Education: English Baccalaureate Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Education

Education: English Baccalaureate

Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury Excerpts
Tuesday 17th May 2011

(13 years ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Asked by
Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury Portrait Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury
- Hansard - -



To ask Her Majesty’s Government what criteria they use in determining which subjects count towards the English Baccalaureate.

Lord Hill of Oareford Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The English Baccalaureate reflects vital subjects—maths, English and science—where pupils should have the option to take exams leading to A-level, and history, geography and languages, which have been in decline. However, these are not the only valuable or rigorous subjects. We are also making detailed performance information available so that the public can look at schools’ results in any combination of subjects.

Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury Portrait Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury
- Hansard - -

I thank the Minister for that Answer. Does he not share my concern over a recent survey in which 60 per cent of the schools that responded said that they would no longer be teaching art and design at GCSE as a result of the introduction of the English baccalaureate as they have to concentrate on the subjects that it encompasses? The qualifications that count towards the current EBacc provide limited scope for the development of creative skills. Does the Minister not agree with me that, considering how important the creative industries are to the present and future prosperity of this country, that is really rather short-sighted?

Lord Hill of Oareford Portrait Lord Hill of Oareford
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I agree with my noble friend about the importance of the creative subjects in terms of the contribution they can make to the creative industries, as she says, and as a good in themselves. It is right and good for children to learn about these subjects for the benefit of education, not just for some gradgrindian economic benefit. I agree with her very strongly on that. The thinking behind the EBacc is not in any way to undermine or diminish the value of other subjects that are not in the EBacc. The starting point is that all of us in this House are keen to encourage social mobility. The fact is that children, particularly from poor backgrounds, have not been having the opportunity to study the kind of academic subjects that will enable them to progress to higher education in the numbers that one would like. We are all keen for children from poor backgrounds to become doctors in the way that those from more affluent backgrounds do, yet only 4 per cent of children on free school meals take physics or chemistry. Any further measure we take will not help those children become doctors. We hope the EBacc will give children who want it the opportunity to study academic subjects. Children, however, come in all shapes and sizes and vocational, arts and creative subjects are equally important.