The Heritage Alliance
submission re:
Reform of the National Curriculum
in England
Department for Education
Deadline: 16 April 2013
About
Aboutthe
theAlliance
Alliance
The Heritage
AllianceAlliance
promotes
the interests
of the independent
heritageheritage
movement.
The Heritage
promotes
the interests
of the independent
It brings
together
over
90
heritage
bodies
ranging
from
specialist
advisers,
movement. It brings together 90 heritage bodies ranging from specialist advisers,
practitioners
and managers,
volunteers
and owners
to national
funders
and and
practitioners
and managers,
volunteers
and owners
to national
funders
organisations
leading
regeneration
and
access
projects.
They
are
supported
in in
turn
organisations leading regeneration and access projects. They are supported
turn
by by
thousands
of
local
groups
and
over
five
million
members
with
a
huge
volunteer
thousands of local groups and over five million members with a huge volunteer
inputinput
at allatlevels.
Together
these
members
own,own,
manage
and and
carecare
for the
all levels.
Together
these
members
manage
for vast
the vast
majoritymajority
of England’s
heritage.
Their
specialist
knowledge
and
expertise
is a valuable
of England’s heritage. Their specialist knowledge and expertise,
national
resource,
much oftowhich
is contributed
on aeducational
voluntary basis
forispublic
particularly
in relation
their position
as a vital
asset,
a valuable
benefit.
national resource, much of which is contributed on a voluntary basis for public
benefit.
In responding to this consultation the Alliance brings together the consensus from
our membership but we are encouraging others to respond from their own
specialist perspective.
Question 2. Do you agree that instead of detailed subject-level aims we should free
teachers to shape their own curriculum aims based on the content of the
programmes of study?
The Alliance agrees that teachers should guide the education of our children.
Teachers understand the needs of their students and are well-placed to adapt
general course aims to a teaching strategy that suits all abilities.
However, concerns have been raised about the prescriptive nature of the ‘aims’
governing the teaching of History. When compared to other subjects – such as
English or Geography – those aims concerning History are both complex and
lengthy, covering a great deal of difficult ground considering the relatively small
amount of time allotted to History in school schedules.
The nature of these ‘aims’ leaves teachers little room to manoeuvre. Far from
allowing them to set their own curriculum aims, the current format would pressure
them into attainment targets that would be difficult to meet – a familiarity not only with
the ‘broad outlines’ of European and world history (as well as the ‘follies and
achievements of mankind’) but also concepts such as ‘civilisation’ and ‘empire’ and
the chronological history of the British Isles from the Bronze Age to 1989.
The Heritage Alliance is a company limited by guarantee in England and Wales no 4577804 and registered charity no
1094793.
1
Question 3. Do you have any comments on the content set out in the draft
programme of study?
The Alliance, representing as it does 90 bodies that protect and preserve the nation’s
historic environment, has some serious concerns about the change in content and
subject emphasis for History. The removal of any specific mention of learning through
historic sites, museums or heritage assets is particularly troubling, as a close
relationship between education and the historic environment has proven mutually
beneficial in the past. Immersive learning techniques have been popular with both
students and teachers and careful adaptation by those running such assets have
resulted in interdisciplinary benefits for multiple subjects.
Moreover, while the expansion of the curriculum to include periods such as the Civil
War or the Glorious Revolution should be welcomed, this places a great deal of
pressure on teachers – particularly primary school teachers, many of whom will not
be history specialists but who will nevertheless be charged with teaching 5-11 year
olds about such concepts as ‘nationhood’ and ‘war’, as well as British history from the
Bronze Age to the Glorious Revolution.
Given History’s position in school timetables, many within the sector also have
serious reservations about the detail in which periods or issues will be covered. The
Government’s desire to teach as much British history as possible – in a chronological
context – is commendable, but such a strict timeline with limited teaching time and
resources available risks marginalising critical thought in favour of testable facts.
