The government’s curriculum and assessment review aims to develop a “cutting-edge curriculum” that equips children with the knowledge and skills to thrive in an ever-changing world. But how will it navigate the well-trodden and often contentious territory of curriculum debates?
The decision to appoint Professor Becky Francis as chair has been well received, and for good reason. Francis is rooted in evidence and has a thoughtful, balanced approach to complex educational issues.
The review panel itself reflects this sensibility, and its terms of reference indicate a careful, considered process rather than a revolutionary overhaul.
One of the big questions is whether the review will lead to major changes in the curriculum. While some fear a dramatic shift, early indications suggest the latter: evolution rather than revolution.
A real test will be what the review removes from the national curriculum. It’s relatively easy to suggest what should be added but the curriculum is already very full in places. Adding more may require taking some out, but what?
Decisions around content specificity will be key and careful calibration is needed to avoid overloading or under-specifying key knowledge.
Perhaps the most interesting element of the review’s terms of reference is its philosophical direction. It talks about building on the work of teachers who have created knowledge-rich curricula, while striving for a curriculum that is “broad, inclusive, and innovative”.
The review recognises the value of knowledge in the curriculum but hints at a deeper consideration of context and diversity than we’ve seen from government in recent years. It states that it will ensure the curriculum “reflects the issues and diversities of our society” and that “every child and young person is represented.”
This feels a departure from a curriculum grounded in some sort of universally shared body of knowledge. A higher profile for diversity and representation in the curriculum is welcome. It also suggests that the government is moving towards a more nuanced understanding of how we establish what knowledge is valuable and whose knowledge should be taught.
Knowledge is not just cognitive but social and real
In a paper published today, we dig a little deeper into what this shift could mean. Grounded in the work of theorists like Maton, Young, and Deng, we describe the bringing together of a knowledge-rich and ‘knower-rich’ curriculum approach.
This reflects a recognition that knowledge is not just cognitive but social and real. It exists between people as much as within and around them, shaped by the contexts in which it is taught and learned.
Building on the knowledge-rich foundations of recent years and widely adopted insights from cognitive science, this approach could place more emphasis on the identities and social context of children. It could also reset the place of teachers in curriculum-making.
This would not detract from the acquisition of powerful knowledge but complement it by recognising that learning is also about building students’ sense of self and place in the world. This already happens in many schools, but it is not currently as consciously reflected in national frameworks.
At the heart of this evolution in curriculum thinking is the idea of human flourishing. A curriculum should not only equip students with knowledge but also use this to nurture their ability to thrive as individuals in society. This includes cultivating attitudes, dispositions and capabilities as well as an understanding of key concepts.
As review panellist Zongyi Deng argues, knowledge acquisition is a means rather than an end. Through it, we allow for the “cultivation of human powers which include, not least, self-determination, imagination, critically reflected action, and a sophisticated and informed understanding of the world.”
The review’s aim to build on the knowledge-rich work of schools is wise. It ensures continuity and avoids overwhelming a system that is already under strain. But it is also exciting to see the potential for a broader, more inclusive approach to curriculum design – one that recognises the importance of knowledge and the students who come to have it.
By expanding the framing of the national curriculum in this way, the review has the opportunity to create a system that is not only knowledge-rich but also knower-rich, supporting the holistic development of all children.
Read the full discussion paper, A knower-rich curriculum: Bringing knowers into the light, here
In the ongoing debate on teacher recruitment, retention, and the improvement of education quality, I believe the issues are more profound and interconnected than commonly addressed. After 35 years as a competitor and coach in fitness and self-defense (Karate), I transitioned into teaching in 2000, earning UK Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) as a science teacher in 2003. With over two decades of experience in a challenging inner-city secondary school, I feel equipped to contribute to this perennial issue—one that was already being discussed when I entered the profession.
In my view, the fundamental problems that the Department for Education (DfE), in its various forms under different governments, has failed to tackle include:
Curriculum Reform: There is a pressing need to introduce and make compulsory subjects like ethics, philosophy, stoicism, civics, social responsibility, and character development. These subjects could help foster well-rounded individuals.
School Culture: What is the prevailing culture in UK secondary schools? A focus on values, respect, and purpose should be at the heart of this conversation.
Purpose of Schools: We must clearly define the goals of education. What are schools aiming to impart to students beyond academics?
Student Attitudes: Many students seem indifferent toward their education, often displaying minimal effort for maximum results. This culture of nonchalance hinders meaningful learning.
Leadership: There is a shortage of high-caliber, principled leaders in schools. Instead, leadership roles are often filled by mediocre educators, which undermines the potential for real progress.
Discipline: A glaring lack of self-discipline, self-respect, and self-esteem among students is pervasive. Addressing this is key to creating a productive learning environment.
Overemphasis on Certification: The educational system has become obsessed with certification, conflating it with true education. This misalignment needs to be corrected.
Teacher Workload: Excessive workloads are crippling teachers, leading to burnout, mental health issues, and physical ailments. This must be addressed to retain skilled educators.
These issues are interwoven, and only by addressing them holistically can we hope to improve both teacher retention and the overall quality of education.