Successful Futures marks a radical departure from the curriculum of the last century and provides an opportunity to build a new curriculum for Wales which is fit for the 21st Century and beyond.  

The publication of Successful Futures and the more recent draft publication of the New Curriculum for Wales is being promised as the most significant change to education in generations. It’s purpose is for Wales to produce lifelong learners who are fit for the 21st century. In order to gain a deep understanding of Wales’ journey to the new curriculum and if in fact it is ‘a radical departure’ from the previous curriculum, it is vital to critically analyse both old and more recent paradigms. In recent years many countries are facing significant changes to education as schools try to keep up with ever advancing technologies and industry demands, therefore, it is valuable to analyse how curriculum's are being effectively designed and implemented in other countries. 
In addition to looking at other curriculum's it is important to reflect on the challenges and opportunities schools across Wales are facing with implementing the new Curriculum for Wales. I will look not too far afield for this, as I believe it is worthwhile visiting nearby schools that may be facing similar challenges to my own, critically reflecting on how the challenges are being overcome.
Finally, I will be completing a force field analysis of the reality of implementation of the Curriculum for Wales within my setting, reflecting on my contextual study and literature. I will report on what I believe are the biggest challenges the school is facing, the risks involved, justifications for taking the proposed risks and recommendations for the future. 


 
Literature review including a critical analysis of old and new paradigms and consideration of national and international evidence on effective curriculum design and implementation

At this time the New Curriculum for Wales draft has been published and the new curriculum is being developed for settings and schools following a feedback period, the final version will be due in January 2020, which will be statutory in schools and settings throughout Wales by 2022. There is excitement as well as uncertainty around the prospect of the new teacher led curriculum and future of education for our pupils and teachers in Wales. It is arguably the most significant change to the Welsh education system for generations, certainly since the Education Reform Act (1988) suggests Wightwick (2019). It is important to note that the Education Reform Act occurred at a time before the world wide web was introduced and reflect on how technologies have advanced since that time. In this section I will be critically analysing both old and new paradigms whilst considering national and international evidence of effective curriculum design and implementation. Here I will look to our neighbour, Scotland and how they designed and implemented their New Curriculum recently as well as further afield, to New Zealand’s Curriculum which has seemingly been very successful in establishing New Zealand as a front-runner of education in the world. There are many similarities between the that curriculum and the Welsh curriculum which I will go on to explore.
In order to gain a deeper understanding of the purpose of constructing the new curriculum it is vital to look at the previous curriculum and analyse aspects of it. During the 1970s there were national concerns over lack of equality of opportunity which was largely influenced by class, gender and ethnic inequalities. During that time, Lawton’s (1975) advocacy of a common core curriculum is well documented, in which his curriculum prescription derived from a commitment, which according to (Halpin, 1990) was to peruse equal opportunities through education. Due to the Labour Government of the 1970’s and the call for a debate on education, the main focus of national policy making became concentrated on the requirements of industry and the economy of the country rather than equality of educational opportunities. During this time unemployment rates were on the rise and Britain’s economy was declining, a major concern was that the education system was not producing appropriately skilled workers (Haralambos & Holborn, 1995). As Britain’s manufacturing industry was gradually declining, a great demand of skilled and educated workers was rising in order to improve the economy. According to Green (1991), British education in England and Wales was widely regarded to be in a state of crisis. These statements echo the arguments for the need for curriculum change in today’s economic climate. Donaldson (2015) explains how employers needs on workforce are vital in designing a curriculum to ensure young people to success in employment.

