# data[].attributes.body
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2019/jan/25/researchers-to-track-impact-of-arts-activities-from-birth-to-25

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.pbs.org/parents/education/music-arts/the-importance-of-art-in-child-development/

# data[].attributes.body
https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Qt7r2GIbryYC&oi=fnd&pg=PA8&dq=art+impact+on+children&ots=RcYamg92Mb&sig=lWeZEg1ivX8uqTBH04G0qdSz8Mc#v=onepage&q=art%20impact%20on%20children&f=false

# data[].attributes.body
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8e07/c0677ad09f6b1c1bae3ae5b27566bda2c38a.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269929932_Embracing_Physical_Literacy

# data[].attributes.body
http://pessgogleddcymru.org/downloads/high-quality-info.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It won't have escaped your attention that curriculum is the next big thing. Of course, you may have thought that curriculum had been around for years, but now everything you thought you were doing under the heading of curriculum needs looking at again because you-know-who has decided it's a big priority. Curriculum is no longer the stuff we put on our curriculum plans; now it's the stuff that Ofsted inspectors scrutinise when they come to check if we're up to scratch.

I can't be the only one who finds this absolutely bonkers. We've had a centralised school inspectorate for a quarter of a century, and now they've decided that curriculum is worth looking at. I guess you could argue that, for many of those years, curriculum wasn't really a matter for schools anyway. The department issued the national strategies, and the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority provided the framework plans for foundation subjects. All teachers had to do was work out how to squeeze them into the school day.

Then, after the change of government in 2010, things took a different turn. Free of the old strategies - and, for many schools, free of the national curriculum altogether - the central dictation was scaled back.

Need to know: Where are Ofsted's school inspection changes heading?

Opinion: Why are we so reluctant to take learning into the outdoors?

Quick read: Three-quarters of 'outstanding' schools lose top grade

Very few schools completely abandoned the foundation subjects, of course. I challenge anybody to show me a primary school that doesn't include the occasional history topic or take infant children out to look at the falling leaves each autumn. And in truth, for all the talk of freedom from the national curriculum, most primaries are pretty happy to make use of the framework to plan learning for their pupils.

Sign up to sequencing

But something else is lying at the centre of the new inspection handbooks, and it's a key aspect that perhaps - if we're honest - we've not given enough thought to in the past. Sequencing the curriculum is where much of the focus needs to be. It's not enough to have done some history: we need to know that what our children learn each year builds on what went before.

I remember in my early years as a teacher coming to the end of a unit on medieval history only to discover that more than one pupil in my class had confused the characters of Henry II and Henry VIII in their minds. The fact that I'd never once mentioned six wives or monasteries seemed academic to them: all they'd retained from Year 5 was that a fat guy called Henry was an important king. Why should they think this Henry was someone else?

That's not to say that teaching things in order will solve the problem. Rather, it requires us to think about what we expect our children to know. When I taught medieval history, I didn't make links to the Tudors because that topic had been two years earlier and I hadn't taught it. On reflection, of course, the very place I should have started was the links to what they already knew. At the very least, the premise that Henry VIII was so called because there had been seven prior Henrys might have been a start!

So maybe we don't need to overhaul the curriculum at all. Very few schools have completely ignored the call for a broad and balanced curriculum. But how many schools are genuinely clear about what we expect children to recall from earlier topics - maybe even those topics from five years earlier?

Perhaps just asking that question might lead us to look again at topics we teach and ask: what do we hope our pupils will remember for future teachers? And then, we can adapt our curriculum accordingly.
Michael Tidd is headteacher at Medmerry Primary School in West Sussex. He tweets @MichaelT1979

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'What does Ofsted really want to see from school curricula?'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It won't have escaped your attention that curriculum is the next big thing. Of course, you may have thought that curriculum had been around for years, but now everything you thought you were doing under the heading of curriculum needs looking at again because you-know-who has decided it's a big priority.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Broad. Balanced. Mastery. Skills-based. Knowledge-based. Cross-curricular. Child-centred. Creative. Inclusive. Many of these words are used daily by teachers and leaders across the country to describe the curriculum in their school.

Of course, we all aspire to offer the "perfect" curriculum, which ticks all the boxes for children, parents and Ofsted. But how often do we ask ourselves the most important question of all: why?

Why do we teach our curriculum, to our children, in our school? Yes, we may have developed a wonderfully broad and balanced mastery curriculum that is child-centred, creative and inclusive - but is it relevant?

Why do we teach the topics we teach in particular year groups? Is it because it's what we've always done? Is it because we have invested in the resources? Or is it because we actually enjoy teaching that topic?

