Children, Young People, and Education Committee

Yes, thank you. I'll ask officials to introduce themselves. I don't know who wants to go first.

Shall I go first? Hi, I'm Nicola Edwards. I'm the deputy director for equity in education.

I'm Georgina Haarhoff. I'm the director of education.

Bore da. Alun Jones, head of the education improvement team.

You are very welcome this morning. [Interruption.] Oh, I didn't see you there.

I'm just around the corner. [Laughter.] Bore da. I'm Sarah Angel, head of school and learner information policy.

Thank you. You're very welcome this morning. Members have a series of questions, and I'd like to start. How do you feel about the fact that boosting standards in schools and colleges is no longer included in the First Minister’s four priorities, and do you believe that this reflects an apparent de-prioritising of educational improvement?

Thanks, Chair. Well, can I say categorically that education has absolutely not been deprioritised? The First Minister's broader priorities include opportunity for every family and, within that, there is the strand of boosting standards in schools and colleges, ensuring that every family has the chance to succeed. So, it sits alongside housing in that pillar, and decent homes are actually very important for children's education, and I see that all the time, the effect of challenges in housing on children's education. So, I can assure the committee that raising educational standards remains a priority for this Government, and it goes without saying that it’s a priority for me. I feel that we are making progress. It’s good to see the progress that’s been made, but I recognise that we’ve got more work to do, and we are as committed as we have ever been to driving that work forward.

Okay. Thank you. We now have a question from Cefin, please.

I'm going to ask this question in Welsh. Professor Dylan Jones undertook a review, and the report following the first phase of the review suggested that the consortia model wasn't working sufficiently well in terms of improving standards in schools. But, of course, almost two years have passed since that report was published, and there is a period of limbo or a vacuum that has existed since then. To what extent do you believe that that directionless period has had an impact on standards in schools? And do you believe that a mistake has been made that this delay has been so long?

Thank you, Cefin. Well, I don't believe that there has been a vacuum or a directionless period. There has been a phenomenal amount of work taken forward since the publication of Dylan Jones's review, and I'm really grateful to officials for all of the work that they've done in taking that work forward. So, the review set out a path towards a new model. That was based on the preferences of schools and local authorities. Local authorities gripped this quickly and set out their aspirations for next steps. We established cross-sectoral governance arrangements and co-developed guidance with local authorities, which was shared with them all in June 2024. But, during this transition period, school improvement work was continuing as the infrastructure processes changed.

By November 2024, all local authorities had submitted detailed plans on how they were going to deliver the school improvement system locally, and all plans set out how they would meet national policy objectives. By January 2025, then, the education improvement team was established and began work with local authorities immediately. Dysgu was established from September 2025. So, we've deliberately set out to execute the programme at pace, and I just want to recognise the professionalism and support of school improvement services during the transition period. So, there hasn't been a vacuum or any absence of support. The existing support services at regional or local level were part of that transition, and we've moved at pace to enable what is a very significant culture change in our approach to school improvement to be taken forward.

So, in terms of our engagement with local authorities, we've been struck by the level of commitment and engagement, and at no time have we been concerned about an absence of support for schools. We've not had any evidence, anecdotally or otherwise, that regional partners did not continue to fully support their schools. Of course, school improvement has always been the statutory responsibility of local authorities, and that legal responsibility has not changed. Estyn has continued to inspect during this period, and schools have continued to be supported. And it was clear in the original written statement about taking this work forward that we expected regional working arrangements to continue during this time, and that was facilitated through specific grant funding.

I think it's important to note as well that one of the key aspects of this change is to recognise that curriculum and ALN reform are not different for schools or parents and carers. They have to be brought together to support that system. We can't have ALN over there and curriculum over there—they have to work together. So, this is about a more integrated local approach.

And we've also carefully kept the management of transitions by our partners in close focus through a range of mechanisms. As part of this work, we've had a transition group, and that's facilitated the sharing of information. And we've also provided additional funding to local authorities to cover the transition costs associated with the change process.

Thank you. Okay, Cefin?

Yes.

Okay. Over to Natasha, please.

Thank you, Chair. Good morning, everybody. Cabinet Secretary, we've had a consortia system here in Wales that we have now shifted over to the operational school improvement function, which has gone over to local authorities, as you mentioned in regards to Cefin Campbell's question. From my understanding, and perhaps the system and the way it has been going, I would have thought that—. The fact that this has been the way things have been going for over a decade, would you say that the result that we are dealing with now is because it didn't have the desired effect when it comes to actually creating a good outcome? Because, from my understanding, the consortia were actually very much intended to be part of the solution, which seems now to have been completely obliterated—we've got a completely new system. What would you say to that?

What I'd say is that the consortia were established in response to the issues that we faced in the system back in 2014, 2015. And they did make a significant contribution to support at that time, especially in respect of the new curriculum roll-out. The challenges we faced at that time were very different. We had multiple local authorities in special measures or other Estyn escalation. So, that was a system that helped us at that time.

Obviously, a lot has changed now. We've had a range of new reforms, and what the review highlighted is that we needed a fresh approach to support our schools in the current climate. Now, that's not to negate the good work of the regions, but the review highlighted the need to be better at recognising and drawing on the expertise that's already available in schools and focusing on more localised support under enhanced leadership. That is now the next step for us as a system.

As I said, this new approach recognises that curriculum and ALN reform have to be completely joined up. By clarifying and emphasising the local authority roles, we're also encouraging local authorities to consider a more integrated approach. We hope that that will enhance the experience for schools and also reduce the level of bureaucracy and duplication in the system. But I think as well as the review, which helps us to move to our next steps, we've also enhanced national leadership through the establishment of clear national structures now. That's with the establishment of Dysgu and the education improvement team. So, this is not the same model that came before the regional consortia; our school improvement system is continuing to mature as the challenges evolve.

I wanted to say to the committee as well that this focus on collaborative work between schools is well-grounded in international evidence in this field as well, and it builds on the work we as a Government have undertaken with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to establish our schools as learning organisations model. That sets out the culture and behaviours that are needed to drive collaborative school improvement.

Now, I don't know if you've taken any evidence from local authorities, but I think Ynys Môn are a really excellent example of how this works well in practice. They were one of the early adopters of schools as learning organisations, and they have very well embedded already this type of collective approach to improvement, and I saw that first-hand when I visited them. There are also really good examples internationally as well of how this kind of system works well. So, New Zealand and Finland are examples, but also we've seen the recent announcements in England with the new regional improvement for standards and excellence strategy. Now, while the context and landscape are very different in England, many of those principles that underpin the RISE strategy are already a key part of our new improvement model. RISE is also focused on collaboration and shared learning for schools, so I think there is a good evidence base to support this way of doing things.

I think it also helps to tackle some of the capacity issues we've seen when we are facing challenges in the school system, and, vitally, it's what schools told us they wanted, and we do have some absolutely phenomenal school leadership out there. This is now about making sure that we all work together to collaborate to make sure that we all come up to the very best level available.

Thank you so much, Cabinet Secretary. I'm glad you said that, and I appreciate it, and all the schools and examples you gave of where it's working positively is really nice to hear, and I don't mean to sound like the queen of doom when I ask this: you mentioned previously that some of the issues that were incurred in the past were due to special measures and councils and having that. Are there any councils at the moment in Wales that you feel are either in special measures or going towards that direction where the problems could arise in future?

We've only got one local authority that is in Estyn escalation at the moment, and that's Powys. That's been a fairly recent development, that they've gone into escalation. All the other local authorities—. And we did have, I think it was around eight, wasn't it, that were in special measures back before the consortia came in, so it was a really serious situation we were facing. Obviously, it's regrettable that Powys is in that position. Estyn are working closely with Powys, as are we. I've met with the leadership of Powys, along with the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government, but I think, importantly, Powys are also now drawing on this kind of model, so they're getting support from other local authorities, actually including Torfaen. Now, Torfaen spent a long time in Estyn escalation, so Powys have involved the chief executive and lead education officer in Torfaen, who are also supporting them with that work, really. So, obviously, we're monitoring the situation very closely with Powys, and there's very close engagement between officials as well as the political engagement.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Back to Cefin, please.

We know of the Hill report back in 2013, which described the existing management of school support services as 'profoundly unsatisfactory'. So, move on 10 years, and there was a period when the consortia were in existence of—. Shall we say it was a bit of a chequered period? There were local authorities breaking away from consortia for different reasons. And at that time as well, we had many local authorities in special measures, and you're right in recognising that there's only one remaining now, but it seems to me that we're going back to a system that was described at the time as unsatisfactory. Are you confident that, in going back to a mainly local authority based school support system, standards will improve?

Well, I don't think we're going back to the same system. I think we're in a very different place now to what we were before the consortia came in. As I said, local authorities were not in a strong position at all to lead this work back then. They have always had the statutory responsibility for school improvement. That is their legal duty. And even with the consortia, we didn't see a consistent approach to school improvement then, and, as you've said, we had local authorities dropping out of things. I think, obviously, we've had a lot of changes as well since then, with curriculum and ALN reform. So, now, the new system will mean that local authorities have oversight of curriculum, ALN and school improvement as a coherent whole.

