National Assembly for Wales

I would like to welcome Members to today’s meeting of the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We have received apologies from Hefin David MS. There is no substitute. I would like to welcome again Heledd Fychan from the Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport and International Relations Committee. The public items of this meeting are being broadcast live on Senedd.tv. A Record of Proceedings will be published as usual. The meeting is bilingual and simultaneous translation from Welsh to English is available. Are there any declarations of interest from Members?

Thank you.

We’ll move on now to agenda item 2. Please can the witnesses introduce themselves and also outline briefly what, if any, involvement they have had in the development of the Bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Sue Edmunds, I'm a local councillor for Ebbw Vale south and cabinet member for education. I've had no involvement in the development of the Bill, but I have contributed towards the consultation that came.

Thank you. Members have a series of questions, and I’ll begin. Thank you. Could you outline your initial thoughts on the Bill and whether you believe it should be a priority at the current time, including within education specifically?

Yes. Broadly, I think we would say that we are supportive of the Bill. We’re certainly supportive of gradually increasing Welsh language provision and opportunities for pupils. There are currently other significant challenges facing education in Wales—mainly, obviously, financial pressures—and we are not sure that this is the appropriate time for this Bill, because of those.

Thank you.

Thank you. In addition to potential barriers to the Bill's successful implementation, you warn that there could be additional tension between the English-medium and Welsh-medium sectors and between those who promote Welsh-medium education and others who perhaps are not so naturally convinced. Could you expand on that, please?

First of all, I'd like to say that there are positives. There's an opportunity to celebrate our attitudes towards the Welsh language provision. The Welsh language generally has come a long way in the last 20 years, certainly within local authorities. All local authorities are committed to their Welsh in education strategic plans and are positively, proactively working with stakeholders to increase the demand. But, in some areas, where local authorities are having to make difficult decisions because of the financial pressures they're under, with situations where small or rural schools may have to close, and we're facing those closures, and then, at the same time, we're increasing funding for Welsh-medium education, that creates conflict within the local authority. It is very difficult to sell that to parents and teachers alike. So, there are some sensitivities, I would say.

Thank you. The Bill makes the target of a million Welsh speakers a statutory target. What is the value of placing the target on the statute book?

We're supportive of this, and local authorities generally are supportive of this, because it gives us a clear direction. I'd say that was the value—that there's a clear target, there's a clear direction, and being statutory makes it very positive.

Heledd.

If I may, you've used some caveats in your statements twice now. You've said 'broadly supportive' and 'generally' there. Are there some local authorities—I don't want you to name and shame—that don't feel that the target of a million Welsh speakers is relevant to their work, and are against what this Bill is trying to achieve? Because I appreciate you're representing all local authorities in Wales. It does feel very negative, some of the caveats that you've given, in terms of the attitudes of local authorities towards even the target of a million Welsh speakers?

I think there are certainly different levels of support, and a lot of it depends on which region of Wales you are in. Welsh-speaking areas are, obviously, more supportive; largely English-speaking areas less so, for obvious reasons. The financial burden on less Welsh-speaking areas is going to be much greater, and the workload is going to be greater—obviously, they're going to be more nervous. I am not aware of—but I could come back to you; maybe that should be a supplementary question we ask to them—any that are absolutely antagonistic. I don't think that exists. Broadly, every local authority supports the principles of the Bill, and, yes, the million target. I'm not sure they support it as a statutory target, but they certainly support it as a target. What they don't want is for it to fail. If we have a statutory target, we want to meet it, and we want to make sure we have the resources to do it.

Okay. Thank you for the clarification.

Marc, do you want to come in?

Thank you, Chair. Can I just check, in terms of the position of local authorities, my reading of your evidence is you’re supportive of the aims and objectives of the Bill, but the concern comes about the practical delivery of it, including resources, practically funding overall, which every public service is concerned about, but also the challenge in the workforce, I think, comes through as well? I just want to check that there's no principled opposition. I just want to check that that's the Welsh Local Government Association's view, that it's a really practical question of what the Bill requires you to do and whether you can do it in a sort of time frame to the standard you would want to do. I just want to check, because that's my reading of your evidence, to see if I've misunderstood you.

From my point of view, that's totally clear, yes. In principle, completely in agreement. However, there are challenges in delivering the Bill.

Thank you, that's very helpful.

Thank you. Just a quick reminder, you don't have to unmute and mute yourself. It's like Zoom.

Sorry, I'm used to it.

I know.

And in some council chambers, you have to do it.

Yes, you do, yes. Finally from me, what are your views on how it is proposed under the Bill that the number of Welsh speakers will be calculated, and are there any changes you would like to see?

Thank you. Can I bring Cefin Campbell in, please?

Is it realistic? Is the target realistic? Again, it depends. Of course it's realistic if you throw enough money at it, if you throw enough resources. Our biggest caveat, I think, is the retention and recruitment of staff. We don't have sufficient quality Welsh-speaking teachers, and before we can even begin to say whether it's realistic, we need to know how we are going to recruit and retain the staff because, without quality Welsh-speaking teachers, we can't get to 10 per cent. It's as simple as that—it can't be done at the moment. Certainly, in my local authority of Blaenau Gwent, we cannot do that. With the level of Welsh-speaking teachers we have at the moment, we cannot achieve that target. Where are they coming from? Who is going to train them? When are we going to get to the position where we have sufficient teachers to actually deliver that? And it is about delivery. Beyond that, there's not a lot to add. If we can be assured that we're going to get the support to achieve that, we can achieve it. 

I'll come back to the workforce later on in the session, but—

Thank you. Now questions from Vaughan Gething, please. 

Thank you. I'm going to focus on the common European framework for reference, or CEFR, and just to start by asking if you think it can be applied effectively in the context proposed in the Bill. And we've had evidence and questions on this from other parties as well.

Yes, overall, I think we are supportive of the common European framework. It's a common approach, and we like that. Also, it promotes the idea of Welsh speaking, of learning Welsh to be a lifelong skill, which is a very positive move. I think it also gives a lifelong framework for employers as well, which gives us a continuum throughout life, which is very positive.

Okay. Thank you. Marc.

Thank you. It's worth noting that I'm using the CEFR programme myself, in the lessons from the Senedd as well.

Another one of the questions we were asking about the use of CEFR is the distinction—and I'm not sure how fair this is, but we're asking everyone—to be made between someone who can speak Welsh and someone who can't, in particular for the purpose of moving towards the 'Cymraeg 2050' target, and the challenge over whether someone like me, who is developing basic Welsh skills, something that could be unusual outside this place, or someone who is an independent user or proficient user, and whether you think there is a threshold where you consider people to be a Welsh speaker. It goes back a bit into some of the commentary earlier about self-assessment and how you understand how many Welsh speakers we have, as opposed to attitudes to the language, which I think really have moved on. I agree with what you said earlier, Sue—in the last 20 years, we're in a very different place and a much better one. But this challenge of does CEFR help us to understand who we consider to be a Welsh speaker, and at what level we should try to persuade people to indicate that they believe they're a Welsh speaker, even if the levels of proficiency change. I'm trying not to put too many words in your mouth.

