Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Good morning and welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee—a meeting that's being held virtually. In accordance with Standing Order 34.19, I've determined that the public are excluded from the committee's meeting in order to protect public health. Notice of this decision was included in the agenda for this meeting, published on Monday. As usual, the meeting is being broadcast live on Senedd.tv, with all participants joining via video-conference, and a Record of Proceedings will be published as usual. Aside from that procedural adaptation relating to conducting proceedings remotely, all other Standing Order requirements of committees remain in place. As usual, the meeting is bilingual, and simultaneous translation is available. If we become aware that there's an issue with the translation, I'll ask you to pause for a moment while our meeting technicians reset the system. I've received apologies for absence from Dawn Bowden MS, and I'm very pleased to welcome Jack Sargeant MS, who is substituting for Dawn. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Well, can I just, then, also remind everyone that if I drop out for any reason, it's been agreed that Suzy Davies MS will temporarily chair, while I try to rejoin?

Item 2 this morning is an evidence session on the impact of COVID-19 on remote teaching and learning and exams and assessments, with Qualifications Wales and WJEC. I'm very pleased to welcome David Jones, chair of Qualifications Wales; Philip Blaker, chief executive of Qualifications Wales; Jo Richards, who is regulations director at Qualifications Wales; Ian Morgan, the chief executive of the WJEC; and Elaine Carlile, who's director of qualifications, assessment and responsible officer at the WJEC. Welcome to all of you. Thank you for joining us this morning. We've got lots to cover so we'll go straight into questions, and the first questions are from Jack Sargeant.

Thank you, Chair, and good morning, everyone. Yes, we have got a lot to cover today, so two questions from me to both Qualifications Wales and WJEC. Firstly, what are your views on the Minister's announcements on the way forward for qualifications in 2021? Secondly, to what extent do you believe that what she has announced is deliverable in a way that is fair to learners and maintains the integrity of the qualifications system?

Thanks, Jack. David.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you very much for the opportunity to be here this morning. Perhaps, from a QW point of view, I'll just start a response to this question. Thank you, Jack. First of all, as we said when we were at the committee in the summer, we recognise the huge difficulties that everyone is facing at the moment, and have done since last March. We absolutely need to focus on learners and the huge loss of teaching and learning time during that period.

I've worked for 35 years as a teacher and a manager in further education and higher education, so I've got a bit of a feel for what it must be like in schools and colleges at the moment. I think it's an almost impossible task for everyone, and this needs to be recognised. But despite my background and experience, I'm not here as a college head or representing schools and colleges, but as the chair of Wales's independent, national qualifications regulator, and QW, Qualifications Wales, has a very clearly defined statutory role and responsibility. I think it's important to understand that we are not a policy maker, we are not politicians, but we are accountable to the people of Wales through the Senedd. Our focus throughout is always on fairness and standards and looking after the interests of learners—past, present and future. Clearly, our current focus is on 2021, which responds to Jack's question, for general qualifications but also, really importantly, we don't forget the vocational qualifications either. I think the issue is that qualifications and assessments are never perfect, even at normal times, and there are no easy options for any of us at present. Indeed, if we're really honest about it, if I look at Qualifications Wales, most, or many, I should say, of our staff and board members are themselves parents, or have family members and friends affected by this, not just from a health point of view, but also from a qualifications point of view. So, it's really difficult.

And as a board at Qualifications Wales, we've got a really experienced board of experts—12 board members—and we recognise that need for flexibility and adaptability during this period. And this was reflected in our response to the Minister's request for advice last month. We fully recognise the pressures and anxiety for young people, their parents and teachers, and issues of the impact on their well-being, and, I go back to that point, the loss of teaching and learning time, and that was reflected in our advice that, obviously, is on the public record.

Specifically responding to your question, in the Minister's announcement on Tuesday, she appears to be agreeing with most but clearly not all of the advice that we provided. We're now awaiting her formal direction, which is the way things work between the Government and the regulator, and then we will consider it and we will respond accordingly, in line with our statutory responsibilities. We remain committed to working with and listening to everyone across the education system in Wales and to implementing the best solutions for 2021, recognising our statutory role and responsibilities. Philip, is there anything else you would want to add in response to Jack Sargeant's question?

Yes, if I can pick up, David, on Jack's point about deliverability. The proposals that we put forward, we had a high degree of confidence that they were deliverable, because they were building on known assessment techniques. It was about adapting current assessments to be able to deliver them quite quickly. We were also very conscious of the fact that teaching and learning time was and is the Minister's priority. So, we were looking at putting things into a very structured environment so that teachers and learners would know exactly what they were going to be facing.

We are concerned about the deliverability of these new proposals. There is a lot of novel finishing that needs to be done quite quickly. And, clearly, the Minister has asked for this design and delivery advisory group to be set up to help her with the policy decisions that would need to be made, and, obviously, that will lead into the thinking that we need to have in terms of assessment and the decisions that we need to make as the regulator with regard to assessment.

Just to give you a little bit of a flavour, what we're concerned about at the moment, I think, is that, without that structure in place, there is continued uncertainty. We think that that uncertainty has some impact on the well-being of learners and teachers. If we think about the potential for actually there being too much assessment—instead of it being structured assessment, if schools start doing lots and lots of assessment, that may actually mean that there is a greater well-being issue for learners. 

I think also we're primarily concerned with fairness and making sure that there's consistency across schools. So, to do that, there is a lot of work to do to work out exactly how that might operate. I think we're concerned about teacher-led outcomes, so the idea that the outcome is eventually determined by the teacher, because that could drive towards inconsistency. We don't want to prejudice the work that needs to be done rapidly over the next six weeks to try and find some solutions to the way forward. So, we will provide advice, as the design and delivery advisory group works, on the things that we think will work, the things that we think are deliverable.

There are lots of issues that still need to be resolved, and those are things like the rights to appeal. We think it would be important that the appeal is heard by the body that makes the ultimate decision. Now, in these circumstances, it looks as though that ultimate decision would be made by the schools because of teacher-led outcomes. That would mean schools having to hear appeals—that would need to be worked through in terms of what does that mean in reality. We're not sure how private candidates would be accommodated within these arrangements, so those children that are education in settings other than schools. We're concerned about equalities, and if we go back to that point of fairness and consistency, we've done work and we've published statistical reports looking at centre variability and we saw that, even within the overall inflated outcomes from 2020, there was a huge degree of variability between schools. So, whatever these assessment mechanisms are, they need to be able to address, or at least tame, those big inconsistencies between schools. And duty about equalities, we saw that attainment gaps changed quite significantly in 2020, so it'd be interesting to see how the design and delivery group thinks about equalities and if they have ideas about how some of those issues might be addressed.

I think, lastly, if we're expecting WJEC to award certificates at the end of this, we want to work with everybody to find out what is the right balance for that. Because WJEC will ultimately have to issue those certificates with their name on them, and we need to make sure that they can stand by those certificates. So, there are lots of issues that need to be resolved very quickly, and that gives us concerns about the deliverability. But it doesn't alter our commitment to working with everybody to try and find a solution.

Thank you, Philip. Ian, do you want to come in on this?

Yes, thank you, Chair. So, from a WJEC perspective, I think it's important that a decision is made and then we recognise some of the challenges now in terms of working on a solution that is deliverable within the time frame that we're talking about. As I'm sure Members are aware, the development of qualifications and qualification assessments is quite a time-consuming process, and in order to deliver something that is deliverable, fair and balanced within a short time frame will require significant effort, and a significant effort not just from a WJEC point of view but from the wider education community point of view. Everybody will need to work together. Everybody will need to sign up to whatever the process is that's defined and put in place so that we all become accountable for it.

I think one of the key things for me is, having been through summer 2020, and Members will be aware of our position in and around that, what we don't want is any fallout from the decisions that are made now happening in summer 2021. We've got to deal with the politics, we've got to deal with the issues and we've got to be upfront in terms of what's deliverable and what's not.

I think, genuinely, as an organisation, we are steeped in process, we are steeped in standards, we are steeped in assessment methodologies and how to apply those in an effective and balanced way. I think where we find ourselves now does cause us some challenges in terms of how we adapt what we do, and the way that we do it, in order to meet the needs of the wider sector. You know, as I said in the last session, we're absolutely across the impact on learners—I mentioned them. I'm the parent of a year 11 child, I know exactly what's going on from a parent and a learner perspective, I know what's going on from a school perspective, and I recognise the challenges in and around it, and I can look at it from both aspects—from a professional point of view, from an organisational point of view, but I also look at it from a parental point of view. And I think we need to be clear, in whatever we do, that this meets the needs of all learners. And I think the jump to just going to a teacher-assessed group will suit some learners; it certainly doesn't suit all learners. So, whatever we put in place needs to be balanced.

I think the work of the design and delivery group is key to this, and the pace at which that group needs to work I can't underestimate. We are probably a tad behind already in terms of where we will need to be to deliver on some of these things, so we need to be on the front foot, as a collective, with joint ownership in terms of what we do, and give that clarity to teachers and learners in terms of what it is that needs to be achieved in the coming weeks and in the coming months. At the end of the day, just to pick up on Philip's final point there: certification rests with the WJEC, and my name goes on the bottom of those certificates, and therefore I have to be comfortable, as well as the organisation being comfortable, that what has been put in place is tried, tested and is fair and balanced to give a fair outcome for learners.

Our role in this will be operating within the regulatory framework. So, back to David's point and Philip's point, there will be Government policy that will go to the regulator, the regulator will then need to direct WJEC in terms of what its role is in and around it. So, again, we need to understand the demarcation of roles and responsibilities. Our organisation will commit to doing whatever it is we need to do, because we want to be part of the solution, not a part of the problem. But there are some key issues that need to be bottomed out in order for us to sign up to that in a clear and effective way.

Okay, thank you. Laura, I think some of the risks et cetera and challenges have been outlined, so if you want to go on to ask about the independent review.

Sure, and I just wanted to comment and say that, I mean, from your contributions this morning, it's certainly not as simple as the announcement initially sounds. You've already, as the Chair has so comprehensively said, outlined your concerns about it—the deliverability, the uncertainty, the fairness and consistency, and we thank you for that. That was really interesting and useful. What are your views on the claim in the independent review that the principle of maintaining confidence and credibility of the qualification systems took primacy in the 2020 exam series?

Perhaps I can offer an answer to this one. I think the committee would agree with me that both of those things are important, and shouldn't be underplayed, so having confidence in qualifications and credibility of the system are both important aspects of what we should be doing. I'm not quite sure what's intended by the review in saying about primacy. So, I'm not sure if there is an implied criticism there. What we would say is that, certainly, Qualifications Wales, we're bound by legislation, and in that legislation, we have two principal aims, and those are to ensure that qualifications are effective in meeting the reasonable needs of learners, and to promote public confidence in qualifications and the qualifications system. So, clearly, we have to think about those things, and they're an important part. The legislation guides us to that and makes us think about those things.

