Part One – the educational origins of the national curriculum

The ‘Yellow Book’ was a 1976 report, by the then Secretary of State, Fred Mulley, on state education provision across England and Wales (Mulley, 1976). It looked at the status of the various subjects commonly found in the curriculum. Mathematics, for example, was seen to be a common GCE (O level) subject in schools, but on the status of the physical sciences it reported that ‘(T)here must be grounds for dissatisfaction in

the lowly position in the list of subjects such as modern languages, and the physical sciences’ (Mulley, 1976, p.11). The report noted that more needed to be done to promote

these subjects in primary schools. Even though science had been a part of the curriculum for many years (see Chapter 2), this report found that physical science uptake in public examinations was poor. It implied that the teaching of science had not been prioritised. The report also noted that there was a specific issue in the recruitment of specialist teachers in mathematics and science. This problem was fuelled by the lack of students taking up sciences and mathematics at a higher level and, ultimately there not being

enough specialist graduates coming into initial teacher training, a situation that still troubles the educational and political establishment today.

The ‘Yellow Book’ is an important document in that it was an internally commissioned and written Government report that reviewed the state of education. It provided evidence and therefore a justification for politicians to pave the way for a ‘core curriculum’, the forerunner of the NC, as the report states:

The time has probably come to try to establish generally accepted principles for the composition of the secondary curriculum for all pupils, that is to say a "core curriculum". One advantage of the existence of such a curriculum would be its guarantee of relative continuity to children moving between schools in different parts of the country. The creation of a suitable core curriculum will not, however, be easy. Pupils in their later years [of] secondary schooling (up to and beyond the age of compulsory attendance) have a wide range of interests and expectations, and suitable provision will have to be made for vocational elements within school education for those who will benefit from this. Extensive consideration and consultation will be needed before a core curriculum could be introduced (Mulley, 1976, p.11).

The ‘Yellow Book’ provides early indications of Government entering the world of curriculum, assessment and accountability. Politicians at this point had no direct control or influence on the curriculum or assessment. HMI was identified in the ‘Yellow Book’, as the mechanism for change in core subjects like Science:

HM Inspectorate can step up their efforts through publications, courses and assessorships. The possibility of outside enquiries into these areas of the curriculum, or aspects of them, will be considered at the same time (Mulley, 1976, p.23).

What this report identified was that the educational influences (i.e. teachers, curriculum writers etc.) on science uptake was not working, political influence was indirect and at ‘arm’s length’. HMI were seen as the agents for change organisationally and politicians were keen to use their influence to improve science uptake.

5.1.2 Callaghan’s Ruskin speech

On the 18th October 1976, James (Jim) Callaghan (1912–2005), then Labour Prime Minister, gave a speech at Ruskin College, Oxford. While The Yellow Book is not regarded as the origin of Callaghan’s speech (Chitty, 1991), there is no doubt that a synergy exists between the report and the eventual speech produced for Callaghan by the Government policy unit at number 10 Downing Street. It was a statement of the ‘reality’ of state education at that point in time. Callaghan’s speech was designed to expose this reality and to challenge the fact that accountability in education was not really

being achieved. A common core curriculum, revised examinations and an inspectorate charged with monitoring and checking education provision would supply that accountability. Callaghan believed that the time was right for education to be no longer the preserve of teachers and unions. These signal important changes. Callaghan identified that HMI was ineffective in bringing about change (despite the ‘Yellow Book’ identifying HMI as the possible agents of change) so he proposed an organisational change to HMI to make the inspectorate one of the mechanisms of accountability working on behalf of the Government to monitor schools.

By the early 20th _{Century it was estimated that more than one hundred different}

examinations existed which controlled entry to many professions and universities. There was no overall control over the variety, content or standards for these examinations (Tattersall, 2007). Leading up to the public examination years, there was no political control over the content taught in various subjects, or for that matter control over exactly what subjects should be on offer or taken by children. The existence of these examinations drove the development of the curriculum subjects by teachers based on their own educational judgement. The rationale for public examinations was suitability to study those subjects at post 16 and at university level. It was not necessarily about what would be good to teach children – what we wanted them to know, be able to do or understand. The examination system did not prioritise any political imperatives, such as employment prospects or an ability to contribute to the economic well-being of the country. Clearly, the examinations did provide employment opportunities and potential scientists and technicians for industry, but there was no explicit political driver for this. Callaghan viewed the state of the national examination as a contentious issue, something his ‘new’ Secretary of State for Education, Shirley Williams (b1930-), would be looking at carefully (see appendix H for a list of Prime Ministers and their Secretaries of State for Education from 1970-2018)

Callaghan’s Ruskin Speech identified a need for more science teaching that would lead to students taking up technology related degrees, training and jobs saying, ‘There seems

to be a need for more technological bias in science teaching that will lead towards practical applications in industry rather than towards academic studies.’ (Callaghan,

1976, cited online by Gillard, 2010) He stated that a high proportion of girls abandon science and 30,000 places for science and engineering remained unfilled in Universities and Polytechnics at that point. Callaghan was making a political case for a NC related to economic prosperity and reducing unemployment. Although unemployment in the early 1970s was relatively low (by today’s standards), at about 1 million people, it had steadily been increasing and would hit 1.5 million by the late 1970s. This was three times the rate

of a decade earlier (Leaker, 2009). With the discovery of North Sea oil in the 1970s, the need for scientists, engineers and technologists grew.

There was a clear political will to exert control over and influence core aspects of the education system. From the curriculum to the examination system, major changes were being signalled as being necessary with political priorities driving the changes. Greater accountability to Government, rather than the LEAs or parents was being proposed, with a revised and more powerful inspectorate proposed as the mechanism for accountability. Following on from this speech, several reports and discussion papers were produced that, in the way the ‘Yellow Book’ set out a reality or truth about what was happening in education nationally, would delve much deeper.