GEC Response to the Curriculum & Assessment Review: A Step Forward – But Who Gets to Move Forward With It?
By Dr Nicole Ponsford, Founding CEO of the Global Equality Collective
The publication of the Curriculum and Assessment Review (CAR), followed by the Department for Education’s formal response, marks an important moment for English education. For the first time in many years, national policy explicitly recognises that our current curriculum and assessment system creates barriers — and that we must build a broader, more inclusive educational experience for all learners.
As the Review states: “We must promote high aspirations and raise standards for the significant group of young people for whom the current system creates barriers.”
This admission is overdue. It echoes what leaders, teachers, students and families have reported to the GEC for years. Our own 26,000 Voices research surfaces the same reality: millions of students do not feel seen, represented or supported within the current curriculum.
The DfE response picks up this tone, stating: “This government’s ambition is for every child and young person to receive a rich and broad, and inclusive and innovative education.”
These words matter. They indicate movement. But as always, the clarity of the ambition must be matched with detail, definition and action. And this is where the gaps remain.
“The Curriculum and Assessment Review is a welcome step. But intention must be matched with clarity, intersectionality and practical tools.” ~ Dr Nicole Ponsford, Founding CEO of the Global Equality Collective
1. What the Review Gets Right
There is much to welcome:
A broader understanding of a meaningful curriculum.
The Review signals a shift from a narrow, exam-driven model towards one that values cultural literacy, creativity, enrichment and wider skills.
Recognition that representation matters.
It notes that curriculum content should reflect modern Britain — its histories, communities and contributions.
Acknowledgement that many learners are currently underserved.
Students with SEND, those experiencing disadvantage and those who feel unseen in curriculum content are finally recognised at national level.
Encouragement of diverse perspectives.
The Review calls for a curriculum that better represents the world as it is — not as it once was.
These are positive steps. But they are only the first steps.
2. What the Review Misses
Limited focus on multilingual learners /EAL
Despite being one of the most rapidly growing groups in our schools, multilingual learners are barely referenced. This is striking given that linguistic diversity sits at the heart of modern British classrooms.
Challenges in key curriculum subjects
One of the most significant opportunities for improvement lies in the curriculum areas that most shape identity, belonging and worldview.
History remains tightly framed around limited British narratives, with Global Majority histories underrepresented and migration stories marginal.
Human Geography often omits linguistic diversity, displacement, migration, and global interconnection — lived realities for many multilingual learners.
English still privileges monolingual norms, Standard British English and canonical texts that do not speak to the diversity of our students’ identities and experiences.
For multilingual learners, this results in:
Curriculum content that does not reflect their identities or histories.
Linguistic diversity treated as a challenge rather than an asset.
Assessment practices built around one linguistic register rather than the full range of communication skills multilingual students hold.
This mirrors our 26,000 Voices findings, where multilingual learners frequently described feeling “invisible” within curriculum materials and texts. A world-class curriculum must intentionally embed linguistic and cultural diversity — not assume monolingualism as the default.
Global Majority representation remains vague
The Review references “diverse contributions” but does not address the structural erasure of Global Majority histories, perspectives and scholarship. GEC Circle expert, Dr Penny Rabiger notes this clearly: “Absent is any mention of the systematic erasure of Black and Global Majority narratives.”
Intersectionality is missing
The Review names groups, but not the intersections that shape lived experience. Our work with the waterline of visibility model is critical here:
Above the waterline: sex, race, age, physical disability.
Below the waterline: neurodivergence, invisible disabilities, socio-economic experience, care experience, gender identity, multilingualism, religion, nationality and migration.
The Review acknowledges inequity but does not explore its complexity.
What we submitted was only partially taken forward
The GEC’s 26,000 Voices submission highlighted belonging gaps, curriculum safety, representation issues, SEND experiences, EAL perspectives and wider curriculum inequity. Some themes appear — but the intersectional depth is not reflected in the final Review.
3. The DfE Response: Strong Intentions, Limited Operational Detail
The DfE response reinforces the aspiration to broaden and diversify what students learn and how they are assessed. There are clear commitments to accessibility, cultural breadth and more equitable pathways.
What the DfE picks up well:
Recognition that the system has been exclusionary.
The Department acknowledges that many learners have been poorly served.
An intention to broaden definitions of success.
This opens the door for schools to value enrichment, creativity, culture and wider skills.
Acknowledgement of accessibility issues in assessment.
This is particularly relevant for disabled learners, neurodivergent students and multilingual learners.
Embedding Media Literacy for a More Inclusive and Informed Curriculum
Recognition of the importance of media literacy is welcome, but it remains underdeveloped. While the Review notes critical thinking and cultural literacy, it stops short of embedding media literacy across the curriculum. With the growing influence of AI, misinformation, and digital communication, students must be taught to question narratives, analyse bias, and understand representation. These skills are vital for critical awareness, belonging, and global citizenship..
