topic_shift
bool 2
classes | utterance
stringlengths 1
7.9k
| session_id
stringlengths 7
14
|
|---|---|---|
false | Yeah. Yeah. | QMSum_78 |
false | But it seems like if we just wanna get something to work , | QMSum_78 |
false | Yeah. | QMSum_78 |
false | Yeah. | QMSum_78 |
false | that , uh , their suggestion of of Th - they were suggesting going to Markov models , uh , but in addition there 's an expansion of what Javier did. And one of those things , looking at the statistical component , | QMSum_78 |
false | One. | QMSum_78 |
false | Yeah. | QMSum_78 |
false | even if the features that you give it are maybe not ideal for it , it 's just sort of this general filter bank | QMSum_78 |
false | Yeah. | QMSum_78 |
false | or or cepstrum or something , um Eee it 's in there somewhere probably. | QMSum_78 |
false | But , eh , what did you think about the possibility of using the Javier software ? Eh , I mean , the , uh the , uh the BIC criterion , the the t to train the the Gaussian , eh , using the the mark , eh , by hand , eh , eh , to distinguish be mmm , to train overlapping zone and speech zone. I mean , eh , I I I think that an interesting , eh , experiment , eh , could be , th eh , to prove that , mmm , if s we suppose that , eh , the the first step I mean , the the classifier what were the classifier from Javier or classifier from Thilo ? W What happen with the second step ? I I mean , what what happen with the , eh the , uh , clu the , uh the clu the clustering process ? | QMSum_78 |
false | Mm - hmm. | QMSum_78 |
false | Using the the Gaussian. | QMSum_78 |
false | You mean Javier 's ? | QMSum_78 |
false | Yeah. | QMSum_78 |
false | What do you mean ? | QMSum_78 |
false | I I mean , that is is enough is enough , eh , to work well , eh , to , eh , separate or to distinguish , eh , between overlapping zone and , eh , speaker zone ? Because th if if we if we , eh , nnn , develop an classifier and the second step doesn't work well , eh , we have another problem. | QMSum_78 |
false | I Yeah. I had tried doing it by hand at one point with a very short sample , | QMSum_78 |
false | and it worked pretty well , but I haven't worked with it a lot. So what I d I d I took a hand - segmented sample | QMSum_78 |
false | Nnn , yeah. | QMSum_78 |
false | and I added ten times the amount of numbers at random , | QMSum_78 |
false | Yeah. | QMSum_78 |
false | and it did pick out pretty good boundaries. | QMSum_78 |
false | Oh. Yeah. But is is if | QMSum_78 |
false | But this was just very anecdotal sort of thing. | QMSum_78 |
false | But it 's possible with my segmentation by hand that we have information about the the overlapping , | QMSum_78 |
false | Right. So if we if we fed the hand - segmentation to Javier 's and it doesn't work , then we know something 's wrong. | QMSum_78 |
false | uh Yeah. The N n Yeah. No. The demonstration by hand. Segmentation by hand I I I think is the fast experiment. | QMSum_78 |
false | Yeah. I think that 's probably worthwhile doing. | QMSum_78 |
false | Uh , we can prove that the | QMSum_78 |
false | Uh - huh. | QMSum_78 |
false | Whether it 'll work or not. | QMSum_78 |
false | this kind o emph emphasises parameter and Gaussian | QMSum_78 |
false | Yeah. | QMSum_78 |
false | Yeah. | QMSum_78 |
false | Yep. Y do you know where his software is ? Have you used it at all ? | QMSum_78 |
false | I yeah have. I have. | QMSum_78 |
false | OK. | QMSum_78 |
false | So. I I have as well , so if you need need help let me know. | QMSum_78 |
false | OK. | QMSum_78 |
false | Let 's read some digits. | QMSum_78 |
false | OK. uuh | QMSum_78 |
false | Mm - hmm. | QMSum_78 |
false | And we are | QMSum_78 |
false | Good morning, everyone, and welcome to this morning's Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence. Can I ask Members who are present if they wish to declare any interests? Okay, thank you. Item 2 this morning is our final evidence session for our inquiry into targeted funding to improve educational outcomes. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Cabinet Secretary for Education; Steve Davies, director of the education directorate; and Ruth Conway, deputy director, support for learners division. Welcome to all of you, and thank you for your attendance and also for the paper that you've provided in advance. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first questions are from Llyr Gruffydd. | QMSum_44 |
false | Bore da. I just want to start by asking some questions around the targeting of the pupil development grant because, clearly, we've had a lot of evidence around this apparent blurring of eligibility to an extent. I'm just wondering how comfortable you are that the money is being targeted appropriately because, clearly, it's being targeted more widely than just those eligible for free school meals, from some of the evidence we've had, but also that it seems to be predominantly focused on low-attaining frees—pupils who are eligible for free school meals. | QMSum_44 |
