Shaping the Future: Strengthening Scotland's education system through empowered schools

4. Introduction

As we review 'the way we do things' in Scottish education, our starting point should be to form a refreshed overarching vision, then build the systems, structures and mechanisms that lead to outcomes in line with that vision. It stands to reason that commitment to resource must match our aspiration, and arrangements ensure that the interconnectedness of all parts is coherent, optimising effectiveness and efficiency. At all times every part of the system should remember the reason behind every decision and action: our children and young people.

The refreshed vision that this report calls for should reflect proudly on what we have achieved, then build on existing strengths and on the bedrock of Scotland’s values. It should be infused with the voice of learners^[3] and of those on whom we depend to deliver on the frontline. The leadership of this re-visioning would be a key role for an Executive Director of our education system. The clearer the vision, and the better matched it is to resources, the more likely it is to be turned into daily reality.

Microcosms of our national culture exist within our schools and in our collaborative learning communities. Partnerships across school communities enable school leaders and teachers to transfer culture, develop professional capacity and increase motivation. Working directly with their cluster schools and neighbourhoods deepens leaders' ability to respond to their own learners' needs and aspirations and guides the development of bespoke school curricula and pedagogical approaches through iterative improvements. Wider geographical professional learning networks enable the sharing of effective practice at scale and increase individual and system capacity for improvement. It would be of benefit to practitioners and learners alike for those collaborative networks to be designed, brokered and supported as fully integrated components of our wider education structures.

Professional collaborative networks that arise from priorities identified by leaders and practitioners should similarly be supported and resourced. For this to happen, school leaders must be afforded enough headroom to strategise effectively, leading to proactive improvement planning that is backed by matched flexibility and resourcing. High-quality education is an investment in both the present and the future, sowing the seeds for stronger local and national economies.

Active participation in our national education community reinforces school leaders’ sense of shared purpose. To further improve their effectiveness school leaders would welcome a clearer, more coherent, less ‘noisy’, policy landscape. This is within our grasp.

Regrettably it is the view of many contributors to this report that our current system inadvertently misdirects attention. Our system should concentrate, not dissipate, the energies of contributors. We must henceforth ensure that the whole of Scottish education becomes greater than the sum of its parts. Achieving this will depend on our overarching vision being adopted beyond geographical and political boundaries and on all stakeholders assuming ownership of their responsibilities to turn that vision into reality.

The range of engagements undertaken to inform this report has been wide and varied. Those engagements have confirmed that while schools are the most important interface with learners there are other vital contributors to an effective system. Inevitably however, this report is heavily influenced by my perspective as an experienced and empowered Headteacher. Those who dedicate their working lives to educating learners in schools are seldom commissioned to report on how things are going in the school environment. Perhaps this is why school-based practitioners responded positively to my being tasked with this report. Their comments could be summarised thus:

“Delighted that someone who is grounded in what’s really happening in schools has been asked to do this.”

and

“Please tell them the truth.”

(I am not certain who the ‘them’ is, but I sincerely hope that the truths within, many stemming from a synthesis of stakeholder views, will serve as signposts for future priorities and actions.)

Excellence and equity

In almost all of our schools, practitioners witness at first hand the stark effects of socio-economic inequality. Much as teachers and school leaders would wish to, they cannot by themselves eradicate child poverty and completely remove the associated barriers to success. What schools can do though, is create spaces that minimise the physical and emotional effects of deprivation on young people's ability to learn, grow and succeed. By doing so, schools can disrupt intergenerational cycles of poverty. Scotland’s schools are good at this, but they want to do more, to make an even bigger difference.

At national level, closing the poverty-related attainment gap is a long-standing component of our National Improvement Framework (NIF). Our system strives to help all learners reach their potential unimpeded by socio-economic circumstances. We continue to make progress on this, but the rate of improvement is too slow.

In the first three years of the NIF, good progress was made in the Broad General Education phase towards 'closing the gap'. The combination of so-called low-hanging fruit and effective targeted interventions indicated promise. Yet in the years since then – notwithstanding the effects of the pandemic – the initial momentum has not been sustained. If everything stays as it is, eradicating the poverty-related attainment gap will at best take multiple generations to achieve.^[4]

Rationally, our options now are either to make changes to how the attainment gap is defined, or change how the gap is tackled in our schools and wider education system. Morally there is only one choice: change how we tackle that gap.

