Steve Besley's Education Eye: week ending 07 November 2025

What's happened this week?

Important stories across the board:

It’s been a big week.

The government confirmed it was sticking with the “existing structural architecture” of the school curriculum but confirmed a number of changes it was intending to make as it responded to the Final Report from the independent Curriculum and Assessment Review published this week.

The government also committed “to embedding workplace health as a cross-government priority,” as it responded to another major Review also out this week on the issue of ill-health and work.

And the Chancellor took to the podium to issue a trigger warning ahead of the forthcoming Budget.

“I want people to understand the circumstances we are facing.”

Each of us must do our bit, she explained, prompting further headlines about likely tax rises.

In other news, the NAHT lost its case at the High Court, the Learning and Work Institute launched ‘Get the Nation Learning Week,’ and Russell Group universities highlighted the importance of their contribution to the government’s Industrial Strategy.

But back to the headline stories and those two big reports.

Let’s start with the Curriculum and Assessment Review.

It’s been over ten years since the national curriculum was updated as the Education Secretary explained in her introduction to the Curriculum Review’s Final Report, adding “it’s more crucial than ever that young people are equipped to face the challenges of today.”

Changes including the revamping of computing GCSE, a potential new qualification in data science and AI, the introduction of media and financial literacy, the creation of a new oracy framework plus references to climate change and “opportunities to practise social and emotional attributes such as resilience,” all tap into the desire to update the curriculum.

“We’ll teach our young people to think critically and act thoughtfully, armed with the digital, financial and media literacy they need to thrive in the modern world,” the Education Secretary said.

In all, the Review’s Report comes up with a long list of recommendations for building as the title says ‘a world-class curriculum and assessment system for all.’

While not all have been accepted, “they represent” as the Report’s Chair indicated, “an opportunity to build on what is working well, and to address what is not.”

Responses have been varied but largely welcoming.

The Centre for Young Lives and the children’s commissioner for instance both saw the Review and the government response as positive steps forward. On other hand former Schools Minister Nick Gibb reckoned “Labour’s dumbed-down curriculum is a betrayal of aspiration” and The Spectator expressed concern ‘that the proposed reforms risk undermining the previous "knowledge-rich" education approach.’

Arguably, two questions stand out from the varied responses.

First, have we got the teachers that we need/how’s it going to be paid for?

So for example, the promise of “a new core enrichment offer” for every pupil and student in schools and colleges “which delivers access to civic engagement; arts and culture; nature, outdoor and adventure; sport and physical activities; and developing wider life skills” sounds impressive but with what resources?

Similar concerns apply to the commitment to the provision of triple science and a new language qualification “which banks progress and motivates pupils to want to continue studying.” Not easy as many have pointed out.

As ASCL explained, “delivering a great curriculum also requires sufficient funding and teachers, and the government must step up to the plate and ensure that schools and colleges have the resources they need.”

Awarding Organisations have made similar points.

“The lack of specialist teachers – especially in Physics – is an issue raised time and again by the educators we’ve engaged with, Pearson noted in its response to the Report.” While Cambridge OCR’s MD Myles McGinley argued, “with no slack in the system, schools will need support to properly implement changes.”

In its response, the government promised to create ‘an online and machine-readable national curriculum’ to help teachers, provide AI tools and materials through the Oak National Academy, and in an oft-repeated phrase ‘support teachers’ with links, data and guidance, but a lot remains to be seen.

And second, has the government gone off piste in some areas?

It was point made by the Chair of parliament’s Education Committee.

“I am concerned that in a number of areas, the Government’s approach differs from Professor Francis’s independent, evidence-based recommendations, and it is important that they set out why this is the case and their own evidence that they have relied on in reaching a different conclusion.”

Two issues in particular have raised the temperature levels.

First, government plans to introduce “a new statutory national assessment of reading fluency and comprehension in Year 8” and the expectation that all schools will assess pupil progress in writing and maths in Yr 8.

That was not how the Review saw things.

As the NAHT explained, “the recommendation for diagnostic assessments in English and maths during Year 8 has resulted in the government announcing a Year 8 reading test, a much more simplified and blunt approach than that proposed by the review. NAHT is clear that tests in themselves do not improve standards – good teaching does.”

And second, reform of Progress 8 where the Review had recommended ‘no changes’ but the government announced plans instead “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.”

Further reflections and concerns are still coming in but in fairness the oracy framework, enrichment benchmarks, and Progress 8 reform let alone changes to subject qualifications such as computer science, RE and languages are all subject to further work.

The aim is to have revisions ready by spring 2027 and the new curriculum ready for first teaching from September 2028. Updates to AS/A levels will follow for 2031 and 2032.

The TES, Schools Week and others have excellent summaries of all the details around the Review but it looks like a busy few years now lie ahead.

On to the Report tackling ill-health and keeping Britain working.

The context, according to Sir Charlie Mayfield who chaired the Report, is that “Britain is facing a quiet but urgent crisis.”

That crisis, according to a less quiet headline from the Daily Mail is that "sicknote Britain is costing the country more than £200billion a year as the UK slides into an 'avoidable crisis.'

