Like an uncomfortable sofa, the English secondary school curriculum is both too narrow and overstuffed. Standardised content in a handful of academic subjects has been prioritised over everything else, with the exception of an accountability system that places intense pressure on schools. This week’s House of Lords report on 11-16 education will make awkward reading for the government – not least because the committee’s chair, Jo Johnson, is a former minister and the former prime minister’s brother. But MPs and others with an interest in secondary education should consider it carefully. Its account of how schools lost their bounce is convincing.
Ditching the English baccalaureate (Ebacc) is the peers’ most eye-catching recommendation. This flagship Conservative policy requires that, by 2025, 90% of pupils should take GCSEs in maths, English language and literature, at least two sciences, history or geography, and a foreign language. Echoing earlier critics of the policy, the Lords argue that this set menu of options is too narrow. In particular, they note that the reforms of the past 13 years have led to a downgrading of artistic, technical, digital and practical learning. Rightly, they call for a review of the national curriculum’s status, along with a more diverse approach to assessment. As over 80% of English secondary schools are academies, and do not have to teach most of the national curriculum, a more balanced list of subjects should be considered.
