Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru The National Assembly for Wales Y Pwyllgor Plant, Pobl Ifanc ac Addysg The Children, Young People and Education Committee
Dydd Mercher, 7 Mai 2014 Wednesday, 7 May 2014
Cynnwys Contents Ethol Cadeirydd Dros Dro Election of Temporary Chair Cyflwyniad, Ymddiheuriadau a Dirprwyon Introductions, Apologies and Substitutions Craffu ar y Bil Cymwysterau Cymru cyn y Broses Ddeddfu: Sesiwn Dystiolaeth 1 Pre-legislative Scrutiny of the Qualifications (Wales) Bill: Evidence Session 1 Craffu ar y Bil Cymwysterau Cymru cyn y Broses Ddeddfu: Sesiwn Dystiolaeth 2 Pre-legislative Scrutiny of the Qualifications (Wales) Bill: Evidence Session 2 Craffu ar y Bil Cymwysterau Cymru cyn y Broses Ddeddfu: Sesiwn Dystiolaeth Pre-legislative Scrutiny of the Qualifications (Wales) Bill: Evidence Session 3 Papurau i’w Nodi Papers to Note
Cofnodir y trafodion hyn yn yr iaith y llefarwyd hwy ynddi yn y pwyllgor. Yn ogystal, cynhwysir trawsgrifiad o’r cyfieithu ar y pryd. These proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken in the committee. In addition, a transcription of the simultaneous interpretation is included.
Aelodau’r pwyllgor yn bresennol Committee members in attendance
Keith Davies	Llafur Labour
Suzy Davies	Ceidwadwyr Cymreig Welsh Conservatives
Rebecca Evans	Llafur Labour
Bethan Jenkins	Plaid Cymru The Party of Wales
Lynne Neagle	Llafur Labour
David Rees	Llafur Labour
Aled Roberts	Democratiaid Rhyddfrydol Cymru Welsh Liberal Democrats
Simon Thomas	Plaid Cymru The Party of Wales
Eraill yn bresennol Others in attendance
Huw Evans	Cyn-gadeirydd yr Adolygiad o Gymwysterau ar gyfer Pobl Ifanc 14 i 19 oed yng Nghymru Former Chair of the Review of Qualifications for 14 to 19-year-olds in Wales
Faith O’Brien	Cadeirydd Dros Dro Ffederasiwn Hyfforddiant Cenedlaethol Cymru , a Chyfarwyddwr ITEC Training Interim Chair of the National Training Federation Wales, and Director of ITEC Training
Gareth Pierce	Prif Weithredwr, CBAC Chief Executive, WJEC
Jeff Protheroe	Rheolwr Gweithrediadau, Ffederasiwn Hyfforddiant Cenedlaethol Cymru Operations Manager, National Training Federation Wales
Arwyn Watkins	Prif Swyddog Gweithredol Ffederasiwn Hyfforddiant Cenedlaethol Cymru, a Rheolwr Gyfarwyddwr Cambrian Training Company Ltd Chief Executive Officer of the National Training Federation Wales, and Managing Director of Cambrian Training Company Ltd
Swyddogion Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru yn bresennol National Assembly for Wales officials in attendance
Sarah Bartlett	Dirprwy Glerc Deputy Clerk
Michael Dauncey	Y Gwasanaeth Ymchwil Research Service
Gareth Rogers	Clerc Clerk

Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 09:30. The meeting began at 09:30.
Ethol Cadeirydd Dros Dro Election of Temporary Chair
[1] Mr Rogers: Good morning. The first item of business today is the election of a temporary Chair. I would like to invite nominations from committee members for a temporary Chair to be elected under Standing Order 17.22.
[2] Simon Thomas: I nominate David Rees.
[3] Mr Rogers: I see that there are no other nominations. I therefore declare David Rees elected.
Penodwyd David Rees yn Gadeirydd dros dro. David Rees was appointed temporary Chair.
Cyflwyniad, Ymddiheuriadau a Dirprwyon Introductions, Apologies and Substitutions
[4] David Rees: Thank you. I therefore welcome Members and the public to this morning’s session of the Children, Young People and Education Committee, where we will go into our pre-legislative scrutiny session of the qualifications (Wales) Bill. The meeting is bilingual, and headphones can be used for simultaneous translation from Welsh to English on channel 1 and for amplification on channel 0. We have received apologies from Angela Burns and Ann Jones and there are no substitutes, I am afraid.
09:31
Craffu ar y Bil Cymwysterau Cymru cyn y Broses Ddeddfu: Sesiwn Dystiolaeth 1 Pre-legislative Scrutiny of the Qualifications (Wales) Bill: Evidence Session 1
[5] David Rees: I welcome our first witness to today’s session, Mr Gareth Pierce, who is the chief executive of WJEC. Good morning to you, and welcome.
[6] Mr Pierce: Bore da. Good morning.
[7] David Rees: We have a series of questions and our timescale is such that we will go straight into those questions, if that is okay with you? I see that it is. We will start off with Simon Thomas.
[8] Simon Thomas: Diolch, Gadeirydd. Bore da. Os caf ofyn i chi yn gyntaf, o safbwynt CBAC, a yw’n glir i chi fel corff erbyn hyn beth yw’r model sy’n cael ei baratoi ar gyfer Cymwysterau Cymru, y rôl y bydd Cymwysterau Cymru yn ei chwarae, a’r dyletswyddau a fydd arni ac ati? A yw hynny’n glir i chi fel y prif gorff gwobrwyo yng Nghymru?	Simon Thomas: Thank you, Chair. Good morning. If I could ask you, first of all, from WJEC’s point of view, whether it is clear to you as a body the model that is being prepared for Qualifications Wales, the role that Qualifications Wales will play, and the duties upon it and so on? Is that clear to you as the main awarding body in Wales?
[9] Mr Pierce: Rwy’n credu bod rhannau o’r model yn weddol glir, ond mae rhannau, byddwn yn tybio, sydd angen tipyn o ddatblygu o ran syniadaeth.	Mr Pierce: I think that parts of the model are relatively clear, but there are parts, I would assume, that need a great deal more development in terms of their concept.
[10] Simon Thomas: Beth yw’r rhannau hynny?	Simon Thomas: Which parts are those?
[11] Mr Pierce: Rwy’n meddwl mai’r hyn sydd fwyaf clir yw’r rôl rheoleiddio. Yn amlwg, un pwynt mawr o drafodaeth dros y cwpwl o flynyddoedd diwethaf yw’r angen i symud y cyfrifoldeb rheoleiddio i fod yn annibynnol ar y Llywodraeth. Wrth gwrs, mae cyfrifoldeb rheoleiddio yn rhywbeth yr ydym yn gyfarwydd iawn ag ef eisoes yn y gyfundrefn tair gwlad, felly mae’r rhan honno o’r model yn eithaf dealladwy. Y pethau sy’n llai eglur, efallai, yw’r materion ynghylch cymwysterau a sut mae Cymru yn mynd i hybu a datblygu’r cymwysterau y mae arnom eu hangen, beth fydd rôl Cymwysterau Cymru yn hynny, a beth fydd rôl cyrff dyfarnu yn hynny, o ran cymwysterau cyffredinol a galwedigaethol. Rwy’n meddwl hefyd mai cwestiwn lle mae angen tipyn o drafodaeth yw’r rhyngwyneb rhwng y Llywodraeth a Chymwysterau Cymru a pha gyfrifoldebau polisi y bydd y Llywodraeth am eu cadw, yn arbennig o ran y cwricwlwm a materion lefel uchel o ran cymwysterau. Felly, ein barn ni yn CBAC yw bod llawer iawn o waith manwl i’w wneud ar y model, a bod hynny yn mynd i fod yn allweddol i lwyddiant Cymwysterau Cymru. Mae angen dealltwriaeth glir o rôl y corff newydd a rhyngwyneb gyda’r partneriaid allweddol eraill.	Mr Pierce: I think that what is clearest is the regulatory role. Obviously, one key point of discussion that has taken place over the past few years is the need to shift that regulatory responsibility to be independent of Government. Of course, regulatory responsibility is something that we are already very familiar with within the three country model, therefore that part of the model is quite well understood. Those things that are less clear perhaps are issues related to qualifications and how Wales is going to promote and develop the necessary qualifications, what will the role of Qualifications Wales be in that, and what will be the role of awarding bodies be in that in terms of general and vocational qualifications. I also think that a question that needs some discussion is the interface between Government and Qualifications Wales and what policy responsibilities will the Government wish to retain, particularly in terms of the curriculum and high level issues in terms of qualifications. So, our view in WJEC is that a great deal of detailed work needs to be done on the model, and that that is going to be crucial to the success of Qualifications Wales. A clear understanding is needed of the role of the new body and an interface with key partners.
[12] Simon Thomas: O’r hyn yr ydych wedi ei ddweud—bydd mwy o gwestiynau manylach ar rai o’r pethau hyn rwy’n siŵr—mae rheoleiddio yn eithaf clir achos mae’n eistedd y tu mewn i’r Llywodraeth beth bynnag; rydych yn gallu gweld hynny. Mae’r dyfarnu ei hunan yn niwlog ar hyn o bryd, yn ogystal â sicrhau’r ansawdd a gweld pwy sy’n gyfrifol am ansawdd—nid jest datblygu cymwysterau, ond sicrhau parhad y cymwysterau hynny, y modelau, a’r hyn rydym yn hen gyfarwydd ag ef erbyn hynny o ran amrywio o flwyddyn i flwyddyn ac ati. A yw’n glir lle mae hynny yn eistedd yn y model newydd?	Simon Thomas: From what you have said—there will be more detailed questions on some of these things I am sure—regulation is quite clear because it sits within the Government anyway; you can see that. The awarding itself is quite cloudy at present, as well as the quality assurance and who has responsibility for quality—not just developing qualifications but ensuring the continuation of those qualifications, the modelling, and what we are quite used to by now regarding the variation from year to year. Is it clear where that sits within the new model?
[13] Mr Pierce: Nac ydy, nid wyf yn credu ei fod yn glir hyd yma. Mae’r ddwy thema hynny—dyfarnu a rheoli ansawdd—yn ddwy thema fawr, ac felly mae cwestiwn o ran pa rôl a fydd gan Gymwysterau Cymru yn y ddwy thema hynny. Er enghraifft—	Mr Pierce: No, I do not think it is to date. Both those themes—awarding and quality control—are two major themes, and there is a question as to what role Qualifications Wales will have in those two themes. For example—
[14] Simon Thomas: Ai’r Llywodraeth sy’n llwyr gyfrifol ar hyn o bryd am y ddwy thema?	Simon Thomas: Is the Government entirely responsible at present for those two themes?
[15] Mr Pierce: Nage, nid mewn gwirionedd. Yr agwedd ar safonau, sydd yn nwylo’r rheoleiddiwr, yw sut yn union yr ydym yn mynd o gwmpas gosod safonau; mae hynny yn fater polisi mewn gwirionedd, onid yw? Yng Nghymru, mae hynny yn nwylo Llywodraeth Cymru ar hyn o bryd, drwy’r rheoleiddiwr sydd y tu mewn i Lywodraeth Cymru, ond hefyd mae hynny ar hyn o bryd yn y fframwaith tair gwlad. Felly, mae cwestiwn ynglŷn â’r fframwaith o osod safonau. Mae hynny yn cynnwys pethau fel rôl tystiolaeth ystadegol wrth osod safonau a rôl ansawdd gwaith yr ymgeiswyr wrth osod safonau. Mae cwestiynau o ran dilyniant safonau o’r cymwysterau presennol i’r cymwysterau newydd. Mae’r rheini i gyd yn faterion polisi, a byddwn yn tybio eu bod yn sicr yn gorwedd gyda’r corff rheoleiddio newydd. Fodd bynnag, mae dyfarnu yn mynd ymlaen i’r gwaith gweithredol o ddyfarnu, sy’n cynnwys gosod yr asesiadau, marcio’r asesiadau, tynnu at ei gilydd yr holl dystiolaeth feintiol ar y canlyniadau a’r cwestiynau unigol, y papurau unigol a’r cymhwyster cyfan, ac wedyn symud ymlaen i ddyfarnu graddau. Mae honno’n agwedd llawer mwy gweithredol ar ddyfarnu.	Mr Pierce: No, not in reality. The aspect of standards, which is in the hands of the regulator, is how exactly we go about setting standards; that is a policy issue if truth be told, is it not? In Wales, that is in the hands of the Welsh Government at present, through the regulator that sits within the Welsh Government, but it is also at present within the three country framework. Therefore, there is a question around the framework of setting standards. That includes the role of things like statistical evidence in setting standards and the role of the quality of the candidates’ work within setting standards. There are questions regarding the continuum of standards from the current qualifications to the new qualifications. Those are all policy issues and I would assume that those would certainly sit with the new regulatory body. However, awarding then goes on to the operational work of awarding, which includes setting the assessments, marking the assessments, drawing together all of the quantitative evidence on the results and the individual questions, the individual papers and the qualification as a whole, and then moving on to awarding grades. That is a far more operational aspect.
[16] Simon Thomas: Sef prif faes—	Simon Thomas: Namely the main area—
[17] Mr Pierce: Dyna yw prif faes a phrif arbenigedd y cyrff arholi, wrth gwrs.	Mr Pierce: That is the main area and the main area of expertise of the examination bodies.
[18] Mae’r un math o beth yn wir o ran rheolaeth ansawdd. Mae hynny’n rhywbeth y byddwn yn tybio sy’n perthyn i’r holl gadwyn o weithgareddau, reit drwodd, o osod papurau cwestiynau i’w darparu’n flynyddol. Mae’r ysgolion yn rhan o’r rheolaeth ansawdd oherwydd mae darlithwyr ac athrawon yn cyfrannu at yr asesu, felly mae rheolaeth ansawdd yno. Felly, mae rheolaeth ansawdd yn thema sy’n rhedeg drwy’r gweithgaredd. Fodd bynnag, bydd rhan o hynny, wrth gwrs, yn gyfrifoldeb i’r rheoleiddiwr, gan gynnwys gosod agweddau ar y fframwaith rheolaeth ansawdd y gallwn ni weithio oddi mewn iddo.	The same is true of quality of assurance. That is something that I would assume would sit within the whole chain of activities, right through from setting papers to providing them on an annual basis. The schools are part of the quality assurance because lecturers and teachers contribute to the assessment, so there is quality assurance there. So, that is an issue that runs through the activities. However, there is part of that, of course, that will be the responsibility of the regulator, including setting aspects of the quality assurance framework that we can work within.
[19] Simon Thomas: Diolch am hynny. Mae agweddau yno nad ydym wedi eu hystyried, yn enwedig yr agwedd tair gwlad o ran rheolaeth ansawdd—efallai yr agwedd dwy wlad o hyn ymlaen: pwy a ŵyr?	Simon Thomas: Thank you for that. There are aspects there that we have not considered, especially the three-country aspect in terms of quality assurance—perhaps the two-country aspect from now on: who knows?
[20] Bu hanes brith rhyngoch chi—nid chi’n bersonol efallai—fel corff a’r Llywodraeth. Erbyn hyn, a ydych chi’n rhan o’r trafodaethau hyn ac a ydych yn teimlo eich bod yn chwarae eich rôl fel CBAC yn y broses o greu Cymwysterau Cymru?	There is a chequered history between you—not you personally perhaps—as a body and the Government. By now, are you part of these discussions and do you feel that you are playing your role as WJEC in the process of creating Qualifications Wales?
[21] Mr Pierce: Ar hyn o bryd, rydym yn brysur iawn gyda’r gwaith o ddatblygu cymwysterau sydd angen eu datblygu cyn i Gymwysterau Cymru ymddangos, fel petai. Felly, mae’n debyg mai’r ateb syml yw: nid ydym, mewn gwirionedd, yn rhan o’r trafodaethau ar fanylder Cymwysterau Cymru bron iawn o gwbl, ond rydym yn edrych ymlaen at hynny.	Mr Pierce: At the moment, we are very busy with the work of developing qualifications that need to be developed before Qualifications Wales makes its appearance, as it were. So, the simple answer it seems is: no, we are not really a part of the discussion on the details of Qualifications Wales, but we are looking forward to that.
[22] Simon Thomas: A yw hynny’n rhannol oherwydd ei bod hi’n edrych yn debyg bellach y bydd Cymwysterau Cymru yn ymddangos mewn dwy broses? A ydych yn fwy ymwybodol y bydd yn datblygu fel corff rheoleiddio ac yna’n symud ymlaen i rai o’r meysydd eraill yr ydych yn sôn amdanynt, neu a ydych yn dal yn aneglur ynglŷn â phethau felly?	Simon Thomas: Is that partly because Qualifications Wales now looks as though it will appear in a two-part process? Are you more aware that it will develop as a regulatory body and then move on to the other areas that you have spoken about, or are you still unclear about things like that?
[23] Mr Pierce: Mewn gwirionedd, nid ydym wedi cael y trafodaethau cyntaf. Nid wyf yn credu bod neb ohonom ni—cyrff dyfarnu cyffredinol na chyrff dyfarnu galwedigaethol—wedi bod yn rhan o drafod y darlun o ran sut y bydd Cymwysterau Cymru yn dod i fodolaeth ac wedyn yn gweithredu yn ei gyfnod cynnar, heb sôn am y cyfnod pellach. Fodd bynnag, byddwn yn dweud mai’r prif reswm am hynny, i ryw raddau, yw bod y sector cymwysterau ar hyn o bryd â’i ben i lawr yn datblygu cymwysterau ar gyfer 2015. Fodd bynnag, ochr yn ochr â hynny, byddem ni yn CBAC yn fwy na pharod i fod yn rhan o unrhyw drafodaethau ynglŷn â’r darlun ar gyfer y dyfodol.	Mr Pierce: We have not had those initial discussions, if truth be told. I do not think that any of us—general awarding bodies or vocational awarding bodies—have been involved in discussions as to how Qualifications Wales will emerge and how it will operate in its early stages, never mind in the longer term. However, I would say that the main reason for that, to a certain extent, is that the qualifications sector at present has its head down developing qualifications for 2015. However, along with that, we in WJEC will be more than happy to be part of any discussions and negotiations on future developments.
[24] Simon Thomas: Wedi’r cyfan, y corff a fydd yn rheoleiddio’r cymwysterau sy’n cael eu datblygu nawr yw’r corff newydd.	Simon Thomas: After all, the body that will regulate the qualifications that are being developed now will be the new body.
[25] Mr Pierce: Yn hollol.	Mr Pierce: Exactly.
[26] David Rees: Thank you, Simon. We have questions from Keith now, and then from Suzy.
[27] Bethan Jenkins: Following on from that, can I—
[28] David Rees: I will get you in after these two.
[29] Keith Davies: Rydym yn mynd yn ôl blynyddoedd maith, ac, wrth imi ddarllen y papurau hyn i gyd, roeddwn yn meddwl am gyfnod ACCAC. Felly, roeddwn yn gofyn i’m hunan wrth ddarllen y rhain beth yw’r gwahaniaeth rhwng y corff newydd a fydd yn rheoleiddio a’r hyn yr oedd ACCAC yn ei wneud. Credaf fod ACCAC wedi dod i ben oherwydd yr angen i gael gwared ar y cwangos. Fodd bynnag, mae’n edrych nawr fel pe baem yn mynd i sefydlu cwango newydd mewn ffordd. Ai hwnnw yw’r darlun—ein bod yn mynd yn ôl?	Keith Davies: We go back many years, and, as I was reading these papers, I was thinking about the time of ACCAC. So, I was asking myself, whilst reading these, what the difference is between the new body that will be regulating and what ACCAC was doing. I think that ACCAC came to an end because of the need to get rid of the quangos. However, it looks as though we are now going to establish a new quango in a way. Is that the picture—that we are going back?
[30] Mr Pierce: Mae rhan ohono’n edrych fel pe baem yn mynd yn ôl, oherwydd, yn sicr, ACCAC oedd y corff rheoleiddio ar y pryd, ond roedd hefyd yn gorff cwricwlwm. Felly, pan ddechreuais yn y swydd hon tua 10 mlynedd yn ôl, roedd ACCAC yn weithgar iawn fel rheoleiddiwr o fewn y grŵp tair gwlad o reoleiddwyr. Mae cyfraniad Cymru i’r darlun hwnnw wedi lleihau yn ystod y degawd diwethaf, ond nid yw hynny’n annaturiol gan fod Cymru yn symud tuag at ei chyfundrefn ei hun. Felly, rwyf yn credu mai’r gwahaniaeth mawr rhwng Cymwysterau Cymru a’r hen ACCAC yw nad yw’n ymddangos fod ganddo gyfrifoldeb cwricwlwm ac, os nad yw hynny’n bodoli oddi mewn i Gymwysterau Cymru, yna rwy’n credu y bydd y rhyngwyneb rhwng Cymwysterau Cymru a’r Llywodraeth o ran materion cwricwlaidd yn allweddol. Bydd cael hynny i weithio yn gwestiwn mawr, oherwydd mae’r cwricwlwm yn dylanwadu ar nifer o’r meysydd mwyaf allweddol mewn cymwysterau.	Mr Pierce: We seem to be referring to the past, because ACCAC certainly was the regulatory body at that time, but it was also a curriculum body. So, when I started in this post around 10 years ago, ACCAC was extremely active as a regulator within the three-country group of regulators. The Welsh contribution to that has decreased over the past decade, but that is not a surprise because Wales is moving towards its own regime. So, I think that the major difference between Qualifications Wales and the old ACCAC is that it does not appear to have curricular responsibility and, if that does not exist within Qualifications Wales, then I think that the interface between Qualifications Wales and the Government in terms of curricular issues will be crucial. Getting that to work will be a major challenge, because the curriculum does influence a number of the key areas within qualifications.
[31] Keith Davies: Yn sicr, oherwydd roeddwn yn yr Alban yr wythnos diwethaf, ac un o’r pethau a ddywedodd prif weithredwr y Scottish Qualifications Authority wrthym—yr oeddwn yn meddwl ei bod yn bwysig iawn—oedd, os oes eisiau arholiad mewn pwnc sydd, efallai, â nifer fach o fyfyrwyr, mae’n gallu troi at y Llywodraeth a gofyn iddo gael ei ariannu, oherwydd ei fod hefyd yn fwrdd arholi yn ogystal â bwrdd cwricwlwm. Wrth ddarllen hynny, ac edrych ymlaen, beth sy’n mynd i ddigwydd yn y dyfodol? A ydyn ni’n mynd i gael rhyw gorff—p’un ai’r corff rheoleiddio newydd neu ryw gorff arall—yn penderfynu beth rydym yn mynd i’w asesu yn y cwricwlwm?	Keith Davies: Certainly, because we were in Scotland last week, and one of the things that the chief executive of the Scottish Qualifications Authority told us, which was extremely important, was that if there is a need for an examination in a subject that is, perhaps, a subject that has a small number of candidates, it can turn to the Government and ask that it is funded, because it is an examinations board as well as a curriculum board. Reading that, and thinking ahead, what is going to happen in future? Are we going to have some sort of body—whether it is the new regulatory body or some other body—deciding what we are going to assess in the curriculum?
[32] Mr Pierce: Rwy’n meddwl bod hynny’n gwestiwn pwysig. Mewn ffordd, mae’n rhaid i Gymru benderfynu sut ydym yn diffinio’r ddyletswydd i ddarparu, mewn gwirionedd. Mae’r cwestiwn hwnnw yn un y mae hyd yn oed gwlad mor fawr â Lloegr yn ei wynebu. Ar hyn o bryd, er enghraifft, mae yna gyfres hir o gymwysterau mewn ieithoedd modern—ieithoedd tramor. Dim ond tair o’r ieithoedd hynny, mae’n debyg, sy’n destun trafodaeth gan yr A Level Content Advisory Board, sy’n grŵp o’r prifysgolion Russell. Mae sylw’n cael ei roi i Ffrangeg, Almaeneg a Sbaeneg. Mae yna gyfres hir o ieithoedd ar gael ar lefel TGAU a/neu lefel A yn Lloegr, Cymru a Gogledd Iwerddon ar hyn o bryd. Fodd bynnag, mae yna gwestiwn mawr ynglŷn â dyfodol yr ieithoedd hynny. Os ewch i wahanol wledydd, mae yna wahanol farn ynglŷn â’r dyletswydd i ddarparu, er enghraifft, cymhwyster yn rhai o’r ieithoedd Ewropeaidd eraill sydd, i raddau, yn lleiafrifol. Mae hynny’n gwestiwn sylfaenol.	Mr Pierce: I think that that is an important question. In a way, Wales needs to decide how we define the duty to provide, in a way. That is a question that even a country as large as England will face. At the moment, for example, there is a long list of qualifications in modern foreign languages. Only three of those languages, it seems, are being discussed by the A Level Content Advisory Board, which is a group of the Russell Group universities. Attention is given to French, German and Spanish. There is a broad range of other languages available at GCSE and/or A-level in Wales, England and Northern Ireland at present. However, there are major questions as to the future of those languages. If you go to various different countries, there are different views on the duty to provide, for example, qualifications in some of the other European languages, which, to a certain extent, are minority languages. So, that is a fundamental question.
[33] Hefyd, rwy’n credu bod agweddau ar ymylon y cwricwlwm traddodiadol: a yw rhai o’r rheini yn feysydd pwysig i’w datblygu yn gwricwlaidd? Wrth gwrs, mae gwahanol wledydd—rydych wedi crybwyll yr Alban—wedi pecynnu gwahanol gyfrifoldebau gyda’i gilydd. Mae rhai wedi gosod cyfrifoldeb cwricwlwm ac asesu o ran modelau asesu gyda’i gilydd; mae hynny’n wir yng Ngweriniaeth Iwerddon, ond nid yw hi mor wir yn yr Alban. Mae eisiau i Gymru—rwy’n credu—benderfynu beth fydd yn gweithio orau i Gymru, o feddwl pa fath o weledigaeth fydd gennym o ran cwricwlwm, a pha weledigaeth o ran cymwysterau.	Also, I think that there are aspects at the periphery of the traditional curriculum; we need to consider whether those are important areas for development. Different nations—you mentioned Scotland—have packaged different responsibilities in different ways. Some have placed curriculum and assessment responsibility in terms of assessment models together; that is true in the Republic of Ireland, but it is not so much the case in Scotland. I think that Wales needs to decide what would work best for Wales, bearing in mind what kind of vision we will have in terms of the curriculum, and what kind of vision we will have in terms of qualifications.
[34] Keith Davies: Rwy’n gweld eich bod yn sefydlu corff newydd—Eduqas, neu beth bynnag yw enw’r corff newydd. A ydych yn cynnig Cernyweg yn awr?	Keith Davies: I see that you are establishing a new body—Eduqas, or whatever the name of the new body is. Are you offering Cornish now?
