AoC responds to the Curriculum and Assessment Review Interim Report

Responding, David Hughes, Chief Executive, Association of Colleges said: "This interim report rightly points to the need to make changes in four areas of key weakness in the current five to 19 system and sets out the good intention of making balanced and measured changes which do not overwhelm schools and colleges.

"We have had too much abrupt and radical change which has not worked, and which has not engaged schools and colleges and other experts in formulation of proposals and their implementation. The college sector is keen to continue to work with the Review over the coming months to ensure that the final proposals have the very best chance of securing positive and lasting change.

"The interim report's central conclusion that the current arrangements do not work well enough for large numbers of young people needs to remain at the forefront of the Review panel's work. I am delighted that the Review has recognised a core and persistent shortcoming in the education system which offers high standards and outcomes for some not for all. The Review sets this out by socio-economic background and by special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and shows that gaps start young and persist through every stage of learning. By age 16 less than two-thirds are achieving the suite of GCSEs which will help them progress to Level 3 learning.

"The challenge to change this picture is partly about curriculum and assessment but goes beyond that as well and we hope that in the next phase of its work, the Review will look at what can be done particularly in key stage 4 to improve outcomes at age 16, including opening up day release options for some children to experience high quality technical education as part of their wider GCSE programme. We would also like to see more work on transition at age 16 which is a tough one for many young people who may have struggled already in school.

"The fourth area of focus on post-16 is welcomed and touches on some knotty issues, such as how best to support learners who do not study A Levels or T Levels, how to strengthen progression routes from Level 2 to Level 3 and how to improve outcomes in English and maths. We agree that T Levels are not appropriate as they are now for all learners, so we want to support the work needed on increasing access to them and on how other vocational qualifications like Alternative Academic Qualifications (AAQs), Technical Qualifications (TQs) and applied generals, including on how qualifications can be combined.

"There is a welcome passing reference to the importance of personal development including enrichment outside of the classroom to equip students to be active citizens in their adult lives and to learn the skills and confidence that employers say they want to see. We would like this to have more attention from the Department for Education (DfE), given that the Review has not been asked to consider it despite its power to motivate and improve outcomes.

"On English and maths, the review identifies the difficulties, like the impact of disengagement on attendance, and the need to value the progress of students who do not achieve Level 2. The report’s call for nuance is very welcome, as its promise to work closely with the sector to identify solutions, but sadly the Review seems to fall short of considering whether the GCSEs are the best or right qualifications for this age group.

"Overall this is a good report which gives colleges the opportunity to work on core areas of change that are needed if the education system is truly going to work for all. We look forward to working with the Review panel to help work through the final recommendations and ideas."