During the early stages of the implementation of national curriculum (1988), it is well documented that many teachers welcomed the new curriculum, but were concerned at the sheer amount of content. A National Curriculum Council and a School Examinations and Assessment Council were to oversee the development of three core and seven foundation subjects, but the Secretary of State was granted the powers to decide on curriculum content. This eventually led to teachers calling for a syllabus at national level and for schools to be given autonomy at local level. Darren Northcott, of teaching union the NASUWT, suggested teachers were not calling for complete discretion but needed greater autonomy. Teacher autonomy, McGrath (2000) suggests, is essential for ensuring a learning environment that addresses children’s diverse needs. As much as the learner requires space, freedom, flexibility and respect, the teacher also requires the same. Due to the overly prescriptive national curriculum and lack of teacher autonomy. The 1988 National Curriculum had a centralised control of education authority on subjects, its syllabus and even its content while reducing the greater autonomy of teachers to apply their rich insights and experience in teaching technique and so forth. Teachers were fearful of straying from the national curriculum and no longer felt confident enough to design lessons themselves. The national curriculum had given education a more "coherent structure" but it was overly prescriptive. The testing regime has narrowed the curriculum to disastrous effect and it's having an effect on creativity and innovation in schools. Teachers became confused about how to provide a broad and balanced curriculum and at the same time carry out their responsibility towards providing children with basic skills (Woods & Jeffrey, 1996).  There were considerable pressures on teachers’ time, not only the amount of work as suggested by (Woods, 1996) but there were also concerns for quantity. Cockburn (1994) suggested that teachers found it difficult to achieve high quality time with their pupils, arguing that instead teachers had to spend a substantial amount of time in various other works. The New Curriculum for Wales allows for teacher autonomy to implement innovative and exciting learning experiences for their pupils. However, Littlewood (1997) suggests that teacher autonomy, whilst promotes trust in teachers, encouragement to be creative, also is constrained by fear of change. This can, in turn, hold back teachers from exploring the new curriculum and moving forward. Little (2000) believes that it is unreasonable to expect teachers to foster the growth of autonomy in their learners if teachers do not know what it is to be an autonomous learner.

Content to be taught and knowledge that needed to be acquired by learners in 1988 was regulated and controlled by central government by the national curriculum, which largely based on nineteenth century public school curriculum with very distinct and strict barriers between subject disciplines. According to Ryan (2015), it can be argued that there exists the stratification of subjects on the basis of their strict relationship to the world of work. An example Ryan (2015) gives is that English, Maths and Science have a higher status in the curriculum than subjects such as Sociology, Psychology, Art and so forth, mainly because they appear to have greater relevance to the type of basic skills required by people in their adult lives and the world of work. Under the new Curriculum coming into force in 2022 subject barriers are still in place to an extent, however, are much broader and are now called areas of learning experiences (AOLE’s) and equal weight is placed on all AOLE’s.  Under the New Curriculum for Wales there is a drive for interdisciplinary studies, using links across different subjects or disciplines to enhance learning. According to (Goldsmith & Johnson, 1990) This promotes the development and application of what has been taught and learned in new and different ways, allows for synthesis of ideas and the synthesis of characteristics from many disciplines. At the same time it addresses students' individual differences and helps to develop important, transferable skills.

Among the purposes underpinning the 1988 National Curriculum was to give pupils values to establish themselves as British citizens, however, the National Curriculum it was noticeable that social studies were absent which was listed among the values embodied in the National curriculum. a subject intended for the purpose of socialising pupils with values so that they can be able to establish themselves as good citizens.  Under the New Curriculum one of the four core purposes that will be instilled in all learners is to become ethical informed citizens. This will not take place under one specific subject, rather, it will be underpinned in all areas of learning in intersessional tasks and projects. The aim is for learners to leave education with these values in order to establish themselves as ethical informed citizens of the Wales and the wider world. Whitty (2002) argued that central regulation of the curriculum is not only geared toward standardising performance criteria in order to facilitate professional accountability and consumer choice within the education marketplace, it is also about creating or recreating, forms of national identity. For example, the formulation of the national curriculum has been that schools concentrate on British history, British geography and ‘classic’ English literature. This may have reflected on lives of British citizens in 1988, however in the 21st Century with the invention of the world wide web, access to other global citizens, this curriculum does not reflect the lives of Welsh young citizens today, such curriculum reforms represent a conscious attempt to position subjects in ways which pull backwards to past rather than forwards into a new globalised times. (Whitty, 2002). Under the New Curriculum for Wales the Welsh national identity is driven throughout the framework and in cwricwlwm cymreig to Welsh-specific aspects to education to improve learners understanding and knowledge of Wales. Giving individual schools more ownership of the content of what they teach under successful futures will allow learners to learn more about their own local history and locality and Wales’ place in the world and what it means to be a Welsh citizen than under the previous national curriculum.


