MERTHYR TYDFIL COUNTY BOROUGH COUNCIL Civic Centre, Castle Street, Merthyr Tydfil, CF47 8AN

Main Tel: 01685 725000 www.merthyr.gov.uk

FULL COUNCIL REPORT

Date Written 15 April 2010 Report Author Chris Abbott Service Area Chris Abbott Exempt/Non Exempt Non Exempt Committee Date 28 th April 2010

To: Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen

Reorganising Post 16 Education and Training in Merthyr Tydfil

PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To inform Council about the outcomes of public consultation on proposals to reorganise post-16 education and training in Merthyr Tydfil and to recommend the publication of statutory proposals to alter the upper age limit of the four secondary schools in the County Borough so that the schools cease to make sixth form provision.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Proposals to reorganise post-16 education and training in Merthyr Tydfil have been conceived in response to critical demographic and regeneration imperatives. The proposals, developed by Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council in partnership with the University of Glamorgan, are aimed at widening the range of learning and training options available to young people, reducing unnecessary duplication of provision and improving the knowledge and skills base of the community. Increasing attainment and enhancing the life chances of all our young people are key priorities.

1.2 In line with Council’s previous decision to support the Critical Path and following submission of an Outline Business Case (OBC) to the Department for Children, Education and Lifelong Learning (DCELL), Council resolved on 4 January 2010 to give permission to Officers to engage in public consultation on a proposal to alter the upper age limit of secondary schools in the County Borough so that the schools cease to make sixth form provision. Subsequently, acting on written guidance and advice from the Welsh Assembly Government and based on custom and practice as established successfully in the County Borough since 1996, preparations were made to consult widely. A copy of the consultation document used to inform the consultation process has been placed in the Members’ Library. Public consultation on the proposal occurred over the period 1 February 2010 to 1 April 2010. 2.0 BACKGROUND TO THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Discussions on the need to reorganise post-16 education and training in Merthyr Tydfil began in 2001. ELWa (now DCELL) funded a feasibility study which identified the requirement to develop a significantly enhanced post-16 provision through a university presence, effective business incubation and a high-tech information and technology facility.

2.2 Whilst the original intention was for Merthyr Tydfil to investigate its own 6th form provision, the WAG decided that it would take responsibility for this via its Geographic Pathfinder process, part of a national drive to modernise post-16 learning and training and to support the development of the 14-19 Learning Pathways agenda. Merthyr Tydfil was one of six authorities in Wales to be involved in the initiative. A review, undertaken in 2005, asked fundamental questions about the configuration of post-16 learning delivery in the authority. Key issues identified included:

• the limited numbers of young people achieving at national standards; • low levels of formal qualifications in the adult population; • progression to higher education below the national average; • the existing learning network, in a compact community, is fragmented with breadth of opportunity being limited; • institutional and sectoral pressure to maintain the status quo tends to act as a barrier to collaboration; • school sixth form classes are generally small and this is restricting learner curriculum choice; • the sixth form consortium presently benefits limited numbers of learners and associated vocational provision is restricted; • there is overlap and duplication of provision; and • the area is characterised by low levels of post-16 engagement.

2.3 In response to the issues identified, ELWa investigated three different models for improvement, as follows:

Option 1: Consortium Arrangement

Strengthen and widen post-16 consortium arrangements to include all stakeholders, including schools, work based learning providers and the further education college as well as driving on a common timetable, rationalisation of minority subject provision and consequent transport needs.

Option 2: Tertiary

Moving to tertiary provision which will replace existing sixth forms and the full-time vocational provision at the further education college and move to a tertiary model with provision located largely on one site.

Option 3: One Sixth Form College

One sixth form site for academic provision, with vocational provision at the further education college.

2.4 Investigation of the three options was undertaken through consultation and research. A matrix was produced identifying the criteria by which the options were evaluated. For each criterion, scores were awarded in relation to the extent to which each option was deemed to satisfy that criterion. The criteria and scores awarded for each option were as follows:

Comparative appraisal of options for Merthyr Tydfil

Criteria scored 1-5, where 5 is strongly agree Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Choice : The option would increase the range/diversity of post-16 provision (e.g. by generating the broadest local 14-19 menu and entitlement for young people, including a broad 2 5 4 range of general and vocational and skills based options.

Standards and achievement : The option would provide a quality of experience to young people and contribute towards achieving corporate targets on 3 5 4 standards and achievement.

Participation/Widening Access/Equality of Opportunity : The option would encourage retention 3 5 3 and/or widen access most effectively.

Progression : The option will strategically strengthen opportunities for pre- and post-16 progression. 2 5 4

Financial viability and cost effectiveness : The option would provide long-term value for money and reflect the demands of the new funding system for funding 2 5 3 productivity.

Network efficiency : The option would increase the ability of the network to respond to future learner community and business needs (including 2 5 3 demographic change).

Wider strategies : The option would complement other community, regional or local strategies and 2 5 3 plans.

Potential cost : The option would not require significant capital investment to realise. 5 1 2

Complexity and risk : The option does not carry significant complexity and risks for implementation. 3 2 1

TOTALS 24 38 27

2.5 Based on the research undertaken, ELWa concluded that, in Merthyr Tydfil, learners aged 16-19 would be best served by tertiary provision and that secondary schools should focus on improving provision and standards for pupils aged 11-16.

2.6 On 14 December 2005, Council resolved that “ the principles of the ELWa Geographic Pathfinder recommendations are accepted and that the Directors of AFL (subsequently IAS) and ICS liaise with ELWa on the further detailed work that needs to be undertaken.” Subsequently, on behalf of the local authority, Tribal Education conducted extensive consultations on the ELWa recommendation. Whilst there was general agreement that the status quo was not acceptable, there was resistance to the proposition that sixth forms should close.

2.7 In 2006, the project management function was transferred to the University. The Council’s Chief Executive was confirmed as chair of the Project Board, consisting of lead directors from the local authority, DCELL representation, the lead councillor for IAS, Secondary Heads and leads from other learning provisions, including Work Based Learning, Community Learning and the University. The aim was to design a tertiary based solution that met WAG requirements, but reflected what was ‘best for Merthyr Tydfil’. Members of the Project Board, including Head Teachers and council representatives, affirmed that the status quo was not acceptable and that an approach leading to radically raising attainment and access was essential. It was recognized that such improvement needed to apply not only to those young people remaining in school post-16 (approximately 40-45%), but also to the majority (approximately 55-60%) of 16-year-olds who leave school without achieving the Level 2 threshold i.e. fewer than five good GCSEs or vocational equivalent.

2.8 In view of the concerns raised by Head teachers, the Project Board agreed that an Interim Business Case be devised to reflect a model which proposed additional subject areas to be delivered at a proposed Merthyr Learning Quarter (MLQ) whilst existing subjects would remain with the schools, but with the use of central laboratory facilities for practical work. The approach reflected a desire to improve the delivery of post-16 education and training that avoided disengaging the schools. It suggested a way forward that built on existing strengths and assumed a delivery model based on:

• strong 11-16 provision to provide a basis for learners’ choice of post-16 learning pathways; • the key advantages associated with collaborative planning of curriculum opportunities; and • the involvement of schools and their staff in the delivery of appropriate specialist provision and pastoral care.

2.9 The Interim Business Case was completed and informal views sought from DCELL. The DCELL response was not favourable. The view was that it was highly unlikely that the case would be supported by the WAG for either EU Convergence or DCELL funding. Fundamental concerns highlighted included:

• The proposal is not transformational and is not sustainable in economic terms. • The single site tertiary solution has been identified as optimal for Merthyr Tydfil.

2.10 DCELL had previously suggested an alternative approach to full tertiary which could still be seen as transformational, would avoid the closure of 6th forms and may also avoid the requirement for full statutory consultation. This would be the development of a Merthyr Learning Quarter on the College site which would focus on a minimum requirement that Science, Technology and Skills (STS) learning be transferred from the schools to the MLQ. In the event, this alternative proved problematic, there being lack of clarity of ‘STS’ in terms of specific curriculum options. Further, the alternative did not readily assist in improving participation and engagement or strategically strengthen opportunities for pre- and post-16 progression. Given the shortcomings, the alternative approach was not progressed.

2.11 In September 2008, the WAG published ‘Transforming Education and Training Provision in Wales: Delivering Skills that Work for Wales’ setting out its expectations for transforming post-16 learning and training in Wales. A key priority of the strategy is to ensure that all post-16 learning delivery is fundamentally reshaped, reconfigured and transformed so as that all delivery is harmonised. The document required that every local authority in Wales should come forward with ‘outline transformational proposals’. In Merthyr Tydfil, this was achieved through the preparation of an OBC that recommends a full tertiary solution which addresses the key indicators of performance identified by the WAG, namely:

• an improvement in levels of basic skills; • an increase in the rate of 16-18 participation in education, training and employment; • an increase in the rate of 19-24 participation in education, training and employment; • an increase in overall learner success rates, reflecting higher levels of learner completion as well as the achievement of qualification aims; • an increase in Level 2 and Level 3 qualifications; • an increase in Level 4 qualifications; and • an increase in progression to higher learning or higher level employment.

2.12 In November 2009, the WAG published ‘Transformation – Y Siwrnai: Transforming Education and Training Provision in Wales’, which reported on the progress achieved by local authorities in responding to the request for ‘outline transformational proposals’. It identified that proposals had been submitted covering all geographic areas in Wales, but that the WAG considered that some local authority-led Learning Partnerships had been unable to develop a suitable case for change. The challenges facing some stakeholders were acknowledged, but it is made plain that the WAG does not accept that there are insurmountable barriers to change and remains committed to the overall objective, which is that every community in Wales should benefit from new and better learning opportunities. The statement is made that “Where the strong desire of some learning providers to maintain the status quo or inappropriately limit change undermines our policy drive to address the needs of all learners, DCELL will take a more interventionist approach.” The efforts of Merthyr Tydfil to address the challenge of transformation are referred to specifically in ‘Transformation – Y Siwrnai’ through the statement: “ Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council and the University of Glamorgan have not wavered from the need to make significant transformational change in the area and they are clear that they wish to take this proposal forward in consultation with the full range of stakeholders.”

3.0 MAKING THE CASE FOR CHANGE

3.1 In Merthyr Tydfil, much has already been done by schools, Merthyr Tydfil College and other learning and training providers to lift overall success rates and to make efficient and effective use of the available resources. In addition, plans for a consortium arrangement between schools and the college to deliver a local curriculum promise to promote further effective teaching and learning. Notwithstanding the actual and potential gains, there are matters still to be addressed if continuous improvement is to be achieved. Key issues for consideration are as follows:

• In Merthyr Tydfil, the performance of students at Key Stage 4 (14 to 16-year- olds) and Key Stage 5 (16 to 19-year-olds) is below the all-Wales average. In 2009 in Merthyr Tydfil, 41.2% of pupils achieved five or more GCSE passes at grades A*-C or vocational equivalent (the level 2 threshold), compared to the all-Wales average of 57%. Performance at this level ranks 22 out of 22 authorities in Wales. In the same year, 91.9% of pupils in Merthyr Tydfil achieved two or more A-levels (the Level 3 threshold) compared to the all- Wales average of 96%. Performance at this level ranks 22 out of 22 authorities in Wales. • Whilst progress has been made in reducing the number of young people leaving full time education or training without a recognised qualification, it is estimated that, without improvement, between 35% and 45% of those in education at age 15 will be unqualified and unemployed by the time they are in their ‘twenties’. In 2004, a report by ‘Shared Intelligence’ for the WAG stated: “One third of the unemployed in Merthyr Tydfil are aged between 16 and 24. This group has low levels of basic skills. Existing training is not providing the skills for present or future needs.” • ‘Business in the Community’ now projects the macro-economic changes that the British economy will experience in the next 25 years to include a reduction of five million low or basic skilled jobs, lost to developing countries, which will need to be replaced by five million new high skilled jobs, including jobs in the ‘knowledge economy’. The change threatens a potentially catastrophic impact on future generations in Merthyr Tydfil, given the present deficiencies in levels of basic skills and low levels of attainment overall. For Year 11 school leavers in the academic year ending 2006, 17% moved into high-skilled jobs/knowledge based employment, 48% moved into the vulnerable ‘semi-skilled’ level and 35% unqualified or with low levels of qualifications (below the Level 2 threshold) moved into unemployment. • New requirements for young people continuing their education post-16 to have access to an agreed local curriculum come into effect in September 2010. Under the arrangements, post-16 learners are entitled to access a minimum of 30 learner choices, five of which should be vocational courses. Working in cooperation, the four secondary schools in Merthyr Tydfil and Merthyr Tydfil College have agreed a curriculum that provides post-16 learners with a choice of 33 courses offered at Level 3 as AS/A Level courses or vocational equivalent. None of the secondary schools is able to offer the full range of subjects, so young people who opt to study courses not available in their own school will need to travel to another school(s) at set times each week to pursue the courses there. The schools have agreed a common timetable to facilitate this travel without detriment to students’ study time. Transport is being arranged through the local authority, but will be paid for by the schools.

• The proposed MLQ allows for an increased range of post-16 provision in an enriched learning environment as a result of the concentration of learners in one institution. A greater number and choice of subjects can be offered than is the case presently, even allowing for the consortium arrangement between schools and the college. The projected MLQ curriculum offer is for 62 courses at Level 3 as AS/A level courses or vocational equivalent. The courses include all the courses presently on offer in the schools, all the courses presently on offer in Merthyr Tydfil College and 10 new courses. There is a good balance of vocational and academic provision. In addition to Level 3 courses, the projected MLQ offer includes 45 courses at Level 2, GCSE equivalents. The Level 2 curriculum is designed to offer progression pathways into Level 3 and is predominantly applied courses. Seven GCSE courses are offered, including Welsh and French which may be offered as part of the Welsh Baccalaureate, English and mathematics that students may need to re-sit and other courses that students may wish to take to complement other studies at Level 2 and/or Level 3. The breadth and depth of curriculum are responsive to the varying needs and abilities of young people across the County Borough and take account of present and future employment opportunities, for example as assessed through the Statement of Needs for the 14-19 Annual Network Development Plan. • In whatever model of provision is adopted, all courses offered at Level 3 are supportive of students moving forward to Level 4. In Merthyr Tydfil progression to Higher Education is presently below the national average. Plans for the MLQ are structured to maximise the advantage that can be taken of the relationship of the University of Glamorgan and University Wales, Newport. This would enable learners from across the Heads of the Valleys region wishing to progress to higher education to access learning pathways in Merthyr Tydfil, Pontypridd, Newport, Cardiff and beyond. There are firm plans to create up to 4,000 additional places for students across the Heads of the Valleys to study for foundation degrees, and for progression routes beyond that. Progression routes will cover both academic and vocational learning. • Sixth form numbers in Merthyr Tydfil are predicted to increase overall, from 646 students in January 2010 to 667 students in January 2011 before starting to fall, owing to a fall in primary pupil numbers already experienced but now stabilising, to a low of 536 students by January 2019 and levelling off thereafter at around 550 students. In Merthyr Tydfil, sixth forms cater for around 40-45% of young people in Year 12. A significant proportion of sixth formers leave school after one year of post-16 education, so that by Year 13 around 35% of young people attend. In 2007, Estyn reported that in Merthyr Tydfil, just under half of AS classes and about four fifths of A-level classes had fewer than 10 learners. As part of a national survey, Estyn has further reported that small class sizes found in many school sixth forms lead to limited student interaction which diminishes the effectiveness of learning. • The size of sixth form is crucial in considering its efficiency and viability. The Audit Commission has historically considered, and the WAG agrees, that sixth forms need at least 150 learners to be viable and efficient. In Merthyr Tydfil, only one of the four sixth forms has more than 150 pupils. Where sixth forms are small, diseconomies of scale and inefficiencies occur, including the potential for funding to be diverted from Key Stages 3 and 4 to support post-16 learning. • The implementation of consortium working will address some of the diseconomies of scale and inefficiencies, but the proposed MLQ allows for greater efficiencies, for example by ensuring viable class sizes and by reducing expenditure on travel between learning settings to deliver the local curriculum under the consortium arrangement. Further, Estyn has identified that the removal of a sixth form can enable schools to direct more resources and energy towards Key Stages 3 and 4, especially where performance in these key stages is not as good as it should be or where there are challenging factors that affect performance. Performance at Key Stages 3 and 4 in Merthyr Tydfil ranked as 21 out of 22 and 22 out of 22 authorities in Wales respectively in 2009.

3.2 It is envisaged that the proposed MLQ will provide sustainable links with and into Higher Education and the world of work. Higher level learning programmes will be developed, building on the strengths of existing provision and identifying the kinds of skills needed in the community. There will be engagement with employers in the development and delivery of learning and training, and close account will be taken of the unique environment and heritage of Merthyr Tydfil. Where appropriate, learning programmes will link to the natural environment of the valleys and the surrounding area and reflect its social and economic history.

4.0 MAKING A STATUTORY PROPOSAL FOR CHANGE

4.1 Local authorities are responsible for planning and providing school places to meet the needs of their area. Local authorities have powers deriving from the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 which can be used to make substantial changes to maintained schools. Although Local Authorities do not have powers under the 1998 Act to make proposals for reorganising voluntary aided schools, Welsh Ministers have indicated their intention to delegate their own powers (to be decided on a case by case basis) which derive from the Learning and Skills Act 2000 to alter post-16 provision at voluntary aided schools to local authorities if the need arises. An application to Ministers to delegate powers to include Bishop Hedley Catholic High School in the proposal for reorganising post-16 learning and training in Merthyr Tydfil was made on 14 December 2009 and approved in writing on 26 February 2010. The arrangement remains in force until 31 December 2011, subject to any earlier termination by either of the parties.

4.2 Reorganisation of school provision usually requires the publication of statutory proposals. The 1998 School Standards and Framework Act, the Learning and Skills Act 2000, the Education (School Organisation Proposals) (Wales) Regulations 1999 (as amended), the Education (Maintained Special Schools) (Wales) Regulations 1999, the Change of Category of Maintained Schools (Wales) Regulations 2001 (as amended) and the School Organisation Proposals by the National Assembly for Wales Regulations 2004 (as amended) determine which proposals require publication and specify the procedures for consultation, publication, the making of objections and the determination of such proposals.

