Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Good morning and welcome to today's meeting of the Children, Young People and Education Committee. The Chair of the committee, Buffy Williams, has sent her apologies, so the first item on today's agenda is the election of a temporary Chair. Under Standing Order 17.22, I call for nominations for a temporary Chair for today's meeting.

I'm happy to nominate Vaughan.

Thank you very much. Are there any other nominations?

I'll second that.

I can see that there are not. Are there any objections? I can see that there are not. In that case, I invite Vaughan to take the chair.

Thank you very much.

Can I just check, before we go into business, are there any declarations of interest from Members? No. Excellent.

We move on to agenda item 2, which is a scrutiny session with Estyn on its annual report. I welcome Estyn and the team. I shall ask Owen to introduce himself and then members of the team. 

Bore da. Good morning. Owen Evans, chief inspector at Estyn.

Hello. I'm Liz Miles, I'm an assistant director at Estyn.  

Bore da. I'm Claire Morgan, strategic director at Estyn.

Bore da. Jassa Scott, the other strategic director at Estyn.

Fantastic. Thank you very much, and thank you for your annual report. We've got questions allocated to different Members. We're going to go straight into the first set of questions, which is from Natasha Asghar.

Thank you, Chair. Good morning, everybody. Your report highlights persistent weaknesses in literacy, numeracy and core skills across the sector. So, I'd just like to ask for your perspective as to just how serious is the position on literacy, in your view. Does Estyn plan to support improvements across the system, for example through the sharing of best practice? Your report shows that some of the sectors in some settings aren't really getting it right. 

I'll say a few words, Chair, then I'll pass over to colleagues. It is an issue. I think that's the first thing we have to recognise. In the work that we do across not only schools, but across the whole portfolio, we're seeing that learners are not attaining what they should be, either at that age group or when they move off to either college, university or to work. That's why, for the first time in a long time, this year, we've announced that we are going to have a specific focus as part of our entire work around reading. We think it's got to the point where we probably need to prioritise some of the basic skills.

Working in collaboration with the Government—because one of the things I'm very keen not to do is have Estyn doing one thing and Welsh Government doing another thing, because there is confusion sometimes around priorities—we're very clear that we are prioritising basic skills for improvement. One of the things that we do is look internationally at best practice and what works. One of the things that we've seen from some of the highest performing systems is that what they have done is have a sustained priority around some of those basic skills. I'll pass to Liz around primary and then to Claire for secondary, and post-16 is also an element of this that we need to cover.

You are correct that there is some exceptionally good practice across Wales, particularly around literacy and numeracy. In those schools, it's central to their curriculum. There's a culture, there's the leadership that understands what good looks like. But as Owen said, we do see variation. We see inconsistency. A lot of that can be linked to a lack of professional learning. All schools are in need of—. Well, some schools are in need of additional guidance, particularly around what the expectations are around certain age ranges.

I know that when my colleagues came last year, they talked about clear age-related expectations. We're still not at that stage yet. If a primary school doesn't understand what the average five, six, seven-year-old should attain, then sometimes their planning doesn't meet the needs of that learner. Then, if their assessment skills aren't where you'd want them to be, they don't think to look up: 'If this child is achieving the average, where should we go next?' or 'How do we then use our assessments to support those learners who are struggling?'

Also around literacy, which, again, we said last year, yes, we agree with the systematic development of phonetical skills, which will help and support most learners to decode, we still have an issue nationally with pupils advancing their reading skills, so reading for meaning, reading for understanding. And particularly as you get to upper primary and lower secondary, those skills are not developed well enough. And again, that's where a national professional learning programme would support practitioners.

I think Liz has covered most of the issues. There is a lot more work to be done around reading. And as Owen said, that's why we're having a three-year focus. But alongside that communication of a three-year focus, we're also training all our external inspectors. We have a staff of about 80 inspectors internally, but we've got a workforce of current practitioners in schools—they're mostly headteachers—who work with us as peer inspectors. In the summer, as part of their update programme, there'll be about 400 or 500 of them. We'll also deliver professional learning for the development of reading skills to that workforce as well, just to support the system, and, as Liz rightly said, the importance of having a consistent message between policy, inspection and what's happening in the classroom. So, we'll be supporting in that way as well.

Owen, you mentioned in your first response to me that you're using international examples. For the benefit of the committee, can you just share with the committee what are some of the countries that you perhaps have looked at that have a really good status of education that you'd like to embed here in Wales?

I will take a basket of three or four. If you look at Ireland, if you look at Estonia, if you look at South Korea, all are vastly different systems. You could look at Denmark, you could look at Norway—I could go on. All are vastly different systems. If you compare Estonia or Finland with South Korea, one is completely autocratic, one is very much control is in the school itself. But they tend to have one thing in common, all of these systems. They tend to have very clearly defined progression steps and age-related expectations, but they also have—and this is something I know the committee has written about—quite sophisticated assessment methods for ensuring that pupils are reaching those expectations.

What we've spoken about is we do quite strongly believe that we need those—this is not the first time we've said this—clear age-related expectations. But we also need some method to be able to work out how the system is performing. There is a spectrum of how you do that, from the very dictatorial, 'Right, we will have assessment right across all years that are nationally published.' I'm not sure that's the way forward, but I quite like systems, for example, like Estonia, where what they would have is one national test that's published at primary and one set that's published in secondary, because that allows you to try and get at the system up and down.

I think if you're looking at those systems, and this is pretty broad, what we see is that the fundamental infrastructure of the most successful systems that we see is that they all have that clear understanding of where to get to and that clear understanding of where they are.

And do you think we're there?

No.

Okay, thank you very much. I like the openness and I do appreciate the honesty. This time last year, you told us that you were very concerned about numeracy and the teaching of mathematics. A year on, I'd like to know, and I'm sure the committee would as well, based on what Estyn has observed, do you believe things are going in the right direction? And do you feel that the Welsh Government's mathematics and numeracy plan is indeed making a difference?

We think we're going in the right direction, but it's still in development. When we see good numeracy in schools, it is always underpinned by high-quality teaching of mathematics. Where children make progress in mathematics, it is because of high-quality teaching. There is still a lot of work to be done to build up the skills of our teachers of mathematics.

We know it's a shortage area in secondary schools, and recruitment is a challenge. You often have people teaching their second subject as maths. Where that works, there is high-quality professional learning, there's coaching, there's mentoring, there's support. But there are high expectations of pupils in mathematics in those schools.

We've got some pockets of really excellent practice across Wales, but there is still too much variation. We are going in the right direction, but there is more professional learning needed. We've had ongoing discussions with the Welsh Government about a national approach, about having a national, more systematic approach to professional learning, where you have experts right across Wales, building the skills of all maths teachers, both in secondary and in primary schools.

We've also supported the system. Recently, we partnered with Dysgu to run a maths roadshow, which was very well received. But we also recognise that, as an organisation, we've got a lot of expertise in-house in Estyn. So, we have agreed to release one of our maths specialists part-time to the Welsh Government to work on the development of mathematical and numeracy skills, and they are currently in the Welsh Government but about to join the Dysgu team as well. But, yes, we are going in the right direction, but there's still a lot of work to be done to improve standards in mathematics.

Owen, you wanted to come in.

It's just to say that this isn't necessarily a Welsh problem, because a number of other systems are facing the same. But if you're looking across the spectrum, right from ITE, we're identifying that some of the primary candidates going through into schools now, their understanding of mathematical concepts can be quite weak.

So, you've got that issue. You've then got teachers. We know that there's a paucity of maths teachers or skilled maths teachers in the system. We know that typically, because of scarcity, they'll be focused at key stage 4, and so the professional learning, actually, and the upskilling of what we've got, but also bringing in people with those skills, is actually a priority, and I think we probably need to be doing more on that. For example, with us doing roadshows with Dysgu, I don't think it's Estyn's natural work to be providing that sort of school support, but, at the moment, as the new school improvement programme beds in, as Dysgu finds its feet about what it's to be doing, I think it was just a positive step, that, 'Look, the system does need some support on maths. We have the resources and facilities, we will run that.' But I see it as something that eventually hands over to other people.

Claire mentioned the roadshow, and you've just touched upon it as well. Can you share with us a little bit more information—obviously, I appreciate you did the roadshow and you had a good turnout from what you said—and can you tell us a little bit about what you wanted to achieve from this roadshow, and did you achieve it at the end of the day?

Whether we achieve it, we'll see, because we will be evaluating. But, in fairness, a number of local authorities actually came to us, asking, 'Would you provide us some guidance on what "good" looks like for maths tuition, particularly in secondary?' So, we ran four roadshows, one in each corner of Wales. We invited and we targeted middle leaders and maths teachers, so it would have been heads of department, hopefully with the concept of 'train the trainer'. We had, effectively, full courses in each of the areas—one in the morning, one in the afternoon. But it was about mathematical teaching pedagogy. Now, with them going back to their schools, through either interim visits or the core inspections, you know, we’re going to be seeing if those principles are embedded, because one of the messages we said quite clearly at the start of every single one was, 'Today changes nothing; you have to take these principles back to your setting and make sure you enact them.' So, long term, we'll see, but I think the approach of having consistent, high-quality professional learning in some of those key skills is something that we probably need to pursue, and I think Dysgu, in fairness, are quite keen to do that.

