Through the EU-funded project “Support for the review of Moldova’s school curriculum” the OECD provided Moldova with technical support for the review of its competency-based school curriculum. The project included the development of a proposal for a planned, cyclical curriculum review that reflects good practice internationally and is tailored to the Moldovan context.
This chapter sets the context by providing an overview of school education and past and current curriculum reviews in Moldova.
The Republic of Moldova considers education a national priority. Since the adoption of a new Education Code in 2014 (Parliament of the Republic of Moldova, 2014[1]), Moldova’s education system has undergone intensive reform and modernisation, with a focus on strengthening education governance and improving the quality of education. The launch of the Education Development Strategy 2030 (in 2023) gave renewed impetus to this reform agenda (Government of the Republic of Moldova, 2023[2]). In particular, the Strategy called for a review of Moldova’s school curriculum to provide the guidance needed for students to develop the competencies for thriving in the 21st century. The Strategy also highlighted the importance of strengthening the education system’s capacity for curriculum design and implementation so that curriculum resources are of high quality and lead to real change in classroom practice.
This paper provides analysis and recommendations for Moldova’s Ministry of Education and Research (MoER) to consider as it puts this strategy into action. It was prepared by the OECD under the EU-funded technical assistance project “Support for the review of Moldova’s school curriculum” (see Box 1.1). The paper is structured in three sections. Section 1 sets the context by providing an overview of school education and past and current curriculum reviews in Moldova. Section 2 explores six key questions for the design and implementation of a new curriculum review cycle, drawing on insights from international research and experience, as well as Moldova’s own experience. Section 3 consolidates this analysis in a proposal for a curriculum review cycle that is evidence-informed, well-planned and allows adequate time for analysis and planning, redesign, preparation, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation.
The EU-funded technical assistance project “Support for the review of Moldova’s school curriculum” provides the MoER of Moldova and the ministry-established Curriculum Working Group (CWG) with technical support for the review of Moldova’s competency-based school curriculum. The project comprises two strands of work:
1. Technical support for the establishment of a curriculum review cycle that fits the Moldovan context.
2. Technical support for the development of a curriculum framework for primary-, lower secondary- and upper secondary education. This strand of work focuses on i) developing an enhanced subject curriculum framework “format” to be used for redesigning (or updating) all subject curriculum frameworks; and ii) reviewing the lower secondary mathematics and science curriculum frameworks.
This paper is the main output of the first strand of work. It was developed through several diagnostic activities. These comprised a desk study of international research and country examples of curriculum reviews, including Moldova’s own experiences in reviewing its school curriculum. The desk study drew heavily from the analysis of the OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030/2040 project (see Box 1.1) whose staff were also part of the OECD project team. In addition, the OECD project team conducted interviews with key stakeholders during a four-day visit to Moldova in October 2024. The proposal was presented to the MoER and CWG for discussion and feedback on two occasions. These meetings allowed for validating and enriching the proposal for a Moldovan curriculum review cycle.
OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030/2040 aims to build a common understanding of the knowledge, skills, attitudes and values students need in the 21st century. It also supports countries in sharing and creating new knowledge on future curriculum design, implementation, and evaluation.
Recognising the urgent need to make the process of curriculum design and development a more evidence-based and systematic process as well as to support an open, global discussion about future of education, in 2015 the OECD launched the “Future of Education and Skills 2030” project (Education 2030, transitioning to Education 2030/40). The project aims to support countries in adapting their education systems by considering the types of 21st century competencies (knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values) that students and teachers need to thrive in the future and managing curriculum issues, e.g. addressing curriculum overload, managing curriculum flexibility and autonomy, closing equity gaps through curriculum innovations, managing time lag between curriculum and today’s evolving societal needs, embedding attitudes and values in curriculum, etc.
To this end, the Project promotes two strands of work:
Strand 1: Learning and Teaching for 2030
In this concept and vision-making strand of work, the project engages multiple stakeholders (governments, school leaders, teachers, students, researchers, social partners, etc.) in a global dialogue to develop a common language/vision that captures shared aspirations for a better future of education. As a result, the OECD Learning Compass has been co-created to represent the types of competencies deemed important for students to thrive in the future. Building on this, the OECD Teaching Compass has been also co-created to define the competencies, professional agency and well-being teacher will need in order to empower their students to shape a better future.
