Insights, responses and thoughts on the Curriculum and Assessment Review’s (CAR) five key themes and related proposed changes.
Last week, we shared a summary of the Curriculum and Assessment Review (CAR) Final Report covering the key recommendations and themes of the review. We wanted to follow this up with an overview of the Government response, insights from Professor Becky Franics CBE and our thoughts on the proposed changes.
The Government’s response to the review was largely in favour of its recommendations. While there are some that they rejected (or seemingly didn’t respond to!) they did agree (or partially agree) with many of the proposals from the review panel.
The new National Curriculum will be effective from September 2028. The planned publication date is Spring 2027, so schools will have access in advance. In agreement with the CAR, the DfE will create an online and machine-readable national curriculum which will, “visually represent the links within and between subject areas and give connections to prior learning, helping teachers to contextualise learning across traditional subject boundaries.” (pg.13)
The CAR’s five key themes – Francis’s insights and the Government response
In a webinar with Francis hosted by Schools Week, she shared that the five key themes for the CAR were:
- high standards must mean high standards for all
- curriculum shape and individual subjects
- knowledge and skills for the future
- revitalising post-16
- assessment and accountability.
1. High standards must mean high standards for all
Francis identified that delivering high standards for all and the narrowing of gaps as one of the most impactful areas of change in their proposals. She shared how the system is working well in many respects, but it isn’t serving everyone. She noted the need for a determined effort to support address the SEND and socio-economic disadvantage gaps by focusing on a more accessible and inclusive curriculum.
The Government supports the review’s recommendation to adapt the curriculum for SEND:
“We also support the recommendation to develop evidence-led resources to support curriculum adaptation for all children and young people, including those with SEND.” (pg.44)
There are also specific mentions in specific subjects/assessments such as GCSE PE, phonics screening check and on-screen assessments. However, it seems they missed some important aspects. For example, I couldn’t find a response from the Government to the recommendation for ensuring the multiplication tables check is accessible for students with SEND or how they would ensure V-Levels were inclusive by design. I also couldn’t help but notice a lack of specification for how the Government would work to close the socio-economic disadvantage gap and other gaps, which is disappointing. All I could find in relation to this was:
“We launched the Curriculum and Assessment Review as a first step towards addressing the ‘existing blocks to progress and good outcomes’ – especially for those who are from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, have special educational needs or disabilities, or are otherwise vulnerable and to stretch the most able pupils to achieve even higher.
“While the Review’s recommendations are designed to enhance opportunities for every child, they will be particularly beneficial for these groups of pupils.” (pg.16)
Francis explained that the CAR felt a subject-by-subject approach was key for ensuring high quality support but that there also needed to be better transitional support, particularly from KS2 to KS3. This is why the review panel recommended diagnostic tests in Maths and English in Year 8 to help with securing this knowledge early, so students could make progress in these subjects and flourish in other areas of the curriculum.
Francis also talked about how the CAR wants all children to have the opportunity to learn to read music and play an instrument.
The DfE has agreed to the diagnostic maths and English tests in Year 8 proposed by the CAR, alongside the provision of their own Year 8 reading tests. They also welcomed the recommendation to focus on equity in music education and agreed to consider how to maximise the impact of their music investment.
Francis explained the rationale behind the triple science entitlement – explaining the correlation with STEM based subjects at A-Level and university and that the CAR wanted to close the gap in who takes these subjects and moves into these types of careers.
The DfE also agreed to support the entitlement of triple science, explaining:
“To make this a reality, we will work with schools to understand the barriers to entry for triple science, including workforce challenges, and support schools to develop a triple science offer, ahead of introducing a statutory entitlement.” (pg. 37)
2. Curriculum shape and content
Francis explained the CAR wants a curriculum that is evidence-based with clear sequencing of content. She reiterated the overload that needs addressing – that the national curriculum must be pared back to allow teacher agency and make space for enrichment. Educators have raised valid concerns around the likelihood that this will happen, given that, for example, statutory Citizenship content will be delivered at primary school and is therefore another item on their packed timetable.
The CAR panel recommended that the Government specify the types of enrichment that should be offered. The Government has agreed to this as well, explaining:
“We will set out a new core enrichment offer that every school and college, in every community, should aim to provide for all children – beyond the statutory curriculum…
And
“We will bring together support for schools and colleges to follow these benchmarks which will set out that, at a minimum, every school should deliver an enrichment offer which provides access to civic engagement; arts and culture; nature, outdoor and adventure; sport and physical activities; and developing wider life skills.” (pg.39)
Francis re-iterated that the CAR would like RE to be introduced into the National Curriculum. She noted the importance of sector consensus on this and how it would need to lead the way. The Government agreed this would be crucial to even considering its inclusion in the curriculum.