But it's quite a narrow perspective to think that that's all we thought about. We had to consider—. The criteria against which we considered solutions for the summer were the things that are important in the assessment world. So, the manageability of solutions for schools and learners and for WJEC; the validity of outcomes; the reliability of outcomes; the extent to which they could manage any bias that might be within the system; and comparability with other jurisdictions, and that's something, again, that we're guided to through our legislation, in matter 6 that we have to look at. So, it wasn't a narrow perspective of just looking at confidence in the system and credibility of the system, but it's really important.

I think we've got to also remember that, through summer 2020, we were working through lots and lots and lots of unknowns. In fact, there were very, very few knowns, and if we cast ourselves back to the beginning of July, which is the first time that we saw the centre assessment grades, so the raw input that was coming from schools, actually, if you applied those criteria of credibility and confidence, if they'd been closer to broadly similar, which is what we were aiming for in terms of results, because we strongly felt that broadly similar results would give confidence and credibility, then standardisation might not have been needed at all, or standardisation would have changed far fewer grades. So, we have to think about those things of confidence and credibility, but it's not a narrow perspective, it's just important.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Laura.

I think it's not my turn now, as we discussed earlier. Sorry, I—

Sorry, yes, you're right. You're right. I'm moving on now to Hefin David, who is here, but we can't see him.

Yes, my signal is poor. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay, I can just about make out what's been said, but not everything, so if I'm asking a question that's been addressed, then I apologise. But I'd like to just look into the suggestion in the internal review that the level of unevenness in learner experiences into 2021 would make 2021 exams unfair for learners. Do you support that, agree with that, and how do you qualitatively respond to that?

Who'd like to start?

Chair, If I could start, please. We acknowledge that teachers and students are facing significant challenges and that it's an incredibly stressful time for them, but we need to remember that there are limits to how changes to qualifications can help to address those challenges. Qualifications are a measure of knowledge, skills and understanding, and changing the way in which qualifications are assessed cannot, in itself, address the underlying issue of lost learning.

What is critical is fairness, and results, therefore, need to be consistent and fair, and as noted, following the announcement in the Chamber by the Minister for Education, by one of your colleagues, actually, for learners, and for those using qualifications, a grade C in Caernarfon needs to mean the same as a grade C around the rest of Wales. One of the reasons for that is that qualifications are used principally for selection purposes, further study and employment. So, we acknowledge, as shown in our advice, that, actually, an exam series is very difficult, given the circumstances that schools and colleges are operating under, and that was why the advice that we put forward was allowing some flexibility around how assessment could be delivered for 2020-21. I don't know, Philip, if you want to add anything to that.

Nothing to add from me, Chair.

Okay. Ian, did you want to say something?

Yes, please. I think we need to set it in the context as well—and I think we reported this in our last briefing session—that adaptations were already made during the summer, significant adaptations to qualifications structures and the assessment methodologies, to try to reflect those kinds of impending changes in access to teaching and learning. So, we've recognised that already in terms of some of the work that we've done.

I think, to pick up on Jo's point, it is really important to stress that we cannot cater for lost teaching and learning time in assessment. It is about knowledge and understanding, and skills for moving forward. Whilst certification is an important aspect of that, what we want is learners with the knowledge and skills to move forward to be able to deliver in both the work context and in the further and higher education context. So, it's really important that we're able to address that and put something in place that is balanced.

What we've talked about as an organisation is about what further adaptations could we do, or could be in place, in order to cater for those in terms of providing additional optionality, and more clarity in terms of the themes and topics that could be examined or assessed during that process, to give learners and teachers a tad more clarity in terms of what the expectations are. So, rather than looking at the whole thing as a holistic kind of examination where there is no knowledge of what could be in the paper, to add some further advice to the teaching community in terms of some of the themes and topics that we could look at. So it does deal with some clarity in terms of providing further information in terms of the key assessment approaches.

So, yes, there are differences in teaching and learning. It's obvious, and as I say, I can see it from a parental point of view. But I, too, think we have to have something that is clear and consistent in terms of how we assess that at the end point, so we've got something that is fair and balanced across the principality. I don't know whether Elaine might want to add something on that.

Ian, just before you sign off there—can you hear me?

Yes, Hefin, yes.

Can I just say, what you're describing seems to be something that will take a bit of time to resolve, and time doesn't seem to be the thing that we've got? Do you have that concern?

Yes, Elaine might answer that one, Hefin.

Elaine.

Thank you very much. I think what Ian is referring to is that we've already made significant adaptations to qualifications, and in fairness, those of you who are looking to how people are viewing this in other jurisdictions, the work that we have done already has been shown as being something that was preferable for, perhaps, students in England to have, where there are adaptations made in order to address the lost teaching and learning time. Therefore, all we were looking at is how we can help teachers to understand more about the streamlining of assessment.

So, Hefin, to answer your question, we're not looking to reinvent the wheel again. Our adaptations booklets have been out there since September, and we've had some positive feedback from a lot of teachers who appreciated the clarity of how the qualifications would operate next summer. So, we believe there was sufficient knowledge, skills and understanding that was still there for the qualifications to be credible and valid, and that work has been completed.

So, with that in mind, the recommendation for an independent delivery board to oversee the revised approach in 2021—that's going to take a bit of time to resolve as well. Are you supportive of that approach? And what kind of issues do you see with that with regard to these time pressures and the other things that we mentioned?

Who'd like to start on this?

Shall I start, Chair?

Yes, go on. 

Yes, I think it's a fair point, Hefin. And I think the role of the independent delivery board does give ownership to the wider and broader sector. I absolutely get the rationale to ensure that we as a collective, as I said in the opening statement, education community work together in terms of coming up with a solution. The challenges will be in terms of understanding what is achievable within the time frame. So what we've got to have is something that is aligned to current practice that already exists—yes with some flexibility, yes with some more involvement from the teaching community in it, and I can align that to the work that we do in terms of non-examined assessment, or coursework. Those processes are already in place to assess individual candidate work within centres with a moderation process that sits over the top of that in order to put in that standardisation approach.

The biggest concern for us will be in terms of how the group works together to determine what the teacher input is to that kind of process. So, whilst we've got something that is non-examined assessment, whilst we've got something that is an externally set, externally marked task or paper to look at, what you've then got is a third element, which is purely in the control of the teacher and the institutions. And it's how, then, you align that from a consistent and standard approach to bring all those three bits of evidence together to determine what that end grade is. In normal circumstances, the determination of the end grade would sit with the awarding body because you would be looking at a whole range of data and information in order to award the grade. In this case, we're looking at something that is defined and designed by the teacher at the end of the cycle, using various ranges of information. So that design and delivery group really needs to get to grips with that to look at what the impact is on the profession and on the learners in coming up with an outcome that is fair and balanced across the whole system.

Okay. Philip, did you want to come in on that?

Yes, Chair, if I might just add a couple of other points. We recognise that there's a huge amount of work that needs to be done by this group in a very short period of time. This is a group that I think is going to try to meet for the first time tomorrow. So, the Minister has set out that she'd like there to be clarity on the way forward as we go into the spring term, which, given the fact that we're only about six weeks away from the end of this term now, doesn't give a huge amount of opportunity to do what we think will be a large amount of work. 

I think that, as a regulator, we have to set out as well that the Minister has said that she doesn't want this group to override the statutory responsibilities that different bodies have got. And I think principally, what we have to do here is think about our role as the independent regulator. So, you'll be aware, through the legislation, that the Minister can issue directions to Qualifications Wales, but Qualifications Wales then has to consider those separately. So, there is a relationship here between the work of this design and delivery group, which we will be observers at and which we will provide advice to, and then the final decisions on assessment, which will have to be considered by our board because that's part of our statutory responsibility. So, we need to be careful here that this design and delivery advisory group—because it isn't a delivery board, and a board would normally have decision-making powers in a different way, this is an advisory group to the Minister. We just need to be careful about roles and responsibilities. And we'll be writing to Government to make sure that we set that out, because we want whatever decisions are made to be lawful decisions.  

Okay, thank you. Hefin, are you finished?

Yes, thank you. 

Okay, thank you. We're going to go on now, then, to some questions from Suzy Davies on the advice given to the Minister by Qualifications Wales. 

Yes, thank you. Some of those questions have been answered, Chair, so I wonder if I could just take the opportunity to ask Ian if he could tell us what's happening with November resits and January exams. The last posting on the Welsh Government website suggested that they're going ahead as normal, but is that the situation now?

Yes, Suzy. November has happened. So, those exams have taken place. There are discussions ongoing between us and Qualifications Wales in terms of January, with clarity coming fairly soon, I think. Philip, Jo, is that right?

What sort of numbers are we talking about?

Elaine, do you have any ideas about numbers? Sorry, Suzy, I don't know off the top of my head. 

No, that's fine.

The January series, the entries wouldn't be—. I think it was only yesterday that would have been the final date for any amendments, and we've kept that open as such. We had a variety of entries for different subjects. So, we're in the thousands for GCSE English and maths, but what we're talking about at this point in time is how many students actually took the exam. People don't withdraw at this point, so some may have sat, some may not have. The exams have just finished, so we're looking to see as to how many actually sat their exams in November. 

Okay. So, why is it fair for these students to be sitting exams, but not exams in the summer? Because the loss of learning has applied to everybody.

Perhaps, Suzy, if I can answer that. For the November series, we've been quite clear that we see this primarily as a retake opportunity for learners. And those would be learners who, in effect, formalised learning for them would have stopped, or school would have stopped for them, at the end of March. Now, by that point, they would have completed most of their course. So, if we think about the two primary problems that we're trying to solve now, one is the ability to conduct a timetabled exam, given uncertain health conditions. The other, which is probably the more dominant one now, from a fairness perspective, is the differential loss in learning that different learners might have had. So, everybody lost the summer term to varying degrees, depending on what their school was providing in terms of remote learning. But this term has shown much bigger differences between individual schools and individual learners within schools. 

For the cohort that we were encouraging the November series for, they would have been in a consistent place. So, that differential learning is different, and they would have completed most of, if not all of, the course. So, it was about the ability to conduct a timetabled exam. One of the reasons why we were quite encouraging of it being primarily a resit opportunity is that would have reduced the cohort size as well—the number of learners that were actually doing those exams—and that would have meant that it was easier for schools to be able to actually deliver those in terms of the space requirements and the like. So, we think the November series is fair on that basis. 

Okay. Thank you. I thought that was important to get on the record because we are—

Suzy, before you move on to your other questions, can I just ask, please, about year 10 students who are due to do early GCSEs in the spring? Will they just carry on as normal now, or would you be expecting them to slip back to be doing them in year 11? What will be the position for early entries?

