The direction of policy: refining the National Curriculum in England

Tim Oates

Chair of the Expert Panel advising on National Curriculum Review 2011

Group Director Assessment Research and Development Cambridge Assessment

The National Curriculum Review 2011

Background: the need for reform

‘Fine-tuning’ or ‘fundamental re-orientation’

1989, 1995, 1999 continuous refinement – 2009 KS3/4 dislocation

A break with principles

But…a failure of ideas?

Schizophrenia of ‘…the State overprescribes…but if it’s not in the National Curriculum we won’t teach it…’

Models of ability – progression

Diversity in the system – dampening of innovation

Views of the aims of schooling and the status of ‘knowledge’

Why the concept of ‘future’ curriculum is vital

- The undue pace of change, ripping capacity from the system- The role of stability in monitoring and fine-tuning systems- The need for principled change

Attending to the precise form of knowledge in a National Curriculum

- The skills versus knowledge dichotomy; observation, mathematising- Attending to true signals regarding important capitals; Bynner, Vignoles- Importance of capitals for social cohesion and reduction of inequalities- The ‘powerful knowledge’ thesis, a radical shift in thinking- QCA futures as future 2, proposed curriculum as future 3

- A curriculum for 30 years? - The pattern of the change cycle

Policy potential: understanding the relative performance of different national systemsthrough ‘control factors’

1 curriculum content (nc specifications, support materials, etc)2 assessment and qualifications3 national framework for qualifications4 inspection5 pedagogy6 professional development 7 institutional development8 institutional forms and structures (eg size of schools, education phases)9 allied social measures (linking social care, health care and education)10 funding 11 governance (autonomy versus direct control)12 accountability arrangements13 labour market/professional licensing 14 allied market regulation (eg health and safety legislation; insurance

regulation)

Evidence paper November 2010

The tendency towards introspection Benefits and ills The importance of subjectsClarity in statutory elementsConcepts, principles, fundamental operations and key knowledgeThe importance of transnational comparisons‘Coherence’ and ‘curriculum control’

benefits 1 The concept of ‘entitlement’ has been highly effective in raising attainment (Chitty C 2004; Colwill I & Peacey N 2003)

2 Structure progression in the National Curriculum has reduced inappropriate repetition of content as children progress through education (Chitty C op cit; Evangelou et al 2008) 3 The rate and pattern of pupil progression has been enhanced (Chitty C op cit; Tymms P 2004; Whetton et al 2007)

4 Balanced coverage has emerged in the primary phase, particularly in respect of science (Harlen W 2008)

5 The common structure has supported more effective pupil transfer, which previously affected vulnerable groups of children in particular (Dobson J & Pooley CE 2004: Strand S 2002) 6 The curriculum entitlement has enhanced performance of girls in maths and science (Machin S & McNally S 2006)

7 The structured approach to content and assessment has led to identification of issues such as the Key Stage 3 dip (Powell R, Smith R, Jones G, Reakes A 2006; Doddington C, Flutter J & Rudduck J 1999)

8 The National Curriculum has led to higher expectations of young people (Barber M 2002; Hopkins D 2001; Tabberer R 1997)

ills

However, problems have accumulated in respect of:

1 Acute overload, with resulting pressure on teachers to move with undue pace through material and encouraging a ‘tick list’ approach to teaching (Black P & Wiliam D 1999; Alexander R (ed) 2010; Dearing R 1994; House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee 2008)

2 All groups clamouring to ensure that subject content which reflects their interest is included in the ‘core’ content of the National Curriculum – leading to a lack of clarity as to what should legitimately be included, or not included (Rawling E 2001)

3 Overbearing assessment with adverse impact on teaching and learning (Black & Wiliam op cit; Pollard A, Broadfoot P, Croll P, Osborn M & Abbott D 1994; ARG & TLRP 2009; Mansell W 2007), with specific problems emerging in relation to narrow drilling for tests (Pollard A, Broadfoot P, Croll P, Osborn M & Abbott D op cit; ARG & TLRP op cit; TES 2005) and a failure of the assessment to provide policymakers with robust information on national standards (Oates T 2005; Statistics Commission 2005; Tymms P 2007; Massey A, Green S, Dexter T & Hamnett L 2003).

The National Curriculum 1995 and 2007

Background to the reforms: a fundamental shift in underpinning principles

The National Curriculum 1995

Chemical Reactions

i. that when chemical reactions take place, mass is conserved;j. that virtually all materials, including those in living systems, are

made through chemical reactions;k. to represent chemical reactions by word equations;l. that there are different types of reaction, including oxidation and

thermal decomposition;m. that useful products can be made from chemical reactions, including

the production of metals from metal oxides;n. about chemical reactions, e.g. corrosion of iron, spoiling of food, that

are generally not useful;o. that energy transfers that accompany chemical reactions, including

the burning of fuels, can be controlled and used;p. about possible effects of burning fossil fuels on the environment.

