ISCA is an independent body specialising in systematic, evidence-based design of science curriculum and assessment. We combine England’s research tradition in science education with rigorous curriculum design to analyse problems, develop practical solutions, and help the organisations responsible for science education put them into practice. Our independence from government and from commercially interested organisations ensures that our conclusions are driven by evidence and scholarship.
England’s science education system is not delivering what the country needs. The 2025 Curriculum and Assessment Review confirmed what the science education community has long understood: that assessment does not measure enough of what matters, that the curriculum is so overloaded that teachers are unable to teach for deep understanding, and that students are not developing sufficient real-world capabilities from science education.
These problems reflect weaknesses in how the curriculum is designed. In the current system, examination specifications have come to define what is taught in classrooms, with the result that what can be efficiently assessed takes priority over what students most need to learn. ISCA calls this qualification-driven design. Its consequences are that excessive content required by the assessments forces teachers to cover the curriculum rather than teach for understanding, rewarding recall over the kind of scientific reasoning that students are likely to need in their lives.
England deserves a more coherent approach to curriculum design. What most drives achievement is a curriculum that is coherent and fully deliverable within available teaching time (Marzano, 2003), not one that is ‘an inch deep and a mile wide’ (Schmidt et al, 1997). ISCA follows an approach we call outcomes-engineered design. Like engineers, we start by defining the desirable outcomes: what students should be able to do with science in the future, such as apply their understanding to unfamiliar phenomena and make informed decisions about real-world issues as well as pursue scientific careers. We then work backwards to define the learning priorities that build towards these outcomes, and only then specify the detailed knowledge and skills. To validate our model, we prototype units to ensure they align with the desired outcomes and manage curriculum constraints (particularly available time) so that the learning for understanding is achievable.
England developed much of the research base for exemplary science education but largely ignores it. Over five decades, researchers at King’s College London, University of York, and UCL Institute of Education have built internationally influential knowledge about how students develop understanding and learn to reason scientifically, and how to develop curricula that develop students understanding of science content as well as their scientific literacy. The Next Generation Science Standards in the United States drew on this research to build a curriculum framework that focuses on the outcomes of understanding and what students can do with what they know, in assessment and in the classroom. England has yet to match that ambition in its own curriculum design.
ISCA is developing solutions to major curriculum problems with the science education community. We have analysed the problems identified by the 2025 Curriculum and Assessment Review and developed two specific, practical proposals. We presented these at ISCA’s inaugural Expert Advisory Panel meeting in March 2026, attended by thirty key stakeholders including awarding bodies, subject associations, multi-academy trusts, the Royal Society, the Association for Science Education, and leading research institutions. The proposals received strong support.
ISCA proposes to close the gap between what the curriculum aims to develop and what examinations actually assess. Students are expected to develop the ability to reason from evidence, evaluate competing claims, and apply science to real-world contexts, but examinations do not test these capabilities in a meaningful way. ISCA has proposed a new Assessment Objective (AO4) to close this gap: an assessment of scientific reasoning and epistemic practices in authentic contexts. AO4 draws on the PISA scientific literacy framework and has gained support from awarding body professionals who believe that there are no significant barriers to its implementation.
We can remove the biggest obstacle to teaching for understanding: curriculum overload. ISCA’s analysis has quantified what teachers have long known — at GCSE level, the curriculum contains approximately 45% more content than can be taught to the depth that genuine understanding requires. This overload, previously invisible in the design process, is the single greatest barrier to deeper learning. ISCA has developed a principled method for its reduction, drawing on David Perkins' framework for identifying knowledge that is truly worth teaching and Jay McTighe's Understanding by Design approach to building curriculum backwards from desired outcomes. The result is a set of tools called SCULPT, which prioritise and optimise content so that the curriculum is viable. SCULPT has been prototyped and is being made available to the organisations involved in curriculum revision.
**There is only a short window to influence the revision of the national curriculum. ** The consultation on new programmes of study is underway, and the development of assessment criteria and examination specifications will follow. A revised curriculum will be produced to be taught from 2028. Evidence and recommendations that reach this process in the next twelve months can make a difference to what is decided. Those that arrive later will be lobbying against a settled framework.
ISCA is seizing this opportunity to improve the quality of students’ science education. We are actively participating in the consultation process: contributing formal responses, mobilising the expertise of the science education community, and engaging with DfE and Ofqual to ensure the revision benefits from the best available evidence. Our goal is not simply to publish recommendations but to ensure they are adopted, so that the next generation are better equipped both for STEM careers and to make good decisions about science-related issues in their working and personal lives and to experience a more meaningful science education.
ISCA’s Founding Fellows are scholars whose expertise has shaped its founding purpose and who endorse the work it exists to do.
Jonathan Osborne — Professor Emeritus, Graduate School of Education, Stanford University; Chair of the PISA 2025 Science Expert Group
Christine Harrison —Professor of Science Education, King’s College London
David Perkins — Carl H. Pforzheimer, Jr. Professor of Teaching and Learning, Emeritus, Harvard Graduate School of Education; author of Future Wise: Educating Our Children for a Changing World