The curriculum review will not “fundamentally change” the number of subjects students study or are assessed in at GCSE, according to a new interim report.

But the findings, published today, do raise a series of concerns about the current school curriculum, assessment system and performance measures that have been highlighted during its call to evidence and first phase of work.

Concerns have been raised about key stage 2 writing assessments, the volume of key stage 4 exams and “indefensible” outcomes for some GCSE students resitting English and maths.

The report also includes a commitment to assess the role of the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) within the accountability framework.

Writing exclusively for Tes today, review leader Professor Becky Francis said that “in some areas the current curriculum is impeding depth and mastery of core concepts, reducing the autonomy of teachers and reducing the time available to teach some important subjects”.

The interim report sets out four key areas of focus for the review until its final report in the autumn.

As set out in Professor Francis’ speech to heads at the Association of School and College Leaders conference, in its second part, the review will focus on ensuring the system works well for all, subject-specific issues, making the curriculum fit for the future and looking at post-16.

The interim report says many aspects of the system are “working well” and the curriculum is reasonably broad and balanced compared with other countries’.

More on the curriculum and assessment review:

• Francis: We’ll resist ‘non-educationalists’ who want revolution
• Speech: Curriculum content balance ‘hindering progress’ in some subjects
• Background: Schools sector has its say

This interim report does not include recommendations, which will be published in the final report in autumn.

Instead, it diagnoses issues and strengths with the existing system and focuses on going forward. Here are some of the key takeaways:

KS2 writing assessment concerns

The review panel heard concerns that the current writing assessment at the end of KS2 “does not validly assess pupils’ ability to write fluently and does not incentivise effective teaching of writing”.

Instead of developing fluency in writing, evidence considered by the review found pupils are spending “considerable classroom time” learning to meet assessment criteria in writing by reproducing writing with the textual features needed for this.

There were also concerns raised over the consistency of judgements in writing assessments. Performance in writing at the end of KS2 is reported as a teacher assessment judgement.

As a result, in the next stage of its work the review will examine how assessment of writing at KS2 can be improved.

After the interim report was released, education secretary Bridget Phillipson said that retaining primary assessments of reading, writing and maths is a “non-negotiable”.

Volume of KS4 assessments

The report highlights strengths in the current system at KS4, but many respondents to the review’s call for evidence raised concerns over the volume of exams, the weighting of exams compared with other forms of assessment and the impact of this on student wellbeing.

The next stage of the review will consider whether the overall volume of assessment can be reduced at KS4 “without compromising the reliability of results”.

The review will look at assessment fitness for purpose on a subject-by-subject basis and the impact of different assessment methods on both teaching and learning.

However, the report reiterates that it will “approach reform of assessments in an evolutionary rather than revolutionary way, and we will therefore not, for example, fundamentally change the number of subjects that students study or are assessed in at GCSE”.

It also states that traditional exams should remain the “primary means of assessment” at GCSE.

Over- and under-prescription

Speaking at the ASCL conference, Professor Francis said some subjects face over-prescription of content, while others have challenges with under-prescription - which means causes for an “apparent imbalance between breadth and depth are not always clear”.

Subjects facing under-prescription “lack specificity”, which can lead to greater curriculum volume as teachers attempt to “cover all eventualities”, the report says. This may be why teachers often report experiencing curriculum overload, the report added, with the next phase of the review looking at this closely.

This stage of the report does not highlight challenges for specific subjects.

Previously, experts have warned that English GCSEs in particular are “not fit for purpose”, while a review chaired by former education secretary Charles Clarke for exam board OCR said GCSE English should be “redesigned as a matter of urgency”.

GCSE resits

One of the big concerns raised by respondents to the call for evidence was the current practice under the condition of funding policy for students to retake GCSE maths and English post-16 until they achieve a grade 4, which sees many students retaking the exams over and over again.

While the report says it heard evidence achieving a grade 4 should continue to be an ambition, it says “there is also clear evidence that the condition of funding policy is not yet fully delivering its intended purpose”.