false | Thank you, Llyr. I think it's important to be absolutely clear that when it comes to individual interventions, those individual interventions should only be targeted at those children who are eligible for free school meals. But in some cases, schools may use their PDG funding to provide a universal intervention, but we would want to—in challenge advisers' discussions in schools—we'd want to have evidence that that universal intervention would have a disproportionate effect on the outcomes for children on free school meals. So, for instance, if I give you an example in your own region, Llyr: at Brynteg County Primary School in Wrexham, if you look at that primary school in Wrexham, their results for free-school-meal children at the end of their primary school period in school are equivalent to their non-free-school-meal counterparts. So, there is no differentiation in those results. One of the things that they've used their PDG for is to really focus on the concept of growth mindset in school. So, that's a universal thing that they've trained all the teachers in, but what we know is that that has a disproportionate effect on those children who are on free school meals. So, if you're familiar with the concept of a growth mindset, it's about really challenging learners to think that, 'I can do things. If sometimes I fail, I pick myself up, I'm more resilient.' Now, that has been, as I said, trained to all the teachers in the school—it's an ethos for the whole school—but we have seen that the impact on the free-school-meal children has been even greater, and now they're at the same level. So, that's the important distinction. Individual intervention per child has to be targeted at those children who are eligible for free school meals, but sometimes a school will employ a whole-school approach to train their staff, for instance, and that, then, has to demonstrate it has a disproportionate effect on free school meals. So, growth mindset; it may be attachment disorder training for staff, for instance, where we know it's of benefit to everybody, but will have particular benefits for that cohort of students. With regard to more able and talented, you know, Llyr, that this is an area of concern for me, generally, within the Welsh education system; that we've not been particularly good at identifying, supporting and driving attainment for those children. I'm absolutely clear that PDG needs to be used for those children who are eligible to drive potential, whatever the potential of that child is, including more able and talented. And again, I'll give you an example that has been seen as good practice in Pembrokeshire: a window on the world bus, again paid for by schools. I don't know if you're aware of it. | QMSum_44 |
false | We've heard about that. | QMSum_44 |
false | Oh, you've heard about it; well, it's a really good example the window on the world. And, again, that's very much targeted at raising aspirations and giving children who are more able and talented, who are eligible for PDG, those experiences, and to really push them. So, yes, I'm absolutely clear that PDG shouldn't just be seen to be getting individuals to the average. For those children who are more able and talented, it should be used to support them— | QMSum_44 |
false | And we all share those aspirations, I'm sure, and you pointed to examples of good practice, but of course, it's not universal, is it, so what I'm asking is: do you think that the guidance is sufficient as it is? Do you think that there's a great enough awareness of how the PDG should be used at the coalface? And also, are you confident that consortia and others have the measures in place to be able to demonstrate that it is being used properly? | QMSum_44 |
false | I think, if we look at what Estyn has said about PDG, it does actually recognise that the PDG is being used to push more able and talented children, but as always with the system, Llyr, it's whether we can be sure that that is strategic and that it's happening across all of our schools. So, you're— | QMSum_44 |
false | But not just in relation to more able and talented, I'm referring to the eligibility and the targeting. | QMSum_44 |
false | Oh, the eligibility. You'll be aware that, on the advice of Sir Alasdair, we have employed and appointed new PDG regional advisers, and I think their role is going to be absolutely crucial in spreading that good practice across the region, whether that's use of PDG for more able and talented, or ensuring that PDG is used in the appropriate way. So, that's there to provide strategic overall advice. And obviously, we have been very clear with regional challenge advisers, in the relationship and the conversations they're having with individual schools, that they're really challenging their schools about the use of PDG, not just in terms of targeting, but the programmes, what the money is being spent on, whether there is an evidence base for that and whether we are clear on impact. So, I think the new regional advisers are going to be crucial in enabling us to ensure more consistent practice across the regions. | QMSum_44 |
false | So, are you content that eligibility for free school meals is the best measure, really, of identifying which pupils to target? | QMSum_44 |
