Excellent, concise question. [Laughter.]

Okay. Well, the principles were broadly supported, Suzy. We received what I would describe as positive feedback regarding the emphasis placed on ongoing assessment that is there to support children's learning and progression. Key messages were perhaps to find a better way of expressing the purposes of assessment—we refer to a formative and summative assessment—and just being a bit clearer about what that actually means and being clear about definitions around it. But, generally, supported.

Okay. That's a good concise answer as well.


Okay. Well, the principles were broadly supported, Suzy. We received what I would describe as positive feedback regarding the emphasis placed on ongoing assessment that is there to support children's learning and progression. Key messages were perhaps to find a better way of expressing the purposes of assessment—we refer to a formative and summative assessment—and just being a bit clearer about what that actually means and being clear about definitions around it. But, generally, supported.

Okay. That's a good concise answer as well.

Obviously, we're all aware now of the distinction between assessment of pupils for their own progression and the evaluation of how a school does at certain points in its life cycle as well. Presumably, the way you're looking at this is to keep these items completely separate, and that evaluation and assessment proposals will be—. They're out in a separate document; their results are going to be coming forward in a separate document—is that right? There's a thick black line between these two concepts.


Okay. That's a good concise answer as well.

Obviously, we're all aware now of the distinction between assessment of pupils for their own progression and the evaluation of how a school does at certain points in its life cycle as well. Presumably, the way you're looking at this is to keep these items completely separate, and that evaluation and assessment proposals will be—. They're out in a separate document; their results are going to be coming forward in a separate document—is that right? There's a thick black line between these two concepts.

Yes, absolutely. I think some of the trouble that we've got ourselves in previously is because there has not been a clear distinction between assessment and accountability, and, when you start using assessment for accountability purposes, that's when, potentially, that assessment process gets corrupted and you have gaming.


Obviously, we're all aware now of the distinction between assessment of pupils for their own progression and the evaluation of how a school does at certain points in its life cycle as well. Presumably, the way you're looking at this is to keep these items completely separate, and that evaluation and assessment proposals will be—. They're out in a separate document; their results are going to be coming forward in a separate document—is that right? There's a thick black line between these two concepts.

Yes, absolutely. I think some of the trouble that we've got ourselves in previously is because there has not been a clear distinction between assessment and accountability, and, when you start using assessment for accountability purposes, that's when, potentially, that assessment process gets corrupted and you have gaming.

Can I ask, with the assessments, though, which is about pupil progression, will those results be published internally? Will parents get to see those?


Obviously, we're all aware now of the distinction between assessment of pupils for their own progression and the evaluation of how a school does at certain points in its life cycle as well. Presumably, the way you're looking at this is to keep these items completely separate, and that evaluation and assessment proposals will be—. They're out in a separate document; their results are going to be coming forward in a separate document—is that right? There's a thick black line between these two concepts.

Yes, absolutely. I think some of the trouble that we've got ourselves in previously is because there has not been a clear distinction between assessment and accountability, and, when you start using assessment for accountability purposes, that's when, potentially, that assessment process gets corrupted and you have gaming.

Can I ask, with the assessments, though, which is about pupil progression, will those results be published internally? Will parents get to see those?

Oh, yes. And that should be the purpose for assessment. The primary purpose for assessment is for that professional to be able to know how to move that child's educational journey on, and you would absolutely expect professionals to have those conversations with parents, whether they're using formative methods of assessment or summative methods of assessment. So, absolutely, you would expect teachers to be sharing information around assessment methods, whichever type they use, with parents, to describe and to inform parents about what happens next for their child.


Yes, absolutely. I think some of the trouble that we've got ourselves in previously is because there has not been a clear distinction between assessment and accountability, and, when you start using assessment for accountability purposes, that's when, potentially, that assessment process gets corrupted and you have gaming.

Can I ask, with the assessments, though, which is about pupil progression, will those results be published internally? Will parents get to see those?

Oh, yes. And that should be the purpose for assessment. The primary purpose for assessment is for that professional to be able to know how to move that child's educational journey on, and you would absolutely expect professionals to have those conversations with parents, whether they're using formative methods of assessment or summative methods of assessment. So, absolutely, you would expect teachers to be sharing information around assessment methods, whichever type they use, with parents, to describe and to inform parents about what happens next for their child.

Right. I accept that. Is it realistic, then, to expect parents, families, communities, not to think about that information when they're drawing conclusions about the school, notwithstanding that formal evaluation of those schools is going to be done completely separately?


Can I ask, with the assessments, though, which is about pupil progression, will those results be published internally? Will parents get to see those?

Oh, yes. And that should be the purpose for assessment. The primary purpose for assessment is for that professional to be able to know how to move that child's educational journey on, and you would absolutely expect professionals to have those conversations with parents, whether they're using formative methods of assessment or summative methods of assessment. So, absolutely, you would expect teachers to be sharing information around assessment methods, whichever type they use, with parents, to describe and to inform parents about what happens next for their child.

Right. I accept that. Is it realistic, then, to expect parents, families, communities, not to think about that information when they're drawing conclusions about the school, notwithstanding that formal evaluation of those schools is going to be done completely separately?

Well, of course, parents will always be interested in how the overall institution is doing. But the conversations I have with parents, and I certainly feel this myself as a parent—I'm interested in how my child is doing, how my child is getting on in school, what are the issues that that child has, and, more importantly, what is the school going to do about it? So, if my child is struggling for whatever reason, what is the school going to do about that to help that child? If my child happens to be exceptionally able and talented, how are you as a school going to make the most of my child's talents and move them on to fulfil their potential? So, undoubtedly, I can't control assumptions that parents will make, but it is absolutely clear in this system, and my intention is, that teachers should share assessment methods and outcomes with parents to have that conversation about what happens next. But I am absolutely clear that we do have to make this distinction between assessment for learning and an accountability in the system, otherwise we drive—inadvertently; people don't set out to do it, but we drive a set of behaviours that has negative unintended outcomes. We only have to look at the debacle around BTEC science to know that.


Oh, yes. And that should be the purpose for assessment. The primary purpose for assessment is for that professional to be able to know how to move that child's educational journey on, and you would absolutely expect professionals to have those conversations with parents, whether they're using formative methods of assessment or summative methods of assessment. So, absolutely, you would expect teachers to be sharing information around assessment methods, whichever type they use, with parents, to describe and to inform parents about what happens next for their child.

Right. I accept that. Is it realistic, then, to expect parents, families, communities, not to think about that information when they're drawing conclusions about the school, notwithstanding that formal evaluation of those schools is going to be done completely separately?

Well, of course, parents will always be interested in how the overall institution is doing. But the conversations I have with parents, and I certainly feel this myself as a parent—I'm interested in how my child is doing, how my child is getting on in school, what are the issues that that child has, and, more importantly, what is the school going to do about it? So, if my child is struggling for whatever reason, what is the school going to do about that to help that child? If my child happens to be exceptionally able and talented, how are you as a school going to make the most of my child's talents and move them on to fulfil their potential? So, undoubtedly, I can't control assumptions that parents will make, but it is absolutely clear in this system, and my intention is, that teachers should share assessment methods and outcomes with parents to have that conversation about what happens next. But I am absolutely clear that we do have to make this distinction between assessment for learning and an accountability in the system, otherwise we drive—inadvertently; people don't set out to do it, but we drive a set of behaviours that has negative unintended outcomes. We only have to look at the debacle around BTEC science to know that.

Okay. I understand that. So, how—? Can you just briefly give us an indication of how you think the accountability, on both sides of that thick black line—the methodology—is likely to change with this? You mentioned that there's going to be an independent review of performance measurements coming shortly; we know that some of the existing ones have been ditched in fairly recent legislation. Without pre-empting the findings of such a review, have you got your top three likely expected changes?


Right. I accept that. Is it realistic, then, to expect parents, families, communities, not to think about that information when they're drawing conclusions about the school, notwithstanding that formal evaluation of those schools is going to be done completely separately?

Well, of course, parents will always be interested in how the overall institution is doing. But the conversations I have with parents, and I certainly feel this myself as a parent—I'm interested in how my child is doing, how my child is getting on in school, what are the issues that that child has, and, more importantly, what is the school going to do about it? So, if my child is struggling for whatever reason, what is the school going to do about that to help that child? If my child happens to be exceptionally able and talented, how are you as a school going to make the most of my child's talents and move them on to fulfil their potential? So, undoubtedly, I can't control assumptions that parents will make, but it is absolutely clear in this system, and my intention is, that teachers should share assessment methods and outcomes with parents to have that conversation about what happens next. But I am absolutely clear that we do have to make this distinction between assessment for learning and an accountability in the system, otherwise we drive—inadvertently; people don't set out to do it, but we drive a set of behaviours that has negative unintended outcomes. We only have to look at the debacle around BTEC science to know that.