It can be argued that, the national curriculum 1988 gave teachers, pupils, parents, employers and their wider communities a clear understanding of the skills and knowledge, its implementation since 1988 resulted in a considerable amount of issues discussed previously. A key concern for teachers was the amount of pressure and workload in teaching. The effect of assessment on the curriculum resulted in dis-engaged pupils. Au (2009) explains how with high-stakes assessment it results in little movement in relation to the curriculum. That assessment sets the agenda rather than the curriculum itself. The issue of adding up new subjects in order to keep up with the demands of future employers on workforce but allocating less time created difficulties for pupils to grasp subjects effectively. In terms of positive aspects of national curriculum, it can be argued that it has succeeded to some extent to eliminate gender-specific choices in compulsory subjects like before boys tend to choose science subjects and girls tend to skip science subjects and choose languages. Although it is notable that the National Curriculum of 1988 achieved requirements of the purpose set by industry, Baker (1998) suggests that it occurred at the expense of child centeredness, pupil led learning and opportunities to learn through play. The importance of child-centred learning which Lal (2014) describes as putting the needs and interests of the child at the centre of learning, therefore, giving children freedom to think, explore and experience on an individual basis. Ryan (2005) suggests the benefits of this type of approach encourage independence and confidence, which are in line with the purposes of the New Curriculum for Wales. However, Simon (1999) warns that child centred approaches does not take into account the needs of the whole class, that with the teacher becoming more of a facilitator, this may drive a learner into isolation. Child-centred learning and play both have its place in a curriculum and although the importance of play is acknowledged in the National Curriculum, particularly the early years, due to pressure on teachers to cover the amount of content prescribes it left little or no time to allow play, suggests Fisher (1966). Furthermore, the features of the curriculum implemented in 1988 are out of time with constant shifts in technology and development of society and economy. Assessments are not making the contribution they intended in order to improve learning. A New Curriculum for Wales is vital to keep raising standards and allowing opportunities, empowering schools and teachers by moving away from a narrow, inflexible and crowded curriculum, suggests Williams (2019). However, the new curriculum is careful to do this without the expense of play and child-centeredness therefore it is clear that there is an importance on a collaboration between teachers and students to ensure there is pupil involvement.

During this time of significant change in education it is appropriate to look at the Curriculum for Excellence, seen by many as the precursor for Wales’ Successful Futures, in Scotland as it bears significant similarities to the New Curriculum for Wales. The Curriculum for Excellence promised to transform education in Scotland by providing “a coherent, more flexible and enriched curriculum” for learners aged 3 to 18, with a firm focus on the needs of the individual child. It is key to analyse if the purposed of that curriculum have been implemented and achieved effectively.

The Scottish curriculum for excellence (CfE) was developed in 2002 in response to a national debate. Ministers established a curriculum review group to identify purposes of education and key principles to redesign the outdated curriculum. They found there were many areas of the curriculum that needed to be changed, for example, content needed to be reduced, teachers needed to be given more freedom to be creative within their classrooms, learning needed to be more enjoyable, active and challenging. There needed to be a balance between academic and vocational subjects and a wider range of learning experiences needed to be offered, to name a few the review group found that curriculum they had was essentially outdated and was not preparing the learners of today for a future and jobs are unpredictable due to the pace of technological advancements occurring.

