English: I was on the committee at the beginning when it was decided to do this report and some of the initial scoping was thought through and picked up on what the Chair described as some of the concerns that motivated the committee to do this, but I haven't had the benefit of sitting through the evidence, which, at least for some members of the committee, seems to have mitigated at least some of the concerns expressed. However, at the same time, the Conservatives have switched their policy to clearly doing away with the Welsh bac. And I've read this report closely, for our group, but we're still considering what we want our policy on this to be going forward. I just wonder whether one of the key challenges about this is explaining what the Welsh bac is, and Hefin referred to the beginning of the title, 'Bacc to the Future', which I was going to compliment the committee on, but it's then the bit that comes after that, 'The status of the Welsh Baccalaureate qualification', and I think that implies at least a degree of uncertainty as to what it is, and I'm not sure as to the degree to which this report clears this up, although I think there have been one or two helpful statements by the Minister in response. I thought it was a good report in general, but there was just one bit where, at least, to me, on my reading, it fell short - I thought one area was just describing the context of the Welsh bac, I don't think it clearly set out the difference between the foundation and the national level. It refers to the difference of the grading of the SCC, but not the need to have the five GCSEs on the appropriate criteria at C level plus for the national. But then for the foundation level, it's only getting the GCSEs at all, so G - [ Inaudible.] Whereas you look at what then is called the English baccalaureate and I think that gives us a challenge still further of explaining the Welsh baccalaureate, and the fact that they set that as a five GCSEs at C or above or now five or above in England, and that has to include English and maths and is a little more specific in terms of, at least, the other three - I worry that that gives the impression to some, perhaps, who don't look at it in quite the level of detail that we're able to debate today, that the Welsh baccalaureate may not be as high a standard as the English baccalaureate because we have this lower foundation level that only requires the level G rather than the C or equivalent. I also think that we aren't successful in explaining or marketing the SCC - skills challenge certificate - component, and, at least in principle, this strikes me as a good idea. I think when people look at the Welsh baccalaureate, and even in some of our conversations today, when we say, 'the bac' or 'the Welsh bac', actually, that's a multiple of things, and part of it's an umbrella that's describing a minimal level of other qualifications, and then you have this SCC that is unique to the Welsh bac, and I think the 50 per cent extended project and what that's trying to do in allowing the student a greater range of options of what they do in that, and something that's a really substantive and extended project to develop their skills, in principle strikes me as something that could work well. And I also think it's something that learners can talk to about in interviews with universities and use to their benefit in that personal statement. But I don't think it's sufficiently well understood by universities and employers and, to a degree, parents, that that SCC is something additional we're doing in Wales that's potentially a real thing they can sell, and it's not clear how that relates to the umbrella that then gives the Welsh bac that that's within, particularly when people, at least to a degree, have a perception of what the English bac is or isn't as well. And I think that's a real challenge for us to sell and explain that. And