Strand 2: International Curriculum Analysis
In this strand of work, the project promotes an integrated view of future curriculum design, implementation, and evaluation. It conducts comparative analyses on curriculum issues that are highly relevant and should be prioritised in making the vision of education (OECD Learning Compass) a reality. The analyses include trends in curriculum redesign, innovations in curriculum implementation and evaluation, as well as lessons learned from countries on curriculum reform.
For more information on the OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030/2040 project please visit the website https://www.oecd.org/en/about/projects/future-of-education-and-skills-2030.html#strand2.
Curriculum is often considered the main tool that educators can use to prepare their students for the future. However, what does the term “curriculum” imply? No universal consensus exists on what exactly constitutes a curriculum and it is often a contested concept. Although curriculum may be broadly defined as the totality of the intended learning experiences of students at school, it is, in fact, a complex, multidimensional phenomenon, and a more nuanced definition is necessary.
In recognition of this complexity, OECD’s Future of Education and Skills 2030/2040 project definition of curriculum aims to be inclusive (covering both the formal curriculum and the hidden curriculum), multilayered (scoping different aspects of curriculum and covering both mandatory and non-mandatory curriculum content), and dynamic, holistic and multidirectional (taking an ecosystem approach to curriculum rather than a linear, industrial model) (OECD, 2020[3]).
The findings from the OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030/2040 project – from here on referred to as “Education 2030/40” for simplicity – show the scope and structure of content covered in curricula or curriculum frameworks can vary considerably across countries. That said, common elements of curricula and curriculum framework often include:
curricular goals
content
guidelines on pedagogy
guidelines on assessment
instruction time (OECD, 2024[4]).
A main curriculum document is often supplemented by separate subject curriculum frameworks that focus on learning goals/content for specific subjects and instruction time. In some countries these documents also provide guidance on pedagogy and assessment, while in others the latter are presented in separate documents. While these pedagogical guidelines and assessment guidelines are often non-mandatory, they are frequently considered part of the curriculum.
In this paper, the term “curriculum review” refers to all phases and underlying activities of a review cycle. This process typically begins with the collection and analysis of relevant evidence – including, importantly, the perspectives of key stakeholders such as teachers, school leaders, students and parents. These insights help articulate the rationale for the review and define its purposes (i.e. why the review is undertaken and what it aims to change), which guide the planning of the review.
In line with the definition of curriculum of Education 2030/40, this paper considers curriculum review as a dynamic and cyclical process, rather than a linear exercise that results solely in a set of high-quality curriculum resources. While having a high-quality curriculum is important, it is not enough. International research evidence highlights the importance of allocating sufficient time and resources for curriculum implementation (OECD, 2020[3]; Alvunger et al., 2021[5]; Gouëdard et al., 2020[6]). This includes supporting teachers in understanding the desired curriculum changes and assisting them in putting these changes into practice.
In addition, monitoring and evaluation of curriculum implementation enable an examination of whether the changes lead to the desired improvements in classroom practice and student learning. In other words, they help determine whether the written (or intended) curriculum is taught and experienced by students as intended and whether it leads to the desired learning outcomes (OECD, 2020[3]). Monitoring and evaluation also allow for timely course corrections in curriculum redesign (i.e. curriculum resources) and implementation, if necessary. Therefore, curriculum review, when evidence-informed and well-planned, can be a valuable developmental process for all involved (Choppin et al., 2020[7]; Sinnema and Stoll, 2020[8]). Monitoring and evaluation of curriculum implementation also serves as an important accountability measure when they are well designed and effectively implemented (OECD, 2024[4]).
In sum, curriculum review is considered a cyclical process that facilitates regular redesign or updating to ensure the curriculum remains relevant and up to date.
