Curriculum 2028: A closer look at the case for reform

Some criticism of curriculum reform risks focusing on proposals in isolation. The Minister’s statement sets out why the wider plan, teacher input and arrangements for implementation matter.

Darrágh Conway

Curriculum reform can attract strong criticism before the full plan is understood. In Northern Ireland, some of the debate about Curriculum 2028 has focused on what the changes might mean while giving less attention to how the proposals were developed, what sits alongside them and how schools are expected to prepare.

That is why I support Education Minister Paul Givan’s recent response to Dr Carmel Gallagher’s critique. The Minister’s statement argues that some criticisms misrepresent the proposals or leave out important context. I believe those points deserve to be heard. If we are to judge reform fairly, we need to look at the whole programme and the evidence behind it.

Dr Gallagher brings considerable experience to the debate and helped shape the 2007 curriculum. Her perspective deserves consideration. But the current curriculum should also be judged by how well it serves pupils now. The Department’s statement points to concerns raised in the Strategic Review: that the current framework is insufficiently specific, lacks a coherent sequence of knowledge and leaves significant decisions about content to individual schools and teachers. I fundamentally agree with that assessment.

These are concerns about the framework, not an accusation that teachers are failing. If expectations are unclear, schools may make different choices about what pupils learn. That risks giving young people different access to knowledge depending on where they go to school. A clearer curriculum can help establish a more consistent entitlement for every pupil while leaving teachers’ professional autonomy over how they teach.

It is also important to recognise the local input behind Curriculum 2028. The Department says the wider Curriculum Taskforce involved around 100 local academics, school leaders and practitioners. Northern Ireland teachers have contributed through subject working groups involved in drafting curriculum content. The Department also reports teacher surveys, stakeholder engagement, a 16-week public consultation that received more than 4,000 responses, six roadshows for school leaders and a dedicated TransformED Day for schools to consider the proposals.

That does not mean every teacher agrees with the reforms, or that consultation has answered every concern. But it does challenge the suggestion that the proposals were developed without professional input. The Department says feedback has led to changes, including moving the planned first implementation date from 2027 to 2028 and revising its approach to A-level assessment. These examples matter when judging whether the process has been able to respond to views raised.

Nor is TransformED simply a change to curriculum documents. The Minister describes it as a wider programme covering curriculum, assessment, qualifications, teacher professional learning, school improvement and educational disadvantage. It also connects with work on special educational needs and wellbeing. The Department says it plans to provide curriculum-aligned teaching resources and a digital resource hub to support teachers’ planning.

The implementation plans are part of the debate too. The Department says work is continuing on bespoke curriculum frameworks for special schools and Irish-medium education, with local practitioners involved. It also points to professional learning and more time for preparation before implementation begins. These commitments will need to be delivered well, and the Department should remain accountable for doing so. But they should be considered alongside the proposals rather than overlooked when the reforms are criticised.

I support the Minister’s case for continuing Curriculum 2028 because the debate should address the full picture: the weaknesses identified in the current framework, the involvement of teachers and local practitioners, and the wider support intended to help schools implement change. Reform deserves scrutiny. It also deserves to be judged on what it actually proposes.

Every pupil should be able to expect ambitious, coherent learning, wherever they go to school. Teachers should have clear guidance, useful resources and meaningful professional support to deliver it. The challenge now is for the Department to turn those commitments into practice - and for the debate to reflect the whole reform programme as that work continues.

Evidence over Ideology!