Primary curriculum has become 'too fat'

---

The primary school curriculum has been allowed to get "too fat", according to a review conducted for the government.

Former Ofsted inspector Sir Jim Rose has published his recommendations for England's primary school curriculum, calling on the government to focus on the basics of teaching.

His comments came after figures revealed that more than three million children left primary school in the last 10 years unable to read, write or add up.

In other recommendations, Sir Jim emphasised that information technology is as important as reading and writing in primary schools.

He told the BBC that the curriculum needs to be "slimmed down" to give teachers more flexibility.

Ministers are expected to accept Sir Jim's call to make ICT a "core skill" in the primary curriculum and incorporate it as part of all subjects.

Sir Jim also called for teachers to be given more training to keep them ahead of their "computer-savvy" pupils.

And he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that the government must not "side-step" the basics.

"It is a very strong reminder of how very important it is to get primary school education right, because we know how well children do at primary school is the best predictor of success in secondary school," Sir Jim said.

"Within all that, there is no doubt that we can't side-step the basics. It is obvious.

"If children can't say it, they can't write it. It is a cliche to say that now, but the interdependency is very clear."

Education authorities must also make sure that the content of history and geography is "really worthwhile", Sir Jim said.

"Knowledge skills leading to understanding, that is what we are trying to make sure is built into this new curriculum," he explained.

"There is no doubt that we have let the curriculum get too fat. We do need to slim it down and we do need to give teachers far more flexibility and opportunity to be creative."

He argued that his proposals were a "much better deal for the learner".

"The three important things are good parenting, good teaching and good curriculum. Get those three right, and you are securing children's educational success, no doubt about it."

His comments came as the Conservatives released figures showing that over three million children left school during the last decade unable to read, write or add up properly.

Since 1998 some 3.1 million 11-year-olds have not achieved Level 4 in their basic SATs.

Shadow schools minister Nick Gibb said: "Ministers need to make sure that the new primary curriculum is rigorous and protects proper subject teaching.

"The suggestion of merging proper history and geography lessons into vague humanities 'themed learning' would take primary education in the wrong direction."

Stakeholder Response: Association for Physical Education

Physical Education is the only school subject which is expected to make major contributions to national strategies in education, health and sport. It is therefore disappointing that the Rose Review has failed to recognise the distinctive value of physical education, and has reduced both its visibility and its importance within this proposed primary curriculum.

The lack of visibility and lower profile of physical education in these proposals constitute a direct threat to its continuing place in the primary curriculum. Right across the world, where physical education has been subsumed under an umbrella curriculum title, it has all but disappeared. At a time when the UK should be seen to be delivering on its commitment to a lasting Olympic legacy for children and young people, it is sad that the future of their physical education, the basis for lifelong participation in sport and physical activity, apparently is at risk.

The Association for Physical Education (afPE) welcomes the opportunities for physical education to lead children's learning in health and well being, but believes that a golden opportunity has been lost, to place physical learning and achievement at the heart of an area of learning which could have made a major contribution to education and health strategies. With one in five primary aged children currently overweight or obese, it is regrettable that the area of learning "Understanding Physical Development, Health and Well Being" should be diluted by disparate elements like "economic well being".

It is also disappointing that the integrity of physical education has been undermined by the removal of dance, which is a vital physical activity to meet the needs of children and young people whose interests do not include competitive sport. While dance is included in the Arts area of learning, and may be delivered within physical education, clear progression from generic movement education through to dance in the secondary physical education curriculum has been lost. This also means that the government’s own ambition for all children to enjoy 5 hours' physical education and school sport within the Physical Education and School Sport strategy is less likely to be achieved.

During the consultation process, afPE will be making strong representation to restore physical education to the central position in the primary curriculum which it, and the nation's children, deserve.

Stakeholder Response: Voice the union for education professionals

General secretary Philip Parkin said: "Voice will study the report in detail but, as with the interim report in December, we would welcome a broader curriculum with a more flexible approach to learning.

"A move away from the current, sometimes prescriptive, subject-based teaching could offer much more flexible and engaging ways of teaching and learning. However, today's teachers – trained to deliver discrete curriculum subjects – would need considerable retraining to move to this method.

"In many cases, given the current school starting age, allowing a September start to school for younger pupils could be helpful – provided that they have an appropriate play-based, experiential curriculum. We are very concerned about children beginning a formal academic education too early in order to satisfy the demands of an inappropriate testing regime. Children are individuals and vary greatly in their academic development and readiness for formal learning. A later start to formal education remains our preferred option.

"The emphasis on technology in the report is welcome. Computers and Internet access are essential tools that define how we learn, communicate and work.

"However, I remain concerned about the possible effects of wi-fi networks in schools. Voice is advocating a precautionary approach – that new wi-fi systems should not be installed and that existing systems should be turned off when not required.

"Primary, infant and nursery schools in particular should consider whether they need and should retain such systems if they already have them, and should consider hard-wired alternatives wherever possible.

"Wi-fi should really be for adults to access the Internet on the move rather than as a convenient alternative to cables in dedicated IT facilities. Serious and sustained scientific research is needed to establish conclusive facts about the potential long-term effects on children."

Stakeholder Response: National Union of Teachers

Christine Blower acting general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said: "I recognise that Sir Jim Rose has strived to free primary schools from the constraints of overload and prescription. He has even sought to bring on board Robin Alexander's review.

"Nevertheless he has not managed to break free from the shackles of the government's criteria for his review.

"It is the high stakes requirements of testing that will continue to determine primary schools' priorities - not the permission to innovate that the Review envisages. That is why the NUT and the NAHT are determined that 2009 will be the last year of primary National Curriculum testing.

"Sir Jim Rose seems to be replacing science with ICT as a core subject, where does that leave the compulsory test in science?

"The fact is that the government's refusal to allow Rose to review the impact of tests and performance tables on the primary curriculum has undermined much of Rose's work.

"Sir Jim Rose should have also recognised that the government now agrees that the Assessing Pupil Progress scheme is now voluntary and that it cannot be imposed on schools.

"I welcome the fact that Sir Jim Rose has stepped back from his proposal that children can only enter reception classes on the first of September. Such a requirement would have led to very young children starting formal learning far too early."