Headteachers in Scotland are finding “creative and positive ways” of using money from the Pupil Equity Fund - but researchers also find that the promised freedom to decide how to use PEF allocations “may be illusory”.
PEF has, as part of the Scottish Attainment Challenge (SAC), been available to almost every state school in Scotland for around a decade, with allocations decided on the basis of how many pupils take free school meals.
However, in recent times, education secretary Jenny Gilruth has presented PEF as a noble but flawed endeavour and argued that it must be revamped; the make-up of the Scottish government formed after the May 2026 elections could lead to big changes around PEF and the SAC.
PEF strengths and weaknesses
Now, a research report has highlighted the strengths and weaknesses of PEF from the point of view of headteachers.
Dr Anna Beck, Dr Jonathan Firth and Dr Claire Wilson - researchers from the University of Glasgow, University of Strathclyde and the University of the West of Scotland, respectively - have published .
The study, which examines the use of PEF in certain schools - and the constraints and support around that - is largely built on detailed interviews with eight secondary heads.
It points to a “strong desire for more support” among heads, finding “several challenges inherent in identifying both priorities and effective interventions”, but also “creative and positive ways that schools have risen to these challenges”.
PEF emerged from former first minister Nicola Sturgeon’s landmark speech in 2015, when she said her record should be judged on whether the attainment gap between rich and poor had been eliminated.
Money allocated to schools through PEF was designed to free up schools to take innovative, localised approaches to closing the gap. However, concerns have emerged in recent years that not only is it difficult to gauge the impact of PEF projects, but also that the money is often used to plug gaps in funding and services left by budget cuts.
The new research states: “The promise of freedom to choose that is built into PEF policy may be illusory without a reliable evidence base for the choices to be made, and support for the development of headteachers’ research literacy and criticality.”
There is a view, reflected in the report, that there is “too little rather than too much” national guidance on PEF, that heads would feel more liberated by more advice on using PEF.
“Sometimes that hands-off approach can leave you a little uncertain about what you can and cannot do,” said one head.
‘Ridiculous pressure on schools’
However, other participants are unhappy that local authorities add to workload and stress by “heavily monitoring” PEF activity, which is “putting a ridiculous pressure on schools”.
Several heads highlighted “the risk of flawed strategies being pushed upon them, and it appears to be typical to receive multiple communications from external agencies offering services”. However, heads seem well attuned to avoiding such dangers.
Most interviewees are “aware - at least to some extent - of the different ways of finding out about evidence-based practices for themselves”.
However, “their sources of information appeared to be quite restricted”. For example, some “commented very positively” on the , a guide which has been highlighted by Education Scotland under the name .
The research report identifies “a lack of critical discussion about how and when interventions can be applied”.
The researchers “endorse an increased role for networks at local and national levels in the future enactment of Pupil Equity Funding”.
While there are “active and influential” support networks helping schools decide how to use PEF, links between schools and universities could be stronger.
Risk of following educational fads
There is also a warning that a “strong reliance on local networks and in-school consultation appeared to supersede evidence in some cases, with headteachers deriving a sense of ‘what works’ on the basis of what was recommended by others”.
The report advises that “too much direct sharing from one school to another could provide a fertile ground for educational ‘fads’ that lack a sound evidence base”.
Reliance on networks could also, the researchers say, “lead to inequalities”. One urban headteacher spoke of having partnerships with more than one local university, but “such opportunities may be more difficult for rural or remote-rural schools to establish”.
You can now get the UK’s most-trusted source of education news in a mobile app. Get Tes magazine on and on