false | Llyr, in the absence of anything better. I'll be the first person to say that maybe it's not as absolutely focused, but in the absence of anything different to identify a proxy for need, I think it's probably the best that we've got at present. And we will continue to have discussions with local government about whether there are different ways. We have to be mindful. Some of the policy levers in this area are out of my hands, so if we look at the roll-out of universal credit, for instance, we've got officials working very hard at the moment to try and understand what universal credit is going to mean and where we are going to be able to identify relative need, going forward. We haven't had any additional resource as a result of this, but we're very mindful that, potentially, this has an impact, going forward. And, officials are working all of the time, I must say, in conjunction with the department in England, to understand their thinking in this area so that we are in a position to make some decisions about what a notional eligibility for free school meals will look like going forward, but before I make any decisions, I want to assure everybody that there will be a full public consultation on that. | QMSum_44 |
false | Okay. Finally for now, on this issue of once a year, in January, if you're eligible for free school meals, then you're in that group for that year. We've had some quite strong evidence about how difficult that makes longer term planning for a number of schools and we've also been pointed in the direction of what's happened in England with the Ever 6, and I'm just wondering whether you're giving any thought to maybe changing that a little bit. | QMSum_44 |
false | Well, we're certainly giving thought to flexibility. In conversations with Alasdair, who is our independent adviser on this agenda, and individual schools, we're actively giving thought to greater flexibility and maybe longer term projections, so that schools know, for a number of years ahead, what their allocation will be. There are advantages to that system, because you could give that flexibility, you could give that long-term approach, but then, how do you make that responsive if a school suddenly has more children? We do know that, actually, the number of free-school-meal pupils is dropping. But there can be changes, you know, regional working in areas of north Wales in tourism, or maybe in other areas at Christmas time, parents are able to get a period of work. So, how can we create a more flexible system? We're actively looking at that at the moment. I wouldn't use it as an Ever 6 concept, but as an 'Ever 2' concept. We have looked at Ever 6, and I'm going to be absolutely blunt with you: to introduce an Ever 6 concept for Wales would mean in the region of identifying an additional £40 million. I'm going to be absolutely straight and blunt with you: we're not in a position at the moment to be able to identify an additional £40 million to introduce an Ever 6. But issues around flexibility, certainly, are actively under consideration. In fact, we'll be having a discussion later on today about decisions, going forward, for the next two years. | QMSum_44 |
false | Thank you. | QMSum_44 |
false | Darren on this. | QMSum_44 |
false | It's just a very brief point in response to the £40 million price ticket that you just put on that. That's, of course, assuming that you maintain the current level of PDG, yes? So, if you reduced the level of PDG slightly, but made it available to more individuals, if you like, via allocating it in a different way, then that £40 million price ticket wouldn't be there, would it? | QMSum_44 |
false | I was asked a question about had I ever considered an Ever 6. We have looked at that, we've priced that up. I have to make decisions in the envelope of resources that are available to me. We could, indeed, change the way in which we allocate PDG money, but we have to do it within the envelope that is available to me, over £90 million. That's a significant level of investment, but, of course, as always, Darren, we could cut the amount per pupil, but that might have quite challenging swings in allocations. What we have done—because what I am clear on is that there was evidence to suggest that in the secondary sector, a great deal of PDG was being focused on years 10 and 11, especially year 11, in catch-up provision, and you'll be aware, because we've said this in evidence to the committee in the papers, we've set a challenge to secondary schools to say, 'Actually, the majority of your PDG allocation has to be used in key stage 3.' Now, we have to balance the needs, the moral hazard of turning round to children in years 10 and 11 and saying, 'We're not going to provide catch-up opportunities for you,' because, clearly, those children need that support. But the evidence and the advice that we're receiving is: actually, strong focus on early years, primary and key stage 3, if we get that right, should negate the need for spending money on catch-up at years 10 and 11. That's why we, in our advice to local authorities and schools, say that we want to see evidence that they're spending this money earlier on in a child's career, rather than just a scramble at year 11 to say, 'Right, we've got to get you through your exams.' | QMSum_44 |
