Evidence, Impact and Actions for Consideration 2024-26 report: School-level evidence
The school-level examples are based on responses from engagements with 52 individual schools, identified by attainment advisors and local authorities as demonstrating a positive improvement journey in attendance. A more detailed explanation of each school’s effective universal and targeted approaches is provided in Appendix 2. This includes information on the school roll, SIMD profile and its urban/rural classification.
Most establishments report year on year improvement, with many seeing small but consistent gains across cohorts. Some note clear strengths in restoring attendance to, or beyond, pre-pandemic levels, demonstrating important strengths in sustained recovery. However, persistent absence, unauthorised holidays and anxiety related non-attendance remain recurring challenges, often intersecting with other factors such as poverty, mental health or complex needs. A few settings show areas where progress is slower or uneven, particularly for those with ASN, FSM or specific year groups. Overall, the pattern suggests encouraging signs of improvement, albeit with some aspects requiring further focused attention.
Common universal strategies include nurturing, relationship centred practice, predictable routines and clear communication with families. Soft starts, breakfast clubs and uniform or cost related support reduce financial and practical barriers for many learners and represent notable strengths in removing obstacles to attendance. Staff training in trauma informed or nurturing approaches strengthens the environment further. Clubs, outdoor learning and leadership opportunities enhance the “pull” to school. Many schools describe consistent messaging and visible leadership as strong features of their approach, showing important strengths in whole‑school culture.
Targeted strategies typically centre on personalised, relationship-based interventions. These include key adult support, staged intervention meetings, home visits, tailored morning routines, and multi‑agency planning, particularly for learners facing complex needs. Emotionally Based School Avoidance (EBSA) specific responses—such as phased returns, safe spaces or flexible timetables—are especially significant and in some settings demonstrate major strengths in meeting individual needs. Additional Pupil Equity Funding (PEF) funded roles and specialist partners (e.g., youth work, counselling, wellbeing practitioners) offer valuable targeted support. Vocational pathways and adapted timetables help re-engage older learners where traditional models have not met their needs. Schools might consider using attendance data more deliberately to refine universal, culture‑building approaches and to strengthen targeted, relationship‑based supports that reduce barriers and improve engagement. Analysis should be used to better tailor interventions for vulnerable groups, inform multi‑agency planning, and adapt pathways or timetables so provision more precisely meets individual needs.
Monitoring is generally structured and frequent, drawing on SEEMiS data, custom dashboards, Red Amber Green (RAG) style tracking, and pastoral discussions. Many schools' triangulate attendance with wellbeing, attainment and staff observations, adjusting interventions as patterns emerge, reflecting effective and well‑embedded practice. Pre/post measures (using, for example, wellbeing webs, Boxall Profiles, or the Leuven Scales of Wellbeing and Involvement) help to evaluate nurture-based interventions. Some establishments would benefit from strengthening cohort level analysis, particularly for groups with persistent absence, signalling areas where further improvement is required, but most show clear routines for reviewing the impact of actions over time.
Schools use data to identify patterns such as day specific dips, persistent absence, lateness, and disparities linked to SIMD, ASN or cohort profiles. Regular reviews, coding checks and “first day anomaly” alerts enable swift follow up and represent important strengths in early intervention. Teachers and pastoral staff receive updated information to support early conversations with families. In several settings, data supports short improvement cycles, helping to refine approaches and target interventions precisely. Moving forward, schools should further develop their processes for data to inform improvement.
Curricular adaptation commonly includes outdoor learning, play pedagogy in early years, nurture bases, and high interest thematic programmes. Many primaries use practical, hands-on experiences to maintain engagement, while secondaries offer vocational courses, National Progression Awards (NPAs), apprenticeships and flexible pathways. Some timetables are adjusted to emphasise motivating subjects or to reduce transitions for anxious learners, demonstrating clear strengths in making learning more accessible. These changes often provide meaningful and relevant routes back into learning for learners at risk of disengagement and in some settings reflect very effective use of curriculum flexibility.
Most establishments enhance transitions through early information sharing, personalised plans and gradual familiarisation. Nursery to primary one transitions often use play-based approaches, buddy systems and soft starts. Primary seven to S1 transitions include extended visits, risk matrices, pastoral contact and targeted supports for vulnerable learners, including those who are experiencing care. Some secondaries provide immersive transition weeks or supported travel familiarisation. These approaches help to reduce anxiety and promote continuity, showing important strengths in supporting learners at key points of change.
