Curriculum and assessment design and pedagogy in the Curriculum for Wales: a qualitative study (summary)

This report is part of the evaluation of the Curriculum for Wales.

It presents the findings of qualitative research into Curriculum and Assessment Design and Pedagogy, led by the University of Stirling.

The research aimed to provide answers to 2 main questions:

1. How is Curriculum for Wales guidance in relation to Curriculum and Assessment Design and Pedagogy being implemented in practice?
2. How are settings and practitioners supported to enact Curriculum and Assessment Design and Pedagogical Approaches as part of Curriculum for Wales?

The methodology included: 

• recruitment of 16 schools (8 primary schools and 8 secondary schools)
• literature and documentation review to inform development of research tools
• semi-structured discussions and focus groups with senior leaders and practitioners on Microsoft Teams (60 to 90 minutes)
• analysis of discussion transcripts

2 theoretical framings informed the research. 

• the curriculum-making model, which analyses curriculum-making across different sites of activity in the Welsh system and explores the interconnections between them (e.g. schools and external agencies).
• The ToA model which is organised around 3 related aspects of curriculum-making:
  • actions (developing practices)
  • constraints (affordances and factors that facilitate or serve as barriers to curriculum enactment)
  • consequences (experiences, sense-making and wider effects)

The report highlights a number of limitations associated with this study, notably:

• the small and self-selecting nature of the sample meaning that findings are not generalisable
• findings were based on evidence collected at a single point in time, limiting opportunities to explore schools’ progress over time
• limited time to explore all aspects of schools’ planning, design and implementation

The findings of the study are structured around the three inter-related aspects of the ToA model, beginning with the Actions senior leaders and practitioners reported, before setting out findings relating to the Constraints and enablers (or factors, influences) that help explain the actions taken, and the Consequences or emerging effects of curriculum enactment.

Actions: what actions are being taken (and not taken) in response to the new curriculum?

All schools reported making substantial changes to their curriculum, involving a systematic curriculum-making process (with some schools having spent as long as seven years on the initial curriculum design stage). The curriculum-making process was reported to be an ongoing and time-consuming journey. 

All schools had undertaken some reorganisation of subjects or knowledge in developing their new curriculum arrangements, with a focus on integral skills to support the four purposes, cross-curricular skills and cross-cutting themes. 

While some schools had moved towards holistic organisation of content (for example, through integrating previously separate subjects or developing interdisciplinary learning), others had not or had retreated from earlier approaches that did this. 

Evidence indicated that schools had made fewer changes to their approaches to teaching literacy and numeracy, revealing a perception that innovation carries risks and concerns about potential negative impacts on attainment. 

Curriculum for Wales had been a catalyst for some schools to overhaul their approaches, with a greater focus on enquiry, experiential and authentic learning approaches. There was evidence that pedagogical approaches were being shaped by closer attention to the purpose of learning (‘Why are we teaching this?’). 

Some primary and secondary schools reported that they used the pedagogical principles set out in Welsh Government guidance to inform their teaching and learning. In these cases, the pedagogical principles were seen as supporting a move towards ‘teacher as facilitator’ and learner-centred approaches.   

The study found a varied approach to assessment across the sample of schools. Most schools focused on formative approaches, and some reported they had introduced peer assessment and self-evaluation. Senior leaders and practitioners noted that they had observed learners taking more ownership of their learning and progress as a result. Primary and secondary schools reported adopting a more holistic view of assessment, aiming to recognise learners’ individual characteristics and progress. 

The research suggests that secondary schools had experienced more challenges in developing assessment frameworks under the new arrangements. Most secondary schools reported having spent considerable time discussing and interpreting the progression steps and descriptions of learning in order to develop assessment frameworks that both reflected the ethos of Curriculum for Wales and were suited to their school context. 

Most schools reported having consulted with learners, staff and parents or carers in designing their curriculum. Research participants noted that curriculum design was an iterative process and that they responded to learners’ needs in response to feedback from learners and parents. The approach at most schools was a learner-influenced or practitioner-mediated approach, rather than learner-led. This means that while learners’ views helped to shape the curriculum, practitioners used their professional judgement to make decisions about how these views would be incorporated into the curriculum. 