The welcome progress Scotland has made in excellence and equity, as detailed in Appendix A, should be applauded. It is the result of determination and hard work on the part of practitioners, leaders and learners across our system. However, attainment in some aspects and at various stages of our children's journey is not as favourable as it might be. Outcomes in similar measures in similar countries are better than ours.

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), provides a useful tool for comparing educational performance across countries. PISA assesses a broadly representative selection of 15-year-old pupils across a wide range of countries on a range of areas including maths, science and reading ability. It aims to test students on what they are expected to know at their age.

PISA scores suggest that overall educational performance in Scotland as measured through this lens has declined over time. In the 2000s, overall scores in Scotland were relatively high and above the average across Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. Since around 2012, there has been a significant decline in PISA scores. This trend of declining performance in Scotland relative to England is seen in both the maths and science domains of PISA scores, although performance has remained more stable for reading.^[5]

Shortfalls in attainment outcomes are not due to lack of effort nor intent. Furthermore, according to the OECD’s most recent data (2025)^[7] and the NIF report 2025^[8] Scotland also spends more per capita compared with the average across participating countries. Our education spending is significantly higher than in England. In 2025–26, school spending per pupil was approximately £10,400 in Scotland, which is approximately 20% or £1700 higher than in England. Spending per pupil has grown more in Scotland since 2009–10 (12% in real terms) than in England (3%) and Wales (10%). Spending on early education and childcare provision, which doubled in real terms between 2016–17 and 2022–23, was a major driver of overall growth in spending in Scotland.^[9]

However, the harsh reality is this: in essence our outputs fall short of our inputs. This need not be over-dramatised, but it merits attention from those trusted with maximising the achievements and life chances of our children and young people. We therefore have a duty to examine what we are doing and how well we do it, and to consider which aspects may benefit from reform. If our purpose is to meet our own NIF targets at pace (including broader aims regarding the whole child), we must avoid simply repeating what we are currently doing in the hope that something better happens.

School leadership

If you can, spend some time with any group of school leaders. You will be struck by their wealth of experience, knowledge, deep commitment and compassion. Their empathy with their learners is not theoretical nor abstract and it goes far beyond even the best policy and professional standards documents. Their regard for children and young people comes from interacting with them every day, supporting them through struggles and championing their aspirations. As has often been highlighted, including in ‘Teaching Scotland’s Future’ 2010^[10], the extent of educational aspiration and the quality of provision within a school are direct consequences of the quality of its leadership.

The voice of our school leaders, and that of their practitioner colleagues, warrant a greater influence on our education system. It is anomalous that their voices are heard primarily through the carefully curated channels of their employers or their professional associations. The former prevents public debate on challenges and potential improvements at local level due to employment contracts. The latter understandably tends to be on specific areas linked to ongoing campaigns. School leaders deserve a platform that encompasses both successes and challenges, to express their ambitions for children and young people and to discuss the obstacles that stifle progress without fear or favour; a platform that influences not only their school but the system in which their schools operate.

Learned commentators strongly encourage Scotland to tap into the knowledge and wisdom that already exists in our education system. Yet in practice our school leaders cannot openly share their opinion unless it broadly conforms or aligns with accepted orthodoxy. Improving our education system is hampered because key stakeholders – indeed those closest to the learners – operate in an echo chamber. Our system risks recycling educational practice and relying on approaches that were effective in the past but may not be fit for the future.

“In times of change learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.” - Eric Hoffer, Reflections on the Human Condition, 1973

What works

The most successful school leaders share common attributes. They possess a clarity of vision, are values-driven, and they invest heavily in those with whom they work.

“The challenge, and opportunity, for school leaders is to unlock that collective capacity so the communities we serve can truly thrive. Progress is rarely linear. Often, it can feel as though we are not the primary power holders, and that uncertainty can make leadership feel like a roll of the dice at times. Yet the reality, when you genuinely believe in your people, is different. A coaching culture harnesses the professional capital within staff teams, turning individual potential into collective efficacy and greater levels of agency. The enduring challenge is creating the time and conditions to build this culture deliberately.” – Nick Burge, Headteacher, Trinity Academy, Edinburgh

The purposefulness of leaders’ decision-making and their disposition offer confidence to their community of learners, colleagues and parents. Their trust in partners is borne from intelligent observation and further developed through relationship-building. This engenders mutual respect and a collective determination to do everything possible to achieve shared goals.