I think, Chair, that's something that we still need to work through. So, there are lots of details coming out of the Minister's decision that we now need to think about and try and work our way through. So, we're primarily concerned at the moment with those year 11 students that will be taking exams for progression purposes, but we will be thinking about those year 10 learners. Of course, we're very conscious of the fact that those year 10 learners are just as affected by all of the impact on teaching and learning time as those in years 11, 12 and 13. So, it's certainly something that we need to come up with a solution for fairly quickly. 

Thank you, yes, because it's something that families are worrying about. Suzy. 

Yes. Thank you. Philip, you mentioned or you drew our attention back to your statutory responsibilities a little bit earlier on, one of which, of course, is to promote public confidence in the exams. Wales is likely now to have a different system from the other parts of the UK, even though there are some similarities with Scotland, for example. How do you think this is going to pan out, bearing in mind that there might have been some loss of confidence in qualifications last year because of what happened?

I think it's important to recognise that all of the UK is facing the same problems. So, each jurisdiction is coming up with slightly different solutions—at least at this point different solutions—to the same problem. And it's the problem that I set out earlier about the confidence in being able to deliver timetabled exams, and, more importantly, at the moment, concerns around fairness, with the different learning experiences that learners have got. So, everyone's trying to face the same problem and actually the solutions drive different concerns around fairness. So, one of the primary concerns that the Minister has been trying to address is the issue of fairness, given the different learning experiences and the fact that disruption is likely to continue. 

I think what 2020 has probably proven is that the way that we think about qualifications and qualifications results is somewhat different during a period of crisis like we're in at the moment. I think, in a normal year, where, if I took one example of a statistic—. So, let's look at the proportion of learners who were getting A* and A at A-level—so that, normally, over the last few years, has been changing by about a percentage point, and we reached 27 per cent of learners getting A*s and As in 2019. Now, with the final outcomes—and admitting that this is lifted somewhat by the introduction of the AS4 in August—we ended up with 43.7 per cent of the learners getting an A* and an A in 2020. Now, in normal times, I think that would have been a primary concern that would have played out in the press, would have been a primary concern that you as a committee would have been talking to both us and WJEC about. But that hasn't been an issue at all. The issue has always been about the standardisation process, which was trying to make results look more broadly similar. So, we don't know what this will do in terms of perceptions of results. Clearly, what we wanted to do, through our advice, was put something in place that was as similar as possible to normal times. But what we will be doing is doing everything we can to come up with a system that does promote confidence, given these exceptional circumstances.

Well, I think part of this comparability also refers to different years as well, doesn't it? I was very struck by your emphasis on external setting and external marking of assessments so that it could compare relatively fairly with previous years as well. It's a very strong message in your advice to the Minister. Was that part of the thinking as well, or was that more about alleviating pressure on teachers?

So, it was both. It was about alleviating pressure on teachers. So, teacher-led assessment now, if it is a centre-designed one, they have to think about those, they have to design them, they'll have to make sure that those are valid assessments. Clearly, WJEC go through an extensive process to make sure that their assessments are fair, unbiased, meet equalities requirements, cover the specifications as they should do, sample things like assessment objectives—so, all sorts of technical things that they need to think about. What we didn't want to do was to displace that effort on to teachers, because, first thing, they're not used to that—that's not their core role, that's not something that they do in normal times, so, there would need to be training for them to be able to do that. And also it's a case of let people play to their strengths. The strength of WJEC is in designing good, well-structured assessments that schools could use. 

Equally, what we wanted to do was to think about reliability in the marking. So, if schools are going to be doing the marking of these assessments, they would need to be trained in that, they would need to be standardised, they would need to be moderated—all of those things would, again, draw on teaching and learning time. And what we were very keen to do was to pay regard to the Minister's priority about maximising teaching and learning time.

So, there is something in terms of managing workload, but, from a comparability perspective, what we wanted to do was to have a mechanism by which standards could be maintained, and we believe that teacher-led outcomes provide probably less opportunity for the controls that would normally be in place for maintaining standards. So, if we're thinking about those comparabilities year on year, then, yes, our proposals around external assessments and external marking were partly guided by that need to be fair not only to this year's learners, but to learners past and present. And that's one of the things that we were trying to do last year as well.

Okay, thank you. And just very, very quickly, universities have made it plain that they're very used to dealing with different types of qualifications for entrants. The Minister's decided not to follow your proposal for a single A-level exam in particular disciplines. Are you worried about that, or are you happy to take the universities at their word?

So, Suzy, if I could come in here, I think we have some concerns around that. Obviously, there have been conversations ongoing with universities. Our concern focuses, really, on the offer strategies of universities, and we wouldn't want any of those to disadvantage learners in Wales.

Okay. That's a really politically—a very sort of nicely put answer. I was after a 'yes' or a 'no', really, but thank you very much.

Okay. Thank you. Just before we move on, if I can just ask about the risks of teaching to the test in this system that the Minister's been proposing. The Minister's made a great play of the fact that this is about maximising learning time; do you think there's more of a risk under this system that we'll see more teaching to the test, which could actually distract from quality learning time for young people?

Could I come in here? I think it's definitely a risk. So, we're always concerned about things like teaching to the test even in normal times when there's an unseen examination. So, what we would want is for learners to experience as much of the curriculum and what's set out in the specifications as is possible. I think all of the solutions that we've looked at this year, including the proposals that we've put forward, have presented concerns to us, and it's been something our board has thought about in terms of reduced security requirements do lend themselves to the propensity to teach to the test. What we would have wanted to do, and I think what's important in the way forward, is to position things for teachers in a slightly different way, which is around preparing learners to be able to take the assessments, and, given the fact that schools are saying they don't have enough time to cover all of the content, it's placing greater trust in schools and in teachers to make sure that they're doing the right thing and making sure that they're covering the content, so that, when a learner is presented with an assessment, they can tick that fundamental box of fairness, which is, 'I've had an opportunity to learn the material that I'm going to be assessed on.' So, what we'd need to do is position it in that way, and trust the teaching profession to do the right thing.

Okay. Thank you. We've got questions now from Siân Gwenllian.

Who'd like to start? Philip? Oh, sorry. Let's take Ian first.

Okay.

I think it's a good question, and I think, in terms of—as we've discussed, the role of the design and delivery group is to look at options and to provide advice to the Minister, for ministerial and Government decisions to be made. That would then flow through the normal channels in terms of, as Phillip's already mentioned, a kind of direction to Qualifications Wales for Qualifications Wales then to consider how they apply their role to the direction that's been given, and, similarly, our role would then follow from that in terms of the regulatory framework in which we operate. Clearly, our input to the group is important, in terms of that advice and guidance, because what we've got to ensure, as I said at the start, is that we've got a solution that is deliverable, fair and balanced for everybody. Now isn't the time to be reinventing the wheel, in terms of assessment approaches and assessment methodologies, when we're in a mode of crisis and crisis response. That would need significant thinking, significant discussions and a longer period of time to do it. 

So, I think there's clarity in terms of the flow of information and the flow of decision making. It's how we respond as organisations to that and where we see we can fit into that decision, in terms of the deliverable aspects of it.

Okay. Philip.

Yes, it was just to restate what I said earlier, really, around our statutory responsibilities as the independent regulator. So, there'll be a combination of policy decisions here and then operational decisions that flow from those. The Minister will, no doubt, want to consider this design and delivery advisory group and its recommendations, and it's an advisory group to her, as the Minister, in terms of the policy decisions that she will need to make.

But our board will have to fulfil its statutory responsibilities in making decisions about assessment arrangements. That's one of the reasons why we will be observers and providing advice on the design and delivery advisory group, rather than members of it, because we need to preserve our position as the independent regulator and make sure that we're making those right decisions, which we will be presenting a little bit further down the line.

Perhaps I could make a start on the answer to this. Clearly, the focus at the moment is very much on coming up with the fairest solution possible for learners in 2021 That's the immediate and most pressing need. We've already signalled, in the consultations that we have already done on Qualified for the Future, as we call it, which is the work that we will need to do to respond to the new curriculum—we've signalled that we're open to thinking about different assessment arrangements, and the curriculum itself lends itself to greater subsidiarity and schools looking at part of the curriculum being designed by them. That will have an impact on the way that qualifications function and it will have an impact on the assessment arrangements that we want to put in place.

So, I think we're looking very keenly at what we can learn from 2021, because if different assessment arrangements are being put in place, then we can use that as a means of understanding how effective they are. We will be going out and consulting, subject to a decision by our board later this month, in January. Certainly, we're proposing to go out and consult on the range of subjects that will be included in the core qualifications for the future. Then we will be engaging with and, potentially, consulting later next year on assessment arrangements for those qualifications, or at least the broad principles that we'd need to underpin them.

Yes, I think the simple answer is that we're very open to learning from this experience, and we've been open for longer than just this current crisis. We've been open ever since we started thinking about qualifications for the new curriculum, thinking about what would be the right assessment arrangements for them. It may well be a different balance between centre-led assessments and external assessments, so there could well be some different balance there. So, yes, we're very open to considering it and actively doing so.

Ian.

Thanks, Chair. I think just one comment, Siân, in terms of the question. I think we need to be careful in terms of the language that we're using in terms of what we're doing for this summer. We talk about a new assessment system. What we're talking about is building on assessment systems that are already in place and making some adaptations to cater for the situation in which we find ourselves. I think if we talk about this in the context of saying, 'This is completely new' or 'We're designing something from scratch', then that adds pressure to the system. What we're talking about in terms of the reference to externally set, externally marked tasks is based on the usual approaches that we would take. The difference for this year is that kind of engagement from the teaching profession in terms of an element of those outcomes being generated by the teacher. So, I think we just need to be careful that we're not selling it as something where we're throwing the baby out with the bath water and starting again. It's predicated on standard processes that are in place already and are embedded in terms of the processes that both schools and colleges, and organisations are used to.

Yes, definitely. There's an opportunity to look at what happens in the coming year, isn't there, in terms of how that plays out and in terms of what those outcomes look like? I think we do need to make sure that we don't end up in a situation where the future is only based on what happens this year, at a time of crisis, when we're trying to put something in place to deal with a specific set of situations. So, I think we do need to be mindful of that, and there are longer term thought processes, holistically, about what qualifications are for and how you assess those qualifications. So, this isn't the time to come up with a solution that we will be embedding for the next three, five or 10 years. I think Elaine might have a view there as well, Siân.

Thank you. Yes, I think it's really important, going to back to where we started in this conversation—the qualifications that there currently are, the specifications are structured in a certain way to meet the needs that were required when they were created, and I think what we're saying is that what's important for teachers and for learners is that they understand the balance of that knowledge, the skills, the application of all of that, and the way we assess this year needs to reflect that, because that's the way the learning will have been structured. New qualifications, to meet the needs of the new curriculum, will be structured in a different way, and I think it's really important—. As we always say, the teaching and learning is really, really important. How we measure that will look different, and how the learners bring their contextual experiences into the assessment I think is the valid way that we're going to assess those new qualifications in the future.

