Wales Assembly statement on Valuing our Teachers—Investing in their Excellence - Nov 13

Through early engagement with the draft curriculum, pioneer schools have considered immediate professional learning implications, and it is clear that a national approach is needed as we rapidly move towards publication of the draft curriculum. The approach is centred on the learner and embodies the four purposes of the new curriculum. It is designed to be responsive to school, local and national priorities, and encompasses the individual learning journey of all practitioners. The new professional learning curriculum is based on the professional learning standards and exploits the benefits of a blend of approaches. The approach has been developed through a process of consultation and co-construction involving the OECD, the unions, universities, regional consortia, local authorities, school leaders, pioneer schools and many others. A range of research projects have been undertaken to provide an evidence base for the components of the approach and ensure overall coherence. I would also like to take this opportunity to recognise the work of the Children, Young People and Education Committee and their constructive challenge on professional learning in supporting the delivery of the curriculum. Last year’s committee report helped bring together valuable input and advice.

When the draft curriculum is launched in April 2019, we will further develop our understanding of the professional learning challenges associated with implementation in schools.  The investment that I'm announcing today gives us and the system the tools to do this successfully. Our own made-in-Wales approach to professional learning is a key point in our reform journey. It pulls together our new professional standards, the schools-as-learning-organisations approach and the professional learning model to create a vision fit for our evolving system.

The new approach will also include a focus on supporting teachers to better understand and improve mental health and well-being. We have listened carefully to the profession on this, and the work that was undertaken by the CYPE committee. In this spirit, I'm committed to making available significant additional funding and resources to support professional learning. In this financial year, we will make an additional £9 million available, and in the next financial year this will increase to £15 million. This means that, in total over the coming 18 months, we will provide an additional £24 million to support the implementation of the national approach. This is the single biggest investment in support for teachers in Wales since devolution. The money will go to the front line and will be targeted to create and release capacity at school and cluster level for structured, managed and resourced engagement with the professional learning needs of the new curriculum. We are expecting a profound transformation in the way our practitioners and leaders think about their professional learning in light of the new curriculum, and we need to provide support to schools to enable them to make this step change. 

This investment will enable teachers, leaders and others in school to take the time that they need to make changes and refine their practice. There will be flexibility as part of the funding, allowing schools to work together in ways that suit their own circumstances. It will support teachers to develop the skills needed for the new curriculum design and delivery, in line with the fundamental shift in approach required in the new curriculum. And it will support dedicated school and cluster-level professional learning coaches and leaders—a key recommendation from university and international research in this area.

Presiding Officer, our national approach to professional learning is fundamental to how we value our teachers and invest in their excellence. We are moving forward in our reform journey with clarity and confidence, giving our teachers the support and investment they need to ensure that they keep on raising standards across our education system. Diolch yn fawr.

You say that the approach to this new funding on supporting teacher development has been co-constructed with a number of interested parties, including local authorities. Were they aware of your intention to earmark this very welcome new funding for this purpose in the way that you have? And are you confident that this is what it'll be used for as soon as it gets to councils? I appreciate what you say, that this is for the front line, and, obviously, as Welsh Conservatives, we support any direct funding to schools, but I'm quite curious about how you'll monitor the use of this money when you—well, obviously, you know where local authorities are on this at the moment, and there is some public sympathy for the position that they're putting forward.

With regard to the specific amount of money, how did you conclude that succeeding in developing this new professional learning, to the level needed to be successful, was going to cost £24 million? Did you argue with the finance Cabinet Secretary that, actually, to get this absolutely right, you might need more, but this was all he was prepared to give you? Either way, actually, if the local authority is able—and, obviously, this is what I was after in my first question—to use some of this money slightly differently from the purpose for which you intended it, would that actually then diminish the availability of actual funds to provide the training that you think is needed in order to get the job done? I think one of the things we'd all be worried about is that, as a policy objective, this could become fragile and maybe even fail if the money that you've identified as being absolutely necessary doesn't get there.

My next question is: 'What's absolutely necessary?' The £24 million—obviously, the finance Cabinet Secretary said that for next year we're talking about £15 million. Another £9 million has appeared from somewhere, so I'd like you to tell us from where that £9 million has come. I'm not saying it's unwelcome, but with just five months to go before the end of the financial year, how do you expect that £9 million to be spent meaningfully, when any national approach is only anticipated as being rolled out, really, from next year? And moreover, the development of the professional learning offer—only £5.8 million was anticipated as being necessary to develop that. So, that's already developed, effectively, so where does that £9 million fit in? Is it for roll-out? And how would you do that in five months' time?

