Curriculum review: ‘Strengthen’ resit accountability and reduce T Level assessment burden

The government should “strengthen accountability” for post-16 English and maths teaching and slash the volume of T Level assessments, according to the long-awaited curriculum and assessment review.

Professor Becky Francis’s review, commissioned last year by the incoming Labour government, also urges ministers to consider making “certain elements” of non-qualification activity, like enrichment and work experience, mandatory for 16 to 19-year-olds. 

Most of Francis’s proposals for 16 to 19 education, such as V Levels, English and maths GCSE stepping-stone qualifications and two new level 2 pathways, have already been accepted in the government’s post-16 education and skills white paper, which was published two weeks ago.

But recommendations to “strengthen” English and maths accountability for post-16 providers, reducing assessment burdens in T Levels and promoting a consistent non-qualification experience in 16-19 study programmes were not covered in the white paper. The Department for Education has been approached for a response to these recommendations.

Francis was tasked with updating the national curriculum for primary and secondary pupils as well as reviewing 16-19 study pathways. Her final report will be published tomorrow (November 5).

Headline pre-16 recommendations from the review include scrapping the EBacc accountability measure, introducing year 8 “diagnostic” tests in English and maths and cutting GCSE exam time by at least 10 per cent. See below for a full list of assessment and accountability recommendations. 

Francis, who returns to her role as chief executive of the Education Endowment Foundation this week, said: “The curriculum and assessment review has been an opportunity to bring our curriculum up to date, and to build on what is presently working well while fixing what isn’t.”

English and maths: Functional skills ‘inappropriate’

Francis said the post-16 sector should not be expected to fix low English and maths attainment alone and was highly critical of functional skills qualifications (FSQs). 

The review found that 80 per cent of learners with low prior attainment at key stage 2 fail to reach level 2 by age 16, calling this a “systemic issue” that begins much earlier.

For those retaking GCSEs in FE, the review warns that the current approach “does not allow sufficient opportunity to revisit more fundamental gaps in knowledge”.

The report said the review panel found “some positive uses of functional skills qualifications to help re-engage learners with studying maths and English.”

For the majority of learners however, “we heard overwhelmingly from providers that FSQs do not currently service as an appropriate pathway for them to reach level 2” because of “unfamiliar” work-related content, high-stakes pass or fail grading and a lack of recognition among parents, employers and universities. 

Calls to scrap the requirement for students without a grade 4 in GCSE English and maths to continue studying towards those grades in their post-16 education were roundly rejected. 

“We consider that the importance for life chances of securing maths and English means that [the requirement] should remain. The urgent challenge is to improve efficacy so that more young people are supported to make progress and fewer of them reach 16-19 study without having secured level 2,” the report said.

It recommends the government “strengthens the accountability system” for English and maths and “explores” ways to incentivise effective practice amongst 16-19 providers.

Francis recommends new level 1 “stepped” qualifications, lasting one year, for students at 16-19 who achieve a grade 1 or 2 in GCSE English and maths at 16.

These qualifications should be assessed in a modular way, which would let learners “bank” their progress, and they would be graded to the equivalent to a “strong” GCSE grade 3 to put them in a better position to resit the next year.

The Department for Education said it would consult on these new qualifications in 2026. 

T Level assessment ‘too heavy’

While reaffirming support for T Levels as “gold-standard technical qualifications”, the review warns the current assessment model is unsustainable as student numbers grow.

“Providers reported challenges about the volume of assessment required, particularly as more T Levels are being offered and the number of learners taking them increases,” the report said, stressing it was “especially acute” in assessing the occupational specialism component.

The occupational specialism is designed to be completed in the second year of T Levels after completing the core component.

In March, DfE streamlined the core content and reduced assessment volume in the digital, construction and education and early years T Levels.

“The government should continue to review and amend assessment practice across all T Level routes,” the report responded.

It also recommended the government work closely with awarding organisations to reduce the assessment burden of T Levels in the context of scale up.

Francis also urged Skills England to increase employer engagement with T Levels, including a “robust and creative approach” to incentivising industry placements.

Mandatory enrichment

The review panel also praised the “wide” range of enrichment, employment and pastoral activities that colleges and schools offer, including volunteering, life skills and student-led social action.

The report said that DfE’s expectations were “deliberately broad” allowing for flexibility, but providers told the panel that the current level of ambiguity is “unhelpful”, which leads to inconsistencies and varieties in student experiences.