Importantly, the CAR wanted the Government to review and update all programmes of study to include stronger diverse representation to allow more children to see themselves in the curriculum. The Government agreeing to this is a big win, but I am curious to see how they will go about ensuring the curriculum is more representative and inclusive and how they will support teachers to adapt it to support their local contexts. Will the offering go far enough in helping the many children who feel they don’t belong feel included and valued in their school life?
3. Knowledge and skills for the future
Francis was keen to note how the introduction of a new oracy framework (agreed by the Government) would support pupils in being more confident and successful in their learning.
She also talked about the introduction of teaching/enhanced teaching (within Citizenship and in other appropriate subjects of financial literacy, digital literacy, media literacy and climate education. The CAR recognised these subjects as essential for responding to social and technological change to maximise young people’s opportunities and help them to meet current and future challenges. The DfE has agreed to the need for these subjects to be integrated into the National Curriculum. It will be interesting to see if ingredients of these elements will be integrated into subjects like science, computing, geography and mathematics – or mostly taught within the citizenship offering.
4. 16-19 education
Francis felt that changes to 16-19 education would be one of the most impactful areas of the new curriculum for this age group. She talked about how it will help young people get out of the ‘resists cycle’ and have a hugely positive impact on their confidence.
She said the CAR panel received many letters from parents asking for improved pathways for young people. The CAR recommended a third pathway, V-levels, which has been adopted by the Government. This pathway would be an alternative to T-levels and A-levels. She did say however they need to get the balance right with these so that students can choose to take a mix of smaller qualifications, if they wish.
Francis mentioned how the introduction of a stepped level 1 qualification would really support learners who need additional support to secure their Level 2 English or Maths qualification. These recommendations have been accepted by the Government and consultation with Ofqual will start in 2026 to discuss the introduction of the Level 1 qualifications.
5. Assessment and accountability
Explaining the rationale behind the removal of the EBacc accountability measures, Francis shared that EBacc is actually widening the disadvantage gap and is squeezing subject areas. She also mentioned that the measures only increased the uptake of languages by 1%.
The CAR wanted to keep Progress 8, bar changing the EBacc bucket to be the ‘academic breadth’ bucket’. The Government has removed the EBacc headline and measures; however, they differed from the review regarding Progress 8, deciding to, ‘develop and consult on an improved version of Progress 8 and Attainment 8 that balances a strong academic core with breadth and student choice.’ This article gives a thorough explanation of the new Progress 8 measures the Government is proposing.
The CAR wanted the current KS2 grammar, punctuation and spelling (GPS) test replaced, alongside a reduction in GCSE exam volume (in terms of time students sit these exams) by 10%. The Government is not planning to replace the KS2 GPS test but said it will ‘improve the current writing assessment processes’.
In regard to reduced exam time, the Government have responded with:
“We will work with Ofqual and awarding organisations to reduce examination time by on average 2.5-3 hours overall for the average student taking eight or nine GCSEs.” (pg. 44)
Summary
The CAR definitely delivered on its ideal of ‘evolution’ instead of ‘revolution’. But is this what the education sector was hoping for? While there are welcome recommendations, the question is whether it goes far enough to change things for the better for young people, especially those for whom the system is currently failing.
One thing that I found disappointing was a lack of shift regarding assessment; that these systems were seen as ‘generally working well’ just didn’t sit well with me. Neither did that they want to encourage more take-up of optional KS1 assessments!
However, I recognise this review was a real challenge and that, through careful consideration and compromise, many good recommendations have been agreed, such as the introduction of an oracy framework, reviewing content to be more representative, introducing citizenship education in primary schools, calling for reduced exam time and streamlining of the curriculum, entitlement to read and play music, entitlement to core enrichment etc.
I really appreciated that subjects such as drama, dance and music were given a well-deserved spotlight (although I’d argue it could have been brighter!). Whilst accessibility was a thread throughout the proposals, I would have liked to have seen this being given more attention too.
What did you think?
I’d love to know your thoughts on the CAR and the Government’s response, so do let me know on social media!
References
- DfE (2025) ‘Curriculum and Assessment Review : Building a world-class curriculum for all, Final Report’. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/690b96bbc22e4ed8b051854d/Curriculum_and_Assessment_Review_final_report_-_Building_a_world-class_curriculum_for_all.pdf (Accessed: 5 November 2025)
- DfE (2025) ‘Government response to the Curriculum and Assessment Review’. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/690b2a4a14b040dfe82922ea/Government_response_to_the_Curriculum_and_Assessment_Review.pdf (Accessed 13th November 2025)
- Dickens, J. and Francis, B. (2025) ‘Under the CAR Bonnet’ .[Webinar] – [Online] – Schools Week and EducationScape (Accessed: 7 November 2025)
- Whittaker, F. (2025) ‘DfE ignores Francis review and proposes sweeping progress 8 reform’. Available at: https://schoolsweek.co.uk/dfe-ignores-francis-review-and-proposes-sweeping-progress-8-reform/ (Accessed: 13 November 2025)
