Leading article: Let schools decide how to teach

Sir Jim Rose's review of primary school teaching, commissioned by the Government, has been touted as a blueprint for the most radical reform of education in two decades. The interim report certainly contains suggestions that will have traditionalists spluttering with indignation.

Sir Jim argues that "areas of learning" should replace individual "non-core" subjects such as history, geography and science. He also recommends that "emotional well-being" and "social skills" should be a compulsory part of the curriculum. Another suggestion is that computer skills should be taught to primary school children, rather than introducing such tuition at secondary school level as at present. Already, the report has been accused of advocating further dumbing down of our education system. Others have criticised it for asking teachers to do the job of parents by teaching children how to behave and interact with others.

Yet these objections rather miss the point. Many primary schools already blur traditional subject boundaries in class. They have made a choice about the most effective way to impart knowledge and understanding. This is the real issue. The goal of primary education reform should be to let individual schools tailor lessons as they see fit. If schools want to conduct lessons in history, or the vaguer "human, social and environmental understanding", that should be a matter for them.

As for imparting social skills, again, let individual schools tailor their approach according to their intake. Let them make a judgement on what is likely to produce the best educational results. The Rose report suggests that children should be taught to use podcasts or make their own radio programmes. But that might not be appropriate in many schools where the priority will, rightly, be on raising basic literacy levels. The point is to let the individual schools and teachers decide the best way to teach.

At present there are too many tests and the curriculum is over-loaded. Schools need to be given the power to ignore top-down directives. If this report can help set primary schools free, it might well live up to its billing as the most significant shake-up in primary education in 20 years. Otherwise, it will end up as just the latest in a long line of meddling and counter-productive prescriptions from Whitehall.