REFERENCES
- CLARKE, J. (1996). ‘Modularising A-levels in social sciences: some conclusions’, Social Science Teacher, 26, 1, 33-5.
- DEARING, R. (1996). Review of Quali? cations for 16-19 year olds. London: SCAA.
- ELLEY, W. (1994). ‘N.Z.Q.A. plans recipe for assessment chaos’, Parent and School, 24, 6.
- McGEE, C. and HAMPTON, P. (1996). ‘The effects of modular curriculum delivery on a New Zealand secondary school’, School Organisation, 16, 1, 7-16.
- MOON, B. (Ed) (1988). Modular Curriculum. London: Paul Chapman.
- MUNN REPORT. GREAT BRITAIN. SCOTTISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT (1977). The Structure of the Curriculum in the Third and Fourth Years of Scottish Secondary Schools. Edinburgh: HMSO.
- QUALIFICATIONS AND CURRICULUM AUTHORITY (QCA) (1998). The New National Framework for Quali? cations. Brie? ng for higher education. London: QCA.
- SCOTTISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT (1983). 16-18s in Scotland:An Action Plan. Edinburgh: HMSO.
- TAVERNER, S. and WRIGHT, M. (1997). ‘Why go modular? A review of modular A-level mathematics’, Educational Research, 39, 1, 104-12.
- THOMAS, G. (1993). ‘Some reactions to the teaching of science using a modular scheme’, Educational Review, 45, 3, 213-25.
- WARWICK, D. (Ed) (1988). Teaching and Learning through Modules. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
- WATKINS, P. (1987). Modular Approaches to the Secondary Curriculum: SCDC. York: Longman.