Education experts are warning that proposed changes to England's national curriculum lack the radical transformation needed to address systemic crises in schools and student wellbeing.
The Modest Proposals
The Francis review, published on 4th November, contained what many consider sensible but insufficient recommendations for overhauling England's education system. The report suggested reducing GCSE exam time by 10% and slightly cutting curriculum content while advocating for more focus on life skills rather than pure examination preparation.
However, Dr Rupert Higham, Associate Professor at UCL Institute of Education, expressed concern about the proposals' modesty given the severe challenges facing education. Research reveals that 80% of headteachers in England believe their role negatively impacts their quality of life, with many planning early retirement or departure from the profession.
Broader Systemic Issues
The critique extends beyond examination structures to fundamental questions about education's purpose. Dr Higham questions why GCSEs remain necessary when education is now compulsory until 18, noting that teenagers spend more time preparing for exams than engaging deeply with subject matter.
Student wellbeing represents another critical concern. Approximately 75% of 16- to 25-year-olds describe the future as frightening, with climate anxiety particularly prevalent. Experts argue that merely teaching about climate change without providing skills for substantive action could backfire, leaving young people feeling both responsible and powerless.
Creative Education's Vital Role
Caroline Norbury, Chief Executive of Creative UK, welcomed the review's confirmation that the English Baccalaureate (Ebacc) will be discontinued. The qualification had drawn criticism for excluding arts and vocational subjects.
Creative subjects provide young people with communication skills, independence and adaptability that support employability across multiple sectors, Norbury emphasised. However, she warned that progress could be undermined unless reforms extend beyond classroom walls.
The proposed new V-levels aim to simplify level 3 qualifications, but uncertainty remains about whether creative subjects will qualify for maintenance support. Unless policy connects school and post-16 education, creativity risks being abandoned at the school gate, potentially severing the talent pipeline.
Implementation Challenges
Professor Colin Richards highlighted fundamental difficulties facing any curriculum reform. He noted widespread agreement about the need for reform but significant resistance to actual change, suggesting the Francis review underplays implementation challenges.
The experts collectively argue that education must prioritise cooperation over competition and equip students with capacity for meaningful action rather than mere knowledge acquisition. They point to existing curriculum models that embody these principles, noting that many academics and teachers await opportunities to implement them.
As Dr Higham concluded, a rounded, cohesive, creative education represents one of the most powerful investments the country could make - an investment that shouldn't cease at age 16.
