Introduction
The government’s response to the Review accepts nearly all the recommendations set out in the Review itself, but goes further in some areas, most notably in proposing welcome consultation to reform Progress 8 (not recommended by the Review) and in going much further in introducing an Arts entitlement. There is also much more detail about enrichment. You can see our separate Review analysis here.
The language in the government response also differs to that of the (heavily evidence-based) Review. There is a much stronger emphasis on “revitalising” Arts education, and on curriculum content that ensures all pupils are “stretched and challenged.” There is also more detail on a timetable for implementation and more reference to wellbeing.
The two documents are closely aligned and highlight the importance of a broad and balanced curriculum entitlement up to age 16 in giving young people the opportunity to access an essential core of knowledge and skills, which can be developed further post-16. “Each subject in the national curriculum plays a vital role in a child’s education. Of course, the national curriculum is not the entire school curriculum but instead is a statement of what every child is entitled to, with schools able to build on this locally.”
The government refers to “existing blocks to progress and good outcomes” and we look closely at some of these damaging “blocks” in our analysis of the Review itself. As we state in our Blueprint for an Arts-rich education, “today’s curriculum is overly knowledge-centred and focused on what can be easily measured.” The government’s new approach will now be “tested with teachers and curriculum designers.”
In summary, we particularly welcome and support the following commitments, many of which align with our long-held ambition for education system change, as set out in our Blueprint:
- The strong emphasis on Arts education: a commitment to Arts subjects as an entitlement is outstanding news, and takes the Review’s ambition much further in spelling out a proposed revitalisation
- The commitment to a breadth of subjects, including Arts subjects, in accountability system changes
- A reduction in exam time
- A strong emphasis on breadth, representation and inclusion,reflecting a modern society and diverse communities
- The frequency with which knowledge and skills appear alongside each other in the government’s response to the Review and the acknowledgement that both are vital for children and young people
- The new emphasis on important capabilities such as critical thinking and oracy (Arts subjects have a key role to play in developing these capabilities, as we set out in our Arts Education Capabilities Framework)
- The emphasis on teacher autonomy after years of over-centralised direction (although a challenge here is the importance of Arts teachers being appropriately trained, skilled, knowledgeable and confident to take full advantage of that autonomy)
- A rich Key Stage 3 to counter the current situation of there being years of there being so much content at Key Stage 4 that qualifications content has been bleeding down into this important Key Stage
- The recognition that areas of the curriculum beyond RSHE offer opportunities to practice strategies for mental wellbeing (barely addressed in the Review)
- The commitment to an entitlement to enrichment within and beyond the statutory curriculum, including funding support and a new set of benchmarks.
As we state in the extended version of our Blueprint for an Arts-rich education, “the system change required is not a quick fix – it will take at least two parliaments to deliver”. In our Blueprint, we call for “a clear national strategy for re-establishing high-quality Arts provision for all, in the interests of all children and young people, with practical and ambitious timelines for successful implementation.”
Key now will be delivering on this new ambition. This will take time and is now in the hands of DfE. We look forward to revisiting our Blueprint to set out our Arts workforce ambitions and all that we will want to see in this altered and significantly improved curriculum, assessment and accountability landscape. But the Arts education erosion of the past 15 years will not be easily fixed. Once a workforce has been reduced and provision diminished it is hard to build back, and there will be immense challenges ahead in this vital work to develop Arts subjects, opportunities and experiences as an entitlement for every child and young person.
Summary headline points for Arts subjects
There are ten non-numbered key bullet points in the executive summary at the top of the government response, the second of which is about Arts education. We address them here before going deeper into the government response to assess the extent of the government’s commitment to valuing and rebuilding Arts provision in schools.
- The second bullet is “Improve arts education – We will revitalise arts education as part of the reformed national curriculum and through high-quality support for teachers of these subjects.”
Comment: This mirrors the Review ambition but goes further in its ambition – in spelling out a proposed revitalisation – and its focus on supporting the workforce (which was not in scope for the Review).
- The sixth bullet is “Improve accountability and assessment – We will consult on Progress 8 options to ensure that pupils can access a strong academic core and a breadth of subjects, including creative subjects. Working with the Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation (Ofqual), we will ensure we retain the rigour of exams whilst reducing the amount of time pupils spend in GCSE exams by 2.5-3 hours on average.” Detail of the reform is provided on page 45. There will now be four “breadth” slots instead of three, and at least two of these must include subjects which are Humanities, Creative (i.e. Arts), or Languages.
