The government’s will examine the volume of content taught in primary school, whether the EBacc is achieving its purpose and scope out reducing the number of exams at key stage 4. But it has ruled out 鈥渇undamental鈥 changes to the number of GCSE qualifications pupils sit, and proposes keeping 鈥渟trong鈥 A-levels. Primary tests are also here to stay, although the review will look at improvements to writing and spelling, punctuation and grammar tests. The review鈥檚 interim report, , sets out four key areas it will focus on 鈥 a system that works for all, curriculum shape and content, a curriculum 鈥渇it for the future鈥 and 16 to 19 pathways and qualifications. The report confirms the review’s commitment to a 鈥渒nowledge-rich鈥 curriculum, but warned 鈥渞apid social, environmental and technological change鈥 required a renewed focus on digital and media literacy, and a greater focus on sustainability and climate science鈥. The call for evidence alone has had 7,000 responses. Here鈥檚 your trusty Schools Week key findings鈥 Reform area 1: A system that works for all 1. The system isn鈥檛 working well for everyone… The report makes clear that the curriculum is, broadly, a good one that most parents back. It 鈥渋s a knowledge-rich offer, and international comparisons suggest that the present arrangements have had a positive impact on attainment鈥, the report states. This success 鈥渞eflects a continued commitment to high and rising standards in state education across the last quarter of a century, as well as the enormous work of education professionals and leaders and the engagement of young people and their parents or carers鈥. However, excellence 鈥渋s not yet provided for all: persistent attainment gaps remain. The review will 鈥渃onsider the positive impact we can make on the outcomes for socio-economically disadvantaged young people and those with SEND with the levers that are at our disposal, while remaining aware of the wider challenges the sector faces鈥. As well as making sure the curriculum and assessment system 鈥減repares young people for life and work, the review applies a social justice lens throughout its work, applying high aspirations for all鈥, the review added. Reform area 2: Curriculum shape and content 2. Breadth of curriculum welcomed, but delivery 鈥榗hallenging鈥 The report said the most frequent theme in response to its call for evidence was 鈥減ositivity about the breadth of the curriculum at key stages 1 to 4鈥. However, it said the review also 鈥渋dentified that some features of the current system make the delivery of this broad and balanced curriculum challenging. Many respondents 鈥渃ited the trade-off between breadth and depth, noting that while the curriculum has a large variety of subjects, there can be a challenge to address them all adequately鈥. Meanwhile, advocates for the arts and some other subjects 鈥渕aintain that some subjects have been squeezed, either in relation to curriculum time, take-up by students, or both鈥. 3. Review into volume of content in primary school lessons The review heard 鈥渢hat the curriculum at key stages 1 and 2 is not effectively balancing depth and breadth鈥. 鈥淭his is reported to lead to a struggle to cover all content with sufficient depth and negatively affects pupils鈥 ability to master foundational concepts.鈥 In its next phase, the review will look at the 鈥渧olume of specified content at key stages 1 and 2 to ensure that a good level of breadth across the curriculum is achievable, while continuing to drive high and rising standards in all subjects鈥. 4. Breadth 鈥榗ompromised鈥 at key stage 3 The curriculum is 鈥渁t its broadest in terms of the number of subjects studied at key stage 3鈥. But 鈥渆vidence shows that breadth is often being compromised at this stage鈥. The volume of content to be covered at key stage 4 means 鈥渕any schools begin preparing pupils for GCSE in year 9鈥hich narrows the curriculum offer and may curtail learning in curriculum subjects not selected for further study鈥. The review also heard transitions 鈥渁re not always well-aligned between key stages, particularly between key stage 2 and key stage 3, and that there is repetition in the key stage 3 curriculum, which can cause learners to become disengaged鈥. The review will now look at the 鈥渁lignment between key stages 2, 3 and 4, assessing how breadth and sequencing can better support students to build their knowledge and deepen their understanding鈥. 