The Implementation of the National Curriculum in Small Primary Schools

Abstract

Since the introduction of the National Curriculum following the Education Reform Act of 1988, policy makers have increasingly questioned the ability of small primary schools to provide a sufficiently broad and in-depth curriculum, especially at Key Stage 2 (age 7-11). Research findings based on qualitative research in a national sample of 50 schools, of which nine had less than 100 pupils, are used to address this issue. Apart from problems with curriculum planning and the writing of policy documents in small schools, policy makers' fears are shown to be largely unwarranted for two reasons. Firstly, they fail to recognise certain positive advantages for curriculum provision in small schools. These include greater opportunities for innovative curriculum and classroom organisation patterns and the likelihood of strong and realistic curriculum planning arising from headteachers who teach. Secondly, they make misguided assumptions about the nature of curriculum and classroom organisation in larger schools.

An evaluation of the role of email in promoting science investigative skills in primary rural schools in England

“…Vulliamy and Webb (1995) attribute this to their more flexible staffing strategies: the likelihood of realistic curriculum planning arising from headteachers, who are also active class teachers; and the greater ease of assessing and monitoring pupil pro~ess in a situation where all the staff know all the pupils. Therefore, innovation can be examined and improved in small schools with the view to recommending best practice for all schools.…”

Respect and responsibility: Review of research on small rural schools in England

“…They concluded that small schools had been more innovative than larger schools, largely due to the teaching involvement and consequent curriculum leadership of the headteachers. Vulliamy and Webb (1995) and (Richards, 1998) also noted also that the small schools' success in teaching quality and pupil achievement may partly result from their greater use of specialist and semi-specialist teaching, thanks to their strategic use of the part-time teachers who are employed to cover the teaching-heads' administration time. 2 In an unique Anglo-Finnish comparative 3 partial ethnographic study, Vulliamy, Kimonen, Nevalainen, & Webb (1997) conducted case studies of how two very small schools in England responded to curriculum change.…”

“…Funding has subsequently been linked strongly to the formation of federations of schools, in which small schools retain their separate sites but work with one headteacher and one governing body. Reviews on the impact of this period of reform on small rural schools 1 are provided by Arnold (1994), Vulliamy and Webb (1995), Phillips (1997), Ribchester and Edwards (1999), National Small Schools Forum (NSSF) (2003), Rule (2005). As Ball (1997) and Bell and Sigsworth (1987) have pointed out, the reforms constitute an increasingly centralised education system, devised in response to urban problems, and with scant regard for rural schools and their communities' needs and assets.…”

“…Webb (1993) and Vulliamy and Webb (1995) included nine small schools within a sample of 50 schools in a largescale observational survey of national curriculum implementation. They concluded that small schools had been more innovative than larger schools, largely due to the teaching involvement and consequent curriculum leadership of the headteachers.…”

Reviews of research in rural schools and their communities: Analytical perspectives and a new agenda

“…Research on small schools' clusters would be located in Category IIa, where clusters were formed locally as a survival mechanism in the face of new policies (Hargreaves, Comber, & Galton, 1996). Category IIb is the most strongly represented in the English research as researchers have sought to examine the effects of large scale structural reforms on teachers' behaviour (see Richards, 1998;Vulliamy and Webb, 1995;Webb and Vulliamy, 2006) or occupational status (e.g. Hargreaves, 2009).…”