Attainment Scotland Fund evaluation: case study research 2025

Research findings – embeddedness, culture and ethos

Embeddedness of approaches

Understanding of challenges faced by children and young people affected by poverty

Respondents at all of the case study schools felt they had a good understanding of the issues faced by pupils affected by poverty. Respondents at several schools, particularly those in the most deprived areas, were very used to seeing these types of challenges and said it was the norm for them.

“That’s just the hand that we’ve been dealt within this school, so that just becomes your bread and butter really.” (Primary headteacher, Accessible small town, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

“I think the senior leadership team in here really do get it, and it is disseminated out to all their staff… Everybody understands what we’re trying to achieve. Everybody understands that we need breakfast in here. Everybody understands that weans need shoes and clothing and uniform to feel part of it.” (Secondary parent, Other urban, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

Even in the most deprived schools where a large proportion of pupils were affected, a systematic approach was generally used to identify those in the most need of support and referral processes set up so that pupils could access help (e.g. staff could complete a form if they noticed a pupil who may need help and these were reviewed by the relevant team for action, such as specific interventions or access to resources/equipment).

Those working in less deprived areas also generally had a good understanding, in some instances due to initiatives such as cost of the school day training, nurture training, and other information sharing such as presentations by headteachers etc.

“We always do, one of our in-service purely on, kind of, the health and wellbeing issue, and some of the challenges that our young people face, one of which is the financial barriers… So, our staff are very aware of the SIMD profile of the school, they're very aware of some of the challenges that poverty can have on young people.” (Secondary headteacher, Other urban, 25-49% SIMD 1&2)

Staff across all case study schools commonly noted that they all play a role in taking an interest in pupils and noticing if they need help, to ensure any financial barriers are addressed – it was understood to be a responsibility of all staff. Respondents in the smallest schools also noted that they know their pupils extremely well because their classes are so small, so they are very aware of the sorts of challenges pupils are facing.

“A lot of teachers will come to me directly if they notice… ‘I've just seen them walking to school, it's lashing rain, they don't have a jacket, can you source a jacket’.” (Secondary teacher, Other urban, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

Only one case study school suggested that awareness could possibly be improved among staff. This was a school with a relatively low proportion of pupils living in SIMD quintiles 1 and 2, and senior leaders noted that there were sometimes instances where they had to remind staff about the financial barriers faced by some pupils.

“I think everyone would be on board, and understands the context… But I do think sometimes the wider understanding about, you know, ‘yeah, great, let's have a trip’, but you still need to think about the cost implications… It might only cost £17 to do the wildlife trip, or whatever, but that’s still £17. So, I think people would say they understand it… [but] I just think it's sometimes, if you're in a situation where you can afford these things, you need to think about the people that [can’t].” (Secondary senior leader, Remote small town, <25% SIMD 1&2)

Role of the ASF in helping improve awareness

Most respondents said that their awareness of the issues around poverty was developed independently of ASF activities, and was part of what schools would have been undertaking anyway. However, some did note that ASF-funded training and PEF-funded roles had led to improvements in understanding in this area.

For example, staff training on aspects such as visible learning has helped staff understand how children learn and the factors that might be impacting challenges associated with learning; training on nurture principles included consideration of readiness to learn, the impact of trauma and factors that affect this; sessions have been run as part of ASF approaches on things like the cost of the school day – all resulting in staff having a better understanding of ‘who’s sitting in front of them’. The use of PEF funding for specific posts and initiatives has also meant that staff are more focused on interventions to support children and young people affected by poverty than they might otherwise have been.

Respondents at a minority of the case study schools noted that some staff had needed persuading about the benefit of certain initiatives: for example, taking pupils out of class to attend partner-delivered activities, or taking support staff out of the classroom to deliver specific interventions. However, they said that evidence of successful PEF-funded initiatives has led to increased staff buy-in and engagement with these issues over time.

“[Depute] was saying, look, these are the things that these guys are working on… If you're [taking a pupil out of class for a specific activity]… it's because they're trying to get their wellbeing in a place that you can then teach them.” (Secondary partner organisation, Large urban, 75%+ SIMD 1&2).

“Once they see initiatives take place… or see the data that comes out of those initiatives… Definitely the staff buy-in is increasing year on year, because they're seeing the value, they're seeing the benefit.” (Secondary teacher, Other urban, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

Embeddedness of approaches

There was evidence of approaches being embedded throughout the majority of the case study schools, and agreement about this from a wide range of staff working in different roles who took part in the research: feedback from support staff as well as senior leaders suggested that most schools were definitely applying a whole-school approach to supporting pupils affected by poverty.