[35] Mr Pierce: Mae hynny’n ddau gwestiwn gwahanol. Nid ydym yn sefydlu corff newydd; CBAC fydd yn parhau fel y corff dyfarnu—y bwrdd arholi. Yr hyn yr ydym wedi’i sefydlu yw brand newydd, fel y bydd, pan fyddwn yn cyhoeddi ein cymwysterau newydd ar gyfer 2015, yn amlwg i bobl yn Lloegr mai’r brand CBAC Eduqas—WJEC Eduqas—yw’r cymwysterau, y manylebau, y dogfennau a’r wefan ar gyfer Lloegr, dim ond i wneud pethau’n fwy eglur.	Mr Pierce: Those are two different questions. We are not establishing a new body; WJEC will continue to be the awarding body—the examination board. What we have established is a new brand, so that when we announce our new qualifications for 2015, it will be clear to people in England that the WJEC Eduqas brand is on the qualifications, the specifications, the documents, and the website for England, just so that there is clarity.
[36] Rydym wedi cael cwestiwn o ran y Gernyweg, oherwydd mae’r Gernyweg, hyd yma, wedi manteisio ar ddarpariaeth sy’n cael ei galw’n ‘asset languages’. Mae hynny’n dod i ben, felly rydym wedi cael cwestiwn anuniongyrchol ynglŷn â’r Gernyweg.	We have had a question on the Cornish language, because Cornish, to date, has benefited from a provision described as ‘asset languages’. That is coming to an end, and there has been an indirect question on the Cornish language.
[37] Keith Davies: Diolch.	Keith Davies: Thank you.
[38] David Rees: We have a further question on rebranding coming up, but I turn to Suzy to ask her question here.
[39] Suzy Davies: May I just ask a few more questions about this awarding function? I know that it is looking a little bit into the future. Obviously, you were very successful in avoiding the initial intention of the merger, and I think that the creation of the Eduqas brand, if you like, has made your position pretty clear, that you intend to be a major player still in the awarding market, if I can call it that, including in the Wales-only qualification market. As the merger did not turn out to be possible, you are going to be commissioned to produce these qualifications. Is there a risk then that what is going to happen, as far as awarding is concerned, is that they are going to be WJEC qualifications just with the Qualifications Wales badge on them?
[40] Mr Pierce: In going forward, as you rightly say, because we have developed the brand Eduqas for our England qualifications—
[41] Suzy Davies: That is like a statement of intent, is it not? You are here to stay.
[42] Mr Pierce: We hope so. Our capacity is very much geared to responding to as much of the needs of Wales as we possibly can, and also, as much as we possibly can outside of Wales. That is giving us, if you like, the size and capacity that is more like the kind of organisation that you would need to serve twice the needs of Wales than that of a population of 3 million. So, we want to make the most of that. That gives us a lot of expertise, and engagement with another country’s approach, and I think that that benefits and enriches our thinking as well. So, in terms of awarding and qualifications, we will have two quite distinct sets of qualifications, both at GCSE and at A-level. The Wales versions, which, as you say, will be awarded under Qualifications Wales’s umbrella, and the England ones, which will continue to be under Ofqual, really will be quite distinctive. To some extent, there will be different policies that will apply to standards and to awarding in the two countries.
09:45
[43] Suzy Davies: But in England, for example, it is still going to be called the WJEC GCSE or whatever, is it not—
[44] Mr Pierce: Yes.
[45] Suzy Davies: Whereas here, it is going to be called the QW GCSE. Is it actually a WJEC qualification in disguise?
[46] Mr Pierce: Well, at the moment, the time when the regulator and the awarding body come together is when qualifications are certificated. So, I am imagining that, going forward, you will have a situation where a young person’s certificate will carry the Qualifications Wales logo, quite rightly, and then, if WJEC is the awarding body for a qualification, the WJEC logo might well be there as well—
[47] Suzy Davies: As opposed to Edexcel or whatever—
[48] Mr Pierce: Whereas, in England, it will be the Ofqual logo with WJEC. I think that the distinctiveness should be clear.
[49] Suzy Davies: Yes, I am just trying to ascertain who takes ownership of the whole brand idea. I know that, perhaps, it does not seem that important, but if you are looking at children in 10 years’ time, are they going to be getting QWs as opposed to GSCEs or whatever? For me, it is an important question because, obviously, QW, in time, will want to develop its in-house branded qualifications, if you like, and there might be a question of duplication. We heard how SQA dealt with that, but how much of a threat or risk of duplication is there if QW starts developing in-house qualifications?
[50] Mr Pierce: Well, I suppose that, in a way, that is a question for Qualifications Wales in due course, but I think that the model that we are envisaging is that a qualification that is regulated by Qualifications Wales will, operationally, be delivered by WJEC. So, we do not see any conflict there. Your point is a very important one because—
[51] Suzy Davies: Yes, it is between quality assurance or, sort of, accreditation, if you like, and growing from scratch.
[52] Mr Pierce: Yes. Your point is a very relevant one, and it is probably most apparent at the moment with the Welsh baccalaureate because the Welsh baccalaureate has always been a Welsh Government-designed qualification, as the new version will be. Keith has been very close to this qualification in the past. The discussions around the design of the Welsh baccalaureate are very much Welsh Government-led and it will be a Welsh Government decision absolutely on the structure of that Welsh baccalaureate. Nevertheless, WJEC will be engaging with schools and colleges in its delivery, and we will be doing the awarding of it. So, I think that your point is well illustrated by the way that the Welsh baccalaureate is currently developed. To some extent, the same is true for the new GCSEs coming in in Wales. The GCSE mathematics qualification for Wales, from 2015, very much bears the imprint of the Welsh Government as a designer of the framework for that qualification. That, for example, is why it is two qualifications—mathematics numeracy and mathematics. That is why the three tiers are there, and that is why the content is going to be as it is and split between the two qualifications. That is very much a Welsh Government-driven or steered design, and yet WJEC will deliver the qualification operationally. So, I think that your point is very relevant to the way that we are already working on some qualifications.
[53] Suzy Davies: So, we have got a situation already where the regulator is also designing qualifications, but farming out the actual delivery of it, if you like. Is that—
[54] Mr Pierce: Yes.
[55] Suzy Davies: What is going to happen when the regulation function comes into QW then?
[56] Mr Pierce: I think that, for some curriculum areas, that may well continue to be the right way forward. For the most fundamental parts of the curriculum—English language, Welsh language, mathematics—I think that it is quite natural for a Government or its regulator to want to have a strong influence on the way those qualifications are designed. In other subject areas, it may well be that the qualification is influenced by higher education, stakeholders and awarding bodies’ own thinking, ideas and engagement with stakeholders—there are all kinds of other themes that can inform qualification design as well. At the end, I think that the important thing will be for Wales to make the best use of its capacities within Wales to design good qualifications. The Government will contribute some of the thinking, as will the new regulator, Qualifications Wales, as well as awarding bodies and stakeholders. I think that we need to make a very good job of joining up the efforts of different expert parties.
[57] Suzy Davies: Well, may I finish with a slightly cheeky question then? If everything is absorbed into one body, which is the ultimate aim here, whose voice do you think is going to be the loudest in terms of determining outcomes, if you like? Who is going to be the most influential in designing this thing?
[58] Mr Pierce: I think that, in many of these cases, there are plenty of issues to debate around qualification design. Therefore, we need to be having a good debate and reaching the right conclusion based around the issues. We are part of some quite robust discussions about qualifications in both Wales and England. We, as awarding bodies, do not hesitate to contribute our view, but we are happy that the decision then has got to be really owned by the policy owners at the end of the day.
[59] Suzy Davies: The reason why I asked the question is that it is a case of whoever screams the loudest is more likely to have a say about how the conflicts of interest are possibly avoided, but that is just a comment not a question.
[60] David Rees: Bethan, you wanted to come in.
[61] Bethan Jenkins: Mae fy nghwestiwn i’n dilyn yn syth o gwestiwn Simon. Yn y wybodaeth sydd gennym o ran Bwrdd Cynghori Cymwysterau Cymru, ar y wefan, mae’n dweud nad yw CBAC yn aelod ohono. I gadarnhau ar gyfer y record, rydych chi’n dweud ar hyn o bryd nad ydych chi wedi cael unrhyw fath o fewnbwn i’r broses. Felly, nid ydych ar y bwrdd sydd, ar hyn o bryd, yn edrych ar yr holl system. A yw hynny’n gywir?	Bethan Jenkins: My question follows on directly from Simon’s question. In the information that we have on the Qualifications Wales Advisory Board, on the website it says that WJEC is not a member of the board. In order to confirm for the record, you say at the moment that you have not had any input to the process. Therefore, you do not sit on the board that, at the moment, is looking at the whole system. Is that true?
[62] Mr Pierce:  Mae hynny’n gywir, ydy. Nid ydym ni fel CBAC ar y bwrdd ac nid wyf yn credu bod unrhyw gorff arholi arall ’chwaith, ond fel y dywedais gynnau byddwn yn croesawu’r cyfle i gyfrannu, yn enwedig wrth i’r drafodaeth symud i’r camau eithaf pwysig o sefydlu’r darlun newydd.	Mr Pierce: That is the case, yes. We, as WJEC, do not sit on the board and I do not think that any other examination board does either, but as I said earlier we would  welcome the opportunity to contribute, particularly as the discussion moves towards the quite important steps of establishing the new picture.
[63] Bethan Jenkins: Rwy’n derbyn eich ateb, ond rwy’n deall ar hyn o bryd bod tipyn o waith wedi cael ei wneud o ran yr hyn roedd Simon yn sôn am edrych arno—efallai fod dau gam i’r broses. Os nad ydych chi’n rhan o hynny yn awr onid ydych yn meddwl eich bod wedi gadael y cart i fynd oherwydd mae’r  trafodaethau wedi cychwyn yn barod? Rwy’n deall bod gwaith arall gennych i’w wneud, ond rwy’n trio deall pam yr ydych yn hapus i fod yn rhan o’r broses yn hwyrach yn hytrach na siapio’r hyn sy’n cael ei siapio yn awr, sef craidd yr holl beth really.	Bethan Jenkins: I accept your answer, but I understand at the moment that quite a lot of work has been done in terms of what Simon was saying to look at—perhaps there are two steps to the process. If you are not part of that now, do you not think that you have missed the boat because the discussions have already begun? I understand that you have other work to do, but I am trying to understand why you are content to be part of the process at a later stage, rather than shaping what is being formed at the moment, which it the core of the whole thing really.
[64] Mr Pierce: Rwy’n credu, i raddau, mai yn awr y mae’r trafodaethau pwysig yn dechrau, byddwn i’n tybio, oherwydd, i fynd yn ôl at y math o bethau yr oeddwn yn sôn amdanynt, sef bod rhyngwyneb gwahanol rhwng y corff newydd a’r corff arholi, mae sawl thema i hynny. Byddwn i’n fwy na pharod i drafod posibiliadau ynglŷn â sut i gael hynny i weithio orau. Thema fawr arall yw cyfathrebu ynglŷn â chymwysterau. Byddwn yn fwy na hapus i gael trafodaeth â’r bobl sy’n cynllunio Cymwysterau Cymru ynglŷn â sut gall corff arholi fel CBAC gyfrannu ochr yn ochr â Chymwysterau Cymru i’r maes cyfathrebu. Cefnogi athrawon—dyna faes pwysig arall. Rwy’n tybio ein bod yn dod yn awr yn weddol fuan i’r cyfnod o angen trafod. Cam allweddol pwysig, wrth gwrs, yw penodiad prif weithredwr cyntaf Cymwysterau Cymru. Mae eisoes nifer o bethau y byddwn i wir am eu trafod yn fuan iawn â’r person hwnnw, unwaith yr ydym yn gwybod pwy yw ef neu hi. Mae hynny’n cynnwys agweddau ar sut i fynd ynghylch safonau o ran y fframwaith safonau, oherwydd bydd eisiau hwnnw mor gynnar â haf 2016. Felly, mae eisiau dechrau meddwl am bethau fel hynny yn fuan iawn, iawn.	Mr Pierce: I believe, to a certain extent, that the important discussions are starting now, I would assume, because to return to some of the things that I was referring to earlier, that there is a new interface between the new body and the examination body, and there are a number of themes there. I would be more than happy to discuss how we can make that work best. Another major theme is communication on qualifications. I would be more than happy to have a discussion with people who are planning Qualifications Wales about how an exam body such as WJEC can contribute along with Qualifications Wales to communications. Supporting teachers—that is another important area. I believe that we are now getting to that stage where we need to discuss. A key step, of course, is the appointment of the first chief executive of Qualifications Wales. There are already a number of things that I would really wish to discuss with that individual at a very early stage once we know who he or she is. That includes aspects of how we deal with standards in terms of the standards framework, because we will need that to be in place as early as the summer of 2016. So, we need to start thinking about that at a very early stage.
[65] Bethan Jenkins: Mae hyn yn dod â fi at y cwestiwn nesaf. Cwrddais â’r Athro Donaldson ddoe i drafod pethau eraill, ond beth ddaeth i’n sylw i, er nad oeddwn yn Iwerddon yr wythnos diwethaf lle cododd y pwnc hwn, oedd bod adolygiad o’r cwricwlwm yn digwydd ‘nawr, ond nid yw o fewn cylch gwaith yr Athro Donaldson i edrych ar yr hyn sy’n digwydd. Mae fel petai dwy drafodaeth hollol wahanol yn digwydd, er bod y ddwy yn mynd i orfod dod at ei gilydd. A ydych chi’n poeni am y ffaith mai dyma realiti’r sefyllfa ar hyn o bryd, lle mae pobl yn gweithio mewn seilos ac sydd angen dod yn fwy clos er mwyn sicrhau bod, fel yr ydych chi’n dweud, y weledigaeth yn iawn ar gyfer y cymwysterau newydd hyn?	Bethan Jenkins: This leads on to the next question. I met with Professor Donaldson to discuss other things, but what came to my attention, even though I was not in Ireland last week where this subject came up, was that a review of the curriculum is happening at the moment, but it is not within the remit of Professor Donaldson to look at what is happening. It is as if there are two different discussions happening, even though the two are going to have to come together. Are you concerned about the fact that the reality of the situation at the moment is that, perhaps, people are working in silos that need to become closer in order to ensure, as you have said, that the vision is right for these new qualifications?
[66] Mr Pierce: Mae gennyf ofid am hynny yn bendant oherwydd yr ydym yn gweithio yn awr ar y cymwysterau ar gyfer 2015, ond mae’r cymwysterau ar gyfer 2016 hefyd yn cynnwys meysydd cwricwlaidd pwysig iawn. Byddaf yn gofyn yn fuan iawn i swyddogion Llywodraeth Cymru am eglurhad o lle yr ydym ni o ran y syniadaeth cwricwlwm ar gyfer y pynciau hynny. Pan fyddwch yn meddwl bod y rheini yn cynnwys gwyddoniaeth, hanes, daearyddiaeth, a Chymraeg ail-iaith, mae adroddiadau wedi cael eu hysgrifennu’n gymharol ddiweddar a’u cyhoeddi gan gynnwys yr un ar y cwricwlwm Cymreig. Yn awr, nid wyf yn siŵr lle yr ydym yng Nghymru o ran gweithredu argymhellion yr adroddiad hwnnw a rhai eraill. Mae’r rheini i gyd yn hollol allweddol i’r gwaith cwricwlaidd a chymwysterau sydd angen eu gwneud dros y gaeaf nesaf, felly, mae’r amser yn fyr iawn, fel bod gennym gymwysterau da yn y pynciau hynny ar gyfer dysgu o 2016. Mae amser yn fyr ac mae polisïau sylweddol sydd angen eu cadarnhau. Mae hyn yn mynd yn ôl at gwestiwn Keith, sef beth yw’r berthynas rhwng syniadaeth Cymru am y cwricwlwm a syniadaeth Cymru am gymwysterau. Mae’n rhaid i’r ddau hynny glosio at ei gilydd. Mae angen i hynny ddigwydd yn fuan iawn, ar gyfer cymwysterau 2016.	Mr Pierce: I certainly have concerns around that because we are now working on qualifications for 2015, but the qualifications for 2016 also include very important curricular areas. I will soon be asking Welsh Government officials for clarity as to where we stand in terms of the curricular concept for those subjects. When you take it that those include science, history, geography and Welsh as a second language, reports have been written relatively recently and published, including the one on the cwricwlwm Cymreig. Now, I am not sure where we are in Wales in terms of implementing the recommendations of that report and others. All those are crucially important to the curricular and qualifications work that needs to be done over next winter, so, the timescale is very brief, in order that we have excellent qualifications in place in those subjects so that they can be taught from 2016.  Time is short and significant policies need to be confirmed. This goes back to Keith’s question, namely what is the inter-relationship between the concepts in Wales on the curriculum and on qualifications. We need to bring those closer together. That needs to happen very soon, for the 2016 qualifications.
[67] Bethan Jenkins: Dyma fy nghwestiwn olaf felly. Rwy’n teimlo eich bod yn gwrthddweud eich hun rywfaint. Yn gynharach, gwnaethoch ddweud bod lle effeithiol i’r Llywodraeth greu cymwysterau achos mai hi sy’n creu polisi. Ond, yn awr rydych yn dweud nad ydych yn gwybod yn iawn beth sy’n digwydd gyda’r cwricwlwm Cymreig. Ai ei lle hi yw gwneud hynny? Pan es i’r Alban i siarad â Scottish Qualifications Authority, dywedodd ei gynrychiolwyr eu bod yn cael paneli o arbenigwyr i roi gwybodaeth iddynt. Ai’r Llywodraeth yw’r lle gorau i greu’r fath syniadaeth neu a oes angen rôl fwy annibynnol er mwyn bod y problemau rydym wedi eu cael yn y gorffennol, gyda gwneud yr holl drafodaeth yn wleidyddol, yn cael eu tynnu allan o’r system, lle nad yw’r Llywodraeth yn gyfrifol?	Bethan Jenkins: This is my last question, therefore. I feel as if you are contradicting yourself. Earlier, you said that there was an effective place for the Government to create qualifications because it creates policy. But, now you are saying that you do not know what is happening with the cwricwlwm Cymreig. Is it the Government’s place to do this? When I went to Scotland to speak with the Scottish Qualifications Authority, its representatives said that they have panels of experts there to provide information to them. Is the Government the best place to create those sorts of ideas or is there a need for a more independent role so that the problems that we have had in the past, such as turning the whole discussion political, will be taken out of the system, where the Government is not responsible?
[68] Mr Pierce: Os wyf wedi gwrthddweud, ymddiheuriadau am hynny. Y pwynt yr oeddwn efallai yn trio ei wneud yw: rwy’n meddwl y byddai gwaith glo mân llawer gwell yn cael ei wneud gan gorff annibynnol a phaneli arbenigwyr, gan gynnwys paneli pwnc. Rwy’n meddwl mai rôl y Llywodraeth yw gosod y polisi lefel uchel—er enghraifft, os oes gan Lywodraeth Cymru farn glir ynglŷn ag i ba raddau y dylai fod dimensiwn cwricwlwm Cymreig yn hanes TGAU a daearyddiaeth TGAU, ac os oes ganddi farn ar le y dylai Cymraeg ail iaith fod fel cymhwyster TGAU. Dyna fyddwn yn disgwyl fel polisi lefel uchel. Mae’n bwysig cael hynny yn ddigon cynnar a chadarn a chlir er mwyn i’r grwpiau mwy arbenigol allu symud ymlaen i ddatblygu cymhwyster, achos mae cymhwyster, wedi’r cyfan, yn cynnwys rhaglen ddysgu.	Mr Pierce: If I have contradicted myself, my apologies for that. The point I was trying to make was that I think that the detailed work is done far better by an independent body and panels of experts, including subject panels. I think that the Government’s role is to set high-level policy—for example, if the Welsh Government has a clear view on the extent to which there should be a cwricwlwm Cymreig aspect in GCSE history and geography, and if it has a view on where Welsh as a second language should be going as a GCSE subject. That is what I would expect of the high-level policy. It is important to get that in place at an early enough stage and that it is robust enough so that the more expert groups can move on and develop a qualification, because qualifications, of course, include a programme of teaching.
[69] Rydym am i’r rhaglenni dysgu hynny fod y gorau posibl, a’r mwyaf gwych posibl, ar gyfer pobl ifanc Cymru. Mae angen yr egwyddorion polisi cwricwlaidd lefel uchel. Mae’r rheini yn rhoi gwybodaeth i’r gwaith manwl. Fel corff arholi a swyddogion rheoleiddiol presennol Llywodraeth Cymru, ac, yn y dyfodol, swyddogion rheoleiddiol Cymwysterau Cymru, rhaid i ni allu gweithio ar y manylion mewn da bryd i ddod â chymwysterau newydd mas.	We need those learning programmes to be the best possible and as excellent as possible for the young people of Wales. We need the high-level curriculum policy principles. They inform the detailed work that happens. As an examination body and, currently, the regulators within Welsh Government, and, in the future, the regulators within Qualifications Wales, we must be able to work on the details in good time to bring those qualifications forward.
[70] Keith Davies: Mae un pwynt arall yn dilyn ein trip lan i’r Alban: dywedodd SQA wrthym ei fod yn gallu rhoi cyngor i’r Llywodraeth ond, yn y pen draw, y Llywodraeth sy’n penderfynu.	Keith Davies: There is one further point following our trip to Scotland: the SQA told us that it can provide advice to the Government, but ultimately the Government decides.
[71] Mr Pierce: Byddwn yn cytuno. Ar rai materion, bydd rhaid i’r Llywodraeth benderfynu, byddwn yn tybio.	Mr Pierce: Yes, I would agree. On certain issues, the Government would have to decide, I would assume.
[72] Keith Davies: Yn sicr. Dywedon nhw hynny wrthym yn yr Alban.	Keith Davies: Certainly. That is what they told us in Scotland.
[73] David Rees: May I clarify a point? You have indicated that those processes should be in place, but you are not reassured at this point in time that they are being considered in the model being put forward at this point in time, as to where each responsibility lies.
[74] Mr Pierce: I was responding to a set of questions around where we are now. However, it is also important to bear in mind that lots of these things that I am referring to will have been done and delivered before Qualifications Wales arrives as a new organisation. All the work to do with qualifications for 2016 will have been well completed before Qualifications Wales is set up. Qualifications Wales, in a sense, is arriving at an interesting time. It is arriving two thirds of the way through the most ambitious, far-reaching qualifications reform that Wales has ever undertaken as itself, as Wales. Qualifications Wales comes on board two thirds of the way through. To some extent, that is an advantage, because it can take stock and develop its own way of working for what is left and also for the next cycle of qualifications reform. But, crucially, it will have to engage with standards immediately.
[75] David Rees: I have questions from Aled, then Simon.
[76] Aled Roberts: Rwy’n derbyn nad ydych yn aelod o’r bwrdd cysgodol nac unrhyw gorff arholi arall, ond wrth ystyried ein bod yn edrych ar sefyllfa lle bydd y Bil hwn yn cael ei gyflwyno yn yr hydref er mwyn iddo gael ei basio mewn digon o amser, faint o gyfarfodydd yr ydych wedi’u cynnal efo’r corff cysgodol, fel corff arholi, i drafod yr holl faterion hyn y dylid eu hystyried er mwyn drafftio Bil sy’n ddigonol ar gyfer ofynion Cymru?	Aled Roberts: I accept that you are not a member of the shadow board or any other examination body, but in considering that we are looking at a situation where this Bill will be introduced in the autumn in order for it to be passed in sufficient time, how many meetings have you conducted with the shadow body, as an examinations body, to discuss all these matters so that they are considered in order to draft a Bill that is sufficient and adequate for the requirements of Wales?
[77] Mr Pierce: Dim.	Mr Pierce: None.
10:00
[78] Aled Roberts: Reit, ocê. A gaf i ofyn cwestiwn arall felly? Un pwynt a wnaethpwyd yn yr Alban oedd eu bod yn meddwl bod yr Alban, ar y pryd, wedi colli cyfle yn eu Deddf nhw, oherwydd nid oedd digon o fanylder ynglŷn â rheoleiddio ac ansawdd. Roeddent yn dweud mai un wers bwysig i Gymru fyddai, yn hytrach na gadael i bethau i ddatblygu’n naturiol, bod angen i’r materion a’r berthynas rhwng y materion hynny fod yn hollol eglur ar wyneb y Bil. A fyddech chi’n cytuno â hynny?	Aled Roberts: Right, okay. May I ask another question, therefore? One point that was made in Scotland was that they thought that Scotland, at the time, had missed an opportunity within their own Act, and that there was not enough detail in relation to regulation and quality. They said that one important lesson for Wales would be, rather than allowing things to develop naturally, that there is a need for those issues and the relationship between those issues to be clear on the face of the Bill. Would you agree with that?
[79] Mr Pierce: Byddwn yn cytuno â hynny. Mae rhai pethau amlwg, sylweddol iawn sy’n dod o fewn y briff rheoleiddio, er enghraifft, cydnabod cyrff arholi a dyfarnu, ac achredu cymwysterau. Mae’r pethau hynny’n hollol amlwg yn lefel uchel o ran y cyfrifoldebau, ond mae’n bosibl datblygu hynny ymhellach. Wrth gwrs, mae manylion di-ben-draw, mewn gwirionedd, yn y fframwaith rheoleiddio presennol, sy’n un sydd yn pontio Ofqual, Llywodraeth Cymru a CCEA yng Ngogledd Iwerddon. Felly, mae digonedd o fanylion ar gael eisoes ynglŷn â’r hyn a allai fod o fewn trefn reoleiddio. Efallai bydd angen dethol pa rai o’r rheini y bydd angen sylw penodol arnynt yn y ddeddfwriaeth er mwyn sicrhau eu bod nhw yn eu lle.	Mr Pierce: Yes, I would. There are certain, very prominent things that fall within the regulatory brief, for example, recognising examining and awarding bodies, and the accreditation of qualifications. Those are obviously high-level issues in terms of responsibilities, but they could be developed further. Of course, there are endless details, in fact, in the current regulatory framework, which bridges between Ofqual, the Welsh Government and CCEA in Northern Ireland. Therefore, there is a plenty of detail already available about what could be included within a regulatory regime. It may be necessary to select which of those need to receive specific coverage in legislation to ensure that they are properly in place.
[80] Rwy’n meddwl bod thema reolaeth ansawdd, fel yr oeddwn i’n crybwyll gynnau, yn un eang iawn sy’n rhedeg ar draws yr holl brosesau ac, felly, mae’n anoddach i’w diffinio, ond, wrth gwrs, byddem yn fwy na pharod i drafod hynny â’r bobl sy’n edrych ar sefydlu Cymwysterau Cymru.	I think that the theme of quality assurance, as I mentioned earlier, is such a broad theme and runs throughout every process that it is more difficult to define, but, of course, we would be more than willing to discuss that with the people who are looking to establish Qualifications Wales.
