Curriculum review pivots away from Tories’ overtly ideological approach – but is it sufficiently radical on children’s experience of education?
The DfE's approach on the curriculum has changed since last year, this review document suggests. Image: Shutterstock.
Snap analysis of yesterday's interim report of the government's curriculum and assessment review.
The government’s newly-published interim report on curriculum and assessment heralds a move away from the much more ideological approach of Labour’s ministerial predecessors. But is it radical enough?
This was the immediate response, on reading this 45-page document, which emerged into the light a mere eight months after the new government came to power.
The sense overall was of a movement towards a more balanced take on some of the debates which have polarised education in recent years. This included an acceptance of quite a few Conservative education reforms, but with some sections of this report making points which the previous administration would have downplayed, if not rejected completely.
To continue reading this article…
You'll need to register with EDUCATION UNCOVERED. Registration is free and gives you access to one article per month. But please consider a subscription which will give you full access to all the news articles and analysis on the website. As a subscriber you'll also be able to comment on each news article. as well as support our journalism and extend the reach of the site.
By Warwick Mansell for EDUCATION UNCOVERED
Published: 19 March 2025
Comments
Submitting a comment is only available to subscribers.
Thanks for this quick analysis. Overall I felt that the report was pretty conservative both in terms of the tenure and in the not wanting that much to change. The acknowledgement of some more relevance was good, and the comments on environmental and technology change is welcome as is the statement about media literacy (see what has been happening for a while in Finland), the hinting at the abolition of the eBac is also good, but overall I found the statements on accountability disappointing. A continued emphasis on the relative position in international tests ignores the changes in the scope of the data over the last 30 years as well as the 'gaming' of these in the last set. It also (as you say) ignores that rather stark areas that England performs poorly at and the large imbalance of results and achievement gaps. The acceptance of the current systems in primary (apart from a possible look at GPS) - with no look at the ways these are reported, little thinking about the place of GCSE in a 14-19 curriculum - still seemingly wedded to the individual, closed book, timed examination and no consideration that the current En and Ma (esp. Ma) curriculum contact may be unsuitable for may not progressing except in a particular way. Overall I felt the whole thing was timid in a rapid changing world surpassing rather than rising to the challenge.
Thank you for this. I'm writing a response to the CAR for English in Education and this helps me focus on the language of the report. As you say, its acceptance of diversity and modernity is welcome, but the binary of "evolution" and "revolution" begs the question: evolution from where? the truncated view of curriculuim and assessment of thec last 15 years? It's evident from the responses of the 19 (!) organisations that submitted responses on language and literacy that the profession has a more pupil-centred area of what learning means and the way things should be developing.