Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's great, thank you. Can I just ask you then about the difference in preparedness between primary and secondary schools, which I've just mentioned previously, and also what your views are on the impact of funding for schools on that as well? Because we're in a situation where a number of primary schools have got surplus funds, sometimes that's because of end of year additional funds just being magicked up, but there is a serious worry that so many secondary schools are in deficit and that, overall, secondary schools are in deficit. Is there a correlation between those two positions, that secondary schools may be less ready for this than primary schools?
Meilyr Rowlands: I think it's probably true to say that secondary schools have a greater challenge than primary schools generally in terms of preparedness for the new curriculum. I think that's why we welcomed the phasing in of the new curriculum. With any sort of education reform, you've got that danger of people wanting to see change as soon as possible on the one hand, and on the other hand you need time to pilot things, to make sure that people have the right professional learning and make sure that there's opportunity for evaluation and thinking and so forth. So, we've got to get that balance right.
Suzy Davies AM: Sorry, that could be difficult to do if a school doesn't have money to create that space, couldn't it?
Meilyr Rowlands: Yes. You raised two issues, I think. One, about the difference between primary and secondary: I think what I'm saying there is I think the fact that the new curriculum is going to be brought in for all the years in primary, but it's going to be phased in year by year for secondary is a recognition of that difference. In terms of funding, probably everyone in this room, and certainly me included, would like to see more money for the education system—any educationalist would like to see that. But, you know, that is a decision for local and central Government to decide how much they can afford. I think there is an argument for saying that the funding has become more challenging for schools over time.
Suzy Davies AM: Can I ask, just to keep it on track, are you finding that that's having an impact on secondary schools particularly—their ability to make space to get their heads around the curriculum?
Meilyr Rowlands: I don't think you can make that straightforward correlation. But if you do look at surpluses and reserves, they have been more or less constant for primary schools over a long period of time, but they have declined for secondary schools. So, I think there probably is an argument for saying that we need to look at the funding of secondary schools in particular because, overall, they're in deficit now. So, I think there is an argument for looking at that. The other thing that's worth saying about funding is that even a small decrease in real terms can be disproportionately time consuming to manage. So, you know, if you have a large school and you have to maybe make one member of staff redundant, it can have a real big effect on the morale in the school. But also the time it takes for the headteacher and the senior staff to make those decisions can take their eye off the educational ball because they're looking at these financial and staffing issues.
Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Siân might develop that a little bit further on. The final question from me is: there's a general concern about the number of teachers that we have in the system at the moment, particularly at secondary level and in particular subjects as well. How do you think we can improve that? What impact is it likely to have on the ability of secondary schools to really get a grip on this?
Meilyr Rowlands: Obviously, the most important resource for the education system is the teachers. So, it is a concern that recruitment is getting more and more difficult and that targets for initial teacher training are not being hit. And we're not seeing them hit, if I remember correctly, even in primary, let alone secondary. So, there is a challenge, and I think we've got to look at this in the round. We've got to make sure that we have both a long-term strategy and a shorter term strategy for this. So, long term, we've got to make sure that education is an attractive option for young people and more mature people to want to go into. So, that is partly to do with workload and staff well-being. I think there's a general acceptance now that that needs to be higher up on the agenda, that people need to take that seriously, and there's work going on regarding the workload issue.
Suzy Davies AM: I suppose what I'm coming to, and I will finish with this, Chair, is, we're asking our existing workforce to undertake a fair bit of continuous professional development—let's call it that—in order to get ready for this curriculum when they've barely got time for lunch as it is. Do you think that's going to have an impact on the ability of secondary schools to get to grips with this, albeit that there'll be a phasing in?
Meilyr Rowlands: Yes. I think it will have an effect, but I think it'll have a positive effect. I think the new curriculum, one of the things about the new curriculum is that it re-professionalises the profession. It gives back agency and ownership to teachers. I think it's really important. And one of the reasons why teaching maybe hasn't been that attractive a profession is that teachers in the past have just been delivering a set curriculum, and now they've got a much more creative part in deciding for themselves how to teach something and what to teach. So, I think that is a very important part of attracting intelligent people into the profession.  There are short-term things we need to do, of course, as well. I think we need to have a much more varied set of routes into teaching, so I welcome some of the part-time Open University courses, for example. So, there are lots of ways—we were talking about maybe converting people from primary into secondary, particularly in Welsh-medium, where there's a shortage. So, all those kinds of varied routes, I think, into teaching, are important as well.
