Today Ofsted has published a commentary from Amanda Spielman on
some of the preliminary findings from the first phase of Ofsted’s
review of the curriculum, announced earlier this year.
The review was commissioned by Amanda Spielman to broaden
Ofsted’s understanding of how curriculums are designed, developed
and implemented by schools.
The first phases of the research found there is no shared
understanding across the sector of what curriculum actually
means, and a lack of clarity about how to plan a good curriculum.
The commentary is clear that tests and exams play an important
role in measuring pupil progress and holding schools to account.
Some level of preparation for SATs and GCSEs is sensible.
However, our research raises concerns about the intensity of that
preparation getting in the way of pupils receiving the subject
knowledge they need.
Today’s commentary says that, according to these initial
findings, this has important consequences:
• Schools are
narrowing the primary curriculum by placing great a focus on
sitting practice SATs rather than learning English and Maths and
encouraging reading for pleasure.
• Schools are
often shortening Key Stage 3 to make more time for GCSEs. This
means that some pupils never study history, geography or a
language after the age of 12/13. This is unnecessary as GCSEs are
designed to be a two year qualification.
• Low attaining
pupils are often deterred from doing Ebacc subjects at GCSE in
order to take qualifications that score more highly in league
tables.