The fact there is a framework and there are three very clear possibilities is a good one. Who is a Welsh speaker? I would say that probably the independent—. We should be aiming for independent Welsh speakers, the middle ground—B2, I think, they call it. So, as a framework, we're with that. I think the distinctions are clear, but there will need to be significant training throughout the whole education sector to be able to deliver it, and, obviously, we come back down to this being a professional development, which will need to be fully funded—I hate to bang on about 'fully funded', but it will.

You're not the only group of witnesses who've talked about funding the workforce. [Laughter.]

So, we would say that, being asked what level we would consider to be proficient, we would say the independent user.

Okay.

Thank you. That goes into a final question, which is about those people who won't get to the basic user level, and there can be a range of reasons for that, and about whether you think descriptors are available for those people who can move beyond the top end of the scale, but also those who wouldn't make the start of it. And, I guess, coming back to this question of a Welsh speaker, if I complete my course and I say I'm then a basic user, when the census comes around, do I then say that I'm a Welsh speaker? Because that's the challenge of, outside the education system, how many people describe themselves as Welsh speakers and at what level, and whether the debate we're having around this is helpful in that context, as opposed to what you want to achieve in the education system when people leave it. And we've had other evidence on whether B2 is equivalent to an A-level in terms of oral skills. I did an A-level in French. When I go to France, I can still speak at least a bit of it, I can get around and have normal conversations. So, I'm trying to understand where we want the skills to be and then whether you think there is a helpful and useful way for describing Welsh speaking skills for those who probably won't make it to the bottom end of the CEFR scale. We had some evidence on this last week, and we've also got Qualifications Wales and others in today as well.

I think this is for—. In some ways, it's not for us to say, but I think this is where supporting guidance and regulations are critical to ensure that all schools are clear that it is a majority of pupils who are expected to reach a language category rather than individuals, for us. No one framework is going to cater for every pupil, and flexibility will need to be built into the system anyway, for that reason.

In relation to special schools, we are pleased that we welcome the fact that those schools will not be—. There won't be a duty on them to provide a specific amount of Welsh language, as it is inappropriate—would be inappropriate—but they'd obviously still have to demonstrate the promotion of the Welsh language.

One concern we have is that current Welsh-medium schools, or schools that have a higher provision of Welsh, will need to ensure that they aren't limiting themselves by some of these categories, and they're still pushing learners to be ambitious in their Welsh language skills.

I think we'll cover that with Qualifications Wales and the WJEC later, actually. Sorry. Marc.

Diolch.

Thank you. We know have questions from Tom Giffard, please.

Thank you very much. Can I start with this issue around primarily English schools and their requirement to teach 10 per cent, or 10 per cent of the teaching time, through the medium of Welsh, including, obviously, the teaching of Welsh as a subject, because I know that's something we've touched on already? How different is that in practicality to what is happening currently? Can I start with you, Sue, because I did write down what you wrote earlier, when you said,

'without quality Welsh-speaking teachers, we can't get to 10 per cent'?

So, are you saying that 10 per cent isn't a level that's currently being reached in schools in somewhere like Blaenau Gwent, at the moment?

I'm fairly confident it's not, although I can't honestly speak with the authority of figures and data behind me. But I'm fairly confident it's not. Welsh is spoken and taught in all Blaenau Gwent schools to the best of our ability, but, obviously, our Welsh-medium schools teach through the medium of Welsh. Our English-speaking schools do not.

So, in looking at the Bill, as you currently understand it, how much of a leap is it, practically, to get from where we are today to being able to reach that 10 per cent?

I couldn't give you an answer to that right off the cuff. We can do some analysis, but I would say it was a leap, a big leap, yes.

Okay. And, obviously, the Bill allows for some flexibility in that 10 per cent to schools in that position you mentioned, that can't reach that 10 per cent. So, I take it from the evidence that you'd anticipate most Blaenau Gwent schools, if this Bill was brought in, would probably be in that area where they'd have to apply for that flexibility pretty quickly.

Yes, I think—. I think there are maybe one, maybe two that I can think of immediately that wouldn't, but apart from that, yes, I would say—. And I think that is for Valleys schools. Valleys local authorities will, in the south-east of Wales, or on the border, that south-east border—I think that is a fairly typical response.

Very helpful, thank you. Marc.

Thank you. I understand the point about the geography, and, obviously, you'll be representing very different places in terms of where you are on this Welsh language journey and speaking in communities more generally, but I'm curious about those schools that are not currently reaching that 10 per cent. Is it helpful to have that requirement, then? Because I know in the last evidence session we had—I think it was the last one we had—there was talk about having targets and statutory requirements in legislation that couldn't be reached, and the impact that that would then have on teaching and staff morale and all the rest of it. If you, Sue, say that a lot of schools are not able to reach this 10 per cent as things stand, is it helpful to have 10 per cent as a statutory target from the off?

Not unless you're going to fund it. It's helpful to have a target.

Sorry, I should say it's not a target, it's a requirement. Apologies for my phraseology.

Yes. There's absolutely no problem with a requirement or a target or a statutory requirement, or whatever you want to call it, providing we have a road map, and we have the means to get to it. The will is there. The positive attitude towards Welsh-medium teaching within our schools is there. It's not that it doesn't happen, it happens all the time, it's just that we do not have the skills within the schools, as it stands at the moment. If you are prepared to provide the professional development for our teachers to learn Welsh so that they can teach through that medium, teachers will be willing to do it. The will is there, but the means are not. So, yes, it's helpful, providing the means are there to achieve it.

Thank you. Can I ask both of you what your views are on the language categories that will be applied to schools under the Bill? I know there's talk about the dual language category, perhaps, being confused with the previous category of dual stream. Is that something that you've considered, and what do you make of that?

Just on that really quickly, you mention that you didn’t feel there was confusion, if you like, at category 1 and 3, but category 2 would be confusing. I wonder whether the title 'primarily English, partly Welsh' is something that would confuse, potentially, in the sense that people might assume there is more Welsh being taught than perhaps there is in reality. Is that something that also concerns you?

Diolch. And finally from me, can I ask about the requirement in the Bill for all schools to have a Welsh language education delivery plan, and then local authorities review and approve them? Does the Bill make it clear enough what happens if a school doesn’t live up to that delivery plan, what happens to that local authority, what happens to that school? And how different is it to what is already in place in schools?

So, our understanding is that if the local authority rejects a draft plan, and reasons are given, additional support will be given, then, to the governing body, and they would submit a further draft plan, and the opportunity for temporary exemption should allow stakeholders enough time to prepare for the first delivery plan when it's needed. The Bill is clear in its expectations, as long as there's the capacity to produce that.

And from the local authority perspective, how different is it to what local authorities and schools are already doing?

I think that we would like to see it included in the school improvement plan, which is currently well established. This as an addition to that would work very well. 

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. A quick question from Vaughan, please.