Okay. I understand that. So, how—? Can you just briefly give us an indication of how you think the accountability, on both sides of that thick black line—the methodology—is likely to change with this? You mentioned that there's going to be an independent review of performance measurements coming shortly; we know that some of the existing ones have been ditched in fairly recent legislation. Without pre-empting the findings of such a review, have you got your top three likely expected changes?


Well, of course, parents will always be interested in how the overall institution is doing. But the conversations I have with parents, and I certainly feel this myself as a parent—I'm interested in how my child is doing, how my child is getting on in school, what are the issues that that child has, and, more importantly, what is the school going to do about it? So, if my child is struggling for whatever reason, what is the school going to do about that to help that child? If my child happens to be exceptionally able and talented, how are you as a school going to make the most of my child's talents and move them on to fulfil their potential? So, undoubtedly, I can't control assumptions that parents will make, but it is absolutely clear in this system, and my intention is, that teachers should share assessment methods and outcomes with parents to have that conversation about what happens next. But I am absolutely clear that we do have to make this distinction between assessment for learning and an accountability in the system, otherwise we drive—inadvertently; people don't set out to do it, but we drive a set of behaviours that has negative unintended outcomes. We only have to look at the debacle around BTEC science to know that.

Okay. I understand that. So, how—? Can you just briefly give us an indication of how you think the accountability, on both sides of that thick black line—the methodology—is likely to change with this? You mentioned that there's going to be an independent review of performance measurements coming shortly; we know that some of the existing ones have been ditched in fairly recent legislation. Without pre-empting the findings of such a review, have you got your top three likely expected changes?


Okay. I understand that. So, how—? Can you just briefly give us an indication of how you think the accountability, on both sides of that thick black line—the methodology—is likely to change with this? You mentioned that there's going to be an independent review of performance measurements coming shortly; we know that some of the existing ones have been ditched in fairly recent legislation. Without pre-empting the findings of such a review, have you got your top three likely expected changes?

To accountability. Well, we're moving to a system of schools as learning organisations, and a greater emphasis on self-evaluation, with external verification of that by Estyn, our inspectors.


To accountability. Well, we're moving to a system of schools as learning organisations, and a greater emphasis on self-evaluation, with external verification of that by Estyn, our inspectors.

And that will be reflected in the school categorisation system as well—will those indicators change, do you think?


To accountability. Well, we're moving to a system of schools as learning organisations, and a greater emphasis on self-evaluation, with external verification of that by Estyn, our inspectors.

And that will be reflected in the school categorisation system as well—will those indicators change, do you think?

Well, categorisation—again, the purpose for categorisation is not to make a judgment on a school in the sense of a league table; it's a triage process, categorisation.


And that will be reflected in the school categorisation system as well—will those indicators change, do you think?

Well, categorisation—again, the purpose for categorisation is not to make a judgment on a school in the sense of a league table; it's a triage process, categorisation.

Well, this is the issue, isn't it? This is the problem of designing a system where there are perfectly good reasons to introduce the system—and in this case it's a triage system to identify levels of support for a school. But then others come along and turn it into something else that it was never intended to be. And categorisation was never intended to be a way of expressing a league table of school performances; it's there to identify levels of support that a school can expect from its regional consortia. Now, we have, we have—we will continue to keep categorisation, but, since coming into office, we have tried to adapt categorisation simply away from pure data to a more formative assessment process, and categorisation will continue to evolve. The message is very clear: this is not to absolve our system of accountability. And the first level of accountability in that system has to be the professionalism of an individual member of staff—the moral purpose that I bring to my classroom today to do right by the children that are in front of me. That's the first level of our accountability, and therefore we have our new teaching standards. As a leader, we have new leadership standards. That's the first part of our accountability regime—the moral purpose our professionals bring to their work. So, categorisation will stay. Will it evolve? Yes, because it's been evolving over the last three years. This is about better accountability, smarter accountability, not less accountability.


Well, categorisation—again, the purpose for categorisation is not to make a judgment on a school in the sense of a league table; it's a triage process, categorisation.

Well, this is the issue, isn't it? This is the problem of designing a system where there are perfectly good reasons to introduce the system—and in this case it's a triage system to identify levels of support for a school. But then others come along and turn it into something else that it was never intended to be. And categorisation was never intended to be a way of expressing a league table of school performances; it's there to identify levels of support that a school can expect from its regional consortia. Now, we have, we have—we will continue to keep categorisation, but, since coming into office, we have tried to adapt categorisation simply away from pure data to a more formative assessment process, and categorisation will continue to evolve. The message is very clear: this is not to absolve our system of accountability. And the first level of accountability in that system has to be the professionalism of an individual member of staff—the moral purpose that I bring to my classroom today to do right by the children that are in front of me. That's the first level of our accountability, and therefore we have our new teaching standards. As a leader, we have new leadership standards. That's the first part of our accountability regime—the moral purpose our professionals bring to their work. So, categorisation will stay. Will it evolve? Yes, because it's been evolving over the last three years. This is about better accountability, smarter accountability, not less accountability.

Okay. Well, just finally on that, there may be an argument, then, for scrapping categorisation, putting something else in place. But I suppose the core question is: how are the general public going to understand all those things that you've just mentioned about the teachers being able to teach, the leaders being able to lead, and how well a school is performing against KPIs on those measures?


Well, this is the issue, isn't it? This is the problem of designing a system where there are perfectly good reasons to introduce the system—and in this case it's a triage system to identify levels of support for a school. But then others come along and turn it into something else that it was never intended to be. And categorisation was never intended to be a way of expressing a league table of school performances; it's there to identify levels of support that a school can expect from its regional consortia. Now, we have, we have—we will continue to keep categorisation, but, since coming into office, we have tried to adapt categorisation simply away from pure data to a more formative assessment process, and categorisation will continue to evolve. The message is very clear: this is not to absolve our system of accountability. And the first level of accountability in that system has to be the professionalism of an individual member of staff—the moral purpose that I bring to my classroom today to do right by the children that are in front of me. That's the first level of our accountability, and therefore we have our new teaching standards. As a leader, we have new leadership standards. That's the first part of our accountability regime—the moral purpose our professionals bring to their work. So, categorisation will stay. Will it evolve? Yes, because it's been evolving over the last three years. This is about better accountability, smarter accountability, not less accountability.

Okay. Well, just finally on that, there may be an argument, then, for scrapping categorisation, putting something else in place. But I suppose the core question is: how are the general public going to understand all those things that you've just mentioned about the teachers being able to teach, the leaders being able to lead, and how well a school is performing against KPIs on those measures?

Well, because we will still—. We will still have inspections, won't we?


Well, this is the issue, isn't it? This is the problem of designing a system where there are perfectly good reasons to introduce the system—and in this case it's a triage system to identify levels of support for a school. But then others come along and turn it into something else that it was never intended to be. And categorisation was never intended to be a way of expressing a league table of school performances; it's there to identify levels of support that a school can expect from its regional consortia. Now, we have, we have—we will continue to keep categorisation, but, since coming into office, we have tried to adapt categorisation simply away from pure data to a more formative assessment process, and categorisation will continue to evolve. The message is very clear: this is not to absolve our system of accountability. And the first level of accountability in that system has to be the professionalism of an individual member of staff—the moral purpose that I bring to my classroom today to do right by the children that are in front of me. That's the first level of our accountability, and therefore we have our new teaching standards. As a leader, we have new leadership standards. That's the first part of our accountability regime—the moral purpose our professionals bring to their work. So, categorisation will stay. Will it evolve? Yes, because it's been evolving over the last three years. This is about better accountability, smarter accountability, not less accountability.

Okay. Well, just finally on that, there may be an argument, then, for scrapping categorisation, putting something else in place. But I suppose the core question is: how are the general public going to understand all those things that you've just mentioned about the teachers being able to teach, the leaders being able to lead, and how well a school is performing against KPIs on those measures?

Well, because we will still—. We will still have inspections, won't we?

Okay. So, it's all going to go in through the Estyn reports. This is the kind of detail I'm after.


Okay. Well, just finally on that, there may be an argument, then, for scrapping categorisation, putting something else in place. But I suppose the core question is: how are the general public going to understand all those things that you've just mentioned about the teachers being able to teach, the leaders being able to lead, and how well a school is performing against KPIs on those measures?

Well, because we will still—. We will still have inspections, won't we?

Okay. So, it's all going to go in through the Estyn reports. This is the kind of detail I'm after.

Yes, that's the ultimate, isn't it? So, the ultimate is—. The ultimate system that we're going to get to and the ultimate arbiter and the part of the system that provides public assurance and public confidence ultimately ends in Estyn. But it starts with our teaching standards and the professionalism of individual members of staff. That's where it starts, and it ends in Estyn.


Well, because we will still—. We will still have inspections, won't we?

Okay. So, it's all going to go in through the Estyn reports. This is the kind of detail I'm after.

