We will reduce…teachers’ daily contact time by an hour and a half to give them the time they need to lift standards.”

Nestled on page 62 of the SNP’s manifesto in April last year, this sentence made me pause. An hour and a half extra a day to do things away from classes? That would mean weekly class-contact time going down from 22.5 to 15 hours per week.

It was well known that contact time in Scottish schools soared way above typical levels internationally, and for years calls had been made for a reduction - but this went far beyond what any union had demanded.

There was widespread disbelief amid the excitement when I tweeted this golden nugget buried in the manifesto’s otherwise workaday education section. And, sure enough, it was too good to be true. That line, a sheepish SNP official confirmed a few hours later, was a clerical error: the reduction would be 90 minutes a week, not per day.

That inauspicious beginning portended the confusion and cynicism that has dogged this policy ever since. But this should not obscure what almost everyone I speak to in education - from class teachers to education directors - says when I ask them about the commitment to reduce contact time by 90 minutes a week: if it works, reducing contact time by an hour and a half a week could be a gamechanger for teachers in Scotland - and could shake things up for teachers in England and elsewhere, too.

First, though, we need to set things in context. Scotland is an outlier in international terms when it comes to class-contact time, at least according to the official data we have. As the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) said in its June 2021 Education at a glance report: “Even though teaching is a core activity for teachers, in a large number of countries, teachers spend most of their working time on activities other than teaching.”

Not so in Scotland, however.

In 22 OECD countries and economies with data for both teaching and total working time for lower secondary school level, for example, teachers spend 44 per cent of their working time on teaching on average, and 35 per cent or less in some countries. It is rare for this figure to be above 50 per cent; in Scotland (the only part of the UK for which this particular data is reported), it is 63 per cent - the highest figure recorded across the 22 countries.

‘In a large number of countries, teachers spend most of their working time on activities other than teaching’

The 2019 version of the same OECD report spelled it out in plain terms: in most countries - but not in Scotland - teachers “spend most of their working time on activities other than teaching”.

Teaching time requirements may change over the course of a teacher’s career. Some countries, such as Chile and Portugal, encourage older teachers to stay in the teaching profession by reducing their teaching hours, but Scotland does not.

And the situation can also vary depending on the age of the pupils teachers work with: in some countries - such as Austria, France, Ireland, South Korea, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain and Turkey - primary school teachers have at least 25 per cent more annual teaching hours than lower secondary school teachers, but Scotland is one of the countries in which there is no difference by this measure.

Teaching time, then, is not only unusually high in Scotland, but also largely constant no matter how old a teacher is, how long they have been in the profession or the age of pupils they work with.

This is why the prospect of reducing teachers’ class-contact time - the term typically used in Scotland for teaching time - is so tantalising in Scotland. Amid huge concerns about the workload demands of myriad education policies and rising concerns about behaviour issues - not to mention the demands of hauling schools out of a pandemic - teachers feel particularly time-poor in Scotland. No wonder the prospect of reassigning 90 minutes of weekly teaching time appeals so much.

It will also raise eyebrows in England, for which the OECD does not have the same type of data as Scotland on teacher working time.

Survey data from Teacher Tapp, the survey app for teachers based predominantly in England - where teachers often have high levels of teaching time in international terms - has shown that teachers are far more likely to succumb to sickness once they reach Scottish levels of weekly classroom time.

Teacher Tapp looked at whether 22 hours was “a limit beyond which teachers are stretched too far”. A December 2018 survey showed that, of teachers who had 15-20 timetabled weekly hours of teaching, 6 per cent had taken sick hours in the previous week; for those with 20-22 hours, 7 per cent had taken sick hours.

However, considerably more teachers took sick time if they had 22-25 timetabled hours (11 per cent) or over 25 hours (10 per cent).

Interestingly, while the maximum class-contact time of 22.5 hours in Scotland (in what should be a 35-hour working week overall) was mandated by the seminal McCrone deal of more than two decades ago - finally a reality for all primary, secondary and special schools from 2006 - Teacher Tapp’s most recent survey of teachers’ timetabled hours showed that the class-contact commitment of teachers in England may often be even higher: in November 2020, 17 per cent of 5,764 teachers reported more than 25 hours a week of timetabled hours, while 20 per cent reported 22-25 hours.

The reality of reduced hours

If Scotland can reduce its teachers’ contact hours, and it proves not to be detrimental to outcomes, English teachers will be asking why the same can’t be done south of the border.

But what might the reduced hours actually look like? Would it require an army of new teachers? How would it be funded?

After our initial report of Scotland’s new contact-time policy in April 2021, we spent months trying to find out when the reduction of 90 minutes might actually happen and also how it would happen. Finally, eight months later, in December 2021, education secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville told the Scottish Parliament that “we would hope to have this in place for August 2022”.

Even then, however, she cautioned that this target date was not certain to be met, and that “the timing of this change will be determined by the Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers [SNCT, a tripartite body comprising local and national government and teaching unions] dependent on capacity in the system”.