[81] Simon Thomas: Mae gennyf ddau bwynt. Yn gyntaf oll, rwyf am fod yn gwbl glir am yr hyn yr ydych chi newydd ei ddweud wrth Bethan ac Aled. Y rheswm nad ydych chi wedi cael cyfarfodydd gyda’r bwrdd ymgynghorol newydd hwn a’r rheswm nad ydych yn aelod o’r bwrdd hwn yw nad ydych wedi cael gwahoddiad. A yw hynny’n gywir?	Simon Thomas: I have two points. First of all, I want to be clear on what you just told Bethan and Aled. The reason why you have not had any meetings with the new advisory board and the reason why you are not a member of that board is that you have not received an invitation. Is that correct?
[82] Mr Pierce: Nid wyf yn credu y buasem yn disgwyl bod yn aelod o’r bwrdd, oherwydd byddai hynny’n codi cwestiwn o fuddiannau’n gwrthdaro, efallai. Fodd bynnag—	Mr Pierce: I do not think that we would expect to be a member of the board, because that may raise the question of a conflict of interests, perhaps. However —
[83] Simon Thomas: Mae’n dibynnu ar beth yw pwrpas y bwrdd: ai sefydlu Cymwysterau Cymru yn llawn, neu jest y rhan gyntaf? Nid wyf yn glir ar hynny. A ydych chi’n glir?	Simon Thomas: It depends on what the purpose of the board is: is it to set up Qualifications Wales as a full body, or just the first stage? I am not clear. Are you clear?
[84] Mr Pierce: Nac ydw, nid wyf yn glir ychwaith. Fodd bynnag, i glymu â hynny, o fy mhrofiad i o ymweld a thrafod manylion yn y gwledydd eraill, gan gynnwys Gweriniaeth Iwerddon, Gogledd Iwerddon a’r Alban, fel yr oeddwn i’n ei ddweud gynnau, mae cydweithio da ar sail fframwaith eglur sy’n sylfaen i gydweithio yn allweddol i’r hyn sy’n llwyddo yn y gwledydd hynny. O drafod â nhw, mae pethau sy’n amlwg wedi cael eu meddwl trwyddo yn eglur, gan gynnwys pethau fel paneli pwnc: os oes angen panel pwnc, panel pwy yw e, pwy sy’n ei arwain a phwy sydd yno i gyfrannu fel aelodau? Mae pethau felly yn bwysig iawn. Nid yw’r rheini’n bodoli yng Nghymru ar hyn o bryd. Efallai fydd eu heisiau ar gyfer rhai o gymwysterau 2016 a dweud y gwir. Efallai y gallai hynny osod patrwm ar gyfer Cymwysterau Cymru yn y dyfodol.	Mr Pierce: No, I am not clear either. However, to tie in with that, from my experience of visiting and discussing details in other nations, including the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland and Scotland, as I was saying earlier, close collaboration on the basis of a clear framework that is the foundation for co-operation is crucially important to what actually succeeds in those nations. Having discussed this with them, there are things that have obviously been thought through clearly, including such things as subject panels: if you need a subject panel, whose panel is it, who is leading it and who is there to contribute as a member? Such things are very important. They do not exist in Wales at the moment. Perhaps we will need them for some of the qualifications for 2016, if truth be told. That might set the pattern for Qualifications Wales in the future.
[85] Simon Thomas: Dyna’r ail beth yr oeddwn i am ofyn ichi amdano. Mae’n amlwg, wrth inni edrych yn ôl ar hen waith Awdurdod Cymwysterau, Cwricwlwm ac Asesu Cymru, a oedd yn awdurdod cwricwlwm ac asesu gyda’i gilydd, mae’r rhyngwyneb honno sydd rhwng y cwricwlwm ac asesu’r cwricwlwm yn diflannu, i mi, yn yr holl broses hon. Nid wyf yn glir lle y mae. Rydych chi’n sôn am ddatblygu bagloriaeth Cymru a rôl Llywodraeth Cymru yn hynny o beth, ac rydych chi’n sôn am y cymwysterau newydd a rôl Llywodraeth Cymru. Rwy’n derbyn yn llwyr fod dyletswydd a diddordeb penodol gan y Llywodraeth i osod peth o hyn mas, a datblygu o’r newydd bolisi pwysig cenedlaethol. Lle nad wyf yn gallu dilyn y gwt ar hyn o bryd yw: i ble mae hyn nawr yn mynd yn y corff newydd? A fydd y rôl hon yn aros gyda’r Llywodraeth? Bydd wastad gan y Llywodraeth ddiddordeb yn y pethau hyn, ond a yw’n glir y bydd gan Gymwysterau Cymru, yn ei gyfansoddiad, y ddyletswydd hon i ddatblygu ac i fod yn gyfrifol, nid am y cwricwlwm fel y cyfryw, ond i fod yn gyfrifol o ddydd i ddydd am hynny? A ydych chi’n gweld i le rwy’n trio mynd?	Simon Thomas: That is the second thing that I wanted to ask you. It is clear, as we look back on the work of the former Qualifications, Curriculum and Assessment Authority for Wales, which was a curriculum and assessment authority together, that the interface between the curriculum and the assessment of the curriculum has disappeared, to me, from this whole process. I am not clear where it is. You mentioned developing the Welsh baccalaureate and the Welsh Government’s role in that, and you talk about the new qualifications and the role of the Welsh Government. I accept completely that the Government has a duty and a specific interest in setting some of this out, and in developing anew an important national policy. Where I cannot follow the trail at the moment is: where will this go now in the new body? Will this role remain with the Government? The Government will always have an interest in these things, but is it clear that Qualifications Wales will have, in its constitution, this duty to develop and to be responsible for not the curriculum per se, but to be responsible on a day-to-day basis for that? Do you see where I am trying to go?
[86] Mr Pierce: Ydw.	Mr Pierce: Yes.
[87] Simon Thomas: Nid yw’n glir i mi lle mae hyn yn gorwedd ar hyn o bryd. Un o’r beirniadaethau sydd gennyf i yw, beth bynnag rydych chi’n meddwl o gwangos a’r hyn a ddigwyddodd, pan ddaeth ACCAC i mewn i’r Llywodraeth, fe gollwyd y glo mân hwnnw; fe gollwyd gafael ar hynny ac fe fu llithro go sylweddol dros y cyfnod, ac yn awr rydym yn trio dal i fyny a dal y rhaff yn ôl, fel petai. Nid yw’n glir imi i ble mae’n mynd nawr.	Simon Thomas: It is not clear to me where this lies at the moment. One of the criticisms that I have is that, whatever you think of quangos and what happened, when ACCAC came into the Government, the detail was lost; the grip on that was lost and there has been substantial slippage over the period, and now we are trying to catch up and pull things back, as it were. It is not clear to me where it is going now.
[88] Mr Pierce: Na. Efallai ei bod yn bosibl defnyddio ymadrodd: mae fel petai Llywodraeth Cymru a CBAC yn dal dwylo o amgylch twll, a’r twll yw ACCAC.	Mr Pierce: No. It may be possible to use an expression: it seems as if the Welsh Government and WJEC are holding hands around a hole, and the hole is ACCAC.
[89] Simon Thomas: Ie.	Simon Thomas: Yes.
[90] Mr Pierce: Mae hwnnw’n gwestiwn allweddol, rwy’n credu, oherwydd byddwn i’n tybio, wrth gynllunio model Cymwysterau Cymru, fod ar bwy bynnag sy’n gyfrifol am ei gynllunio, gan gynnwys y prif weithredwr, angen deall yn hollol glir beth mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn bwriadu dal gafael arno ac i ba raddau y mae’n mo’yn dal gafael arno, yn enwedig o ran agweddau cwricwlwm a phethau polisi lefel uchel ynglŷn â chymwysterau. Rwyf wedi nodi rhai o’r rheini yn y papur cefndir. Er enghraifft, i mi, mae’n eithaf amlwg mai cwestiwn lefel uchel yw: a ddylai fod gan Gymru fagloriaeth? Cwestiwn lefel uchel arall yw: a ddylai Cymru barhau i fod â chymwysterau high stakes 16 oed? Felly, buaswn i’n meddwl bod angen i’r Llywodraeth fod â perchnogaeth ar y rheini.	Mr Pierce: That is a crucial question, I think, because I would assume, in planning the Qualifications Wales model, that whoever is responsible for planning it, including the chief executive, needs to understand clearly what the Welsh Government intends to keep hold of and to what extent, particularly in terms of the curriculum and high-level policy issues regarding qualifications. I have noted some of those in the background paper. For example, for me, it is quite clear that the question as to whether Wales should have a baccalaureate is a high-level question. Another high-level question is: should Wales continue to have high-stakes qualifications for age 16? So, I would think that the Government needs to have ownership of those.
[91] O ran y cwricwlwm, hyd at a chan gynnwys cyfnod allweddol 4, mae yna, mewn rhai pynciau, gwricwlwm cenedlaethol yn cael ei osod, onid oes? Felly, mae hwnnw, buaswn i’n tybio, yn rhywbeth sy’n mynd i aros y tu mewn i Lywodraeth Cymru. Fodd bynnag, beth yw perthynas hwnnw â chymhwyster a pha sgôp a fydd i Gymwysterau Cymru weithio gyda chyrff arholi er mwyn adeiladu cymhwyster sydd yn cwmpasu’r cwricwlwm cenedlaethol? Rydym ni’n trafod pethau fel hynny ar hyn o bryd yn Lloegr. Er enghraifft, mae pethau diddorol iawn yn eu datganiad nhw ar gyfer y cwricwlwm cenedlaethol yng ngwyddor cyfrifiadureg cyfnodau allweddol 4 a 3. Felly, mae hwnnw yn fewnbwn pwysig wedyn i ni i gynllunio fel cyrff arholi’r cymhwyster TGAU gwyddor cyfrifiadureg. Felly, mae’r teip hwnnw o gwestiwn yn hollol allweddol—	In terms of the curriculum, up to and including key stage 4, in certain subjects, a national curriculum is laid down, is it not? So, I would assume that that is something that would remain within the Welsh Government. However, what is the relationship of that with qualifications and what scope will there be for Qualifications Wales to work with examination bodies in order to develop qualifications that encompass the national curriculum? We are discussing such issues in England at present. For example, there are very interesting issues in their statement on the national curriculum on computer science in key stages 4 and 3. So, that is an important input then for us to plan, as examination bodies, the GCSE qualification in computer science. So, that type of question is crucially important—
[92] Simon Thomas: Ai’r Llywodraeth yn Lloegr sydd wedi gwneud hynny?	Simon Thomas: Is it the Government in England that has done that?
[93] Mr Pierce: Y Llywodraeth sydd wedi gosod allan y cwricwlwm, ie, ond wedyn mae Ofqual, y cyrff dyfarnu a hefyd y Llywodraeth yn rhoi mewnbwn i drafodaeth—	Mr Pierce: It is the Government that has set out the curriculum, yes, but then Ofqual, the awarding bodies and the Government all input into this—
[94] Simon Thomas: I asesu effaith y cwricwlwm maes o law, fel petai.	Simon Thomas: To assess the impact of the curriculum eventually, as it were.
[95] Mr Pierce: Ie, i greu’r TGAU newydd. Mae deall hynny yn fewnbwn allweddol, buaswn i’n tybio, i gynllunio model manwl ar gyfer Cymwysterau Cymru.	Mr Pierce: Yes, to create the new GCSE. Understanding that is a key input, I would assume, to developing a detailed model for Qualifications Wales.
[96] Simon Thomas: Os caf i, felly, roi enghraifft, achos efallai os soniwn am enghraifft wedyn y bydd yn gliriach, os cymerwch chi Gymraeg ail iaith, ac rydych newydd sôn amdano, rydym ni i gyd yn gwybod nad yw’n gweithio. Mae Estyn yn dweud nad yw’n gweithio ac rydym i gyd yn gwybod nad yw’n gweithio. Ymateb y Llywodraeth, gyda’r sefyllfa bresennol, oedd comisiynu rhywun allanol i wneud adroddiad i’r Llywodraeth. Wedyn roedd datganiad yn y fan hon ac rydym yn aros i glywed beth fydd ymateb y Llywodraeth ac fe gawn ni weld. Yn y pen draw, bydd yn rhaid datblygu cymhwyster newydd, naill ai Cymraeg ail iaith, neu efallai cymhwyster sydd yn rhychwantu holl sgiliau iaith Gymraeg. Fodd bynnag, beth bynnag sy’n digwydd, o dan y drefn newydd, a ydych chi’n gweld y byddai datblygiad fel hwnnw yn rhywbeth a fyddai’n perthyn i Gymwysterau Cymru a phaneli arbenigedd a phaneli pwnc? O’r hyn a welais yn yr Alban, rwy’n meddwl ei fod yn perthyn yn bendant i’r SQA. Byddai’r Llywodraeth yn gosod allan amcanion, ‘Rydym ni eisiau gweld mwy o bobl yn dysgu Cymraeg ail iaith,’ dywedwch, ond byddai i fyny wedyn i’r SQA i ddatblygu hynny yn ei ffyrdd gwahanol. A ydych chi’n gweld mai fel hynny y dylai’r llif fynd felly—o’r Llywodraeth i’r corff newydd hwn?	Simon Thomas: If I could, therefore, give an example, because perhaps if we talk about an example it might be clearer, if you take Welsh as a second language, and you just talked about that, we all know that it is not working. Estyn says that it is not working, and we all know that it is not working. The Government’s response, given the current situation, was to commission an external person to report to the Government. Then there was a statement here, and we are waiting to hear what the Government’s response will be and then we will see. Ultimately, we will need to develop a new qualification, either Welsh as a second language or perhaps a qualification that spans the range of Welsh language skills. However, whatever happens, under the new system, do you see that such a development is something that would belong to Qualifications Wales and expert panels and subject panels? From what I saw in Scotland, I think that it definitely belongs to the SQA. The Government would set out objectives, such as, ‘We want to see more people learning Welsh second language’, but it would then be up to the SQA to develop that in various forms. Do you see that is the direction that the flow should take—from the Government to this new body?
[97] Mr Pierce: Yn bendant. A chymryd y maes hwnnw fel enghraifft, ac mae’n enghraifft dda, mae angen golau gwyrdd gan y Llywodraeth ynglŷn â rhai pethau polisi lefel uchel, onid oes, er mwyn gallu symud? Unwaith mae’r golau gwyrdd wedi ymddangos, bydd yn bosibl i swyddogion rheoleiddio Llywodraeth Cymru, hyd yn oed fel y maen nhw yn awr, plus ni fel corff arholi, i symud ymlaen a datblygu cymhwyster newydd gan dynnu i mewn barn rhanddeiliaid sydd hefyd yn arbenigwyr yn y maes. Fodd bynnag, heb y golau gwyrdd, nid oes dim byd yn digwydd, a dyna’r sefyllfa rydym ynddi. Fel y mae, gall fod y bydd Cymwysterau Cymru, hyd yn oed, yn ymddangos cyn bydd gennym y golau gwyrdd. Felly, mae honno’n enghraifft lle mae angen y golau gwyrdd. Mae angen y golau gwyrdd hefyd ar y cwricwlwm Cymreig, achos mae i gyd yn effeithio ar bethau a ddylai fod yn cael eu datblygu ar gyfer dysgu o 2016.	Mr Pierce: Certainly. If you take that as an example, and it is a good example, you need a green light from Government on certain high-level policy issues in order to progress, do you not? Once that green light has been given, it will be possible for the regulatory officials within the Welsh Government, even as they are now, as well as us, as an examinations body, to move forward and develop a new qualification, bringing in the views of stakeholders who are also experts in the field. However, without the green light, nothing happens, and that is the situation that we are in. As it is, it could be that Qualifications Wales, even, has appeared before we see that green light. So, that is an example of where the green light is needed. The green light is also needed on the cwricwlwm Cymreig because it all impacts on things that should be being developed for learning from 2016.
[98] Fodd bynnag, o ran egwyddor, dyna fyddai’r model, buaswn i’n meddwl, o dan Gymwysterau Cymru hefyd. Mae rhai pethau lefel uchel y mae angen i’r Llywodraeth berchnogi penderfyniad arnynt ac wedyn mae hynny’n hwyluso’r maes i Gymwysterau Cymru a chorff arholi fel CBAC i symud pethau ymlaen ar lefel fanwl, ond gan dynnu’r rhanddeiliaid sydd â barn bwysig hefyd i mewn, gan gynnwys athrawon a darlithwyr.	However, in principle, that would be the model, I would think, under Qualifications Wales too. There are certain high-level issues where the Government needs to take ownership of decisions and then that facilitates matters for Qualifications Wales and examination bodies such as WJEC to move things forward on a detailed level, while drawing in stakeholders who will have an important contribution too, including teachers and lecturers.
[99] David Rees: May I just clarify a point? In the SQA, it was highlighted that SQA has the responsibility from that point on for everything below it and, therefore, if you are talking about the development of the curriculum and the development of assessments, under this current model, where WJEC would be a commissioning body, effectively, would you expect to see a Qualifications Wales structure that is such that, when you go through that process, there is collaboration in the development process of both the commissioning body and Qualifications Wales in developing those specifications and curriculum, effectively?
[100] Mr Pierce: Yes, I think that it does become a collaborative approach, does it not? There is a very good example, I think, in the Republic of Ireland, where they have a curriculum and assessment council working with the State Examinations Commission, and that is the kind of relationship there—they would always work jointly on qualifications, and I do not see any reason why, in Wales, the same should not apply. It is not unusual for any of these countries to have key organisations working together. As I mentioned earlier, I think their success is largely built on how well that joint working delivers in reality.
[101] David Rees: Aled, you have questions.
[102] Aled Roberts: Un o’r problemau yng Nghymru yw ein bod mewn marchnad eithaf agored, ac mae cymharu ag Iwerddon a’r Alban yn anodd o achos bod gan y State Examinations Commission yn Iwerddon fonopoli i ryw raddau, a’r un modd yr SQA yn yr Alban, o ran arholiadau ysgol. A oes perygl, gyda’r holl ansicrwydd hwn? Un o’r negeseuon o’r Alban ac Iwerddon oedd, wrth iddynt ddatblygu proses newydd, bod teimlad eu bod wedi colli rhywfaint o symud o ran datblygu cwricwlaidd. Os nad ydych chi’n gwybod pryd bydd y golau gwyrdd yn cael ei roi, efo’r holl newid hwn—ac rydych wedi dweud mai hwn yw’r newid mwyaf yn hanes arholiadau yng Nghymru—onid oes perygl mai’r plant a’r athrawon a fydd ar eu colled yn ystod yr holl symud hwn?	Aled Roberts: One of the problems in Wales is that we are in quite an open market, and the comparison with Ireland and Scotland is difficult because the State Examinations Commission in Ireland to all purposes has a monopoly, just as the SQA has in Scotland in terms of school examinations. Is there a danger, with all this uncertainty? One of the messages from Scotland and Ireland is that, as they developed a new process, there was a feeling that they had lost some measure of movement in terms of curriculum development. If you do not know when the green light is being given, with all these changes—and you have said that this is the biggest change to examinations in Wales—is there not a risk that children and teachers will miss out during this movement?
[103] Mr Pierce: Mae’n rhaid inni sicrhau nad yw hynny’n digwydd. Dyma’r newid mwyaf y mae Cymru wedi ei wneud ar ei phen ei hun—dyna’r pwynt, onid e? Wrth wneud hyn ar ein pennau ein hunain, gyda safonau a fydd yn perthyn i Gymru, yn hytrach na safonau tair gwlad, yna diogelu buddiannau pobl ifanc yw’r peth pwysicaf, ac mae hynny’n bwysig o ran ansawdd y rhaglenni dysgu—mae’n rhaid i’r rheini fod yn ardderchog—a diogelwch y safonau dyfarnu ar y diwedd. Wrth gwrs, un o’r pethau a fydd yn parhau i wneud Cymru’n wahanol i’r Alban a Gweriniaeth Iwerddon yw bod gennym o hyd y cysylltiad brand hwn â’r drefn yn Lloegr. O ran lefel A, mae’r union yr un brand, a’r un graddau a fydd, o A* i E—gwahaniaeth yn y model asesu ydyw. Mae’r cynnwys yn mynd i fod ym mherchnogaeth y ddwy wlad, oherwydd bod y prifysgolion wedi dylanwadu’n drwm iawn ar gynnwys y lefel A newydd yn Lloegr ac yng Nghymru.	Mr Pierce: We need to ensure that that does not happen. It is the greatest change that Wales has undertaken on its own—that was the point, is it not? In doing this on our own, with standards that will be Welsh standards, rather than standards for three countries, then safeguarding the interests of young people is the most important issue, and that is important in terms of the quality of programmes of learning—those must be excellent—and the standards at the end of the day. Of course, one of the things that will continue to make Wales different from Scotland and the Republic of Ireland is the fact that we still have this brand linkage to the system in England. In terms of A-level, it is exactly the same brand and the grades will be exactly the same, from A* to E—the difference is in the assessment model. The content will be owned by both nations, because the universities have had a great influence on the content of the new A-levels in England and in Wales.
[104] O ran TGAU, bydd parhad yn y defnydd o’r brand, ond bydd gwahaniaeth yn null y graddau. Felly, rhaid inni sicrhau ein bod yn blaenoriaethau’r buddiannau i bobl ifanc Cymru, a hefyd, lle bo safonau yn y cwestiwn, lle mae Cymru yn dal am bwysleisio cyfatebiaeth safonau, mae’n rhaid ffeindio’r dull cywir o wneud hynny. Buaswn i’n tybio bod hynny’n bwysig iawn yn lefel A. Fy marn i yw ei bod yn bosibl gwneud hynny.	For GCSE, we will continue to use that brand, but there will be differences in the grading regime. So, we must ensure that we prioritise the interests of the young people of Wales, and also, in terms of standards, where Wales still wants to ensure that there is portability of qualifications, we must continue to do that. In my opinion, it is possible to do that.
[105] Keith Davies: Yn ôl yr hyn a ddywedasoch chi, a yw’r prifysgolion wedi dylanwadu ar Gove? Y drafodaeth yr oeddwn i’n ystyried iddi ddigwydd yn y flwyddyn ddiwethaf oedd nad yw Lloegr yn mynd i gael Uwch Gyfrannol rhagor, ond bod lefel A yn mynd i fod am ddwy flynedd, gyda Llywodraeth Cymru’n penderfynu—ac roeddwn yn falch o weld hynny—bod plant Cymru yn gallu sefyll Safon Uwch Gyfrannol ac wedyn wneud lefel A. A ydyn nhw wedi newid yn Lloegr, felly?	Keith Davies: From what you have just said, have the universities influenced Gove? The discussion that I consider to have happened in the past year was that England is not going to have AS-level, but that A-level was going to be for two years, and that the Welsh Government had decided—and I was pleased to see that—that children in Wales could sit AS-level and then A-levels. So, have they changed in England, then?
[106] Mr Pierce: Mae’r prifysgolion wedi dylanwadu’n drwm ar y cynnwys. Er enghraifft, yn economeg, dadl y prifysgolion oedd bod dwy thema fawr, bwysig nad ydynt yn y lefel A bresennol, ond eu bod am eu gweld yn dod i mewn. Y ddwy yw’r farchnad lafur a’r sector ariannol. Felly, barn y prifysgolion yw bod eisiau i’r ddwy hynny ddod i mewn, ac felly mae hynny’n digwydd. Dylanwadu’r cynnwys y mae prifysgolion wedi ei wneud, a dyna enghraifft.	Mr Pierce: The universities have had an influence on the content. For example, in economics, the view of the universities was that there were two major themes not included in the current A-level, and they want to see them included. One is the financial sector, and the other is the labour market. So, universities want to see them included, and that is what is happening. The universities have influenced the content, and that is an example.
[107] O ran y model, nid ydynt wedi cael gweld eu barn yn cael ei gweithredu yn Lloegr oherwydd, ar y cyfan, mae prifysgolion yn dal yn ffafrio’r model Uwch Gyfrannol yn cyfrannu at y lefel A, a bydd hynny’n parhau yng Nghymru ac yng Ngogledd Iwerddon. Yn Lloegr, fodd bynnag, mae’n mynd yn lefel A linol gyda’r asesu ar y diwedd. Felly, mae’r prifysgolion wedi dylanwadu’n drwm ar gynnwys y lefel A newydd, a bydd hynny’n wir yn Lloegr ac yng Nghymru, ond mae’r model asesu’n dangos dylanwad y Llywodraethau yn y ddwy wlad yn bennaf.	In terms of the model, of course, they have not seen their views implemented in England, because, on the whole, the universities still favour the AS model contributing to A-level, and that will remain in place in Wales and in Northern Ireland. In England, however, it becomes a linear A-level with assessment at the end. So, the universities have had an influence on the content of the new A-level, and that will be true in England and Wales, but the assessment model demonstrates the influence of the Governments of both nations mainly.
[108] Bethan Jenkins: Efallai nad yw hyn yn berthnasol o gwbl, ond a oes unrhyw bosibilrwydd o dan y system newydd, gan y bydd Cymru’n mynd yn wahanol, na fydd rhai prifysgolion—wel, gobeithio y cânt roi mewnbwn yn y broses newydd—os ydynt yn teimlo nad ydynt yn cael mewnbwn, yn cydnabod y cymhwyster newydd, yn debyg i agwedd rhai at y fagloriaeth, ynteu a yw hynny’n gonsyrn sy’n mynd o flaen gofid? Daeth y syniad i’m pen wrth i Keith ofyn ei gwestiwn.	Bethan Jenkins: This may not be in any way relevant, but will there be any possibility under the new system, as Wales will be different, that some universities—well, hopefully they will have an input into the new process—if they feel that they are not having an input, will not recognise the new qualification, similar to the attitude taken by some to the baccalaureate, or is that worrying about something that might not ever happen? It just came into my head when Keith was asking his question.