Yes, that's the ultimate, isn't it? So, the ultimate is—. The ultimate system that we're going to get to and the ultimate arbiter and the part of the system that provides public assurance and public confidence ultimately ends in Estyn. But it starts with our teaching standards and the professionalism of individual members of staff. That's where it starts, and it ends in Estyn.

Okay. Will you just let me have this one?


Okay. So, it's all going to go in through the Estyn reports. This is the kind of detail I'm after.

Yes, that's the ultimate, isn't it? So, the ultimate is—. The ultimate system that we're going to get to and the ultimate arbiter and the part of the system that provides public assurance and public confidence ultimately ends in Estyn. But it starts with our teaching standards and the professionalism of individual members of staff. That's where it starts, and it ends in Estyn.

Okay. Will you just let me have this one?


Yes, that's the ultimate, isn't it? So, the ultimate is—. The ultimate system that we're going to get to and the ultimate arbiter and the part of the system that provides public assurance and public confidence ultimately ends in Estyn. But it starts with our teaching standards and the professionalism of individual members of staff. That's where it starts, and it ends in Estyn.

Okay. Will you just let me have this one?

I don't think I've quite followed that journey. Because I get the point of the end point being Estyn, and that's where the public assurance will be seen, but what about the public assurance at those early steps of the teaching standards and the leadership standards? Where will we see those demonstrated?


Okay. Will you just let me have this one?

I don't think I've quite followed that journey. Because I get the point of the end point being Estyn, and that's where the public assurance will be seen, but what about the public assurance at those early steps of the teaching standards and the leadership standards? Where will we see those demonstrated?

Well, you would expect to see those demonstrated in the self-evaluation that a school will provide of itself, and then Estyn—


I don't think I've quite followed that journey. Because I get the point of the end point being Estyn, and that's where the public assurance will be seen, but what about the public assurance at those early steps of the teaching standards and the leadership standards? Where will we see those demonstrated?

Well, you would expect to see those demonstrated in the self-evaluation that a school will provide of itself, and then Estyn—

All right, so schools will be publishing self-evaluations annually, or something like that?


Well, you would expect to see those demonstrated in the self-evaluation that a school will provide of itself, and then Estyn—

All right, so schools will be publishing self-evaluations annually, or something like that?

The outcome of the self-evaluation is a school development plan. We expect those to be considerably enhanced.


All right, so schools will be publishing self-evaluations annually, or something like that?

The outcome of the self-evaluation is a school development plan. We expect those to be considerably enhanced.


The outcome of the self-evaluation is a school development plan. We expect those to be considerably enhanced.

We expect a series of priorities for a school to set itself as a result of prioritisation. We expect that to be published through the school website, so the outcomes of that. What we're looking at, in terms of what's brought to that, is not a narrow set of measures—just two measures, or one measure in a secondary school. The measures will still consider reflection on progress of children, but it'll also have reviews of mental health, well-being, how it approaches that and things that it wanted to do. It's broadening the evidence base. The school is evaluating—the outcome of that will be a development plan, annually published on the website. Within the plan, they will have a set area of priorities that they will be publishing.


The outcome of the self-evaluation is a school development plan. We expect those to be considerably enhanced.

We expect a series of priorities for a school to set itself as a result of prioritisation. We expect that to be published through the school website, so the outcomes of that. What we're looking at, in terms of what's brought to that, is not a narrow set of measures—just two measures, or one measure in a secondary school. The measures will still consider reflection on progress of children, but it'll also have reviews of mental health, well-being, how it approaches that and things that it wanted to do. It's broadening the evidence base. The school is evaluating—the outcome of that will be a development plan, annually published on the website. Within the plan, they will have a set area of priorities that they will be publishing.

And the schools' ability—whether they do that well or whether they don't do it well—will be judged by Estyn.


We expect a series of priorities for a school to set itself as a result of prioritisation. We expect that to be published through the school website, so the outcomes of that. What we're looking at, in terms of what's brought to that, is not a narrow set of measures—just two measures, or one measure in a secondary school. The measures will still consider reflection on progress of children, but it'll also have reviews of mental health, well-being, how it approaches that and things that it wanted to do. It's broadening the evidence base. The school is evaluating—the outcome of that will be a development plan, annually published on the website. Within the plan, they will have a set area of priorities that they will be publishing.

And the schools' ability—whether they do that well or whether they don't do it well—will be judged by Estyn.


We expect a series of priorities for a school to set itself as a result of prioritisation. We expect that to be published through the school website, so the outcomes of that. What we're looking at, in terms of what's brought to that, is not a narrow set of measures—just two measures, or one measure in a secondary school. The measures will still consider reflection on progress of children, but it'll also have reviews of mental health, well-being, how it approaches that and things that it wanted to do. It's broadening the evidence base. The school is evaluating—the outcome of that will be a development plan, annually published on the website. Within the plan, they will have a set area of priorities that they will be publishing.

And the schools' ability—whether they do that well or whether they don't do it well—will be judged by Estyn.

Okay, as my colleague Chair Dai Lloyd would say, 'Now we're into the needing serious agility territory'. So, we've got some questions on specific areas. Firstly from me: Qualifications Wales have told us that the curriculum must define qualifications rather than the other way around. What implications does that have for the amount of time that is needed to develop qualifications that are properly aligned with the new curriculum?


And the schools' ability—whether they do that well or whether they don't do it well—will be judged by Estyn.

Okay, as my colleague Chair Dai Lloyd would say, 'Now we're into the needing serious agility territory'. So, we've got some questions on specific areas. Firstly from me: Qualifications Wales have told us that the curriculum must define qualifications rather than the other way around. What implications does that have for the amount of time that is needed to develop qualifications that are properly aligned with the new curriculum?

Well, I'd absolutely agree with Qualifications Wales. The qualifications have to arise out of the curriculum, and the qualifications should not be dictating the curriculum. Qualifications Wales, which I met with yesterday, I think—yes, yesterday; it seems a long time ago—will begin their national conversation about reform of qualifications as a result of curriculum reform in November.


Okay, as my colleague Chair Dai Lloyd would say, 'Now we're into the needing serious agility territory'. So, we've got some questions on specific areas. Firstly from me: Qualifications Wales have told us that the curriculum must define qualifications rather than the other way around. What implications does that have for the amount of time that is needed to develop qualifications that are properly aligned with the new curriculum?

Well, I'd absolutely agree with Qualifications Wales. The qualifications have to arise out of the curriculum, and the qualifications should not be dictating the curriculum. Qualifications Wales, which I met with yesterday, I think—yes, yesterday; it seems a long time ago—will begin their national conversation about reform of qualifications as a result of curriculum reform in November.


Okay, as my colleague Chair Dai Lloyd would say, 'Now we're into the needing serious agility territory'. So, we've got some questions on specific areas. Firstly from me: Qualifications Wales have told us that the curriculum must define qualifications rather than the other way around. What implications does that have for the amount of time that is needed to develop qualifications that are properly aligned with the new curriculum?

Well, I'd absolutely agree with Qualifications Wales. The qualifications have to arise out of the curriculum, and the qualifications should not be dictating the curriculum. Qualifications Wales, which I met with yesterday, I think—yes, yesterday; it seems a long time ago—will begin their national conversation about reform of qualifications as a result of curriculum reform in November.

Thank you. How is awareness and understanding of human rights, including children’s rights, being embedded in the new curriculum?


Well, I'd absolutely agree with Qualifications Wales. The qualifications have to arise out of the curriculum, and the qualifications should not be dictating the curriculum. Qualifications Wales, which I met with yesterday, I think—yes, yesterday; it seems a long time ago—will begin their national conversation about reform of qualifications as a result of curriculum reform in November.

Thank you. How is awareness and understanding of human rights, including children’s rights, being embedded in the new curriculum?

Children's rights, human rights—they've been key considerations throughout the design, and this is currently set out in overarching guidance and we continue to work with the children's commissioner's office to map the rights of the child across each area of learning and experience. And I'm delighted that the children's commissioner took the time to write to me during the feedback phase to say that they were very pleased that their initial assessment demonstrates that what we're proposing is a big step forward.


Thank you. How is awareness and understanding of human rights, including children’s rights, being embedded in the new curriculum?

Children's rights, human rights—they've been key considerations throughout the design, and this is currently set out in overarching guidance and we continue to work with the children's commissioner's office to map the rights of the child across each area of learning and experience. And I'm delighted that the children's commissioner took the time to write to me during the feedback phase to say that they were very pleased that their initial assessment demonstrates that what we're proposing is a big step forward.

Thank you. And how do you respond to the concerns expressed in the children's commissioner’s quarterly report of July 2019 that consultation materials for young people were not released until mid June, allowing just over a month for young people to engage? And they said it was disappointing that a plan was not in place at the start of the consultation period.


Thank you. How is awareness and understanding of human rights, including children’s rights, being embedded in the new curriculum?

