SPOTLIGHT FEATURE: CURRICULUM & ASSESSMENT REVIEW
sponsored by
Foundations for the future: the Curriculum and Assessment Review
E
ducation Today’s Managing Editor, Charlotte Westwood, shares the key takeaways from the long-awaited Curriculum and Assessment Review.
kIt’s been a long time coming. Chaired by Professor Becky Francis CBE, the Government’s independent review of the curriculum, assessment and qualifications system in England began in July 2024. The review’s findings were finally published last month in the much-anticipated Curriculum and Assessment Review Final Report, Building a world-class curriculum for all.
The reason behind this review? Well, the clue is in the title of the Final Report – ‘a world-class curriculum for all’. Indeed, the review panel’s Interim Report, published in March this year, confirmed that the national curriculum was not “delivering for every child”. It hasn’t been updated in over a decade – and in a changing world, it had become clear that the curriculum needed to change too.
Perhaps most notably, pupils with SEND and those from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds have experienced longstanding attainment gaps under the curriculum in its current form. Plus, technology is evolving, impacting the way we all live and work, and necessitating an up-to-date, relevant curriculum which equips young people with the right skills to succeed in modern life.
It’s against this backdrop that the Department for Education’s (DfE) Curriculum and Assessment Review has taken place, spanning Key Stage 1 through to 16-19 pathways, and conducted in close consultation with education professionals and other experts; parents and carers, children
and young people; and stakeholders such as employers, universities and trade unions. Professor Francis states in her foreword to the Final Report: “The Review Panel and I have… sought to ensure the curriculum is fit for the future, addresses the rich knowledge and skills young people need to thrive in our fast-changing world, and encourages a love of learning.” The Final Report sets out the recommendations through which these overarching aims might be achieved, with a view to first teaching of the overhauled curriculum starting in September 2028.
What’s working – and what’s not While some of the review’s recommendations represent significant changes, Professor Francis also acknowledges the “many strengths in our existing curriculum and assessment arrangements” – strengths which should be built on.
One of these strengths is the breadth of the curriculum. At both primary and secondary level, it provides a “knowledge-rich offer” and enables pupils to study a wide range of subjects. The value of this breadth was first highlighted in the responses to last year’s Call for Evidence, with stakeholders noting that it offers pupils multiple pathways of opportunity and supports well- rounded development.
The holistic ethos of England’s Key Stage 1 and broader primary education received recognition, with the review reporting that it’s something children, parents and carers are generally happy with and should be preserved. The Review Panel also suggests retaining the current key stage
24
www.education-today.co.uk
system which is “functioning effectively overall”. In addition, the review confirms that most national assessments and qualifications (including GCSEs and A Levels) are “broadly working well”. Indeed, the strengths of the curriculum are reflected in international performance comparisons. While the COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact, the review notes the multiple instances where England is above the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) average in areas such as reading, Maths, Science and adaptive problem solving.
But for all the curriculum’s merits, the review finds areas where it is seriously lacking. It argues that SEND and socio-economically disadvantaged pupils are not sufficiently supported to reach their full potential, and that they “suffer disproportionately when the curriculum is poorly articulated, overloaded, badly organised or depends on experiences outside the classroom”. A better structured, more thoughtfully designed curriculum could make all the difference to these groups – and would benefit all pupils. As it stands, however, attainment gaps tend to widen between Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 4, and the review calls for smoother transitions between key stages.
Moreover, the problem of accessibility extends to tests and assessments, which not all pupils – including those with SEND – are necessarily able to sit.
Looking ahead to 16-19 pathways and qualifications, the review finds that not all young people are able to find options which accommodate their skillsets. There is no “aspirational alternative to A Levels and T Levels”.
December 2025
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44