“I mean, definitely top-down stuff makes a difference. But you know, the teachers and the [pupil support workers] in here are speaking exactly the same stuff. It’s not like there’s a fragmented approach to this.” (Primary partner organisation, Large urban, 75%+ SIMD 1&2)

Specific examples were given of learning and teaching approaches being embedded, particularly where the ASF had funded roles with a remit to focus on specific aspects such as literacy attainment. This was most often the case where PEF-funded staff had shared training/approaches with other staff or supported delivery themselves. For example, learning assistants at one school had received training to deliver a numeracy intervention and then shared this learning with other staff; a Principal Teacher with a remit for literacy noted that part of her role was ensuring that reading was taught at a consistently high level throughout the school:

“To embed the school’s approach to literacy, I went into classes, kind of, as a support role to see what is happening in the classes, and looked to see what are our, what areas do we need to look at. What areas do we need to have [Career-Long Professional Learning] sessions on… to raise the bar on it [across the school]. Then went into classes to do some coaching and modelling. Then again, going in to support and just to see… just to make sure that it is getting used in all classes.” (Primary teacher, Other urban, 75%+ SIMD 1&2)

This also involved having policies that were implemented across the school:

“Throughout the week every class should have experience of reciprocal and dialogic reading, it is not a solitary activity reading, it is more we are doing it together… I know that by learning walks, by going into classes, by supporting in classes, I see it happening.” (Primary teacher, Other urban, 75%+ SIMD 1&2)

Another teacher noted that they had developed resources and provided training to embed skills across the school:

“I have provided a lot of [Career-Long Professional Learning]: how do you use [literacy programme] in your classroom? How do you recognise the signs of dyslexia?... If I’m telling you a young person’s got a reading age of 8 years 6 months, what does that actually mean?… So it’s really offering staff all that advice as well.” (Secondary teacher, Large urban, 75%+ SIMD 1&2)

Schools also noted specific examples of learning and teaching approaches being embedded, e.g. interventions such as Common Words and SEAL (see earlier on how ASF funding has been used) being used consistently across the school.

Other aspects of support were said to be embedded, as well as learning and teaching approaches. This included a focus on addressing financial barriers, while reducing stigma/ensuring dignity – some felt that this kind of approach was more embedded than learning and teaching approaches, since it was necessary to put this support in place first:

“I think probably historically it has been more direct support, but I don’t know maybe so much about learning and teaching approaches. I think there has been a bit of a shift change when we are thinking about these children coming from these more disadvantaged backgrounds. Historically that brings a lot of poor attendance and late coming. As a school we have adjusted our whole start to the day in terms of expectations of what time registers are done… A lot of classes we all do a soft start in the morning. So it is not straight into the learning and teaching to allow for those children that are going to trickle in at maybe quarter past, half past nine. Not really a teaching approach, but a different set up to our day.” (Primary teacher, Accessible small town, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

Whole-school approaches focusing on nurture were also mentioned as being embedded throughout schools – i.e. all school staff being aware of the nurture needs of children and young people throughout the school, and how to support them.

“In terms of looking at the whole school nurture approach, it's my responsibility to ensure that all the CPD learning that takes place is then embedded within departmental practice. So, I think, kind of, restorative conversations, keeping that calm learning environment. It's kind of, my responsibility to ensure that, that is maintained as much as possible.” (Secondary teacher, Other urban, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

Staff in PEF-funded roles, or those leading interventions, also noted that a lot of their approaches require buy-in from other staff in the school and they would not be successful without the input of others.

“A lot of my stuff relies on the expertise and knowledge of staff to help and support targeted pupils. And I genuinely think that, if staff didn’t buy in the way that they do at this school, I don't know how successful some of the interventions would be… And there is great buy-in, I think there's a real, kind of, community feeling here, where everybody is trying to adapt to pupils.” (Secondary teacher, Other urban, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

There was only one case study school where ASF approaches did not seem to be embedded: a secondary school in a more affluent area, where most referrals to the pupil support team came via Guidance staff who monitor attendance – so the approach was relatively siloed rather than affecting approaches across the whole school.

Culture and ethos

When asked about the culture and ethos of their schools in supporting pupils affected by poverty, respondents most often mentioned a focus on inclusivity, nurture and support for health and wellbeing.

