We move on now to a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Education on the update on GCSE early entry, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to make the statement. Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, acting Presiding Officer. The independent regulator, Qualifications Wales, yesterday presented us with clear recommendations on the issue of early entry for GCSEs. They engaged widely with teaching professionals in the course of their work and have come to firm conclusions. I’d like to take this opportunity to thank them for their report and considerations. I would also like to thank the many teaching professionals who supported this work, and the many teachers, parents and pupils who have contacted me on this issue. I have taken time over recent months to consider that input and available options in advance of sight of Qualifications Wales’s report so that I may respond swiftly today.

As Cabinet Secretary, I see raising standards, reducing the attainment gap and ensuring a system in which the public can have confidence as at the heart of our national mission. The best interests of learners have been at the forefront of my thinking on this specific issue of early and multiple entries for GCSEs. I stated in the summer that the trend towards increased use of early entry is unsustainable, including for year 10, when most learners will only have covered half the course. My views on this have not changed. Last summer we saw 43,000 year 10 learners entered for English and Welsh language GCSEs and the two maths GCSEs, with some applying the approach across the entire cohort of learners.

It is clear that far too many pupils in Wales are not being allowed to reach their full potential. Nearly 9,500 pupils took maths numeracy GCSE early in November 2016 and got a grade A or less but were not then re-entered for the examination last summer. Of those pupils, 30 per cent achieved a grade C. This is simply settling, rather than challenging, and it is holding some of our young people back. Qualifications Wales have also calculated the cost at over £3.3 million for early entry last year, and that is unsustainable, particularly at a time when school budgets are so pressured.

Members will recall my statement on 24 May on assessment for learning, which focused on increasing teacher skills on formative assessment. Qualifications Wales highlights the inappropriate use of GCSE assessments for formative purposes. Put simply, the GCSEs are not designed for this. Schools should have the means to assess learner progress and shape ongoing teaching and learning without the reliance on high-stakes, high-cost, external GCSEs.

Qualifications Wales’s report highlights the complexity and the diversity of opinion on the issue of early entry. There is no single approach that is suitable for all, and I have always accepted that early entry could benefit some learners in certain circumstances, such as those ready to demonstrate fuller understanding and who wish to engage in further learning in the subject, and it must be used within the context of a broad and balanced curriculum.

Motivation impacts at the individual learner level, with the report showing a diversity of views from teachers. There are real issues on teaching time being taken out to prepare for high-stakes GCSEs. There is evidence of increased teacher and learner workloads, and an increased assessment burden, and increased potential for learner examination fatigue. Qualifications Wales’s findings are clear: they consider that the widespread use of early entry poses a significant risk to learners and to our examination system. That is not outweighed by potential benefits. So, we need to act to discourage inappropriate GCSE entry patterns.

I have accepted Qualifications Wales’s clear recommendation to change key stage 4 performance measures to a ‘first entry only counts’ approach. This will encourage schools to enter learners when they are confident that they are ready to gain the best possible results. It will not prevent schools from entering early, or entering again should they, or a learner, wish to improve results, but the resit results will not count towards the school’s performance measure, even when the result is higher. Let me be absolutely clear, acting Presiding Officer: our young people will be able to use their best result when accessing further learning or the world of work. The change only relates to how we will consider school performance. This will form part of the wider assessment and evaluation framework that will be published next year.

I have also accepted Qualifications Wales’s views that schools should be able to enter learners in November for the first time in English and Welsh language—something currently only available to them for the two mathematics GCSEs. This will provide schools with appropriate and flexible earlier entry options, should they feel it of benefit, particularly for those students who are at risk of disengagement or are ready to progress to further learning. I have listened to the schools’ concerns with regard to making changes half way through the academic year. I recognise that schools need time to plan their teaching, learning, and their approaches to GCSEs. Therefore, the changes to performance measures will take effect for the summer 2019 reporting. The freeing up of November first entry for English and Welsh language is a matter for the regulator, but I expect this to be available to schools in the next academic year. We will also publish revised guidance for schools on when early entry can benefit certain types of learners, and when it does not, to support their decision making going forward.

