A major change that has occurred in the last 150 years is the curriculum development through the Education Reform Act 1988. The act is regarded to be one of the most important legislations interlinked with the education industry since the ‘Butler Act 1944’. The Education reformed Act transferred the majority of powers and responsibilities from the educational authorities to the schooling governing bodies and the secretary of state at the time (Coast, Floridi and Sigle, 2018.) At the time, the governing Party were the Conservatives, they oversaw the education sector as a business industry (Goodson, 1988) stated that it is a multifaceted, interacting matric that initially includes, schools that are of state and private sectors, teacher and teachers training techniques and providence of resources that ensure that they are able to provide in subject areas.
Before, the Education Reform Act (1988), the Education Act (1944) established rules such as statutory schooling for students of the age range 3 to 5 as well as a tripartite secondary school system of vocational, modern, technical and grammar institutions. In order to have an understanding of the curriculum development within the UK, individuals need to consider the ideas about the two traid relationship (Bennett et al, 2006). Traid A being an effective learning experience for students within an institution, as well as traid B; the partnership, where initially learning is an experience that is shaped by what is being provided through the teaching (pedagogy), and how the process affects the assessments provided by the industry.
The newly established 1988 Education Reform Act initiated and introduced that all state institutions in England, should follow the National curriculum where the required schools had to provide their fellow students with a broad and balanced subject range curriculum.(Coulby and Bash, 1991) This meant for students, it was compulsory that they studies core subjects such as English, maths and science and studied foundation subjects such as information and technology, history, Physical education and Music. Also, Religious education was a set compulsory made subject, but was not considered to be a part of the testing / examination criteria, therefore was not considered to be a foundation subject. However, the new curriculum was not enforced in fee-paying private schools or in city technology colleges.
Also, students in secondary schools should have a foreign language within their curriculum, and schools should find time within their timetable to add such a subject into their schedule or programme of study (Coulby and Bash, 1991). However, the time allocation within the schooling time table of 70-80% was not specified within the legislation (Lawton,1989). Also, a new set of examinations were introduced into secondary schools, known as the General Certificate of Education, which were first examined and tested in 1988, where it was to have two different syllabuses that would have to be implemented into the same school and education process.
This was a major change set up after the 1944 assessment system of the examinations at 16, of the O-level General Certificate of Education and at 18 the A-levels. However, by the year 2000 the requirement for students to study a foreign language or Design to key stage 4, was cancelled and other changes came to place, such as vocational and enabling students to gain academic experience till the age of 19.
Ideally, the proposed curriculum had four components of which ones was subject designated sections, as week as, attainment targets, programme of study and assessment programs at age 7,11,14 and 16. Furthermore, there has been criticism of the new updated curriculum, of which some statements opposed in favour of the curriculum is as follows; children having the right to have access to a supportive, worthwhile programme, an egalitarian view of which crucially stresses the idea of equalising access to institution and opportunities on a national basis, reduces discrimination or differences in the quality of education being offered. Also, the Importance that institutions share common standard, which ensures that there is an expected level of teaching standards well as the national curriculum increases the accountability of schools and their educational processes (Lawton,1989).
However, even though there are many suggestions in favour of the new, updated curriculum, there are also criticisms against Bakers updated version of a conservative national curriculum, which are; the new curriculum is more concerned with the market force, the parental choice rather than the curriculum planning, teachers would not have been central to the curriculum, but are regarded as routine worker, that get payed to transmit the syllabus rather than sharing ownership of the curriculum. Also, the new curriculum can be recognised as inferior, due to not being implemented into independent schools, which reinforces the suspicion of accountability and the main control of staff and finally a shortage of specialist teachers to teach core and foundation subjects (Lawton,1989). The impact of this according to (Leonard,1989), was that theoretical idea of the national curriculum within secondary schools will cause a demand for teachers of the subject area of modern languages, likewise for science as well as technology.
The Bakers proposal of the national curriculum was a conservative view, of the act, or education as being a business or a market. Also, that the curriculum was not intended to be radical but a retreat from the ideal comprehensive schooling to an uncluttered situation. This is for the simplicity of parents being able to choose rationally with evidence or data, of schools that they wish to enrol their children in. The evidence would have been produced and transformed into league tables, of a predicted, or stated ranking. In terms of politics, the idea of a league table is more important than the curriculum itself.
Another change within the national curriculum was Testing and Assessing (Lawton,1989) Professor Paul Black and a small group, published a report in January 1988. The report recommended a variety of things regarding assessment progression and procedures within an institution, some of which included; age related assessments, where there will be 10 levels of achievement, this would not be a standard concept of progression procedures. Also, assessments at age 7, where they will include formative tests to identify achievement levels of the grading 1,2, or 3, which would have enabled institutions to recognise if any pupil requires extra support. As well as, the next set of assessments students would need to sit after four years prior their formative assessments, their SATs and tracking reports. This will be supportive and useful for pupil’s progression through their next stage of education within secondary school.
The Task Group on Assessment and Testing report was a broad appeal that comes across teaching and the community. Professor Black himself believed his findings were more of a ‘brief’ not a ‘solution’, and that it was a way of ensuring the time scale of how long it would take to implement the new system fully into education (Black and Wiliams,2005). However, the report caught the eye of the conservative politics, the prime minister at the time, Margret Thatcher, saw this theory or approach as a revolutionary idea of a political left-wing investment. Hence this, the labour party, NUS and the TES welcomed the idea (Thatcher,1993:595).
The TGAT supported teachers to a great extent, supported their assessments, as well as their grading of the 10-level scale of criteria, that tracked the student’s progress. By the scheme being utilised across all key stages, it allowed a different solution to occur based on assessments, which they offer progression, continuity and opportunity on recognising and working on knowledge, skills and characteristics. This system can be described as Meritocratic, as it enabled staff to have a levelled understanding of their service users and their personal education holistic preferences.
This also meant that the system, and its schemes were widely understood by families, government sectors, and school inspectors. The inspectors sector called ‘Ofsted’ was formed under the Education Act 1992 but had a major role in centralisation of the schooling industry system that begun by the installation of the Education Reform Act 1988. Initially Ofsted was set up to ensure that schools were inspected and assessed for parents to have accessible data on the judgment of school consistency, schools would be assessed and graded on a seven-point scale, where 1 was ‘excellent’ and 7 was ‘poor’ (Elliot. A, 2012).
There has been on going debates on how effective or reliable Ofsted really is (Wilcox and Gray) commented that ‘ In the early years of Ofsted the emphasis created on ensuring the accuracy and consistency impressed many people and that in the last 150 years since inspection were established there was no form of handbook or framework regarding what inspectors would look for in an institution’. Also, according to a survey that took place in 2008, that resulted in 5% of staff believing that inspection made a positive impact to the school, to a great extent. Whereas, 40% believed that the inspections made no difference (ofsted.gov.uk/node/2315). However, Ofsted’s role in the Education sector is still considered vastly controversial after its foundation in the education system.