What is the context?
In March 2025, the independent Curriculum and Assessment Review, chaired by Professor Becky Francis, published an interim report, based on the review panel’s initial findings. It suggested changes were needed in four key areas:
- the system is not working well for all
- challenges with specific subjects
- the need to respond to social and technological change
- 16-19 technical and vocational pathways
It also talked about the ongoing importance of English and maths at all ages, including in the early years and for students who don’t achieve a Grade 4+ by the end of secondary (a group ASCL has previously called the ‘forgotten third’).
The final report is due to be published in autumn 2025.
ASCL position: ASCL welcomes the interim report of the independent Curriculum and Assessment Review, particularly the focus on English and maths, both at early years and for young people who don’t achieve at least grade 4 GCSE by the end of secondary school. We have long advocated for a new assessment in literacy and numeracy which a vast majority of students would achieve by the end of Key Stage 4, and urge the review team to make this recommendation in its final report.
We also support the review’s focus on the breadth and balance of the curriculum, and its recognition of the negative impact of the current Key Stage 2 assessments and the EBacc on this. The final report must advocate scrapping the EBacc measure and address the decline in the take-up of arts and vocational GCSEs over the last decade.
We do not think the interim report goes far enough on the need to address the burden of assessment on young people, particularly aged 16. ASCL does not support the reintroduction of NEA, coursework or modular exams, but we would like to see the introduction other forms of assessment that reflect the disciplinary nature of subjects.
More attention must also be given to how the national curriculum remains relevant between major reforms, and reflects the needs and cultural capital of all pupils.
Why are we saying this?
As identified in the opening of the interim report, it is important to acknowledge that while the current national curriculum and assessment structures work well for many young people, for a sizeable minority they don’t. ASCL’s focus in our call for evidence to the review was the needs of the forgotten third, and we want to ensure that this emphasis isn’t lost in the final report or in how government responds to it.
To achieve this, we think some innovation is needed in assessment and qualifications. While the mantra of the review, ‘evolution not revolution’, is generally welcome, there are some areas, including these, that require significant change quickly.
We do not believe that the current English language and maths GCSEs are good proxies for being literate and numerate. The comparable outcomes approach to grading means that roughly a third of sixteen-year-olds don’t achieve a grade 4+ in these qualifications each year (even though there isn’t a strict quotient). We therefore need a new gold standard assessment that young people can take when they’re ready, that demonstrates to future employers and educators that they’re literate and numerate, and which a vast majority would achieve by the end of secondary school.
Given the fact that the universal participation age is 18, we think the burden of assessment at 16 is disproportionate and leads to curriculum narrowing from aged 14. This is exacerbated by performance measures such as the EBacc which, though well-intentioned, have undoubtably led to the relative decline in many arts, design, technical and vocational courses.