Of course the Lords are right in recognising that “one size doesn’t fit all” for the secondary curriculum. However, such generalisations easily mask as much as they reveal. We have a divided and unequal education system in which, as your editorial (12 December) pointed out, a third of pupils in England do not obtain a pass in maths and English and, one could add, often give up a science and a foreign language.
It is also true, as the House of Lords committee states, that the Ebacc is too narrow. Any national curriculum should encourage access beyond the traditional academic subjects. However, the damage caused by educational inequality will not be remedied by replacing the Ebacc with art and other practical subjects. This is to treat the curriculum in isolation from the inadequate resources of state-funded schools as the main cause of low achievement and disaffection.