Suzy Davies AM: Degree apprenticeships, potentially.
Meilyr Rowlands: Yes, I think it's well worth exploring that. Yes.
Suzy Davies AM: Lovely. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Siân Gwenllian now has some questions on secondary schools causing concern. Siân.
Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Just before going on to that, just to pick up on that last point that you made about the shortage of teachers and losing teachers during the first year of their training. Has Estyn done any themed work on that particular issue, or do you intend to do anything on that? Also, looking at the financial incentives and how they compare with the situation in England, for example; do we need, perhaps, to think about financial incentives, not just for specific subjects, but for going to schools where there are particular issues, perhaps?
Meilyr Rowlands: Well, yes, there are currently discussions ongoing between us and the Government about working in those early years for teachers. It's possible that we will be undertaking work in the near future on that. I know that Professor Mick Waters is looking at this currently, and we've had the discussion with him. And I think we would welcome the opportunity to look at this particular period. Now, we are, of course, looking at initial teacher training, but we haven't looked at the first couple of years for many a year.
Sian Gwenllian AM: Right, thank you very much. And for your information, I've commissioned a piece of work on that particular issue, and that work will be published in due course. So, I hope to have a discussion with you about that.
Meilyr Rowlands: Thank you very much. Yes.
Sian Gwenllian AM: In terms of the secondary schools, that’s where the problem lies, isn’t it, rather than the primary sector. How much of a concern is it to you that children’s chances of going to a secondary school that is good or better appear to be 50:50, and that, indeed, over 10 per cent of secondary schools are judged to be failing and 12 per cent are under Estyn review? How much of a concern is that to you?
Meilyr Rowlands: Well, it is of concern to us, of course. I hope that we will have an opportunity to talk about the positive aspects of the education system in Wales, because there are a number of good things we can report also. The primary sector, the special sector, post-16—there are many sectors that are doing well, and I think a story that's particularly positive this year is that we have seen pupil referral units improving. We have seen examples of excellent practice in that sector for the first time in many a year, and we've also seen excellent practice in independent special schools, which is also a sector—. Because these are two sectors where there are very, very vulnerable children in attendance. So, I think that's very encouraging. But, you're right, of course, the biggest concern for the system, I would say, is secondary schools, and that is an issue of leadership, and also of the quality of the teaching and learning. Those are the recommendations that we make most often in our inspection reports. So, I believe that there is a need to find a long-term solution, as I mentioned previously, and also a short-term solution to this problem. In the long term, to improve the quality of teaching and learning—well, that’s the main aim of the new curriculum. So, I am confident that that strategy is the right strategy. It will take time, as we mentioned previously; it will take longer in secondary schools, and that's for a number of reasons, and I have discussed the challenges that are additional for secondary schools in previous annual reports. So, there are many reasons why secondary schools find it more difficult, possibly, than primary schools. The children themselves are older and they have greater challenges. Life is more complicated for them, possibly. It’s more difficult to engage with the parents of older children than younger children, and that’s an important factor. That’s one of the reasons why I believe it’s important that we do have community schools that ensure that the parents are part of the school’s life and take an interest in the education of their children. We also know that qualifications take a very prominent role in secondary schools’ mindsets, and, in some cases, perhaps excessively so. So, we need to ensure that those qualifications are reformed as a result of the reform of the curriculum, and, of course, Qualifications Wales is carrying out that work currently. And also, we need to change the measures that we use to measure the schools’ successes. Now, there is work ongoing on that as well. But there are all kinds of variations and differences between the primary and secondary sectors. In primary schools, for example, the greatest and most obvious difference, I would say, is that you’ve got one teacher who looks after a child for a whole year, and that teacher can identify the needs of the pupil very well over a period of time, getting to know the child and, possibly, the family very well. It’s much more complicated for secondary school to do that; there have to be systems put in place for that. So, there are many long-term things that we need to respond to. But in the short term, what is important is that those schools that cause concern receive much more support, and that is why I am glad and do welcome what's being piloted currently, which is a system of supporting these schools, the multi-agency approach, that is. So, that is something that we have been calling for for quite a long period of time and piloted ourselves a few years ago. So, I'm very glad that we are doing this in secondary schools throughout Wales. I believe there are about 12 schools that are in that pilot scheme.
