Deficiency in the Curriculum of Primary Education in the UK - Essay Example

The Deficiency in the Curriculum of Primary Education in the UK Primary education is crucial to the holistic development children. Illiteracy is a global problem that needs to be addressed properly. In fact, more than 1 billion people worldwide are illiterate, a primary reason for which is that the “quality of their primary education was too low” (Donker 2005). Because of this, there is a need to continually examine the quality and effectiveness of primary education, not only in developing countries, but also in first world nations. The quality of education should not be taken for granted, especially in developed countries like the UK. There are many aspects contributing to the effectiveness and efficiency of primary education, like the teaching styles, the schedule and length of classes and even governmental, societal and parental support. Foremost of these contributing factors is the curriculum. The current issue presented by the 2009 Cambridge Review of Primary Education that the curriculum of primary education in the UK has been found to be deficient and lacking due to the schools’ focus on the their ranking measured by standardised tests will be discussed and analysed in this paper.  The Importance of Primary Education The International Education Conference (2003) emphasised the importance of education to children in that it is “a critical enabling right” that helps “children to develop the skills which enable them to cope with life’s challenges and be active contributing members of society.” Basic education is certainly key to the survival of peoples from all kinds of culture as it paves the way for the development of knowledge and skills that are extremely useful in life and a deficiency in primary education creates a disadvantage to the students (Donkers 2005; Garner 2009). For instance, a plumber would need to know basic concepts like weight, pressure and balance in order to do his work properly and a mother or a father needs to know basic mathematical skills in budgeting household expenses. The significance of a good primary education, even just this and not secondary and tertiary since many cannot afford further education, can be seen in how developing countries’ industries are problematic and inefficient. “Ministries, factories, hospitals and farms in developing countries often work inefficiently, not because the people working there are not capable but because they lack the right knowledge and skills” (Donker 2005). This is the primary reason why the effectiveness of basic education is crucial to the survival of communities and societies: it paves the way for the learning of basic knowledge and skills that are necessary to be able to live in this modern world. It must be noted that this need for effective and holistic primary education is not diminished in developed countries. It is the view of the author of this paper that first world countries like the UK need to avoid the presupposition that because it has been proven through standardised tests and statistics that their education system is better than most, there is no need to analyse and improve on it. The Context and Parameters It must be explained that education cannot be separated from societal life in that it is manifested in society in as much as society reflects it. This means that different societies place different values in education and this is mirrored in the quality of their education and the illiteracy rate. Furthermore, as illustrated earlier, poor primary education can be seen in the problems it presents to society. It may come in the form of slow industrial and technical growth or the illiteracy rate as every society is unique and this uniqueness is paralleled in their education system and the issues emanating from them. Because of this, it is important to situate the issue presented here within the English community. The Parameters Although it may be a reiteration of what was said earlier, it is still worth clarifying that the social parameter of primary education lies in the fact that schools are situated in different places, serving different students belonging to the various economic strata. Much like clothes, some are designer-made while some are from common retail stores. Likewise, students come from a range of cultural backgrounds that affects their reception of education. Schools have to take this into consideration, especially with a diverse population like the UK, in order to make sure that the goals of education are met. However, because state schools and the statutory tests done that experts claim limit the breadth of primary education are the ones in question here, these social and cultural parameters will not be investigated further. The two parameters of primary education that is involved in this critical review are the political and economic factors. The economic parameter overlaps with the political in that the amount and importance given to primary education is determined by the government. The political aspect is the one that weighs heavily on this issue as many criticise the state for approving such measures for assessment that has produced a narrow curriculum and consequently, has “impoverished the lives of the children” (Garner 2009). The political and economic factors at work are exemplified by The Independent’s (2009) view of education in the UK: “This preoccupation with the way our children learn, and the contradictory advice that is all too often dispensed, sets us apart from most Continental countries, where teachers are, by and large, left to teach.” Here, it can be seen how the state has made education one of its priorities. Hence, there is large funding for education in the UK and this is coupled with strict legislation in the form of the National Curriculum. In effect, it has been argued that primary education has become an agenda that is determined largely by politics, instead of the welfare of the children (The Guardian 2009). This and the statutory assessments it requires will