NAEE has invited a number of writers to comment on the current Francis Review of curriculum and assessment which was set up in July 2024 by the new Secretary of State for Education. These will appear over the next few weeks. This first post introduces the review with a number of observations. As ever with our blogs, the views expressed do not necessarily represent the views of the Association.
Perhaps the first thing to note is that the DfE is at pains to point out that this is a review of the national curriculum, not the wider school curriculum. The school curriculum includes the national curriculum, and is the one that students actually experience and which Ofsted inspects. This narrow focus is a good thing as it will leave schools a bit of wriggle room to do things that they deem important which the national curriculum ignores. As the government now intends that academies (and presumably free schools) will be required to teach to the national curriculum, this would seem to reduce the scope for innovation within the school curriculum in that sector, despite innovation’s being a key desired focus of reforms.
We are told that the national curriculum which emerges from this review will need to be “cutting edge” (the first DfE explanatory paragraph says this twice). This is never defined and hence is essentially meaningless, although, presumably, better than trailing edge. It will also have to be “rich and broad, inclusive, and innovative”, “aspirational and motivating”, and have “depth”; none all of these are defined either, but we might feel we know what some of them mean.
The old idea of a “balanced curriculum” is introduced rather late in the document, and this isn’t defined either – it hardly ever is these days. The idea of balance in the wider world (think of weighing scales) needs a theory (of gravity) to help us understand it. Similarly, the idea of a balanced curriculum needs a theory of the curriculum if we are to understand what is being proposed and why. This is lacking from the guidance given to Francis but perhaps the Review itself will propose one. These did exist, back in the time when HMI used to think it was important to think – and be seen to think – about the curriculum and education in schools – and back in those heady days when students on BEd and PGCE courses had an introduction to the theory and practice of curriculum and other foundational areas (eg, psychology / sociology) that were then deemed essential to the preparation of a teacher. A bygone age, and one prone to nostalgia.
Oddly, or not, there is no mention of the recent DfE innovations around the idea of model curriculums, and so it is unclear how these stand in relation to the Review. Last year, the DfE published a model music curriculum. The Foreword and the introduction to the document makes these points:
- The Model Music Curriculum [MMC] is designed to introduce the next generation to a broad repertoire of music from the Western Classical tradition, and to the best popular music and music from around the world.
- It is non-statutory guidance for the national curriculum in England.
- It is built from the experience of schools that already teach a demanding and rich music curriculum
- It is produced by an expert writing team led by ABRSM (one of the UK’s largest music education bodies, one of its largest music publishers and the world’s leading provider of music exams) and informed by a panel of experts – great teachers and musicians alike … .
- It is designed to assist rather than to prescribe, providing a benchmark to help teachers, school leaders and curriculum designers make sure every music lesson is of the highest quality.
- This curriculum provides a roadmap to introduce pupils to the delights and disciplines of music, helping them to appreciate and understand the works of the musical giants of the past, while also equipping them with the technical skills and creativity to compose and perform.
- It sits at the heart of the Government’s agenda for supporting curriculum music in schools during Key Stages 1, 2 and 3.
- The aim is to ensure a universal provision of music education, for all pupils in all schools.
- The MMC is a non-statutory resource that provides a practical framework through which the statutory requirements of the curriculum can be met. By setting out a model of how the curriculum can be delivered, it offers guidance and ideas for teachers, and provides a springboard from which to approach teaching.
- It has been developed with this in mind to provide a strong core set of competencies and shared knowledge. Many schools will want to go well beyond this core and to use it to supplement current practice.
- It is anticipated that supporting resources and opportunities for Continuous Professional Development will be created by numerous partners, both at a local level amongst school cluster groups, Music Education Hubs and also by national partners across the music education sector.
This was both unusual and genuinely interesting and suggested that the DfE (under the last government), which had set its face against ever revising the national curriculum, was doing just that on the quiet. A model history curriculum is (or was) also planned [Note 1]. Others were set to follow, but not for environment / sustainability because that’s not a subject and it’s subjects that matter to the DfE, not the spaces between them, their intersections or the synergies to be had from bringing them together. Maybe Francis will learn from the model curriculum idea and run with it. Time, as usual, will tell.
My final point is that, however the Review turns out, curriculum is always, as Denis Lawton pointed out in his book Class, Culture and the Curriculum, a selection from the culture of a society which should be appropriate (and age-appropriate) for all children. This is why curriculum making is always a battleground of ideas and a jostling for power and influence over that selection. It follows that such curriculum making needs as many groups and interests as possible to participate. We hope that the series of comments that follow this introduction will nudge you into taking part in the Review and having your say.
Note 1: On September 7th, The Times reported the cancellation of model history curriculum project. “Sources in the education department confirmed that the review had come to an end, but said its work would form part of a wider review of the curriculum started by Phillipson. Labour has said that this will create a curriculum that “reflects the issues and diversities of our society, ensuring all children and young people are represented”.
…………………………………………….
William Scott
University of Bath