Dancing to whose tune?: Conflicting priorities for primary schools

International Journal of Phytoremediation

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 24-31

  Millett, Alison ^a   Johnson, David C ^b  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85023661827     PISSN: 15226514     EISSN: 15497879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03004270085200291     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Cuckle, P., Hodgson, J., and Broadhead, P., 1998. Investigating the relationship between OFSTED inspections and school development planning. School Leadership and Management, 18 (2): 271-283.
2. Cuttance, P., 1994. “ The contribution of Quality Assurance Reviews to Development in School Systems ”. In Development Planning for School Improvement, Edited by: Hargreaves, D, and Hopkins, D. 49-68. London: Cassell. in
3. DfEE. 1998a. National Literacy Strategy, London: DfEE.
4. DfEE. 1998b. Numeracy Matters: the preliminary report of the numeracy task force, London: DfEE.
5. DfEE. 1998c. The implementation of the National Numeracy Strategy: The final report of the Numeracy Task Force, London: DfEE.
6. Fidler, B., and Davies, J., 1998. “ The inspector calls again: the reinspection of schools ”. In Improvement after inspection? School and LEA responses, Edited by: Earley, P., 153-167. London: Paul Chapman. (Education.)
7. MacGilchrist, B., Mortimore, P., Savage, J., and Beresford, C., 1995. Planning matters: the impact of development planning in primary schools, London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
8. Maychell, Karen, and Pathak, S., 1997. Planning for action. Part 1: a survey of schools' post inspection action planning, Slough, UK: NFER.
9. Millett, A., and Johnson, D.C., 1999. Anticipating inspection: whose agenda counts? under review
10. Office for Standards in Education. 1994. Handbook for the inspection of schools (1994 consolidated edition), London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
11. Office for Standards in Education. 1995. Planning improvement: a report on schools' post-inspection plans, London: HMSO.
12. Ouston, J., and Davies, J., 1998. “ OFSTED and afterwards? Schools' responses to inspection ”. In School improvement after inspection? School and LEA responses, Edited by: Earley, P., 13-24. London: Paul Chapman. (Education.)
13. Ouston, J., Davies, J., Fidler, B., and Earley, P., The reinspection of secondary schools: a different impact second time around?. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference. September2-51999. University of Sussex.
14. Pathak, S., and Maychell, K., 1997. Planning for action Part 2: a guide to post-inspection action planning, Slough: NFER.
15. Sandbrook, P., 1996. Making sense of primary inspection, Buckingham: Open University Press.
16. Wilcox, B., and Gray, J., 1996. Inspecting schools: holding schools to account and helping schools to improve, Buckingham: Open University Press.
17. Woodhead, C., 1999. Why inspection sets you free. Times Educational Supplement, May: 17-17. 14