Education

Public backing for retaining the EBacc amid Education Department's curriculum overhaul

Thursday, 13 November 2025 5:05AM UTC

A recent poll reveals that two-thirds of Britons oppose Labour’s plan to scrap the English Baccalaureate, favouring traditional academic subjects over creative disciplines as the government introduces sweeping changes to the school curriculum.

Two thirds of Britons oppose Labour’s decision to scrap the English Baccalaureate (EBacc), favouring what critics have derided as ‘Mickey Mouse’ subjects instead, according to a recent poll. The survey, conducted by the More in Common think tank among 2,000 adults, reflects widespread public support for maintaining the EBacc as a central component of the school curriculum.

The EBacc, introduced in 2010, is a collection of GCSE subjects regarded as academically rigorous, including English, maths, science, a language, and a humanity. Under the previous policy framework, schools were incentivised through league tables to encourage pupils to study these subjects, reinforcing the perceived importance of a traditional academic foundation. This policy is now set to be replaced following Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson’s announcement last week to ‘mothball’ the EBacc in favour of boosting take-up of creative and less traditional disciplines.

The poll found that 66 per cent of respondents want pupils to continue taking the EBacc, even if it means sacrificing other subjects. This sentiment cuts across political affiliations, with more than half of supporters in all major parties and particularly strong backing of 76 per cent from Liberal Democrat voters. Luke Tryl, executive director of More in Common, highlighted the bipartisan nature of the support: “While the public wants to ensure children are taught vital life skills, few want changes to the curriculum to come at the expense of traditional subjects.”

Furthermore, the survey revealed resistance to shifting curricular emphasis heavily towards the arts. Almost half of respondents prefer maintaining the current balance between arts, sciences, and humanities, while only 9 per cent advocate for prioritising the arts. There was also limited endorsement for Labour’s proposals to introduce contemporary topics like ‘spotting fake news’ in primary schools if such additions would detract from fundamental skills like literacy and numeracy.

The government, meanwhile, has unveiled a comprehensive curriculum overhaul following a review led by Professor Becky Francis, which includes reducing GCSE exam hours, simplifying grammar lessons in primary education, a move to ‘decolonise’ the curriculum, and an increased focus on climate change. These reforms, perceived by some as undoing elements of the previous Conservative government’s flagship education initiatives, were welcomed by teaching unions but criticised by political opponents. Shadow Education Secretary Laura Trott described the changes as ‘education vandalism,’ while former Tory education minister Sir Nick Gibb called them ‘deeply retrograde.’

Despite Labour branding the EBacc as limiting, critics from within the Liberal Democrats and others have labelled the EBacc itself a ‘Mickey Mouse’ qualification, arguing it tries to serve contradictory purposes, rewarding academic excellence and acknowledging basic education, without fully succeeding at either. According to commentary from LibDemVoice, the qualification’s attempt to balance these goals may undermine its effectiveness as an educational measure, suggesting the need for a more nuanced approach to curriculum design.

The government defends its reforms by claiming that the EBacc has failed to increase uptake in languages and restricts student choice in subjects vital to the economy and society. A spokesperson asserted that the revamped curriculum will secure a strong foundation in essentials like reading, science, and maths while equipping pupils with the knowledge and skills necessary for future life and work, aiming to provide equal opportunity regardless of school attended.

As this debate unfolds, the public remains cautious about dismantling entrenched academic standards, reinforcing the contentious nature of education policy reform in the UK.

📌 Reference Map:

^[1] (Daily Mail) - Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]^[6]^[7] (LibDemVoice) - Paragraphs 8, 9

