Working Group on GCSE English Reform

The Working Group on GCSE English Reform was set up by the English Association and University English in response to very widespread disquiet in the discipline about the current GCSE provision. The group is made up of secondary school teachers, academics from university Departments of English, university Departments of Education and educational consultants.

Report and Recommendations (July 2024)

Summary

Prompted by very wide disquiet right across the discipline of English at Secondary, Further and Higher education level, our Working Group argues that the current GCSE provision for English Literature and English Language is not fit for purpose. Increasingly narrow in content, encouraging forms of teaching which do not develop the core skills of English, they have made the subject too coupled to assessment, and mean that English no longer engages with students’ identities or diversity. Both assessments fail to foster the core aptitudes of the subject ­- communication, collaboration, creativity and critical thinking – and as a consequence, let down students, teachers, potential employers and other stakeholders as well as diminishing the enjoyment of the subject.

In response, our Group makes detailed recommendations to reframe and reform both GCSE English Language and GCSE English Literature, make them more diverse and inclusive in content and scope, and reset their relations to reading, to writing and, with due regard to ongoing work, to oracy, and further to develop assessment and teacher expertise.

 

Introduction

1. We are a Working Group on GCSE English Reform composed of secondary school teachers, academics from university Departments of English, university Departments of Education and educational consultants. We were set up by University English, an organisation of Departments of English in Higher Education, with the English Association, a subject association which brings together individuals and organisations from all sectors of education and all areas of English studies.
2. We are responding to very widespread disquiet in the discipline about the current GCSE provision for English Literature and English Language. We believe that the current curriculum and assessment models for GCSE English Literature and GCSE English Language are not fit for this purpose and need reform.
3. Here we explain why the GCSEs are not fit for purpose and we make recommendations for reform. We aim to encourage a discipline and sector-wide conversation among teachers, academics, relevant organizations, parents, policymakers, exam boards, employers and all other stake-holders, with a view to implementing reforms.

 

Why is English important?

4. As the National Curriculum for English at KS4 makes clear, “English has a pre-eminent place in education and in society” because it teaches students to “communicate their ideas and emotions to others”, to “develop culturally, emotionally, intellectually, socially and spiritually” and to play a full role in the social and political life of the nation. It is a compulsory subject at KS3 and KS4.

5. For Higher Education, the Quality Assurance Agency Subject Benchmark Statement for English states that

Students of English study meaning through communication in the medium of English… and develop their understanding through creative, critical and analytical responses. The subject enhances students’ ability to understand themselves, other people and our shared world. The study of language, of literary, fictional, non-fictional, digital and multimodal texts, and the production of critical and creative work develops students’ abilities to communicate, collaborate, create, and think critically, capabilities which enable them to develop as individuals, have rewarding careers and contribute effectively to society and the economy.[1]

These general principles apply to English at all levels.

6. English, with its concern for language, communication, narrative and critical literacy is a core subject for the world of work. Research shows unambiguously that companies big and small value and are looking for people with capabilities in in communication, collaboration, critical thinking and problem solving, creativity, independence and adaptability: all taught by English. A recent HEPI report notes the “strong correlation between the skills of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences graduates and key skills valued by employers”.[2] A British Academy Report notes that of “the ten fastest growing sectors, eight employ more graduates from AHSS [Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences] than other disciplines, with six having over two-thirds of their graduate workforce from AHSS”.[3]

7. While English is core to all sectors, it has a special relevance for the creative industries. As a NESTA report argues, these, are “driving economic growth across the UK” and will create 900,000 new jobs by 2030.[4] 25% of arts and humanities graduates find work in the creative sector and are three times more likely to be in a creative job than other graduates.[5]

 

GCSE English Literature and GCSE English Language are currently not fit for purpose

8. GCSE English Literature and GCSE English Language are currently not fit for purpose and do not develop or assess attributes that are of key importance in future life, nor relate sufficiently clearly to the academic disciplines of which they are a part.