David, briefly. Oh, you're muted. There we are.

Okay, thank you. Just before we close, then, can I just ask Philip a question? You've emphasised several times this morning your role as an independent statutory regulator. Are you telling us that there could be things coming out of this delivery group that you would refuse to sign off?

There is the potential for that, and that would be us exercising our independence, which is what the Senedd would expect us to do. I would hope that we don't find ourselves in that situation. So, one of the reasons why I think it's important that we sit as observers on this design and delivery group and provide the advice that both we and WJEC will do as assessment experts is to try and guide the recommendations that they come out with, the proposals that they present to the Minister, to make sure that they're the sorts of things that we can accept. And I think it comes back to this point that I've made several times, that these are very unusual times. These are exceptional circumstances and we need to be flexible in those exceptional circumstances, and that's notwithstanding what we've already said in the response to the last question about thinking ahead for Qualified for the Future. We do want to think about things differently in the future, but here and now, what we need to do is come up with something showing flexibility that can get buy-in across education that gives us a sound platform for those assessments that need to take place in 2021.

The one point we haven't made, which, I think, is important, is we've got to remember that all qualifications will be, and all these assessments are measurements of what young people know. So, that's all the qualification can ever be. It can't be the remedy to all of the problems that they're experiencing, or may be experiencing, in their education at the moment. So, we'll play our part to make sure that those measurements are as fair as they possibly can be in the circumstances, showing the flexibility that we can. 

Okay, thank you. I'm afraid we are out of time, Siân, I'm sorry. Can I thank you all for your attendance this morning and for answering all our questions? We'll send you a transcript to check for accuracy, as usual, but thank you again, all of you, for your time and your input this morning. It's very much appreciated. Diolch yn fawr. The committee will now break for 15 minutes.

Can I welcome everyone back to the Children, Young People and Education Committee? Item 3 is a further evidence session on the impact of COVID-19 on remote teaching, exams and assessment. I'm very pleased to welcome Louise Casella to the committee this morning. Louise is chair of the independent review panel on qualifications. Thank you for joining us this morning. We're looking forward to hearing what you've got to say, and we'll go straight to questions from Laura Jones.

Thank you, Chair. Thanks, Louise. What are your views on the Minister's announcement of the way forward for assessment in summer 2021? And I'll just expand on that: to what extent do you believe that the way forward announced is deliverable in a way that's fair for learners and maintains the integrity of the qualifications system?

Okay, thank you. Can I start by saying, as the independent review panel, I think we very much welcomed the Minister's announcement this week, and it reflected what we had been hearing in the work that we've been doing? We've been listening to some hundreds of statements from those throughout the sector. We've taken quite a deep dive into certain schools, and we've listened, obviously, to Qualifications Wales and WJEC in the work that we've done. We've talked to people at the various tiers within the education system as well. We also had the survey that we undertook, which we had around 4,000 responses to. So, we've been doing an awful lot of listening over the last six weeks in terms of reaching the conclusions and the recommendations that we made.

Our recommendations were that the amount of lost learning that's gone on for this group of learners—and this group of learners for 2021 are probably in the worst position for that, the 2020 cohort had just about completed the curriculum by the time that we had to go into crisis mode, but for this group, they are still facing uncertainty, it's still unknown how much time they will get in school over the coming year. Our conclusion was, taking that in the round and looking at the learning experience in the round, the priority had to be on maximising their learning time in the school, maximising their learning time right through to the end of the summer term. So, by removing the exam period and the pattern that tends to happen that we were hearing about of trying to cram all learning in by March/April, using that period then through to the summer for revision, and the exam period—if that switches and you can actually concentrate on learner time, learner time in front of the teachers at a point where, hopefully, the risk of school closures and being out will be much reduced by next summer. That was going to be a much better outcome for the learner and for their preparation for progress and moving on into whatever else they're going to do next in life.

So, yes, we very much welcomed that. It removed risk, it gave some certainty and meant people could get behind a single system and move forward with that now in the interest of the learner, rather than, potentially, riding the two horses of, 'Maybe exams can happen, maybe they can't. Are we going into centre-based assessments? How quickly would we need to switch on that?' This gives us some time to know what we're doing and for the education sector to come together behind that and co-design an outcome that works for the learners and the learners in 2021.

Thank you, Louise. Are there any areas in the announcement that you would have liked to have seen included that are not?

It's a matter for the Minister to make those decisions. We've made a number of recommendations, and I think most are almost wholly aligned with what we asked to see. I actually can't think of anything else that I would have wanted to see in there. I think it's a balanced set of recommendations that reflect the advice that's come from Qualifications Wales as well, who have a very proper role to play in this.

Thank you. Chair.

Laura, you've got a third question on this section as well. You're muted.

I asked two in one.

Okay. Right, we've got some questions now, then, from Hefin David, whose camera is off. Hefin.

Yes. Can you hear me?

I can.

Okay. You're dipping in and out at this end, but I can just about make out what's being said. I'm sorry about this. 

I did see you on Wales Live last night, where you answered questions very clearly with regard to the review. But I don't know whether it was just me, but I kind of picked up a little bit of trepidation from the regulators with regard to the timescale for implementing what is required in the recommendations. Do you perceive that yourself?

I think we have to be realistic. It's a tight timescale and it needs people to come together and really get behind this now, and step up and do the work. It would be wrong of me to sit here and say it's going to be easy. We didn't think that in making the recommendations that we made. However, we're starting in November. If you look at what was achieved last year, from March onward, to deliver all sorts of different approaches, both in our schools and elsewhere in the public and private sector, it's clear that when we come together as a country and when the education sector comes together, it can make changes.

In a time of crisis, sometimes you really have to get together and do things differently. I accept that our recommendations put some pressure on the system to come together, but we weren't recommending something that was entirely new. Schools are doing continuous assessment, they're doing non-exam based assessments, all through the year in different ways. Our FE colleges are extremely used to doing continuous assessment in terms of the various vocational qualifications that they deal with. So there's a lot of expertise out there about how you do this fairly, how you moderate, how you validate processes, et cetera, which can be brought to bear on this process as well. 

Thank you for that. One of the things you said on BBC Wales last night was that it's not your job to ensure the integrity and standards of the qualification itself, but to make recommendations about a way forward. But can I press you a bit further on that? How do you perceive, when you are making the recommendations, that you are able to prioritise that balance between the needs of learners and what you would then perceive to be the integrity of the qualification? Because I'm sure it came into your consideration.

I do not believe anything that we have recommended diminishes the integrity of the qualifications. I think you have to look at what those qualifications are intended to do, and they are about saying, 'Do these learners have the potential and the learning—have they demonstrated that they've got the potential and the learning to progress on to the next thing in their lives?' And what this shift is is where that judgment is made. Is that judgment made through an exam sat on a single day, or is it made through a series of assessments with the teachers and college lecturers around what the progress of that individual is, and how they have worked?

So, I think one of the problems if you only look at the integrity of the system is that you look, year to year, at groups of learners rather than individual learners, and I think this is one of the issues that then comes out—that if you're simply looking at the performance of the group, you miss that unevenness of learning amongst the individual learners, and I think one of the things we really have to think about for 2021 is what that impact is on the individual, and how unevenly that falls and how unpredictably that falls. Do you take that single-day examination as a measure of all our learners when actually, there's some mitigation that needs to be built into that? It's the teachers and lecturers who are close enough to be able to do that. 

I don't think that that undermines the integrity of the system. I think the system should be supporting the best efforts of every individual learner.

Okay, and then if we look at what you've just said about the well-being of learners, and how they perceive the current stresses of the uncertainties that lie ahead, do you feel that that was a primary consideration of the recommendations you made, and do you think that learners have found centre-based assessments stressful up to now?

Apologies—it cut out a little bit for me. Could you repeat it?

Do you feel that the mental health and well-being of learners was a primary consideration? You've indicated that you considered it as a significant part of your recommendations. Do you feel that centre-based assessment caused a degree of further stress for students?

I think all students are different, aren't they, in terms of how they respond to the different regimes that are in place and what's put in front of them. But I think one of the accepted issues around stress and uncertainty is the uncertainty of what’s going to happen. And I think what we’re doing here is trying to remove that uncertainty and to give the learners clear sight by January about what the system will look like and what’s happening. And removing the pressure of the final exam when students feel that they have lost a lot of learning is also removing a stress for them.

Ongoing centre-based assessment is something I think students are used to. It depends how you label it, it depends how you present it, but continuously in schools—schools and colleges are used to doing formative assessment, supporting their learners about how well they’re doing, being reflective in their learning, et cetera. So our view as a panel was that that produced far less stress than the exam system, but it does need to be carefully defined so that students understand what it is that feeds in. And that’s about the clarity, but also that’s why we’re saying that teachers and lecturers should come together to be part of the design of the system, because they understand that and they understand that very well.

Okay, Chair. With the risk of my Wi-Fi cutting out, I’m going to stop there.

Okay, thank you, Hefin. We’ll move on to some questions from Suzy Davies.

Thank you, Chair. Hello, Louise.

Hello.

It was interesting what you said, actually, that exams are there to help people understand whether individuals have the potential to progress. Qualifications Wales said that they are there as a measurement of what people know. Do you think that those are mutually exclusive statements, or are they complementary and that you’re basically saying the same thing but in a different way?

I don’t think they’re mutually exclusive. I think there may be a slight philosophical difference about how we approach that one, and I’m not the exam regulator. With our job in terms of looking at learning lessons from 2020 and making recommendations into 2021, we took very much the perspective that we needed to look at the whole learner experience and how this group of learners in 2021 could be supported to progress with their studies. So, I think if you only took exams as a test of what you know and what you can produce on a single day, I’m not sure that that’s really what we want for our learners, is it? Don’t we want our learners to be able to progress in accordance with their potential and their learning? And in terms of what we do this year for this group, our assessment regime has to reflect what it is that this group of learners have experienced.

Yes, that’s what I was coming to, really. I wasn’t trying to catch you out. It’s a difficult time, isn’t it? But we do have comparability between years to consider here so that students from the past don’t feel disadvantaged, or—well, disadvantaged, let's put it that way. What we had in the summer of this year, do you think that that fundamentally undermined the trust in exams, whatever they’re for, or is this a situation that’s recoverable and exams at some point will play the place that we always had them playing?