Moldova’s participation in the 2022 OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) showed that the average performance of 15-year-olds was below the OECD average in mathematics, reading and science (OECD, 2023[9]). Nevertheless, average scores in mathematics and reading in 2022 were higher than those recorded in PISA 2009, indicating modest but sustained progress in student performance over the longer term.
Note: White dots indicate mean-performance estimates that are not statistically significantly above/below PISA 2022 estimates. Blue dots indicate mean-performance estimates that are statistically significantly above/below PISA 2022 estimates. Black lines indicate the best-fitting trend. An interactive version of this figure is available at https://oecdch.art/a40de1dbaf/C032 (accessed on 4 March 2025).
Source: OECD (2023[9]) PISA 2022 Results (Volume I and II) – Country Notes: Moldova
The proportion of top performers (Level 5 or 6) in at least one subject was smaller in Moldova than the OECD average. For example, about 1% of Moldovan students were top performers in mathematics, compared to 9% across OECD countries. Similarly, a smaller proportion of students in Moldova achieved the minimum level of proficiency (Level 2 or higher) in all three domains. For example, in mathematics, 44% of Moldovan students attained at least Level 2 proficiency, significantly lower than the OECD average of 69%.
The Moldovan school system is relatively small. In 2023/24 there were 1 201 schools, serving around 334 000 students. Most students attend schools where the language of instruction is Romanian. However, there are also schools that accommodate the needs of minority populations, offering instruction in Russian, Gagauz, Ukrainian or Bulgarian (European Commission, 2025[10]). Education is compulsory for children aged six to sixteen (see Table 1.1); however, many begin formal education earlier and continue their studies beyond the compulsory years.
Source: European Commission (2025[10]), Eurydice – Moldova, https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/node/23723 (accessed on 14 November 2024).
Moldova’s national curriculum for primary, lower secondary and upper secondary education is centrally defined by the MoER. It comprises several core documents, including the National Curriculum Reference Framework, which serves as the overarching curriculum document. This framework outlines the overall vision, design principles and structure of the curriculum, and sets out the key competencies to be developed, as well as the underlying philosophy of teaching and learning. In addition, education level-specific framework plans define the compulsory and optional subjects, as well as the minimum and maximum instructional hours. Subject curriculum frameworks provide further detail on expected learning outcomes, pedagogical approaches and other key components. The MoER also considers school textbooks, methodological guidelines (i.e. pedagogical guidelines) and assessment guidelines to be integral parts of the curriculum (European Commission, 2025[10]).
The curriculum is organised according to the main educational levels (see Table 1.1) and aims to promote a holistic, learner-centred approach to education. It seeks to balance students’ cognitive, social and emotional development, while placing increasing emphasis on competence-based education and alignment with European standards (MoER, 2023[11]).
The current primary education curriculum in Moldova is designed to develop foundational literacy and numeracy competencies, while also fostering key competencies such as critical thinking, creativity and civic engagement (MoER, 2023[11]). The list of compulsory subjects is outlined in Table 1.2. Within the parameters of the national framework, schools are granted a degree of flexibility to offer optional subjects and adapt learning pathways, with 10-15% of instruction time allocated to them. The curriculum places particular emphasis on formative assessment, personalised learning approaches and inclusive pedagogical practices. These elements are intended to address individual learner needs and promote equity in educational outcomes (MoER, 2018[12]).
Lower secondary education introduces a more subject-specific curriculum that is delivered by specialised subject teachers. In addition to the compulsory subjects, students are to choose optional subjects that account for 15-20% of instruction time. The curriculum aims to incorporate cross-cutting themes such as media literacy, democratic citizenship, and sustainable development. The emphasis on key competences is intended to help students apply knowledge in real-life contexts and develop their transversal skills (European Commission, 2025[10]).
Source: Developed by the authors of this report based on Ministry of Education and Research (2025[13]), Framework Plan for Primary, Middle and High School Education, Academic Year 2025–2026. Chișinău: Ministry of Education and Research.
