1. Introduction

The Code of Professional Conduct and Practice (‘the Code’) is a key document. It makes clear to EWC registrants the principal standards of good conduct and professional practice each is expected to uphold in order to remain registered. It also allows learners and young people, and all those involved in their education and training in Wales, particularly parents/guardians, to know what they should expect from registrants.

The EWC is legally required by the Act to publish a code which sets out the standards of professional conduct and practice expected of persons registered. The Act also requires the EWC to review and revise the Code within three years of its publication, or, whenever a new registration category is added. The current version of the Code was last reviewed in May 2024 following the introduction of new categories to the Register of Education Practitioners.

The Education Workforce Council (Main Functions) (Wales) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations) require the Code to contain a minimum provision dealing with the following matters:

• basing relationships between learners and registered persons on mutual trust and respect
• having regard to the safety and well-being of learners
• working in a collaborative manner with colleagues and other professionals
• developing and maintaining good relationships with parents, guardians and carers
• acting with honesty and integrity
• being sensitive to the need for confidentiality, where appropriate
• taking responsibility for maintaining the quality of professional practice
• upholding public trust and confidence in the education workforce

The Regulations also require an EWC investigating or fitness to practise committee to take into account any failure by a registrant to comply with the Code in any of the disciplinary proceedings against that person.

In drafting the revised Code, the EWC has:

1. taken account of the 13 workforce groups which the EWC is now required to register and regulate to ensure the Code is relevant to, reflective of and accessible to all
2. reviewed the codes of other regulators, throughout the world and across a range of professions
3. considered themes emerging from fitness to practise casework to inform areas of the Code which may need strengthening

The consultation period on the draft revised Code ran between 17 February and 28 March 2025.

2. The consultation process

Public consultation

The consultation was launched on 17 February 2025, with a link to the consultation documents available from the EWC website. Responses could be submitted directly from the website or by email. All stakeholders were emailed to announce the launch of the consultation and provided with a link to the consultation page.

Marketing

The EWC undertook a number of activities to raise awareness of the consultation on the Code which included communication to registrants, employers, unions, and other stakeholders using email, social media, partner publications, the EWC’s website, EWC registrant newsletter, trade press, and virtual drop-in sessions.

3. Consultation responses – organisations and individuals

A total of 19 responses were received. One respondent did not use the standard questionnaire choosing to provide personalised responses instead.

Of the 19 direct submissions, responses were received from the following:

• 9 x registrants
• Bridgend College
• Estyn
• Flintshire County Council
• Grŵp Llandrillo Menai
• General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS)
• National Education Union Cymru (NEU)
• NASUWT Cymru
• Social Care Wales
• UCAC
• UNISON Cymru

Summary of responses

Question 1: Is the purpose, scope and status of the revised Code clear and in line with Welsh Government legislation (as set out in the consultation document)?

The majority of respondents (88.8%) considered the purpose, scope and status of the revised Code to be clear and in line with Welsh Government legislation.

Question 2(a): Are the key principles (personal responsibility, knowledge, integrity and working collaboratively) appropriate, relevant to and reflective of all registrant groups?

The majority of respondents (83.2%) considered the key principles to be appropriate, relevant to, and reflective of all registrant groups.

Question 2(b): Do you agree that introducing a new key principle about leadership is appropriate and relevant?

The majority of respondents (61.2%) considered the key principle to be appropriate and relevant. A number of comments and suggestions were made regarding the introduction of this key principle. For example, some commented on the importance of effective leadership in improving services and the well-being of practitioners, and noted that these standards are rightly more exacting and specific for professionals whose scope and responsibility (and thereby impact on educational providers and systems) is broader.

Other comments mention it is not only the role of those with formal leadership and management responsibilities to promote and encourage a positive workplace culture, and that registrants should not be discouraged from aspiring to embody the Code, lead by example, and promote and encourage a positive organisational culture of respect, integrity, accountability, and professionalism.

Some respondents suggested it should be made clear which specific groups of leaders and managers this principle is aimed at, and those which are presumably excluded, for example, HLTAs/junior managers.

Question 3(a): Are the expectations under each key principle (personal responsibility, knowledge, integrity and working collaboratively) appropriate, relevant to and reflective of all registrant groups?

The majority of respondents (77.7%) considered the expectations under each key principle were appropriate, relevant to and reflective of all registrant groups. A number of comments and suggestions were made to improve the expectations:

Some respondents were concerned about the reference to ‘personal’ as well as professional responsibility, in that ‘personal’ has the potential to impact on the right to a private life.

In addition, reference to ‘learners and young people’ might be amended to ‘learners and young people for whom they are professionally responsible’, or similar, or the expectations have the effect of extending the responsibilities of registrants beyond that which is reasonable - wider public responsibilities are adequately captured in the other principles and descriptors.

Other respondents queried whether or not further refinement should be made to the expectation to be unimpaired by alcohol or other substances, and queried whether or not the expansion of other expectations – such as those relating to finances and examinations – was necessary.

Some respondents queried whether or not specific words such as ‘ethically’, ‘inclusivity’, ‘responsive’, ‘in work’, ‘public figure’ are clear, and/or necessary, and/or create additional burdens for registrants.

Question 3(b): Do you agree that the expectations for leaders and those with management responsibilities is appropriate and relevant?

The majority of respondents (66.7%) considered the expectations in this key principle to be appropriate and relevant. A number of comments and suggestions were made regarding the expectations set out under this key principle.

Some respondents considered the expectations on leaders and those with management responsibilities should be expanded further to include the responsibility for the health, safety and wellbeing of staff, or supporting the well-being of the workforce.

Other respondents commented that the expectations set out specifically under this new principle should apply to registrants in general.

Question 4: Does the Code offer reassurance to learners, parents, guardians and the general public about the conduct and practice of the education workforce?

The majority of respondents (66.7%) were of the view that the Code did offer reassurance to learners, parents, guardians and the general public about the conduct and practice of the education workforce.

Question 5: We would like to know your views on the effects the draft Code of Professional Conduct and Practice for registrants with the Education Workforce Council would have on the Welsh language, specifically on:
(a) opportunities for people to use the Welsh language; and
(b) treating the Welsh language no less favourably than the English language

The question provided for a ‘free-text’ response and the main comments related to an acknowledgement that the EWC should continue to be committed to providing a bi-lingual service.

Question 6: Do you have any other comments?

A range of other comments were received from respondents in relation to, for example, school support workers, the EWC’s Good Practice Guides, the design and graphics of the Code, and suggestions as to how to expand the Code further.

4. Next steps

The EWC would like to thank those who responded to this consultation. Feedback will be reviewed when finalising the Code update.

The new version of Code will thereafter be published in September 2025.