It's just on this point, about whether there needs to be a separate delivery plan or whether actually you could have the delivery plan for Welsh education included and integrated within the school improvement plan. My reading of the Bill was that it wouldn't prevent there being an integrated plan, so it could be clear about where the improvement in Welsh was as part of that. But I just wanted to check that that understanding is correct, and are you really making a point about the form of how the plans are provided—and I understand that you can require a form that requires lots more work—rather than the content of the plan and how it can be integrated to hopefully have the best chance of everyone understanding what it is in the same place? So, that's my understanding of what you're saying, but I just want to check that we're not at cross-purposes here. 

That's helpful. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm really conscious of the time, so could we keep questions and answers as succinct as possible, please? Over to Cefin Campbell. 

Anything to add?

The only thing I'd add to that is that I would counter that we could turn what is currently a recruitment and retention challenge into a crisis if we’re not careful, that this is probably the one area in which we need to be very mindful of what is available and how much attention we need to give to making sure that we can upskill sufficiently.

What are your thoughts about setting a target in the Bill, if I can ask that specific question?

I think it's very difficult. My thoughts, and this is entirely personal—. I don’t think there should be targets set in the Bill—targets for recruitment—because I don’t think we have the means to meet them, and, in that case, we are putting our local authorities into a position of failure before we even start. Unless we have the means to meet the targets, there’s no point in setting the targets.

I've got very little to add. On a personal level, I've recently had experience of the effects of late-immersion teaching, and it is very impressive. Getting that message across nationally would be the best way to do it. I think all local authorities have a duty to increase this provision, and developing a national message that can be tailored to local needs will save time and resources and ensure that multiple individual authorities aren't individually researching and advertising the benefits of late immersion.

Thank you. We now have some questions from Gareth Davies, please.

Thank you very much, Chair. I think in your responses to previous questions, you’ve covered my first question which was about the delivery at a local, national and school level, so I think we’ve covered that. But just to look at the implementation of the Bill in terms of local authorities, WESPs et cetera, obviously, the Welsh Government’s ambition, with the consent of the Senedd, is to create a Bill that works for all of Wales, to get to, ultimately, the 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050. We've spoken a lot about, and in previous evidence sessions, the local differences, and I think there’s some credibility in that, definitely, in terms of the areas I represent.

So, in terms of that delivery of the Bill, and looking at, particularly, Part 4, what would you be seeking from the Bill in order to encompass some of those things that we've spoken about, because, obviously, from committee level, we’re going to debate it in the Senedd to a high degree, so what would you be specifically looking for in the Bill to encompass some of those realities that have been given in evidence as to those regional differences and how they can be delivered at a local level?

Sue, any additional comments?

I have nothing to add to that.

Okay. No problem. Thank you very much. I'm conscious of time, but, just to finalise my questions, to what extent are you satisfied with the duration that the Bill sets for local authorities' WESPs, and do you think it strikes the right balance between a short enough period to ensure accountability and long enough so that authorities have flexibility to plan over the long term?

Sue, have you got anything?

Yes, the only thing I would add is that there is a continuous process and the need for it, really, and want seems a little bit obscure. We don't understand, because the plan is continuously being assessed anyway, so why would we need a three-year time frame?

Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Just a really quick question from me: do you agree with the shift in the purpose and approach of local authorities' Welsh in education strategic plans, whereby the Welsh Government sets the targets and local authorities plan and implement them?

Okay. Thank you. Now questions from Heledd Fychan, please.

I have very little to add to that. I'd just say that it does ensure continuity and a clear pathway of support, which we would welcome.

Thank you. Thank you so much for joining us this morning. We really appreciate your time. You'll be sent to a transcript of this morning's proceedings for checking. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

We'll now break to bring in the next witnesses. Thank you.

Welcome back. We'll now move on to agenda item 3. Please can you introduce yourself and also outline briefly what, if any, involvement you've had in the development of the Bill?

Okay. Thank you very much. Members have a series of questions, and I'll begin. Could you outline your initial thoughts on the Bill and the extent to which it will support the work and progress required to achieve the 'Cymraeg 2050' target of a million Welsh speakers?

Thank you. We'll now move on to questions from Cefin Campbell, please.

Thank you. We now have questions from Vaughan Gething, please.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I want to start by going back to questions that I've asked consistently on the common European framework of reference for languages, or CEFR, and whether it can be applied effectively, in your view, in the context that the Bill proposes.

Okay, we're going to hear evidence later from Qualifications Wales and the WJEC on future qualifications for primarily English-medium and Welsh-medium schools as well, so that's interesting. But, on your point around a literacy framework to guide children along and the concerns you have, just so I understand, are you saying that your concern is that the CEFR framework is appropriate for primarily English schools with some Welsh, which is a new category, but you're not sure how it would apply to Welsh-medium education, and you don't want to undermine what you see as the literacy framework being used in Welsh-medium education? Just so I understand, because, in your evidence, you talk about some concerns about moving away from using a literary framework with CEFR.

Okay. Diolch yn fawr. Thank you.

Thank you. I now have some questions from Tom Giffard, please.

Diolch yn fawr. You mentioned you've got concerns regarding the use of the term 'Welsh-language education' in the Bill. Do you believe the Bill rows back on the kind of accepted concept of what Welsh language education is?

Diolch yn fawr. It's almost like you foresaw my next question. [Laughter.] To what extent are you concerned that the Bill overly focuses on English-medium schools and the development of Welsh at that end of the spectrum, and not enough on ensuring that pupils in Welsh-medium schools among first-language-Welsh children is not being developed in the same way?

Thank you. Cefin, would you like to come in here?

Thank you. We'll now move on to questions from Gareth Davies, please.

Thank you very much. I'd like to cover Part 4 of the Bill, if I may. The Welsh Government wants to establish a clear line of accountability at a national, local and school level for the planning of Welsh language education. To what extent do you believe that the Bill does this?

Diolch. Does the new framework for planning Welsh language education need addressing, in your view, considering the issue outlined earlier regarding the definition of Welsh language education?

It's not my own view, but just to play devil's advocate, a local authority could come back and say, 'We're under-resourced, we're underfunded, we're understaffed, we don't have the skills within our workforce to deliver this at a local and school level, and we're really struggling.' It could be somewhere in the east, for example—Flintshire, Wrexham or Powys or wherever it may be. What would be your view and response to that possible pushback from local authorities?

Thank you. I'm really conscious of the time, but we have a question from Heledd Fychan, please.

Thank you. Thank you so much for joining us this morning. We really appreciate your time. You'll be sent a transcript for checking in due course. We'll now take a break until 11 o'clock. Thank you.

Welcome back. We move on to agenda item 4. Please can the witness introduce himself and outline briefly what, if any, involvement he's had in the development of the Bill?

Hello. Good morning. My name's Hayden Llewellyn, chief executive of the Education Workforce Council. I should be joined by a colleague today, Eithne Hughes, who is the chair of the EWC; I think she's having some communications problems. 

In terms of involvement, the EWC is the independent regulator for the education workforce in Wales, so our expertise is around the workforce. We've a lot of data that can be used to inform all things Welsh language, but also we have an advisory function, so we're involved in certain aspects of work, for example efforts to try and recruit more Welsh language teachers. So, our background is as a regulator and adviser to Government.