On my own leadership journey, I have observed remarkably capable school leadership. As well as the attributes outlined above, a consistent common factor is leaders’ ability to inspire those around them to work together to develop and achieve a shared purpose. It is their vision and their ability to convey it that makes the difference. But that vision itself never derives from thin air, nor is it ego driven. Rather it is invariably a product of deep awareness of the social and historical context of their establishment, combined with a respect for the individual and collective aspirations and capabilities of the people around them. When these characteristics are demonstrated by a school leader, the team mindset that arises enables a school to overcome just about any challenge that comes its way. And when the time inevitably comes to review and modify goals, all stakeholders stay on board, prepared to put their shoulders to the wheel once again. The alignment of intention and energies, and of policy and practice, is a joy to behold.

Might it be possible for Scottish education, at system level, to build on its existing strengths to inculcate similar attributes? On this larger stage, the main elements of Scottish school education should be aligned around a renewed vision, sustaining a clarity of purpose that enables policy makers, leaders and practitioners to push in the same agreed direction. This is an ambitious goal, but certainly not beyond Scotland – as long as all stakeholders leave their egos at the door for the sake of our learners. The prize, after all, is enormous.

What gets in the way: “The Tyranny of the Immediate”^[11]

Within schools, working in accordance with clear systems and relying on standard operating procedures can make good sense, but with hundreds of moving parts including the learners and the staff, each one affected by their own influences, schools have to be exceptionally flexible. Educators operate in an unpredictable environment and must respond to unexpected emergencies and crises. David Cameron’s analogy of school leaders being akin to stage performers spinning plates is apt. As more and more plates are added from the wings and the sound of smashing is heard leaders must retain composure and deploy expert prioritisation skills. Both operational flexibility and emotional intelligence are required in a fast-moving environment where the wonderful unpredictability of children and young people affects all decisions and actions.

In essence the structures that shape our country's education system are in place to enable schools to provide excellent learning opportunities and reduce the number of spinning plates. This in turn should create the platform for excellent learner outcomes. The Governance Review 2016^[12] onwards, and the ensuing recommendations from a variety of sources, built up a head of steam. Evidence from several years of focused engagement with a wide range of stakeholders clearly indicated that it was appropriate, indeed necessary, for Scotland to change how it organises and supports its schools. However, by 2023 the ICEA found that improvements in outcomes, particularly at upper secondary stage, had stalled. In seeking solutions, the ICEA proposed that substantial progress would depend on entrusting the teaching profession and moving away from the top-down compliance culture that continued to pervade. ^[13]

It seems that despite overwhelming evidence to devolve more decision-making powers to those closest to the learners our education system has yet to fully respond. Schools, managed by local authorities, each one tied on a one-to-one ratio with local government, broadly feel the same level of empowerment as they did 10 years ago. Some feel less empowered. One has to question why this is the case despite recommendations arising from extensive academic research and broad enthusiasm for greater autonomy amongst the schools themselves. The innate risk of change is one reason, but this seems to have masked the risk of not changing.

To change little or nothing is to assume that the current moderate pace of improvement is acceptable to Scotland.

What should happen now?

Subsidiarity and Empowerment. The Headteachers' Charter. Devolved School Management of resources. Decision-making powers devolved to those closest to the learners.

These are grand ideas, all pointing in the same direction towards the same thing, all based on firm evidence of what brings the best for learners. If we want our children and young people to become the best version of themselves, teachers and school leaders must be entrusted and be given the tools to turn this rhetoric into reality.

There is a plethora of policy documents within the Scottish education landscape that identify school empowerment as the key change that would unlock transformational improvement. The Governance Review which resulted in the Headteachers Charter and attendant policies generated rich evidence to bring about radical reform. Stakeholders from learners and their parents to school leaders, local authorities and Directors of Education openly agreed that such reform would bring benefits.

The 2018 Education Joint Agreement between Scottish Government and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA) is written proof of that. In 2022 Professor Muir re-stated the central message, stating that our underlying principle should be: “A redistribution of power, influence and resource within Scottish education to one that reflects the principles of subsidiarity, genuinely empowers teachers and practitioners and where learners' voices, experiences, perspectives and rights are central to decision making.” – Professor Ken Muir, Putting Learners at the Centre, 2022.

Teacher unions agreed. Local authorities agreed. School leaders agreed. Yet by 2026, eight years on, many components of the Agreement have not been implemented.