So, we're moving deliberately now to a system that promotes peer support and challenge within a collaborative improvement structure. I think that's important for us, and also to recognise that our system is mature enough to ask for this kind of ownership and leadership across Wales to achieve this. I think it reflects the approach that Estyn takes, because, obviously, their inspection approach is also based on that kind of peer inspector input as well. But we are doing lots of work to support this as well. We're working incredibly closely with local authorities through the education improvement team. We've set out clear expectations and guidance and provided support through the production of a system maturity matrix. And we've also led focused workshops in each local authority. There's been extensive engagement with school leaders, and officials are also working closely with Estyn and the group of headteachers from my ministerial headteacher advisory group to consider some national guidance and support to enhance school self-evaluation, because we know that that has been identified as a weakness in some schools.

What this new system will require is that ability to look at themselves and work with partners to address weaknesses and also to promote strengths. I think the introduction of Dysgu will be a game changer, because we've had a really, really—. Well, they called it 'white noise' as part of the review; they said they were struggling to navigate the white noise of professional learning. So, now, we will have this national approach to professional learning in priority areas. That doesn't mean that there is not a role for local professional learning and for local authorities to respond to local need. But what Dysgu will give is that clear direction in the key areas of literacy, numeracy, well-being and inclusion.

I do also want to be clear with the committee that, obviously, there's a lot of work to do on this. We're building capacity and collaboration across local authorities as part of our work. We've also had the strategic partnership agreement with the Welsh Local Government Association, so that sets out in writing our shared commitment to taking that work forward. So, I think we are in a very different place to before the consortia were established. Officials are in constant dialogue with local authorities. Obviously, I have a dialogue with local authorities as well. And I think everybody is signed up to this vision and to making it work.

Can I follow up on just two points? I welcome the establishment of Dysgu and I'm looking forward to seeing how Dysgu can have a direct effect on driving up standards and support for schools. During this period of flux, when we've gone from a consortia-based system to more of a local authority based system, schools in my region—I've spoken to many of them—have been telling me that they have found it difficult to get the support they need, particularly around ALN but other issues as well. And we know that we're far behind where we should be in terms of school standards compared to other nations in the UK, and we've been languishing behind the rest of them for so long, and it's getting really frustrating for many of us who believe that we're letting so many of our young people down. Now, my question is this: the chief inspector of Estyn told us, back in March, that going back to a 22 local authority system of everyone doing things in a different way would be a disaster. Do you agree with him?

Well, first of all to say that there shouldn't have been a vacuum at all, where schools needed support and weren't getting it, because we made it very clear our expectations that support would continue and we put in all the arrangements, which I've already described to the committee, to make sure that that support would be there for schools. And we're not returning to 22 different ways of doing things. There won't be a return to a fragmented approach to this. As I've said, we are providing significantly enhanced national leadership with Dysgu, the education improvement team and our national guidance. So, there'll be a new system, one that's more streamlined and focused on key priorities.

But we've also made it clear that all local authorities have to deliver this school-led collaborative model, and that's set within a clear national framework around vertical and horizontal engagement between schools. So, that's making sure that the 3-16 continuum is promoted through the system, so that working between primary and secondary, as well as the collaboration on school improvement. But we've also been clear that all local authorities must work with other local authorities, either for shared services or for peer learning and support. Now, those partnerships are voluntary and our experience is that that approach is more resilient and works better. And as I've said, educational standards are already the responsibility of local authorities, and this will give them that clear ownership. There'll also be clear accountability for what they are doing. But we are continuing to engage with all local authorities, and we've recently, as well, established a national improvement network for all local authorities to meet and share thinking. What we've done with that is—. It's not just about the school improvement leads, we've also got the inclusion leads there, really, because, as I said in the Chamber, you can't have school improvement over here and ALN over there. This has to be a completely joined-up system.

Okay.

Okay. Back to Natasha, please.

Thank you so much. Cabinet Secretary, the new national professional learning body, Dysgu, which you referred to in some of your answers today and in the Chamber, we hear being thrown around a lot, and I appreciate it was set up on 1 September 2025, but there isn't actually a lot of physical information as to what Dysgu will actually do, and what a national professional learning body will look like in actual practice. So, I'd be really grateful if you could share with the committee today how you're planning to hold it accountable? When will more information be available as to the functioning of Dysgu? And how will it be communicated across, not just with us, obviously—with us, I hope it's today—but with those who are going to be the users of it as well?

Okay, thank you. Well, Dysgu is a big change, as I've said, and I'm very supportive of the role that they will play. They were only established in September. We've appointed our chief executive, Dr Gwenllian Lansdown Davies. She's taking up her post on 10 November, although she has been doing quite a bit of work, I have to say, with us already. She's being supported by Kate Williams and Meurig Jones—they're both respected headteachers—as deputy directors. It is obviously still in its infancy, and they're currently developing their strategic plan and operational plan, and, as part of that, they will be engaging with partners and stakeholders in the coming months. This first year of Dysgu will be a transitional year. Their focus will be key priority areas—literacy, numeracy, well-being and inclusion—and the provision will align with and progress the Curriculum for Wales priorities. The grants that we've already announced to support literacy and numeracy—the plan is to move those in on a phased basis to Dysgu, so that they've got ownership of all of those. We're developing a transitional plan to move those funding programmes into Dysgu.

I should say that we are expecting them to develop robust quality assurance processes, so that all professional learning meets the Welsh Government endorsement criteria. We want them to have robust arrangements in place to monitor the impact of all their activity. We are currently in the middle of recruitment for a new chair for Dysgu's board, and we will also be commencing the recruitment of additional board members shortly. I'm expecting the chair and board members to be making sure that Dysgu drives progress on key priorities. I'm going to be meeting with the chief executive and chair regularly. Dysgu will be required to give evidence, as appropriate, to committees in the Senedd, as with other organisations.

These are really early days, but I am very encouraged by the strong start that I think we've made with the appointment of Gwenllian. I think there's a very clear shared understanding that we want this national body to drive national priorities and to cut through that noise that we've had in the system before now.

In your answer, you mentioned 'a year' earlier on. Is that how long you're giving them to set up? Is there a time frame? I appreciate what you mentioned about the chair, and I take all of that into account, but I'm just curious to know, for example—. They are new, so I'm not holding them completely to hostage for anything yet, but I just wanted to know, and you know I like my time frames—

I know you do.

I do. So, I'd like to know—. If we park the chair for the position that you just mentioned, as advertised, when exactly are you hoping it's going to be up and running fully? By what point are you going to say, 'Okay, you need to have your key performance indicators in place, so we know where we're going', so that you can give them the ultimate handover?

Well, it is a transitional year, because they only started in September. Gwenllian, although she's been—. We're very grateful to her for giving us her time when she's not actually on the payroll. She's not going to start until 10 November. I'm confident they will get things up and running with as much pace as they possibly can. They do have to develop their strategic plan and make sure that the governance arrangements are in place. We will be supporting that and will be in regular dialogue with them throughout this transitional year. It's not going to be a standstill thing either. Obviously, they've got their key priorities, but over the years, things like that will change, won't they? Did you want to add anything to that?

Not in particular. I think that the important point is that, in the transitional year, lots of things will happen over the course of the year. Come September 2026, I think we'd expect them to be running the various priorities of Ministers in a more comprehensive way, and at least have a plan about that, so will be able to talk about all of the different things that the Cabinet Secretary has talked about.

So, that will be in September next year?

Yes.

Okay, fine. You mentioned earlier about local authorities working in collaboration with each other, particularly when it comes to professional learning, as well as those who are acting on their own. So, I wanted to know, how will such differing, or different arrangements—my apologies there—interact with the new system that Dysgu is going to be creating? Do you have any idea how that's going to look?

Yes, I think we've got a clear picture, really, of how it will look. So, Dysgu is going to provide professional learning in the areas of national priorities, so literacy, numeracy, well-being and inclusion. What we're looking to them to do is provide a once-for-Wales approach and consistency. We've been clear with local authorities that we're not expecting their professional learning to, in any way, duplicate the provision that is offered nationally, because that would be a step backwards. We've got to have that national approach now to professional learning in key priorities, but we have provided some funding to local authorities so that they can connect the national offer with their local offer.

During this transition year, Dysgu and ourselves will work with local authorities to understand their existing professional learning and to clarify future roles. We're also expecting Dysgu to be working in partnership with local authorities on some programmes, so the continued development and delivery of the induction programme for newly qualified teachers and the teaching assistants learning pathway, because we want those also to be consistent across Wales.

Dysgu's offer will also complement the provision offered by some other partners, so Welsh language provision, where Dysgu will work with local authorities, CYDAG and the National Centre for Learning Welsh on the development of PL to support practitioners in the Welsh-medium sector and the teaching of Welsh in English-medium schools. We know that we've got particular challenges with capacity there, but there will still be an important role for local authorities to focus on that bespoke support for schools in their area, and we are providing some funding for them to do that. As we've done for several years now, we're continuing to provide £13.5 million of professional learning funding direct to schools, to enable them to prioritise the PL needed for their school development plans. But we've got a clear plan, which I have here, of who's doing what. So, yes, I'm happy to share that with the committee, if that would be helpful, so it's nice and clear, rather than me spending ages talking to you about it.