The changes I have announced form part of our transitional accountability arrangements and will help schools act in the best interests of the pupil and not perceived institutional self-interest. If we are always committed to putting the interests of the learner first, and ensuring they can reach their full potential, then we can be confident that we will raise standards and reduce the attainment gap.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement today and put on record my thanks for the work of Qualifications Wales in producing an excellent report? The report’s two simple but important recommendations—namely to count only the first grade awarded toward performance measures and lift the restriction on English and Welsh language resits in November—are ones that the Welsh Conservatives fully support. Whilst I welcome the statement today, I think that what we also need to be asking is why it’s taken so long to get to this point. I know that in other parts of the UK, this matter has been addressed for a number of years, and I would be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary can tell us why it’s taken so long to address this issue of inappropriate early entry when the problems have been apparent for some years. Perhaps the Cabinet Secretary can explain why this issue hasn’t been addressed before now. I appreciate that she has only been in post for 18 months, but maybe there has been a specific reason why this matter has not been addressed before now.

We are not talking about small numbers when it comes to pupils sitting GCSEs early. In 2016-17, nearly 19 per cent of all summer GCSE entries in Wales came from year 10s or younger. Of course, that number of early entries, combined with repeating the exam multiple times, generates significant extra costs for the taxpayer. One of the reports estimated it to be more than £3 million during the 2016-17 academic year. Had there been appropriate early-entry options, then that cash could have been spent on more teachers, teaching assistants, textbooks and other parts of the education system. In addition, the report points to an inconsistency in school budgets to fund for early entry, which has led in some cases to schools asking parents to fund resits of exams, which is clearly unfair. Given this, will the Cabinet Secretary tell us what she estimates the savings of more appropriate levels of early entry to be once the changes she’s announced today are implemented? And will she also look at the issue of parents being charged for resits by some schools, so that parents don’t find themselves in that situation in the future?

Entering pupils early for GCSEs has, arguably, been more for the benefit of the schools than for students in the majority of cases in Wales. As the Qualifications Wales report found, school performance measures are often seen as the driving force behind early entry. Schools use GCSE results for their secondary school performance regime, and that’s put enormous pressure on teachers to maintain or increase students achieving results between that A* to C threshold. Of course, what’s inevitably resulted from this practice is that schools are aiming for the lowest hanging fruit—C grades—rather than reaching for A*s, As and Bs. As a result, more able and talented pupils are missing out on the top grades that they would have achieved had they been entered at the appropriate time, having benefited from sufficient classroom time to develop their learning. I appreciate the Cabinet Secretary will be publishing revised guidance on early entry, but could she tell us how the Welsh Government will ensure that schools are only putting forward students for GCSEs who are properly prepared and have studied the whole curriculum? And can she also tell us when she will be in a position to publish this revised guidance?

Now, I accept from today’s statement that, in future, the resit result will not count towards the school’s performance. However, whilst schools will only take one result into account from early entry, my understanding is that pupils are required to disclose all their GCSE results on their UCAS application forms, not just their best results. Universities are more likely to take a student who took the exam once and achieved a C than the one who took the exam three times before managing to achieve a C, and that could result in fewer Welsh students attending more competitive Russell Group universities in the future. Therefore, will the Cabinet Secretary confirm that she will monitor university entry amongst early entrants and multiple entrants to measure the impact of this specific issue?

I think a concern that we have to note from this report too is the effect that preparing for early entry has had on teaching time. The worry is the impact on current lower year groups, who are finding their teachers have less time to prepare for lessons or to mark homework. This means that even before it comes to GCSEs, students in some cases aren’t being adequately prepared to move on to this next stage. Will the Cabinet Secretary confirm that she will review the impact of early entry on lower year groups? And perhaps she could tell us whether this impact will actually be reflected in the revised guidance she intends to issue in due course.

In her statement today, she also makes clear that the performance measures will take effect for summer 2019 reporting. But will the Cabinet Secretary agree to provide the Chamber with regular updates on their impact on early entry?

Therefore, in closing, acting Deputy Presiding Officer, can I thank the Cabinet Secretary once again for her statement this afternoon and once again put on record the Welsh Conservatives’ support for the recommendations made by Qualifications Wales?

Acting Presiding Officer, could I thank Paul Davies, who is double-jobbing once again as the Conservative education spokesperson? He really should be asking for a slice of the wages of his counterpart. But I genuinely thank him for his thoughtful analysis of the report that is before us.