The review therefore recommended DfE strengthen their guidance to “promote effective practice” in non-qualification activity and consider whether some parts should be made mandatory to improve consistency.

Francis added: “Our recommendations have sought to ensure that high standards extend to all young people irrespective of background, and that barriers to opportunity are removed.

“My hope is that the recommendations contained in this report will take us a step closer towards ensuring that every young person has access to an excellent education by building a world-class curriculum and assessment system for all.”

Here are the review’s overall recommendations and those relating to accountability and assessment from primary school to post-16.

Overarching recommendations

• Introduce an oracy framework to support practice and to complement the existing frameworks for reading and writing
• Review and updates all programmes of study and, where appropriate, the corresponding GCSE subject content to include stronger representation of the diversity that makes up our modern society, allowing more children to see themselves in the curriculum
• Develop the national curriculum as a digital product that can support teachers to navigate content easily and to see and make connections across key stages and disciplines
• Develop a programme of work to provide evidence-led guidance on curriculum and pedagogical adaptation (as well as exemplification) for children and young people with SEND, including those in specialist provision, who experience various barriers to accessing the curriculum
• Involve teachers in the testing and design of programmes of study as part of the drafting process. This must take into consideration the curriculum time that is available, ensuring the national curriculum is ambitious but teachable within a typical school timetable

Principles

• The refreshed national curriculum must be an aspirational, engaging and demanding offer that reflects the high expectations and excellence our young people deserve, irrespective of background
• The refreshed national curriculum should retain a knowledge-rich approach, ensuring skills are developed in conjunction with knowledge in ways that are appropriate for each subject discipline
• The national curriculum should be constructed so that it supports children and young people to master core concepts, ensuring sufficient space for them to build their knowledge and deepen their understanding
• Curriculum coherence should be an organising principle for curriculum drafters and support the selection and prioritisation of content. Where appropriate, vertical core concepts on which subjects have been constructed should be clearly presented, and horizontal coherence should be ensured
• Foundation subject content should specify the essential substantive knowledge and skills which should be taught to enable children and young people to meet expectations at the end of each key stage
• The refreshed national curriculum should ensure the professional autonomy of teachers is maintained, making sure that greater specificity does not substantially restrict teachers’ flexibility to choose lesson content and how to teach it
• The national curriculum is for all our children and young people. As such, it should reflect our diverse society and the contributions of people of all backgrounds to our knowledge and culture

Accountability

• Remove the EBacc performance measures and the associated EBacc entry and attainment headline accountability measures
• Retain Progress 8 (and Attainment 8) with no changes to its structure or subject composition, but rename the current EBacc bucket to ‘Academic Breadth’ bucket
• Continue to develop initiatives related to similar schools, with a particular emphasis on supporting inclusive approaches within accountability measures

Key stage 1 assessment

• Ensure that the STA works with the DfE to find ways to encourage take-up of optional Key Stage 1 assessments
• Ensure that the STA works with DfE to explore approaches for assessing progress for the small minority of pupils with certain SEND needs that make the phonics screening Check inaccessible. This assessment should be administered in the school setting

Key stage 2 assessment

• Ensure that the STA works with DfE to explore if access arrangements can be refined for pupils with certain SEND that make the multiplication tables check inaccessible. This assessment should continue to be administered in a school setting
• Develop an improved teacher assessment framework to provide teachers with clarity and include a greater focus on writing fluency
• Review external moderation processes and look to strengthen peer moderation between schools, with the aim of embedding good practice to improve moderation in years where schools are not selected for external moderation and improving consistency between external judgments
• Replace the current grammar, punctuation and spelling (GPS) test with an amended test, which retains some elements of the current GPS test but with new tasks to better assess composition and application of grammar and punctuation
• Once the new test is established in schools, the DfE may wish to consider whether the role of the test in accountability remain as stands, or whether any changes, such as including the new test in headline measures, should be explored

Key stage 3 assessment

• Introduce diagnostic assessment for key components of maths and English to be taken during year 8 to support teachers to address students’ needs and ensure that they are well prepared to progress into key stage 4
• Commission the design and trialling of the test, with a view to making it mandatory if the pilots demonstrate that this is an effective approach

