The “erosion” of history as a subject has been reversed, according to Ofsted in a new report looking at how the subject is being taught in primary and secondary schools.
The watchdog also praised the subject knowledge of teachers, but noted that some staff were spending “significant time” outside of dedicated working hours to develop this.
The inspectorate has committed to producing subject reports based on research visits to schools as part of its emphasis on the importance of curriculum.
The Rich encounters with the past: history subject report is based on evidence inspectors gathered from subject visits to a sample of 25 primary and 25 secondary schools carried out between July 2022 and April 2023.
Here are its key findings:
1. The erosion of history as a subject has been reversed
In a survey focused on history teaching in 2011, Ofsted raised concerns about the marginalisation and integrity of history in schools. It says that evidence from its recent research visits reveals that the position of history in schools is “much more secure now than it was 12 years ago”.
“In most of the schools we visited, history was highly valued by leaders and teachers, and pupils were given enough time to study the subject. The trend towards erosion of history as a distinct subject appears to have been reversed,” Ofsted said.
Ofsted also revealed that the gap between the quality of history education in primary and in secondary schools appears to have closed.
It added: “We were particularly impressed by the security of primary school teachers’ subject knowledge, given the pressures of teaching a wide range of subjects.
“The overall quality of history education has improved, but there were significant differences in the quality of history education between schools. However, in most cases, we found similar strengths and weaknesses in primary and secondary settings.”
2. Teachers ‘working outside dedicated working hours’ to build up subject knowledge
Ofsted said that it often found individual teachers who had committed significant time outside dedicated working hours to develop their content knowledge, including those in primary schools, where teachers teach a range of subjects.
It said that most teachers had secure content knowledge of the topics they were teaching. In some schools, leaders supported and developed teachers’ knowledge systematically.
It said that in most schools, however, guidance and training on effective approaches to teaching and assessment in history were limited.
3. Significant work on curriculum in recent years
Inspectors found that, in recent years, there has been “significant” work done in the large majority of primary and secondary schools it visited to “develop a broad and ambitious curriculum in history”. Ofsted said this work is having a significant impact on the quality of education that pupils receive in history.
In the large majority of the schools Ofsted visited, it said leaders made sure that there was enough time in the timetable to teach a broad and ambitious history curriculum. Pupils studied a wide range of historical periods.
It said that in a few schools, curriculum planning was less effective. In those schools, teachers focused on superficial aspects of the past. It has given an example of reducing Egypt at the time of the Pharaohs to the pyramids and mummies “without exploring deeper features of Egyptian society and culture”.
4. Concern about ‘disciplinary knowledge’
Ofsted’s report also looks at how schools approach teaching disciplinary knowledge in history. This refers to knowledge about how historians and others study the past, and how they construct historical claims, arguments and accounts.
The report said that curriculum plans relating to disciplinary knowledge were “typically not ambitious enough”.
It added: “The teaching of this was less effective than it could be. The complexity of disciplinary traditions and approaches was often misrepresented. We saw just a few schools where pupils developed more complex knowledge over time of how historians study the past and construct accounts”.
5. Primary schools teach local history well
Ofsted’s report highlights that primary schools taught local history “particularly well”. It said that schools were particularly successful in developing topic knowledge in local history.
The report added: “In just over half the schools visited, including in some schools where this was weaker in other topics, teachers had successfully developed rich and connected knowledge of time and place when teaching pupils about history in their local area.”
6. Concern over expecting pupils to make their own judgements
The report said that in nearly half the schools, teachers expected pupils to make their own judgements, for example on sources of evidence, without having developed the secure historical knowledge to be able to do this meaningfully.
The report said this approach often led to pupils having less secure knowledge of the past and misconceptions about the work of historians.
However, the report added that in just over half the schools visited, teachers’ pedagogical decisions were designed well to make sure that pupils could learn new material. In these schools, teachers drew on their secure subject knowledge to make the past meaningful for pupils.
7 Support for SEND pupils a priority
Ofsted said that in all the schools visited, support for pupils with special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND) was a priority. However, it said this support was not always as effective as it could be.
The report said: “In most cases, this was because teachers focused on adapting the immediate task so that pupils could complete it, instead of building their knowledge and skills and addressing gaps so that they could access the curriculum in the longer term.”
8. Assessment not fully developed in primaries
Ofsted said that assessment in history was “not fully developed” in most of the primary schools visited.
It said that, commonly, teachers made broad judgements about pupils’ progress, but did not identify or address specific gaps and misconceptions in their knowledge. Inspectors found that in around half the secondary schools, teachers used “assessment effectively to identify gaps and misconceptions in the most important knowledge they had intended pupils to learn. In the other half, this was not the case”.
