Why Our English Curriculum Feedback Must Connect with Adolescent Reality

by Rebecca Thomas

Adolescence, Netflix

I promise this blog won't summarise the many concerns I have already heard this week. Not the Rata sham, not the Te Mātaiaho lack of reference, not Shakespeare.

Yes, those are big issues and yes, they do bother me. But the conversation we are not having—the one we urgently need—is about the reality our kids are living in. We need to talk about the world that shapes their language, their thinking, their emotional wellbeing, their futures.

And that world is not built in libraries or classrooms alone.

It's in their pockets.

It's on their screens.

It's in the algorithms whispering to them before they fall asleep.

For those of you who have followed the UK's reaction to Adolescence, the new Netflix series that has gripped a nation, you'll know exactly where I am coming from. Without being extreme, without spreading fear, we must critically examine the new Draft English Curriculum and ask: does it prepare our kids for the world they are actually living in?

As I read through the curriculum, I asked myself:

• Do the adults in front of our young people actually know what world our young people are living in?

• Do the nostalgic-aged academics, who believe their own rigorous schooling was the pinnacle of education, really think today's students will thrive with a curriculum that ignores their digital reality?

• How much student voice has actually shaped this curriculum?

• When was the last time we asked a nine-year-old, let alone a twelve year old about their online relationships?

A group of nine-year-olds told me about their online lives. They described how easy it is to access apps designed for older teens, how young the voices sound on their gaming platforms, and how they themselves use voice changers to sound older. They spoke about game rage, chat rage, swearing as second nature, and a blurring of online and offline selves.

A group of twelve-year-olds told me how they dodge school filters, game during lessons, and absorb content that no school would ever endorse. They spoke about social fuelled beef that spills into playground fights, parents glued to their screens during dinner, and their frustration at being ignored at home.

A group of eighteen-year-olds spoke to me with deep concern. They see the generation coming up behind them and fear for them. "They believe everything they read online," they said. "They don't know what's real."

And then I spoke to high school teachers, who see their students flick between screens, eyes darting to ChatGPT for answers before mindlessly scrolling, consuming. Addiction.

The Draft English Curriculum states:

"The English learning area opens pathways for every student to maximise their life opportunities, pursue tertiary education, enhance their employability, and become active and engaged citizens."

This sounds wonderful on paper. But does it reflect the actual pathways our students are navigating? Does it acknowledge the challenges of online misinformation, algorithmic bias, and the addictive nature of digital content?

Our children are not simply stepping into a world of neatly signposted opportunities. They are bombarded with curated realities, persuasive narratives, and AI-driven influences that shape their choices before they even realise they are making them.

If the English curriculum is to be truly future-focused, it must do more than uphold traditional aspirations. It must equip students with critical digital literacy, AI literacy, and the tools to question and interpret the flood of information that defines their world.

The curriculum's promise of "enhancing employability" rings hollow if we do not first teach our young people how to discern truth from manipulation, how to write and think critically in an age where AI can generate content in seconds, and how to engage with media responsibly.

Right now, the curriculum speaks in abstractions while our students live in a reality that is anything but abstract.

We understand that te ao Māori is about passing down what is important, protecting our young people, and ensuring they are equipped to navigate the world with wisdom. So, if we critique this draft curriculum through a te ao Māori lens, what should we be looking for?

Are we asking the right questions?

Are we looking at this through the right lens?

Are we centering the safety and wellbeing of our tamariki?

We should be asking:

• Does this curriculum provide the tools for our young people to engage with the digital realm with the same critical lens as they would a physical environment?

• Does it empower them to challenge misinformation, resist harmful online narratives, and advocate for themselves and their peers?

• Does it reflect the principles of whakapapa, whanaungatanga, and manaakitanga, ensuring our tamariki are protected in their learning journeys?

  
  

Because if it doesn’t, we are failing them.

I scoured the Draft English Curriculum for future-proofing. For critical literacy. For critical AI literacy. For relevance, for engagement, for something that signals we are ready to protect and prepare our children for the world they live in.

I found references to analysing and evaluating texts—a start, but far too vague.

I saw mentions of digital and multimodal texts—but no serious engagement with how these shape children's realities.

There is nothing explicit about social media, online misinformation, digital safeguarding, or the AI-driven content machine that will shape their futures.

And yet, the UK government is backing Adolescence to be made freely available in schools, recognising that we cannot shy away from the conversation. Keir Starmer, watching the show with his own teenage children, called it "groundbreaking." The show's writer, Jack Thorne, says its goal is to provoke conversations among students. Because if schools don't have these conversations, where else will they happen?

I am not interested in debating who wrote the curriculum or which texts are included. We do not have time for that. This is about safeguarding. About wellbeing. About ensuring that our English curriculum is driven by the reality our students face, not the nostalgia of those writing it.

Because if we do not give our students the tools to critically navigate their online world, if we do not teach them to question, challenge, and think for themselves, then we are failing them.

My Feedback on the Draft English Curriculum

After reviewing the Draft English Curriculum (Years 7-13), I have some concerns about its ability to meet the realities of our students' lives. While it acknowledges digital texts, it lacks the depth needed to prepare young people for the challenges of a rapidly changing information landscape.

Digital Literacy Needs Strengthening – The curriculum vaguely references digital and multimodal texts but does not explicitly address how social media, AI, and misinformation shape the way students engage with information. We need a clearer, more structured approach to critical digital literacy.

AI Literacy is Absent – With AI increasingly influencing how knowledge is created and consumed, the curriculum should include AI-generated content, ethical AI use, and algorithmic biases as essential learning areas.

Student Voice is Missing – There is no evidence that this draft has been shaped by students' actual experiences with online information, social media, or digital communication. If we’re serious about preparing young people for the future, we need to listen to them first.

No Clear Connection Between Literacy & Wellbeing – The draft does not address how digital media consumption impacts mental and emotional wellbeing. In a world of doomscrolling, gaming rage, and algorithm-driven content, literacy education should empower students to navigate digital spaces with awareness and resilience.

 A future-ready English curriculum must explicitly address algorithmic bias, misinformation, and AI-generated content. 

If we truly want to equip students with the skills they need, we must push for these changes before the curriculum is finalised.

What else do you think should be in the curriculum? 

Let’s make sure our students' realities aren’t ignored.