Scottish secondary schools operate within national frameworks, policies and performance measures. However, the extent of their autonomy raises important questions: do these frameworks provide a balanced structure or do they inadvertently offer schools the choice to either fully embrace or largely ignore national standards?
Inspections by Education Scotland, which serve as a critical tool for maintaining educational quality, are so infrequent that they can be likened to the experience of dental check-ups for many people - so rare that, by the time an evaluation is carried out, the teeth might need to be replaced.
More consistent oversight of schools
Curriculum models across Scotland, which vary widely, are often celebrated as innovative and adaptive. While this flexible model of education can indeed be commendable, a lack of accountability and scrutiny casts a shadow over its benefits. My experience through most of my time in Scottish education underscores the need for more consistent oversight.
The senior-phase qualifications illustrate a different approach. Here, a central quality-assurance framework is firmly in place. For example, when schools introduce new courses, all course materials, assessments and moderation must be verified by the Scottish Qualifications Authority. This ensures a consistent and valid approach to learning, teaching and assessment. However, this rigorous quality assurance applies only to one aspect of the education provided to children aged 11 to 18.
Why isn’t the same level of quality assurance in place for younger learners? Schools often navigate an array of suggested experiences and outcomes, vague guidance and unclear examples of broad general education (BGE) level 2-4 assessment outcomes. This approach leaves too much to chance and lacks the stringent checks that ensure educational quality.
Recent reviews of Scottish education by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), along with subsequent inquiry projects such as those led by professors Louise Hayward and Ken Muir, suggest that even more diversity of assessment is needed.
They advocate moving away from traditional assessment approaches such as high-stakes exams towards ongoing assessment models. This shift is aimed at providing a more comprehensive evaluation of learner performance.
However, there remains no indication of an increase in school inspections or meaningful accountability measures. That absence of oversight raises concerns about the quality of learning and teaching in Scottish schools.
Have we gone too far with autonomy?
The OECD highlighted the need for a balanced approach, noting: “Schools and teachers internationally are increasingly given responsibility in curriculum management in countries and jurisdictions where curriculum adaptations or autonomy are granted at the local or school level to ensure that the curriculum meets the needs of students and local communities.”
This sentiment is echoed in the Hayward review: “It was suggested that an approach such as open-book examinations, oral tests and structured observations of activities should be used more widely to broaden the opportunities for learners’ experiences to be better balanced.”
As an educator and a parent, however, I find myself questioning whether we have gone too far in embracing autonomy in Scotland. Has freedom led to inconsistencies? Has the aspiration for innovation and adaptive curriculum design been justified, given the resulting lack of national quality assurances?
While I support choice, flexibility and diversity of approach in education, the current system leaves me worried about the potential risks. Without meaningful accountability measures, schools may adopt curriculum models that do not necessarily guarantee the best education or meaningful qualifications for young people. This concern is pressing for parents, who rely on a consistent and high-quality educational framework to safeguard their children’s futures.
Avoiding the mistakes of the past
In short, while the autonomy of Scottish secondary schools fosters innovation, it also opens the door to inconsistencies and a lack of accountability. The need for a balanced approach, combining school freedom with stringent quality assurance, is critical to ensure that all students receive a high-quality education that prepares them for the future.
As the Muir review aptly noted - regarding reactions to the idea of a new curriculum and assessment agency - “It was suggested that in Scotland we had ‘been here before’ and that there was a grave danger of this proposal [amounting] to ‘rearranging the deckchairs’ or being a ‘rebranding’ of past ineffective agencies.”
Let’s not keep repeating mistakes of the past.
Ed Carlin is a depute headteacher working in a secondary in North-East Scotland
For the latest Scottish education news, analysis and features delivered directly to your inbox, sign up to Tes magazine’s The Week in Scotland newsletter