5. EBacc under review The report said it had heard 鈥渢wo main barriers to achieving breadth and balance at key stage 4鈥. The first is a 鈥渜uestion of volume which is reported to challenge adequate curriculum depth and to squeeze the curriculum time available for mandatory but non-assessed subjects such as PE, RE and RSHE鈥. The second challenge 鈥渇requently noted relates to the EBacc performance measures鈥. Responses 鈥渉ave highlighted that the EBacc performance measures may unnecessarily constrain student choice (and, consequently, their engagement and/or achievement)鈥. While the report said the review remained 鈥渟trongly committed to the progress performance measures which focus on the difference a school makes鈥, it is 鈥right that we review the impact of performance measures on curriculum breadth, depth, and choice for all pupil groups鈥. 鈥淭he intention behind the EBacc to improve access to a comprehensive, academic curriculum for all should be acknowledged, but as the review progresses, we will also consider whether this remains the most effective means of achieving this objective.鈥 Reform area 3: Curriculum fit for the future 6. 鈥楰nowledge-rich鈥 commitment, but curriculum must 鈥榢eep pace鈥 The responses to the call for evidence 鈥渙ften demonstrate a continued support for a high-quality, knowledge-rich curriculum that drives excellence in education across a broad range of subjects and pathways鈥. But 鈥渞apid social, environmental and technological change necessitates that the curriculum keep pace; including a renewed focus on digital and media literacy, and a greater focus on sustainability and climate science鈥. Polling suggests young people want a greater focus on 鈥渢he applied knowledge and skills that will equip them for later life and work鈥, for instance. Although many schools teach areas like digital skills, 鈥渟ociety is rapidly changing, and bringing new opportunities and challenges, including those presented by AI, and those relating to global political developments and climate change鈥. 鈥淥ur ongoing work in this area will consider whether there is sufficient coverage of these (and other) areas of knowledge and skills within subjects, and how content can remain relevant and support young people to thrive in a fast-changing world.鈥 7. Subject-by-subject review over content balance 鈥榠nhibiting mastery鈥 The review heard that in 鈥渟ome subjects the current construction and balance of content appears to be inhibiting鈥 mastery. The causes of this 鈥渁re not always clear鈥, and while 鈥渜uestions have been raised about the volume of content, we have also been made aware of challenges with under-prescription in subjects, with some programmes of study lacking specificity. 鈥淟ack of specificity can, counter-intuitively, contribute to greater curriculum volume, as teachers try to cover all eventualities in demonstrating the quality of their curriculum; or repeat material due to a lack of clarity about what has previously been covered.鈥 The next phase 鈥will conduct closer analysis to diagnose each subject鈥檚 specific problems and explore and test a range of solutions鈥. 8. Review to identify opportunities to 鈥榠ncrease diversity鈥 The review 鈥渉eard compelling arguments that the curriculum needs to do more in ensuring that all young people feel represented, and that it successfully delivers the equalities duties to support equality of opportunity and challenge discrimination鈥. But as well as making sure that children and young people can see themselves represented in the curriculum, 鈥渋t will be important that we also make sure they encounter the unfamiliar, and have their horizons stretched and broadened鈥 Representation 鈥渄oes not and must not mean restriction to only some frames of reference for particular children or groups of children鈥. As part of our subject review work, 鈥we will look across the curriculum to examine where opportunities exist to increase diversity in representation, and to ensure that the curriculum facilitates a fostering of inclusivity and challenge to discrimination鈥. 9. Concerns over 鈥榣ack of national agreed RE content鈥 The report noted religious education and relationships, sex and health education were compulsory, but not part of the national curriculum. With RE, they said evidence suggested a 鈥渓ack of national agreed content standards has led to national disparities in the quality of provision. 鈥We will consider these points through our analysis of each different subject before publishing our final report.鈥 Reform area 4: 16-19 pathways and qualifications 10. A-levels here to stay, concerns over vocational The report found that A-levels are 鈥渨orking well鈥 and T-levels are 鈥渂ecoming an established brand鈥. But 鈥渢oo many young people are not gaining the right knowledge and skills as they progress through the system and by the time they leave formal education are not prepared to thrive in life and work. They heard concerns 鈥渃learly expressed about the technical and vocational parts of the system鈥, which serve over 40 per cent of young people. The high number of 鈥渄ifferently branded and graded qualifications means that learners and employers are unclear about the purpose and value of some study programmes鈥. This can lead to 鈥渃hurn in the system, with learners switching between courses, and, as a result, poor outcomes for them and for the economy鈥. 