The proceedings are
reported in the language in which they were spoken in the
committee. In addition, a transcription of the simultaneous
interpretation is included.
Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 09:33.
The meeting began at 09:33.
|
Cyflwyniad,
Ymddiheuriadau, Dirprwyon a Datgan Buddiannau
Introductions, Apologies, Substitutions and Declarations of
Interest
|
[1]
Lynne Neagle: Good morning, everyone. Can I welcome you all to the
meeting of the Children, Young People and Education Committee this
morning? There have been no apologies for absence. Can I ask
whether there are any declarations of interest? No?
Okay.
|
Gweithredu
‘Dyfodol Llwyddiannus: Adolygiad Annibynnol o’r
Cwricwlwm a Threfniadau Asesu yng Nghymru’:
Sesiwn Dystiolaeth 1 The
Implementation of the Review ‘Successful Futures: Independent
Review of Curriculum and Assessment Arrangements in Wales’:
Evidence Session 1
|
[2]
Lynne Neagle: We’ll move on,
then, to item 2, which is the implementation of the review
‘Successful Futures: Independent Review of Curriculum and
Assessment Arrangements in Wales’. I’m delighted to
welcome Professor Graham Donaldson to our meeting this morning.
Thank you very much for coming. We haven’t had a paper in
advance, so would you like to make some opening remarks to the
committee?
|
[3]
Professor Donaldson: First of all, just to thank the
committee for the opportunity to come along and discuss with you
what I think is a reform that is of huge significance to
Wales—the young people of Wales, but also to Wales more
generally. It sets Wales in the context of what’s happening
internationally in terms of educational reform, right at the
forefront of thinking about not only what it is we should be doing
for our young people while they’re at school, but how we
ensure that the things that we want to happen actually happen in
schools. The history of educational reform over a long period of
time has often seen a huge gap between what we aspire to happen for
our young people and the reality of what actually happens in
classrooms on a day-to-day basis. So, we’ll get a chance to
talk about the specifics in the course of the session, but I want
to say right at the outset that, in my experience, the systematic
way in which Wales is approaching this reform is unusual in the
context of education reform. The tendency is to go for a bit of a
reform programme and focus on that, and then find out afterwards
that, actually, for that to happen, something else has got to
happen. So, although at first sight the kind of programme that we
have here in Wales, which is very comprehensive, may look daunting,
the reality is that it, in its broad approach, gives us the best
chance of actually succeeding in terms of creating the kind of
high-quality learning and outcomes for the young people of Wales
that we all want to achieve.
|
[4]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you very much. We’ve got a number of
questions. If I can just start by asking you to expand a little bit
more on your role as the chair of the independent advisory
board.
|
[5]
Professor Donaldson:
Yes. I think the creation of that
independent advisory group within the structure of the reform is
also innovative in the context of reform generally. In the original
report, ‘Successful Futures’, one of the
recommendations that I made was that there was a need to create,
more explicitly, distance between the political environment
that’s driving reform and the nature of the reform itself. A
lot of countries do that by having arm’s-length bodies that
undertake the specifics of reform. In the context of this reform,
the decision to set up an independent advisory group was a way of
meeting that recommendation by building into the governance
structure a kind of critical friend role to that structure. As
chair of the independent advisory group, I’ve no executive
responsibility; I can’t take any decisions in relation to the
way in which the reform develops, but I do have access to the main
committees and I report to the advisory group itself, the members
of the advisory group, about the way in which the reform is
developing. In turn, I can also report to the change board
that’s managing the programme as a whole issues that the
advisory group has identified that might undermine the likelihood
of success, and also the things that are going well inside the
process.
|
[6]
So, my role is partly to make sure that
that independent advisory group is independent; is both supportive
and challenging to the process as a whole; is gathering
intelligence about what’s happening, both inside the
structure but also what’s happening more generally; and is
engaging partly with officials who are responsible for developing
the programme and the other key bodies, but also increasingly with
the stakeholder groups that are engaged in the process as a whole
across Wales.
|
[7]
So, I think the existence of that group
is, again, a very powerful signal that there’s a
determination within the programme to try to see it though so that
the inevitable pressures that will arise in the course of a
programme that’s lasting over a period of four or five years,
by the time it comes to fruition, the inevitable pressures that
arise during that period don’t completely blow us off course
in terms of where we were originally trying to get to. So, part of
my role and that of the independent advisory group is to try to
identify where things might be beginning to distort the process by
going off in directions that weren’t intended. So, broadly,
that’s the role that I play.
|
[8]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. And how often does the group meet,
then?
|
[9]
Professor Donaldson:
So far, it’s been meeting every six
weeks.
|
[10]
Lynne Neagle: Right. And is the line of communication mainly with
officials, or do you have meetings with the Cabinet Secretary as
well? Do you have the ability to report to the Cabinet
Secretary?
|
[11]
Professor Donaldson:
I meet with the Cabinet Secretary on a
fairly regular basis and, again, my job is to give her independent
advice based on the deliberations of IAG, but to give her
independent advice that has not been filtered through the official
network, but is actually communicated directly to the Cabinet
Secretary. Increasingly, we’re also meeting not just with
officials, but with others who are involved in the overall reform
programme outwith Welsh Government. And one of the things that we
discussed at our last meeting was that we’d like to establish
a network of young people throughout Wales so that, as the process
goes forward, those who are hopefully the beneficiaries of
this process will also have the opportunity to understand
what’s happening and also give us important perspectives on
it from a young person’s point of view. We’ve been
talking about how we might do that—at the last meeting.
Certainly, the intention is to establish something of that
kind.
|
[12]
Lynne Neagle: Lovely, thank you. Oscar.
|
[13]
Mohammad Asghar: Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you,
Professor Donaldson. What assessments have been made of the impact
of the Donaldson recommendations in Scotland? Supplementary to
this, how has this impacted on the implementation timetable in
Wales? Finally, has there been any significant deviation in the
implementation of the review in Wales?
|
[14]
Professor Donaldson: I think one of the misconceptions from
the start of the process of ‘Successful Futures’ was
that, because I’m a Scot and was involved in the curriculum
reform in Scotland, all we were doing was translating the Scottish
reform into Wales. Nothing could be further from the truth. What I
saw as my responsibility was to learn from what happened in
Scotland, but also what’s happening in England, what’s
happening in Northern Ireland, what’s happening in countries
in Europe and what’s happening across the world, and to try
to distil from all of that the implications that we might want to
think about here in Wales, in terms of taking things forward.
|
[15]
So, in terms of looking at Scotland specifically, I think there are
important lessons to be learnt from the way in which curriculum
reform has taken place in Scotland, both positive and negative. The
recent OECD review of the reform programme in Scotland, I think,
very helpfully identified first of all that—. Broadly, what
the OECD seemed to be saying was that the direction that Scotland
was going in was a coherent direction and that they saw it as
being, in terms of the other countries they’ve looked at, a
persuasive way to move forward.
|
[16]
Basically, that’s about thinking about what happens in
school, during the time that young people are at school, as moving
from being defined almost wholly in terms of what you learn while
you’re at school and then being tested on whether or not
you’ve learned what you’re supposed to have learned.
All that matters and is very important, but the reform is going
beyond that to say, ‘How do we ensure that young people are
able to use that learning, and how do they develop as people across
the time that they are at school?’, such that their learning
that they’re doing and the subjects that they’re taking
and so on are not just serving the needs of the subject, but also
broader purposes, in terms of their development as young
people—hence the four purposes that are recommended in
‘Successful Futures’.
|
[17]
When I was looking at Wales, what I did was to initially spend
about three or four months actually talking to individuals and
groups, visiting schools and businesses from across Wales. I spent
a long time just trying to engage with people, all of whom have an
interest, obviously, in the future of Wales and the role of young
people, so that young people are in a position to flourish in that
future and play their full part in that. What I was able to do from
that—. That’s where the four purposes of the curriculum
broadly came from, because I asked people what their aspirations
were and what they would want an educated young Welsh person to
look like when they leave the school system and move on to whatever
the next stage in their lives might be.
|
[18]
The four purposes grew out of that and from looking at the similar
kind of questions that are being asked in countries across the
world. Actually, those four purposes are not dissimilar to the kind
of things that Australia, for example, is talking about in terms of
its Melbourne declaration on what it thinks about how young people
in Australia should benefit from the school system. Singapore more
recently has been moving in a similar direction, as have countries
across the world.
|
[19]
So, what was in ‘Successful Futures’ certainly took
account of what’s happening in Scotland, but it also took
account of lots of other things. It’s really part of a much
broader move that’s taking place just now to think about the
purposes of schooling in a way that goes beyond some of our more
traditional ways of thinking about that. So, the need for rigour
and depth in learning remains absolutely at the heart of the
curriculum, but it’s also about how people can use that
learning creatively and how they can apply it across the various
pieces of learning they’re getting so that learning
doesn’t all happen in compartments—developing
skills, creativity and entrepreneurship. It’s the way in
which the learning process can take place that helps them to
understand how to be a learner, not just to learn because
there’s an exam at the end of it, but to learn how to learn,
so that you engage in a learning process because of the importance
of learning itself, not simply because there’s an exam at the
end of it, although the exam, obviously, remains a very important
part of that process.
|
09:45
|
[20]
What I think that we can learn from reform in Scotland, but also
much more generally, is that if you’re going to focus on
thinking about the curriculum and thinking about the purpose of
schooling in a rather broader way than we have thought about
hitherto, you can’t just do that and then say to schools,
‘Now you’ve got to do this’. If you’re
going to do that, you’ve got to think about what are the
implications for how we grow and develop teachers who both
understand the reform and want to engage in it, and how we engage
with school leaders in a way where they are also going to create
the conditions that allow reform to happen, and how do we ensure
that our accountability systems are not valuing something different
from the way in which the curriculum is developing.
|
[21]
So, the big message that has come through, I think, from looking
more generally, not just at Scotland, is the need to think about
this with all the various components that need to come
together—the pieces in the jigsaw that need to come together
if we’re going to create the kind of high-quality education
system in Wales that we need.
|
[22]
I’ve forgotten the second part of your question. That’s
the first part—about Scotland—but in terms of Wales,
was the second part about how we’re doing in Wales in
relation to that?
|
[23]
Lynne Neagle: It was the lessons for Wales, wasn’t
it?
|
[24]
Professor Donaldson:
I think the lessons for Wales are partly
what I’ve just said. One, I think that—and this came
through from the review process itself—while it’s
tempting to think that the more you put in legislation or the more
you make it clear exactly what you expect of schools, the more
likely that is to actually happen in practice, experience tells us
that’s not the way it works. The more you specify from the
outside what it is that should happen inside a school, the more you
stifle those inside the school thinking about their children, and
the nature of the learning that their children need. So, one of the
lessons for Wales, I think—and it’s a debate
that’s to be had, and this committee will be right at the
heart of that—is, ‘What’s the balance between
what you put in legislation and other methods you use in order to
achieve consistency across Wales?’ The more you put in
legislation, the more you lock a curriculum into a particular point
in time. The current curriculum is partly locked into 1988, which
is when it was created. So, the more you put in statute, the more
difficult it is to be flexible, agile and responsive in terms of
the way in which the world is changing and the nature of
what’s happening in the world around schools just now in the
lives that young people are currently leading. But also, those
young people are going to live their lives throughout the entirety
of this century and into the next century. So, one of the key
questions that schools have to answer is: ‘How do we help
prepare those young people for a future that we can’t even
begin to imagine, and what is it that we need to do during their
time at school?’ That part is where this notion of building
them as people, as well as focusing on the learning, becomes of
critical importance. So, one big lesson for Wales, I think, is to
think hard about the balance between what we put in legislation and
where we use other means in order to try and achieve the necessary
consistency—but not uniformity, necessarily—across
Wales.
|
[25]
The second lesson is the one that I
talked about—you need you to think about this in terms of all
the things that need to come together if you’re going to make
reform happen. And you need to do that early, I think. One of the
questions in Scotland has been that the curriculum was developed in
the middle of the first decade of the century. The implications for
teachers really only began to be addressed in a big way in the
second decade of the century. The Scottish Government invited me to
undertake a review of teacher education in Scotland, and I produced
a report in 2011 called ‘Teaching Scotland’s
Future’, which was about how our teachers need to grow and
develop if they’re going to be at the heart of what’s
needed for the future—similarly with leadership and similarly
with accountability. So, I think, again, one of the
important lessons is: do that early. Think about it in advance,
think about it as part of the reform. Don’t think about it as
a reaction to reform. It should all come together.
|
[26]
Mohammad Asghar:
Thank you very much.
|
[27]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. Llyr.
|
[28]
Llyr Gruffydd: You mention getting the balance right between
legislation and other means. Are we at a point where we can
actually make that call now, do you think? Or do you have a
particular view as to when we need to come to that
conclusion?
|
[29]
Professor Donaldson: I think we need to be talking about it
just now. I think we do need to be thinking about that. One of the
big messages in the report—and I think it is reflected in the
way in which reform is taking place increasingly,
internationally—is this principle of subsidiarity: that,
fundamentally, you only constrain what headteachers and teachers in
schools are doing where you have to. Rather than saying, ‘We
decide what’s good and how much freedom we’ll give
them’, you turn it round the other way and you ask the
question, ‘What do we have to do? What’s absolutely
essential that is done outside the school in order to ensure that
young people are getting a high-quality education that’s
consistent across Wales?’ I think that’s a debate that
needs to happen in principle just now. Clearly, we’re going
to have to move to legislation reasonably quickly, and
there’s a particular issue, I think, about pioneer schools,
and the extent to which the existing legislation—if
we’re asking them to think creatively about what
they’re doing, then we have to think about the relationship
between that and existing legislation. That’s a debate
that’s got to be had just now as well. So, we’re
certainly talking, I think, about decisions about legislation and
something coming through in the course of the next couple of years.