4.3 Statutory proposals to reorganise school provision come to Ministers for determination where such proposals attract objections or where the Welsh Ministers call in the proposal under paragraph 8 (1) (a) of Schedule 6 to the 1998 Act. Some types of proposals automatically need the approval of Welsh Ministers, regardless of whether or not there have been objections. In all cases, the Welsh Ministers make the decision on the basis of advice from officials. Each case is judged on its merits. 4.4 The Welsh Ministers may:

• approve the proposals; • approve the proposals with modification; • reject the proposals; • give a conditional approval, which becomes a final decision once action to meet the condition has been taken to their satisfaction.

5.0 KEY CONSIDERATIONS IN DEVELOPING A PROPOSAL FOR CHANGE

5.1 In accordance with the guidance contained in Welsh Assembly Government Circular No: 021/2009, key considerations which local authorities and other promoters are expected to take into account in the development of proposals to change the pattern of school provision include:

i. the effect on the standard of education to be provided in the area, including provision for pupils with special educational needs and/or disabilities; ii. the effect on accessibility to schools, particularly in rural areas and on journey times to schools; iii. the extent to which proposals will improve efficiency and the match between the number and location of school places and demand, including the level of demand for Welsh medium or schools with a designated religious character; iv. the cost effectiveness of the proposals in relation to both capital and recurring costs, and whether adequate financial resources would be available to implement them; v. the views of those most directly affected, including children, young people, parents and other schools or providers in the area; and vi. if the proposals support the local authority’s programme to deliver their 21 st Century Schools capital investment programme and promote the principle of sustainability in school design.

5.2 Consideration of the foregoing, including by means of a Community Impact Assessment and a Language Impact Assessment, copies of which have been placed in the Members’ Library, identifies the benefits of the proposed MLQ as including:

• an increased range and diversity of post-16 provision in an enriched learning environment, including a broad range of general and vocational and skills based options; • providing a quality of experience to young people, thereby contributing towards achieving corporate targets for improving standards and achievement; • access for post-16 students to a larger team of specialist staff, including staff from the proposed MLQ, schools and other providers, with a consequent wider range of expertise and experience, leading to a wider choice of options ranging from Entry Level to Level 4 at Key Stage 5; • reducing inequality in achievement between advantaged and disadvantaged areas, groups and individuals and improving social justice; • viable teaching groups to promote beneficial peer interaction; • contributing to an increased focus on improving performance in Key Stages 3 and 4; • a well resourced learner support unit to cater effectively for the learning, personal and support needs of students with additional learning needs/special educational needs; • provides long-term value for money and reflects the demands of the funding system for funding productivity; • a central location that allows for easy access via public transport; • diminishing the need for students to travel between different schools and other providers to access their preferred learning options; • opportunities for learners from all communities and social backgrounds to mix, share traditions and values and develop mutual respect; • opportunity to develop bilingual and Welsh medium programmes as required, in conjunction with the Regional Welsh Medium Education Programme; • increased size of learning setting improves financial and staff stability to the benefit of students’ learning; • ‘In principle’ funding of £33 million available; • all needs in terms of premises and facilities fully met, including issues related to access by disabled pupils, environmental performance and sustainability; and • the authority’s plans for the 21 st Century Schools Programme complementing the proposed change to post-16 education and training by focusing on reducing surplus places and providing accommodation fit for teaching and learning in the 21 st Century.

5.3 Matters requiring further consideration in developing the proposal include:

• Learners and their families will expect transport to be available to and from the proposed MLQ site to mirror session times, which may include curricular or extra-curricular provision over a three-session day. • The MLQ proposal does not attempt to replicate any faith based educational activities, including liturgy, retreat or the richness of a faith based curriculum that incorporates the spiritual and moral dimensions seen as underpinning faith- based learning. In addition, the proposal is perceived as denying parents their right to opt for a faith-based education for their children throughout statutory schooling and into sixth form. • The proposal may result in a loss of funding to schools that could result in a reduction of the capital needed to maintain certain facilities that are available for community use, for example athletics tracks, theatre space and theatre equipment. • The proposed MLQ will not provide sports facilities comparable to those offered by the four secondary schools and will need to develop service level agreements or work in partnership with the schools and other providers to ensure appropriate provision. • Some teaching groups, parents, governors and students consider that the proposal would disadvantage learners who wish to undertake a purely academic education.

5.4 Other considerations which local authorities and other promoters also need to take into account in the development of proposals to change the pattern of school provision are identified by the WAG (Circular No: 021/2009) as:

i. the impact that the proposals may have on local families and the local community, through the preparation of a community impact assessment; ii. the effect on the Welsh language through the preparation of a language impact assessment if any school affected is Welsh medium or bilingual; iii. whether a proposal contributes to ‘A Fair Future for our Children’, the WAG strategy for tackling child poverty, and any successor strategy, such as any impact the proposal might have on raising educational attainment amongst children from economically deprived backgrounds;

iv. the extent to which the proposal would contribute to specific WAG policies for improving educational outcomes for children and young people in all phases; and v. the need to comply with equality legislation.

5.5 Consideration of the foregoing, including by means of a Community Impact Assessment and a Language Impact Assessment, highlights the benefits of the proposed MLQ as including:

• encouraging retention and widening access; • promoting more inclusive schooling for the entire cohort of Merthyr Tydfil learners; • promoting further community cohesiveness; • through learning, achievement, accreditation and attaining qualifications, enhancing future prospects for employment, leading to fewer people within the County Borough being economically inactive, which assists in tackling child poverty and disadvantage generally; • the potential to transform post-16 learning and promote further regeneration through learning and by enhancing the opportunities for individuals to reach their full potential; • strategically strengthening opportunities for pre- and post-16 progression; • the potential to provide good progression routes for learners wishing to pursue a range of academic and/or vocational courses in Welsh; • directing more resources and energy towards Key Stages 3 and 4 (11-16) as well as benefiting post -16 and creating improved learning pathways to Further or Higher Education and skilled employment; and • the capacity to build on existing good policies and procedures relating to equality and diversity, including membership of the Multi Agency Diversity Forum, Migrant Workers Forum and Global Village Steering Group and partnership with the Human Rights Commission Wales and the Commission for Racial Equality.

5.6 Matters requiring further consideration in developing the proposal include:

• There is concern that the degree of community involvement and charity work undertaken presently by sixth formers will reduce. • The need to consider the implications of developments in neighbouring authorities on Merthyr Tydfil’s ability to provide appropriate and sufficient post- 16 Welsh medium education. • There is a potential for some families, including the most vulnerable, not to interact with the MLQ to the same extent as they do with schools. • There may be some economic loss to traders close to the four secondary schools due to a drop in spend by sixth formers.

5.7 For post-16 provision, collaboration between providers and shared planning is deemed essential for the most efficient and cost-effective delivery and to provide a sufficient range of opportunities for study. In assessing proposals, the WAG will take account of whether or not they ensure delivery of a broad and balanced curriculum, including the requirements for wider choice and flexibility for learners aged 14 and over, taking into account arrangements for cooperation with other schools, Further Education Institutions and training providers in the area. Additional factors taken into account for proposals to reorganise secondary schools or to add or remove sixth forms include:

i. whether the proposed provision will contribute to the wider range of relevant courses and qualifications and high quality, employer informed, vocational learning routes targeted at pupils of all abilities, whilst maintaining GCSE, AS/A level and other established courses which is required under the Learning and Skills Measure 2009 for 14 to 19-year-old learners; ii. the extent to which the proposal contributes to the 14-19 and transformational agenda taking account of the views of local 14-19 networks and learning partnerships; iii. whether any proposed new post-16 provision is of sufficient size and quality to deliver a range of courses appropriate to the particular needs and abilities of the likely intake, without adverse effects on 11-16 provision at schools; iv. how the proposals would affect the viability of institutions already providing good-quality post-16 provision, including sixth forms, Further Education Institutions and private training organisations; v. whether the proposals are likely to lead to increased participation in learning by pupils beyond compulsory school age, taking into account transport issues and costs; vi. how proposals might affect the sustainability or enhancement of Welsh medium provision in the local 14-19 network and the wider cross-country area; vii. the views of young people, parents, schools and colleges in the area; and viii. current levels of collaboration and innovation and the extent to which proposals will provide additional learner benefits compared with the status quo and other tenable options for post-16 organisation.

5.8 Consideration of the foregoing highlights the benefits of the proposed MLQ as including:

• the preservation of all existing academic and vocational courses and the addition of new courses, the great majority of which will be available in new, purpose built accommodation located on one site; • contributing appropriately to the transformation agenda; • complementing other community, regional or local strategies and plans, for example the Community Strategy and the Children and Young People’s Plan; • increases the ability of the Learning Network to respond to future learner community and business needs, including demographic change; • providing the critical mass needed to deliver a wide range of courses appropriate to young people’s developing needs and abilities; • capacity to improve participation and staying-on rates; • capacity to enhance Welsh medium provision in the local 14-19 Network, for example by improving the viability of Welsh medium courses and by actively increasing demand for Welsh provision; • potential to increase collaboration and innovation, for example by working in partnership with local employers and through the drive to increase provision for foundation degrees; • improved learner benefits, in particular an improvement in overall standards of attainment.

5.9 Matters requiring further consideration in developing the proposal include:

• The increase in surplus places that would follow if the proposal is implemented. • The potential impact on the viability of the 11-16 schools that would result from implementation of the proposal, in particular the one faith-based secondary school in the County Borough. • The potential impact on post-16 Welsh medium education in Ysgol Gyfun Rhydywaun. • The potential impact on post-16 Welsh learners from Merthyr Tydfil of proposed changes in post-16 learning and training in neighbouring authorities. • The acknowledgement of the majority of those responding to consultation of the need for change in the organisation of post-16 learning and training in Merthyr Tydfil, but with no clear consensus amongst the respondents about the best way forward.

5.10 In the event that the proposed reorganisation of post-16 education and training in Merthyr Tydfil proceeds, matters requiring further consideration would need to be addressed in the period leading up to the implementation of the proposals. The matters identified are primarily organisational matters and it is not feasible to address them in advance of determining the way forward.

6.0 THE CONSULTATION PROCESS

6.1 A consultation document was used to inform the consultation process. The document was provided in English, Welsh, Portuguese and Polish, and as a young persons’ version. It was circulated widely and referred to on the Council website and via Facebook, the social media website. A list of those to whom the consultation document was sent is included at Appendix 1 of this report. The consultation document incorporated a consultation response form, which was the principal means by which comments about the proposal were communicated to the local authority.

6.2 A total of approximately 2,245 people attended the 71 meetings that were organised. The meetings arranged were as follows:

Ø 1 x Children & Young People’s Partnership Ø 1 x Trade Unions / Professional Associations Ø 1 x Community First Coordinators Ø 24 x Primary School Councils (one governing body asked that there not be a meeting to discuss this matter with their pupil school council) Ø 5 x Primary School staff cluster Ø 5 x Primary School governor cluster Ø 5 x Primary School parent/carers cluster Ø 4 x Secondary School governing bodies Ø 4 x Secondary School pupil body/school council Ø 4 x Secondary School parents/carers Ø 4 x Secondary School staff Ø 1 x Special School governing body Ø 1 x Special School staff Ø 1 x Special School council Ø 1 x Special School parents/carers Ø 1 x Youth Forum/Council Ø 1 x 14-19 Strategic Partnership Board Ø 1 x College Student Body representatives

Ø 1 x Pupil Referral Units staff cluster Ø 1 x Pupil Referral Units parents/carers cluster Ø 1 x Pupil Referral Units Management Panels Ø 2 x Pupil Referral Units student meetings Ø 1 x ACL Meeting

6.3 Some of the meetings arranged, for example those held with the Children and Young People’s Partnership and the Adult Community Learning Group, gave an opportunity for members of the consultation team to speak about the proposals and answer questions, but not to obtain views about any perceived advantages or disadvantages. The minutes of these meetings belong to the groups concerned. For all other meetings, minutes were taken and, subsequently, copied to the groups concerned. A summary of the main points raised during the meetings, together with details of key matters raised in written communications is provided in at Appendix 2 of this report.

6.4 All consultation meetings were organised as follows:

• Purpose of the meeting and the organisation of the consultation process. • Rationale and main features of the proposal. • Questions and comments.

6.5 The team assembled to conduct the consultation on behalf of the County Borough Council consisted of:

Ø Councillor Richard Thomas, Portfolio Councillor Ø Chris Abbott, Director of Integrated Children’s Services Ø Stuart Whippey, Head of Governance, Inclusion and Support Ø Dr Ron Cobley, Project Manager Ø John O’Shea, Dean of Merthyr Tydfil College Ø Greg Owens, Chief Executive of ESIS, the Authority’s Advisory Service, or his representative.

6.6 As the sole providers of sixth form learning in the County Borough, our secondary schools have a direct stake in the provision of services to post-16 students. It is not unnatural, therefore, that they may wish to preserve the current pattern of provision. There are, though, some essential functions which cannot be discharged by schools individually. Obvious examples are: the planning of school places; intervening in schools that have weaknesses or are in need of significant improvement; taking strategic decisions on behalf of the County Borough; and issues which impinge on educational provision in more than one school. Such decisions need to be taken against a background of statutory responsibilities, national and local priorities for improvement and the duty of community leadership. Such concepts are not always readily appreciated, particularly when rehearsed in meetings which tend to be impersonal and where the agenda may challenge long-established practices and beliefs. A balance needs to be struck between satisfying those consulted, having full and proper regards for their views, and the need for strategic leadership in taking decisions on behalf of the whole community. 6.7 On occasions, the ability of the review team to consult was inhibited. Factors contributing to this included: pre-formed views achieved through the organisation of meetings by individual schools to identify the perceived shortcomings of the proposals to parents, governors and students prior to the meetings arranged for consultation; staff and sixth form pupils seeking and obtaining invitations to speak with governors of feeder primary schools but with no comparable arrangements for the majority of young people in Merthyr Tydfil who do not attend sixth forms; the presence of staff and sixth form pupils at meetings to which they had not been invited formally, tending to inhibit free expression by consultees; a tendency in some schools towards narrow, sectoral interests in juxtaposition with the espoused aims of the Project and Project Board to delivering improved outcomes for all 16-year-olds in the County Borough; and orchestrated vote taking in advance of allowing time for consultees to reflect on the information provided at meetings. Notwithstanding, the consultation meetings proved to be generally productive.

6.8 Details of attendance at consultation meetings arranged for parents/carers of the four secondary schools and one special school in the authority, and for staff, parents/carers and governors at primary school cluster meetings are as follows:

Percentage of attendances at meetings convened for parents/carers of pupils in Secondary Schools (in comparison with the number of students on roll as at January 2010)

No. of students Estimated number in Estimated % of attendance attendance in comparison to the number of students ATHS 1086 21 2% BHCHS 656 405 62% CHS 1401 220 16% PYDHS 845 12 1% GREENFIELD 147 5 3% SPECIAL TOTAL 4135 663 Average=16%

Percentage attendances at the separate meetings convened for staff, governors and parents/carers of primary schools in the catchment area of the four secondary schools and for staff, parents and governors of the two Welsh medium primary schools in the County Borough.

% of Staff * % of Governors % of Parents/Carers

ATHS 8 9% 1% BHCHS ≠ 58% 48% 10% CHS 47% 17% 1% PYDHS 14% 4% 0.3% WELSH MEDIUM 18% 18% 2% PRIMARIES * Includes teaching and classroom support staff ≠ Includes linked schools from Blaenau Gwent and Rhondda Cynon Taf.

Information about the number of attendees at all consultation meetings is provided at Appendix 3 of this report. 7.0 CONSULTATION WITH SCHOOLS: STAFF, GOVERNORS, PARENTS AND YOUNG PEOPLE

Note: Not all respondents completed all parts of the consultation form and not all respondents identified their status e.g. parent.

7.1 Responses to the consultation form received from adults and young people associated with Afon Taf High School were as follows:

Q1. Do you agree that changes are necessary to the organisation of post -16 learning and training in Merthyr Tydfil?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 53 13 356 87 Staff 3 9 30 91 Governors 7 87.5 1 12.5 Parents/carers 6 50 6 50 Others 2 28.5 5 71.5 Total 71 Average=38% 394 Average=62% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q2. If your answer to the previous question is yes, do you agree with the proposal to alter the upper age limit of secondary schools in the County Borough so that the schools cease to make sixth form provision?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 28 10 250 90 Staff 1 7 14 93 Governors 4 50 4 50 Parents/carers 3 33 6 67 Others 0 0 2 100 Total 36 Average=20% 271 Average=80% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q3. Do you support the proposal to transform learning and training through an ambitious learning facility to be known as the Merthyr Learning Quarter?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 53 13 343 87 Staff 0 0 31 100 Governors 4 57 3 43 Parents/carers 4 33 8 67 Others 0 0 7 100 Total 61 Average=21% 387 Average=79% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q4. Would you wish to make an alternative proposal?

31 suggestions for alternative proposals were received. The main themes emerging are:

• leave the sixth forms alone; • invest more money in the sixth forms; • integrate more vocational courses into sixth forms; • maintain some post-16 provision within at least two of the secondary schools in the County Borough; • increase expenditure on getting basic skills right before pupils enter Key Stage 3; • put practical courses in the college and keep academic courses in the schools. 7.2 Responses to the consultation form received from adults and young people associated with Bishop Hedley Catholic High School were as follows:

Q1. Do you agree that changes are necessary to the organisation of post -16 learning and training in Merthyr Tydfil?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 235 89 29 11 Staff 15 83 3 17 Governors 15 79 4 21 Parents/carers 160 68 75 32 Others 587 85 100 15 Total 992 Average=81% 211 Average=19% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q2. If your answer to the previous question is yes, do you agree with the proposal to alter the upper age limit of secondary schools in the County Borough so that the schools cease to make sixth form provision?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 8 3 241 97 Staff 0 0 9 100 Governors 0 0 12 100 Parents/carers 9 4 200 96 Others 13 2 657 98 Total 30 Average=2% 1119 Average=98% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q3. Do you support the proposal to transform learning and training through an ambitious learning facility to be known as the Merthyr Learning Quarter?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 38 14 237 86 Staff 1 10 9 90 Governors 0 0 14 100 Parents/carers 21 9 211 91 Others 11 1.5 677 98.5 Total 70 Average=7% 1148 Average=93% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q4. Would you wish to make an alternative proposal?