false | Okay, but have you actively considered, then, reducing the level you have? | QMSum_44 |
false | We've— | QMSum_44 |
false | Sorry—I was just going to say that one of the things is looking at the scope of the definition, and I think it's about being more flexible with the definition, rather than reducing the amount per head. | QMSum_44 |
false | Okay. Thank you. | QMSum_44 |
true | Thank you. If we can go on, then, to talk about some of the practical uses of the PDG, you write in your written paper that 'the majority of schools are making well thought out and appropriate decisions' on how to use it. But Estyn reported that only two thirds of primary and secondary schools make effective use of the PDG. Given that we've had it now for six years, would you not have expected there to be a higher level of schools actually making good use of that funding? | QMSum_44 |
false | Well, to flip it on its head, the vast majority of schools, as identified by Estyn, are using this money to good effect. So, that's the way I like to see it—that the vast majority of schools are doing well. What Estyn has also indicated is the intrinsic link here to leadership within individual schools, and as you'll be aware, leadership, improving capacity in leadership and developing leadership talent in the Welsh education system is a key priority for me in our national mission. Of course, that's being developed in a different work stream. I think what's fair to say is that the use of PDG is evolving over time. I think we are seeing, increasingly, more and more schools understanding how best to deploy that money for best effect for students. So, if we're honest, when PDG first started, I think, in some schools it was spent on investing in tracking of children, because they'd never thought about tracking these children, they didn't have systems in place to look at the performance of these children, and to have a system in place. So we've moved now from spending money on the infrastructure around support for FSM children into actual inputs in terms of teaching and learning. We're also seeing from Estyn that, actually, in terms of money following the evidence of what we know works, Estyn says that PDG is probably the best example of schools following tried and tested and evidence-based interventions to deploy the money. But clearly we want all of this money to be deployed as well as it can be, and again we come back to the decision I've made to appoint regional PDG advisers so that we can get that better consistency of approach. We are, in the discussions that I have with the regional consortia about how they challenge individual schools on usage, looking for very clear evidence of schools using the Sutton Trust toolkit, and we could have a discussion about whether that's the right thing, because that's on my mind too. But we want to see schools demonstrating their evidence base, and if they're not, if a school isn't doing that, okay, so demonstrate to us why you've made those decisions and, crucially, what are you doing as the school to judge whether that decision is actually making a difference for your individual pupils. So, if you're moving away from tried and tested interventions, what we know works, if you're doing something different with your money, okay, you need to justify that and you need to explain how you're going to demonstrate impact. But I think what we're seeing is increasing good practice in this area as the PDG develops and as our understanding of our school-to-school working in our self-improving school system also develops. I think we're seeing better usage of the money year on year. | QMSum_44 |
false | Thank you. Llyr on this. | QMSum_44 |
false | You mentioned some schools will be moving from the tried-and-tested interventions, really, and I'm just wondering to what extent that evolution of use of PDG is being driven by cuts to core funding. | QMSum_44 |
false | No, I don't think it's being driven by cuts to core funding. I think there has been—. One of the biggest impacts of PDG has not been—well, I suppose it is the money in itself, because the money has concentrated the minds, hasn't it? So, one of the most important things that PDG has done is highlight the importance of this agenda within schools, and really raise this up in the thinking of leadership and senior management teams in our schools, and has driven a focus on scrutiny and accountability in the systems that are working with our schools. I think the changing use of PDG reflects the journeys that schools have been on, some of them from a very low base where this was not a priority for them, to better understanding, and as research and as intelligence grows over time in this area, both in Wales and outside of Wales, schools are increasingly learning to use that evidence to tailor approaches in their schools. | QMSum_44 |