Children's rights, human rights—they've been key considerations throughout the design, and this is currently set out in overarching guidance and we continue to work with the children's commissioner's office to map the rights of the child across each area of learning and experience. And I'm delighted that the children's commissioner took the time to write to me during the feedback phase to say that they were very pleased that their initial assessment demonstrates that what we're proposing is a big step forward.

Thank you. And how do you respond to the concerns expressed in the children's commissioner’s quarterly report of July 2019 that consultation materials for young people were not released until mid June, allowing just over a month for young people to engage? And they said it was disappointing that a plan was not in place at the start of the consultation period.

Well, we undertook a specific programme of engagement with children and young people, as I said at the beginning. We had over 20 events where focus groups of young children were involved and we had a number of children who took the opportunity to feed back via different mechanisms. The output of that engagement and feedback has been drawn together into a report exploring learners' views about schools and learning. It's a powerful contribution and I think will actually effect change, especially in how the 'what matters' statements are worded.


Children's rights, human rights—they've been key considerations throughout the design, and this is currently set out in overarching guidance and we continue to work with the children's commissioner's office to map the rights of the child across each area of learning and experience. And I'm delighted that the children's commissioner took the time to write to me during the feedback phase to say that they were very pleased that their initial assessment demonstrates that what we're proposing is a big step forward.

Thank you. And how do you respond to the concerns expressed in the children's commissioner’s quarterly report of July 2019 that consultation materials for young people were not released until mid June, allowing just over a month for young people to engage? And they said it was disappointing that a plan was not in place at the start of the consultation period.

Well, we undertook a specific programme of engagement with children and young people, as I said at the beginning. We had over 20 events where focus groups of young children were involved and we had a number of children who took the opportunity to feed back via different mechanisms. The output of that engagement and feedback has been drawn together into a report exploring learners' views about schools and learning. It's a powerful contribution and I think will actually effect change, especially in how the 'what matters' statements are worded.


Thank you. And how do you respond to the concerns expressed in the children's commissioner’s quarterly report of July 2019 that consultation materials for young people were not released until mid June, allowing just over a month for young people to engage? And they said it was disappointing that a plan was not in place at the start of the consultation period.

Well, we undertook a specific programme of engagement with children and young people, as I said at the beginning. We had over 20 events where focus groups of young children were involved and we had a number of children who took the opportunity to feed back via different mechanisms. The output of that engagement and feedback has been drawn together into a report exploring learners' views about schools and learning. It's a powerful contribution and I think will actually effect change, especially in how the 'what matters' statements are worded.


Well, we undertook a specific programme of engagement with children and young people, as I said at the beginning. We had over 20 events where focus groups of young children were involved and we had a number of children who took the opportunity to feed back via different mechanisms. The output of that engagement and feedback has been drawn together into a report exploring learners' views about schools and learning. It's a powerful contribution and I think will actually effect change, especially in how the 'what matters' statements are worded.

Turning to the Welsh dimension in the new curriculum, the Learned Society of Wales has said that there needs to be a directory of resources to implement that Welsh dimension. Do you agree with that and will you be publishing such a resource?


Turning to the Welsh dimension in the new curriculum, the Learned Society of Wales has said that there needs to be a directory of resources to implement that Welsh dimension. Do you agree with that and will you be publishing such a resource?

We have a separate programme of work that is looking at resources that are needed to support the curriculum. It's one of the conversations I had with Qualifications Wales yesterday to try to avoid the debacle that we've had previously, where we have new qualifications and the resources to support those qualifications aren't available. So, we're already having those conversations with Qualifications Wales and there is a piece of work that is ongoing to look at what are the resources that are necessary to support the curriculum. And this proposal by the Learned Society will be considered as part of that work.


Turning to the Welsh dimension in the new curriculum, the Learned Society of Wales has said that there needs to be a directory of resources to implement that Welsh dimension. Do you agree with that and will you be publishing such a resource?

We have a separate programme of work that is looking at resources that are needed to support the curriculum. It's one of the conversations I had with Qualifications Wales yesterday to try to avoid the debacle that we've had previously, where we have new qualifications and the resources to support those qualifications aren't available. So, we're already having those conversations with Qualifications Wales and there is a piece of work that is ongoing to look at what are the resources that are necessary to support the curriculum. And this proposal by the Learned Society will be considered as part of that work.

Okay. And, in terms of the single continuum of learning with regard to the Welsh language, how are progression steps and achievement outcomes in Welsh-medium schools going to work and how are they going to work in English-medium schools?


Turning to the Welsh dimension in the new curriculum, the Learned Society of Wales has said that there needs to be a directory of resources to implement that Welsh dimension. Do you agree with that and will you be publishing such a resource?

We have a separate programme of work that is looking at resources that are needed to support the curriculum. It's one of the conversations I had with Qualifications Wales yesterday to try to avoid the debacle that we've had previously, where we have new qualifications and the resources to support those qualifications aren't available. So, we're already having those conversations with Qualifications Wales and there is a piece of work that is ongoing to look at what are the resources that are necessary to support the curriculum. And this proposal by the Learned Society will be considered as part of that work.

Okay. And, in terms of the single continuum of learning with regard to the Welsh language, how are progression steps and achievement outcomes in Welsh-medium schools going to work and how are they going to work in English-medium schools?

Okay. Just on the Welsh dimension, I think it's really important that whatever resources we have to support the Welsh dimension are really, really, really broad and not confined to specific areas. I was in Swansea University just this week, looking at some of their Technocamp work that they're doing to help us with coding, and we had an amazing conversation about the Welsh contribution to the computing industry. And so my expectation is that that isn't taught in a history lesson—that, actually, when children are learning about coding, they get to hear that Welsh people have been at the forefront of developing this technology. So, that's—. When I talk about a Welsh dimension, I mean right the way across the curriculum, and I think that's important. With regard to—. The continuum for language will have to be contextualised depending on the setting where a child is being taught. We have to recognise—. We have to recognise that, and there will be progression points on that continuum that will be there to show progression both in Welsh language and in the English language, and they have to be contextualised. We recognise that children learning Welsh in a Welsh-medium school, their progressional on that point would be more speedy and quicker, and by the end of primary school they would be in a very different position than a child that was learning Welsh in an English-medium school. Vice versa—we've had this discussion before—if a child is going into Welsh medium, their progression in English perhaps from age three to seven would be very different from a child that was in an English-medium school, although the expectation would be that by 11 they would be in the same position. So, we have to contextualise that learning continuum depending on the medium of tuition with the school, but recognising that it is a progression. It isn't a start and never get any further.


We have a separate programme of work that is looking at resources that are needed to support the curriculum. It's one of the conversations I had with Qualifications Wales yesterday to try to avoid the debacle that we've had previously, where we have new qualifications and the resources to support those qualifications aren't available. So, we're already having those conversations with Qualifications Wales and there is a piece of work that is ongoing to look at what are the resources that are necessary to support the curriculum. And this proposal by the Learned Society will be considered as part of that work.

Okay. And, in terms of the single continuum of learning with regard to the Welsh language, how are progression steps and achievement outcomes in Welsh-medium schools going to work and how are they going to work in English-medium schools?

Okay. Just on the Welsh dimension, I think it's really important that whatever resources we have to support the Welsh dimension are really, really, really broad and not confined to specific areas. I was in Swansea University just this week, looking at some of their Technocamp work that they're doing to help us with coding, and we had an amazing conversation about the Welsh contribution to the computing industry. And so my expectation is that that isn't taught in a history lesson—that, actually, when children are learning about coding, they get to hear that Welsh people have been at the forefront of developing this technology. So, that's—. When I talk about a Welsh dimension, I mean right the way across the curriculum, and I think that's important. With regard to—. The continuum for language will have to be contextualised depending on the setting where a child is being taught. We have to recognise—. We have to recognise that, and there will be progression points on that continuum that will be there to show progression both in Welsh language and in the English language, and they have to be contextualised. We recognise that children learning Welsh in a Welsh-medium school, their progressional on that point would be more speedy and quicker, and by the end of primary school they would be in a very different position than a child that was learning Welsh in an English-medium school. Vice versa—we've had this discussion before—if a child is going into Welsh medium, their progression in English perhaps from age three to seven would be very different from a child that was in an English-medium school, although the expectation would be that by 11 they would be in the same position. So, we have to contextualise that learning continuum depending on the medium of tuition with the school, but recognising that it is a progression. It isn't a start and never get any further.

With regard to the creative thinking element of PISA, I take it that you are adhering to the fact that the Welsh Government is opting out of the creative thinking tests with regard to PISA 2020. I don't entirely understand that because the new curriculum does place great emphasis on creative thinking and independent thinking. So, why not participate in these tests?


Okay. And, in terms of the single continuum of learning with regard to the Welsh language, how are progression steps and achievement outcomes in Welsh-medium schools going to work and how are they going to work in English-medium schools?