Many suggestions for alternative proposals were received. The main themes emerging are:

• Preserve faith based education. • A detailed written alternative proposal has been received from governors. The maintenance of faith based education for post-16 pupils is held to be paramount and it is proposed that there should be special provision for this. Reference is made to post-16 learning and training in Neath Port Talbot where there is tertiary provision for the majority of post-16 students but where two secondary schools, a Catholic Secondary School and a Welsh Medium Secondary School, retain their sixth forms. The alternative proposal is to emulate this arrangement. It envisages that there would be links with the suggested tertiary/MLQ, but that Bishop Hedley Catholic School would retain its sixth form and deliver part of the local curriculum there. 7.3 Responses to the consultation form received from adults and young people associated with Cyfarthfa High School were as follows:

Q1. Do you agree that changes are necessary to the organisation of post -16 learning and training in Merthyr Tydfil?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 148 44 191 56 Staff 9 21 34 79 Governors 0 50 0 50 Parents/carers 12 25 36 75 Others 1 7 13 93 Total 170 Average=29% 274 Average=71% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q2. If your answer to the previous question is yes, do you agree with the proposal to alter the upper age limit of secondary schools in the County Borough so that the schools cease to make sixth form provision?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 13 6 204 94 Staff 0 0 18 100 Governors 0 50 0 50 Parents/carers 1 3 29 97 Others 1 12.5 7 87.5 Total 15 Average=15% 258 Average=85% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q3. Do you support the proposal to transform learning and training through an ambitious learning facility to be known as the Merthyr Learning Quarter?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 15 4 366 96 Staff 0 0 43 100 Governors 0 50 0 50 Parents/carers 4 9 43 91 Others 2 14 12 86 Total 21 Average=15% 464 Average=85% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q4. Would you wish to make an alternative proposal?

269 suggestions for alternative proposals were received. There is much repetition in the proposals, but the main themes emerging are:

• leave the sixth forms alone; • invest more money in the sixth forms; • continue to develop the collaborative model between the sixth forms and Merthyr Tydfil College; • sixth form provision at the top and bottom of the valley (Afon Taf and Cyfarthfa) and more vocational provision at the college; • create a sixth form school; • extend sixth form provision at Cyfarthfa High School; • evaluate why the success achieved at Cyfarthfa High School is not achieved at other sixth forms in Merthyr Tydfil and improve standards there; • improve transport links. 7.4 Responses to the consultation form received from adults and young people associated with Pen y Dre High School were as follows:

Q1. Do you agree that changes are necessary to the organisation of post-16 learning and training in Merthyr Tydfil?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 1 50 1 50 Staff 5 83 1 17 Governors 5 83 1 17 Parents/carers 2 100 0 0 Others 6 37.5 10 62.5 Total 19 Average=71% 13 Average=29% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q2. If your answer to the previous question is yes, do you agree with the proposal to alter the upper age limit of secondary schools in the County Borough so that the schools cease to make sixth form provision?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 0 0 1 100 Staff 3 60 2 40 Governors 4 67 2 33 Parents/carers 1 50 1 50 Others 5 38.5 8 61.5 Total 13 Average=43% 14 Average=57% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q3. Do you support the proposal to transform learning and training through an ambitious learning facility to be known as the Merthyr Learning Quarter?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 0 0 2 100 Staff 3 50 3 50 Governors 4 67 2 33 Parents/carers 1 50 1 50 Others 10 62.5 6 37.5 Total 18 Average=46% 14 54% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q4. Would you wish to make an alternative proposal?

Five suggestions for alternative proposals were received, as follows

• sixth forms and MLQ to co-exist; • sixth forms to remain as they are; • put the money earmarked for the MLQ into sixth forms; • avoid expenditure on the MLQ in the interest of preserving school funding; • offer subjects on a consortium basis.

7.5 Responses to the consultation form received from other adults and young people who did not indicate affiliation to any school (non school), and in some cases did not identify their status (e.g. as a parent), were as follows: Q1. Do you agree that changes are necessary to the organisation of post -16 learning and training in Merthyr Tydfil?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 47 57 35 43 Staff 21 84 4 16 Governors 5 42 7 58 Parents/carers 21 46 25 54 Others 23 61 15 39 Total 117 Average=58% 86 Average=42% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q2. If your answer to the previous question is yes, do you agree with the proposal to alter the upper age limit of secondary schools in the County Borough so that the schools cease to make sixth form provision?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 38 57.5 28 42.5 Staff 17 71 7 29 Governors 2 25 6 75 Parents/carers 10 33 20 67 Others 19 63 11 37 Total 86 Average=50% 72 Average=50% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q3. Do you support the proposal to transform learning and training through an ambitious learning facility to be known as the Merthyr Learning Quarter?

Number Yes % Yes Number No % No Students 39 51 38 49 Staff 18 75 6 25 Governors 2 17 10 83 Parents/carers 11 27 30 73 Others 19 50 19 50 Total 89 Average=44% 103 Average=56% Percentages rounded to nearest whole number

Q4. Would you wish to make an alternative proposal?

Three suggestions for alternative proposals were received, as follows

• take Merthyr Tydfil College out of the hands of the University and reinstate core qualifications and subjects; • provide a core number of A levels at one or more of the secondary schools; and • let Cyfarthfa HS remain open as customers will vote with their feet eventually and go to the MLQ because the facilities will be better.

Note : A further 62 responses to the consultation form were received after 1 st April, the closing date for consultation. The responses have not been included in analyses provided above.

8.0 SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES

8.1 The responses to the consultation form for Question 1,’Do you agree that changes are necessary to the organisation of post-16 learning and training in Merthyr Tydfil?’ are summarised in percentages as follows:

School Students Staff Governors Parents/Carers Other Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Afon Taf HS 13% 87% 9% 91% 87.5% 12.5% 50% 50% 28.5% 71.5% Bishop Hedley CHS 89% 11% 83% 17% 79% 21% 68% 32% 85% 15% Cyfarthfa HS 44% 56% 21% 79% 50% 50% 25% 75% 7% 93%

Pen y Dre HS 50% 50% 83% 17% 83% 17% 100% O% 37.5% 62.5% Non school 57% 43% 84% 16% 42% 58% 46% 54% 61% 39%

8.2 The responses to the consultation form for Question 2, ’If your answer to the previous question is yes, do you agree with the proposal to alter the upper age limit of secondary schools in the County Borough so that the schools cease to make sixth form provision?’, are summarised in percentages as follows:

School Students Staff Governors Parents/Carers Other Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Afon Taf HS 10% 90% 7% 93% 50% 50% 33% 67% 0% 100% Bishop 3% 97% 0% 100% 0% 100% 4% 96% 2% 98% Hedley CHS Cyfarthfa HS 6% 94% 0% 100% 50% 50% 3% 97% 12.5% 87.5% Pen y Dre HS 0% 100% 60% 40% 67% 33% 50% 50% 38.5% 61.5% Non school 57.5% 42.5% 71% 29% 25% 75% 33% 67% 63% 37%

8.3 The responses to the consultation form for Question 3, ’Do you support the proposal to transform learning and training through an ambitious learning facility to be known as the Merthyr Learning Quarter?’ are summarised in percentages as follows:

School Students Staff Governors Parents/Carer Other s Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Afon Taf HS 13% 87% 0% 100% 57% 43% 33% 67% 0% 100% Bishop 14% 86% 10% 90% 0% 100% 9% 91% 1.5% 98.5% Hedley CHS Cyfarthfa HS 4% 96% 0% 100% 50% 50% 9% 91% 14% 86% Pen y Dre HS 0% 100% 50% 50% 67% 33% 50% 50 % 62.5% 37.5% Non school 51% 49% 75% 25% 17% 83% 27% 73% 50% 50%

8.4 Whilst the number of responses to the consultation form is in some cases small, evaluation of the returns identifies that: • Responses to Question 1, ‘Do you agree that changes are necessary to the organisation of post-16 learning and training in Merthyr Tydfil?’ indicate that a majority of the respondents agree that change is necessary. (Number of returns = 1,369 agreeing (58%) and 978 (42%) not agreeing). • Responses to Question 2, ‘Do you agree with the proposal to alter the upper age limit of secondary schools in the County Borough so that the schools cease to make sixth form provision?’ indicate that the proposal is not agreed. (Number of returns = 180 agree (9%) and 1,734 (91%) not agreeing) • Responses to Question 3, ‘Do you support the proposal to transform learning and training through an ambitious learning facility to be known as the Merthyr Learning Quarter?’ indicate that the majority of respondents do not agree with the proposal. (Number of returns = 259 agree (11%) and 2,116 (89%) not agreeing). 8.5 Responses to the forms provided during meetings with members of primary schools councils indicate that a majority of the young people consulted and who responded are supportive of the proposals to change the age range of secondary schools and to open a new college for all young people aged over 16, including those who presently stay in school. (201 in favour (62%), 111 not in favour (35%) and 10 (3%) undecided)

SCHOOL SUPPORTIVE NON SUPPORTIVE

Abercanaid Community 11 0 Bedlinog Community 0 6 Brecon Road Infants 0 0 Caedraw Primary 0 8 Cyfarthfa Junior 5 4 (3 undecided) Dowlais Primary 13 0 Edwardsville Primary 0 0 Gellifaelog Primary 13 3 Goetre Infants 25 1 Goetre Junior 14 2 Gwaunfarren Primary NO RESPONSES RECEIVED Heolgerrig Community 2 15 Mount Pleasant Primary 0 9 Pantysgallog Primary 9 0 St Aloysius RC 0 18 St Illtyd’s RC 0 9 St Mary’s RC Primary 33 18 (1 undecided) Trelewis Primary 10 1 Troedyrhiw Community 15 0 Twynyrodyn Community 12 0 Ynysowen Community 0 0 Ysgol Coed y Dderwen 3 10 (3 undecided) Ysgol Rhyd y Grug 8 4 (3 undecided) Ysgol Santes Tudful MEETING DECLINED BY GOVERNING BODY Ysgol y Graig Primary 28 3

Reasons given for supporting the proposals by the majority of young people who voted in favour include:

• We will meet more people from all over Merthyr Tydfil. • We will make new friends. • There will be more subjects for us to choose from. • The new building will be nice. • Older pupils will be together. • We will be mature enough to go to the new college. • It’s more grown up. • It will help you get a better job. • We won’t have to travel to different schools to do our work. • New resources. • It would be available to everyone. • It will attract more people. Reasons given for not supporting the proposals by the minority of young people who voted against it include:

• There is less pressure in school. • There will be older people in the college. • A-levels should stay in school. • It is too expensive/waste of money/taxes will go up. • Keep Catholic education. • It will be crowded in each class and there is more space in school. • Even if we go to the college and then to University, there might not be jobs for us anyway. • It’s rubbish. • You can know everyone in a sixth form. • It will be sad to leave old teachers. • The pupils who go to sixth form go to do A-levels and the pupils going to the college go there because they have to. • I don’t think you should move to the sixth form. I attended a meeting in Cyfarthfa High School and met the Head Boy/Girl who said the sixth form was fun and you get to choose the A levels you want.

8.6 A summary of the outcomes of separate consultation meetings with governors, staff, parents/carers and students in each of the four secondary schools and of other consultation meetings as well as the main points raised in written communications is contained at Appendix 4 to this report. The main matters arising are as follows:

Consultation Meetings

Group/Organisation Response Afon Taf HS Governing GB subscribes to the aspiration to improve standards, but does Body not agree that the proposed MLQ is the right way forward. Afon Taf HS Staff Do not support the proposals Afon Taf HS Parents No clear consensus Afon Taf HS Students Do not support the proposals Afon Taf Primary No clear consensus School Governors Afon Taf Primary No clear consensus School Parents Afon Taf Primary Overall support for the proposal School Staff Bishop Hedley CHS GB subscribes to the aspiration to improve standards and Governing Body provision, but does not agree that the proposed MLQ is the right way forward. Alternative proposal submitted. Bishop Hedley CHS Do not support the proposals Staff Bishop Hedley CHS Do not support the proposals Parents Bishop Hedley CHS Do not support the proposals Students Bishop Hedley CHS Do not support the proposals Primary School Governors Bishop Hedley CHS Do not support the proposals Primary School Parents

Consultation Meetings continued…

Group/Organisation Response Bishop Hedley CHS Do not support the proposals Primary School Staff Cyfarthfa HS Do not support the proposals Governing Body Cyfarthfa HS Staff Do not support the proposals. Preference is to strengthen the current arrangements for collaboration Cyfarthfa HS Parents Overwhelmingly do not support the proposals Cyfarthfa HS Students Do not support the proposals Cyfarthfa HS Primary No clear consensus, but tending to oppose Governors Cyfarthfa HS Primary No clear consensus, but tending to oppose Parents Cyfarthfa HS Primary No clear consensus, but tending to oppose Staff Pen y Dre HS Some support, but no clear consensus Governors Pen y Dre HS Staff No clear consensus, but tending to oppose Pen y Dre HS parents No clear consensus, but tending to oppose Pen y Dre HS Students No clear consensus Pen y Dre HS Primary No clear consensus Governors Pen y Dre HS Primary No clear consensus Parents Pen y Dre HS Primary No clear consensus Staff Welsh medium Primary Do not support the proposals. Alternative proposal is for a full Governors Welsh medium tertiary provision Welsh medium Primary No clear consensus. Concerns about the impact of the Parents proposals on post-16 Welsh medium education Welsh medium Primary Do not support the proposals. Alternative proposal is for a full Staff Welsh medium tertiary provision Greenfield School Some support, but no clear consensus Governors Greenfield School Staff No clear consensus Greenfield School No clear consensus Parents PRU Management No clear consensus Panel PRU Staff No clear consensus PRU Students No clear consensus Trades Unions Do not support the proposals. Merthyr Tydfil Youth Some support, but no clear consensus Forum Merthyr Tydfil 14-19 Do not support the proposal Network Merthyr Tydfil College Overall support for the proposal Students

Consultation Meetings continued…

Written Responses Group/Organisation Response Former Sixth Form Does not support the proposal Student Trades Unions NASUWT, NUT and ATL do not support the proposals Cwm Taf Health Board Supports strategic direction, but identifies matters for consideration Archdiocese of Cardiff Does not support the proposal. Supports alternative proposal submitted by Bishop Hedley CHS Governing Body Faith School Leaders Does not support the proposal Association Assembly Member Supports the proposal Careers Wales Will support and work with any post-16 structure implemented in Merthyr Tydfil South Wales Police Supports the proposal Welsh Language Board Acknowledges the good intentions expressed in the consultation document, but would welcome further information

9.0 CONCLUSIONS

9.1 The momentum for transformation underpinning proposals for change to the organisation of post-16 education and training in Merthyr Tydfil is informed by the pressing need to lift overall levels of participation, retention and attainment in the County Borough and fostered by the policies of the WAG, which require that every community in Wales should benefit from new and better learning opportunities. Local authorities are expected to develop a suitable case for transformation, tackle barriers to change and give priority to the needs of learners. This means rationalising provision and delivering a coherent, joined up and sustainable education system. The proposed MLQ is designed to achieve these objectives and to address the key considerations that local authorities and other providers are expected to take into account in the development of proposals to change the pattern of school provision.

9.2 The finding of the consultation is that the majority of respondents agree that changes are necessary to the organisation of post-16 learning and training in Merthyr Tydfil but there is no clear consensus amongst the respondents about the best way forward. Rather, seven suggested alternatives to the proposed MLQ were identified during the consultation process. An evaluation of these alternative proposals is contained at Appendix 5 to this report, detailing outcomes, perceived advantages and disadvantages, costs and general comments. The following summarises the main points:

Option Comment Conclusion 1. Preserve the sixth The option is not viable. It does not facilitate Not forms i.e. maintain delivery of the local curriculum and is not recommended status quo. transformational. 2. Base all academic The option is not transformational, could be Not subjects at Cyfarthfa seen as divisive and there are no adequate recommended High School and all financial resources to implement them. Does vocational subjects not encourage retention or widen access at Merthyr Tydfil effectively. College i.e. sixth form school. 3. Create two viable The proposal is difficult to implement, may Not sixth forms, one in create differing perceptions of the worth and recommended the north and one in value of our schools and is not the south of the transformational. Does not provide long-term County Borough. value for money and does not increase the range and diversity of post-16 provision. 4. Hub and spoke Limits range and quality of post-16 provision Not model and may be complex to organise and manage. recommended Has not attracted the support of the WAG. Funding is unlikely to be forthcoming. Does not strategically strengthen opportunities for pre- and post-16 progression. 5. Consortium Ensures delivery of local curriculum and Some support, arrangement assists in removing inefficiencies. Preserves but not faith based education at Bishop Hedley recommended Catholic High School. Not as transformational as preferred as the proposed MLQ, for example in catering option appropriately for the full range of students’ needs and abilities and in creating high quality, employer informed, vocational learning routes targeted at pupils of all abilities. Does not generate the broadest local 14-19 menu and entitlement for young people. Insufficiently increases the ability of the network to respond to future learner community and business needs. 6. Tertiary model, but Preserves post-16 faith-based education and Some support, with the one Catholic avoids risk to viability of Bishop Hedley but not High School in the Catholic High School as a ‘heads of the recommended County Borough valleys’ faith school. Potential disparity of as preferred retaining its sixth provision, not cost effective or transformational option. form. and undermines business case for MLQ. Does not reflect the demands of the funding system for funding productivity. 7. Full Welsh medium There is insufficient demand presently. Difficult Not tertiary college to devise an adequate business case. recommended May deter English speaking students from continuing their education post-16. Does not complement other community, regional or local strategies and plans.

9.3 Evaluation of the alternative proposals indicates that they are either not transformational or not sufficiently transformational to address the need for improvements required in the County Borough, including: the need for overall improvement in levels of basic skills; an increase in the rate of 16-18 participation in education, training and employment; an increase in overall learner success rates, reflecting higher levels of learner completion as well as the achievement of qualification aims; an increase in Level 2 and Level 3 qualifications; an increase in Level 4 qualifications; and an increase in progression to higher learning or higher level employment. Achieving these improvements is central to promoting further social and economic regeneration to the benefit of all the young people of Merthyr Tydfil.

