Labour Is Dumbing Down the Curriculum – and Disadvantaged Children Will Suffer Most

Laura Trott: Labour is dumbing down the curriculum – and disadvantaged children will suffer most

LAURA TROTT MP

 

Laura Trott is the Shadow Education Secretary, and Conservative MP for Sevenoaks.

The Call for Evidence for the Government’s curriculum review closes today. As the new Shadow Education Secretary, as you would expect, I am taking a keen interest in this review, and an article in the Times yesterday about the emerging themes rang alarm bells.

It reported that the review wants to cut the content of some GCSEs and the number of exams, scrap the EBacc (a performance measure for schools on whether they put pupils through academic GCSEs), and will ignore best practice in other countries.

In other words, if reports are correct: dumbing down the curriculum, undermining the three Rs, and undermining us in international league tables.

Under the last Labour government, the number of pupils sitting core academic subjects halved. Alongside this we plummeted down international league tables, the attainment gap at A level widened and universities and employers lost confidence in the education system.

In contrast under the Conservatives we soared up international league tables, and a focus on core subjects has been one of the driving forces behind this improvement in standards for children from all backgrounds over the last decade.

The EBacc tracked the number of children taking GCSEs in English, maths, science, a language and a humanity. It was introduced in response to children from more deprived backgrounds being put through non-academic subjects at the expense of the opportunity to have a full academic education.

It was a means of driving take up of subjects that we know to be useful to children in later life, and provided information to parents so that they knew the school they were sending their children offered the core subjects.

Research from the Sutton Trust in 2016 showed that studying the EBacc can help improve a young person’s performance in English and maths and “the EBacc effect” meant students chose facilitating subjects that will give them the most flexibility in choosing their futures.

So you can see why I am concerned at reports that Labour want to move away from the principles of the EBacc. Unless children have the basics they can’t fulfil their potential in other areas. Children doing English, maths, science, a language and a humanity at GCSE is the least parents expect; it is not right that at 14 children are told these subjects aren’t for them.

Of course, creativity should be nurtured and explored, with arts GCSEs taken on top of these core academic subjects – but not at the expense of giving children a fully rounded education. It should be both, not either/or.

And we all know what will happen, children from private schools and in the best state schools will continue to do academic routes, children from deprived backgrounds and in failing schools will be steered down non-academic – “easier” – routes that do pupils no favours.

Turning to the curriculum, we reformed the curriculum and assessments to make them more academic and restore confidence in qualifications. Cutting content will mean pupils less prepared to go into A Levels and higher education.

Dumbing down may be good for the Education Secretary’s grade-inflated league tables, but it would be letting children down. It puts children at a disadvantage compared to their international peers.

When the Labour Government announced a review of the curriculum, I was immediately worried it was going to be like Labour’s review of the Curriculum in Wales – which was described by the IFS as risking “widening inequalities, increasing teacher workload and limiting future education opportunities”.

Indeed, if you look across to how Labour have been running education in Wales for the last 25 years, it should make you even more nervous about Education Secretary Bridget Philipson’s activity here in England.

There have been millions of children who have received a better education than they would have because of our reforms. Whilst the Call for Evidence closes today, those of us who care about high standards and good quality education will continue to monitor this curriculum review.

We will continue to make the case for a rigorous, knowledge-based curriculum focused on core subjects, so that all pupils have the strong foundation of learning to help them achieve what they want from life. We must not let Labour undermine the ingredients of our education success in the last decade – that would not only be bad for the country, but it would be devastating for our children.

This article (Laura Trott: Labour Is Dumbing Down the Curriculum – and Disadvantaged Children Will Suffer Most) was created and published by Conservative Home and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Laura Trott, MP 

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*