The report says it is “particularly concerning” that many of the students retaking post-16 made no grade progress during their post-16 studies.

The review heard existing accountability arrangements “may not encourage” providers to give students resitting the opportunity to revisit basic core knowledge and skills before they are entered for resits.

Only around 50 of the 3,400 17-year-olds with a grade 2 in GCSE maths from June 2024 achieved a grade 4 when they resat in November 2024; most achieved another grade 2.

The report said these outcomes are “indefensible” and students must be entered into the resits in a timely way.

“We think the expectation for study of maths and English should remain, but with greater nuance in measures to ensure that as many learners as possible can achieve positive outcomes,” the report sets out.

It will evaluate potential solutions in the final report.

Can assessments be made more inclusive?

One of the key areas for the review in its next phase is the finding that the system is not working well for all.

The report highlights that young people with special educational needs and disabilities make less progress than their peers.

It adds that while the explanations often lie outside curriculum and assessment, the review plans to take steps “to ensure that the curriculum and assessment system reflects high expectations for all, and properly supports the progress and achievement of all young people”.

The report adds: “We consider that the system is broadly working well, and we intend to retain the mainstay of existing arrangements. However, there are opportunities for improvement. This includes the potential to improve the inclusivity of the assessment system for young people with higher levels of SEND.”

Reviewing the EBacc

Submissions to the review’s call for evidence called for major changes to accountability. The English Baccalaureate received particular mention with unions calling for it to be scrapped.

The report says responses to the call for evidence highlight that the EBacc “may unnecessarily constrain the choice of students” and limit access and time for arts subjects.

”We are strongly committed to the progress performance measures which focus on the difference a school makes, and which avoid a potentially problematic focus on grade borderlines,” the review report states, adding that Progress 8 achieves a focus on progress and breadth.

However, the report adds that it must ensure performance measures are not conflicting with or duplicating each other and are not introducing “perverse incentives”.

The review will continue to assess the EBacc’s place within the accountability framework and whether it remains the most effective way of improving access to a comprehensive, academic curriculum.

The key stage structure

The key stage structure is one of the areas of the current system that the report says is “broadly working well”. However, it does highlight a few issues with breadth for further focus in the second stage of the review.

At KS1 and KS2, the review heard from primary teachers that the curriculum is “not effectively balancing breadth and depth”, leading to a struggle to cover all the content and affecting mastery.

The review will look at the volume of specified content to ensure a “good level of breadth” is achievable.

Evidence further shows breadth is “often being compromised” at KS3 as many schools begin preparing students for GCSE in Year 9, the report states.

There is also some repetition in the KS3 curriculum, which can “cause learners to become disengaged” and may “contribute to slower progress”.

The next stage of the review will look at alignment between KS2, KS3 and KS4 to assess how breadth and sequencing can best support pupils.

Concerns over Spag test

The report says that the review’s call to evidence and its wider engagement have highlighted concerns over the standalone KS2 test of pupils on grammar, punctuation and spelling.

The report says some respondents said it “might lead to the teaching of textual features in isolation at the expense of a sound understanding of reading and writing”.

It also says that the review will now look at the curriculum and “how this assessment might better equip pupils to use these foundational building blocks fluently”.

In its submission to the review, the NAHT school leaders’ union said the multiplication tables check, phonics screening check and KS2 grammar, punctuation and spelling tests should all be “scrapped”.

New National Centre for Arts and Music Education

The DfE also today announced the creation of a new National Centre for Arts and Music Education intended to promote opportunities for pupils to pursue the arts. This will include signposting and a new online professional development offer for arts teaching.

The centre is expected to be established in September 2026.

The DfE and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport will also publish a framework for enrichment activities by the end of the year, developed alongside an expert working group.

The department has also announced a new group to advise on what changes can be made to improve children’s artificial intelligence (AI) and digital skills, and also drive “better teaching and learning through the use of AI and technology”. This group will report before the end of the academic year.

For the latest education news and analysis delivered every weekday morning, sign up for the Tes Daily newsletter