Comment: The Progress 8 reform the government is seeking is not recommended in the Review. It is good to see the specific mention of “creative” subjects here. It is implicit acknowledgement that the Progress 8 measure has been limiting breadth and student choice, including for Arts subjects, and it is good to know that this will be reformed in addition to the removal of the EBacc. It is good to see exam time being reduced – is 10% going to be enough to address assessment overload? CLA has long called for changes to student assessment (see our Blueprint for an art-rich education and the Arts in Schools Report). We recommended that Rethinking Assessment was used to form the basis for considering approaches to arts assessment, reflecting the use of digital learner profiles, and achievements beyond exams. Arts subjects require an accountability, assessment and progression system that is sensible, proportionate, and developed through consultation with teachers and practitioners.
- The final bullet is on enrichment: “In addition to the core national curriculum and assessment system, the government is determined that every child has access to a wide range of enriching activities that broaden their horizons, stretch their abilities and build wider skills.”
“We will provide an enrichment entitlement for every child, to ensure broad opportunities, within and beyond the curriculum, during and after the school day. We will set out a new core enrichment offer that every school and college should provide for every one of their pupils, which delivers access to civic engagement; arts and culture; nature, outdoor and adventure; sport and physical activities; and developing wider life skills. In line with their new inspection framework, Ofsted will consider how schools are meeting enrichment expectations when judging the personal development grade.The enrichment framework will be extended to further education settings, so that students gain a broad range of experiences and opportunities that help them to thrive.”
Comment: This mirrors the Review ambition but goes further in creating a specific entitlement to embed this objective. This is excellent news. We are pleased to see “arts and culture” are included as one of five enrichment areas, and to see the new enrichment framework being extended to further education. We are particularly pleased to see that this entitlement is “within and beyond the curriculum, during and after the school day”. We address this further in our separate section on enrichment below.
Some of the other objectives include:
- Creating a world-leading curriculum – this involves creating “secure understanding of the curriculum”; refreshing the programmes of study for each curriculum subject in line with the Review’s recommendations; and publishing a revised national curriculum in 2027 for first teaching in 2028, with updated GCSEs being ready for 2029. Coherence, subject mastery and depth are key curriculum principles here.
Comment: This mirrors the Review ambition but also provides a timeline for the changes for the curriculum and for GCSEs. We have always known that change will not be quick, and (as we state in our Review analysis) this timetable makes clear the need for education change and curriculum design to be rooted in legislation that protects a ten-year cycle so that new governments cannot uproot these changes.
Prepare young people for life and careers in a changing world – this places an emphasis on subject-specific disciplinary skills being clearly articulated in the refreshed programmes of study, “including critical thinking, creative thinking and problem solving, “as well as opportunities to “practice social and emotional attributes such as resilience”. It also highlights the new oracy framework and the vital applied knowledge and skills in the relevant subjects in areas such as media, digital and financial literacy as well as climate and sustainability education.
Comment: This mirrors the Curriculum and Assessment Review ambition and articulates important subject-specific disciplinary skills (critical thinking, creative thinking and problem solving and oracy) – all of which align with our Capabilities Framework.
- Ensure that schools and teachers are ready for the new curriculum – this recognises the support that schools and teachers will require and identifies the existing and upcoming hubs, online platforms and other partnerships and initiatives that will be in place to provide this support. These range from subject-specific hubs; the new National Centre for Arts and Music Education; PE/Sports partnerships; and Oak National Academy.
Comment: The government response is more granular than the Review’s here in getting to the specifics of resources. It is good to see the new National Centre referenced. Oak is seen as contentious by some and is currently under judicial review as we highlighted in our October Latest News.
The other four intentions are:
- Creating a digital and easily navigable version of the national curriculum
- Delivering high standards for all
- Post-16 English and maths (new preparation for GCSE Level 1 qualifications)
- 16-19 reform (already set out in the new Post-16 White Paper so we do not address this in detail here – see our analysis of the Review for comments from our Post-16 Adviser).
Analysis of the government response to the Review
Here are our headlines from the 60-page government response to the Review that was published on 5 November (alongside the Review itself).
1. A commitment to Arts subjects as an entitlement
“The curriculum should be enriching in every single subject, including the arts subjects which are a fundamental part of the rich and broad education. The arts subjects are an entitlement rather than an optional extra and are disciplines in their own right, with unique pedagogies that the best schools teach with expertise and rigour. For example, the study of creative subjects can allow pupils to harness the process of creative endeavour, generating original works, fluency of communication and teamwork. Under this government, access to a high-quality arts education will not be the preserve of the privileged few, but the entitlement of every child. That is why we are committing to revitalise arts education as part of the reformed national curriculum and through high-quality support for teachers of these subjects. In addition to our continued investment in music hubs, we are launching a new National Centre for Arts and Music Education, promoting arts education and enabling high-quality teaching through a teacher development offer.” (p.14)
Comment: This is outstanding news for our sector and takes the Review’s ambition much further in spelling out a proposed revitalisation, making clear Arts subjects are an entitlement and not an optional extra, and in understanding their unique pedagogies, and in the focus on supporting the workforce (which was not in scope for the Review).
