Extract from Welsh Parliament: Questions to the Minister for Education and Welsh Language - Nov 10

Laura Anne Jones MS: Diolch, Llywydd. Afternoon, Minister. It almost seems like old news now, it's been so long since I've had the chance to question you at spokespersons' questions in the Chamber, but it comes of great concern to education providers and myself that the new curriculum will see the separation of GCSE, the separate sciences, and also the separation of English and English—. Sorry, it will see the separate sciences at GCSE merged, and English and English literature also merged. We have always realised in this Chamber the importance of science and the importance of encouraging people into science, as well as, obviously, highlighting the importance of people going into science for our future economy, for future jobs.

So, I was quite baffled when I heard this announcement, and, for me, it flies in the face of one of the four purposes of the new curriculum. The issue of conflating subjects is nothing less than to disregard the best of what's been thought and said over centuries. Biology is not chemistry, and English is not English literature. Minister, England will be keeping separate subjects, appreciating their value and importance. So, Minister, do you not see that this will inevitably now cause a brain drain of students who want to study medicine at Oxbridge, who will, obviously, need triple science GCSEs to maximise their chance of success? Is this really what we want to see happening? It's hard enough to recruit into the education sector without staff feeling that their subject is being dissolved or amalgamated.

I would love to hear your comments, Minister, on what impact you think that this move will have on the children of Wales—a move that's not supported by the majority of the education sector, including the union the Association of School and College Leaders Cymru, who highlighted that only 30 per cent of those involved in the original consultation exercise thought that this was a laudable or workable idea, but somehow it made it into the final report. So, Minister, why is it that the unions, professors at Swansea University and the Royal Society of Chemistry are wrong about the disastrous impact of this decision, and yet you and Qualifications Wales are right?

Jeremy Miles MS (Minister for Education and the Welsh Language): Well, I think it's important to approach this topic with a degree of moderation in some of the descriptions that we give, because it's a very important area for our learners. If the Member has had an opportunity to look at the Qualifications Wales report, 'Qualified for the Future', she will have seen there the case that Qualifications Wales makes for the reforms that they propose in both those areas, which, as she acknowledges, were both the subject of previous consultation. She will find in relation, for example, to the proposal to bring English literature and English language together that, if you look at the current entry figures in relation to English literature, the proposal could in fact, and is intended to, enable more learners to participate in English literature for longer in the curriculum. So, the argument that is made by Qualifications Wales is that that will extend the opportunity to more pupils than are currently having the opportunity to study English literature.

In relation to science and technology, I know that she supports the principle in the curriculum of making sure that our learners have a breadth of experience. And the intention, which again is laid out in the Qualifications Wales report, is to provide scope at GCSE for learners to study, to be qualified in a broader range of qualifications. And indeed, she'll know that the proposal in relation to a science award is for that to be, effectively, the value of two GCSEs, and to enable the links to be made in the way that we understand is important between the various sciences. She probably also knows that, currently, the most entries for science at GCSE is in fact the double science that currently exists. There is, however, clearly a range of opinions in relation to this, so I would encourage her and others to contribute to the consultation that is currently open; it's important that we hear those perspectives as well.