In some cases, there had been reorganisation of staff and management structures, including the creation of faculty or Area leads who were given responsibility for leading on curriculum design within their respective Areas. There was evidence that, where staff structures were put in place giving individuals responsibility for different aspects of curriculum design, this led to a variety of approaches both within and across the sample of schools. These approaches were not always consistent with the aims set out in the Curriculum for Wales Framework, including in some cases an emphasis on knowledge-rich approaches.

Constraints and enablers: what explains the actions people are taking (and not taking) in response to Curriculum for Wales?

All schools reported that they had made considerable progress in their curriculum-making in ways that reflected the aims of Curriculum for Wales. The Curriculum for Wales Framework (the legislation and statutory guidance) had acted as a spur to substantial changes in all the schools in the sample. Examples were shared of schools developing a curriculum framework and pedagogical approaches that integrated the four purposes and were based on the six Areas, statements of what matters, cross-cutting themes, cross-curricular skills and the pedagogical principles. Due to the ‘flexibility’ provided to schools to design their own curriculum under the Framework, some senior leaders felt that this afforded schools opportunities to prioritise what was felt to be ‘best’ for their learners. 

Leadership had a strong influence on the extent of changes within many schools. Participants emphasised the important role of effective leadership. Senior leaders and practitioners identified school leader understanding of curriculum-making processes and confidence in leading curriculum change as critical components in supporting the reforms. 

In some cases, external support had been invaluable (for example, the Curriculum Design Pilot, or external networks), but in others, participants had a more critical view of the value and quality of the external support available to them (for example, regional consortia). 

High levels of engagement, collaboration and trust between staff were important factors in supporting curriculum enactment, especially a staff body that felt supported by senior leaders and where there was an open, questioning culture in which innovation and challenge was encouraged. 

School clusters and partner schools in federations were cited as important sources of support by many participants, as they helped to strengthen schools’ curriculum-making capacities. Where conditions allowed for good cluster working, this facilitated a coherent approach to curriculum-making, planning and enactment across primary and secondary. 

Some participants reported weak system level support for curriculum-making. Some said that curriculum guidance and other supporting materials were sometimes insufficiently clear and arrived too late, after action had been taken to develop Curriculum for Wales.

Resource constraints, particularly in relation to time and capacity, were identified by many schools as an important factor inhibiting curriculum development and pedagogical innovation. Participants reported that the ability to provide authentic learning experiences – sometimes beyond the school classroom – may be tempered due to a lack of resource.

Consequences: to what extent and in what ways are the actions being taken in response to the new curriculum supporting the realisation of Curriculum for Wales aspirations?

All schools in the sample used the flexibility afforded by Curriculum for Wales to develop their own approaches to curriculum development and enactment. Most schools had moved towards a more holistic and interdisciplinary approach to learning. In some cases, however, the approach to curricula did not fully reflect the aspirations of Curriculum for Wales as a process model in which there is an integrated approach rather than separate subjects. For instance, some secondary schools had initially attempted an integrated, interdisciplinary approach but had subsequently reasserted separate subjects or ‘knowledge-rich’ approaches). A majority of primary schools were less willing to take risks with the subjects of numeracy and literacy and tended to treat these as a special case, relative to other subjects.

Participants were of the opinion that, overall, children were more engaged in their learning following the introduction of Curriculum for Wales. Participants believed that learners have perceived a change from a content-based curriculum (education as transmission of knowledge and culture) to one which is process-oriented (education as developmental).

Some schools have developed stronger connections to their local communities and an emphasis on cynefin as part of their curriculum-making.

In many cases, additional time and resources have been dedicated to professional learning, and a culture of learning and enquiry has developed. Many participants described this shift as transformative, and that embedding research and enquiry-based approaches throughout the school had been an enriching experience for both staff and learners.

However, participants raised concerns about equity of experiences for learners between different schools. Some participants said that schools that had been doing well prior to Curriculum for Wales were flourishing, whereas schools that faced greater challenges were struggling with the change. These participants expressed the view that educational inequities could potentially widen, unless school capacity issues were addressed. A few participants were concerned that standards in numeracy and literacy were declining and attributed this to challenges arising from curriculum change. Other participants reflected on the continuing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the challenges posed by introducing Curriculum for Wales during this time, which could not have been predicted.