Many schools maintain purposeful learning up to the final day of the term, organising engaging activities to discourage early absence due to pending holidays. Others adjust assessment windows, activity days or showcase events to improve attendance patterns, reflecting effective use of planning to mitigate dips. Messaging around medical appointments and avoiding term time holidays also plays a role. Some establishments modify the timing of trips or celebratory events to strengthen attendance in the lead up to breaks, which in some contexts has emerged as a notable strength.
Learners are involved through pupil councils, surveys, focus groups and leadership roles. Many schools encourage learners to help design attendance incentives, clubs, or whole school events. In targeted plans, learners set personal goals and reflect on progress with key adults, showing strengths in pupil partnership. Secondary learners often contribute through mentoring or structured tutor time conversations. While some establishments involve learners mainly at individual level, others are increasingly using learner voice to shape whole school culture, representing positive emerging practice in meaningful participation.
In line with the Curriculum Improvement Cycle, schools might consider using attendance and engagement information to evaluate which curriculum adaptations have the strongest impact for different learners (e.g. outdoor learning, practical experiences, vocational pathways and reduced transition structures). Schools may also wish to involve learners more directly in shaping themes, pathways, clubs, incentives and transition activities so that the curriculum reflects what motivates them and supports the wider national programme to evolve curriculum practice by 2028.
Establishments reported that strong, trusting and non‑judgemental relationships with families are central to improving attendance. Meeting families 'where they are' and clearly communicating the link between attendance and attainment helps shift parental behaviours and expectations. Reducing financial/practical barriers (e.g. uniform, transport, cost of the school day) was noted as a frequently used strategy to improve attendance. Flexible timetables, ‘Safe, Healthy, Achieving, Nurtured, Active, Respected, Responsible and Included’ (SHANARRI) ‑ based adjustments, use of engagement data, understanding individual contexts and home visits were viewed as the most effective personalised approaches. Multi‑agency work with health, social work, educational psychology and third-sector organisations was especially effective for families facing complex needs such as mental health, poverty or parenting challenges. Overall, relational, practical and personalised support is considered largely effective for families and should be a key element of all strategies to improve attendance.
The overall picture shows persistent and indeed intersecting attendance challenges linked to poverty, Additional Support Needs (ASN), care-experience, parent and learner mental health and term‑time holidays. Pressure points were noted in upper primary (P6-7), early secondary (S2–S3 - most notably in the afternoons) and key transition stages. Establishments reported that Mondays and Fridays often have lower attendance rates. Ensuring targeted, relational and multi‑agency approaches to address these ongoing concerns is important for all schools. Differences were noted between boys and girls in multiple establishments, with reports that boys’ attendance was lower overall in some establishments, while S3–S4 girls show lower attendance in other establishments, often linked to anxiety and wellbeing factors. Moving forward, it is important that schools look to further understand the barriers for girls, working with them to identify solutions and support.
Illness and health‑related concerns were the most common causes of absence. Anxiety, mental health difficulties, EBSA and term‑time holidays also feature prominently. Socioeconomic pressures (for example poverty, cost of the school day) and practical barriers (for example transport, geography) were said to influence attendance. Neurodiversity and Additional Support Needs (ASN) related challenges were also common causes of non-attendance. Social dynamics and peer relationships between learners were reported as causes of absence (for example bullying and fear arising from social media incidents). Parental influence, non-engagement and home factors were also identifiable as causes of absence.
Next steps could include the strengthening of early and co-ordinated work with families and partners to address pressures such as anxiety, EBSA, mental health needs, socioeconomic constraints, transport issues and peer or online concerns. Further priorities could include enhancing supportive communication and practical assistance so families can respond earlier to worries, reduce inconsistent routines and work collaboratively to resolve emerging attendance issues.
Establishments mostly rely on local authority attendance policies rather than creating their own standalone versions. Where standalone policies do exist, they appear to align with local authority guidance. Regarding the frequency with which policies are reviewed, it was reported that some establishments do so annually, while some do so every two to three years, while some had not reviewed for several years. Consideration should be given by all schools to ensuring they have an up-to-date policy, taking account of their own context.
Establishments aim to strengthen early intervention via more accurate tracking and monitoring, especially for learners with persistent absence (<90% attendance), free school meal (FSM) entitlement and those with additional support needs (ASN), anxiety or who have experienced care. There is a move toward enhanced data use, including Power BI, attendance trackers and SEEMiSSEEMiS. Improved family engagement including flexible meetings, home visits and use of family hubs were priorities.