A steer towards better representation.
The DfE supports the idea that curriculum content should reflect diverse contributions.
These are welcome signals. But they are high-level, and implementation remains vague.
Where the DfE is still unclear
No working definition of inclusion.
The response uses the language of inclusion, but does not describe what inclusive curriculum design looks like in practice — at subject level, year group level or assessment level.
Intersectionality is absent.
Without intersectionality, reforms cannot tackle structural patterns of disadvantage.
Multilingual learners are not addressed directly.
There is no plan for EAL inclusion, multilingual pedagogy or linguistic diversity within assessment.
Assistive Technology remains aspirational.
AT is referenced but not embedded as a core entitlement. This limits its potential impact.
No alignment with accountability or inspection.
Inclusion will not progress if inspection frameworks do not embed it.
No CPD or workforce plan.
Teachers cannot teach what they do not feel confident to deliver. This remains unaddressed.
No commitment to student or staff voice.
This is particularly concerning given our dataset’s findings around representation, belonging and participation.
4. Sector Responses Strengthening the Case for Inclusion
A range of sector organisations have responded to the Curriculum and Assessment Review, and their analyses echo many of the concerns raised by the GEC. Together, these responses highlight the need for greater clarity, stronger guidance and a more explicitly intersectional approach to curriculum reform.
ASCL
ASCL’s response questions whether the ambitions of the Review can be achieved without significant changes to accountability and assessment frameworks.
https://ascl.org.uk/News/Our-news-and-press-releases/our-press-releases/details/response-to-curriculum-and-assessment-review
Foundation for Education Development (FED)
The FED synthesises five years of consultations and emphasises the need for long-term strategic planning, arguing that without coherence and stability, curriculum reform risks losing momentum.
https://fed.education/feds-response-to-the-curriculum-assessment-review-5-years-of-consultations-synthesised/
Education Policy Institute (EPI)
EPI warns of “significant risks” if the government does not provide a clear plan for implementation, including how inclusion and wider skills will be measured and supported.
https://epi.org.uk/comments/governments-response-to-the-curriculum-and-assessment-review/
Royal Society
The Royal Society highlights the absence of future-facing scientific literacy and stresses that a modern curriculum should prepare young people for rapidly changing technological, environmental and global contexts.
https://royalsociety.org/news/2025/11/curriculum-assessment-review-response/
Local Government Association (LGA)
The LGA stresses that without proper investment, particularly for SEND provision, the system will struggle to deliver on the Review’s ambition for equity.
https://www.local.gov.uk/about/news/government-response-curriculum-and-assessment-review-lga-comment
Sutton Trust
The Sutton Trust cautions that the most disadvantaged pupils risk being left behind unless the Review’s recommendations are matched with structural change and targeted resourcing.
https://www.suttontrust.com/news-opinion/all-news-opinion/sutton-trust-response-to-curriculum-and-assessment-review/
NAHT
NAHT underscores that the workload demands of curriculum redesign must be recognised and supported and that schools need time, space and resources to implement new expectations effectively.
https://www.naht.org.uk/news/latest-updates/naht-responds-curriculum-and-assessment-review
NEU
The NEU raises concerns about whether the reforms go far enough in addressing systemic inequities and warns that without a genuine shift in accountability, inclusion risks becoming rhetorical rather than practical.
https://neu.org.uk/latest/neu-response-curriculum-assessment-review
NFER
NFER’s response stresses the importance of evidence-informed implementation and highlights gaps in how the Review addresses diverse learner needs, assessment fairness and opportunity pathways.
https://www.nfer.ac.uk/news-events/press-releases/nfer-responds-to-the-curriculum-and-assessment-review/
Schools Week Review
https://schoolsweek.co.uk/curriculum-review-all-the-key-policy-recommendations/
Council for Disabled Children
NGA
Taken together, these responses reinforce a consistent message:
The Curriculum and Assessment Review opens the door — but inclusion must walk through it.
They strengthen the position that without clearly defined expectations, proper resourcing, accountability alignment and an intersectional framework, the Review’s ambition risks falling short of transformative impact.
5. The GEC Response: Inclusion Must Be Designed, Not Assumed
The CAR and the DfE response together signal a system that wants to move towards greater inclusion. But without operational clarity, schools will be left to interpret inclusion themselves — often without the tools, training or data they need.
This is where the GEC’s contribution becomes essential.
Our Kaleidoscopic Data framework offers what the Review and DfE response do not:
A clear way to define inclusion.
Data that captures representation, belonging and identity.
Insight into the lived experience of different student groups.