2. Do we get clear purposes for schooling?
Education is seen as a shared endeavour to shape the future; a passing on of knowledge, skills and values, with the curriculum at the centre as a common entitlement. Reference is made to needing to reflect fast-paced change, to equip students to adapt and excel. There is an emphasis on the need for young people to “think critically and act thoughtfully, armed with the digital, financial and media literacy they need to thrive in the modern world,” and this mirrors the ambition of the Review, but the political rhetoric here is inevitably more powerful than can be deployed in an independent evidence-based review. “Our task is to prepare our young people to be not just the skilled employees of tomorrow, but the citizens: the artists and scientists, teachers and campaigners, entrepreneurs and trade unionists, match-goers and museum-goers, carers and parents.”
There are positive references to wanting young people not to be passive consumers of information/disinformation; to wanting them to be clearsighted in “drawing on a store of knowledge to be questioning and sceptical about the information now so readily at their fingertips, but also to share in the sense of wonder about our world that is so precious a part of our human condition.” And breadth is important: “For every child we must shift from a narrow conception of what they need to know, to deliver a breadth of knowledge, skills and opportunities that sets them up to achieve and thrive.” To deliver that there is a need for a “curriculum rich in knowledge and broad in scope,” and enrichment is seen as essential.
Comment: The language in this section is similar to the language used within the Review but is not identical and still lacks – as does the Review – the clarity of expression and presentation that we see in the purposes of the Curriculum for Wales. A narrative version is always going to be less digestible than clear bullet points – we do wonder why that hasn’t been provided at this stage. There is no distinct section entitled ‘purposes of the curriculum’ or ‘purposes of schooling’ and no checklist of any kind.
3. Adopting the Review’s curriculum principles
The government is adopting the Review’s curriculum principles including on depth, specificity, coherence, mastery of core concepts, knowledge, professional autonomy and representation. (p.12)
Comment: Our analysis of the Review presents multiple deficiencies in the current curriculum across subjects – some little short of shocking – so the commitment to adhering to the Review’s principles of entitlement, curriculum depth, coherence, specificity, knowledge (aligned with skills) professional autonomy and a curriculum for all (embracing inclusion, breadth and representation) in the government response is very welcome.
4. Cultural references
Cultural capital – as formulated by the previous government – is no longer common parlance in education policy, but it is stressed that “powerful knowledge can promote equality by giving everyone access to the same cultural references and give all pupils the knowledge and skills they need to engage with the changing world around them.” (p.12)
Comment: We do not mourn ‘cultural capital’ for all the reasons we have set out in the past, and the dangers inherent in formulating an official view about what constitutes ‘cultural capital’ – and that not being representative or future-facing. So, we welcome this more equitable approach to knowledge and skills, and frames of shared cultural reference.
5. Knowledge and skills are in lockstep
“We will ensure that the revised national curriculum remains knowledge-rich and enables students to develop disciplinary skills, setting students up to achieve in life and work.” (p.12) A distinction is made (in footnote 4) between ‘substantive knowledge’ – i.e. established facts and widely accepted concepts – and ‘powerful knowledge’ which can help build a shared frame of reference. We welcome the frequency with which knowledge and skills appear alongside each other in the government’s response to the Review. Elsewhere the response talks about ‘secure knowledge’ (p.23) and the value of this in enabling the skills of questioning, critical enquiry and weighing up evidence. A “strong, secure and established body of knowledge” is also referenced as the first step (the second being the skill of critical thinking) in arming young people with the tools “to protect themselves from mis- and dis-information and to scrutinise what is put before them.”
Comment: We welcome the frequency with which knowledge and skills appear alongside each other in the government’s response to the Review and the acknowledgement that both are vital for children and young people. Knowledge and skills are presented in lockstep here, as a “powerful partnership for learning” which is excellent to see. You can see our three-part series of Latest Thinking articles on what knowledge-rich means for Arts subjects here: article 1; article 2; article 3.
6. A focus on applied knowledge and critical thinking
The government welcomes the Review’s call for more applied knowledge and skills in the curriculum, including financial, digital and medial literacy, as well as climate education and oracy. When refreshing the national curriculum and GCSEs in individual subjects, they will “identify where subject-specific disciplinary skills are not clearly described or not emphasised adequately, and ensure these are properly reflected in those subjects’ programmes of study, for example, creative thinking in computing, critical thinking in history or problem solving in maths.”