Okay. Just on the Welsh dimension, I think it's really important that whatever resources we have to support the Welsh dimension are really, really, really broad and not confined to specific areas. I was in Swansea University just this week, looking at some of their Technocamp work that they're doing to help us with coding, and we had an amazing conversation about the Welsh contribution to the computing industry. And so my expectation is that that isn't taught in a history lesson—that, actually, when children are learning about coding, they get to hear that Welsh people have been at the forefront of developing this technology. So, that's—. When I talk about a Welsh dimension, I mean right the way across the curriculum, and I think that's important. With regard to—. The continuum for language will have to be contextualised depending on the setting where a child is being taught. We have to recognise—. We have to recognise that, and there will be progression points on that continuum that will be there to show progression both in Welsh language and in the English language, and they have to be contextualised. We recognise that children learning Welsh in a Welsh-medium school, their progressional on that point would be more speedy and quicker, and by the end of primary school they would be in a very different position than a child that was learning Welsh in an English-medium school. Vice versa—we've had this discussion before—if a child is going into Welsh medium, their progression in English perhaps from age three to seven would be very different from a child that was in an English-medium school, although the expectation would be that by 11 they would be in the same position. So, we have to contextualise that learning continuum depending on the medium of tuition with the school, but recognising that it is a progression. It isn't a start and never get any further.

With regard to the creative thinking element of PISA, I take it that you are adhering to the fact that the Welsh Government is opting out of the creative thinking tests with regard to PISA 2020. I don't entirely understand that because the new curriculum does place great emphasis on creative thinking and independent thinking. So, why not participate in these tests?

Because, for me, the key factor for making that decision, and I intend to stick to it, is in 2021 we will be expecting schools to be right in the middle of their preparation for the introduction of the new curriculum—


Okay. Just on the Welsh dimension, I think it's really important that whatever resources we have to support the Welsh dimension are really, really, really broad and not confined to specific areas. I was in Swansea University just this week, looking at some of their Technocamp work that they're doing to help us with coding, and we had an amazing conversation about the Welsh contribution to the computing industry. And so my expectation is that that isn't taught in a history lesson—that, actually, when children are learning about coding, they get to hear that Welsh people have been at the forefront of developing this technology. So, that's—. When I talk about a Welsh dimension, I mean right the way across the curriculum, and I think that's important. With regard to—. The continuum for language will have to be contextualised depending on the setting where a child is being taught. We have to recognise—. We have to recognise that, and there will be progression points on that continuum that will be there to show progression both in Welsh language and in the English language, and they have to be contextualised. We recognise that children learning Welsh in a Welsh-medium school, their progressional on that point would be more speedy and quicker, and by the end of primary school they would be in a very different position than a child that was learning Welsh in an English-medium school. Vice versa—we've had this discussion before—if a child is going into Welsh medium, their progression in English perhaps from age three to seven would be very different from a child that was in an English-medium school, although the expectation would be that by 11 they would be in the same position. So, we have to contextualise that learning continuum depending on the medium of tuition with the school, but recognising that it is a progression. It isn't a start and never get any further.

With regard to the creative thinking element of PISA, I take it that you are adhering to the fact that the Welsh Government is opting out of the creative thinking tests with regard to PISA 2020. I don't entirely understand that because the new curriculum does place great emphasis on creative thinking and independent thinking. So, why not participate in these tests?

Because, for me, the key factor for making that decision, and I intend to stick to it, is in 2021 we will be expecting schools to be right in the middle of their preparation for the introduction of the new curriculum—


With regard to the creative thinking element of PISA, I take it that you are adhering to the fact that the Welsh Government is opting out of the creative thinking tests with regard to PISA 2020. I don't entirely understand that because the new curriculum does place great emphasis on creative thinking and independent thinking. So, why not participate in these tests?

Because, for me, the key factor for making that decision, and I intend to stick to it, is in 2021 we will be expecting schools to be right in the middle of their preparation for the introduction of the new curriculum—


Because, for me, the key factor for making that decision, and I intend to stick to it, is in 2021 we will be expecting schools to be right in the middle of their preparation for the introduction of the new curriculum—

So, later on, maybe when this is embedded—


So, later on, maybe when this is embedded—

I think there could well be a different decision at a later date, but at 2021 this is not the right time to do it. Can I just say? In terms of creativity, Wales is seen as an exemplar by the OECD, especially our partnership with the Arts Council of Wales and creative learning through the arts.


So, later on, maybe when this is embedded—

I think there could well be a different decision at a later date, but at 2021 this is not the right time to do it. Can I just say? In terms of creativity, Wales is seen as an exemplar by the OECD, especially our partnership with the Arts Council of Wales and creative learning through the arts.

I get that. That's why I don't understand why we're not actually going for it and showing how good we are through the PISA. But, I understand.


So, later on, maybe when this is embedded—

I think there could well be a different decision at a later date, but at 2021 this is not the right time to do it. Can I just say? In terms of creativity, Wales is seen as an exemplar by the OECD, especially our partnership with the Arts Council of Wales and creative learning through the arts.

I get that. That's why I don't understand why we're not actually going for it and showing how good we are through the PISA. But, I understand.

There could well be a different decision, but for 2021 we're asking enough of people at the moment and this would be an unnecessary addition to cope with. I just don't think that that should be seen as us running away from it because we're worried about a lack of creativity in our education system. The very opposite is true. We are seen as exemplars by the OECD and some of the work that's been going on with creative learning through the schools is now being shared internationally.


I think there could well be a different decision at a later date, but at 2021 this is not the right time to do it. Can I just say? In terms of creativity, Wales is seen as an exemplar by the OECD, especially our partnership with the Arts Council of Wales and creative learning through the arts.

I get that. That's why I don't understand why we're not actually going for it and showing how good we are through the PISA. But, I understand.

There could well be a different decision, but for 2021 we're asking enough of people at the moment and this would be an unnecessary addition to cope with. I just don't think that that should be seen as us running away from it because we're worried about a lack of creativity in our education system. The very opposite is true. We are seen as exemplars by the OECD and some of the work that's been going on with creative learning through the schools is now being shared internationally.

So, you'll think about it for the next round of PISA.


I get that. That's why I don't understand why we're not actually going for it and showing how good we are through the PISA. But, I understand.

There could well be a different decision, but for 2021 we're asking enough of people at the moment and this would be an unnecessary addition to cope with. I just don't think that that should be seen as us running away from it because we're worried about a lack of creativity in our education system. The very opposite is true. We are seen as exemplars by the OECD and some of the work that's been going on with creative learning through the schools is now being shared internationally.

So, you'll think about it for the next round of PISA.

Oh gosh, that shows that Siân thinks that I'll be here to make that decision. [Laughter.] That's very encouraging indeed. [Laughter.]


There could well be a different decision, but for 2021 we're asking enough of people at the moment and this would be an unnecessary addition to cope with. I just don't think that that should be seen as us running away from it because we're worried about a lack of creativity in our education system. The very opposite is true. We are seen as exemplars by the OECD and some of the work that's been going on with creative learning through the schools is now being shared internationally.

So, you'll think about it for the next round of PISA.

Oh gosh, that shows that Siân thinks that I'll be here to make that decision. [Laughter.] That's very encouraging indeed. [Laughter.]

One very quick technical point, Chair. We have not opted out of this. Countries were offered if they wished to take the invite to come into it, and a number of countries across the world are yet to make their decision on this.


So, you'll think about it for the next round of PISA.

Oh gosh, that shows that Siân thinks that I'll be here to make that decision. [Laughter.] That's very encouraging indeed. [Laughter.]

One very quick technical point, Chair. We have not opted out of this. Countries were offered if they wished to take the invite to come into it, and a number of countries across the world are yet to make their decision on this.

Okay, thank you. Janet, you've got a question on physical activity.


Oh gosh, that shows that Siân thinks that I'll be here to make that decision. [Laughter.] That's very encouraging indeed. [Laughter.]

One very quick technical point, Chair. We have not opted out of this. Countries were offered if they wished to take the invite to come into it, and a number of countries across the world are yet to make their decision on this.

Okay, thank you. Janet, you've got a question on physical activity.

Can you give a guarantee that all children and young people, where appropriate, will take part in physical activity under the new curriculum for Wales? Also, how much time per week will the Government expect children and young people to spend undertaking physical activity?


One very quick technical point, Chair. We have not opted out of this. Countries were offered if they wished to take the invite to come into it, and a number of countries across the world are yet to make their decision on this.

Okay, thank you. Janet, you've got a question on physical activity.

Can you give a guarantee that all children and young people, where appropriate, will take part in physical activity under the new curriculum for Wales? Also, how much time per week will the Government expect children and young people to spend undertaking physical activity?

Yes, all children will be given that opportunity, because if they are not then that school would be in breach of the expectations that will be set out in statute.