Okay. Thank you very much. Members this morning have a series of questions and I'd like to begin, please. Could you outline your initial thoughts on the Bill from your perspective as the regulatory and registration body of the education workforce, please?

Eithne, can you hear things, now? Eithne was going to take this one.

No, it looks like she's still having problems.

Okay. If it's okay with the committee, then I'll take this one, but if we do get Eithne back later, I'm sure she can add.

Okay. No problem.

The EWC's view is that we support the intentions and proposals behind the Bill. We think the aspirations and intentions there are good, but we do have some concerns in terms of practicalities and I know that some of those concerns have been mooted by other organisations as well. It's really about if this is what we want to do in Wales in terms of the Bill, and the EWC supports that, it's just making sure that it's achievable and realistic. So, some of the areas that we'd invite the committee and the Government to have due regard to—as I say, they've been mentioned by a number of other agencies already—include making sure  there's sufficient funding available to allow these changes to be implemented, but also enough funding in the education system and the school system as a whole, because there are a lot of other initiatives happening at the moment and also various challenges for Government in terms of funding overall.

The second area where we'd invite consideration of is recruitment and retention. The EWC—. I know that there are some questions that you're likely to ask around recruitment and retention and we have the data to answer those questions for you. But there are some challenges in recruitment and retention, notably recruitment, around the Welsh language. So, there's quite some work to do in that regard.

The third area that we'd like some attention to is the extra workload for teachers and support staff that these changes and developments might create. In parallel with that, there will be a need to ensure that there's sufficient professional learning available to equip staff and also, obviously, the funding for that.

Finally, just to say, let's look for some common sense in the system as well. There are, as I've said already, a lot of initiatives and developments happening by Government—the new curriculum, ALN changes, et cetera—so additional initiatives and changes pulled in with those other matters really just need to be taken in the round, to make sure that schools would be able to deliver them and that it would be practical. So, at a high level, that’s what we think about the Bill. There is more detail, and if we get Eithne in, I’m sure she’d be keen to add to those points.

I can actually hear now, so apologies.

Great.

Hurrah. Obviously, I don't know what’s already been said, but I’m presuming that Hayden has outlined the fact that we’re in broad support of the ambition of the Bill and that we’re keen to have a look at the implementation of the strategic delivery, looking at the rich source of data that the EWC has got unique access to. We of course know that there are various issues that need to be taken into consideration around the delivery of these ambitions, which we see to be fundamental in terms of making sure that they can actually be realised.

Some of the aspects that I heard Hayden cover there at the end of what he was saying was that we do need a commonsense approach to this if we’re to make it work. We want and we approve of the 1 million Welsh speakers by the time we get to 2050, but there are real concerns around the practicalities for delivery of some of these ambitions. The system is not yet stable post COVID, and I think we have to acknowledge that. There are issues around attendance, there are issues around behaviour, there are issues around language acquisition, first-language acquisition, which of course immediately impacts upon the ability of learners to acquire, use and be fluent in a second language. There are a number of changes as well swirling around the system, and those changes would be around other aspects of policy, such as the ALN Bill, Curriculum for Wales, and the delivery of the new qualifications.

Workload implications as well need to be considered, and we don’t feel that they’re adequately covered within the Bill. They need to be mapped out, they need to be costed, and we really obviously can’t ignore them, nor would any of us want to. The human financial resource in this discussion as well needs to be front-loaded, in order that we have got the capacity to work through these various issues.

Penultimately from me, finances are critically important, human resource, financial resource. Schools and local authorities are cash strapped, and if we do want a world-leading ability to deliver on this Bill, then we really do need to have funding that matches that ambition. I’ll say no more given that I’ve already held you up for a period of time at the beginning with the technological issues, because I could bang on forever more.

That's no problem, no problem at all. We now move on to questions from Vaughan Gething, please.

Thank you. It's following on from what you said at the starting point about how realistic the goal is that pupils would be at least independent users by the time they finish compulsory education. So, how realistic is that goal and how much of an expansion in the Welsh language capacity of the workforce would that require? I noticed what you said about the staging for that to take place to get to 'Cymraeg 2050' as well.

If I answer the first part of it, and then Hayden can answer the second part about looking at the number of teachers that we would require in order to meet the ambitions of the Bill. The first part of the question is looking at independent learners. If we were to look at that in terms of the European framework being B2, which is what the Bill is looking at, in that sense B2 is actually equivalent to A-level. It’s an approximation, it’s not the totality of an A-level in Welsh language. So, how realistic is it for learners of statutory age to get to that point? I think that’s quite a stretch, to say the least. In order that we would have that ambition delivered around B2, which is an A-level, we would clearly need teachers to be more qualified than that, at C1 or C2 level. C2 level is almost a native speaker, and C1 is an advanced speaker. So, the workforce would need to be ahead of that, obviously, in order to deliver that for all statutory learners. That is a huge stretch, I think, for the workforce at the moment. So, Hayden, can I give you the second part of the question, if that's okay?

Thanks, Eithne. I'll give quite a high-level answer here, because I know some of the other questions that we've been provided with want to explore the data in more detail. But I think, at a high level, it's fair to say that the number of Welsh-speaking teachers and support staff, and also those able to teach or work through the medium of Welsh, isn't what we need at present. It has not been what we need for some time. And moving forward, if we're to have the 2050 aspiration, there would be some way to go to expand the workforce to do that. So, I'll take further questions, of course, in terms of the detail of the data, but I think at a high level, it's to say that we haven't got that sufficiency at the present, and that's not likely to be the case for some time, actually, without concerted improvements in recruitment.

Okay. I'm interested in the point about staging, but that might be more appropriate with the questions that are coming up, otherwise I'll ask all of Tom's questions, and he may never forgive me. [Laughter.]

Thank you. We'll now move on to questions from Tom Giffard, please.

Okay. So, following on, Hayden, from the data you've just given us, we know that the Welsh Government's target is 30 per cent of teachers trained to teach through the medium of Welsh. In 2021-22, that was 20 per cent. Why is that target consistently being missed, and what are the barriers to it being hit?

Thank you. I'll bring those figures up to date for you first. Every August, the EWC allocates certificates to those that have completed teacher training in Wales. So, I can tell you the data as at 24 August. This August, we created just over 1,000 new teachers through university partnership routes. Two thirds of those, roughly, were primary and a third were secondary. In terms of the percentages, it was 20 per cent of those who qualified through primary routes that undertook their teacher training through the medium of Welsh, and 18 per cent on secondary. So, that Welsh Government aspiration for 30 per cent to be trained through the medium of Welsh, we're short of that. The EWC's figures indicate that we've been short of that for some years, so we are shy of the numbers.

The reality is that Welsh-speaking individuals and those able to teach through the medium of Welsh, they're in short supply, they're in high demand. There's a range of other attractive careers available to those individuals. In terms of global recruitment to being teachers, there are shortages, certainly in particular areas, particularly secondary. We're okay on primary in Wales, but it is a competitive market when it comes to Welsh speakers, and I know that schools that deliver Welsh language provision, they really struggle, both on primary and secondary, actually, to get the numbers of teachers through. So, I think it's a difficult one, really, to crack, this, and these individuals are in high demand.