I heard from your statement that there are a range of research projects ongoing. Well, presumably, they're not going to be ready to inform how that £9 million is to be spent. Or is there something you really, really could bring forward into this year? Because if there is—and there may well be—that's obviously going to release £9 million at the other end of next year's budget. What do you anticipate spending that on? Who are the professional learning coaches and leaders that you're anticipating? I mean, are they available now, or is the anticipation that they would be stepping up and helping us roll out this good plan next year? Are the schools clear about who they would want to release, if you're able to bring a lot of this forward?

I just want to make it plain, really, that I'm asking these questions not to challenge your policy objective, but bearing in mind that local authorities have been clamouring for extra money, not least for their schools budget, how was the decision made that this £9 million, which has come from somewhere, goes for this very creditable and worthy objective at the same time when schools are saying, 'Actually, we can't afford to run our schools.' So, if you could help us and explain that, I would be very grateful. Certainly, the money is welcome, it's just the immediacy of the use of it that I'm curious to know more about.

Let me be absolutely clear about how the money will get to the front line. So, in this financial year, the money will be allocated to the regional consortia, who have been involved in the development of this programme and are confident that we can get those resources out to the front line. We're not starting from scratch. There is much evidence base already that has been undertaken, and our pioneer schools that are involved in professional learning have already been trying out some of these techniques. So, this is not a standing start. This is informed by practice that has already been undertaken in schools, and there are some wonderful examples that I can point to. For instance, King Henry VIII school in Abergavenny: a relatively new professional development pioneer, but working really, really hard, not only within their own school, but actually with surrounding cluster schools, to really look at what are the professional learning opportunities and needs if we're to get ready for the curriculum—very proactive in that. Romilly Primary School: again, another example where, already, the mapping has been done for individuals to identify what they feel they need to get ready to be ready for the new curriculum. But, clearly, some of this will have to be developed further when the details of the AoLEs are released in the spring of next year. That will shape our ongoing discussions about what's needed.

The money for next year will be a hypothecated grant to local authorities, which has to be spent on these purposes. Both with regard to money to consortia and to schools, we will be looking to ensure transparency in the method of allocation of the resources and also the monitoring of the funding. Now, there is always, is there not, a balancing act to be struck between creating huge amounts of bureaucracy, especially for individual schools, to account for money, and making sure the money is used for what it is intended for? Therefore, we will be working with regional consortia, who will be required to publish their spending plans for the money, and we will be monitoring the uptake of professional learning opportunities by professional group and by individual school. So, we will be expecting the collection of that data so that we can satisfy ourselves as to what use is being made of the money, but it's a balancing act between creating a bureaucratic nightmare for people and allowing the money to be used for the purposes that it's intended to be used for.

I don't have rows with my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Finance. It's not in my interest to have rows. I think you used the word 'arguments' with him. But he is aware that, if our curriculum is to be a success, then we have to invest in our teachers to enable them to do that. All the work that we have done on the curriculum will come to naught if our teachers are not in a position to implement that successfully on behalf of their students. The examples of sorts of things that schools will need to explore—we'll be looking at the implications of the new content, new approaches for planning and realising learning, new approaches to assessment of children's progress, developing the skills for school-level curriculum design—something that perhaps schools have not been quite so used to doing—developing collaborative arrangements for school-level curriculum from four to 19, so actually getting schools to work together in both the primary and the secondary phases to ensure that there is the pathway for individual learners. Implications of the AoLEs, for instance—we will have a new AoLE of health and well-being. That, in some ways, will be a challenge to the sector in this particular area, and that's why we need to make sure that our teachers are confident that they can make the most of the opportunity of having that new AoLE.

What do we expect the money to be used for? Well, we are confident that schools are in a position to map the learning needs of their teachers. We will expect them to use the money for releasing and covering staff time to be involved in collaborative work. Often that's really difficult. I think we had this conversation just the other week in committee about when budgets are tight, the ability to release staff for training disappears, and this now means that there will be dedicate resource to allow that to happen.

I'm very alive to and alert to the significant pressures on local government. You will have heard the First Minister's answers today about the Government continuing to look to see what more we can do to alleviate those pressures. I'm sure that, if the Government is in a position to do that, local authorities will want to prioritise spending on schools and to ensure that children in their local area get the best possible opportunities. But having done that, we need to make sure that those teachers in those classrooms have the skills and the training that they need. In responding to the committee's report, we're also responding to consistent calls from the unions to have this money in place, and I was delighted yesterday to see the very warm welcome the teaching unions gave to this announcement.

Before turning to one issue that's been discussed here on a number of occasions, namely supply teachers and their part in the process, I also want to touch on the issue Suzy raised on the £15 million, and whether it would have been better for that funding to go straight into the core budget, rather than being a specific grant.

