Bridget Phillipson said the findings will shape her policies and help develop a new inclusive curriculum for England
The Times has learnt that the shake-up of science GCSEs is a crucial part of the review's conclusions -- arguably the biggest change for the subject since Michael Gove's reforms a decade earlier.
The number of pupils taking physics, chemistry and biology GCSE peaked in 2019 at 27 per cent of the cohort and has since fallen to 23 per cent.
A paper written by Francis and other academics in 2023 said that those taking triple science were almost four times more likely to take science A-levels than those doing combined science GCSE -- even when prior attainment was accounted for -- and nearly twice as likely to take a science degree. These often lead to better-paid jobs, such as medicine, meaning that GCSE choices at age 14 are constraining life chances.
About one in ten schools does not offer separate sciences and this is much higher in deprived areas of the north east of England. Those at grammar and private schools or with university-educated parents are more likely to take triple science.
It is thought that the report will reveal that only 13 per cent of those from deprived backgrounds take triple science compared with 28 per cent of wealthier classmates.
Sources close to the review said that the intention was for triple science to become a statutory offering at schools in England, with schools given time and support to prepare for this. The biggest barrier is likely to be a shortage of physics teachers.
It is understood that the intention is to improve opportunities for pupils from more modest backgrounds but also to create a pipeline of science graduates that benefits the economy.
Research by the Royal Society found that 19 per cent of pupils who wanted to take triple science were unable to do so, either because it was not offered at their school or because they were steered to take combined science instead. The figure was 24 per cent for the North East and 23 per cent for the West Midlands.
Those taking separate GCSE sciences are more likely to be taught by the relevant specialist in physics, chemistry or biology.
The Institute of Physics called for the three sciences to be timetabled and taught separately, by a separate specialist teacher, in its evidence to the review. The shortage of specialist physics teachers could be plugged by other teachers retraining, it said.
The review may also recommend the scrapping of the English baccalaureate measure, introduced by Gove, which assesses schools on how well pupils perform across five GCSEs: English, maths, a science, a humanities, and a language.
Its interim report said that this could limit the opportunity to take other subjects, making teenagers less likely to choose triple science.
It said: "All this limits the uptake of triple science, computing, and arts subjects and we have heard strong concerns from schools, and from organisations representing the arts and other non-EBacc subjects, on this constraining effect."
The government said last week in its skills white paper that it would adopt two other recommendations by the review: a new qualification to counter multiple resits of English and maths GCSE, and a suite of vocational "V-level" courses as an alternative to A-levels and T-levels.
The review was conducted by a panel of 12 experts from across the education world and took evidence from more than 7,000 individuals, groups, societies and organisations.
Francis, chief executive of the Education Endowment Foundation but on secondment while conducting the review, had promised "evolution not revolution" and that her recommendations would be evidence based. She has spoken previously about school time-constraints meaning that if much was added to the curriculum, other things would have to be removed.
Phillipson said earlier this year that the review "will take us onward, delivering a core curriculum for all children that is deep and rigorous, knowledge-rich down to its bones" and that it would "break down barriers to opportunity".
Sir Jon Coles, chief executive of United Learning, which runs more than 100 schools, told The Times: "We have known for a long time that doing triple science at GCSE makes success in A-level science more likely -- every young person should have that opportunity."
Tim Oates, a director at Cambridge Assessment, said: "The direction of travel on encouraging triple science entry is exactly right, all the labour market data on enhanced earnings, job progression and economic growth endorse it. Wales has just moved in exactly the same direction."
The Times understands that the review will not push for triple science to be mandatory for all pupils but for it to be a statutory entitlement. It is expected to recommend that the government considers how this can be done within a reasonable timeframe.