FORUM - Volume 56, Number 3 (2014) - Changes to the English Literature GCSE: a Sociocultural Perspective

Sep 5, 2026

Upload by Ophelia

Sociological frameworks suggest recent revisions to the English literature GCSE syllabus will disadvantage learners from environments with limited educationally exchangeable cultural capital in literary and linguistic domains. The article correlates multiple theoretical approaches to assess these impacts and argues that, while further research is needed for certainty, the current GCSE changes are unlikely to support students lacking such capital. It further calls for stronger policy surveillance to ensure future reforms are addressed effectively by relevant stakeholders.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryExam

FormatPDF

Pages14

Reading Time35 min

AccessFree to download

Changes to the English Literature GCSE: a Sociocultural Perspective

Introduction

A Deconstruction of the Reform

FORUM Volume 56, Number 3, 2014 [www.wwwords.co.uk/FORUM](www.wwwords.co.uk/FORUM) Changes to the English Literature GCSE: a sociocultural perspective ADAM MORBY ABSTRACT Various sociological frameworks strongly suggest that recent changes to the English literature GCSE syllabus content will have a detrimental effect on those individuals who come from an environment with few sources of educationally exchangeable literary and linguistic cultural capital. In an attempt to provide a more sociological position from which to understand the situation, this article attempts to correlate a number of these frameworks, concluding that although more research would be necessary to reach a definitive conclusion, it is difficult to see how the recent GCSE changes will help (relatively speaking) those from an environment lacking in such capitals. It also suggests that perhaps a more vigorous system of policy surveillance is necessary if any future changes are to be properly and effectively addressed by the stakeholders in question. Introduction In May 2014, and after a period of over two years during which numerous government publications were drafted, written and eventually released for public consultation, Britain’s four exam boards finally published the first draft of their 2015 English literature specifications.[1] Although it took almost 10 months, when it was finally noticed that all non-British literature would be absent from the syllabus, over 30 newspaper articles were written within the space of only 7 days.[2] Since the publication of the exam boards’ specifications, however, there is another significant change that seems to have been overlooked: the specifications of each of the United Kingdom’s (UK) four exam boards indicate that the presence of modern literature in the new English literature GCSE has dropped by over 50%.[3] After describing the process that led up to this situation, this article will then examine the GCSE change from a more sociological perspective, using the 499 Adam Morby theoretical frameworks of Pierre Bourdieu and Basil Bernstein as a means of analysis. It should be noted that the focus of this article is on the language used in modern and pre-1917 literature, and the effects that an increase in various forms of language in the literature syllabus will have on individuals from various socio-economic backgrounds. The focus is not on the quality, sociohistorical importance or inspirational potential of specific texts, but rather on the GCSE attainment, educational capital, and social mobility through educational equality that the changes will supposedly facilitate among various socio-economic groups; it is these three things that the Department for Education (DfE) seem so enthusiastic to encourage.[4] From a Bourdieuean perspective it is in the ‘exchange value’ of literature, rather than its ‘use value’, where any trends of social reproduction can be examined. Few people deny the phenomenal universality of Shakespeare, the wonderful imagination of Dickens, or the intrinsically transformative effects of poetry, but the debate over which individual texts should be included in the syllabus is a subjective one, whereas to examine the situation from a more sociological position might allow for an objective examination that has so far been absent from the debate. A Deconstruction of the Reform On 20 January 2011, the DfE published a call for evidence to ‘all those interested in the National Curriculum’; this was the first step towards its full review and eventual reform. Michael Gove then appointed an advisory committee and a panel of experts to ensure that all decisions were evidencebased, with final proposals subject to a period of public consultation in 2012.[5] In December 2011, The Framework for the National Curriculum: a report by an expert panel for the curriculum review was published. Structured around a substantive foundation of ‘international best practices’, including those

FAQs

What is the article’s main sociological concern about the GCSE changes?

The revisions are argued to harm students from backgrounds with few educationally exchangeable forms of literary and linguistic cultural capital.

Which frameworks are used to analyze the GCSE reform?

The article uses theoretical frameworks associated with Pierre Bourdieu and Basil Bernstein to interpret the changes.

What policy process led up to the GCSE specifications being published?

The Department for Education initiated a call for evidence, commissioned an expert panel and report, then released remits for review and drafts subject to public consultation and regulation.

Sep 5, 2026

Upload by Ophelia