Okay, thank you. Janet, you've got a question on physical activity.

Can you give a guarantee that all children and young people, where appropriate, will take part in physical activity under the new curriculum for Wales? Also, how much time per week will the Government expect children and young people to spend undertaking physical activity?

Yes, all children will be given that opportunity, because if they are not then that school would be in breach of the expectations that will be set out in statute.


Can you give a guarantee that all children and young people, where appropriate, will take part in physical activity under the new curriculum for Wales? Also, how much time per week will the Government expect children and young people to spend undertaking physical activity?

Yes, all children will be given that opportunity, because if they are not then that school would be in breach of the expectations that will be set out in statute.

Again, Janet, I don't go around monitoring schools now.


Yes, all children will be given that opportunity, because if they are not then that school would be in breach of the expectations that will be set out in statute.

Again, Janet, I don't go around monitoring schools now.

No, but through the systems and mechanisms in place.


Again, Janet, I don't go around monitoring schools now.

No, but through the systems and mechanisms in place.


Again, Janet, I don't go around monitoring schools now.

No, but through the systems and mechanisms in place.

How will you ensure that every child has that opportunity?


No, but through the systems and mechanisms in place.

How will you ensure that every child has that opportunity?

Well, as we've just said, ultimately, we are not getting rid of our school improvement services and regional consortia, nor are we getting rid of Estyn. So, one would expect the quality of the curriculum to be a key consideration of any visit that Estyn would make to a school.


How will you ensure that every child has that opportunity?

Well, as we've just said, ultimately, we are not getting rid of our school improvement services and regional consortia, nor are we getting rid of Estyn. So, one would expect the quality of the curriculum to be a key consideration of any visit that Estyn would make to a school.

Okay, thank you. Suzy, you've got a question on early years.


How will you ensure that every child has that opportunity?

Well, as we've just said, ultimately, we are not getting rid of our school improvement services and regional consortia, nor are we getting rid of Estyn. So, one would expect the quality of the curriculum to be a key consideration of any visit that Estyn would make to a school.

Okay, thank you. Suzy, you've got a question on early years.

Yes. To what extent will the new curriculum allow for the continuity of the way that the foundation phase is taught? Will there be any significant differences and have the early years professionals been involved in the development of the curriculum to date?


Well, as we've just said, ultimately, we are not getting rid of our school improvement services and regional consortia, nor are we getting rid of Estyn. So, one would expect the quality of the curriculum to be a key consideration of any visit that Estyn would make to a school.

Okay, thank you. Suzy, you've got a question on early years.

Yes. To what extent will the new curriculum allow for the continuity of the way that the foundation phase is taught? Will there be any significant differences and have the early years professionals been involved in the development of the curriculum to date?

Yes, early years professionals have been involved in the curriculum to date. One of the advantages, I think, of the new curriculum is to take the pedagogical principles that underpin our approach to early years education actually further into children's educational journey. I'm sure, Suzy, that you've had conversations that—. We have a certain pedagogical approach until the age of seven, and then all of a sudden, at seven, it's like, 'Forget all of that now. Sit down, pick up your pen and do this.' That's been really uncomfortable for many practitioners in our primary sector. So, actually, yes, statutory and non-statutory provision have been involved in the development of the curriculum because, of course, some of this is going to be delivered in the non-statutory sector. I'm very welcoming and supportive of that, but those pedagogical principles will now be available throughout that child's educational journey, rather than the false divide we've got at the moment.


Okay, thank you. Suzy, you've got a question on early years.

Yes. To what extent will the new curriculum allow for the continuity of the way that the foundation phase is taught? Will there be any significant differences and have the early years professionals been involved in the development of the curriculum to date?

Yes, early years professionals have been involved in the curriculum to date. One of the advantages, I think, of the new curriculum is to take the pedagogical principles that underpin our approach to early years education actually further into children's educational journey. I'm sure, Suzy, that you've had conversations that—. We have a certain pedagogical approach until the age of seven, and then all of a sudden, at seven, it's like, 'Forget all of that now. Sit down, pick up your pen and do this.' That's been really uncomfortable for many practitioners in our primary sector. So, actually, yes, statutory and non-statutory provision have been involved in the development of the curriculum because, of course, some of this is going to be delivered in the non-statutory sector. I'm very welcoming and supportive of that, but those pedagogical principles will now be available throughout that child's educational journey, rather than the false divide we've got at the moment.

So, aside from the purposes and the AoLEs, the type of teaching is unlikely to change in the foundation phase settings.


Yes. To what extent will the new curriculum allow for the continuity of the way that the foundation phase is taught? Will there be any significant differences and have the early years professionals been involved in the development of the curriculum to date?

Yes, early years professionals have been involved in the curriculum to date. One of the advantages, I think, of the new curriculum is to take the pedagogical principles that underpin our approach to early years education actually further into children's educational journey. I'm sure, Suzy, that you've had conversations that—. We have a certain pedagogical approach until the age of seven, and then all of a sudden, at seven, it's like, 'Forget all of that now. Sit down, pick up your pen and do this.' That's been really uncomfortable for many practitioners in our primary sector. So, actually, yes, statutory and non-statutory provision have been involved in the development of the curriculum because, of course, some of this is going to be delivered in the non-statutory sector. I'm very welcoming and supportive of that, but those pedagogical principles will now be available throughout that child's educational journey, rather than the false divide we've got at the moment.

So, aside from the purposes and the AoLEs, the type of teaching is unlikely to change in the foundation phase settings.


Yes, early years professionals have been involved in the curriculum to date. One of the advantages, I think, of the new curriculum is to take the pedagogical principles that underpin our approach to early years education actually further into children's educational journey. I'm sure, Suzy, that you've had conversations that—. We have a certain pedagogical approach until the age of seven, and then all of a sudden, at seven, it's like, 'Forget all of that now. Sit down, pick up your pen and do this.' That's been really uncomfortable for many practitioners in our primary sector. So, actually, yes, statutory and non-statutory provision have been involved in the development of the curriculum because, of course, some of this is going to be delivered in the non-statutory sector. I'm very welcoming and supportive of that, but those pedagogical principles will now be available throughout that child's educational journey, rather than the false divide we've got at the moment.

So, aside from the purposes and the AoLEs, the type of teaching is unlikely to change in the foundation phase settings.

Okay. The other end of the scale now: you report that one of the themes of the feedback from further education has been the need to ensure that the transition to post-16 education is supported so that the systems don't just clash against each other. How are you working on the sector at the moment to make sure that there's a decent dovetail?


So, aside from the purposes and the AoLEs, the type of teaching is unlikely to change in the foundation phase settings.

Okay. The other end of the scale now: you report that one of the themes of the feedback from further education has been the need to ensure that the transition to post-16 education is supported so that the systems don't just clash against each other. How are you working on the sector at the moment to make sure that there's a decent dovetail?

Okay. So, that's really important. We don't want to do anything in pre-16 that stops people going on to be successful in post-16, whichever route the child or young person decides to take. FE have been involved in every single AoLE and they're a part of the curriculum and assessment group. So, colleagues in FE have been part of this process throughout. And then in the conversations we had yesterday with Qualifications Wales around what qualifications will look like, I was very keen to take the opportunity to emphasise that any changes to qualifications should be a gateway to further study in FE, whichever type of route the child took. But FE have been involved in this process from the very beginning.


Okay. The other end of the scale now: you report that one of the themes of the feedback from further education has been the need to ensure that the transition to post-16 education is supported so that the systems don't just clash against each other. How are you working on the sector at the moment to make sure that there's a decent dovetail?

Okay. So, that's really important. We don't want to do anything in pre-16 that stops people going on to be successful in post-16, whichever route the child or young person decides to take. FE have been involved in every single AoLE and they're a part of the curriculum and assessment group. So, colleagues in FE have been part of this process throughout. And then in the conversations we had yesterday with Qualifications Wales around what qualifications will look like, I was very keen to take the opportunity to emphasise that any changes to qualifications should be a gateway to further study in FE, whichever type of route the child took. But FE have been involved in this process from the very beginning.

And you're confident they're geared up to accepting young people who have been educated in this way.


Okay. The other end of the scale now: you report that one of the themes of the feedback from further education has been the need to ensure that the transition to post-16 education is supported so that the systems don't just clash against each other. How are you working on the sector at the moment to make sure that there's a decent dovetail?

Okay. So, that's really important. We don't want to do anything in pre-16 that stops people going on to be successful in post-16, whichever route the child or young person decides to take. FE have been involved in every single AoLE and they're a part of the curriculum and assessment group. So, colleagues in FE have been part of this process throughout. And then in the conversations we had yesterday with Qualifications Wales around what qualifications will look like, I was very keen to take the opportunity to emphasise that any changes to qualifications should be a gateway to further study in FE, whichever type of route the child took. But FE have been involved in this process from the very beginning.

And you're confident they're geared up to accepting young people who have been educated in this way.