9. The 2019 ‘The State of English and the Teaching of English’ survey, undertaken by the National Association for the Teaching of English (NATE), revealed “growing student dissatisfaction and disengagement with English studies at earlier stages of education, especially in GCSE English”. A 2017 Survey from the English and Media Centre, an educational charity, found that teachers “commented that the new GCSEs were ‘narrow and dull’, that ‘students really dislike them and are intimidated by the workload’ and that they fail to engage students because ‘everything is performance-focused’. Others made the point that ‘too much emphasis on testing has destroyed any creativity in this subject’ and that ‘we have killed this subject with the new, terribly boring GCSE’”.[6] We note three core aspects.

10. The increasingly narrow curriculum, especially since 2015, has damaged the effectiveness of the subject. Varied language study, and the development of associated skills and competencies, has been reduced, for instance, by the decrease in emphasis on media, digital and other non-literary texts in GCSE English Language and the removal of Spoken Language Study in 2015.[7] Study of these kinds of non-fiction and ‘multi-modal’ texts are vital for future life as a citizen and the world of work today, and significant language study is an important element in making students aware of how language works in the world. The opportunities for reading contemporary and socially diverse texts have shrunk significantly, meaning that the GCSEs do not engage with the students’ identities or our increasingly diverse global world. English has traditionally been a ‘big picture’ subject allowing students to develop and make connections, teaching students how to ‘make meaning’ for themselves: vital skills for the world of work and for becoming socially responsible, culturally aware, global citizens.  However, as NATE argues, the recent student “experience of English… tends to be a microcosmic analysis of textual features and their alleged ‘effects’ rather than on reading for meaning”. As the curriculum narrows, students feel a lack of ownership, connection and purpose.  We agree with the teacher from the NATE 2019 survey, who wrote that the curriculum “misses the opportunity to engage students in the issues that are shaping their lives today”.

11. Current forms of teaching, promoted by Ofsted and DfE, which rely on direct instruction and ‘scripted lessons’ may potentially be well-suited to other disciplines. However, they are inappropriate ways of approaching the skills and knowledge that English teaches and that underpin the discipline. Recent online curricula and resources, developed by an arm’s length government body and by some large MATs, have been very widely criticised by practitioners across the discipline. The nature of the subject and the ways in which collaboration, communication and creativity are central to its purposes, requires a variety of pedagogic approaches. Too much emphasis on direct instruction and explicit teaching can impede the development of independence and personal response to texts. They also encourage an approach that focuses on the historical contexts of a text, not on the text itself. They risk reducing teacher autonomy and judgment, so decreasing teacher confidence and sense of professional expertise.  As a Head of English wrote, again in the NATE survey: “I want to enable and empower my team to teach as themselves, excellently, using their own professional judgement, and working as a team. But there is pressure to ‘be more like science’ even though I don’t think that will work for outcomes or engagement or motivation or keeping my staff on side”.

12. The subject has become too coupled to assessment: the subject is not for assessment, assessment needs to be for the subject. Currently, assessment drives pedagogy, which means that the students can become passive and disengaged, with ‘exam-craft’ swamping genuine engagement. The texts can become high stakes assessment transaction points rather than opening the possibility for meaningful and exciting, but in assessment terms potentially more risky, exploration. Exclusively terminal examination excludes the possibility for an element of reflective coursework, extended writing and research, and is a poor preparation for the workplace, where a range of resources is consulted, and work drafted and redrafted for particular audiences and purposes. Generally, assessment in schools shows little recognition of the complex nature of learning in English, which involves non-linear progress and a wide range of skills.  Moreover, students’ own responses, choices and voices are limited, reducing their ability to become independent learners, and work critically and collaboratively with others and so to develop dispositions and aptitudes that will stand them in good stead in future life.  The removal of the Speaking and Listening assessment was especially damaging in this regard.

