Extracts from expert panel documentation relating to basic curriculum and dand t


Published on

Extracts from https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/DFE-00135-2011 relating to D&T

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Extracts from expert panel documentation relating to basic curriculum and dand t

  1. 1. Extracts from expert panel documentation relating to ‘BasicCurriculum’ and D&TThe ‘Basic Curriculum’ describes the statutory requirements for curricular provisionin addition to the National Curriculum.These are compulsory requirements butschools are able to determine for themselves the specific nature of this provision(although maintained schools cannot determine the nature of religious educationprovision). The Secretary of State is therefore not required to produce Programmesof Study and Attainment Targets for subjects and topics in the Basic Curriculum.We have considered these three options in turn and set out below ourrecommendations.Option 1 - Removal of subjects/topics altogether from statutory curriculumrequirements (i.e. removing subjects and topics from the National and BasicCurricula)4.4 An INCA enquiry was carried out to inform this review, examining internationalevidence on curriculum organisation and content.55 It shows a very strong pattern,with high-performing jurisdictions tending to promote a wide range of subjects thoughthe years of compulsory provision. High performance thus appears to be associatedwith broad forms of curriculum provision – a pattern that Ofsted also has repeatedlyrecorded.564.5 The review’s Call for Evidence also produced a clear response in this matter.Although mindful of the self-selecting nature of respondents, and also noting thatthere were some significant variations in the degrees of support for different subjectsremaining within the National Curriculum, the most noticeable outcome was that theexisting breadth of the National Curriculum was broadly supported. Indeed, althoughnot asked explicitly, 35% of respondents chose to state that breadth is a key strengthof the current National Curriculum.57 Many respondents supported the retention of artand design, design and technology, geography, history, information andcommunication technology, modern foreign languages and music within the NationalCurriculum. There was less support for the retention of citizenship.4.6 We suggest therefore that the existing curriculum subjects are retained in somestatutory form (in either the National or Basic Curricula). However, to achieve areduction in prescription we recommend that significant efforts are made to focusexisting curriculum subjects on essential knowledge only, and that the level of detailis specified carefully.Option 2 - Reclassification of subjects/topics which remain statutory (i.e. movingthem from the National to the Basic Curriculum)4.7 While there appears to be a strong argument for retaining most existingcurriculum subjects in some statutory form, we believe that the National Curriculumshould be slimmed down by reclassifying some subjects and topics as part of theBasic Curriculum. This would retain a duty on schools to teach them, but wouldenable schools to determine appropriate content, i.e. there would no longer becentrally prescribed Programmes of Study or Attainment Targets.4.8 Despite their importance in balanced educational provision, we are not entirelypersuaded of claims that design and technology, information and communicationtechnology and citizenship have sufficient disciplinary coherence58 to be stated asdiscrete and separate National Curriculum ‘subjects’. We recommend that:Design and technology is reclassified as part of the Basic Curriculum. Werecommend that design and technology programmes should be developed byschools in response to local needs and interests, which is why we take the view thata reclassification to the Basic Curriculum is desirable.Information and communication technology is reclassified as part of the BasicCurriculum and requirements should be established so that it permeates all NationalCurriculum subjects. We have also noted the arguments, made by some respondentsto the Call for Evidence,59 that there should be more widespread teaching of
  2. 2. Extracts from expert panel documentation relating to ‘BasicCurriculum’ and D&Tcomputer science in secondary schools. We recommend that this proposition isproperly considered.Citizenship is of enormous importance in a contemporary and future-orientededucation. However, we are not persuaded that study of the issues and topicsincluded in citizenship education constitutes a distinct ‘subject’ as such. We thereforerecommend that it be reclassified as part of the Basic Curriculum.Option 3 - Reduction in the extent of the specification of certain subjects/topics (i.e.requiring less detailed specification of Programmes of Study for foundation subjects)4.11 As explained in Chapter 3, we recommend that National Curriculumspecifications should provide two different degrees of detail in, depending on whetherthe subject is core or foundation. We propose the distinction should be that:(a) core subjects should be specified for each key stage through detailed Programmes of Study and Attainment Targets; and(b) foundation subjects should be specified for each relevant key stage through significant but refined and condensed Programmes of Study, with minimal or no Attainment Targets.4.12 Although there is a need for further consideration of possible variations by keystage, we recommend that:Core subjects of the National Curriculum should, as now, be English, mathematicsand science; andFoundation subjects of the National Curriculum at Key Stages 1 - 4 should begeography, history and physical education. Foundation subjects at Key Stages 1 -3 should be art & design and music. Modern foreign languages should be afoundation subject at Key Stages 2 - 4.Curriculum load and breadth at Key Stage 44.15 At Key Stage 4, unlike in Key Stages 1 - 3, we are concerned that the existingarrangements narrow the curriculum too early. We focus instead, therefore, on howthe provision of focused breadth can be ensured at Key Stage 4, which we believe ispossible without generating too demanding a requirement on schools.4.16 International evidence supporting the provision of focused breadth at Key Stage4 is extremely strong (see Annex 3) and it appears that England narrows itscurriculum earlier than many of the high-performing jurisdictions. This has theconsequence at Key Stage 4 of depriving many young people of access to powerfulforms of knowledge and experience at a formative time in their lives, and foreclosingon some pathways and choices. As with many of the changes that we feel aresuggested by the international evidence, this would place pressure on the skill baseof the existing teaching force, and we recognise that significant problems of teachershortages in specific subject areas exist. We have also taken account of the fact thata number of high-performing jurisdictions stage their schooling so that pupils taketheir key public examinations at age 17 or 18 rather than 16.4.17 Specifically we recommend that, in addition to existing arrangements, curricularprovision in the following subjects should be made statutory at Key Stage 4:geography, history, modern foreign languages (all foundation subjects within theNational Curriculum), design and technology and ‘the arts’ (both parts of the BasicCurriculum).
  3. 3. Extracts from expert panel documentation relating to ‘BasicCurriculum’ and D&T