That's brilliant. Thank you. Over to Carolyn now, who's on the screen.

Thanks, Chair. I'm going to ask you some questions about national leadership on school improvements. Given supporting school improvements at a national level is meant to be one of the three aspects of the school improvement partnership programme, how would you respond to the stakeholders who've suggested there is an absence of a national model for school improvement and lack of a coherent plan behind the developments over the past two years?

Well, I would say that that is absolutely not the case. As I've already said, from early 2024, officials have worked with local authorities to co-produce the guidance for the model for school improvement. That was shared with all local authorities in early summer 2024, and that formed the basis of their plans. We established a programme board involving all partners, trade unions, Estyn, as well as the Association of Directors of Education in Wales and WLGA, to make sure there were sector-wide discussions on how we take this forward. We recognise that the change programme also involves schools, local authorities, regional partners and has, obviously, implications for Estyn.

Over the next few weeks, we'll be publishing the updated school improvement guidance, which will reflect the guidance that we already issued, which I believe we've sent to the committee. Our education improvement team has been working really hard. They've been to all local authorities to meet with directors, teams, headteacher representatives, and also, in many local authorities, they've also created strategic groups of headteachers and officers.

We've also, as I said, brought together the school improvement and inclusion leads from all local authorities to a national conference, to reinforce national messages and to give people an opportunity to share their plans. And the EIT team in Welsh Government has been attending a wide range of local and national headteacher conferences over the last six months.

We've also got my ministerial headteacher advisory group. That's been spending some time looking at the policy and expectations here, and they will be helping us to consider what more we can do, as I said, nationally, to support schools with their self-evaluation and improvement planning.

We did publish as well a simple and high-level national improvement framework last year, which is aligned to the Estyn framework, and we're soon going to be providing further clarity again around key national priorities, and I've already mentioned the key role of Dysgu.

Obviously, as part of this work, having good information on what's happening on the ground is going to be absolutely key. So, as part of this work, we've been focusing on building a system that gives us that real insight and effective accountability mechanisms—a system that focuses on supporting learner progression without putting an additional burden on the workforce. We've moved away, as you know, from high-stakes arrangements in the past. We have not long ago consulted on a set of learner entitlement indicators for the 14 to 16 learner entitlement, and the intention is that will become operational in summer 2027. That's a very different arrangement to what we've had in the past with things like the capped 9 [correction: capped 9 key stage 4 indicator]. It's designed to reflect the breadth of the learner entitlement, obviously including qualifications, but also balanced with broader issues like well-being, learner readiness and support for post-16 progression.

There's a lot of information there, and the stakeholders have actually called for concise, up-to-date guidance about school improvement that's available in one place rather than piecemeal. Is it available in one place so that they could research and just have the guidance there when they need to find it?

Well, we—[Interruption.] Sorry, Carolyn. Carry on.

Okay. And also, you said that you plan to issue updated school improvement guidance in the next few weeks. Is that right? That was the second part of my question.

Yes, we're publishing new school improvement guidance before Christmas, but we've already shared a draft with local authorities, Estyn, members of the ministerial advisory group. As I said, there was previous guidance in autumn 2024 that set out the national expectations to provide clarity for stakeholders, and the committee has had a copy of that. But what we're also looking to do—. Because I'm aware that the sector want us to be really clear on what our priorities are. People say to me, ‘What are the real things that we need to be focusing on?’ So we're looking to publish some more information for stakeholders and for schools and heads that just sets out the key priorities, and we'd be looking to renew that annually.

And is that available in one place, that information?

Well, it'll be available on Hwb and on our website.

In relation to the school improvement guidance, that's what the school improvement guidance will do, and we'll publish that, as the Cabinet Secretary said, before Christmas.

Can I bring Cefin in quickly here, Carolyn, before your next question?

Just an additional question from me. Obviously, we all welcome a national plan and guidance as well, but for that to work we need to be clear about do we know what ‘good’ looks like. And then, how do we ensure that that ‘good’ is consistent across all schools, and what system are you putting in place to ensure that the benchmarking is there, that the monitoring is there, that the challenge is there as well to ensure that those high standards that we aspire to are reached across the whole of Wales?

You make a very important point. We have to have that assurance in the system that what we are doing is working. Obviously, our curriculum places a lot of emphasis on the individual progression of pupils, but we have got things in place already that enable us to have some oversight of that. We've got the personalised assessments that are done between ages four and nine [correction: ages two and nine]. We publish a national report on those. But one of the really important things that we're looking at is—. At the moment, personalised assessment data is held by the schools. Not all schools share that information with local authorities. I think it's fair to say some local authorities are frustrated about that. I understand the schools are nervous about not going back to any kind of high-stakes accountability. That is absolutely not our intention, but we have to be in a place where rich information is shared, otherwise we can't have those open and trusting collaborative discussions.

But in relation to the personalised assessments, they are a really useful resource, but what we're now currently working on is building into those age-related expectations so that we can see where children should be, because that is something that isn't there at the moment. They'll still be formative, so we have to do it carefully, because we don't want to go back to the high-stakes accountability, but we will hopefully give schools—. And schools have asked for this; they want to have that advice on where their learners should be. And also then, in addition to that, the learner entitlement indicators framework that I referred to will give us information for every school. They'll all be reporting on that. It's not meant to be burdensome for schools, but we will have much richer information that's available.

Also, on benchmarking, obviously there are multiple ways you can benchmark. The commitment to enter TIMSS and PIRLS is really important in that space. I'm a big supporter of international benchmarking. We've remained committed to the Programme for International Student Assessment, and the engagement with PISA has been really good this year. So, I think we're trying to use everything that we've got in the system to give us that really clear picture of how things are going.

Thank you. Back to you, Carolyn.

There's a myriad of governance arrangements and entities that have been recently created in the school improvement space, for example the national coherence group, the internal delivery board, the strategic programme board, the education improvement team within the Welsh Government and the ministerial advisory group. Can you explain how these elements all fit together and deliver as a whole?

Thank you. I recognise that it's quite complicated. I think we gave you a chart, didn't we, trying to explain how it all fits together. We've got an internal delivery board that comprises senior officials from across the Welsh Government education directorate. That was established to oversee the development and design of national functions. We've got the strategic programme board, which is one with external stakeholders. That's got representation from the Association of Directors of Education in Wales, the Welsh Local Government Association, the regions, trade unions, Estyn and us.

But then, we also established the national coherence group that was chaired by Kirsty Williams. That was so that I could have some advice slightly removed from the other structures about how coherent the measures that we were putting in place were. The advice I've had from the national coherence group is that they are reassured with the current governance arrangements. The education improvement team is a game-changer as well, because we haven't had that before in the Welsh Government. Alun here leads a team of officials, and they're working really closely with local authorities and schools to make sure that we can deliver on this.

And just finally to mention the ministerial headteacher advisory group. That is something that is separate from the school improvement partnership programme, although obviously they do consider it because they're considering a whole range of issues. I established that because I found that one of the richest sources of information I was getting as a Minister was when I went out to schools and got the opportunity to talk directly, and I wanted to formalise that. They are a fantastic group of headteachers. I love spending time with them, because they are really inspiring. They're working hard with us around our key priorities. We've got a really good, trusting relationship. I've been clear with them that I want to hear it always warts and all. It's given us a really rich source of information across the board, really, about tackling some of the issues that we face.

There's a lot of information here today. We're asking for information to be available, and to be clear and understandable. We were talking earlier about school governors and how important their role is. All of this needs to be clear and easily accessible for them to understand as well, if they're going to do good governance of the school. That's really a point I want to make.

We're very conscious of the need to communicate with governors. You'll be aware, Carolyn, that I've announced a review of the role of school governors. That'll be an extensive piece of work, as I said in the Chamber this week. But I think one of the points to make as well is that with this new system we're putting in place, which involves collaboration between schools, we need to look at the governance model to make sure it aligns with that. Because having a governing body that is just focused on one school, when we're expecting everybody else in the school to work in a collaborative way to improve things, is something that we need to address. But we've got mechanisms for communicating with governors.

Yes, absolutely.

Thank you, Carolyn. Cefin, please.

The Foden report—obviously, now is not the time to discuss that; we can discuss that some other time—does raise huge questions about the role of governing bodies. I welcome the review that you announced of school governance. In that review, does it also ask the fundamental question about do we need school governors and do we need a different system of governing schools?

I think the review is going to be quite widespread. It'll look at the whole range of roles that governors play. Obviously, the Foden review highlighted concerns about the role of governors in terms of safeguarding and well-being, and those are very important. I don't want to pre-empt the findings of the review, and I'm also very conscious that school governors are volunteers who work very, very hard in their communities.

The review is going to be conducted by officials, but we'll have a reference group with key partners on that. It is going to be a substantial piece of work, and I'm keen that it looks at everything. Because the Foden case is absolutely horrific, but it is not the only area where we've had issues with school governors. They're meant to support and challenge headteachers. That happens with really good governors; it doesn't always happen, and we have to have a system.