10:15
[109] Mr Pierce: Mae’n rhywbeth y mae’n rhaid inni sicrhau yn bendant fel nad oes risg y bydd prifysgolion yn gwahaniaethu rhwng y ddau gymhwyster. Os cymerwn lefel A economeg fel esiampl, byddwn yn gallu dangos ein bod ni yng Nghymru, drwy CBAC, wedi gwneud yn union yr un newidiadau, cryfhau a diweddaru cynnwys lefel A economeg ag y mae Lloegr, drwy’r un cyngor, wedi eu gwneud. Felly, bydd y ddwy lefel A yn cyfateb yn llwyr o ran y cynnwys. Bydd y safonau hefyd yn parhau a bydd dilyniant o ran y safonau presennol. Felly, byddant yn cyfateb o ran cynnwys ac o ran y safonau, a’r unig beth fydd yn wahanol fydd y model asesu yng Nghymru, lle mae AS yn dal i gyfrannu. Felly, dyna’r dystiolaeth. Mae’n dystiolaeth gadarn. Dyna y byddwn yn ei ddefnyddio fel tystiolaeth i UCAS a’r prifysgolion ym mhob un o’r gwledydd i sicrhau pawb bod y rhain gyfwerth.	Mr Pierce: It is something that we must ensure so that there is no risk that universities will discriminate between the two qualifications. If we take A-level economics as an example, we will be able to demonstrate that we in Wales, through WJEC, have made exactly the same changes and have strengthened and updated the content of A-level economics as England has, through the same advice. So, both A-levels will correspond fully in terms of the content. The standards will also remain and there will be continuity in terms of the current standards. So, they will correspond in terms of content and standards, and the only thing that will be different is the assessment model in Wales, where AS still makes a contribution. So, that is the evidence. It is robust evidence. That is what we will use as evidence to UCAS and the universities in each of the nations to assure everyone that these are of equal value.
[110] Simon Thomas: I fynd yn ôl at y model, a ydych yn gweld mai’r Llywodraeth neu Gymwysterau Cymru ddylai fod â’r hawl i benderfynu ar y model asesu?	Simon Thomas: To go back to the model, do you think that it should be the Government or Qualifications Wales that should have the right to decide on the assessment model?
[111] Mr Pierce: Mae hwn, efallai, hefyd yn y papur. Rwyf wedi rhestru rhai pethau yr wyf wedi eu galw ‘y meysydd llwyd’. Credaf fod cwestiwn ynglŷn â pha rhai sy’n faterion technegol arbenigol y dylai’r rheoleiddiwr cymwysterau benderfynu yn eu cylch a pha rhai sydd, efallai, yn bethau lle y byddai’r Llywodraeth dal am gael perchnogaeth arnynt ond, gobeithio, am gymryd cyngor gan y rheoleiddiwr ac efallai hefyd gan y cyrff dyfarnu. Mae hynny’n gwestiwn lle mae’n bosibl dadlau’r ddwy ffordd o ran y model. Mae dadleuon o blaid y lefel A linol a dadleuon o blaid y lefel A lle mae Uwch Gyfrannol yn dal i gyfrannu. Pe bai rhywun yn gofyn imi roi tystiolaeth, gallwn roi rhywfaint o dystiolaeth o blaid y ddau. Felly, mae’n bosibl iawn y bydd polisi’r Llywodraeth yn penderfynu hynny.	Mr Pierce: This is also, perhaps, in the paper. I have listed some things I have described as ‘grey areas’. I believe that there is a question as to which of these are specialist technical issues that the qualifications regulator should decide upon and which are, perhaps, issues that the Government might wish to retain ownership of, but, hopefully, would also wish to take advice from the regulator and perhaps even the awarding bodies. That is a question on which there are arguments to be made both ways in terms of the model. There are arguments in favour of the linear A-level and in favour of an A-level where the AS level still plays a part. Were someone to ask me to provide evidence, I could give some evidence in favour of both models. Therefore, it is very possible that Government policy will decide that.
[112] Enghraifft arall yw’r rôl ar gyfer asesiadau gan athrawon. Mae gan Lywodraeth Lloegr farn eithaf pendant ar hynny, ac mae gan y rheoleiddiwr farn eithaf pendant arno. Mae gwledydd eraill sydd â barn eithaf gwahanol.	Another example is the role of teacher assessments. The Government in England has a set view on that, and the regulator also has a view on that. There are other countries that have different views.
[113] Simon Thomas: Mae hynny’n cynnwys rhai sy’n gwneud yn arbennig o dda yn y gynghrair PISA.	Simon Thomas: That includes some that have done extremely well in the PISA league table.
[114] Mr Pierce: Ydy. Felly, mae hynny’n fater, efallai, lle byddai Llywodraeth Cymru am gael perchnogaeth ar agwedd ar y polisi ynglŷn â hynny, ond eto yn cymryd cyngor gan y rheoleiddiwr newydd a’r cyrff arholi.	Mr Pierce: Yes. Therefore, that is an issue where, perhaps, the Welsh Government may want to take ownership of aspects of that policy, but again take advice from the new regulator and the examining bodies.
[115] Simon Thomas: Gan gymryd yr enghraifft y bu ichi ei rhoi o lefel A economeg, os yw’r cynnwys yn cyfateb a’r safonau yr un peth, mae’r cwestiwn yn codi ynghylch beth yw’r pwrpas o asesu mewn dwy ffordd wahanol. Yr unig beth y medrwch ei ddweud yw bod un math o asesu yn helpu math arbennig o ddisgybl i ddatblygu ac y byddai math arall yn ffafrio math arall o ddisgybl. Nid yw hynny yn ddim byd i’w wneud â safonau, felly.	Simon Thomas: Taking the example that you gave of A-level economics, if the content corresponds and the standards are the same, the question arises as to the purpose of assessing in two different ways. The only thing you could say is that one kind of assessment helps a certain type of pupil to develop and another kind of assessment favours a different type of pupil. So, that has nothing to do with standards.
[116] Mr Pierce: Nac ydy. Byddwn yn cytuno nad yw’n ymwneud â safonau. Byddwn yn dadlau ei bod yn bosibl dangos bod y safonau yn mynd i fod yn gyfatebol drwy’r ddau ddull. Credaf mai un o’r rhesymau y mae prifysgolion yn tueddu i ffafrio cynnwys y gwaith Uwch Gyfrannol yw eu bod yn gyfarwydd â hynny eu hunain.	Mr Pierce: No, it has not. I would agree that it does not have anything to do with standards. I would argue that you could demonstrate that the standards will correspond whatever the method adopted. I think that one of the reasons that universities tend to favour including AS is that they are familiar with that system themselves.
[117] Simon Thomas: Maent yn cael rhagflas o waith y bobl fydd yn dod atynt.	Simon Thomas: It gives them a taster of the work of prospective students.
[118] Mr Pierce: Maent yn cael rhagflas o ran y wybodaeth, ond hefyd maent yn gyfarwydd iawn â’r dull modiwlar gan fod y rhan fwyaf o gyfundrefnau addysg uwch ar hyn o bryd wedi eu sefydlu ar system modiwlar, lle mae ail flwyddyn y radd a’r drydedd flwyddyn yn cyfrannu. Maent yn cael eu pwysoli’n wahanol, efallai, ac rydym yn falch o weld bod y lefel Uwch Gyfrannol yn cael ei bwysoli braidd yn llai i’r dyfodol—bydd yn cyfrannu 40%, tra bod A2 yn cyfrannu 60%. Credaf fod hynny’n gywir.	Mr Pierce: They do get a taster in terms of information, but they are also very familiar with the modular system, as most systems of higher education are now based on a modular system, whereby the second and third years of a degree contribute. They may be weighted differently, perhaps, and we are pleased to see that the AS-level will be weighted a little less in future—it will contribute 40%, while A2 will contribute 60%. I believe that that is correct.
[119] Simon Thomas: Mae prifysgolion wedi bod yn defnyddio’r dull hwnnw ers oes Lladin, hyd yn oed.	Simon Thomas: Universities have been using that method since the age of Latin.
[120] Mr Pierce: Mae’n ddigon posibl.	Mr Pierce: Very possibly.
[121] Simon Thomas: Nid yw mor newydd â hynny. Diolch am hynny.	Simon Thomas: It is not as new as that. Thank you for that.
[122] Keith Davies: I ddilyn hynny, nid dim ond y prifysgolion sy’n ffafrio’r system honno. Credaf fod myfyrwyr rhwng 16 a 18 oed yn hoffi’r ffaith y gallant wneud cyrsiau Uwch Gyfrannol am flwyddyn a dilyn, efallai, pedwar neu bum pwnc ac, ar ôl blwyddyn, gallant benderfynu pa bynciau y maent am eu gwneud ar gyfer lefel A. Mae’r hyn yr ydym yn ei gynnig yng Nghymru yn help mawr i fyfyrwyr, rwy’n credu.	Keith Davies: Following on from that, it is not only the universities that favour that system. Students aged 16 to 18 like the fact that they can do AS-level courses for a year and study, perhaps, four or five subjects and, after a year, can decide which subjects they wish to study for A-level. What we offer in Wales is of great assistance to students, I think.
[123] Mr Pierce: Ydy.	Mr Pierce: Yes, it is.
[124] David Rees: I would like to ask a question on the SQA model. Clearly, there has been a lot of emphasis on the SQA model. Last week, when we met, the emphasis was on the self-regulation of the academic aspect of it. What is your view on the role of the development of the self-regulatory aspect of the academic, school-based qualifications, such as that which operates in Scotland?
[125] Mr Pierce: I think the context in Scotland is obviously quite different. Some of the things that we have discussed now are to do with comparability of standards within a brand that is still common between two countries with a different philosophy about assessment. I am not convinced that, in that context, self-regulation would be anywhere near enough. We are sitting right next door to a large country where a regulated version of the same brands that we want to use in Wales is continuing. My own view is that, in the interests of stakeholders, especially young people in Wales, we should stick with a meaningful version of regulation. That is, more than self-regulation: genuine regulation. That does not prevent that same organisation, Qualifications Wales, from playing a very constructive role in the developmental sphere. It is about that working together, as I mentioned earlier, with organisations like WJEC and other stakeholders, and perhaps I should have mentioned Estyn as well, because the input of a stakeholder like Estyn, and the perception that it has of standards and learning and the learning environment, is important.
[126] In Scotland, another key organisation is Education Scotland, which includes its inspectorate, and which also works on the development of learning resources. There are different configurations that can bring key expertise and key organisations together. However, I really do believe that it is in the interest of Wales’s learners that we stick with a genuinely meaningful interpretation of regulation, both for general qualifications and vocational qualifications. I know that we have not touched on vocational, but the other view that I have is that the IVET, the initial vocational education and training programmes, are strategically a vital area for Qualifications Wales to engage with early on. We have some ideas from WJEC and another major awarding body that we would like to contribute to that. We would not like the vocational area to get forgotten about—it is of major importance to many 14-19 learners. So, although we are very busy on general qualifications now, the vocational qualifications need the same priority and a similar regulatory approach.
[127] David Rees: I can assure you that the vocational qualifications will not be forgotten about or lost in any way whatsoever. I was going to highlight the question of vocational qualifications, because we have not discussed them this morning, and one of the issues that we raised with SQA was the accreditation committee it has in relation to vocational qualifications. [Interruption.] You will have to excuse the noise overhead. I suppose in your view—. How do you see the Qualifications Wales model? Should it be following a model such as that with an accreditation committee that is separate and, I believe, is legislated for as well, to ensure that the accreditation process of Qualifications Wales, particularly in the vocational area, is managed properly?
[128] Mr Pierce: I think, for the vocational qualifications, our view in WJEC is that on the CVET, the continuing vocational education and training, which is strongly linked to the occupational spheres, Qualifications Wales will need to be very much one of four regulators working collectively—that is, with Scotland, England and Northern Ireland—because, very likely, the qualifications for the CVET will continue to be ones that have currency and are delivered by awarding bodies that work across the UK. Therefore I think that the kind of accreditation function, and also the recognition of awarding bodies, can happen jointly with the other regulators for the CVET programmes. However, for the IVET programmes I hope that Qualifications Wales will have started discussions on this well before they are fully set up. There is a strategic role to play there, to see Wales move forward with a really top-class IVET model that is well-suited to being delivered nationally within a 14-19 framework that prioritises bilingual availability as well. So, for the moment, we are working in terms of joining together of qualifications that happen to be available in the IVET area, but a much more strategic approach is possible, linking with the Welsh baccalaureate and drawing on the European experience of how you have a really good IVET programme that marries well with the general education that those young people are also pursuing. So, strategically, Qualifications Wales can play a very substantial role in moving the IVET area forward.
[129] David Rees: Simon, do you want to come in on this?
[130] Simon Thomas: Rwyf jest am eich holi ynglŷn â chymwysterau galwedigaethol, oherwydd yn yr Alban, sydd â’r model y mae’r Llywodraeth yn sôn cymaint amdano, mae’n bur wahanol. Mae’r ochr alwedigaethol y tu allan, bron, i reoleiddiad. Mae achredu yn digwydd, ond nid yw’n rhan o’r broses reoleiddio, nid yw’n rhan o ddeddfwriaeth, ac mae’n gorwedd—nid wyf cweit yn deall yn awr, er fy mod i wedi treulio diwrnod ar hyn, ond mae gwahaniaeth rhwng yr ochr academaidd a’r ochr alwedigaethol, ac mae gwahaniaeth yn y farchnad, mae gwahaniaeth o ran achredu, ac mae gwahaniaeth yn y monopoli, fel roeddech yn sôn amdano gynnau fach. Yn y cyd-destun Cymreig, felly, roedd argymhelliad—rwy’n gwybod mai’r tyst nesaf yw Huw Evans—i symleiddio’r holl gymwysterau galwedigaethol. A yw hynny yn dal yn rhywbeth sy’n cael ei drafod yn weithredol rhwng y gwahanol gyrff, neu a yw hynny’n rhywbeth sydd wedi cael ei roi i’r neilltu am y tro, tra bod trafodaethau eraill yn digwydd?	Simon Thomas: I just want to ask a question about vocational qualifications, because in Scotland, where there is a model that the Government is talking so much about, it is quite different. The vocational side is outside regulation, nearly. There is accreditation, but it is not part of the regulation process, it is not part of legislation, and that lies—I do not quite understand it, even after spending a day on it, but there is a difference between the academic side and the vocational side, and there is a difference in the market and in terms of accreditation, and there is a difference in terms of the monopoly, which you were talking about earlier. In the Welsh context, therefore, there was a recommendation—I know that the next witness is Huw Evans—to simplify the whole vocational qualifications. Is that something that is still being actively discussed between the various bodies, or is it something that has been put aside for the moment while other discussions are ongoing?
[131] Mr Pierce: Rwy’n meddwl efallai fod y symleiddio yn fwy realistig o ran y rhaglenni IVET, fel roeddwn yn sôn. O ran y rhaglenni CVET, mae’r ffaith bod cymaint ohonynt yn adlewyrchu’r ffaith bod cymaint o feysydd galwedigaethol pwysig sydd eisiau eu hybu. Felly, byddwn yn tybio bod y maes CVET yn un lle mae rôl i reoleiddiwr cryf yng Nghymru gyfrannu at drafodaethau ar lefel Prydain, achos mae digon o ddeinamig yn y trafod sy’n digwydd ynglŷn â’r meysydd galwedigaethol hefyd. Mae pob math o gwestiynau pwysig, er enghraifft ynglŷn â fframweithiau safonau galwedigaethol—beth yw pwrpas y rheini, sut mae eu diweddaru a pha mor berthnasol ydynt yn y gwahanol wledydd. Felly, rwy’n credu bod cyfraniad Cymwysterau Cymru i’r trafodaethau hynny yn mynd i fod yn bwysig, ac mae llais da o Gymru yn mynd i gyfoethogi’r trafodaethau hynny, rwy’n credu.	Mr Pierce: I think that simplification is perhaps more realistic in terms of the IVET programmes, as I mentioned. In terms of the CVET programmes, the fact that there are so many of them reflects the fact that there are so many important vocational areas that need to be promoted. So, I would assume that the CVET sphere is one where there is a role for a strong regulator in Wales to contribute to discussions at the British level, because there is plenty of dynamic in the discussions that are happening on vocational qualifications as well. There are all sorts of important questions, for example on the framework for vocational standards—what their purpose are, how they should be updated and how relevant they are in the various nations. So, I think that the contribution of Qualifications Wales to those discussions is going to be important, and having a strong Welsh voice will enhance those discussions, in my opinion.
[132] Fodd bynnag, o ran y rhaglenni IVET, categoreiddio sydd yn digwydd ar hyn o bryd, ac rydym yn gweld hynny fel y cam cyntaf. Y cam strategol nesaf yw datblygu gweledigaeth yng Nghymru ar gyfer rhaglenni IVET o ran sawl maes sydd eisiau eu datblygu, ac a ddylent fod yn gymharol eang fel meysydd fel nad yw pobl ifanc yn arbenigo’n rhy gynnar, ond eto yn cael blas ar y posibiliadau. Mae’n rhaid edrych ar sut mae hynny yn plethu â’r fagloriaeth a sut mae’n plethu â’r addysg gyffredinol y bydd y bobl ifanc hynny yn parhau ag ef yn ystod yr oedran 14-19. Felly, rwy’n credu bod cyfle gwych i Gymru drwy ryddhau ei hun, i raddau, o’r fframwaith tair gwlad ar gyfer IVET, a datblygu model ar gyfer Cymru, gan bwysleisio darpariaeth ddwyieithog, ac adnoddau sy’n ei hybu a’i chefnogi. Mae hynny’n bosibl drwy resymoli. Mae hwnnw’n un o’r cyfleoedd mwyaf cyffrous rhwng nawr a diwedd y degawd, sef y gall fod rhaglenni IVET a darpariaeth alwedigaethol 14-19 gwirioneddol dda sy’n strategol o ran ei gweledigaeth.	However, in terms of the IVET programmes, it is categorisation that is happening at present, and we see that as the first step. The next strategic step is to develop a vision for IVET programmes as to how many areas need to be developed, and whether they should be relatively broad so that young people do not specialise too early, but get a taster of the possibilities. We have to look at how that dovetails with the Welsh baccalaureate and how it dovetails with the general education given to those young people as they continue with that during the ages of 14 and 19. So, I think that there is an excellent opportunity for Wales by, to a certain extent, freeing itself from the three-country framework for IVET, and developing a model for Wales, emphasising bilingual provision in so doing, and the resources that will promote and support that bilingual provision. That is possible through rationalisation. That is one of the most exciting opportunities between now and the end of this decade, namely that there could be IVET programmes and excellent vocational provision for 14-19 that are strategic in terms of their vision.
[133] Simon Thomas: Diolch am hynny, achos dyna’r peth mwyaf cadarnhaol rwyf wedi’i glywed am yr ochr honno am sbel, felly peth braf yw hynny. Gyda’r holl bethau rydym wedi eu trafod y bore yma, a chyda’r hyn rydych newydd ei ddweud am y maes diddorol ond dyrys galwedigaethol hefyd, mae’n rhaid imi ofyn a yw 2015 yn ymarferol fel amserlen ar gyfer sefydlu Cymwysterau Cymru?	Simon Thomas: Thank you for that, because that is the most positive thing that I have heard for a long time, which is very pleasing. With all that we have discussed this morning, and given what you have just said about this interesting but complex area of vocational qualifications, I must ask whether 2015 is a practical timescale for establishing Qualifications Wales.
[134] Mr Pierce: Yn fy marn i, mae’n rhaid iddo fod. Byddwn wrth fy modd pe bai yn bodoli yn gynnar yn 2015 yn hytrach na’n hwyr yn 2015, neu yn well byth, pe bai yn bodoli yn awr yr haf hwn. Felly, mae’r agenda gymwysterau yn un cyffrous a phrysur iawn ar hyn o bryd. Mae angen cyflawni lot o bethau pwysig i’r safon uchaf er mwyn diogelu buddiannau pobl ifanc Cymru. Rydym yn amlwg yn bwrw ymlaen gyda hynny, gyda chyfraniad Llywodraeth Cymru, Estyn a rhanddeiliaid eraill. Mae’n rhaid i hynny ddigwydd fel bod y rhaglenni hyn yn eu lle ar gyfer eu haddysgu o 2015 ymlaen. Yn y cyfamser, rwy’n credu bod angen gweithio ar y darlun strategol o ran Cymwysterau Cymru, gan y bydd ei gyfraniad maes o law yr un mor bwysig, achos yn y fan honno mae’r dyfodol. Rwy’n credu bod cydweithio gwych yn bosibl yng Nghymru rhwng cyrff sy’n deall rôl ei gilydd ac mae angen eglurder ynglŷn â sut mae pawb yn cyfrannu. Dyna’r math o bethau sydd eisiau eu blaenoriaethu. Mae hyn yn mynd i lwyddo, a dyma’r ffordd ymlaen.	Mr Pierce: In my view, it has to be. I would be delighted if it were in existence early in 2015 rather than late in 2015, or even better, if it came into existence this summer. So, the qualifications agenda is very busy and very exciting at present. A number of very important things need to be achieved to the highest standard to safeguard the interests of young people in Wales. Clearly, we are progressing with that, with the contribution of the Welsh Government, Estyn and other stakeholders. That has to happen so that these programmes are in place to be taught from 2015 onwards. In the meantime, I think that we need to work on the strategic planning for Qualifications Wales, given that its contribution in due course will be just as important, because that is where the future lies. I think that excellent collaboration is possible in Wales between bodies that understand each other and there is a need for clarity regarding how everyone makes a contribution. These are the things that need to be prioritised. They will succeed, and this is the way forward.
[135] David Rees: I have one final question from Keith, then our time is up.
[136] Keith Davies: Roeddwn am ddilyn i fyny ar y cyrsiau galwedigaethol, achos mae’r Llywodraeth wedi penderfynu’n barod, rai blynyddoedd yn ôl bellach, bod plant rhwng 14 a 16 yn gorfod cael dewis o 30 o bynciau yn yr ysgol, ond bod dros 20% o’r rheini yn gorfod bod yn rhai galwedigaethol. Felly, o ran y rhai IVET rydym yn sôn amdanynt yn awr, beth sydd angen ei wneud yw edrych ar y cwricwlwm a sicrhau bod y rheini yn gallu dod i mewn a chael eu hasesu.	Keith Davies: I want to follow on on the vocational courses, because the Government has already decided, some years ago now, that students between 14 and 16 must have a choice of 30 subjects in school, but that over 20% of those have to be vocational. So, in terms of the IVET programmes that we are now talking about, what needs to be done is to look at the curriculum and ensure that those can come in and be assessed.
[137] Mr Pierce: Rwy’n cytuno; mae elfennau o’r polisi yn eu lle. Mae’r flaenoriaeth i’w gweld yn y polisi, ond rwy’n credu ei bod yn bosibl symud ymlaen i ddelifro’r polisi hwnnw’n well drwy roi fframwaith cenedlaethol iddo. Ar hyn o bryd, byddwn yn tybio ein bod yn eithaf aneffeithlon o ran y defnydd o adnoddau i gefnogi’r maes galwedigaethol. Gallai tynnu hynny at ei gilydd o ran brand Cymwysterau Cymru dros y rhaglenni IVET olygu ei fod yn ddarpariaeth wych. Mae pethau i’w dysgu o wledydd eraill, gan gynnwys rhai o’r modelau Ewropeaidd gorau. Un o’r pethau sy’n allweddol yn y fan honno yw plethiad yr addysg alwedigaethol â’r addysg gyffredinol, ac mae’r fagloriaeth yn rhoi fframwaith delfrydol, ym marn llawer, i wneud hynny.	Mr Pierce: I agree; elements of the policy are already in place. The prioritisation is already in the policy, but I think that we can progress in delivering that policy more effectively by putting in place a national framework for it. At the moment, I would assume that we are relatively inefficient in terms of the use of resources to support vocational education. Drawing that together under the Qualifications Wales brand for the IVET programmes could make excellent provision. There are lessons to learn from other countries, including from some of the best European models. One of the things that is crucial there is the dovetailing of vocational education and general education, and the baccalaureate provides an excellent framework, in the view of many people, to achieve that.
[138] David Rees: I thank you for your evidence this morning. It was very helpful. You will receive a copy of the draft transcript in order for you to make any factual corrections that need to be made. Once again, thank you for attending and giving us the information, which, I am sure, will help us in our deliberations.
[139] Mr Pierce: Thank you. Diolch yn fawr.
[140] David Rees: We will move straight on to item 3.
10:30
Craffu ar y Bil Cymwysterau Cymru cyn y Broses Ddeddfu: Sesiwn Dystiolaeth 2 Pre-legislative Scrutiny of the Qualifications (Wales) Bill: Evidence Session 2
[141] David Rees: I welcome Huw Evans, who is chair of the advisory board established to set up Qualifications Wales. He also chaired the review of qualifications.
[142] Mr Evans: I did indeed, Chair.
[143] David Rees: Welcome. We have some questions for you that we will move to quickly because we have limited time, so if it is okay with you, we will go straight to the questions.
[144] Mr Evans: Okay.
[145] Simon Thomas: Nawr eich bod wedi gorffen eich argymhellion i’r Llywodraeth a nawr yn cadeirio’r bwrdd cynghori, a ydych chi wedi dysgu mwy o’r model penodol yn yr Alban, ar oedd yn greiddiol i’ch argymhellion, sydd naill ai’n rhoi hyder i chi wrth symud ymlaen neu efallai’n codi mwy o gwestiynau ynghylch sut y bydd Cymwysterau Cymru’n gweithio?	Simon Thomas: Now that you have finished your recommendations to the Government and are responsible for chairing the advisory board, have you learned more from the specific Scottish model, which was at the heart of your recommendations, which either gives you confidence going forward or perhaps raises more questions about how Qualifications Wales will work?
[146] Mr Evans: Mae nifer o gwestiynau yn codi o edrych ar y model yn yr Alban. Rydym wedi edrych yn fanwl ar beth sydd yn mynd ymlaen yn yr Alban. Mae swyddogion wedi bod yn yr Alban yn edrych ar ei model; maent hefyd wedi bod yn yr Iwerddon. Teimlaf fod cyfle i edrych i’r dyfodol. Fel rhan o’r argymhellion, rydym wedi dweud, yn eithaf positif i fod yn onest, fod cyfle gennym yng Nghymru i symud ymlaen i sefydlu model sy’n debyg i’r hyn sydd yn yr Alban. Dyna beth yr oeddem wedi trio’i ddweud ar y pryd. Credaf ei fod yn bwysig ein bod ni yng Nghymru yn gweithio i’r cyfeiriad hwnnw. Mae’n bwysig ein bod yn ailfeddwl y drefn sydd gennym yn y wlad hon ar y foment—y drefn o safbwynt rheoleiddio. Teimlaf ei fod yn bwysig ein bod yn edrych ar fodelau eraill, lle mae rheoleiddio a dyfarnu yn dod gyda’i gilydd mewn un corff unedig. Dyna pam, i fod yn onest, ein bod wedi cyflwyno’r cynnig i greu Cymwysterau Cymru fel corff cenedlaethol. Rwy’n deall nad ydym yn y sefyllfa honno ar y funud a’n bod ar siwrnai, a chredaf fod y siwrnai honno’n cynnwys ymateb hollol wahanol i sicrhau ansawdd o safbwynt cymwysterau. Yn y pen draw, efallai mewn 10 mlynedd, byddwn mewn sefyllfa debyg, gobeithio, i sefyllfa’r Alban. Felly, rydym wedi ystyried ac wedi edrych ar dystiolaeth, a chredaf fod y cyfeiriad hwnnw’n hollol gywir.	Mr. Evans: A number of questions arise from looking at the Scottish model. We have looked closely at what is going on in Scotland. Officials have been to Scotland to look at the Scottish model; they have also been to Ireland. I feel that there is an opportunity to look to the future. As part of the recommendations, we have stated quite positively, to be honest, that we have the opportunity in Wales to move forward to establish a model that is similar to that in Scotland. That is what we were trying to say at the time. I believe that it is important that we in Wales are working in that direction. It is important that we rethink the regime that we have in this country at the moment—the regime in terms of regulation. I feel that it is important that we look at other models, where regulation and awarding are brought together in one unified body. That is why, to be honest, we have introduced the proposal to create Qualifications Wales as a national body. I understand that we are not in that position at the moment and that we are on a journey, and I believe that that journey includes an entirely different response to ensure quality in terms of qualifications. Ultimately, maybe in 10 years’ time, I hope that we will be in a similar position to that of Scotland. So, we have considered and we have looked at the evidence, and I believe that that direction of travel is entirely correct.
