The current exam system fails a third of students who do not achieve five GCSEs at grade 4, the chair of the government’s new curriculum review panel has warned as she launched a call for evidence.
Professor Becky Francis said a disproportionate number of these young people were from economically disadvantaged backgrounds and their life chances were being stymied.
Speaking to Tes ahead of the launch of an eight-week consultation on the curriculum and assessment review, Professor Francis also warned that “too many young people are not meeting the expected levels at key stage 2 and then aren’t catching up”.
Today the review, which was announced by Labour in July after the election, has begun a consultation calling for evidence.
The consultation covers a range of specific areas, including how best to provide “an excellent foundation in English and maths”, support for children from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, and access to a broad and balanced curriculum.
Respondents will also be asked about the current assessment and school accountability systems, including performance league tables.
Professor Francis told Tes that the review could make recommendations about the future of exams or the current GCSE English and maths resits policy.
However, she said that it was “in the foothills”, having only just started. She added: “Once we collect the evidence back...we will be able to then appraise that and make our recommendations.”
Experts have previously called for governments to rethink compulsory GCSE resits for students who do not achieve a standard pass in English or maths.
‘Much to be done’ on the curriculum
In a foreword to the call for evidence today, Professor Francis said there was “much to be done to ensure that all children and young people gain the foundational and advanced learning that sets them up to achieve, thrive and foster a lifelong love of learning”.
However, she stressed that the review would be about “evolution, not revolution”.
Professor Francis described the review as “crucial” if the country is to prepare all pupils for the future “and to confront the divides that perpetuate the class ceiling”.
“The reality is that we continue to fail the third of our young people who do not achieve five GCSEs at grade 4 or above age 16, a disproportionate number of whom are from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds,” she said.
“There are subsequently fewer clear, well-recognised routes available to these young people at 16-19, resulting in a stymieing of life chances.”
Professor Francis also acknowledged an “urgent need for a sufficient supply of high-quality teachers”.
She told Tes she recognised that “there is currently very low capacity in the system”.
She said that ensuring the reviewed curriculum and assessment package is fit for purpose and allows flexibility in teacher delivery “can only help the experience of the classroom teacher” and she hoped there “might be a positive knock-on” effect in terms of teacher supply.
“But, obviously, this will take time to implement and I’m hopeful that, in the meantime, the teacher supply issue will be positively impacted and turned around,” she added.
Professor Francis said she thought the sector had moved beyond binary debates about knowledge versus skills.
“I don’t think that anybody debates the need for a knowledge-rich curriculum.”
She said that the question reflected in the call for evidence “is whether there are also particular skills that need development or that young people would benefit from, which may be either underplayed or missing in the curriculum at present”.
The review will also look at whether “new knowledge should be built into curriculum subjects, or whether some should be developed outside the classroom through co-curricular or extracurricular activities”.
The Department for Education previously said the review would focus on supporting children and young people from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, those with a special educational need or disability and those who are otherwise vulnerable.
In the call for evidence, published today, the DfE states that it is aware that, in some education settings - special schools for example - “delivery of the curriculum may need significant adaptation in order to meet the needs of those who receive it”.
Professor Francis told Tes that the review would not look at specific institutions, but is “very focused on inclusion”.
“I’m not sure it’s useful to separate out institutions, especially when we’re focused on the national curriculum, but of course, we absolutely welcome the views of all parties in regard to the call for evidence.”
Review will look at impact of accountability
In the call for evidence document, published today, the DfE acknowledged that curriculum and assessment “are inextricably linked to other aspects of the education system, including accountability, inspection, pedagogy and structures”.
As a result, the review will make recommendations in this area, the DfE said, and will “offer commentary on the impact of accountability on the curriculum and assessment system, and how planned changes should interact with the system as a whole”.
Ofsted announced earlier this month that a consultation will take place on a new school inspection framework and report card system, to be introduced in September 2025. Formal consultation is set to begin after Christmas this year and a new framework is to be developed and piloted before the summer holidays.
There have been concerns that Ofsted’s new inspection regime will be set up before the curriculum and assessment review has published its recommendations.
Professor Francis said there was “an exciting opportunity for us to look again at accountability as a profession and as a system, and actually to work in collaboration and in parallel to ensure that we improve efficacy”.
For the latest education news and analysis delivered every weekday morning, sign up for the Tes Daily newsletter