I've said this to the committee before: schools have changed so much, with the complexity of the issues that they're dealing with, that, really, the governance needs to reflect that now as well. This is a whole new system that we're putting in place. When I went to Anglesey—and they're really good at this school-to-school working—one of the issues they raised was governors. They said, 'Well, how do governors fit into this?' Because they're protecting their particular area, and we've got to make sure that that collaboration goes right up to governing bodies as well.

I just wanted to check that nothing's ruled out, then, in terms of this review, in terms of the future role of governors, if we actually need them at all.

Nothing's ruled out, because it's going to be a thorough examination of the system.

Thank you for that question, Cefin. We now have some questions around learner attainment through GCSEs and A-levels. I'll start here. What conclusions do you draw from key stage 4 performance indicators about the direction of attainment among those leaving compulsory school-age education? The capped 9 points score and indicators in literacy, numeracy and science are fairly similar in 2025 to pre pandemic in 2019, although the skills challenge certificate score is somewhat lower. What do you put that down to?

Thanks, Buffy. Obviously, key stage 4 indicators are a really important part of our evidence base. They show some positive movement in this year's outcomes, as do our personalised assessment data and our A-level results. But I'm not in any way complacent about the work that we have to do. Our overall results at GCSE for 2025 show that performance has improved across the grade ranges—so A* to A, A* to C, and A* to G—compared to last year. Overall performance at the very top grade, A* to A, is up on what was seen in 2019. That was always a goal, to try and make sure that we can get back to the pre-pandemic position. I was also really pleased to see positive movement in maths, numeracy and English language, with more awards at top grades. In terms of the capped 9 as well, we also see a small upturn in performance for the capped 9 indicator, at 353.3. So, that's up by 1.2 points on 2024, and stability for literacy and numeracy indicators.

The skills challenge certificate indicator is down compared to last year, and we think that that is probably due to changes in behaviour of entry patterns. So, the Welsh baccalaureate as an aggregated qualification is no longer available to new learners. We've got the skills challenge certificate, which will continue to be available as a stand-alone qualification for learners starting year 10 in 2025-26, but then, from September 2027, that's going to be replaced by the skills suite, and that's part of our new 14 to 16 qualifications. So, we think that it's likely that fewer schools are teaching the existing skills challenge certificate and that that could be leading to a reduction in the indicator score. It's always been our position that schools should make the decision on offering these qualifications in the best interests of their learners and by giving due consideration to the well-being and potential of the young people involved.

Thank you for that very comprehensive answer. We'll go over to Natasha now for some more questions.

Thank you so much. Cabinet Secretary, what conclusions do you draw from the GCSE attainment data about what happened during the pandemic to the attainment gap between pupils eligible for free school meals?

Right. So, entry patterns for GCSEs have changed substantially since 2016, and I think it's important to note that. So, direct comparability is challenging. We've had 20 per cent more GCSE entries amongst our year 11 learners. We've also introduced a number of changes to key stage 4 measures, which were designed to encourage schools not to enter learners for alternative qualifications where they weren't the most useful for learners to pursue their next steps. So, consequently, the characteristics of the cohort have changed over time, and we see more of a mix of ability levels.

In terms of free school meals, this is one of our biggest challenges, really—the impact of poverty on educational attainment. I am disappointed that we haven't been able to do more to close the attainment gap. This is something I've recently discussed with my expert advisory group, which includes some serious experts, really, on this—so, Sir Alasdair McDonald, Lee Elliot Major, Mel Ainscow and Professor John. I think it's important as well to recognise that other countries are also struggling with an attainment gap, and also the challenges that we're facing here both for our children and families and schools in terms of poverty.

So, the other issue that we've got—and I might ask Sarah to say something about this—is the use of eFSM, which is currently the best indicator that we've got to measure poverty. That in itself has become less accurate for us now, in terms of the fact that some children aren't eligible any more. So, I'll ask Sarah to explain that. So, we're effectively dealing with a different cohort of learners, and they are the learners who are really in the most need. So, it's not such an accurate picture. I probably haven't explained that very well.

I think you've said exactly what I would say anyway. So, we know that levels of learners eligible for free school meals are falling, which is not what we would expect today, and it's likely that the learners that we identify through that eligibility status are those facing the greater challenge with barriers to their education.

Can I bring Cefin in here quickly?

Yes, go for it.

It's a question about how we measure FSM. It was quite easy to do, but now that every child is getting free school meals, how can we differentiate between what we used to be able to measure and what is now a universal provision? So, how do we transfer from one system to another?

It is quite challenging for primary now, because, obviously, everybody is eligible for a free school meal. And what we’ve been trying to do is communicate to families that even if their child is just automatically getting that free school meal, they have to register; it’s really important for them to register as being eligible for free school meals, because that will then—. It passports them to the school essentials grant. It also means that the school gets the pupil development grant for them, and schools, I think, are pretty good at trying to make sure that parents do register.

The issues are slightly different in secondary, because, obviously, since going to universal credit, our thresholds haven’t moved. So, we know that there are children who would benefit from free school meals in secondary, and because of the pressures within my budgets I haven’t been able to increase that threshold as yet. But that is something that I am always actively pursuing funding for.

But we’ve also got a piece of work—. And I remember discussing this when I was on the committee, how good is eFSM as a measure of poverty. I suppose the fact that it’s stood the test of time means that it is about as good as it gets, really. But we’ve got a piece of research, as well, that we’re looking at, which is called 'Beyond eFSM'. So, I’ll ask Sarah, as the expert, to say something about that.

Yes, so it’s exactly that. It’s a multi-phase research project that has just about completed the first phase, looking at various needs for that data, and uses of that data currently, and then it will proceed to looking at how we can improve that and what alternative options could be to meet each of those individual needs for that data, and how we can more effectively understand and monitor the impacts on our learners, and understand the underlying causes.

I can see the challenge here. So, really, it’s up to parents to volunteer their understanding of the criteria around free school meals as they were, in the light of this new universal provision. Is that difficult?

It’s not ideal, to be honest, really, because the onus is on the families, and we’ve got a campaign that we run on an ongoing basis, especially when the school essentials grant is launched, which is called, 'Get help with school costs'. So, we do videos saying, 'Please make sure that you make yourself known to the local authority.' But there is also work going on with the Government, in terms of UK-wide legislation, which we hope, when that goes through, might make it easier to automatically get the information on who is receiving benefits, which will be a much better system, without having to rely on families to do that.

Did you want to say something?

No.

Okay, back to Natasha. Oh, Cefin, sorry. No, Russell.

Can I just come back on that? So, how easy is it to enrol, for a parent or a family?

They've just got to contact their local authority or the school—

That can be challenging sometimes.

Yes.

Is there an online link or something?

Most of them do have an online link.

Yes, they do, because they—. And all the schools are desperate for the parents to register, because otherwise they lose their PDG element for them. But it's not ideal, and a better system would be automatic. But that requires information sharing with the Department for Work and Pensions, and there is—I can't remember what the name of the legislation is—

The Digital Economy Act.

The Digital Economy Act—

I think that's the one.

—which will hopefully involve an information sharing agreement then, so that we can get that information. And it's also linked to the wider work the Government is doing around the Welsh benefits charter.

Okay, thank you. Natasha.

Prior to my next question to you, Cabinet Secretary, I wanted to ask Sarah about the 'Beyond eFSM' that you mentioned with regard to research and everything happening as it's progressing right now. When are you hoping to get the outcome of it, and what are going to be, not even the conclusions, but what do you see as happening once you've got the outcome of that research?

Well, it's largely dependent on what the outcomes actually are and what the recommendations are from the research.

Well, as the Cabinet Secretary said, if eFSM and the stats and the information you're gauging right now are not exactly accurate, how are you going to make that accurate, going forward?

Would it be helpful for us to do a note for the committee on this project, just because it's quite complicated and there are a number of issues being picked up around primary versus secondary? Would it be helpful if we could just set this out?

Yes, that's fine.

Yes, that would be very helpful.

And obviously, we wouldn't want anything that made anything more negative for families, and I know that the Government in the past has looked at things like the Welsh index of multiple deprivation, but all of these systems have imperfections, and that is, I suppose, why FSM has stood the test of time, really. But now it is much more complicated with the universal offer that we have; universal credit is a very different kind of benefit to income support, so it's much more complex.

No, I appreciate that, and thank you very much for the offer of the note as well. But, Sarah, if you could just give us a bit of a summary. Like I said, if the issues at the moment are with the data, which is unfortunately an issue that we encounter in all different areas of education—and I appreciate funding and all of that—how do you suspect that this is likely to turn out with regard to getting better data collection?

Yes, we'll pick it up in there, because there's some difference between data collection and then data that we have available through other sources as well. So, there's a range of things that we'll be looking at through the rest of this project.