Now, I sympathise with you, because I’ve just said that I do think that we need to invest in professional learning. But, of course, it is an exceptionally difficult period for our local authorities, and the WLGA have said that they would very much prefer to see that £15 million being spent on retaining posts—either 350 experienced teachers or over 600 teaching assistants—as would have been the case if this funding had been included within the core budget.
I do recognise your dilemma: you want to spend the money in the right place, but, on the other hand, it is a period of crisis and our schools need every penny to retain their experienced teachers. So, I would just ask you to consider and to dwell on that a little.

To turn specifically now to supply teachers, there are four times more private agencies for supply teachers now than there were just a few years ago, and there are concerns about pay and conditions and professional development for these teachers, with very many schools increasingly reliant on supply teachers to cover teacher absences. It’s crucial, therefore, that those supply teachers also get training and that their information about curriculum developments is up to date.

In a statement by you recently on the Government website, it was stated that professional learning will be available to all practitioners in schools, not just teachers, so I would like to know whether there will be provision for supply teachers too and how you’re going to ensure that that works.

The statement also says that funding will ensure that the changes are made in a way that will prioritise the welfare of teachers and will have as little a disruptive effect on pupil learning as possible, and that the funding will help to ensure that staff are released for professional learning too. So, can you expand on how that is going to happen? Is that inevitably going to lead to more reliance on supply teachers? So, on those specific points and your comments on the core budget against the grant. Thank you.

We can have a debate about the mechanisms by which this money will find its way to the frontline, but, as you've recognised yourselves, often the first thing to go is investment in staff and training. And, therefore, if we are to invest in our staff, I have made the decision that the only way that we can be absolutely sure that that will happen is via a hypothecated grant. I don't think it should be a binary choice either—that this is either about money for the RSG or money for professional learning. We need to do better than that, and I would also reiterate that the Government continues to look at what more it can do to support the RSG going forward.

But, Presiding Officer, Siân Gwenllian used the word 'crisis'. What I believe will be a crisis is if our new curriculum is introduced on a statutory basis in 2022 and our teachers are not in a position to deliver it. Now that, indeed, would be a crisis. And unless we prioritise this expenditure on support and professional learning, the new curriculum will not do what it needs to do. I think that indeed would be a crisis that we would find ourselves in. That's why I have made this decision to prioritise and make these resources specifically available to invest in our staff. As I said, it's been done in conjunction with our teaching union colleagues and they have welcomed this resource. 

You're also absolutely right to recognise that both teaching assistants and supply teachers have an equal right to access professional learning opportunities. They are much valued and valuable members of our education workforce and have a significant role in developing and delivering on education, on our national mission. Therefore, we will be, as part of the monitoring process, looking to consortia to report on the amount of training that is taken up and made available both to supply teachers, but also looking and giving schools flexibility on their ability to use their resources to support their teachers but also their teaching assistant staff. Some schools already do that; some schools say they're not in a position to do that. So, there will be flexibility for individual schools and clusters to make arrangements for both teaching staff and teaching assistant staff and we will be monitoring issues around supply.

I know issues around supply continue to be of concern to Members across this Chamber; they are of concern to me. That's why we continue with our work to look to enshrine better terms and conditions via our national procurement of these services and look to ensure access to professional training as a prerequisite to agencies working in this area. As I said, I'm under no illusions about the challenges facing the RSG, but, if we're serious about getting the profession ready for the new curriculum, and we are serious about the curriculum being successful, then we have to invest in our workforce and we have to do that now, at this point. It'll be too late if we wait for a couple of years' time, if and when the financial system may or may not be—the financial sector, financial atmosphere, may or may not be better. We have to take this opportunity right now. 

But, turning to your statement, I'm sure teachers and schools will be deeply, deeply grateful for the funds that you're announcing today—or rather that you pre-announced. I just wonder: is this an admission that you're seeking to change too much too quickly? Have you had to pledge this amount of funding because of the cost of supply teachers because you haven't sorted out an alternative to using agencies, which charge a fortune to schools? Was it always the plan to spend the huge sum of £24 million in this way? If so, why haven't you said so before—that is, when you announced the new curriculum?

You say it's to ensure that changes are made in a way that will prioritise the well-being of teachers and minimise disruption to pupils' learning. I don't object in principle to the allocation of the money. I think I've always said that, any measure that you introduce, whether it's the additional learning needs Bill or whatever, unless the resources are there to enable those changes to take place, it's not worth the paper it's written on. I'm just questioning why this is now coming up and why it hasn't been considered before, because surely you should have considered this when you first announced your plans to introduce all these curriculum changes, and surely you should have done an impact assessment on how much these changes were likely to cost the teaching profession to implement them.

