National tests for primary school pupils will be backed by the government’s curriculum review, but it is likely to call for an end to a policy introduced by Michael Gove for students taking GCSEs, the head of the review has suggested.
Prof Becky Francis, the chair of the curriculum and assessment review, said its interim findings would be released “exceedingly soon”, and that England’s education system was performing well despite the strains caused by the Covid pandemic.
Unions and parents groups had lobbied for the review to curtail testing done in primary schools, including national assessments in year 6 and the phonics test in year 2, but Francis said the review was satisfied with the current structure.
“Our appraisal is that our education architecture, such as the key stages and our national assessments and qualifications, are broadly working well, including the phonics screening check, the multiplication tables check, national tests at the end of the key stage two, GCSEs, A-levels, T-levels and some wider general qualifications at 16 to 19,” Francis told delegates to the Association of School and College Leaders’ annual conference.
She said there were concerns, however, that the English baccalaureate (Ebacc), announced by Gove as education secretary in 2010, restricted choices at GCSE level by prioritising academic subjects at the expense of subjects such as music.
“We’ve identified that some features of the current system make the delivery of a broad and balanced curriculum challenging,” she said.
“Responses to the call for evidence and advocates for some subjects suggest that the Ebacc may constrain choices, impacting students’ engagement and achievement, and limiting access to, and time available for, vocational and art subjects.”
The education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, appointed Francis last yearto head the sweeping review of England’s school and college curriculum and assessment system.
Francis said the review “recognises the hard-won successes and educational improvements of the last quarter century, and we share the widely held ambition to promote excellence. But in practice, high standards too often means high standards for some. Our ambition is high standards for all.
“We must therefore drive high aspiration and raise standards for the significant groups of young people for whom our current curriculum and assessment system creates barriers to their progress, in order to ensure the best life chances for all young people.”
The chair of the government’s expert advisory group for inclusion,Tom Rees, told the conference he backed calls to reform the way children with special educational needs and disabilities (Send) are supported. “I think we need to just acknowledge that it’s a bad system,” he said.
He explained that the growing number of children with special needs, including fast-growing diagnoses of ADHD and autism, meant the school system needed to adapt.
“If we’re talking about 40% of a school population, that’s such a big number in a classroom, that’s 12 children out of 30,” he said. “We’ve got to think about how we can make sure that schools and classrooms are able to better deal with this variation of need.”
He also said the “medicalised model” of Send as a prescriptive label was no longer useful, given the wide range of needs and abilities it covers. “I’d like to see a world where we can retire the label of Send because we’ve become much more precise in our understanding of different needs,” he said.
The shadow education minister, Neil O’Brien, accused the government of “dumbing down”. “Ministers need to start being honest,” he said. “They want to get more time for arts subjects by chopping back rigorous content in the core academic subjects.”
Source: theguardian.com