false | So you wouldn't accept at all that some of this money's being used to paper over some funding cracks from elsewhere. Because the unions and some others have told us that, whether we like it or not, there is some of that going on. | QMSum_44 |
false | As I said, Llyr, we're very clear about the usage that this money can be spent on in terms of individuals or universal application within schools, and that forms an important part of the checks and balances that we have in our system. Can we continue to improve, and ensure that more and more of our schools are employing best practice? Yes, we can, and as I've said, we've taken steps to put in place the infrastructure to support that. | QMSum_44 |
false | Thank you. Mark's questions are next. | QMSum_44 |
false | Cabinet Secretary, how would you assess the impact of PDG on attendance and hopefully subsequent engagement with education from children who have free school meals? | QMSum_44 |
false | I think what's important to note is that, as Estyn have themselves said, over the period of the last inspection report, we have seen improvements in attendance, but I do think we need to, again, look at how PDG can support this particular agenda. And as always in the Welsh education system, there are some excellent examples of how schools use the money to address this. Ysgol y Preseli in Pembrokeshire is a very good example of how they've deployed their money. Forgive me; I can't off the top of my head remember the name of the primary school I visited, again in north Wales, where the school has proactively used this money, and they actually send teaching assistants out of school in the morning before the start of the school day, and they actually have a walking bus. They call at homes for children, and they walk the children to the breakfast club. So, they're proactively going out into the community and making sure that those children are in the classrooms, because the teacher said, 'We recognised we had a problem with attendance. We tried a variety of means of improving that, but in the end we have taken this quite bold step—we actually send the staff out and they create that walking bus, and they walk the children into school'. They say that they know that, for some of those children, because of the difficult circumstances they and their families are living in, they probably wouldn't be in school if it wasn't for that proactive approach. So, we're looking again at what more we can do to support this particular agenda in terms of improving attendance, because although, again, there are examples of good practice, there is still a gap between the attendance of free-school-meal pupils and non-free-school-meal pupils. And, of course, we can have the best curriculum in the world with really high-quality teaching, but unless the children are in the classes then we're not going to make the difference for them. Whilst that differential exists, then it's going to be hard to close the attainment gap for those children. | QMSum_44 |
false | I was actually quite shocked just reading in advance of this meeting that the proportion attending 95 per cent or more, who have pretty full attendance, was only 35 per cent for free-school-meal children at level 4, compared to 60 per cent for non-free-school-meal pupils. It still is an extraordinary difference. My colleague here showed me, I think, last week, a graph showing the link between attendance and attainment, in particular. When people were absent, a lot of the—. As I'm sure you're aware, there's a huge connection. What more can PDG do to deal with it? In the example you give I can see how a school with an awful lot of free-school-meal children could do that, but a lot of the free-school-meal children are actually in schools that don't have that high a proportion of free school meals, where it would be much more challenging to bring in that type of initiative. | QMSum_44 |
false | Yes, indeed, and I think it gets more challenging the older the children get. I think it's more difficult to find interventions that are successful higher up, so key stage 4. So, you can do a walking bus with little ones, can't you, but I don't suppose your average 15 or 16-year-old is going to take very kindly to that. So, you do need a different approach to that. But again, we see in Ysgol y Preseli the employment of staff to directly work with families of older children to reinforce the messages around, as you quite rightly say, the linkage between attendance and attainment, and really work with individual families to understand the barriers to attendance: what's going on in the family that is preventing that child from going to school, and what more can the school do to address those situations. But you're absolutely right; there is more that we need to do to address this particular agenda of attainment. I don't know if there's anything extra you wanted to add, Steve. | QMSum_44 |
