Lizzie Crump, CairnsCrump and What Next?
More to follow as analysis rolls in – let me know any errors, amends or acknowledgements needed.
Today the final report and recommendations from the Curriculum and Assessment Review have been published, and the Department for Education has released its response. The new curriculum is set to come into force in September 2028.
This is a strong, thoughtful, rigorous piece of work – thanks to all who had a hand in it.
It has been great (and interesting!) to see that the arts and culture are the lens that the government has chosen to view this 200 page Review through; with the Prime Minister taking the opportunity to talk passionately about our subjects and how music has enriched his life. National discourse around the arts matters – and we desperately need our elected representatives making it clear to schools, parents and students that these subjects are valued and valuable.
These documents are detailed and wide-ranging and it will take some time for their full implication to be understood (do come to What Next? UK on 12th November for an expert discussion!). This post includes some headline considerations from me.
The focus on the EBacc is to be scrapped
The English Baccalaureate (EBacc) was created in part to drive take-up of History and Geography and Modern Foreign Languages, and the Curriculum and Assessment Review (CAR) makes it clear that this has not been meaningfully achieved – numbers of students taking these subjects remain in decline at A-level.
The EBacc is stranded throughout our education system in lots of different ways. Schools have been held accountable to government on their GCSE EBacc numbers for around a decade, which has meant that money, resources and curriculum time have all been diverted to the included disciplines. Government language to parents and pupils has been clear: choose these subjects if you want to progress and achieve.
Removing the EBacc as an accountability measure should help to move the dial for our decimated arts subjects – removing barriers of hierarchy (real and perceived), and giving schools permission to broaden their subject offer to their students.
It will also need to be unpicked from other places: Progress 8 and Attainment 8 (two other school accountability measures that currently weight the EBacc within them) are set to be consulted on by the Department, with a new model illustrated within the DfE response that places creative subjects on a par with language and humanities.
New curriculum content for arts subjects
The curriculum content itself will be amended; giving us the opportunity to ensure that our subjects are fit for purpose, future facing and exciting. For me – this must include real consideration of creativity, curiosity and design thinking, alongside subject knowledge and skills (preferably across all subjects).
I am particularly interested to see comments in the CAR calling for arts subject content to increase in representation and diversity, and its acknowledgement that they don’t currently go far enough. It is good too to see the Review’s overarching prioritisation on inclusion, and on closing the widening disadvantage gap. Equity for all our children has to be our joint, forensic focus.
Citizenship and wider literacy
For me, the main headline of this Review is on strengthening citizenship and introducing a stronger, earlier focus on different literacies: climate, financial, media, digital, democratic, and on a new oracy framework. As we increasingly experience polarisation, fragmentation and policy led by ideology, giving young people the tools to advocate, be heard, and to understand the systems and processes that surround them are critically important – and, importantly, are core to the long-term health of the arts and cultural sector and the creative industries.
There are other key headlines: recommendation of the introduction of V-levels – to sit between academic and technical qualifications, a call to reduce the number of hours spent in exams (though not the depth or difficulty), a call to strengthen the science offer – with an ambition for a science entitlement – and an ambition to introduce Religious Education to the national curriculum.
Evolution not revolution
Throughout this Review the team have been clear that they will be pursuing an evolution, and not a revolution; and this looks true for the arts subjects too. This is still a curriculum that values a ‘knowledge-rich’ approach, but one that acknowledges that knowledge should not be placed in opposition to skills. Dance remains in PE and Sport, and Drama within English, for example, albeit with more prominence in each. There is a very welcome recognition of the real knowledge and skills gap that can exist between those who study music, dance and drama privately out of school, and those that work through the curriculum only – and the obstacles to progression for the latter. There is potential here for the new enrichment entitlement to help level this playing field.
I would have liked too to see a recognition here that reading for enjoyment is in crisis, and needs strategies put in place to address this alongside writing, oracy, and reading for understanding.
Arts and culture and the wider-policy ecology
I’ll be interested to see how the arts and culture feature in the forthcoming enrichment entitlement and its benchmarks. Work is currently underway within the DfE, and we know too that there is a National Youth Strategy, a Schools White Paper, A National Centre for Arts and Music Education, and a Dormant Assets Strategy in the policy pipeline (as well as last month’s Post-16 education and skills White Paper and the recently refreshed Ofsted framework). It is absolutely essential that all these policies relate to, and operate in tandem with one another. In this time of reduced civic infrastructure and budget deficit, a joined-up ecology that doesn’t duplicate, and doesn’t add to the overall volume of work for our professionals, matters more than ever. Crucially, all of these policies from the National Centre to the Enrichment Entitlement will need serious, structural long-term investment if they are going to move beyond project or pilot status.
What do we need?
For any of this to be truly transformational, we will need teachers, training and real resources (all outside the scope of this review) – and we will need real space in timetabling in schools to deliver it. This means that the hard choices about slimming down content – to make space for the enrichment – will need to be made. We need to incentivise and invest in our arts subject teachers. We need facilities and well-equipped spaces. We need to also be clear-eyes and honest about the talent pipeline; where young people wish to pursue a career in the arts or creative industries, we must have routes, jobs and salaries in place to support them.
As this work moves forward we must not take our eyes off the data. As an arts sector, we have made assumptions (for good reason) that it was the EBacc contributing to decline and affecting choice over the last decade, but if the numbers don’t rise for the arts subjects, or other issues surface, we must be alive to the possibility that other fundamental barriers are at play.