Priestly (2018) suggests that upon first glance the CfE is a process curriculum due to its four capacities. However, in 2006 the CfE established the primary curriculum would be less cluttered with the content being reduced releasing progress and proposals, the Scottish Executive added six levels, although clearly adding that there was no implication of testing at specific ages, although it was announced in 2015 in The new national framework that standardised testing would be implemented in all schools in 2017. Testing was implemented in order to improve attainment, specifically I reading, writing and numeracy and to close the attainment gap. This has been widely disputed. One of the architects of Scotland's curriculum, Keir Bloomer says it is being seriously undermined by too many new exams calling it the single most important mistake in the implementation of the new curriculum in Scotland has been the introduction of new exams and qualifications. Bloomer, reflecting on the purpose of the CfE believes the aims of the CfE and the outcome are contrary to one another due to the introduction of testing, calling it “the single most important mistake made in the implementation process.”

Young (2014) argues that purposes are essentially aims and objectives, thus intertwining two different curriculum structures (process and outcome). An outcome based curriculum can rob learners of possibilities for spontaneous learning opportunities, therefore narrowing learning (Torrance 1997). Priestly and Humes (2010) suggests that the CfE’s organised sequential levels results in an incoherent structure that is not typical of a process curriculum, vaguely defined contents hidden as objectives. Hyland (1994) suggests that objectives should not be determined in advance as it takes away of the process of learning, going on to explain that learning often occurs but is not measured or tested.

It was also proposed that outcomes would be structured according to 8 areas of learning, not dissimilar to wales’ Successful futures 7 areas of learning experiences. 
Priestly and Humes (2010) argues that some elements of the CfE are those of a process curriculum. The general statements of purpose (the four capacities) are in line with Kelly’s (1999) characteristics of individual growth and intrinsic purposes. However, this could impact the perception of importance and therefore the level of impact of the new national curriculum due to these contradictions.

Lawton (1973) believes philosophical and sociological matters are necessary to planning a curriculum, however, there is very little mention of this in the CfE document. Priestly and Walters described the CfE as a serious attempt to provide a coordinated approach to curriculum reform whilst taking account of anticipated future needs, however they go on to say that the CfE disregarded literature of educational theories and believe this is to blame for the problems the CfE is now facing 

Harlen (2004) credits the earliest CfE documents and the introduction of testing at stages of learning, reducing the freedom of teachers and learners, leaving teaching and learning predictable, limited and un creative. Evans (2016) suggests that the pace of the roll out of the CfE left school leaders with insufficient time to get to grips with the policy documents. But another reason why CfE has struggled is that it was introduced at a time of austerity. Schools have seen their money for resources, teaching staff, support staff and professional development cut at the same time as trying to introduce an ambitious reform.

Wales employed a former Scottish chief inspector of education and current education adviser to the Scottish government, Graham Donaldson, to review the Welsh curriculum and make recommendations for a curriculum fit for the 21st century, which has become known as Successful Futures. 
In Wales, they are talking about scrapping boundaries between subjects; in Scotland, with the new curriculum came a push for more interdisciplinary learning.
The four purposes of the Welsh curriculum are strikingly similar as CfE’s four capacities and the plan is that Welsh learners will progress through progression steps, which equate roughly to the five levels of CfE. The three responsibilities of all teachers in Scotland under CfE are literacy, numeracy, and health and well-being; in Wales, the plan is for three cross-curricular responsibilities, literacy, numeracy and digital competence. The Welsh curriculum is also to be outcomes-based and the so-called experiences and outcomes of CfE are framed in the same way. Again, like Scotland, the Welsh are implementing the new curriculum first in the primary sector, which will become statutory in September 2022 with full roll-out to be achieved in 2026. Despite the many similarities between the CfE and the New Curriculum for Wales, as mentioned above, it is important to also look further afield to international curriculum's for inspiration.