Quick read: How to take a thematic approach to the curriculum

Quick listen: Why we need a curriculum based on what is 'useful'

Want to know more? How to build a primary curriculum

My school is undergoing a pilot inspection under Ofsted's new inspection framework later this year, which means that we have had to ask ourselves these questions and to accelerate our plans for curriculum improvement.

In preparation for our inspection, we first needed to refer to the three new additions to the "Ofsted English Dictionary". These are known as the three "Is":

Roughly, these translate to:

Why do we teach what we teach?

How do we teach it?

What is the outcome? What progress did the children make?

Here's how we began the process of critically reflecting on the curriculum we deliver every day, and making sure that we deliver the three Is.

Intention

When thinking about curriculum intention, we considered Simon Sinek's theory of " Golden Circles". He explains this concept in a TED talk about how great leaders inspire action and stresses the importance of always starting with "why".

"People don't buy what you do. They buy why you do it," Sinek says, going on to explain that the most successful organisations in the world are those that start with their reasons for doing something and place great importance on understanding and sharing these reasons.

In other words: intention must underpin everything.

We decided it was valuable for all subject leaders to have a good understanding of their "why" in terms of their subject content. We spent staff development meetings in subject teams writing a rationale for each of the foundation subjects. Our school intake is predominantly white British and we are situated in an area of high deprivation; we recognised that our foundation subjects need to reflect and respond to our demographic. We also need to provide knowledge, skills and experiences that may not be relevant to another school that is just a few miles away but has a very different demographic.

Implementation

We all love to design exciting and inspiring lessons for the children in our classes. I, for one, certainly sleep better at night knowing I have a cracking hands-on investigative science lesson planned and ready to go for the next day.

But, to return to our critical friend "why?", we have to ask ourselves: are our topics really as exciting and inspiring as we thought they were when we last revamped the curriculum five to 10 years ago?

To answer this, we planned a two-day Dragon's Den-style Inset. In the staff meetings leading up to it, subject teams were given the brief to plan two brand new topics (KS1/EYFS and KS2) with their subject as the central focus. The only other rule was that it needed to link to a high-quality text and to include visits, visitors or an experience.

Subject teams were asked to present their topics at the Inset in any way they chose. Needless to say, we didn't need much encouragement to come up with engaging and exciting presentations (some of which involved fancy dress), but the topics themselves also proved to innovative, refreshing and exciting. The PE team planned a topic about the Women's Rugby World Cup with brilliant geography and civil rights links; the music team planned an Andrew Lloyd Webber topic with links to drama and writing our own musical; and the history team introduced us to JM Barrie, the author of Peter Pan who (unbeknown to us) lived locally.

The second part of the Inset focused on implementation: how could we incorporate these new topics into our curriculum while still ensuring coverage?

Year teams went back to their curriculum maps to discuss which topics they would like to "bid" for - considering the national curriculum statutory programmes of study. Year leaders then met to bid for the topics they wanted and worked together to make sure we met the statutory expectations.

Impact

Starting the school year with two new topics in each year group has given our curriculum a well-needed revamp - for both staff and children. Naturally, there are challenges involved in this process, such as resourcing new topics, starting plans from scratch and visiting new places, but, as with all new things, there is a buzz of excitement around the school and one that I hope will continue as the year goes on and we see the impact of our changes.
Rebecca Misselbrook is deputy headteacher at White Meadows Primary Academy in Littlehampton, West Sussex
Further reading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Broad. Balanced. Mastery. Skills-based. Knowledge-based. Cross-curricular. Child-centred. Creative. Inclusive. Many of these words are used daily by teachers and leaders across the country to describe the curriculum in their school. Of course, we all aspire to offer the "perfect" curriculum, which ticks all the boxes for children, parents and Ofsted.

# data[].attributes.body
https://cornerstoneseducation.co.uk/a-summary-of-amanda-spielmans-hcmi-ofsted-latest-curriculum-update/

# data[].attributes.body
https://teacherhead.com/2015/09/19/face-it-a-formula-for-learning/

# data[].attributes.body
https://rosalindwalker.wordpress.com/2018/02/12/my-redbrum-talk-the-nature-of-school-science-knowledge/

# data[].attributes.body
https://thelearningprofession.com/2018/05/01/on-our-reddurrington-presentation-practical-approaches-to-bringing-research-informed-practice-to-the-classroom-the-department-and-whole-school/

# data[].attributes.body
https://pedfed.wordpress.com/2018/06/03/im-bringing-knowledge-back/

# data[].attributes.body
https://debra-kidd.com/2018/06/11/a-rich-curriculum/

# data[].attributes.body
https://primarytimery.com/2017/09/16/memory-not-memories-teaching-for-long-term-learning/

# data[].attributes.body
https://cornerstoneseducation.co.uk/broad-balanced-curriculum/

# data[].attributes.body
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/766252/How_to_assess_intent_and_implementation_of_curriculum_191218.pdf