Upper secondary education in Moldova is structured into two main pathways: general and vocational. The general upper secondary curriculum maintains a broad subject offering, while providing opportunities for specialisation based on students’ preferences. Students may select from two profiles: the scientific profile or the humanities profile. The curriculum includes six compulsory subject areas: Language and Communication; Mathematics and Sciences; Socio-humanistic Education; Technologies; Physical Education (Sport); and Counselling and Personal Development (see Table 1.3). Additional subjects are determined based on the chosen profile, with optional subjects accounting for around 20-25% of instruction time.
Source: Developed by the authors of this report based on Ministry of Education and Research (2025[13]), Framework Plan for Primary, Middle and High School Education, Academic Year 2025–2026. Chișinău: Ministry of Education and Research.
Upper secondary VET programmes in Moldova place a stronger emphasis on practical skills and workplace competences, while maintaining general education subjects in the core curriculum to support a balanced education (OECD, 2023[14]). Students may choose from four specialisation profiles: arts, sports, theology or military studies. Since 2014, Moldova has also implemented dual VET, which is delivered through partnerships between VET institutions and companies, with a greater focus on in-company, practical training (European Commission, 2025[10]).
In Moldova, as in OECD countries, both formative and summative classroom-based assessments contribute to students’ semester and annual results. The national curriculum emphasises formative assessment to support learning – a practice formally introduced in 2010 alongside the competency-based curriculum. However, many teachers continue to face challenges in applying formative assessment effectively in the classroom. Although implementation is guided by assessment guidelines, its application remains superficial. This is partly due to the quality of the guidelines, which are reported to lack clarity, require simplification and, according to teachers, impose a significant administrative burden. The concept of formative assessment was also unfamiliar to many teachers at the time of its introduction (UNICEF, 2019[15]). Moreover, it remains unclear whether formative and summative assessments are fully aligned with the competency-based approach. Further analysis is required to assess whether they evaluate not only content knowledge but also the application of skills.
As in many OECD countries, the use of standardised student assessments in primary and secondary education is well established in Moldova (OECD, 2013[16]; OECD, 2023[17]). A mandatory full-cohort assessment is conducted at the end of Grade 4 for system monitoring and to support teaching and learning. Moldova also administers central examinations to certify learning: the Grade 9 gymnasium examination and the Grade 12 baccalaureate examination.
International evidence underscores the importance of aligning all forms of student assessment with the curriculum, and of maintaining this alignment following a curriculum review. Assessments must validly measure the competencies that students are expected to develop. If assessments remain based on the previous curriculum, they risk measuring content that is no longer prioritised, resulting in a disconnect between instruction and evaluation. Furthermore, what is assessed strongly influences what is taught. When assessments focus narrowly on specific knowledge or skills, they can unintentionally narrow the curriculum, limiting opportunities for students to engage with the full breadth of the curriculum (OECD, 2013[16]).
Moldova’s Education Development Strategy 2030 outlines a long-term vision for the development and transformation of the sector, covering early childhood education and care, primary, secondary, tertiary, and vocational education, as well as non-formal education and lifelong learning. It aims to achieve the following strategic objectives:
Connect education to the requirements and needs of the labour market from the perspective of sustainable development by restructuring the mechanisms for the development of human capital.
Ensure access to quality education for all throughout their lives.
Provide the educational system of all phases and forms of education with qualified, competent, motivated and competitive teaching, scientific-didactic and leadership staff.
Strengthen socio-educational cohesion for quality education by combining the efforts of all actors of the educational process.
Create new, effective, and motivating environments for the development and lifelong learning of all citizens.
Improve the functionality, quality and sustainability of the education system through the efficient implementation of digital technologies.
Ensure for all citizens, throughout their lives, opportunities for learning and education in a formal, non-formal or informal context.
Promote innovations and changes in education through the development of scientific research.
Increase the performance of the educational system by streamlining the network of educational institutions, modernising the infrastructure, strengthening the leadership and managerial capacity and developing a culture focussed on quality (Government of the Republic of Moldova, 2023[2]).
To achieve these strategic objectives – particularly the objectives of enhancing the quality of the education system and its connections with the labour market – the Strategy calls for a review of the school curriculum. It also emphasises the need to strengthen the system’s capacity for curriculum design and implementation so that curriculum resources are of high quality and lead to real change in classroom practice.
