There must be better things to do on a wet Thursday afternoon than sitting in front of the computer watching the webcast of the latest meeting of PCC’s schools and learning overview and scrutiny committee.
My reason for putting myself through this slow torture was that the committee was considering a report on “Outcomes and standards 2016” which contained a multitude of graphs comparing PCC’s performance with other Welsh authorities.
Let’s be charitable and just say that, on the evidence of these graphs and tables, PCC’s performance was somewhere short of stellar.
Indeed, one had to scroll through page after page of graphs to find an example where the results in 2016 didn’t fall below those of previous years.
However, to be fair to the council I should point out that, from a statistical viewpoint, many of these graphs lack even a shred of credibility.
George Orwell described political language as an attempt to “give an appearance of solidity to pure wind” and the purpose of all this pretend maths is to persuade members of the scrutiny committee that they are involved in a meaningful scientific analysis of pupil achievement.
Take for instance “Core subject indicator” which attempts to give meaning to the following set of numbers.
……………………..,…….2015……Position …….2016 ………Position
Wales average………..83.9% ……………………85.9%
Pembrokeshire……….84.5%……9th…………..85.4%………15th
A fall from 9th to 15th might seem significant, but it is statistically meaningless because the year on year changes are so small as to be well within the error bars of the measurements.
This is especially so given that the integrity of the data is open to serious question (see below).
Then there is the graph for “looked after children” (LAC) reaching “level 5+” in English
The figures over the past six years are 2011 (29%) 2012 (50%) 2013 (55%) 2014 (47%) 2015 (60%) and 2016 (29%).
This appears to show a dramatic rise and fall, but when you look a bit closer you find that, for 2016, this involves just 6 pupils – a number so small as to render the whole exercise statistically meaningless.
If the scrutiny committee wants to do something really useful, it might consider whether the resources devoted to producing all these worthless graphs might be better spent on driving up teaching standards.
However, while it is easy to pick holes in individual graphs, the trend is so uniformly negative across the board that it seems to indicate that something is amiss.
I waited eagerly to hear what the recently-appointed Cabinet member Cllr David Lloyd had to say about all this.
After giving the committee an update on the new school building programme, which had nothing whatsoever to do with the matter at hand, Cllr Lloyd fired of a burst of the flowery waffle that has become his trademark.
There was some stuff about “interdisciplinary working focussed on driving up standards” which was having a “very clear impact” and just to be sure that we got the message there was “partnership working” that was “having a massive impact”.
All this made him “incredibly optimistic” and gave him “great pride in what this department is doing”.
Indeed so well was the education department performing that it was “sector-leading”.
The director of education Kate Evans-Hughes wasn’t a lot better.
From what I could make out, this apparent drop-off in performance was something to do with “teacher assessment” (TA).
This, I believe, refers to the assessment by the teachers of how well the children are doing.
According to the director, while PCC’s TAs are robust, in that there is “strong alignment” with national monitoring, “There are other authorities where the gap is quite wide between those tests and TAs which you could interpret as over-generous TAs”.
Which roughly translated means that teachers in other authorities massage the figures to make themselves look better.
All of which supports what I said above, because, if the original data is flawed, there is no point in spending time and money on converting it into fancy graphs and tables.
It fell to former Leader Cllr John Davies to inject a bit of realism into the proceedings by pointing out that, in terms of free school meals, Pembrokeshire was seventh in Wales compared to 16th at foundation stage.
“It’s not really a great place to be” he said.
Cllr Davies was particularly concerned about GCSE results which do not depend on teacher assessment.
He pointed to Pembroke School where, in 2016, only 47% of pupils obtained 5 A-C (inc English/Welsh and Maths) compared to 52% the previous year and a Welsh average of 60.3%.
“I don’t want to be negative, but I’m trying to be honest”, he added.
The idea that facing up to the truth might be seen as negative neatly sums up the culture that has got Pembrokeshire where it is.
However he was told by Kate Evans-Hughes that, because of the number of pupils in receipt of free school meals, Pembroke wasn’t expected to achieve the Welsh average.
That sounds like a counsel of despair to me.
Surely the whole point of having a publicly-funded education system is to minimise the gap between the underprivileged and the better off.
To his credit, Cllr Davies didn’t attempt to downplay his failings as leader from 2004 – 2012 – a period that included the summer of 2011 when the council was hit with the two highly critical inspection reports that prompted the Welsh Government to place the authority’s education service in special measures overseen by a Ministerial Board.
“When I left in 2012, we were not in a good place” he admitted.
“I was hoping that with a change of leadership and personnel that we would have moved on – I don’t think we have. Sorry to say that but I’m just going from the data in front of me.”
Cllr Sue Perkins – Cllr Lloyd’s predecessor as Cabinet member for education – told the committee: “I don’t want to go on about the past” before proceeding to do nothing else.
“I have to say that when Ken [Rowlands] took over, and when I took over, the education department was in a very difficult position.”
“Nothing was in place – we had to start from the beginning” she continued.
“It wasn’t a pleasant place when we took over. We have to put our hands up and admit it – we did come from a difficult position.”
This shambles, you will remember, occurred during Cllr Huw George’s reign over the education department, yet when I put down a motion of no confidence in the cabinet member the whole of the establishment rallied to his support.
Twenty odd mainly primary heads circulated letters to members telling us what a wonderful job the Rev George was doing.
One particularly memorable testimonial said he “couldn’t be faltered” and at the meeting where the no confidence motion was debated Jamie Adams praised him to the heavens and he survived by a large margin.
However, having repeatedly emphasised what a desperate situation she and Ken Rowlands had inherited, Cllr Perkins assured the committee: “We will see an improvement, but it won’t come overnight”.
Hard to believe that those two critical inspection reports are coming up to their sixth birthday, or that the IPPG, of which Ken Rowlands and Sue Perkins are both members , has been in control of the county’s education system since 1996.
The last word went to Cllr Lloyd: “The unswerving focus and unblinking eye that this committee brings to standards – to say that I welcome it hardly touches it – I’m inspired by it.”
I’m afraid this sort of windy rhetoric is no substitute for action.