Okay. You mentioned, obviously, the results of this aren't going to be seen, but when are they likely to be seen by us?

Education takes a while to bed in. That's one thing we do know. You'd hope that, if you can provide—. Two things: first of all, consistent priority around basic skills—that's one of the things I think we've lacked over years, and I think the Government are getting around to it now, but I think we've lacked; coupled to the fact that you have repeated training—as I said, one day is not going to change anything, and you have to have this repeated support, and actually support sometimes in the classroom itself for teachers, coupled to strong self-evaluation. If you can couple some of these concepts together, then you start seeing traction and you start seeing things improve. Just providing maths tuition on one day isn't going to change the world. What we need to see is that those teachers are equipped to evaluate, to embed that practice, to share that practice, and that's what we'd like to see more long term.

Okay. Thank you very much for your response. How would you characterise the current national picture on digital skills development, given your findings that competence remains less secure than literacy and numeracy in Wales, and what actions are going to be taken across the system to secure constant skills progression across the sector and in alignment with the digital competence framework? 

I'll pick that one up. Thanks, Natasha. So, in our inspections, it's quite rare that we make recommendations around improving pupils' digital skills, but there are a few instances where schools—and usually primary—are not planning progressively enough for digital skills, and that means the development of children and young people is fragmented, and the application of those skills is patchy, and there are gaps quite often in planning in terms of that digital competence framework skills, and particularly the computational science elements as well. We're starting to see a little bit better professional learning in terms of things like coding. So, we're seeing a bit more of that, particularly at the top end of primary school. But there are some particular aspects that were quite neglected, in terms of things like spreadsheets, databases, some of that control technology. So, I think, overall, it's a bit of a patchy picture.

I think the other thing in relation to some of that that is starting to impact is AI and how that is feeding into some of that work. You may be aware that we had a report that we published in October, looking at that early emerging use of AI across the system. And there were some quite interesting messages: some quite positive aspects around teacher workload and some of that used to support planning; some quite positive aspects around things like adapting resources for differentiation and things like that, and, in some ways, that is helping to improve accessibility and inclusion. But I think there were certainly some areas for concern as well that were emerging from that. It's at quite an early stage and it's not being planned very strategically in many instances in terms of how AI may start to support the work of the school. 

You just mentioned areas of concern. What were some of the ones that you picked up on?

Okay, so, apart from that not being planned strategically, I think, in particular, one of the areas of concern is that it's being used more and more without professional learning. So, we've talked already in a number of places about the importance of professional learning, and AI is only there as an enabler to support good teaching and learning. And if it's not embedded in effective pedagogy, then there's actually a risk that it will impact negatively on teaching and learning, and that, for example, pupils may be over-relying on it, which might reduce independence, critical thinking, and some of that deeper learning, if it's not carefully managed. It can be used to enhance some of those things as well. Where it's used really well, it can actually enhance independent thinking—all that kind of stuff.

So, I think there is a need for better recognition of the potential, but also some of the risks in terms of how it can impact on pupils' cognitive development and learning overall, and, at the moment, there's a bit of an absence of a professional learning programme and a very clear framework of support, I think, to help that embed and be used in the most constructive way.

Okay. Thank you very much for that. The report highlights that, although progression is strong in Welsh immersion and Welsh-medium settings, Welsh language oracy skills in English language schools still remain pretty weak. So, with over a quarter of primary schools receiving recommendations, I'd like to know what measures will, can or should be put in place to address these weaknesses?  

Do you want to start?

Yes, if I start, then perhaps I'll hand over. I think, probably, if you were to point at one thing it's the fact that teaching Welsh as a second language at the moment is not particularly strong, and we know that, and this is what we see day in, day out. And having met with newly qualified teachers, who are expected to teach through Welsh, frequently their biggest worry is will the pupils know more than them.

So, where we see shortages in staff in some areas, it is particularly acute in having people with sufficient Welsh language knowledge. And I think one of the things, as part of the 1 million target, is that we're going to have to see, if we're going to tackle this, increasing resources put into upskilling the present cohort of teachers and their Welsh language skills to ensure that that knowledge and experience actually can embed itself in pupils. So, I think this has to be a long-term project, actually, and investment.

Yes, and, interestingly, we're doing a piece of thematic work at the moment—a themed inspection of the National Centre for Learning Welsh—particularly looking at that support that they're providing for education professionals in schools. So, we're in the middle of the fieldwork for that, so that will be really interesting. They've only picked that up relatively recently, as a body, in terms of one of the programmes they've been asked to deliver, but it'll be interesting to see how that's embedding to tackle that issue.

I think, at a school level, it's some of the same issues—what we're not seeing is that planning that actually enables progression and has very clear planned development of those skills over time. What we see in the worst cases is pupils looping back to the same skills, rather than actually extending over their education lifetime, I guess, those Welsh language skills. There are slightly different issues in primary and secondary. We see that speaking is quite well focused in primary; less so in secondary. In primary, I think that progressive planning is the key bit. 

You mentioned the thematic research that is taking place there. Can you just give us a bit of a timeline as to what your targets are and the time frame of doing the research to actually seeing it through to fruition, at the end of the day? Would you share that with the committee?

Yes. So, we're doing the field work at the moment, and I think that that concludes around May time—April/May time. I can't remember the exact date when the report is planned to be published, but it will be either at the end of the summer or I think it might be right at the start of the autumn term. But I can check and provide that to you as a committee.

That would be helpful. 

Just to add, quickly, at the end, a lot of this is down to leadership as well. We've seen fantastic practice in schools, where they've begun with a very low base of Welsh language understanding, but, through leadership, through embracing the Welsh language, you've got teachers who have taken a lot of time to learn the language themselves, who have embedded that culture around the school, and you can see fantastic practice coming from that. And we've shared some of that best practice. For last year's annual report, we launched some of the results in a school demonstrating some of those skills. It can be done, but we do need that balance, really, between strong leadership and also support for those teachers.

Great. Thank you so much for that. Your thematic report on increasing the use of Welsh in post-16 sectors found that—and I'm sorry my Welsh is atrocious—Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol—you know what I'm talking about—schemes have been effective at targeting lower levels of Welsh language skills as opposed to developing beyond that. Have you seen any progress in regard to that over the last year?

I don't know, because we haven't specifically gone back and relooked at it in terms of that evidence. We have just done a couple of FE inspections over the last—. We're just doing one now and we're doing one in a couple of weeks. We haven't done any inspections in FE colleges, so I think those inspections will give us a really good insight to see whether that has shifted forward a bit, because that's part of a national programme to upskill staff across FE and apprenticeships in terms of that better understanding. It was starting to have a little bit of an impact, but it's still quite early days and there's still a long way to go in terms of post-16 sectors and bilingual and Welsh medium, which is a separate issue to what you're asking about really. But it will be a year on, so it'll be really interesting to see, on these couple of inspections, whether that has moved on. So, we can let you know.

Great. A final question from me. I love my social media—it's a great thing to do and it's also a very time-consuming thing to do. But I came across an image on Twitter, and I think many members of the committee have seen it as well. It was prepared by an MP and showed absenteeism levels in civil service departments, and on this graph it showed that Estyn had the highest level of absenteeism, compared to other organisations. Is this something that you want to comment on, or say anything about that, to defend the record that you hold or something on that basis, because we'd love to know your input on that?

Yes, I'm perfectly happy to. It's not, clearly, one that we'd warm to, but if I can just give you some context. The first thing is that, if you look at the organisations listed, we are a minnow amongst them. And to be quite honest about that period, we had two members of staff who, unfortunately, were on long-term sick. If you looked at our results today and compared them to March, when those figures were published, we're about the same as Ofsted. So, we had a period when we had, unfortunately, two members of staff who were ill and who were on long-term sick. That skewed our figures enormously, unfortunately. We just have to accept that sometimes. We're a small organisation and these things happen. But I'm pleased to note that, now that the situation has resolved for those two individuals, we're more or less the same as Ofsted now. So, I don't think it's a particular issue. But the figures back in March last year were pretty stark.

So, next year, basically, if the graph is ever redone, we should see you at the top of it, as opposed to the bottom.

Not at the top, but middling. 

Okay. Fair enough. Thank you very much, Chair. 

With the majority.

Okay. Fine. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. We've now got another set of questions from Cefin Campbell. 

Thank you. Just to go back on what Owen said, where we find weaknesses in teaching, a lot of that can be linked back to leadership that haven't put in place coherent, progressive planning from one year group to the next and then ensured that teachers have the right amount of professional learning to be able to deliver those plans. And, again, it's about the progressive development, but knowing where your children are, knowing where your strengths are in terms of your practice in the school, and then putting in remedial issues and support for those teachers who aren't able to reach the standards. And we can link it back to that this should be a national professional learning offer, so that teachers know the right methods and methodologies in order to bring about the outcomes for pupils.