In April, however, responding to a freedom of information (FOI) request from Tes Scotland, the government seemed to suggest that the capacity and funding for the policy were already there.

“With regards to costings, the commitment to reduce class-contact time was made alongside the complementary commitment to fund 3,500 additional teachers over and above the 1,400 additional teachers recruited during the pandemic (giving an overall total of 4,900 additional teachers),” the FOI reply read - the 4,900 total to be realised sometime over the next five years of this parliamentary term.

“We estimate that the additional teachers delivered by the commitment to increase teacher numbers will be sufficient to reduce maximum class-contact time - therefore, there is no projected additional cost of this policy change.”

Somerville’s target seems less and less likely to happen, in the absence of any more detail emerging. That view was underscored by 31 pages of correspondence between government officials released under FOI legislation on 11 April. You could almost see eyebrows arching in concern after they noted that Somerville had been “quite strong on August 2022 as a [government] preference for a reduced class-contact time start date”.

In one message in January, an official relayed the rising anxiety of education directors, who had flagged up that schools would start their 2022-23 timetabling in the next few weeks and urgently needed clarity about whether reduced contact time should be factored in. Reading all this correspondence made it clear that expectations were being lowered, with caveats - such as “we hope to at least begin implementation of this commitment, possibly on a phased basis, by August this year” - peppered through the email chains.

August 2022 is now definitively out in most parts of Scotland, even on a phased basis. On 16 May, I emailed all of Scotland’s 32 local authorities to ask if they would be introducing the reduced contact time policy this August, either wholly or partially. A little more than a day later, we had received replies from 20 - none of which were planning in any way to do so.

So when will it happen?

Headteachers I have spoken to say that August 2023 is the earliest it would be possible to resolve all the staffing and timetabling issues to make it work.

One council, East Lothian, gave us a firm starting date: the policy would be fully introduced in August 2024, and that is increasingly the date cropping up when you speak to local educational officials, unions and school leaders behind the scenes.

The EIS teaching union says a paper submitted by councils to the SNCT indicates that August 2024 would be the earliest possible start date, but it has not yet given up on August 2023. The next SNCT meeting to discuss the policy is on 31 May.

Using the time wisely

So what might reduced contact time actually mean for teachers when it does happen?

Already, some are drawing battle lines around what the 90 minutes are for and who will decide how it is used. At the Scottish Secondary Teachers’ Association (SSTA) annual congress in Crieff this month, the contact-time policy inspired three motions and formed a key part of both the general secretary’s and the president’s speeches.

Indeed, the very first motion was about contact time, with one delegate warning that the 90 minutes must not be filled with “needless meetings and madcap ideas” - the latter a reference to teachers’ frustration at repeatedly being made to attend CPD that they say serves little purpose.

That message was echoed by general secretary Seamus Searson, who was insistent that the 90 minutes should be considered preparation and correction time for teachers. Get the policy right by giving “ample time for teachers to plan, prepare, mark and correct”, said SSTA president Catherine Nicol, and it will have “a positive impact on pupil achievement and increase job satisfaction” - and see fewer teachers leaving the profession - as “schools could become workplaces where every teacher can perform the tasks required of them within a 35-hour working week”. She was careful, though, to add that “recruitment of thousands of teachers and hundreds of support staff will be necessary to reach this goal”.

Larry Flanagan, general secretary of the EIS teaching union, says a key requirement is that teachers decide how the extra time is used - “otherwise it could increase workload, rather than reduce it.”

He adds that teacher representatives at the SNCT are “united in our position that the full 1.5 hours should go to preparation and correction time” - which causes much of teachers’ “overbearing workload” - as “this will have the best and most direct impact on both attainment and achievement, and also on teacher workload and stress”.

Mike Corbett, national Scotland official for the NASUWT teaching union, also wants faith shown in teachers’ abilities to make the best use of the extra non-contact time.

“This is the kind of trust that seems to be given to teachers in other successful education systems, such as those in Scandinavia, and is something we should seek to emulate in Scotland,” he says.

Councils, education directors and the Scottish government have been reticent on how much control they want over the 90 minutes. With unions starting to adopt a hard line on reserving it for preparation and correction, protracted discussions could lie ahead. They fear that if it is instead primarily used for “collegiate” activities - the euphemistic term that sceptics say is often a byword for unhelpful meetings and CPD - then the policy could actually increase the burden on teachers.

North Lanarkshire assistant chief executive Derek Brown - a former secondary head - is part of a working group assembled by the education directors’ body ADES to help shape the 90 minutes non-contact time policy.

He describes it as “a unique moment, a once-in-a-generation opportunity to improve the educational experience of all learners and make a significant benefit to Scotland’s cultural and economic future”, especially in the context of such an investment arriving at a time of huge strain on council budgets.

He “totally” backs calls for “teachers to be empowered”, but does not wish to be drawn into details about who would ultimately decide how the 90 minutes are used.

The teachers’ point of view

So, what do secondary heads think about the prospect of reduced contact time?