Key stage 4 assessment

Volume

• Work with Ofqual, seeking to reduce overall exam time by at least 10 per cent, focusing on assessment design choices to deliver this reduction, and going further than this where possible. This should be considered on a subject-by-subject basis, ensuring minimal impact on reliability, fairness and teaching and learning
• Work with Ofqual to introduce a design principle that considers of the volume of exam assessment as a priority. The DfE and Ofqual should explore a range of options within each subject to seek to minimise exam length whilst ensuring minimal negative impact on reliability, fairness, teaching and learning and system resilience
• Ensure that in implementing the above recommendations, each subject retains at least two assessment components

Method of assessment

• Continues to employ the principle that non-exam assessment should be used only when it is the only valid way to assess essential elements of a subject
• Ensure that assessment approaches continue to be derived from the nature and structure of subject content, ensuring that what is assessed reflects what is most important for students to learn and do. Changes to the balance of assessment should only be made where this reflects changes to the content
• Ensure that the DfE and Ofqual work closely with the wider education sector to explore how core aspects of subject content can be retained and assessed whilst managing and mitigating the risk of generative AI
• Ensure that the DfE and Ofqual continue to consider the full range of options for assessment methods, including non-exam assessment, where it would be necessary to mitigate the risks posed by generative AI
• Ensure that the DfE and Ofqual continue to work together to explore potential for innovation in on-screen assessment in GCSE, AS and A Level qualifications, particularly where this could further support accessibility for students with SEND and where this could reduce exam volume in the future. We recommend they continue to review the evidence and carefully consider risks and benefits
• Ensure that Ofqual, awarding organisations and the DfE work together to consider how awarding organisations can build accessibility into the design of new specifications for GCSEs, AS and A-levels
• Ensure that, when updating the maths and science GCSEs, subject experts evaluate each formula and equation to determine whether students should be required to memorise and recall it, or whether assessment should focus on their ability to apply it when provided

16 to 19 education

• Introduce a revised third pathway at level 3 to sit alongside the academic and technical pathways. This pathway should be based on new qualifications, which we recommend calling V Levels
• Consider learners who have SEND or face other barriers to education to ensure that the qualifications are inclusive by design
• Continue to work closely with awarding organisations to reduce the assessment burden of T Level assessment in the context of scale up
• Ensure that the content for T Levels remains up to date and that the amount of content can be delivered within the time available, and that it should seek opportunities to review and reduce content where necessary
• Introduce two separate pathways at level 2 (an occupational pathway and a pathway to level 3), each serving different purposes and designed specifically to meet these purposes and improve student outcomes
• Strengthen guidance for 16-19 study programmes to promote effective practice in delivering non-qualification activity and to clarify expectations about the types of activities that should be core to the enrichment offer. The focus should be on applied knowledge and transferable skills that will enable learners to step confidently into adulthood. 
• Consider whether certain elements of non-qualification activity should be made mandatory so that learners’ access to opportunities is more consistent. 

16 to 19 English and maths

• Strengthen the accountability system and explores opportunities to better incentivise effective practice across 16-19 providers
• Introduce new level 1 stepped qualifications for maths and English language at 16-19, to enable learners to make progress towards achieving level 2 in these GCSEs during 16-19 study. The Review Panel recommends these qualifications are:
  – One-year, level 1 qualifications for 16 to 19-year-olds with prior attainment of a grade 1 or 2 at GCSE.
  – Designed to focus teaching on mastery of the fundamentals, addressing knowledge gaps from earlier key stages in steps and enabling learners to build confidence in all areas of the GCSE up to the equivalent of grade 3.
  – Assessed in a modular way to allow learners to build up and ‘bank’ their progress, giving accreditation for modules learners have passed.
  – Graded up to the equivalent of a strong GCSE grade 3, thereby putting learners who have achieved this level 1 qualification in a strong position to resit the GCSE the following year and thereby achieve level 2 during 16-19 study.

Future curriculum reviews

• Limit the intervals between holistic curriculum reviews to approximately a decade
• Supplement holistic reviews with a rolling programme of light-touch minimalist updates (conducted by the DfE with support from its agencies) of the national curriculum and its programmes of study
• These should have the threefold aim of ensuring the national curriculum remains up to date, addressing any specific issues arising and ensuring that the volume of content remains appropriate and deliverable
• Ensure that future reviews set clear objectives at the outset, adopt a rigorous evidence-led approach and undertake public consultation
• Ensure that future reviews strike an appropriate balance between external expert input and central coordination and that it evaluates the likely impact of any proposed changes, including considering the capacity and workload of professionals and educational institutions