be discussed further in the coming sections. The Context: primary Education in the UK Primary education in the UK starts at the age of five and “local education authorities [the body that funds public schools] must provide all children with a school place no later than the start of the term after their fifth birthday” (BBC News 2001). Secondary education starts at twelve years of age and hence, primary school students are between the ages of five and eleven (BBC News, 2001). There are more than 30,000 primary schools in England and Wales and 90% of the students go to publicly funded state schools (British Council n.d.). State schools strictly follow the National Curriculum drafted in 1992, which states that the core subjects are Mathematics, English and Science (British Council n.d.). The National Curriculum has delineated 7 levels and 4 stages, two stages of which fall within the scope of primary education, with teachers assessing the students’ attainment of each stage through statutory tests, with the national tests being the assessment tool used when it comes to the fourth and final stage of primary education (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2001).  Theoretical Groundwork It is significant to analyse the theoretical groundwork of the National Curriculum based on the current issues and criticisms made against it. Polly Curtis (2009b) asserts that it employs the “memorisation and recall” style of learning that inhibits, instead of cultivates, a child’s holistic educational development. This learning technique, more academically known as rote learning, was introduced by B. F. Skinner as a part of his operant conditioning theory in which he proposed that “proper and immediate reinforcement strengthens the likelihood that appropriate behavior will be repeated” (Skinner as cited in Bucher and Manning 2001). Although rote learning has proven to be useful when dealing with special children in that repetition and memorisation helps them learn lessons more effectively, it tends to deal with short-term learning and has proven to be inefficient in gaining long-term practical knowledge (Bueno 1990; Curtis 2009b). For instance, students may learn the meaning of a word and its various tenses so that they can answer questions pertaining to it in a test, but fail to be able to converse using it or create a meaningful sentence (Bueno, 1999). The National Curriculum also used Piaget’s Constructivist Approach in its formulation of the different levels and key stages for assessment in that they base the children’s attainment targets with the corresponding ages (DirectGov 2009). The Current Issue The Cambridge Review of Primary Education (2009), “the most comprehensive inquiry into primary schooling since the Plowden report of 1967,” found that current curriculum in primary education in the UK is "fundamentally deficient" due to "an over-emphasis on the skills of reading, writing and maths at the expense of other subjects" because of the excessive attention given by schools in the standardised tests that determine their ranking (Garner 2009; Curtis 2009a). The government argues that the development of basic skills cannot be done successfully while taking into consideration a holistic approach that includes a breadth of learning that encompasses a wide range of subjects (Alexander and Flutter 2009). Thus, the state decided to focus on basic subjects like Math, English and Science in the formulating of the National Curriculum. However, these subjects are not enough to produce a holistic primary education. However, the Cambridge Review of Primary Education begs to differ on this assumption, even stating that it is a “false debate” by citing evidence in their work that “schools that blend literacy and numeracy into the wider teaching of other subjects often get the best results” (Alexander 2009 as cited in Curtis, 2009b). It is not enough to focus on them and make students excel in these subjects to prepare them for the real world and equip them in tackling the challenges that life brings. The attention given to these subjects has become a great cause for concern as many feel, and now the Cambridge Review of Primary Education has provided proof and evidence, that it produces a curriculum that can only be characterised as “too narrow” (BBC News 2009). This is because the government and school administrations operate on the assumption that “standards in the basics are best secured by concentrating upon them to the exclusion of all or most else,” like history, arts, humanities and other sciences (Alexander and Flutter 2009; Curtis 2009b). The reason why the curriculum is deemed too narrow is due, largely, to the schools themselves as they implement a curriculum that focuses on these three subjects in order to make sure that their students will score high in the tests and improve the reputation and ranking of their schools. “Key stage tests are there to hold the school to account that was their original purpose and main function” (Eason 2007). Because schools do not want to lose accreditation and are competitive when it comes to their ranking determined by these statutory and national tests, the curriculum has become focused on the subjects that are included in the tests (The Independent 2009). Most of the time is spent on mastering these three subjects in order to prepare for the test that other subjects not included in the assessment have been neglected. This poses a great threat as the effects of this shortcoming can easily be translated into the secondary and tertiary levels (The Independent 2009). Perspectives on the Issue The National Curriculum and its mandatory assessment of the attainment of the different stages have resulted to the statistics that “pupils in England on average take 70 national tests while at school” (BBC News 2008). Imagine the number of tests a student must take that mostly revolves around the three primary subjects designated by the National Curriculum: Math, English and Science. Children will certainly feel tired and pressured from having to study