Yes, absolutely. FE continues to be one of the real strengths of our education system.


Okay. So, that's really important. We don't want to do anything in pre-16 that stops people going on to be successful in post-16, whichever route the child or young person decides to take. FE have been involved in every single AoLE and they're a part of the curriculum and assessment group. So, colleagues in FE have been part of this process throughout. And then in the conversations we had yesterday with Qualifications Wales around what qualifications will look like, I was very keen to take the opportunity to emphasise that any changes to qualifications should be a gateway to further study in FE, whichever type of route the child took. But FE have been involved in this process from the very beginning.

And you're confident they're geared up to accepting young people who have been educated in this way.

Yes, absolutely. FE continues to be one of the real strengths of our education system.


And you're confident they're geared up to accepting young people who have been educated in this way.

Yes, absolutely. FE continues to be one of the real strengths of our education system.

Okay, thank you. We've got a question now on governance arrangements. Suzy, you're down to do that one—sorry, Siân.


Yes, absolutely. FE continues to be one of the real strengths of our education system.

Okay, thank you. We've got a question now on governance arrangements. Suzy, you're down to do that one—sorry, Siân.

I think you actually answered this at the beginning, but just to confirm that you're carrying on with the same governance set-up, the different groups that you've got, and there's nothing being added there or taken away.


Okay, thank you. We've got a question now on governance arrangements. Suzy, you're down to do that one—sorry, Siân.

I think you actually answered this at the beginning, but just to confirm that you're carrying on with the same governance set-up, the different groups that you've got, and there's nothing being added there or taken away.


Okay, thank you. We've got a question now on governance arrangements. Suzy, you're down to do that one—sorry, Siân.

I think you actually answered this at the beginning, but just to confirm that you're carrying on with the same governance set-up, the different groups that you've got, and there's nothing being added there or taken away.

Thank you. And just finally from me, then, on pupil referral units: what arrangements will be in place to ensure that they can benefit from the new curriculum and how is that going to be reflected in the legislation?


I think you actually answered this at the beginning, but just to confirm that you're carrying on with the same governance set-up, the different groups that you've got, and there's nothing being added there or taken away.

Thank you. And just finally from me, then, on pupil referral units: what arrangements will be in place to ensure that they can benefit from the new curriculum and how is that going to be reflected in the legislation?

Okay. So, we've been taking advice from Brett Pugh, who chairs the education otherwise than at school improvement group, and this has been an area where we've had to think really, really, really, really, really hard. So, what we intend to do for EOTAS and PRU is to set a minimum of what we would expect a child to receive. So, that would be around the four purposes; that would be around the cross-cutting themes of literacy, numeracy and digital competency and health and well-being. So, that would be the baseline of our expectation, that every pupil would get that. After that, then there needs to be a discussion and a focus on what is in the best interests of that particular pupil. One of the things we know about sometimes in EOTAS is we have very able and talented students who don't get access to the range of qualifications and courses that they have the capability and the aptitude to do. We also have to consider, though, that for some children they may be out of school for reasons, and telling them that they've got to do a full curriculum may be hugely detrimental to their mental health and well-being. So, for instance, to give an example, you could have a child who's very ill, and saying to them, 'You have to carry the full load of a curriculum' could be inappropriate. So, we'll be setting a minimum standard, as I said, around the purposes, around the cross-cutting themes and health and well-being, and then there will be an expectation that in conjunction with the child and the family an appropriate addition would be put in place to meet the needs of that child, recognising that they could have very different needs. Is that clear?


Thank you. And just finally from me, then, on pupil referral units: what arrangements will be in place to ensure that they can benefit from the new curriculum and how is that going to be reflected in the legislation?

Okay. So, we've been taking advice from Brett Pugh, who chairs the education otherwise than at school improvement group, and this has been an area where we've had to think really, really, really, really, really hard. So, what we intend to do for EOTAS and PRU is to set a minimum of what we would expect a child to receive. So, that would be around the four purposes; that would be around the cross-cutting themes of literacy, numeracy and digital competency and health and well-being. So, that would be the baseline of our expectation, that every pupil would get that. After that, then there needs to be a discussion and a focus on what is in the best interests of that particular pupil. One of the things we know about sometimes in EOTAS is we have very able and talented students who don't get access to the range of qualifications and courses that they have the capability and the aptitude to do. We also have to consider, though, that for some children they may be out of school for reasons, and telling them that they've got to do a full curriculum may be hugely detrimental to their mental health and well-being. So, for instance, to give an example, you could have a child who's very ill, and saying to them, 'You have to carry the full load of a curriculum' could be inappropriate. So, we'll be setting a minimum standard, as I said, around the purposes, around the cross-cutting themes and health and well-being, and then there will be an expectation that in conjunction with the child and the family an appropriate addition would be put in place to meet the needs of that child, recognising that they could have very different needs. Is that clear?

Well, yes, and it's something that we'll probably look to build on when we look at our inquiry on EOTAS, which is coming up. Thank you. That concludes our questions. We've covered a lot of ground. So, can I thank you for attending and thank your officials for coming today? As usual, we will send you a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again, all of you, for your attendance this morning.


Okay. So, we've been taking advice from Brett Pugh, who chairs the education otherwise than at school improvement group, and this has been an area where we've had to think really, really, really, really, really hard. So, what we intend to do for EOTAS and PRU is to set a minimum of what we would expect a child to receive. So, that would be around the four purposes; that would be around the cross-cutting themes of literacy, numeracy and digital competency and health and well-being. So, that would be the baseline of our expectation, that every pupil would get that. After that, then there needs to be a discussion and a focus on what is in the best interests of that particular pupil. One of the things we know about sometimes in EOTAS is we have very able and talented students who don't get access to the range of qualifications and courses that they have the capability and the aptitude to do. We also have to consider, though, that for some children they may be out of school for reasons, and telling them that they've got to do a full curriculum may be hugely detrimental to their mental health and well-being. So, for instance, to give an example, you could have a child who's very ill, and saying to them, 'You have to carry the full load of a curriculum' could be inappropriate. So, we'll be setting a minimum standard, as I said, around the purposes, around the cross-cutting themes and health and well-being, and then there will be an expectation that in conjunction with the child and the family an appropriate addition would be put in place to meet the needs of that child, recognising that they could have very different needs. Is that clear?

Well, yes, and it's something that we'll probably look to build on when we look at our inquiry on EOTAS, which is coming up. Thank you. That concludes our questions. We've covered a lot of ground. So, can I thank you for attending and thank your officials for coming today? As usual, we will send you a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again, all of you, for your attendance this morning.


Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders. I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome Suzy Davies to the committee, and to thank Mark Reckless and Darren Millar, who have left us, for their service and hard work as members of the committee. Can I ask whether there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We will move on then to our evidence session on our inquiry into the impact of Brexit on higher and further education. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams, Cabinet Secretary for Education, and Eluned Morgan AM, Minister for Welsh Language and Lifelong Learning. Can I just ask you to introduce your officials for the record, please?

Bore da, Lynne, and thank you for the invitation to join you. Eluned and I are joined this morning by Huw Morris, who's the group director at SHELL—skills, higher education and lifelong learning—and Marie Knox, who is deputy director, overseeing European transition.

Okay, thank you very much, and thank you for coming. We'll go straight into questions, then, and the first questions are from Suzy Davies.


Bore da, Lynne, and thank you for the invitation to join you. Eluned and I are joined this morning by Huw Morris, who's the group director at SHELL—skills, higher education and lifelong learning—and Marie Knox, who is deputy director, overseeing European transition.

Okay, thank you very much, and thank you for coming. We'll go straight into questions, then, and the first questions are from Suzy Davies.

Thank you. I'd like to ask you both, if that's okay, a little bit about preparedness. But if I could start with higher education, I understand that—I don't know, it must be about 18 months ago now—Ken Skates told another committee in this place that there had been nine sector analyses done. Presumably, one of those was HE, because of the—well, Welsh Government had a presence, and still does, in Brussels, related to higher education. Apparently, those have now been superseded by work that's been done by Cardiff University. I don't know if you've got any comments on that research, or whether it's been brought to your attention yet.


Bore da, Lynne, and thank you for the invitation to join you. Eluned and I are joined this morning by Huw Morris, who's the group director at SHELL—skills, higher education and lifelong learning—and Marie Knox, who is deputy director, overseeing European transition.

Okay, thank you very much, and thank you for coming. We'll go straight into questions, then, and the first questions are from Suzy Davies.

Thank you. I'd like to ask you both, if that's okay, a little bit about preparedness. But if I could start with higher education, I understand that—I don't know, it must be about 18 months ago now—Ken Skates told another committee in this place that there had been nine sector analyses done. Presumably, one of those was HE, because of the—well, Welsh Government had a presence, and still does, in Brussels, related to higher education. Apparently, those have now been superseded by work that's been done by Cardiff University. I don't know if you've got any comments on that research, or whether it's been brought to your attention yet.