The Member’s first question was: why have we decided to act now? Well, Paul, I can’t account for the decisions that others have made before me. This summer’s results were the first set of early entry results under my watch. You’ll be aware that I’ve been expressing concern since I became aware of the high levels of early entry. But, to be fair to my predecessors, if you look at the data in the report, this is a relatively new phenomenon over the last two years, and a lot of that, as is accounted for in the report, is driven by a nervousness around the new specification of GCSEs. Now, whatever the rights or wrongs of that, we can debate, but that’s been a driving factor behind some of the scores. So, although there has been a rising trend, over the last two years it has been particularly acute. But we’re acting now. I’m acting as quickly after the publication of the report as I can, but we do also have to give schools the time and opportunity to plan appropriately. It simply would not be fair to say that we’re going to use this new measure for reporting next year for the students who have already done exams. It simply wouldn’t be fair to the sector. So, this gives people the time to plan accordingly.

Paul is right that individual schools have used this practice to different effect, but there has undoubtedly been, in some schools, the pressure to do early entry because others are doing it, and they have felt that maybe their school would be put at a disadvantage if they don’t follow suit. I am also aware of some schools who do not do early entry because of the financial pressures rather than any other reason, and by having this rule across the board, it creates a parity for all schools in that regard, about how they will be assessed.

Can I make it absolutely clear? If there is a school in Wales that is thinking about asking parents to pay for resits, they need to think again. It is not acceptable, and I am aware that this is happening. Only yesterday, I had an e-mail from a grandfather whose granddaughter sat English this summer. She got a C at the end of Year 10. She and her family are very anxious that she should have another opportunity to do that English examination, and the school have asked for them to pay for the resit. Now, in that particular case, the grandfather says that he is in a position to help, but how many other children’s parents and grandparents will not be in that position? That is not a reflection of the values of the Welsh education system, where we are striving for excellence and equity.

The Member will be aware that a lot of this behaviour has been driven around accountability measures, and as I announced in my statement, and in the written statement I made two weeks ago with regard to school categorisation, we’re in a process of transitioning to a different set of accountability measures. But again, let me be clear: accountability is here to stay, and to be fair to the headteachers and teachers I meet, they know that, they understand that, and they want to be held accountable for their practice. We need to work with the profession to find a fair way in which we can create an accountability system that drives the kind of behaviours in schools that we want to see and, crucially, measures the impact that that school has on individual pupils, and not an accountability set of measures that perhaps narrows the focus onto a very small number of children in the cohort, which you have quite rightly identified as those on the C/D borderline, to the expense of other people within the system, whether that be lower attainers or the more able and talented.

I want to be in a position to have that new set of accountability measures in place by next year. The revised guidance to schools will be released later this year, but we will be communicating this change to all stakeholders—schools, challenge advisers, regional consortia and LEAs—and I would expect challenge advisers in regional consortia to have to be monitoring their individual schools’ performance and patterns around early entry. Let me be clear: we’re not stopping early entry, but it does have to be taken in the best interests of individual children, for them to be sitting their exams at a time that is right for them and gives them the best opportunity to achieve the very highest grades that they are capable of.

May I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement this afternoon? May I also endorse the thanks to Qualifications Wales for their research, and for sharing the information with us beforehand?

It’s important that we don’t forget, in this debate, why this is happening, and we have to remind ourselves that this is happening because what the teachers want is the best for the pupils and the best for their schools, and there’s a risk that that is lost in this debate. That is why this situation has arisen, to all intents and purposes, but we shouldn’t doubt, and I’m sure we don’t doubt, the motives of teachers in insisting on the best for their pupils and the best for their schools. It’s also important, as the Cabinet Secretary has reminded us in her statement, that we recognise that there is value and importance in allowing the use of early entry GCSEs, and I welcome the fact that the Government is to provide specific guidance on that, because I do think that that will be of assistance—of great assistance, in fact.

As I said, I welcome the statement and I also welcome what the Government intends to do in light of the content of the statement. There is one question at the back of my mind, however, on the limited element of the research carried out by Qualifications Wales: 59 professionals in the education sector—heads of departments, headteachers and teachers and so on; no school governors, no parents, and most importantly, no consultation with the pupils and students themselves—the very people who are impacted most by this decision. Where is the voice of young people in this debate, and where is the voice of young people in this decision? I do think that it’s a weakness in the process if we haven’t been having discussions with the very people most affected by this. And Qualifications Wales themselves have said that, because of the limitations of this research, they have failed to undertake further research, which would provide them with additional sources of evidence in order to evaluate the statements made by teachers.

My first question to you, Cabinet Secretary, is: are you confident that you have all of the evidence necessary to make this decision? And how can we be certain that all voices impacted by this have been heard and have had an opportunity to express their views in the debate that has led to this decision? Because views are quite clearly polarised, in terms of the evidence gathered by Qualifications Wales. Some feel that they are strongly in favour of what’s happening, and others feel that it’s the wrong approach and this polarisation, to me, would insist that the evidence that we have is as robust as it possibly can be before we come to a decision.

