UK National Curriculum: History, Reforms, and Analysis

Introduction

The National Curriculum is defined as a select set of standards and subjects to be pursued within a defined time frame to ensure that learners are subjected to the same learning experiences. It provides guidelines on the subjects to be taught and the learning objectives students are expected to achieve. The national curriculum's main function is to present learners with critical knowledge considered essential for an educated person. From a young age through to adulthood, learners are subjected to learning experiences that have been carefully researched and designed. The curriculum espouses the essence of human ingenuity and creativity. However, the national curriculum is only part of the larger picture in educating children (Department of Education, 2013).

The curriculum allows considerable time for other activities that learners can engage in. It serves as the central guideline for teachers to develop interesting and exciting learning experiences. As part of the wider curriculum, learners can internalize the required knowledge and skills.

The initial national curriculum in Britain was set in motion by the Education Reform Act of 1988. The original curriculum was used in both England and Wales. However, when education was devolved in Wales, the two nations pursued different national curricula (Swift, 2009). The curriculum is therefore a standardized set of content ensuring that children are taught the same material across the country. It guides which subjects should be taught and the performance standards for each area. The curriculum currently in use was initiated in 2014, introducing new content for both primary and secondary school children. Some elements were deferred until September 2015. The curriculum provides the content that teachers must teach in the various maintained schools.

Philosophical Foundations and Early Legislation

The Education for All statutory requirements were established in 1944 for children aged 5 to 13 years, alongside a three-pronged secondary school system comprising grammar, technical, and modern/vocational schools. These developments did not change the content of secondary schooling to any significant extent. By the 1970s, there was a general feeling among the public that the education system was gradually stagnating. It was widely felt that standards were not attuned to the fast-changing world and that achievement expectations were too low. These views were expressed about all levels of instruction (Convey and Merritt, 2000). Consequently, the content and status of vocational subject areas were reviewed. The then Labour Prime Minister, James Callaghan, delivered a memorable speech at Ruskin College, Oxford, that significantly affected the direction of UK education (Callaghan, 1976).

Before the implementation of the national curriculum, the preceding period is sometimes regarded as a golden age — a time when teachers had the leeway to decide what to expose their learners to (Lawton, 1980). The reality, however, is that several government-initiated programs were already undermining such autonomy in curriculum matters. The UK government introduced the Technical and Vocational Education Initiative (TVEI), deemed to address the technology gap and the need for modernization of secondary schools in relation to vocational training concerns.

The Education Reform Act (ERA) of 1988 introduced the National Curriculum for state-run schools in Wales and England, beginning in 1989. The intention was to provide learners with a broad curriculum incorporating mathematical skills, English, and science. It also included information technology, design and technology, geography, history, art, music, physical education, and a modern foreign language. The content to be taught was enshrined in law and was developed by various subject working groups, referred to as study programs related to age (DES, 1989). Study programs were defined for each age group: 5 to 7, 7 to 11, 11 to 14, and 14 to 16.

A national statutory curriculum was formally announced for Wales and England by Kenneth Baker, Secretary of State for Education, in 1987, with implementation beginning in 1988. Northern Ireland also introduced a national curriculum in 1992. In Scotland, a framework provides teachers with guidance on what they should teach (Elliott, 2005).

Callaghan's Great Debate and Its Legacy

The Great Debate, as it is still known, was launched by the then Prime Minister James Callaghan. The debate originated in a speech the Prime Minister delivered in 1976 at Ruskin College, Oxford. It is regarded as the speech that gave education reform its impetus over the subsequent decades (Adonis, 2006). The speech was intended to stir a national discussion about the state of education in the UK. Callaghan said:

"These are proper subjects for discussion and debate. And it should be a rational debate based on the facts. It is not my intention to become enmeshed in such problems as to whether there should be a basic curriculum with universal standards — although I am inclined to think there should be… The goals of education, from nursery school through to adult education, are clear enough. They are to equip children to the best of their ability for a lively, constructive place in society and fit them to do a job of work. Not one or the other, but both… Both of the basic purposes of education require the same essential tools. These are basic literacy, basic numeracy, understanding how to live and work together, respect for others, and respect for the individual. This means requiring certain basic knowledge, skills, and reasoning ability. It means developing lively, enquiring minds and an appetite for further knowledge that will last a lifetime. It means mitigating as far as possible the disadvantages that may be suffered through poor home conditions or physical or mental handicap. Are we aiming in the right direction in these matters?" (Callaghan, 1976)

James Callaghan's speech can only be compared, in its impact, to one delivered by Tony Blair in 1996 (Adonis, 2006). In the years preceding Callaghan's address, Prime Ministers had generally kept away from matters relating to education, a subject apparently not considered important enough to command their public attention. Only the Duke of Wellington had ever touched on the subject in a public forum.