Sian Gwenllian AM: You said previously that it's a cause of concern for you that these schools that are failing or underachieving are not identified early enough. Are there signs that that's improving?
Meilyr Rowlands: Well, one of the things that's very positive about this pilot scheme is that it's not just the schools that are officially causing concern that are a part of the pilot scheme, that is, the schools that we have identified, through inspections, as needing to be put in a statutory category. So, there are schools involved in the pilot scheme that the authorities and the consortia have identified themselves as schools that are at risk of causing concern. I believe that it's fair to say that we have not reached a point yet where we have a system of agreed criteria in relation to identifying these schools yet. I think that there has been initial work that has been commissioned or that is about to arrive in relation to that, and the types of measures you would expect us to take account of would be dissatisfaction from parents, staff leaving, a change in leadership. We use surveys with the children, for instance, and that gives you quite a good idea of whether a school is possibly facing difficulties. So, there's not one single criteria alone that will tell you, 'This is a school that is at risk of causing concern', but taken together, having a set of criteria that everyone has agreed would be a good way of monitoring schools, I believe.
Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Well, we'll be coming on to that middle tier later on, and perhaps that's where the problem lies, namely that if there isn't an agreed system from consortia and yourselves, perhaps that's where the focus needs to be.
Meilyr Rowlands: I would say that it's not the identification of the schools that is the greatest problem. The greatest problem is ensuring that there is support for them and that the support is multi-agency support, where all the agencies that support these schools are working together.
Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, how long does it take, therefore, for a school to move from an improvement category, in terms of special measures, to be escalated then? Because one sees sometimes that there's an excellent school, and within five years' time, it's in the red. So, there's a great deal of variance in that.
Meilyr Rowlands: Well, that would be something quite unusual—to move from excellent to red.
Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, gradually, perhaps.
Meilyr Rowlands: Yes. Perhaps Claire can respond to this.
Claire Morgan: On average, secondary schools that are in need of special measures take just over two years, on average. Some are shorter; some are quite a considerable amount longer. It's a little less for schools that go into significant improvement. With primary schools, of course, it's much shorter because the issues are far less complex; it's easier to bring about improvements in teaching. When you've got large numbers of staff, you've got large secondary schools, it takes time to actually bring about those improvements, but it is a long time, just over two years, when you think that some pupils, maybe in key stage 4 for the two years—. Certainly, we want to see schools coming out of category much quicker, and this is where the multi-agency approach certainly is a positive step. All partners involved in supporting the school are involved in these improvement boards. They focus on bringing about improvement in the areas of the school that are weakest, and it is the responsibility of everybody involved—that is: ourselves, the regions, local authorities, the schools themselves and their governing bodies—to look at how they can best support the school to bring about that improvement. So, it's getting an agreement on what the issues are, and then planning the support so that we avoid duplication, but that we support the school in the areas they need more support. And we hope that this then will accelerate the improvement of the schools that find themselves in category. But, as Meilyr already said, there are some schools involved in that particular pilot that are at danger of causing serious concern. So, the pilot is trying out those two different approaches as well.
Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, thank you. And just finally from me, for the time being at least, the financial situation; we've spoken about that already this morning. If you could—. If funding was injected into the system tomorrow, say, what would you spend it on? What aspects would benefit from that additional funding?
Meilyr Rowlands: Were you asking about something specific there?
Sian Gwenllian AM: In the schools themselves, if you were a school leader, what would you—
Meilyr Rowlands: Oh, if I were a school leader.
Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. How would you use any additional funding that would flow into the school?
Meilyr Rowlands: It's difficult to make that decision, because every school is different. It is important, of course, that leaders do have the power and the ability to make those decisions themselves. But, certainly, in the short term, the type of thing I would have thought would be to prepare for the new curriculum. That means freeing up teachers to think about what the new curriculum means to them. The schools that have been a part of developing the curriculum have been in a fortunate position in that they've had plenty of time to think about this. So, it's now time—and this was the chief message of my annual report this year—for every school in Wales to start to think. Because I think that the new curriculum is truly an opportunity to take a forward step in terms of how we teach and learn within schools. But that means that time is needed for schools to think this through and, in that thinking, to contact the community, to talk to their children as well, to see what the community in its broader sense would like to see being in the new curriculum, because it's up to every school. Although the new curriculum sets a framework, it is up to each and every school to decide what they're going to teach, and what they're teaching in order to prepare their young people for this new world that we have in the twenty-first century. Therefore, to give you a somewhat superficial answer, I would be setting time aside for the training of teachers.