Well, Suzy, following the vote, I was very keen that we work very closely with colleagues in higher education and further education, to get an understanding from on the ground about the potential impact. So, in terms of preparedness, we started that group in the September, and that work from that group, which includes both HE and FE, has been instrumental in helping the Government form its views, which were articulated in the Government's White Paper, 'Securing Wales' Future'. There has been ongoing work being done—as the debate in London and Europe becomes a little bit more clear, then it becomes a little less clear, and then a little bit more clear, but, bearing in mind the difficulties of working in an ever-changing field, we have been refining those approaches. Each institution has been looking at their own institution, because, as you can imagine, although we have an overview of the sector, the challenges are very different for individual institutions—so their exposure, for instance, to the number of European Union students that they have at their college, or the work that they might be doing with Horizon 2020, or their success—and there has been considerable success in the HE field in securing structural funds for various projects—the exposure and the potential impact of leaving the EU, in a 'no deal' or in a 'deal' scenario, is very, very different. But I don't know if, Huw, you want to talk any further.


Okay, thank you very much, and thank you for coming. We'll go straight into questions, then, and the first questions are from Suzy Davies.

Thank you. I'd like to ask you both, if that's okay, a little bit about preparedness. But if I could start with higher education, I understand that—I don't know, it must be about 18 months ago now—Ken Skates told another committee in this place that there had been nine sector analyses done. Presumably, one of those was HE, because of the—well, Welsh Government had a presence, and still does, in Brussels, related to higher education. Apparently, those have now been superseded by work that's been done by Cardiff University. I don't know if you've got any comments on that research, or whether it's been brought to your attention yet.

Well, Suzy, following the vote, I was very keen that we work very closely with colleagues in higher education and further education, to get an understanding from on the ground about the potential impact. So, in terms of preparedness, we started that group in the September, and that work from that group, which includes both HE and FE, has been instrumental in helping the Government form its views, which were articulated in the Government's White Paper, 'Securing Wales' Future'. There has been ongoing work being done—as the debate in London and Europe becomes a little bit more clear, then it becomes a little less clear, and then a little bit more clear, but, bearing in mind the difficulties of working in an ever-changing field, we have been refining those approaches. Each institution has been looking at their own institution, because, as you can imagine, although we have an overview of the sector, the challenges are very different for individual institutions—so their exposure, for instance, to the number of European Union students that they have at their college, or the work that they might be doing with Horizon 2020, or their success—and there has been considerable success in the HE field in securing structural funds for various projects—the exposure and the potential impact of leaving the EU, in a 'no deal' or in a 'deal' scenario, is very, very different. But I don't know if, Huw, you want to talk any further.

Maybe just to use the 'no deal' scenario is probably the easiest, isn't it?


Thank you. I'd like to ask you both, if that's okay, a little bit about preparedness. But if I could start with higher education, I understand that—I don't know, it must be about 18 months ago now—Ken Skates told another committee in this place that there had been nine sector analyses done. Presumably, one of those was HE, because of the—well, Welsh Government had a presence, and still does, in Brussels, related to higher education. Apparently, those have now been superseded by work that's been done by Cardiff University. I don't know if you've got any comments on that research, or whether it's been brought to your attention yet.

Well, Suzy, following the vote, I was very keen that we work very closely with colleagues in higher education and further education, to get an understanding from on the ground about the potential impact. So, in terms of preparedness, we started that group in the September, and that work from that group, which includes both HE and FE, has been instrumental in helping the Government form its views, which were articulated in the Government's White Paper, 'Securing Wales' Future'. There has been ongoing work being done—as the debate in London and Europe becomes a little bit more clear, then it becomes a little less clear, and then a little bit more clear, but, bearing in mind the difficulties of working in an ever-changing field, we have been refining those approaches. Each institution has been looking at their own institution, because, as you can imagine, although we have an overview of the sector, the challenges are very different for individual institutions—so their exposure, for instance, to the number of European Union students that they have at their college, or the work that they might be doing with Horizon 2020, or their success—and there has been considerable success in the HE field in securing structural funds for various projects—the exposure and the potential impact of leaving the EU, in a 'no deal' or in a 'deal' scenario, is very, very different. But I don't know if, Huw, you want to talk any further.

Maybe just to use the 'no deal' scenario is probably the easiest, isn't it?


Well, Suzy, following the vote, I was very keen that we work very closely with colleagues in higher education and further education, to get an understanding from on the ground about the potential impact. So, in terms of preparedness, we started that group in the September, and that work from that group, which includes both HE and FE, has been instrumental in helping the Government form its views, which were articulated in the Government's White Paper, 'Securing Wales' Future'. There has been ongoing work being done—as the debate in London and Europe becomes a little bit more clear, then it becomes a little less clear, and then a little bit more clear, but, bearing in mind the difficulties of working in an ever-changing field, we have been refining those approaches. Each institution has been looking at their own institution, because, as you can imagine, although we have an overview of the sector, the challenges are very different for individual institutions—so their exposure, for instance, to the number of European Union students that they have at their college, or the work that they might be doing with Horizon 2020, or their success—and there has been considerable success in the HE field in securing structural funds for various projects—the exposure and the potential impact of leaving the EU, in a 'no deal' or in a 'deal' scenario, is very, very different. But I don't know if, Huw, you want to talk any further.

Maybe just to use the 'no deal' scenario is probably the easiest, isn't it?

Well, yes, because that's the worst-case scenario, so let's look at that one.


Maybe just to use the 'no deal' scenario is probably the easiest, isn't it?

Well, yes, because that's the worst-case scenario, so let's look at that one.

As the Cabinet Secretary mentioned, the higher education Brexit working group's been meeting since September 2016 and has been looking at that in general. More recently, when the prospect of no deal became talked about, officials have been visiting individual institutions to talk to them about their preparedness for that. As you'll be aware, the funding for much of the activity is secured, we believe, even under a 'no deal' scenario, until December 2020; that's a letter we had from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. I think the research you're referring to may be research that Cardiff University has been doing with the Bevan Foundation and others. I know there's a report due to be launched later today. We have been doing our own research and looking at the impact on HE, FE and apprenticeship providers.


Well, yes, because that's the worst-case scenario, so let's look at that one.

As the Cabinet Secretary mentioned, the higher education Brexit working group's been meeting since September 2016 and has been looking at that in general. More recently, when the prospect of no deal became talked about, officials have been visiting individual institutions to talk to them about their preparedness for that. As you'll be aware, the funding for much of the activity is secured, we believe, even under a 'no deal' scenario, until December 2020; that's a letter we had from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. I think the research you're referring to may be research that Cardiff University has been doing with the Bevan Foundation and others. I know there's a report due to be launched later today. We have been doing our own research and looking at the impact on HE, FE and apprenticeship providers.

Well, that's really helpful because my understanding was that this Cardiff University research had superseded all those nine sector analyses.


Well, yes, because that's the worst-case scenario, so let's look at that one.

As the Cabinet Secretary mentioned, the higher education Brexit working group's been meeting since September 2016 and has been looking at that in general. More recently, when the prospect of no deal became talked about, officials have been visiting individual institutions to talk to them about their preparedness for that. As you'll be aware, the funding for much of the activity is secured, we believe, even under a 'no deal' scenario, until December 2020; that's a letter we had from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. I think the research you're referring to may be research that Cardiff University has been doing with the Bevan Foundation and others. I know there's a report due to be launched later today. We have been doing our own research and looking at the impact on HE, FE and apprenticeship providers.

Well, that's really helpful because my understanding was that this Cardiff University research had superseded all those nine sector analyses.

That may be true for the economy brief. Certainly, there are published papers by Max Munday and a team at Cardiff University on the impact of Brexit on the Welsh economy, but for HE and FE and apprenticeship provision, it's as the Cabinet Secretary outlined.


As the Cabinet Secretary mentioned, the higher education Brexit working group's been meeting since September 2016 and has been looking at that in general. More recently, when the prospect of no deal became talked about, officials have been visiting individual institutions to talk to them about their preparedness for that. As you'll be aware, the funding for much of the activity is secured, we believe, even under a 'no deal' scenario, until December 2020; that's a letter we had from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. I think the research you're referring to may be research that Cardiff University has been doing with the Bevan Foundation and others. I know there's a report due to be launched later today. We have been doing our own research and looking at the impact on HE, FE and apprenticeship providers.

Well, that's really helpful because my understanding was that this Cardiff University research had superseded all those nine sector analyses.

That may be true for the economy brief. Certainly, there are published papers by Max Munday and a team at Cardiff University on the impact of Brexit on the Welsh economy, but for HE and FE and apprenticeship provision, it's as the Cabinet Secretary outlined.

So, are there any formal risk assessments that are available for us to scrutinise, for example? For HE and FE for that matter.