Hoffwn ofyn ichi hefyd, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet: beth fyddech chi'n ei ddweud wrth y bobl hynny a fyddai o’r farn, yn ôl yr ymchwil eto gan Cymwysterau Cymru, na fyddai caniatáu dim ond y canlyniad cyntaf i gyfrif tuag at fesur perfformiad ysgol yn ei hanfod yn wahanol i dynnu'r dewis o gael cofrestru’n gynnar yn gyfan gwbl oherwydd y pwysau sydd wedi bod yn flaenorol, y byddai'r un pwysau'n digwydd eto, o ran dim ond cofrestru’r disgyblion ar ddiwedd y broses, pan fyddant yn cael y canlyniad gorau posibl? Mae hwnnw’n bryder sy’n cael ei fynegi yn yr ymchwil, a meddwl ydw i sut y byddech chi'n tawelu’r meddyliau hynny.

Yr amserlen y gwnaethoch ymhelaethu arni. Rydych yn dweud eich bod yn ymwybodol bod angen digon o amser ar ysgolion i addasu, ac rwy’n cytuno'n llwyr. Er hynny, mae Cymwysterau Cymru yn awgrymu y dylai Llywodraeth Cymru gynnal ei hasesiad effaith ei hun ar ba mor fuan i gyflwyno unrhyw newidiadau. Felly, meddwl ydw i a ydych chi wedi gwneud hynny, ac os ydych chi, a fydd hwnnw’n cael ei gyhoeddi gan y Llywodraeth. Rydych chi wedi sôn yn fyr am y goblygiadau cost, ac eto, rwy'n rhannu llawer o'ch pryderon. Ac er bod rhai pobl yn canolbwyntio ar arbed arian—ac, yn amlwg, mae hwnnw un o nifer o ffactorau—i mi, y brif flaenoriaeth, yn amlwg yw gwneud yr hyn sy'n iawn i'r disgybl. Nawr, mae'r amcangyfrif ceidwadol o £3.3 miliwn yn sylweddol iawn ar lefel ysgol a system o fewn addysg yng Nghymru. Rydych chi wedi mynegi'ch pryder ynghylch y posibilrwydd o rannu costau a'r effaith y bydd hynny’n ei chael ar degwch i fyfyrwyr unigol ac, yn amlwg, cynaliadwyedd hirdymor ysgolion. Ond fy nghwestiwn i chi yw hyn: os bydd hynny'n ymddangos, pa gamau fyddwch chi’n eu cymryd? Gallwch ddweud wrth bobl y dylent feddwl yn ofalus amdano—wel, oni ddylem ni fod yn gweithredu i sicrhau nad yw'n digwydd? Felly, efallai y gallech chi rannu gyda ni unrhyw feddyliau sydd gennych ynglŷn â hynny.

A wnewch chi ddweud wrthym ni beth yw eich bwriad o ran gwerthuso effaith y penderfyniad yr ydych chi'n ei gyhoeddi heddiw, a phryd yr ydych yn bwriadu gwneud hynny? Ac, wrth gwrs, o ystyried y cwricwlwm newydd, diwygio'r cwricwlwm, sut mae'r Llywodraeth yn asesu'r angen am ddiwygio’n ehangach y modd y mae perfformiad ysgol yn cael ei fesur, a pha effaith yn benodol y bydd hyn yn ei chael, neu y bydd y newidiadau hyn yn ei chael, o fewn y broses ehangach honno? Diolch.

Can I thank Llyr Gruffydd for his statement and questions? It was, ‘We agree that you’re doing this, but—’, I suspect, trying to hedge his bets maybe with regard—. I’m not in a position to hedge my bets. I have to make a decision, and I have made that decision in the best interests, I believe, of the examination system as a whole, so that we can have public confidence and employer confidence in our system, and in a way that I believe will be in the best interests of individual children. I have a huge amount of confidence in Qualifications Wales. There was cross-party support for the establishment of an independent regulator of the Welsh exam system, after the debacle a few years ago, which you will be very familiar with. And therefore, it’s only right that when the independent regulator of our exam system writes a report, makes recommendations, they are taken very seriously indeed.