Priestly (2001) draws on similarities to educational changes between Britain and New Zealand leading to curriculum changes, therefore it is appropriate to look for New Zealand for inspiration especially as the education index published by the UN Human Development Index ranks New Zealand amongst the highest in the world. The New Zealand Curriculum (2007) focuses on giving learners opportunities to develop skills needed for lifelong learning. Much like the New Curriculum for Wales the subject disciplines are much broader and less prescriptive, with eight learning areas (subjects). Hopkins (2018) explains that the purpose is at the core of the New Zealand curriculum alongside effective pedagogy. The curriculum document is not designed to dictate to teachers what to teach, it is a document that stresses the importance of teaching the whole child. A third of the document is dedicated to learning areas as acknowledges that subject specific knowledge does have a place in teaching but is only a part of a much broader and complex purpose of education. The New Zealand Curriculum does not set out specific teaching strategies but places importance on effective pedagogy, encouraging teachers to research evidence as a basis for their own practice and reflect on the impact it has on their pupils learning.

In conclusion, there is much that can be learnt from the previous national curriculum. It is clearly important to the future of education to ensure teachers have a level autonomy, giving teaching exciting dynamic by ensuring practitioners get opportunities to reengage their students in a way that has not been done before. Abolishing rigid subject barriers and encouraging inter-disciplinary learning, giving students opportunities to practice skills in a meaningful context may inspire creative thinking that is necessary in the 21st century. It is necessary to keep the purposes of education (4 core purposes) at the forefront of every aspect of teaching and learning. These four core purposes should be underpinned in every activity to ensure the content of lessons are purposeful and learners are using their skills to progress though their education. There is also lessons to be learnt from Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence and the New Zealand Curriculum, giving appropriate training to teachers, clear leadership and guidance of assessment opportunities and above all allowing schools time to fully embraced the possibilities of the New Curriculum without being penalised for attempting change.
 
Professional Context
I am a recently qualified teacher, gaining my NQT status last year (2018). I have had the unique experience of completing my PGCE through the previous curriculum for Wales, but completing my NQT year following the new teaching standards and working towards the new curriculum for Wales. I am a primary school teacher with the majority of my experience being in Foundation Phase. I am currently teaching Nursery. I am the Welsh Coordinator at my school and work closely alongside the Literacy Coordinator, as together we lead the new Languages Literacy and Communication area of learning and experience team for the New Curriculum. Therefore, as my position is in Primary School Education, my focus on the contextual study is based on primary school perspective of challenges and opportunities. This may be similar to, or very different to, the challenges and opportunities of a secondary school, but for the purposes of this section it is vital to make my professional context and perspectives clear.

Contextual study: critical reflection on the challenges and opportunities for implementation of the Curriculum for Wales.
The school I visited (School A) to reflect on challenges and opportunities faced is further along on their journey than the school I am in, it is a larger school than mine and in a more deprived area. School A is in the Newport Local Authority in Wales. It has 376 pupils on roll. It is a large school with 19 classes. Around 39% of pupils are eligible for free school meals, which is above the Welsh National average of around 21%. Around 10% of pupils come from ethnic minority backgrounds and have English as an additional language. The school has identified as having additional learning needs. No pupils speak Welsh as their first language. 
On visitation to the school it was clear that the school had undertaken many aspects of the new curriculum. The first aspect the school decided to tackle was how lessons were planned. The school has a thematic approach to planning with a new theme every term. This is where School A encountered its first challenge. Initially, teachers and learners decided on a termly theme together. However, teachers were struggling to gain authentic contexts, content and skills. One example given was that a year 4 class wanted a whole theme about Labradors, the teacher found it challenging to gain skills from this. The school then tweaked their planning approach to teachers deciding on the termly theme and then holding a whole class planning session. The teacher and learners collaborate to look at skills and activities the children would like to do in order to achieve the skills. School A believe this works well as it increases interest of the children, helps learners make connections with their work and keeps the pupils engaged. With ESTYN’s most recent inspection noting that across the school, pupils contribute extensively to how and what they learn. The school’s consistent approach to planning ensures that nearly all pupils build successfully on previous learning as they move through the school. Another challenge School A expressed that they faced with teaching all the skills was a difficulty in gaining certain skills across the whole school. To combat this head teacher challenges were introduced. This is where the head teacher sets half termly whole school challenges. An example given was that all classes were lacking a money based skill so the head teacher gave every class a ten pound note and was challenged to grow the money. This encouraged entrepreneurial skills. The school believes that these head teacher challenges promote collaboration, critical thinking, problem solving, enjoyment and creativity throughout the school.

