These are the conclusions of a review carried out by OCR’s chair – the former education secretary Charles Clarke.
The review set out to address the “curriculum and assessment challenges” at key stages 3 and 4. The final report – entitled Striking the balance – recommends “rebalancing” assessment away from a sole reliance on exams at 16.
It states: “The current volume and intensity of examination at GCSE and for vocational key stage 4 qualifications in England is too high, with students taking an average of 31.5 hours of exams each, and is higher than most comparable jurisdictions.
“This dependence on exams as the only mode of assessment means there is too much focus on a narrow range of learning.”
The review concludes: “Assessment needs to be balanced far more evenly across the whole five-year period, rather than being focused almost entirely in the last part of the final academic year at age 16.
“A wider range of assessment models can include Non-Exam Assessments (NEAs), a modular approach, and greater use of ‘open book’ exams and exam aids. All of these alternatives have associated risks along with benefits, and in particular a thorough review of NEA models will be required to ameliorate the risk of plagiarism, and additional requirements on teachers.”
The review also wants to see an updated curriculum, the creation of an independent body responsible for “keeping it relevant”, and an end to the cycle of “infrequent ‘big bang’ reforms”.
It adds: “The over-reliance on exams is exacerbated by a curriculum that is overloaded with content. The content of GCSEs can and should be reduced. The potential for reducing content varies from subject to subject, with maths, the sciences, and history standing out as particularly overloaded.”
It continues: “Throughout the whole five years the curriculum itself needs to engage students by being far more contemporary and forward-looking, including more content on digital skills and artificial intelligence, and climate change and sustainability.”
It comes after education secretary Bridget Phillipson commissioned a government review into curriculum and assessment, which is being chaired by Professor Becky Francis.
The OCR review says that many issues become apparent during GCSEs when they should be being tackled much earlier, such as weak foundational skills – especially in maths.
The review warns: “Nearly one-third of GCSE students fail to achieve what the government describes as a ‘pass’. Only about a fifth pass their resits, condemning the rest to revisit the demoralising experience of failing the exam.
“Poor performance is also linked to deprivation and the attainment gap. Not only do roughly one-third of students ‘fail’ the maths GCSE but research … has also found strong evidence that they are reaching 16 without the basic foundations in number skills that they need for life, work and study.”
The report adds: “The key stage 3 years, 11 to 14, need to be focused far more rigorously on building the foundational skills, particularly in maths and English, which enable all pupils to move forward to further study in a way which will deliver results.”
And it advocates for the creation of an independent body to oversee “incremental” curriculum reform. It adds: “We advocate the creation of a curriculum body, independent of government, which should take the lead on developing and maintaining a broad and balanced curriculum.”
The review’s assessment and curriculum recommendations
- Reduce the length and number of assessments used at GCSE: “The number of hours spent sitting GCSEs is unnecessarily high and needs to be reduced while still retaining standards and rigour. It is evident that there is considerable scope for doing this without impacting on the reliability and validity of exams.”
- Reduce the amount of content in GCSEs: “There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the content of GCSEs other than that there is too much of it.”
- Schedule some exams early or make limited use of modular exams or NEA in some subjects: “There is scope to look at opportunities, at subject level, for spreading assessments over a longer period of time so that not all exams are taken in a concentrated period at the end of key stage 4.”
- Require the exam boards and the regulator to conduct a thorough but urgent review of existing NEA models.
- Introduce a benchmarking qualification, taken on screen, in maths and English to highlight gaps in students’ knowledge and provide structure to key stage 3.
- Redesign the English language GCSE as a matter of urgency, and include a broader definition of English skills including media and spoken language.
- Government should put in place mechanisms for the on-going review and evaluation of curriculum and assessment.
Commentary
Jill Duffy, chief executive of OCR: “No-one expects an exam board to say there are too many exams. Established exams have enormous strengths. But you can have too much of a good thing over a short period. As this report makes clear, it is possible to rebalance assessment at GCSE without sacrificing rigour and standards.”
OCR chair, former education secretary Charles Clarke: “The realistic, bold reforms set out in this report would give young people every opportunity to fulfil their ambitions and potential. Many teachers we consulted felt that this sort of change would give them the time and space to do the sort of teaching they joined the profession for.”
Geoff Barton, chair of the Independent Commission of Oracy in England: “This report provides an important, evidence-based agenda for the new government’s curriculum and assessment review, and provides a welcome opportunity to keep what’s good in our education system but improve what’s not good enough.”
Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders: “We have become a nation that is hooked on exams, and this report resonates with many concerns raised by school and college leaders. The excessive volume and intensity of GCSEs, as reformed by the last government, is completely unnecessary for the purpose of aiding progression. It creates significant exam anxiety among students, with a detrimental impact on their mental health, and is particularly challenging for those with additional needs. OCR’s proposals to reduce the length, number and content of assessments, and to reform GCSE English and maths, are spot on. We’re pleased also with the recognition that reform should happen incrementally as it is vital that education staff are not overwhelmed by rapid changes.”
- OCR: Striking the balance: A review of 11–16 curriculum and assessment in England, 2024: https://teach.ocr.org.uk/striking-the-balance