for tests all the time. This will certainly inhibit their learning potential and even cause children emotional and mental stress. One mother even reported that her daughter developed stress-related shingles due to the pressure of taking the Sats (BBC News 2003). Both parents and teachers think it is damaging to children’s learning and it undermines the full capacity of the students. This can be seen in the boycott that they have organised in 2003 as a response to the sheer number of tests givern and the way that these tests focused only on the three basic subjects. Ruth Hooper (as cited in BBC News 2003) explained why she organised a petition against the tests: “I just think theres far too much pressure - not from the teachers at the school but from the system generally.” Children’s books authors eloquently expressed their views by stating that: “We think that childrens understanding, empathy, imagination and creativity are developed best by reading whole books, not by doing comprehension exercises on short excerpts and not from ticking boxes or giving one word answers” (BBC News 2003). However, amidst the barrage of complaints, and even the threat of a boycott, the government has remained steadfast in their assertion that the statutory and national tests are imperative to ascertain a child’s progress in school (Eason 2007). Christine Blower (as cited in BBC News 2008), an officer of the National Union of Teachers, expressed her disapproval by stating that “the government now stands isolated on the future of national curriculum testing. It has steadfastly resisted the mounting evidence of the damage caused by the tests to the curriculum and childrens learning.” One thing that the government did, though, in response to the complaints against the tests is to lessen the age wherein these statutory tests are to be taken. Key Stage 1 is now based on teacher’s assessment of the child’s attainment and progress (Eason 2007). But this is not enough as it seems that the government did this just to appease the growing complaints from the public. The Cambridge Review of Primary Education, notably the most comprehensive and the best in their field, should be taken seriously by the government. It is only logical to believe that students are not getting a holistic education due to the preoccupation of the government, and in turn, the schools too, on these tests that measure the basic skills acquired by the children. This has edged out other subjects that are also of equal importance in that they contribute to the breadth of a child’s learning. Conclusion In conclusion, it can be seen throughout the discussion that the National Curriculum, while it has proven to have worked successfully in its earlier years of implementation, has failed in providing a holistic primary education to the children of England. The Cambridge Review of Primary Education has confirmed this. Changes in primary education in the UK should be done in order to better the chances of children getting a holistic education that can help them face future challenges. Now, there is a need to set aside politics and focus all attention on the welfare of the child, and not literacy and numeracy rates. Bibliography 1. Alexander, R.J. and Flutter, J. 2009, Towards a New Primary Curriculum: a report from the Cambridge Primary Review. Part 1: Past and Present, Cambridge, University of Cambridge Faculty of Education. 2. BBC News 2001, Primary Schools, [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 3. BBC News 2003, Complaints grow over school tests. [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 4. BBC News 2008, Tests damaging to school system, [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 5. BBC News 2009, Primary Education ‘too narrow’, [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 6. British Council n.d., UK Education Systems, [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 7. Bucher, K. T. and Manning, M. L. 2001, ‘Exploring the Foundations of Middle School Classroom Management: The Theoretical Contributions of B. F. Skinner, Fritz Redl and William Wattenberg, William Glasser, and Thomas Gordon All Have Particular Relevance for Middle School Educators’, Childhood Education, vol. 78, no. 2, pp. 84+. 8. Bueno, K. 1999, Rote Learning. [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 9. Curtis, P. 2009a, ‘Tests blamed for blighting childrens lives: Landmark study of primary schools calls for teachers to be freed of targets’, The Guardian, February 20, [Online] Available from:< http://www.primaryreview.org.uk/Downloads/Curriculum_report/media-coverage/090220_Guardian_Curtis_Tests-blamed-for-blighting-childrens-lives.pdf> [Accessed March 8, 2009] 10. Curtis, P. 2009b, ‘Where now after damning indictment of education?’, The Guardian, [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 11. DirectGov. 2009, Understanding the National Curriculum. [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 12. Donker, P. 2005, The Importance of Good Basic Education, [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 13. Eason, G. 2007, ‘Schools Repeatedly Testing Pupils’, BBC News, [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 14. Garner, R. 2009, ‘Schoolchildrens lives are being impoverished’, The Independent, February 20. 15. International Education Conference 2003, ‘The Importance of Early Childhood Development Programmes in Improving Key Education Endicators and the Quality of Education’,Quality in Education, June 11-13, Norway. 16. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2001, About The Primary Curriculum, [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 17. The Guardian 2009, Thats the Way It Is, February 21, [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 18. The Cambridge Review of Primary Education 2009, Towards a New Primary Curriculum, [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] 19. The Independent 2009, Leading article: Our primary schools are short-changing their pupils, [Online] Available from: [Accessed March 8, 2009] Read More