The interim findings of the new Curriculum and Assessment Review finally lands on our desks

Image: Stock Images

There's been a lot of chatter, hasn't there? The interim findings of the new Curriculum and Assessment Review finally lands on our desks, hot off the digital presses, and those of us who've been around the educational block a few times sit up and wonder: what's changed? What have they found this time?

Well, according to Professor Becky Francis and her team, we've got issues. Big surprise, right? They've pointed out not just a handful, but fourteen areas (at least that's how many a few media outlets have run with) needing attention. Let's unpick them a bit.

First, equality. Turns out our curriculum isn't quite as fair as we'd hoped—students with SEND and disadvantaged backgrounds are still trailing behind. Education should lift everyone, not just those who start higher up the ladder.

And then, there's the matter of breadth and depth. Too much content squeezed into primary years, leaving little room for real mastery. Key Stage 3 sees many schools rushing into GCSE territory, narrowing experiences rather than broadening them.

EBacc? Yes, that one's back in the spotlight. Is it constraining student choice rather than enhancing it? Maybe our curriculum should be wider, richer, more open to the arts, and vocational routes. That's something worth thinking about. It’s a real mix isn’t it? We have too much squeezed in, but not enough depth. Squeeze more in? Take more out? Who knows the answer to this question? Seemingly not the curriculum review team. Not yet at least anyway. And that sort of sums up much of the interim findings really. We have noticed some things, we don’t know what to do about those things.

The review also says we need to keep pace with our changing world. Digital literacy, media literacy, sustainability, climate change—topics urgently demanding classroom time.

Representation and diversity can't just be side notes, either. Pupils need to see themselves reflected in what they learn, recognising the world around them and their place in it.

Now, assessments: there's a lot of testing going on. Primary assessments are staying, but perhaps they need refining. SATs, writing, spelling, punctuation and grammar—can we do better, more thoughtfully? (Incidentally, I submitted evidence AGAINST the GPS tests for this review). Meanwhile, GCSE students face between 24 and 31 hours of exams—far higher than elsewhere. Let's pause and consider if that's the best way forward.

Qualifications need clarity, too. Pupils, parents, and employers all benefit from clearly defined pathways, whether academic or vocational. And speaking of vocational pathways, there's work to do for 16 to 19-year-olds—ensuring the system truly supports all learners.

A-levels? It seems stable enough for now, but GCSE numbers might need trimming—not fewer subjects, necessarily, but perhaps fewer exams. It's about striking the right balance, isn't it?

What's next? Well, deeper dives into individual subjects, more discussions, and finally, recommendations coming this autumn.

**Just a final thought here, by the by…**

Number of times the review mentions mental health: 0

Number of children referred to mental health services last year: 949,200

Number of children still awaiting mental health support: 270,300

Number of children who have waited more than two years for mental health support: 40,000

Can we at least consider children’s mental health a little more in the full review please?