In the Government written press release, you're quoted as saying that the money shows how highly we value teachers and professional learning, yet earlier it says it's to make the transition to the new curriculum as smooth as possible. But which is it? It seemed a little bit contradictory there. Is this a new opportunity for professional learning, as your quote suggests, or is it a response to panic that teachers will need hitherto unforeseen help in adapting to all the changes, as the rest of the article suggests? Is this new money, or is this money that will have to be found from the existing dwindling education budget that the Labour Government you're propping up has cut in real terms? If it's not new money, do you feel embarrassed that your changes are requiring money to be taken from other parts of the education system in order to help smooth the transition to the new curriculum because you're trying to make too many changes too quickly? Twenty-four million pounds is a lot of new teachers, a lot of new books—a few rural schools and local schools could avoid closure. So, I think we and the taxpayers deserve to know what is having less spent money—sorry, I'll start again—what is having less money spent on it in order to fund your latest announcement. And can you give us an itemised list of what will be getting less funding than anticipated as a result of this and what assessments you and the rest of the members of the Cabinet have made of the implications of those reductions? Thank you.

I have never, ever, ever said that we would not need to invest in the professional learning development of our teaching staff. I have never said that. I know better than anyone that, if we are to have the education system that I want for my children and, indeed, every child in Wales, it is a quality education workforce that will deliver it. Now, the Member says 'Why now?', and that is a legitimate question to ask. We're making this announcement now because the research has been done, the work has been done, to identify what professional learning opportunities and requirements are arising out of our curriculum changes. That's why it's important to make this announcement now, because we have the research—we've done the research with our universities, we have consulted with our teaching profession, we have looked at the impact of curriculum changes in other nations and what they have done to make sure that their curriculum reforms have been successful. That work is now completed, our pioneer schools have fed back, and we're in a position to ensure that that national approach is taken forward.

Now, Michelle Brown says, 'Do the public really want us to spend this money?' Well, I would argue— I would argue—[Interruption.] I would argue that the public do expect this Government to invest in the teachers up and down this country who stand in front of their children day in, day out, delivering not only the current curriculum but the future curriculum—a curriculum that, with the exception of UKIP, it has been acknowledged that we need here in Wales. And to give it its best chance of success and not to set our teachers up for failure, we need to invest in them. The Member says, 'Which is it? Is it an investment in our teaching staff or is it an investment in our curriculum?' Well, you can't have one without the other. This is about valuing our teaching profession; it is about saying that we will prioritise their learning and development. We will not just talk about it, we will fund it, and we will give them the very best chance of making the exciting new curriculum for Wales a reality for them, but, more importantly, a reality for our learners.

As you've highlighted, it is about the new curriculum, but it is also about investing in our workforce, who are our greatest asset. And I know that local government have been quite vocal about this funding, but I wonder if you'd take this opportunity to reiterate to me now that, although we desperately need more funding for local government, and I hope that will come, it is absolutely crucial that we have this protected resource to invest in our skilled teachers, especially as Estyn has consistently told us that teaching is the weakest aspect of the system. 

I had one further question, which was around what you've said about the funding contributing towards helping teachers with emotional and mental health. That also responds to the committee's 'Mind over matter' report, and I wondered if you could say just a little bit more about how you would anticipate that part of the money being spent.  

It has been necessary for me to hypothecate this funding to ensure that it is spent for these purposes. Without such hypothecation, I think there is a very real danger that this money would not be available for professional learning opportunities. I guess the WLGA press release confirms that—that they would not have prioritised that; they would have spent it not on less important things, but they would have spent it on different things. I will always continue in the Cabinet to look to maximise the resources going to the front line in education. As I said earlier, the Government continues to look to see what more can be done to support local authorities through the RSG, but it is absolutely crucial, if our education reforms are to be successful, that we invest in our teaching profession. 

Now, the Member will be aware that 'Successful Futures'—'Donaldson', as it is known—highlights, and I would quote, that

'Children and young people need to experience social, emotional and physical well-being to thrive and engage successfully with their education.'

And one of the four purposes of the new curriculum will be to support children and young people to become healthy, confident individuals, and those four purposes are, of course, at the heart of our new curriculum. So, we need to be in a position to ensure that teachers have that training to allow them to realise one of those purposes.

One of the 'what matters' of the health and well-being area of learning and experience will focus on mental and emotional health, and as I said in answer to questions earlier, one of the things that schools will need to address as they prepare for the new curriculum is how they will be able to interact with the AoLEs, and how they will be able to have confidence that their staff are in a position to deliver that. Given that that is such a fundamental part of that area of learning and experience, we would expect that schools—perhaps in the past, in some schools, they haven't had a great deal of attention on this area—would want to utilise some of this resource to be able to put themselves in a position to deliver on that AoLE, and on that 'what matters' statement. 

Of course, there will be greater clarity for everybody regarding the AoLEs when they are published in the spring of next year, and then that will help us guide our next set of professional learning opportunities.