English Baccalaureate

The UK Government introduced a new performance indicator called the English Baccalaureate, which measures the percentage of students in a school who achieve 5+ A*-C grades (now five Grades 4 to 9 since the GCSE Reforms) in English, mathematics, two sciences, a foreign language and history or geography at GCSE level.[3] The reason for its introduction was to combat the perceived fall in the number of students studying foreign languages and science.[4]

In their election manifesto (14 April 2015), Cameron, the British Conservative Party politician declared that under their office, the UK government would make the English Baccalaureate a compulsory qualification to be completed by every 16 year student in secondary schools in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland.[5] By the time this was put out to consultation by Nicky Morgan in November both the 100% goal and the reasons has changed:

• For the EBacc to become the "default option" for all pupils, with schools to determine the "small minority of pupils for whom taking the whole EBacc is not appropriate." (The consultation subsequently makes clear that the Government intends that "in time, at least 90% of pupils in mainstream secondary schools should be entered for the EBacc." 26 )

• That the proportion of pupils entering the EBacc will become a headline measure of mainstream secondary school performance that would be given a more prominent role in the Ofsted inspection framework. Also, the EBacc entry and attainment data for similar mainstream secondary schools will be published.[6]

Computer Science has now been included with Physics, Chemistry and Biology as an acceptable qualification.

On 19 July 2017, the Government published its response to the consultation on Implementing the English Baccalaureate.

• 75% of year 10 pupils in state-funded mainstream schools will start to study GCSEs in the EBacc combination of subjects by September 2022 with 90% of year 10 pupils studying GCSEs in the EBacc subjects by September 2025. (Sitting the GCSEs) in 2024 and 2027 respectively.[6]

University technical colleges, studio schools and further education colleges with key stage 4 provision will not be included in these targets.[6]

• Subject choice:[6] There is a conflict for the school, whether it spends its limited resources on incentivising the EBacc subjects to achieve the government target or on the subjects that are most suitable for the cohort of students. EBacc subjects reflect the subjects favoured for entry by the Russell Group Universities, at the expense of creative subjects such as Music, Art, Performance Arts, and vocational subjects such as Design and Technology. There is debate over the assumption that EBacc subjects actually do facilitate university entry.[7][8]
• Teacher supply:[6] Modern foreign language teachers are in short supply, after a government decision to make languages optional in 2005. To make the change suggested would require 2000 extra teachers to teach the extra 7000 hours in each year group.[9]

The Sutton Trust examined the effects of the proposals in 300 early adopters in 2013.[6]^: 19 The report set out the following key findings:

• the number of students attempting the full EBacc rose from 8% to 48%.
• that pupils at these schools largely benefitted from these changes. They were more likely to achieve good GCSEs in English and maths.
• those pupils were 1.7 percentage points more likely to be taking an A level or other level 3 qualification and 1.8 percentage points less likely to have dropped out of education entirely.
• Pupil premium students being more likely to do EBacc subjects benefitted most. The pupil premium gap closed a little more than in schools with similar pupil intake
• pupil premium students still do not have fair access to the EBacc curriculum subjects nationally, Sutton have identified nearly an 8% gap in languages take-up or 11,000 students.[6]^: 13Also there was an 11% gap in humanities, equivalent to 15,000 students missing out.[6]^: 19 [lower-alpha 1]
• Although evidence demonstrated that schools have successfully moved towards an EBacc aligned curriculum, the survey of headteachers confirmed that delivering the EBacc to 90% of students is beyond the reach of many schools given specialist teacher shortages. Moreover, these headteachers believe that it is not appropriate for many students.^: 20

GCSEs are graded with a number 1–9, 4 and above is considered a pass.[11] There are five academic areas (pillars):

• English: This consist of two subjects (English Language and English Literature), so take the best score of the 2
• Maths: One subject
• Science: Three possible subjects so take the best two
• Language: Only one is counted, so take the best score
• Humanities: Only one is counted, so take the best score

Added together, this gives a total maximum point score of six times nine thus 54.[11] An average of the five pillars is taken, that is the total point score divided by 6, which is the student's 'Average point score'.[10][11] As an indication in England this figure for girls 2018 was 4.33.[11]

Sum the EBacc average point score for all pupils at the end of key stage 4 Then divide that by the number of pupils in the group.[10]

Published in 2019, this report[6]^: 20 shows that "Percentage of GCSE pupils entered for all EBacc components" flat-lined in 2014 at under 40%, and that "Percentage of GCSE pupils who pass all the EBacc components" flat-lined in 2013 at under 25%. It then comments on the Sutton Trust findings that the measure widens the achievement gap for disadvantaged children.[1]^: 2

It notes that the original aim was to switch children towards academic subjects and this was partially achieved and schools had switched resources. There had been a drop in exam entry in other crucial subjects and a loss of teachers.[1]^: 3 However, now schools are confused as to the purpose, particularly the claim that it will help students to get into high status university. Parents, when polled, said they didn't need more indicators about their school but were worried about the narrowing of the curriculum and its impact on non-EBacc subjects. Additionally, almost all schools were experiencing significant problems with recruiting enough teachers of EBacc subjects, especially science and mathematics.[1]^: 3

EDSK questions the need for an EBacc indicator, as its function is duplicated by the Progress 8/ Attainment 8 indicator, that has been in place since 2016.[1]