Okay, fair enough. Cabinet Secretary, the free school meals attainment gap at GCSE is slightly wider, obviously, with grades A* to A now than it was in 2016, and nearly 5 percentage points wider than grades A* to C, such that the gap is now almost 30 percentage points. So, given how long the attainment gap has been a priority, and how much has been spent on the pupil development grant, or PDG, since 2012, which is now £128 million per year, wouldn't you have expected to see more progress in narrowing the gap by now?

Well, I am really frustrated about this, because as you say, we have been investing. It's a very substantial sum of money—

It's £128 million a year.

—a year into the pupil development grant, so it's one of our key levers. We're currently working with local authorities to better understand the impact of PDG on the attainment of eligible learners. We've also supported practitioners by developing guidance and best practice materials, but this committee will be very aware—and we did a piece of work on this when I was Chair—that not all schools use that funding as effectively as we would like. That is not a criticism of the individual schools at a time when budgets are really pressured. That's been one of the things that has really bothered me, really.

I went to Islwyn High School recently, and the head there said to me that he looks at everything, all the problems in the school, through the lens of eFSM, because he thinks that's a good way of doing it. He was able to say to me that they use all their PDG for children who are eFSM. He tracks every single one of them. It's very flexible, so he said if there's a child that needs maths tuition, they have it through their PDG. So, your middle-class parents are able to pay for that anyway; it's the kids on eFSM who can't get that. And I was quite impressed by that.

So, we've been looking deeper at how it operates, how grant funding is allocated, monitored and evaluated. We've also got some challenges with the data set, which means that it's capturing a smaller cohort of learners each year. And we do put in place what's called smoothing, so that when the figures fluctuate, the schools don't lose out. But we also don't have a clear picture of how the funding is spent, and although there's some monitoring in place, we do think that that needs to be updated, and we need to make sure that the funding is reaching the children that it is intended to reach.

So, we're developing now a piece of work based on the international evidence of what works to tackle the attainment gap, and I'm very happy to provide the committee with further information on that. What I would say is that it is very difficult to make changes to something that is as long-standing as the PDG at a time when school budgets are under massive pressure, because obviously that, then, means—. Schools would see it as taking money that they maybe use for other things away from them.

So, it's important that we maximise the resource that goes into education so that we can do something really proactive on this, because I do recognise that it's been in place for a long time, the attainment gap isn't improving, and I would like to see a really focused approach to it. I've got similar concerns around the PDG for looked-after children, and we've recently issued new guidance on that, because I've seen evidence myself of schools using it for general initiatives rather than to benefit those children directly. So, I'd like to see a much closer link between that money and the children that it's meant to benefit, with much clearer data and tracking. But I do want to make it clear to the committee that that would be very challenging with the current budget pressures in schools.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Now we have a question from Russell, please.

Thank you, Chair. Good morning. What conclusions do you draw from the national aggregated data on personalised assessments in reading?

Thanks, Russell. So, yes, we have our personalised assessments and, while attainment in reading in years 6 and 9 remains lower in 2023-24 than in 2020-21, there are also signs of improvement. There has been an improvement across all year groups from years 2 to 9 in English reading attainment in comparison with 2022-23, particularly in younger year groups. Attainment for year 3 was higher than both 2020-21 and 2021-22—a sustained improvement in attainment not seen in other assessments or year groups. There have also been improvements across years 3 to 9 in Welsh reading attainment, compared to 2022-23. Although we've not got pre-pandemic data on reading assessments, it is clear that the impact of the pandemic has been far reaching. I think that there are signs of improvement in the most recent report, which, hopefully, means that some of our investments are bearing fruit. But we have got much more work to do, and that's why I've announced over £19 million for national support in literacy and numeracy, which will provide a national programme of professional learning and support. I've set out before how we're working with Estyn to support schools on this, and also we've got the work that we're doing on age-related expectations, which will give us much more granular information.

In terms of Welsh medium, we did have some significant concerns about Welsh reading. We think that was obviously impacted by the pandemic and maybe children from English-speaking homes and that loss of learning there. But now we've got the new Act, that will give us the opportunity to strengthen our work there. One of the first commitments is to establish one standard method, which the committee will know is based on the common European framework of reference for languages. I think that will also help us to monitor improvement in that space.

Thank you. I was just looking at the data, so I can see there have been improvements, but those improvements are from a low base, of course, in 2022-23. And attainment remains lower than when the assessments were first rolled out in 2020-21. You mentioned the pandemic, but that was in the middle or when we were coming out of the pandemic, 2020-21, so the attainment rates are worse than they were at that position, and that’s even taking into account that that was the pandemic year. So, why is that?

Well, I think it's difficult to compare with some of these measures anyway. We did have that gap in the pandemic. It's also the case that the tests haven't been run for all the subjects in the same way, really. I think that there are signs of improvement, but we've clearly got more to do. That's why, as a Government, we've been really clear that literacy and numeracy are top priorities. That's why we're investing millions of pounds in professional learning, in national support, in enhancing the literacy and numeracy framework. And I think we've got a base on which we can build. I don't know if any officials want to come in.

Not in particular. I think that the important thing is that the pattern is improving year on year, particularly in the younger years, from 2022-23, which is where it was rebased from. And so, if you look at it, it is actually improving, so that—

Didn't it go—? Wasn't it higher, then it went lower, and it's gone higher again, but still not to the highest point?

Yes, it is an improvement journey, and particularly in younger years. I think that's where we're pleased about this improvement. It is slow, and there is more to do, and certainly, in the secondary age, there are still challenges, but it is turning into a slightly more positive space.

I'm new to this, but the statistics are showing that the attainment levels now are not as good as they were in 2020-21, so, they're not improving, are they, from that base, or have I misunderstood?

So, 2020-21 was the year of the pandemic, which was a difficult year for the personalised assessments, because obviously young people weren't in school for a lot of that time. So, we'd have to go back to some of the detail about what the numbers are on some of this, but I think the important point that has been shown in the release last summer was that we rebased it all around 2022-23, so, that's the starter year that we should be comparing to, and it's an improvement from then, I think, is what we are looking at in particular.

And we recognise there's a long way to go.

And what would you expect the attainment levels to be this time next year?

Well, I think it's difficult to make those kinds of calculations, but I hope that we will see an improving picture across the board as we reap the benefits of the very significant extra support that's been put in. And, as we go on as well with this, with the school improvement programme, with Dysgu, that much more consistent support that's available should enable us to make quicker progress.

Okay, thank you. Natasha, please.

Thanks, Chair. I feel like I'm talking quite a lot today. What's your response in relation to the criticisms of the approach in Wales to teaching children how to read from Elizabeth Nonweiler? I hope I pronounced her name correctly. She was the chair of the Reading Reform Foundation, who recently resigned from the Welsh Government's expert panel of literacy, saying that efforts to improve reading will fail unless the approach changes. What do you have to say to that?

Well, okay, thank you. I'm not surprised you've asked about that, really.

You knew it was coming.

I did, yes. Okay. Well, I am passionate about ensuring that we get the best for children and young people. Literacy is an absolutely key gateway skill. Kids can't access the curriculum without it. There are impacts on mental health. There's even evidence that you're more likely to end up in the criminal justice system. So, this is the absolute baseline. And I was very concerned when I came into post about the PISA results on reading and the national personalised assessment report. I am obviously, though, not an expert on reading. That's why we've drawn together the literacy expert panel to make sure that the support we offer is firmly based on clear research and evidence.

That panel has brought together a range of views on reading and literacy. They're all international experts, to ensure that I get balanced and considered advice. Now, the panel agrees that systematic synthetic phonics is a very important approach to effective reading instruction. That should be used with a range of additional approaches to developing wider literacy skills, including fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, especially for learners who have ALN. And we've said since the curriculum was developed that a systematic approach to phonics is an absolutely integral part of learning to read. I've clarified—and I've set this out many times—the guidance to make this clear: all children should be explicitly taught the sounds that letters represent and how to blend them into words. For the avoidance of doubt, I expect these principles to also be clear about picture cueing: the Curriculum for Wales does not endorse picture cueing, and learners should not be encouraged to guess words as opposed to decoding them. So, I'm taking the advice of our experts on reading. The expert panel will continue into December; I'm expecting a report from them by Christmas.

In terms of Elizabeth Nonweiler’s resignation, I'm very grateful to Elizabeth for the contributions she's made during the last year, and I'm very disappointed that she no longer feels able to be part of this. I have reached out to her to ask to discuss this with her, and she has agreed to have that discussion. I've received a letter from our literacy panel in recent days; I've every confidence in their work. As I say, these are international experts, and the diverse views of the panel, I think, are part of its strength. It has been a long process, but I'm confident that the time taken to do this work will make sure that all viewpoints are taken on board.

As I said, I'll be speaking to Elizabeth. The panel and I would agree that systematic synthetic phonics is a vital component of effective reading instruction—so, that’s explicitly teaching the sounds that letters represent and how to blend them into words. I'm looking forward as well to meeting with the literacy panel to further discuss their views before their report is published, and we're also very happy to share with the committee information on the literacy panel's recommendations.