“The ability to critically analyse, challenge claims and assess sources are important cognitive skills that are already developed in subjects like history, English and science. We must strengthen these skills for students to critically engage and challenge the world of information they now have at their fingertips. By making citizenship compulsory in primary, we will introduce all pupils to key content including media literacy, financial literacy, law and rights, democracy and government and climate education to enable children to be informed and active participants in society. Covering these issues in citizenship will ensure we continue to focus on schools’ role in developing fundamental British values, including of mutual tolerance and respect. These principles will be extended to the secondary core content to reflect the age range of pupils and will focus on more complex content …”
Comment: We welcome this emphasis and would argue that Arts subjects have a role to play here in developing important capabilities such as critical thinking, empathy and understanding the perspectives of others (see the societal value of Arts subjects set out in our Capabilities Framework).
7. An emphasis on Citizenship
The government will make Citizenship compulsory in primary and will introduce all pupils to key content including media literacy, financial literacy, law and rights, democracy and government and climate education “to enable children to be informed and active participants in society. Covering these issues in citizenship will ensure we continue to focus on schools’ role in developing fundamental British values, including of mutual tolerance and respect. These principles will be extended to the secondary core content to reflect the age range of pupils and will focus on more complex content …”
Comment: We welcome that Citizenship becomes statutory from KS1 but hope to see a greater understanding of the role that the Arts can play in citizenship-building, as set out in our Capabilities Framework.
8. Oracy
The government will create a new oracy framework to sit alongside the national curriculum for primary. In secondary, it is recognised that literacy and oracy are both general skills and subject-specific, and that teachers require support to teach students how to read, write and communicate effectively, so there is to be a secondary oracy, reading and writing framework.
Comment: We welcome this recommendation for oracy but note, as in our response to the Review, that there is little reference to the power of Arts subjects for oracy when our Capabilities Framework makes clear the distinct contribution and when the Oracy Education Commission Report described oracy education and arts education as being “mutually supportive: teaching pupils to talk and listen makes an arts education accessible; and an arts education provides a distinctive vehicle for the provision of opportunities for pupils to engage in experiences that foster the development of their oracy skills …”
9. Core concepts, specificity and sequencing within and between subjects
The government agrees with the Review’s recommendations that the revised programmes of study should be focused on the mastery of core concepts and be constructed with careful sequencing within and between subjects.” There is acknowledgement that current programmes of study for foundation subjects lacks detail, and that many could benefit from more specificity. (p.13) “Improved sequencing and focus will improve both transition between key stage 2 and key stage 3, and progress during key stage 3. We will ensure that the reformed key stage 3 national curriculum builds effectively from key stage 2 in every subject …”
Comment: As in the Review, there is a welcome emphasis on progression from solid foundations and supporting transition across key stages, starting in the primary years through the transition to secondary education and from KS3 to KS4. The call for more detail and specificity in programmes of study aligns with the Review and is again welcome.
10. An emphasis on teachers and teacher agency
“We value the professionalism and creativity of teachers in bringing the curriculum to life, and the work they do to ensure the curriculum is inclusive, stretching and adapted to the needs of all pupils, including those with SEND.” They want to allow for flexibility alongside the new specificity, so that teachers can choose lesson content and how to teach it.
Comment: As with the Review, we love this. We have long advocated for more teacher agency. There is strong recognition of professional expertise and autonomy which we very much welcome, in line with the recommendations in the Arts in Schools: Foundations for the Futurereport. As we say in our summary above, the challenge here is the importance of teachers being appropriately skilled, knowledgeable and confident to take full advantage of that autonomy, especially among non-specialist teachers in primary – we know that there is a great deal of capacity building needed for Arts subjects. And indeed if there are enough trained Arts teachers available, given the dramatic falls in Arts teacher recruitment we highlight in our 2025 Report Card. Guidance for Initial Teacher Training (ITT) to achieve QTS (Qualified Teacher Status) published by the government for 2026/7 reveals a complete cut of ITT bursary funding for four subjects – including two Arts subjects – while five others have had reductions to the funds available ranging from 23% to 80% – so there do not currently seem to be any published plans to recruit new Arts teachers. We will wait to see how the National Centre for Arts and Music Education will support “high-quality teaching through a teacher development offer” …
11. A curriculum that can be responsive to local context
“The national curriculum is not the entire curriculum but an underpinning of what every child is entitled to know, which schools build on locally. Schools will continue to remain responsible for deciding how their school curriculum brings those core concepts to life in their choices of historical events, physical and human geography, and novels, for example. This will allow them to create dynamic learning environments where pupils can flourish.”
Comment: We welcome this. As the Arts in Schools: Foundations for the future report sets out in its recommendations, “We would like to see schools able to respond more to local circumstances, engagement with civic society, and more agency for teachers to develop partnerships within their localities in order that schools can benefit from the creativity and resources available … reflecting the local economy, cultures, arts provision, employment needs and opportunities, and contributing to thriving local communities.”