Curriculum is a powerful lever for supporting student learning and well-being, and for preparing students to thrive in and contribute to the future. It can help ensure consistent levels of quality across different types of education provision and age groups, thereby contributing to a more equitable education system. However, curriculum may also constrain the creativity and agency of students and teachers, particularly if it is overloaded or lacks flexibility to allow exploration of individual interests and purpose. Moreover, if a curriculum remains unchanged for extended periods, it may fail to reflect societal developments and lack the innovation needed to meet evolving needs (OECD, 2020[3]).
In recent years, an increasing number of OECD countries have engaged in curriculum reviews to ensure education remains relevant (OECD, 2020[18]; Gouëdard et al., 2020[6]; Schleicher, 2021[19]). These experiences offer valuable opportunities for peer learning for education systems aiming to strengthen their capacity for curriculum design and implementation. Moldova is among such countries as it seeks to move from an ad hoc approach to curriculum review towards a more planned and cyclical process.
Since gaining independence in 1991, Moldova has conducted five reviews of its school curriculum when including the current curriculum review that was initiated in 2024 (OECD, 2003[20]; UNICEF, 2019[15]). The first curriculum review began in 1996 (see Figure 1.2).
One of its main purposes was to move away from a “programme of study” that emphasised rote learning and content-based instruction, and instead to promote student-centred and active learning approaches. The review also aimed to strengthen curriculum continuity across educational levels and to enhance flexibility and local autonomy in curriculum design (OECD, 2003[20]).
The MoER was responsible for planning, designing and implementing the new curriculum across all subjects. To support this work, the MoER established the National Curriculum and Assessment Council (NCAC), composed of representatives from universities, teaching staff and non-governmental organisations, to oversee and facilitate curriculum design and implementation. In addition, subject-specific working groups were established, each comprising five to seven teachers and one or two university-based experts. More than 1 000 experts, teachers and other stakeholders contributed to the planning and design of the revised curriculum (World Bank, 2005[21]).
Prior to implementation, the National Curriculum Council (NCC), composed of curriculum experts, reviewed the curriculum documents to ensure quality. The NCC then submitted its recommendations for approval to the Minister of Education. A sequential approach to curriculum review was adopted across levels of education. The new primary education curriculum was approved for implementation in 1998, followed by the approval of curricula for lower and upper secondary education in 2000. Implementation involved the development and distribution of curriculum materials to schools and district Departments of Education, along with the participation of curriculum developers in teacher training. The MoER was responsible for monitoring the implementation process (World Bank, 2005[21]; Gremalschi, 2015[22]).
A second curriculum review was initiated in 2005. Its main purpose was to "decongest" the curriculum, particularly by reducing the theoretical content in curriculum resources (Gremalschi, 2015[22]). Unlike the first review, which followed a sequential model, this review adopted an integrated approach by updating the curricula for primary, lower secondary and upper secondary education simultaneously. The revised curriculum was implemented from the 2006/07 school year onwards.
Source: Developed by the authors of this report based on OECD (2003[20]), Reviews of National Policies for Education: Southeastern Europe 2003: Volume 2: FYROM, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, OECD Publishing, Paris; World Bank (2005[21]), Implementation Completion Report - General Education Project; Government of the Republic of Moldova (2014[23]), Education Development Strategy 2014-2020; Gremalschi, A. (2015[22]), Key competences in general education: challenges and constraints; UNICEF (2019[15]), Republic of Moldova. Review of the evaluation and assessment in education; Dumbraveanu (2022[24]), Science Education in Moldova.
The governance of the second review in part mirrored that of the first. The MoER remained responsible for planning, designing and implementing the new curriculum. However, the NCAC was not continued. Instead, the MoER engaged the then-existing Institute for Educational Sciences, comprising teacher trainers and researchers, as a “critical friend” to support the review process.
In 2010, Moldova began its third curriculum review since independence. This review aimed to introduce for the first time an explicit, competency-based approach to learning in Moldova. As part of this, it also placed significant emphasis on formative assessment (Government of the Republic of Moldova, 2014[23]; Gremalschi, 2015[22]). As in the previous review, an integrated approach was adopted, with the entire school curriculum reviewed simultaneously. The MoER once again established subject working groups to revise all subject-specific curriculum frameworks and requested the NCC to conduct quality assurance prior to implementation.