Thank you for that, Cabinet Secretary. The reason why I'm quite curious to know and ask you this following question is that I live a very sad life, and I've gone through the cv of all of the people sitting on the panel that you've created, and that's fine. Elizabeth was one of the very few-and-far-between individuals who's pro-phonics on that panel, from my understanding, and I've set up a panel of my own, which is very pro-phonics, consisting of experts from all across the country, not just in Wales, who are very insightful into what they believe the system should be. It does seem from the outside looking in that the group has been set up in a way—. Obviously, I appreciate what you said, that literacy and numeracy is a focus for you, and I take that on board, but it does feel that those who are pro-phonics aren't very welcome to the panel. So, I am glad you're having a meeting with Elizabeth to discuss this, because the feedback I'm receiving is that the panel itself doesn't comprise an equal component of phonics versus cueing individuals on there in the first place.

Well, I do reject the view, Natasha, that it's been set up to somehow promote some particular view. The panel has got a range of international experts on there. They're not all from Wales; Elizabeth herself isn't based in Wales, I don't think, is she? We've got Cameron Downing from the University of York. We've got a professor from—

Cabinet Secretary, I'm not questioning their ability, their capability. Please don't think that in any way. They are experts in their field, I don't deny that, but all I'm saying is that it seems to be very imbalanced from a perspective of phonics versus cueing. That's the impression that comes across, and the person who's very pro-phonics is the one who's left.

Well, I think I've said already that the whole panel believes that phonics is an absolutely key part of teaching reading to children. I'm not aware that anyone on the panel has been promoting cueing. That has not been happening at all. I've already attended one meeting with the panel, and we had a really rich discussion, because this is a really complex issue, and one of the things that came out of the discussion I had with them was their concerns, for example, about oracy. And I know that there are children who are starting school now and they don't have any language, they are not able to articulate more than a few words, and we've got evidence as a Government that that communication is not there for children and young people. Well, you have to be able to speak if you're going to learn to read.

So, this panel, which is a range of international experts, is looking in granular detail at all of that. I'm disappointed that Elizabeth left the panel, and I will have that discussion with her. I think it's important. And she was there when I attended the panel, and the panel were working, as I had understood it, effectively together to—and there are different nuances in this—come up with a clear set of principles for us as a Welsh Government. I'm confident in the panel's work, and I'm looking forward to receiving their report. But I will talk to Elizabeth as well, so that I can better understand her concerns.

Good. I'm glad to hear that. A final sub-question from me: do you believe in the exclusive use of systematic synthetic phonics, or do you believe that this should be combined with other approaches, such as cueing? What's your actual view on this?

I've already said that we don't advocate cueing. I've already said that the systematic teaching of phonics is an absolutely key part of what we're expecting schools to do. I think the panel is also in agreement with that. This situation that we've got into where everybody is worried about cueing I think is a bit of a distraction. We want to focus now on the panel's recommendations and how we can make sure that top-quality professional learning is fully embedded.

I think it's important, as well, for the committee to be aware that this is a really contested area, how you teach reading. When I first became embroiled in it last year, I was told that there is something called the 'reading wars', and this is part of that, really. I don't think having that kind of approach is helpful to children and young people. All I am focused on is making sure that we do the best for children and young people. I am not an educator. I have huge admiration for educators. I just want to do what is best for children and young people. For me, that means listening to a panel, including Elizabeth and listening to her views. They have done all this work for a year, and we will have their report by December.

Okay. And once that report comes, how are you hoping to implement it?

I think we've got to receive the report first. That report will give us some established principles that we will follow. We will make sure that those principles are embedded in our professional learning, in our literacy framework, in our national support for literacy. Obviously, there would be no point having had an extensive consideration by a panel if we were just going to let it gather dust on a shelf.

I appreciate that we have an election coming up. We've said this on a few occasions, particularly within the committee and outside of here. I appreciate time frames and I appreciate budgets. But if, for example—. Like you said, the report comes out in December, there are certain things you're going to have to do with regard to learning and development and getting it out there, making sure that every school in Wales gets the messaging that is going to be coming out from it. How quickly are you going to be able to have that turnaround?

Firstly, I would say that we've protected budgets for this. I've already referred to the £18 million that we're investing, and that's part of a wider package. It's £44 million that I've announced in recent months for the curriculum grant programme. So, we absolutely recognise as a Government that we have to make sure that the new curriculum is really solidly underpinned across Wales.

We will take forward the work on this. I've said in the Chamber that we've already pushed out additional professional learning in relation to numeracy. The literacy professional learning will be going out soon as well. We're reviewing the statutory framework, but practitioners told us that they wanted this PL support before. We will do it as quickly as we can. I can't help that there's an election intervening, but whatever happens in the election, officials will be taking forward work on this. We've got a very clear picture of what we need to do, and we're determined to do that.

I appreciate that, Cabinet Secretary. The only reason I am pushing for a time frame is purely because I don't want children to miss out in the long term, regardless of what happens. That's the only reason.

I don't want children to miss out. It's critical that we deliver for children and young people. I think we are taking a very extensive range of steps to make sure that we give them the very best opportunities. If I can say so as well, it's not just about the early years and that learning to read. The reports that we've had from Estyn have raised more concerns. Estyn have been very satisfied with what they've seen in schools in terms of teaching reading to little ones. One of the things they've said to us is that there are challenges at that transition point between primary and secondary school. So, it's about wider comprehension and the depth of reading. We haven't got children who've got a love of reading as much as we'd like anymore. So, part of the money that we are spending is also going to go on catch-up for older learners, to make sure that transitions are managed effectively. It is much wider than that focus on the early years, which we also obviously have to get right.

Okay. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Can I bring Cefin in quickly?

Can I just come in on the back of the questions from Natasha? I think you would be the first to acknowledge that this has been a bone of contention for quite a while in the education sphere in Wales, and there's been this kind of argument about phonics versus cueing and so on. And I'm glad to hear that you are committed to the synthetic phonics approach to learning and reading in particular, because that is what the majority of experts across the world believe is the right way of teaching reading. So, it's not a good look when a highly respected person like Elizabeth Nonweiler has decided—and I'm sure it was an extremely difficult decision for her to make—to resign from this expert group. After all, she's the chair of the Reading Reform Foundation, again a highly respected organisation.

Given the fact that it's not a good look and the fact that there have been mixed messages to schools over many, many years, and I'm sure you appreciate that this has happened, could you report back to us in confidence the kind of conversation you're likely to have with Elizabeth? Because it's really important for us to understand why she's taken this decision. Does she feel that her views have not been respected and has she lost confidence in the direction of this group? Because that would make me feel extremely uneasy, if that is the case.

Well, I would hope that nobody would be in a Welsh Government group and not have their views respected. I think officials are very keen to work co-productively with people. I will have that discussion with her. I don't think it would be appropriate for me to say that I would feed back directly on what she says to me, but we're very happy to update the committee further on the work of the panel. I've said I was disappointed to see that she'd resigned and we reached out immediately to her. I'm also going to be having a further discussion with the wider panel. We're very focused on making sure that everybody works together to deliver for children and young people.

From what you've told us today, your guidance is clearly in support of synthetic phonics as the right approach for reading, because experts show that that's the best way of lifting words from the page and the best way for young people to learn to read. Are you still of that opinion?

Well, what I've said is—and the panel is also of the view—that synthetic phonics [correction: systematic phonics] is a key part of teaching children to read. It's not the only thing we have to do. We also need fluency, vocabulary and comprehension, as I've said. And this has been, as you say, a contested issue, but, last autumn, we did immediately issue guidance to schools clarifying the position. We updated the guidance to schools. We updated the information that was available to schools via Hwb and the guidance, and we've continued to do that. The work of the panel is the next step in this, and that work will underpin our statutory framework on literacy and numeracy. You're looking at me.

I was going to say you've already committed to share the views of the panel when they come forward before Christmas, so that might be the next thing for the committee to look at and see what the panel are specifically recommending around this.

Okay.

Thank you. Back to Russell, please.

Thank you, Chair. What is your assessment of personalised assessments in numeracy, particularly in year 9?

The latest data for numeracy does show that there wasn't any marked or significant improvement for year 9 last year. However, there's still a month's progress on the previous year, and year 9 attainment has improved over the last three years. I'm also encouraged by the sustained improvement in procedural numeracy that our younger learners are making, and I'd obviously like to see that continue as these learners progress.

For numeracy reasoning, attainment overall has been relatively stable over the past three academic years since the assessment was introduced. There was a slight decline in attainment of one month compared to 2022-23 for year 9. All other groups have improved in comparison with that year.

It is probably too early to make judgements on longer term trends, as we have got fewer years' data available. I also wanted to add that, when interpreting the data and the statistical release, it is important to remember that younger learners make more progress in absolute terms than older learners. So a month's difference in attainment for older learners is less pronounced than for younger learners.

As I have said, we are continuing to grow the personalised assessments year on year. We are adding to that with the assessments that we are putting in on—what are they called again?

Age-related expectations.

Age-related expectations, yes. It went from my mind then. I have talked a bit about the support that we have put in for literacy, but we also have got a programme of national support for maths and numeracy, including professional learning resources, associated professional learning and support delivered through the Curriculum for Wales support programme. We have invested £6.648 million for support projects over the next three years, and that will ensure nationally consistent professional learning on maths and numeracy available across Wales. That is already active.