some of the areas that Suzy highlighted in terms of what learners are saying about it I think adds to that difficulty. I'm not quite ready to say, 'This is wrong', but I really do have concerns about it. On one area, I think the Minister's response is really helpful when she says that 'The Welsh Baccalaureate is not a statutory subject in the national curriculum, and is therefore not compulsory for all pupils', irrespective of what guidance she may be revising or putting out there. That is on the record - a very clear statement. The Minister will recall one particular constituency case that I had and in which she and her senior team were really very helpful, and it was a learner doing A-levels, applying to Cambridge, already doing four A-levels, trying to do sixth term examination paper levels for Cambridge as well, and was really struggling to fit in the Welsh bac - I mean the advanced SCC element - and his school was telling him, 'Well, actually, this is compulsory, or at least this is required, and this is because of what Welsh Government is saying.' And it wasn't easy for him to agree that at a school level, and thanks to the Minister's intervention, we had a successful outcome for that particular individual who is now at Cambridge, and congratulations to him. But I think we have a more helpful statement here, but I just wish we could do better at selling this skills certificate and that component of it. And I worry that the A to G possibility of getting the Welsh bac but not the English bac gives the perception to some people that people who do get the national or the advanced level unfairly suffer, by comparison, if people have a perception that the Welsh bac may be easier or not at the quality of qualification as the English one is, and that English bac itself is pretty much the same performance indicator that the Minister's just decided she is no longer going to hold schools to account for.
Welsh: Roeddwn ar y pwyllgor ar y dechrau pan benderfynwyd gwneud yr adroddiad hwn ac ystyriwyd rhywfaint o'r gwaith cwmpasu cychwynnol a nodwyd yr hyn a ddisgrifiodd y Cadeirydd fel rhai o'r pryderon a oedd yn cymell y pwyllgor i wneud hyn, ond nid wyf wedi cael y fantais o eistedd drwy'r dystiolaeth, sydd, i rai o aelodau'r pwyllgor o leiaf, fel pe bai wedi lliniaru o leiaf rai o'r pryderon a fynegwyd. Fodd bynnag, ar yr un pryd, mae'r Ceidwadwyr wedi newid eu polisi yn amlwg i gael gwared ar fagloriaeth Cymru. Ac rwyf wedi darllen yr adroddiad hwn yn ofalus ar ran ein grŵp, ond rydym yn dal i ystyried beth ydym am i'n polisi fod ar hyn wrth symud ymlaen. Rwy'n meddwl tybed ai un o'r heriau allweddol ynghylch hyn yw egluro beth yw bagloriaeth Cymru, a chyfeiriodd Hefin at ddechrau'r teitl Saesneg, 'Bacc to the Future', ac roeddwn yn mynd i ganmol y pwyllgor ar hynny, ond wedyn cawn, 'Statws cymhwyster Bagloriaeth Cymru' ar ei ôl, a chredaf fod hynny'n awgrymu rhywfaint o ansicrwydd o leiaf ynglŷn â beth ydyw, ac nid wyf yn siŵr i ba raddau y mae'r adroddiad yn ateb hynny, er fy mod yn credu ein bod wedi cael un neu ddau ddatganiad defnyddiol yn ymateb y Gweinidog. Roeddwn i'n meddwl ei fod yn adroddiad da yn gyffredinol, ond roedd un man a oedd yn ddiffygiol, o'r hyn a ddarllenais i o leiaf - roeddwn i'n meddwl mai dim ond disgrifio cyd-destun bagloriaeth Cymru a wnâi mewn un man, nid wyf yn credu ei fod yn nodi'n glir y gwahaniaeth rhwng y lefel sylfaen a'r lefel genedlaethol. Mae'n cyfeirio at y gwahaniaeth wrth raddio'r dystysgrif her sgiliau, ond nid yr angen i gael y pum TGAU ar y meini prawf priodol ar lefel C neu uwch ar gyfer y lefel genedlaethol. Ond wedyn ar gyfer y lefel sylfaen, dim ond cael y TGAU, felly G - [ Anghlywadwy.] Ond os edrychwch ar yr hyn a elwir wedyn yn fagloriaeth Lloegr, credaf fod honno'n rhoi her bellach eto inni egluro bagloriaeth Cymru, a'r ffaith eu bod wedi gosod honno ar bum TGAU lefel C neu uwch neu bump neu uwch yn