But you’re right, Qualifications Wales themselves admit in the report that their research is limited, and that’s why I will commission further research around this particular area, which will help guide our guidance going forward, about when early entry is appropriate. And I would state again, for some children, early entry is the right decision. For those children, for instance, who may be in danger of disengaging from school, and not simply being in school by June of year 11, the ability to sit maths and English in November may very well be the right one. For children, for instance, who are particularly talented in the field of mathematics, an early entry, thus allowing them to go on to study for further maths, may be indeed the right decision. But let me tell you, even looking at those achieving good grades in maths, a sizeable number of those children do not go on to study maths again in their school career at a higher level. And that’s a missed opportunity—it really, really is.

Can I be absolutely clear, for those people who said that it said in the report that, by changing the school accountability measure, we are essentially banning early entry—we are not banning early entry? If the school believes it is in the best interests of the pupil—and, as you said, surely then that is the same as being in the best interests of the school—schools have the flexibility to enter students when they feel it appropriate. All that is changing is how we include this in our accountability measures.

And the Member asked the question: how does this feed into a broader reform of accountability? The Member will be aware of my written statement, earlier this term, as part of our transitional arrangements; this statement today is another part of that transitional arrangement. And I know that he is an avid reader of ‘Education Wales: Our national mission’, which states very clearly that, by next year, we will have agreed with the sector a new set of school accountability measures, and this time next year, we will also have agreed an entire system set of accountability measures, and I intend to publish a report card on Welsh education.

So, this is not just about changing accountability for schools, it is about developing an accountability system for the whole of the education system, and the timetable is outlined in ‘national mission’.

With regard to cost sharing, this is a grave concern to me. As I said in answer to Paul Davies, I pride myself, and the vision contained within ‘national mission’ is a system that is based on the two principles of equity and excellence. And we cannot have equity if some people get to have multiple goes at exams because their parents are able to pay for that. And I will use all powers that I have, and all methods under my persuasion, to ensure that that does not happen in Welsh schools. I cannot be clearer than that, Llyr.

I’d like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for your statement today. And as a former secondary schoolteacher myself, I wholeheartedly agree that this is a complex issue, and there is no single approach to GCSE entry that is suitable for all. We must ensure pupils are given time to reach their full potential, not entered early, and encouraged to bank a lower grade than they may be able to achieve in the fullness of their two-year studies.

I recognise the issue of exam fatigue too. Pupils sitting various GCSE modules throughout the course of year 10 and year 11 can increase stress levels among many. I also recognise the issue of teachers at key stage 4 constantly teaching to the test. I agree that these reforms will give teachers the time and space they need to deliver a broad and balanced curriculum.

But, Cabinet Secretary, you stated early entry can be very beneficial for our most able pupils, allowing them to spread the workload involved in their studies, and get some qualifications under their belt early, before moving on to focus on others. I am pleased that schools will be encouraged to create approaches that are tailored to the individual, but my question is: how will this be monitored? It also ties in with Estyn advice that we do need to do more to push our most able pupils in Wales. So, how will the Welsh Government make sure that those who could get a good grade early aren’t discouraged by schools fearing that their failure in early entry could impact on the school’s performance or the school’s budget?

I’m always very nervous when Vikki gets up to ask questions having been a recent practitioner, but Vikki will know that one of the unintended consequences of early entry can be—and it’s alluded to in the report—a narrowing of the curriculum, so that all the lessons become about is getting that child through an exam. Now, don’t get me wrong, exams are crucially important, but education is about more than that and we need to ensure that all our children have access to the broad and balanced curriculum that is underpinned by law in this country. We also know, and this was alluded to by Paul Davies, that, again, another unintended consequence and the impact of early entry is lost teaching time. That can be in the issue of pupils lower down the school, whose teachers are displaced to get children ready for a continuous set of external exams, or it can be at the expense of subjects not English, Welsh or maths. And as a history teacher, I’m sure Vikki might have been aware of that, where certain subjects are regarded, perhaps, as less important and lesson time for those subjects gets squeezed. Again, that’s an unintended consequence of some of these practices, which I hope these changes today will alleviate.

