I know what Tim would have said about the curriculum and assessment review. We talked about the need for it often. Our book, About Our Schools highlighted two important failings of our system.
First, there are no agreed, statutory purposes for schooling in England, so schools are subject to the whims of education secretaries. Even when the national curriculum is reviewed and in place, new content is added, based on current political issues.
So, the first thing we need, as Tim argued, is a clear statement about what childhood and youth should be like and how schools help to achieve this. Agreement on this would guide the secretary of state over an agreed period of, say, seven years.
Second, previous versions of curriculum have been handicapped by not considering assessment and examinations at the same time, nor the pedagogic approach needed to ensure success for pupils. We likened it to a ‘three-sided wheel and a very bumpy ride’. The current review does include both curriculum and assessment and that is to be applauded.
Next, Tim and I would discuss the structure of learning. As a nation, we never recognise that a curriculum must meet the needs of children, helping them to climb from early years into adulthood with rich, fulfilling and nurturing experiences while also meeting the needs of the economy, employers and universities with a pathway to higher-level qualifications.
Tim was vexed that one-third of our children are destined for failure with our examination system based on norm-referencing. We despaired about the limited progress made since the Newsom report of 1963, which exposed the neglect of ‘half our future’.
We’ve now reduced that to a ‘forgotten third’; is that the extent of our national schooling success over 60 years?
The vital step in assessment would be a move to criteria-referenced exams. That would allow pupils to take exams when ready rather than on a day shared with everyone else born in the same year. We could also look at modular, project-based, incremental exams and more practical assessment.
A curriculum must meet the needs of children
We recognised the imperative of focusing on equity in learning and achievement. Our system’s impact on children in poverty or under-served by society or with additional learning needs have not been sufficient. Nor have we paid enough attention to the issue of race. We must now address these issues coherently.
We would smile, perhaps grimace, that the new review might see the usual rush to polarities.
It is possible to teach knowledge [ITALS] and skills. We can blend subject specific [ITALS] and interdisciplinary learning. We can have practical and creative learning [ITALS] and scholarly and academic learning.
It can’t be an either/or. Crucial experiences should be the right of a young person. The arts, sport and practical subjects should be at the heart of a curriculum, not additional, optional areas. Of course we want ‘the basics’, which should include the long-neglected oracy.
And a relevant curriculum can’t ignore current societal issues. From changing childhoods to an ageing population, and from AI to sustainability to our legacy of history: such issues have to be addressed.
They should be taught by qualified teachers, so teacher training needs investment to overcome the deplorable shrivelling of recent years. We would hope those teachers could use their skills, free from the constraints of metronomic timetabling and the perverse need to generate evidence for accountability.
Tim always argued for ‘guarantees’ that children would have opportunities like residential visits, performances and tournaments. I would say that schools should see such experiences as integrated aspects of their curriculum, not a parallel offering.
Good schools take every opportunity to teach what pupils need to learn: health, finance, English, mathematics, humanities, languages and personal qualities. Children should see themselves as linguists, artists, scientists and so on and should be confident, ethical, responsible citizens.
They are our future plumbers, doctors, engineers, clean energy innovators and craftspeople. Many will do jobs our society needs but few of us can face or imagine.
The review is an incredible opportunity. Becky Francis has a mammoth task. She would have had Tim’s blessing and support and she will have mine.
Unfinished Business: The life and legacy of Sir Tim Brighouse – a tribute and a call to action is available now
Your thoughts