The facts in ‘the landmark Report’ are ‘stark.

“One in five working-age adults are now out of the labour force – 800,000 more than in 2019 due to health reasons” and likely to rise by a further 600,000 by 2030 without decisive action.

And, “employers lose £85 billion a year from sickness, turnover, and lost productivity.”

As the Report says, everyone loses as a result: individuals, employers, the state.

Sir Charlie is, however, optimistic. He believes we can turn this round and that the groundwork has already been laid.

As such, he is proposing “a fundamental shift from a model where health at work is largely left to the individual and the NHS, to one where it becomes a shared responsibility between employers, employees and health services.”

To support this, he’s proposing to co-lead a Vanguard Taskforce “to develop the interventions and build the evidence for what works.”

This will include developing employer-led solutions such as A Healthy Working Standard and Workplace Health Provision by 2029, establishing a Workplace Health Intelligence Unit and strengthening incentives such fit notes and Access to Work.

There are, the Report emphasises, responsibilities on all sides, government, employers and employees but “the proposals put the players in the right positions on the pitch.”

There’s been broad support from across such players.

The CBI for instance said, “it will be welcomed across the business community.” The British Chambers of Commerce saw it as “a hugely important contribution to tackling the issue and helping businesses access and retain a skilled workforce” while the Work Foundation welcomed the emphasis on ‘early intervention and prevention to support healthier working lives.’

As the Report concludes, “everyone wins if we keep Britain working. The case for change is compelling.”

What about other education-related stories from this this week?

In schools, the NAHT lost its case at the Royal Courts of Justice this week for a pause in the introduction of the new inspection framework which is due to get underway next week.

The union claimed that Ofsted had failed to consult adequately on its new system and that it posed a risk to mental health and wellbeing of staff.

But the Court concluded, "it is for Ofsted to decide how to conduct its inspections, in a way in which, in its expert judgement, is effective."

The union is considering an appeal and possible strike action.

In other news, the Institute for Government ran through some of the pressures facing the schools system in England as it published its latest Performance Tracker on Schools.

In a word, issues like closing the attainment gap, resolving SEND provision and tackling teacher shortages will prove challenging within the current budget.

“What is clear is that balancing these pressures will be extremely difficult within the budget Labour has set for the coming parliament.”

In FE, the Learning and Work published its latest annual landmark survey into adult participation in learning showing ‘rates faltering most notably for those in work.’

As the Institute’s Chief Exec said “today’s findings make clear the sheer scale of what needs to be achieved to Get the Nation Learning.”

On top of that the report suggests that access to learning is not spread fairly across society.

A disappointing context for this week’s ‘Get the Nation Learning Week.’

In HE, like other parts of the education system, there’s been considerable reflection on what the proposed new curriculum changes for schools might mean for HE.

HEPI’s Nick Hillman looked at what was in and what had been left out of the Review in terms of its application for HE. He reckoned the word ‘university’ was mentioned just nine times across the 197 pages of the Review Report.

Professor Chris Husbands suggested there were three things HE might want to note from the Review: the emphasis on evolution rather than revolution; the re-balancing of assessment; and the focus on progression from L2 to L3.

Elsewhere, the Russell Group reminded the Chancellor ahead of her forthcoming Budget of the importance of universities, including notably research-intensive universities, in providing the skills needed for the government’s Industrial Strategy.

According to its briefing, ‘88% of graduates of high-tariff and postgraduate degrees enter IS-8 sectors within five years.”

The message was “universities require a sustainable funding settlement to protect this crucial skills pipeline.”

And it isn’t just science or tech graduates. “Our analysis shows,” they added, “UK defence businesses are benefiting from the skills of high-tariff graduates who studied everything from geography to history or modern languages.”

The OfS published new guidance for institutions using algorithms to determine degree classifications.

And, the OfS’s ‘Free Speech Tsar,’ Arif Ahmed highlighted the importance of defending free speech and withstanding political intimidation as he responded to media stories this week about the “intense pressure” exerted by China on Sheffield Hallam over planned research into ‘alleged forced labour practices’ there.

Links to most of these stories below, starting with the week’s headlines.

The top headlines of the week:

• ‘Head teachers to be consulted on strike action over new Ofsted inspections’ (Monday)
• ‘Mortgages and AI to be added to the curriculum in English schools’ (Tuesday)
• ‘Ofsted tweaks inspection framework just days before roll-out’ (Wednesday)
• ‘University to suspend music and language courses’ (Thursday)
• ‘DfE plans £3m SEND research centre’ (Friday)

General:

• Chancellor’s scene-setter. The Chancellor laid the ground for a difficult Budget in a few weeks’ time with a set piece speech pointing to a range of challenges the country now faces, many global, some historic, but claiming that she will ‘continue to deliver on the priorities of the British people’ including cutting NHS waiting lists, the cost of living and the national debt.
• More Budget speculation. The Resolution Foundation reckoned that the Chancellor may well need to raise taxes in the forthcoming Budget by £21bn-£26bn, with up to £10bn as headroom, indicating that raising income tax by 2p while cutting NI by 2p would be the best way of achieving this.
• Budget submission. The CBI published its submission to the Treasury ahead of the forthcoming Budget, outlining ‘four key, growth-busting areas that can be done right now,’ including focusing on skills delivery, fast tracking critical infrastructure, harnessing innovation and technology, and focusing on improving competitiveness.
• Keep Britain Working. The government welcomed the Final Report from the Review looking into the issue of economic inactivity driven by ill-health, acknowledging the importance of government, employers and employees taking shared responsibility about health at work and supporting a new Vanguard Taskforce to help lead the changes required.
• Economic Confidence. The Institute of Directors (IoD) reported that business confidence remained at ‘historic low levels’ with business leaders worried about the Budget and ‘worn out from the past year’s roller coaster of uncertainty and tax increases,’ as it published the results of its latest survey among members.

