A major new research report by education experts from the University of Nottingham and Goldsmiths, University of London raises vital issues around the use of standardised curriculum packages (SCPs) in schools and the impact on teachers' job satisfaction.
The report, which has been commissioned by the National Education Union, explores recent trends towards the use of pre-prepared curriculum packages in both primary and secondary schools, that teachers can use 'off the shelf.'
Co-investigator of the study Howard Stevenson, Emeritus Professor of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at Nottingham, and Principal Investigator Anna Traianou, Professor of Education at Goldsmiths, along with study contributors Dr Sarah Pearce at Goldsmiths and independent education consultant Dr Jude Brady, based the findings on teacher interviews, curriculum analysis, and a survey of more than 1600 teachers.
The report found that although in some cases these materials are used by teachers in a flexible and creative manner, in other contexts they have become a script which teachers are expected to follow closely. And in these cases, teachers who did not very closely follow the prepared resources and plans revealed they risked damaging their relationship with managers.
Although standardised curricula are often presented as the answer to problems of teacher workload, we found no significant difference in workload between teachers who used standardised curricula and those who did not. Problems of teacher workload are very serious, but they are also very complex. Our research suggests that rigidly imposed standardised curricula do not materially improve workload, but they can contribute to job dissatisfaction."
This experience of standardisation and uniformity is captured in the words of one teacher that frames the title of the report Are you on Slide 8 yet? In these cases, teachers said they feel their professional expertise is ignored and they question the quality of the experience for students.
The report provides a more detailed analysis of the curriculum materials produced by Oak National Academy, an executive non-departmental public body, sponsored by the Department for Education with significant public funding to provide curriculum materials across the whole national curriculum. The report casts doubt on claims made by Oak about the usage and impact of its materials and raises important questions about whether the money committed by the previous government represents a good investment.
Goldsmiths Professor Anna Traianou, added: "Oak National Academy claimed that its materials were high quality, well-used and an answer to problems of teacher workload. Our research suggested that these claims were difficult to sustain. Teachers found Oak's materials useful in some circumstances, but generally uninspiring.
"If teachers have to implement standardised curricula that they have had little part in designing, there is a clear risk that they feel their skills are undervalued and their belief in themselves as educators will be reduced. If the government is aiming to improve the classroom experience and increase teacher retention, it should take the findings of the report into account."
A The full report Are you on Slide 8 yet? The Impact of Standardised Curricula on Teacher Professionalism, was launched at the National Education Union Conference 2025 on Wednesday 16 April.
