28 APRIL 1961, Page 13


SIR.—There are stil' several points which need making in this controversy. (1)1 can think of no other profession in which there ri so slight a differential between graduates (or their equivalent) and the non- graduate grade, as in teaching. One only has to think of the differentials between doctors and nurses, solici- tors and managing clerks. etc.. to see this point.

(2) Parity seems to work only one way. Is not a sixth-form master doirg work very much closer to a university lecturer's than to an infant teacher's?

(3) Other European countries make a sharp dis- tinction between gradbate and non graduate teachers.

In France there arc two distinct professions and there the a,grege can earn up to £2.000 p.a. for fif= teen hours' teaching without extraneous duties.

(4) A good graduate teacner will find that his for- mer university colleagues are now earning two to four times as much as he is. Even heads of big gram- mar schools may, for financial reasons, be cut off from social contacts with general practitioners and lawyers who will probably eare twine as much. But the com-

• Parable alternative professions for a girl with five GCE ordinary level passes-are. say. nursing or secre-

tarial work and the non-graduate woman teacher is already receiving more than she would get in these professions.

As the graduate is heavily m a minority in the pro- fession and as the Burnham Committee teachers' Panel is largely dominated by the mainly non- graduate NUT, it is he wtn has received less than justice.—Yours faithfully.


[Name and address supplied.]