Fortunately, that’s not for me; that’s for the Welsh
Government. But it’s an issue that really needs to be taken
very seriously. My counsel would be: be cautious about what you put
in legislation.
|
[30]
Lynne Neagle: Okay. Llyr.
|
[31]
Llyr Gruffydd: We’ve heard a lot about the process, the
situation as it is, lines of communications et cetera. I’m
interested now in your view as to how the Welsh Government has
interpreted the vision that you articulated in ‘Successful
Futures’ and, generally, your opinion of the way that
it’s approaching the implementation.
|
[32]
Professor Donaldson: The publication of ‘A curriculum
for Wales—a curriculum for life’, which captures, I
think, the undertakings that Welsh Government have made about how
they’re going to take things forward, has been, I have to
say, a pretty faithful attempt to take 68 recommendations—I
mean, a very, very comprehensive and complex set of
recommendations—and translate them into a working programme:
big, broad and complex in itself. But I think the intentions that
are embedded in the document ‘A curriculum for Wales—a
curriculum for life’ are a pretty faithful reflection of the
recommendations of ‘Successful Futures’. So, that
starting point is a really good one. The devil, of course, is in
the detail: what actually happens after all the complexities that
arise in that. But, from my point of view, I was, I have to say,
very impressed by the extent to which the Government responded to
the review in such a systematic way.
|
[33]
In my experience—and I’ve worked with a number of
governments in different contexts—the temptation is to
cherry-pick a report of that kind, and to like bits of it and not
like other bits of it. I tried to make clear what I said to
Ministers, and also when I met with the Committee in the previous
Parliament: that cherry-picking would be likely to undermine what
we’re talking about, because the proposals were deliberately
was constructed as a jigsaw, with lots of pieces that had to come
together. The way in which, strategically, that’s being
developed, I think, is a pretty faithful reflection of what was
called for in ‘Successful Futures’.
|
[34]
Llyr Gruffydd: And in terms of the main challenges, then—you
say it’s fraught with complexities and clearly it’s
such a huge undertaking—what would you highlight as the main
risks or challenges of that process?
|
[35]
Professor Donaldson: I think, again, based on my experience
and research on reform in education systems, one of the biggest
challenges is to keep on reminding yourself why you’re doing
it. Because the tendency, once you get involved—especially in
a reform programme as broad as this one—is for it to
disaggregate and you start focusing on, ‘Well, this is the
most important bit’, or, ‘That’s the most
important bit’, and, actually, creating a simple, powerful
message that everyone understands and signs up to is both the most
important thing to do and the biggest risk that we lose that.
|
[36]
So, given that there has been and is, as far as I can tell from all
my contacts, strong and continuing not just support, but enthusiasm
for the four purposes that are in the curriculum, that’s what
we would like to achieve: that for our young people we’ve
satisfied those four purposes and they come out of the school
system reflecting the reality of those four purposes. We must keep
on reminding ourselves that that’s why we’re doing it,
so that in all the various hundreds and thousands of decisions
that’ll have to be taken and are being taken in the course of
the whole reform, we’re constantly asking ourselves the
question about how does this relate back: are we embarking on a
different work stream and losing sight of what it is that
we’re trying to do? So, I think one of the most important
tasks and one of the biggest risks is that we lose sight of the
prize, and that the reform becomes disaggregated. All the things
that will be happening will all be important in their own right,
but, actually, the real power of this is the fact that it’s
all coming together behind a unifying set of purposes, which
continue to be the driver.
|
[37]
If we can do that in Wales, if that’s something that,
actually, we can achieve over the course of quite an elongated
programme, that will be a huge achievement. The pressures will all
be to go the other way. So, that’s probably the thing that
worries me most in the programme—not worries me because I
think it’s happening, but worries me because I think it might
happen, because, elsewhere, it has happened.
|
[38]
Llyr Gruffydd: Just very briefly, has there been any
noticeable difference in the Government’s approach following
the election? You urged the new Cabinet Secretary to hold her
nerve; has there been any change in approach or is the consistency
of approach still there?
|
[39]
Professor Donaldson: No. Obviously, with the change of
administration—albeit some of the faces remain, but a change
of Minister—you always wonder as to whether a new
Minister—. Quite rightly, they’ll look at things and
have to make their own mind up about things. I have to say that the
Cabinet Secretary—my discussions with her have not suggested
that she has anything other than full confidence and enthusiasm for
the process. So, that was good.
|
[40]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. Julie, on this.
|
[41]
Julie Morgan: Just to pick up, you say you mustn’t
lose sight of the prize and, obviously, keeping sight of the prize
is having the children and young people right in front of you in
everything you’re doing.
|
[42]
Professor Donaldson: Absolutely.
|
[43]
Julie Morgan: And you did mention earlier on about having a
network of young people who would feed in—have you had
anything like that so far in what’s happened so far?
|
[44]
Professor Donaldson: As part of the role that I have in the
independent advisory group, I undertake visits to schools on a very
regular basis and will always try to talk to young people as part
of that visit and get a chance to engage with them about the nature
of—. I try to explain to them what I think is going to happen
and see whether or not they like that and sign up to that vision,
but also what their worries and concerns are. That also
helps—that process helps to remind me that there sometimes
can be a tension between what we, as educators, think matters and
what children think matters. And particularly—and this came
through in the course of the review—their focus on health and
well-being as being something that young people feel that schools
currently don’t do well at all; they were, in general, not
very complimentary about personal and social education-type courses
in schools, but they also thought it was incredibly important. So,
health and well-being is one of the important building blocks in
the new curriculum and it’s an area of learning and
experience in its own right. Meeting with young people just keeps
on reminding me about the things that can interfere with their
ability to learn, to do with their own well-being and their
understanding of how, as they move through school, they can
increasingly see ways in which they can help to take control of
their own lives and not feel that they’re just simply subject
to whatever the pressures of the moment are. That is a very
important bit of reminding, but I do think—and that’s
why we discussed it in IAG—we need to be more systematic
about that than simply the visits I’m making to schools,
hence the notion of setting up some kind of network.
|
10:00
|
[45]
Julie Morgan: Thank you.
|
[46]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. We’ll move on now to talk
about timescales and implementation. I’ve got John, then
Hefin.
|
[47]
John Griffiths: Could I start off, Professor Donaldson, by
asking you about the transition period? Because, obviously, as
you’ve said, it’s a massive change; it’s a very
important and far-reaching reform that we’re engaged upon. Is
there a danger, do you think, that, during that transition, some of
the children in school at that time may suffer before we get to the
new education system that, hopefully, will deliver for young people
in Wales?
|
[48]
Professor Donaldson: In any change process, there’s a
risk that the point of change has unintended effects for young
people who are in school at that point of change and, therefore,
the process by which this morphs from the current system into the
new system is an incredibly important one. I do think that the
chances of doing that well and minimising those unintended
consequences are increased by the involvement of pioneer schools at
the heart of the process, because those pioneer schools, of course,
have responsibility for the children they have just now. They also
have the responsibility to think about the future. So, working with
pioneer schools I think will help to keep feet on the ground about
the process of how you move from one system to another. Working
with the pioneer schools, I think there’ll be an opportunity
to identify what the implications are of the way in which that
process takes place.
|
[49]
I think the fact that the timescale is over a period that’s
running into the start of the next decade is quite important, and
there’s not a kind of cliff-edge reform so, in 2018, assuming
the new curriculum framework becomes available, every school has to
do it instantly. I think the opportunity for that to take place
over a two or three-year period, taking us into 2021-22, increases
the capacity we have to try to make sure that we manage the process
well in ways that don’t damage the children who are there
just now.
|
[50]
But, of course, a lot of what’s in ‘Successful
Futures’, a lot of what’s happening, can be done within
the existing framework, and there are schools across Wales that are
already exemplifying some of the things that we’re talking
about. Schools are doing that. The worry that people have is,
‘Will this undermine the capacity of young people to do well
in GCSEs, if we’re changing things up to the age of 14/15 and
then they move into GCSE preparation?’ There are schools that
already, at the existing key stage 3, have been doing some very
innovative things and some of the schools I’ve been in are
producing better GCSE results. So, I don’t think
there’s any inevitability about the process in any way
undermining the chances of young people who are there, but it is a
risk and it needs to be thought through very carefully. The pioneer
school approach, I think, will help in that.
|
[51]
John Griffiths: Yes, okay. Obviously, the committee’s
concerned about whether the timescale set out by Welsh Government
is realistic and achievable, and I just wonder, really, in your
work, heading up the advisory board, and the external engagement
that you’ve had that you described earlier, what you’ve
picked up from the profession from those who are going to have to
deliver on the new curriculum, have to deliver the change process?
Are you picking up any concerns around the timescales set out by
Welsh Government and the doability of this?
|
[52]
Professor Donaldson: Inevitably, there are concerns, but I
have to say the concerns at the moment go in opposite directions.
There’s a head of steam that’s building up for doing
thimgs more quickly, a ‘just let us get on with it’
pressure that’s there, and then there’s a
countervailing pressure that’s saying, ‘We’re
being too ambitious, we’ll never do it in the time
that’s available’ and that we ought to elongate the
timescale. So, there’s nothing that’s coming through to
me that would conclusively say that the existing timescale is one
that it’s not possible to deliver the reform within. I have
deliberately—and it was said in ‘Successful
Futures’—counselled not rushing at the reform. When you
have a reform that’s as radical as this reform—and
it’s a culture shift we’re talking about in terms of
the implications of the reform—the risk is that we pick up
part of the message and rush in and do something that doesn’t
reflect, actually, the full potential of what we’re talking
about, but then that gets locked into the system. So, one of the
things that I’ve counselled in ‘Successful
Futures’, and it has been built into the process, is to take
time for people to understand, particularly teachers and
headteachers in schools, the full implications and the full import
of what this reform is about. We’re now at a point where
there is undoubtedly—it’s certainly there in the
pioneer schools—impatience and a desire to get on and do
specific things. All I can say is that education systems across the
world would give their eye teeth to have teachers who are
desperately asking to be involved in reform rather than reluctantly
waiting to be pushed.
|
[53]
John Griffiths: Well, I think that’s very good to
hear. Could I ask: in terms of the four strands that implementation
is based upon, which of those presents the greatest challenges in
terms of the timescale and the doability element in your view?
|
[54]
Professor Donaldson: The four strands—
|
[55]
John Griffiths: The four strands that Welsh Government has
based the implementation on.
|
[56]
Professor Donaldson: They’ve got the building blocks
and the enablers. Do you mean the—
|
[57]
John Griffiths: I’ve
got the four strands that I’m referring to: strategic design,
which the timetable sets out on; high-level design of the areas of
learning; then strand 3, which is fully developing and populating
the areas of learning and on from that; and then refinement,
testing, preparation and support. There are particular time frames
set out for each of those. So I’m just wondering, of those,
because that’s the basis, really, that we understand roll-out
is to take place upon, which might present the greatest
challenges.
|
[58]
Professor Donaldson:
I think the current stage is a move from
the kind of broad strategic design to the specifics, the more
technical aspects, of what the new curriculum framework will look
like. Embedded in that are a lot of really quite complex
educational issues about the nature of a framework, about how you
best define progression in children’s learning, how you best
describe the content of the curriculum, and what’s the best
way to describe that. So, that’s just the point that
we’re at just now in the programme. This is going to be a
very critical period, because, after Christmas and the start of the
new year, it’s very important that the pace increases in
terms of addressing the difficult technical questions that are in
there. We are at one of those tipping points, I think, in the
process. We’ll know once we get into the new year just how
well that’s been done. It’s certainly something
that’s exercising the independent advisory group in looking
at the process as a whole and trying to do what we can to offer
advice, because we have an advisory role as well a monitoring role,
about some of the issues that are inherent in that. That’s
going to be a vitally—. The next couple of months are going
to be very important.
|
[59]
John Griffiths:
Okay. I wonder, Chair, if I could just
ask briefly on assessment.
|
[60]
Lynne Neagle: Very quickly.
|
[61]
John Griffiths:
Very quickly, then, on assessment,
Professor Donaldson, you will know the history of the debate in
Wales around assessment and standard attainment tests’
abolition, perceived unreliability of teachers’ own
assessments, et cetera. So, as part of this timescale for
implementation, how significant is it, and are we, in what’s
proposed, going to get it right for the future given that
there’s a perception that we’ve had quite a lot of
difficulty around that agenda?
|
[62]
Professor Donaldson:
Yes, I think you’re right to
identify assessment as one of the trickiest issues in the whole
process, because, first of all, as was made clear in
‘Successful Futures’, we must do all we can to preserve
the critical role that assessment plays in helping young people
understand how they can progress in their learning, and
helping the teachers to understand how to help them do that. And
therefore, that notion of assessment as being absolutely integral
to learning has to be preserved in the process. What we’ve
had—and this is not by any stretch of the imagination unique
to Wales, it’s happened in lots of places—is that an
understandable desire to improve the nature of accountability, the
‘How well are our schools doing?’ questions, has in
turn led to the nature of assessment being distorted. So the
assessment starts to look at what other people are going to think
about the results of assessment, rather than how is assessment
being used to help young people learn. And the evidence on that is
huge, about the distorting effect that that has as soon as you take
your eye off the ball in terms of assessment being primarily for
children’s learning.
|
[63]
So, the nature of what’s happening just now, I think, is very
important. I think my advice to Welsh Government has been not to
look at accountability and assessment together, but to look at a
curriculum and assessment framework that will do the job for the
young people of Wales and where assessment can play its full role
in helping young people to learn, and then we’ll think about
how do we establish the mechanisms for accountability that
don’t undermine that framework. But the stricture will be
that that accountability must not undermine the role of assessment
in helping young people to learn. And one of the risks at the
moment is that we’re ending up with a situation where, in the
way the system works, we’ve got data that come out of the
system that are neither very reliable for accountability purposes,
nor very good in terms of helping young people to learn. And the
challenge where we are just now is to get it right in terms of
learning and then think of the accountability—what we need in
order to satisfy you and others that the schools and the school
system are working as well as they should be.
|
[64]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. Hefin.
|
[65]
Hefin David: Thank you,
Chair. How prepared are teachers for what you’ve already
described as a daunting and complex culture change?
|
[66]
Professor Donaldson:
Well, at the moment, teachers quite
naturally are focused on and have been focused on the current
system. I think the work that’s been done with pioneer
schools—. The emphasis now—the strong emphasis—on
the kind of learning that needs to take place on teachers’
part in order to be able to realise the full potential of the
opportunities of the new curriculum—. I think the
involvement, interestingly, of the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development, in terms of working with a number of
pioneer schools to think about how schools themselves learn, how we
learn about how best to serve children, and that’s the work
the OECD are doing—that obviously links to what that means
for teachers.
|
[67]
Hefin David: But if
I’m a teacher in a school, how do I feel, and how am I going
to be prepared?
|
[68]
Professor Donaldson:
Well, that’s not a question I can
answer, because those are decisions to be taken by Welsh
Government, but I do think that the process that’s under way
is one that recognises the need to prepare teachers for the new
curriculum, and do that now, rather than wait until the new
curriculum exists. So, I would expect, over the course of the next
year, a lot of work to be done in terms of professional learning,
but building out from the pioneer schools, because for identifying
what that professional learning means, it’s the pioneer
schools that will help to identify where the needs are, what the
needs are and how you do it, and then you—
|
[69]
Hefin David: But your
changes aren’t going to work if teachers aren’t
adequately prepared, so I would have thought it would be an
important part of your planning process to advise Welsh Government
on how teachers can be prepared for this.
|
[70]
Professor Donaldson: And
that’s a process that is under way just now, in terms of
thinking through the nature of the way in which the professional
learning is going to take place. I think the switch in thinking
from the new deal to thinking more broadly about professional
learning is the first sign of that, because it’s a
recognition that there’s a need to think about this afresh.