Curriculum and assessment design

In most cases, participants felt that the curriculum making process had enabled them to engage with questions about the purpose and value of education, often described as ‘what do we want our children to learn, and why?’ These considerations and reflections informed the development of locally responsive curricula focused on learners’ needs. 

Senior leaders and practitioners in some secondary schools noted that differences in curricula presented challenges in relation to supporting learner progression from primary to secondary. The development of local, unique curricula at primary level resulted in learners having varying knowledge, skills and experiences of assessment when they progressed to secondary education. 

Important features of the Curriculum for Wales framework, namely the four purposes, integral skills, cross-curricular skills, and cross-cutting themes, featured in schools’ curriculum-making processes. Participants used terms such as ‘themes’, ‘skills’, ‘concepts’ and ‘interdisciplinary approaches’ to describe these. There was evidence of the four purposes being used to underpin curriculum-making, seemingly inspiring a focus on educational purposes in many schools in the sample.

Participants reported a mix of different assessment approaches, including what they described as peer assessment and self-evaluation. In many schools, approaches which might be viewed as more traditional, such as literacy and numeracy tests, were also being used in combination with what could be regarded as more Curriculum for Wales-aligned approaches. 

Participants noted that the importance of literacy and numeracy, which in part seemed to derive from ‘external pressures’ such as attainment statistics and inspection, had contributed to the continued use of tests. Secondaries said that, while they agreed with the ethos of Curriculum for Wales and had aligned their curricula accordingly, nevertheless, qualifications were of paramount importance to them, to their learners and parents or carers.

Participants emphasised the importance of collaboration, whether this was in the form of support from their cluster, being in a formal federation, or engagement in a wider network, such as regional consortia. Collaboration had many benefits, including the sharing of resources and ideas which could then be adapted to schools’ contexts. 

Participants said that Curriculum for Wales statutory guidance and supporting documentation was of varying use and relevance. Some participants said that it was insufficient to enable them to design their curricula within and across Areas effectively. Some participants said that, in their view, the guidance was too vague, or that it had not been available to them at the time when it would have been most helpful, namely, at the start of the curriculum making process. 

In general, practitioners and school leaders welcomed the freedom and flexibility afforded by Curriculum for Wales, while at the same time many of them had concerns about variability and equity of experience across Wales. Some practitioners felt overwhelmed by curriculum-making demands and unsupported by national and regional guidance, resources and networks (including regional consortia).

A distinction has emerged between what might be termed ‘knowledge-rich’ approaches and learner needs-based curricula. The former was valued by some secondaries in the sample. This also affected the curricular frameworks in these secondaries, since many attempts at interdisciplinary approaches had been subsequently abandoned. Subject specialisms were regarded by all of the secondaries in the sample as necessary for supporting the in-depth, specialist knowledge required for qualifications. In contrast, the primaries in the sample generally emphasised the learner-needs approach and found it easier to construct curricula that better reflected Curriculum for Wales’s emphasis on interdisciplinarity and cross-cutting themes.

Effective leadership at school level was reported to be of critical importance. Indeed, some participants said that successful curriculum change would not have been possible without strong and dynamic curriculum leadership.

Pedagogy

The pedagogical principles were used to a certain extent by most of the schools in the sample. In many cases, the principles were used during the initial stages of curriculum planning to inform schools’ sense-making processes. Some schools developed what they described as their own principles which were influenced by the twelve principles, if not exactly identical to them. 

Most participants reported that the introduction of Curriculum for Wales required substantial investment in professional learning, particularly in relation to curriculum-making. In contrast, practitioners generally felt more confident that they had existing knowledge and skills regarding pedagogy. In some cases, practitioners had undertaken professional learning about enquiry or research-informed pedagogical approaches. 

Most participants said that new approaches to pedagogy had resulted in learners engaging more meaningfully, demonstrating an increased sense of ownership and enthusiasm about their learning. Many schools had incorporated participatory elements in their learning, involving learners and also parents or carers and communities in curriculum design.

Overarching conclusions

Although senior leaders and practitioners recognised the value of Curriculum for Wales, many struggled with structural issues of budget constraints and insufficient time and capacity. This led to variation and impacted on their ability to support innovative approaches. The effect of these constraints was of particular concern in areas of higher deprivation, and for learners already facing other challenges to their learning. 

