Many aspects working well but education system not working for all, says interim Review

Many aspects working well but education system not working for all, says interim Review 19 March 2025

The interim report of the Curriculum and Assessment Review confirms that many aspects of the curriculum and assessment system are working well. The knowledge-rich curriculum is reasonably broad and balanced to age 16 and national assessments and qualifications are broadly performing well. But changes are needed to make the education system work for every young person.

The Review’s “social justice lens” found that the current system is not delivering for every child particularly those with SEND or those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

The interim report presents initial findings and insights from over 7,000 responses to the Review team’s call for evidence. It sets out four key areas needing improvement which will form the basis of the Review moving forward:

The system is not working well for all: the review will further consider how the curriculum and assessment can be more inclusive, representative and equitable to ensure excellence for all.
There are challenges with specific subjects: the curriculum has a large variety of subjects which can be challenging to address adequately. Is there imbalance between breadth and depth of content? The Review will analyse each subject to diagnose any specific problems considering questions that have been raised during the Call for Evidence about the specificity, relevance, volume and diversity of subject content. A range of solutions will be explored and tested.
The curriculum needs to respond to change: rapid social, environmental and technological change necessitates that the curriculum keeps pace. The Review will consider how education can better equip children and young people with the essential knowledge and skills which will enable them to adapt and thrive in the future.
16-19 technical and vocational qualification pathways need to be addressed: pathways beyond GCSE need to work for all. The Review will explore how post-16 education can better supports successful routes to further study or employment, especially for those from less privileged backgrounds.

Areas that the Review will consider include:

Key Stage 3
Respondents to the Call for Evidence stressed the need to preserve Key Stage 3 as an educational stage with a broad and balanced curriculum that encompasses a rich variety of subjects, offers flexibility in teaching and learning and supports students’ wider development and progress. The Review will look closely at this stage so that learners at Key Stage 3 experience depth and well-sequenced learning as they progress through the stages of education.

Assessment at Key Stage 4
The Review believes that the assessment system is broadly working well, that it is crucial to raising standards and that externally set and marked exams are an important way to ensure fairness as part of our national qualification system. However, the Review says that improvements are needed to ensure assessment captures the strengths of every young person and the breadth of the curriculum, as well as alleviating stress caused by the concentration of exams particularly at the end of Key Stage 4. The report goes on to say that the right balance and weighting of assessment methods is needed and whilst the important role of examinations should be maintained particularly at GCSE, the volume of assessments at Key Stage 4, not the number of GCSEs taken, needs to be addressed.

With a subject-by-subject approach, the Review will consider whether assessment is fit for purpose, that the content, volume and frequency of assessments are not unnecessarily burdensome for students or teachers, and that the assessment system captures learning in a way that is fair, reliable and inclusive, particularly for those with SEND.

EBacc
Responses to the Call for Evidence highlighted that the EBacc performance measure may unnecessarily constrain student choice, engagement and/or achievement particularly around arts or vocational subjects, and thereby reduce breadth in the curriculum. The Review will continue to analyse the evidence and assess the place of the EBacc within the wider accountability framework.

Post 16

Maths and English resits: The Review Panel heard strong evidence that whilst too many young people arrive at the end of Key Stage 4 without having succeeded in securing their Level 2 qualifications in maths and English, a minimum of a grade 4 in maths and English should continue to be the ambition for as many learners as possible. However, there is clear evidence that the condition of funding policy is not fully delivering its intended purpose and may be contributing to disengagement and absence. The Review will work closely with the sector to evaluate potential solutions to support learners to achieve in maths and English.
A Levels: Overall A Levels are given a strong endorsement. The interim report says that A Levels are well-established, are rigorous and have good progression outcomes.
T Levels: The Review considers T Levels to be the gold-standard technical qualification, and will seek to ensure that the quality of their design and delivery is supported, but the interim report goes on to say that T Levels will not be appropriate for all post-16 learners.
Level 3: The Review will consider what Level 3 qualifications may be needed alongside A Levels and T Levels that serve the needs of all learners. The Review will build on 16-19 reforms that have already taken place and look at how a simpler, clearer offer which provides strong academic and technical/vocational pathways for all can be achieved. The report says that further work is needed to consider the implications of new Alternative Academic Qualifications (AAQs), to explore other qualifications such as Applied General qualifications, and the different combinations of qualifications that can be studied together, and the outcomes they support for learners.
Level 2: The report says this is an important area for the Review to address in order to provide high quality progression for those young people who wish to progress but have not secured the necessary qualifications at age 16, or who may require additional support to do so. The Review will consider how best to develop strong occupational pathways at Level 2 and examine how to strengthen progression routes from Level 2 to Level 3.

The Review says its final report, to be published in the autumn, will recommend to government a phased programme of work in different subjects, with any reform made incrementally in a way that does not destabilise the system, reiterating the focus on “evolution not revolution”.