Source: Noah Wire Services

More on this

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15284271/Two-thirds-Britons-disagree-Labours-decision-scrap-EBacc-favour-Mickey-Mouse-subjects-poll.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=1490 - Please view link - unable to able to access data
https://www.libdemvoice.org/the-english-baccalaureate-is-a-mickey-mouse-qualification-29939.html - An article from LibDemVoice criticises the English Baccalaureate (EBacc), labelling it a 'Mickey Mouse' qualification. The author argues that the EBacc attempts to serve dual purposes: rewarding excellence and recognising basic education. They question how a single qualification can effectively achieve both objectives, suggesting that the EBacc may not be the best approach to address these goals.
https://www.libdemvoice.org/the-english-baccalaureate-is-a-mickey-mouse-qualification-29939.html - An article from LibDemVoice criticises the English Baccalaureate (EBacc), labelling it a 'Mickey Mouse' qualification. The author argues that the EBacc attempts to serve dual purposes: rewarding excellence and recognising basic education. They question how a single qualification can effectively achieve both objectives, suggesting that the EBacc may not be the best approach to address these goals.
https://www.libdemvoice.org/the-english-baccalaureate-is-a-mickey-mouse-qualification-29939.html - An article from LibDemVoice criticises the English Baccalaureate (EBacc), labelling it a 'Mickey Mouse' qualification. The author argues that the EBacc attempts to serve dual purposes: rewarding excellence and recognising basic education. They question how a single qualification can effectively achieve both objectives, suggesting that the EBacc may not be the best approach to address these goals.
https://www.libdemvoice.org/the-english-baccalaureate-is-a-mickey-mouse-qualification-29939.html - An article from LibDemVoice criticises the English Baccalaureate (EBacc), labelling it a 'Mickey Mouse' qualification. The author argues that the EBacc attempts to serve dual purposes: rewarding excellence and recognising basic education. They question how a single qualification can effectively achieve both objectives, suggesting that the EBacc may not be the best approach to address these goals.
https://www.libdemvoice.org/the-english-baccalaureate-is-a-mickey-mouse-qualification-29939.html - An article from LibDemVoice criticises the English Baccalaureate (EBacc), labelling it a 'Mickey Mouse' qualification. The author argues that the EBacc attempts to serve dual purposes: rewarding excellence and recognising basic education. They question how a single qualification can effectively achieve both objectives, suggesting that the EBacc may not be the best approach to address these goals.
https://www.libdemvoice.org/the-english-baccalaureate-is-a-mickey-mouse-qualification-29939.html - An article from LibDemVoice criticises the English Baccalaureate (EBacc), labelling it a 'Mickey Mouse' qualification. The author argues that the EBacc attempts to serve dual purposes: rewarding excellence and recognising basic education. They question how a single qualification can effectively achieve both objectives, suggesting that the EBacc may not be the best approach to address these goals.

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score: 8

Notes: The narrative appears to be based on a recent poll conducted by the More in Common think tank, suggesting high freshness. However, the Daily Mail article was published on 13 November 2025, which is more than 7 days after the poll's release. This delay may indicate recycled content. Additionally, the article includes updated data but recycles older material, which may justify a higher freshness score but should still be flagged. ([en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_Kingdom_general_election?utm_source=openai))

Quotes check

Score: 7

Notes: The quotes attributed to Luke Tryl, executive director of More in Common, and other figures are not found in the provided search results. This suggests that the quotes may be original or exclusive content. However, without direct verification, the authenticity of these quotes cannot be confirmed.

Source reliability

Score: 6

Notes: The narrative originates from the Daily Mail, a reputable UK newspaper. However, the article's reliance on a single source, the More in Common think tank, and the absence of corroboration from other reputable outlets raise concerns about the reliability of the information presented.

Plausability check

Score: 7

Notes: The claims about public opposition to scrapping the EBacc and the introduction of 'Mickey Mouse' subjects are plausible and align with ongoing debates in UK education policy. However, the lack of supporting detail from other reputable outlets and the absence of specific factual anchors (e.g., names, institutions, dates) reduce the credibility of the narrative. Additionally, the tone and language used in the article are consistent with typical media reporting on education policy, suggesting a moderate level of plausibility.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM

Summary: The narrative presents plausible claims about public opposition to scrapping the EBacc and the introduction of less traditional subjects. However, the reliance on a single source, the Daily Mail's publication delay, and the lack of corroboration from other reputable outlets raise concerns about the freshness and reliability of the information. The absence of direct verification for the quotes further diminishes confidence in the narrative's authenticity. Therefore, the overall assessment is 'OPEN' with medium confidence.

education
UK politics
Curriculum reform