Lloegr yn awr, ac mae'n rhaid i hynny gynnwys Saesneg a mathemateg ac mae ychydig yn fwy penodol o ran y tri arall, o leiaf - rwy'n poeni bod hynny'n rhoi'r argraff i rai, efallai, nad ydynt yn edrych arno mor fanwl ag y gallwn ei drafod heddiw, efallai nad yw bagloriaeth Cymru mor uchel ei safon â'r fagloriaeth Seisnig am fod gennym y lefel sylfaen is hon nad yw ond yn gofyn am lefel G yn hytrach nag C neu radd gyfatebol. Credaf hefyd nad ydym yn llwyddo i egluro neu farchnata elfen y dystysgrif her sgiliau, ac mewn egwyddor o leiaf, mae'n fy nharo fel syniad da. Pan fydd pobl yn edrych ar fagloriaeth Cymru, a hyd yn oed yn rhai o'n sgyrsiau heddiw, pan ddywedwn 'y fagloriaeth' neu 'fagloriaeth Cymru', rwy'n credu bod hynny'n nifer fawr o bethau mewn gwirionedd, ac mae rhan ohono'n ymbarél sy'n disgrifio lefel fach iawn o gymwysterau eraill, ac yna mae gennych y dystysgrif her sgiliau sy'n unigryw i fagloriaeth Cymru, ac rwy'n credu bod y prosiect estynedig 50 y cant a'r hyn y mae'n ceisio ei wneud i ganiatáu mwy o opsiynau i'r myfyriwr o ran yr hyn y maent yn ei wneud yn hynny, a rhywbeth sy'n wirioneddol sylweddol a phrosiect estynedig i ddatblygu eu sgiliau, mae hynny mewn egwyddor yn fy nharo i fel rhywbeth a allai weithio'n dda. Ac rwy'n credu hefyd ei fod yn rhywbeth y gall dysgwyr siarad amdano mewn cyfweliadau â phrifysgolion a'i ddefnyddio er eu budd yn y datganiad personol hwnnw. Ond nid wyf yn meddwl ei fod yn cael ei ddeall yn ddigon da gan brifysgolion a chyflogwyr ac i raddau, gan rieni, fod y dystysgrif her sgiliau'n rhywbeth ychwanegol yr ydym yn ei wneud yng Nghymru sydd o bosibl yn beth go iawn y gallant ei werthu, ac nid yw'n glir sut y mae'n berthnasol i'r ymbarél sydd wedyn yn rhoi'r fagloriaeth Cymreig sy'n ei gynnwys, yn enwedig pan fydd gan bobl ganfyddiad, i raddau o leiaf, o'r hyn yw'r fagloriaeth Seisnig a'r hyn nad ydyw hefyd. Ac rwy'n meddwl bod honno'n her go iawn i ni werthu ac egluro hynny. Ac mae rhai o'r pethau y tynnodd Suzy sylw atynt o ran yr hyn mae dysgwyr yn ei ddweud am y cymhwyster yn ychwanegu at yr anhawster hwnnw. Nid wyf yn gwbl barod i ddweud, 'Nid yw'n iawn', ond mae gennyf bryderon yn ei gylch. Ar un maes, credaf fod ymateb y Gweinidog yn ddefnyddiol iawn pan ddywed 'Nid yw Bagloriaeth Cymru yn bwnc statudol yn y cwricwlwm cenedlaethol, ac felly nid yw'n orfodol i bob disgybl', ni waeth pa arweiniad y gallai fod yn ei adolygu neu'n ei gyflwyno. Mae hynny wedi'i gofnodi - datganiad clir iawn. Bydd y Gweinidog yn cofio un achos arbennig a gefais yn fy etholaeth lle roedd hi a'i huwch dîm o gymorth mawr, sef achos dysgwr a oedd yn gwneud safon uwch, yn gwneud cais i Gaergrawnt, dysgwr a oedd eisoes yn gwneud pedwar pwnc safon uwch, yn ceisio gwneud lefelau papur arholiad chweched tymor i Gaergrawnt hefyd, ac roedd yn ei chael hi'n anodd iawn cynnwys bagloriaeth Cymru - hynny yw, elfen y dystysgrif her sgiliau uwch - ac roedd ei ysgol yn dweud wrtho, 'Wel, mae'n orfodol, neu o leiaf mae'n ofynnol, a hynny oherwydd yr hyn y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei ddweud.' Ac nid oedd yn hawdd iddo gytuno i hynny ar lefel ysgol, a diolch i ymyrraeth y Gweinidog, cawsom ganlyniad llwyddiannus i'r unigolyn hwnnw sydd bellach yng Nghaergrawnt, a llongyfarchiadau iddo. Ond rwy'n meddwl bod gennym ddatganiad mwy defnyddiol yma, ond trueni na allwn wneud yn well am werthu'r dystysgrif sgiliau a'r elfen honno. Ac rwy'n gofidio bod y posibilrwydd o gael bagloriaeth Cymru A i G, ond nid yn y fagloriaeth Seisnig, yn rhoi'r argraff i rai pobl fod pobl sy'n cael y lefel genedlaethol neu uwch yn dioddef yn annheg, mewn cymhariaeth, os yw pobl dan yr argraff y gallai bagloriaeth Cymru fod yn haws na'r un Seisnig o ran ansawdd y cymhwyster, a bod y fagloriaeth Seisnig ei hun yn debyg iawn i'r dangosydd perfformiad y mae'r Gweinidog newydd benderfynu nad yw'n mynd i ddwyn ysgolion i gyfrif amdano mwyach.