Food education and reform: Secondary food teacher perspectives on curriculum, accountability and post-16 pathways
The purpose of this survey was to capture the perspectives of secondary food teachers on a range of current policy developments and proposals affecting the subject in England. These included the Curriculum and Assessment Review (CAR), consultation on the proposed Progress 8 framework, post-16 pathways, enrichment opportunities, and the expectation that food will be taught in all schools, including academies (but not independent schools). The survey aimed to explore teachers’ views on these reports, proposals and legislative changes, with a particular focus on their perceived impact at school level. (Survey conducted 26/3/26 – 24/4/26.)
FTC Food education and reform report 2026 – click to download
Executive summary
The survey of 316 secondary food teachers provides insight into how current policy proposals are being interpreted at school level and their anticipated impact on food education across Key Stages 3 to 5 in England.
The findings reveal a clear tension: food education is highly valued by teachers but widely perceived to be at risk of decline. While there is strong professional consensus on its importance, current policy, accountability measures, and school-level constraints are expected to reduce provision, status, and access over time. Uncertainty and lack of discussion in many schools further suggest that the subject is not yet a strategic priority.
1. KS3 and KS4 provision
Provision is uneven and increasingly fragile:
- at KS3, responses highlight a polarised picture, with some schools protecting provision while others reduce time or move to carousel models
- at KS4, the subject remains structurally disadvantaged, leading more schools to anticipate declining uptake or removal than growth
- decisions at KS4 are seen to directly impact KS3, reinforcing a cycle of reduced provision.
2. Impact of accountability and reform
Policy and accountability frameworks are viewed as key drivers of decline:
- proposed Progress 8 arrangements are expected to marginalise GCSE food, limiting student access
- inclusion in more favourable accountability measures is seen as critical to sustaining the subject
- without reform, teachers anticipate reduced availability and widening inequality between schools.
3. Role of KS4 qualifications
There is overwhelming agreement that KS4 qualifications are essential:
- removing GCSE food would lead to significant reductions in curriculum time, staffing, funding, and subject status at Key Stage 3
- GCSE provision is seen as central to sustaining food education across all key stages.
4. Post-16 pathways
Teachers strongly support academic progression routes:
- there is near-universal agreement on the importance of A Level Food & Nutrition and combined nutrition/food science pathways.
In contrast, vocational Hospitality and Catering routes face major barriers:
- around half of schools are unlikely to offer them
- delivery is constrained by timetabling, funding, staffing, facilities, and perceptions of low academic value
- current models are often seen as misaligned with student aspirations.
5. Enrichment
Enrichment offers some optimism but limited reach:
- a majority of schools are likely to offer food-related enrichment activities
- however, provision is inconsistent and heavily dependent on individual staff, with significant barriers to scaling
- enrichment is viewed as complementary, not a substitute for curriculum provision.
6.Policy implementation (National Curriculum in all schools)
Proposed changes to require all schools to follow the National Curriculum are expected to have minimal immediate impact, with most schools anticipating no change and limited evidence of active planning.
7. Key barriers
Across all areas, consistent challenges emerge:
- timetable and curriculum constraints
- funding and resource pressures
- staffing shortages and expertise gaps
- facilities and infrastructure limitations
- low subject status and perceived lack of academic value.
8. Conclusion
Teachers present a clear and unified message: food education is essential for health, life skills, and future careers, but is currently under threat.
Without targeted policy action to:
- strengthen its position in accountability measures
- protect curriculum time
- invest in staffing and facilities
- and secure clear progression pathways.
there is a significant risk of continued decline in provision and widening inequality in student access.