And it’s true not just in Wales, but elsewhere, that the
focus on professional learning is very important. But professional
learning has to take place in relation to something—you know,
you can’t just do professional learning per se. So, I think
the point at which the professional learning process goes up a
gear, or goes up a number of gears, will have to work as the shape
of the new curriculum becomes clear. So, I think it’s in the
course of 2017 that that process begins to jack up, because if you
start doing a lot of professional learning in an apparent vacuum
and it’s not relating to—. You know, people say,
‘What actually are we talking about here?’ Well,
you’ve got to know what you’re talking about. Teachers
naturally want to know what the new frameworks are going to look
like. Professional learning really has got to be geared to the new
framework that will be emerging over the course of the year.
|
10:15
|
[71]
Hefin David: I’m concerned there’s a gap there,
and I’m concerned there’s not enough, perhaps,
reflective practice going on. Have you had dialogue with
universities that are engaging heavily in teacher training and
development?
|
[72]
Professor Donaldson: Well, I have, yes, but I must remind
you I’m an adviser to this process; I don’t run the
process. I’m not responsible for the process as—
|
[73]
Hefin David: ‘Are they prepared?’ I suppose is
what I’m asking.
|
[74]
Professor Donaldson: I know that the John Furlong report,
‘Teaching Tomorrow’s Teachers’, said some very
radical things about how we prepare new teachers for the new
curriculum, but also more generally, and I know there are
discussions taking place with all of the universities in Wales that
are involved in teacher education to try to ensure that the
universities understand the role that they need to play and that,
where necessary, they can up their game in relation to that. So, I
think there’s certainly a job to be done in terms of the
nature of the university sector in Wales. Some universities are
already rising to that challenge and have quite radically moved
forward. Others are a bit slower in that, but I think the process
is under way to make that happen, and it’s not just initial
teacher education, obviously, it’s also the teachers that are
in schools just now. A lot of that has to happen through the
consortia. A lot of that has to happen through the processes that
we have in place for professional learning changing to address the
new curriculum.
|
[75]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. How important is Professor
Furlong’s role on the advisory board, then, in taking forward
these issues specifically?
|
[76]
Professor Donaldson: Very important. I was delighted that
Professor Furlong accepted the invitation to join the board, and
that aspect of what we do, which I think was the implication of the
question, will become increasingly important in the course of this
year. A lot of the early work has been around thinking about the
nature of the curriculum and some of the issues embedded in that,
and getting the strategic direction right. I think the phase that
the Government is now moving into, and the whole reform programme
is now moving into, has to look very hard at those things that need
to happen, and teacher education and teacher learning are a very
important part of that phase. John Furlong is right at the heart of
that process.
|
[77]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. Michelle.
|
[78]
Michelle Brown:
Thank you, Chair. I just wanted
to—. The pioneer schools are responsible for working out the
detail of the curriculum. Is that right? How is the actual content
of the curriculum that the schools will be delivering finalised and
actually signed off, if you like? And who’s ultimately going
to be accountable for the decision over what to put in the
curriculum?
|
[79]
Professor Donaldson:
The nature of the fleshing out of the
curriculum, as it currently stands, which is the process
that’s about to get under way—the pioneer schools are
at the heart of that process, but not just the pioneer schools. So,
in addition to that, what will be made available to those who are
fleshing out the curriculum is different kinds of expertise.
There’s the expertise of the teachers and the schools, but
there’s also subject expertise, which is very important. So,
if we’re going to ensure that the teaching of science in
Wales is as good as it can be, then we’ve got to use the
expertise in the schools but we’ve also got to bring in
expertise that reflects leading thinking about the nature of
science and the nature of science education. The process will bring
not just the schools themselves—their expertise
matters—but will bring other forms of expertise to bear in
order that we ensure that what comes out of this process is right
at the leading thinking about the nature, for example, of science
education.
|
[80]
The formal process, I suppose, that would
be gone through is that overall responsibility for this lies with
the change board, which is chaired by a deputy Permanent Secretary,
Owen Evans. That, I suppose, is the point at which decisions would
be taken and advice given to Welsh Government and to Ministers
about the final shape of the programme. So, the process I think
will be quite—. There will be moves between the way thinking
is developing, evaluation of that, going back, and that becoming a
process that’s going to take place over a period of time. The
best model for that, and the thing that gives me some
confidence that this is a process that can work, is the way
in which the digital competence framework was developed. What that
involved was a group of pioneer schools that were brought together
and given the challenge of what is it that the young people of
Wales—. What’s the competence they need to develop, in
the digital world that we are dealing with, that goes beyond the
ability just to use the apps that are around and be comfortable on
social networking and so on? But there was also expertise in the
whole area of thinking about digital competence from universities
and elsewhere that was made available to the digital pioneer
schools. There was a process that was gone through of producing
initial versions of it, revisions to that, further versions of it
and revisions to that. So, that kind of process eventually led to
the digital competence framework as we now see it, which was then
signed off by the decision structure, and the Cabinet Secretary
authorised it to be made available more generally.
|
[81]
Michelle Brown: Right. So, the change board is responsible
for actually authorising the final content. Am I right
in—?
|
[82]
Professor Donaldson: The change board is the top of the
pyramid in terms of the decision-making strategy.
|
[83]
Michelle Brown: Okay. And how accountable are they, and to
whom? I’m sorry, that might not be within your sphere.
|
[84]
Professor Donaldson: It isn’t, but it would operate
within the normal framework—the change board and the Welsh
Government, which is obviously accountable to the Welsh Assembly,
and that’s my understanding of the process that would take
place at those very high-level parts of the system.
|
[85]
Michelle Brown: Okay, thank you.
|
[86]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. Llyr, then Darren.
|
[87]
Llyr Gruffydd: Primary schools clearly have a key role to
play in this, but what would your advice be to Government about
making sure that non-pioneer schools as well are very much on board
and in the loop, because there is a message or a signal coming back
from many schools that they are concerned that they’re not
maybe part of this process as maybe they would wish? And in our
evidence, for example, we’ve had, from the Education
Workforce Council, concerns about a growing sense of a two-tier
system that could be potentially divisive and unnecessary. To what
extent do you think that’s a valid concern, and how do you
think we could mitigate the risk of maybe only taking a small
number of schools with us on this journey and maybe leaving the
others behind?
|
[88]
Professor Donaldson: It’s a valid concern. It’s
one that the independent advisory group has been addressing and
asking questions about in the process. It seems to me that the
pioneer schools should see themselves as being the ones that will
be directly involved in the process of taking this through, but
they should be working with their partner schools, with the schools
within their learning community, or more widely, so that every
school in Wales is both kept informed about how this is going.
Pioneer schools are a key part of the process by which that
happens, but others also get a chance to contribute to that
process. And, as I understand it, the discussions that are taking
place just now are looking at ways in which the consortia and the
local authorities can ensure that that process is actually
happening on the ground, and that we have a process, because if we
do end up with a kind of elite set of schools that are going off in
one direction, and everybody else is wondering what’s
happening, then this will not have worked as a process.
|
[89]
So, it’s very important that the school system as a whole is
moving forward. The pioneer schools will be the spearhead of that,
if you like, but it’s not them on their own that need to do
it. And therefore, the way in which pioneer schools can work with
the partner schools around them is the critical thing we need to
establish.
|
[90]
Llyr Gruffydd: But that in itself is a challenge because of
capacity, I’d imagine, for those individuals who are fully
involved. Not only are they developing the curriculum, but also now
they’re being asked to go to other places to explain to
others. It’s a lot of time out of the classroom for some of
these people.
|
[91]
Professor Donaldson: That may be an issue in terms of how we
do it, but there are lots of opportunities for heads to meet in
areas and so on. I think it’s what you do inside those
meetings that becomes important. So, it’s getting it on the
agenda, it’s establishing the context within which this can
happen, using existing mechanisms, that I think is the way to do it
in the short run. As we move forward, and the thing becomes—.
As the substance of what it is that we’re talking about
becomes clear, then we need a more direct process of engaging with
all schools. But that’s a little bit down the line.
|
[92]
As I say, we’re just at that point where the risk is, if you
go too hard and there’s not a lot of substance, you know,
because the hard thinking hasn’t been done, you’ll have
people saying, ‘I’m not quite sure what this all adds
up to; I don’t understand what you’re talking
about’. So, there’s a timing issue in all of this that
is very important, I think, and that will be a call for both Welsh
Government and the consortia and local authorities in the course of
2017 as we move into September 2018 and this being available.
|
[93]
But there will be both time and opportunity to do that; it’s
more, I think, the mood music that’s around. If the mood
music, if the kind of implication, is that there are schools that
are doing it and schools that aren’t, we’ll have got it
wrong. We’ve really got to try and create the context where
all schools are thinking about the way ahead—and many are,
because I’ve been to many schools that aren’t part of
the pioneer network, but they’re already saying and wanting
to show me, ‘These are the kinds of things that were doing;
this is the thinking that were undertaking in order to do
it’. So, there’s an encouraging desire to move forward,
and, as I said earlier, a lot of countries would give their eye
teeth to have a schools system that’s complaining about not
being allowed to reform, rather than complaining about being forced
to reform.
|
[94]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. Darren.
|
[95]
Darren Millar: Yes, I’m also concerned about this
capacity issue of pioneer schools to meet the aspiration to be
developing the curriculum and talking to everybody else about what
they’re doing, and I wonder to what extent the independent
advisory group has made any recommendations to the Government about
releasing extra resources to those schools to help them to fulfil
the aspirations that you have for them to be developing this in a
subsidiarity sort of way, rather than there being a top-down
approach?
|
[96]
Professor Donaldson: I think we’re not at that stage
yet. You know, as I say, during the course of the next calendar
year, there will be a call about what the implications are in terms
of using pioneer schools as being at the centre of a network as
advocates—. Because one of the huge strengths of this pioneer
process, if it’s got right, is that, instead of schools being
told by people like me, you know, who are out there somewhere,
‘This is what you need to do’, they will actually have
in their local area schools that have been involved in the process,
and they can be in a position to both explain and advocate what
they do. That’s what’s happening with the digital
competence framework just now. So, the signs are that this is
something that can be made to work, but it will require very close
monitoring as the process goes forward, and, inevitably,
there’ll be areas that move forward further than others,
there’ll be difficulties that emerge in the process, and I
think the consortia will play a very important part in that,
because there is a lot of resource is tied up in consortia.
|
[97]
Darren Millar: Obviously, with a framework, though,
that’s cross-cutting across all subjects, across the whole of
the school. When you’re talking about the areas of learning,
they’re tighter, aren’t they? You’re talking
about curriculums for subjects, effectively. So, I mean,
isn’t it a bit odd to compare that to the digital competence
framework and that giving you a high level of confidence in the
ability to change the curriculum to meet the recommendations that
you’ve made?
|
[98]
Professor Donaldson: I think the process of the DCF, the
digital competence framework, if that hadn’t worked, it would
be very worrying. You know, if what we’re seeing was a
process where, somewhere or other, we didn’t produce
something that commanded confidence. But the reaction to the
digital competence framework, from well beyond the pioneer schools
that were involved in the process, has been incredibly strong and
positive. So, I think, as a way of thinking about how you build
support for reform, and understanding about reform, then what
we’ve seen with the digital competence framework certainly
would give me some confidence that, although it’s on a
different scale and it’s in a different context, that
process, that way of thinking, is one that we can pursue. And
remember, we’re talking about the framework becoming
available in September 2018, and we’re into 2021 before
we’re talking about widespread adoption. So, there’s a
long period of time during which schools can partly dictate the
pace at which they move during that period. Therefore, there are
all sorts of opportunities for phasing, for focusing attention and
resource on particular areas. Now, it’s not my job to do
that, but I think that, in principle, both the timescale and the
experience we have with the digital competence framework suggest
this is doable.
|
[99]
Darren Millar: So, the digital competence framework is
available. We know that 2021 is the deadline for its statutory
implementation, if you like. But, on top of that, all of these
other new parts of the curriculum are going to be coming through,
and everybody’s going to be expected to deliver all of that
in addition to the digital competence framework, which sounds very
reasonable and relaxed in terms of the way it’s being
implemented. So, this is going to be a much bigger challenge than,
perhaps, you’re making out, isn’t it, Professor
Donaldson, in terms of the capacity of schools to be able to
deliver all of this change, especially as we approach the 2021
timetable?
|
10:30
|
[100] Professor
Donaldson: That may be right, but I don’t think it
necessarily is right. I think that the process that we’re
talking about is one that, given the timescale that we’re
looking at, allows a fairly sophisticated process of engagement
with different departments. In secondary schools, it’s not a
whole-curriculum commitment—you’ve got a subject
department, so it’s science you’re talking about, or
it’s maths, or it’s any other department. So, that is a
bit analogous to the digital competence framework. In primary
schools, it’s a broader approach to the curriculum, but a lot
of the kind of thinking that lies behind ‘Successful
Futures’, primary teachers are already almost intuitively are
attracted towards that—that way of thinking.
|
[101] So, I think the
issue is a real one. I think it needs to be thought through very
carefully, but, from where I sit at the moment, it doesn’t
look to me as if this is a showstopper and just can’t be
done. I think it’ll be challenging, but I think it’s a
reasonable prospect if it’s managed properly.
|
[102] Darren
Millar: Just—
|
[103] Lynne
Neagle: Very quickly.
|
[104] Darren
Millar: Yes, just in terms of the implementation of the
subjects—the areas of learning—would it not be better
to phase that approach by subject, rather than all subjects
becoming available on a single date, in terms of the timetable that
we’ve got at the moment?
|
[105] Professor
Donaldson: Well, by implication, because there’s a two or
three-year window after it becomes available, it is being phased,
because schools can determine the pace at which they go so that
they can focus on particular bits of the curriculum over a two or
three-year period. So, there’s a lot of flexibility built in
there that does allow for, I think, a kind of phasing. As I say,
2018 is not a cliff edge—it’s not all got to happen
instantly in September 2018. There’s quite a lengthy period
that allows for that to be a managed process. But, the issue is a
real one—it needs to be well managed if that’s to
happen. It needs to be thought about very carefully, and any
additional resource implications have to be identified early and
catered for in the process.
|
[106] Darren
Millar: Okay, thanks.
|
[107] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you very much. We’ve run out of time.
We’ve had a very good session. Can I thank you for attending
this morning? I’m sure Members have all found the opportunity
to talk to you very useful, so thank you very much for your time
and for attending. We will send you a transcript of the meeting
this morning for you to check for accuracy. Thank you.
|
[108] Darren
Millar: Can I just ask a question, Chair? Does the independent
advisory group produce minutes of its meetings?
|
[109] Professor
Donaldson: Yes.
|
[110] Darren
Millar: Are they publicly available?
|
[111] Professor
Donaldson: Yes.
|
[112] Darren
Millar: Okay, thanks.
|
[113] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you very much, Professor Donaldson.
|
10:34
|
Gweithredu
Dyfodol Llwyddiannus: Adolygiad Annibynnol o’r Cwricwlwm a
Threfniadau Asesu yng Nghymru: Sesiwn Dystiolaeth 2
The Implementation of the Review Successful Futures: Independent
Review of Curriculum and Assessment Arrangements in Wales: Evidence
Session 2
|
[114] Lynne
Neagle: We’ll move on now to our second evidence session
this morning. I’m delighted to welcome two representatives of
pioneer schools to talk to us this morning: Luke Mansfield from St
Julian’s Primary School in Newport, and Eirian Davies from
Ysgol y Strade in Llanelli. Thank you very much, both, for coming.
I know that you’ve also come at short notice, so we’re
very grateful to you for that. Would you like to make some opening
remarks?
|
[115] Mr
Mansfield: Yes, it’s a fantastic opportunity to have been
involved in curriculum reform like this—it’s never been
done before—and to be working with the Welsh Government.
Teachers, historically, are told what to do by the Welsh
Government, and we just do what we’re told, so it’s
great to have the opportunity to work together and to bring in
experts as well to look at how we can really raise the standard of
education for our learners in Wales.
|
[116]
Mr Davies: Yes, I’d like to echo those remarks.