There is no doubt that the quality of teaching is variable across our schools. And it's not where we want it to be, for sure. It is linked, as Liz said, to leadership. There are two factors that affect how much children achieve, how much progress they make, and it's the quality of leadership and the quality of teaching. And certainly, a lack of aspiration, or low expectations of our learners, holds them back. And this is particularly acute for our learners in Wales eligible for free school meals. We know that roughly 30 per cent of our children are living in low-income homes. So, their achievement is particularly important and needs to be a very, very prominent focus in our schools. But, in order for all children to achieve, including those learners, we need high-quality teaching.

So, it's the messages about professional learning, making sure that there is a clear vision that is aspirational coming from a leadership level, and that leaders ensure that all teachers have the right professional learning and have high expectations for all learners in their schools. So, there is still work to be done to improve the quality of teaching in our schools.

There's good practice. We've got the thematic report, 'Teaching the Curriculum for Wales' from last year. There's an Estyn Live related to that. So, there is good practice out there, but it's about also sharing that more widely.

Perhaps if I turn to Liz and Claire, if you'd like to add anything.

We're very supportive of the need for minimum age-related expectations that are aspirational and are available for each progression step. We've been working, in partnership with Welsh Government, to draft some minimum age-related expectations in relation to literacy, and we've also offered to continue our support for this work. But there is definitely a need for more guidance for schools.

We've mentioned PL a number of times—

Claire, do you want to answer, then I'll bring Carolyn Thomas in?

We've mentioned PL a number of times, and what we would consider to be a way of progressing on PL is to narrow down the number of priorities for schools. Because sometimes schools are trying to do so many things it can be overwhelming, or, sometimes, where there's weak leadership, they identify the wrong things for their particular school. So, we need a narrow set of priorities. We also need to ensure that leaders are equipped to make decisions about the professional learning in their own schools and that they evaluate it properly. Because often, PL goes on, there may be a staff survey, but they don't actually evaluate the impact of the professional learning on learners in the classroom. So, that is definitely a weakness in the system.

One other area that Dysgu needs to look at is subject-specific professional learning. In the past, in Wales, we would have had a very strong structure around professional learning for science, for maths, for history. But that has dwindled over the years and there is more generic PL. But the problem with generic PL is that, if you are a secondary school teacher and you're in a very small department, generic PL will take you so far, but you need the subject-specific pedagogies. And that is something that, when we visit schools, talk to middle leaders, they are looking for some guidance on around subject specific. So, that's something that we've already discussed with Dysgu, but something that we're hoping that we can contribute to in some way in the future.

I'm just going to pause. I'm going to bring Carolyn Thomas in.

Thank you, Chair. You talked about maths skills and benchmarking. So, at one time, we used to have curriculum advisers who would go into schools. Do you think that—? If we had a return to those, somebody who specialised in maths, they could go in, they could go into several schools, like they used to do, they could see that there isn't consistency in different schools—you know, if we could just even have a return to that for a short while, to bring things up. Previously, schools used to work in consortiums as well—I don't know if they still do—under an umbrella high school. Again, you could see if there are inconsistencies, can we learn from each other. Is that happening?

And we've got growing societal problems—. Sorry, I just—. You know, we visit schools and, post pandemic, children are coming in not being able to speak, with behavioural issues. So, do you believe that that is also taking teachers away from actually being able to teach at the moment, and creating a problem? So, we need to look at that as well. I'll be going on to that afterwards when we do ALN, won't I?

Yes. So, there are some broad points there. I think, essentially, it follows on from the point you were making about whether you have professional learning that's specific and whether, actually, the point that's being made about specific advising areas—whether that's the same thing or something slightly different. And then there's the broader point about pressures on schools and whether families of schools are still a useful part of improvement and learning.

I'm sorry, I've been listening so much—it's been really interesting—and then making notes, because it brings questions up in your head, doesn't it?

Perhaps if I lead off, then I'll hand over. The first thing about peripatetic support, when I was answering Cefin—one of my three is getting the classroom, and I think one of the things we've—. You're absolutely right, the past 20, 30 years, we've seen the eroding, really, of that cohort of specialists that went out to schools, that sat with teachers and helped them improve. So, I think moving back to having more of that model actually would be an improvement. I think Claire would probably nod quite strongly on that.

Absolutely. I absolutely agree with your comments, and Liz, actually, was one of those peripatetic maths teachers in a previous life, almost.

What we had were advisers and then advisory teachers, and as advisory teachers, we would lead the professional learning in the local authority for our age-related sectors. So, I led on early years mathematics and numeracy in a local authority, and then you would go and you would model. And that is a really crucial way of supporting teachers to develop their skills—that you model the lesson, you model the language, you bring the resources, you show how they're used, and then you go back to a coaching model where you watch those people teach, and then you have a professional discussion. Bringing teachers together who are teaching similar age ranges was a really powerful way of improving classroom practice across the whole authority. And you would build relationships, which, again, were vitally important.

So, when we talk about having that national professional learning offer, the advisers and advisory teachers used to meet together and share practice, and then we would go and we would take that out to our schools. If we're going to look back—it was not as strong in some areas, particularly those who weren't large enough to support a full advisory service. But in some local authorities, the advisers and advisory service brought about vast improvements. In some of those local authorities, we can still see the legacy of the mathematics, of the reading, the writing coaching, because those people who were trained have gone on to be the next series of deputy and headteachers, and they have sustained that practice. When you see that, it's a wonderful thing to see.

Can I just come in quickly? We've got city growth areas and regional schools partnerships, we've got collaboration, corporate joint committees, so if we could do it on a collaborative model, perhaps that could be a way forward.

I agree. Part of the school improvement programme we are still hoping to see is the collaboration amongst local authorities—you know, let's not do this 22 times. If I could just mention the collaboration—it was just a point I was going to make generally about professional learning—it's back to this: let's not do one-offs everywhere. The beauty of having peripatetic is that you can continue it, you can embed it. Sometimes, I do wonder about the system of in-service education and training days that we have at the moment—you know, it's a day here, it's a day there, they're difficult to plan for.

If you look at some of the best systems—and I take this back to Estonia, actually, an interesting example to this—the last week of term in Estonia, the children aren't in. It is a week where, purely, it's for professional learning for the staff. That's the point where they bring in other schools and involve them, and they can plan accordingly. So, sometimes, it needs thought about how you time these interventions, how you plan them and how you evaluate—back to Claire's point earlier on—to see it's improving, but have that skill, then, where, if it's not working out, you can go in and support and mentor and coach.

Estonia also have free childcare in kindergartens, don't they, so it's a very different set-up from a very early age as well—that investment. 

It is. The post pandemic, that's probably another question, but if you'd like us to handle that now, we're perfectly happy to, but it's quite a big—

I can ask under my question, it's fine.

We'll come back to that. I think it'll be interesting to just be clear about the advice you're giving about the structure you'd like to see in terms of how that structure of professional learning is delivered. And it's not just subject areas, but if you're talking about how it's delivered through the school year, and whether you're saying whether this is about having consistent INSET days, where everyone has the same days, or is it about the length of time together, because—. Is the point you're making about having a block of time, or is it that there needs to be a consistent block of time, which can be one day, or is it better off having more than one day? Because I think that's—. It's not just an interesting point, it's about what's effective. Because this isn't party political, this is about—. Any new Government is going to be thinking about what it needs to do, working with Estyn, to try to deliver improvement, because we all want to see an improvement in the quality of teaching and outcomes for learners. So, I just want to be clear about whether you're saying, 'There are interesting things in here, but we haven't reached a conclusion', or whether you're saying, 'We think there should be more structured, specific professional learning support in subject areas'—I think that's what you're saying. And then your point about INSET days: are you making a general point, or is there a conclusion Estyn have reached that, 'We think that could be better organised across Wales'?

Okay. If I come to the general point in a second. Claire, if you'd like to mention what you think about INSET days.

Already we see co-ordination of INSET days across schools, and it does support collaboration. But collaboration doesn't just take place on INSET days; there are other times where schools work together. So, finding time where schools can work together outside the classroom is absolutely essential to improve practice. I don't think, within Estyn, we've reached a position where we think that there is one rule, but there are lots of benefits to what Owen is saying about grouping days together—whether that's all the INSET days for a year together, or a proportion of them—so that you can plan more coherently across schools and across local authorities. There is probably a place for both. But the co-ordination to ensure there's high-quality professional learning is essential, and some grouping together—there are obviously benefits of that.

I'm sure, if there was national coherence on that, parents would welcome it as well—if they know when INSET days are going to be, as opposed to the variation that can take place.

Yes.

