The government has published its long-awaited review of the National Curriculum in England, the first such large scale review in a decade, a decade in which we have seen a huge transformation in society and technology, necessitating a rethink of the National Curriculum what it offers each learner and how it can remain relevant until the next review.
Parents will be asking how this is going to affect their children and the short answer to this is that, for now, it’s unlikely to have a significant impact. The reforms, whilst designed to be transformative in the medium and long term, have been deliberately styled as not being revolutionary, in part to allow for a gradual transition to a more appropriate 21st century curriculum, but also to preserve the wellbeing of teachers and school leaders in implementing and evaluating the changes. By this nature, some critics say that the reforms don’t go far enough, some elements have been broadly welcomed, whilst others have caused some puzzlement as to the effect of their introduction.
The key takeaways are that young people need to know how to live and work alongside emerging technologies such as AI. It’s commonly realised that AI can be a massively valuable tool in creating a sustainable and productive future but, used inappropriately, it can undo much of what society has strived for over centuries of learning and discovery.
There’s also the realisation that the constraints of the EBacc, a suite of qualifications proposed to give a ’rounded education’, were limiting young people’s access to a broad education and this has now been removed. One of the perceived negatives of this is the diminishing of the importance of learning a foreign language.
A more perplexing aspect of the review is the commitment to keeping formal examinations as the principal form of assessment given the potential for AI to skew coursework but to reduce the length of examinations by at least 10%. The reasoning behind this seems to be a means of making examinations less stressful for SEND students but, of course, it will reduce the amount of material that can be assessed within the examination duration. Cynics could see this as a response to the massive increase in requests by schools for additional time in exams for SEND students.
Another interesting aspect of the review is the proposal to allow more time in the school day for non-academic activities; PSHE, extracurricular activities and more to broaden the school experience for students. There’s more of a focus on applied skills, one example being that maths skills will be linked with money management skills, and hopefully removing the age-old question ‘When will I ever need to use this in life?’
Science too, gets a revamp with students enabled to take triple science at IGCSE, giving them a grounding in chemistry, biology and physics. Concern has been raised here as to whether the refreshed course will prepare students for undertaking the individual sciences at A level and beyond but, that remains to be addressed in the final detail of the implementation plans.
Broadly welcomed, part because of the necessity of reform of a decade old system but also because of the areas where the review does act to move learning and learning experiences forward, it was accepted that it wouldn’t please all areas of the field of education. In its defence, the review, and the reforms it’s proposing is forward thinking, tests the water for further innovation, maintains the integrity of the teaching profession and, in answer to the question posed in the title of this blog, in the medium and longer term, properly funded, it should generate an improvement in education standards, not least in ensuring our young people can enter the technological world with confidence.