[147] Simon Thomas: Diolch am hynny. Rydych yn codi nifer o gwestiynau diddorol. Mae’n amlwg eich bod yn dal o’r farn mai corff rheoleiddio a dyfarnu—corff sy’n gallu gwneud y cyfan—yw’r ddelfryd yn y tymor hir. Yn y cyfamser, wrth gwrs, mae proses dwy ran yn digwydd, ac, yn sicr, sefydlu Cymwysterau Cymru fel y rheoleiddiwr annibynnol a fydd yn digwydd gyntaf.	Simon Thomas: Thank you for that. You raise some interesting questions. It is clear that you continue to believe that, in the long term, a regulating and awarding body—a body that can do it all—is the ideal. In the meantime, of course, a two-step process is taking place, and, certainly, establishing Qualifications Wales as the independent regulator will be happening first.
[148] Gan edrych ar eich delfryd tymor hir a’r potensial a welwch ar gyfer y corff hwn, sut fyddech yn hoffi gweld y ddeddfwriaeth yng Nghymru yn cael ei chynnig? Yn ystod ein hymweliad â’r Alban yr wythnos diwethaf, dywedwyd wrthym nad yw eu deddfwriaeth, sydd dros 20 mlwydd oed erbyn hyn, yn sôn am reoli ansawdd, er enghraifft—nid yw’n ddigon clir o ran rheoli ansawdd. Roeddent yn fodlon eu bod wedi canfod ffordd o ddelio â hynny, ond fe fyddent wedi dymuno gweld y ddeddfwriaeth yn paratoi ar gyfer y 10 neu 20 mlynedd nesaf. Ym mha ffordd y gallwn sicrhau bod hynny’n digwydd yng Nghymru?	Looking at your long-term ideal and at the potential that you see for this body, how would you like to see the legislation in Wales being proposed? During our visit to Scotland last week, we were told that their legislation, which is over 20 years old now, does not cover quality control, for example—it is not clear enough about quality control. They were satisfied that they had found a way of dealing with that, but they would have wished that the legislation had prepared for the next 10 or 20 years. How can we ensure that that happens in Wales?
[149] Mr Evans: Credaf ein bod wedi dechrau edrych ar y cwestiynau hyn o fewn y bwrdd. Gwn fod y gwaith a wnaethom—	Mr Evans: I think that we have started to look at these questions within the board. I know that the work that we have done—
[150] Simon Thomas: A ydych yn rhoi cyngor ar y ddeddfwriaeth yn ogystal â’r pethau ymarferol, megis sefydlu bwrdd?	Simon Thomas: Do you advise on the legislation as well as on the practicalities, such as establishing a board?
[151] Mr Evans: Ydym. Rydym ni’n cymryd tystiolaeth, beth bynnag. Rydym ni’n edrych ar y cwestiynau ac ar y problemau. Fodd bynnag, a gaf i ddweud eto fy mod i’n credu mai’r hyn sy’n bwysig yn y fan hon yw ein bod yn ailedrych ar y system yn gyfan gwbl o safbwynt cymwysterau ac fel rydym yn rheoleiddio cymwysterau?	Mr Evans: Yes. We take evidence, at any rate. We look at the questions and at the problems. However, may I say once again that I think that what is important here is that we take another look at the system as a whole in terms of qualifications and how we regulate qualifications?
[152] Rwy’n teimlo hefyd ei bod hi’n bwysig ein bod yn edrych yn fanwl iawn ar fel rydym yn sicrhau ansawdd. Rwy’n credu mai’r hyn maen nhw wedi ei wneud yn yr Alban yw symud bant o’r model o edrych ar reoleiddio, yn enwedig o safbwynt cymwysterau cyffredinol. Yr hyn maen nhw’n edrych arno ac yn canolbwyntio arno yw datblygu ansawdd y cymhwyster. Rwy’n credu mai dyna le dylem ni fynd yng Nghymru ac rwy’n credu mai dyna hanner y broblem sydd gennym ar y funud yng Nghymru. Dyna pam mae cymaint o broblemau gennym o safbwynt arholiadau ddim yn gweithio allan yn hollol iawn—achos nad ydym wedi canolbwyntio ar yr ansawdd hwnnw.	I also believe that it is important that we look in great detail at how we ensure quality. I think that what they have done in Scotland is to move away from the model of looking at regulation, particularly from the point of view of general qualifications. What they are looking at and are concentrating upon is developing the quality of the qualification. I think that that is where we should go in Wales, and I think that that is half the problem that we have at present in Wales. That is why we have so many problems in terms of examinations that are not working out as they should—because we have not concentrated on quality.
[153] Rwy’n credu, ar ddiwedd y dydd, ac efallai mai achos fy nghefndir fel pennaeth coleg rwy’n dweud hyn, taw hunan-reoleiddio yw’r dyfodol wrth i ni symud ymlaen. Mae prifysgolion yn gwneud hynny yn barod, onid ydynt? Nid oes neb yn cwestiynu gradd sy’n dod allan o brifysgol. Maen nhw’n hollol yn hunan-reoleiddio’r hyn sy’n mynd ymlaen. Felly, rwy’n credu taw dyna’r nod ar gyfer y dyfodol. Nid ydym yno ar y funud, ond rwy’n credu taw dyna’r ffordd dylem ni symud. Mae’n rhaid i ni greu strwythur ac mae’n rhaid i ni ymateb i ddelio â’r broses honno o newid.	I believe, at the end of the day, and perhaps it is due to my background as principal of a college that I say this, that self-regulation is the future as we move forward. Universities are already doing that, are they not? Nobody questions a degree that is awarded by a university. They entirely self-regulate what goes on. That, I believe, is the aim for the future. We are not there at the moment, but I think that that should be our direction of travel. We must create a structure and we must respond in order to deal with that process of change.
[154] A gaf i hefyd wneud y pwynt bod y model sydd yn bodoli gennym ar y funud yn fodel sydd wedi dod o Loegr? Mae’n fodel rheoleiddio sydd wedi canolbwyntio ar y gwaith sydd yn mynd ymlaen yn Lloegr. Mae’n waith pwysig. Rydym ni wedi symud i mewn i weithio yn sgîl hynny, fel rhan o waith Ofqual, er enghraifft. Dyna’r ffordd rydym yn trio meddwl am reoleiddio yng Nghymru. Edrychwch dros y byd, edrychwch ar Ewrop neu edrychwch ar Iwerddon a’r Alban ac nid yw hyn yn digwydd, i fod yn onest. Nid dyna’r broses sy’n digwydd o gwbl. Rwy’n credu, fel rhan o’r gwaith rydym yn ei wneud i greu awyrgylch hollol wahanol, ac awyrgylch sy’n gryfach ar gyfer cymwysterau, ei fod yn bwysig ein bod yn edrych ar fodelau hollol wahanol, ond ein bod yn edrych ar y risg ac yn cryfhau beth sy’n mynd ymlaen ar y funud hefyd.	May I also make the point that the model that we currently have is a model that has come from England? It is a regulatory model that has concentrated on the work that is happening in England. That is important work. We have moved in to work in the wake of that, as part of the work of Ofqual, for example. That is the way that we are trying to think of regulation in Wales. If you look at this globally, if you look at Europe or at Ireland and Scotland, this is not the case, if truth be told. That is not the process that is happening at all. I believe, as part of the work that we are undertaking to create an entirely different environment, and an environment that is enhanced for qualifications, it is important that we look at entirely different models, but that we also look at the risk and make what is happening at present more robust.
[155] Simon Thomas: A sôn am edrych ar y risg, rydych chi’n sôn yn y fan honno am brifysgolion. Rwy’n cofio o leiaf un brifysgol yng Nghymru yn mynd i bach o drafferth a mynd drwy dân ynglŷn ag ansawdd ei graddau, nid yng Nghymru, ond dramor. Felly, mae’n rhaid i mi ofyn a ydych chi wir yn credu bod hunan-reoleiddio yn fodel gweithredol pan fod model arall yn y wlad drws nesaf i ni gyda 55 miliwn o bobl, a lle mae’r drafodaeth ynglŷn ag ansawdd a rheoleiddio yn dueddol o gael ei dominyddu gan un model—ie, model Lloegr, ond dyna’r un sydd yn dominyddu’r discourse, os liciwch chi.	Simon Thomas: Talking about looking at the risk, you talked about universities there. I remember at least one university in Wales getting into a bit of trouble and facing flak about the quality of its degrees, not in Wales, but abroad. Therefore, I must ask whether you really believe that self-regulation is an operational model when there is another model in the country next door to us with 55 million people, and where the discussion about quality and regulation tends to be dominated by one model—yes, the English model, but that is the one that dominates the discourse, if you like.
[156] Mr Evans: Rwy’n credu bod yr hyn rwyf wedi ei ddweud yn hollol realistig, i fod yn onest. Mae effaith yr hyn sydd yn digwydd yn Lloegr yn bwrw ymlaen ar Gymru, ond mae’n rhaid i mi ddweud ei fod yn bwysig ein bod yn edrych yn fanwl ar le rydym ni ar y funud, ein bod ni yn edrych ar y gwendidau, a’n bod ni yn edrych ar ffyrdd gwahanol o greu pethau sy’n addas i Gymru wrth inni symud ymlaen. Yr hyn rwy’n bwriadu ei wneud yn y fan honno yw creu, dros amser, newid yn y ffordd rydym yn delio â chymwysterau yng Nghymru. Fel y dywedodd y Cadeirydd ar y dechrau, rwyf wedi cael y fraint o gadeirio’r adolygiad, ac mae’n rhaid i mi ddweud, ar ôl blwyddyn o edrych ar y problemau, nad yw’r system sydd yn bodoli yng Nghymru yn gweithio yn berffaith. Nid yw’r system sydd gennym ar y funud, sef y bartneriaeth rhwng rheoleiddio a dyfarnu cymwysterau, yn hollol iawn. Mae cyfle gennym i wella ar hynny wrth i ni symud ymlaen. Yr ateb yw edrych yn fwy manwl ar sicrhau ansawdd. Dyma’r ymateb a dyna’r ymateb yn y cyfnod cyntaf wrth i Gymwysterau Cymru ddod i fodolaeth.	Mr Evans: I think that what I have said is entirely realistic, to be honest. The impact of what is happening in England does have a knock-on effect on Wales, but I have to say that it is important that we look in great detail at where we are at present, that we look at the weaknesses, and that we look at alternative ways of creating models that are appropriate for Wales as we progress. What I intend to do is to create, over a period of time, a step change in the way in which we deal with qualifications in Wales. As the Chair said at the outset, I have had the privilege of chairing the review, and I have to say, after a year of looking at the problems, the system currently in existence in Wales does not work perfectly. The system that we currently have, in the partnership between regulation and awarding qualifications, is not completely right. We have an opportunity to improve that as we progress. The solution is to look in greater detail at securing quality. That is the response and that is the initial response as Qualifications Wales comes into being.
[157] Simon Thomas: Diolch am hynny. Rwy’n meddwl y byddai llawer yn gweld ac yn cytuno bod yn rhaid bod rhywbeth o’i le i ni fod wedi cael o leiaf dau ddigwyddiad eithaf traumatic i’r disgyblion, yn sicr. Mae’n dangos bod rhywbeth o’i le yn y system o ran y rhyngweithio, mewn rhyw ffordd. A fedrwch ddweud lle mae’r bwrdd cynghori erbyn hyn o ran yr hyn rydych newydd ddisgrifio fel delfryd 10 mlynedd i symud at fod yn gorff sy’n dyfarnu hefyd, fel y mae’r SQA yn ei wneud yn yr Alban? Yn yr adroddiad gwreiddiol, rwy’n meddwl eich bod wedi sôn am 2017 o bosibl o ran dod â’r holl beth at ei gilydd. Mae’n edrych yn annhebyg y byddech yn sôn am amserlen o’r fath nawr. Felly, pa drafodaethau sydd wedi bod gyda chyrff dyfarnu megis CBAC a chyrff eraill ynglŷn â’r dyfodol tymor hir yna? Nid wyf yn siŵr o hyd sut y bydd hwn, wrth fynd yn ôl o’r ddelfryd, nawr yn dylanwadu ar y math o ddeddfwriaeth y mae’n rhaid i ni fel Cynulliad ei basio i ganiatáu i rai o’r pethau hyn i ddigwydd.	Simon Thomas: Thank you for that. I think that many would see and agree that something must be wrong for us to have had at least two rather traumatic events, certainly for the pupils. It shows that something is wrong in the system with regard to the interaction, in some way. Can you tell us where the advisory board is now in terms of what you have just described as a 10-year ideal vision of moving towards becoming an awarding body as well, as the SQA is in Scotland? In the original report, I think that you mentioned 2017 as a possible date when everything would come together. It looks unlikely that you would hold to such a timetable now. So, what discussions have taken place with awarding bodies, such as WJEC and others, about the long-term future? I am still not sure how this, in working back from the ideal, will now influence the sort of legislation that we as an Assembly have to pass to enable some of these things to happen.
[158] Mr Evans: Rwy’n credu bydd yr amserlen sydd gennym o safbwynt cymwysterau a’r newidiadau sy’n dod i mewn o safbwynt yr hyn sy’n digwydd i gymwysterau yng Nghymru—yn Saesneg a mathemateg, er enghraifft, a’r fagloriaeth—yn golygu y bydd y pethau hynny i gyd yn mynd i ddigwydd erbyn 2017. Yn y tymor hir, rydym yn edrych i fwy o waith gael ei wneud. Dim ond dechrau ar y drafodaeth hon rydym wedi ei wneud hyd yn hyn. Yr hyn yr ydym yn sôn amdano o fewn y pwyllgor ar y funud yw sut y gallwn gryfhau rheoleiddio a sut y gallwn gryfhau ein hymateb o ran ansawdd, ac ansawdd y byrddau dyfarnu hefyd. Dyna lle rydym ni ar hyn o bryd. Dim ond ers blwyddyn rydym wedi bodoli, ond rydym wedi gwneud tipyn o waith.	Mr Evans: I think that the timetable we have from the point of view of qualifications and the changes that are to be implemented in terms of what is happening to qualifications in Wales—in English and mathematics, for example, and the baccalaureate—means that all of that will happen by 2017. In the long term, we are looking for more work to be done. We have only just started this discussion at present. What we are talking about at the moment within the board is how we can strengthen regulation and how we can strengthen our response to issues of quality, and the quality of the awarding bodies, too. That is where we are at present. We have only been in existence for a year, but we have done a great deal of work.
[159] Mae gennym swyddogion yn gweithio’n galed i geisio creu’r drefn, i ddechrau, i gael pobl sy’n ymwneud â rheoleiddio i mewn i’r bwrdd hwn. Wedyn, byddwn yn dechrau ar y model comisiynu yr ydym yn dechrau sôn amdano. Rydym jest yn symud ymlaen gyda’r model hwnnw am y rheswm nad oedd y bwrdd mwyaf pwysig yng Nghymru o safbwynt cymwysterau cyffredinol wedi dod yn rhan o’r bartneriaeth ar y dechrau. Bu i CBAC ei wneud yn eithaf clir, ar ôl yr adolygiad, ei fod am barhau fel cwmni annibynnol, ac roedd rhyw fath o philiosophical divide rhwng y ddau. Dyna’r rheswm y dechreuon ni edrych unwaith eto, wrth inni drio datblygu ein cymwysterau ein hunain, roedd yn rhaid inni ffeindio model oedd yn gweithredu dros Gymru, ac rwy’n credu mai’r model comisiynu yw’r model mwyaf pwrpasol sydd gennym ar y funud i symud ymlaen. Felly, byddwn yn symud y tîm rheoleiddio, wedyn datblygu’r model comisiynu ac yna, efallai, creu un bwrdd unedig.	We have officials working hard to try to create the regime, initially, to bring individuals involved with regulation into this board. Then, we will start on the commissioning model that we are beginning to talk about. We are only now just moving on that model for the very reason that the most important board in Wales in terms of general qualifications had not been a part of the partnership at the outset. WJEC made it quite clear, following the review, that it wanted to remain as an independent company, and there was some sort of philosophical divide between the two. That is why we started to look again, as we were trying to develop our own qualifications, and we had to find a model that could work for Wales, and I believe that the commissioning model is the most appropriate model that we have at present to progress. Therefore, we will move the regulatory team, then develop the commissioning model and then, perhaps, create one united body.
[160] David Rees: Members have expressed a desire to come in here. We will have Aled first, then Suzy, Keith and Bethan.
[161] Aled Roberts: Er hynny, rwy’n meddwl bod rhai ohonom yn synnu nad oes cyfarfodydd uniongyrchol wedi bod â CBAC, wrth gofio mai CBAC sy’n gyfrifol am ddarparu’r arholiadau hyn yng Nghymru, ynghylch yr holl ddatblygiadau yr oedd Gareth Pierce yn dweud bod newid mawr yn eu cylch o ran y sefyllfa yng Nghymru ar hyn o bryd. Felly, a ydych yn derbyn ei fod yn syndod nad ydych wedi cyfarfod yn uniongyrchol?	Aled Roberts: Despite that, I think that some of us are surprised that there have not been any direct meetings with WJEC, given that WJEC is responsible for providing these examinations in Wales, regarding the range of developments about which Gareth Pierce said there had been substantial changes in terms of the situation in Wales at the moment. So, do you accept that it is surprising that you have not met directly?
[162] Mr Evans: Rwy’n synnu bod Gareth wedi dweud hynny, i fod yn onest â chi. Clywais y clip pan gerddais i mewn i’r ystafell, ond ni chlywais yr ymateb yn gyfan gwbl. Fodd bynnag, mae CBAC ar un o’r byrddau mwyaf pwysig sydd gennym ar hyn o bryd, sef y stakeholder reference group. Mae Gareth ei hunan wedi bod mewn cyfarfodydd o’r stakeholder reference group a oedd yn ymwneud â chreu Cymwysterau Cymru. Rwy’n credu ein bod wedi cael rhyw bedwar cyfarfod hyd yn hyn o’r grŵp hwnnw. Dyna un o’r grwpiau mwyaf pwysig sy’n rhoi cyngor i’r bwrdd, yr advisory group. Heblaw hynny, er nad yw’r bwrdd wedi cwrdd fel bwrdd gyda Gareth, rwyf wedi cwrdd â Gareth, fel cadeirydd, ryw bedwar neu pum gwaith i drafod y pethau hyn. Heblaw hynny, mae’r swyddogion yn cwrdd yn gyson i drafod y busnes hwn. Felly, nid wyf yn deall yn iawn ymateb Gareth i’r pwynt hwnnw, i fod yn onest â chi. Mae e’n iawn i ddweud nad yw CBAC ar y bwrdd cynghori. Bwrdd bach yw’r bwrdd cynghori. Rwy’n credu unwaith yr oeddem wedi deall bod trafferthion i gael CBAC fel rhan o’r bartneriaeth, gwnaethom y penderfyniad nad oedd pwynt cael unrhyw fwrdd dyfarnu ar y bwrdd. Petaem ni wedi rhoi CBAC ar y prif fwrdd, byddai Edexcel, AQA, OCR neu beth bynnag wedi cwyno efallai ac wedi dweud nad oedd hynny cweit yn deg. Felly, beth benderfynom ei wneud oedd gwneud yn siŵr bod y strwythur rownd y bwrdd hwnnw yn gwneud yn siŵr bod llais CBAC yn cael ei glywed a’i fod yn y drafodaeth.	Mr Evans: I am surprised that Gareth made that comment, if truth be told. I heard the clip as I entered the room, but I did not hear the response in its entirety. However, WJEC is on one of the most important boards that we have at present, namely the stakeholder reference group. Gareth himself has attended meetings of the stakeholder reference group, which is related to the creation of Qualifications Wales. I think that we have had some four meetings of that group to date. That is one of the most important groups that advises the board, the advisory group. Apart from that, although the board has not met as a board with Gareth, I have met him, as chair, some four or five times to discuss these matters. Other than that, officials meet regularly in order to discuss all of these issues. Therefore, I do not fully understand Gareth’s response on that point, if truth be told. He is right to say that WJEC is not on the advisory board. The advisory board is a very small board. I think that once we had understood that there were difficulties in bringing WJEC into the partnership, we made the decision that there was no point having any awarding body involved. If we had put WJEC on the main board, then Edexcel, AQA, OCR or whoever else would have complained perhaps and said that that was not quite fair. What we decided to do was to ensure that the structure around that board did ensure that the voice of WJEC could be heard and that it was included in the debate.
10:45
[163] Aled Roberts: Rwy’n derbyn eich gweledigaeth chi o ran lle yr ydym yn symud fel gwlad o fewn y 10 mlynedd nesaf. Hwyrach fod hynny’n ddatblygiad, yn hytrach na chreu corff newydd o’r dechrau. Fodd bynnag, a ydych yn derbyn mai un o’r gwersi a gawsom yn Iwerddon wythnos diwethaf oedd bod y Further Education and Training Awards Council, sef y corff oedd yn bodoli cyn Quality and Qualifications Ireland, wedi dechrau ystyried cael un porth ar gyfer yr holl gymwysterau galwedigaethol a bod QQI wedi dweud bod hynny’n gam rhy bell i Iwerddon? Yn bendant, dywedwyd wrthym fel aelodau’r pwyllgor eu bod nhw wedi dysgu’r wers nad oedd stampio baner gwlad ar gymhwyster a dweud eu bod yn mynd i lawr y lôn honno yn unig yn ymarferol yn Iwerddon. Hwyrach bod hyn yn creu cwestiynau i ni oherwydd, fel roedd Simon yn dweud, maint a grym y farchnad tu draw i Glawdd Offa.	Aled Roberts: I accept your vision in terms of where we are moving as a country in the next 10 years. Perhaps that is a development, rather than creating a new body from the start. However, do you accept that one of the lessons we had in Ireland last week was that the Further Education and Training Awards Council, which was the body that existed before Quality and Qualifications Ireland, had started to consider establishing a gateway for all vocational qualifications and that QQI had said that that was a step too far for Ireland? Certainly, we were told as committee members that they had learnt the lesson that stamping the flag of a country on a qualification and saying that they were only going to go down that route was not practical in Ireland. This, perhaps, raises questions for us, because, as Simon said, of the size and power of the market beyond Offa’s Dyke.
[164] Mr Evans: Yn Iwerddon, mae’n anodd iawn i edrych ar y model a chymharu beth sy’n mynd ymlaen yng Nghymru, i fod yn onest. Os cofiaf yn iawn, mae tri bwrdd yn Iwerddon. Mae’r QQI, sy’n edrych ar ôl cyrsiau galwedigaethol yn Iwerddon. Wedyn, mae’r National Council for Curriculum and Assessment a’r States Examinations Commission, sy’n edrych ar ôl y cyrsiau mwy cyffredinol sy’n bodoli yn yr ysgolion. O ran y cyrsiau hynny, sef cyrsiau tebyg i TGAU, lefel A a hyn a’r llall, mae marc cenedlaethol ar y cymwysterau. Ar y cyrsiau galwedigaethol, na, nid wyf yn credu bod marc cenedlaethol achos maen nhw’n dibynnu ar farchnad. Yng Nghymru hefyd, yr hyn yr ydym yn bwriadu ei wneud yw’r single suite, fel yr ydym yn ei alw. Dyna beth sy’n mynd i fodoli ar gyfer y cyrsiau cyffredinol yng Nghymru, fel cyrsiau TGAU. Fodd bynnag, o safbwynt cyrsiau galwedigaethol, bydd rhaid inni edrych ar y farchnad. Rwy’n credu mai beth yr ydym yn mynd i’w wneud yn y fan honno yw creu rhyw gatekeeping neu borthladd y bydd yn rhaid i bawb ddod drwodd ar ddiwedd y dydd. Rwy’n credu mai dyna’r ffordd y byddwn yn ymateb i gyrsiau galwedigaethol. Fodd bynnag, rwy’n credu bydd yn rhaid i gwmnïau fel Edexcel a City and Guilds, er enghraifft, ddatblygu rhai o’n cyrsiau galwedigaethol, yn enwedig y cyrsiau CVET sydd yn specialised iawn, wrth inni symud ymlaen. Yn Iwerddon, rwy’n credu bod dwy agwedd yno. Mae marc y wlad ar rai o’i chyrsiau a’r un arholiad hanes sydd ar yr un diwrnod ar draws y wlad i gyd, ond o safbwynt cyrsiau galwedigaethol, maen nhw yn dod o le bynnag maen nhw’n gallu eu cael nhw.	Mr Evans: In Ireland, it is very difficult to look at the model and compare it with what is happening in Wales, to be honest. If memory serves me correctly, there are three boards in Ireland. There is the QQI, which looks after vocational courses in Ireland. Then there is the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment and the States Examinations Commission, which are responsible for the more general courses in schools. In terms of those courses, namely courses that are similar to GCSE, A-level and so on, there is a national brand on those qualifications. On the vocational courses, no, I do not think that there is a national brand because they are dependent on the market. In Wales too, what we intend to do is provide the single suite, as we are describing it. That is what is going to exist for the general courses in Wales, such as GCSE courses. However, in terms of vocational courses, we will have to look at the market. I think that what we will do there is create some sort of gatekeeping or portal that everyone will have to come through at the end of the day. I think that that is how we will respond to vocational courses. However, I think that companies such as Edexcel and City and Guilds, for example, will have to develop some of our vocational courses, particularly the CVET courses, which are extremely specialised, as we move on. I think that in Ireland there are two aspects. Some of its courses are given that national brand and it is the same history examination on the same day across the whole country, but in terms of the vocational courses, they come from wherever there is provision available.