The formation of the Regional Improvement Collaboratives (RICs) arose as a direct consequence of the Governance Review. As some of the RICs began to develop effective working practices the global Covid pandemic affected them as it did every aspect of life. Schools and the education system went into survival mode, and addressing longer-term reform was put to one side. Momentum halted as the immediate challenge shifted to schools protecting health and aiming simply to keep their doors open to learners.

In our post-pandemic world the call for school and practitioner empowerment has not gone away. Indeed it may be louder and more necessary now than ever. Pertinently the 2023 ICEA report states, “We are strongly supportive of this approach but believe that there remains some way to go to achieve the full benefits of local decision making and realise the potential that exists within schools and their communities.” ^[14]

In 2025 Professors Chapman and Donaldson further strengthened this argument: “The principle of subsidiarity ... should be more entrenched in our educational culture. The closer decision-making is to the realities of the classroom, the more the focus will be on the needs of young people and the specifics of learning and teaching.” – Christopher Chapman and Graham Donaldson, Creating tomorrow’s education for today, October 2025^[15]

Despite strong encouragement based on evidence gathered by the best-informed advisors, Scotland's schools continue to operate in a top-down structure within a compliance culture overseen by over-stretched local authorities and seek guidance from a fragmented and arguably incoherent policy landscape.

Schools do not operate in a vacuum. School leaders are obligated to respond to current guidance and expectations from a range of bodies external to their school, both nationally and locally. They have a duty to guide their colleagues on how to deliver key policy expectations. But at the time of publication our national education bodies essentially operate independently of each other. Resourcing and strategic system leadership comes through 32 local authorities which themselves have multiple responsibilities to local citizens. This is resulting in significant duplication, overlap and friction. In this environment even most effective school leaders’ risk being overwhelmed and under-supported.

At any given time Headteachers are required to consider a proliferation of policies many of which overlap, some of which do not align. Professor Muir stated, “Senior leaders in primary and secondary schools pointed to their day-to day lives being adversely impacted by having to take into account, respectively, 34 and 40 areas of policy”^[16]. In response to this, effective school leaders carefully consider the advice and implicit demands then must prioritise or de-prioritise expectations depending on what would complement their school context. Some policy expectations are not prioritised and not delivered simply because the school is already overstretched by ongoing policy demands. Being forced to choose what to implement based on lack of capacity rather than on what would bring the most benefits for learners in the long run is not a recipe for success.

There is another insidious and significant consequence. Although pressure on leaders is a given, the sheer volume of expectations and demands unmatched by resource can make school leadership a deeply challenging and very uninviting role. School leaders are bound to fail often and fail repeatedly, regardless of their aptitude and skill. Not many professionals would welcome or even tolerate this constant professional stress.

While complexity is unavoidable in a complex world the Scottish education landscape is a multiplicity of intertwining interdependencies. Stakeholders, including classroom practitioners are playing three-dimensional chess while doing their best to focus on the needs of the learners in front of them. That pressure affects every school-aged child, in every classroom, in every school. Around 700,000 at the last count.^[17]

In 2023 the ICEA made specific recommendations which resonate with the views of school leaders across the country^[18]:

“In reviewing the infrastructure for the leadership and governance of Scottish education, Scottish Government should:

1. Redesign governance arrangements to give greater prominence to education professionals and other stakeholders in the decision-making process.

2. Establish relationships across levels that allocate clear roles and responsibilities, minimise duplication and create potential for impact.

3. Pursue the principle of subsidiarity through reporting and financial arrangements that allow effective decision making at the local level.

4. Create a leadership narrative that highlights the importance of innovation in learning and teaching and of teachers engaging in innovation together within and across their schools to support pupils’ achievement.”

A fair question would be to ask why our highly skilled and relatively highly paid school leaders don’t do more to make this happen. It is because when the structures around schools are not conducive to subsidiarity, fighting for it takes precious time and energy away from overseeing what learners need. The ‘tyranny of the immediate’ almost always wins out because too many plates cannot be allowed to fall and smash. In any case, local authority managers, themselves under immense pressure, are unlikely to be able to respond and adapt to every individual school’s individual contextual pressures. Thus the system constrains what the system should be enabling.

Instead of designing and overseeing the culture and the complex mechanisms of their schools, enormously capable professionals spend much of their time firefighting and operating the machinery. This is a waste of their wealth of experience and knowledge, as well as their compassion for and proficiency in educating the very people for whom our education system exists. It is the opposite of what should be happening. If we aim to accelerate improvement, this must change.