After reviewing planning, School A then looked at the classroom environment and set up. To promote independent learning each class got rid of many tables and chairs instead using only two tables to fit ten learners per table. The teachers set up learning stations and independent learning areas in each classroom and shared area. Lessons consist of three twenty minute short bursts (twenty-minute group input with the teacher, ten completing an independent task and ten children playing and completing individual tasks within the provision). The learning environment is rich is activities that link clearly with the theme in an appropriate and purposeful way.  School A found that highly effective and stimulating learning experiences provide pupils with a wide range of opportunities to develop their independent learning skills, encouraging pupils to think maturely and give reasoned responses. Across the school, regular and effective use of the outdoor learning environment enriches the curriculum and impacts positively on pupils’ learning. This is consistent throughout the school from Reception to Year 6. The main challenge the school faced with this change was training the children to become independent learners. However, teachers expressed that as this was a whole school approach it helped the learners understand classroom set ups and the level of independence skills was evident on walking around the school. 

Behaviour in the school was very good and teachers felt that this was due to expectations. The learners were trusted to complete independent tasks not only in the classroom but also in the hall without adult supervision. The children were expected to not only behave in the same was as they would if there was a teacher present but also complete tasks to the same standard as if a teacher was present. Again, this was evident by walking around School A and also by looking at their books. The standard of work in their independent challenge books was the same as their other books. 
School A is set in an underprivileged area and one of the struggles was showing the pupils the purpose of lifelong learning as many learners and families in the area struggled to see the value of education. To overcome this, the teachers model the importance of lifelong learning, A weekly assembly is held which begins with the teachers playing instruments. The teachers explained to the pupils at the beginning of the academic year how many of them did not know how to play an instrument and decided they were going to learn how to and perform weekly for the children to assess them and see how they improve. On witnessing this assembly, it was clear to see the level of respect and admiration the pupils have for the teachers. The teachers were modelling to the learners in an exciting, fun and engaging way how it is difficult to learn a new skill but how it is a process, some finding it easier and others more difficult. 
School A expressed many challenges in implementing the New Curriculum and much like many schools in Wales are still very early on in the implementation journey. However, it was clear that every challenge was viewed as an opportunity to create a solution that was personal and purposeful to the school and its pupils. Many of the challenges faced by School A. I found on discussion with my university trust ground are also being faced by many other schools across Wales. The main challenges were how to collaborate effectively with pupils to ensure child centeredness, engagement and enjoyment whilst also gaining skills and progression set out by the New Curriculum. Another common challenge was reluctance to change the learning environment to ensure the environments were fit for the New Curriculum, with more flexible and free-flowing areas that promote independence and challenge that fit alongside the AOLE’s. It was expressed in my trust group by a peer that their school changed the classrooms before doing any research on what environments worked well, this resulted in a ‘trial and error’ process and took up valuable teacher time. This leads me on to the final major challenge faced in schools which was research. Due to the vague New Curriculum it is essential that teachers do research and look to studies and education theories to ensure a purposeful and appropriate learning environment is built in preparation for valuable learning. Many teachers feel not enough time or funding is in place for this to happen. 





 
Complete a force field analysis of the reality of implementing the Curriculum for Wales in your setting leading to a detailed report to Governors including the challenges, risks and justification and recommendations to move forward.
 