false | There is also another very good example—and I take what you say about where there are small numbers—but in our secondary schools where there are significant numbers, they're investing PDG in resources like a school nurse and a school counsellor, not just to work with the children but link to other agencies on whom the children and the families are dependent to support them in terms of working with schools. So, it's something, particularly in our most challenging areas, where it cannot just be delivered within the school. So, good use of that resource is being made to employ people to support them in those wider areas. | QMSum_44 |
false | Thank you. To what extent is PDG also used to seek to reduce the higher rates of exclusion for children entitled to free school meals? | QMSum_44 |
false | So, if we looked at permanent exclusions, there isn't a differential, but if we look at temporary exclusions, there we see there is a disproportionate number of children on free school meals that are subject to those exclusions. Again, I think what schools employing best practice understand is that you need a multi-agency approach to supporting that particular child. Some of those exclusions can be as a result of the need to address other issues going on in a child's life. So, this is where we come back to the committee's work, for instance, on mental health and support for children, support for behaviour in school. So, again, it's a multi-agency approach that I think we need, and, in our good schools, our really, really good schools, there's a recognition of that need to have a whole team around a child to support that child in education. With EOTAS, we made some changes last year regarding PDG for EOTAS. So, for those children who do find themselves in education other than at school, we are providing additional support that previously was not available. | QMSum_44 |
false | Thank you. | QMSum_44 |
false | Okay. We're going to move on now to talk about the impact of PDG on attainment. Hefin David has got some questions. | QMSum_44 |
false | It appears that the attainment gap at 2017 has actually widened, in spite of PDG levels. Is that correct? | QMSum_44 |
false | Yes. So, if you look at it—with the usual caveats about whether you can make direct comparisons on level 2 plus between the exams the year before and the exams that we had last summer—on the face of it, the gap has increased. I think what's important to recognise, Hefin, is a direction of travel. I'm sure we all want to, because I want to, have a discussion about why children on free school meals were less resilient in the exam system last year. But, if we look at the period that we have been employing PDG, over that period, we have seen a narrowing of the gap. I think what's quite stark, if we think about it—. So, if we look at where we started from: in 2009, one in five children on free school meals got level 2 plus—one in five—by 2016, we had got that down to one in three. Obviously, there's still a way to go, but, Sir Alasdair, who knows about these things, says that that is a significant improvement. Last year, we got some challenges. We need to understand why that happened, but I do think it's— | QMSum_44 |
false | Why, do you think? | QMSum_44 |
false | Why, do I think? What I do think is there is no one answer. There is no one answer to this. I think we could look at and we can have discussions around the move from BTEC to science GCSEs. I think we have supplied figures to the committee about the significant change in the number of children on free school meals who weren't doing a single science GCSE and are now doing science GCSEs. We can look at the unintended consequences of literature. Again, we've supplied figures. Where children have done language and literature, whether that be through the medium of English or through the medium of Welsh, there is more resilience. So, it's that exposure to literacy in all its forms that I think could potentially make a difference. So, I think there's no one answer to why free-school-meal children were not so resilient last year. We continue to have discussions with Qualifications Wales to get a better understanding of this. At my next ministerial policy board, in May, we'll be doing a deep dive into this particular subject. | QMSum_44 |
false | So, to what extent would exam boards be responsible for lack of grade stability? | QMSum_44 |
false | It could be one of the contributory factors. What I think is important is that there is no one, single reason why there seems to be less resilience in this cohort of children. | QMSum_44 |
false | Will you be speaking to the exam boards about this and raising concerns? | QMSum_44 |