We’re thrilled to be a part of it, and it’s such an
exciting venture for us in Wales, to be different again, to be the
leaders. I think we’re at the stage now, and listening to the
debate so far here, where there’s an eagerness to get on with
it, there’s an eagerness to progress, and some elements,
possibly, of frustration in leading that change. We’re in
that middle period at the moment, but there’s definitely a
lot of enthusiasm within schools at the moment to get this done and
to get this done well.
|
[117]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you very much. We’ll go to questions from
Members now. If I can just start by asking you to maybe say a
little bit about whether you’re involved in curriculum or
professional development, and which working group you’re
involved in.
|
[118]
Mr Davies: A ydw i’n gallu mynd i’r Gymraeg ar
hyn? A ydy hynny’n iawn?
|
Mr
Davies: Can I turn to Welsh on this, if that’s okay?
|
[119]
Wel, rydw i’n bennaeth
cynorthwyol yn Ysgol y Strade yn Llanelli. Rŷm ni’n
ysgol ddwyieithog â Chymraeg fel iaith gyntaf. Rŷm ni yn
gyfrifol, neu wedi cael y cyfrifoldeb am arwain ar ochr datblygiad
proffesiynol i staff. Mae gyda ni dros 1,000 o ddisgyblion yn yr
ysgol.
|
Well,
I’m an assistant headteacher at Ysgol y Strade, Llanelli.
We’re a bilingual school and Welsh is our first language. We
are responsible, or have had the responsibility, of leading on the
professional development side for staff. We have over 1,000 pupils
at the school.
|
[120]
Rŷm ni wedi adnabod ers rhyw
dair neu bedair blynedd bellach bwysigrwydd datblygiad proffesiynol
i’n staff ni er mwyn sicrhau cynnydd disgyblion. Dyna ein
prif ffocws ni. Cynnydd disgyblion yw’r peth y dylai fod ar
flaen y gad a dylai fod yn un o’r blaenoriaethau wrth i ni
symud ymlaen i’r dyfodol. Rydw i wedi clywed yn barod o fewn
yr ystafell hon y pryder, o bosibl, yn y cyfnod yma o newid, ein
bod ni’n colli cenhedlaeth o blant sydd yng nghanol y newid.
Mae angen i ni sicrhau yn y cyfamser bod ein staff ni yn barod, bod
ein staff ni â’r gallu i gwrdd â’r her yma
o newid sydd o’n blaen ni.
|
We have identified, for about three or
four years, the importance of professional development for our
staff in order ensure the progress of our pupils. That has been our
main focus—the progress of pupils should be at the forefront
of our minds and our priority as we move ahead in the future.
I’ve already heard it mentioned here that the concern in this
period of change is that we might lose a generation of children,
possibly, namely those who are in the middle of this change. So, we
need to ensure in the meantime that our staff are prepared, that
our staff have the ability to meet this challenge of change that
lies ahead of us.
|
[121]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. Mr Mansfield.
|
[122]
Mr Mansfield:
Nid ydw i’n gallu siarad
Cymraeg. Rydw i’n dysgu.
|
Mr
Mansfield: I can’t speak Welsh. I’m a learner.
|
[123] So, I’m
going to talk in English if that’s okay. So, I’m deputy
headteacher at St Julian’s Primary School in Newport.
It’s a large primary school, with over 600 pupils on roll.
We’ve been involved as a digital pioneer, but also with the
professional learning pioneer as well. We’ve been involved in
all sorts of aspects of the curriculum development, looking at
working with the consortia and how we can basically build networks
around our area to bring the partner schools on board, to make sure
that everybody’s on board with this, because it’s very
easy for non-pioneer schools to feel like they’re not part of
this process, and we don’t want this to be something that is
a new curriculum for a certain, select number of schools. This is
something for all schools in Wales, so we’ve been really
conscious of building networks to work with other schools and to
get key messages out. Communication is vital, particularly around
this time, and so that’s been a key role, particularly in our
group of digital pioneers, looking at how we get the key messages
out based around the digital competence framework.
|
[124] So, we’re
currently looking at how the digital competence framework,
obviously, being a cross-competency skill, can feed into the other
areas of the learning experience, and also how to look at
professional development for teachers in this area. When you say
‘digital competence’ to teachers, it’s often the
thing that scares teachers and makes them panic, thinking,
‘Oh no’. We were saying, teachers sometimes say,
‘Well, I can check my e-mails and I can make a PowerPoint
presentation, but what’s all the rest of this digital
competence?’ I think it’s really important that we look
at how digital competence can be mapped across all the areas of
learning and experience, but also how we can develop teachers and
school staff to equip them with the necessary skills they need.
Often, children will come in and, dare I say it, they’re 10
steps ahead of the teacher in digital technology. So, it’s
really supporting teachers in developing their skill set, and also
looking at how we can effectively map these skills across the
curriculum.
|
[125]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. Julie, on this.
|
[126]
Julie Morgan: It’s great that you’re so enthusiastic.
That’s very encouraging. On your relationship with the
non-pioneer schools, you said you made a particular effort to reach
out. Could you tell us what form that takes and how they have
responded to your efforts?
|
[127]
Mr Mansfield: Certainly. I’ve spoken at many of the
curriculum pioneer events and new deal pioneer events, and things
are often leaked and put on Twitter. So, different messages get
out and it really started from that. We’ve been
working with the consortia and we were already involved in going to
train various schools in different elements. Programming became a
big thing in primary, teaching children computational thinking and
how to solve problems, and so we were already offering, as a
school, workshops for other teachers to come and be involved in.
From that, people heard that we were involved in curriculum
development and it really just started with e-mails being sent back
and forth. You’ll get a school saying, ‘We’ve
heard you’ve been involved with the digital competence
framework, can you come and talk to us about it?’ and I think
that’s key—breaking down the barriers of schools
feeling like they can’t ask other schools for help.
|
[128] The culture that
we work in in education is often one of competition with each other
and it’s systemic through the whole education system,
actually. We need to break down those barriers and look at how we
can support other schools and work together to share best practice,
to know of schools that are great in certain areas. So, you know,
the school down the road is brilliant at, say, assessments, and so
we can learn from them and what can they get back from us in
return? So, we built up these networks, almost, of people who I
just had contacts with and then they would talk to their
colleagues, and when you start to impact one network, it then
spreads out and things do get out and things do spread. Obviously
social media and the internet are a fantastic way to get key things
out as well, so we’re constantly posting things on our
Twitter account. And again, working with the other pioneers to
really look at how we best get the networks—and the consortia
have had a key role to play in that.
|
[129] Being part of
the Education Achievement Service consortium, we were already
delivering various workshops, like I say, but now our role is split
into two, really: looking at how we impact wider Wales and working
with Welsh Government, but also working with the consortia to
impact regionally and get the messages out. We’ve got some
events coming up. There’s a teach-meet-style event with lots
of short presentations to get key messages out really quickly. So,
yes, it’s really looking at local schools and the context
that they have and also bringing together regional, wider events as
well.
|
[130] Julie
Morgan: So, you feel that the non-pioneer schools in your area
are very aware of what’s happening and are drawn into it,
overall. Would you say that?
|
[131] Mr
Mansfield: I’d like to think so. There’s certainly
a lot of work being done. Communication is a two-way thing, I
always say, and you can give all the messages you like and you can
speak at as many schools—. I’ve done over 15 in-service
training days and staff training events recently, but unless
the—. Schools all know that there’s a new curriculum
coming and schools really have to take ownership of it themselves,
whether they’re a pioneer or not, and get involved.
There’s plenty of information going out there and it’s
really encouraging all schools to get involved in the process and
seek the information for themselves as well. But, yes, I’d
like to think that all schools feel like they’re kept
informed—
|
[132] Julie
Morgan: But you don’t know.
|
[133] Mr
Mansfield: It’s difficult to talk, because obviously,
being in the networks that I’m in, I’m very well
informed.
|
[134] Lynne
Neagle: Mr Davies, have you got anything to add to that?
|
[135] Mr
Davies: No, I think I’d agree completely with what Luke
was saying. One of the biggest frustrations, I think, for schools
that are not involved in the project is that they are currently
labelled as ‘non-pioneers’ and that is very far from
the truth. There is a lot of excellent practice that happens within
those schools that we need to learn from as well. As a Welsh-medium
school and as a Welsh-medium secondary community, I think
we’re probably slightly ahead of the game in terms of
networking, due to necessity, due to the fact that the resources,
possibly, aren’t as widely available as they are in the
English-medium sector. We have had to, over the past years, develop
these strong network links and those links are now coming to the
fore in terms of being able to share good practice, and in terms of
being able to share resources.
|
[136] One of the
biggest strengths for us, as an individual school, due to this
project, is that we’ve developed a new network of
Welsh-medium and bilingual schools that are now working in
partnership. We meet regularly, we’ve invested time in
developing lesson observation success criteria that are common
throughout the schools. The aim of that being, when we observe
lessons, we observe them to the same standard and we’re able
to compare across schools. We’re now looking forward to next
year, now that we have our initial baseline and recommendations for
teachers within our schools, to develop learning triads across the
network in order to share good practice. It works very well within
schools, but this has given us much greater scope to look outwards,
within that context.
|
[137] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you. Llyr, then Darren on this.
|
10:45
|
[138]
Llyr Gruffydd:
Diolch, Gadeirydd. Rydw i jest eisiau
gofyn, rŷch chi’n sôn am y gwaith rŷch
chi’n ei wneud yn datblygu’r cwricwlwm, ond hefyd yn
mynd mas i siarad ag eraill—roeddech chi’n sôn am
15 diwrnod INSET ac yn y blaen—ble mae hynny’n eich gadael chi o safbwynt
capasiti a’r adnoddau dynol sydd gennych chi i wneud eich gwaith
o ddydd i ddydd, oherwydd yn amlwg rŷch chi’n cael eich
tynnu i fwy nag un cyfeiriad? A oes yna gymorth ychwanegol yn dod o
rywle, neu a oes angen cymorth ychwanegol arnoch chi?
|
Llyr
Gruffydd: Thank you, Chair. I would just like to ask, please,
you’re talking about the work that you do in developing the
curriculum, but also going out and speaking to other
schools—you mentioned 15 INSET days there—where does
that leave you in relation to capacity and the staff resources that
you have to do your day-to-day work, because obviously you’re
being pulled in more than one direction? Is there any additional
help available, or do you need additional help from anyone?
|
[139]
Mr
Davies: Mae’n her.
Mae’n bwysau gwaith ychwanegol, yn sicr, ar uwch-dîm
arwain yr ysgol. Mae’r rhan fwyaf ohono fe yn cwympo wrth
ddesg un person. Beth sy’n bwysig, a beth rŷm ni wedi
trio ei wneud yw creu’r rhwydwaith, fel roeddwn i’n
dweud, fel bod modd rhannu’r baich yna, fel bod modd benthyg
arbenigedd o un ysgol i’r llall. Ond efallai bod
heddiw’n enghraifft dda: rŷm ni’n eistedd yn fan
hyn heddiw oherwydd bod e-bost wedi cyrraedd ddydd Mercher diwethaf
yn gofyn i ni fod yma. Mae wedi achosi’r anghenraid i warchod
gwersi o fewn yr ysgol, ac mae hynny’n rhywbeth nid ydych yn
ei gael yn ôl, ac mae’n rhaid bod yn ofalus iawn,
rwy’n meddwl, i sicrhau ein bod ni’n mynychu’r
digwyddiadau sydd wir yn symud y project ymlaen. Ac rwy’n
meddwl, heb fod yn rhy ‘controversial’ yn hyn,
rwy’n meddwl bod yna ymdeimlad, weithiau, nad yw rhai
o’r cyfarfodydd yn symud yr agenda ymlaen yn ddigonol,
a’u bod yn cymryd ychydig yn ormod o amser athrawon allan.
Mae rhai digwyddiadau deuddydd wedi bod ar ein cyfer ni, lle yn wir
efallai y buasai wedi bod yn bosib i gwtogi’r rheini i
ddiwrnod o waith ac eto, trwy rwydweithio wedyn, i rannu a
lledu’r neges. Felly, mae hi yn drwm; dyna’r ateb
syml.
|
Mr
Davies: It’s a challenge. It’s additional work
pressure, certainly, on the senior leadership team in the school.
The majority of it falls on the desk of one person. What’s
important, and what we’ve sought to do, is to try to create
the network that I talked about so that we can share that burden,
and that we can borrow expertise from one school or another. But
perhaps today is a good example, because here we are, sitting here
today, because an e-mail arrived last Wednesday requesting our
presence. And it has caused it to be necessary to cover lessons
within the school, and that is something that you don’t get
back, and you have to be very careful, I think, to ensure that we
do attend the events that truly do move the project forward. And,
without being too controversial here, I do think that there’s
a sense, sometimes, that some of the meetings do not move that
agenda forward sufficiently, and that it takes a little too much of
the teacher’s time away from the school. There have been some
two-day events that we’ve had where, honestly, it might have
been possible to have that as a day’s work and then, through
networking, to share the message. So, it is a heavy workload;
that’s the simple answer.
|
[140]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. Darren.
|
[141]
Darren Millar: You’re obviously here today because
you’re shining examples of pioneer schools that are doing the
work well and you’re clearly networking with others, and
that’s all great and good, but to what extent are you
communicating with other pioneer schools, not just the non-pioneer
schools, but other pioneer schools? And is their experience the
same as yours, or not, particularly outside of your current
regional consortia areas?
|
[142]
Mr Mansfield: One of the great things that’s happened at a
lot of these events, particularly in the earlier events, was the
chance to meet other staff, other professionals, and find out about
their context and what they’re doing well. This is something
we want to keep doing and driving forward, because obviously all
the pioneers are now experimenting and doing things in their own
schools, and it’s important we all share things, and we have
to be honest with each other about what works well and what
doesn’t, and they’re important things to share with
each other, even as pioneer schools. I think I can talk from the
digital pioneer perspective on this.
|
[143]
With 13 main digital pioneer schools,
spread out across Wales, communication is difficult at the best of
times, and we’ve been meeting, and we have our two-day
meetings spread out throughout the year. But one of the ways that
we’ve been doing this is using all the online resources that
we’ve got. E-mails are going out, lots of video-calling is
going on, particularly when you’ve got people in north Wales
and people in south Wales who are working on the same sub-group of
the digital pioneer group, trying to share ideas and work together.
