For more than a decade, “leadership” has been one of the buzzwords in Scottish education. In inspection reports, the leadership qualities of the head teacher are seen as a vital factor in school improvement. The 2011 Donaldson report on teacher education emphasised the importance of “leadership development programmes” to prepare staff for senior management posts in schools.

As a result, the Scottish College for Educational Leadership (Scel) was established in 2014. Despite this, many schools find it hard to attract good candidates for headships. Following John Swinney’s review, Scel is now to be subject to the warm embrace - or suffocating stranglehold - of Education Scotland.

There has been little discussion of the political dimension of leadership. What goes on in schools is shaped by the policy framework, which depends on the quality of political leadership at national level. Since devolution there have been nine ministers or cabinet secretaries responsible for school education.

In assessing ministerial performance, several criteria might be used: the introduction of new legislation and policy initiatives; dealing with crises; relations with key institutions, such as Education Scotland, the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) and the General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS); communication with teachers, parents and the wider community and the ability to win over those charged with introducing reforms. Education has been high on the political agenda post-devolution, so there is no shortage of evidence on which to base judgements.

The period has been dominated by the introduction, development and implementation of Curriculum for Excellence, a flagship policy that proved challenging for several ministers.

At critical points, there was a preference for high-sounding rhetoric over clear thinking and effective management. To focus only on headteachers seems to indicate a desire to devolve responsibility and deflect attention from the people who exercise real power.

Picking up the pieces

One of the most striking features of political leadership is that ministers and cabinet secretaries are in post for a relatively short period before they are moved. Only Peter Peacock and Michael Russell held the post for any length of time. Sam Galbraith had to resign following the examinations crisis of 2000. Jack McConnell gave up the education portfolio to become first minister. Hugh Henry was a stopgap appointment in the run-up to the 2007 Scottish election, while Angela Constance was regarded as struggling with the education remit and was moved on after the 2016 election.

Civil servants and officials have to pick up the pieces and brief new office holders and frequent changes mean it can be hard to pin down responsibility for ill-judged decisions.

A common thread has been a fondness for high-profile launch events, with ambitious targets and boastful press releases. This has been evident in relation to class sizes, support for learning, additional resources to reduce the attainment gap and widening access to higher education. Successive governments have been less keen to monitor the results of educational initiatives based on independent evaluation.

This is consistent with a trend across all policy areas to prefer spectacle to substance. Politicians are well-placed to construct their own narratives of events - ones that are generally shaped to reflect well on themselves.

The current cabinet secretary, John Swinney, has adopted a high-stakes stance. He has introduced a raft of reforms, some in the face of strong opposition from the educational establishment. Presumably he hopes to be remembered as the man who began to turn Scottish education round, restoring its reputation for high standards. Like all politicians, he is concerned about his legacy.

Mr Swinney might care to reflect on the record of Michael (now Lord) Forsyth, who served as Scottish education minister during the Thatcher years.

Lord Forsyth exhibited the reforming zeal of a right-wing ideologue, seeking to introduce the virtues of the market to the public sector. He was not afraid to challenge what he saw as the cosy “consensus” model of policymaking, but he held the education portfolio for a relatively short period. When he was moved to other responsibilities, the old guard of the policy community began to reassert themselves. It will be interesting to see if Mr Swinney suffers the same fate.

Scottish education is going through a difficult phase. It is perfectly reasonable to consider ways in which the leadership skills of professionals could be strengthened, but a fair assessment of what has been going wrong should also take account of the questionable record of political leaders.

Walter Humes is an honorary professor in the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Stirling