We have also worked very closely with Estyn, which has enabled us to develop more granular detail in maths. The first tranche of the new professional learning offer, which has been developed with Swansea University, has already been released. The full resource to support learning from three to 16 is due for publication by the end of March 2026.

As I have said in the Chamber, we are continuing to review the literacy and numeracy framework, but schools said to us that they wanted us to focus on providing the professional learning. So, we are doing the same with mathematics as we are with literacy. It is a top priority for us.

Thank you. You said that there has been very little improvement, particularly in numeracy reasoning attainment. It is at its lowest level since the assessment started in 2021-22. You talked about the initiatives and the funding that has been brought around in these last few years. I appreciate that there is a time lag, so there has not been that improvement, but that will come—I think that is what, effectively, you are saying. Is it therefore the case that, prior to 2021-22, there were not those initiatives, there was not that appropriate investment, because what should have happened then should be showing improvement now, if you like.

I think what we are trying to do is make sure there is a consistent national offer of support, and that probably hasn't been in place until now, really, in the same way.

It has definitely not had the same sort of focus over the years before that as it does now. It is complicated by the COVID years as well. So, it is very difficult to compare what was happening in 2019-20 and 2020-21 with what is happening now, because there was complexity around what was happening in schools during that time.

Not all the schools were even able to do the personalised assessments during COVID. It has been a priority for me to make sure that we do these things on a once-for-Wales basis. We are a small country. We should be able to do that. That is why, through that £44 million of curriculum grants, which is just some of the money we're spending, we're putting in place that national support.

I understand that to a point, but in terms of the pandemic, the assessment started in 2021-22, so that was after the pandemic, or coming out of the pandemic, and it's disappointing not to see that improvement then. But what you're saying is, in a year or two years from now, we'll be in a different position.

Well, yes. I've come into post and I've prioritised, making sure that we do things consistently as far as possible, and that we respond to what schools are telling us they need in terms of that support and scaffolding around what they're doing. Unfortunately, things do take time to change in education, that's the very nature of it, but I think we're encouraged by signs of progress, and we would expect that to strengthen in the time ahead now. Obviously, we'll be monitoring the effect as well of all these things, and I've already talked at length about the data that we're using to understand exactly what's happening on the ground.

Thank you. Before we move on I'd like to welcome our visitors in the viewing gallery. We now have some questions from Cefin, please.

I'm going to be asking this question in Welsh. Those schools that are part of the PISA system are currently undertaking their tests. What are your expectations for this cycle of PISA results? Do you intend to set a target, for example 500, across that entire range of different requirements, such as mathematics, science and reading, as you did 10 years ago, or is there no target at all?

Thank you, Cefin. Well, my expectation for the current PISA cycle is that it will give us a clear and robust picture of how Wales is performing internationally in reading, maths and science, and it will help us understand the impact of our reforms and recovery efforts. We are committed to PISA as a Government, and if I can say, I'm really pleased with the way that the school system has responded. We've got 114 schools across Wales participating in PISA this year, and that's a significant increase. And we've worked hard to support schools and learners as well with virtual preparation lessons via e-sgol, with well-being resources from Children in Wales, and we've also included incentives like Tempo Time credits, and I want to thank all the schools that are taking part.

We are no longer setting a numerical target, such as the 500-point benchmark, but our expectations are high. We want to see an improvement. And, actually, the 500-point target is no longer appropriate, because many of the high-performing countries that we look to to benchmark have actually fallen below that now.

The 2025 PISA cycle will be the first opportunity since 2022, so that will be the first opportunity to assess the global recovery from COVID. I think it's important to say that PISA isn't just about rankings, it's about learning from international best practice.

We get a range of very rich information from PISA, as well as the basic headlines in the key areas. But I also think it's important to recognise that PISA is one part of a broader evidence base, alongside the data that I've talked about, alongside Estyn reports. I think we have to recognise that Estyn's framework has changed, and they're inspecting schools more regularly. That's very important at a time of change.

I accept that there's a great deal to learn from the PISA system, but the ranking and the scoring is important so that we can measure the success of Wales against other nations worldwide. So, if you aren't setting a target, how are you going to assess success? What would success look like for you? Would a small increase as compared to where we were three years ago be enough? It's important for us to be able to know what the Government expects in terms of progress and success. That is, what is going to make you happy when these results are announced?

Well, we want to see an improvement across the range of domains, and we'd like that improvement to be as big as possible, obviously, but I think it is difficult to set a numerical target, and I have already explained that the 500 is no longer appropriate, because countries that were doing really well under PISA have themselves now slipped below that. So, I think we want to see our children do well in PISA across the board and see some improvements, and we will look at that when the time comes.

Okay. I'm going to ask you a similar question now about PIRLS and TIMSS. They sound like rather exotic acronyms, don't they? But you have committed, as you've said earlier, to be part of these systems, and the assessments will be taking place next year, I think I'm right in saying, and in 2027. Again, what do you expect to gain from being part of these systems too? What benefits will be derived for our education systems in Wales as a result of our participation in the trends in international mathematics and science study and the progress in international reading literacy study?

Thanks, Cefin. I'm very enthusiastic about PIRLS and TIMSS. I think it represents a further step in our commitment to international benchmarking. They're globally recognised studies. They'll provide robust national data on how our learners are progressing in reading, maths and science. They will provide us with rich insights into how children are doing. That will help us track progress over time, identify gaps early and ensure that the education system is building strong foundations. The schools who take part will have their own report, which will be helpful for the schools, so we'll make sure that the findings directly inform our policy and strengthen the support that we give to schools.

It's the first time we're taking part in these international tests. PIRLS will assess reading and literacy in year 5 learners. TIMSS will focus on maths and science. Our participation is voluntary, and we've worked hard to try and minimise the burden on schools. We've put funding in to cover administration fees, and we're working with schools around workload, accommodating test dates. We're also working, through Children in Wales, with children to make sure that this isn't something that causes them any stress. I have had some pushback from some in the sector, including trade unions, on the participation in TIMSS and PIRLS, but I've been very clear that those are tests of us as a Government and of the system. They will tell us how our system is doing. We'll have our country report for the different tests. I've seen one from previous years for other countries, and I think they will be really, really valuable. It just builds on that picture. We need as much rich information as we can get, and I'm really pleased and happy that we're doing it.

Thank you. Back to Carolyn, please, on the screen.

Thank you, Chair. Can I just ask a question about PISA? There's always a lot of emphasis on PISA, which focuses on maths, English and science, but are there other ways of measuring learning and progress? That focus on PISA and, ‘Oh, Wales has done well because of the PISA results’, but there are also people that say to me, ‘Young people learn in different ways as well.’ We have a lot of neurodiversity, we have a lot of young people who have issues with confidence post COVID. When we visited a school recently, children lit up when we went outside. So, some children learn through other ways, through music, through art, which unlocks the brain so they can learn better, then, maths, maybe. I know it's important to focus on numeracy and literacy, but I don't want to lose the focus on music and art, learning through nature, through the outdoors, other ways to help unlock children's learning and their brains. I just wanted to add that, really, into the mix, especially when we talk about additional learning needs as well.

Thanks, Carolyn. PISA is important, but it's one of a range of ways that we assess how well our learners are doing. I think it's important to recognise that it's not just the core domains of PISA that are valuable. They also look at things like well-being, which are really useful to us. But it's just one part of the jigsaw, really. We've also, through our new curriculum, got a really focused effort to track the progression of individual learners in a way that responds to their needs and benefits them in a much more individual way than we've ever had previously. Our whole curriculum is very broad and is focused on that holistic development of children and young people. I think across the board, really, it is quite a rich offer.

I know that you're passionate about outdoor learning, and obviously that's a key part of the curriculum. The cross-cutting way that the curriculum operates across the areas of learning and experience allows those connections to be made. Children can be learning about maths and literacy through part of the work they're doing under the health and well-being area of learning and experience, or under the humanities work that they're doing.

So, I would never want to give the impression it's just about PISA. That is one of the measures that we use, and I think it's important. I'm really keen on the international work that we do with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and I think it is right that we have that international benchmarking that shines a light on what we're doing in Wales, whether that's negative or positive, because it's part of accountability, isn't it?

Thank you for the holistic approach you've used to this. That's really appreciated. I'm just going to ask you a question about Estyn's observations. How concerned are you by the picture Estyn’s early insights into its 2024-25 annual report paints of the situation in secondary schools? The majority of secondary schools are struggling in some fundamental aspects, and 10 per cent of secondary schools are in one of the two statutory categories of special measures, or in need of significant improvement.

Thanks, Carolyn. I'm extremely concerned about the numbers of secondary schools that are in an Estyn category, and we're working closely with Estyn and local authorities to understand the underlying causes. Obviously, early identification of schools getting into difficulty is absolutely crucial. And I think the new school improvement programme that we've talked about today is really important to stop schools getting into difficulty, because if you have got a concern in a school, having a collaboration of schools along with the local authority to broker support and challenge is a way of providing additional capacity in a much more sustainable long-term way.

