Introducing multi-year performance tables, scrapping pupil-level SATs data and reviewing the English Baccalaureate are among proposals in a new report by a think tank known to be influential in shaping Labour policy. The Institute for Public Policy Research has published on “navigating the tensions” in England’s school system today. The policies are aim at “dialling down the stakes” on school accountability and cover key areas targeted for reform by Labour, including the curriculum and assessment. The report is authored by Loic Menzies, Will Yates and Billy Huband-Thompson. The Centre for Education and Youth also contributed. Here are five key findings … 1. Multi-year league table measures to ‘release pressure valve’ The think-tank said it 鈥渋t is time to move away鈥� from single-year measures in performance tables which can 鈥渕ake or break鈥� a school and incentivise 鈥渜uick fixes鈥�.&苍产蝉辫; Instead, using 鈥渕ulti-year, rolling averages鈥� in headline performance measures could 鈥渞elease the pressure valve鈥� but without undermining the government鈥檚 ability to hold schools to account. It鈥檚 an idea that has, including a research paper by Menzies and John Jerrim in 2020. The also proposed using comparative performance data – based on a three-year average – as it was the “most reliable data indicator”. 2. School-only SATs grade ‘could lighten testing burden’ IPPR said the government could review whether pupil-level grading is needed in key stage 2 SATs, and instead just provide a school-level measure. Children would still take a test, but they wouldn鈥檛 be given individual grades. Instead the school would have an overall measure. The Schools Week Labour education policy tracker The think-tank added that pupil-level results are not needed for school accountability, system monitoring or setting a school-level baseline for progress 8. If pupil-level reliability were not needed, it means the primary school exams could be shortened. This would lighten the 鈥渢esting burden鈥� and reduce the predictability of exam content, the think tank said. 3. Make curriculum space for 鈥榳ider enrichment offer鈥� There is a 鈥渟trong case鈥� for reviewing what is considered core in the curriculum, IPPR said. Any future curriculum should 鈥済uarantee all pupils an entitlement to a common body of knowledge and skills鈥� informed by 鈥渙ngoing, subject-based debate鈥�. Schools should be allowed to shape a 鈥渃ontext-informed鈥� curriculum, too. But it should create space for a 鈥渨ider enrichment offer鈥�. For instance, more opportunities beyond the school gates. Schools should focus on pupils achieving 鈥渃ompetency鈥� in a small number of core subjects, but then given more opportunities to learn in independent ways, such as 鈥渞eal-world projects鈥�.&苍产蝉辫; Labour has committed to a full review of curriculum and assessment, including looking at a a broader curriculum, 鈥渟o that children do not miss out on subjects such as music, art, sport and drama鈥�. 4. Review to consider scrapping EBacc or subject shake-up IPPR said it is time for a review of the Conservative鈥檚 five subject English Baccalaureate – including its components, but also whether it should continue to exist. They added the EBacc has 鈥渟ignificant influence鈥� over curriculum at key stage 4 and 5 and there is 鈥�no transparent rationale for which subjects are included鈥�.&苍产蝉辫; The review should reconsider which subjects are included – such as whether this is a place for arts and technology, something the Labour party has also proposed. IPPR also wants to increase 鈥渢he breadth of subjects鈥� taken by A-level students. 5. Schools as hubs for specialist support Schools should be given funding to act as 鈥渉ubs鈥� for specialist provision and enrichment, IPPR argues. The think-tank said schools are 鈥渋deally placed鈥� to improve access in these areas. But gaps in evidence around 鈥渇ull service extended schools鈥� need to be filled in, they added. The wellbeing and mental health of pupils also needed to be assessed in a 鈥渕ore granular and comprehensive manner鈥�.&苍产蝉辫;