Right. In terms of the 2020 summer, I think it’s generally accepted—and I don’t think this is just from me—that there has been an undermining of confidence in the system because of what happened in 2020. And this is the reason why the independent review was asked to take a look at this and to look at what lessons we could learn from this and take it forward. And I think, in doing that, we are reflecting—and our final report, which comes out in December, will reflect on this very much more on events of 2020. Our interim report concentrated, really, on recommendations for 2021. And I think we will have to take some lessons out of that about how we move forward. It would be a waste not to, wouldn’t it? This is a time when we are all learning some things, and crises give us opportunities to really reflect on given ways of working and the way we’ve always done this. And actually, when you have to adapt very quickly, you often create some quite interesting innovation as well.

So what’s the place of exams going forward? Well, it’s not for me to make that judgment, but I think what we will see, and I think particularly from the work that will be done for 2021 and how that then will align with the curriculum for the future—

If I just butt in there, you’ll get some questions on this particular point later on, Louise. It was mainly to do with: are exams even trustworthy anymore? I’m sorry, I didn’t ask the question in that way.

Of course there are circumstances in which exams are appropriate and trustworthy, but I think it’s about matching it to what your learner experience is and how your learners are prepared for that. So, it's all contextual, isn't it? It's all about the context in which the learner is operating and learning. 

So, can I just flip that over? Are teacher assessments or centre-assessed grades trustworthy as well? You'll have heard Qualifications Wales's comments on how far out they were, certainly in this last year, compared to exam results in previous years. We're all familiar with this story. Do you understand that there's concerns about those as well?

I do understand, and certainly, in our conversations with the schools and colleges about the work they had to do this year to very rapidly produce the centre-assessed grades, and the rank order that they had to submit, there was an expectation there that there would be a professional conversation around what they had produced, if it was out of line with expectation. There was an expectation that they would have had the opportunity to discuss that and to understand it. And, of course, because of the time considerations, the qualifications bodies didn't feel that that was doable across the summer.

What you've got the opportunity for now, in terms of doing centre-based outcomes, is to introduce those systems of validation of the process being used. You've got the opportunity to do some standardised assessment across, and this is where the WJEC's expertise and input will come in. And you've got the opportunity to do some moderation of some of those pieces of work. You can introduce that into the system to create more standardisation of the process as it goes through. And I think one of the problems of last year that we've been identifying is that standardisation of the outcome at the end created enormous perturbation. And that's where your problem was—in standardising the outcome, when you hadn't tried to standardise the system and the various processes that fed into the system in the first place. 

Okay. Thank you. Obviously, we've heard concerns about whether there's enough time for that, but, obviously, you've responded to that as well. I just very quickly wanted to ask you about the A-levels. As you know, the Minister has decided not to proceed with any set exams for A-levels. Have you got any concerns about how universities might look at that? They've been saying very reassuring things, but how can we be certain that they mean it?

I think you can be certain that they mean it. As you know, I'm from the university sector; this is an area I actually understand extremely well. We talked to universities about this. We talked to universities in Wales, we talked to universities in England about it, and we discussed with them what their concerns might be, and where their priorities would lie, because they are very conscious of the experiences the students coming to them are having at the moment. Certainly, the priorities of those that we spoke to were about maximising the learner time, getting them to the point where they were ready to progress with confidence into their courses, and that's where they put their priorities. 

They're also extremely used to dealing with all sorts of different qualifications. They deal on an international basis. Not every qualification comes on an examined basis; many of them come on an assessed basis. What the universities want confidence in is that that's robust. And the other thing that universities told us is that they don't want a late change of course. They want certainty now. They want to be able to know now what's going to happen so that they can adapt. I think, for them, the worst thing in 2020 was the late switching—the late changes that then created an enormous workload for them and the way that they then had to deal with that, which created all sorts of issues about admissions and delays for students, and the stress around that for those students, and the stress for the university staff, who dealt extremely professionally with it, but had to change course at such a late date. And they don't want to see that again. 

I just want to finish off on this point, because the big losers in that great change were those high-demand, high-status courses—the science, technology, engineering and maths courses, and the medicine courses. Have you had the reassurances from the universities for those particular courses that Welsh students won't be disadvantaged by the lack of a traditionally set A-level?

It is one of the areas that we explored, certainly. And if you take something like medicine, you have the various testing—independent testing—that they do with applicants to look at aptitude. And exam results, of course, are not the only thing that they take into account. They're looking at aptitude; they're looking at much more than that in their admissions. So, yes, it is something we discussed with them and had reassurance on. 

Thank you. Thank you, Chair. 

Thank you. I'm going to go to Jack Sargeant now, who first of all has got some questions around risk. Jack. 

Thank you, Chair. Good morning, Louise. Just to focus on risk firstly, both Hefin and Suzy Davies mentioned, obviously, centre-assessed grades, and fairness of the approach going forward. Can I just press you again on that? Are you confident or can you go perhaps as far as assuring this committee that the way forward of centre-assessed grades—that the level of work in Connah's Quay, for example, to gain a C, will be the same as in Ceredigion and Cardiff? And further to that, what overall assessment of any risks from the approach announced by the Minister for 2021—what is your assessment of those?

You'll have seen in our interim report that we call out the risks quite explicitly in the recommendations that we gave. Alongside those risks, we talked about the mitigating actions that needed to be taken. So, I think we have to be clear that no approach is risk free and so the importance is what you do to mitigate for those risks. We put those risks in a number of categories. We certainly looked at the issue about comparability, and this is where we feel that the standardisation issues need to come in and what I've talked about in terms of validation—standardisation and moderation needs to come in to create that comparability.

We talked about risks around fairness for certain disadvantaged groups and one of the issues there that we heard from those giving evidence to us is the risk of unconscious bias in the judgments being reached, and that's something we took very seriously. We think there is a role for training and development in this and certainly one of the things we heard from the FE colleges is some very good work that's gone on there around that that could be shared.

There is a risk too in terms of the timing, and we've talked about that—can it be delivered, the capacity, can it be delivered quickly enough? And this is about getting on with it right now in terms of the design and delivery group, which meets for the first time next week. And there's a risk there about the capacity of the system to cope with change. We went back and tested that very hard with the teachers and school leaders who talked to us about being engaged and involved in the scheme and asked them, 'Are you sure?' and the answer came, 'Yes, we're sure. We think this is such high priority, we have to be engaged with it—it's so important to our learners'. So, we called out those risks and looked at them. We're not saying that it's risk free, but neither is an exam system risk free. And I think if you went with it—if you were to have gone down the exam route, you'd also be carrying a lot of risks in that.

We were very struck by one of the things that we heard from Sir Alasdair Macdonald, who advises on pupil deprivation and achievement. One of the phrases that he used to us, which summed it up to a large extent, was that exam systems advantage the most advantaged and disadvantage the most disadvantaged. You'll see that quote in our report. And this is about, when you go back to the unevenness of learning—those who can compensate for that unevenness tend to be in the most advantaged groups, and those who can't compensate tend to be in the most disadvantaged groups. And if you then echo that in the exam system, you are amplifying those disadvantages. So, I think that is a far greater risk than any of the risks that we've called out and talked about the mitigation for, for the system that we recommended.

Okay. Thank you for that answer. Obviously, you've noted some risk there and it's still there. So, assurances perhaps—the way I'm reading it is that you're confident about this being a fair system. If I can move on to the delivery group that you mentioned in previous answers, which the review obviously recommended—the establishment of that. Will you explain to the committee what you see the role of the group or board being, who it should involve and in what ways such a board or group, whatever we want to call it, would have improved the outcomes this summer?

As you've seen from our report, this was one of our key recommendations. This is something we think has to underpin the work for the coming year. As I said, we spoke to a lot of people in the work that we've done over the last six weeks, and we were absolutely struck throughout by the professionalism and the hard work of everybody at every layer of the system who we've talked to, who were working in extreme, crisis conditions and responding with decisions and were very, very fast in doing this. And each of them was working in their own area to make the best decisions that they could make.

However, one of our reflections was—a reflection from my professional life and our professional lives, really—when you're in that kind of major change scenario, which is what you were across the summer, of having to make some very big changes, you need to bring people together who are delivering, to make sure that everything is aligned and can be done together, and that sometimes needs to step outside of the normal boundaries. You bring people together to kind of do that, and you can refer back into your decision-making and assurance route afterwards, but you need to bring them together to design together, and to spot where things might fall down the cracks, or is the communication for everybody absolutely right, is the design going to work for all groups.

So, we felt that there was something missing there in 2020, as everybody—as I say, this is not a criticism of any individual whatsoever; this was people working their socks off in major crisis conditions. But there is a need for something to bring everything together and to spot some of the risks and issues that the system that was being developed had in it, and to provide some challenge and questioning of that.

What we're suggesting with the design and delivery group now is first, the design phase, which is about bringing that expertise together to say, 'Yes, this would work. Where does the expertise already sit? What can we learn from it?' It's not about designing something completely new. I did catch Ian speaking to you earlier, talking about drawing on the expertise that they've got and the experience that they've got and I think that's enormously important. It's about having everybody there to have a shared confidence in what goes forward, and then for the delivery part, it really is about saying, 'And are we all confident this is happening? Are we all confident that this is going forward?' and keeping an eye on all the parts coming together as a whole in delivering that changed system.

Thank you. And finally, Chair, if I may, you mentioned then about bringing everyone together and this isn't about a certain individual group and so on. Can I just ask you for your assessment on how the group would impact Qualifications Wales as the independent qualifications regulator here in Wales?

Qualifications Wales has this role to ensure that the qualifications stand up to scrutiny and everything else. And they are sitting, as I understand—and I haven't got the details of the group; that hasn't been shared with us. We made the recommendations and I've seen the announcement, but I haven't seen the working process of the group. So, I understand that there will be observers on the group and I think that's proper, in terms of where they are in the system, and where their legal responsibilities lie. But I'm sure they will also engage in the group. They're not simply going to sit as observers and not engage, and their engagement, and helping the group understand what works and what doesn't, will be really important in moving that forward.

Okay. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. We move on now to Siân Gwenllian.

Okay. I'll break that down a bit. There was quite a lot in there. Is the design and delivery advisory group the same as the board that we recommended? It's not quite the same, but it has had further thought and consideration given to it in relation to the governance roles of the various parties and how they play in, and I think that's quite appropriate. But it is close enough to what we recommended for us to feel comfortable that here is a board that can really bring people together and design and test the impact of decisions together. The decisions on that and how that will play out—I would sincerely hope that, as Philip Blaker said earlier, it becomes a collective decision that the board, then—the Qualifications Wales board—has confidence in because of the role that has been played. But, that is the way that we were proposing it: that what's needed is that collective confidence in how things move forward.

Sorry, the last part of your question was about—.

I was asking whether your final report will, actually, address some of the problems that—. I gather that the need for a delivery board is because the process wasn't clear last time and that the responsibilities need to be clearer. So, will your final report be helping us to address some of those problems, going forward?