Science - key stage 3Materials and properties

National Curriculum 2007

Chemical and Material Behaviour

In their study of science, the following should be covered:

a. chemical change takes place by the rearrangement of atoms in substances;

b. there are patterns in the chemical reactions between substances;

c. new materials are made from natural resources by chemical reactions;

d. the properties of a material determine its uses.

Where are we now and why?

Science in the National Curriculum

ATs statements of attainment

1991 Original specification 4 KS3 96 KS4 139

1995 Dearing Revision 5 KS3 166 KS4 221

1999 QCA-led revision 4 KS3 121 KS4 189

2007 QCA-led revision 4 KS3 37 KS4 30

- Dramatic contraction in 2007- Mysterious reappearance, in June 2009, of the 1999 National Curriculum - Significant reduction in conceptual demand- ‘Upward drift’ in, and removal of, demanding material

- Decay of understanding of original purpose of National Curriculum- Confusion between ‘curriculum’ and ‘National Curriculum’ - Generic (imprecise) statements driven by a commitment to consensus- Confusion regarding an ‘up-to-date and motivating’ curriculum- Confusion between context and concepts

Policy potential: understanding the relative performance of different national systemsthrough ‘control factors’

1 curriculum content (nc specifications, support materials, etc)

2 assessment and qualifications

3 national framework for qualifications

4 inspection

5 pedagogy

6 professional development

7 institutional development

8 institutional forms and structures (eg size of schools, education phases)

9 allied social measures (linking social care, health care and education)

10 funding

11 governance (autonomy versus direct control)

12 accountability arrangements

13 labour market/professional licensing

14 allied market regulation (eg health and safety legislation; insurance regulation)

My conclusions regarding direction – 2010 policy paper

Curriculum coherence is crucial – a National Curriculum is one means of establishing this – note the conundrum regarding textbooks

Focus on concepts, principles and fundamental operations arranged in an age-related framework

Stable, sparse listing

Contextualisation should be controlled by teachers

No slavish commitment to a common structure across subjects, bar attending to necessary links

Rapid action allied to appropriate long-term direction

The current review

Revised specifications in thePrimary phase: English, Science and Mathematics

Initial reactions – NAHT survey summer 2012

NAHT n50054% teach 12x12, long division80% add subtract multiply and divide fractions66% algebra44% taught subjunctive88% learned names of planets in solar system90% taught foreign language, 83% in yr3

If implemented in current form 13% help 38% hinder30% make no difference19% don’t know

Detail 26% About right 47% too much 5% not enough 22% don’t know

A responsible approach to transnational comparisons(note not identical to control factors)

Character and structure of the National Curriculum (size, focus, underpinning theory, and design principles)

Curriculum coherence – content, pedagogy, assessment, support materials, drivers and incentives

Teacher quality and teaching quality

Demarcations between national requirement and school autonomy – locus of control

School ethos and balance between National Curriculum elements, taught elements and untaught elements

Family culture and national social culture

General attitude to innovation

Investment in education

Elements of comparisons….size

Note on populations Singapore 4,839,400 (world bank)

Finland 5,313,399 (worldbank)

Hong Kong 6,977,770 (worldbank)

Mass 6,593,587 (uscensus)

Alberta 2,974,807 (finance and enterprise Alberta)

England 51,460,000 (office for national statistics)

Korea 48,747,000 (worldbank)

Elements of comparison: expenditure

Public expenditure on education as % of GDP

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Australia 5.1 5 5.1 5 4.9 4.9 4.8 5.2Canada 5.7 5.6 5.1 5.2 4.9Finland 6.1 5.9 6 6.2 6.4 6.4 6.3 6.1Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China 3.9 4 4.3 4.6 4.2 3.9 3.5Japan 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.5New Zealand 6.9 6.8 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.5 6.2 6.3Singapore 3.1United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 4.6 4.6 4.7 5.3 5.5 5.4 5.5United States of America 5.1 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.6 5.3 5.7

From UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS)

Education at a Glance 2009: OECD Indicators - OECD © 2009 - ISBN 9789264024755

Indicator B1: How much is spent per student?

OECD countries

United States 31

United Kingdom 27

Finland 25

New Zealand 23

OECD average 26

EU19 average 24

Source: OECD.

Primary to tertiary

education

Table B1.4. Annual expenditure on educational institutions per student for all services relative to GDP per capita (2006)

Policy potential: understanding the relative performance of different national systemsthrough ‘control factors’

1 curriculum content (nc specifications, support materials, etc)2 assessment and qualifications3 national framework for qualifications4 inspection5 pedagogy6 professional development 7 institutional development8 institutional forms and structures (eg size of schools, education phases)9 allied social measures (linking social care, health care and education)10 funding 11 governance (autonomy versus direct control)12 accountability arrangements13 labour market/professional licensing 14 allied market regulation (eg health and safety legislation; insurance

regulation)

Some overall comparisons

Mathematics – primaryBasic structure similar to other nationsNumber curriculum narrower and less demanding Data handling broader and more demandingVisualization and transformational geometry unique to England

Science – primaryDifferent structural division - greater disaggregation in some other nationsScientific enquiry shared - but this not a structural element in some other nationsPhysical processes narrower and less demanding than majority of other nationsLife processes narrower but not less demanding overallScientific enquiry and Materials level of demand similar to other nations