HE:

• Providing the skills. The Russell Group pointed in a new briefing to the key role that universities play in delivering the skills needed for the government’s Industrial Strategy with both STEM and non-STEM degrees providing ‘a wide range of the skills needed across the listed skill sectors.’
• Degree authenticity. The OfS reported on its work looking into the role of algorithms used to determine classifications of degrees, highlighting the importance of ensuring that they accurately reflect the knowledge and skills of each student and listing two new requirements providers need to observe when using such algorithms.
• Securing excellence. Wonkhe reported on its work, commissioned by Advance HE, looking into how best to secure educational excellence in HE at a time of great change, using roundtable evidence to stress the importance of understanding the core roles of HE and how these can best be delivered at times of uncertainty.

Tweets and posts of note:

• “@bphillipsonMP is unfortunately determined to ruin our schools and the life-chances for the poor. They are lowering standards big time. They have just been clever at hiding it” -@Miss_Snuffy.
• “Curriculum and assessment review's proposal to reduce GCSE exam time by "at least 10%," which has been translated as a 3 hour cut per pupil, interesting. But seems to fall short of argument of head of OCR exam board last year for a 8-10 hour cut” -@warwickmansell.
• “It is so easy to be wrong – and to persist in being wrong – when the costs of being wrong are paid by others.” Thomas Sowell’s line could be the motto of English education. Policy-makers get plaudits; teachers get the blame; children pay the bill” -@DavidDidau.
• “Reasons teachers quit or get really peeved 101: Long curriculum conversations over coffee in serene offices vs carnage in corridors and classrooms directly adjacent. Completely oblivious or more interested in beautiful sequencing. It happens!” -@RogersHistory.
• “Using AI in education reduces the requirement to think much. I'd ask myself, before using an LLM, why is it that I don't want to think much about whatever it is I'm using the LLM for” - @MBDscience.
• “PJs and storytelling in Year 1 today was so lovely. Children and parents giggling at me on gate duty in my striped pyjamas. But the best bit? I didn’t even need to get changed into my PJs when I got home” -@MrAllington.
• “Obesity in children aged four and five at highest level outside of pandemic | Sky News” -@schoolsontap.
• “If you feel like you're bad at your job and it's making you depressed, just consider that, as the investigation of the recent heist revealed, the password to access the Louvre's video surveillance system was "Louvre" -@phl43.

A selection of quotes that merit attention:

• “At the Budget this year, I will continue to build the strong foundations to secure Britain’s future” – the Chancellor sets the scene for this year’s big Budget.
• “The aim is to re-humanise the workplace, raise standards, improve access to support, and transform the visibility of data” – the Keep Britain Working Report outlines its approach.
• “Frustration with work, still less ‘I hate my boss’ syndrome, are not health conditions” – the Keep Britain Working Report suggests what does and doesn’t count as a health condition.
• “The Immigration White Paper included an illustrative example that a 6% levy could reduce student inflows by up to 7,000 per year” – the DfE responds to MPs’ questions about the possible impact of the international student fee levy.
• “This important report shows we’re not yet where we need to be, with too few workers having access to opportunities to develop their skills” – the Chief Exec of the Skills Federation responds to the Learning and Work Institute’s latest survey of adult participation in learning.
• “Education vandalism” – the Conservatives respond to the government’s curriculum reforms.
• “The review’s recommendations reflect that the nature of childhood is changing,” – the children’s commissioner reflects on the Curriculum and Assessment Report.
• “We are confused by the fact that the government has already announced plans for a mandatory Year 8 reading test before the outcome of the curriculum and assessment review, and we do not agree with its plans to share the results of these tests with Ofsted” – ASCL raises its concerns about the government’s proposed Yr8 reading test.
• “This review promised ‘evolution, not revolution’ and this is welcome for a sector that has become accustomed to significant changes in the context of severe capacity constraints” – the Sutton Trist responds to the Curriculum Review’s Final Report.

You can sign up here to receive Education Eye straight to your inbox on publication.

If you find my policy updates useful, please consider donating something, however small, to help support its publication. EdCentral is a not-for-profit social enterprise and relies on donations to continue its work.

Steve Besley

Disclaimer: Education Eye is intended to help colleagues keep up to date with national developments in the education sector. Information is correct at the time of writing and is offered in good faith. No liability is accepted by Steve Besley or EdCentral for decisions made on the basis of any information provided.