Curriculum and Assessment Review Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDarren Paffey
Main Page: Darren Paffey (Labour - Southampton Itchen)Department Debates - View all Darren Paffey's debates with the Department for International Development
(1 day, 7 hours ago)
Commons ChamberThe right hon. Lady said at the start that any criticism was levelled my way, but she then went on to criticise many of the recommendations in the review. Has she even bothered to read it at all? She comes here time and again, every single time full of sound and fury, signifying nothing—and yes, Shakespeare is here to stay on the national curriculum. She tries to paint the report and our response as undoing the achievements in schools. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are not abandoning it; we are building on it, with a curriculum that will allow all young people to achieve high standards, with core academic subjects alongside the breadth that they deserve.
Our reforms have higher standards right at their heart. They will raise standards of pupils right across the curriculum, including in speaking and listening, reading, writing and maths. Our improved Progress 8 and Attainment 8 measures will ensure that students retain a strong academic core, but with a breadth to expand into further study. The right hon. Lady might oppose the changes we are setting out, but today they have won support from the Sutton Trust, from employers like the CBI and from Sir Hamid Patel, the wonderful leader at Star Academies, who backs the changes we are making, saying that they
“signal both a welcome emphasis on creativity—reflecting amazing career opportunities…but with continued affirmation that success in English and mathematics is crucial for everyone’s life chances.”
I could not agree more.
We know that it is important that our new measures provide breadth and enrichment. Leaving aside that the arts and creative subjects are worth up to £125 billion to our country and employ 2.4 million people, I want more young people to have brilliant careers and opportunities in those fields. The two are not in opposition. We can and will deliver high and strong academic standards, alongside making sure that a broad and rich curriculum is the entitlement of every child. There was once a time when the Conservatives supported that idea. It is why they introduced a national curriculum to apply in every school. We are restoring the Conservative principle of the national curriculum applying for every child. I benefited from that, and I want every child in our country to benefit from it.
The curriculum has not been updated for over a decade. Parents want one that is fit for the future, employers back what we are doing and children deserve it. The changes we are setting out today will secure better life chances for all our children.
Darren Paffey (Southampton Itchen) (Lab)
I welcome a curriculum review that will break down barriers. It opens up so much of the digital and financial literacy that the Conservatives seem to think is unimportant to all, but which we know will raise aspirations by equipping young people from all backgrounds. I have two questions that I would like to ask the Secretary of State. One is on examinations. We know that this country has an examination overload and I welcome the proposed reduction by 10%.
Darren Paffey
I will listen to the experts before I listen to the Front Bench any day—the Opposition Front Bench. [Laughter.] If the right hon. Member listens, she will hear that. Will the Secretary of State please look at the overall load throughout school, not just in GCSE year, and comment on how she sees the introduction of an additional year 8 diagnostic panning out?
On my second question, I declare an interest as the vice chair of the all-party parliamentary group on modern languages. We broadly welcome the Government’s response, which goes further than the recommendations, and the recognition of importance. It is right to scrap the EBacc, which has never really been taken seriously by professionals, but will the Secretary of State please say how she will stop uptake from dropping immediately? What other incentives will there be? When will she deliver the feasibility review of the new qualification based on languages ladder expertise, which is welcomed by the sector ?
On languages, I share my hon. Friend’s determination to ensure that more young people have the chance to study modern languages. There is a particular challenge that we face around transition from primary to secondary—the review makes that clear—and that is one area for further action. On the EBacc, I am afraid that it did not have the outcome that was intended in improving languages take-up: we are no further forward than we were in 2010 in percentage figures. We are seeing increases in the number of teachers coming forward to train in modern languages, and that is welcome. I also believe that a new stepped qualification will provide a useful route for more young people to move on to study languages at GCSE.
On exams and time, particularly at GCSE, Ofqual has been clear that a 10% reduction in the time spent in exams—that amounts to two and a half to three hours—is more than achievable while at no point compromising the integrity or the high quality and standards of the system. We will work with the regulator to make that happen. We are an international outlier on the amount of time our children spend in exams at GCSE. On the year 8 reading test, we will introduce a statutory reading test to ensure that problems are identified and children supported. That will run alongside diagnostic maths and writing tests to ensure that children are also making progress in those key areas, but if you cannot read well, you cannot do anything else.