6
7
8
We used a variety of methods co co llecr a nd sift ev idence across a wide range of areas. We had 20 meetings of the full Committee, which formed the backbone of o ur work programme These usuall y lasted a full day, though one residenti al meeting lasted for three da ys. At the meetings we discussed the overall direction of our work, the implications of the ev idence which we had gathered, including cv idence from witnesses in vited to those meetings, and fin all y the contents of this report. We also had two half-day seminars to receive evidence from overseas. We started by idcntifying four key questions. These formed the basis of all our enquiries. They featured in an advertisement published in May in the educational supplements of na tiona l newspapers inviting written contributions co the Enquiry. The questions were about: 7.1
definitio ns of good behaviour and discipline (and their opposites) in the school context;
7.2
the ex tent of any discipline problems in schools;
7.3
the principal causes of these problems; and
7.4
action which could be taken by relevant organisations and individuals to promore good behaviour in schools.
We sent a more detailed list of questions to all LEA s and all institutions providing teacher training in England and Wules. 68 LEAs and 59 teacher training institutio ns replied - a response rate in both cases of over 60%. Many other national o rganisatio ns also supplied written evidence, either in response to our advertisement or to a specific invitation. In all, wc received a cotal of 476 submissions from these other organisations and individuals, including many serving teachers . This makes a to tal of just over 600 written submissions. Details are given in Appendix A. We are most grateful to all those who contributed in thiS way.
9
We also in vited a number of wimesses co our meetings . They included representatives of the seven major teacher unions in England and Wales, othe r national organisations and expen witnesses on various topics. Our discussions with d"lem helped us to exp lo re some of the more difficult issues raised in the written evidence. We were also able to learn at first-hand from their experiences. O nce again, we are most grateful for all their help. The ir names are listed in Appendix B.
10
Visits were 8n importune part of o ur work programme. We were anxious to see for ourselves schools and o ther institutions in different regio nal and social senings. In particular, we hoped to draw lessons from any
55