Technology moves along so fast, as I’m sure you’ll be
aware. So, when we started back in September, there were certain
things available that we were using in our schools and we said,
‘This is great, we need to share this; let’s get this
out to teachers.’ Now, we’ve moved on so much and
it’s just great to have those connections with like-minded
people, if you like, really seeking out the best tools for
developing digital competence and how to move teaching and learning
forward. And so it’s something that, I think, is being done,
but always needs to be done further and the mechanisms to do that
need to be developed as well.
|
[144] Darren Millar: Is that your experience
too?
|
[145]
Mr Davies: It is, yes; a very similar experience. I think the
partnerships that we’ve developed were born from the
necessity of attending meetings, as the new deal pioneers, as it
began—we were told abruptly that we were no longer new deal
pioneers a month or so ago. But, in terms of the partnerships we
developed, they were due to the fact that we could see that there
was speciality within one school that we didn’t particularly
have, and therefore sharing that expertise was essential to us to
be able to deliver on our programme and share the
workload.
|
[146] Darren Millar: Okay. And just in terms of
the greater number of pioneer schools, now that it’s been
broadened out, particularly on the digital competency framework,
one thing that some organisations are telling us is that not all of
the teachers in those schools know that they are in pioneer
schools, which seems quite bizarre. You’ve obviously
disseminated the fact that you’re a pioneer school to all of
the staff and are trying to get them involved, probably because the
issues that you’re talking about are cross-cutting, across
the whole of the curriculum, in terms of teacher training and
assessment, and in terms of digital competency. Do you think that
the experience of other pioneer schools is as good as yours in
every case, or is some of the feedback you’re getting that
there is perhaps a different picture in some parts of Wales,
particularly for those subjects? I appreciate you’re not
subject pioneers as such, but can you give us any feedback on
that?
|
[147] Mr
Mansfield: I think it comes down to leadership and how the
leadership handle the role. Back when we were selected as pioneer
schools, it was sort of an application process. We submitted the
application and the consortia then helped to decide who should be
selected as the pioneer schools. And I think straight away the
schools thought, ‘Wonderful, but what exactly are we letting
ourselves in for?’ There were some clear things in the
application that we knew that we’d be doing, but developing a
new curriculum, I always say, is a messy process, because nobody
really knows exactly what we’re aiming to get. We know we
want a new curriculum, but exactly what it’ll look like and
how it’ll evolve was a mystery at the start. I think some
pioneer schools might say that they’re not entirely sure
exactly what their role would be. The digital competence framework
was slightly different because it was a smaller group, and we made
progress—again, not so much at the start, but then things
started to speed up and as it gathered motion and the deadline was
approaching, things started to take shape and to
form.
|
[148] But it really
strongly depends on the leadership within the school as to how much
they share the messages with their own staff. Again, the size of
the school—we’ve got a very big school—and
sometimes getting messages out to the whole staff and helping
everybody to have buy in is a difficult thing. From the point of
all staff feeling involved in the process, we’ve really tried
to keep staff up to date and to keep governors up to date about the
things that are going on.
|
[149] It’s very
easy—. With digital skills in school, you will often find the
schools that thrive the most have that one passionate person who
loves technology. The minute something new comes out, they’re
reading about it and then they’re buying it, saving up their
pay packets to be able to afford the latest thing. And
they’re the schools that are often far ahead with technology,
just being driven by one person, but it’s sharing that
message. I think it’s important for pioneer schools to make
sure that that doesn’t just stop with that one person in the
school—that it is shared. It’s something that
we’re working on in school at the moment as well, to make
sure that we’re forming a team of people who are really going
to drive this forward, and trial things and experiment with things.
Now that the framework is out, it’s ready to be tried and
tested and that’s the responsibility, actually, of everyone
in the school, and it’s important that everybody has the
chance to feed back on that.
|
[150] Mr
Davies: Possibly our experience as a professional development
school—a former new deal school—is different to the
digital pioneers. The digital pioneers had some very clear ideas
from the start of where they needed to reach, whereas as a
professional development school, we were at the beginning waiting
to see a framework that we could build around, because it’s
very difficult to train staff for something that doesn’t
exist.
|
[151] I think that
frustration was something that built over the first few months, and
it led to the development of partnerships that then had their own
ideas. The possible concern with that is that there are many, many
ideas now spread throughout the entire network that haven’t
been brought together yet. That needs to be the next step now, in
bringing those ideas together, bringing some collaboration within a
smaller steering group, possibly. A room with 100-plus teachers in
there, all with their different roles and ideas, isn’t the
way to bring those together, so possibly the consortia need to have
a mechanism by which they can bring the ideas together in terms of
the development of staff. I think now our work as a professional
development school really starts in earnest, as we build on the
digital pioneers, and as we build on what we can see that’s
been brought out from the curriculum is coming to fruition.
|
[152] In terms of your
point about schools not being aware of the fact that they’re
pioneer schools, I do have to point out respectfully at this point
as well that in terms of the school—sorry, I’ve got the
Welsh term, ‘rheoli perfformiad’—the
performance management within the school asks them to reach targets
at GCSE, to reach targets at key stage 3 and to ensure that pupils
show progress. I find it very difficult sometimes to have those
conversations with teachers about the pioneer network because,
actually, at the moment it’s nothing to do with what
they’re doing in the classroom with the children.
|
[153] Coming back to
the question, I listened to you asking Professor Donaldson earlier
regarding the implementation and the dangers involved with that.
Teachers are still very much focused on the curriculum that we have
currently and the measures that we have currently for
accountability, and that is at the forefront of their minds and of
school leaders’ minds. Where we go from there, I’m not
entirely sure.
|
[154] Darren
Millar: Just one final question. Obviously, you’ve
grasped this opportunity to be involved in shaping the new
curriculum as individual schools, and what you’ve described
seems to be a sort of organic growth in the pace and the shaping
over the period of time that you’ve been involved. To what
extent has that been led, if you like—the shaping of the
digital competency, and the shaping of the professional development
work that you’re doing—by the consortia, rather than
from the schools up? Which way round is it? Or is it a bit of
both?
|
[155] Mr
Mansfield: It’s been interesting. We met, like I say,
back last September, and started to put together this thing. We met
in a room in City Hall in Cardiff and the teachers kind of arrived.
Even though we knew this was a curriculum that was being developed
with teachers, and the teachers were leading on this, we kind of
arrived waiting to be led. And the personnel from Welsh Government
sort of stood in front of us and said, ‘This is what
we’re aiming for; now, let’s go for it, what we do we
need to do?’ And, we as teachers, went, ‘We don’t
know, we don’t know exactly what we’re aiming
for.’ And, so, we started to research things. The initial
period was incredibly slow and, often, we were leaving meetings
feeling really disheartened, thinking, ‘What have we
accomplished? Have we accomplished anything at all?’
We’d have long discussions about this, throwing ideas around,
and discussing what does a digitally competent 10-year-old or
14-year-old look like, and how do we then make that happen, or how
do we equip them properly with the curriculum. But, actually, it
felt like there was very little leadership.
|
[156] Now, that could
have been on purpose, in that, I think, for any pioneering work to
be done, there needs to be that period of panic. And it’s
after that initial period when you think, ‘I don’t
really know what to do’ that you start to develop things. And
you look at all the great pioneers through
history—they’ve all had that period of frustration and
panic, and then it sort of leads to something great. I don’t
think we’re at the great point yet. I think we’re on
our way there, we’re on a journey there, and there’s
certainly a lot to be learnt, but from a leadership point of view,
it has felt frustrating at times, feeling like there hasn’t
really been any clear leadership, which may be right, or maybe we
could have done with some clearer leadership to really point us in
the right direction. We’re classroom practitioners, and
that’s our expertise, but it’s important that this is
done with experts, advising and guiding, and also with wider
stakeholders as well.
|
[157] Darren
Millar: And you said that that deadline focused people’s
attention—
|
[158] Mr
Mansfield: Absolutely.
|
[159] Darren
Millar: —and there was an acceleration of pace. That was
your experience too, was it?
|
[160] Mr
Davies: Again, slightly different for us, because we
didn’t have a clear goal, but also, we had nothing to build
on. So, it wasn’t possible to sit down in the same way with
the digital competency and the curriculum to think ‘What
should a 10-year old achieve, what should an 11-year-old
achieve?’ and so on. So, we had this kind of cryptic idea. We
had the professional standards for teachers. However, those, we
knew, were being reformed, and therefore, there was very little
point in producing a package based on those. Had we been able to
hit the rewind button, I think the first step should have been that
the professional development schools looked at the professional
standards of teachers, get those in place, and then we’d have
a framework to build on.
|
[161] Now, our school
is part of that committee that is trialling out the new standards,
and it’s a very positive thing, because we now have a clearer
idea of what the expectation is, and we have a clearer idea of, as
is said in ‘Successful Futures’, this line of
progression through the profession that we didn’t have
before, and we certainly didn’t have a year ago.
|
[162] Darren
Millar: Okay, thank you.
|
[163] Lynne
Neagle: So, are there any areas that are outstanding, then, in
terms of where you feel we should pinpoint that you need better
communication from consortia and from Welsh Government?
|
[164] Mr
Davies: With the consortia, I think there is a feeling as well
that different consortia are giving out different messages, and
different consortia have greater resources than others in order to
do that. There is quite a large disparity between some of the
southern consortia compared to the northern and the central
consortia in terms of funding and in terms of ability to deliver on
this, purely from a personnel perspective. So, I do believe that
that does cause quite a bit of talking in terms of what our
neighbours are getting compared to what we’re getting. So,
yes, possibly a steering group there that brings everything
together. But, again, we still have a lot of ideas throughout the
entire pioneer network that somehow need to be brought to
fruition—that need to be brought to one idea that we can give
out. It’s fine to get teachers to create this and build it
from the ground up, but, sooner or later, we need one clear
goal—we need one document to say, ‘This is the
model’. At the moment, we don’t have anything near
that.
|
11:00
|
[165] Lynne
Neagle: Llyr on this.
|
[166]
Llyr Gruffydd:
Yn eich barn chi, job pwy yw hynny?
Pwy ddylai eistedd i lawr a thynnu’r cyfan at ei
gilydd?
|
Llyr
Gruffydd: In your opinion, whose job is that? Who should sit
down to pull everything together?
|
[167]
Mr Davies: Nid wyf yn ddigon cyfrifol nac uchel i fyny yn
fy swydd i ateb y fath gwestiwn â hynny, ond, yn sicr, fel yr
wyf i’n ei gweld hi, mae’n rhaid bod y consortia yn dod
i mewn ar hynny, achos nhw yw’r rhai sydd yn ein harwain ni a
nhw yw’r rhai sydd yn dod â’r negeseuon draw atom
ni. Felly, byddem ni’n gwerthfawrogi gallu cael yr arweiniad
yna.
|
Mr
Davies: I’m not responsible enough and my position
isn’t high enough for me to answer that question. But,
certainly, how I see it is that the consortia have to come in on
that, because they are the ones who are leading us and they are the
ones who are disseminating the messages to us. So, we would
appreciate having that leadership.
|
[168]
Nid wyf yn dweud am funud—rwyf
eisiau i hwn gael ei ddweud—nad ydym yn cael cefnogaeth. Mae’r gefnogaeth yno, ond
mae angen bod y meddylfryd yn glir rhwng y gwahanol gonsortia
i’r neges fod yn debyg i bob ysgol ar hyd Cymru, yn hytrach
na syniadau gwahanol yn digwydd ym mhob consortia.
|
I’m not
saying for a moment—I need to say this—that we’re
not receiving support. The support is there, but we need for the
mindset to be clear—a shared mindset between the
consortia—so that the same message, or a similar message, is
being passed on to the various schools in Wales, rather than there
being different ideas in different consortia.
|
[169]
Llyr Gruffydd:
Diolch.
|
[170] Lynne
Neagle: Okay. I’ve got Michelle, then Oscar and then
Hefin.
|
[171] Michelle
Brown: Thank you. How is the work of the pioneer schools and
the outputs of the pioneer schools on curriculum development being
co-ordinated with other pioneer schools?
|
[172] Mr
Mansfield: In what way?
|
[173] Michelle
Brown: Are you specialising in a particular subject? The work
that you do on curriculum development—you must be coming up
with recommendations and ideas. How does that fit in with the work
of the other pioneer schools? Because they must be coming up with
very similar things and, in some cases, very different ideas. Who
co-ordinates that?
|
[174] Mr
Davies: Neither of us is part of curriculum design or a school
that’s looking at curriculum design, but my understanding is
that there are sub-groups or sub-committees that do work on
specific areas and the areas of learning and experience, and
they’re developing their area of the curriculum through that.
I don’t have the information to hand as to how exactly that
happens.
|
[175] Mr
Mansfield: From the digital pioneer point of view, you’re
right in saying that all of us would meet for the two days and have
our two-day meetings, and then go off back to our own settings and
our own schools. We’d come up with different ideas or think
about things and think, ‘Oh, actually, I don’t know
whether that’s quite right—shall we change it?’,
and we’d just come back and discuss it. There were some
lengthy debates about the content and the number of strands and
elements that the digital competence framework should have, so
there were mechanisms in place for discussing that and having
debates about things, often late into the night on Skype, which was
interesting.
|
[176] Lynne
Neagle: Okay, thank you. Oscar.
|
[177] Mohammad
Asghar: Thank you very much, Chair. I want to make sure that I
tell Luke that my constituency office has been in St Julians for
the last eight years. When I was there in the beginning, they were
full of ethnic minority children—actually, they were
non-achievers. How they’ve turned that around in the last
eight years—hats off to them. I’m very proud of
them—I’d give them 10 out of 10. How have you done it?
How have you motivated these children? Forget the
curriculum—that’s my first question: how have you
achieved what you’ve achieved in the last eight years? Hats
off to you.
|
[178] The second
question is: in December 2013, the chair of MEGA—the
ministerial expert group on advocacy—said,
|
[179] ‘There are
examples of good practice but the overwhelming impression is one of
a postcode lottery…based on “finger in the wind”
calculations rather than any more scientific estimation of
need.’
|
[180] In your opinion,
where do we stand in November 2016 on this statement, both of
you?
|
[181] Mr
Mansfield: Good question. I think teachers, schools and
leadership teams are very adaptable, and we’ve got to be able
to adapt to the children we serve and the communities that we
serve. In our area now, in St Julian’s, the children we
see—we’re seeing a great intake of children coming from
overseas and the demographic is really changing.
|
[182] Mohammad
Asghar: How have you motivated them?
|
[183] Mr
Mansfield: It’s important that we try a range of
different things. Sometimes things work well, and sometimes things
don’t. One thing that changes in lots of schools’
demographics—one thing that’s changing in our
demographic at the moment—is the number of children eligible
for free school meals, which has an impact on everything that we
do, because that impacts our funding through the pupil deprivation
grant and things like that. Then, how we allocate those resources
is vitally important, and the grants that we receive to support
children in these different groups that we’re talking about
are absolutely vital. But it all comes down to developing the
teachers, underpinning good teaching and learning, and really
investing in the staff—providing staff training, keeping
morale high. We’re at a period, I think, where teachers feel
overworked, overburdened and almost squeezing the passion and
creativity—the reason these people went into these jobs to
start with. I think that if we’re really going to continue
the drive, we’ve got to get a couple of key messages out. The
first thing is that teachers are valued and trusted and are really
important roles in society. Get that key message out there and make
sure that teachers know that they’re valued. Secondly, look
at accountability and the way that accountability is structured in
the school. We’re talking about being pioneer schools. I
think, to be truly pioneering, you need to have almost a sense of
freedom in certain areas, and schools often aren’t working in
freedom. We’ve talked about exams and the pressures of exams,
and assessments are one area that is being looked at, but if you
look at the whole accountability structure within schools, it
actually restricts some of the creativity, and so we’ve got
to really look at how the accountability is done and how grants and
money are shared out, and these sorts of things that are absolutely
vital if we’re going to pioneer and come up with the best
ideas and the best curriculum for our learners, to see the impact
that we’ve had continue and grow.
|
[184] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you. I’ve got John then Hefin on this.
|
[185] John
Griffiths: First of all, it’s great to see you here, as
St Julian’s.
|
[186] Mr
Mansfield: There are pictures of you all around St
Julian’s at the moment, because the children met you the
other day.
|
[187] Darren
Millar: I’m sure they’ll be defacing them.