Yes, sorry. Yes, one of the things we will be reporting on in our final report is these issues about decision making and flow of information between places, and the context of that as well. I do stress that we recognise the context in which people were working, but we have to take lessons from that about where we then go into 2021.

One of the big strands around this in our report will be about communication, and communication with the different audiences that not only have an interest in what's happening, but are impacted by what's happening and who have to implement what's happening. Each of them needs to understand the basis for it, and I think the earlier people are involved in that decision making—part of what the design and delivery board is about is getting that earlier involvement and understanding—the more they will feel invested in the solution. So, what we were looking for was something that was done with the sector, because, certainly, what we heard last year was the sector feeling it was done to them and they weren't able to input as much as they would have wished. 

Yes, we have already mentioned that in the interim report, as you picked out, that we feel that there is an opportunity to involve the young people at a much earlier stage in all of this and to listen to their concerns, and to listen to their ideas as well. We've had what I have to say was the absolute pleasure of having met with various young people in the course of our work. The quality of the input we have had from those young people has been outstanding.

We had a brilliant session with the Youth Parliament, and I think the Youth Parliament could really contribute and have a role to play here. We have heard such thoughtful contributions from school pupils and college students across Wales. Those contributions, I have to say, were so fair and balanced; they were so considerate of the whole of their year group and the whole of their contemporaries; they were not fixed on their personal positions. We were knocked out by it, let me say. They gave us some really brilliant contributions and I think they need to be listened to—it's really important.

Oh, I haven't got that crystal ball, but let's hope we have moved forward. I think this does give us an opportunity to really think about how assessment works for our young people and how that would work in the context of the new Curriculum for Wales. I think there really are opportunities to shift our thinking. As you say, there's a lot of debate going on out there and a lot of research going on about what the best outcomes are, and I think one of the things we're proving in Wales is our willingness to be innovative and our willingness to listen to the research and bring the evidence base into the steps that we take and the decisions that we make as a whole. So, what I hope we will take out of 2021 is that open mind around what might be possible and what would work best for our young people, and what the research and evidence might show us for the future. So, times of crisis actually sometimes offer you opportunities and we need to take those opportunities that are offered to learn and to move forward. So, no crystal ball, but I hope it doesn't look the same in five years' time or we will have wasted an opportunity to learn.

Okay, well, we've come to the end of our questions, so can I thank you, Louise, for attending this morning and for answering all our questions? This is your first appearance before the committee, so just to say that we will send you a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting. Thank you again for your time this morning. Diolch yn fawr.

And the committee is now going to break until 11:20.

Can I welcome everybody back to the Children, Young People and Education Committee for our third evidence session of the morning? I'm very pleased to welcome Guy Lacey, who is chief executive officer at Coleg Gwent and vice-chair of ColegauCymru; Kay Martin, who is the principal at Cardiff and Vale College, and chair of the ColegauCymru curriculum and quality group; Meinir Ebbsworth, chief education officer and corporate lead officer, schools and culture at Ceredigion council, and here today representing the Association of Directors of Education; Mike Tate, assistant director of education and lifelong learning at Cardiff council, also representing the Association of Directors of Education; Councillor Ian Roberts, leader of the council and cabinet member for education at Flintshire County Council, and education spokesperson for the Welsh Local Government Association; and Arwyn Thomas, managing director of GwE, representing all the regional education consortia. Thank you all for joining us this morning. We've got lots to cover, so we'll go straight into questions from Jack Sargeant.

Diolch, Chair, and bore da, pawb. It's good to see you all, and in particular my own leader of the council. Good morning. Can I ask the witnesses, what are their views on the Minister's announcements on the way forward for assessments for summer 2021, and to what extent they believe the way forward announced is deliverable in a way that is fair to learners and maintains the integrity of the qualifications system?

Who would like to start?

Perhaps, if I could take that, madam chair. As WLGA spokesperson for education, I have held meetings of 22 cabinet members from across Wales with the education Minister, with Ian Morgan from the WJEC, and with Phillip Blaker. I would say that there is a very warm welcome for the Minister's announcement, and in particular because it puts the young people who have suffered the most in this at the heart of the process. It recognises the challenges and puts the young people at the heart of the process. I was a teacher for many years, and I'm also very pleased that it recognises the professional role that teachers have to play in the examination system, or in the qualifications system. I shouldn't call it the examination system really. The system is something that should recognise the achievements of the young people and needs to adapt, as our schools have done throughout this crisis, to the fact that we still need qualifications, but need to adapt to the needs of the pupil through changing circumstances. So, in fact, yesterday, GwE, which is the education consortium for north Wales, met, and are in the process of preparing a letter of thanks to the Minister from the six local authorities in north Wales, for her decision, saying that,

'This gives the best opportunity to demonstrate a student's ability regardless of how COVID has affected them during the year. It's taken significant pressure off the shoulders of learners, teachers and school leaders.'

Yes, we can't pretend that the way ahead may not be difficult; there will be issues now, which GwE have certainly offered to work on, and WJEC and local government will play its part in it as well, in how we actually achieve this now, but I think a resounding, 'Thank you, Minister' from the WLGA.

Thank you. Does anybody have anything to add?

If I could, just briefly, just to say that, in the independent review, learners across the FE sector were spoken to by the people, and this was the result that they wanted too. So, while there is never going to be universal agreement for whatever decision the Minister made, it is generally welcomed, and now we must work together to make sure it is deliverable in the timescales, and we deliver what is best for the learners in Wales.

Thank you. Guy, did you want to come in?

Thank you, Chair. I was going to say something very similar to what Kay has just said. It is warmly welcomed. I think, as Kay has said, for young people within the FE sector, this was their preferred way forward. So, we absolutely welcome it and we're ready to work with the design and delivery advisory group to ensure that the implementation is effective, which, I think, is the next key step in the process.

Thank you. Jack.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you for those answers. Everyone seems to be singing from the same hymn sheet there, but also recognising the challenges that we still face. One particular question I have, finally, is on vocational qualifications, and it's something that's come into my inbox following the announcement of the Minister. Can I ask the witnesses, and perhaps ColegauCymru, really: do you have any concerns about the impact on vocational qualifications going ahead?

Guy.

Thank you. Yes. The short answer is, 'Yes, we do.' I think Kay is probably better placed to answer this than me, given that she chairs our curriculum quality group, but the short answer is 'yes'. I think the top-level issue here is that so many vocational qualifications that are delivered in Wales are not regulated in Wales, and that is a key part of our concerns, but I suggest Kay says a few words.

Okay, absolutely, Guy. We work with about 40 awarding organisations that operate right across the United Kingdom, so are governed by the three-nations agreements, and so, we have to wait, with each of those awarding bodies, to work with them to see what changes they will make. But we don't have control of that in Wales, so there will be different ones. So, we are now working with those and we've got many of those already agreed, if you like, across Wales. But there are challenges there because there are still examinations in January for many of the Pearson courses, and we still have many learners in Wales who, you know, are still completing qualifications from last year. So, the big challenge is the large number of learners on vocational qualifications and working with so many awarding bodies. So, we are working with each one of them, and each one of them has a different solution, so it is a challenging situation.

Thank you. We've got some questions now on continuity of learning, starting with Laura.

Thank you, Chair. Welcome, everyone. Nice to see you all here today. Given the ongoing nature of the pandemic and continued disruption of learning—the challenges, obviously, of the home and blended learning is something that I experience as a mother of a 10-year-old—how has the education sector been able to implement any lessons learned from the March lockdown?

Can I add to that, really? I think what both Meinir and Arwyn have talked about is a real opportunity, and the opportunities that have come from this period, and they very much talked about the pedagogical response to this, and how that's developed, in terms of the progress that's made in a very short period of time. I think what it's also allowed support services, local authorities and Welsh Government to do is to really get upstream in terms of ensuring that the majority of our families are prepared for a different approach to learning in terms of the hardware and the connectivity around that. But it's also ensured that we're aware of that as a particular issue and we can address it, and local authorities are addressing it through the resources from Welsh Government to ensure that those pupils from backgrounds where there are elements of digital deprivation have got the appropriate and necessary resources to allow them to develop as they go further. I think, really, what we have to look at—and really this goes back to what Arwyn was saying—are the opportunities that we've had over the last six months really wouldn't have been enabled to the teaching profession, and we've seen huge impacts in terms of the differences and the changes to pedagogy, more so, I think, than we've seen for the last 30 years.

Could I just possibly come in to agree there with what Mike has said? I think the issues of digital exclusion early on, and the resources that came from Welsh Government to provide schools with additional laptops and devices to loan out to students, were really key in all of this. The inclusion agenda has been quite clear.

There is an issue where a family's only connection, or a home's only connection, to the internet may be through a mobile device. There is an issue there of data, and I know, as far as my authority is concerned, we did lend out some dongles to students so that they could access the lessons. But I do think, as spokesperson for education, I must pay tribute to staff in schools for the fantastic work that they've undertaken, and the speed at which they've undertaken it. Mind you, I suppose we've all got used to remote computer meetings during this time, and how to use various systems, but the staff in school need recognition for the fantastic work they've done on a number of fronts.

Okay, thank you. Guy, okay? Do you either of you want to come in from an FE perspective?

I was going to say from an FE perspective, I think we were well placed in March to continue learning, which we did, because of the connectivity and the staff development, the continual professional development that had gone on beforehand, and the work with learners as well. Obviously then we learned that, in September, we needed to get the new learners ready for online learning very quickly, and make sure the inclusion issues that were mentioned were dealt with. But obviously, the vast majority of our learners couldn't complete their qualifications online, and they've had to come into college since August to complete their competency based qualifications in engineering, carpentry, hospitality, health and social care, et cetera. So, they weren't able to be awarded their qualifications until much later.

Okay, thank you. Laura.

Yes, thank you for those answers. I think it's clear to us all, in that first lockdown, there were different experiences across schools and colleges, even classrooms. But we've come an awful long way in that time. As you say, everyone's had to get up to speed very quickly with their digital skills, and it's been impressive, the speed at which that's happened, actually. There were issues, as Mr Tate and Mr Roberts outlined, on computers and things being available for children. Now, I think that's pretty much sorted, but there are still internet issues. We're in Wales, and this happens, doesn't it? It needs to be sorted pretty quickly. But to what extent are schools and colleges able to ensure that there is continuity, fairness and consistency across the board with this new way of learning, for all learners? How have learners with additional learning needs been supported in this way?

Who would like to start?

Thank you. Anything from FE?

Yes, I think that the learners with additional learning needs, particularly those with severe learning difficulties, were clearly the ones most affected, because learning online for them depends a lot on the ability of their parents or carers to support them. And while support mechanisms were put in place that I’m aware of in schools and colleges, it was difficult to get full engagement with some of those learners, whatever efforts were tried, because of the ability of their parents and carers.