So, if there's a national priority, grouping INSET days for schools would be a sensible option, because, then, schools could work together and you could share the good practice. With a headteacher's perspective, though, there are going to be areas in my school that I'd want to improve, or I need to improve. So, when we're talking to schools about professional learning, we talk about, 'What have you identified, what professional learning are you going to put in place?', but, more importantly, what are leaders going to do to make sure it happens, what's going to be the impact in the classroom, and how are you going to know? So, I would want to have that initial professional learning input, but, then, it's about me as a leader—what I do to ensure that it actually has the impact. That's the biggest issue about professional learning. You can have a wonderful person, adviser, but if it doesn't then translate into improvements in classroom practice, then it wasn't really worth the money you paid for it. It's so crucial that you go and check that your staff are consistently implementing the professional learning and then putting in place any remedial interventions if staff are struggling—'What's working well? Keep doing that. What do we need to amend further?' So, professional learning isn't a once-and-done, it's an ongoing journey for a professional.

Okay. We're going to come back to Cefin and his questions.

Yes, certainly. Owen has touched on some of the reasons. Leadership is one of them. Inconsistency in the quality of teaching is another one. Weaknesses in self-evaluation, and even where we see self-evaluation that's pretty accurate, often there's an inability to follow that through to bring about improvements for learners. But there's also variation in the quality of support for these schools. You are right that the higher percentage is in secondary schools. We're really concerned about the number of secondary schools in a statutory category. Since we supplied you with the last update, it's gone up to 16 per cent of secondary schools. That's 15 secondary schools in special measures and 13 in significant improvement.

There is a difference between those two categories. As Owen said, when a school goes into special measures, we're concerned about the progress of learners in that school, and we don't feel the leadership has the capacity to bring about the improvement. So, that's quite a serious decision for us, when we say a school requires special measures, and in those instances, we expect the local authority to produce a robust statement of action around how they're going to support the school and how they're going to support the leadership of the school. So, there's definitely an issue there with improving leadership.

With significant improvement, we are concerned about the progress of learners in those schools, but sometimes we see a couple of green shoots that give us a degree of confidence that, with the right support, those leaders can bring about the improvement. What we tend to do with schools in need of significant improvement is we visit them in about 12 to 18 months, and over that period we expect the local authority to put in a series of actions to support the school, so that, when we revisit, we're more confident in the school's trajectory of improvement.

With special measures, we visit and monitor the progress every four to six months, and each time we visit, we'll look at how leadership is enabling that improvement and how the local authority is supporting it. But it is an ongoing concern, and we've done some work to look at whether there are patterns across local authorities. Are there groups of schools facing similar challenges? We've had a look at whether there's eligibility for free school meals playing into this. And when we look at—. We've got about 60 schools currently across all sectors. There's not a lot of difference in terms of the average of EFSM in those schools compared to the average in Wales, so it's not an issue that is just about the more disadvantaged areas. But we are seeing some differences. Jas, I don't know whether you want to mention anything about the local authorities.

Yes, I just wanted to also mention the pupil referral units, first of all, because you mentioned primary and secondary, but there are smaller numbers across Wales in terms of pupil referral units, and about 20 per cent of those are in follow-up at the moment, and much of the same issues playing. But I think there are a few systemic factors that are affecting that as well in terms of that increasing complexity of pupil needs, rising demand for those services, and some of those workforce pressures, particularly instability in leadership, which we tend to see more typically in PRUs than we would for secondary and primary schools. So, I did just want to mention those as well.

Claire has touched on those patterns across local authorities. There are some patterns. There are some local authorities that have a lot more schools in follow-up than others. We've also looked at the proportion of pupils who are in schools that are in follow-up as well, and there's a concerning number of authorities where around 10 per cent of their pupils are in schools that are in follow-up—where we're saying, essentially, that the quality of education isn't good enough. So, as well as those school-based factors that you picked up on, there are factors about local authority support being variable, as Claire said. 

I think particularly this point of transformation into a new programme for school improvement has meant quite a lot of change within that system. We feel, in general, it has probably diminished slightly during that period, as changes were made, that overall support for schools causing concern. We can unpack that a bit more if you want.

We're coming up to about halfway through our session. We're about a third of the way through our questions. So, as much as I enjoy talking, and I do, we are going to need to try and get through more of our questions. We will have to deal with some of the points in follow-up afterwards, but just so Members have an idea of where we're heading. I don't want to get to the end of the session and some people have not asked questions. Cefin, do you want to finish your questions?

Diolch, Cefin. Now, a few questions from me. We've talked lots about the quality of teaching and learning and about outcomes for learners as well. One of the points that relates to all of it is recruitment and retention. The committee has taken an interest in this through the term, but especially when it comes to maths, science and Welsh medium. We've talked about Welsh-medium provision generally, but also, of course, as a second language as well. What assessments have you made in Estyn of the Welsh Government's plans to both try and stabilise the current workforce but also to make sure the workforce is equipped to deliver the reform and improvement that we've been discussing through the first part of this session?

I'll kick off. First of all, we are worried about the dearth of high-quality teachers that are available to the system at the moment in some of the key skills. And actually, we're starting to see issues around humanities, as well, so I wouldn't limit it, necessarily, to just the historic science-based, and obviously Welsh language. There are some things, as well, that feed into that that I think we need to make more progress on, as well.

There is an awful lot of bad press about careers in teaching at the moment. We know that there are certain difficulties and we're seeing behaviours that are an issue; we're seeing workload being raised by the unions in particular. I think that there are probably advances we can make on both. The Cabinet Secretary wrote last month, I think, on progress since the behavioural summit last year; we probably want to see that accelerated. But on the workload in particular, I think there are actually quite a lot of gains that we can make about making the lives of teachers easier so that they can spend more time on professional learning and teaching in the classroom.

I think the first thing to say is that we've got to remind people that teaching is a great profession, it's pretty well paid, and the actual benefit you can feel personally from educating people is significant. So, we need to get that message across collectively, I think, that it's still a great profession to go into, so we can get the best people going into the profession. But we need to support the profession that are there.

Just looking at some things, I think we've seen relatively slow progress so far on particularly Welsh language and getting to the steps, through the Welsh in education strategic plans, that we'd like to see if we're going to meet the 2050. That doesn't mean to say that there's no progress there, because there is progress being made by a number of local authorities at the moment, but ramping up that ability to recruit people with the skills not only in teaching Welsh as a second language, but also in those specialist subjects, is going to be an issue. How often do I meet heads now who, perhaps a few years ago, would have three appointable candidates for those specific jobs, who now are struggling to have one appointable candidate? So, I think, probably, we do need more work on that. Claire.

I think the only thing I'd add to what Owen has said is that we have challenges in initial teacher education. I think it's quite challenging for universities to retain some of their programmes because of the small numbers involved. We've carried out inspections of all the centres over the last four or five years, and there is quite a lot of variation in the quality across teacher education, as well, and I think we probably need to explore different routes into teaching, particularly salaried routes, because that is often a barrier for people changing their occupation in mid life. So, I think there's more creativity needed in that area, as well.

We want the best people to come into the profession. We're a small country. We've had a number of reviews of initial teacher education, but we still seem to have the same number of centres, so our trainees are spread quite thinly across those centres, so we might need to think about a different approach. Do we need a national centre for teacher education where we can tap into all the best practice, both in Wales and internationally, to build up our provision for teachers of the future?

Okay. I'd be interested—

Just one final thing, if I may, on that. If you look at what's happened with Welsh for adults and creating a national centre for that, I think we've seen big gains with that approach. I think what Claire says about having a national approach to teacher training is probably one that a future Government would want to look at, but also the fact that we're not getting the throughput. For the past three years, we haven't hit more or less a third of the target for Welsh speakers coming through. If you look at some of the sciences, they're way off the mark. We're not even recruiting enough secondary teachers into the system at the moment through ITE. So, I think we do need to actually throw the hat in the air and pitch for some new ideas—things like do we defer repayments of student loans, for example, for teachers in certain areas. I think we do need to get a bit more creative with some of the ideas we're using.

We went through a lot of this in the inquiry that the committee had, so there's work that we know is ongoing, but I'd be interested—. I won't pursue it now, or we won't finish, but the points you made both about behaviour and what you think can be done to accelerate progress, and the second point you made around workload, where you thought there were gains that could be made, I think it would be interesting for the committee to have that from you after the session, about what you think those points are and have they already been shared with the Government and partners as well, because this isn't simply a session of saying, 'Estyn must have all the answers.' There are other partners who need to make things happen in the wider system as well.

In your report, you've gone through the financial pressures that schools face, some running licensed deficits, and there's a challenge here, I think, for all of us sat around this table and beyond, around not just how you evaluate financial resilience during your inspections, but how that can be improved. Is this a question of schools properly managing their budgets? Is there a skill issue in understanding how to do that? Or is it about the pressures that are coming into the school system and the resource base they have?

We talked a bit earlier about the wider pressures coming into our school system. The Cabinet Secretary regularly talks about the fact that societal challenges are all visible in our school system right throughout it. So, I'm trying to understand, with all the expectation we have of our system, are we giving them a fair fight with the resourcing we give them, because there's a question for members of the public, politicians and others, or how much of this is an issue about how schools manage their budgets?