Jon Reid, president of School Leaders Scotland and headteacher at Falkirk’s Larbert High, and Graham Hutton, headteacher at Grove Academy in Dundee, want the 90 minutes used for collaborative work and CPD that brings together staff in and across different parts of their school - and from other schools - to explore new ideas in important areas such as assessment and raising attainment.

“The richness that would come out of all that collaboration…all of that could be really powerful,” says Reid.

Hutton is enthused about staff having “a wee bit more time to think about what they’re doing rather than being on autopilot, flustered and rushed off their feet”. Effective collaboration across schools is more viable now than pre-Covid, he adds, now that using communications platforms such as Microsoft Teams are commonplace.

However, both heads recognise teachers’ desire for more correction and preparation time and say the pragmatic approach would be to devote some of the 90 minutes to that, too. School and local authority leaders cannot expect to be overly prescriptive about the 90 minutes if, as Hutton says, heads typically never press teachers on what they do doing with their existing 300 minutes of non-contact time.

First, though, there are big logistical headaches for heads.

“How the hell are we going to do that?” was Hutton’s instant reaction when he first heard about the 90 minutes policy.

He reckons he will need five more teachers - the school has only received one after the government promised an influx of new recruits to help schools contend with Covid - and wants to know where they will come from and how the policy will be financed.

Both heads point out that the 90 minutes will be tricky to weave into the school day. “Most schools are timetabled very efficiently, so there’s no wasted time,” says Reid.

And, while Scottish secondary schools’ typical timetable-building blocks of 50-minute periods fit perfectly into teachers’ existing weekly non-contact time of 300 minutes - in other words, six periods exactly - 90 minutes is more of a challenge. To make it efficient, says Reid, you might have to “completely relook at the structure of your curriculum” or else be left with some awkward little chunks of time to fit in.

Reid suggests a partial solution could be to treat the 90 minutes as an average weekly amount, so that it could be used to add two or three in-service (Inset) days over the course of a year - perhaps even national in-service days. “You need concentrated periods of time for high-quality thinking,” he says.

Before the summer, says Reid, secondary heads want “clarity, a clear timeline and expectations” around the policy. August 2022 was “never achievable” as a start date, because school staffing, recruitment and budgeting start the January before the following school year - so the clock is already ticking if there are any ambitions for an August 2023 start.

‘The evidence supports reducing contact time, but only if you can do so without reducing teacher quality - which would be tricky right now’

Primary heads, like their secondary colleagues, are cautiously optimistic about the possible impact of the extra 90 minutes.

Primary school leaders’ body AHDS wants answers on who will be expected to provide class cover. Under the current 22.5 hours of class contact, and amid widespread staff shortages, this responsibility already falls to school leaders much of the time.

“A big concern expressed by AHDS members is that they would be called on to provide even more class cover to enable teachers to get this additional planning and preparation time,” says general secretary Greg Dempster. “The result being that they have more pressure on their time, and cannot get to the core of their own jobs until the evenings and weekends.”

Brian McLaren, headteacher at Langlees Primary in Falkirk, likes the prospect of teachers having “more time to think, plan and take account of the specific needs of their class” - but fears there may be some “bear traps” lurking.

“It is difficult to see where the additional members of staff are coming from, given how challenging it has been to cover absences over the last couple of years [and] some teachers who will be providing [non-contact time] cover across a large number of classes may end up covering only small pieces of the curriculum.”

Other countries may look at this and begin to believe the problem is too complex - and shy away from contact-time changes. Certainly, there is little interest in it in policy terms in England currently, and the situation in Scotland may not encourage it to emerge.

“I don’t think we really know what’s happening in England,” says Sam Freedman, a former senior policy adviser at the UK government’s Department for Education (DfE) and a senior fellow at the Institute of Government.

“There’s certainly no concerted push to reduce contact time but equally no evidence I’m aware of that it’s increasing. The last workforce survey the DfE did, which is pretty out of date now, showed an increase in overall workload but that was due to assessment and pastoral support, not teaching time.

“Generally speaking, I’d say the evidence supports reducing contact time, but critically only if you can do so without reducing teacher quality - which, given the recruitment problems in both Scotland and England, I think would be tricky right now.”

Too much contact time, we hear over and over, makes it harder to step back from the day-to-day grind and to find room for sparking ideas off other teachers - and above-average levels of teaching time may even make teachers sicker. There is almost universal agreement that it is a good idea to reduce contact time in countries where it is particularly high, such as Scotland and England.

It’s just that, with the ever-increasing demands placed on teachers and school leaders, it also seems like there may never have been a more difficult time to make it happen.

Henry Hepburn is Scotland editor at Tes. He tweets @Henry_Hepburn

More long reads from Tes Scotland:

• The end of the primary head? A warning from Scotland
• Two years of Covid: the view from inside schools
• Is this the way to get teachers into rural schools?
• The schools making ‘impossible’ timetable change a reality
• The deal that tried to transform teaching - and almost did