Just for clarity—thank you for the latest figures—obviously I've got 20 per cent from 2022, and you've got 20 per cent primary, 18 per cent secondary. So, just to be absolutely clear, that is trending in the wrong direction against 2022. I appreciate we're down to decimal points here in some places, but it's just worth seeing the trend.

I think, really, we've seen no improvement. They're pretty stable around the same levels. As you can see, the 20 per cent is still 20 per cent, and the secondary is slightly under. I don't have to hand the intervening years there, but it's stayed around the same level. In respect of teachers and support staff registered with EWC, it's the same. The EWC's trend data for teachers, we have over 20 years' worth of data, and the number of Welsh-speaking teachers and the number who can teach through the medium of Welsh, it has not changed in 20-odd years. It has not really gone up, it has not really gone down. With the 2050 aspiration, I think that's a key point and it’s not an easy one with a ready fix.

I think it's important to say as well that initial teacher training can't fix everything. This is about a supply chain of Welsh speakers coming through, who then may choose to be teachers or support staff. I think it would be really unfair to put the blame and the emphasis on teacher training to fix matters here.

No, no, and I don't think anybody would have been. On that point more generally, in terms of the subjects—because I'm particularly concerned about the secondary figures that you mention, and I think you shared that concern—I think we had a headteacher in last week who mentioned struggling to recruit more generally, in certain subject areas. I think he mentioned struggling to be able to hire a teacher who can teach physics, so then imagine trying to hire a teacher who can teach physics through the medium of Welsh. Is that something borne out by your stats as well, that it exacerbates an existing problem trying to find priority subject areas, and then, in addition, ones that can teach them through the medium of Welsh?

It does continue to be a challenge, actually. So, in Wales, we turned out 369 new secondary teachers through traditional routes this year. That's supplemented by some additional numbers from the Open University, and also some teachers who trained in England and returned to Wales. But the main new teachers coming through were through Welsh programmes. And, yes, some of the subjects now are pretty low in terms of overall numbers, but then when you move into Welsh language ability as well, the numbers are very low. So, from 2024, this year, we turnd out 27 new maths teachers, of which three had their teacher training through the medium of Welsh. Physics was seven in total, of which two had their training through the medium of Welsh. So, yes, those numbers are low, and that is a challenge for schools, who need those individuals.

And just so I'm clear, sorry, I'm very conscious of the time, that seven you mentioned, for example—it was physics, you said, wasn't it, for the seven and the two—how does that relate to the Welsh Government target? You don't happen to have the figure for the Welsh Government target for teacher recruitment, or training, in those areas.

I don't to hand, but I know off the top of my head that the maths figure in total would be over 100. It's not a target, it's important to say; it's an allocation to the partnerships of the numbers the Welsh Government would like to see train. So, it's not a target, but the Government would like more to be trained.

Okay. Thank you.

And there was 30 per cent of that on the Welsh, so you could work that out: 30-odd would be liked through the medium of Welsh.

Okay. Thank you.

Thanks, Tom. Now we have some questions from Cefin Campbell, please.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. I'm going to be asking my first couple of questions in Welsh, so I don't know whether you've got the simultaneous translation working there. The first question is this.

Sorry. Is it coming through, the translation? It's not, is it?

No.

Oh, right. Okay.

It's not. It was tested before and it did work, but I'm not getting it now, sorry.

Is it fixable, or—

Yes. Yes, it's coming through now.

It's working. Okay. Sorry, if I can maybe start the question again.

Yes, yes.

Okay.

Thank you. One of the things the EWC can do is map retention, because we have data that goes back some time. And one of the things we tend to do, because it's often referred to in all countries, is we look at a cohort of teachers and a cohort of support staff and whether they are still registered with us after five years. We then look in the middle of a career, we look at the end of a career. The retention of teachers in Wales has generally been better than other countries, particularly England. So, we take any five-year cohort and then look forward five years. So, the 2019 cohort, are they still registered with EWC now? Seventy-five per cent of teachers who were registered in 2019 are still registered with the EWC now. If you look at those who speak Welsh, or teach through the medium of Welsh, it's around about the same, if not a little bit higher, so the retention isn't worse, actually.

In terms of support staff—and some in the room will know I've talked about this before—the churn or turnover of support staff in Wales is much higher than teachers. We're talking 40 per cent, 45 per cent of support staff who were registered with the EWC in 2019 were not registered five years after. Salaries are lower, contracts are not necessarily permanent, term-time working—there's much more turnover. When you look at the Welsh language of support staff, the numbers who are able to speak or work through the medium of Welsh are much lower anyway than teachers. Twenty per cent of support staff registered with the EWC can speak Welsh, 17 per cent can teach or work through the medium of Welsh. When you bear in mind that there are more support staff than teachers now in the education workforce, that is a challenge. If you look at the Welsh language ability to begin with, and then the turnover, it will be a challenge, and there is a challenge for schools in that regard.

Eithne, can you take that one, please?

Yes, absolutely, I'm happy to. I think it is a solution but it's not a long-term solution. I think we need to watch that the relationships with children, between the children and the teacher, are maintained. And if we're looking at distance learning as being a solution too, I don't think that's necessarily going to solve the problem. I think this requires a more systemic solution than that. But it's a partial solution only, so, yes, I take it to be pragmatic but not a good solution long term.

Okay. My next question—. I've got two questions left, one is around the ways that we could possibly offer some kind of inducements to attract more teachers into the profession, and one of them may be around offering a bursary at a level comparable to what they are offering in England. What are your views on that?

I think, in terms of incentives, it's not uncommon at all for incentives to be offered, and you see that in lots of countries and professions, so it's a common thing that you do see.

You may know that the EWC is about to work with the Welsh Government to undertake some tracking and mapping work, to see how those that had incentives in the past—not just in respect of Welsh, but other subjects as well—are still in the profession, how advanced they are in the profession. So, that work's about to commence very shortly, and we're pleased to help the Welsh Government with that. That's an important piece of work to see whether incentives have worked in the past and whether they may have value, either as they stand or in a different guise, moving forward. I think it's important to do that work to get some evidence.

Okay. My final question then is this: in the context of the challenge around recruiting Welsh-medium teachers and support workers, now, in your response to the White Paper, you said this, and I'm quoting:

'The Council supports the proposal for a statutory National Plan for the acquisition and learning of Welsh...We also agree with the proposal...to set national targets for the education workforce, to be included within the National Plan'.

Do you still agree with that?

Eithne, I think you'll take that one, please.

We’re of the view that we do need to have targets, obviously, which are sensible and common sense, and those that are achievable as well. But we're of the view that we do need to be ambitious in this; we're clear about that. But we would still underscore this with what we've already said around making sure there is funding, there is sufficient support, and we're not overloading the system. And it's about an entitlement and a right to the language of this country, not just the fact that we're driven by targets, but we're driven by the right sense of culture, expectation, language acquisition, and a pride in this country and the language that is spoken. So, in terms of those targets, absolutely, yes. The question I think is about the delivery that we need underneath those targets in order that those ambitions can be achieved.