The force field analysis shows that forces for change outweigh forces against change. Some forces are stronger than other and I will give a detailed explanation of what I believe are the biggest challenges for my school, risks, justifications and recommendations for the future which will enable school to overcome these challenges faced with implementing the New Curriculum. 

Content vs Delivery
The new curriculum focuses on how students learn, rather than what they are being taught, moving away from the content curriculum of the past. It is vital that students are active participants in the construction of knowledge and the development of understanding rather than as passive recipients of knowledge. This will give all schools and teachers in Wales more responsibility for deciding what is taught. Whilst this provides an exciting opportunity to ensure pupils are engaged with relevant and up-to-date content, the challenge is how we are going to develop a framework which offers sufficient guidance of what needs to be learned and establishing necessary consistency nationally while also promoting creative teaching and learning that can be decided by teachers with knowledge of their learners within their locality. With this change we are moving away from subject-based curriculum to areas of learning and experiences, organising content around skills and using themes. Some teachers may find this dramatic shift of the teacher’s role of facilitating and enabling independent learning rather that passing on knowledge daunting, it is shifting the focus from what is perceived as the narrow ‘tick box’ delivery of content of the current curriculum to something more free and exploratory. Teachers will be providing a more ‘engaging’ and ‘relevant’ education to pupils. Successful Futures is a curriculum unlike the previous national curriculum, it is designed to be relevant to the needs of 21st Century learners. The underlying pedagogy lends itself to learning that is: experiential (lending itself to project-based/real-life learning); relevant (cross-curricular, where and when appropriate); and collaborative (between teachers; students, students and teachers, and between schools and relevant external links). 
Risks
Without careful consideration and planning skills may be disregarded. There is a risk of repetition of themes in different year groups therefore it is important for teacher to communicate or even collaborate about topics or themes, perhaps even mapping them out through the year. The balance between pupil led planning and teacher autonomy will be key to choosing appropriate themes with enough skill progression and coverage. Another risk is that there could be a lack of progression of skills If learners are not challenged enough, it will be vital to ensure challenging yet appropriate tasks are set.
Justifications
Without changing the way in which we teach, plan and deliver lessons the New Curriculum simply will not succeed and our learners may not get opportunities to experience a curriculum designed for them. 
Recommendations:
	Include both pupil and parent voice when planning content within topics
	Use progression steps and what matters statements to inform planning alongside LNF and DCF

Lack of training for current workforce
As well as the New Curriculum coming into force, New teaching standards have also been introduced. New teachers studying their PGCE are following these new standards so will receive a different training than the current teaching workforce did, therefore, the lack of training and support to current teaching staff needs to be taken into consideration of how this will impact the implementation of the New Curriculum. The new teaching standards place much more importance on teacher pedagogy, professional development and research. The standards introduce a new expectation that teachers will use research to inform the curriculum and school improvement decisions as well as carry out research in their own classroom in the form of practitioner enquiry. 
Risks
Teachers are used to ‘doing what has always been done’ therefore may find it difficult to begin undertaking research and reviewing their own personal teaching pedagogy. However, without this, teaching and education will stay the same, our learners may become increasingly less engaged and standard may drop as a result. On the other hand, if teachers start changing the way in which the teach this may take them out of their comfort zone and encourage them to leave the profession.
Justifications:
The new teaching standards place importance on teacher pedagogy and professional development and progression. This is what is required of teachers in order to keep up with the demands of education and schooling in the 21st century, enabling Wales to compete with the rest of the world.
Recommendations:
	Allow teachers research time and give a half termly research focus for teachers to discuss, collaborate on and put into practice.
	Split members of staff into AOLE teams to ‘unpick’ progression steps and what matters statements, feeding back to staff in staff meeting.