Though the framework document does point out that “teaching of the content should
be approached as a combination of overview and in-depth studies”, it does not
indicate which periods are more likely to be examined and relies on teachers making
subjective assessments of relative ‘importance’ – thus potentially disadvantaging
their students.
There are also concerns around the suitability of the subject matter for the ages in
question. There is likely to be some difficulty in engaging the interest of the youngest
children in relatively abstract areas that may be beyond their ready comprehension
and have not previously had curriculum priority, therefore suffering from a lack of
resources or educational aides. What is more, the chronology leaves no leeway for
teachers to adjust content to suit differing levels of ability or interest within a
classroom – technical topics such as late 19th-century politics, for example. The
difficulties are compounded in mixed-age classes.
There may be great benefit in exploring the possibility of a spiralling curriculum,
allowing the revisiting of the same topics with different emphasis as pupils develop
during their schooling, and in longitudinal study within certain topic areas.
Engagement with local heritage is an excellent means of illustrating history in an
understandable social context and is an opportunity not to be missed. From a
heritage perspective, the Alliance applauds the inclusion of an “opportunity to study
local history” – but the phrasing of this particular clause makes it clear that this is not
a priority, with the emphasis on dates and events of national importance taking
precedence. The diminishing of Victorian and economic history also means that
industrial history – a vital part of community heritage in many places around the UK –
has little exposure.
The inclusion of prehistory and ancient societies does give access to some underrecognised areas of study, although these are expected to be at the start of a child’s
The Heritage Alliance is a company limited by guarantee in England and Wales no 4577804 and registered charity no
1094793.
2
school career and not to be revisited. Here, as in some other areas of the draft
curriculum, the naming of periods and features is at times erroneous or outmoded.
Finally, members have pointed to a general lack of recognition of ‘alternative history’
and a much-diminished focus on migration, international connections and ethnic
communities - including less attention being paid to the histories of Ireland, Scotland
and Wales. The current curriculum makes specific mention of pupils studying “the
social, cultural, religious and ethnic diversity of…societies in Britain and the wider
world…” Nowhere is this apparent in the new draft. The Alliance’s concerns in
relation to this are covered more comprehensively under Question 9.
Question 4. Does the content set out in the draft programmes of study represent a
sufficiently ambitious level of challenge for pupils at each key stage?
Ambitious is certainly an appropriate word to use for the content laid out in the draft
programmes of study – again, particularly in relation to History. Other subjects, such
as English or Geography, seem to strike a balance between challenging students
and giving teachers sufficient licence to adapt content through broader subject aims.
An explicit commitment to the chronology of British history means an enormous
amount of content is expected to be conveyed in Key Stages 1-3.
Question 5. Do you have any comments on the proposed wording of the attainment
targets?
The wording of attainment targets for History – pupils “are expected to know, apply
and understand the matters, skills and processes specified in the relevant
programme of study” – is vague and does not indicate how or when this
knowledge, application or understanding is to be properly assessed.
Question 9. What impact – positive or negative – will our proposals have on the
‘protected characteristic’ groups?
Serious concerns have been raised on the proposals’ lack of emphasis on the history
and culture of the diverse communities which now make up modern Britain. A
diminished focus on world history and an increase in content concerning empire and
conquest might result in such groups feeling disenfranchised. Though specific
mention is made of the influx of East African Asians and the Windrush generation, as
is the discussion of the legalisation of homosexuality, these come at the end of a
hectic Key Stage Three timetable that runs from the conquest of Canada in the mid18th Century to the fall of the Berlin Wall. In such circumstances, it is all too easy to
imagine that certain topics might be dropped or rushed through in an effort to cover
the appropriate ground. Insufficient attention to these topics would be deeply unfair to
‘protected characteristics’ students as proper coverage helps not only historical but
also social education.
Contact:
Kate Pugh
Chief Executive
kate.pugh@theheritagealliance.org.uk
020 7233 0500
The Heritage Alliance
Clutha House
10 Storey’s Gate
London SW1P 3AY
The Heritage Alliance is a company limited by guarantee in England and Wales no 4577804 and registered charity no
1094793.
3