Okay. Thank you. Laura, are you finished?

Yes, that’s something I was concerned about, and that was in my inbox. Several of the people I spoke to, that’s what they were concerned about, because there was a heavy reliance on parents who weren’t used to dealing with that situation. Thanks very much for those. Thanks, Chair.

Thank you. We’ve got some questions now from Hefin David.

Yes, I just wanted to make sure that this has been answered. There was a suggestion that there should be a minimum offer for learners who are required to study from home—for example, a guaranteed personal contact. Do you feel that that’s appropriate, and how do you respond to the deliverability of that?

Who would like to start? Arwyn.

Can I follow up on that? I think it's about contextualising the offer as well. As Arwyn said, over the time, we've been able to really focus down on individuals. And whilst there is now a lot more guidance, and a lot more guidance in terms of what that offer should look like, it's ensuring that appropriateness of that to the age of learner, to where they are, to the engagement and to how best the individual learns really is taken into consideration as well. And I think, throughout this process, we've had the opportunity to make those contacts, to develop that one-to-one approach and to really look at our learners. But whilst we all now have a sort of minimum expectation of what learning should look like across Wales, it's really important that we look at how we contextualise that for a school, an area, et cetera, very much like how we're interpreting the curriculum in these areas as well. 

Hefin, before you come in, can I ask a question? Arwyn, you've said a couple of times that you're aware of schools doing particular things that are good practice. What's the role of the consortia and, indeed, the local education authority when you're aware of schools that aren't doing those proactive things, and to what extent are you systematically monitoring that? I saw the Education Achievement Service report on remote learning that was published in the summer, and it was very headline stuff, I thought, really. So, how can we be assured as a committee that you're really going to drill down in those schools where maybe children are getting a lesser offer?

Thank you. Mike, have you got anything to add?

I think this is an absolutely fundamental question, because it's fundamental in terms of our change in thinking of what is school improvement. I think we're now, with KPIs and the delivery of exam results, in a very different place. We now need to be looking at fundamentally what schools are and how schools are doing. And this is certainly one of the parts, in terms of our improvement partners and the principal improvement partners, that is about having that dialogue with schools. And whilst we're on that learning journey in terms of the development of pedagogy, we're also on a learning journey in terms of how we assess how schools are doing, and it's looking then at all of these different things: well-being, the impact of learning, the delivery of learning, going back to the last question on the minimum offer—all of these things, I think, are starting that conversation, and this is a really important conversation to be had because now we're actually talking about teaching and learning. So, I think this is absolutely fundamental to us, going forward.

Thank you. Hefin.

Who'd like to start? Arwyn.

Is it possible to repeat the question? Hefin broke up; I couldn't hear the whole question. If it's possible please.

Hang on a minute. I've got my—. Wait a second. There we go. Let's try again.

Thank you. Mike—

Chair, I didn't want to go to everyone. I think we're going to be forever if we keep on. I've got one more question. Is that okay?

Okay, yes. I was keen to get an FE perspective, but I'll take that after you've asked your question.

Yes. I was specifically—. And I apologise—I'm not sure if it was my poor Welsh, which I'm constructing myself, or whether the signal was bad, but I did want to come back. With regard to live lessons in schools, I wanted to know what support teachers have had to achieve it. So, how have teachers been able to do it? Because one of the problems—. I've got a three- and five-year-old at home, and not every teacher is able to achieve that.

I'm going to go to Guy or Kay first, then, maybe, to pick up the general issue and also to say something about support for teachers.

Yes, I can start—. Go on, Guy.

Sorry, Kay. I think, in the post-compulsory setting, it is slightly different. I think, for many of our learners, it's more about learning on demand than it is necessarily live, so all colleges for a long time have had elements of blended learning in the delivery of their programmes. All colleges use virtual learning environments, and this has allowed, over a period of time, for learners to pursue elements of their learning at a time that suits them.

So, I think, in the post-compulsory setting, there's probably less, if you like, of an urgency to have live sessions, but having said that, I have to say that I know of lots and lots of really creative examples of staff in further education delivering to groups of learners, and indeed delivering to groups of learners in mixed settings, some of whom may well be in college whilst others are at home and still delivering a live experience.

And then, just very briefly, in answer to the question from Hefin about support for teachers, again, in all of the colleges, there's an extensive network of support staff who are trying to upskill and improve digital skills amongst all staff in colleges, and they themselves form a very effective informal network across the colleges in Wales.

Okay, thank you.

I was just going to say that each college has got their digital department, if you like, and has been training staff for several years in digital competency, but every college has got its challenge; some staff are not as easy to come to a digital world as others, and we're working with those staff who are less competent to make sure that happens.

As Guy said, live learning online is something that we've been doing for many years, so that continued throughout March, April and May. One of the things I wanted to mention was that some of the groups who actually benefited from that live learning at home were our young carers, and people who are our junior apprentices across colleges, who are 14-year-olds, who actually said that having some time at home gave them more time to do the other things they needed to do, their family commitments, and that was particularly true as well for our English for speakers of other languages people, who are mainly refugees, who digitally, we had to equip them very quickly, and like the schools, we were grateful for some of the additional resource provided by Welsh Government for that. But they are people who really need to keep that language. When you're learning a language, you have to keep at it every day, and keeping them on live learning was really important during lockdown for the more vulnerable areas.

With the more mature learners, they're more autonomous. Our A-level learners were more autonomous and could get on with things more easily. But I just wanted to mention the benefit for some of the parents, young carers, who said they benefited, actually, from having some of the time at home and still being able to learn.

Thank you. And is there anything anybody would like to say from a school's perspective in terms of support for teaching staff? Mike.

I would just say we've got good support across the consortium, across Wales in terms of development of learning approaches here. But really, I wanted to reinforce the fact about expectation, and that, I think, what Kay has said in terms of the FE sector, I think that, as it filters down, is really important because the expectation shouldn't be that you've got young people sat in front of a screen for five hours being spoken at, because actually, this is an opportunity at the moment to start individualising learning and look at the different ways of learning. So, rather than just replace face-to-face in an actual environment with face-to-face in a virtual environment, what we've seen schools do—and supported with training from the consortium—is look at lots of different approaches and tools to learning in effective blended learning that is then supported by what we see back in school. So, I think the training has been really important. There's a lot more work to do there, there's no doubt about that, but there's also a lot of sharing of that best practice. I think this is where the consortia really do form a key part of that, because their improvement partners and their principal improvement partners get a good overview—they can really bring that together and then start sharing that. 

Arwyn.

Just to say very quickly, Chair, we're working with the Welsh Government on this particular issue—learning design on digital—and really trying to look externally to bring more expertise into the education sector. So, we're at early stages in learning design, from live-streaming and digital, and it's something that we are very keen to learn from others and adopt into the education workforce as we go forward.

Thank you. Ian, were you wanting to come in?

Yes, please. Local authority officers have worked closely with schools, with heads' federations and so on during these difficult times. Our relationship with GwE, as our regional consortium, has been excellent in north Wales, and they have provided considerable support to schools, as the local authorities have. Certainly, I have met with headteachers in Flintshire on a number of occasions and have received no major concerns about the advice they've been getting, either from the local authority or from the regional consortium, which is very good.

Thank you. Meinir, briefly, please.

Thank you. I've got some questions now from—

Sorry, could I possibly come in on the immersion issue? As it happens, my granddaughter was in Ysgol Gymraeg Croes Atti, y Fflint, in the nursery. Now, she has obviously missed out considerably. She was just beginning to respond to me when I spoke to her in Welsh around Christmas and after Christmas. Six months out of school, from the week before the Easter break until the middle of September, have, I would suggest—well, I think she's lost what language she was beginning to develop.

I do have a concern in all of this that at the very youngest age—. I suppose, as a former primary school teacher of many years, for the very youngest children, we're talking about giving them experiences in school and allowing them to learn about the world and life, and to socialise. I do believe that, to a certain extent, the age group that will have missed the most is some of our youngest children in schools. It's a shame, really.

Thank you. Thank you, Ian. I've got some questions now from Suzy Davies.

Thank you, Chair. Quite a lot of what I wanted to ask has been covered, but I think it's pretty clear, isn't it, that regardless of the improvements that might be made in the supply of online teaching, we're still no clearer on how we persuade our young people at home to take up the offer in a way that's meaningful. You know, there are two sides to this story, and I think we should all be concerned that 40 per cent of learners have spent 10 hours or less on remote learning. This is why we're getting exams cancelled, if we're honest, isn't it? The learning has not been able to be done.

What can you tell me, in your respective sectors, about how much you've been able to take advantage of the £29 million for catch-up that the Minister has offered? What specifically might you be using some of that money for in supporting the mental health of your pupils and students?

Who'd like to go first? Guy.

I'm happy to kick off. So, our challenges in post-16 have been, as Kay alluded to earlier, the very large number of vocational learners who were unable to complete in the last academic year. So, the additional funding we've received from Welsh Government for catch-up learning has been critical in ensuring that we're able to try and deal with some of that backlog to young people's ability to progress.

Can I just ask—? Sorry, Guy, I don't mean to interrupt, but in answering the question, would you mind saying whether you've taken on any new teaching staff as part of this?

I think it would be fair to say that across the sector there has been a limited number of additional staff taken on, but it has resulted, I know, in staff working at different times outside of the academic year. So, colleges, certainly, had a big push for the delivery of assessment towards the end of the academic year and into the beginning of the summer break, and colleges also then had a push on trying to complete assessments for learners before the new academic year started this September. I think it would be unfair to say that that funding has created new jobs, but it has certainly led to an increase in activity and staff being paid for working outside of their normal work routines. That backlog of assessment is still there in the colleges sector, and particularly in certain key sectors. We have particular problems in health and care qualifications that are related to the ability to do work placements, which can't be done at the moment. In general terms, I think we've really seen the impact in that delayed assessment group, where we've had to allow learners to progress onto higher level courses in September when they still haven't completed the course that they were on in the previous academic year.

If I can come in in terms of the schools' viewpoint there, Suzy, I think the money has been used in a whole range of different ways, not only in terms of employing staff, but also different types of staff, from some teaching staff, especially in the core subjects, but also additional time in terms of mentoring groups. So, when we were talking about catch-up groups, certain groups, particularly for vulnerable learners, where they've been able to develop some more mentoring approaches to look at some of those catch-up opportunities, but also vulnerable groups and the support of those pupils around them, as well as creating time—I suppose this is what you were saying, Guy—to develop more online resources.

But I think your point in terms of the engagement element is absolutely critical, and I think that really comes to light with not only a change in mindset about how we start to deliver, but also how the delivery of a distance-learning approach is supported by an in-school approach and how they support one another in terms of ensuring that the engagement happens. It's also then developing the expectations with parents in terms of ensuring that engagement happens as well. I think it's a little early, currently, to look at the impact of the additional moneys, but it's certainly welcomed by schools, although depending on the size of the school, it depends on how much of that resource went to the schools, so it's about how they've used that quite creatively.