12. Reflecting a modern society and diverse communities
They want the curriculum to be both “a mirror, in which every child can see themselves and their communities reflected, and a window through which every child is connected to the world beyond their existing horizons and perspectives.” (p.14)
Comment: This is in line with the Review’s recommendations, but we particularly love the language here. We welcome this approach, which is in line with the recommendations within our own Blueprint for an Arts-rich education for a focus on representation, breadth and relevance across the Arts curriculum, resources and practice so that children can see themselves reflected in what they are learning. We also welcome the point about enabling children to see beyond their own perspectives and horizons to step in the shoes of others. Arts subjects are brilliant for this, as our Capabilities Framework highlights.
13. A rich Key Stage 3
“Every secondary school needs to give sufficient priority to organising and strengthening key stage 3, driven by a clear vision of a rich and stretching curriculum backed with high-quality assessment, and a broader focus on a rewarding school experience. School leaders should ensure that pupils in key stage 3 benefit from the full three years of the key stage, with a strong transition in place followed by time for breadth of experience, depth of learning and wider enrichment. Pupils should experience the same quality of resources in key stage 3 as they do in key stage 4, including being taught by experienced staff. Schools should also find ways to recognise pupils’ achievements at key stage 3 so that their personal, social and academic accomplishments are celebrated. Many schools already do this well and there are excellent models to draw from that demonstrate what can be achieved.” (p.19) Ofsted’s new framework supports the new KS3 ambitions.
Comment: This is excellent news and one of the many points we made to the Review’s Call for Evidence. There has long been an issue with KS4 bleeding into Year 9, and this directive, together with a reduction in the volume of content at KS4, will be very welcome. Richness and stretch in these valuable years are important. We particularly like the recommendation to find ways to recognise and celebrate pupils’ personal, social, and academic achievements at KS3. This is great to see.
14. Schools working together
‘At a minimum, we want schools to work together to support stretch and share best practice on what works well.” They recognise that many schools are already teaming up and creating pockets of excellence and they are keen to support partnership working locally and regionally across trusts, local authorities and the wider education community. “There are also lots of academic enrichment and excellence programmes available, in the arts, science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) subjects, English and the humanities, but the offers are sometimes complex to navigate. We will help schools to identify effective programmes and get the best out of them.”
Comment: We welcome the commitment to building communities of practice which are of great value for arts provision. They don’t mention the National Centre for Arts and Music Education here but since one of its roles is to work to strengthen collaborations between schools and cultural organisations to ensure more children have access to creative activities, we assume that this is the “help” being referred to here.
15. Social and emotional development and wellbeing
The government goes further than the Review on wellbeing. In addition to a solid knowledge base, the government wants pupils to develop their social and emotional capabilities and have the “opportunity to practice these personal attributes that they will need to navigate a changing world.” The updated statutory relationships, sex and health education (RSHE) guidance sets out that “schools should support pupils to develop strategies for self-regulation, perseverance and determination, even in the face of setbacks”. They say they “will support teachers to better understand pupils’ needs and how they can support social and emotional development both through their everyday interactions and through teaching of mental wellbeing content in RSHE such as resilience.” They give an example of the national curriculum providing many opportunities for students to practise these: “For example, physical education (PE) allows students to practise team work, while drama allows pupils to practise communicating. We will ensure that the refreshed national curriculum identifies opportunities for pupils to practise these attributes.’
Comment: We picked up in our analysis of the Review that wellbeing was largely missing so it’s good to see it referenced here, and the recognition that areas of the curriculum beyond RSHE offer opportunities to practice strategies for mental wellbeing. However, we would add that Arts subjects provide excellent opportunities here; wellbeing is one of the seven capabilities set out in our Capabilities Framework under the pillar of ‘Being, belonging and becoming’. There is a great deal of robust evidence to demonstrate impact in this area: Arts subjects are important for flourishing, pleasure, and resilience, leading to adaptability, good mental health and emotional wellbeing benefits.
16. An evidence-led approach
As we covered in our Review analysis, it stated that “Maintaining an evidence-led approach is crucial. This must include a variety of evidence, including robust longitudinal data and research. It should include a critical approach to claims and assumptions which are not rigorously substantiated by independent research.” We cannot see a corresponding commitment in the government response.