[Laughter.]
|
[188] John
Griffiths: Not at all. Luke, I was just going to ask—.
It’s coming back, really, Luke and Eirian, to what you were
saying, really, about communication and how clear it is
what’s expected of you and whether that leadership is there
in the consortium more generally. Would you say that you’re
quite clear about implementation now—you know, what the
timescales are for the different strands of implementation and what
you’re expected to do for that to make sure it’s
delivered effectively?
|
[189] Mr
Davies: In terms of the timescale, I think that’s been
apparent from the beginning of the process. In terms of the
knowledge of what our role in it is, it’s been, possibly, a
little bit of a free for all. Going back to what Luke said about
the beginning of just running around in circles and not quite
knowing—the headless chicken scenario—we’re out
of that now, but we’re still not being told exactly what our
role is, because, of course, in this process it’s supposed to
be like that. However, sometimes, I think that schools would prefer
to know exactly what a clear role would be, what is the start
point, what is the end point. I mean, if I observed a good lesson,
I’d expect the children at the beginning of the lesson to
know what they’re expected to achieve by the end of it and,
at the end, that they have achieved it. This hasn’t been done
in that way at all, and, as teachers, I think we find that mightily
frustrating, that we haven’t got that clear idea. So,
it’s swings and roundabouts, isn’t it? We’re
asking for the ability to be creative, but, then again, that has to
be within a confine; otherwise, the end of this year is the same as
the end of last year; we’ll end up with a roomful of separate
ideas that aren’t being brought together.
|
[190] John
Griffiths: So, if you look, for example, at the areas of
learning and experience and the timescale, which is due in 2017 to
define and elaborate the areas for the pioneer school networks, do
you feel that you’re on course to achieve that?
|
[191] Mr
Davies: We’ve been doing a lot of work. As a Welsh-medium
partnership, we’ve been doing quite a bit of work on this
with CYDAG De-ddwyrain Cymru and what we’ve looked at is the
possibility and the strong likelihood that the curriculum is going
to be based widely on a thematic model, with the six areas of
learning, and, therefore, we have defined those areas within the
school. Throughout the partnership, we’ve decided on
different themes that we could experiment with. Now, I’m very
cautious in using that word ‘experimentation’, because
it seems as if we have no idea of the outcome, and, in many
respects, that’s true. However, what we decided in
preparation, for our staff more than anything else, is that, next
summer, years 7 and 8 will run two weeks of a specific theme.
We’re also involved in Erasmus, so we brought this idea of
refugees as a theme into a two-week project that is spread across
the six areas. And we’ve tried our best to disseminate our
departments, to take them out of their comfort zones and place them
into the six areas of learning, and we’re going to try it out
to see what happens.
|
[192] The use
we’re making of our funding at the moment is to release a
group of staff, a steering group for that particular theme, from
lessons. There’s going to be a block of lessons before
Christmas, then in the spring term as well, to allow them to plan,
because I think what hasn’t been built into this is that you
can get a curriculum, and that can be brought to fruition, but that
has to be implemented on the classroom floor. And that’s what
worries me is the workload on teachers. Once we do get this written
curriculum, how do we then present it to the pupils? I’ve got
many departments now who are up to here, and possibly over, in
rewriting their GCSE and A-level schemes of work, in line with the
new specifications that have been brought out. And there is a
massive concern among my staff at the moment that this curriculum
that’s been written at the moment will eventually feed into
GCSE, and all this work that they’re currently doing, within
a few years, will be null and void. And it worries people. It
worries people to the point that it does cause widespread stress,
because writing a scheme of work is—well, it takes months. It
takes months and years, and these teachers pour their heart and
soul into it.
|
[193] Back to your
question about inspiring students, people are inspired by people.
But, at the moment, I am worried that our teachers are being less
inspirational because they are being confined so much with
preparing and creating this curriculum within the classroom. And
that is holding some back, and, obviously, as we see from the
numbers, it is causing a lot of people to leave the profession as
well. One of our main leaders as a school is a project we’ve
run with the University of Wales Trinity Saint David’s,
whereby as a group of schools—there are eight schools
involved—every Wednesday, our prospective teachers, sorry,
not student teachers anymore, but prospective teachers, will meet
up to hold seminars. The schools provide some new information for
them, or some training for them, in a half an hour session, and
then a seminar to discuss among each other the good practice that
they’ve seen within their schools and how they implement it.
It’s been very, very successful, because teachers have had
time to sit down and discuss with one another the job of standing
in front of pupils and teaching them and getting that progress to
fruition. And it is something we’re seriously considering for
our newly qualified teachers, and also, then, for the trial system
for our qualified and experienced teachers.
|
[194] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you. Have you finished, John, because I want to
bring Hefin in? You’ll have to be really, really brief.
|
[195] John
Griffiths: Very, very quickly, just in terms of initial teacher
training then, given what you’ve said, do you feel
there’s an alignment there between what initial teacher
training is now and the new developments around the curriculum?
|
[196] Mr
Mansfield: I think there’s a long way to go, and,
certainly, initial teacher training is involved in this process
now, and it’s making sure that these things are developed
together in tandem, to make sure that courses adapt in the same way
to reflect the new curriculum and things that are being developed.
And, certainly, we’ve seen good practice of that, from lots
of universities and higher education institutions, but
there’s a long way to go, definitely. And with the standard
of students, or prospective teachers, coming in, it’s always
interesting to see and find out which universities they’re
coming from. But also, we’ve noticed a decline in those
numbers of people taking on the courses as well, which is
incredibly sad, because it’s a great job.
|
[197] Mr
Davies: We need great people involved, and I do worry
we’re not attracting the best people at the moment.
|
[198] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you. Final question from Hefin.
|
[199] Hefin
David: It’s pleasing to see that, with regard to
professional development, you’ve answered some of the
questions that Professor Donaldson wasn’t able to answer, but
you’ve also highlighted that, perhaps, our concerns about the
gaps are real and they do exist. Just moving on to a more
philosophical question: isn’t the logical conclusion to all
of this free schools?
|
[200] Mr Davies:
‘No’ is the straight answer.
|
[201] Hefin
David: I’m glad you said that.
|
[202] Mr
Davies: I don’t think so. You’re looking at
fundamental change to what happens within the classroom. Are we
saying, then, in that statement that all of our schools are failing
at the moment? I think Estyn would disagree with you and I think
most headteachers would disagree with you. The passion is there to
teach and the model that we have we know works. We can send out
students who will take on the rest of the world quite readily. What
we need, however, is this in place now, as quickly as possible and
to a high quality.
|
11:15
|
[203] Hefin
David: It’s with relief that I’ve written down your
categorical ‘no’ there. Luke, I assume—
|
[204] Mr
Mansfield: Yes, absolutely. I echo that completely.
|
[205] Lynne
Neagle: Okay. Thank you very much. That concludes our session.
Can I, on behalf of the committee, thank you both for coming? We
very much appreciate you taking time out of the school day to come
and talk to us, and I’m sure Members found your remarks very
informative. You will get a written record of the discussion for
you to check for accuracy following the meeting. But thank you,
again, for coming. The committee will now break until 11.25
a.m.
|
Gohiriwyd y cyfarfod rhwng 11:16 ac 11:28.
The meeting adjourned between 11:16 and 11:28.
|
Ymchwiliad i Wasanaethau Eirioli Statudol:
Sesiwn Dystiolaeth 1
Inquiry into Statutory Advocacy Provision: Evidence Session 1
|
[206] Lynne Neagle: Can I welcome everybody back
to the committee for our first evidence session on statutory
advocacy provision? I’m really pleased to welcome Christopher
Dunn from Voices from Care, Jackie Murphy from Tros Gynnal Plant, Sean O’Neill from
Children in Wales, and Emma Phipps-Magill from NYAS Cymru. Thank
you all for coming this morning. We’re looking forward to
hearing what you’ve got to say. If you’re happy,
we’ll go straight into questions.
|
[207]
If I can just start by asking you why
statutory advocacy services are important, and what risks are there
for children when it’s not provided.
|
[208]
Mr O’Neill:
Thank you, Chair. If I can just open
proceedings this morning. So, thank you for the invitation very
much to contribute to the evidence session this morning, and also
for identifying statutory advocacy provision as one of the early
inquiries for this Assembly term. So, we’re delighted about
that.
|
[209]
If I can just say a little bit about
advocacy before I hand over to colleagues to illustrate more points
from on the ground. Advocacy is very much about speaking up for
children and young people, and it plays an important role for those
children and young people who face a number of barriers in terms of
getting their wishes and feelings heard, and their voices, and
getting things stopped, started or changed without independent
support. So, an independent advocate will very much listen to the
voice of the child and young person, support the child to navigate
their way through decision-making processes, represent them to get
their views and wishes heard, challenge decisions on their behalf
and make sure that they have their rights and statutory
entitlements met. Of course, it’s very much about focusing on
the wishes and feelings of children, which is very much
differentiated from other models as well.
|
[210]
So, for me, advocacy’s
fundamentally about children’s rights. We’ve made great
strides in Wales over a number of
years in terms of taking forward the United Nations Convention on
the Rights of the Child. Advocacy is a key cornerstone for a number
of eligible groups within that, particularly looked-after children,
children in need, and children on the child protection system. But
also advocacy’s fundamentally about keeping children safe and
safeguarding. I think history is littered with inquiries and
investigations of child abuse inquiries and examples where children
weren’t heard in the past, where they were not believed or
they didn’t have anybody independent and separate to turn to.
We can go back to the Waterhouse report, ‘Lost in
Care’, which called for very much the establishment of
advocacy services in Wales, and now there’s statutory duties
on local authorities to provide advocacy for a number of eligible
groups through the children’s Act, which is now restated
through the social services Act. So, I’ll hand over—.
Two of the services are here today that provide advocacy services
on the ground, NYAS Cymru and Tros Gynnal Plant, and they can
illustrate some of those points from the ground.
|
11:30
|
[211]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. Jackie.
|
[212]
Ms Murphy: I think for me—. I’ve been at this a long
time—people who know me know that I’ve been at this for
over 16 years now—so I’ve been on a long journey with
this, and, for me, advocacy is ultimately about safeguarding.
I’ll give you a couple of scenarios—not cases, but
scenarios of things that we’ve seen regularly over the last
16 years.
|
[213]
The little boy who is placed in a private
home or a home in Powys, and his advocate, who’s followed him
around various placements, comes to see him because he’s rung
up and said, ‘Will you come and see me? I’m frightened,
I don’t like it here’. So, she gets there and goes on a
very long—a lot of these homes are very remote—winding
path. She gets there, the staff are sitting outside, she says to
them, ‘I’ve come to see John,’ they go,
‘Oh, he’s not here; he’s run away,’ she
says, ‘Well, why aren’t you looking for him?’
‘Oh, he can’t get very far; we’re in the middle
of nowhere’. That gives you the sense of the vulnerability of
that young person.
|
[214]
To the young person who rings up on a
Friday to say, ‘Oh, I was assaulted by a member of staff: she
punched me in the eye and she’s hurt my shoulder. I told the
officer in charge, but they haven’t done anything and
she’s back on duty today and I’m afraid’, so the
advocate goes out, will make a child protection referral, and will
help settle that child somewhere else.
|
[215]
We see, then, the little girls who ring
up or speak to their advocate and say, very innocently, ‘Oh,
one of the members of staff; he likes me and he’s asked me to
meet him in the playground after work. I’m not to tell
anybody else’. Those are the kinds of things that we see in
terms of protection and safeguarding of children in the
looked-after system.
|
[216]
Emma will talk to you about, then,
sometimes, the differences it can make in positive outcomes. Then
Chris is going to talk, then, that Voices often will pick up people
after their care experience and give an example of how that can
make a difference as well.
|
[217]
Ms Phipps-Magill:
Thank you, Jackie. I’d just like to
sort of highlight and to reaffirm what Jackie was saying in regard
to safeguarding. It is there for safeguarding for children and
young people—advocacy is a safety net—but it’s
also about allowing them to have some voice, to be listened to, and
to get something stopped, started and changed. I think, in regard
to protection, we can also consider the long-term well-being and
the difference that advocacy can make to children and young
people.
|
[218]
For example, a young person in
school—dad in prison, desperately asking for contact with
dad, one way or another wanted to see dad; this man was a big
figure and a big influence in this young person’s life.
Unfortunately, the behaviour within school, the behaviour at home,
broke down family relationships. Social services had to become
involved, you had parenting support put in place, you had education
looking at alternative provisions, a lot of finances, a lot of
things implemented and put in place to support this young person.
But all they wanted was contact with dad. Now, we had a referral to
the advocacy service and were able to work with that young person
and the family to be able to navigate the probation service, the
prison service, to be able to look at contact, to break down those
barriers. Successfully, we were able to support that young person
and get them contact with their dad on Christmas Eve. What a
massive impact that had on that young person’s life. So, what
I can say to you now is, three, four years down the line, that
young person’s actually doing eight GCSEs, is doing extremely
well. So, it’s not just about that protection. It’s
about that well-being, it’s about that investment early on so
young people can reach their aspirations and do very, very
well.
|
[219]
Lynne Neagle: Thank you. Christopher.
|
[220] Mr Dunn: For me,
it’s kind of what young people have said in the past,
it’s the ‘what if?’ question. They feel that an
advocate could have helped ease those feelings of being alone, or
particularly those frustrations that they had at the time
with some of the systems that they were going through.
|
[221] Just a quick
example I want to give is of a young person—and for me it
highlights the importance of having advocacy across the whole ages
and having an active offer of advocacy across the whole ages and,
sometimes, particularly even when things are going well, because
things might not necessarily go too well in the future. This is
what happened with this young person: when he was in care,
everything was great, he was in a really stable foster placement,
and, for him, where it all fell down was when he left and the fact
that he struggled with that independence. He didn’t feel he
had anyone he could talk to. He’d struggled with paying the
bills and the general life experience. That feeling of not having
someone to talk to—he kind of then felt that his voice was
worthless and it just really knocked his confidence. At Voices, we
have many meetings and things like that, and they were talking once
about advocacy, and it really struck him how much of a difference
it would have made to his life, actually, if he’d known about
advocacy at the time—when he was in care, particularly, but,
equally, when he had left care as well. If he’d known what it
was—he’d heard of the word ‘advocacy’, but
had no idea of the practicalities of what it actually means and how
it can support you. When he heard the impact, like that story then,
that it has on a young person’s life, he had that ‘what
if?’: what could I have been now? Where could I have been
now? Would I have been successful in my independent living?
|
[222] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you.
|
[223] Ms
Murphy: Can I just sum that up, really? I think for me,
again—as I say, I’ve been at this for over 15/16 years,
in that time—I think, back in 2002, we estimate, with the
charities bringing money in, there was over £2 million going
into advocacy services in Wales. We know now that there is probably
just under £1 million and we know that there are a lot more
young people in need of the service. So, that’s the main
issue for me, really, is those in-between years—that lost
generation who were lost in care while we were trying to sort
something out. So, we’ve been at it, like Sean said, for a
long time, and this is why it’s really, really important that
this committee and this administration try and crack this once and
for all, so that there are no more lost children in care.
|
[224] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you. Michelle.
|
[225] Michelle
Brown: Thank you, Chair. Can I just come on to—? The rate
of progress has been very, very slow. What do you think the factors
are in the lack of progress with bringing advocacy services to the
fore, because they’re such essential services for the
children in care? Where’s the problem been?
|
[226] Mr
O’Neill: I think that, if we focus on where we are at the
current moment, it is around the national approach for statutory
advocacy, as the committee will well be aware. In summer 2014, the
Minister asked local government and ADSS to bring forward a model
for statutory advocacy provision across Wales, and that report was
then delivered in November last year. A task group was set up,
there was a project manager in place, funded by Welsh Government
then, to take that forward, and they identified four key components
within that case that fundamentally have to be developed and
delivered as a package. That also links in with the active offer,
which was the recommendation of the children’s commissioner,
because there was a clear—in the work that the previous
children’s commissioner did, lots of young people
didn’t know about their entitlement to advocacy and
didn’t know that these services were available and what
support advocacy could provide. It’s just been illustrated
very clearly in terms of how it protects children and improves
their general well-being outcomes, as well. So, we are very
concerned about where we are today in terms of the delay in the
implementation plan, as we understand it.
|
[227] So, as we said,
the report was completed in November. We’re now into, almost,
the first anniversary of that report. We understand there was delay
because there needed to be consultation, because there were
financial applications for local authorities in terms of delivering
that, but we’re not clear, when we sit here today, whether
there is complete sign-up to all the strands of that business case,
whether there’s clear agreement across each of the local
authorities and each of the six regions that have been tasked with
taking this forward—whether there is clear agreement to that.
