Today, activists expressed strong disapproval of Labour’s suggested changes to education, which involve revamping history lessons to better showcase Britain’s inherent diversity.

This morning, a comprehensive review of the current curriculum was unveiled, spearheaded by Professor Becky Francis, a noted left-wing academic.

The report advocated for incorporating a wider range of perspectives and connections across various eras and regions into history education.

It also referenced a 2012 analysis by the race equality organization, the Runnymede Trust, which criticized British history TV shows for portraying the nation as predominantly white.

In reaction to Professor Francis’s findings, the Government announced plans to enhance the focus on the history of black and Asian communities in Britain.

“As we reform the curriculum, we aim to enable educators to highlight the intrinsic diversity within British history, including the histories of British Black and Asian populations,” the detailed response stated.

The review had also aired concerns that the teaching of English at GCSE is ‘dry’ and has contributed to students’ reduced enthusiasm in studying the subject at A-level. 

Bodies who contributed to the review called for ‘greater representation within, and diversity of’ GCSE texts.

The Government said today that the curriculum will ‘continue to draw on a recognised body of English literature’, including by mandating the study of at least one Shakespeare play and one 19th-century novel.

But they suggested other texts that are traditionally studied, such as works by Charles Dickens, could be under threat by saying they will ‘consider the amounts of literature required to avoid an increase in content’. 

Campaigners today savaged Labour’s proposed education reforms after it emerged the teaching of history is to be overhauled to make it reflect Britain’s ‘innate diversity’. Above: Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson leaving Downing Street yesterday 

Chris McGovern, of the Campaign for Real Education, criticised the plans to overhaul the teaching of history and English.

He told the Daily Mail: ‘The lights are going out on the teaching of history and pupils are likely to see further “decolonisation” under the new curriculum.’

‘I think the subject is going to be captured by the Left and they are going to use the classroom as a vehicle for promoting a particular ideology.

‘It is highly dangerous and will lead to further problems in the future. The ideology is left-wing, decolonisation.’

Labour also plans to reduce GCSE exams, simplify primary school tests and scrap a drive against ‘Mickey Mouse’ subjects implemented by the previous Conservative government.

And there will be a new focus on teaching children about climate change. 

Mouhssin Ismail, who gave up a six-figure salary as a City lawyer to become a teacher and is now the chief standards officer of the City of London Academies Trust, called the reforms a ‘tangle of misguided policies’.

He added on X: ‘What we are witnessing is educational vandalism: a series of ill-conceived reforms that threaten to drag England’s schools back fifteen years and undo the hard-won progress of the past decade. 

‘There is a striking disconnect between the rhetoric of supporting disadvantaged children and the reality of the decisions being taken. 

‘Policymakers claim to champion the most vulnerable, yet it is precisely those children who will feel the harshest impact, while those responsible face no accountability for the consequences.’

The report was chaired by Professor Becky Francis. It is titled ‘Building a world-class curriculum for all’

The Government said today that the curriculum will ‘continue to draw on a recognised body of English literature’ 

Currently, there is a requirement for 40 per cent of content on the GCSE History course to focus on Britain’s past.

But a footnote in the curriculum report said that educational organisations have challenged, ‘the division between, for example, “British” and “World” history and argued for a more inclusive approach which better recognises the complexities and diversities of our national history’.

The footnote then directed readers to the Runnymede Trust’s 2012 report, which was titled ‘Making British Histories: Diversity and the National Curriculum’.

It criticised programmes such as period drama Downton Abbey, ancestry series Who Do You Think You Are and even children’s show Horrible Histories.

The report said the shows contributed to creating a ‘portrait of the nation’ that is ‘overwhelmingly white’.

It added: ‘Ethnic or racial minorities rarely feature. Along with women and the poor, they constitute the invisible others of the dominant narrative of the nation.’ 

It also labelled the work of popular historian Niall Ferguson as ‘Monty Pythonesque revisionist Imperialism’. 

Another footnote in the report authored by Professor Francis linked to the Runnymede Trust’s response to the review when it was launched last year. 

The Trust argued that history teaching in many schools is ‘still focused on narrow, celebratory accounts of “Our Island Story”‘. 

They called on the Government to ’embed statutory topics on race, migration and the British Empire’.

A wide-ranging report on the current curriculum, led by left-wing academic Professor Becky Francis (pictured), was released this morning 

The Government’s plans for history make no mention of findings earlier this year that that fewer than one in five schools are teaching students about inspirational British victories such as those at Agincourt, Waterloo and Trafalgar.

The study, by the Policy Exchange think tank, also highlighted that while almost all pupils are being informed about the transatlantic slave trade and the First World War, children are by and large being left in the dark about other history-changing moments.

On the teaching of English literature at GCSE level, Professor Francis’s report noted that the National Curriculum currently requires that students study ‘at least one play by Shakespeare, at least one 19th century novel, fiction or drama from the British Isles from 1914 onwards and a selection of post-1789 poetry’.

However, the report added: ‘Many respondents to our Call for Evidence and expert stakeholders argued that a “dry” curriculum diet in GCSE English has contributed to a reduced enthusiasm for English at A Level. 

‘They suggested that greater representation within, and diversity of, GCSE texts would engage students more effectively. 

‘This approach has been found to support students’ engagement and outcomes, alongside empathy and understanding of others.’ 

The Government said in their response today: ‘We agree with the Review’s recommendation that the curriculum should continue to draw on a recognised body of English literature, including at least one play by Shakespeare, one 19th-century novel, poetry, and fiction or drama from the British Isles from 1914 onwards. 

‘We will also consider the amounts of literature required to avoid an increase in content.’

They added: ‘Beyond this, we want schools to have the flexibility to choose a range of texts and authors, including those of local significance. 

‘These changes will ensure that schools and teachers can continue to draw on a full and extensive literary body of work from a variety of rich sources, whilst having the choice to determine the best collection of literature to engage their pupils.’ 

Last night, Laura Trott, Shadow Education Secretary, warned: ‘Labour’s idea of boosting social mobility is to teach primary school children about climate change instead of making sure they can read, write and add up properly.

‘These reforms will mean fewer children studying history and languages post-14, and will hide standards slipping in schools.

‘Education vandalism will be the lasting legacy of the Prime Minister and Bridget Phillipson.’