9.4 The proposed MLQ promises to transform learning and training provision in Merthyr Tydfil by:

• increasing the range and diversity of post-16 provision; • providing a quality experience for young people and contributing towards achieving corporate targets for improving standards and achievement; • encouraging retention and widening access; • strategically strengthening opportunities for pre- and post-16 progression; • providing long-term value for money and reflecting the need for funding productivity; • increasing the ability of the Learner Network to respond to future learner community and business needs, including demographic change; and • complementing other community, regional or local strategies and plans.

10.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

10.1 There are no additional financial implications associated with this report. Officer time will be required to progress the proposal should Council so determine. In the event that the proposal is eventually implemented, there may be financial implications associated with the reorganisation of schools as 11-16 schools. Any such financial implications will be reported to Council.

11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS that

11.1 Council approves the publication of statutory proposals to alter the upper age limit of the three maintained secondary schools and one voluntary aided secondary school in the County Borough so that the schools cease to make sixth form provision.

11.2 Council instructs Officers to move to publication of the statutory notices so as to progress the proposals.

CHRIS ABBOTT DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL PROJECTS

BACKGROUND PAPERS Title of Document(s) Document(s) Date Document Location National Standards and 1999 Schools, Governance and Framework Act 1998: Organisation Technical (SGT) Directorate of School Places, WAG Circular 9/99

Guidance accompanying the 2004 SGT School Organisation Proposals by the National Council for Education and Training in Wales Regulations 2004, WAG Circular 48/2004

Excellent Schools: A Vision for 2002 SGT/Estyn Website schools in Wales in 21 st century (Estyn)

Review of secondary school 2003 SGT provision in Merthyr Tydfil, Report to Council (077 2002-2003)

Learning Pathways 14-19 2004 SGT Guidance: National Assembly for Wales Circular No: 37/2004

Post-16 provision in schools: 2005 SGT/Estyn Website Factors that influence the capacity of school sixth forms to meet the needs and aspirations of learners (Estyn)

Collaboration between schools 2006 SGT/Estyn Website with sixth forms and Further Education colleges to deliver high quality provision that expands choice and achieves value for money (Estyn)

Council Minutes 14 December 2005 SGT

Merthyr Tydfil Lifelong Learning 25 June 2008 SGT Project Board Update

Report by ‘Shared Intelligence’ to 2004 WAG Website WAG

Geographic Pathfinder Merthyr 2005 SGT Tydfil (Milestone Report: Analysis & Options)

The Learning Country: Vision into October 2006 SGT/WAG Website Action (WAG)

Leith Review of Skills December 2006 WAG Website

One Wales: A Progressive Agenda June 2007 WAG Website for Wales (WAG)

Estyn 14-19 Area Inspection 2007 SGT/Estyn Website Report for Merthyr Tydfil

Promise and Performance ‘Webb December 2007 WAG Website Review’.

BACKGROUND PAPERS Title of Document(s) Document(s) Date Document Location Merthyr Tydfil Lifelong Learning June 2008 SGT Project Board Update: Report to Council

Transforming Education and September 2008 SGT/WAG Website Training Provision for Wales

Strategic Outline Case February 2009 SGT

MLQ Progress Report to Council 4 March 2009 SGT

MLQ Progress Report to Council 1 April 2009 SGT

Learning and Skills (Wales) 2009 WAG Website Measure 2009

Quality and Effectiveness February 2009 WAG Website Framework for Post-16 Learning in Wales

Rationalising School Provision: 24 June 2009 SGT Report to Council

MLQ Progress Report to Council 29 June 2009 SGT

Minutes of Full Council Meeting 0f 29 June 2009 SGT 29 June 2009

Transformation – Y Siwrnai: November 2009 SGT/WAG Website DCELLS Transformation Policy

School Organisation Proposals: September 2009 SGT/WAG Website Welsh Assembly Government Circular No: 021/2009

Outline Business Case (OBC) 2009 SGT

MLQ Progress Report; Report to January 2010 SGT Council

Proposal to Reorganise Post-16 January 2010 SGT Education and Training in Merthyr Tydfil: Report to Council

Consultation has been undertaken with Executive Board in respect of each proposal(s) and recommendation(s) set out in this report.

APPENDIX 1 MLQ CONSULTATION LETTER CIRCULATION LIST

• Governors, teaching and non-teaching staff, schools councils and parents/carers of pupils attending Afon Taf High School, Bishop Hedley Catholic High School, Cyfarthfa High School, Pen y Dre High School and Greenfield Special School. • All other schools and Pupil Referral Units in the Local Authority. • Ysgol Gyfun Gymraeg Rhydywaun, Aberdare. • St Margaret’s RC Primary School Aberdare. • St John Baptist C in W High School, Aberdare. • St Joseph’s RC Primary School, Blaenau Gwent. • All Saints RC Primary School, Blaenau Gwent. • Local Health Board. • Merthyr Tydfil Association of School Governors. • Merthyr Tydfil Chamber of Trade. • Merthyr Tydfil Children and Young People’s Partnership. • Merthyr Tydfil Youth Forum. • Merthyr Tydfil Youth Music. • Mid Glamorgan Careers Service. • Parent Teacher Association of Wales. • Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council, Bridgend County Borough Council, Caerphilly County Borough Council, Neath Port Talbot Council, Powys County Council, Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council, Torfaen County Borough Council. • Trades Unions and Teachers’ Professional Associations. • Universities of Glamorgan and Swansea. • University of Glamorgan (Merthyr Tydfil College). • Voluntary Action Merthyr Tydfil (and local voluntary groups). • Welsh Joint Education Committee (WJEC). • Welsh Language Board. • Welsh Primary Schools Association. • Welsh Secondary Schools Association. • Work based learning providers, Merthyr Tydfil. • Bedlinog Community Council. • Rhigos Community Council, Rhondda Cynon Taf. • Hirwaun Community Council, Rhondda Cynon Taf. • Town Council, Blaenau Gwent. • Chief Executive, Directors and Heads of Service of Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council. • Communities First, Merthyr Tydfil. • Council for Ministry of the Church in Wales. • Diocesan Director of Education of the Roman Catholic Church (Cardiff and Menevia). • Catholic Education Service (London). • Archbishop Peter Smith, Cardiff. • Diocesan Directors of Education of the Church in Wales (Llandaff, Swansea and Brecon). • Early Years Development and Childcare Partnership. • Education Business Partnership.

c.c. All Councillors – Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council Dai Havard MP – Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney Huw Lewis AM – Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney APPENDIX 2 Summary of main issues identified during consultation

Issue Comments made Response Is change • The system is not broken, so The reasons why change is necessary remain as ELWa necessary? why fix it? identified previously, namely: • The post-16 sector in Merthyr Tydfil has seen a radical shift in • low levels of formal qualifications in the adult the last 10 years through the population; introduction of a consortium. No • limited numbers of young people achieving at national further changes are necessary. standards; • Why should the current pattern • progression to higher education below the national of progression be any different average; with the proposed MLQ? • the existing learning network, in a compact • Where is the support for the community, is fragmented with breadth of opportunity MLQ? being limited; • Teachers and parents are • institutional and sectoral pressure to maintain the concerned that standards will status quo tends to act as a barrier to collaboration; drop without sixth form provision. • school sixth form classes are generally small and this • There are other ways of is restricting learner curriculum choice; achieving change, for example • the sixth form consortium presently benefits limited by reducing the number of sixth numbers of learners and associated vocational forms or having a sixth form provision is restricted;

college. • there is overlap and duplication of provision; and

• the area is characterised by low levels of post-16

engagement.

In Merthyr Tydfil, overall performance in AS and A level

ranks 22 out of 22 authorities in Wales The proposal is

aimed at boosting performance across the County

Borough as a whole. It aims to build on existing elements

of good practice so as to promote further effective learning

by all our young people, including those catered for in the

Consortium.

The proposed MLQ curriculum links appropriately to the

14-19 Learning Network and promotes progression

through clear learning pathways that will be matched to

young people’s developing needs and abilities. The

curriculum allows for a better mix of academic and

vocational provision.

Support for the MLQ has been received from parents,

governors, teachers and young people. The majority of

respondents oppose the proposals, but such opposition is

not uncommon when change is perceived as

uncomfortable or challenges traditional views. The

proposals relate to the minority of young people (about

two-fifths) who are educated in sixth forms. It will be for

the Council to determine how it wishes to proceed in the

best interests of all the young people in the County

Borough.

The evidence from Neath Port Talbot is that standards

have improved as a consequence of implementing tertiary

provision. In addition, evidence from Estyn indicates that

standards in 11-16 schools are at least as good, and often

better, than they are in 11-18 schools.

Alternative proposals to the MLQ have been considered

and evaluated (see separate appendix). Overall, it is

considered that the MLQ is the preferred option.

It is • The consultation document ‘sells’ The consultation proposal and document have been perceived the MLQ. There are no negative progressed in compliance with the procedures defined in that the points included in the document. key WAG circulars. The consultation document sets out consultation • Members of the University of the reasons leading to the proposal and sets out the document is Glamorgan and Merthyr Tydfil evidence supporting it. The purpose of the consultation is biased. College were involved in the to allow different options to be discussed prior to the consultation and ought not to publication of any final proposal within a framework of have been as they have the most local consultation. In undertaking the consultation, to gain out of the proposals. adequate time (two months) and sufficient information • A problem with the document is have been provided for those being consulted to form a that it is produced to promote considered view on the matters on which they are being tertiary and does not promote consulted. sixth form provision. • The statistics contained in the 71 consultation events have been held. The proposals consultation document only have been publicised widely and copied to stakeholders present one picture. and customers throughout and beyond the County • There are no statistics about how Borough. Throughout the consultation process, it has well young people in the college been made clear what the procedure is for responding to are doing presently. the consultation to ensure that views are made known. • The document doesn’t explain The information is being collated and presented to Council why putting all post-16 provision to inform judgements about next steps. Council may into one building will improve accept, reject or amend any additional proposals standards. presented to it following consultation. If it is proposed to • There is no mention of revenue move to a statutory proposal, a period of two months will funding in the document. be available for objections. If there are any objections, the proposal will be called in for determination by the Minister, • The document is biased. It leads who will be the final arbiter. to only one conclusion, which is

pro-MLQ. Representatives of the University of Glamorgan and • There is a lack of clarity Merthyr Tydfil College were involved in the consultation as concerning the impact on the they are partners to the proposal. They were present to employment and conditions of answer questions about those parts of the proposal service of teachers and the directly relevant to them. They share the same interest as impact on 14-19 education in the local authority, namely to improve overall levels of secondary schools in Merthyr attainment and enhance the life chances of all our young Tydfil. people. • The bullet points contain laudable statements, but there is It is not practicable presently to offer accurate information no evidence in the proposals that on such matters as the employment of teachers. Should the MLQ will improve provision. the proposal for a MLQ be accepted, these would be • There is a lack of clarity about matters for further discussion with trades unions, the proposed governance employers and others. The local authority is committed to arrangements. working in partnership with schools and other • The consultation document omits stakeholders to ensure the best interests of our young to mention that Merthyr Tydfil’s people and to ensure regard to well being of staff in low ranking in league tables is schools. not helped by being the second smallest unitary authority in Current performance in the local authority is not as Wales. advanced as it needs to be to improve the life chances of • It is not explained who will our young people. The proposals are aimed at deliver the curriculum at the M transformational change. • MLQ. • There should have been Some matters highlighted were covered during the reference to ‘value added’ consultation exercise. They are described in minutes of information. meetings.

Loss of • Pupils at the bottom end of the valley Merthyr Tydfil is not alone in considering tertiary choice may be more inclined to move to out- education. Neighbouring authorities are doing the between of-county schools with sixth forms. same. The WAG requires that every community in sixth form • The number of pupils entering Year 7 Wales should benefit from new and better learning and college. will decrease as parents want their opportunities. children to go to schools with sixth forms. The proposed MLQ will offer state of the art facilities • By doing this you are curtailing to benefit the learning of all our young people post- choice. There will be no choice other 16. We will continue to support our schools to than to attend the MLQ. achieve high standards for pupils aged 11-16. Parents will continue to make informed choices for their children, based on the quality of what is on offer. Our task is to ensure quality provision throughout the 11-18 age range, and indeed throughout the whole of pupils’ education.

Having considered performance, funding, disadvantage, etc., it is considered that the proposed MLQ is best placed to offer the curriculum choice and diversity most likely to engage our young people and to retain them in education and training. We need and want them to exercise their choice to participate. In this, we need to respond appropriately to all our young people, both the minority in sixth forms and the majority catered for in the college and elsewhere.

The proposed MLQ offers considerably enhanced curriculum choice, predominantly on one site. It diminishes the need for student travel and helps to promote parity of esteem for vocational and academic provision, making it easier for young people to make informed choices that will improve their life chances. Loss of • Catholic parents have a right to have It is acknowledged that the proposed MLQ is not able choice/right their children educated in accordance to replicate the faith based education provided by for parents with the teaching of the Catholic Bishop Hedley Catholic School. It is intended to wishing to Church. provide some faith provision at the MLQ and it is opt for a • It would be a major loss to the quality envisaged that there will be close working with the faith-based and diversity of education in the area school to assist in providing appropriately for pupils’ education if there was no Catholic provision faith needs, eg by offering courses delivered by staff post-16. post-16. from BHCS where numbers are viable. The college • Bishop Hedley Catholic School is a already caters successfully for many pupils from Heads of the Valleys faith school, Bishop Hedley Catholic School who complete their catering for pupils from Blaenau education there at 16 and transfer to the college. As Gwent and RhCT as well as from part of the University of Glamorgan the MLQ, and its across the whole of Merthyr Tydfil. If learners and staff, will have full access to the multi the school should lose its sixth form, faith chaplaincy of the university. The MLQ would its viability may be threatened since work closely with BHCS to ensure that those learners out-of-County pupils may no longer who wished to partake in particular Roman Catholic wish to attend. activities were given every opportunity so to do. • Our strategic position in serving the Heads of Valleys communities The local authority has had due regard to the underpins our moral purpose in requirement of the WAG (School Organisation serving the common good, Proposals, Circular No: 021/2009) to consider, in the recognised by Estyn as an case of a school with a designated religious outstanding feature. character, the impact of the proposed change on • The parents of Bishop Hedley High accessibility to that form of provision, balanced with School pupils, the parents of Bishop the need for efficient provision. The proposal is to Hedley High feeder schools and the alter the upper age limit of the school, which would wider Catholic Community have result in the loss of the school’s sixth form. Presently, demonstrated overwhelmingly their Bishop Hedley Catholic School provides sixth form wish that their children be educated in education to 112 post-16 students, including 22 Year a Catholic School to the age of 12 students and 15 Year 13 students who attend eighteen in Bishop Hedley sixth form. from other local authorities.

Post-16 provision would continue to be available at • As the sole educational institution the proposed MLQ for young people wishing to serving the entire Heads of the continue their education beyond the period of Valleys region and with a rich and statutory schooling. The proposed MLQ is considered diverse community to call upon, to make efficient provision for such learning for the Bishop Hedley is uniquely placed to reasons outlined in the consultation process, support the aspirations of the Heads including the drive on increasing overall levels of of the Valleys Strategic Renewal Area performance, participation and retention. and to assist in improving the educational attainment and social The proposed MLQ will make provision for worship cohesion which the area desperately and enable pupils to participate in learning in respect needs. of particular religious principles, for example through • Can Bishop Hedley Catholic School links with Bishop Hedley Catholic School. As the be excluded from the proposal for a proposed MLQ caters for post-statutory education, MLQ? learners will not be required to engage in study that is • Local priests often visit the school to overtly contrary to the parents’ religious principles. provide support. Some sixth form students are considering becoming priests. • We have received legal advice which suggests that Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights gives parents a right to have their children educated in accordance with their own religious and philosophical convictions. Welsh • Unless full Welsh medium provision is Proposals for the MLQ take due regard of the WAG medium retained post-16, the may be a policy development that all transformation plans education diminution in the quality and must take account of bilingual provision ensuring that standards of Welsh education. there is a range of quality opportunities available • The implications of developments in across the network. neighbouring authorities on Merthyr Tydfil’s ability to provide appropriate It is not practicable presently to offer accurate and sufficient post-16 Welsh-medium information on the exact nature of Welsh medium education to its pupils need close provision, but account will be taken of the good consideration. practice highlighted in the Welsh Language Board • The suitability of Welsh-medium document ‘Mesur y Galw’ (November 2009) to provision needs to be considered in determine the need for and suitability of Welsh relation to the range of Welsh- medium provision within the proposed MLQ. medium courses offered and the development of an appropriate ethos The local authority supports Strategic Aim 3 of the that supports effective teaching WAG consultation document, ‘Welsh-medium through the medium of Welsh. Education Strategy’ (May 2009) in respect of post-14 education, namely to ensure that all learners develop their Welsh language skills to their full potential. The areas for development identified in the WAG document will be central in assessing the impact of the proposed MLQ on the Welsh language development of learners. In addition, Strategic Aim 4, to ensure a planned Welsh-medium workforce, will be an area for reviewing regularly within the MLQ.

Current Welsh-medium provision for post-16 Welsh speakers is limited and, consequently, the opportunities to engage in cross-county collaboration are central in ensuring that a range of pathways at levels 2 and 3 is available and secures a local curriculum that meets the requirements of the Learning and Skills Measure. Plans for the proposed MLQ are structured to maximize the relationships of the University of Glamorgan and Wales, Newport and the Universities of the Heads of the Valleys. Both the University of Glamorgan and Newport have a well established range on Welsh language courses which would not only benefit post-16 pupils, but the community as a whole.