And there are impacts on the delay in terms of the commissioning
model, so, clearly, we sit here today frustrated, as I have sat at
this committee before frustrated in terms of the pace of progress,
despite all the good work and all the resources, time and money
that have gone into this to date.
|
[228] Michelle
Brown: Do you think—?
|
[229] Ms
Murphy: Can I just say, as well—you asked the question
about why there’s been a lack of progress over the last, I
suppose, 15 years. For me, I think it’s because there’s
been so much investment, and we haven’t seen the change on
the ground, because we keep changing tack. So, we started off with
this kind of committee and this approach, didn’t we, and then
that wasn’t followed through, so then it changed, and we had
the ministerial expert group on advocacy, and then we had kind of a
plan with that. And, like Emma will tell you, on the ground, I
think local authorities have been really struggling with leadership
and a really clear kind of direction. I think it’s the
keeping changing tack, which I why I’m concerned that we
don’t do that. We have an opportunity now, with this
proposal, and providing the implementation plan provides all those
checks and balances that we feel are necessary to make it work,
it’ll be important that we don’t change tack and we
pursue this.
|
[230] Ms
Phipps-Magill: I think, just building on what Jackie was just
saying, we need the implementation. We do have commissioners within
the local authorities who are quite eager to put things in place,
who are asking questions and looking to us, really, as providers,
saying, ‘What is happening?’, and we’re unable to
give them answers. We’re in situations as providers where
services are about to end and local authorities are saying,
‘Do we extend? Can we extend? Where is the guidance
here?’ In regard to extend, with most of our contracts,
we’re able to extend for two years, but actually we’re
at that point as well. That’s been done. So, it’s about
that implementation, and I think quite immediately, really, and
that good communication between local authorities on what is the
vision on how we’re going to take this forward, and this is
what we expect of you.
|
[231] Michelle
Brown: So, is it more a case of not so much resistance from
local authorities, just confusion among local authorities and a
lack of communication?
|
[232] Ms
Phipps-Magill: I think—
|
[233] Ms
Murphy: It’s a whole mixture of things, but I think
that’s one of the components.
|
[234] Ms
Phipps-Magill: Yes. I think we are working well with the local
authorities, which are keen to take these things forward, but they
are looking for that direction and they’re looking for that
guidance as to how they do that.
|
[235] Michelle
Brown: Okay. And just one final thing: can I ask you what the
demand is like for advocacy services, and do you have the supply to
meet that demand?
|
[236] Ms
Murphy: No, at the moment it is very much underfunded, but the
demand is there and we are struggling to meet the demand, and I do
believe that there are a lot of young people who are not hearing
about advocacy, and that’s where the active offer would come
in; they would all be introduced to it at a very early stage in
their careers in care, and then they would know about it, and then
they would be able to access it as and when they needed to, as they
went through.
|
[237] Ms
Phipps-Magill: And I think it always concerns me, personally,
that a young person will only be told about advocacy at a point
that they would be seen in crisis. That is not a choice. An early
introduction to the service to know that it is a safety net is so
important.
|
[238]
Lynne Neagle: Okay. Thank you. I’ve got quite a few Members
who want to come in on the issue of the delays with the national
model. I’ve got Darren first.
|
[239]
Darren Millar: So, there’s been a woeful lack of leadership,
hasn’t there, from the Welsh Government, on advocacy. We know
that there’s been the right intention, as it were, from the
Welsh Government: there is the establishment of the group, we know
that that group made clear its recommendations 12 months ago, and
yet we’ve seen little action since. So, as far as
you’re concerned, you seem to give the impression that local
authorities want some strong leadership from the centre in order to
be able to get on with delivering a new national model that is
truly independent. Do you agree with me that the buck stops with
Ministers here in Cardiff Bay and that, really, they need a rocket
up their backside in order to get on and deliver this national
approach that you’re all asking for?
|
[240]
Mr O’Neill:
I think, for me, there are two different
levels there. I think what Emma was referring to is at
commissioning level, and I think it’s the commissioners
within the local authorities who are asking questions of providers.
I think, in terms of that leadership, it was very clear back in the
summer of 2014 that Ministers asked local government to bring
forward a plan of action. That plan was done in consultation with a
number of providers and with the children’s commissioner and
a number of organisations around the table. Now that case for
change has been tabled, it’s there, it needs to be
implemented. We’re not clear what the delay is, and why
it’s taken a year until we’ve seen the implementation
plan. I understand from the response to the committee’s Chair
from the Cabinet Secretary that we should see—well, the
Ministers will see—the implementation plan later this month.
Now, we’re not clear how strong that implementation plan will
be, whether it will be fit for purpose and whether it will be
taking forward each of the key components—the four key
components—and the business and the active offer as part of a
package, because it can’t be a pick and mix; it has to be the
full package. So, that’s where we are today. So, there has
been a delay. We’ve been involved—some of us has been
involved—in developing the business case, but there’s
been a delay in terms of that implementation and taking that
forward. So, what sort of state the implementation plan will be in
when its delivered we’ll have to see when it comes
forward.
|
11:45
|
[241] Darren
Millar: But you made it quite clear, Emma, that some advocacy
providers are coming to the end of their service level agreements
with the local authorities that they’re providing advocacy
services for. The deadlines, the dates are rapidly approaching. No
doubt you’ve got excellent advocates that are concerned about
their future in terms of their employment. Unless we get some rapid
decisions from the Government and more rapid implementation—.
You know, just looking through the briefings for today’s
meetings, I can see that there have been a number of reports from
this committee’s predecessors on advocacy over the years.
There have been a number of reports and follow-up actions from the
children’s commissioner’s office. And yet, it appears
to be like wading through treacle trying to get any progress on
this subject, in spite of warm words from Ministers. So,
doesn’t the buck stop with Ministers? They need rapidly now
to get on with implementation, try to phase in a timetable for
implementation—I don’t know, either for the start of
the new financial year, if there’s time, or to extend
existing contracts beyond the start of the new financial year in
order to bed things down part way through the next financial year,
so that people can have access to the advocacy that they need.
|
[242] Lynne
Neagle: Before you answer that, can I just draw your attention
to the fact that the Cabinet Secretary’s paper maintains that
the delays are down to local government—that it’s for
decision making at local government level. So, maybe you could pick
that up as well when you answer Darren.
|
[243] Darren
Millar: Yes. I mean, it does seem to be, though, with respect,
Chair, that the message that we seem to be getting from the
panellists is that local government wants to get on with this, but
there’s guidance lacking from central Government, from the
Welsh Government, in terms of driving implementation forward.
|
[244] Lynne
Neagle: Yes, I wanted to give the panel the opportunity to
respond directly to the Cabinet Secretary’s paper. Go on,
then.
|
[245] Mr
O’Neill: I think there is frustration, as Emma has
illustrated, at that commissioning level. Those commissioning the
advocacy services, there’s frustration at that level. Now,
this is more of a strategic level. The Ministers have asked local
government with ADSS to bring forward a plan for delivery on this.
The plan hasn’t been put forward. We don’t know what
the plan is like. So, there have been lots of, kind of—. You
know, we’re very frustrated in terms of the delay. I
mentioned very early on the ‘Lost in Care’ report from
Waterhouse back in 2000. Sixteen years later, this committee has
had three inquiries. The children’s commissioner has
conducted four inquiries. It’s almost 14 years since
‘Telling Concerns’ came out under the first
commissioner. So, there’s a great deal of frustration that
there have been huge delays, and there has been a whole host of
different groups set up by Welsh Government over the last few
years. But we are where we are. We’ve got the national
approach to statutory advocacy set up. We’ve got a business
case, which was tabled in November last year. We just want to see
what the business case looks like and we want it implemented
rapidly. And we want it implemented by the timescales that were
agreed in the business case, which was by March next year.
|
[246] Darren
Millar: Just one final question, and it’s on the
commissioning arrangements. Obviously, it may not always be in the
interests of local authorities to have good advocacy in their
areas, because very often that advocacy may make their life more
difficult as local authorities with responsibility for some of the
individuals in their care. Do you think that the commissioning
models ought to change so that there’s a national
commissioning body, rather than individual local authorities making
their own arrangements?
|
[247] Ms
Murphy: Can I just answer that, then? In this approach, again,
there’s been a lot of work invested in it by local
authorities and providers. Children and young people have also had
the chance to be consulted on it. Local authorities and Welsh
Government were involved in that task and finish working group. We
have tried to overcome that by a range and level tool, and
it’s a range and level tool that actually calculates how much
local authorities should be spending in relation to the number of
young people in their eligible groups within their catchment, and
other factors as well like rurality and things. And I think that if
they implement that, that will give really good fair funding and
fair commissioning, as you’re going to get even under a
national service. So, I think what we would like is to see this
plan put forward. We believe it will deliver good commissioning
guidance and a national framework of outcomes, and, for the first
time, what we’ll be able to do as well is to be able to start
collecting the statistics on these children, because, in the past,
we have considered it to be commercially sensitive information.
|
[248] So, after all
this time, we can’t tell you how many young people are
accessing or have accessed advocacy, or what the issues are, and
that would be really important, I think, for Government to see that
if one issue is coming out all the time, then you’d be able
to have a strategic answer to that, rather than a number of
individual children going through the same hamster wheel all the
time, trying to resolve it. So, to answer your question, I think
the national approach should be able to deliver a very robust
commissioning tool, if it’s implemented in the way that we
hope it is.
|
[249] Darren
Millar: Can I just clarify this issue of commercial
confidentiality?
|
[250] Lynne
Neagle: Darren, very quickly, because I got other Members who
want to come in.
|
[251] Darren
Millar: Who was saying that it’s commercially sensitive
information to share?
|
[252] Ms
Murphy: In the past, you’re in a contracting situation,
you’re running a service, you know, and the information that
you have is then owned by the local authorities and there’s
been no sharing of this in the past. What we’re hoping for,
out of this new model, is that ability then to start collating the
kinds of issues that children and young people are coming up with.
You know, we come and give evidence, and we can give you anecdotal
evidence on the kinds of cases we’re seeing and the kinds of
issues with contact, or is it placement, or are there as many
safeguarding child protection concerns out there as we think there
are? But, we would be able to start to compile a proper national
overview of statistics, of names, genders, ages. It would have such
good information, just to do future planning in Wales, on our
children.
|
[253] Ms
Phipps-Magill: To shape services, Jackie.
|
[254] Ms
Murphy: Yes, to shape services.
|
[255] Ms
Phipps-Magill: And to shape and develop services for the young
people and children who are accessing them. You know, that
information is so vital for across Wales.
|
[256] Ms
Murphy: Yes, so, how many people are in foster care? How many
people are out of placement in their own locality? Those kinds of
stats would be really useful.
|
[257] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you. Julie.
|
[258] Julie
Morgan: It’s obviously very frustrating that
there’s been no progress, and I think we all appreciate how
difficult this is, and it’s hard to pin down why. I did want
to ask some more questions about local authorities, because there
have been some public statements that have said they felt local
authorities were maybe not fully engaged with the process and were
reluctant. And so, I just wondered if you could tell us of any
examples where local authorities have been fully engaged with the
process and where there actually has been progress made, rather
than, sort of, you know, damn local authorities generally? But, you
know, is there anything you could tell us about that?
|
[259] Ms
Murphy: There are some local authorities that are following
very closely this model and are trying to prepare themselves so
that, if the national approach is implemented, they are already in
a place where they can just adopt it. So, for example, the north
Wales contracts. The six contracts went to tender—I think it
would probably be about 12 months ago, or probably a bit
longer—and, should this be implemented, they are in a good
position then to adopt the model; they don’t have to go to
tender again and they’re ready for it. And there are some,
then, that have gone to contract and have tried to implement bits
of it, and they might have to go back out to tender. So, there is
some definitely good progress there. And, I think, as Emma says,
there are a lot of local authorities that are just waiting for a
decision and guidance on what they are commissioning.
|
[260] Julie
Morgan: Right. So, you would say it’s not true that local
authorities are sort of reluctant to implement; it’s more a
matter of the process.
|
[261] Ms
Murphy: Yes. I think it’s that there’s a lack of
leadership on the model, and there are concerns about funding as
well, I think, Julie, and I think they need to be given clear
guidance on the funding, which, again, with the national approach,
there is a clear cost calculator, if you like; it’s a range
and level tool that tells them how much they should be—. And,
if this approach goes forward, that is one of the things
we’ll be asking—that it’s fully funded to that
range and level tool based on the number of young people that are
eligible for the service from 2014 to 2015, because it’s
based on the population. So, I think, if we’d started, it
would have been calculated on the 2014 population, and now
we’re looking at it being calculated on 2015, really.
|
[262] Julie
Morgan: So, you’re saying the framework is there; we just
need to move.
|
[263] Ms
Murphy: Yes. And, again, it is there and I think we do need to
move on this, but, then again, if it isn’t going to—.