I'll start at a national level. I'll perhaps bring Jassa in to talk about the recent thematic work we've been doing on this. You're seeing several storm clouds hitting schools at the moment. You have post pandemic, but also some of the societal issues were there before the pandemic, which means that learners are presenting, at primary in particular, with greater needs further away from where we'd want them to be starting their education off.

That means that we are seeing, at the moment, huge pressures on specialist provision. Most of the specialist provision in Wales is full. You're seeing huge pressures on the PRU estate. We've just seen new specialist provision opening in Cardiff—it's full immediately. PRUs are full. We're seeing the lack of throughput through our PRUs at the moment. So, historically, what would happen is that pupils with some requirements would go to a PRU, they'd be supported and they'd go back into the mainstream system. That is happening less and less now, which means the PRU system is blocking. Between PRUs and specialists, that is where the specialist and expensive provision is provided. So, you're seeing, first of all, huge amounts of resource being taken away from schools for that element.

Secondly, you've seen local authorities and the NHS having to withdraw services that, historically, they might have provided to schools. That's providing additional requirements of schools that they didn't have before. So, you're seeing, step by step, a number of things that schools are now having to cope with that, historically, either didn't exist, or not to the same extent, or that the services that supported them are not where they would have been a few years ago.

But that doesn't mean, to start with, looking at the school estate and saying the biggest problem is finance, because quite often we see where finance is stretched, but through strong leadership, you can actually deliver great results. I'll hand over to Jassa, perhaps, to talk about some of the thematic work we've been doing around this.

I think the answer to your question, Vaughan, is it is both. There are those increasing pressures. I think we are seeing examples of schools using targeted grants and things just to cope with their overall delivery. But the work we've been doing has been looking at local authority support for school budgets, and there are a couple of key messages there. The first one is that, day to day, schools manage their finances really well. Local authorities provide good support for that day-to-day financial management. But what's lacking is that longer term, more strategic advice and support, so that the decisions that are being taken are done in that longer term financial context. I think there is definitely a piece of work to be done there to actually improve that longer term financial planning that goes on between a local authority and its schools, which would help ameliorate and actually mean that some of that decision making is done on a better evidence base. So, I think those are the sort of headline messages that are coming from that work.

We'd expect some of this would affect what schools can provide in terms of budget pressures, but there's also some of the same pressures, we understand, in the further education system. You make reference to this as well. We've had a number of concerns from the FE system. I'm trying to understand why you think that is particularly challenged this year and what are the pressure points in the system. I think ColegauCymru made a point that they've actually had a couple of bumper years of people wanting to come in, and a lot of it is about dealing with basic skills provision. So, we're trying to understand whether, again, their financial challenge is worse because there's extra demand in the system. And again, we have, I think, understandable high expectations of the quality of education people receive in our colleges as well.

This isn't a specific answer, but it is a contributory factor, that, post pandemic, we did see a huge investment in education. We saw a lot of money pumped into schools. Those schools ramped up the provision, particularly for those pupils who needed to catch up. What we're seeing now, of course, is that the majority of that money has been withdrawn and it's now, really, that schools are actually having to face the fact that some of the provision that they were providing additionally, because of this additional money, is having to be cut back at a time, actually, when some of the other provision they're providing they're going to have to look at as well, as part of these cuts. So, I think it's a double whammy almost of, things are getting tougher, there is more for schools to cope with, coupled to the fact that they've had a couple of years of not plenty, but more money coming through the system, and that's now being withdrawn slowly as we move away from the pandemic.

I think one of your other findings was about special schools and pupil referral units, about the fact that there were some challenges there as well about reusing spaces—they might have been well-being or sensory spaces now being used as mainstream classrooms. And I'm interested in whether you think that is about the financial challenge and that it is unavoidable, or whether it's part of the earlier point that there's a bit of both, about the quality of leadership and the ability to find an answer, and how much of that is actually about a broader pressure within the system. You've set out that there is a significant additional number of people going into our pupil referral units—the system's got bigger, but that's because the number of admissions going into it got bigger. So, is this a challenge that we have to accept our system is trying to deal with, because of that extra need and demand going in, or is there something else about how our system could be potentially more effectively run that you find from your own work? 

If I just précis quickly, I think the system is very good at coping, and you do get to a point, sometimes, where you can't rely on people coping forever more, and so we are seeing local authorities at the moment really looking at their estates, looking at their provision, and rationalising that. I think Cardiff is probably a good example of that at the moment. Jassa. 

I think there is an element of that complexity of need placing additional pressures on those services. But I think there's also an element that, over a number of years, strategic planning has not been strong enough in relation to things like ALN and especially that range of specialist services to support, and things take quite a long time to happen.

We're seeing, very regularly now, new creation of specialist resource base provision in schools. I don't know what the latest numbers are in terms of those statutory consultations, but there's been a proliferation of that, because that's a quicker way to, I guess, meet some of that demand. But it takes quite a long time to plan and open new special school provision in particular, and there's not a great deal of regional thought being given to it, I don't think. So, each local authority is making their own decisions, yet something such as special school provision is surely something that should be being considered on a needs basis, particularly in areas like south Wales, where you've got quite a lot of local authorities close together, with some kind of regional planning element to it.

[Inaudible.]—transportation as well, because that was in it, really, quite a lot.

I understand. Ysgol y Deri is in my constituency, and it's certainly not just the Vale of Glamorgan, so I understand the point you're making. I'm going to come back to Owen and then we're going to move to Natasha.

I'll be really brief. One point that we've come across in the thematic actually, is that where it's working best is where the local authority has pooled all the people involved together—so it could be transport, it could be youth services, it could be support services from a local authority—and where they use everything at their fingertips to try and support, the system tends to support better.

Okay. We could spend lots more on this, but we need to move on to our next batch of questions. Back to Natasha Asghar.

Thank you so much, Chair. I have a lot of questions, but I'm going to only pick the favourite ones that I have in line for you, if that's okay. So, we all know attendance levels are still significantly below pre-pandemic levels, especially amongst learners who are eligible for free school meals and those with ALN needs. So, what does Estyn's evidence indicate about why attendance has been so slow to recover, and what interventions appear to have been most effective so far in different sectors?

Okay, if I kick off, then, Claire, perhaps, I'll bring you in. We've seen progress, but, over the past year, if anything, it's probably gone backwards to a degree on FSM in particular, and we seem to have plateaued, which is a real worry, and particularly with some pupils—we've seen quite a significant percentage of some pupils missing 80 per cent plus, and that is a real concern.

Why do you think that is? 

It's a mix of things, and I'll bring Claire in on this in a second, but it's a mix of things. If you have schools that have very good community focus, that have a good relationship with the parents, that can embed the value of education to those parents and the pupils, that have an interesting, engaging curriculum, that monitor the system assiduously, and also if you understand the reasons why specific pupils are not attending and you can rectify those, if you can do those sorts of things, you tend to see quite significant improvements, but it's quite a complex picture. Claire.

Yes, absolutely. It's about engaging learners and having very strong partnerships with parents, and having the support systems in schools for learners to meet where there are additional learning needs, or where there are emotional needs, and having a range of provision. Where it's working well, learners are engaged in learning and they want to be in school, and you've got the support of parents to make sure that they come to school regularly. Community-focused schools and that concept seem to support really good attendance and really good engagement, where the school has strong partnerships not only with the parents, but with the community and with a range of partners who also have some responsibility for supporting learners. So, where those relationships are strong, then learners are well supported and they're more likely to be in school. So, there's quite a lot of good practice right across schools that have got a community-focused approach. And even in areas where there are high levels of deprivation, some of those schools have been able to keep on improving attendance, because it's about getting your curriculum right, engaging learners, and making sure you have a strong partnership with parents and that you're able to meet the breadth of needs that your children experience over their lifetime in school.

Thank you very much for that. Your thematic report into behaviour in FE colleges found a number of concerning negative behaviours, including bullying, harassment and violence. Did you find that these behaviours were prevalent across Wales or in specific pockets of Wales, within all FE colleges, or just in certain ones? And have you seen any improvements in support for learners and staff since then?

Jassa

I think there were pockets across all the colleges that we visited, but it wasn't consistent across any single college. So, it wasn't that there was a college where those types of behaviours were prevalent across. I think there was a tendency to see worse behaviours where learners were less engaged. So, for example, with things like GCSE resits, we tended to see worse levels of behaviours there. There were a few examples in some of the quite low-level vocational courses as well—there tended to be more pockets consistently across where we might see some of those behaviours.

As I said earlier, we've been in a college last week and we're in one in a couple of weeks, so I'll have a better idea about whether we've seen some improvements, based on that. There was nothing coming out from the one that we were in last week particularly in terms of concerning behaviours on the level of some of the ones that we were talking about—in a few instances, we should say, but it was not across most of the learners in FE in that report last year. 

Okay. Thank you very much for that. We've talked a little about AI. I know you mentioned that in one of your previous responses. We've talked a little about social media as well. So, how significantly has social media-driven behaviour or absenteeism featured in recent inspections and interim visits, and how does Estyn actually determine whether a school's digital citizenship education is indeed adequate or not?

