. This means that apart from a reference to examinations in language we have excluded any specific consideration of sixth form work and higher and further education. At the same time we felt a particular concern about the needs of those pupils who leave school unable to read, and we have accordingly stretched our brief to include observations on adult illiteracy. We felt equal concern about the language problems of children from families of overseas origin and have included a chapter on their special needs. A good deal of our time was naturally spent in discussing the difficulties of children who are retarded in reading, but we have confined our attention to pupils being educated in ordinary schools. Our inquiry did not extend to children receiving special educational treatment in separate schools.

It became clear to us from our early discussions and from the evidence we received that we must give attention to the provision of resources and to the internal organisation of schools, since both have an important bearing

[page xxxii]

on the development of language and the teaching of reading. Our first thought was to deal separately with primary and secondary education, allocating a part of the Report to each. We chose instead a form of presentation which would emphasise the continuity of English teaching, and this is explained in the plan of chapters which follows this introduction. Finally, we had to decide how far to go in discussing examinations. To have made a series of detailed recommendations about form and content would have extended our inquiry beyond what was practicable. At the same time it would have been unrealistic to leave examinations out of account, not least because they play a very large part in the experience of English of many pupils in the later years. We have therefore looked at some aspects of present examinations in English and at their influence on teaching and have given our views on the direction they ought to take.

Like many Committees before us, no doubt, we are anxious that the Report should be read and considered as a whole. Though individual chapters deal with given topics they are not intended to be self-contained, and those topics depend for their proper understanding on a knowledge of the background from which they emerge. This is particularly true of reading, not only for the reason we have already stated but because references to different aspects of the teaching of reading occur in various places throughout the Report. One of our main arguments is that there is no one method, medium, approach, device, or philosophy that holds the key to the process of learning to read. We believe that an essential condition for bringing about an improvement is a recognition that there is no simple nostrum and above all no substitute for a thorough understanding of all the factors at work. It is for this reason that we have made a policy of entering in places into considerable technical detail. We regard this kind of descriptive account as essential to an inquiry of this nature, since the Report is addressed to a wide audience. It is addressed in fact to all who are professionally engaged in education and to many more who have an interest in it - from parents to publishers. If there is one particular group, however, who have been in the forefront of our thinking it is the teachers in the schools. The quality of learning is fashioned in the day to day atmosphere of the classroom through the knowledge, intuitions and skill of individual teachers. Whatever else the Report may achieve we regard its first purpose as a support for them.

Throughout our work we have been made aware of the great public interest in the matters we have been investigating. From this point of view the setting up of an inquiry could hardly have been better timed. From two other points of view, however, the administrative and the financial, the publication of the Report comes at an awkward moment. The reform of local government has altered the shape and composition of many Authorities. Moreover, change is going forward in the structure of teacher training following the publication of the James Report and the subsequent White Paper 'Education: A Framework for Expansion'. With so much in a state of transition it has not always been easy to give our recommendations - for example in relation to professional centres and in-service training - the precision we should have wished. We hope, however, that the unsettling effects of change will be more than compensated for by the opportunities it creates to review existing

[page xxxiii]

practices. The financial circumstances of the country at the time when we were formulating our recommendations have impressed on us the need to be realistic. Some of the recommendations inevitably call for increased expenditure, and we recognise that it will take time before they can be implemented; but many could be put into operation by simple changes of practice which involve little if any increase in costs. By far the greatest number of our suggestions are intended for consideration by the schools themselves.

So much for the scope and limits of our inquiry. We pass next to the evidence on which we have been able to draw. The Committee agreed at its first meeting to obtain as complete a picture as possible of the actual practice in the schools. It was decided to draw up two questionnaires and these were completed in January 1973 by a random sample of 1,415 primary and 392 secondary schools. The survey was organised by the Secretary and Assistant Secretary to the Committee, and we are grateful for the help given them by statisticians of the Department of Education and Science, by Mr Stephen Steadman of the Schools Council, and by members of HM Inspectorate. This is the first time a survey of English on this scale has been attempted in this country. It could not have been undertaken without the willing cooperation of the local authorities and the heads and staffs of the many schools involved, and we wish to express our great appreciation of the trouble they took to help us. As the survey contains much information likely to be of interest to anyone concerned with education, we have printed the questionnaires and the results in Chapter 25, together with a commentary upon the findings.

The Committee drew up a list of 66 individuals and 56 organisations from which it wished to receive written evidence, and a shorter list of those it wished to interview. At the same time, the Chairman issued a public invitation to anyone interested to submit written evidence, an invitation of which several hundred individuals and organisations took advantage. The evidence obtained from all these sources was the foundation on which the inquiry was built, enabling the Committee to draw upon an accumulation of experience, a wealth of research - both published and unpublished - and a very wide range of opinion. We are greatly indebted to all those who generously made these available to us, often at the cost of considerable trouble to themselves in preparing papers specially for the purpose. Another valuable source of evidence has been HM Inspectorate, and we have been grateful for the opportunity to draw upon their wide experience at various points in our work.

The Committee was also, of course, able to call upon a varied experience and expert knowledge from among its own members, several of whom produced drafts or papers of various kinds. 16 of the Committee are or have been teachers, 6 are involved with the training of teachers, either in universities or in colleges of education, and 5 have undertaken and published research relevant to the subject of the inquiry. We were also fortunate to have the expert advice of Professor J Sinclair, who gave the Committee much valuable help in its discussions on the place of linguistics, and of Mr A Yates, Dr R Sumner and Mrs C Burstall, of the National Foundation for Educational Research.

