Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you, Mr Smyth, for applying for recognition for the cross-party group.

My blushes have just been spared. The initial papers that I had did not list any individuals or organisations as members of the group and I was going to ask why that was the case. However, the clerking team has just furnished me with an outstandingly impressive list of stakeholders. I am pleased to see that you are reaching out to all the relevant individuals and groups.

I have a supplementary question that is based on the convener’s interaction with the witnesses. He was right to push you on whether there was improvement pre-Covid. The statistics that I have show that, in the two years before Covid hit, the number of young people in primary schools who were meeting the expected standards for literacy was up by 3.1 per cent; for numeracy, the increase was 2.7 per cent. Therefore, quantifiable progress had been made.

Last week, we heard from local authorities that we need to be better at celebrating the progress that has been made. The committee also met the West Partnership teachers at St Roch’s secondary school, in my constituency. Graeme Dey and I were with one group of teachers who were a bit concerned that the impact of Covid might mask some of the really good success that has been evidenced in previous years. We need to ensure that that success is acknowledged and that the good practice is supported and embedded, along with the recovery that Mr Marra mentioned.

Will you say a bit more about how we ensure that we do not throw the baby out with the bath water, and that the good practice that has led to those improvements is not masked by Covid? That is a lengthy supplementary question, so if just one witness could answer, that would be good.

That is helpful. You have the granular, child and family-centred, tailored approach that we need, and you have all the wonderful anecdotal stories and the layer upon layer of great practice that is happening. However, we need to know reliably what is happening consistently across the country as a pattern, rather than as a snapshot, so that we can measure those activities. The danger is that that does not happen. Is Education Scotland going to bring a structure to look at that data, instead of citing individual bits of good practice—which can, I am sure, be multiplied by the 32 local authorities across the country? What work is Education Scotland doing now, and what does it intend to do, to monitor that in a meaningful way? I do not know whether Patricia Watson wants to comment.

We need to follow through a couple of things. The committee will eventually move towards report recommendations, and we want to do that by consensus. With the convener’s indulgence, I ask witnesses every week about celebrating success in education, and I deliberately mention the positive things that are happening. However, for my credibility, I need to ensure that I also scrutinise the positive information.

Education Scotland and Skills Development Scotland might collect data, but that does not necessarily mean that they are consistently collecting the correct data in the correct way and in a way that fits in with your key monitoring role for the proportion of 16 to 19-year-olds who are participating in education, employment and training. I know that there will be a new organisation, but you have said that Education Scotland has another two years to perform. We are not going to wait for two years until we get more sophisticated in collecting data.

Perhaps you could reply to this in writing, because there are time constraints. I suspect that we would like to put something meaningful in our report about how we can ensure that we take the longitudinal approach that Ross Greer has talked about and that I am talking about now so that, when I celebrate success in the committee, which is important, I am confident that a 16-year-old in my constituency will be supported when they are 17, 18 and 19, and that there is success in learning for life. We are not sure about that as yet. Do you have any comment to make on that?

Finally—I will not come back in again, because of the time constraints—in each meeting, I have asked about a dashboard of robust and reliable indicators to depoliticise some of this. Sometimes the data will show good things for politicians in Government, and sometimes it will show not-so-good things. Do we have an agreed range of indicators with which we can have a balanced approach to scrutinising the progress that has been made? If so, will Education Scotland lead on providing that information? I do not mean a 40-page strategy document; I mean one page of the top 10 indicators that are tracked over time. Some indicators will be up, some will be down and some will be the same, but we could look at that accessible and transparent document in a quick and easy way.

Are there any thoughts on those two issues? I will not come back in.

If schools and councils do not track and monitor in the same way, we cannot compare anything.

Convener, I am sure that someone else will want to get an assurance that we have to track and monitor consistently across each school and local authority, or we will have a mountain of anecdotal information and nothing that we can compare substantially and robustly.

The conversation this morning has been fascinating. I want to look at Education Scotland’s monitoring role. I will ask about some of the core aims of the attainment challenge and I might refer to some of the stretch aims, which I think are called core plus.

One of the core aims is about the proportion of 16 to 19-year-olds who are participating in education, employment or training. At last week’s meeting of the committee, I waxed lyrical about the positive destinations that have been achieved in my constituency and across Glasgow, which are tremendous given the pandemic and what has happened in the past two years. However, that is a snapshot in time. If we consider a 16-year-old who leaves a school in my constituency, who is monitoring where they are at 17, 18 or 19? We have to be robust in what we measure and we have to ensure that progress is sustained. Does Education Scotland monitor that?

I know, but it is my birthday.

That is very helpful. I will bring in Pamela Di Nardo in a second, but I have a follow-up question that it would be great if you could also address. I know that Mr Clement has a strategic responsibility for performance. I want to know about the 16-year-old who goes into a structured volunteering activity as a positive destination. It is a positive destination if it creates another opportunity for the 17-year-old and another for the 18-year-old, where they can build on that again. It is a lifelong learning pursuit. We need to put in those building blocks.

I accept what Mr Clement said, but he did not say who is doing the monitoring. I have mentioned a longitudinal study in previous meetings, as has Ross Greer. Are we tracking a cohort of 100, 500 or 1,000 students over three, five or seven years? Who is doing that kind of work? If that is not being done, there is a great opportunity for Education Scotland and its successor organisation to do some of that work.

I do not know whether Pamela Di Nardo would like to comment, but those are my thoughts, based on the initial response.

That was really helpful evidence. I thank all four witnesses.