How will the • Schools will not be able to retain Presently, 200 staff are employed at Merthyr Tydfil MLQ be experienced staff. College. More will be needed to deliver the staffed? • There will be a ‘talent’ drain as proposed curriculum. These will come from three teachers that enjoy teaching sixth sources: formers leave the authority. • Best teachers are attracted to schools • Anyone who spends the majority of his/her with 6 th forms. Young people under 16 time teaching sixth formers will transfer to the will be disadvantaged because their proposed MLQ under the existing TUPE teachers will not have the same level arrangements. of expertise. • Proposed Service Level Agreement with • Jobs will be lost. There will be more schools to enable school based staff to spend fixed term contracts, extended on a some of their time teaching in the MLQ. It is year by year basis. considered preferable for teachers, rather than • What is the quality of the safety net in students, to travel. relation to staff losses? • Direct recruitment, especially to ensure that • Teachers may need to travel between there is specialist teaching on all courses. their school and the MLQ. • The interests of teachers are The creation of the proposed MLQ is bound to paramount. have an impact on teacher employment, but falling • The proposed SLA for staff will mean rolls are having an impact now. The authority is a decrease in the level of pastoral committed to working closely with Trades Unions care for 11-16 students. to manage staffing matters effectively. • If the best teachers go to the MLQ that will affect the teaching of GCSE Note: Estyn evidence is that 11-16 schools are at courses. least as effective as 11-18 schools. What is the • Will the proposed MLQ offer a broad There are plans for an additional 4,000 higher proposed curriculum? education places for the Heads of the Valleys, curriculum? • Are you comparing like with like in including work-based foundation degrees. The How many relation to the number of courses on proposed MLQ will not only offer a broader of the offer? curriculum, but one that is linked to Learning courses are • Shouldn’t you add the 33 courses that Pathways post-18. new? the consortium will provide to the vocational courses presently on offer The proposed MLQ is part of investing in the in the college? You are presenting a community. Other countries in the world that are biased viewpoint when you say that prospering are investing in education. the MLQ will offer 62 courses compared to the schools’ 33? The proposal is aimed at boosting overall • Will 62 courses be guaranteed year standards, in both academic and vocational on year? courses. • The curriculum looks attractive, but how realistic is it to provide? It is proposed to offer 62 level 3 courses and 45 • Will all of the curriculum be on one level 2 courses. A minimum of 10 students will site? normally be required to run a course. If there are • Will the proposed MLQ have more than 20 students, the course will run more computer and music facilities? than once. Once a course starts, it will run until it finishes. Because there will be more than 1,500 • Will there be courses to do things students, we can be confident that the majority of outdoors? courses will run. Special consideration will be • I see many benefits, especially in the given to important minority subjects, for example vocational courses offered. music, physics, modern foreign languages. • You are talking about up-skilling students, but there are no jobs here. The curriculum has been developed in response to Are you raising students’ expectations careful assessment of local and regional training for jobs that won’t exist? and employment needs. New programmes will • Are you selling out the academic at create progression routes across the 14-19 the expense of the vocational? Learning Pathways. Students will be better able to combine Level 2 and Level 3 courses and to combine vocational and academic courses.

The proposed curriculum brings together all that is presently on offer in the schools and all that is presently on offer in Merthyr Tydfil College plus 10 new subjects. The key is that nearly all provision will be on one site, which assists in promoting parity of esteem for the different learning options and in reducing learner travel. Access to • How will the needs of students with Students with profound and multiple learning courses, in ALN be met? Will there be ‘tailor- difficulties will continue their education in particular made’ courses for them? Greenfield School, but with links to the proposed provision for • We know the pupils with ALN/SEN MLQ as appropriate. students well here and they benefit from that. with • The proposed MLQ will be too large The curriculum on offer in the proposed MLQ will disabilities to provide individual support to cater for the full range of ability and needs from or additional students. Entry Level to Level 3 and beyond. The college learning • How will the MLQ cope with a child already has a wide variety of learners and support needs. with dyslexia? systems. The experience gained in catering for • What about young people who might students with ALN will continue into the MLQ. In be unable to choose what they want addition, it is proposed that there will be close links to do at age 17 or even 18 or 19? with Greenfield School, building on the RAISE, ‘Reaching for Excellence’ initiative.

The proposed new building will ensure access for all. There will be learning coaches operating in a dedicated centre and a multi-agency support network. Where appropriate, individual support will be provided.

The college already caters for a mix of academically or vocationally able students and others, including those with special or additional learning needs. Effective systems are in place to respond to their needs. This will continue.

The 14-19 Learning Pathways approach will assist in guiding all our young people to make the right choices, matched to their developing needs and abilities. Cost of the • The £33 million funding promised for The £33 million is ‘in principle’ funding available proposed the MLQ ought to be used to fund the for building the MLQ, provided the proposal is MLQ . sixth forms. progressed appropriately and accepted. It is not • Will £33 million be enough? Costs available to be used in other ways. could escalate out of control. • It is a waste of money to knock down Project management techniques will be employed the college and build a new one. to keep costs within limits. An Outline Business • Money spent recently on the Case has been completed and, subject to the refurbishment of Merthyr Tydfil outcomes of consultation, a Final Business Case College will be wasted, showing is nearing completion. disregard for the value of public money. The proposed new building will offer new facilities • There are hidden costs for which would not be possible in the present infrastructure, such as car parking building. It will also help to cater effectively for and a traffic management system. more people. • There is no mention of revenue funding for curriculum provision. This Refurbishment of Merthyr Tydfil College was is wholly dependent on new funding. necessary to ensure ‘fitness for purpose’ and to What guarantees are there that maintain the well being of staff and students for as savings made because of economies long as the building is required. The building will of scale will not be taken back by continue to serve the needs of the community until DCELL or through capping? such time as a new building is developed. • What are the financial implications for schools if the proposed MLQ goes Additional funding is being sought to deal with any ahead? infrastructure costs, for example as part of the Heads of the Valleys development. A traffic impact • Will the MLQ absorb all the available assessment has been undertaken. funding? Revenue funding for post-16 comes directly from • Finance is the main reason for this the WAG. The arrangements will remain largely proposal, not quality and standards unchanged. The larger number of students at the and certainly not choice. proposed MLQ will help to make provision cost • Sixth forms are described by Estyn effective, but there is no proposal and no provision inspectors as providing good value for for funding to be ‘clawed back’ by DCELL. money. There is thus little financial reason for change. The proposed MLQ will better enable funding to be focused on where it is most need. There will be less likelihood of funding being drawn away from pre-16 to support post-16. In addition, the cost of learner transport may be reduced.

Revenue funding for post-16 education and training would go to the proposed MLQ. There would be no reduction of funding and no risk of revenue funding being taken from 11-16 to support the MLQ.

The proposed MLQ facilitates the delivery of a broader and richer curriculum than is the case presently. It is aimed at improving standards, increasing participation and improving the range of opportunities for learners. It is also a cost effective proposal for maximising investment of available funds.

Pastoral • The pastoral care in sixth forms is The proposed MLQ will be approximately the care described as being ‘exceptionally same size as Cyfarthfa High School. Class sizes high’. I seriously wonder whether this would be a maximum of 20. There is no case for would be the case in the larger, more suggesting that classes will be anonymous. anonymous classes which would be Students will be supported effectively, building on provided at the MLQ. existing good practice in both the schools and the • Teachers at sixth form level offer a college. great deal of support to students outside designated lesson times. This sort of extra pastoral support is one of Students presently in Merthyr Tydfil College often the features which we would clearly arrive at the college at 16 less able and less lose if the MLQ proceeds. motivated and with lower levels of qualification • It seem that pastoral support will be than those who continue at schools and therefore cut because there is a need to save need a greater degree of support and assistance. money. However, results show that these pupils do well. • It seems that in the MLQ a student will The proposed MLQ will build on existing good be just one of a very large number practice in schools and Merthyr Tydfil College to whereas in schools there is follow up if ensure that all students make the looked for gains students do not attend or submit work. in their learning and personal development. Will there be follow-up in the MLQ? • Some pupils are not mature enough to There is no proposal to cut pastoral care to save go to a college at 16. They need to be money. The MLQ will work closely with schools to ‘chased’ to get things done. ensure continuity and progression in young • Will staff in the MLQ have a duty of people’s learning and well being. This requires care? continuing good will by all concerned. • A vital element of pastoral care in sixth forms is the ‘personal reference’ There are good arrangements for pastoral care in provided by staff for students applying schools and in the college. The further for admission to university or college. development of 14-19 Learning Pathways will In sixth forms, the nominated member facilitate the organisation of effective support and of staff liaises with other staff to guidance for young people as part of the transition ensure that the reference represents process. The use of Learning Coaches is students’ merits accurately. Staff at the significant. proposed MLQ will have limited time to form an opinion of a student, and there All students will have an assigned Learning would be less contact and intervention. Coach. Firm arrangements will be implemented to This means that students at the MLQ ensure effective oversight of students and to assist would not receive the high level, highly them in applying for admission to university or detailed reference they so richly college as part of the arrangements for Learning deserve. Pathways 14-19.

• Sixth forms are noted for providing a

‘well rounded’ experience to students which prepares them for the ‘wider world’ and any challenges it will bring. This provision will be at risk if the proposed MLQ proceeds, which will be a loss for the wider community of Merthyr Tydfil.

CRB • Will the only people present in the Most adult classes will take place in the evenings. On checking of MLQ be 16 to 19-year-olds? Will occasions adults will join young people for day-time adult adults be educated at the same time classes. learners as young people? • Will adults and young people be All students will be taught by staff who have been taught together in the same class? CRB checked. The college is fully in compliance with • Will adult learners be CRB checked? legal requirements. There have been no recorded • School sixth forms offer a highly instances of concern. protective, secure and safe environment. I do not want my sister to Most classes are not mixed age. Where adults are be sharing a class with an adult taught alongside young people, the college’s learner who could hold serious experience is that the students find it stimulating. criminal convictions. This is totally unacceptable. There are more 16+ plus learners already at the • From a parent’s point of view, I would College than there are in the sixth forms in Merthyr only be happy if my child came into Tydfil. They respond well to the existing contact with adults who have been arrangements. All of the staff are CRB checked. CRB checked. I wouldn’t be happy to When we have multi-age classes, there is always a allow my children into this member of staff present. environment. • If there are adults in class, pupils will No incidents of child abuse have happened in over be less confident. They will feel 50 years. We have processes and procedures in inferior. place to ensure the welfare of students. We already • If one incident happens, that will be have mixed students. A significant proportion of one incident too many. former school students attend the college already.

• You could never guarantee that adults There are no guarantees. Most abuse happens at and young people would not be mixing home. We will need to take every care and when they are all in a college precaution. Our record is very good, but we environment. understand these are very real concerns. It should be recognised that some multi age delivery is found in all further education and tertiary colleges across the UK and that it works to the benefit of pre and post 18 learners alike. Sixth • Sixth formers act as high quality role The evidence from Estyn is that schools without sixth formers as models to younger pupils in secondary forms achieve at least as well, and often significantly role models schools. The proposed MLQ would rob better, than those with sixth forms. In secondary schools and younger students of role schools where there are no sixth forms, the GCSE models. students act as role models. In primary schools, • If sixth formers are not in schools, Year 6 pupils act as role models. there will be no positive role models for younger pupils. There will be opportunities for post-16 students to • The sixth form acts as a beacon to visit schools. pupils in the lower school. It will be important to maintain good links between schools and the proposed MLQ. The planning of learning pathways and discussing aspirations for the future proceeds in earnest in Year 10. Some pupils in Y10 and Y11 will go the MLQ for some of their options, where they will observe the positive role model of post-16 students.

Transition • Learning can begin on Day 1 in a sixth The evidence from Estyn and from schools form. Teachers are aware of students’ themselves is that pupils manage transition needs, situations and abilities and can effectively at different stages in their education, respond appropriately from the outset. including transition from primary school to secondary There would be a process of ‘getting to school. know each other’ in the MLQ. This would be a barrier to any continuing The implementation of the local curriculum means learning. that students may need to travel to different schools • Will transition be solely about seeing a and/or the college to access their preferred learning familiar face in the college? options. In this arrangement, it is inevitable that students may find themselves in teaching groups comprising students from different schools taught by an unfamiliar teacher.

Close cooperation between the schools and college and good systems of record keeping will assist in managing this transition effectively.

In the case of the proposed MLQ, there will be a comprehensive induction programme plus opportunities to visit before transfer. In this way, staff and students will begin to know one another before the courses start.

Transition to the proposed MLQ needs to be seen in the context of 14-19 Learning Pathways. Options at age 14 will be linked to pathways available at the MLQ. Some 14 to 16-year-olds will attend the MLQ for some courses, which will help to ready them for transition at 16. Lack of • The OBC for the proposed MLQ Indoor sports facilities will be provided at the sports acknowledges that the existing college proposed MLQ. The MLQ will be part of the facilities site is not large enough to University of Glamorgan and able to access the accommodate outdoor sports facilities. international standard facilities there. This is not acceptable. How can a council say it is promoting good A key part of the proposal is to work with schools and physical health when its proposed a wide range of other sporting providers to access flagship education development does existing facilities in the County Borough. not contain any sports fields or any outdoor sports provision? Learner travel is increasing from September in order • The consultation document includes that students can follow courses of their choice. glossy pictures of sports fields. This is There will still be some learner travel if the MLQ misleading. proposal is accepted, but the need to travel between • You say that the MLQ would reduce different schools to access the full curriculum will be the need for learner travel. That is not diminished substantially. true. Students taking PE and playing sport will have to travel. Improving • The high level of pastoral support and The proposal aims to build on existing elements of attainment guidance available at sixth forms to good practice in schools and Merthyr Tydfil College achieving and talented students would to enable all post-16 students, including gifted and potentially be at risk from the proposal. talented students, to realise their full potential. There • There is a suggestion that high level is no case of ‘dumbing down’. Rather, there are clear achievers will need to be brought targets for increasing the proportion of young people down a level in the interests of progressing to further and higher education and bringing the lower end up. meaningful employment. • Cyfarthfa High School produced fantastic A-Level results in 2009. The success of individual schools and individual Similar success was apparent in other pupils in A-level examinations is acknowledged, secondary sixth forms. The proposed though it remains the case that the overall level of MLQ looks set to betray students who performance is not as advanced as it is in all other clearly thrive under the academic authorities in Wales. rigour provided by sixth forms. • No evidence has been presented to Neath Port Talbot has tertiary provision. Results suggest that there will be an increase there are better than they are in Merthyr Tydfil. There in the overall standard of attainment. are other examples. • How do examination results between the sixth forms and the college The proposal is for a brand new learning facility that compare? will bring together students from sixth forms and the • What guarantee is there that the existing Merthyr Tydfil College. Presently, sixth forms proposed curriculum will raise and the college do not follow the same type of standards? courses or examinations, so it is not feasible to • The Governing Body recognises the compare standards. Performance in the small need to improve standards, but there number of A-levels provided in the college meets are other ways of achieving the averages, but is high in photography. Most of the desired improvement, for example by courses offered by the college are vocational closing one school. courses. In these performance ranks seventh out of 22 in Wales. Overall A-level performance in sixth forms in Merthyr Tydfil ranks 22 out of 22 authorities in Wales.

We cannot be complacent about current levels of performance. The proposed curriculum caters appropriately for students’; differing needs and abilities. It improves vocational provision and offers clear learning pathways to further and higher education and employment.

The proposal is not to do with individual schools. It is about improving progress and performance for all the young people in Merthyr Tydfil, that is both the minority in sixth forms and the majority not in sixth forms.

Appendix 3

ATTENDEES AT CONSULTATION MEETINGS DATE CONSULTEE VENUE TIME GROUP PRESENT

8th February 2010 Afon Taf High School Afon Taf High School 1.30 School Students/Council 20 3.15 Staff 100 4.30 Governing Body 20 6.00Parents/Carers 21 Troedyrhiw Primary School 9th February 2010 Pupils Troedyrhiw Primary School 12.30 Pupils 15 10th February 2010 Greenfield Special School School 2.30 School Students/Council 8 3.30Staff 50 5.00 Governing Body 2 7.00Parents/Carers 5 11th February 2010 CYPP Orbit Business Centre 4.30 CYPP Partnership 20 12th February 2010 14-19 Network Orbit Business Centre 1.00 14-19 Network 6 22nd February 2010 Heolgerrig Primary School Heolgerrig Primary School 10.30 Pupils 17 23rd February 2010 Merthyr Tydfil Youth Forum VAMT Offices 4.30 Youth Forum 20 23rd February 2010 Pantyscallog Primary School School 10.15Pupils 9 23rd February 2010 Gwaunfarren Primary School School 1.30Pupils 11 Twynyrodyn Community 24th February 2010 School School 10.00Pupils 12 25th February 2010 Ysgol Rhyd y Grug School 10.00Pupils 18 25th February 2010 Penydre High School School 1.30 School Students/Council 20 3.00Staff 60 5.00 Governing Body 12 6.30Parents/Carers 12 Trade Unions and Professional 26th February 2010 Associations ICS Boardroom 9.00 Unions 3 Primary Cluster 2 - Bishop 1st March 2010 Hedley Schools School 4.30Staff 49 5.30Governors 34 6.30Parents/Carers 84 2nd March 2010 Cyfarthfa Junior School School 9.30 Pupils 14

2nd March 2010 St. Illtyd's RC Primary School School 12.00Pupils 9 2nd March 2010 Cyfarthfa High School Upper School 1.30 School Students/Council 200 3.30Staff 90 5.00 Governing Body 19 7.00 Parents/Carers 220 3rd March 2010 Caedraw Primary School School 9.00Pupils 8 3rd March 2010 Brecon Road Infants School School 9.30 Pupils 7 3rd March 2010 Goetre Infants School School 10.00Pupils 26 3rd March 2010 Goetre Junior School School 11.00Pupils 16 4th March 2010 Bedlinog Primary School School 9.30Pupils 7 4th March 2010 Edwardsville Primary School School 12.30 Pupils 9 4th March 2010 Bishop Hedley High School School 1.30Pupils 59 3.30Staff 50 5.00 Governing Body 14 7.00 Parents/Carers 405 5th March 2010 Trelewis Primary School School 9.30Pupils 11 Ynysowen Community Primary 5th March 2010 School School 1.30Pupils 7 Merthyr Tydfil College 5th March 2010 Students College 12.00 Students 36

8th March 2010 St Mary's RC Primary School School 9.30Pupils 52 8th March 2010 Dowlais Primary School School 10.00 Pupils 13 8th March 2010 Gellifaelog Primary School School 11.00Pupils 16 Primary Cluster 1 - Afon Taf 8th March 2010 School School 4.00Staff 10 5.00Governors 8 6.00Parents/Carers 14 Communities First Co- 9th March 2010 ordinators 7

9th March 2010 Ysgol y Graig Primary School School 10.00Pupils 31 Primary Cluster 3 - Cyfarthfa 9th March 2010 High School Upper School 4.00 Staff 63 5.00Governors 17 6.00Parents/Carers 17 Primary Cluster 4 - Pen y dre 10th March 2010 High School School 4.00Staff 20 5.00Governors 4 6.00Parents/Carers 4

10th March 2010 Abercanaid Community School School 9.30Pupils 11 Ysgol Gynradd Coed y 10th March 2010 Dderwen School 9.30Pupils 31 Mount Pleasant Primary 10th March 2010 School School 9.30Pupils 9 St. Aloysius RC Primary 12th March 2010 School School 9.30Pupils 18 Primary Cluster 5 - Welsh 12th March 2010 Schools ICC Pentrebach 4.00 Staff 7 5.00Governors 5 6.00Parents/Carers 9 17th March 2010 ACL Partnership 15 18th March 2010 Options Programme/PRU PRU 2.00 PRU Pupils 8 3.00 Staff 8 4.00 Management Panels 6 5.00Parents/Carers 0 25th March 2010 Options Programme Afon Taf Education Centre 10.00 Options Pupils 7 Total 2245 APPENDIX 4

Meetings with governors, staff, parents/carers, students and stakeholders plus other responses and written comments

AFON TAF HIGH SCHOOL

Meeting with Afon Taf High School Governing Body

20 governors attended. Governors requested that there should be a short presentation followed by an opportunity for them to ask questions. Points raised in the ensuing discussion included: a perception that the consultation document is biased; the need for capital investment in schools, not the proposed MLQ; how staff would be recruited; the omission of value added data; a recognition that there must be change, but a view that this could be achieved in ways other than the proposed MLQ, for example closing one secondary school; the necessity to plan appropriately for 11-16 as well as post-16; governance arrangements; accuracy of data; and the perceived lack of evidence that standard will improve. The general view was that the governing body subscribed to the aspiration to improve standards and provision, but did not agree that the proposed MLQ was the right way forward.

