Well it could have been worse! Anyone who saw the egregious draft history curriculum of February 2013 will realise what a relief the final version published in September 2013 turned out to be. Gove lost the battle to increase prescription and for all topics to be taught in strict chronological order. Instead we have a history curriculum from 2014 which is very similar to that operating for the last decade and more. We have the familiar British units and then an interesting thematic one stretching back before 1066, a local study and a study of a significant aspect or period of the school’s choice.
So there really is very little additional imposition or prescription here. It is probably even looser than it was before. All the more reason then to ensure that our final curriculum choices have a clear underpinning rationale.
How do we explain :
our choice of units; our ordering of the teaching of the units; our linking of units; our nesting of one within another; why we are, for example, doing local history in three places rather than in one large study; why we have gone for a thematic appraoch at the beginning and end of the