Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy, you've got a question on early years.
Suzy Davies AM: Yes. To what extent will the new curriculum allow for the continuity of the way that the foundation phase is taught? Will there be any significant differences and have the early years professionals been involved in the development of the curriculum to date?
Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, early years professionals have been involved in the curriculum to date. One of the advantages, I think, of the new curriculum is to take the pedagogical principles that underpin our approach to early years education actually further into children's educational journey. I'm sure, Suzy, that you've had conversations that—. We have a certain pedagogical approach until the age of seven, and then all of a sudden, at seven, it's like, 'Forget all of that now. Sit down, pick up your pen and do this.' That's been really uncomfortable for many practitioners in our primary sector. So, actually, yes, statutory and non-statutory provision have been involved in the development of the curriculum because, of course, some of this is going to be delivered in the non-statutory sector. I'm very welcoming and supportive of that, but those pedagogical principles will now be available throughout that child's educational journey, rather than the false divide we've got at the moment.
Suzy Davies AM: So, aside from the purposes and the AoLEs, the type of teaching is unlikely to change in the foundation phase settings.
Kirsty Williams AM: No.
Suzy Davies AM: Okay. The other end of the scale now: you report that one of the themes of the feedback from further education has been the need to ensure that the transition to post-16 education is supported so that the systems don't just clash against each other. How are you working on the sector at the moment to make sure that there's a decent dovetail?
Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, that's really important. We don't want to do anything in pre-16 that stops people going on to be successful in post-16, whichever route the child or young person decides to take. FE have been involved in every single AoLE and they're a part of the curriculum and assessment group. So, colleagues in FE have been part of this process throughout. And then in the conversations we had yesterday with Qualifications Wales around what qualifications will look like, I was very keen to take the opportunity to emphasise that any changes to qualifications should be a gateway to further study in FE, whichever type of route the child took. But FE have been involved in this process from the very beginning.
Suzy Davies AM: And you're confident they're geared up to accepting young people who have been educated in this way.
Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. FE continues to be one of the real strengths of our education system.
Suzy Davies AM: Okay, that's great, thank you.
Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a question now on governance arrangements. Suzy, you're down to do that one—sorry, Siân.
Sian Gwenllian AM: I think you actually answered this at the beginning, but just to confirm that you're carrying on with the same governance set-up, the different groups that you've got, and there's nothing being added there or taken away.
Kirsty Williams AM: No.
Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. And just finally from me, then, on pupil referral units: what arrangements will be in place to ensure that they can benefit from the new curriculum and how is that going to be reflected in the legislation?
Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, we've been taking advice from Brett Pugh, who chairs the education otherwise than at school improvement group, and this has been an area where we've had to think really, really, really, really, really hard. So, what we intend to do for EOTAS and PRU is to set a minimum of what we would expect a child to receive. So, that would be around the four purposes; that would be around the cross-cutting themes of literacy, numeracy and digital competency and health and well-being. So, that would be the baseline of our expectation, that every pupil would get that. After that, then there needs to be a discussion and a focus on what is in the best interests of that particular pupil. One of the things we know about sometimes in EOTAS is we have very able and talented students who don't get access to the range of qualifications and courses that they have the capability and the aptitude to do. We also have to consider, though, that for some children they may be out of school for reasons, and telling them that they've got to do a full curriculum may be hugely detrimental to their mental health and well-being. So, for instance, to give an example, you could have a child who's very ill, and saying to them, 'You have to carry the full load of a curriculum' could be inappropriate. So, we'll be setting a minimum standard, as I said, around the purposes, around the cross-cutting themes and health and well-being, and then there will be an expectation that in conjunction with the child and the family an appropriate addition would be put in place to meet the needs of that child, recognising that they could have very different needs. Is that clear?
Lynne Neagle AM: Well, yes, and it's something that we'll probably look to build on when we look at our inquiry on EOTAS, which is coming up. Thank you. That concludes our questions. We've covered a lot of ground. So, can I thank you for attending and thank your officials for coming today? As usual, we will send you a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again, all of you, for your attendance this morning.
Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you.