Discussions

During the face to face event held on 5 June 2009 and on the STEM Advisory Forum website between 1 May 2009 and 31 July 2009 a number of comments were made regarding the proposed primary curriculum. The department's response to these is detailed below:

General

The way that the review report places the learner at the centre of the curriculum is welcomed, as is the emphasis given to links between subjects. The opportunity to make links between STEM subjects is considered particularly appropriate and some would like to see these made explicit.

Issues

There was general criticism of the layout of the programmes of learning. People feel this is overly complex and obscures, rather than clarifies, the key ideas within the subjects.

• Some changes to the layout of the programmes of learning are being considered to take account of responses to the consultation.

The structure of Early, Middle and Later in curriculum progression is generally welcomed but its rationale is not made clear in the body of the final Rose report, so is open to misunderstanding.

• Guidance and support materials will make clear how the curriculum progression statements should be used to inform curricular design and planning. DCSF is putting in place a package of support and materials which will be available to schools from
• January 2010.

A concern was expressed on the website that the level descriptions, being consulted on, do not match the proposed curriculum. This was mirrored by comments made at the event about non-alignment of level descriptions.

• QCDA is considering responses to the level descriptions consultation. The use of level descriptions in primary education is only statutory in English, mathematics and science. QCDA will be providing exemplification and guidance to help teachers assess pupil progress within areas of learning.

Numeracy and mathematical understanding:

A new curriculum is felt to be a very good opportunity to take stock of primary mathematics and make a step change. It is seen as a rare chance to take action on the full range of issues, including attitudes to mathematics. A new curriculum has the potential to re-enthuse teachers and children alike.

Issues:

At the event, participants approved of a single programme of learning for mathematics, rather than combining it with another subject. There was a general view that the daily mathematics lesson should remain, alongside mathematics linked to other subjects.

Furthermore they felt that the proposed curriculum includes all the important ideas in primary mathematics. However, they think that the programme of learning is too long; it is still quite prescriptive and the review has not met its brief to thin the curriculum.

• Jim Rose engaged a number of subject experts to help him and QCDA to draft the proposed programmes of learning. Attempts were made to restrict content to the essential knowledge, skills and understanding children needed to be taught and acquire between the ages of 5-11. However, this was easier to do for some subjects and areas of learning than for others. Initial analysis of the consultation responses suggests that the majority of respondents believe that overall the proposed primary curriculum is less prescriptive and more flexible than the existing one.

Participants at the event were concerned that the new curriculum could be undermined by the National Strategy Framework, which presents objectives on a year-by-year basis.

• It is the National Curriculum which is statutory not the National Strategy Frameworks. While the Frameworks will continue to be useful to schools for planning teaching it is the National Curriculum which sets out what is to be taught. Guidance materials will make clear what is statutory in relation to the National Curriculum.

Scientific and technological understanding:

Issues:

There is concern about the absence of science from the new core skills. Comments on the website were mainly expressing concern that this represents a downgrading of science.

• With a move to areas of learning, core and foundation subjects will no longer apply in the same way. The areas of learning will not be designated as core or foundation. However, Jim Rose identified a number of skills considered to be Essentials for Life
• and Learning (literacy, numeracy, ICT capability and personal learning and thinking skills) which should be developed across the curriculum and within all the areas of learning.
• Science remains an important subject in its own at primary. This will be made clear in guidance and support materials. The Review Team worked with the science community to ensure the curriculum contains the scientific knowledge, skills and understanding they consider it essential for children aged 5-11 to learn. Suggestions from the consultation for improving the draft Scientific and Technological
• Understanding programme of learning will be carefully considered.

There was a concern expressed at the event that D&T could simply become a vehicle for demonstrating scientific ideas rather that a creative design subject in its own right. Many would prefer 'design' to be in the title of the programme of learning and the practical aspects to be made more explicit.

• We believe that the position and teaching of D&T will be enhanced through its links with science. There are numerous references in the programme of learning to creative design and applying practical ideas to design in its own right as well as in
• relation to science and technology.

There were many comments at the conference and on the website about enquiry skills and 'how science works'. Most of these comments are critical of the proposed new curriculum. The view is that the emphasis should be on enquiry and investigation and that there should be clearer demonstration of the progression in enquiry skills.

• There are many references to investigation throughout the programme of learning, including in the progression statements. However we will look at how this could be strengthened further. Learning how to investigate is one of the Essentials for Life and
• Learning and children will have opportunities to develop this skill across the curriculum.

Most people feel that food and textiles are not well covered. The programme of learning includes the phrase 'apply knowledge, skills and understanding when designing and making products using construction materials, textiles and ingredients'. This single mention of both textiles and food is not considered to be adequate.

• Food is covered in greater detail in understanding physical development, health and well-being. We will look again at textiles in light of the consultation responses.