A fourth curriculum review began in 2017. The review continued the purpose of transitioning to competency-based teaching and student learning, with an ongoing emphasis on formative assessment. It also aimed to enhance the alignment between formative assessments and national standardised student assessments. In addition, the review sought to increase instructional time for STEM subjects. The school curriculum was redesigned and updated during 2017-18 and approved for implementation from the 2019/20 school year onwards. The review was operationalised and governed in the same way as previous reviews. A notable change was the introduction of a merit-based selection process for membership in the subject working groups. Unlike in previous reviews, where members were invited to participate, candidates were now required to apply and were selected based on merit. This measure aimed to enhance transparency and improve the quality of curriculum developers (Dumbraveanu, 2022[24])
While the move towards a competency-based curriculum can be seen as a positive step towards a more comprehensive and well-rounded education, the system’s capacity for curriculum design and implementation have hindered its practical application in classrooms across Moldova. One key challenge has been the limited capacity to develop quality curriculum resources. Several studies have found that curriculum documents have remained largely theoretical and have lacked rigour, focus, coherence and clarity throughout successive curriculum reviews, despite efforts to address these issues (Vivdici, 2023[25]; Dumbraveanu, 2022[24]; Gremalschi, 2015[22]; UNICEF, 2019[15]). These findings were corroborated by the OECD team’s analysis conducted as part of the second strand of work under this project (see Box 1.1). For example, the review of the lower secondary mathematics curriculum framework revealed that the document was overly lengthy (exceeding 180 pages) and lacked a user-friendly structure to support the identification of learning outcomes. Interviews with various stakeholders confirmed that the format and complexity of the curriculum documents posed challenges for their use by teachers, students, parents and other key actors, such as textbook developers.
In addition, interviews with education stakeholders and findings from several studies highlighted the limited experience and capacity of textbook developers and publishers in Moldova. As a result, textbooks were often insufficiently aligned with curriculum frameworks and remained overly theoretical in nature – issues that may partly reflect the broader quality concerns identified in the curriculum documents. Moreover, a limited understanding of formative assessment among textbook developers likely contributed to the lack of assignments and exercises designed to support assessment and student learning (UNICEF, 2019[15]; Hadîrcă and Vivdici, 2021[26]).
Unlike many OECD countries, Moldova has not benefited from the presence of a dedicated agency for curriculum development. As shown by the experience of Korea, for example, which has established the Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation, and Ireland, which is served by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, establishing such a body can yield several advantages, including the development and institutionalisation of specialised expertise in curriculum design, subject-specific knowledge and educational research. The absence of such a body is partly due to the historically ad hoc nature of curriculum reviews in Moldova – an approach the MoER is keen to move away from.
Lastly, teacher capacity is a critical factor in determining a system’s ability to implement a curriculum effectively. A significant portion of Moldova’s ageing teaching workforce was originally trained to teach a knowledge-based curriculum. Many teachers also lacked the necessary skills for effective formative assessments, a concept that was unfamiliar to many, as mentioned earlier (UNICEF, 2019[15]). Consequently, the transition to competency-based teaching, assessment, and student learning is expected to require more time and effort, including additional investments in the professional development of Moldova’s teaching workforce (OECD, 2023[27]; Vivdici, 2023[25]; Casap, Midari and Gonta, 2022[28]).
As mentioned earlier, the Education Development Strategy 2030 called for a review of Moldova’s school curriculum. This review was initiated in 2024. One of its initial outputs was the Concept for School Curriculum Development, which sets out, among other elements, the stated purposes of the current curriculum review (Ministry of Education and Research of the Republic of Moldova, 2024[29]) (see Box 1.2). While the list of stated purposes is extensive, the OECD team found that the key purposes of the current review were not clearly defined, and their relative importance was not articulated (see below).