Comment: This is of value for CLA which is about to co-publish (with the Royal Shakespeare Company) Rapid Evidence Reviews presenting more than 1,000 pieces of evidence asserting the role of the Arts in building children and young people’s agency, wellbeing, collaboration, communication, empathy, creativity and critical thinking. Evidence is the foundation of all CLA’s work. Will the government now continue to adhere to the Review’s recommendation as it begins to implement curriculum reform? As we noted in our early October Latest News coverage of ministerial changes, the use of research, science and evidence within the DfE had been dropped from the Early Years brief (now held by Olivia Bailey) so we were wondering if that was an error … or not. It will be helpful for DfE to clarify its position in relation to research, science and evidence if no minister has oversight of this area. Russell Viner, Chief Scientific Adviser for DfE (each department has one), leaves his post in December.
Subject-specific analysis
The government response on each subject is brief is comparison with the Review’s, although English and languages get more extensive coverage. We will be discussing the government response coverage of Arts subjects with all the relevant subject associations and are likely to report further on this. In the meantime, here are our headlines for Arts subjects in the government response:
ART & DESIGN
- Value and relative health of the subject: The government response highlights the value of Art and Design in stimulating and challenging pupils to evaluate, respond to, participate in, experiment with, and create their own works. “It supports pupils to develop their creativity and expression, build practical skills and ultimately enables them to contribute to the culture, creativity and economic success of our society.”
- There is the assertion that A&D is working well based on the metric of high GCSE entries.
- Clarity to programmes of study: The government agrees with the Review’s proposals to add further clarity to the programmes of study where a lack of detail has posed problems. “In doing this, we will exemplify the knowledge and skills that pupils should develop, including through their own creative practice.”
- Representation and breadth: “We will consider how a new programme of study can set clear expectations about the teaching of a broader range of artists and designers.”
- A broader range of media: “We will also support the teaching of a broader range of media, including digital media in line with our broader approach to digital literacy, while maintaining the importance of drawing and painting.”
- Assessment: Though they think the GCSE is generally working well, they agree that improvements need to be made to the volume of assessment, and they will work with Ofqual to consider how the range and volume of work pupils need to produce for their non-examined and final assessment can be clarified and streamlined.
Comment: We welcome the specificity and the emphasis on a wider range of media and particularly welcome the inclusion of digital media. This is excellent news. We also welcome the focus on representation and breadth – a key ask in our Blueprint for an Arts-rich education – the need for improvements to the volume of assessment and the consideration of the volume of work for non-examined assessment. The explicit societal link between Art & Design and the culture, creativity and economic success of the country here is helpful.
In terms of the assertion that A&D is performing well, we have been guided by the subject associations in asserting in our Report Cards that this is linked to students migrating from more expensive D&T GCSE options (where take-up has declined by 71% since 2010) – so healthy is likely to be masking another issue.
DANCE (WITHIN PE)
For Dance, the government:
- Welcomes the Review’s recommendations to strengthen the national curriculum for PE, “recognising its role in supporting pupils’ wellbeing and educational outcomes.”
- Will “revisit the aims of compulsory PE across all four key stages to ensure a scaffolded approach to developing fundamental movement skills and participation in sport and physical activity.
- Will also consider how specific elements like … dance … are presented to support quality teaching and progression.”
- Will work with Ofqual and stakeholders to review the PE GCSE subject content
- Will ensure that the PE curriculum has clear purpose for all pupils so that “schools recognise the need to protect two hours of PE time for all pupils throughout their time at school – securing a foundation for continued participation in sport and physical activities.”
- Acknowledges that Dance holds a unique position in the curriculum as both a physical activity and a creative art form. It provides an engaging route within PE for many pupils …
- Welcomes the Review’s acknowledgement of the “creative as well as physical aspects of dance” and in line with the Review they will add further detail to content on dance within the PE programme of study, to ensure consistency and an effective pathway to further study.
- Wants to ensure that the GCSE reflects “dance as a creative art form, is reflective of professional best practice, and enables pupils to study a broad and diverse body of work” so GCSE subject content and balance of assessment methods and approaches will be reviewed to achieve this.
- In addition, the National Centre for Arts and Music Education and new PE and School Sport Partnerships are identified as addressing recognised workforce challenges by building capability and confidence in the teaching of dance.
Comment: We very much like the acknowledgement of dance supporting wellbeing as well as educational outcomes here – the government response in general goes further on wellbeing than the Review. We value the specific acknowledgement of the creative as well as physical aspects of dance and the desire to ensure that the GCSE reflects dance as a creative Art form and not just a physical activity.
DRAMA (WITHIN ENGLISH)
For Drama, the government:
- Agrees with the Review that Drama plays an important role in a broad curriculum, and that it supports the development of a range of knowledge and skills including creativity and oracy.
- Considers Drama to be an important artistic discipline in its own right, helping pupils to find their voice and express their ideas, “on stage and off”.
- Agrees that the brilliant practice seen in many schools already, particularly at secondary, is to be celebrated: “we want to ensure this is reflected in the curriculum, supporting progression to further study.”
