Richard Austen-Baker (Letters, May ) suggests that the value of training higher education teachers to teach can be evaluated if we get "proper scientific evidence as to whether students actually do learn more when taught by those with teaching qualifications". Up to a point, except that teachers with the qualifications may not always teach as they were taught (perhaps because of institutional pressures) and students who learn more (more than what, exactly?) may do so for reasons unconnected with the "teaching" they receive (for example, intelligence, prior experience, peer support and so on).
What we need is evidence about what kind of teaching system (including aspects of course development, teaching-related research, course presentation, assessment practices, student support, staff rewards and so on) is most often associated with students achieving worthwhile enhancement of their learning - and how the teachers and others concerned came to be capable of providing it. From such an analysis, it may emerge that institutions need to do more than simply requiring their staff to take a course - not least by giving excellence in teaching the same weight as excellence in research when pay and promotion are considered.
Derek Rowntree
Banbury