Assessment
Until the new progression frameworks become statutory in September 2022, the expectation is that schools will assess pupils using the best fit model of the National Curriculum in the form of teacher assessments. The Welsh Government has published a number of documents that have provided some detail on what assessment will look like in Wales after September 2022. National Curriculum Key Stages will be replaced by five Progression Steps with each Progression step to be populated with Achievement Outcomes for each Area of Learning and Experience. These Achievement Outcomes will be short statements in learner friendly language and will serve as reference points for each pupil’s learning journey. The Achievement Outcomes will cover the What Matters Statements from each AoLE, address the four purposes of the new Curriculum and provide a sequence of learning across the curriculum. The main and most important difference between these Achievement Outcomes and the NC Level descriptors is that it will be moving from a best fit model to a continuum of progression where assessment will have to be precise and focused on progression. Every school in Wales will be visited by ESTYN for a one day to give schools support and guidance on their journey implementing the new curriculum. 
Risks:
Without appropriate assessment, learning objectives and standards may lose their value. Therefore, it is important to track pupil progress and place value on peer assessment, self-assessment etc.
Recommendations:
	Assess pupil progress using the coded Literacy and Numeracy Framework (LNF) Progression Pathways designed by the Welsh Government. 
	Support pupils to take ownership of their own learning by using the learner friendly LNF statements to monitor their own progress and identify their next steps
	Help staff to develop their formative assessment skills by building a digital exemplification portfolio of pupil work against priority Literacy and Numeracy skills, together with next steps for the pupil. 
	Ensure assessment processes in school focus clearly on developing pupils’ skills, not an individual piece of work.

Inter-disciplinary learning 
A driver of change for the new curriculum is the opportunity for teachers to be more creative in their teaching, listen to what the pupils want to learn and above all is an opportunity to re-engage students with learning. It is important we not use this as an opportunity to use subject content as context to achieve the Four Purposes and develop the skills and competencies which underlie the ‘What Matters’ statements. This is an opportunity to explore projects that encompass all AOLE’s.  Subject knowledge could still be instilled, but it would be in a relevant and realistic way that is relevant in the 21st century. In order to enable cross-curricular projects to take place we need to abolish the typical structures timetables that have been used in the past e.g. literacy and mathematics in the morning, science and art in the afternoon. We should be interlinking all areas of learning within topics to allow learners to be more inquisitive and creative with their learning.
Risks:
With less strict boundaries between subjects and more holistic approaches being in place less subject based knowledge will be instilled in learners. 
Justifications:
Although learners may well have less subject based knowledge they will have more skills to enable them to seek out knowledge should they wish to. The learners will become more independent thinkers, creators and researchers.
Recommendations:
	Teachers to use autonomy  to hose themes/topics relevant to the children
	Plan rich, engaging and challenging cross curricular projects and activities
	Re-structure timetables to allow cross-curricular lessons
	Use the four core purposes to underpin all learning








In conclusion, it is clear through the literature review that Wales is overdue a change from the previous national curriculum. Studies and reports show it was outdated, packed with what many professionals deemed as unnecessary content, too many assessments, it lacked creativity and teacher autonomy. The New Curriculum for Wales promises less content, more creativity for both learners and teachers and most excitingly for the profession, teacher autonomy. It is an exciting time in the profession, however, Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence serves as a reminder to enter into the curriculum with caution. Whilst the autonomy has been handed back to teachers, we are looking to the curriculum for answers and examples of how things should be done. Have teachers lost the capability to be creative? Are educators too used to being told exactly what to teach and when? Or are teachers too afraid of the inspectorates judging them harshly for simply doing what has never been done before? As Little (1997) suggested, giving pupils autonomy in their learning can be detrimental when teachers themselves are not autonomous. There are many questions I feel are unanswered. However, on review of my force field analysis it is clear that the forces for change far outweigh the forces against change and that the opportunities outweigh the risks. Will Successful Futures build a curriculum that is fit for the 21st century and beyond? With teacher collaboration, pupil led learning, appropriate assessments and focus on skills not knowledge, I am optimistic it will achieve its purpose.