Collaboration made a substantial difference to schools’ experiences of curriculum-making and adaptations to pedagogy, whether this was internal (in-school collaboration) or external (clusters, federations and other networks). 

Curriculum for Wales has provided an impetus for schools to focus on educational purposes and to explore different teaching, learning and assessment styles. While some welcomed the freedom afforded by Curriculum for Wales, others found it to be challenging, particularly given the amount of time, capacity, knowledge and resources that curriculum-making requires. 

At some schools, teachers had a more sceptical view of Curriculum for Wales or felt that it lacked specificity. This issue of differing interpretations of Curriculum for Wales’s aims was an important theme in most of the discussions.  For some schools, the question of what was ‘best’ for their learners led to a prioritisation of what could be perceived as a traditional approach (for example, so-called ‘knowledge-rich’ approaches, separation and prioritising of literacy and numeracy), and retaining aspects of the previous curriculum that were perceived to ‘work’. Some schools attempted to merge these different agendas, citing the freedoms afforded by Curriculum for Wales as an opportunity for doing so. 

Overall, the research found support for Curriculum for Wales principles among senior leaders and practitioners, tempered by a recognition of the practical constraints that have complicated the pathway to successful realisation. Practitioners and senior leaders were mostly positive about the potential and observed benefits of Curriculum for Wales. However, participants also emphasised the need for increased support and resources to sustain these developments, and to address gaps so that all schools can deliver equitable outcomes for learners in Wales.

The important areas for consideration arising from the research are:

Effective curriculum leadership is crucial. A shared vision for change supports successful curriculum-making and new approaches to assessment and pedagogy, and effective leaders play an important role in ensuring that this happens. They are also vital in creating the spaces and processes for collaborative working. The Welsh Government should consider how strong curriculum leadership can be made available in all settings. Curriculum-making is a time and resource-intensive process in a context when schools are already stretched.

External expertise or support at the middle tier has been shown in many countries to be an important factor in supporting successful curriculum-making in schools, particularly in the sense making phase (namely, where to start, what to do).^{[footnote 1]} The middle tier can help build practitioner capacity and knowledge in curriculum-making, assessment and pedagogy where it might otherwise be lacking, as well as offering a forum to produce resources for curriculum development and enactment. The Welsh Government should consider how this can be made available when schools require it. Collaborative processes and spaces to develop practitioner agency also emerged as highly important. Welsh Government should consider how the middle tier could better support practitioner agency. 

Some schools have adopted a learner-led, or learner-influenced, approach to curriculum-making. The Welsh Government should consider what resources, time and support should be made available so that all learners in Wales have the opportunity and the capacity to engage in active, meaningful curriculum-making.

The current approach to assessment adopted by schools includes a blend of different formative and summative methods, some of which seem inconsistent with the vision and aspirations of Curriculum for Wales. The Welsh Government should consider whether the assessment system (especially secondary phase qualifications) is appropriately aligned with the aspirations of Curriculum for Wales.

Communication regarding statutory guidance and supporting documentation needs to be improved. Some participants expressed concerns about the relevance, quality and timing of what they referred to as ‘guidance’. A few participants said that the amount of guidance and other documentation was overwhelming or difficult to keep up to date with, and they felt that it was changing too often (‘moving the goal posts’).

[1] For example, see Priestley, M. Alvunger, D, Philippou, S. & Soini, T. (2021). Curriculum Making in Europe: Policy and Practice Across Diverse Contexts. Bingley: Emerald.

Report author: Mark Priestley, Barbara Schuler, Sophia Georgescu, Stella Mouroutsou, Andrea Priestley, Elizabeth Rushton and Joseph Smith (University of Stirling) Brett Duggan, Dr Felicity Morris (Arad Research), Claire Sinnema (University of Auckland)

Views expressed in this report are those of the researchers and not necessarily those of the Welsh Government.

For further information please contact:
Curriculum Research Branch
Social Research and Information Division
Welsh Government
Cathays Park
Cardiff
CF10 3NQ

Email: curriculum.research@gov.wales

Social research number: 73/2025
Digital ISBN: 978-1-80633-105-5