Meeting with staff of Afon Taf High School

Approximately 100 staff attended. Points discussed included: the accuracy and perceived bias of the information provided about the proposed curriculum; the good standards achieved by schools compared to the standards achieved by the college; perceived detriment to pastoral care if the proposal is implemented; the level of opposition to the proposal; the perceived loss of choice for students and parents; how staffing will be organised; concerns about transition; and the leap of faith required to believe that the MLQ was advantageous to students. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with parents/carers of Afon Taf High School

21 parents attended plus 3 pupils. Points discussed included: provision for the Welsh Baccalaureate and whether the Baccalaureate was desirable; what evidence existed about performance in areas where tertiary was established (reference was made to performance in Neath Port Talbot); a perceived overemphasis on vocational at the expense of academic provision; concerns that young people may be taught alongside adults; concern about the lack of sports facilities; some support for the reduction in student travel time; potential negative impact on 11-16; concerns about the possible loss of minority subjects; suggestion that sixth forms be retained, but reduced in number; suggestion that the funding be used to support sixth forms; and questions about transport arrangements. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with students of Afon Taf High School

Approximately 20 students attended, with some staff present. Points discussed included: lack of sporting facilities on the college site; a view that implementation of the proposal would dissuade parents from sending their children to schools in Merthyr Tydfil; the economic viability of the proposals; how staffing will be organised; what guarantee there is that standards will improve; whether there will be a transition programme for young people; what option there will be to stay in school post-16; perceived adverse impact of the proposal on the town centre; and the role model provided by sixth formers. At the conclusion of the meeting, the young person chairing the meeting stated that students had been asked about the proposal preceding the consultation meeting and a vote taken. This showed:

Question 1: Yes 11.1% No 86.9% (sic) Question 2: Yes 19.8% No 80.2% Question 3: Yes 10.8% No 89.2%

The students were asked if they proposed to inform their school mates about the matters raised in the meeting in the event that the additional information would impact on the decision taken before listening to the discussion.

Meeting with governors of primary schools associated with Afon Taf High School

Eight governors attended. Matters discussed included: building work on-going at Merthyr Tydfil College; access by students to the proposed MLQ curriculum; concerns about possible traffic congestion; arrangements for pastoral care; communication and links with parents e.g. providing information about students’ progress and performance; effect on school funding; and the necessity for pupils to travel for sport. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation. Two response forms, both in favour of the proposal, were handed in.

Meeting with parents/carers of primary schools associated with Afon Taf High School

14 parents/carers attended. Matters discussed included: proposed date of implementation and which year groups would be affected; transport arrangements; arrangements for students to re- sit examinations; curriculum presently on offer and the proposed additionality; concerns that young people will be taught alongside adults; whether the quality of pastoral care would be maintained; and a preference by one parent for a sixth form school/college. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with staff of primary schools associated with Afon Taf High School

10 primary school staff attended. Matters discussed included: reality of timescale for implementing the proposal; impact on parking facilities; concerns about possible loss of good teachers; a comment by one teacher that the School Council is very much in favour of the proposal; and questions about the views of staff in the secondary schools. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation. Nine response forms, all in favour of the proposal, were handed in.

BISHOP HEDLEY CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL

Responses to the consultation form received from adults and young people associated with Bishop Hedley Catholic School were as follows:

Meeting with Bishop Hedley Catholic High School Governing Body

14 governors attended. Matter discussed included: how the consultation report will be completed; whether the report to Council will be seen beforehand; agreement that the status quo is not appropriate, but a desire to see an approach other than the MLQ; provision for minority subjects; advantage of hub and spoke model used in Carmarthen; concern that value added data is not incorporated in the consultation document; reference to high performance in Bishop Hedley Catholic School; positive outcome of recent Estyn inspection report; Merthyr Tydfil has a strong Catholic tradition which should be valued; whether Bishop Hedley Catholic School was being treated fairly; performance of the college; would there be consultation if this was an Islamic School; need to preserve choice; can the Neath Port Talbot model, where there is still a Catholic Sixth Form, be adopted; how will our views be reported; concern that young people may be taught alongside adults; the quality of pastoral care at Bishop Hedley Catholic School; and a view that legal advice suggests that Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights gives parents the right to have their children educated in accordance with their own religious and philosophical convictions. The general view was that the governing body subscribed to the aspiration to improve standards and provision, but did not agree that the proposed MLQ was the right way forward. There is a strong concern to preserve faith-based education.

Note: Governors subsequently submitted an alternative proposal. An account and evaluation of the alternative are provided alongside other proposed alternatives at Appendix 4 of this report

Meeting with staff of Bishop Hedley Catholic High School

Approximately 50 staff attended. Points discussed included: the lack of reference to a spiritual dimension in the consultation document; the importance of Catholic education; a view that Bishop Hedley Catholic School should keep its sixth form; the removal of choice for a Catholic education; concerns that young people may be taught alongside adults; transition from school to the proposed ML:Q may lead to a drop in standards; the precedent set in Neath Port Talbot for retaining a Catholic sixth form; a perceived loss of quality pastoral care; the role model provided by sixth formers; impact on teachers’ employment; lack of value added data in the proposal; and the size of classes. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with parents/carers of Bishop Hedley Catholic High School

405 parents attended. Points discussed included: the distinctive and special nature of Catholic education; concern about the mis-use of alcohol at the college; lack of sports facilities; only one chance to get it right; why not spend the money on the sixth forms rather than the college; concern that young people may be taught alongside adults; a view that Bishop Hedley Catholic School should retain its sixth form, but work in collaboration with the proposed MLQ; if the system is not broken then why fix it; concern that we may be dumbing down, rather than lifting, performance; reference to good standards in Bishop Hedley Catholic School and need to lift standards in other schools; what evidence is there that tertiary works; consultation with students seen as very important; and a view that a new building won’t improve performance. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with students of Bishop Hedley Catholic High School

Approximately 60 students attended (two per form), with some staff present. Points discussed included: perceived poor use of funding spent on upgrading Merthyr Tydfil College; perceived lack of choice for students; numbers required to make courses viable; the positive outcomes of the recent Estyn inspection of Bishop Hedley Catholic School; staffing arrangements; transport arrangements; reasons for low standards overall in the authority; good performance of Bishop Hedley Catholic School; desire to preserve strong faith community; concerns that young people may be taught alongside adults; capacity of MLQ to cater for minority ethnic groups; perceived potential for other students to attack sixth formers; a view that small sixth forms are necessary for quality; removal of choice for Catholics; lack of sporting facilities on the college site; perceived removal of choice for academic pupils; and the basic right to practise the Catholic religion. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with governors of primary schools associated with Bishop Hedley Catholic High School

34 governors attended. Matters discussed included: concern that young people may be taught alongside adults; whether 60+ courses would run every year; perceived emphasis on social issues at the expense of educational standards; concern to maintain academic standards; proposed staffing arrangements; importance of faith-based education; the perceived impersonal nature of tertiary provision; and the right of parents to faith schooling for their children. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with parents/carers of primary schools associated with Bishop Hedley Catholic High School

84 parents/carers or grandparents attended. Matters discussed included: perceived advantage of spending the ‘in principle’ funding on sixth forms; concerns that young people may be taught alongside adults; concerns about class sizes; suggested lack of balance in the proposal; strong desire to maintain Catholic education; proposed staffing arrangements; whether Catholic pupils would be segregated in the proposed MLQ; perception that drop out rate will increase; perceived diminution in the quality of pastoral care; perception that class sizes will be unduly large; concern to preserve choice for a faith-based education. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with staff of primary schools associated with Bishop Hedley Catholic High School

49 primary school staff attended. Matters discussed included: removal of choice for a Catholic education; concerns that young people may be taught alongside adults; questions about transport arrangements, including transport from neighbouring authorities; provision for minority subjects; suggestion that academic provision was being sacrificed in favour of vocational provision; and strong desire for Bishop Hedley Catholic School to be treated as a special case so as to be able to retain its sixth form. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

CYFARTHFA HIGH SCHOOL

Meeting with Cyfarthfa High School Governing Body

19 governors attended. Governors contended that there was no true consultation as the Council had already determined to follow the tertiary route. Governors wished to preserve choice for pupils and parents. The proposal was seen as removing choice. Cyfarthfa High School was held to be a centre of excellence that should be built on and not destroyed. There was reference to the buoyant sixth form numbers in Cyfarthfa High School, concerns about adults being taught alongside 16-19 year olds in the proposed MLQ, potential teacher redundancies, good consortium working and the potential high cost of the curriculum and pastoral care at the proposed MLQ. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Chair asked for a vote in favour of maintaining the sixth form at Cyfarthfa High School. The vote was unanimous to do so.

Meeting with staff of Cyfarthfa High School

Approximately 90 staff attended. The strong consensus of feeling was that Cyfarthfa High School was demonstrably achieving good results, but that there was no evidence that the proposed MLQ would lift attainment. Staff wished to preserve choice for pupils and parents. The proposal was seen as removing choice. Concerns were expressed about the perceived high costs of the proposed MLQ, the loss of job security for teachers, the perceived lack of adequate pastoral care at the proposed MLQ and the potential for high drop out rates at the MLQ. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Head Teacher asked the staff to vote on whether or not the school should retain its sixth form. The vote was unanimous in favour of retaining the sixth form. The Head Teacher stated that the preferred option for reorganisation would be the strengthening of the current arrangements for collaboration.

Meeting with parents/carers of Cyfarthfa High School

Approximately 220 parents, carers, staff and students attended. The strong consensus of feeling was to retain the school’s sixth form. Reference was made to the high standards achieved in Cyfarthfa High School, a lack of confidence that the proposed MLQ would achieve as well, particularly in academic subjects, concerns about the continuing quality of pastoral care at the MLQ, the perceived inadequacy of sports facilities at the MLQ and the costs of implementing the proposal. A parent requested a show of hands in favour of Cyfarthfa High School retaining its sixth form. The vote was very largely carried, with one against. Subsequently, the Head Teacher reminded parents as to how they could respond to the consultation. He asked for a further vote as to whether those present wished to retain the school’s sixth form. The vote was carried, with one against.

Meeting with students of Cyfarthfa High School

Approximately 200 students attended, with some staff present. The strong consensus of feeling was to retain the school’s sixth form. Matters referred to included: the desirability of small sixth form class numbers; perceived misrepresentation concerning the need for student travel; the potential adverse impact of staffing the MLQ on the results achieved at GCSE as well as post- 16; a perceived loss of choice; a concern that the high standards achieved by Cyfarthfa High School were not acknowledged appropriately and would suffer if the proposal went ahead; and a view that the costs involved were high and unwarranted. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Head Teacher asked for a vote as to whether or not students supported the proposal. The vote was unanimous to retain the sixth form.

Meeting with governors of primary schools associated with Cyfarthfa High School

17 governors attended. Matters discussed included: the perceived desirability of more than one option, to include the consortium arrangement; concerns about adults being taught alongside 16 to 19-year-olds; comparison of performance and retention rates of sixth forms with that of Merthyr Tydfil College; the need to maintain staff morale; and whether there is evidence that the proposed MLQ will lift standards. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with parents/carers of primary schools associated with Cyfarthfa High School

17 parents/carers attended. In addition, 7 sixth form students, 2 teachers from Cyfarthfa High School and 3 Councillors were present. Matters discussed included: the perceived waste of money expended on refurbishing the college; perceptions about the adverse impact of the potential loss of sixth form; the positive impact of the consortium arrangement and the desirability of preserving that; concerns about young people being taught alongside adults; the perceived high cost of the proposed MLQ; and the potential adverse impact of the proposal on pre- as well as post-16 quality and standards. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with staff of primary schools associated with Cyfarthfa High School

63 primary school staff attended. In addition, 4 sixth form students and 2 teachers from Cyfarthfa High School were present. Immediately prior to the meeting, students distributed a document entitled ‘Advantages of the Sixth Form and What the Council is not telling You’. Matters discussed during the meeting included: whether or not students from Merthyr Tydfil would have priority to attend the proposed MLQ; concerns about a perceived loss of good pastoral care; catering for minority subjects; the good standards achieved by Cyfarthfa High School and a perceived failure to highlight this because of the reference made to County Borough statistics; and the positive impact of the consortium arrangement and the desirability of preserving that. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

PEN Y DRE HIGH SCHOOL

Meeting with Pen y Dre High School Governing Body

12 governors attended. Matters discussed included: the support needed for emotionally damaged pupils and pupils looking to leave school at 16; implications of the proposal for Council Tax payers; whether there is evidence of the effectiveness of tertiary education; financial implications; levels of attainment across the County Borough; impact on the morale of staff; possibility of a merger between Pen y Dre High School and Cyfarthfa High School; impact on car parking in the town centre; the possibility of improperly raising expectations; and performance in Merthyr Tydfil College compared to school performance. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with staff of Pen y Dre High School

Approximately 60 staff attended. Points discussed included: the proposed staffing of the MLQ; role of the University of Glamorgan; provision for pupils with Additional Learning Needs; arrangements for transition; arrangements for pastoral care; the amount of direct teaching time for each subject; course numbers; and the potential impact on the number of schools in the authority. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with parents/carers of Pen y Dre High School

12 parents attended. Points discussed included: concerns about young people and adults being taught together; adequacy of space at the proposed MLQ; whether minority subjects would be protected; proposed staffing arrangements; any evidence that tertiary provision works; and whether or not the authority has considered the possibility of as sixth form college. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with students of Pen y Dre High School

20 students attended. Points discussed included: proposed staffing arrangements; potential impact on the number of schools in the authority and, in particular, on Pen y Dre High School; the possibility of the timescale for implementation of the proposal being unduly ambitious; the viability of class sizes; perceived loss of opportunities for extra-curricular activities and the effect of this on sixth formers; and the role model offered by sixth formers. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with governors of primary schools associated with Pen y Dre High School

Four governors attended. Matters discussed included: the accuracy of pupil number projections given new building work in Merthyr Tydfil; perceived large class sizes in the proposed MLQ; the potential loss of inspirational teachers; curriculum options; support for under-achievers; concerns about young people possibly being taught alongside adults; and the potential loss of the good ethos of sixth forms. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with parents/carers of primary schools associated with Pen y Dre High School

Four parents/carers attended. Matters discussed included: whether or not schools supported the proposals; a strong desire by one parent to preserve the sixth form; the proposed student- teacher ratio; whether or not students will be banded according to ability; proposed staffing arrangements and potential impact on the schools; perceived inability of the MLQ to cater appropriately for academic subjects; and perceptions about the performance of the college. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Meeting with staff of primary schools associated with Pen y Dre High School

20 primary school staff attended. Matters discussed included: potential for costs to spiral out of control; inadequacy of sporting facilities at the proposed MLQ; impact of the proposal on the number of schools in Merthyr Tydfil; fears that Pen y Dre will close; proposed staffing arrangements; proposed curriculum; and pay and conditions of staff. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

WELSH MEDIUM SCHOOLS

Five governors from Welsh medium primary schools in Merthyr Tydfil attended a consultation event. The background to the proposals was discussed. Comments received included: the importance of proposals in Rhondda Cynon Taf as pupils from Merthyr Tydfil wishing to access Welsh medium education at secondary level presently received their education in that authority; concern that the proposal was centred on a college site and not a school site; a suggestion that schools were better placed to support learners’ all-round growth and development than were colleges; the desirability of influencing RhCT’s proposals; and a desire to avoid Welsh speaking children being excluded from the wonderful proposed provision in Merthyr Tydfil. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Nine parents and carers from Welsh medium primary schools in Merthyr Tydfil attended a consultation event. The background to the proposals was discussed. Comments received included: the impact of the proposals on pupils in Ysgol Gyfun Rhyd y Waun; whether the proposed MLQ for Merthyr Tydfil was English medium only; how the proposed MLQ might support Welsh speakers post-16; concern that young people would be taught alongside adults; why it is proposed to ‘scrap’ sixth forms; possible entry requirements for the proposed MLQ; the attainment levels of the college; a query as to why we don’t organise our schools like Eton; queries about the minimum number of students needed to run a course; and queries about the proposed staffing arrangements. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Seven members of staff from Welsh medium primary schools in Merthyr Tydfil attended a consultation meeting. The background to the proposals was discussed. Comments received included: the impact of the proposal on pupils in Ysgol Gyfun Rhyd y Waun; queries about funding for post-16 pupils; a concern that the proposal for RhCT related to bilingual and not Welsh medium provision; a desire for a better balance of vocational and academic provision; support for a pure Welsh medium tertiary college, a question about transport; and a query relating to the timetable for consultation.