Can I ask, before someone else comes in, Mike, whether you've had any early indications about how difficult it's been to get the types of staff you need to do those specific pieces of work—whether it's traditional teaching or more mentoring—and whether some of those new people are being targeted at the engagement question? It may be too early, but you may have some anecdotal—.

Yes, I think, in terms of staff, we're aware, obviously, that the recruitment of staff is very difficult, isn't it, and we're aware of that right across the sector. So, to prepare for that and to really engage with a full process of that, we'd need a number of months of planning, but I know schools were looking at previous students they'd had in, even some teachers that had retired, to utilise those directly as well. And that's when, I think, because of the difficulties in terms of the time frame of recruitment, they were also looking at other ways of utilising that money, as I've said, in terms of internal mentoring groups, the utilisation for the development of resources—those sorts of things.

Okay. It's just that we've heard some evidence that supply teachers feel that they're being a bit left out of this process.

I think what we've seen, certainly within Cardiff, is that because, obviously, of the very fluid nature of the pandemic and the necessary needs of schools to employ more supply teachers to ensure sustainability of staff throughout, especially in the Welsh language sector, there have been some real issues in terms of the development of that workforce.

Okay. Thank you. If somebody wants to come in on the mental health point as well.

Just to support the accelerated learning programme, we've put some suites of resources together. We're looking at three strands, really—one being physical development, physical fitness; one being emotional fitness; and the other one being learning fitness. So, we're collating against those three elements, then, for each of the key stages, a suite of resources that will support, then, the literacy and numeracy, to help accelerate. Support, then, with emotional well-being and some support and some advice for children—what things they could do at home with their parents, then—and on the physical side as well. So, there's that suite of resources that has been made available to schools and made available to parents as well, through apps, so that they can actually support their own children during the various scenarios that could be facing them in going forward.

But, Arwyn, that's only going to work in those homes where the parents and their children are engaged. You know, our main concern is those who are slipping through the net.

And I think, to go back to your mental health point, the whole progression from full lockdown to whether it was hub-based approaches and then support through the summer—I know lots of local authorities that worked very well with schools, firstly to identify different levels of vulnerability and then to put in appropriate levels of support around those pupils, whether it was one-to-one contact or whether it was more direct contact, through the hub-based provision, and then continuing that contact.

What I would say now is I think our schools have got a better awareness of the vulnerability of pupils in terms of mental health. We've used the children's commissioner's 'Coronavirus and Me' opportunities, the questionnaire, and the feedback from that to look at exactly the feedback we've had from pupils in terms of their mental health. And there's some really positive feedback coming from that report that can be utilised within an authority and then shared with schools to really start to target some additional work.

Youth services played a key part in supporting pupils through this period in terms of their mental health and that keeping in touch as well, and I think the role of that outreach work and the mentoring work, many of which took place digitally, really can't be overlooked. And the support of that as well. It's been interesting to see some of the 'Diff Diaries coming in across Cardiff and some of the work coming through from some of our pupil groups to really show how they've managed through that. I think the well-being approaches of the catch-up element at the end of the summer term, together with the phasing in of pupils at the start of September with a focus on well-being so that they're aware of getting to know different approaches in schools and coming into a COVID-safe environment, has allowed them to focus back on the mental health element of it.

That's a very helpful answer, because what I was getting to, Arwyn, is that if you haven't got young people in a position where they're really interested in engaging, some of which will be down to mental health, it doesn't matter what the resources are, they won't look at them. But if there's a line of sight in this, I think there may be some opportunity—

I think, as well, in response, Suzy, in a similar vein to Mike, this partnership approach and filtering now about where the actual needs are is becoming more—what's the right word I'm looking for here—I think it's becoming more targeted, more clear, and this sharing of evidence, or sharing of information across agencies, is vitally important to ensure—. The accelerated learning is a partnership between school and local authority, in the first instance, to get them there, and then the further partnership on the professional resources side is to ensure that they've got the right quality of learning to do the accelerated part of the work when they're engaged.

Okay. Thank you. Because we want to see that this £29 million is spent effectively. So, thank you.

Can I just mention one thing about what the FE sector did? One of the things they did was—there's a lot of staff who couldn't do their normal job during lockdown, so they were diverted. So, for example, colleges have got work placement officers, they've got enrichment officers, they've got progression officers to look at where they go to when they leave college. So, they were all diverted to well-being teams across the colleges, some of them delivering free school meal vouchers or actual free school meals, or being on the telephone to be the one-to-one with vulnerable learners. So, there's a lot of staff who, actually, because their core job wasn't in existence, were then diverted to do other well-being tasks, because well-being was the major role that we identified. We couldn't do learning, as you say, unless their well-being was looked after.

Just before Meinir comes in, it's not just about the £29 million for catch-up; there's been a substantial investment by Welsh Government in money specifically for mental health, and a lot of that has gone out via local government on the basis that there would be an increase in school counselling for those children where that was appropriate, but also in terms of younger children, to fund an increase in family support. Are you able to offer the committee any assurances that all that money is being used for those purposes?

Okay. Thank you. Mike.

Very quickly, really, I wanted to give a couple of examples in terms of some of our more vulnerable pupils, especially at the sharp end. What we found, together with their families, is that the engagement through some digital devices and different technologies has actually led to greater engagement and greater opportunities to keep in touch. Some of our very sharp end, in education-other-than-at-school facilities and also the off-site elements of education, have actually really engaged with a digital way of learning and a digital way of keeping in touch. The feedback has been that it's been far less threatening, far more relevant to them, and that's also been the case for our families, as well. When we've engaged with families in terms of attendance and welfare concerns, they feel far easier in a virtual environment with 10 or 12 people in a virtual room than they would do in an actual room. So, I think there's some real impacts here about continuing to utilise the technology as we move forward.

Okay. Thank you. Siân.

Can I come in? I think the Member raises a very pertinent issue there about the attainment gap. I think schools are focusing on the attainment gap at all times, really. The attainment of the most vulnerable learners is particularly important to all of our schools, and certainly as local authorities and regional consortia—and Estyn will be asking about vulnerable groups and how schools engage with them. I know, certainly, my local high school here, where my wife is chair of the governors, is engaging with vulnerable learners very, very early in the whole process, lending out devices. I do accept that there may be difficulties in some houses, in particular where, perhaps, parents have been asked to work at home as well. They may have a laptop and another device, but the adults may wish to use those devices at the same time as the children. I think we have to remember in this that, in my opinion as a teacher of many years, there is no replacement for face-to-face activity. A good teacher in front of a class will produce far better results than remote learning. We're dealing with a situation that is unprecedented here, and as I said earlier, I do think schools have reacted in a very, very positive way to the demands that have been put on them. Of course, the schools are very aware of the mental health needs of their pupils. I think as local authorities and as regional consortia, we are very aware of the mental health needs of staff, and particularly leaders in schools, who have the ultimate responsibility for all of the learners and their staff as well within their setting and within their school.

Okay. Thank you. Siân.

Was Kay going to come in there?

Yes, I was. Absolutely; the vulnerable learners and particularly the free-school-meal learner group—and in some colleges, obviously, there are girls, particularly from ethnic minority groups, that are not allowed to do work at home, so colleges in those places have provided safe places for them to come in to learn. But in some cases we have to tell the families that they actually have to come in, even during a lockdown sort of situation. So, I think a lot has been put in place, but that's why we introduced, across colleges, food parcels, and made sure that we took advantage of the funding for free school meals throughout the holiday period as well, and to make sure that we did the best we could to get the money spent on food for that, because some of our learners didn't have bank accounts and we didn't want them paid directly to parents, so we gave them vouchers. So at least they spent the money. Whether they spent it on food is another thing. But colleges also continued to deliver the food parcels. But we know from the gap at GCSE level that when some of those learners come into practical subjects, they do very well, and the gap is shrunk, but when they're not there in those practical sessions, learning online has been difficult, and like you, I worry about the attainment gap widening during this time. But we are doing everything we can to support those more vulnerable learners, putting in place safe places for them to go to, and speaking to them about what it is they need, because every learner is different, and every learner has got a different support mechanism at home.

Okay. What I was trying to get to was a solution. Do we think that targeting resources to the schools in the most disadvantaged areas is a way forward in addressing the attainment gap?

I've got Mike then Arwyn.

I was going to come back on that, because I think what the last few months have done is highlight the issue. I think there has been a resource passed out, and we have started to address connectivity, hardware, and we have addressed it. But what we've also done is we've audited the need, and I think that's absolutely critical here—that we continue to build upon that and we don't stop doing what we're doing. This is something that will be ongoing, and I think really the aspiration of Wales is to get to a situation where our pupils are one-to-one device led, so that we can actually utilise innovative approaches to reduce the gap that poverty has made in the past. 

But, equally, I think it's also important to realise that it's not just poverty that leads to digital deprivation, as it's also the difference in working practice, the difference in where we are at home. We have all had to change the way we work, and, I think, nationally there's a recognition of that. We've all had occasions where the dog has been barking in the background or we haven't been able to connect because someone else is online, or we've had four and five-year-olds at home and we've had to help with their work. And so all of our working practices are changing, so we need to reflect that. But I think the aspiration now is to really move forward for Wales as very much that digital leader within the home nations, and I think, because of the size of where we are, we've got the opportunity to do that. 

Okay. Arwyn, you wanted to come in—briefly please. You're muted. 

I'm a slow learner through this lockdown period. 

Okay. Kay, and this is going to have to be the last contribution, then. 

I just wanted to say one of the solutions for Siân, so she's got a solution. One of the things that many colleges did during lockdown was increase their family learning and homework clubs online, particularly targeting year 6 and year 7, and the numbers grew, particularly for the vulnerable communities. So, for example—I can't give you the numbers from all the other colleges—in my college, we increased the number of people doing family learning by 586 learners during lockdown. And I think one of the solutions is in those vulnerable areas increasing and finding funding for family learning and families learning together. 

Okay, thank you. Well, we have come to the end of our time. We've covered lots of ground, so can I thank you all for attending and for answering such a wide range of questions? We very much appreciate your time. And, as usual, you'll be sent a transcript following the meeting so that you can check it for accuracy. On behalf of the committee, thank you, all. Diolch yn fawr. 

Item 5, then, is papers to note. We've got 12 papers to note. Members can see that papers 1 to 11 are all additional information on the Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Bill following the evidence sessions. So, I ask Members if they're happy to note those together. Paper to note 12 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the firebreak and beyond. Are Members happy to note those? Thank you.

Under item 6, then, can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17.42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you. We'll now proceed in private.