Do you want to open on that? 

There are a couple of elements to that. The whole idea around social media and how it's used in schools is a really debated issue at the moment. I think what we've seen from the behaviour thematic that we did around secondary schools last year, and others, is where this is working well, a school takes a whole-community approach to deciding its policy and takes learners and families with it, and what that usually means is that does result in quite clear expectations—potentially a ban during school time of use of phones and social media—but it's done with people being on board, and there's a really lovely case study video, from Cardiff west, I think, where they have gone through that process, and the positive impact it has actually had on that school community and on engagement in learning and things. So, that's from the point of view of social media.

On digital literacy, I think we're seeing a lot more work happening in schools generally. We quite often look at this as part of our focus on safeguarding, as well, during inspections, and we're actually picking up some really positive practice in terms of, again, in the best cases, doing that with the school community, so not just with learners, but with parents as well.

So, I think, actually, we are seeing some positive practice in terms of schools actually working with young people to talk about their confidence in navigating that whole digital world, really.

One of the things we saw as an issue in behaviours, for example, was kids are kids are kids—they're creative. If you ban things, they will find ways of using it, and we were seeing hordes of pupils hiding in toilet cubicles on social media together. So, I think, on Jassa's point about having to engage them, you have to let them understand why you're banning. I think the approach of Monmouth has been quite interesting, having that dialogue with parents across the school portfolio, but also with learners about, 'Look, this is causing issues. Let's talk about a responsible approach to it.' You know, we have harmed our approach, really, to social media use and its control within schools, and it's something we do pick up on, particularly, as Jassa said, as part of safeguarding.

Okay. I know you talked about social media, and this is sort of entwined within that, but what assessment has Estyn made to date of a potential mobile phone ban or restrictions? I know you spoke about restrictions on social media, but I'd like to know what your views are on, potentially, an all-out ban.

Okay. I'll bring Jassa in in a second, and anyone else, but we've been part of the deliberations the Welsh Government's been leading. They've got an expert group looking at this. Where we've held back, I think, from a ban outright is that there are some areas where sometimes you can use mobile phones or iPads or whatever for the benefit of education. We wouldn't want to see that being eradicated. We've seen sometimes the use of quite clever AI techniques—in attendance, for example—and some of that might involve tracking, it might involve mobile phone use. The legitimacy of that I'll park for a minute, but this is why we haven't gone the whole hog, so to speak, and said, 'Right, we'll just have a unilateral ban.' We tend to trust headteachers to have responsible attitudes to how they do it. I think the majority are, but we've been involved in that group who I think are reporting at the moment.

I think we would probably have a clear expectation that there wouldn't be free use of phones during the school day. That's a slightly different position to advocating for a kind of national ban, I think. And I think, as we said, schools working with—. Usually, it ends up with something that is a pretty restrictive policy within a school, but I think the way you get to that point can have a very different impact on how it is then upheld and how bought-in young people and their parents actually are to that.

We're all aware of what's happened in Australia. If, for example, it is demonstrated—obviously, I appreciate that they've just rolled it out from December onwards—and if it does show and demonstrate to parents, teachers and the world at large that having a ban on mobile phones, particularly with regard to social media for under-16s, actually proves fruitful for their development, for their attendance, with regard to their performance in schools, would that perhaps change your opinion?

It might do. We're continually evaluating evidence we see on this. There is a significant amount of evidence now about the potential of banning social media for pre-16 children. We will have an extraordinary case study now of whether this works or not. So, yes, you know, the evidence on these sorts of things, of course we take account of.

It's very sensible to note that if the evidence changes you might need to change your position.

Yes. Thanks.

We'll go to Cefin Campbell and then we've got the next set of questions from Carolyn Thomas. 

Yes, just very briefly on the social media issue, obviously, you're inspecting secondary schools in particular that have restricted the use of mobile phones in schools, and you've inspected other schools that haven't. Have you spotted any behavioural changes or differences between those schools in terms of progress made, concentration levels, behaviour changes?

I don't think we've observed anything significant at the moment. Usually, where behaviour, well-being and attendance are strong, it's usually to do with the culture of the school. And often, in these schools, they make very well-considered decisions around social media. So, they tend to be a lot of our stronger schools as well. But I don't think, to date, we've done any sort of analysis of the differences. But that would be something that we certainly could look at.

Individual schools have certainly reported that they have seen a difference, so some of the cases were picked up, but I don't think we've analysed our evidence in a way to look at those.

No. Okay. That's fair enough.

So, questions from Carolyn Thomas.

I chair the Petitions Committee, and the Petitions Committee did an inquiry and the outcome was that there should be mobile-free schools—rather than saying 'ban'—and it should be up to individual schools. So, there are lots of interesting conversations regarding this.

We've also had petitions regarding ALN, and that there shouldn't be universal provision. I've got a question to you about ALN. The thematic work highlights inconsistency in the quality of individual development plans and the interpretation and application of the ALN code. What are the most common misunderstandings or implementation weaknesses you are seeing in schools and local authorities, and what more can be done to ensure that guidance is clear and easy to understand? I've been going into schools, and you can see—. I went to one school, where they used a classroom for well-being, and called it 'the bridge', because it was, hopefully, the bridge back again into the classroom as well, but—. Is assessment an issue as well with ALN?

Okay. Jassa, are you happy to take that?

Yes. I think one of the things that we've been finding in terms of that inconsistency, and where the biggest misunderstanding is, really, is what is meant by 'significantly greater difficulty in learning'. So, that is that almost threshold in terms of should a learner have, do they require, additional learning provision and have those needs and therefore they require an IDP. And it is really variable across different areas in terms of what is being determined there.

Now, there has been some really constructive work happening since around September last year in terms of local authorities working with Welsh Government—and we've been contributing—to try to make sure there's a much better shared understanding and some guidance that actually unpacks that a little bit better, which will, hopefully, then help practitioners to have that more consistent understanding. So, hopefully, that will help.

The other variations are things like the time and the type and amount of evidence required to actually identify additional learning needs. It's the kind of number of 'assess, plan, do' cycles that teachers need to go through to actually then get to that point, and to some extent that use, as you touched upon, of assessment data and specialist advice and how that is used in that decision-making process.

So, it's that understanding, but then also how inconsistently evidence of various kinds and approaches are being used to actually reach that decision to determine whether an IDP is needed and therefore what support will be put in place.

One of the schools said that there was an issue as well with having space in the specialist provision in that school, which you've touched on. What, in your view, is driving the slower progress on the Curriculum for Wales in roughly a third of primary schools?

A majority of primary schools are doing well in implementing the Curriculum for Wales, and they've balanced skills and knowledge, they've created authentic learning experiences that are motivating pupils, and they've got expectations at the correct level. They've also ensured that the basic becoming literate and numerate are core centres of their curriculum, and then that skills are applied well and creatively across all areas of learning and experience.

For a minority of schools, they've found developing a curriculum more trying. There are some misconceptions around what an authentic curriculum looks like, and they have misinterpreted the balance of knowledge and skills and they have gone down a themed-based route, which sometimes doesn't meet the needs of all their learners. And there has been, in a couple of local authorities, a misinterpretation of what independent learning looks like, so that children have gone and completed tasks independently, on their own, but not at the correct level. And these we've seen, too often, have been—. I think you referred to worksheets. Some of them are time fillers. So, it's actually lost learning time. So, when we go into schools that have misinterpreted the curriculum, particularly in primary, what we see is lost learning, so children not making the progress, and we're not seeing, consistently, progressing across and between classrooms.

It goes back to my earlier point about having curriculum advisers, or advisers on how things are put in consistently, and monitoring that is being done properly again.

What explains the wide variation that Estyn identifies between local authorities in the effectiveness of school improvement, and how does this variation affect school progress following inspection? So, you said that there is great variation and a lack of consistency in schools and across authorities. So, what can be done, and what needs to happen? We've discussed that a lot. 

The first thing to say—. There are two initial things I'll say before I pass it on. The first thing is that it isn't size. If you look at Ceredigion, they do it very well. They've got a relatively small council. Also, it's been a bit of a surprise for us, I think, how few local authorities have worked together to develop. Because, where we see poor school improvement, it's normally because the local authority has a poor grasp of school improvement itself. And I think sometimes we've seen the coupling of a poor understanding of how to apply the new curriculum coupled to poor school improvement measures. When you have that in place, it can be quite devastating for schools. Luckily, that's relatively isolated. But, really, we see that coupling of self-evaluation, that coupling of school support—where those are strong, things to tend work quite well, and Ceredigion is probably quite a good example of that. Perhaps if I hand over.

Yes. So, I think where it works well, what we see are much stronger models of using first-hand evidence and structured approaches to triangulate intelligence about schools, and then really strong professional dialogues and a balance of challenge and support, I guess. But it really varies, and I think it's the quality of evidence and the quality of relationships that a local authority and its staff have with schools are what causes that variability. So, in those weaker examples, those processes are too informal, there's insufficient monitoring and challenge to support improvement, and that just means that that improvement isn't secured quickly enough. I think I mentioned earlier that this transition period has caused some confusion, and there's not an absolute clarity in some areas about who does what at the moment, which, ironically, was one of the reasons for the whole programme of reform.

