Like an uncomfortable sofa, the English secondary school curriculum is both too narrow and overstuffed. Standardised content in a handful of academic subjects has been prioritised over everything else, with the exception of an accountability system that places intense pressure on schools. This week’s House of Lords report on 11-16 education will make awkward reading for the government – not least because the committee’s chair, Jo Johnson, is a former minister and the former prime minister’s brother. But MPs and others with an interest in secondary education should consider it carefully. Its account of how schools lost their bounce is convincing.
Ditching the English baccalaureate (Ebacc) is the peers’ most eye-catching recommendation. This flagship Conservative policy requires that, by 2025, 90% of pupils should take GCSEs in maths, English language and literature, at least two sciences, history or geography, and a foreign language. Echoing earlier critics of the policy, the Lords argue that this set menu of options is too narrow. In particular, they note that the reforms of the past 13 years have led to a downgrading of artistic, technical, digital and practical learning. Rightly, they call for a review of the national curriculum’s status, along with a more diverse approach to assessment. As over 80% of English secondary schools are academies, and do not have to teach most of the national curriculum, a more balanced list of subjects should be considered.
Academic rigour and uniformity are the current system’s aims. Ministers sought to raise achievement while holding all schools and pupils to the same standard – and avoiding a situation where less able pupils were steered towards vocational choices. But around a third of pupils in England do not pass English and maths, while experts in many subjects believe that rote learning and memorisation have squeezed out time for critical thinking and creativity. Lord Johnson describes this unsatisfactory outcome as “an attempt to recreate an education system from the 1950s”.
The Lords recognise that a complete overhaul is unlikely, whether before or after a general election. There are too many other urgent issues to deal with. These include a worsening teacher shortage, the collapse of confidence in Ofsted, rising pupil absenteeism and a special educational needs and disabilities (Send) system beset with difficulties including cost pressures. But curriculum and assessment are too important to be parked until other problems have been solved. The recruitment and retention of staff could be made easier by allowing teachers more room to innovate. Some of the pressure on the Send system could be eased if the curriculum were less prescriptive.
The UK has a poor record on vocational subjects. Clear and coherent routes are needed into post-16 technical education. The government should also encourage schools to promote language learning, given low take-up of GCSEs in foreign languages despite their inclusion within the Ebacc.
There will be concerns about the reintroduction of less academic pathways, which are more likely to be taken by children from families in lower socioeconomic groups. But one size doesn’t fit all in education and there is no reason why it should, especially in a society that values diversity and recognises that the world of work is changing all the time. Curriculum reform is always contested, and no government will act without conducting its own research. But a partial relaxation of the current highly prescriptive Ebacc is a sound recommendation that deserves broad support.