I have asked Estyn to look at how schools have approached the implementation of the new GCSEs and how they have coped with that change. The report acknowledges that those changes to GCSEs has been one of the main drivers for such a large increase in early entry and we will be reflecting on that. We will continue to ask our challenge and review advisers, as part of the consortia who are our school improvement arm and muscle, to review this when they meet with their individual schools about what decisions and what choices schools are making with regard to how they apply early entry. I hope to be making an announcement on specific additional support for MAT later on.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. I commend Qualifications Wales for conducting this research and for publishing the report. I also agree with the sentiments you express in your statement, Cabinet Secretary. It is interesting to note that the report comments that there has been no substantive research into the views of professionals on early and multiple entry for examinations. Can the Cabinet Secretary please explain why this is? The Labour Party, which has been in control of the Welsh education system for 20 years now in one way or another, is supposedly plugged into the unions, so why do you think it’s only now, thanks to Qualifications Wales, that the opinions of educational professionals have been sought on the issue? The report also mentions that Welsh Government’s guidance on early and multiple entry was greeted far from enthusiastically by some of the teaching profession. So, where was the Welsh Government’s understanding of the issue when they produced that guidance? There appears to have been a serious and long-term breakdown in communication between the teaching unions and the Labour Party, I’d suggest.

I’m pleased that you’ve decided to implement the two recommendations made by the report. However, it’s disappointing that were it not for this report, you wouldn’t have any suggestions for dealing with the problem and that is something that concerns me and should concern every parent of school-age children in Wales. Apart from implementing the two recommendations made in the report, what are you doing to tackle the root cause of the problem, which is not necessarily schools entering the students for exams early, but the excessive stresses and pressures they’re trying to avoid by doing so?

So, whilst I welcome these ideas that have come from Qualifications Wales, they clearly only deal with the symptoms of an underlying and undeniable illness in the Welsh education system, not the root cause itself, which is a lack of vision sadly matched by a lack of analysis and planning by the Welsh Government. Qualifications Wales have confirmed that some schools are taking action on not putting the educational interests of our children first despite obviously not wanting to. They’re being forced by Government to do so. I wonder if you agree with me, Cabinet Secretary, that it is a damning indictment on this Government that they have brought about an education system that does not have the education of Welsh children as its top priority. What would the Lib Dems have done differently, or is your party happy with a Labour perspective that makes a school more worried about its reputation on paper than the life chances it bestows on its pupils? Thank you.

Can I just very briefly say, acting Presiding Officer, that I enjoy a very challenging but productive relationship with the trade unions and that is how it should be? They have things they say to me that I agree with and I have things that I say to them that they disagree with, but we will move the education system forward in partnership.

The Member says that we have no vision for education. I would refer her to the very statement that she asked me questions about just two weeks ago. ‘Education in Wales: Our national mission’ has been widely welcomed by those in the sector and sets out very clearly this Welsh Government’s vision for our education system.

What is clear from this report is that there have been some unintended consequences around flexibility for early entry. I, at the earliest opportunity, on the evidence provided by the independent regulator of our exam system, am making a decision and making that call, and I am very pleased to do so.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement and welcome her references, which are not surprising, to the importance of closing the attainment gap and the focus on inappropriate early entry. Because of course, for many pupils, those whose improved performance is essential to closing the attainment gap, early entry is the right option. The ability, in the context of a standalone study and entry opportunity, to focus on that qualification and benefit from more intensive support can be very important for particular students to gain the best possible result, which is important in its own terms, but also in terms of giving them a boost to their academic confidence to continue staying on in education. So, I welcome the fact that she will be bringing forward guidance on when early entry is appropriate for some students. I wonder if she could share what her reflections are on how schools that make judgments in accordance with that guidance, in the best interest of individual pupils, will not be penalised for having done so through revised performance measures.

Thank you, Jeremy. It is clear to me from my time in office that accountability measures and how we judge individual schools is key then to the behaviours that we see exhibited within those schools, which is only to be expected and only reasonable. But the current accountability measures only get us so far, and I think it is acknowledged, across the sector, now is the time to look again at how and what constitutes performance measures for individual schools. As I said, we are transitioning away from the old way of doing it to a new system that will be announced next year.

Key to my consideration in that is recognising the concept of progress within a school. Because, for some students, a C is a success story and demonstrates the hard work and commitment of the teaching profession. However, if a student came into your high school predicted from their abilities at the end of year 6 to be somebody who has the potential to go on and get an A*, then a C is clearly a disappointing result. We need to come up with an accountability system that recognises the impact that schools have on the progress of the children they make, because each child is an individual and each child’s set of results will be very reflective of their own innate capabilities. We need an accountability system that recognises the impact of schools and recognises that success looks very different for very different individuals. A simple one-size-fits-all or an entire-cohort approach, which is what we’ve seen sometimes with early entry, does not serve the best interests of individual pupils. We are working very hard to be in a position to make that available before the end of next summer.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.