Okay, thank you. 

And we have a very quick question from Vaughan.

Thank you, Chair. It's about the work you're doing with the Government about incentives to try and increase the teacher workforce. I'd be very interested in not just that piece of work, but on whether you're looking at wider challenges or factors about why people either choose to become teachers in the first place, or about why they stay as well. Because the incentives are just one part of it, and I worry that we can get focused on financial incentives, rather than a much bigger range of factors about how people see the profession. So, I'd be interested in whether that's going to be included in the work you're doing with the Government, because that would obviously be relevant, not just in this area, but across the wider teaching workforce.

It won't be included in that work, but we have other intelligence in that regard. The EWC has undertaken two national workforce surveys previously in collaboration with Government, trade unions and others, and there's good intelligence from those surveys as to why people may or may not choose to be teachers, and also whether they choose to stay. And one of the things that the EWC has always said in the area of recruitment and retention is there needs to be efforts to try and look at the causes and treat the causes of why recruitment and retention may not be where we wish them to be. It's not easy, it's very hard, and you're competing against lots of other attractive professions for graduates. But the areas that come up regularly from the surveys we've done and from trade unions include workload, bureaucracy, accountability, student behaviour, and matters like that. And then it's the perception of what a career into teaching might be, taking on board those sorts of matters. Eithne might want to add to that.

Yes. I think the question is an excellent one, and I think it goes to some of the wider areas around how teaching is perceived, and as Hayden said about workload, accountability and so forth—those downward pressures that we would hope this Bill doesn't add to.

I think the other thing around this, if we go back to being a teacher of Welsh, is that we also need to look at the encouragement further back in the school system for children to actually take some of those qualifications that are formal. At A-level, for example, in 2024, there was only 0.5 per cent of children who took an A-level in Welsh language, for either Welsh first language or Welsh second language. So, the pipeline there isn't a convincing one. But to the broader point, I think Hayden has covered the general issues around why the workforce is not necessarily attractive, and that also does need to be addressed if we're to look through this particular subject area.

Sorry, Chair. A note on that might be helpful, rather than pursuing more questions.

Okay. Okay, thank you. We now have questions from Heledd Fychan, please.

Thank you very much.

Yes. If I can just put a couple of points in around this, and we do welcome this. The implications, we think, will be very important for the education workforce, and they will have a really important strategic function. We would want to see them build on provision, but also make sure that there are new professional learning opportunities that are open to the entire workforce, and that's something that we would be very, very keen to work closely with this national institute on.

I’ve got to note the fact that the professional standards are not owned by the EWC—something that we constantly talk about—they’re owned by Welsh Government. And we feel there’s an opportunity for us to work closely with the national institute on making sure that the professional standards are scaffolded in the area of developing and improving on Welsh language provision. And the professional standards really should be doing that, and it’s important that they do.

Further to this, the national institute would have a role, we would hope, in working alongside initial teacher education providers to make sure that there’s focused provision to help enhance some of the Welsh language skills of new teachers. But, again, all of this requires strategy, good operational output, planning and plenty of investment. Thank you.

Thank you. We now have our final question from Gareth Davies, please.

Yes, and just to conclude this session, I just want to ask if there are any aspects of the Bill relating to education, or any part of the Bill, that we haven’t covered, which you think would be helpful for us to hear as a committee this morning.

I think a point—I don’t know if it was raised when I was not able to hear the meeting—is around early years acquisition and usage of language, which I think is a really important aspect to focus on. And that has been hit quite hard during the period of COVID. So, I do think that that is an area that we would like to bring to your attention as a focus, to make sure that we’ve got longevity to this Bill going beyond 2050.

Hayden, did you want to add to that? No. Okay. 

No, thank you, Chair. 

Okay. Thank you so much for joining us this morning, we really appreciate your time. And there will be a transcript sent to you shortly for checking. Thank you again.

Thank you, all. 

We will now take a very short break to bring in the next witnesses. 

I will now move on to item 6, which is—. Oh, sorry, I’m on the wrong page here. Welcome back. We now move on to agenda item 5. Please can the witnesses introduce themselves, and also outline briefly what, if any, involvement they’ve had with the development of the Bill? Thank you.

Philip Blaker, chief executive of Qualifications Wales. We’ve had no direct involvement in the development of the Bill.

Thank you. 

Ian Morgan, chief executive of the WJEC, and, again, no direct involvement in the development of the Bill.  

Thank you very much. Members have a series of questions, and, if it's okay, I'll begin. Could you outline your initial thoughts on the Bill and its implications for qualifications? For example, will any changes be needed to the proposed qualifications in Welsh as a subject due to be introduced from September 2025?

Shall I go first? First of all, Qualifications Wales supports the Bill, and also supports the importance of giving a statutory basis to the ambition of 1 million Welsh speakers. In terms of the impact on qualifications, the committee will be aware that there is a new suite of GCSEs that are being released at the moment as part of a new suite of national qualifications for 14 to 16-year-olds. As part of that, new GCSEs in Cymraeg and core Cymraeg have recently been published by WJEC, and those will be ready for first teaching by schools and other settings from September of next year, working on the recommendations that we've had previously of allowing a full year for schools to become familiar with the requirements of new qualifications before first teaching.

That actually follows two years of development of those qualifications. So, we're not seeing an immediate impact of the Bill on the design of those qualifications. Actually, those qualifications have been designed to meet the requirements of the curriculum, so they map very directly to the curriculum and its needs. In particular, they look towards the oracy skills, so they do talk to the ambitions of the Bill in some respects, in that oracy is given a greater weighting in the qualifications than it perhaps is in other language qualifications. They've also been designed to continue the standards that are within the existing GCSEs and existing Welsh and Welsh second language qualifications, which are not related to the CEFR. They're related to those existing standards.

In terms of what might be done, obviously, once the CEFR is in place, actually that needs to be contextualised for Wales, importantly. The CEFR is quite a generic framework. That needs to be translated into more detailed requirements for Wales. But once that happens, there can be an exercise of mapping the existing qualifications against the CEFR, and obviously also I think something for the Welsh Government to look at is mapping the requirements of the curriculum against the CEFR as well.

In terms of the future, GCSEs will typically, we think, be looked at on a review basis every five to seven years. So, there will be time to establish the code, and this framework for translating the CEFR, and then there will be time to look at what the implications are for those qualifications. At that time, obviously, qualifications can reflect the CEFR more directly. They can also look at the policy aims that Government has got at that particular point, and particularly whether there is a requirement to change that standard from the existing GCSE standard to something different. And it can also reflect progress of the Bill.