[165] Aled Roberts: Pwynt arall a wnaethpwyd yn yr Alban oedd bod yr SQA, i ryw raddau, yn hunangynhaliol o ran arian, ond ei bod yn amlwg bod ganddo lai o gyfrifoldebau o ran darpariaeth leiafrifol, yn arbennig felly drwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg. Pan ofynnon ni sut yr oedd yn teimlo dywedodd bod y sefyllfa yng Nghymru yn wahanol. A oes perygl, wrth inni greu’r sefyllfa hon, y bydd rhyw fath o ymateb o ran y rheoleiddiwr yn Lloegr, ac y bydd y ddarpariaeth sydd gan CBAC yn Lloegr ar hyn o bryd, hwyrach, yn cael ei gwthio allan yn yr un ffordd? Ar hyn o bryd, wrth gwrs, mae’r incwm sy’n dod draw i CBAC o Loegr yn fodd iddo gynnal cyrsiau a darpariaeth drwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg, a phe bai hynny’n diflannu, byddai’r holl gyfrifoldeb ariannol yn syrthio ar Lywodraeth Cymru.	Aled Roberts: Another point made in Scotland was that the SQA, to some extent, was self-sufficient in terms of funding, but that it was clear that it had fewer responsibilities in terms of minority provision, particularly through the medium of Welsh. When we asked how it felt about that it said that the situation in Wales was different. Is there a risk, as we create this situation, that there will be some sort of response from the regulator in England and that the provision that WJEC has in England at the moment will perhaps be pushed out in the same way? At the moment, of course, the income that comes to WJEC from England is a means for it to support courses and provision through the medium of Welsh, and if that disappeared, all the financial responsibility would fall to the Welsh Government.
[166] Mr Evans: Rwy’n deall y pwynt rydych chi’n ei godi ac rydym wedi ystyried hyn, i fod yn onest. Y peth diwethaf y mae Cymwysterau Cymru yn mo’yn ei wneud yw amharu o gwbl ar gyllid CBAC ac o ble mae’n cael yr arian. Mae’r gwaith y mae’n ei wneud yn Lloegr yn bwysig, ac mae’r gwaith hwnnw’n rhoi incwm iddo. Rwyf i, fel cadeirydd y bwrdd ar y funud, yn teimlo’n gryf bod yn rhaid inni greu model i Gymwysterau Cymru yn yr hirdymor sy’n gallu sefyll ar ei draed ei hunan. Felly, efallai bydd yn rhaid inni, yn y dyfodol, edrych ar fodelau hollol wahanol o gael yr arian. Wrth gwrs, bydd yn rhaid cael partneriaeth gyda Llywodraeth Cymru ac, wrth gwrs, bydd yn rhaid inni ddilyn polisïau sy’n dod o Lywodraeth Cymru a bydd rhai o’r rheini yn ymwneud â’r iaith Gymraeg. Bydd yn rhaid inni ddatblygu. Mwy na thebyg, bydd CBAC yn cymryd y mwyafrif o’r pwysau i ddatblygu’r cyrsiau hynny. Nid wyf yn credu y byddai’n gall inni symud ymlaen i wneud unrhyw beth sy’n mynd i ymyrryd ar ymateb CBAC i’r hyn y mae’n ei wneud yn Lloegr. Wedi dweud hynny, os awn yn ôl i’r dadleuon yr oeddem yn eu cael yn y dyddiau cynnar, un o’r rhesymau yr oeddem ni eisiau creu un bwrdd unedig i edrych ar gymwysterau oedd bod cyfleoedd o fewn CBAC i gael yr income base ac i gael y critical mass hyn yr oedd eu hangen arnom i greu rhywbeth a oedd yn hollol ar y blaen yng Nghymru.	Mr Evans: I understand the point you raise and we have considered this, to be honest. The last thing that Qualifications Wales wants to do is interfere in any way with the funding of WJEC and its funding sources. The work that it does in England is important, and that provides it with an income. As chair of the board at the moment, I feel strongly that we must create a model for Qualifications Wales in the long term, so that it can stand on its own two feet. So, perhaps in the future we will have to look at completely different models of funding. Of course, there must be a partnership with the Welsh Government and, of course, we will have to follow the policies emerging from the Welsh Government and some of those will relate to the Welsh language. We will need to make developments. In all likelihood, WJEC will take most of that burden on board to develop those courses. I do not think that it would be wise for us to move on or do anything that would impact upon WJEC’s ability to carry out its activities in England. That said, if we return to the debates that we had in the early days, one of the reasons that we wanted to create a single unified board to look at qualifications was that there were opportunities within WJEC to have that income base and critical mass that we required to create something that was in the vanguard for Wales.
[167] Simon Thomas: Yn benodol, pan aethom at yr Alban, roedd SQA, ar yr ochr alwedigaethol, yn dweud ei fod yn achredu y tu fas i’r Alban. Roedd ganddo farchnad ac roedd rhai cyrff yn dewis cael eu hachredu ganddo. A ydych chi’n gweld y bydd Cymwysterau Cymru, felly, yn gallu gweithio yn y ffordd honno yn yr hirdymor?	Simon Thomas: Specifically, when we went to Scotland, the SQA, on the vocational side, was saying that it accredited outside Scotland. It had a market and some organisations decided to be accredited by it. Do you see that Qualifications Wales, therefore, could work in that way in the long term?
[168] Mr Evans: Ar y funud, nid yw hynny’n eistedd yn gyfforddus, i fod yn onest. Rwy’n credu, wrth i’r ddeddfwriaeth symud yn ei blaen, mai cyfle i Gymwysterau Cymru i weithredu yng Nghymru yn unig a fydd gennym. I weithio y tu allan i Gymru, byddai’n rhaid inni greu rhyw bartneriaeth gyda chwmni arall, neu fe fyddai’n rhaid inni wneud rhywbeth bach yn wahanol.	Mr Evans: At present, that does not sit particularly comfortably with me, to be honest. I believe that, as the legislation progresses, giving Qualifications Wales an opportunity to operate in Wales alone will be all that will be available to us. To work outwith Wales, we would have to create a partnership with another company, or we would have to work slightly differently.
[169] Mae’n bwysig ein bod ni, fel Cymwysterau Cymru, yn cael yr hawl i weithredu mewn gwledydd eraill ac i edrych ar incwm, i greu incwm i ddod i mewn i’r wlad. Rwy’n credu y byddai hynny’n her, ac rwy’n gobeithio y gallwn ni a chi, fel Cynulliad, edrych ar hyn i roi pob mantais i ni wrth inni symud ymlaen.	It is important that we, as Qualifications Wales, have the right to operate in other nations and to create income, and to bring income into Wales. I think that that would be a challenge, and I hope that we and you, as an Assembly, can look at this issue to provide every advantage to us as we move forward.
[170] Keith Davies: I fod yn glir o’r cychwyn, nid yw Cymwysterau Cymru’n bodoli.	Keith Davies: To be clear from the outset, Welsh Qualifications does not exist.
[171] Mr Evans: Nid ar y funud.	Mr Evans: Not at the moment.
[172] Keith Davies: Dyna pam yr ydym yn trafod beth fydd cyfrifoldebau Cymwysterau Cymru. Un o’r cwestiynau y gofynnais i Gareth Pierce gynnau oedd—. Rwy’n gallu mynd yn ôl i amser ACCAC; ACCAC oedd yn rheoleiddio ac a oedd yn cael dylanwad ar y cwricwlwm. Yr hyn fydd yn digwydd, wrth gwrs, os cawn ni Gymwysterau Cymru, ac os caiff fodoli, yw y bydd yn rheoleiddio, ond efallai bydd cyfrifoldeb am y cwricwlwm gan y Gweinidog a Llywodraeth Cymru yn y pen draw. Dyna’r ffordd roeddwn i’n edrych ar y—sawl un sydd yma?—43, rwy’n credu, o bethau rydych chi wedi dylanwadu arnynt—	Keith Davies: That is why we are here to discuss what the responsibilities of Qualifications Wales will be. One of the questions that I asked Gareth Pierce earlier was—. I can go back to ACCAC’s time; ACCAC was regulating and had an influence on the curriculum. What will happen, of course, if we have Qualifications Wales, and if it comes into existence, is that it will regulate, but perhaps responsibility for the curriculum will be with the Minister and the Welsh Government ultimately. That is the way that I look at the—how many of them are here?—43 things, I think, that you have influenced on—
[173] Mr Evans: Mae 42 ohonynt.	Mr Evans: There are 42 of them.
[174] Keith Davies: Pedwardeg dau. Cwestiwn arall yw a fyddant i gyd yn dod i fodolaeth. Fodd bynnag, beth yw’r gwahaniaeth rhwng y cyfrifoldeb a fydd gan Gymwysterau Cymru a’r hyn a oedd gan ACCAC? Corff annibynnol o’r Llywodraeth oedd ACCAC.	Keith Davies: Forty two. Whether they would all come into existence is another question. However, what is the difference between the responsibility that Qualifications Wales will have and what ACCAC had? ACCAC was an independent body of the Government.
[175] Mr Evans: Ie, rwy’n deall.	Mr Evans: Yes, I understand.
[176] Keith Davies: Nid oedd yr un cymhwyster yn gallu cael ei gynnig mewn unrhyw ysgol neu goleg yng Nghymru os nad oedd wedi cael ei achredu gan ACCAC.	Keith Davies: Not one qualification could be offered in any school or college in Wales if it had not been accredited by ACCAC.
[177] Mr Evans: Rwy’n deall. Cymwysterau Cymru fydd yn gyfrifol am gymwysterau—am ddull y cymhwyster, am safon y cymhwyster, am ddull asesu’r cymhwyster, a hefyd am ddilyniant. Bydd Cymwysterau Cymru yn gyfrifol am yr hyn rydym yn ei alw’n fitness for purpose y cymhwyster ar ddiwedd y dydd. Hefyd, bydd Cymwysterau Cymru’n edrych ar y ffordd y mae’r wlad yn ymateb i’r cymwysterau—a yw’r cymwysterau’n cael eu datblygu’n effeithiol yn y wlad? Hefyd, byddwn yn edrych ar hyder, ac at y ffydd sydd gan y boblogaeth yng Nghymwysterau Cymru a’r hyn yr ydym yn trial ei ddatblygu.	Mr Evans: I understand your question. Qualifications Wales will be responsible for qualifications, for the method of the qualification, the quality of the qualification, the assessment method, and for continuity. Qualifications Wales will be responsible for what we would call the fitness for purpose of the qualification at the end of the day. Qualifications Wales will also be looking at the way in which the country responds to the qualifications—are those qualifications developed effectively within Wales? We will also be looking at issues of confidence, and the trust that the population in general has in Qualifications Wales and what we are endeavouring to develop.
[178] Ni fydd Cymwysterau Cymru’n edrych ar y cwricwlwm na pholisi yn ymwneud â’r cwricwlwm. Bydd polisi yn ymwneud â’r cwricwlwm, fel y mae ar y funud, yn rhywbeth sydd gan Lywodraeth Cymru, a byddwn ni yn dilyn yr hyn y mae Llywodraeth Cymru’n gofyn inni ei wneud o safbwynt y cwricwlwm. Fodd bynnag, o safbwynt cymwysterau, rwy’n gobeithio, wrth i’r corff ddod i rym ymhen rhyw flwyddyn a hanner, y bydd yr hawl gennym i ddatblygu cymwysterau mewn ffyrdd sy’n addas at ofynion Cymru. Dyna pam yr ydym yn creu’r corff hwn. Rwyf hefyd yn credu, ac yn gobeithio, y bydd y corff yn rhoi cyfle inni i ddatblygu rhyw gryfder mewn cymwysterau nad yw yno ar y funud, achos mae pobl yn edrych ym mhobman heblaw i mewn i Gymru. Felly, o safbwynt cymwysterau y bydd yr hawl gennym, ond o safbwynt y cwricwlwm, bydd hwnnw’n rhan bwysig o rôl y Llywodraeth, a bydd y bartneriaeth honno rhwng Cymwysterau Cymru a’r hyn sy’n mynd ymlaen yn y Llywodraeth yn o bwysig i ni. Credaf ei bod yn bwysig ymateb i hynny, a bod yn onest.	Qualifications Wales will not be looking at the curriculum or policy related to the curriculum. Policy related to the curriculum, as is currently the case, will be an issue that sits with the Welsh Government, and we will follow what the Welsh Government asks of us in terms of the curriculum. However, in terms of qualifications, then I do hope that, as this new body emerges in around a year and a half, we will have the right to develop qualifications in ways that are appropriate to the needs of Wales. That is why we are creating this new body. I also believe, and I hope, that the body will give us an opportunity to develop a robustness in qualifications that currently does not exist, because people are looking everywhere except into Wales. So, in terms of qualifications, we will have that right, but in terms of the curriculum, that will be an important part of the Government’s role, and that partnership between Qualifications Wales and what happens within Government will be very important to us. I think that it is important to respond to that, to be honest.
[179] Keith Davies: Pan oeddem yn yr Alban yr wythnos diwethaf, cawsom nifer o sylwadau oddi wrth yr SQA yn dweud taw’r Llywodraeth a fydd yn penderfynu yn y pen draw.	Keith Davies: When we were in Scotland last week, the SQA made a number of comments to us, saying that it was the Government that would decide ultimately.
[180] Mr Evans: Y Llywodraeth a fydd yn penderfynu yn y pen draw, rwy’n siŵr, o safbwynt polisi. O safbwynt y cymwysterau, os bydd rhywbeth mor bwysig â chael gwared ar arholiadau i blant 16 oed—er enghraifft, arholiadau TGAU—wrth gwrs, byddai’n fater i’r Llywodraeth. Fodd bynnag, rwy’n gobeithio y byddai’r Llywodraeth yn cymryd cyngor ynghylch yr hyn y mae Cymwysterau Cymru’n ei ddweud ar y pwnc.	Mr Evans: The Government will ultimately decide in terms of policy, I am sure. From the point of view of qualifications, if it is something as important as, let us say, abolishing examinations at the age of 16—GCSE examinations, for example—then, clearly, that would be an issue for the Government. However, I do hope that the Government will take advice from Qualifications Wales on that issue.
[181] Keith Davies: Ie, ond dywedwyd wrthym fod y Gweinidog wedi dweud wrthynt, pe baent am gynnig rhyw gymhwyster, taw’r Gweinidog yn yr Alban a fyddai’n penderfynu a fyddai’r cymhwyster hwnnw’n cael ei gynnig ai peidio.	Keith Davies: Yes, but they told us that the Minister had told them that, if they wanted to offer a qualification, it would be up to the Minister in Scotland to decide whether that qualification would be offered or not.
[182] Mr Evans: Nid wyf yn siŵr beth a fydd yn bodoli—mater i’r Llywodraeth yw penderfynu hynny. Y bwriad ar y funud yw rhoi cymaint o bŵer ag y gallwn ni i Gymwysterau Cymru i wneud y penderfyniadau hynny fel corff sy’n gweithio ar ei ben ei hunan, yn annibynnol ar yr hyn y mae’r Llywodraeth yn ei ddweud. Hefyd, bydd yr umbilical cord yn o gryf, rwy’n gobeithio, achos, ar ddiwedd y dydd, bydd Cymwysterau Cymru yn gweithio i’r remit a fydd yn dod o’r Llywodraeth, o’r Gweinidog.	Mr Evans: I am not sure what the situation will be here—it is up to Government to decide that. The intention at present is to give as much power as possible to Qualifications Wales to take those decisions for itself as a body that works independently of Government. However, there will also be that umbilical cord, and it will be quite strong, because, at the end of the day, Qualifications Wales will work to a remit that will be set by the Government, by the Minister.
[183] Suzy Davies: I would like to take you back, to the awarding functions—which I appreciate are not immediately on the table—and your conviction that the unitary body, except in relation to the curriculum issues, is quite capable of self-regulation and self-quality assurance, drawing on the experience of the SQA. Now, as far as its school qualifications go, SQA is the developer, the designer and the regulator/quality assurer. On those occasions when it may develop some vocational qualifications, they have to nip over the Chinese wall into accreditation to get them signed off and accredited. In fact, even though we heard from SQA that it was strongly in favour of self-quality assurance, even the SQA said that if the legislation were to be made today, as opposed to when it was made, it would have preferred for those issues of regulation to have been made a little clearer. Now, SQA provides its own school qualifications. Under the model that you are looking at, because you were not able to merge WJEC into your initial idea—because it fell at the first hurdle, really—you will be commissioning other bodies—that is, WJEC—to provide qualifications.
[184] Mr Evans: Including WJEC.
[185] Suzy Davies: Well, yes; it has to be, primarily. I think that we can be realistic at this stage, though it might develop over the years. I appreciate that. How would the whole idea of self-regulation and self-quality assurance work when you are commissioning third parties to provide your qualifications? Gareth Pierce said that that probably would not work.
11:00
[186] Mr Evans: Gareth is obviously making a point as chief executive of an awarding body.
[187] Suzy Davies: I appreciate that it is his own—
[188] Mr Evans: There will be a relationship between the two bodies. I also made it clear that the whole process of self-regulation was a long way down the track. We would start with developing a quality assurance model that was robust and strong and looked at the content of qualifications, the standard, the level, the assessment techniques of qualifications, et cetera, and making sure, through the commissioning model, that it was delivered. That commissioning model would, in the first instance, apply to Qualifications Wales’s own courses—in other words, the made-in-Wales courses with the Welsh specifications. They would include courses such as the GCSE suite of qualifications, the A-level suite and the Welsh baccalaureate—the core that is contained within the Welsh baccalaureate. As that is part of Qualifications Wales, we feel that regulation—if, let us say, there is one body delivering all of that—in its traditional sense is not required because, usually, regulation is applied when you have a myriad of regulatory awarding bodies out there delivering qualifications. You regulate to make sure that they provide the same standard and level, regardless of where they are based and regardless of their market. We are proposing that, in this journey from the traditional view of regulation, we move towards a quality assurance view of regulation that is initially applied to our own suite of qualifications that is more robust and rigorous than is currently offered, regardless of who is delivering those qualifications.
[189] With regard to the other courses that we have out there, I have also said from the beginning, in the context of vocational courses, that we will have to treat those slightly differently, because there could well be two or three providers providing engineering, for example, at levels 2 and 3 within the system. We will then regulate in those bodies that are offering those qualifications to make sure that a level 3 qualification in engineering from Edexcel is of the same standard, and has the same expectations and the same challenge as a course from another body. That is where we would continue with regulation. I am not proposing self-regulation from the outset. I am not proposing that we move immediately to that. I am proposing that, for a long-term aim, that is not a bad aim for a country. If you have something that works effectively, then, by and large, that is where we need to be.
[190] Suzy Davies: For those third-party providers for whom you would think that QW would have a sort of an accreditation function, almost, to say, ‘You are as good as Qualifications Wales wants you to be’, is that going to be a sort of compulsory regime or a voluntary one? What about those providers that are offering vocational qualifications in particular that do not want to come to you for quality assurance? Obviously, they will not have your badge if they do not, but will they be banned from teaching in Wales?
[191] Mr Evans: That is something that we need to think through in some detail. Currently, we are of the view that any qualification that is publicly funded and offered within Wales should have the Qualifications Wales seal of approval on it. In other words, if it does not, how do we know that it has met the kind of new standard that we are trying to set here? There will be organisations that are minority organisations and very specialised organisations for which we may have to find a different route. Also, if you go back to the main reason as to why the review of qualifications was established, you will see that it was basically to sort out duplication to simplify the examination system. If there is no one body that can control that, you will end up with 13,000 qualifications, as was the case three or four years ago. I do not think that that is helpful for employers, for young people, or for anyone. We need something that is manageable here, that is of high standard, and that meets the needs of young people as they come through the system in Wales.
[192] Suzy Davies: I will just finish with one question. Given that I understand what your argument is, who ultimately regulates the regulator then? I think that this might touch on Keith’s question. Ultimately, I guess that it is still the Welsh Government that will have the say over your chairman, or whoever it is going to be—
[193] Mr Evans: Welsh Government will always have the say, and will always have the power, I think, to remove the chief executive. When appointed, the chief executive will become the regulator and will also have the power to remove the chairman of the board, and possibly the board. However, those two key individuals will certainly be under the removal control, if you like, of Welsh Government. So, ultimately, there is a control factor here.
[194] Suzy Davies: So, if Welsh Government ends up having a different idea of what constitutes quality from QW, QW could still be in danger.
[195] Mr Evans: What I am trying to establish here is a partnership, namely that as this body moves towards an independent state—because at the end of the day, that is what the Government has asked us to do—it moves in such a way that it is in tune with the policies coming out of Welsh Government, that it is responsive to the needs of Welsh Government, and, basically, that it responds fairly quickly, I would hope, if requested to do something. There will be checks and balances in there to make sure that the body does do that.
[196] Suzy Davies: You have said my favourite words, ‘checks and balances’, so I will keep my eye on that.
[197] David Rees: Before I ask Bethan to come in next, you have highlighted there the issue of quality assurance, which is clearly a big issue on this aspect. You have also mentioned that you want to work towards self-regulation down the line. So, how do you think that the legislation will allow for a situation where we develop a strong, robust quality assurance system now, but at the same time, ensure the flexibility to actually move towards a more self-regulatory system?
[198] Mr Evans: We are looking at a rolling programme and we are beginning to look at a piece of work at this point in time in terms of trying to establish, longer term, a single qualifications body for Wales. Currently, that body, as I have indicated already, will be regulatory; it will develop a commissioning role, and who knows, after that, we will try to plan to create a single body. The success to all of this is making sure that we have our quality assurance principles in place, and that we have those principles in place from the very beginning because we will inherit, at the very beginning of this process, a fairly accepted traditional regulatory process. We need to strengthen those and we then need to strengthen that relationship that takes place with the awarding bodies to make sure that everybody understands what is expected of them. Most importantly, we need to make sure that the students, at the end of the day, fully understand what is expected of them in terms of their examinations and what they are sitting. That, to me, is a basic fundamental in terms of moving this forward.
[199] I have thrown that in, and perhaps the term ‘self-regulation’ has been overused, but what I would hope is that, as we move through the process, the need for regulation, particularly in the single suite of qualifications, lessens, and it becomes a self-sustaining quality assurance process. In vocational terms, obviously, a different route will be taken through gatekeeping processes, et cetera. However, the key to this is making sure that we have properly and efficiently addressed quality assurance within the qualification system, and that is where I think that we have an issue at this point in time.
[200] Bethan Jenkins: Gofynnaf y cwestiwn cyntaf, ac rwy’n credu ei bod yn bwysig gofyn y cwestiwn yma gyda myfyrwyr yn gwylio’r hyn sy’n digwydd. Rydym wedi cael dau ddigwyddiad yma yng Nghymru lle mae problemau wedi bod yng nghyd-destun cymwysterau a’r hyn sydd wedi digwydd yn sgîl hynny. Yng nghyd-destun Cymru, mae gwrthdaro wedi bod rhwng CBAC a Llywodraeth Cymru o ran yr atebolrwydd yn hynny o beth, a phwy oedd yn gyfrifol am yr hyn a aeth yn anghywir. Gydag unrhyw system newydd, rwyf eisiau bod yn siŵr bod rhywun, neu ryw gorff, yn mynd i fod yn hollol atebol am hynny. Yr hyn sydd wedi bod yn anodd i ddisgyblion ac athrawon ei ddeall yw nad oedd y Gweinidog ar y pryd eisiau cymryd cyfrifoldeb, er mai fe oedd yn rheoleiddio, ac wedyn roedd e yn trio rhoi’r bai ar CBAC a CBAC yn ymateb gan ddweud, ‘Nid ein bai ni oedd e’. Beth sy’n mynd i fod yn ddigon cryf, mewn system na fydd yn cael ei rheoleiddio yn ôl eich gweledigaeth chi, os oes problem gydag unrhyw gymhwyster? A oes corff sy’n mynd i ddweud, ‘The buck stops here’ o ran yr hyn sydd yn digwydd? Rwy’n credu bod hwnnw yn gwestiwn nad yw lot o bobl yn sicr ohono, er y gwaith sy’n digwydd ar hyn o bryd.	Bethan Jenkins: I will ask my first question, and I think that it is important to ask this question with students watching what is happening. We have had two situations here is Wales where there have been problems in the context of qualifications and what has happened as a result of that. In the Welsh context, there has been a conflict between WJEC and the Welsh Government regarding that accountability and who was responsible for what went wrong. With any new system, I want to be sure that someone, or some body or organisation is going to be totally accountable for that. What has been difficult for pupils and teachers to understand is that the Minister at the time did not want to take responsibility, even though he was the regulator, and he was then trying to put the blame on WJEC and WJEC responded saying, ‘It wasn’t our fault’. What is going to be robust enough, in a system that is not going to be regulated according to your vision, if there is a problem with any qualification?  Is there a body that is going to say, ‘The buck stops here’ in terms of what happens? I think that is a question that many people are not sure of, despite the work that is ongoing at present.
[201] Mr Evans: Mae’n gwestiwn pwysig ac mae’n gwestiwn rydym ni wedi bod yn ei ofyn hefyd. Fel corff, rydym yn ddiweddar wedi dechrau ar broses o edrych ar y gwersi rydym yn gallu eu dysgu o beth sydd wedi mynd ymlaen yn y ddwy sefyllfa rydych wedi sôn amdanynt. Rwy’n credu y bydd y gwaith hwnnw yn dod i ben mewn rhyw ddau fis. Rydym ar y funud yn cymryd tystiolaeth. Rwy’n credu eich bod wedi rhoi eich bys ar y pwynt yn y fan honno o ran pwy sy’n atebol. Nid yw’n iawn o safbwynt y system ansawdd sydd gennym ar y funud bod neb quite yn siŵr. Rwy’n credu ei bod yn bwysig, os oes rhywbeth yn mynd o’i le yn y dyfodol, ein bod yn deall pam ei fod wedi mynd o’i le a beth sydd wedi digwydd i’w achosi, ac nad yw’r bys o fai yn cael ei bwyntio ym mhobman.	Mr Evans: It is an important question and a question that we have been asking too. As a body, we have recently started a process of looking at the lessons learnt from what has happened in the two situations that you alluded to. I think that that work will conclude in a couple of months’ time. We are taking evidence at present. I think that you have put your finger on the pertinent point about who is accountable. I do not think that it is right from the point of view of the quality assurance system that we have at present that no-one is quite sure. I think that it is important, if something goes wrong in future, that we understand why it has gone wrong and what has caused the problem, and that the finger of blame is not pointed indiscriminately.