Jassa Scott: Can I just add one thing there? I think what we've seen over the years recently is that local authorities, to some extent, have safeguarded the funding that goes to the schools, but the effect of that is that we've seen less funding going into some of the local authority services; for example, those services that support well-being, that promote attendance, and that perhaps support behaviour and assistance for schools. So, I think that all of those factors contribute to how schools can support and assist their pupils, and to improve themselves. So, I think that side of things is important as well—in the school or in the local authority, if funding is available, it should be allocated to all of those things so that those services can also support the children to succeed.
Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you.
Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on to the middle tier, if I can just ask about the quality of teaching? There's been a consistent message from Estyn that that is the weakest part of the system in Wales. The Government recognises that and has invested a very significant amount of money in that area, yet it's still an issue again in your annual report. You haven't said whether it's getting better or going in the right direction. What is your assessment of whether we are seeing the improvements we need to see in the quality of teaching?
Meilyr Rowlands: I think, in nearly all the elements of our framework, the picture is fairly similar. So, in terms of quality of teaching, we have seen gradual but quite small-scale improvements in primary. So, you can feel that that is going in the right direction. In secondary, it's more or less level; we haven't seen it getting particularly better or particularly worse. One of the things that's really important to realise is that the curriculum is about the quality of teaching. It is about the teaching and learning; those are two sides of the same coin, if you like. What's important is the learning experience that our pupils get in school. From the perspective of the pupil, it's the learning; from the perspective of the teacher, it's the teaching. They are two sides to the same coin. I think there's no doubt and I think there's general agreement that, in order to have a step change in the quality of teaching and learning—. I think it was Einstein who said that if you keep on doing the same thing, you'll get the same result. So, you're going to have to change something, and what's changing is the curriculum. I think there's general consensus that this is the right approach to improve the quality of teaching. And that's exactly what all schools need to do now: to think how does this new curriculum affect them in their particular school, in their particular circumstances, in the context of their particular children. How can they use this opportunity now to improve the teaching and learning in their school?
Lynne Neagle AM: Siân.
Sian Gwenllian AM: It does cause one concern, because if the teaching and learning standards just stay the same in the secondary sector, and we know that 12 per cent of secondary schools are under Estyn review and 11 per cent of them are in special measures, we're talking about half of the schools almost, and no improvement in the teaching quality in general. So, there is a major cohort of children captured in that situation, and then there's a new curriculum that comes in. I see the opportunities, but these schools that are doing well are going to go, 'Wow, up there', but schools are there in the bottom layer and one is genuinely concerned about those children in those schools. Isn't that where the focus should be and any additional funding that's allocated? You talked about releasing teachers for training, but perhaps it's in those particular schools that we need to focus.
Meilyr Rowlands: I do agree that the best schools will welcome the opportunities and that their standards will improve even more. But then, with regard to the other schools, in a way, there are two very broad categories, which are those that need only a little support just to help them to improve—. And I believe that the new curriculum and the general support that's going to be surrounding that will be the solution for those schools. It's going to be an opportunity for the quality of the teaching and the learning to improve. But you're right to say that there is another smaller cohort that has a much greater need for support, and they're going to find coping with the new curriculum difficult, because they'll also have many other problems. So, I do agree—. And you're not talking about a huge number of schools—some 200 secondary schools is what we have in Wales, so that percentage is relatively small, the number is relatively small—but they need much greater support. That is why this pilot scheme of the multi-agency approach of supporting those schools is important. I do believe that you're right to say that there are funding implications to supporting those schools. I don't think it's enormous, but certainly there's a certain amount of funding that is needed to offer those schools that support.
Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet.

Summary: First of all, although a number of primary schools have surplus funds, still a lot of secondary schools are in deficit and low on funds. Also recent years have seen a shortage of teachers with appropriate initial teacher training. There are concerns as well that schools in the bottom layer may find it difficult to adapt to the new curriculum and have little improvement on teaching quality.