13. These three aspects mean that the English GCSEs do not effectively engage with students’ identities or student diversity; do not assist the ability of students to formulate their own knowledge or feel ownership of language issues or literary texts; cut them off from their own experience of literature and culture more widely. The Lit in Colour report published in 2021 details findings that only 27.2% of the young people surveyed agreed that the “the books we study in English Literature helped me learn more about my heritage”, which was only marginally more than the level of agreement from Black, Asian or minority ethnic young people (24.8%).[8] While some students are reading a lot, and in a very diverse range of genres, they feel that the way they have to read and analyse texts for the current GCSE is a long way from the reading they do for pleasure.

14. More, we note that these issues at KS4 impact directly, and negatively, on KS3. The high-pressure accountability culture in schools has all too often led to KS3 being viewed only through a GCSE lens, as preparation for the very specific demands of flawed GCSE exams, rather than as a broader and more expansive education in the subject. GCSE can shape the whole of KS3 and this can lead to inappropriate choices of text and pedagogical approach.

15. The GCSE is no longer fit for employers because it is not developing students for today or tomorrow’s workplace. The aptitudes English fosters – communication, collaboration, creativity and critical thinking – are vital to all areas of the economy: the GCSEs risk failing to deliver these.

 

Recommendations

16. The secondary English ‘ecosystem’ is especially complex and interwoven: some changes are easy, some involve systemic development, decisions and work from all stakeholders. In the light of this complexity, we offer recommendations below which range from the specific to the more general. The recommendations are under eight headings (17-24).

17. Reforming the content of both GCSE English Language and GCSE English Literature. We recommend that both GCSEs should:
    1. offer a clearer idea of the purpose and integrated nature of the subject, and what they equip students to do in the world of work, and in their life as engaged citizens. English develops aptitudes in communication, collaboration, creativity, and critical thinking that enrich all sectors of industry and social enterprise.
    2. define more clearly the relationship between the two GCSEs, focussing on the connections and with due regard to the importance of language as its own field of knowledge.
    3. pay due attention to the forms of knowledge appropriate to the subject, rather than applying a generic template for all subjects, as if there are no differences between them.
    4. include more diverse texts, including texts written in English from around the globe. These should be brought into relationship with each other: old and new, canonical and non-canonical, in the long traditions of the subject.
    5. include more media, non-fiction and multi-modal texts, including print journalism, Film, TV, drama, computer games and other digital texts.
    6. include texts and approaches that support global environmental sustainability and greening the curriculum through climate education, and enhanced awareness of the representation of the natural environment.
    7. include, and consider more appropriate ways of assessing, creative writing, to reflect the ways in which texts are planned, drafted and written in the wider world.
    8. recognise the links to creative industries. While English develops aptitudes for all sectors of industry and social enterprise, there is a special link between English, a subject concerned with creativity, communication, language and narrative, and the flourishing creative industries in the UK, which both GCSEs could usefully recognise.

18. For the content of GCSE English Literature, we recommend that:

1. teachers focus on the idea that students are studying literature not texts: that is, we are studying literature by means of specific texts. (E.g. Geographers do not teach ‘the Lake District’ but geological processes as exemplified through the Lake District).
2. the literary curriculum be diversified and include global English texts and texts in translation.
3. the role of context as the sole determinant of meaning is reduced and the relationship between text, form, reader and writer is developed. Context is only one aspect of how we come to understand a text’s meaning and should not dominate that process, nor prevent a more authentic personal response nor limit critical exploration. The text should be at the centre of analysis and the context should illuminate the text.
4. texts should be framed by a range of different criteria, led by pedagogical concerns, rather than just by period. These criteria might include text type, genre and suitability for the age and stage of learning.
5. scope for enjoyment is created, as mandated by the National Curriculum.
6. the assessment of poetry should be re-thought, to encourage wide reading, authentic personal response and a shift away from the overuse of technical terminology, feature-spotting and learned responses.
7. critical literacy should be at the heart of reading practices, enabling students to interrogate the values and ideas that underpin texts and their interpretations.
8. Overall, we recommend a broader range of approaches which enhance enjoyment, creativity and diversity of style as well as exam-focused analysis.