In 2024, the MoER of Moldova released the Concept for School Curriculum Development to guide the current curriculum review. The concept document was developed based on studies, a public consultation process, and incorporates the recommendations of the Council of Europe on key competences for lifelong learning, as well as the curriculum development objectives outlined in the Education Development Strategy 2030. The concept document lists the arguments or purposes of the current curriculum review, which is deemed necessary to:
Implement the European Council recommendations on the development of key competences for lifelong learning;
Achieve the priorities outlined in the Education Development Strategy 2030, particularly focusing on inclusion, personal development, and active and responsible citizenship;
Define a new profile for graduates, better prepared for future professions;
Strengthen the interconnection between formal, non-formal, and informal education to support the development of each child's potential;
Support the development of school competences through innovative teaching, learning, and assessment methods;
Ensure the unitary character of education by leveraging social, cultural, and linguistic diversity, while promoting intercultural and multilingual education;
Reduce the gap between the educational offerings of schools and the evolving demands of the labour market and vocational/higher education;
Increase students' motivation for learning and modernise the educational process by leveraging technological innovations, digital pedagogy, and artificial intelligence;
Improve learning outcomes in general, as well as in national and international assessments.
The concept document forms the basis for developing all curriculum outputs, including the National Curriculum Reference Framework and subject curriculum frameworks.
Source: Ministry of Education and Research of the Republic of Moldova (2024[29]), Concept for School Curriculum Development (Concepția Dezvoltării Curriculumului Școlar), https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/last_version_copy_compressed_1_0_0.pdf (accessed on 4 March 2025).
Under this current review, the MoER again intends to adopt an integrated approach, in which all levels of education are reviewed simultaneously. The governance of the review slightly differs from previous reviews (see Figure 1.3). To support the planning and oversight of the redesign of the primary, lower secondary and upper secondary curricula, the MoER established a Curriculum Working Group (CWG) composed of national experts. As in previous reviews, the MoER established subject working groups for each subject. These groups, comprising over 160 curriculum experts, teachers, and other stakeholders, are tasked with redesigning and updating all subject curriculum frameworks. The updated subject curriculum frameworks are planned to be piloted during the 2026/27 school year, with nationwide implementation scheduled for 2027/28 onwards (Ministry of Education and Research of the Republic of Moldova, 2024[29]).
The NCC continues the critical function of reviewing all subject curriculum frameworks and advising the Minister on their approval. The enhanced subject curriculum framework format, which features clearer learning outcomes, is expected to support the NCC in assessing the alignment of textbooks with the curriculum.
Source: Developed by the authors based on information shared by the MoER
In addition, the action plan for the current curriculum review which was developed with support of the CWG indicates that the review will focus primarily on the development and revision of curriculum resources. However, the action plan does not explicitly address curriculum implementation and monitoring and evaluation (see Chapter 2) (Ministry of Education and Research of the Republic of Moldova, 2024[29]).
[5] Alvunger, D. et al. (2021), “Conclusions: Patterns and Trends in Curriculum Making in Europe”, in Curriculum Making in Europe: Policy and Practice within and Across Diverse Contexts, Emerald Publishing Limited, https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83867-735-020211013.
[28] Casap, L., V. Midari and I. Gonta (2022), Human Development Assessment for Moldova : Background Paper on Education, World Bank, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099940106202222966.
[7] Choppin, J. et al. (2020), “The role of instructional materials in the relationship between the official curriculum and the enacted curriculum”, Mathematical Thinking and Learning, Vol. 24/2, pp. 123-148, https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2020.1855376.
[24] Dumbraveanu, R. (2022), “Science Education in Moldova”, in Lecture Notes in Educational Technology, Science Education in Countries Along the Belt & Road, Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-6955-2_26.
[10] European Commission (2025), Euridyce - Moldova, https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/node/23723.
[6] Gouëdard, P. et al. (2020), “Curriculum reform: A literature review to support effective implementation”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 239, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/efe8a48c-en.
[2] Government of the Republic of Moldova (2023), Education Development Strategy 2021-2030, Government of Moldova, https://www.legis.md/cautare/getResults?doc_id=136600&lang=ro (accessed on 25 November 2025).