- In line with the Review, will consider whether further detail and clarity at primary could enable a stronger Drama offer within English.
- Will create a discrete Drama section within the key stage 3 programme of study
- Will want to ensure that teaching at GCSE connects to and builds from pupils’ experience at KS3, so the subject continues to be engaging and prepares students for future study.
- Will recognise the opportunity to promote further diversity in the body of work studied at GCSE.
- As recommended, review GCSE drama subject content against the balance of assessment methods and approaches to achieve this.
- Will recognise the importance of clear speaking and listening skills that is set out by the Review and will act on this by introducing an oracy framework, which will complement the reading and writing frameworks and will guide teachers through the evidence that supports the best teaching approaches.
- There is also an emphasis on the importance of media literacy to spot disinformation which links to the Interpretation/critical thinking capability in our CLA Capabilities Framework.
Comment: We welcome this strengthening of Drama within English and as an artistic discipline in its own right. We also welcome the recognition of Drama for self-expression and enabling pupils to find their voice, in line with our Capabilities Framework. The acknowledgement of existing “brilliant practice” is excellent, as is the ambition to connect to and build from KS3 work at GCSE. The promotion of diversity in the work studied is again excellent, and in line with our Blueprint for an Arts-rich education, although there is no reference to this before KS4. And again, we are pleased to see a review of content against assessment methods. Within the English curriculum, as in the Review, Shakespeare is the only named writer at KS4.
The new oracy framework is a welcome step in light of the Arts links made by the Oracy Education Commission Report to Arts subjects. The Review made little reference to the power of Arts subjects for oracy but our Capabilities Framework makes clear their distinct contribution.
MUSIC
For Music, the government:
- Highlights that a good-quality music education is a “powerful tool for connection and expression. It should be creative and challenging and equip pupils with the knowledge and tools to appreciate, understand and make music, bringing school communities together.”
- Welcomes the Review’s focus on equity in music education and sees equitable access starting with a “clear, effective curriculum that delivers a rigorous foundation for all”. The response states that for music, the current programme of study is not achieving that.
- Places an emphasis on supporting teachers to give every child a strong start in the subject: “this is critical to improving quality and equity”. The programme of study will be reformed “to clarify and exemplify its purpose, aims and content, to ensure that pupils develop a strong foundation in the three pillars of musical understanding – technical, constructive and expressive – including how to read music.”
- Sets out the intention to create a clearer, more rigorous programme of study which “is critical to enabling pupils to continue their musical study should they wish to” and they will review all KS4 Music qualifications to support musical understanding and progression effectively, and so that the distinct purposes of music GCSE and technical awards are sufficiently clear.
- Will “consider whether current GCSE content and assessment could be better suited to the discipline, including enabling alternatives to instrumental performance (using technology, voice, or both) more effectively.”
- There is also reference to Music Hubs and investment in the new National Centre for Arts and Music Education; to support for teachers; and to provision of instruments (through an existing £25m investment to provide more than 130,000 additional instruments, of which 40,000 have been delivered).
Comment: The government response on Music is relatively brief and makes clear the inequity baked into the current curriculum. There is significant investment made into Music in comparison with other Arts subjects. The new National Centre, with its responsibility for Music Hubs and teacher support, will be doing a lot of the heavy lifting here, alongside the reformed curriculum. We particularly like the emphasis on music being a powerful tool for connection and expression, and the alignment here with the important capabilities set out in our Capabilities Framework.
DESIGN & TECHNOLOGY
The government will:
- Revise the design and technology curriculum and GCSE subject content to focus on developing pupils’ design capability and to introduce the concept of sustainability within the programme of study – to help tackle the challenges around building a sustainable economy through more discerning use of materials and processes and better reflect the needs of the designs sector as a whole.
Comment: As we state in our Review analysis, we examine this subject due to its adjacency to Art & Design – prior to 2018 it had Graphic Products and Textiles Technology strands. The Review goes into much more detail in citing dramatic decline in GCSE take-up; addressing the outdated purpose of study and aims of the D&T curriculum; the potential for it to be a key subject for learning green knowledge and skills; and the need for more of an emphasis on a finished product for “young people’s satisfaction and enjoyment”. The Review also saw inequality of access being especially pronounced along lines of disadvantage. We hope that the government will bear all of this in mind in its curriculum revision and in revising GCSE content.
Enrichment
There are four pages on enrichment, which we summarise here:
General approach
- There is an ambition for a “curriculum rich in knowledge and broad in scope,” and enrichment is seen as essential – and is also seen as being for too long the “privilege of a lucky few”. Hence the introduction of a new enrichment entitlement. “A revitalised arts offer will spark their creativity. Access to sports, culture and nature will expand their horizons.”