There is one area where the Bill, if it progresses, and the CEFR work to develop a more detailed code, can have a more immediate impact, in that whilst GCSEs have been designed with the intent to have seamless progression into existing A-Levels, we are about to initiate the WJEC review of AS and A-levels, which we think will be a light-touch exercise for most subject areas, and really like a due diligence exercise to make sure there are no broken links from progression, not by looking at GCSE upwards but by looking at A-Level backwards. But we do think that there is probably scope for more substantive changes for Welsh and Welsh second language A-levels.

To some extent, WJEC—and we're within our seventy-sixth year of activity now in Wales—came together on the basis of supporting and developing the Welsh language and Welsh language qualifications. So, as part of our charitable purpose, we are keen to see the activity within the Bill and keen to support the way the Bill is moving forward in terms of the use of the Welsh language and the Welsh language in education. In terms of everything that we currently do as an organisation for Wales, we are bilingually providing all of those qualifications, so it's embedded in us as an organisation, but also embedded in terms of what we do in terms of the qualifications and how those qualifications are utilised across Wales. And that's in general qualifications and vocational qualifications as well. So, we've got a broad range of activity there. 

I think the second aspect I would just pick up on is that we do also provide the adult education Welsh language qualifications as well. So, as an organisation, we've got both aspects coming in in terms of what is school provision—GCSE and A-level provision—but also what is in that adult community learning world as well. So, we're able to bring and converge those two aspects together. That gives us access to a broad range of information, a broad range of knowledge and a broad range of experiences. We would be used to the CEFR, because of the alternative language teaching environment in which we operate, but also in terms of the general qualifications and how they move on. 

Philip has already alluded to the fact that the GCSEs were already in train before the Bill came along. We've been working closely with the approval criteria, as designed by Qualifications Wales, and those qualifications will go into first teaching from September 2025. But that opportunity to further develop and further think, even through the professional learning offer, is there for us to ensure that we can embed where we need to embed. I think we just need to understand the similarities and the complexities of both aspects of the work that we're doing.

Thank you. We'll now move on to questions from Vaughan Gething, please. 

It follows on from what you've already had to say about CEFR and its usage, and about how appropriate CEFR is in the context of the Bill and in particular what you've already had to say about the fact that we've got new GCSEs. So, there's the Cymraeg and the core Cymraeg, for the different streams, and they've been developed to align with the curriculum, which is another significant piece of reform. But, just so I understand, in the evidence you've already given, the adult qualification has already taken up the CEFR—

Correct. 

The GCSE hasn't been developed in that same way. We're talking about mapping across what the GCSEs are going to do, as they're introduced from 2025. So, it's really about not just the appropriateness of CEFR but how much work you'd anticipate you'd want or need to do for the GCSE element of it to make sure it's aligning in a way that's coherent. It's the coherence of the offer and the teaching and learning outcomes that I think are the main aspects. Lots of witnesses have said that there is consistency in having a pan-European framework that people can understand, but just to understand the work that you'd anticipate needing to do, from the GCSE you're about to introduce to what the Bill looks at. 

I think there is some work to do there and, over a period of time, as we roll out the new GCSEs, we can look to see where that synergy is and where the similarity is between the approaches. I think we do need to be cognisant of the fact that there would be a lot of pre-work that would happen in schools before we get to the GCSEs as well. So, I think that in order for the qualifications system to be truly reflective, it's about the embedding of the Welsh language and Welsh language provision right through the education system. So, I think that, as we start to roll the qualifications out, as we start to see what they look like in terms of practice, then as Philip has already alluded to, as part of that review process, we could start to look at where we could backward engineer some of those things into the system as well. I think we are at two separate points at the moment, and we know that we need to converge at some point further down the line. We just need to do that in the most appropriate and most timely way to make sure that we are not missing those opportunities.  

Can I just ask, because I think it will help us to move on—? When you hear evidence like this, sometimes people get very excited and say that it means that nothing is going to work, people are moving in different directions and this undermines the purpose of trying to create confident speakers. How much of a problem is this, or isn't this? Because I don't want the committee to get unduly excited about this if you don't think that it is much of a problem, but equally, if you think it is, there's then the challenge of how quickly that gets brought into a place of genuine coherence for teachers and learners.

We recognise that the CEFR is a proven framework. As you said, it's pan-European. Because of that, it's quite generic in nature, if you just look at it on the framework as such. So, it needs that detailed work to try to actually distil what does that mean for Wales, what does that mean in relation to the Welsh language. As part of that process, I think it does need to look at things like qualifications and the curriculum to influence some of those things. So, I think there's a synergy between what the framework will look like and what's there at the moment. 

For me, I think, there's a lot there that will have a natural synergy between the two. So, I don't think there will be any particular points of disjuncture between them. Probably, what we would want to do is to more explicitly draw out the links against that detailed framework, and that's what happening through this mapping exercise. The important thing there is that CEFR provides a number of things. It provides a reference point for things like curriculum requirements; it provides a reference point for qualifications; it allows learners to understand where they are on a continuum of learning; and it allows people like employers to be able to express more clearly what their linguistic proficiency requirements are.

I think, importantly, that once that detailed code is in place, it’s about looking at the existing qualifications and seeing where they lie in the framework, because I think it’s reasonable to say—and we haven’t done the exercise yet, so we wouldn’t know for sure—that Welsh second language and core Cymraeg is more likely to relate to the competencies around A1 and A2 than going into B1 or B2. If that is the case, once we've done that exercise, then you start to understand what the quantum of change is in a more measurable way in terms of moving what is, in effect, 75 per cent of learners that are currently going through the Welsh second language stream up into Level B1 or B2 and be more confident users of Welsh. So, I think the links are already there, it’s a case of making them more explicit.

My question is around the CEFR again, and it's to do with two elements. The first one is whether it is broad enough to encompass all the language skills—those who have no language or very little down at the bottom end of A1, for example, and maybe even higher than C2. And secondly, do we need to modify the definitions as they currently stand, which are universal across a European framework, so that they are meaningful to learners of a very young age and all the way through, plus parents and teachers? I've seen the framework; in a previous life, I've worked with that framework. It can be very nuanced and complex, the wording around the definitions. Do we need to simplify the definitions?

The descriptions are fairly limited and would need to be adapted to the context in terms of, ‘We are specifically talking about 14-to-16 learners’, and we’d need to make sure that the descriptors reflect that 14-to-16 curriculum and 14-to-16 qualifications and specification. I think the companion volume in 2020 was developed to address some of the issues, including the pre-A1 level—so, better defined descriptions for phonological competence, as well as aspects of proficiency as well, which are not addressed in the 2001 framework. Having no measurability to Welsh means that the learner in question cannot be said to be on any level in terms of the current framework. So, considering the demand, as Philip has already alluded to, the use of notional levels would be limited, because of the limited way in which we would be applying it to the qualifications in the curriculum.

Okay. Do you have anything to add?

Just to reiterate that it’s very generic in its out-of-the-box format and it needs to be contextualised. I think, in that contextualisation, it makes it simpler, because it makes it more relatable. I think that’s the important part of it. And it is intended to be a comprehensive framework. People who wouldn’t speak any Welsh at all would be sitting below A1, and then, once you’re up into C1 or C2, you’re looking at proficient users of the language. So, I think it’s comprehensive enough for the purposes.