[202] I greu’r sefyllfa honno, mae’n rhaid i ni gael systemau ac mae’n rhaid i ni gael y remit yn iawn o ran beth yw disgwyliadau pob un—beth yw disgwyliadau’r bwrdd dyfarnu, beth yw’r disgwyliadau ar Gymwysterau Cymru a beth yw’r disgwyliadau ar Lywodraeth Cymru hefyd. Rwy’n credu bod y bartneriaeth a’r ddealltwriaeth o le mae’r buck hwnnw yn dod i ben yn bwysig. Nid wyf yn credu ein bod wedi gwneud hynny hyd yn hyn.	In order to create that situation, we must have systems in place and we must have the remit properly in place in terms of what are the expectations placed upon all the stakeholders—what are the expectations of the awarding body, what is expected of Qualifications Wales and what is expected of the Welsh Government too. I believe that that partnership and understanding of where the buck stops is important. I do not think that we are at that point as of yet.
[203] Bethan Jenkins: Y cwestiwn sy’n dilyn o hynny a’r hyn y gwnaethoch gychwyn arno oedd y philosophical divide hwn gyda CBAC. Pa mor hyderus y gallwn fod gyda’r system rydych eisiau ei chreu o ystyried nad yw CBAC ar hyn o bryd yn rhan o’r drafodaeth? Mae’n edrych i fi fel eich bod wedi newid sut mae’r corff yn gweithredu a chreu system gomisiynu yn sgîl y ffaith nad yw CBAC yn rhan o’r trafodaethau. Felly, pa mor ddelfrydol yw hynny mewn system lle rydym angen pawb i siarad â’i gilydd, o feddwl mai CBAC ar hyn o bryd yw’r prif gorff yn hynnny o beth? Mae’n fy mhoeni i feddwl nad yw CBAC yn rhan o’r trafodaethau, fel mae’n ei ddweud, er eich bod chi yn dweud bod trafodaethau wedi digwydd.	Bethan Jenkins: The question that follows on from that and what you started with was the philosophical divide with WJEC. How confident can we be with the system that you want to create, considering that WJEC at the moment is not part of the discussion? It looks to me as if you have changed the way that the body operates and created a commissioning system as a result of the fact that WJEC is not part of the discussions. Therefore, how ideal is that in a system where we need everyone to talk to each other, given that WJEC at the moment is the main body in that context? It worries me to think that WJEC is not part of the discussions, as it says, although you say that discussions have taken place.
[204] Mr Evans: Dyna’r pwynt a wnes i ar y dechrau mewn ymateb i Aled, sef y ffaith bod CBAC wedi bod yn rhan o’r drafodaeth. Mae’n rhan o’r stakeholder reference group. Mae cyfarfodydd wedi cymryd lle rhyngof i fel cadeirydd y bwrdd a Gareth. Mae cyfarfodydd cyson rhwng swyddogion y Llywodraeth â CBAC, ac maent yn swyddogion sydd yn ymwneud â Chymwysterau Cymru. Felly, fy nealltwriaeth i—cofiwch mai cadeirydd bwrdd wyf i; nid wyf yn gweithio’n llawn amser yn y busnes hwn—yw bod cyfathrebu cyson a bod CBAC yn rhan o’r broses i ddatblygu’r dyfodol. Nid yw’n rhan o’r pwyllgor—mae hynny’n iawn—ond rwy’n credu bod hynny yn eithaf teg, achos unwaith rydych yn dod ag un bwrdd mewn i’r pwyllgor, mae cwestiynau yn cael eu gofyn. Cofiwch mai bwrdd cynghori rwyf yn gadeirydd arno. Bydd y bwrdd parhaol yn cael ei sefydlu yn y dyfodol. Wedyn, gallwn weld beth allwn ei wneud.	Mr Evans: That is the point I made at the outset in response to Aled, namely that WJEC has been part of the discussion. It is part of the stakeholder reference group. Meetings have taken place between me as chair of the board and Gareth. There is regular contact between Government officials and WJEC, and they are officials working on Qualifications Wales. So, my understanding—do bear in mind that I am the chair of the board; I do not work full-time in this—is that there is regular communication and that WJEC is part of the process in developing the future. It is not a member of the board—that is true—but I think that that is a fair state of play, because once you bring one organisation onto that board, questions will be asked. Do bear in mind that it is an advisory board that I am chairing. The permanent board will be established in the future and then we will then consider what we can do.
[205] Bethan Jenkins: Felly, i gadarnhau—dyma fy nghwestiwn olaf—a oedd hi wastad yn bwrpas yn eich gwaith chi i weld CBAC mewn rôl gomisiynu yn hytrach na’i fod yn rhan, o’r cychwyn, o siapio craidd yr hyn sydd yn cael ei drafod nawr? Yn fy marn i, mae CBAC wedi dod yn hwyrach i’r drafodaeth, yn ôl y dystiolaeth a roddodd Gareth Pierce. Roeddem ni’n deall y byddai yn system ddwy gam, ond nid yw CBAC hyd yn oed yn ymwybodol o hynny ar hyn o bryd.	Bethan Jenkins: Therefore, to confirm—this is my final question—was it always an intention in your work to see WJEC in a commissioning role rather than being part, from the outset, of the shaping of the core of what is being discussed at the moment? In my view, WJEC has come into the discussion later, according to the evidence provided by Gareth Pierce. We understood that it was going to be a two-stage process, but WJEC was not even aware of that at the moment.
[206] Mr Evans: I fod yn onest, nid wyf yn credu mai bai Llywodraeth Cymru na’r bwrdd sydd wedi cael ei greu yw hynny. Roedd CBAC wedi cael y cyfle i ymateb o’r dechrau. Am resymau mae’n well i chi ofyn i’r corff amdanynt, penderfynodd o’r cychwyn beidio a chymryd rhan yn y model a oedd yn bodoli. Mae’r bartneriaeth gyda CBAC yn iawn, i fod yn onest—mae’n gryf o hyd—ond roedd mo’yn creu ei ddyfodol fel cwmni annibynnol yn symud i’r dyfodol. Dyna oedd y tensiwn a oedd gennym. Unwaith yr oeddem wedi deall hynny, gallem fod wedi trio gwthio hwn ymlaen, ond nid wyf yn credu y byddai hynny wedi bod yn iawn. Roedd yn bwysig ein bod yn creu model arall a fyddai’n gallu bodoli i greu Cymwysterau Cymru a rhoi mantais i bawb.	Mr Evans: To be honest, I do not think that that is the fault of the Welsh Government or the advisory board that has been created. WJEC had a full opportunity to respond from the outset. For reasons that you should ask the body about, it decided from the outset not to participate in the model that we were establishing. The partnership with WJEC is fine, to be honest—it remains strong—but it wanted to safeguard its future as an independent company in moving to the future. That is where the tension lay. Once we had understood that, we could have tried to push this forward, but I do not think that that would have been right. It was important that we created an alternative model that could exist in order to create Qualifications Wales and to benefit everyone.
11:15
[207] Bethan Jenkins: Rwy’n deall nawr. Diolch.	Bethan Jenkins: I understand now. Thank you.
[208] David Rees: To clarify a point, on the concept of a body being commissioned, you have talked about WJEC having discussions. Have you had discussions with any other awarding bodies, such as Edexcel or OCR?
[209] Mr Evans: Personally, I have not had such discussions on the commissioning model. It is something that the advisory board is currently discussing. I know that officials, who are putting together this commissioning model, have been looking at examples of commissioning right across the UK and how it works. That is currently being discussed via the advisory board. However, I cannot give you a hard-and-fast response on that because we are not at that point at this point in time.
[210] Aled Roberts: Hoffwn fynd yn ôl at y cydweithio hwn rhwng y tair gwlad ar hyn o bryd, o ran rheoleiddio a’r ffaith o ran arholiadau Safon Uwch, ar hyn o bryd, fod y cynnwys yn eithaf tebyg. Y bwriad yw y bydd Safon Uwch yn parhau yng Nghymru er y bydd y modd asesu’n wahanol. Gwnaeth Keith y pwynt yn gynharach fod prifysgolion i ryw raddau yn fodlon efo’r ffordd rydym ni’n asesu yng Nghymru ac yn fodlon ein bod yn parhau efo’r arholiadau Uwch Gyfrannol. Os ydych yn dweud y byddwn yn symud at fodel o hunan-reoleiddio yn y pen draw ac y bydd hynny’n ddatblygiad, sut yn union fydd y ddeddfwriaeth yn symud o’r model hwn o reoleiddio tair gwlad, o ran arholiad sy’n gyffredin i’r tair gwlad, at sefyllfa lle, yn y pen draw, byddwn ni’n hunan-reoleiddio? Rhaid ystyried y ffaith bod Gareth Pierce wedi dweud wrthym fod trafodaethau eithaf difyr wedi bod—roedd e’n sôn am economeg Safon Uwch, lle yr oedd y prifysgolion yn mynnu bod rhai pynciau’n cael eu cynnwys a’u bod wedi dylanwadu ar y sefyllfa yn Lloegr a bod hynny hefyd wedi dylanwadu arnom ni yng Nghymru. Sut y bydd deddfwriaeth yn delio â hyn a phwy fydd yn gyfrifol am ddweud ein bod i ryw raddau’n optio allan o’r system tair gwlad rhywbryd yn ystod y 10 mlynedd nesaf?	Aled Roberts: I want to go back to this collaboration between the three countries at the moment, in terms of regulation and the fact that, in terms of A-level exams, the content is quite similar. The intention is that A-levels will continue in Wales, even though the assessment methods will be different. Keith made the point earlier that universities are, to some extent, content with the way that we are assessing in Wales and are content that we continue with the AS examinations. If you say that we are moving to a model of self-regulation ultimately and that that is a development, how exactly would legislation move from the model of three-country regulation, in terms of an exam that is common to the three countries, to a situation where, ultimately, we will be self-regulating? Bear in mind that Gareth Pierce has told us that there have been quite interesting discussions—he mentioned economics A-level and that universities had insisted that some subjects were included and had influenced the situation in England and had also influenced us in Wales. How will the legislation deal with this and who will be responsible for saying that we are, to some extent, opting out of the three-country system at some time during the next 10 years?
[211] Mr Evans: Mewn ffordd, mae Lloegr wedi optio allan o’r system tair gwlad yn barod. Unwaith y cafodd Ofqual ei greu ac unwaith y penderfynodd Lloegr ddilyn ei llwybr ei hun, yr oedd hynny’n ei gwneud yn anodd iawn i Ogledd Iwerddon a Chymru i gydweithio yn y modd yr oeddent arfer cydweithio. Rwy’n credu bod y prosesau yn dal i fod yn eu lle ac maen nhw yn bodoli. Mae’r prosesau yn bodoli yn go gryf o safbwynt cyrsiau galwedigaethol, ond unwaith i ni benderfynu, yng Nghymru, i ddatblygu ein safonau a manylebau ein hunain, roedd hynny wedi gwahaniaethu rhwng yr hyn a oedd yn digwydd yng Nghymru a’r hyn a oedd yn digwydd yn Lloegr. Rydym ni, yng Nghymru, wedi gwneud y penderfyniad hwnnw am resymau da iawn—rhesymau o safbwynt myfyrwyr i greu safonau gwell a symud y pynciau hyn ymlaen.	[212] Mr Evans: In a way, England has already opted out of the three-country approach. Once Ofqual was created and once England decided to follow its own path, it made it very difficult for both Northern Ireland and Wales to collaborate as they used to collaborate. I think that the processes are still in place and they do exist. The processes are relatively strong in terms of vocational courses, but once we, in Wales, decided to develop our own standards and specifications, then that differentiated what was happening in Wales from what was happening in England. We, in Wales, had made that decision for very good reasons—reasons that were focused on students in terms of improving standards and moving these subject areas forward.
[213] Yn y dyfodol, wrth i ni gymryd rheolaeth o’n cyrsiau ni ein hunain—a gan nad ydym yn ynys—bydd yn rhaid inni edrych ar yr hyn sy’n mynd ymlaen mewn gwledydd eraill a bydd yn rhaid i ni gael rhyw fath o system o peer review, neu beth bynnag y byddwn yn ei alw, rhwng y gwledydd eraill i wneud yn siŵr bod y cymwysterau sydd gennym ni yng Nghymru o’r un safon a bod yr asesu yr un fath ag y mae mewn gwledydd eraill. Rydym yn dechrau cael y drafodaeth honno, ac rwy’n credu bod y broses yn go gryf o safbwynt cyrsiau galwedigaethol, ond bydd yn newid o safbwynt y cymwysterau mwy cyffredinol sy’n bodoli yn y wlad hon. Fodd bynnag, ar yr un pryd, rwyf yn gobeithio y bydd y safon yn cynyddu ac ar gyfer pob cymhwyster y byddwn yn ei ddatblygu, bydd rhaid bod dealltwriaeth bod y cwrs hwnnw o’r un safon â’r cwrs sy’n cael ei ddatblygu mewn unrhyw fan arall ym Mhrydain Fawr ar ddiwedd y dydd. Er enghraifft, mathemateg—rydym yn datblygu cwrs newydd mathemateg ar y funud. Bydd rhaid i hwnnw fod o’r un safon â’r cyrsiau sy’n cael eu datblygu ym mhobman arall. Mae hynny’n go glir i mi wrth i ni symud ymlaen.	In future, as we take control of our own courses—and given that we are not an island—we will have to look at what happens in other countries and we will have to have some system of peer review, or whatever we will call it, between the various nations to ensure that the qualifications that we have are of the same standard and that the assessment is the same as it is in other countries. We are starting to have that discussion, and I believe that the process is relatively robust in terms of vocational courses, but it will change in terms of the more general qualifications that exist in Wales at present. However, simultaneously, I hope that standards will increase and for every qualification that we will develop, there will have to be an understanding that that course is of the same standard as a course developed anywhere else within the UK at the end of the day. For example, maths—we are now developing a new maths course. That will have to be of a corresponding standard to the courses developed elsewhere. That is quite clear to me as we progress.
[214] Pwynt arall o safbwynt prifysgolion—rwyf wedi treulio rhyw chwe mis yn trafod y pynciau hyn gyda phrifysgolion a chwmnïoedd ar draws Cymru a Lloegr. Rwyf wedi bod ymweld â rhwng 12 a 15 o brifysgolion yn Lloegr ac rwyf ymweld â phob un yng Nghymru. Mae pob un yn gefnogol o’r hyn yr ydym yn ei wneud yng Nghymru ac yn gefnogol o’r ffordd yr ydym yn delio ag AS a lefel A. Rwy’n teimlo, oherwydd y ffordd yr ydym wedi datblygu ein cymwysterau ynddi yng Nghymru—achos ein bod wedi cyfathrebu a thrafod â phobl eraill—fod pobl eraill yn derbyn yr hyn yr ydym yn ei wneud yn y wlad hon. Fodd bynnag, ar yr un pryd, fi yw’r cyntaf i dderbyn na allwn fod yn ynys. Mae’n rhaid i ni gydweithio, mae’n rhaid i ni edrych ar safonau gwledydd eraill, ac mae’n rhaid i ni edrych ar safonau rheoleiddio mewn gwledydd eraill. Yr awyrgylch sydd gennym ar y funud yw awyrgylch rheoleiddio. Rhaid i ni wneud yn siŵr bod ansawdd yn dod mewn i’r broses honno.	Another point in terms of universities—I have spent some six months having discussions on these issues with universities and companies across Wales and England. I have visited between 12 and 15 universities in England and I have visited all of those in Wales. They are all supportive of what we are doing in Wales. They are all supportive of the way in which we are dealing with AS and A-level. I believe that because of the way we have developed our qualifications in Wales—because we have been communicating and discussing these issues with others—people are accepting the approach we are taking in Wales. However, at the same time, I am the first to say that we cannot be isolated. We have to collaborate, we have to look at standards in other nations and we have to look at regulatory standards in other nations. The environment that we are working in is a regulatory environment. We must ensure that quality comes into that process.
[215] Aled Roberts: Dau bwynt byr—rwy’n meddwl bod yr SQA yn gallu rheoleiddio tu allan i’r Alban achos bod yr hawl hwnnw yn Neddf addysg yr Alban 1996. A oes ystyriaeth i’r ffaith eich bod wedi dweud, yn y Bil hwn, na fydd hawl i Gymwysterau Cymru wneud yr un peth tu allan i Gymru, achos bod y sail gyfreithiol o fewn Bil sy’n ymwneud â Lloegr a Chymru? Mae perygl, os bydd Cymru’n ceisio ymestyn ei dylanwad ar draws Clawdd Offa, y bydd rhyw fath o ymateb gan Loegr.	Aled Roberts: Two brief points—I think that the SQA can regulate outside Scotland because it has the right to do so under the Education (Scotland) Act 1996. Is there consideration of the fact that you have said, in this Bill, that there will not be a right for Qualifications Wales to do the same outside of Wales, because the legal basis is within a Bill relating to England and Wales? There is a danger, if Wales attempts to extend its influence across Offa’s Dyke, that there will be some sort of response from England.
[216] A gaf hefyd ofyn hyn? Roeddech yn dweud ein bod yn edrych ar sefyllfa lle byddai’n rhaid i ysgolion dderbyn arholiadau Cymwysterau Cymru er mwyn iddynt gael eu hariannu gan Lywodraeth Cymru. A fydd hynny’n rhan o’r Bil? A ydych wedi ystyried beth yw’r sefyllfa o ran—nid wyf yn siŵr beth yw’r geiriau am foundation schools yn Gymraeg, ond a fydd sefyllfa’r ysgolion hynny’n wahanol? Mae nifer o ysgolion o’r math hwnnw ar y ffin. Os na allwn eu sicrhau bod y cymwysterau yng Nghymru o ansawdd ddigonol, mae perygl y byddant yn dweud, ‘Fe awn ni tu allan i’r gyfundrefn hon a symud draw at fwrdd arholi yn Lloegr.’	May I also ask this? You said that we are looking at a situation where schools would have to accept Qualifications Wales examinations in order for them to be funded by the Welsh Government. Will that be part of the Bill? Have you considered what the situation is regarding—I am not sure what the Welsh is for foundation schools, but will the situation of those schools be different? There are a number of schools of that kind on the border. If we cannot assure them that the qualifications in Wales are of a sufficient quality, there is a danger that they will say, ‘We’ll go outside this regime and move to an examination board in England.’
[217] Mr Evans: Fy nealltwriaeth i—. Nid wyf yn siŵr, i fod yn onest, a bydd rhaid i mi gymryd cyngor ar a yw hyn yn y Bil sy’n symud drwyddo ar y funud, ond fy nealltwriaeth i yw y bydd yn rhaid i ysgolion a cholegau, i gael eu cyllido, ddilyn cyrsiau Cymwysterau Cymru. O ran yr ysgolion annibynnol, wrth gwrs, maen nhw’n hollol wahanol.	Mr Evans: My understanding—. I am not entirely sure, to be honest, and I will need some advice on whether this is included in the Bill that is progressing at present, but my understanding is that schools and colleges, in order to be funded, will have to follow Qualifications Wales courses. In terms of independent schools, of course, they are entirely different.
[218] Aled Roberts: Roeddwn i’n meddwl am yr hen grant maintained—	Aled Roberts: I was thinking of the old grant maintained schools—
[219] Mr Evans: Rwy’n gwybod, y grant maintained. Rwy’n credu y bydden nhw’n dod o dan ddeddfwriaeth Cymru, ond bydd rhaid i mi gymryd cyngor ar hynny. Ni allaf roi ateb uniongyrchol i chi ar y pwynt hwnnw, i fod yn onest.	Mr Evans: I know—the grant maintained. I think that they would fall into the remit of the Welsh legislation, but I would need to take advice on that. I cannot give you a direct response on that particular point, to be honest.
[220] David Rees: I have got Rebecca then Bethan, and then we will see how the time goes.
[221] Rebecca Evans: I would like to take you to your paper where you refer to the governance and accountability arrangements. I am particularly interested in the establishment of an effective sponsorship unit to manage relationships between Welsh Government and Qualifications Wales. Can you give us an example of how you would envisage that working and who would be on the unit and so on?
[222] Mr Evans: That is currently being discussed at this point in time, but I think the success of this venture with Qualifications Wales is twofold. First of all, it is about having governance that is effective within Qualifications Wales, and part of that governance includes an effective chief executive officer who will run it, but it also has to have an effective sponsorship division that sets the remit, conveys the policy, and does so in a meaningful way. I would imagine that that would come under the remit of the Minister for education and a division that the Minister for education would set up to undertake that process. That is not a detailed discussion that the advisory board has had. We have talked about sponsorship and we have talked about the need for efficient and effective sponsorship, but we have not talked about the who and the when and how it is going to happen. I think that is a matter for Welsh Government.
[223] Rebecca Evans: In terms of the full and informative reporting to the National Assembly that you refer to in your paper, how would you envisage Assembly Members scrutinising the work of Qualifications Wales?
[224] Mr Evans: I would envisage an annual report being presented in front of the Assembly and I would imagine that the detailed follow-up of the work of Qualifications Wales would be scrutinised via this kind of committee, with the chair and the chief exec and whoever the chief exec decided to have in attendance.
[225] Bethan Jenkins: I fynd ymlaen â’r un pwynt o ran y system peer review roeddech yn sôn amdano, i glirio rhywbeth lan nad wyf yn deall yn bersonol, roedd Gareth Pierce yn dweud yn gynharach mai’r unig beth fyddai’n wahanol rhwng Cymru a Lloegr fydd yr asesiadau, ond rydych chi’n dweud na fydd yr asesiadau’n wahanol.	Bethan Jenkins: To go on with the same point in terms of the peer review system you mentioned, to clear something up that I do not understand personally, Gareth Pierce said earlier that the only thing that would be different between Wales and England would be the assessments, but you say that the assessments would not be different.
[226] Mr Evans: Fe allent fod yn wahanol.	Mr Evans: They could be different.
[227] Bethan Jenkins: Maen nhw’n gallu bod yn wahanol.	Bethan Jenkins: They could be different.
[228] Mr Evans: Nid ar gyfer lefel A efallai, ond gallent fod yn wahanol ar gyfer cyrsiau TGAU.	Mr Evans: Not for A-level perhaps, but they could be different for GCSE courses.
[229] Bethan Jenkins: Pam felly?	Bethan Jenkins: Why would that be?
[230] Mr Evans: Mae hynny achos bod specifications hollol wahanol gennym yn y wlad hon. Rydym yn parhau â chwrs modiwl, er enghraifft, fel rhan o TGAU—nid yw Lloegr yn gwneud hynny. Felly, byddai’r asesiad yn hollol wahanol yn y wlad hon ar gyfer cyrsiau TGAU mewn rhai pynciau. Bydd rhai pynciau yn gyrsiau linear. Fodd bynnag, bydd yr asesiad lefel A yn dilyn yr hyn sy’n digwydd yn Lloegr er mwyn gwneud yn siŵr ein bod yn gyson fel rydym yn symud ymlaen.	Mr Evans: That is because we have entirely different specifications in this country. We deliver GCSE in a modular manner, and England does not. So, the assessment would be entirely different for GCSE courses in some subjects. Some subjects will be taught on a linear model. However, the A-level assessment will follow what is happening in England to ensure that we are consistent as we move forward.
[231] Bethan Jenkins: Dyna’r peth yr oeddwn am ei ddeall, achos, os ydym yn sôn am ansawdd fel y prif beth, rhaid i ni sicrhau—. Mae’r cwricwlwm yn cael ei ddatblygu yn awr, ac nid ydym yn gwybod sut fydd yn edrych. Sut fydd yn cael ei asesu yn yr un ffordd os yw’r cwricwlwm yn edrych yn hollol wahanol? Dyna’r hyn yr wyf yn ei ffeindio’n anodd i’w ddeall. Mae hynny’n digwydd yn baralel i’r hyn sy’n cael ei drafod yma heddiw.	Bethan Jenkins: That is the thing I wanted to understand, because if we are talking about quality as the main issue, we must ensure—. The curriculum is being developed now, and we do not know how it will look. How will it be assessed in the same way if the curriculum is going to look totally different? That is what I find difficult to understand. That is happening in parallel to what is being discussed here today.
[232] Mr Evans: Mae’r Llywodraeth yn edrych ar y funud ar y cwricwlwm yng Nghymru. Rydym yn gweithio’n agos gyda’r tîm cwricwlwm i wneud yn siŵr bod yr adolygiad cymwysterau yn plethu â’r hyn sy’n digwydd o safbwynt y cwricwlwm. Os bydd rhywbeth hollol newydd yn y cwricwlwm i Gymru, bydd yn rhaid i ni fel Cymwysterau Cymru ymateb i hynny wrth iddo datblygu.	Mr Evans: The Government is currently looking at the curriculum in Wales. We are working very closely with the curriculum team to ensure that the qualifications review dovetails with what is happening in terms of the curriculum. If there should be something entirely new in the curriculum for Wales, then we, as Qualifications Wales, will have to respond to that as it develops.
[233] A gaf i ddweud rhywbeth? Rwy’n teimlo dros Gareth, i fod yn onest. Mae gan Gareth her; mae ganddo ddau feistr. Mae un meistr yn Lloegr ac mae un meistr yng Nghymru. Dyna’r her iddo ef: i wneud yn siŵr bod y meistr yng Nghymru jest mor bwysig â’r meistr yn Lloegr.	May I make one further point? I feel for Gareth, truth be told. Gareth faces a challenge; he has two masters. One is in England and one in Wales. That is the challenge he faces: to ensure that the Welsh master is just as important as the master in England.
[234] David Rees: I have one final question. You have discussed an awful lot about qualifications, but in your paper you talk about possible responsibility for qualifications for apprenticeships and the relevance of apprenticeships. How far down the line have your discussions gone in relation to programmes for apprenticeships? Where do you think that Qualifications Wales’s responsibilities will be in that area?
[235] Mr Evans: We started at a disadvantage, because the review of qualifications did not have the apprenticeship framework as part of its remit. We did not consider apprenticeships when we were looking at general and vocational qualifications. Following that, and following our consultation, it became clear to us that there is a need to bring apprenticeships and the qualifications that go into making an apprenticeship into what constitutes the work of Qualifications Wales. What I am talking about there is very much the makeup of the qualifications themselves, as opposed to funding the apprenticeship, which I think is a matter for the Government and various divisions. I am talking about the qualifications themselves. I think that apprenticeships need to be valued in exactly the same way as an A-level programme or a full time vocational programme. If it is not under the same standardisation rules, regulation rules, et cetera, they could be viewed differently.
11:30
[236] David Rees: What role do you see, therefore, for Qualifications Wales?
[237] Mr Evans: I see Qualifications Wales being the issuing authority that can actually determine the qualifications framework and what goes into the apprenticeship framework.