 

19. For the content of GSCE English Language, we recommend that:

1. GCSE English Language change to reflect its status as a discipline in its own right and more clearly and explicitly to develop student knowledge about language. This would also make the path from GCSE to A level English Language clearer and more coherent, as well as allying it to the academic disciplines of linguistics and English Language.
2. speaking and listening are assessed, and so valued.
3. speaking and listening and knowledge about spoken language are brought into relationship with each other, to develop students’ understanding of speech and writing.
4. the relationship between GCSE English Language and future adult life and employment is made clearer.
5. Outside specific discussions to do with the history and evolution of language, English Language GCSE should be focused on modern and contemporary texts and period requirements for pre-20th century texts should be reserved for GCSE English Literature
6. opportunities for discussion and critical analysis of digital and other media texts are offered.
7. awarding bodies are encouraged to include more varied writing tasks, including creative writing, so that there are opportunities to write in a variety of forms that reflect and represent young people in the 21st century and support them in life, learning and employment.

 

20. Reading and the English GCSEs

The word ‘reading’ overlaps in sometimes confusing ways in relation to English and literacy. Reading can refer to what is called ‘decoding’ (this is, for example, where phonics has a role to play); it can also refer to what is sometimes called ‘functional literacy’ (the example usually given is the ability to read prescriptions).

Reading also means making an interpretation (we ‘make’ or ‘offer’ a reading), whether simply making inferences from texts or something more formal. While school English departments are, rightly, concerned with all three forms of reading, the GCSEs are more concerned with the third sense: as Margaret Meek wrote, reading “is the process of turning written language into meaning”.[9]

In the light of this clarification, strategies for reading at GCSE need reform and further work. We recommend: 

1. 1. building thoughtfully on what teenagers are actually reading in order to introduce them to a wider range of texts.
   2. develop responsive strategies for reading, including building greater reading resilience and skill.
   3. develop strategies for helping students to respond to texts, developing probing of personal responses, infer meaning and make interpretations, through exploration, dialogue and debate
   4. other forms of reading are enabled, including audiobooks and digital forms.
   5. these strategies should complement the mandate to foster reading for pleasure.

 

21. Writing and the English GCSEs: writing is crucial for the discipline of English. We recommend that the strategies for writing at GSCE:

1. allow for more forms of writing to be both taught and assessed, including creative writing and building in talking and dialogue about texts.
2. build in scope for the development of writing, including rewriting, editing, redrafting.

 

22. Oracy and English

We note the work of the current Oracy Commission. Oracy is clearly a ‘whole school’ issue. However, like literacy, it also sits comfortably in both English Language, with its interest in language, and English Literature, with its interest in communication, dialogic pedagogy, talk for learning and literature’s role in developing student identity and fostering student voice. We await its recommendations. Our view, as signalled above, is that speaking and listening and the study of spoken language should have a much bigger role in English Language GCSE, and potentially in new forms of assessment too.

 

23. Reform of assessment

Assessment, assessment load and accountability play a central role in some of the problems for the English GCSEs. Solutions to these problems are on both the largest national scale and on the small scale of the individual curricula. No one solution will resolve the array of issues. We recommend:

 1. the assessment burden be reduced.
2. the return of some form of assessment of work of the course e.g. portfolio, assessment by viva or other spoken means, as one element
3. the assessment be more holistic.
4. building in a range of enrichment activities that will contribute to assessment.

 

24. Teacher Expertise

John Hattie writes that a crucial factor for improving the quality of student outcomes is not “the amount of knowledge” a teacher has but “how teachers see the surface and the deeper understandings of the subjects that they teach”.[10]  Again, these issues are sector-wide. We recommend support, CPD and training to develop teacher expertise and confidence, with a particular focus on subject knowledge and subject-related pedagogy.