GREENFIELD SCHOOL

Two governors attended a consultation meeting. The background to the proposals was discussed and the implications for Greenfield School considered. One governor stated that the proposal had many benefits, not least in improving opportunities presently leaving schools with limited prospects. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Five parents/carers attended a consultation meeting. Following discussion, those attending agreed unanimously to support the proposal to amend the upper age limit of secondary schools in the County Borough. Perceived merits of the proposed MLQ were identified as increasing the range of learning options available to all students and increased opportunities for young people from Greenfield School to access a wide range of courses.

Approximately 50 teaching and non-teaching staff attended a consultation meeting. Matters discussed included: whether the proposed MLQ would make provision for students with disabilities; accessibility of courses to young people with special educational needs; provision of ancillary support; ; integration in as well as integration out; and the influence of Greenfield school on course provision.

Eight students attended a consultation meeting. Matters discussed included: demolition of Merthyr Tydfil College; will the proposed college have computer and music facilities; would the proposal affect links with the existing college; will there be a swimming pool; when will the building start to be built. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

PUPIL REFERRAL UNIT (PRU) AND OPTIONS PROGRAMME

Six members of the management panel attended a consultation meeting. The background to the proposals was considered. Comments received included: how can we ensure that standards will improve; will the extra support currently offered in schools continue in the proposed MLQ; possibility that the proposals will lead to the closure of one of the four secondary school in Merthyr Tydfil; proposed staffing arrangements; funding for sixth forms; and whether the proposed MLQ would be bilingual provision. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

No parents/carers attended the planned consultation meeting.

Eight members of staff attended a consultation event. The background to the proposals was discussed. Comments received included: the desirability of small class sizes for A levels; proposed staffing arrangements; the inclusiveness of the proposed MLQ; the possibility of teacher redundancies; the quality of pastoral support; concerns that young people will be taught alongside adults; and the extent of parental involvement. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

Seven students of the Options Programme and 12 students from the PRU attended separate consultation meetings. The students discussed the cost of the proposed MLQ, the desirability of demolishing the present building and the timescale involved; when would the building be ready; and what will happen to students when the building commences. There were no other matters arising. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

TRADE UNIONS

A consultation meeting with representatives of Trades Unions was convened on 26 February. Not all trades unions invited to the meeting were represented. The background to the proposals was discussed. Comments received included: the interests of teachers are paramount; the motivating factor is providing education on the cheap; arrangements for protecting teachers; proposed provision for Welsh medium education; whether Head Teachers will be downgraded as the number of pupils reduces; whether the authority has considered reducing the number of secondary schools, but retaining sixth forms; suggestion that the ‘in principle funding’ should be used to sup[port school budgets; quality of the safety net in relation to staff losses; the authority should be ‘mothballing’ classes to deal with surplus places; any envisaged use of part-time contracts; proposed arrangements for Voluntary Early Retirement; and provision for out-of-county pupils.

MERTHYR TYDFIL COLLEGE STUDENTS

36 students from Merthyr Tydfil College attended a consultation meeting. The background to the proposals was discussed. Comments made included: the proposed arrangements for building the MLQ; whether car parking would be affected; financial implications; provision for Welsh-medium education; perception that the proposed MLQ was good for economic regeneration; and the involvement of local workers in the proposed new build.

MERTHYR TYDFIL YOUTH FORUM

Approximately 20 people attended the meeting including 14 members of the Forum. The background to the proposal was discussed. Comments received included: the perceived advantages of the proposed MLQ; the breadth of the curriculum proposed and the consultation arrangements. There were expressions of support for the proposed MLQ. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

MERTHYR TYDFIL 14-19 NETWORK

11 members of the 14-19 Network attended a consultation meeting. The Network representatives considered the proposal. Substantial concerns were raised, covering the perceived bias of the consultation process; why the University of Glamorgan was involved; the desire of schools to develop their own proposals for post-16 provision; query re the potential involvement of the WAG where pertinent; suggestion that the hub and spoke model was a way forward; statement that the new curriculum is really a configuration of the old one; the challenge of staffing the MLQ appropriately without detriment to the schools; perceived lack of information about revenue funding; the perceived detrimental effect on staff morale and recruitment; lack of choice for students; the disadvantage to faith based education; the good performance of secondary schools; and the arrangements for taking the consultation forward. Overall, comments from the Network members present at the meeting indicated opposition to the proposal. At the conclusion of the meeting, those attending were reminded of the means by which they could respond to the consultation.

WRITTEN RESPONSES

Former sixth form student

A written response received from a former sixth former, now University student, expresses concerns at the proposals. Matters raised include: whether change is necessary; the perceived detrimental effect on pastoral care; the perceived detrimental effect on transition; the lack of sports facilities at the proposed MLQ; perceived adverse impact on completion of University admissions forms; the loss of sixth former as role models to younger pupils; a perceived adverse impact on preparing students for the ‘wider world’; the good value for money provided by sixth forms; the impact on faith education; whether high achievers will continue to do well; a perceived impact on the high academic standards achieved in sixth form; lack of CRB checks for adult students; cost of the proposals; the perceived bias of the consultation document; contesting the claim that the ML:Q will raise attainment 11-16; and criticism of the claims for the benefit of the proposed MLQ. Overall, the response is in support of retaining sixth forms. No clear proposal or alternative for transformational change is offered.

Trades Unions

A written response received from the NASUWT states that the union supports in general the initiative to increase the choice of post-16 pupils and to bring about parity of esteem between vocational and academic courses. The response further states that, as a Trade Union, the NASUWT must ensure that the employment and conditions of service of its members are maintained and wherever possible enhanced. THE NASUWT states that it is unable to support the proposals at this stage as there is a lack of clarity regarding the exact nature of provision, the impact on the employment and conditions of service of teachers and the impact on 14-19 education in secondary schools in Wales. Other points raised by the NASUWT include: a lack of clarity in the proposed governance arrangements; the lack of modelling of the staffing and financial arrangements for the remaining 11-16 schools; the threat to employment of teachers; the threat to conditions of service of teachers; the transfer of post-16 education from a democratically accountable MTCBC to the University of Glamorgan; and the lack of consultation with the NASUWT. Note that three members of the NASUWT attended the meeting organised on 26 February, which was prior to the written response received from the union, dated 30 March. No firm proposal for transformation is provided by the union.

A letter received from Divisional Secretary NUT Merthyr Tydfil complains about the conduct of a consultation meeting held at Cyfarthfa High School. Concerns are expressed about the perceived bias of the consultation document, the involvement of the University of Glamorgan and the allocation of funding to pupils in Merthyr Tydfil. The concerns expressed about the conduct of the consultation meeting are being considered under the authority’s complaints procedure. The NUT was not represented at the meeting with Trades Unions convened on 26 February. No firm proposal for transformation is provided by the union. A written response received from the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL) comments on the lack of reference in the proposals to the perceived disadvantages of the MLQ. Questions are raised about protection for teachers and pupils, the faith needs of pupils in the one Voluntary Aided school in the County Borough; the need to ensure that arguments for and against are rehearsed before any decision is made; pupils’ best options; and the need for appropriate pastoral structures. Anecdotal comment about the behaviour of college students is provided. The ATL was not represented at the meeting with Trades Unions convened on 26 February. No firm proposal for transformation is provided by the union.

Local Health Board

A written response received from the Cwm Taf Health Board acknowledges the case for change and supports the strategic direction outlined in the proposals to re-organise post-16 education and training in Merthyr Tydfil. The Health Board offers comments in relation to the proposals that will need to be reflected in any future configuration of the provision, as follows:

• Delivery of health promotion may be affected due to sixth formers being in classes with adult members. • The need to preserve the established relationships between the named nurse of the individual comprehensive school and the sixth form pupils that will be merged into the new college. • The need to establish a school nurse drop in service within the college to replace those offered in the school setting. • The need to establish systems to enable professionals to sign post the young people to appropriate services they require, e.g. Youth Advisory Service, Drug Aid and Counselling, that currently exists in the school settings. • Concerns that the vulnerable young person could be lost in a much larger system. • Concerns around the child protection process in that it will be difficult to continue input into the child protection process because there will be loss of contact with the child.

Archdiocese of Cardiff

A letter from the Diocesan Director of Schools and Colleges states that the proposal is opposed as, if implemented, it would lead to the closure of Catholic post-16 provision at Bishop Hedley Catholic High School. The operation of Bishop Hedley Catholic School on a regional basis is emphasised. Reference is also made to the complimentary nature of the recent Estyn inspection report on the school and to the gains achieved in expanding curricular provision through a consortium arrangement. The Diocesan Director is aware that the governors of Bishop Hedley Catholic High School have submitted an alternative proposal aimed at ensuring the broadest entitlement for learners whilst allowing them to continue their post-16 education within a Catholic environment. Reference is made to the approach adopted in Neath Port Talbot where there has been a long period of running a distinct faith-based sixth form alongside a tertiary system. The Diocesan Director states that the Archdiocese of Cardiff would like to see this system applied to Merthyr Tydfil to enable students to have the option of faith based post-16 provision.

Faith School Leaders’ Association (FSLA)

A written response received from the FSLA, a consortium of Head Teachers and College Principals offering faith-based education to students across the Anglican and Catholic dioceses of South Wales, comments on the thinking underlying the proposals for transforming learning and training post-16, suggesting that alternative viewpoints are possible and that the logic for the proposed MLQ is woolly. The response contains inaccurate comments about the perceived lack of involvement of young people and other matters, including predictions of pupil numbers and performance at key stages 1 to 3. The response states that the proposals do not meet the legitimate right of parents to have their children educated in a Gospel-centred environment. No alternative proposals are identified.

Assembly Member

A written response received from the Assembly Member for Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney applauds the measures taken by secondary schools to increase the choice available to students, but comments that such a system is fraught with logistical and physical difficulties for the school and the students. The response further states that collaboration with Further and Higher Educational establishments, alongside the current secondary schools, can only serve to provide our children with an extensive knowledge base and access to provision currently not within their reach.

Neighbouring authorities

Nil comments received.

Careers Wales

A letter received from Careers Wales thanks the authority for the comprehensive consultation document. Careers Wales states that it would like to assure the authority that it will support and work with any post-16 structure implemented in Merthyr Tydfil. The over-riding wish of the group is for the young people of the area to have the best possible learning opportunities in the future.

South Wales Police

A response on behalf of the South Wales Police offers support for the proposal on the basis of economies of scale, enhanced opportunities for young people and the opportunity to create a centre of excellence.

Welsh Language Board

A written response on behalf of the Welsh Language Board focuses on the support given to the provision of Welsh-medium education for post-16 students. The Board acknowledges the good intentions expressed in the consultation document to increase provision for learning through the medium of Welsh, but states that it would welcome further information about this. The Board identifies that there are two issues to consider concerning the suitability of Welsh medium provision, namely the range of Welsh medium courses offered and an appropriate ethos which supports effective teaching through the medium of Welsh. The Board requests the authority to consider the implications of developments in neighbouring authorities on Merthyr Tydfil’s ability to provide appropriate and sufficient Welsh-medium education to its pupils. The Board would also appreciate further information concerning any plans the County has regarding language impact assessments. The Board proposes to monitor the development of the reorganisation proposals within the context of the annual monitoring report on the Welsh Education Scheme.

Account has been taken of all comments received through responses to the consultation form, during meetings and in writing submissions in the separate appendices covering the main issues identified during consultation and, as appropriate, in the summary of suggested alternatives to the proposed MLQ.

APPENDIX 5 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS

Alternative 1: Preserve the sixth forms

This alternative preserves the status quo. It envisages no change to the upper age limit of the four secondary schools in the County Borough and no change in the organisation and delivery of the post-16 curriculum. Essentially, the view is that the sixth forms are doing a good job and should be left as they are, but desirably with more money invested in them.

Outcomes

Existing and predicted post-16 students at each secondary school in Merthyr Tydfil

School 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019 2021 Afon Taf High 157 149 131 118 110 112 Bishop Hedley High 90 112 129 108 97 105 Cyfarthfa High 247 256 276 257 252 252 Pen y Dre High 142 129 95 86 77 85 Total 636 646 631 569 536 554

Advantages

• Some benefits to staff morale. • Continuation of current arrangements for parental preference. • Meets requirement of those wishing to preserve sixth forms. • Preserves faith based education for post-16 pupils attending the one Catholic High School in the County Borough.

Disadvantages

• Three of the four sixth forms have fewer than the 150 pupils considered by the Welsh Assembly Government and the Audit Commission to be the minimum required to be viable. • Size of sixth forms predicted to fall further in two of the four secondary schools, making for even smaller class sizes and reduced opportunities for beneficial peer interaction. • At least three of the four schools unable to deliver the statutory local curriculum whereby all post-16 learners are entitled to access a minimum of 30 learner choices, five of which should be vocational options. • Uneconomic provision and high costs in smaller sixth forms. • Where sixth forms are small, the high cost of provision may be at the expense of funding for pupils aged 11-16, thus impacting adversely on standards in Key Stages 3 and 4. • Limitation of range and quality of post-16 provision in most, if not all schools. • Does not transform provision for education and training and, thereby, contribute to improving the overall standards attained by academically able students and the majority of young people in Merthyr Tydfil (approximately 60%) who do not attend sixth forms. • Does not promote parity of esteem between vocational and academic provision. • Incurs risk of intervention by the Welsh Assembly Government.

Costs

Running costs: As at present Capital costs: None directly, though the alternative would impact adversely on plans to accommodate all pupils from Cyfarthfa Lower School site on the Upper School site as it would necessitate additional new build to relocate one year group. Estimated cost of additional new build is £4 million. The proposal would not attract additional capital funding from the Welsh Assembly Government. Loss of £33 million ‘in principle’ funding.

General comments

The alternative is not viable. It inhibits the delivery of the statutory local curriculum which requires close cooperation between the four secondary schools to offer the minimum of 30 learner options required by the Welsh Assembly Government. Crucially, our secondary schools acknowledge that the status quo is not an option and there is virtually no support for this alternative from senior managers and most governors. The Welsh Assembly Government has stated: “Where the strong desire of some learning providers to maintain the status quo or inappropriately limit change undermines our policy drive to address the needs of all learners, DCELLS will take a more interventionist approach.” (‘Transformation – Y Siwrnai, Transforming Education and Training Provision for Wales’, Welsh Assembly Government, November 2009)

Alternative 2: Base all academic subjects at Cyfarthfa High School and all vocational subjects at Merthyr Tydfil College.

This alternative identifies Cyfarthfa High School as having a proven track record of success in teaching sixth formers effectively. It requires that the school should be extended to enable all sixth form academic work in the County Borough to be taught there, whilst all vocational provision would be taught in Merthyr Tydfil College. The proposal is considered to be significantly cheaper than the cost of the proposed MLQ and to be less disruptive overall to college students and sixth formers. It is suggested that the ‘small minority’ of students wishing to mix academic and vocational learning options could be transported between Cyfarthfa High School and Merthyr Tydfil College.

Outcomes

Existing and predicted post-16 students at each secondary school in Merthyr Tydfil

School 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019 2021 Afon Taf High 157 149 0 0 0 0 Bishop Hedley High 90 112 129 108 97 105 Cyfarthfa High 247 256 502 461 439 449 Pen y Dre High 142 129 0 0 0 0 Total 636 646 631 569 536 554

Advantages

• Some benefits to morale of staff in one secondary school. • Continuation of current arrangements for parents to make a choice between sixth form and college. • Meets requirement of those wishing to preserve sixth forms. • Assuming Bishop Hedley Catholic High School is not involved, the option preserves faith based education for post-16 pupils attending that school.

Disadvantages

• The alternative does not deal adequately with the impact on Bishop Hedley Catholic High School which, as a voluntary aided school and in the absence of approval by Ministers, cannot be required to be involved. If the school was not involved in the alternative, the effect would be to create one large sixth form (predicted 449 students by 2021) and one with substantially fewer than the 150 students deemed to be the minimum to be viable. Some diseconomies and limitation in the range and quality of post-16 provision would persist. • Removal of opportunities for the exercise of parental preference for the two maintained schools losing their sixth forms may encounter opposition from parents and from the schools themselves. • There is a risk of creating differing perceptions of worth and value when 11-16 and 11-18 schools are juxtaposed. • Increased travel for some students. • Substantial new build required on the already limited Cyfarthfa Upper School site. • No impact on the range and quality of post-16 provision overall or on standards for academically able students and the majority of young people in Merthyr Tydfil (approximately 60%) who do not attend sixth forms. • Does not contribute to increasing participation and staying on rates in Merthyr Tydfil. • Does not promote parity of esteem between vocational and academic provision. • The need to travel to Merthyr Tydfil College to study vocational options may dissuade some students from pursuing such options and may lead to them following courses that are not best suited to their needs and abilities. • Incurs risk of intervention by Welsh Assembly Government.

Costs

Running costs: Annual savings in teaching costs. Capital costs: Approximately 250 extra places at Cyfarthfa High School estimated £5m plus). Possible additional transport costs. If Year 7 Cyfarthfa Lower School pupils are to be relocated from the Castle Building, a further extension for approximately 220 pupils will also be required (£4m plus). The proposal would not attract additional capital funding from the Welsh Assembly Government. Loss of £33 million ‘in principle’ funding.

General comments

The alternative does not address the Welsh Assembly Government’s requirements of expanding local opportunities for all and for providers to work together to create and increase much needed progression routes. It does not contribute to the narrowing of inequalities in achievement between advantaged and disadvantaged areas, groups and individuals in the interests of all. It requires substantial capital investment for which there is no obvious funding available. It is potentially divisive and may create different perceptions of the worth and value of our schools and Merthyr Tydfil College. A view is required as to the desirability of locating academic and vocational provision separately, predominantly in one secondary school and Merthyr Tydfil College respectively, and the perceived impact of the proposal on lifting overall levels of attainment and increasing participation and retention in learning and training. Regard should be had to the impact on the remaining secondary schools in the County Borough, including the one voluntary aided faith school. Alternative 3: Create two viable sixth forms, one in the north and one in the south of the County Borough.

This alternative envisages the retention of two viable sixth forms in the region of 200 -250 students each, one in the north and one in the south of the County Borough. The alternative takes account of the geography of the County Borough and the need for sixth forms to have more than the 150 students regarded by the Welsh Assembly Government as the minimum required to be viable. It does not deal adequately with the impact on Bishop Hedley Catholic High School which, as a voluntary aided school and in the absence of approval by Ministers, cannot be required to be involved. The location of our secondary schools means that the alternative requires the closure of sixth form in one of the two maintained schools in the north of the County Borough, namely either Cyfarthfa High School or Pen y Dre High School, and the retention of sixth form in Afon Taf High School, the only secondary school in the south of the County Borough. Provision in Bishop Hedley Catholic School would remain unchanged.