[238] David Rees: Thank you very much for attending this morning and for giving us evidence in this session. It was very helpful for us. You will receive a copy of the transcript to check for any factual inaccuracies that you might identify. Once again, thank you very much.
[239] Mr Evans: Thank you very much—diolch yn fawr i chi i gyd.
[240] David Rees: I propose that we have a five minute break and start back up at 11.40 a.m.
Gohiriwyd y cyfarfod rhwng 11:30 ac 11:40. The meeting adjourned between 11:30 and 11:40.
Craffu ar y Bil Cymwysterau Cymru cyn y Broses Ddeddfu: Sesiwn Dystiolaeth 3 Pre-legislative Scrutiny of the Qualifications (Wales) Bill: Evidence Session 3
[241] David Rees: I welcome Members back to this evidence session in our pre-legislative scrutiny of the Qualifications (Wales) Bill. Session 3 is with the National Training Federation Wales. I thank you for attending this morning. Would you like to introduce yourselves?
[242] Mr Protheroe: Good afternoon, everyone. Prynhawn da i bawb. I am Jeff Protheroe, operations manager at NTFW.
[243] Mr Watkins: I am Arwyn Watkins, chief executive, National Training Federation Wales, and managing director of Cambrian Training.
[244] Ms O’Brien: I am Faith O’Brien, interim chair of NTFW and director of ITEC.
[245] David Rees: Thank you very much. As you are aware, we have limited time, and we do have some questions, so if it is okay we will go straight into questions. For your information, this session is bilingual. If you need to use translation, it is on channel 1 on the headphones. You do not need to touch anything because we have automatic mics. Simon, do you want to start the questioning?
[246] Simon Thomas: Diolch, Gadeirydd. Gwnaf ofyn fy nghwestiwn cyntaf yn Gymraeg. Diolch am y dystiolaeth yr ydych wedi ei chyflwyno. Fedrwch chi ddweud wrthym  yn y lle cyntaf beth fu eich cyfraniad hyd yma i adolygiad Huw Evans, ac, erbyn hyn, gyda’r bwrdd cynghori sydd wedi ei sefydlu, a ydych chi’n rhan o’r trafodaethau o gwmpas y bwrdd hwnnw tuag at sefydlu Cymwysterau Cymru?	Simon Thomas: Thank you, Chair. I will ask my first question in Welsh. Thank you for the evidence that you have presented. Could you tell us, in the first place, what your involvement has been so far with the Huw Evans review, and, now that the advisory board has been established, are you part of the discussions around that board, towards establishing Qualifications Wales?
[247] Mr Watkins: I can declare that I was a member of the qualifications review board from the very first instance. We are currently not members of the advisory board, but we are represented on both the workforce impact stakeholder group and the wider stakeholder group that Huw referred to earlier on in his evidence.
[248] Simon Thomas: Does that involve regular communications on these issues?
[249] Mr Watkins: The communication is very regular, to be honest. We are currently having meetings on a bi-monthly basis, and it is evolving. The mechanism for that comes back through our communication channel, down through our board and to the wider network.
[250] Simon Thomas: Obviously, you are broadly in support of the review. I would not expect anything different, as you have been on the review. However, what are the particular issues around the separation of the regulation of qualifications in Wales, including vocational qualifications, and specifically for yourselves, and the new proposed body—which is slightly different from the body that the review initially saw? Do you see that working in practice? How do you see that affecting the work that you do, particularly as training organisations?
[251] Mr Watkins: It has been very evident that the ideal model clearly has not transpired in terms of the recommendations. The one thing that we hugely welcome is in terms of the clarification between IVETs and CVETs and all of that. For us, as the next stage in the progression of our learners, the clarity there is great. The one thing that we do have concerns about is that Wales is quite a small marketplace for quite a lot of the qualifications that our networks deliver. We already operate very much in terms of a different framework, because on the apprenticeship framework we have to be compliant with the ‘Specification of Apprenticeship Standards for England’ and ‘The Specification of Apprenticeship Standards for Wales’. We already incur some issues around awarding bodies that will not invest the level of resource to make a certain apprenticeship framework SASW compliant because the business case does not stack up in terms of economics whereas they are SASE compliant in England because of the business.
[252] Simon Thomas: So, compliance in one does not automatically read across in that sense.
11:45
[253] Mr Watkins: No, absolutely not. So, there is a role there for Qualifications Wales to absolutely enable us to not be reliant on what is currently that tripartite system with some of the qualifications we currently deliver. That, sometimes, forms a barrier or delay for us. The other thing we should emphasise here is that we hope that this is a real opportunity to reach that ambition in terms of parity of esteem between vocational and academic qualifications. It was a disappointment that the apprenticeships did not form part of the remit of the review in the very first place because they are such a significant factor in the work that we do and the priorities going forward.
[254] Simon Thomas: Yes. I do not know whether you had the chance to listen to Huw Evans’s evidence to us earlier, but he also made that point. He also said that his long-term view of Qualifications Wales is still that as set out in his report, albeit over 10 years rather than the two or three years that were initially thought of. In other words, Qualifications Wales could eventually develop into an awarding body as well as the regulatory and quality assurance kind of body. Your evidence and what you have just said suggest that you would also still be interested in that kind of framework. How would that body then work with the plethora—because it is much bigger in the vocational sector—of awarding bodies out there, including apprenticeships later on perhaps? Do you have any thoughts in your head at the moment on how Qualifications Wales, over the next two or three years, will be working in that field? Is it as an accrediting sort of organisation? It is not going to be awarding them yet, is it?
[255] Mr Watkins: No. We have not had the luxury of being able to see what they talk about in terms of a future commissioning model or whatever in those terms, but—
[256] Simon Thomas: You would want to be part of those discussions, I assume.
[257] Mr Watkins: Absolutely. You are right, Simon, in stating that, in the area we operate in, it has been an absolute free-for-all, historically, in terms of the marketplace. It has been very commercially driven and that has resulted in the number of qualifications that are on the system and available to us. It is confusing for us all, to be honest. You visited Scotland and the SQA. SQA is not the only awarding organisation in our arena within Scotland, but it has a very clear gatekeeper business case process in terms of any other awarding body coming onto that system. What concerns us is that, if the need in Wales is not sufficient for an awarding body to do the business case on its own back, what is the alternative? To me, it has to be Qualifications Wales.
[258] Simon Thomas: So, looking forward, you would see that apprentices and those doing vocational qualifications in Wales would have a Qualifications Wales, QW, mark on their course, as it were—it would be accredited by QW in the same way as the Scottish model works.
[259] Mr Watkins: Yes. I think that the question you have to ask is, ‘Why wouldn’t you want to?’ Why would you not want that on there if it is set within the right standards and it is robust and reliable? We do have concerns about portability, and I am sure that a question may come up around that.
[260] Simon Thomas: Finally from me, putting that in its context—and I am sure that there will be more questions on some of the detail of this—in terms of a piece of legislation, because we as an Assembly have to legislate to allow these things to happen, do you have any thoughts on what it should be saying or allowing in terms of powers that the new body should have therefore to operate, particularly in the field you are operating in? For example, as you said, apprenticeships were not part of the original remit, but they seem now to be coming up as something that should be considered.
[261] Ms O’Brien: Very simply, we have to see it as the gatekeeper to give a seal of approval for that apprenticeship to be delivered and funded in Wales.
[262] Simon Thomas: So, for that to happen, it needs to have some kind of statutory duty or authority to operate in that way.
[263] Ms O’Brien: Yes.
[264] Simon Thomas: Okay. Diolch.
[265] David Rees: You say that it would be a gatekeeper, but are you also asking that, for example, where the frameworks are not expanded into Wales, it becomes more of an active body to look at how we could expand the framework into Wales as well?
[266] Mr Watkins: Yes. Currently, there are two mechanisms that a lot of our network—. In fact, it is three, four—some of our network, in terms of our membership, currently operates in four countries, so they are already delivering four different sets of framework criteria in four different countries. Obviously, with SASW-compliant frameworks, the SASW stuff is already established by the Welsh Government. It has set the requirements for any apprenticeship framework to be approved. We are finding already in some, particularly in higher apprentices, where that is becoming a barrier issue to some awarding bodies to develop the higher apprenticeship for Wales because the business case is not there.
[267] Ms O’Brien: That is correct. There are a number of higher apprenticeships that can be delivered, let us say in England, at the moment. We think that, at the moment, we are restricted to 12 or 15 in Wales because of the process.
[268] Suzy Davies: I am assuming that your general enthusiasm for the proposals is based on the idea that something that has a QW stamp on it will help to improve parity of esteem. Is that part of the idea? We have just talked about apprenticeships, and we did discuss with the previous witness vocational qualifications that are offered but where the QW stamp is not sought. We heard very clearly from Huw Evans that if it does not have a QW stamp on it, it will not be publicly funded in Wales. How much, do you think—and I think that this might be a question for Jeff—that will curtail the availability of qualifications for young and older people working in Wales? I note from your evidence that you say that you would prefer whoever is offering the training to still have complete freedom to choose whatever courses they wanted to provide.
[269] Mr Protheroe: I think that it comes back to the point that Arwyn was making earlier, in that our members operate in a sort of market where there are quite a lot of organisations offering vocational qualifications. What we recognise, as individual members, is that, over a period of time, relationships have been built up with providers and with awarding organisations, in terms of ways of operating and agreed practice et cetera. We obviously would not want to see Qualifications Wales putting up barriers to entry for awarding organisations to offer qualifications in Wales, because we recognise that there needs to be enough scope for providers to choose which awarding organisation to work with. The nature of what we deliver is so wide across all sectors and industries et cetera that we need to have that breadth of offer. Really, that is the sort of message that we want to put across: we need to have that ability to operate across different awarding organisations.
[270] Suzy Davies: The Scottish Qualifications Authority took a nice median route, if you like. It said that, ideally, it would like the SQA to have the authority to choose what it regulated. The impression that I got from the previous witnesses was that we will regulate everything, and if you do not get a QW stamp, as I say, you are not operating in Wales, effectively. You have said that that would be a limitation. Does that go with parity of esteem, because we do not have the QW stamp?
[271] Mr Protheroe: Currently, the Welsh Government is a regulator of all qualifications in Wales, whether they are publicly funded or not. That is obviously well within the detail of the Deputy Minister’s remit, I guess. I think that the QW stamp will assure that that qualification has gone through that rigorous quality-assurance process and that, having gone through that gatekeeper process, everyone is happy that it is fit for purpose and therefore can attract public funding. There will be a whole range of qualifications and courses, as I said, delivered outside of that which are not necessarily accredited. I use the example of PRINCE2. It is a project management qualification that is not currently accredited within the qualification systems in Wales. However, there is a very valued employer value to the qualification. As we mentioned earlier, the question should be why they would not want it to be accredited, and why they would not want to go through Qualifications Wales. This is about making sure that the system is robust enough and that those who are developing qualifications see the benefit in having that QW stamp.
[272] Suzy Davies: I think that we have an example in Scotland of Microsoft qualifications. A company the size of Microsoft is not really going to care if it has a QW print on it or not; it has its own standard. We also had an indication that the SQA was not particularly interested in reinventing the wheel at all. If you have City and Guilds out there, which already has a very good name, it may stick a stamp on it but it will not be using the vocational scene as an opportunity to start, really, cranking up its own home-developed qualifications. It was very much a sort of gap filler, I think we heard. We had the example of Harris tweed—maybe the SQA would do a qualification in that, but otherwise it was quite happy to let existing vocational providers, subject to the once-over, carry on meeting the demand. Do you think that Qualifications Wales, and the model as you understand it so far, is likely to be as open as that, or do you get a sense that it is really looking to create a suite of its own vocational qualifications, home-grown for Wales?
[273] Mr Watkins: I would hope that Qualifications Wales would need to intervene only where there was significant market failure in terms of a specific qualification that was not coming from the likes of City and Guilds or Edexcel, or some of the existing quality-assured awarding organisations that are already out there.
[274] Suzy Davies: Just one final question on this: we heard from Gareth Pierce at the beginning, as our first witness, that he thought that there was scope for a much greater strategic direction in how vocational education is planned for in Wales, which would come from the top. I think he might even have meant Government, but certainly Qualifications Wales’s kind of level, if not. Do you think that is an unnecessary ambition, or do you think there is enough strategic direction to meet the needs of Welsh employers now?
[275] Mr Watkins: I think there is definitely a need to utilise this window of opportunity that we have—a one-off opportunity—in Wales to actually be very clear in terms of how we communicate progression pathways throughout the whole of the education system all the way through to employability and skills. If this is an opportunity to provide that strategic direction to all of us involved in this, then absolutely we should welcome it.
[276] David Rees: I think you want to focus on the IVETs and CVETs, effectively.
[277] Suzy Davies: I will not press you on who and where you think that point of power should lie, but there you go.
[278] David Rees: I have Aled, and then Keith.
[279] Aled Roberts: Rwyf eisiau gofyn yn Gymraeg. Mae’r farchnad yn llawer iawn mwy yn yr Alban nag yw yng Nghymru. Pan ydych yn sôn bod rhai cyrff rŵan nad ydynt yn barod i greu cymwysterau yng Nghymru, gan nad yw’r farchnad yn ddigon mawr, a allech roi rhyw fath o flas i ni am faint y broblem honno ar hyn o bryd? A gaf i roi un enghraifft i chi am le bydd problemau yn codi ynglŷn â chwmnïau sy’n darparu ar lefel Prydeinig ar hyn o bryd? Mae’r adolygiad yn dweud y bydd yn rhaid i unrhyw gyrff ddarparu yn yr iaith Gymraeg os maent i dderbyn sêl bendith Cymwysterau Cymru. Dyna’r hyn a oedd yn yr adolygiad gwreiddiol. A oes perygl felly y bydd rhai cyrff ar lefel Prydeinig yn anfodlon i fynd trwy’r broses Gymreig hon? Fel roedd Suzy yn ei ddweud, ar hyn o bryd yn yr Alban, anaml iawn mae cyrsiau galwedigaethol nad ydynt yn cael eu darparu gan gyrff ar lefel Prydeinig. Roeddent yn sôn am bethau fel ‘Harris tweed’, lle maent yn gorfod camu mewn a gwneud darpariaeth eu hunain. A oes perygl yng Nghymru y bydd y broblem hon yn fwy o achos maint y farchnad, a gofynion Cymwysterau Cymru i ddarparu niferoedd bach o gyrsiau trwy’r iaith Gymraeg?	Aled Roberts: I want to ask my question in Welsh. The market is much larger in Scotland than it is in Wales. When you were talking about some bodies that are not willing now to create qualifications in Wales because the market is not of sufficient size, can you give us some sort of idea of the size of the problem at the moment? May I provide you with one example of where problems will arise in terms of companies that make provision at a British level at the moment? The review says that any bodies will have to make provision through the medium of Welsh if they are to receive the seal of approval from Qualifications Wales. That was what was in the original review. Is there a risk therefore that some bodies at a UK level will be unwilling to go through this Welsh process? As Suzy said, at the moment in Scotland, it is not very often that there are vocational courses that are not provided by bodies at a UK level. They were talking about things such as Harris tweed, where they have to step in and provide those courses themselves. Is there a danger in Wales that this problem will be greater because of the size of the market, and the requirements of Qualifications Wales to provide small numbers of courses through the medium of Welsh?
[280] Ms O’Brien: In terms of the vocational qualifications on a UK level, there is currently a mechanism in place that, if the demand is in Wales, we can request that those qualifications are funded. I would hope that that system would not change, so we can actually request QW to review the qualification, look at the demand in Wales, and get that seal of approval. Do you want to pick up on the Welsh language, Arwyn?
[281] Aled Roberts: May I just ask about this SASW thing? You mentioned that there was already some evidence that bodies were going through the SASW process because of the size of the market. What is the extent of that problem currently? You mentioned the higher apprenticeships in particular. What is the extent of that problem currently?
12:00
[282] Ms O’Brien: It is not significant. I think that, if it was significant, there would be more pressure on the Welsh Government to look at the qualifications and to bring them into play a lot sooner. However, it is where you have niche markets where there are not a significant number of learners, but where it would support the market for delivery.
[283] Aled Roberts: Okay.
[284] Mr Watkins: Moving on from that, it is about that uniqueness around the SASW and the SAES. Welsh-language provision is a massive challenge for us. Let us not underestimate that in post-16 education and the whole area we operate in. There could well be a barrier to certain awarding bodies if the criterion was that you had to provide all your materials through the medium of Welsh and that everything had to be available bilingually and so on. However, the one thing I am hoping—and it might be too ambitious in terms of a hope—is that Qualifications Wales will actually give us the same level of support in the vocational setting as the support that has been provided for the delivery of Welsh-medium education in the academic setting. Currently, that does not exist at all; it is literally up to the market to create that as opposed to it being something strategic.
[285] Mr Protheroe: May I offer an example as well? It is quite a recent example of the opportunities that are available, particularly within apprenticeships et cetera, and Wales developing. Until recently, there was not a framework in the creative industry sector. That is such an important economic sector for Wales moving forward—we all recognise that. Work has been undertaken within Welsh Government and by other stakeholders to develop, under SASW-compliant frameworks, an apprenticeship in the creative sector. So, it is in those sorts of areas where you would like to think that Qualifications Wales, if it took the lead on apprenticeships, could then recognise all of that and bring all of the parties together to develop apprenticeship frameworks that are quite specific or unique to Wales or in an area that is of such economic importance to Wales.
[286] David Rees: Bethan, do you have a question on this?
[287] Bethan Jenkins: It is just on that. Suzy mentioned the strategic direction, and I just want to put a scenario to you. For example, we see a lot of young people moving from mid and north Wales to south Wales because they cannot stay in their communities to find positions. So, not to generalise, but some areas are Welsh-speaking. So, would you therefore expect a policy direction whereby certain apprenticeships in certain areas, for example, could be funded to be through the medium of Welsh? Would that be a compromise on the idea of everything being through the medium of Welsh as it would be some recognition of what types of jobs or apprenticeships might follow through in a certain area as opposed to things being done on an all-Wales basis? Could that be a potential outcome?
[288] Mr Watkins: Yes. I think that there should perhaps be a mechanism to prioritise certain areas, certain job roles and perhaps certain public-facing roles. It also varies in terms of the environment people work in. What is the language of the environment a person is working in? I live in mid Wales, so I do not underestimate the challenges we face in terms of the number of young apprentices coming onto the programme whose first language is Welsh and whose whole secondary education has been through the medium of Welsh who, at the first opportunity, would decline to undertake their apprenticeship programme through the medium of Welsh. Sixty-five per cent of my workforce is made up of training officers with Welsh as their first language.
[289] Bethan Jenkins: You made an interesting point earlier about the academic side being fully endorsed and supported with regard to the Welsh language. You clearly see that that is a gap here with regard to the vocational side. So, I am just wondering whether that is something you have had conversations about with the likes of Huw Evans already to try to build something in the system earlier rather than later so, as you said, that 65% does not end up saying, ‘Well, actually, no, I do not want to do that because I cannot do it in the language of my choice’.
[290] Mr Watkins: I have not had a conversation around that at all. Rightly or wrongly, we assumed that with an organisation such as Qualifications Wales, with it being a key priority for us in Wales, that there is a mechanism to develop materials against a common set of standards that will help us all to achieve the objectives that we would like to see for our country.
[291] David Rees: Keith is next, then Simon.
[292] Keith Davies: Mi wnaf i ofyn yn Gymraeg hefyd. Roeddwn i’n credu bod bas data cenedlaethol o gymwysterau. Fodd bynnag, rydych chi’n sôn yn eich papur am ddysgu yn y gweithle a bod pobl ifanc yn cael cymwysterau Sgiliau Hanfodol Cymru ac efallai yn mynd i Loegr, ond nid yw’r cymwysterau yn cael eu derbyn yno. Ai’r pryder sydd gennych gyda Chymwysterau Cymru y bydd mwy o gymwysterau yn cael eu rhedeg yng Nghymru na fyddant yn cael eu derbyn yn Lloegr?	Keith Davies: I will ask in Welsh as well. I thought that there was a national database of qualifications. However, you talk in your paper about work-based learning and that young people gain Essential Skills Wales qualifications and perhaps go to England where those qualifications are not recognised. Are you concerned that Qualifications Wales will run more qualifications in Wales that will not be recognised in England?
[293] Mr Protheroe: Faith can talk about the portability.
[294] Ms O’Brien: I think there is a general concern that when qualifications—the qualifications that are specific to Wales—come into play, there is awareness of equivalents across the other countries, and a raising of the priorities of these qualifications in Wales so that they are portable and that they are seen as an equivalent in England, Northern Ireland or Scotland. There is a concern that that piece of work has to be done.
[295] Keith Davies: Does the NDAQ, the national database of accredited qualifications, still exist?
[296] Mr Protheroe: Yes, it is now the register of qualifications. In Wales, we use the DAQW, which looks at what qualifications are fundable within Wales. However, there is the register of regulated qualifications Wales, which is the overarching one across the nation.
[297] Simon Thomas: To take that point and also Bethan’s point a little further, and test some of the things that you have been saying as well, we start from Huw Evans’s original report. When it looked at vocational qualifications, it was very clear—I think you said it as well, Arwyn, at the start—that there is a plethora of qualifications. Employers sometimes do not know which to choose. With young apprentices coming up, they do not quite know which is the best path for them. They might have an idea where they want to go, but they do not know which the best path is for them. The review said that there should be some kind of simplification or streamlining—whatever you want to call it; I think ‘simplification’ was the word used. Your evidence to us makes it very clear that you want to see the provider still have a choice of awarding organisations, so there is a market still in operation there. It seems to me that if we are going to get parity of esteem, we have to recognise that on the academic side—it may not happen overnight—Huw Evans’s vision was that over five to 10 years there would be a one-stop shop for academic qualifications in Wales, which would be QW working with WJEC and others, or possibly in a commissioning role, whatever it might be. I am not quite sure from your evidence or the other evidence that we have had so far that there is quite that clarity of vision for the vocational and apprenticeship side. I would suggest that there should be. If in the Welsh context there were—to give rather a hypothetical example, but probably not far off the truth—three awarding bodies for level 3 plumbing, say, should there not be some kind of process within this new body that says, ‘We will work with this awarding body in Wales, because we know it has the standards, we know it has done some work, say, on the Welsh language already, so we can put together a level 3 plumbing qualification in Wales that we can accredit easily and that will be available in both languages; that is the easiest way to do it.’ In the main suite, therefore, of vocational qualifications—not your Harris tweeds, not your coracle-making—you do something similar to the academic side. Is that something that would be completely anathema to you as training providers, or is it something that could make sense over five to 10 years?
[298] Mr Watkins: I think that that is something that could absolutely make sense. Those could well be some of the criteria in terms of the business case to get through the gatekeeper process. There is a mechanism happening elsewhere, across Offa’s Dyke. That place that I live very close to has been mentioned quite a lot today. There are business cases being done on all qualifications across all awarding bodies currently, and there are minimum criteria in terms of how many were being offered in Wales, for example, in the last—. So, absolutely.
[299] Simon Thomas: So, turning to higher apprenticeships, just as another example, they have had extra resource from the Welsh Government because of the deal between the Welsh Government and me and Plaid Cymru—not me personally, but you know what I mean. [Laughter.]
[300] Bethan Jenkins: Simon is claiming credit, as you can see. [Laughter.]
[301] Simon Thomas: If anyone is claiming credit it should be Ieuan Wyn Jones because he was the one who did the work previously.
[302] Bethan Jenkins: So, you.
[303] Simon Thomas: Yes, me as education spokesperson for Plaid Cymru. However, it was a deal with the Welsh Government, and we said that there would be more money for higher-level apprenticeships. As I understand it, there has been a lot of interest in that and it has taken off quite well. There were other aspects. There was a Welsh language part of it, which has not worked so well. So, there are swings and roundabouts. However, in that business case, therefore, there has to be some kind of public interest kind of recognition, national interest or whatever you want to say, that either the Welsh Government or Qualifications Wales—and it is not clear to me who will be doing that—can put in that business case, ‘Actually, we need to develop higher-level apprenticeships in Wales; therefore we will push a little bit more resource here, cross-subsidise perhaps, or do it in a different way, so that a little bit more resource will go into this’. Where do you see that decision making coming in? Is it the Government doing the decision making, or is it Qualifications Wales doing it in co-operation with the stakeholders, as it were?
[304] Mr Watkins: Once Qualifications Wales is established.
[305] Simon Thomas: Yes.
[306] Mr Watkins: If Qualifications Wales is going to do a proper job in terms of research and evidence and that type of stuff, it would have had to engage with the stakeholders; it would have had to identify the evidence requirements; and it would have had to take account of what the policy priorities are for the Government of the day, one would have thought. So, yes, absolutely, there should definitely be, within that business case, a mechanism for innovation—for want of a better word—in terms of developing. I have to be honest, higher apprenticeships has been a breath of fresh air for us as providers in Wales. It has really raised the ante in the workforce, has it not?
[307] Ms O’Brien: Yes.
[308] Simon Thomas: Yes; it has opened up a sort of bigger vision.
[309] Mr Watkins: It has challenged our own workforce, to be honest. Absolutely. It has been very welcomed.
[310] Simon Thomas: I am glad to hear that. [Laughter.]
[311] David Rees: Do other Members have questions? I see that there are no further questions, so I thank you for your evidence. Clearly, the emphasis of this session has been on the vocational side of things, and post-16 education effectively. Thank you very much for that. It is very important that we make sure that we cover the whole spectrum of what Qualifications Wales would be expected to look at, particularly the vocational side, because, as was mentioned by you and Huw Evans, it was not part of the review; the apprenticeships side, in particular, was not part of the review of qualifications. I think that it is important that we address those issues very clearly. So, thank you very much for that.
[312] You will receive a copy of the transcript to check and to let us know of any factual inaccuracies. Once again, thank you for attending this morning.
[313] Mr Watkins: Thank you very much, Chair. If there is anything that you want to come back on, please do so by all means.
[314] David Rees: We may well take you up on that. Thank you.
12:13
Papurau i’w Nodi Papers to Note
[315] David Rees: We have received two papers that are relevant to our inquiry into child and adolescent mental health services, which are from Barnardo’s Cymru. Are you happy to note those—paper 4? I see that you are. We have also received a letter from the Minister for Education and Skills on the outcomes for children from low-income households. Are Members happy to note that? I see that you are. Thank you very much. In that case, I remind Members that the next meeting will be held on 15 May during which we will be taking evidence from service users on the CAMHS inquiry. Details will be forwarded to all members of the committee. I remind you that, in 15 minutes’ time, the Minister for Communities and Tackling Poverty will be attending a briefing session on the children commissioner’s review. I therefore close the meeting.
Daeth y cyfarfod i ben am 12:14. The meeting ended at 12:14.