Nfer study of Taipei, Hong Kong, Latvia, Netherlands, Ontario, Singapore, British Colombia, SwedenRudduck G & Sainsbury M Comparison of the Core Primary Curriculum in England to those in other high performing Countries DfES 2008

‘Stand out element’

In Primary, fewer things in greater depth

‘…Concentration on a small number of attainable goals, mostly of an academic variety or concerned with the individual’s relationship to society, rather than a spread of effort across many academic, social, affective and moral goals…’

Reynolds and Farrell 1996

The revised specifications available on DfE website http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/nationalcurriculum/b0075667/national-curriculum-review-update

English

Early acquisition, highly fluent reading by end KS2 and reading for enjoyment

Structure and range in writing

Development of spoken language

‘Language of grammar’, rules and exceptions

Cognitive development through memorising – writing and poetry

Mathematics Developing proportional reasoningWorking with decimals and fractionsSecure understanding of key concepts Fluency and confidence in four operations

ScienceSeparate sciences, for conceptual clarity Classification Life processes, inheritance, evolutionForces, physical structure, properties, states of matter, sound and light Science through the lives of scientific figures Observation, safe tests, recording

Ability models and pedagogy

Concentration on a small number of attainable goals, mostly of an academic variety or concerned with the individual’s relationship to society, rather than a spread of effort across many academic, social, affective and moral goals.

Mechanisms to ensure that things are taught properly the first time around, and that there is no ‘trailing edge’ of children who have to be returned to later (an example from Taiwan is that children have to repeat in the homework books any exercises that they got wrong in their previous homework).

The use of the same textbooks by all children, which permits teachers to channel their energy into classroom instruction and the marking of homework, rather than into the production of worksheets that is so much a feature of English teaching.

Reynolds and Farrell 1996 p56

Chasing the right demarcation between control and autonomy

Transnational analyses do NOT supply a ‘judgement-free solution’

Using the control factors Understanding patterns of incentivesThe partial role of the National Curriculum Embedding the distinction between National Curriculum and School Curriculum

Key elementsRevision of inspectionReview of EYFSReview of teacher supplyReview of national assessment Examination of role of textboooks and materials Review of capacity in Primary phaseDevelopment of a broader range of performance metrics - including EB

Prudent policy involves relaxing some factors and tightening othersRecognising that control is a system characteristic, not a top down mechanism

How much detail, in which areas of the National Curriculum?

Expert Panel recommendations

- importance of curriculum aims Yes - standards emerging from transnational comparisons Yes - considerable detail in key subjects Yes- ‘two-year block’ structure to content No- reduced scope (crucial elements) but increased specificity (greater precision) Yes- using the existing legal categories for the level of prescription in different subjects No change- retain statutory breadth to 16 but with less prescription in specification No change

- importance of curriculum coherence Yes

- change to structure of key stages - KS2 in particular No change - challenge of models of progression in primary phase Yes - assessment which links to the specifics of the curriculum – remove ‘levels’ Yes- importance of ‘spoken language’ including rich pedagogy Yes

- emphasis on teaching quality, leadership and ‘intelligent accountability’ Yes- language learning in Primary Phase yr3-6 Yes

- additional requirements (2012) to publish year on year school curriculum

The reality of the proposed changes

Has statutory breath decreased? No - and fl has been added at primary

Have overall aims of the curriculum been neglected, including 'broader aims' of education regartding development of the child? No - they've been re-inforced

Is it all about facts? No - the importance of powerful knowledge has been emphasised; deep conceptual learning is emphasised as well as 'joy of reading' 'understanding the wonder of the natural world' 'rich oral exchange'

It is over prescriptive – is increase in autonomy illusory? No - fewer things have been described with clarity and precisionm, making room for choice over high quality teaching and learning

But what if all subjects are stated in the same level of detail as Eng Maths Sci in primary? They won't be - that's one way in which things are being freed up

Does it prescribe what happens each week, each year? No - the legal requirement remains reaching a high standard at the end of each key stage - that's the existing law and it will stay that way - schools can depart from the precise year on year scheduling - the year on year specification is to bring greater clarity to expectations, not over-determine the shape of the school curriculum

Scheduling

Originally:

Phase 1 subjects – English, mathematics, sciences, and PE Specifications in schools by Sept 2012 for first teaching in Sept 2013

Phase 2 subjects – to be determinedSpecifications in schools by Sept 2013 for first teaching in Sept 2014

Now:

Phase 1 and Phase 2 - now on same timetableSpecifications in schools by Sept 2013 for first teaching in Sept 2014

Issues

The National Curriculum is important, but it is not the sole control factor – the locus of control issues are not to be underestimated – autonomy can deliver curriculum coherence but there is a lot to play for and a lot which can go wrong

Quality of teaching is critical

Focus on key concepts and secure learning

The model of progression in primary seems to be vital

Maintaining statutory breadth is challenging, and requires a subtle policy approach

Continuing problems regarding MFL and classical languages

Strong stereotypical participation in public examinations