We asked Northern Ireland history teachers to provide their opinions of the proposed History Curriculum to inform our formal response to the TransformEd. Curriculum Consultation. We circulated the anonymous survey amongst our members and received 89 responses. Participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with a number of statements relating to the new curriculum and to expand upon their choices. We have collated and analysed the responses and used the data to inform the following statement. We have sent this statement to Department of Education and a number of media outlets. You can see an illustrated breakdown of the quantitative results.
HTANI statement concerning the TransformED curriculum consultation 21/08/26
NEW curriculum proposals for history teaching in Northern Ireland have met with a strong backlash from teachers across the province. A survey conducted by the History Association of Northern Ireland (HTANI) has found that the vast majority of teachers are concerned the proposals published by the Department of Education are not fit for purpose and could be detrimental to the future of the subject.
The Department of Education is currently re-writing curricula for all subjects in its ‘Transform Ed’ programme. But the HTANI survey completed by over 80 teachers was overwhelmingly negative about the proposals drafted for history teaching from Key Stages 1 to 3.
Denver Charles, HTANI Chairman and Head of History and Citizenship at Magherafelt High School, said: ‘The HTANI survey indicates clearly that teachers believe that the new curriculum is content heavy and incoherent, while the illustrative bullet points could be improved and made more relevant to the Northern Ireland context in the 21st Century.’
The new proposals, drafted by a taskforce appointed by the Minister for Education and chaired by English academic Dr Christine Counsell, differ markedly from the current 2007 curriculum which is thematic-based and allows teachers to choose which history topics to focus on. Instead, the new curriculum, based on a ‘knowledge rich’ approach, presents teachers with long lists of bullet points of prescribed content which must be covered. Key Stage 3 alone includes over 60 bullet points covering over 900 years of history.
The reaction from teachers in the survey is scathing, with over 90 percent of respondents believing the proposals will ‘fail to unlock pupils’ interest in history’, will reduce teacher autonomy and flexibility, and will increase workload. Over 80 percent said the new curriculum would fail to teach critical thinking and would fail to teach ‘the ability to disagree about interpretations of the past’.
Many teachers expressed alarm at the sheer volume of content in the curriculum, which appears to prioritise accumulation of knowledge over historical skills. One commented: ‘This has gone from being a loose curriculum to a draconian system with a huge amount of topics to cover. It will lead to teachers racing through it and it being taught superficially’.
John Wishart, Head of History at Belfast High School, expressed his dismay at the proposals. ‘This is a massive lost opportunity. It will ‘transform’ things for the worse. History is not a set of separate stories. These proposals seem to be more a splurge of events to cram into the heads of young people, like something out of Dickens classic Hard Times.
‘We cannot ‘stuff their heads full of facts’. We stand to lose the joy and understanding of history by the sheer scale and complexity of what is proposed.’
Dr Alan MCully, a specialist in history education and former Senior Lecturer in Education in the School of Education in Ulster University, said that while he welcomed the strong rationale for history education in the proposals’ vision statement, he feared there was ‘an overemphasis on content coverage at the expense of historical thinking and evidential understanding’.
‘Key Stage 3 reads like a relentless charge through the centuries’, Dr McCully noted.
‘The 2007 curriculum had its limitations but it was progressive and it did take account of literature on teaching difficult histories. The new curriculum appears to take little notice of the research into teaching difficult histories in societies affected by conflict. Northern Irish history teachers have been working in that context for over 50 years with many building up considerable expertise.’
Denver Charles echoes this point. ‘History has remained a popular option at GCSE and this is testament to the professionalism and dedication of the teachers who have worked tirelessly to keep it relevant and engaging for the students.
‘However many of the teachers we have consulted are concerned that the new curriculum is so dry and prescriptive that it will put pupils off choosing the subject at GCSE and A level.
‘This is a once in a generation opportunity to create a transformative curriculum. The history teaching community want to play a key role in ensuring that this is the case.’