11. English and maths re-sits to stay, but changes signalled Pupils who don鈥檛 get a grade 4 in English, maths or both at GCSE currently have to continue to study the subjects during post-16. This is a condition of funding for sixth forms and other providers. The review said it had heard 鈥渟trong evidence that a minimum of a grade 4 in English and maths should continue to be the ambition for as many learners as possible鈥. However, 鈥渢here is also clear evidence that the condition of funding policy is not yet fully delivering its intended purpose鈥. It is 鈥減articularly concerning that a large proportion of learners studying level 2 maths and English at 16-19 have made no grade progress in these subjects during their 16-19 studies鈥. The review said that 鈥we think the expectation for study of maths and English should remain, but with greater nuance in measures to ensure that as many learners as possible can achieve positive outcomes鈥. 12. SATs 鈥榠mportant tool鈥, but review to look at SPAG and writing The review observed a 鈥渘umber of strengths in the current assessment system at primary school鈥. Assessments 鈥渞ightly focus on the core skills of reading, writing and maths鈥, it added. End of key stage 2 statutory assessments 鈥渁re an important tool in holding schools to account for the progress and attainment of their pupils, and to ascertain whether pupils have learned the national curriculum鈥 Given this, 鈥we are clear that formal assessments are an important part of key stage 1 and 2鈥. However, the review also heard concerns that the standalone end of key stage 2 assessment on grammar, punctuation and spelling 鈥渕ight lead to the teaching of textual features in isolation at the expense of a sound understanding of reading and writing鈥. 鈥We will review the curriculum and how this assessment might better equip pupils to use these foundational building blocks fluently.鈥 The review also heard concerns that the writing assessment at the end of key stage 2 鈥渄oes not validly assess pupils鈥 ability to write fluently and does not incentivise effective teaching of writing鈥. The next phase 鈥will examine how the assessment of writing at key stage 2 can be improved to support high and rising standards鈥. 13. No 鈥榝undamental鈥 GCSE changes鈥 The review said it would approach assessment reform 鈥渋n an evolutionary rather than revolutionary way, and we will therefore not, for example, fundamentally change the number of subjects that students study or are assessed in at GCSE鈥. 鈥淕iven all of the evidence, we are clear that traditional examined assessment should remain the primary means of assessment across GCSEs.鈥 But it said its call for evidence 鈥渉ighlighted areas where the system could work better for students and the education sector鈥. The impact of exams on pupil wellbeing was a 鈥渇requently raised concern鈥. Polling found 41 per cent of last year鈥檚 GCSE cohort found it difficult, while 10 per cent found it 鈥渧ery difficult鈥 to cope with stress during that period. 14. 鈥ut volume of exams under spotlight Another theme in responses was the 鈥渧olume of assessment undertaken by students at key stage 4鈥. Students in England 鈥渢ypically sit between 24 and 31 hours of exams in year 11鈥. This is comparable to Singapore but 鈥渟ignificantly more than other high-performing jurisdictions such as Ireland (16 hours)鈥. Previous reforms reduced the use of coursework and other non-exam assessment This means a student鈥檚 grade is 鈥減redominantly (or entirely) determined by a student鈥檚 performance in exams 鈥榦n the day鈥, rather than being a reflection of their performance at different points across their course鈥. The next phase of the review will 鈥渃onsider carefully whether there are opportunities to reduce the overall volume of assessment at key stage 4 without compromising the reliability of results, and therefore the trust that stakeholders have in these qualifications. It will take a 鈥渟ubject-by-subject approach to consider assessment fitness for purpose and consider the impact of different assessment methods on teaching and learning鈥. The review will “consider potential risks and trade-offs with non-exam assessments, such as deliverability (including the impact on teacher workloads), the risk of malpractice and risks to equity”.