The implementation date for the new national curriculum feels far away. But in fact there is little time in which to make sense of the proposals and plan for their implementation. The final proposals will be published in spring next year, which leaves four terms for teachers to plan their response. For some subjects, particularly in primary, the changes will be substantial. At the same time leaders will be planning for the implementation of the ambitious schools white paper, which aims to drive significantly greater inclusion of pupils with special educational needs (SEND) in mainstream schools. The Teaching Commission today launches its second report, using international evidence to assess whether the revised national curriculum and the government’s SEND reforms are likely to succeed in their ambitious aims. The government is right to focus on improving the education of all children. The widening attainment gap is testimony to the importance of this. But both reforms will make significant demands on teachers and leaders. The international evidence is that is that curriculum reform brings with it a high additional workload for teachers. Teachers need extra time to acquaint themselves with the new subject requirements, with high-quality professional development and dedicated additional resources. Support for teachers We examined the government’s plans and asked whether these conditions are in place to support the profession as it works to make its proposals a reality. We found that while the broadening of the curriculum has been welcomed, concerns remain about the ability of schools to staff a broader range of subjects. Since 2010, arts subjects have seen a precipitous decline of 42 per cent in training applications, reflecting a trend that has resulted in more than 40 per cent of English state schools no longer entering any pupils for music and drama GCSEs. At the same time, the proportion of teaching by non-specialist teachers has increased from 12.5 to 13.1 per cent. Add the mandatory offer of triple science to the likely increase in uptake of modern foreign languages and creative subjects and it is not hard to see how challenging it will be for schools to recruit the right teachers, particularly in deprived areas. Another important requirement for all successful policy reform is a “whole system” approach focused on coherence of different education policy initiatives. So how aligned are the 2028 curriculum and the drive towards SEND inclusion? The answer is: not enough. Although they have common aims, these are not matched by the plans in the respective policy statements to achieve them, nor by adequate resources to support teachers and leaders. A key example of this mismatch is the retention of current GCSEs with only a 10 per cent reduction (2.5 hours) in exam time to reduce the pressure on pupils. Staged implementation The only explicit provision for low-attaining pupils, many of whom have SEND, is a post-16 level 1 stepped qualification to be offered to those who get lower grades in English and maths GCSE. Expert witnesses to the commission questioned why pupils with low prior attainment had to wait to fail GCSEs before being offered courses and learning opportunities that enable them to engage in productive learning, experience achievement and have that accredited. The report emphasises the importance of professional development and concludes that much more should be done to support the profession whose current awareness of the broad focus of the curriculum changes is very low. We recommend that the implementation of the 2028 curriculum is staged so teachers and leaders have time to absorb the new requirements, including greater “slack” in the curriculum, and that teachers are given extra time to prepare properly. One respondent in a focus group told us: “Teachers are where policy meets reality. If it doesn’t work for teachers, then it doesn’t work.” These are very wise words. If the 2028 curriculum and the SEND reforms are to succeed they should be well heeded.