VIEWS & OPINION
Labour need look no further in its curriculum review – a solution already exists
Comment by MARK WILSON, Head of School at ACS International School Egham
When the Labour party was voted into power on 4 July, one of its most pressing priorities was to ‘modernise’ the UK national school curriculum, with the Prime Minister himself commenting: “I (will) introduce a curriculum fit for the digital age.” Two weeks later, on 18 July, a Curriculum and Assessment Review was launched to study the current education model, collect evidence and share its recommendations, due to be published in 2025.
The current system is trapped by tradition and isn’t teaching students the skills they need for the future. Instead of inspiring the next generation of global thinkers and doers, the emphasis is firmly placed on the regurgitation and memorisation of facts. Highlighting this, artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming every walk of life, yet students studying the national curriculum are not properly taught how to harness it and use it ethically. Similarly, UK employers are desperate for the future workforce to have skills such as critical thinking, yet students studying the national curriculum are not actively encouraged to develop them.
Starmer’s vision for the future of education includes several key components, namely it must span from Key Stage 1 through to Key Stage 5, focus on both knowledge and future skills, and ensure that every young person leaves school with the best life chances. As I was reading the unveiling for the first time, I thought it had been taken from the International Baccalaureate (IB) website. The IB, at its core, believes in an identical philosophy: to develop students into resilient, self-motivated young people who contribute to making the world a better place.
The IB, like the Prime Minister’s plan, is structured so that it caters
for students aged 4 to 18, through the Primary Years Programme (PYP), Middle Years Programme (MYP), Diploma Programme (DP) and Career-Related Programme (CP). This means students get a seamless, consistent and coherent educational experience, and build a strong foundation for future success. In each of these programmes, students study digital tools, how to be a global citizen and undertake interdisciplinary learning so that they can make connections between individual subjects and the wider world. The emphasis on future skills alongside subject knowledge is, again, a fundamental part of the IB and I am relieved that Starmer has focused on this too. So, if we have this globally recognised curriculum that has been taught in schools for over 50 years, surely the Prime Minister and his party do not need to spend time and resources reinventing the national curriculum? A tried and tested model, which encompasses his aims as well as the needs of businesses around the globe, already exists, and it is called the IB. The results of this speak for themselves. In the UK, Diploma Programme (DP) students are three times more likely to enrol in a top 20 university compared to their equivalents, 40% more likely to obtain an honours degree and 38% more likely to be involved in further education. Furthermore, the average salary for a DP graduate who studied Mathematical Sciences at university is £30,000, compared to £22,000 for A-Level students who completed the same course. All educators in the UK will agree that it would be wonderful to witness students learning across a consistent continuum to develop skills and competencies that will help them thrive in the future. I see it at my school, ACS Egham each and every day. And, my question to Sir Starmer would be: is the new curriculum going to have the courage to truly let go of an outdated and uninspiring system? And instead of repackaging an existing model, why not embrace one that is already being delivered to more than 1.95 million students across the world with an incredibly positive impact?
In defence of nature: the case for teaching natural history at GCSE level
Comment by ELLEN BRADLEY, Co-Director of UK Youth 4 Nature
It is not often that an idea emerges that receives support from the entire political spectrum, young people, teachers, parents, business leaders, farmers, conservationists and healthcare professionals. Through my work, I have crossed paths with all of these groups and I am yet to hear a single person tell me that they think a Natural History GCSE is a bad idea. This is not a conservation or a climate change GCSE; it will teach young people to observe, identify and understand the wildlife on their
doorstep. Done right, this subject has the power to engage generations of nature-lovers and to help young people uncover new layers of wonder in the world around them. Understanding and caring for nature is the foundation for respecting and protecting it.
Students will also benefit from improved connection with nature. Young people are battling a growing mental health crisis and nature has been proven to be a powerful tool in improving mental health. As the Co-Director of UK Youth 4 Nature, a network of 16-35-year-olds calling for action on nature, I have seen first-hand the power of a little nature knowledge to ignite curiosity and delight in young people. In April 2023, after 11 years of campaigning, led by Mary Colwell, the Department for Education (DfE) announced that the Natural History GCSE would be taught in schools across England from September 2025. That deadline has been missed and a start date of 2026 was promised. We are still waiting for a subject criteria to be announced and a plan to be shared for supporting schools and teachers to deliver the new subject –
January 2025
this second part is critical, we cannot expect teachers, already under huge pressure, to deliver this alone.
As frustrating as the original delay was, we are now concerned that it will stretch further. The new Labour government has labelled the GCSE as a Conservative initiative and says that it needs to be reassessed. Colwell says: “Nature education cannot be seen as a political football, we are in a biodiversity crisis and we need a nature-literate society to tackle the huge environmental issues we face. The idea for the GCSE was mine and it was pushed through the political and educational corridors by former Green Party MP Caroline Lucas and Tim Oates from Cambridge Assessment. The GCSE is not aligned to any party, but it is needed by everyone. I sincerely hope the Labour Government will see sense and progress it immediately.”
Our current education system is failing to give secondary school children the chance to understand nature, and that general disconnect is following them into further education. I studied biology at university and was dismayed to discover how many of my peers – with first class biology degrees under their belt – cannot name even the most common of our native species. We desperately need this GCSE, which is why UK Youth for Nature is supporting the campaign and calling for the Department for Education to deliver on their promise of bringing this new subject into the classroom without delay.
This new subject is a unique and hugely exciting opportunity for us to do something for young people, for nature and for a future green economy. But it cannot happen while plans gather dust on a Westminster desk. The best time to start this GCSE would have been ten years ago, the second best time is now.
www.education-today.co.uk 29
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 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68
