3. Statement by the Minister for Education: Managing Workload and Reducing Bureaucracy

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 3:51 pm on 11 June 2019.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Suzy Davies Suzy Davies Conservative 3:51, 11 June 2019

Thank you very much, Minister. I'm sure, like everybody in this Chamber, actually, we come across teachers who still tell us that workload is one of the main issues for them and the update we've had today will help us understand and perhaps ask them whether they've had the kind of support that you've just been talking about in the schools in which they teach, because I suppose one of the things that you'd be interested in finding out as well is whether the steps that have been taken to improve workload have made their way to the chalkface, so to speak. 

We have, as we know, a teacher recruitment problem perhaps verging on the threshold of crisis now—not unique to Wales, of course, but particularly acute in certain parts of Wales, as evidenced by difficulties we have with meeting the demand for supply teachers in certain parts of Wales. The Children, Young People and Education Committee certainly agreed with you in 2017 that workload was affecting the potential to teach to good standards, but also damaging the well-being of staff as well. That's why it recommended immediate work to establish the level that workload was a barrier to recruitment. 

Since then, of course, we've had the pay and conditions review as well, which you didn't mention in your statement, but I think it's pertinent to the general point. I'm a bit curious, though, why the managing workload and reducing bureaucracy group was only established in April this year and why it's only now that they've identified the need to carry out a sector-wide audit and to, if I understand this correctly, assess the impact of impact assessments. Do you wonder—? Well, perhaps I wonder whether the delay has extended the period during which teacher recruitment is a challenge. 

Just on the point of the school business manager pilot, that of course was one of the actions that had some attention at the time. I'm not 100 per cent sure quite when the first managers went into the schools, but perhaps you can give us some indication of the reporting back that you've had during that time, as requested by the Children, Young People and Education Committee. Can you also tell us how much of that £1.28 million cost, which was earmarked for this work, has been spent and how straightforward it's been, particularly in the current climate, to get the local authorities to share that cost, as of course that was part of the original intention? 

I've spoken to teachers in my region who speak really, really highly of Hwb—so much so that some of the private schools, as you know, are very willing to pay to have access to that service as well. But what can you tell us about some of the other resources you've mentioned in your statement and the take-up for that and perhaps who's paying for those as well? In particular, I've got some concerns about this one-page guidance issued by Estyn to help teachers understand how to reduce their workload. The pay review concluded that it had fallen on stony ground, with teachers still working up to 50 hours a week and high rates of teacher absence. 

I guess I'm asking how the findings of the 2018 pay review, or pay and conditions review, have adjusted your priorities for reducing workload and bureaucracy and are they mitigating that extra work that is now being undertaken by teachers to make up for the staff that schools are letting go as a result of schools' core budget allocations having shrunk so considerably in these last couple of years? Because it would be disappointing, I'm sure you'd agree, for progress to be made in reducing workload only for that then to have to be rolled back simply because the number of teachers in schools has diminished. 

Briefly, because supply teachers are a big player in helping to reduce workload—we probably need another statement on this, but if you can just give us an indication about the work that's going on to retain supply teachers to build capacity within the workforce, if you like. And then finally, perhaps related to that, the preparation for the new curriculum. New entrants, of course, will be trained in this from the beginning, but you found £9 million last year and £15 million this year to prepare the existing workforce for the future. With the shortages of supply cover and shortages of in-school capacity now and an existing heavy workload, how can you be sure that, even though you might have found the money, the teachers are finding the time to become Donaldson ready? And, if teachers are already leaving because of high workload, I don't think that £24 million will stop them leaving, and I'm wondering then how you can explain how that money could be used to help teachers stay in the system, because I don't think the connection's being made, by the teachers that I've spoken to anyway, at the moment. Thank you.