My second question, and last question, is in Welsh, so you'll need your headphones. 

I think our interpretation would be that it's very difficult to define a B2 as an equivalent to an A-level and that could be on the basis of inputs that are required to achieve those levels. So, we have circa 120 guided learning hours for the GCSE core Cymraeg and 60 guided learning hours for the level 2 additional core Cymraeg. So, we need to offer a broader suite of qualifications and more qualifications in order to get to a point where those two things could be seen to be of equivalence. I think, probably, we need to be careful collectively in terms of how we try to map those two things together to make sure we're comparing like with like and making sure that we are, in fairness, presenting the information in the most appropriate way. So, I think we just need to be careful that, where we can link it to the CEFR, we need to make a judgment call in terms of the value of that as an outcome and output from the decisions.

It's difficult to comment on somebody else's analysis without understanding the detail of it. I think I've already said that we think that most learners that are taking Welsh second language at the moment will be down in A1, A2, in terms of competency in the framework. To get to B2 is going to be a significant change for them; it's going to require a lot of inputs to be able to do that. The amount of time that is spent learning Welsh would be one of those things, I would suspect.

The 600 guided learning hours that you mentioned, I don't know what time period that's across, but, if we're looking at years 10 and 11 as the qualifications phase, that's the equivalent of five GCSEs in terms of curriculum time, which would seem to be an awful lot. So, I think if the 600 guided learning hours, if it has some validity, and if that is spread over a longer period of time—. It might be realistic if it's over the whole of secondary education, as an example, but it wouldn't be realistic as a guided learning hours time associated with a qualification in years 10 to 11, because it would take out five GCSEs-worth of learning. 

Okay?

Okay.

Thank you. We now have questions from Tom Giffard, please. 

Question singular. [Laughter.] To what extent will there always be two Welsh language qualifications, and does the Bill mean we might eventually come to a stage where there's one singular Welsh language qualification, regardless of a learner's exposure to the Welsh language?

Shall I answer?

Yes.

I think there's always been an ambition, certainly amongst a number of stakeholders, to have a single Welsh language qualification. Our view has been that, at the moment, there is such a wide range of attainment and ability that a single qualification wouldn't be able to measure that range appropriately. In effect, if you were to have a single qualification at the standard of Welsh language GCSE at the moment, I think many learners in English-medium schools would not do very well in that qualification. They would probably know that they wouldn't do well in that qualification before they'd even started it, that would affect their motivation and would, effectively, be self-defeating, so we don't think it's the right time now for a single qualification.

What we're trying to do, though, is to have a range of qualifications that means that people can take qualifications that are appropriate to their context and their ability, so, in the new range of qualifications, there is, for example, for English-medium schools, a foundation qualification, which will be at entry level. There is the GCSE, which would be at level 1, level 2, and then we're looking at an additional core Cymraeg qualification, which would be at level 2, which is looking to stretch learners beyond the core Cymraeg GCSE towards the standards of Cymraeg. So, the idea there is to try and have a range of qualifications that would allow learners to be able to demonstrate their ability in the most appropriate way. It doesn't rule out the possibility of something further down the line that might be a single qualification, but the other thing we need to be careful about is we wouldn't want to dumb down Cymraeg GCSE in order to have something for everybody. So, it's a case of making sure that it's not too demanding for one cohort or too easy for another cohort.

I think the other point is just making sure we've got the capacity and capability in schools to be able to deliver as well. We know the challenge in terms of Welsh-medium, and Welsh-medium teachers being available, and particularly teaching Welsh in an English-medium school. So, I think, in terms of the qualifications and the framework for the qualifications, we just need to make sure that, if we did decide to go down a slightly different route, we've got that capacity and capability in schools to be able to deliver it, because, otherwise, you've just set yourself up for a fall further down the line, as opposed to being cognisant of the challenges that currently exist in the system. The response to most of this is a systemic one as opposed to just individual organisations or individual qualifications.

Okay, thank you. Thank you, Tom. We now have questions from Gareth Davies, please.

Thank you, Chair. Good morning. To what extent do you agree with the creation of the National Institute for Learning Welsh and the role that the Bill sets out for it? What sort of working relationship do you envisage having with the National Institute for Learning Welsh?

I think from our perspective, we'd kind of welcome it if it would ensure that learners would have access to the resources that they need in order to learn. And I go back to my previous point, really, about making sure that—. You know, there is a shortage of teachers who are proficient in Welsh language skills across Wales and, if we're going to have an institute that supports that, we need to make sure we'll be able to service it with the right people, in the right way and at the right time. So, we do work closely with the National Centre for Learning Welsh in developing appropriate resources anyway, and that plays into our adult education provision as well. So, I think, in principle, absolutely, as long as we can, systemically, provide the resources that it needs in order for it to be efficient and effective.

Yes. And you?

Very much the same, really. If we're thinking about the level of resources that might be needed to meet the ambitions of the Bill, there is going to need to be a significant investment of time and resource and there needs to be a body dedicated to leading on that. So, I think the institute would be useful for that in terms of being able to lead on some of those requirements that the system would have. In terms of relationships, we would look to have a strategic partnership with them, as we do with many other organisations as we look to involve others in our work.

Thank you very much. And, finally, are there any other aspects of the Bill, whether relating to qualifications or otherwise, that you would like to comment on, or anything that we haven't covered already?

I think, from our perspective, it's just about recognising the integral element that WJEC brings to the teaching of Welsh language and Welsh language qualifications across Wales. I think, from our written evidence, you can see where we're already involved in a broad range of activity with third party organisations, Canolfan Bedwyr and Bangor University, and those kinds of things that we're involved with, and I think we are intrinsically involved in some of the task-and-finish activity that's going on as well. So, I think what I would say is that, from our perspective, we've got a role to play in the Welsh-medium education system, we've got a role to play in Welsh-medium qualifications, and exploit us in order to help move the whole system forward. We want to be part of it; when it's happening, we'll be in there and we'll do whatever we can to support the system. That is intrinsically what we're about.

I've just got one thing further to add, which is really just to remind the committee that qualifications can only do so much; they're a measure of attainment. Actually, what we're trying to do is understand what the output looks like through the education system. The important thing, I think, to further the Bill will be the inputs that learners require. So, that is around having an appropriate curriculum, and that's where the CEFR can help in terms of relating the curriculum to specific measures, it's around having the resources, it's around having the teachers, it's around having the time and other resources that they need to be able to deliver. So, we can only play one role, which is measuring the output of the system, and it's all of those input measures that I think are the things that, at a system level, are really needed to deliver the Bill successfully.

Thank you very much.

Any further questions? No. Okay. Thank you so much for joining us this morning. We really appreciate your time. You will have a transcript of the meeting sent to you in due course. Thank you, again.

Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you.

I will now move on to item 6, which is papers to note. Full details of the papers are set out on the agenda and in the paper pack. Are Members content to note the papers together? Yes. Thank you.

Moving on to item 7, I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(ix), that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting. Are Members content? Yes. We will now proceed in private.