If we have early indications that it’s not going to work,
then, possibly, move to a national service.
|
[264] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you. Llyr.
|
[265] Llyr Gruffydd: Well, you’ve started teasing out some of the
financial issues that I was going to be asking about, really, and
I’m just wondering to what extent it is the financial
considerations that are proving to be a barrier here in terms of
local authorities not moving in the direction that you’d like
to see them moving in terms of a national approach, or is that too
simplistic?
|
[266]
Ms Murphy: I don’t know. I just don’t think I have
the answer to that question for the local authorities, I suppose,
really.
|
[267]
Mr O’Neill:
But I suppose the business case did
identify a shortfall in funding, so there’s additional
funding needed to implement the national approach. So,
there’s additional funding needed—
|
[268]
Ms Murphy: In some areas.
|
[269]
Mr O’Neill:
In some areas. There’s additional
funding needed for the active offer. There’s been a request
for funding to help with the implementation of this from Ministers,
and that was stipulated in the business case. And we understand
that, after the business case was tabled in November last year,
there was a need at that point for ADSS to go back to local
authorities to raise with them that there were cost implications
for them and for them to make a decision on that basis. So,
finance, it appears, has been a big factor.
|
[270]
Llyr Gruffydd: And are you confident that that is going to be
addressed, because my understanding is that the Government has told
ADSS that new money will be forthcoming?
|
[271]
Ms Murphy: I’ve seen so many false horizons and I’ve
been told the cavalry is coming on so many occasions, I’m as
confident as I can be. Like I said, if the plan is implemented in
its entirety, in its integrity, and that cost calculator is used, I
have confidence in this model. And that’s why I said, if it
isn’t, then we need to be very quickly mindful of moving to
an alternative, like a national service.
|
[272]
Mr O’Neill:
There are some parts of the business case
that haven’t been fleshed out yet, and that’s in terms
of the governance arrangements. So, if we do have a robust
implementation plan tabled at the end of this month, what will be
the governance arrangements to make sure that is implemented as
intended? So, are there named national leads across each of the
regions across Wales? Is there a named lead person that’s
going to lead on this, because it does need somebody to drive it
forward? We’ve got lots of implementation plans, but we need
them implemented. So, I think we need to then look beyond the end
of this month. So, once we’ve seen the implementation plan,
we can begin to ask those questions in terms of how it’s
going to be governed and who’s going to monitor the
arrangements and scrutinise the arrangements to make sure that it
delivers as it was intended during that course of work.
|
[273]
Ms Phipps-Magill:
And not just when it has been delivered,
but after, to make sure that we’re measuring the impact of
that and that it still is fit for purpose and is being funded the
full allocation, because we all know those figures and the
population of children known to social services can move. So, this
constantly needs to be—.
|
[274]
Ms Murphy: And, also, as part of the governance as well, it does
need to be linked to the national safeguarding board.
|
[275]
Lynne Neagle: John.
|
[276]
John Griffiths:
I just wonder about your involvement, the
providers of the advocacy services, in the process, both with Welsh
Government and local authorities, because, obviously, there
doesn’t seem to be that effective a communication channel,
from the discussions that we’re having in terms of the
uncertainty as to what’s going to happen and when it’s
going to happen. I think you said, Sean, that you were involved in
the business case and helping to get that drawn up, but, in terms
of the delivery plan, presumably not much involvement at that
level.
|
[277]
Mr O’Neill:
Yes, just to clarify, I, as part of
Children in Wales, was positively involved in the business case
with colleagues from Tros Gynnal, so we had a representative from
our children and young people’s advocacy providers group on
that group, on the task and finish group. But, that task and finish
group came to an end a year ago, when that business case was
tabled. So, since that group has come to an end, there hasn’t
been that kind of forum to take the work forward.
|
[278]
John Griffiths:
So, has that left a real gap, do you
think, in terms of necessary communication and knowing what’s
happening and what work is going on?
|
[279]
Mr O’Neill:
Absolutely.
|
[280]
Ms Phipps-Magill:
It’s left a gap for drive, and
it’s needed to be able to drive that forward and to ensure
that progress is made in a timely way.
|
[281]
Lynne Neagle: Oscar.
|
[282]
Mohammad Asghar:
Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the
panel. My question relates to stress-free advice provision. In
December 2013, the chair of MEGA, the ministerial expert group on
advocacy, said—and the quote is—and I’ll read the
quote now:
|
[283]
‘There are examples of good practice but the
overwhelming impression is one of a post code lottery…and is
based on “finger in the wind” calculations rather than
any more scientific estimation of need’.
|
[284]
In your opinion, where do we stand in
November 2016 on this statement?
|
[285] Ms Murphy: I
think that that’s still the case, and that’s why
it’s important and why a lot of work was done by the task and
finish group around this range and level tool cost
calculator. You put the figures in—how many young people are
eligible for the service in your local authority area. It’s
done per head, and there are other factors in there as well. You
put the numbers in, and then it comes up with the
figure—‘This is how much you should be spending on
advocacy.’ That will change the commissioning in that they
won’t be able to say, ‘Right, well, we’ve got
this much money available—what services can you provide for
that?’ It’s ‘This is how much money we need to be
spending. Can you provide us a quality service for
that?’—‘Yes, we can’.
|
12:00
|
[286] In the past,
regional commissioning has been used as well as a mechanism for
driving down cost. This new range and level tool will stop that
happening—it’ll be set. The commissioning will be on
the quality of the service, not on how cheaply you can provide it.
Does that answer your question?
|
[287] Mohammad
Asghar: Partly, yes.
|
[288] Ms
Phipps-Magill: I think that embedding the active offer within
that actually eradicates that postcode lottery, because every child
or young person would be informed of advocacy, and not just when
they come into care, but at key points of their time in care or
their involvement with social services. So, it’s really
giving that choice to them.
|
[289] Mr Dunn:
I think what young people tell us is the fact that they just want
that consistency. They hear of some fantastic schemes and services
from young people in one part of Wales. They’re not, maybe,
sure that they have that in their own region, or they don’t
have that in their region. They just want that consistency of
support.
|
[290] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you. Julie, did you want to ask about Meic?
|
[291] Julie
Morgan: Yes. I wonder how effective you felt Meic was. I know
that they are concerned about the fact that there isn’t any
reference to Meic in the national approach. I wondered if you could
comment on that.
|
[292] Mr
O’Neill: Yes, we obviously welcomed the committee’s
report back in 2008, in which one of the recommendations was that
there should be a helpline for children and young people to support
that kind of development, because there was, back in 2008, a gap in
terms of knowledge, which we hope that the active offer will
support, and also that Meic will help access to statutory advocacy
provision and other advocacy provision. You’re absolutely
right: it’s not in the business case—as far as
I’m aware, it wasn’t part of the framework for
discussion, which is why it wasn’t in there. I think that was
a missed opportunity at that point. I think the potential of Meic
hasn’t been fully explored in the context of not just the
national approach for statutory advocacy, but the wider context
that we’re in now under the Social Services and Well-being
(Wales) Act 2014, in terms of the golden thread of advocacy under
Part 10.
|
[293] So, Meic could
fit in in a number of different layers, in terms of assessment, in
terms of supporting safeguarding and in terms of all of the
different strands of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act
2014. It is another piece of work that’s been left dangling
after the business case was tabled last year, and it’s
another piece of work that urgently needs to be looked at, in terms
of how Meic fits into the broader landscape of advocacy, as set out
in the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, but also
how it fits in with the national approach to statutory advocacy. I
think in the absence of an advisory group, or some kind of
stakeholder group, which there isn’t at the moment, there are
lots of pieces of work—including Meic, including Government
arrangements and including monitoring and implementation of the
plan—that are still left dangling or there are still
questions to be had over that.
|
[294] Julie
Morgan: Right. So, the opportunity that’s offered by Meic
being there has been neglected, not just in the advocacy
context.
|
[295] Mr
O’Neill: I think there’s huge potential for the
Meic service. We’re into the second contract—a number
of us, as organisations, were involved in setting up the Meic
service, working with and supporting ProMo-Cymru with that. I think
there’s huge potential. We’ve got Meic for another
couple of years, but it seems to be sitting in isolation from all
of these other pieces of legislation and pieces of work that are
going on, and it hasn’t been considered in the way that we
would hope it would be considered and should have been considered
by now.
|
[296] Julie
Morgan: There’s been no reason given for that, as far as
you know.
|
[297] Mr
O’Neill: Not as far as I’m aware.
|
[298] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you. One of the things that Tros Gynnal Plant
highlighted in your written evidence is the fact that there’s
still got to be a consultation on the new national standards and
outcomes framework, which, presumably, is going to delay things
even more. Have you got any comments on the fact that that
consultation hasn’t happened yet and what impact that’s
going to have?
|
[299] Ms
Murphy: As you said, Lynne, it’s just delaying things
more, but it does need to happen quite quickly. I think it can be
done quite quickly as well, and it’s a key piece of work
that, hopefully, we can—well, the Welsh Government can get on
with straight away, really.
|
[300] Mr
O’Neill: I also think that the national outcomes and
standards framework—we were involved in the consultation
phase for the early strand of that, and the task and finish group
and the business case reviewed that. We haven’t seen the
current draft, because, obviously, that’s part of the
business case going forward, but it does need to go into statutory
legislation because, as we know, Part 10 is unfinished at the
moment. There was a parallel piece of work, which was the national
approach to statutory advocacy. We had all the work that we were
involved in supporting Welsh Government as part of the technical
groups around advocacy. Those two pieces of work need to come
together so that we have robust legislation, which the national
outcomes and standards framework sits within, and all the other
strands of the national approach then can sit within that. Because
it does need to be statutory, otherwise we’ll have more
voluntary guidance that disappears after a few years.
|
[301] Ms
Phipps-Magill: I think we’re already experiencing that
within the local authorities where we are getting requests for
advocacy support that is outside children’s services, but
under Part 10. Those arrangements are being agreed through spot
purchase, which is not something that we would like to encourage,
because there is concern, then, about who is accessing that, who is
making the decision that advocacy would be the support for that
person, and, again, a spot purchase arrangement is something that
can be gate kept, really.
|
[302] Ms
Murphy: And what we find is that it comes very, very late in
the day, so it’s when it has reached crisis point, local
authorities will think, ‘Oh, we’d better get an
advocate in for this, because it’s spot purchase, and if this
is not covered by out contract—’. You’re
firefighting—you’re not actually making a real
difference.
|
[303] Mr
O’Neill: But there’s a huge impact potential with
Part 10 of the social services Act. And the Act, across
that—what’s been deemed the golden thread of
advocacy—there’s huge potential for it to be more
accessible for other groups that don’t sit within those
eligible—. I think, again, that’s something that needs
to be explored and needs to be urgently looked at, but we’re
still waiting for the implementation plan and national
approach.
|
[304] Ms
Murphy: I think there’s no reason why they can’t go
along side by side. I don’t think we have to wait for one
before we do the other; we can do them both in tandem and then slot
it in.
|
[305] Lynne
Neagle: Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members?
[Interruption.] Briefly.
|
[306]
Mohammad Asghar:
Thank you very much, Chair. I wonder
if—[Inaudible.]—the roll-out of your advocacy
system. I think most of the communities where I serve are totally
unaware of your presence. So, how do you actually promote
yourselves for awareness? Children won’t, but at least
parents should and they should pass on to the children that
it’s for the children’s benefit. So, how do you roll
out your presence in the communities?
|
[307]
Ms Murphy: In the past, going back to the early days, there was
a lot more promotion of advocacy, because there was the capacity
there to pick up those services. We do promote as much as we can,
but you’re right, part of this new process, going forward,
will allow a lot more promotion. In the past, you’d have to
say, ‘Well, it’s a postcode lottery: if you’re
this young person in this local authority, you can have this
service, but if you’re this young person in this local
authority, you have a different service.’ What this will give
us is that real opportunity to say, ‘No matter where you live
in Wales, you are entitled. If you’re in looked-after care,
you’re in child protection or you’re a child in need,
you’re entitled to an advocacy service and you can access it
and this is how you do it.’ I think we will be able to create
a lot more awareness then, and not be so limited by the things that
have constrained us in the past.
|
[308]
Ms Phipps-Magill:
I think we need to recognise the
independence of advocacy and how important that is. We therefore
don’t have reasonable information about children and young
people who can access our service; we very much look to the local
authorities to be able to promote that and to take that ownership
in telling children and young people about the advocacy service and
how to access it, because we couldn’t go knocking doors and
asking, ‘Are you entitled?’ because of our confidential
service that we offer and the independency, which is really
important.
|
[309] Mohammad Asghar: My point really is not
the local concern, but my point is to schools and areas like that
where children can be made aware of it, rather than the—
|
[310]
Ms Phipps-Magill:
I personally think that, sometimes,
there’s a reluctance. I know myself, as a service manager of
services within local areas, I don’t want to set children and
young people up to fail. I feel that if I go out to a school, I
will develop work with advocacy and local safeguarding leads within
the school and designated teachers et cetera, because they share
the same information with regard to who is entitled to that
service. I wouldn’t want to go into a school and talk to
parents and children and young people when I’m walking away
from a need that can’t be fulfilled.
|
[311]
Lynne Neagle: Okay, thank you very much. That concludes our
session. Can I thank you on behalf of the committee for coming
today and for sharing your views with us on this very important
subject? I think we all hear your frustrations loud and clear, and
will take that forward. So, thank
you very much for coming. You’ll have a transcript of the
proceedings to check for accuracy. Sorry, I nearly forgot. Thank
you.
|
12:10
|
Papurau i’w Nodi
Papers to Note
|
[312] Lynne Neagle: Item 5, then, is papers to note. The first is a
letter from the children’s commissioner: additional
information following the meeting on the 6 October. Then paper 3 is
a letter from the Chair of the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills
Committee regarding the Diamond review. Paper 4 is the letter from
the committee Chair to the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh
Language regarding the Council for Wales of Voluntary Youth
Services. Then, finally—no, not finally, there’s the
letter from the Minister to us about CWVYS and—
|
[313]
Llyr Gruffydd: Sorry, could I declare an interest as one of the
honorary presidents of the Council for Wales of Voluntary Youth
Services? But I just want to make the point that, whilst the
Minister has replied to our letter, he hasn’t actually
addressed some of the explicit questions that we raised in the
letter. So, I was just wondering if we could write again, and ask
the Minister to actually answer some of the questions that were
asked—or all of the questions, actually, not some of the
questions that were asked.
|
[314]
Lynne Neagle: Yes, very happy to do that. Everybody? Yes. Okay.
Then, finally, there’s a letter from the Cabinet Secretary
for Communities and Children: additional information following our
meeting on 2 November. Okay, is everybody happy to note
those?
|
[315]
Julie Morgan: Is that the Play Wales letter?
|
[316]
Lynne Neagle: Yes. Play Wales was one of the things we asked
about.
|
[317]
Julie Morgan: Yes. That’s fine.
|
12:18
|
Cynnig o dan Reol Sefydlog 17.42(ix) i Benderfynu
Gwahardd y Cyhoedd o weddill y Cyfarfod ac yn ystod Eitem 1
o’r Cyfarfod ar 24 Tachwedd
Motion under Standing Order 17.42(ix) to Resolve to Exclude the
Public from the remainder of the Meeting and for Item 1 of the
Meeting on 24 November
|
Cynnig:
|
Motion:
|
bod y pwyllgor yn penderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o weddill y
cyfarfod ac yn ystod eitem 1 o’r cyfarfod ar 24 Tachwedd yn
unol â Rheol Sefydlog 17.42(ix).
|
that the committee resolves
to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting and for
item 1 of the meeting on 24 November in accordance with Standing
Order 17.42(ix).
|
Cynigiwyd y cynnig.
Motion moved.
|
|
[318] Lynne
Neagle: Item 6, then, is the motion
under Standing Order 17.42 to resolve to exclude the public for the
remainder of this meeting, and for the first item at next
week’s meeting, which is when we’re having the update
on child and adolescent mental health services. Are Members
content? Okay, thank you.
|
Derbyniwyd y cynnig.
Motion agreed.
|
Daeth
rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am 12:12.
The public part of the meeting ended at 12:12.
|