The Ruskin speech ruffled the feathers of important figures in leadership. The education establishment was put on alert. According to Bernard Donoughue, a Policy Director at Number 10, the Department of Education was thrown into shock that a Prime Minister had the audacity to venture into such a sensitive subject (Adonis, 2006). Callaghan made improving schools a national matter and a priority for labour and the working class. He insisted that schooling should be a right for every child and not a privilege reserved for a select few in elite families (Adonis, 2006).

Callaghan campaigned for both more and better-quality education. He proposed radical steps to introduce standards into the sector, going beyond traditional concerns such as comprehensive education (Adonis, 2006). He addressed fine details: having listened to parents' concerns about teaching methods, Callaghan explored how co-curricular activities could be incorporated into the education system and how business could engage with schools. He broached the virtues that laid the basis for both national standards and inspection units.

The outcome of the Ruskin speech was a fierce debate in the education sector, though Whitehall remained largely complacent. It has been noted that the Labour Government failed to act decisively on education, leaving the issues to Prime Ministers Margaret Thatcher and John Major to address. The two laid the foundation for a national curriculum, a national inspectorate, and national standards. A persistent problem, however, was that programs remained underfunded and the focus tended to favour the upper half of the academic spectrum. The salient issues Callaghan raised were as relevant in 1997 as they had been in 1976. Donoughue recollects that most parents' concerns did not revolve around grammar schools versus comprehensive schools. Rather, they centred on whether children would be taught to read, write, and solve sums — whether the system would address bullying, and whether basic discipline and social skills would be instilled in their children (Adonis, 2006).

Tony Blair subsequently provided investment and reform targeted at those most in need. The reforms focused on the most disadvantaged (Adonis, 2006; Gillard, 2018). Records show that over 100,000 children aged 11 and below now achieve better literacy skills each year compared to 1997. Children admitted to primary school are 12 to 18 months ahead in spelling skills compared to three decades ago. Schools posting poor GCSE results have dropped significantly — from 616 in 1997 to 48 at the time of reporting. Schools have also employed more teachers, improving the teacher-to-learner ratio. It was also planned that all secondary schools would be rebuilt and half of primary schools would undergo similar modernization. New diplomas with specializations were programmed for launch in 2008, intended to address concerns regarding vocational education.

Even with these changes, significant work remains. Callaghan drew the analogy of the wise parent, as first noted by his mentor R.H. Tawney, arguing that the state should wish for its citizens what a wise parent wishes for their children (Callaghan, 1976). Reducing attainment gaps is essential. The number of school leavers without qualifications remains high, and one in eleven children still does not demonstrate expected literacy standards.

Reducing existing differentials is not enough on its own. Only 44% of 16-year-old children attain good GCSE grades, including mathematics and English. Five good GCSE grades could serve as the minimum achievement benchmark for all learners at the end of secondary schooling, regardless of social class (Adonis, 2006). There is also a need to continuously implement secondary education reforms if such goals are to be attained.

References

Adonis, A. (2006, October 17). 30 years on, Callaghan's words resonate. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2006/oct/17/education.schools

Boaler, J. (1998). Back to basics or forward to the future. Maths Teaching, March, 6–10.

Braund, M., Campbell, B., Cook, H., Ladds, J., & Walkington, A. (2006). A community of practice to learn to teach about ideas and evidence in science. School Science Review, 87(321), 83–90.

Callaghan, J. (1976). A rational debate based on the facts. Ruskin College Oxford, 18.

Callaghan, J. (1976, October 15). Ruskin College Speech. The Times Educational Supplement, 15.

Colwill, I., & Gallagher, C. (2007). Developing a curriculum for the twenty-first century: the experiences of England and Northern Ireland. Prospects, 37(4), 411–425.

Convey, A., & Merritt, A. (2000). The United Kingdom. In C. Brock & W. Tulasiewicz (Eds.), Education in a Single Europe (2nd ed., pp. 377–403). London: Routledge.

Department for Education and Science (DES). (1989). The National Curriculum: From Policy to Practice. London: HMSO.

Department of Education. (2013, September). The national curriculum in England: Key stages 1 and 2 framework document. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/425601/PRIMARY_national_curriculum.pdf

Elliott, J. (2005). School-based curriculum development and action research in the United Kingdom. In International Action Research: A Casebook for Educational Reform (pp. 17–29).

Gillard, D. (2018). Education in England: A history. Education England. Retrieved from www.educationengland.org.uk/history

Khan, M. A., & Law, L. S. (2015). An integrative approach to curriculum development in higher education in the USA: A theoretical framework. International Education Studies, 8(3), 66–76.

Lawton, D. (1980). The Politics of the School Curriculum. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Morris, E. (2007, February 27). What next for schools after two decades of change? The Annual York Education Lecture. York Racecourse, York.

Swift, M. (2009). England's national curriculum, 20 years on: A teacher's viewpoint. Info Brief, 15(2).

Wyse, D., & Torrance, H. (2009). The development and consequences of national curriculum assessment for primary education in England. Educational Research, 51(2), 213–228.