[page xxxiv]

Members of the Committee undertook a series of special visits to 100 schools, 21 colleges of education, and 6 reading or language centres. These visits, in various parts of the country, gave members the opportunity to see different methods of teaching and organisation and above all to talk to a large number of teachers in their classrooms. The Committee also studied, at first and second hand, the practice of certain other English-speaking countries. Evidence was received from Scotland, Canada, and the United States, and two members of the Committee, accompanied by the Secretary, paid a visit to North America, studying developments in schools, colleges, and universities. Over a period of two years the full Committee has met on 54 occasions, but the total of days devoted by individual members in visits and other kinds of consultation has run into many hundreds.

The Committee owes its gratitude to Mrs GW Dishart, its Assistant Secretary, and the members of the supporting team - Mr DA Robins, Mrs KF Briggs, Mrs P Diegeler and Mr K Price - who have been a personal help to members in so many ways throughout. To Mrs Dishart we owe particular thanks for her special contribution, not least in clarifying for the Committee all the material produced by the survey and arranging it for presentation.

The Committee's greatest debt is to its Secretary, Mr R Arnold, HMI, who has been a constant source of energy, ideas, and invention at every stage of the inquiry. Throughout its course he has produced a stimulating flow of original material and drafts for the Committee, and his wide knowledge of all the aspects of our subject of inquiry has been an invaluable resource. The ability and efficiency with which he handled a formidable volume of organisation under great pressure have impressed us all. He has crowned two years' hard work by turning the views and judgements of the Committee into a coherent Report written by a single hand.

(signed)

Alan Bullock James Britton Sister Basil Burbridge JWA Burnet June Derrick James Fairbairn Henry Fowler Stuart Froome David Gadsby

Keith Gardner Diana M Rought Hutchcroft Audrey Johns Michael Marland John E Merritt Alan Puckey Vera Southgate Booth Muriel Stewart Jack Wrigley

R Arnold, HMI (Secretary)

[page xxxv]

The design of the Report is intended to reflect the organic relationship between the various aspects of English, and to emphasise the need for continuity in their development throughout school life. It would have been a simple matter to deal separately with language, taking it right through the age range, and then to have done the same for reading. It would have been equally simple to divide the Report into separate sections for the primary and secondary years, each containing every aspect of the subject as it related to the needs of that particular age group. However, both these methods would have conflicted with the principle that reading, writing, talking and listening should be treated as a unity, and that there should be unbroken continuity across the years. Against this has to be balanced the need to take certain topics out of context for concentrated attention, and it becomes obvious that some compromise is the best course. The chapters are therefore arranged in such a way as to avoid rigid divisions while at the same time allowing detailed examination of a given topic or the needs of a particular age group.

Part One opens with a review of current attitudes to the teaching of English and then goes on to examine the question of standards of reading, considering evidence from the most recent NFER survey and other sources. After introducing a number of issues which will be taken up in detail in subsequent chapters, the section ends with a case for a new system of monitoring national standards of reading and writing. As the introduction makes clear, we believe that the inquiry is essentially concerned with the development of language in education, and Part Two of the Report establishes this principle. It opens with a discussion of the way in which language and learning interact and goes on to propose various measures for improving language development in young children, particularly those from home backgrounds which put them at a disadvantage in certain ways. Only when it has been determined that reading is secondary to and dependent upon the growth of language competence in the early years is it introduced as a separate topic, and this is the subject of Part Three. We have already given our reasons for going to the length of setting out in detail what is involved in the process of learning to read. Chapters 6 and 7 are entitled respectively 'The reading process' and 'Reading in the early years', and they are intended to be complementary. Indeed, there is a deliberate overlap between them, and they should be read as one for a proper understanding of what is being advocated about the teaching of reading in the early stages. By the same token they should be related to other parts of the Report where topics given separate treatment have an important bearing on the development of reading. For example, the first two chapters of Part Five deal with organisation within schools and continuity between them, and implications for the teaching of reading enter into both. Even more relevant is the opening chapter of Part Six, where there is an examination of diagnostic procedures and the way they can be used to develop reading ability. Similarly, both chapters of Part Seven have much to say about reading, from the points of view respectively of the use of books and of technological aids.

[page xxxvi]

The second half of Part Three deals with the later stages of reading and with literature. It leads into a study of language at the same age level, which is the burden of Part Four, and the chapter on literature is the point of juncture. Both parts have related chapters on reading and language across the curriculum. There are thus five consecutive chapters which associate language and reading in the middle and secondary years, covering the age range 7 or 8 to 16 years.

Part Five examines organisational factors, with chapters devoted to primary and secondary schools linked by one on continuity. We have made a point of not dealing separately with middle schools, but the problems explored in relation to primary and secondary schools have equal relevance to them. The last chapter of this part of the Report extends the discussion of specialist support within the school to that of specialist support from outside, presenting a case for expanded LEA advisory services.

After the development of language and reading has been considered across the age-range and placed within the organisational framework it is possible to consider in greater detail the question of special difficulties. Thus, what is said in Part Six depends upon an acquaintance with what has gone before. The section is introduced with a chapter on preventive measures in the form of screening and diagnosis, and this is followed by a consideration of provision for children with reading difficulties in primary and secondary schools. The subject is extended into the post-school years with a discussion of adult illiteracy and the steps that might be taken to reduce it. The section concludes with an examination of the special needs of children from families of overseas origin.

Part Seven of the Report is concerned with the role of books and technological aids in the school and relates them to suggestions made in earlier chapters. The section ranges from the use of the library to educational broadcasting and contains proposals for a review of allowances. Teacher training is the last major subject and its placing in Part Eight is determined by the need to show the range of concerns of which initial and in-service training need to take account.

The concluding two sections are a presentation of the results of the survey and a summary of the Report in the form of a list of conclusions and recommendations.