Chamber and committees

The PEF sampling work has been pivotal in looking at clear-cut examples of where PEF has made a difference. I am sure that the member will be aware of examples from her constituency. Every headteacher whom I meet at the events that we host and at school visits is asking me not to take PEF or Scottish attainment challenge funding away.

If members remember, the funding stream was always meant to be a 10-year funding stream. I have discussed that with the committee and given it and Parliament an assurance that the funding will continue to 2026-27, which is as far as any Government can go. I suspect that there is probably cross-party consensus that it is important that the SAC funding is maintained and that there is a PEF budget line within that.

I have said at the headteacher events that I have been to that I am struck by the normalisation of poverty in our schools, and the existence of food banks and clothing banks. The reality in our schools is that PEF is being used to meet needs that it did not have to meet 10 years ago. That means that the funding is being used in lots of creatively different ways to impact on our schools. For example, a primary school in Kirkcaldy that I visited recently was using it to fund a parents’ group. On the face of it, that might not be considered to be an educational intervention, but it is about getting mums involved in their children’s education and, in so doing, helping to improve attendance and attainment.

There is a link between allowing our headteachers the autonomy to use that extra funding for best use and the requirement of the Government to reflect on the impact of PEF. We have done that through the PEF sampling report, which tells us a positive story about the detailed impact that it has had.

We also need to ask, what more? Schools are responding to a need that they might not have had to meet in the past, so we are required to reflect on how we resource our schools post-pandemic. I have been keen to discuss that point with headteachers at the national events.

I am not aware of the specific together to thrive programme, but I would be more than happy to engage in a visit with the member, perhaps during Parliament’s summer recess, after schools have gone back, to learn more about how that works.

On the substantive point about engagement with parents, no behaviour improvement plan will work without buy-in and support from parents. We have consistently seen that in relation to the way in which teachers have taken forward mobile phone bans. That will not work if you do not get the buy-in of mums, dads, parents and carers—you have to get that buy-in from home. When I launched mobile phone guidance back in August, I spoke to the head teacher at Stonelaw high school about the work that she had undertaken with the kids and with the school community, parents and carers to mine their own data so that they could look at how much time they were spending online and on screen. She got the buy-in of her whole school community by doing that, which took time but was the right approach for her school.

The same approach should apply in relation to behaviour. Many parents and carers are struggling after the pandemic and they turn to the school because that is often the service that is open. School is a constant in a young person’s life, but it is also a constant for many of our parents and carers who are unable to obtain support elsewhere. I was in a school in Dundee last summer and learned about approaches that they are using, through PEF, to support income maximisation officers who can support families with the cost of bills. We would not have countenanced using SAC funds for those things 10 years ago, but that funding is undoubtedly now being used to meet a wide range of family needs. That helps to close the poverty-related attainment gap, but we must be mindful not only of how support goes out to parents but of how it comes back to the school.

As I said, I would be happy to go on a visit with Mr FitzPatrick in the near future.

I could take further advice from my officials on that. I have no objection to sharing that detail with the committee, and I could provide that in written form following today’s session.

I believe that Ms Duncan-Glancy and I are going to engage in trading statistics this morning, so, if I may, I will consult my notes.

The proportion of pupils who achieve the expected level in literacy and numeracy across primary and secondary schools reached its highest level ever in 2023-24. The poverty-related attainment gap between young people from the most and the least deprived areas who are meeting literacy standards has reached record low levels. The gap between secondary pupils from those areas who achieve third level in both literacy and numeracy has reached record lows, too. Therefore, I do not accept all the challenges that Ms Duncan-Glancy has put to me in that regard.

Ms Duncan-Glancy also mentioned issues in relation to positive destinations. The proportion of pupils who have gone on to a positive destination three months after leaving school is 95.7 per cent, which is the second highest since records began.

We can engage in trading statistics if Ms Duncan-Glancy wishes to. However, I intend to engage in the substantials in relation to my responsibilities. I do not accept all the challenges that she has set out, because we are seeing improvement in our schools on the narrowing of that gap. For example, the achievement of curriculum for excellence levels—ACEL—data tells us a much more positive story. The examinations data shows a trajectory of improvement since the pandemic. In addition, as I said, we have the second-highest level on record in relation to positive destinations.

I am not clear whether Ms Duncan-Glancy and I will agree on the statistics that we have traded, but I am happy to take any questions that she might have.

I know where the data is taken from—it is Scottish Government data.

I think that Mr Greer has raised an important point: the information should be published in a far more timely way than it currently is. I am advised that it is to do with our having to disaggregate all the information and to go back to local authorities, which takes time. We also get evidence from community services and from schools, and we need to bring all that together. However, we should be able to do it more quickly, and I will take the matter away and speak to officials about how we might do that.

The member has also made an important point in relation to the gender divide and the fact that our boys are not accessing counselling services in the same way that our girls are. I think that that speaks to changes in society more broadly; we have talked briefly about misogyny and toxic masculinity. I am worried about a generation of young boys growing up in an Andrew Tate society and we need to consider what more we can do to support them, whether that be through Government approaches such as the gender-based violence framework or through role models in schools. We have some fantastic male teachers in our secondary schools, and it is important that our young boys have role models in their lives to whom they can relate. When we talk about these kinds of gender splits, it is important that we reflect on that data.

I will take away both points—that is, on gender and on more timely publication of the data. Perhaps I can reassure the member if I tell him that the data set, I am told, will be published in the coming weeks.

That takes me back to the point that I made previously, which is that we need to reduce class contact time. We do so by providing funding through the budget. If other parties can get behind it, we can deliver on that goal by putting in the extra teachers who are needed to allow us to reduce class contact and to create the time for teachers to engage in relation to ASN.

Roles and responsibilities are important here. Mr Rennie knows that local authorities are the employers. What we have done through the budget agreement, which was made in good faith—

I understand that the child poverty group will meet next Monday, but I am more than happy to write to the committee to discuss those issues in the round. I know that there are significant issues in relation to temporary housing, and I very much support the member’s point on the consistency of educational provision, particularly when a child has had disruption in their private life.

I support the member’s point, but I will come back to him on the substantives in relation to my engagement with the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice.

Absolutely.