[23] Government of the Republic of Moldova (2014), Education Development Strategy 2014-2020, Government of Moldova, https://www.globalpartnership.org/sites/default/files/moldova-education-strategy-2014-2020.pdf (accessed on 8 August 2024).
[22] Gremalschi, A. (2015), Formarea competenţelor-cheie în învăţământul general: Provocări si constrângeri (Key competences in general education: challenges and constraints), https://soros.md/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Studiu-Formarea-Competentelor-Cheie.pdf.
[26] Hadîrcă, M. and A. Vivdici (2021), Societal trends and challenges for the transformation in a learning society, pp. 85-95, https://izss.uken.krakow.pl/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2023/01/Maria-Hadirca-Ana-Vivdici-SOCIETAL-TRENDS-AND-CHALLENGES-FOR-THE-TRANSFORMATION.pdf.
[13] Ministry of Education and Research (2025), Framework Plan for Primary, Middle and High School Education, Academic Year 2025–2026, Ministry of Education and Research.
[29] Ministry of Education and Research of the Republic of Moldova (2024), Concepția Dezvoltării Curriculumului Școlar (Conception of the Development of the School Curriculum), https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/last_version_copy_compressed_1_0_0.pdf (accessed on 4 March 2025).
[11] MoER (2023), Planul-Cadru pentru învățământul primar, gimnazial și liceal anul de studii 2023-2024 [Framework Plan for primary, lower and upper secondary education].
[12] MoER (2018), Curriculum Național Învățământul primar [National Curriculum Primary Education].
[4] OECD (2024), Curriculum Flexibility and Autonomy: Promoting a Thriving Learning Environment, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/eccbbac2-en.
[27] OECD (2023), “An assessment of the professional development of teachers and school leaders, and curriculum and learning resources in Moldova”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 78, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/22633a40-en.
[17] OECD (2023), Education at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e13bef63-en.
[14] OECD (2023), “Enhancing the evaluation of VET programmes and institutions in the Republic of Moldova”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, https://doi.org/10.1787/8f90a4c6-en.
[9] OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume I and II) - Country Notes: Moldova, OECD Publishing, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-results-2022-volume-iii-factsheets_041a90f1-en/moldova_c3dcb267-en.html#:~:text=Only%20in%2020%20out%20of,%3A%2020%25%20and%2017%25).
[3] OECD (2020), Curriculum (re)design: A series of thematic reports from the OECD Education 2030 project, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/projects/edu/education-2040/2-1-curriculum-design/brochure-thematic-reports-on-curriculum-redesign.pdf.
[18] OECD (2020), What Students Learn Matters: Towards a 21st Century Curriculum, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d86d4d9a-en.
[16] OECD (2013), Synergies for Better Learning: An International Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment, OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264190658-en.
[20] OECD (2003), Reviews of National Policies for Education: South Eastern Europe 2003: Volume 2: FYROM, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Reviews of National Policies for Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264030879-en.
[1] Parliament of the Republic of Moldova (2014), Education Code of the Republic of Moldova, No. 152 dated July 17, 2014, https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/education_code_final_version_0.pdf (accessed on 25 January 2023).
[19] Schleicher, A. (2021), Learning from the Past, Looking to the Future: Excellence and Equity for all, International Summit on the Teaching Profession, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f43c1728-en.
[8] Sinnema, C. and L. Stoll (2020), “Learning for and realising curriculum aspirations through schools as learning organisations”, European Journal of Education, Vol. 55/1, pp. 9-23, https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12381.
[15] UNICEF (2019), Republic of Moldova. Review of the evaluation and assessment in education, UNICEF, https://www.unicef.org/moldova/en/reports/review-evaluation-and-assessment-education-0.
[25] Vivdici, A. (2023), Developing the general plan of national curriculum from the perspective of key competences’ development, https://anacec.md/files/Tibuleac-absract.pdf (accessed on 28 August 2024).
[21] World Bank (2005), Implementation Completion Report - General Education Project, Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group., http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/500181468774587254/Moldova-General-Education-Project (accessed on 17 December 2024).