This document summarizes the curriculum changes and journey undertaken by Chiswick School, a mixed comprehensive school in West London. It discusses the new accountability frameworks, national curriculum, and exam system that prompted a review. A working group researched models and recommended personalizing learning through engaging projects while ensuring progress for all. The school visited other institutions and is implementing "REAL" projects in key stage 3 and a widened key stage 4 curriculum from 2015/16 onward. Initial feedback has been positive from stakeholders.

1. CHISWICK SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
JOURNEY
www.chiswickschool.org

2. Chiswick School Context
 11 to 18 mixed West
London school
1,250 students
 Fully comprehensive
intake in terms of
prior attainment
 48% FSM
 65% Black and
Ethnic Minority

3. NEW EXAMINATIONS
FRAMEWORK
• linear Exams
• Coursework limited to
Arts/Practical
subjects
• Expanded Core
• Retakes discouraged
• Exams part of
vocational courses
• More ‘rigour”
STAKEHOLDERS
• Parents
• Staff
• Governors
• Local Business
NEW ACCOUNTABILITY
FRAMEWORK
• Progress 8
• Attainment 8
• English & Maths
• Ebacc
NEW NATIONAL
CURRICULUM
• New expanded
course content
• Focus on
knowledge over
skills
SCHOOL VALUES &
ETHOS
• Exciting learning
experiences
• Learning for a rapidly
changing world
• Celebrating
achievement
• Progress for everyone
• Inclusion
• Developing individual
talents & aptitudes
• Preparing students for
employment and adult
life
KS4 Curriculum
KS4

4. Curriculum Working Group
 Remit to research curriculum designs and
recommend change
 Made up of a cross section of staff. SLT, Core
Curriculum Team Leaders, other Curriculum
Team Leaders and main scale staff
 Started work in Jan 2014 and completed the
above remit in October 2014 though there is
more work to do on Key Stage 3

5. Journey First Steps

6. Aims
 The group discussed and looked at a range of
examples
 Ended up with an amended version of The
Curriculum Foundation’s statement
 Distilled down to three key words
Engage Personalise
Progress

7. SWOT Analysis 1
 Strengths: excellent results, much improved
teaching with teachers willing to take on new
ideas, a curriculum which until now has met
the needs of all students
 Weaknesses: many staff and most students
unused to working with or experiencing one off
linear assessment

8. SWOT Analysis 2
 Opportunities: Progress 8 allows us to focus
on achievement of all students, opportunity to
move further away from being an ‘exam
factory’ to fulfil our own curriculum aims,
 Threats: Lower attainers and ‘disadvantaged’
will find it more difficult to achieve, possible
disengagement and disaffection, considerable
exam pressure at the end of year 11 for all
students, Need for students to tackle tougher
core GCSEs

9. School Visits
Thanks to
Cramlington Learning Village, Homewood
School, The Causeway School, School 21,
Hove Park School, Canons High School

10. The results:- Key Stage 3
 REAL projects to be incorporated into year 7 to
replace our Opening Minds programme.
 Competencies to be tracked and assessed
through year 7 and 8
 Curriculum teams to be paired to deliver one
REAL project each
 SLT took decision to plan KS3 from Sept 2015
for implementation in Sept 2016 because of
capacity issues.

11. Key Stage 4 Rationale
 Wide variety of progression options
 More teaching time for Core subjects
 Students are able to focus on fewer subjects to
achieve more
 Less exam pressure in year 11
 Personalised curriculum which meets the needs and
interests of the full range of learners
 Spiral curriculum in order to reinforce learning in core
and EBacc subjects
 Enrichment/Project courses built into the timetable
 Possibilities for extra provision for weaker students (
EAL, SEN.....) built in the curriculum

12. Key Stage 4 Curriculum Plan

13. Impact to Date
 Mostly positive reception from staff with some
concern about one year courses and early entry
 Good selection of enrichment courses
 Positive response from parents and students.
Year 8 parents being surveyed
 Positive response from Governors who have
agreed the changes
 Staff on group gave positive feedback on CPD
aspect.
‘Great to take part in INSET which has a direct impact on
the school’
‘ I liked working on ideas which actually came to fruition’