“Our school values are supportive, honesty, inclusion, nurturing and equity, and I would say that that runs through everything that we do within the school. And our children have a real understanding around equity as well. That it’s not about everybody getting the same. It’s about everybody getting what they need to be successful.” (Primary headteacher, Large urban, 75%+ SIMD 1&2)

Whole-school approaches to nurture were also highlighted as a key part of the ethos at several schools and nurture training had helped staff to understand that children face different challenges and have different needs etc. Ensuring school was a ‘safe space’ for pupils was emphasised, as the first step to them wanting to come to school, and then engage with learning.

“They need to know when they come in here the relationships are strong. I am here and I am safe, and I know I am going to be safe here no matter what I am doing. It is unconditional basically.” (Secondary senior leader, Other urban, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

Being aware of the challenges facing pupils from the most deprived areas was also highlighted by several respondents as part of their school’s supportive culture, particularly those working in areas where poverty was more prevalent.

“I think that’s a real strength of the school… The support for the pupils is ongoing, a real understanding of who they are and what they’re coming from and why… We’ve got a lot of really good resources available to us about our pupils and their needs and what works for them and we talk to each other if something’s not working, I think that’s something as a school we do really well. It’s a very nurturing school.” (Secondary teacher, Large urban, 75%+ SIMD 1&2)

Ensuring there is no stigma in seeking support was a key part of the culture and ethos for most – including not making it obvious when support is provided, and ensuring nobody feels judged if they ask for help. For much PEF-funded support, pupils were not aware they were being targeted on the basis of deprivation/need.

“It is just a really positive ethos within the school. The children are supportive of each other, there is not that stigma attached to those that have and those that have not. I think it is very much an ethos of just the [school] family. There is no unkindness towards people who don’t have that.” (Primary teacher, Accessible small town, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

Pupil feedback also supports this – for example, pupils at one secondary school were very aware of the financial support available to all pupils, and knew that anyone could ask for help confidentially:

“Our year group recently went to London and the teachers just said if you couldn’t afford it, it wasn't that much of an issue, like it would be sorted. And you could just go to them and just say, say you're having troubles with it and it would again be completely confidential, and it would get sorted out.” (Secondary pupil, Other urban, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

Leadership was highlighted as being key to schools’ culture – respondents often emphasised the high level of care and commitment to the local area and the community that school leadership had.

“What I would say about [this school] specifically is that it knows the community that it is part of and [headteacher] is an advocate for all the children and families within this community. She knows the community well… [and] has made school somewhere where they can go to for help if they need it. [She] will access all of her supports to try and prevent things from getting worse for families.” (Primary partner organisation, Large urban, 75%+ SIMD 1&2)

Staff teams working collaboratively was also commonly reported, with respondents noting that staff at all levels are involved in the same mission to support those who need it. People often noted that staff went ‘above and beyond’ to support pupils (including personally contributing snacks/resources etc.), reflecting their care and commitment to improving outcomes for children. Feedback from varied staff roles also supports this finding.

“It is very much a team effort at the school. I think in all the initiatives that we have tried to do that has been a focus, we are keen to exploit and explore leadership at all levels in the school. So, it very much is from ourselves and senior leadership down to the rest of the staff, but from the ground up as well.” (Secondary headteacher, Other urban, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

A final key element noted in terms of culture and ethos related to celebrating all types of achievement and raising aspiration among pupils. This was noted as being important in encouraging pupils on to positive destinations, whether that was academic or not.

“Everything in the school is organised around equality. So we celebrate as much the people with the SCQF^[21] barista as we do with the person with the Advanced Higher in Physics, right through award ceremonies, through our commendations, etc. It’s equal footing. So whatever you’re doing, they feel uplifted.” (Secondary headteacher, Other urban, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)

It is difficult to attribute any specific aspects of culture and ethos within schools directly to the ASF. Given the types of issues they deal with, particularly in the most deprived areas, staff felt they were likely to be operating within a similar cultural framework and supportive ethos regardless of the funding received. However, some did feel that the initiatives introduced via PEF funding had some wider impacts on school culture in terms of ensuring all staff had a good understanding of how to support pupils – and in one case also feeding through to how pupils support each other:

“A wee girl came up to me yesterday and said, ‘I've got loads of stationery at home, and it's really nice, but I don't use it, could you use that for your [resource hub]?’… They can see that… maybe they need to take at times, but they can also give as well. And I think, then by the time they get to fifth and sixth year, a lot of them are willing to be like, ‘I'll step up and help the other ones as well’. So, I think, that kind of impact, which I think is more challenging to measure, as well, but it's definitely there.” (Secondary teacher, Other urban, 50-74% SIMD 1&2)