- There is a link to civic engagement and stretching pupils’ abilities beyond the classroom to prepare them for a democratic and inclusive society: “not just speaking up and speaking out but listening to the voices of others too”.
Evidence of value and inequitable access
- There is a great deal of evidence presented (e.g. from the Education Policy Institute) which links extra-curricular enrichment participation to higher educational achievement and positive outcomes in adulthood.
- There is evidence of how the enrichment offer varies significantly from school to school and evidence of how participation varies and is particularly low for pupils eligible for free school meals (FSM) compared to those who were not.
- Non-participation is higher for white pupils eligible for FSM compared to white pupils who were not FSM eligible.
- When looking at all ethnic minority pupils, the non-participation difference was smaller and not statistically significant.
- Pupils with SEND were also less likely to be involved in sports and physical activities
- This evidence demonstrates why the government wants to embed enrichment opportunities within the school curriculum as well as extracurricular activities.
Enrichment within the curriculum to ensure access
- The government recognises Arts, Music and PE as important curriculum subjects which will be strengthened through the Review’s recommendations and ongoing support for high-quality teaching – it sees this as essential to ensure that disadvantaged pupils have the same access to wider enriching experiences.
Extra-curricular enrichment
- In addition to a high-quality enriching curriculum, the government wants every child to be entitled to a strong and well-rounded extracurricular offer: “This offer both supports and extends beyond the curriculum and school day – opportunities to discover interests, ignite passions, grow talents and, above all, to enjoy learning.”
Enrichment entitlement
- There will be a new core enrichment offer that every school and college, in every community, should aim to provide for all children – beyond the statutory curriculum.
- There is recognition that many schools already excel at this and the RSC is given as an example of school activities being enhanced by working with partners. There is an ambition to “enable and build such partnerships to spread opportunities across our schools”.
- There will be a new set of benchmarks, developed with sector experts, schools and colleges, to frame this joint working and a wider range of hands-on experiences that get children out of the classroom.
- The benchmarks will set out that, at a minimum, every school should deliver an offer which provides access to five enrichment areas:
- civic engagement
- arts and culture
- nature, outdoor and adventure
- sport and physical activities
- and developing wider life skills.
- The government will “bring together support for schools and colleges” to follow these benchmarks (p.39), which sounds excellent.
- Parents should have the confidence and knowledge that their children will have access to these experiences, wherever they live so the government will provide information on schools’ enrichment opportunities in the new School Profiles based on the five categories above. Cold spots will be identified and support directed where needed.
- When Ofsted updates its inspection toolkits next year, it will take account of the new enrichment benchmarks, in a similar way to the Gatsby Benchmarks currently included in relation to careers education.
- “Sufficient time in school is crucial” to enable enrichment opportunities (p.41) There is an expectation that “all state-funded, mainstream schools deliver a minimum school week of at least 32.5 hours.” Colleges are not mentioned here, although they are previously referenced in relation to being supported to follow the new benchmarks.
- There is a list of support being put in place:
- PE and School Sport Partnerships
- Music Hubs
- An £88 million investment in Building Creative Futures including £22.5 million of new funding over three years to create a tailored enrichment offer in up to 400 schools
- £132.5 million of Dormant Assets funding to support the provision of services, facilities, or opportunities to meet the needs of young people, particularly those from disadvantaged and underrepresented backgrounds.
- Commitment from others to support this work is recognised, including the National Youth Theatre, and Into Film, and funders such as Clore Duffield.
Comment: There is much more detail on enrichment provided by the government, including on framework intentions and funding support which was not in scope for the Review. This reflects that the national curriculum should be an “ambitious entitlement for all” (p.9 of the Review) but that schools must have space to go beyond it to provide enrichment activities.
And there are some questions here for further education. If colleges are to be supported to follow the new enrichment benchmarks, we would like to know if this will extend to funding support for Guided Learning Hours linked to enrichment. There is an expectation around the length of a school week, and colleges are not mentioned here, although they are previously referenced in relation to being supported to follow the new benchmarks. Will this also be a funded expectation for colleges? On page 49 the response says government “will extend this framework to further education settings.” And in the reference to £88m of investment, this only seems to be for schools – does it also apply to colleges?
As we state in our analysis of the Review, our position has long been that we know that Arts activities and experiences within and beyond the curriculum are extremely valuable in supporting attainment and achievement but have always argued that arts enrichment should only follow from a strong Arts curriculum offer – enrichment provision cannot be a substitute for curriculum delivery. We therefore warmly welcome the emphasis the Review places on Arts enrichment expectations, within and alongside a broad and balanced curriculum which values Arts subjects. We look forward to learning more. The challenge now will be ensuring a balance across the five enrichment areas so that the Arts are not overlooked.