Evidence that helps schools design inclusive, adaptive curricula with precision.
Tools to support staff confidence and capability.
Without this type of data, reforms risk becoming symbolic rather than structural.
6. What Schools and Trusts Can Do Now – With GEC Support
Schools do not need to wait for policy cycles or new guidance to take meaningful steps towards a more inclusive, equitable curriculum. There are practical, evidence-informed actions leaders can begin immediately — and the GEC provides the tools, data and expertise to support them.
Strengthen staff understanding and confidence with GEC KnowHow
Curriculum inclusion depends on staff confidence. The GEC KnowHow library offers curated books, playlists, articles and resources that help teachers and leaders engage with diverse histories, multilingual perspectives, cultural representation, neurodiversity, gender equity and intersectionality.
This foundation empowers curriculum teams to understand not just what to include, but why it matters.
Use open-access research to inform curriculum reviews
The 26,000 Voices Report and the GEC Inclusion Index provide detailed insights into how students experience curriculum content, belonging, representation, safety and opportunity.
These findings help curriculum leads identify:
which subjects feel unsafe or exclusionary,
where representation is missing,
where students feel unseen or unheard,
and where the wider curriculum is not reaching all learners.
Embed Assistive Technology (AT) as a core part of curriculum and assessment
Assistive Technology is not an add-on. It is an inclusion tool that enables access to learning, communication and independence. Schools can:
ensure AT is integrated into curriculum planning rather than used only as a SEND accommodation,
train all staff — not only SENDCos and TAs — to use AT features within everyday teaching,
audit which learners would benefit from speech-to-text, text-to-speech, translation tools, visual overlays, reading tools and adjustable platforms,
map AT provision across subjects to ensure consistency,
incorporate AT into assessment preparation and classroom routines.
AT is a ‘nice to have’ for some students, but essential for disabled students, neurodivergent learners and multilingual pupils. It should be viewed as part of universal design, not specialist provision.
Prioritise Media Literacy and Critical Digital Skills
Our school system was built in an era of information scarcity, where reciting knowledge signalled intelligence. Today, in a world of information abundance, the question is no longer what you know but how you know it. Media literacy is essential to help young people create, question, and deconstruct content.
Media Literacy is now fundamental to inclusion. It equips students with the tools to think critically, evaluate bias, and participate ethically in a digital world. Embedding Media Literacy across English, Humanities, Science and Citizenship helps students see themselves — and others — represented accurately. GEC KnowHow, our GEC Circle and our GEC Platform supports curriculum leads to integrate Media Literacy into subject design, ensuring that critical thinking, creativity and ethical technology use are embedded throughout learning.
Adopt Data for Inclusion approaches across leadership teams
Inclusion cannot be delivered through attainment data alone.
Schools need a more human-centred set of metrics that include:
representation gaps
belonging and cultural safety
visibility of identities
staff confidence
lived experience
participation and access in both the curriculum and wider curriculum
This requires a shift in data literacy.
Data Managers, Teaching & Learning Leads and SENDCos each play a distinct role:
Data Managers can integrate identity, belonging and representation indicators alongside academic metrics.
Teaching & Learning Leads can use these insights to redesign schemes of work, text choices and pedagogical approaches.
SENDCos can use Kaleidoscopic Data to identify patterns in access, AT use, classroom support and SEND learner experience across subjects.
This is where GEC Data for Inclusion frameworks provide a clear structure, enabling leaders to interpret data ethically and actionably.
Conduct a GEC Inclusion Audit
The audit offers a structured review of:
curriculum content and sequencing
representation and identity visibility
pedagogy and inclusive practice
AT and digital inclusion
wider curriculum access
classroom cultural safety
It highlights what is working, what needs attention and where targeted change can have the greatest impact.
Use the GEC Staff & Student Inclusion Index
These tools offer subject-by-subject insight into:
curriculum safety
representation gaps
identity affirmation
staff capability and confidence
student experience by demographic group
This supports Heads of Department, curriculum leaders and senior teams to make precise, targeted improvements. Download now.
Implement Kaleidoscopic Data across leadership cycles
Kaleidoscopic Data allows schools to bring together:
student voice
identity and representation data
staff confidence and cultural competence
curriculum content analysis
wider curriculum access patterns
By embedding this across leadership cycles — curriculum review, CPD, quality assurance, SEND planning, equalities work and school improvement — leaders can build an inclusive curriculum that is accurate, evidence-informed and sustainable.
Conclusion
The Curriculum and Assessment Review is a welcome step. The DfE response signals a more inclusive direction of travel. But intention must be matched with clarity, intersectionality and practical tools.
The GEC exists to provide that clarity. Through evidence, lived experience, data and practical support, we help schools turn ambition into action.