So, I think the collaborative work is still at an early stage. But it can work well. It is working well in a few local authorities. And where it is, it's that really strong evidence triangulation, building relationships, promoting collaboration and sharing of practice that really makes it work.

And also—sorry—back to a point that Claire made earlier on about prioritisation, what we see too often is trying to boil the ocean—we focus on way too many things. You know, let's get a few things right. It goes back to questions around basic skills sometimes.

We might write to you about the point about the new architecture for school improvement and the points you're making about variation between local authorities, who have regained their role for school improvement and standards with moving on from the consortia, but the point about variation and what the prospects are for improvement, and then how much confidence we can have and how much assurance you can get about improvement across the system, and, where that's not identified as being where it should be, about what improvement measures are in place, both with your relationship with the local authorities, but also the Government and what a future committee will no doubt be keen to look at here.

I just want to go back to an area that Carolyn Thomas asked about before. It goes back to one of the points you made in your report about the difference between thematic approaches and making sure that subject depth isn't lost. So, when we did a visit to a school, one of the points that Carolyn was really interested in was the difference between geography and geology and slimming some of that down, and, actually, if possible, we can talk about history, which is one of my obsessions, and about the loss of chronology. I interpret that as understanding the course of historic events, rather than obsessing about dates and being able to recite kings and queens without understanding why events have happened. So, we're trying to understand whether you're concerned that that broader thematic approach is taking away some of the depth of knowledge. I'm reminded of this because it's a particular point that Carolyn has made before.

It was—[Inaudible.] They've moved ecosystems and tectonics out of geography, and I'm really concerned about the ecosystem side of it, if that's lost. That's as a GCSE now. I've raised it with Qualifications Wales. So, there's a gap there, and then you can go on to—. You can learn it at A-level. So, if we're supposed to be learning through field work, and nature and climate change, all these things that we're looking at going forward in green jobs, that seems to be missing.

I think this is one of the things we've written about in the annual report itself, actually, particularly in the humanities—looking at them becoming too broad, too superficial. Geography was actually highlighted within that. We are seeing this curricular misunderstanding of having skills as opposed to actual knowledge, and, as you say, not just dates, but the chronology of how things develop and why, and we're seeing a lack of that, I think, both in primary and secondary at the moment.

We are, and it all comes back to (1) that you've got to teach the knowledge that children need, then you've got to allow them to apply that, but if they haven't got those basic skills—. So, in history, if you're thinking about that, to be able to then critically evaluate, to reason, to understand—. They need those basic skills, particularly in primary—being able to read, evaluate, synthesise, to write for a range of purposes, to be able to speak, to discuss, to think. So, what we want to see is that children have the necessary skills to be able to access all areas of the curriculum, but, because of the broadness, some teachers have inadvertently forgotten the detail and the knowledge that is necessary to get children to be able to access not just areas of learning, but the curriculum as a whole.

And there's your point about whether schools are interpreting the curriculum in the way that you say is the right way to look at it. Because it's not supposed to be, 'Let a thousand flowers bloom'—there is supposed to be knowledge as well as skills in this. How is that then not just picked up, but then addressed? It goes back into Carolyn's earlier questions about school improvement and how to help schools to improve, rather than understanding, in five years' time, that you've potentially let down a generation of learners.

I think there was almost certainly a lack of scaffolding around the curriculum when it was rolled out. There were certain things that were non-negotiable, but there has been a flight—and this was seen to a degree in Scotland—to the skills and applying learning areas across every lesson, for example, to the detriment of actually knowledge and the teaching of knowledge and the accumulation of knowledge. I think that's been one of the issues. I think, slowly, the system is sorting it now, but there are still some areas that we see in local authorities, for example, where they haven't moved far enough ahead yet in having that balance between, yes, ensuring they've got the basic skills to learn, but having the depth of subject knowledge as well to progress. Claire.

Yes, it is down, as you said, Vaughan, to misinterpretation of Curriculum for Wales. And as Jassa said, there's variation in the support from local authorities, and we've been in that transitional period, where they've been recruiting staff to fill gaps to provide curriculum support to schools. So, there is more to be done to make sure that there are consistent messages and that the advice that schools are getting is in line with Curriculum for Wales to avoid those misinterpretations.

Okay. We're now going back to Cefin Campbell for a couple of questions.

Yes. Thank you.

And there might be time for me to ask a couple at the end as well.

Yes, I'll move quickly on to the two questions that I have. So, what are your latest observations on the level of progress made in closing the attainment gap between those living in the most disadvantaged communities, perhaps, and those living in more affluent areas?

I think there has been progress, but not enough. And if you look at—. We have a paucity of data in the system, full stop. And I think we are over-reliant on key stage 4. But using what data we have and using the benefit that we have through going to schools week in, week out, we are seeing that you have a number of issues. First of all, that the most able children aren't being stretched enough, but we're seeing those that need additional support, for whatever reason, to progress have not been having the support they need, which is manifesting itself in a widening gap, really, in both attendance, but also in key stage 4 results. So, I think there's progress being made, but not enough. Claire or Liz?

Yes, we are concerned about the progress of pupils eligible for free school meals. Their attainment is still behind their peers. Schools are working hard to alleviate the impact of poverty on learners. They're doing a lot of work around trying to address what we would say are the sort of material impacts of poverty. So, we see more and more schools running foodbanks. I visited Ysgol Gymraeg Gwynllyw a month ago and they've got the Big Bocs Bwyd, and that is typical of schools now, that they're moving into that. They help with uniforms and so on. The majority of them use the pupil development grant well to alleviate the impact of poverty. Do they do enough to evaluate the impact on learner progress? Probably not as much as the material impact. It's certainly still a challenge. But, you know, the gap between these pupils and their peers is too wide.

And I think—

Sorry, can I—? So, the points you're making about understanding progress, both for the most able and gifted, but also the challenge for children from our least advantaged backgrounds—does this go back to where we started the session and you were making points around school systems where there's consistency and sophistication of assessment? And your point about the paucity of data—. Because, actually, there are loads of data in education, but it's about how useful it is and how consistent it is to understand progress. That's one of the things that we struggle with as a committee—understanding where our whole system is and how that helps to hopefully target support, as well as understanding what needs to improve and what needs to be praised and done more consistently.

That's exactly what I was going to come back to. If I may caveat my phrase on the 'paucity of data', there's a paucity of quality data in the system, and I think through three things. One—not being clear enough what our level of ambition is in the classroom; two—having those very clear progression steps that teachers can understand, because, you know, some of the progression steps we have at the moment are a little academic, they're a little loose; and then having personalised assessments, which, again, can be vague. What we haven't got is that ability—. I don't want assessment to be something that we beat the system with, I want assessment to be used at a quality basis in classrooms day in, day out, to see how pupils are advancing—all of them. And where the best systems work is where they have that level of ambition, they know exactly what they want to attain, and they have, almost on a micro basis, that understanding, day to day, of how pupils are adjusting and adapting. I think that can be done, but I don't think it's in place yet.

Okay. And, again, that would be an interesting point to follow up on, about what that might look like in Wales, in our follow-up letter, and in your reply as well, as opposed to a general point about where is that good, and what that could look like here, as opposed to wanting to transfer that out from a different school system, but what that could look like here in Wales.

Yes. We've actually supplied, as part of this endeavour, information to Welsh Government about—. We've actually given examples of what these progression steps could look like. There are systems in Ireland, there are systems in Estonia where the assessment model is very clear—used at a micro level for the majority, but used at a national level, to ensure that support and that local authorities get a good handle on their schools. So, I think there are systems that we could adopt quite quickly, based on international practice. We've done a lot of work already and supplied it to Government around what progression steps could look like, which are ambitious. So, these could be enacted relatively quickly, I think, with this system, but with that understanding that this is for the benefit of learners. This isn't dangling a cosh over the system, this is, 'We can use this for our collective improvement.'

That's helpful. Back to you, Cefin—sorry.

Diolch. Thank you. You mentioned some schools struggling with understanding or evaluating the impact of the pupil development grant. So, where, if you could explain, does the differentiation obviate itself more in some schools than others? What are some schools doing better than others in that evaluation process?

In some schools, there's a more forensic approach to how they use the pupil development grant. So, when they develop their action plan or spending plan for that funding, they tend to identify specific outcomes as the intention of the grant, and they tend to monitor those throughout, where other schools are more vague in their planning and they don't always fully evaluate the impact of the grant. But it has to be said that there are some schools who are having more financial pressures than maybe others and are using the pupil development grant to plug some holes in staffing as well. So, it's quite a complex area, but it is to do with being very clear what you hope to achieve through the funding.