 

 Conclusion 

25. We believe that these significant changes, which could be developed and implemented through the usual, established, cost-neutral routes in dialogue with DfE and Exam boards, or future routes to be developed with government and other stakeholders, would increase the range and breadth of English, better equip young people with the skills they need to progress into post-16 education and employment in a future digital and green economy, and improve their motivation and confidence. We believe that it would also improve the attractiveness of the teaching profession, and the recruitment, training and retention of teachers.

 

 

Members of the Working Group

Dr Furzeen Ahmed, Associate Lecturer in English Language, University of Derby

Andy Atherton

Dr Carol Atherton, Head of English, Spalding Grammar School

Dr Joe Barber, Senior Lecturer in English Education, Manchester Metropolitan University

Dr Freddie Baverstock, Head of English, Harris Westminster Sixth Form

Barbara Bleiman, Editor of emagazine, Education Consultant, English and Media Centre

Chris Curtis, educational author, English teacher and Head of Department

Professor Robert Eaglestone, Professor of Contemporary Literature and Thought, Royal Holloway, University of London r.eaglestone@rhul.ac.uk

Professor Kamilla Elliott, Professor of Literature and Media, Lancaster University

Eve Giwa-Osagie, Lead Practitioner, Harris Academy Greenwich

Dr Andrew Green, Senior Lecturer in Education, Brunel University

Kat Howard

Professor Gail Marshall, Professor of Victorian Literature and Culture, University of Reading; Chair of University English

Dr Lesley Nelson-Addy, Education Manager, Runnymede Trust

Dr Rachel Roberts, Associate Professor in Secondary English Education, University of Reading

Dr Gary Snapper, Lecturer in English Education, University of Oxford

and other members of the Working Group

 

While we are a Working Group set up by disciplinary bodies, we write in an individual capacity and not on behalf of the Universities, Schools or Colleges to which we are affiliated.

 

Contact: Professor Robert Eaglestone, r.eaglestone@rhul.ac.uk

---

[1] https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/sbs/sbs-english-23.pdf?sfvrsn=3559ae81_6

[2] The Humanities in the UK Today: What’s Going On?  HEPI Report 159 (2023), p. 1 https://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/The-Humanities-in-the-UK-Today-Whats-Going-On.pdf

[3] Qualified for the Future Quantifying demand for arts, humanities and social science skills (2020), p. 21 https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/documents/1888/Qualified-for-the-Future-Quantifying-demand-for-arts-humanities-social-science-skills.pdf

[4] https://www.nesta.org.uk/press-release/creative-industries-are-driving-economic-growth-across-the-uk-on-track-to-create-one-million-new-creative-industries-jobs-between-2013-and-2030/

[5] Qualified for the Future Quantifying demand for arts, humanities and social science skills (2020), p. 22 https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/documents/1888/Qualified-for-the-Future-Quantifying-demand-for-arts-humanities-social-science-skills.pdf

[6] https://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/blog/emc-survey-significant-drop-in-numbers-taking-a-level-english-subjects/

[7] The Oracy All-Party Parliamentary Group report (April 2021) found that the development of spoken language skills requires purposeful and intentional teaching and learning throughout children’s schooling. The Ofsted Research Review of English (July 2022) echoed this, noting that ‘The benefits of spoken language extend beyond just success at school. Becoming an articulate, effective communicator forms the basis of democratic engagement within wider society.’ Currently we have the worst of all worlds at GCSE, where teachers are obliged to undertake oracy assessment, but it is given no value in the eyes of students and does not contribute to their grades.

 [8]Victoria Elliott, Lesley Nelson-Addy, Roseanne Chantiluke and Matthew Courtney, Lit in Colour; Diversity in English Schools, The Runnymede Trust and Penguin Books, June 2021, p. 51 https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/61488f992b58e687f1108c7c/61d6fc0b4a6b8786bd88d10b_Lit-in-Colour-research-report-min.pdf

[9] Margaret Meek, On Being Literate (London: Bodley Head, 1991), p. 38.

[10] John Hattie, Visible Learning for Teachers: Maximizing impact on learning (London: Routledge 2012), p. 28.