Outcomes

Existing and predicted post-16 students at each secondary school in Merthyr Tydfil, assuming closure of Pen y Dre sixth form

School 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019 2021 Afon Taf High 157 149 226 204 187 197 Bishop Hedley High 90 112 129 108 97 105 Cyfarthfa High 247 256 276 257 252 252 Pen y Dre High 142 129 0 0 0 0 Total 636 646 631 569 536 554

Existing and predicted post-16 students at each secondary school in Merthyr Tydfil, assuming closure of Cyfarthfa sixth form

School 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019 2021 Afon Taf High 157 149 269 246 236 238 Bishop Hedley High 90 112 129 108 97 105 Cyfarthfa High 247 256 0 0 0 0 Pen y Dre High 142 129 233 215 203 211 Total 636 646 631 569 536 554

Advantages

• Some benefits to staff morale in two of the three maintained schools. • Continuation of current arrangements for parents to make a choice between sixth form and college. • Meets requirements of those wishing to retain sixth forms. • Reduces by one the number of schools that learners may need to travel to in order to access their learner options (assumes the two maintained schools (and one voluntary aided school) cooperate to deliver the local curriculum). • Reduces the possibility of diverting resources from 11-16 to post-16. • More viable class sizes and better opportunities for beneficial peer interaction in the two maintained schools. • Increased opportunities in the two maintained schools to deploy specialist staff to best effect. Disadvantages

• Bishop Hedley Catholic School would not be catered for by the perceived alternative, resulting in two large sixth forms (200-250 students) and one with fewer than the 150 students deemed to be the minimum to be viable. Some diseconomies and limitation in the range and quality of post-16 provision would persist. • If Cyfarthfa High School’s sixth form is retained, there is virtually no change as the school already caters for 250 plus post-16 students. If Pen y Dre High School’s sixth form is retained and increased in size, pupils presently attending Cyfarthfa High School sixth form would be redirected to Pen y Dre High School or Afon Taf High School. Designation of catchment areas is problematic. Parental choice may negate impact of any new catchment areas. • Removal of opportunities for the exercise of parental preference for the maintained school losing its sixth forms may encounter opposition from parents and from the school itself. • There is a risk of creating differing perceptions of worth and value when 11-16 and 11-18 schools are juxtaposed. • Increased travel for some of the post-16 students relocated to one or other of the two maintained sixth forms. • No impact on the range and quality of post-16 provision overall or on standards for academically able students and the majority (approximately 60%) of young people in Merthyr Tydfil who do not attend sixth forms. • Does not contribute to increasing participation and staying on rates in Merthyr Tydfil. • Does not promote parity of esteem between vocational and academic provision. • The need to travel to Merthyr Tydfil College to study vocational options may dissuade some students from pursuing such options and may lead to them following courses that are not best suited to their needs and abilities. • Possible risk of intervention by Welsh Assembly Government.

Costs

Running costs: Some potential savings in teaching costs. Capital costs: Possible additional transport costs. May need to upgrade and improve specialist facilities, for example laboratories and provision for information technology, in at least one of the two maintained schools (Afon Taf). If Cyfarthfa sixth form is retained and if Lower School pupils are to be relocated from the Castle Building, a further extension for approximately 220 pupils will also be required (£4m plus). The proposal would not attract additional capital funding from the Welsh Assembly Government. Loss of £33 million ‘in principle’ funding.

General comments

The alternative contributes insubstantially to expanding local opportunities for all and to promoting further joined up work between providers to create and increase much needed progression routes. It is potentially divisive and may create different perceptions of the worth and value of 11-16 schools, 11-18 schools and Merthyr Tydfil College. Difficulties may be experienced in enforcing catchment areas and maintaining two sixth forms of similar size. A view is required as to the impact of the proposal on increasing participation and staying on rates in Merthyr Tydfil, its manageability and its capacity to promote parity of esteem between vocational and academic provision. Regard should be had to the continuing need for learner travel and the potential effect of this on learner choices and overall standards of achievement. The alternative is unlikely to attract additional capital funding. Alternative 4: Hub and spoke model

This alternative envisages the retention of sixth forms working in cooperation to deliver elements of an agreed local curriculum in association with an enhanced Merthyr Tydfil College. It is envisaged that the college would commission or contract with the schools to deliver particular learning options, mainly academic options, with all other learning options, primarily vocational options, being delivered by the college. Various permutations of subject options are possible, but all involve retention of the sixth forms as ‘spokes’ to Merthyr Tydfil College which acts as the ‘hub’ for delivering an agreed curriculum.

Outcomes

Existing and predicted post-16 students at each secondary school in Merthyr Tydfil

School 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019 2021 Afon Taf High 157 149 131 118 110 112 Bishop Hedley High 90 112 129 108 97 105 Cyfarthfa High 247 256 276 257 252 252 Pen y Dre High 142 129 95 86 77 85 Total 636 646 631 569 536 554

Advantages

• Some degree of continuity with present system. • Some benefits to staff morale. • Continuation of current arrangements for parental preference. • Meets requirements of those wishing to preserve sixth forms. • Opportunities for sixth forms to continue to identify with their local communities. • Opportunities to rationalise post-16 staffing and to better deploy specialist staff. • Coordinated arrangements for the delivery of a local curriculum. • Preserves faith based education for post-16 pupils attending the one Catholic High School in the County Borough.

Disadvantages

• Limitations of range and quality of post-16 provision in all schools and Merthyr Tydfil College. In order to access the learning options they wish to study, young people may be required to travel between schools or between schools and the college. The need for travel may dissuade young people from following the learning options best suited to their developing needs and abilities. • May be complex to organise and manage. • Quality assurance may be difficult to achieve. • Does not contribute directly to increasing participation and staying on rates in Merthyr Tydfil. • Does not contribute directly to improving provision for groups and people who are more likely to experience discrimination and have access to fewer opportunities. • Does not support the provision of a greater choice of learning options to students or make it easier for them to combine academic courses with vocational courses. • Does not readily promote parity of esteem between vocational and academic provision. • Does not provide a cost effective and efficient model for delivery. • Class sizes in some subjects could be small, limiting the opportunities for beneficial peer interaction. • Responds inadequately to the Welsh Assembly Government’s proposals for transforming education and training provision in Wales to make it fit for the 21 st Century. • No improvement in accommodation, equipment and technology for sixth formers. • Does not command the support of the Welsh Assembly Government. • Possible risk of intervention by the Welsh Assembly Government. Costs

Running costs: Some potential savings in teaching costs. Capital costs: Additional transport costs. The alternative would impact adversely on plans to accommodate all pupils from Cyfarthfa Lower School site on the Upper School site as it would necessitate additional new build for one year group. Estimated cost of additional new build is £4 million. The proposal would not attract additional capital funding from the Welsh Assembly Government. Loss of £33 million ‘in principle’ funding.

General comments

The alternative does not sufficiently expand local opportunities for all or promote further joined up working to create and increase much needed progression routes. It is potentially divisive and may create different perceptions of the worth and value of the four secondary schools and Merthyr Tydfil College. A view is required as to the desirability of locating post-16 academic and vocational provision separately in secondary schools and Merthyr Tydfil College. Regard should be had to the relative lack of efficiency and effectiveness of the proposal and to the lack of potential for it to attract additional capital investment to the County Borough. The challenge of ensuring effective management and governance is also relevant.

Alternative 5: Consortium

This alternative involves close cooperation between the four secondary schools and Merthyr Tydfil College to deliver the Welsh Assembly Government’s requirements for a post-16 local curriculum. Under these requirements, post-16 learners in each local authority in Wales are entitled to access a minimum of 30 learner choices, five of which should be vocational courses. Working together, the four secondary schools in Merthyr Tydfil and Merthyr Tydfil College have agreed a local curriculum that provides post-16 learners with a choice of 27 academic AS/A level courses and 6 vocational courses (33 courses total).

Outcomes

Existing and predicted post-16 students at each secondary school in Merthyr Tydfil

School 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019 2021 Afon Taf High 157 149 131 118 110 112 Bishop Hedley High 90 112 129 108 97 105 Cyfarthfa High 247 256 276 257 252 252 Pen y Dre High 142 129 95 86 77 85 Total 636 646 631 569 536 554

Advantages

• Some degree of continuity with present system. • Some benefits to staff morale. • Continuation of current arrangements for parental preference. • Exceeds minimum requirement for number of learner options. • Meets requirements of those wishing to preserve sixth forms. • Opportunities for sixth forms to continue to identify with their local communities. • Opportunities to rationalise post-16 staffing and to better deploy specialist staff. • Assists in removing inefficiencies in the use of resources and directing more of the funding available to teaching, learning and learner support. • Reduces the possibility of funding for 11-16 being diverted to subsidise post-16. • Coordinated arrangements for the delivery of a local curriculum. • Preserves faith based education for post-16 pupils attending the one Catholic High School in the County Borough.

Disadvantages

• Limitations of range and quality of post-16 provision in all schools and Merthyr Tydfil College. In order to access the learning options they wish to study, young people may be required to travel between schools or between schools and the college. The need for travel may dissuade young people from following the learning options best suited to their developing needs and abilities. • Does not contribute directly to increasing participation and staying on rates in Merthyr Tydfil. • Does not contribute directly to improving provision for groups and people who are more likely to experience discrimination and have access to fewer opportunities. Caters primarily for the minority of young people who gain five or more GCSE qualifications at grades A*-C, but not as well for the close to 60% who do not achieve this level of performance in Merthyr Tydfil. • Does not improve the opportunity for students to combine academic courses with vocational courses. • Does not improve parity of esteem between vocational and academic provision. • Does not provide as cost effective and as efficient a model for delivery as is possible. • Class sizes in some subjects could be small, limiting the opportunities for beneficial peer interaction. • No improvement in accommodation, equipment and technology for sixth formers.

Costs

Running costs: Some potential savings in teaching costs. Capital costs: Additional transport costs. The alternative would impact adversely on plans to accommodate all pupils from Cyfarthfa Lower School site on the Upper School site as it would necessitate additional new build for one year group. Estimated cost of additional new build is £4 million. Does not attract additional capital funding from the Welsh Assembly Government. Loss of £33 million ‘in principle’ funding.

General comments

The alternative exceeds the minimum requirements of the Welsh Assembly Government for a local curriculum. It builds on goodwill between the schools and Merthyr Tydfil College and represents a genuine desire to offer post-16 students a suitably broad and balanced range of learning opportunities. It assists in removing inefficiencies in the use of resources. It creates and increases much needed progression routes. It may, however, create different perceptions of the worth and value of our schools compared with Merthyr Tydfil College and of academic and vocational provision. A view is required as to the extent to which the curriculum has been broadened and enriched compared to the other options for change available, including the proposed MLQ, and the impact of this on increasing participation and retention rates. Regard should be had to the increased cost of transport since learners may be required to travel between different schools and the college to access the learning options they may wish to study. The need for travel may dissuade some learners from following the courses best suited to their needs and abilities. Regard should also be had to the lack of potential for the alternative to attract additional capital investment to the County Borough.

Alternative 6: Tertiary model, but with the one Catholic High School in the County Borough retaining its sixth form.

The governors of Bishop Hedley Catholic High School have prepared a detailed, proposed amendment to the suggested Merthyr Learning Quarter. The proposed alternative is aimed at preserving the faith based education available to all students attending Bishop Hedley Catholic High School, including sixth formers. All key stakeholders consider that the school serves as a Heads of the Valleys faith school. The catchment area covers the whole of Merthyr Tydfil. In addition, around 200 pupils attend from parts of Blaenau Gwent and Rhondda Cynon Taf, including …. in the sixth form. The school considers that its strategic position in serving the Heads of the Valleys communities underpins its moral purpose in serving the common good, the quality of partnership being recognised as an outstanding feature in a recent inspection of the school by Estyn, HM Inspectorate of Education and Training in Wales. It is further held that Bishop Hedley Catholic High School and the wider Catholic community, drawn substantially from successive waves of immigration to the Heads of the Valleys region, have an important role in nurturing cultural diversity and assisting in the process of integration.

Key stakeholders consider that the potential loss of sixth form would impact adversely on the viability of the school by making it less attractive to out-of-county pupils and parents. It is considered that this jeopardises Catholic education across the Heads of the Valleys. The maintenance of a faith education for post-16 pupils is held to be paramount and it is proposed that there should be special provision for this. Reference is made to post-16 learning and training in Neath Port Talbot where there is tertiary provision for the majority of post-16 students but where two secondary schools, a Catholic Secondary School and a Welsh Medium Secondary School, retain their sixth forms. The alternative proposal is to emulate this arrangement. It envisages that there would be links with the suggested tertiary/MLQ, but that Bishop Hedley Catholic School would retain its sixth form and deliver part of the local curriculum there. It is contended that Bishop Hedley Catholic High School, working in collaboration with the proposed MLQ, would be a beacon of excellence across the Heads of the Valleys achieving aspirational outcomes for all learners in Merthyr Tydfil and not at the expense of discrimination of those who legitimately seek a faith based education for their children.

Outcomes

Existing and predicted post-16 students at each secondary school in Merthyr Tydfil

School 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019 2021 Afon Taf High 157 149 0 0 0 0 Bishop HedleyHigh 90 112 129 108 97 105 Cyfarthfa High 247 256 0 0 0 0 Pen y Dre High 142 129 0 0 0 0 Total 636 646 129 108 97 105

Advantages

• Benefits to the morale of key stakeholders. • Continuation of current arrangements for parents opting for a faith based education for their children. • Meets requirements of those wishing to preserve the sixth form. • Some opportunities to rationalise post-16 staffing and to better deploy specialist staff, but principally in relation to the element of tertiary provision. • Avoids risk to the viability of the school.

Disadvantages

• Limitations of range of post-16 provision in Bishop Hedley Catholic High School. In order to access the learning options they wish to study, young people may be required to travel between their own school and the proposed tertiary college. The need for travel may dissuade young people from following the learning options best suited to their developing needs and abilities. • Potential disparity between provision for pupils in Bishop Hedley Catholic School sixth form and proposed tertiary provision, though access to the provision would be ensured through close working between the school and the tertiary college. • Potentially divisive and may encounter opposition from maintained schools or a request to be treated similarly i.e. retain all sixth forms. • May impact adversely on the efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed tertiary provision (e.g. reduced number of post-16 students impacts on viability of some courses). • May involve unnecessary duplication of provision. • Does not contribute directly to increasing participation and staying on rates in Merthyr Tydfil. • Does not contribute directly to improving provision for groups and people who are more likely to experience discrimination and have access to fewer opportunities. • Does not make it easier for students to combine academic courses with vocational courses. • Does not improve parity of esteem between vocational and academic provision. • Does not provide as cost effective and as efficient a model for delivery as is possible. • Class sizes in some subjects could be small for sixth formers, limiting the opportunities for beneficial peer interaction. • No improvement in accommodation, equipment and technology for sixth formers, other than by access to the facilities at the tertiary college.

Costs

Running costs: Some potential savings in teaching costs, primarily through the tertiary arrangement. Capital costs: Costs of transporting young people to/from the tertiary college. Possible loss of £33 million ‘in principle’ funding.

General comments

The alternative reflects the strong desire of key stakeholders to maintain faith based education for post-16 students. In evaluating the proposal, there is a need to reflect appropriately on this concern to preserve faith based education for post-16 students whilst also having regard to the importance of offering a broader and better balanced curriculum than is currently available to all the young people in Merthyr Tydfil. Consideration is required as to the impact of any decision on improving levels of performance and increasing participation and retention rates across the County Borough. Regard should be had to the cost of transport since learners may be required to travel between Bishop Hedley Catholic School and the proposed tertiary college to access the learning options they may wish to study. The need for travel may dissuade some learners from following the courses best suited to their needs and abilities. It is appropriate to consider the potential response of other schools and their governing bodies to the proposed alternative. It is also appropriate to have regard to any suggestions as to how the proposed tertiary college may make provision for different faiths so as to lessen the loss of faith based education post-16. Such faith provision should build on that already provided in Merthyr Tydfil College for the majority of young people in the authority who do not go into sixth forms, including pupils from Bishop Hedley Catholic School who leave the school aged 16 and transfer to the college to continue their education and training. Alternative 7: Full Welsh medium tertiary college

This alternative reflects the desire of Welsh medium primary schools in the County Borough to sustain full Welsh medium provision for students presently receiving their post-16 education at Ysgol Gyfun Rhydywaun. It has regard to draft proposals for bilingual tertiary provision announced recently in Rhondda Cynon Taf. The alternative is based on a concern that bilingual provision may not provide sufficient immersion in the Welsh language to facilitate fluency post- 16. Presently, 398 young people from Merthyr Tydfil, including 87post-16 students, attend Ysgol Gyfun Rhydywaun.

Advantages

• Continuation of post-16 linguistic provision for parents opting for a Welsh medium education for their children. • Some opportunities to rationalise post-16 staffing and to better deploy specialist staff, but requires all staff to be fully bilingual. • Potential to remove inefficiencies in the use of resources and direct more of the funding available to teaching, learning and learner support. • Reduces the possibility of funding for 11-16 being diverted to subsidise post-16. • Coordinated arrangements for the delivery of a local curriculum through the medium of Welsh.

Disadvantages

• There is no evidence that there is sufficient demand for a full Welsh medium tertiary college presently. The number of pupils able to benefit is insufficient to warrant the change required. • Difficulty of devising an adequate business case, which militates against prospect of attracting additional funding. • The inability of a full Welsh medium tertiary college to cater for the learning and training needs of English-only students in Merthyr Tydfil would exacerbate the post-16 knowledge/skills deficit in Merthyr Tydfil.

Costs

Running costs: Some potential savings in teaching costs, primarily through the tertiary arrangement. Capital costs: Potential additional costs of transporting young people to/from the Welsh medium tertiary college. Hidden costs associated with inability to cater appropriately for the majority of post-16 young people in Merthyr Tydfil e.g. cost of unemployment, social care, depleted knowledge and skills base. Possible loss of £33 million ‘in principle’ funding.