By Gavin Mackintosh-
Ofsted’s head, Amanda Spielman has bemoaned the reduction of the curriculum in a number of British schools in response to funding cuts.
The curriculum in most schools is influenced by the rich guidance form the Department Of Education for state-funded school must offer a curriculum which is balanced and broadly and which prepares pupils at the school for the opportunities, responsibilities and experiences of later life.
The guidelines also imposes responsibility on schools to plan lessons in a way that ensure that there are no barriers to any pupil achieving in school. However. Ofsted which regulates the progress of primary and secondary schools in the Uk has expressed concern of the narrowing of the curriculum in schools.
The concern is most acute because of the higher academic standards of exams right from the end of year Sats in primary schools right up to G.C.S.E and A level exams at the end of secondary schools.
School pupils of today are expected to be brighter than the generation before them, but only pupils responding to the rich national curriculum in schools can benefit from the new higher standard of academics set by the Department Of Education.
Today, a worried Ms Spieldman said; saying that it is “particularly concerning” to see schools reducing access to subjects such as languages, computing, design, technology and music.
“We placed curriculum and quality of education at the heart of our education inspection framework, because all pupils should be entitled to a broad and rich curriculum that will give them the foundations for further study or work, and prepare them for life in modern Britain,” said Spielman.
“This makes it particularly concerning that schools are responding to funding pressure by reducing curriculum breadth, with languages, computing, design and technology and music most affected. Extra-curricular provision has also been cut in a number of schools. This may reduce pupils’ opportunities to enrich their experiences and grow cultural capital.”
“In some of the secondary schools we visited, subject specialists were not being replaced when they left and other teachers were teaching outside their specialism. In some schools, experienced teachers were replaced with less-experienced and lower-qualified staff.”
Schools also reported cutting continuous professional development and removing teaching and learning responsibility points
“In some schools, higher level teaching assistants were being used to cover classes when teachers were absent, rather than the school paying for teachers to cover these lessons.”
She said that while some of these decisions “cannot be helped” and staff cuts “may be necessary”, they are sometimes “being done with insufficient monitoring of the effects on quality of education”.
“This is clearly not the way to ensure that children and young people get the education they deserve.”