false | I have written to Qualifications Wales, we've had discussions about it, but I've asked them to formally submit evidence ahead of my policy board for May, where, as I said, we will be doing a formal, deep-dive discussion across the department about these issues. But, again, Hefin, what we've got to be clear on is—while we look at overall factors, you know, our overall national statistic—we did see some schools last year whose FSM performance was better than it had been the year before. So, what was it in those schools that enabled those children to do really well, whereas, in other schools, the performance was different? Even in individual cities, you can see a huge variety of performance. So, take Cardiff and Swansea, our two biggest cities. You've got schools in those cities with comparative levels of free school meals. So, you could have really high-performing schools with a very small number of the cohort on free school meals. The difference between those performances in a single city—so, that's the same local education authority and the same regional consortium—you can see a massive change. There's one school I can talk to: their free-school-meal performance is 88 per cent. A similar school in the same city with the same proportion of children on free school meals, their performance is down in the 20 per cents. So, I think what's important is that we can't draw broad-brush conclusions. For me, the challenge is to go into individual schools and understand what was happening in that particular school that ensured that their children did really well. We've got one school in Swansea, their FSM performance at GCSE level 2 outperforms non-FSM pupils. | QMSum_44 |
false | But we still need to rely on the trends from a distance. If we take your argument that 2017 was an unusual year and the trends up to 2016 were positive, in a few years' time, when we will be looking back in two years' time, how are we going to measure this progress, say, in 2019? What are we likely to see and what methods are you going to use to measure progress that way? | QMSum_44 |
false | Well, you'll be aware that we are moving away from level 2 plus as a performance measure anyway because of the— | QMSum_44 |
false | So, what performance measures will you use? | QMSum_44 |
false | So, for the lack of sophistication around the level 2 plus, and for the unintended behaviours that that particular performance measure has driven within our schools. I'll be making a statement shortly to the Assembly around a new performance measure for schools. We were, at our most recent secondary heads conference, working with schools to develop that. What's important to me is that we have a more sophisticated model that looks at school performance for all children. What level 2 plus does is narrow, very much, the focus of schools on an individual part of the cohort, usually the C/D borderline, which is why then we have problems with the number of students getting a B grade or above. We have marked success in our schools by saying to schools that a C is good enough. Well, if a child gets a C but came to you in year 7 and they were destined to get an E, yes, indeed, a C is a success, because you've moved that child on; but, if that child came to you destined to get an A* and gets a C, then we haven't done a good job by that particular child. So, we need a performance measure that is much more sophisticated, looks at each individual child, tracks that progress, and measures the value added by that school in performance. | QMSum_44 |
false | Last question: therefore, should we have confidence in the data up to 2016? Is there a lack of confidence in that data? | QMSum_44 |
false | No, it's not a lack of confidence in the data. The data is the data. What I'm saying is, using that as a performance measure and an accountability measure within our school system may have been right for the time. I think it is now right to have a different way of measuring success in schools. I think that particular set of performance measures has driven certain behaviours—not because Ministers wanted that to happen, but as an unintended consequence. I think we can work together with our school system, learning the lessons of international best practice, to develop much more sophisticated accountability and performance measures for individual schools, and, I should say, for the Government. So, you will be aware of my intention to issue the first national report card on Government performance later on this year. So, this is not about trying to avoid scrutiny. It's about trying to develop a more sophisticated way, which is in line with our national mission, where every child's education is valued, and where the impact of the school can be tracked more effectively. | QMSum_44 |
false | Okay, thank you. Can I just ask, Cabinet Secretary, are you still holding on to your target of 37 per cent of free-school-meal pupils achieving the level 2 threshold? | QMSum_44 |
false | Well, we're moving away from the level 2 threshold. So, that's the first thing to say. So, we will want to develop a new suite, in line with our new accountability measures, as we go forward. So, we will be absolutely continuing to track and evaluate the performance of free-school-meal pupils. When we announce our new accountability measures, I will be in a position to address how we'll measure the Government's performance, and national performance, going forward. But, given the fact that we're moving away from level 2 plus, then we will need a different set of performance indicators. | QMSum_44 |
true | Okay, thank you. The next questions are on looked-after children and adopted children, and I've got questions from Michelle then Mark. | QMSum_44 |
false | Thank you. Good morning— | QMSum_44 |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.