We’re two years into the new computing curriculum: it’s still early days, but for those schools that have engaged with computing, much has been achieved already.

We’re seeing an upswing in entrance to university computer science courses, A-level computer science entries are picking up and there’s been a swing from ICT to computing at GCSE.

And yet: the national curriculum sets out a vision of computing for all but how inclusive are we in implementing this?

There are too many schools where the curriculum lacks the breadth and balance it should: not teaching computing, or treating it too superficially, leads to inequity. It’s often those who would most benefit from studying computing who are more likely to be denied the opportunity to do so.

There are also questions about how teachers can make computing more accessible to pupils with SEND, as well as eliminating the biases that can make the subject less appealing to girls. There are other issues, too.

Too much focus on coding

We’ve seen too much focus on coding. This should be complimented by teaching the concepts and approaches of computational thinking (things that help us make sense of problems in such a way that computers can help solve them), as well as good, old-fashioned ICT skills such as editing video, spreadsheets and developing content for the web.

Meanwhile, e-safety rightly gets lots of attention in schools now, but this is all-too-often focused on risks to the individual without attention to moral values or the wider, societal implications of digital technologies.

Broader outlook

To progress how we teach computing, we need a broader outlook. Other countries are starting to include programming in their curriculums, too, and there are some great resources developed elsewhere that we can adopt and adapt (check out code.org’s curriculum and the CS50 advanced placement materials).

Often, curriculums elsewhere include some robotics: while the kit can be expensive, perhaps we ought to look at ways to include more of this in what we do, beyond early experiences with the Bee-Bot?

Better assessment

Assessment is improving. Things are starting to settle down as we get used to life after levels. There are innovative ways to assess computing, such as automatic testing of whether a program works and analysis of the features it includes (see Dr Scratch at drscratch.org). There’s a place for low-stakes formative assessment.

The McIntosh Commission on Assessment Without Levels last year recommended developing national item banks of questions, and we’re already on the case for computing: check out the 1000+ multiple choice questions that we’ve crowdsourced for Project Quantum, using the Diagnostic Questions platform for the heavy lifting here.

Diverse community

Finally, it’s been interesting to see how a “what works” pedagogy for computing is emerging out of the experience of a diverse community of practice. If you’re not already using ideas such as the following as jumping off points, the 2016-17 school year is as good a time as any to try them out:

It’s not always about the code - make sure you think before you click.

You don’t have to use a computer.

It’s easier to read code than to write code.

It’s easier to edit code than to start from a blank screen.

Making things matters.

Pair programming is powerful.

Debugging helps to grow mindsets.

Go for depth not breadth.

Look for interesting contexts.

This is for everyone.

Miles Berry is principal lecturer in computing education at the University of Roehampton, and is a former headteacher
@mberry