And some of that is evidence based and some isn't. There's a lot of evidence about what works. The Sutton Trust, years ago, published a report on, 'For this certain investment, this is where you're likely to get the best bang for your buck.' Sometimes, we see poor evidence, but sometimes we see very good evidence, and sometimes we see very good evaluation of whether it's worked, and sometimes we don't.

Well, I'd love to explore that further with you, but, obviously, we've run out of time, but anyway—.

Thank you, Cefin. Just a few questions about looking back and looking forward. Bearing in mind some of what you've said today as well, we talked about lots of elements within the system, about school improvement, the role of Dysgu. I don't think we've strictly mentioned Adnodd, but we've got a range of areas in our system, some of which are relatively new, and you make the point in your report that there is a challenge with system coherence that is still uneven. And that's perhaps not surprising, given the reforms that have been introduced and the change in that system-wide architecture. So, I guess the question is, really: how do you think that greater coherence can be delivered across our system? Is it about the overarching vision and expectation, the ambition that's required? Or is it more nuts-and-bolts stuff about, 'This is how we think school improvement could and should look like—here's how we could do that, here's how we could get partners together', and then your role in assessing and providing assurance on that? I appreciate, as ever, it could be a bit of everything. I'm trying to understand what you think needs to be done to deliver that coherence, and then a bit of an idea, which we may have to follow up in writing, about over what time would you expect to see that happen as well. Politicians are always impatient because we're always up for election.

There are a number of things, and I'll open this up in a second. The first thing is prioritisation.

You've made the point repeatedly, actually.

It's a complex scenario out there. Headteachers have got a number of conflicting priorities. Be clear: three priorities—deliver them. That could be done very quickly. The second is—and we've discussed it at length today, I think—be clear what we expect of the system, what are the progression steps, how we're going to monitor that happening. And the third thing is, who does what? We have a fairly fluid system at the moment. We've got the school improvement system bedding down. We have Dysgu in its very formative stages. I think there's space now for a discussion between everyone about, look, there are some things that are going to be nationally delivered, because this is what we need in the classroom on a national basis. There are some things that are going to have to be delivered on a local basis, individual school support, as Liz said, where schools have particular priorities of their own. So, that understanding of where the system—. Because what we don't want to do is move back to a system where we've got mixed priorities, that we don't really know where we want to be or what we're trying to achieve through the assessment model, and that we've got slightly convoluted accountability about who's meant to be delivering this support for the schools themselves. I think we've made progress on some of that during this Government, if I'm to be honest, but I think, if I was to start with a clean piece of paper for a next Government, they would probably be close to the top of my priority list. Claire.

The only brief thing that I'd add to what Owen has said is there's a need to have clear roles and responsibilities for each organisation. Because you've got Dysgu now, the professional learning organisation, but you've also got local authorities, which have the statutory responsibility for delivering school improvement. So, rather than having any duplication between all the key players, we need to be very clear what we expect of each organisation, so that we maximise our resource and maximise the impact.

We're too small to do things 22 times, which is what—. We've made that point a few times during this. So, there needs to be some national aspects to it, I think, that bring together that critical concentration of expertise, which will then benefit everybody.

And I think, although we're all fans of subsidiarity, we're all fans of devolution, I think the system is actually crying out for a bit more national direction on certain things.

Okay. And, again, on 'certain things', are you clear that those 'certain things' are things you've started off the answer on—a slimmer set of priorities and these things we can get done quickly?

Yes.

Okay. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but—

I think aspiration would be the other thing that would—generally, that point—help.

Okay. Going back to a specific one, about the joint inspection you undertook in Gwynedd with Care Inspectorate Wales after the Neil Foden case, a very difficult report was published, taking account of the impact on survivors as well. So, there was—. In your view, does it identify systemic issues specific to the education system—whether in Gwynedd or more generally—that, across Wales, people should take greater account of in looking at how their system operates, and its interaction as an education system, but also with partner organisations, including, of course, the care system, which has an impact within the school system as well? Because we're trying to understand: have we got all the lessons we need, and how much does that joint inspection tell you about what happened, specifically in Gwynedd, but, more than that, system-wide lessons as well?

There are. I think the majority of organisations did what they were statutorily asked to do, but we failed. So, we've all been looking at what could we do differently. I think the main thing that jumped out from the paper was, first of all, stronger scrutiny of the culture of safeguarding. Safeguarding has to be an absolute priority. When we go into a school, our No. 1 priority is safeguarding. It's the one thing that we will always pay attention to, more than anything else. Strengthening that safeguarding oversight across the whole system, I think, is something we need to discuss.

The improved evaluation of safeguarding records, chronologies—if you look at what happened in Gwynedd, there were a number, as the report picked out, of points of failure, where people didn't realise, really, what the expectation was about whether they should report or not. So, having that clear expectation of what to report is very important, but also the fact that what you have in all of these cases where you see this type of scenario is that you see a multiple of micro-events, but, really, a failure to put them together. I think that's one of the things that, between the system, we need to share data better, we need to share intelligence better. And that's on Estyn, the same as it's on Care Inspectorate Wales and all the other partners involved. And I think you can't ignore that absolute laser clarity about the pupil voice. Even in some of the initial reactions from some of the parties involved, it was about more tick-box exercises, about, 'Have you got this policy in place? Have you got that policy in place?' It's back to: is it happening? Do actual learners feel that they've got that ability to raise their voices and be heard? So, I think those were probably the key lessons for us. If I open it up—

You asked—. We obviously went to Gwynedd specifically, and did that piece of work. I think our feeling would be that other local authorities would need to look at their own practice, and that Gwynedd aren't necessarily a big outlier in some of the aspects that we found in that recent report, in terms of what Owen's just articulated there. Funnily enough, I was with the Welsh Local Government Association cabinet leads for education yesterday, urging them to have a look at that report and use it to actually reflect on their own local authority’s practice as well. 

And so, Welsh Government have put out statements about what they're doing, but it's not just about local authority leads who have responsibility for the care system and the education system. So, would that be part of the way, when you do authority-wide inspections, about how you will look for that evidence that they are looking to add up the totality of what's happening, and this point around pupil voice, which came through very clearly, that it hadn't been taken account of in the way that case was dealt with?

Absolutely, and I think it's interesting—. We work closely with CIW and I think the findings of the child practice review at an overall level chime with some of the findings in the rapid review of child protection that we did with CIW before, and what's coming through some of the joint inspections of child protection arrangements we've done with them. The scale of the missed opportunities was absolutely shocking, but some of those system-wide recommendations, in a sense, are the same.

So, I think, as part of our work, we are no different. We've been looking internally to think what we can do better, as we have done a number of times over the years, and I think we've strengthened our own approaches to looking at safeguarding on inspection over a number of years. So, that focus on culture is something we've been trying to do for probably about four or five years now. We've had another internal look over the last few months. We’ve looked elsewhere in terms of other inspectorates. And I think for us, interestingly, the area where I think we'll be focusing on trying to improve further is about almost the minimum evidence expectations that we would have on any inspection, just to be a bit more consistent about that in terms of where we do pick up. But I think that relationship with CIW is really important, because a lot of the aspects of that work were at that line between education and social services, and we'll be working with them to particularly look at professional allegations and how they're handled in a series of inspections later this year and early next year.

I think, from our point of view, the other area that review we've done has shown is that inspection is only as good as the evidence that is in front of you, and the intelligence that we might have. So, we're also looking to think: how can we ensure that we've got the absolute best intelligence to then be able to inform our inspection work? So, things like being made aware of when there are actually professional allegations, making better links with the Education Workforce Council in terms of patterns of disciplinary action, and things like that. There are things that we're trying to do to make sure that we're best placed to do our job, which is only ever that snapshot in time. But, hopefully, if we have better intelligence, we can do our job better.

Okay. We have got a couple of questions that I don't think we're going to reach. One of them is about you looking back on the sixth Senedd, and what you think the education system has done well, as well as things you wish had happened earlier. And also a question about the future priorities for the seventh Senedd. But I think, rather than trying to get your answer in 20 seconds, we're better off writing to you about that, and another question about the change in the grading reporting to a narrative reporting as well, to get those more considered responses in writing. Obviously, once they come to us they'll be shared with Members and with parties in and outside as well, because they’ll be published too. So, I think it’s probably best we stop the session now, write to you with those, get a considered response, and then I'm sure that a future committee will be very interested in a number of the points you've made today, including the last point about the inspections coming up, to see what evidence comes from those, and more broadly whether our system is run in greater coherence and a better job for teachers to work in, in what is a fabulous job to do, which has a really big impact, and the impact that can have on all learners and families as well.

Thank you for coming in today. You will, of course, as usual, be sent a transcript for checking, and I'm sure you will enjoy coming in to a new Senedd and a new group of Members to kindly look upon you and your work, or not. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Item 3 is papers to note. There are five papers to note today. Full details are on the agenda and in the paper pack. Are Members content to note those? Fantastic, I see you are. Thank you.

We're now on item 4. I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(ix), that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of today's meeting. Are Members content? I see Members are. We'll now proceed in private session.