I also wanted to say that where early support and collaboration don't lead to improvement, then there will be cases where local authorities have to intervene. They have statutory responsibility for intervening where appropriate, and we expect them to take prompt and effective action. We're working with Estyn, as I said, and the ministerial heads advisory group to look at the extra support we can offer to schools, and a key part of that is the support around self-evaluation and improvement planning, because self-evaluation is often also identified as a weakness.

I also wanted to note for the committee that we provided a substantial package of funding in this financial year for schools causing concern. So, £4.3 million was allocated to local authorities for targeted support to schools causing concern. So, that's schools that are in an Estyn category of either special measures or significant improvement, or schools that are identified by local authorities. And we also give £700,000 directly to local authorities to support schools that have been in special measures for over two years—they had an additional £100,000. We've allowed local authorities to work with the schools to best determine the support that they need, but we have had that focused support on the schools that are having the most difficulty. Obviously, I meet Estyn very regularly; a key part of that discussion is around schools causing concern, as well as the work that officials do with them.

Okay. Carolyn.

One of the—. I've just a little extra on that. One of the fundamental aspects includes not planning suitably for progressive development of pupils' literacy, numeracy and digital skills, too often not teaching the understanding of mathematical concepts securely enough. And in two thirds of secondary schools, leadership is not effective enough in ensuring consistent, good-quality teaching. So, those were the main focus.

Yes. Those are obviously very important points, and ones that we recognise as part of the work that we're doing on numeracy. One of the things we're trying to address is the fact that children need to have a really secure understanding of those concepts before they move on. That's why the additional professional learning and the other support is so important.

Okay. Thanks, Carolyn. Thank you. Over to Russell again now, please.

Thank you, Chair. Absence amongst secondary school-age pupils remains under 90 per cent, and as low as 81 per cent in secondary schools amongst pupils eligible for free school meals. So, why are the attendance rates so poor?

Well, I think we've seen some improvement in our headline attendance levels, Russell. I think it's important to recognise that. Obviously, school attendance dropped significantly after the pandemic, and schools and local authorities, and families, are working really hard to turn that around. The statistics that we published recently showed that average attendance for 2024-25 rose to 90.9 per cent, so it is improving. I was also pleased that overall absence fell from 12 per cent to 10.9 per cent, and to see some progress with persistent absence. But persistent absence is still a really big challenge, and I'm not in any way complacent. That's why we have invested so much money and focus. Obviously, attendance is a key part of our work to raise attainment.

In this year, we've provided an extra £7 million to tackle attendance. That's been for our family engagement officers who do the work with some of our most complex families who are having those challenges with persistent non-attendance. We've also invested in enrichment activities, because there's evidence that having that varied offer means that children are more likely to attend school. We're continuing to invest in our community-focused schools and, obviously, there's also our school holiday enrichment programme, so that we've got something during the summer so that we don't lose these children.

These issues are really complex. If you talk to anyone with expertise, they'll tell you they can be a really wide range of issues. It can be ALN, mental health, it might be not having the money for the bus, not having a coat to wear, parental engagement. They are really complex, and that's why we've made such a big investment in family engagement officers. We've got a network of those now across Wales. They do really granular work with families to try and break down the barriers. I've had really inspiring feedback from families, but also from the family engagement officers, because they develop relationships with families in a way that maybe other school staff don't have the time to do. So, they're a really key part of getting children back into school.

I'm sure the committee will be aware that Estyn updated their report on attendance. We've accepted their latest recommendations. That involves working with local authorities around setting of targets. We have to be careful always with targets, because they can drive unintended consequences when we're talking about things like attendance and complex families. But we're committed to doing that work with local authorities to make sure that we're all moving to improve attendance. The good thing about the school improvement partnership programme is that nothing is sitting over there—it's all part of the wider attempts to improve standards in Wales, and that obviously includes children being in school.

I appreciate what you've said, but persistent absence remains nearly double that of what it was in pre-pandemic levels. Some of the reasons that you've talked about, they would have been there before the pandemic as well. So, just give a little bit more of a help to understand what the issues are compared to five years ago, because those issues existed then that you mentioned.

The issues existed, but I don't think they existed at the same scale. The pandemic has had a huge impact. One of the things that the pandemic has done is that it broke that contract, to some extent, between school and families. We've got people working from home. That was a big change for families, and we're still working to overcome that. Russell, I hate to say to you that poverty has got worse, and another Government has had a large part to play in where we've ended up with child poverty in Wales; we had austerity for a long time under the previous Government. And I think we're generally seeing more complexity. I've talked about this to the committee a lot. The pandemic has impacted on children hugely, not just in terms of the expectation that they would all go to school all the time, but we're seeing increases in ALN, increases in children with mental health issues, and we're working really hard across the system.

Schools are doing phenomenal work. Some of them have got washing machines, so they're washing clothes to make sure the kids have got clean clothes to come in. It is about breaking down those individual barriers for some of those children where it is most difficult. But I definitely don't accept that things have gone back to where they were before the pandemic, because that pandemic has had a really fundamental impact on children and young people.

But the figures are double what they were before the pandemic.

The figures are not good at all, and that's why we're investing millions and millions of pounds in trying to tackle those figures. The family engagement officers, the additional investment in those, they've only come on stream this year. We've had education welfare officers before, but this thing where we've got a network of family engagement officers across Wales, that's only come on stream this year. We're bringing them together as a network to make sure that we can learn from them. These are really challenging and complex issues.

And a real, I suppose the biggest—. One of the biggest concerns is that the gap between those who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not, that gap is growing. So, it's becoming an increasing problem. Is that your assessment as well?

In terms of attendance?

In terms of attendance, yes.

So, we would say that the attendance by children eligible for free schools meals is worse than attendance more generally. We're not closing the gap as quickly as we would like. There is more work that we need to do in that space. But I think, as the Cabinet Secretary has said, and it goes back to the points we were making earlier, that cohort of children who are eligible for free school meals are now some of the most disadvantaged, with the most complicated set of family circumstances, with compounded issues, one on top of another, that are causing problems. You fix one problem, but there are five or six other problems that you need to fix to be able to get that child in on a regular basis.

I was at a conference about 18 months ago, and there was a teacher talking about a child in his school that attends only 5 per cent of the time. When you've got a child only going in 5 per cent, even getting them up to 10 per cent is a huge improvement. So, it's making those steps and those changes for every child.

And it's like Sarah said: they are now the hard core of our poorest children that we're talking about in that group.

And you would agree, I'm sure, that this is the area to tackle, because that gap has widened, as we've talked about. But, as we talked about earlier, of course, with the changes to free school meals, my concern is how is a future education committee going to challenge a future education Cabinet Secretary to ensure that that gap is narrowing, when we will no longer have that data set about who is eligible for free school meals. It comes back to the earlier conversation, because this should be a key thing, shouldn't it, for a future education committee and a future Cabinet Secretary. So, what data can we work on in the future to scrutinise this?

Well, we do get very regular data on attendance; it comes out every fortnight. We have got the challenge that I’ve articulated about basically having reducing numbers because of the changes. We will have to tackle that.

In terms of other things that could be done, I think it’s important to scrutinise the figures and to take forward that work, which we will take forward with as much pace as we can. I also think it’s about the partnership with schools, isn’t it, really, and the school improvement partnership programme. The schools know their children. They know who the most complex children are. Schools have said to me that they really value the role of the family engagement officers and work closely with them. So, we have to work with them as well, through the school improvement partnership programme. Attendance is critical to improving standards, so it’s a key part of that.

Can you provide the 2024-25 persistent attendance figures by school meals status?

So, official data for persistent absence in the 2024-25 academic year in schools in Wales will be published in December. The latest official data, which was published on 30 September, shows that, in the 2024 academic year, 58 per cent of pupils eligible for free school meals in secondary schools were persistently absent, compared to 35 per cent in 2018-19. That is a very high and sobering figure. And it's complex, and it needs a complex response. We've already talked about—. There'll be lots of children now who aren't getting a free school meal as well, who we would like to get a free school meal to in secondary school, that we also need to consider. And, obviously, for the children who are eligible for free school meals, the cost-of-living pressures are massive, really. We know that there are children who can't afford a coat. They haven't necessarily got clean clothes. Maybe they haven't got bus fare. We've heard from families who tell us that children get their free school meals, maybe, on a pre-paid card. By Wednesday, they might have run out of that money. And I'm really keen—and I've said this to the committee before—to do more to provide more help to families, including the ones that are currently not captured by the definition.

The other thing that we're looking at—obviously, we're doing the work around healthy eating regulations in schools—is work around things like portion sizes. I was at a school in Barry the other day, with secondary school pupils, and they were saying to me, 'Well, it's just not enough for us. We're hungry.' We can't have children being hungry, because they're not going to learn.

Okay. Sorry, we've run a little bit over. I do apologise.

Doesn't time fly when you're having fun? [Laughter.]

Thank you for joining us this morning; we really appreciate your attendance.

Thank you.