Establishments emphasised that acting on learner voice and implementing more engaging and relevant curriculum pathways (especially in upper stages) are key to improving attendance. One establishment mentioned that curriculum approaches must increase the “magic, wonder and belonging” that learners experience (primary school). Multi‑agency partnerships continued to be widely noted as a strategy for improvement as did the need for the improvement of systems and policies regarding attendance, lateness and unauthorised absence.
Consideration should be given to strengthening early intervention through clearer tracking, integrated data use and more flexible family engagement so policies better identify risk and remove barriers for vulnerable learners. Reinforcing multi-agency planning and stabilising support roles will ensure families with complex needs receive consistent, coordinated help that improves attendance.
Schools highlighted the importance of strengthened support for vulnerable families, including access to mental‑health services, practical assistance and approaches that help build positive family relationships. Improved access to multi‑agency services was viewed as essential in helping address complex needs and supporting better attendance. The most consistent message from establishments was the importance of increased capacity in roles that directly support attendance, such as family link workers, guidance staff and pupil support assistants.
Several establishments emphasised that greater curriculum flexibility for interrupted learners could help those who are persistently absent or experiencing anxiety. Schools also noted that more streamlined data tools, clearer processes and reduced administrative demands would support earlier and more targeted attendance interventions. Schools expressed concerns in planning for sustainability.
Scottish Attainment Challenge (SAC) funding and Pupil Equity Funding (PEF) were described as essential for sustaining and improving attendance - primarily through relational, preventative and targeted staffing and interventions. Common posts included leadership roles, family link workers, youth workers, nurture/wellbeing staff and support assistants. SAC funding and PEF also support breakfast clubs and soft starts, outdoor learning, nurture, wellbeing programmes as well as reducing financial barriers (including clothing, transport, equipment). Partnerships with organisations such as children’s charities, community organisations, football trusts and employability services strengthen family engagement and youth activity. A few establishments however, report not using SAC funding or PEF specifically for attendance.
It will be important to review how SAC and PEF funding, alongside external partnerships, might be used even more strategically to reduce financial barriers and strengthen the relational and practical supports that contribute to improved attendance.
Engagement with Education Scotland varies, some establishments receive extensive support whilst others engage less because attendance is already strong or support is not deemed necessary. Where used, Education Scotland’s influence and support is deemed positive with mention of improved use of data and systems leading to more targeted and impactful interventions. Establishments report meaningful and regular engagement with attainment advisors (AAs) as well as the use of Education Scotland attendance resources. Participation in Education Scotland’s quality improvement (QI) programme and regional improvement collaboratives (RIC) attendance networks were particularly valued for improving use of measurement tools and refining attendance interventions.
Most establishments have not experienced a major rise in flexi‑schooling requests, though a minority noted a gradual increase since COVID‑19. A more noticeable rise has occurred in home-schooling rather than flexi‑schooling, often linked to mental health or anxiety. Establishments are increasingly using adapted pathways such as outreach programmes, home tuition, in‑house flexible packages and partner programmes (for example, skills academies).
Establishments emphasised a sustained commitment to improving attendance that is grounded in a positive culture, relational practice and data‑informed approaches. In establishments where attendance is improving, it appears to be part of a whole school ethos where values are “lived and embedded” (cited by one primary school). Staff request more professional learning on complex social issues that influence absence and greater opportunities for expert collaboration.
High quality learning experiences, nurturing and inclusive environments and leadership opportunities are noted as vital to support strong attendance. Establishments also identified challenges such as holiday scheduling and “short week” effects which may be detrimental to attendance. Finally, some establishments noted a positive shift in authority‑level support and communication, with greater emphasis on consistent messaging, media campaigns and transparency with families. This has strengthened shared understanding of attendance expectations and reinforced collective responsibility for improvement.
In addition to the responses analysed from schools, pilot work was undertaken with a focus on S4 leavers and how to support strengthened engagement and positive destinations. This work had two strands; one being gathering practice from secondary schools which resulted in published videos and the second being coordinated support with a group of secondary schools in one local authority. The evidence from both strands of the pilot illustrates how early identification, flexible curriculum design and strong relationships support learners at risk of leaving school at the end of S4. Across the schools involved, staff used robust data systems, pastoral information and multi‑agency insights to identify risk early, often from S2 or S3, and monitor engagement closely through live tracking of attendance, behaviour and aspirations. This enabled timely, targeted intervention.
A shared focus on flexible and personalised pathways was evident. Schools offer a mix of vocational options, tailored programmes, skills‑based awards and alternative learning experiences to address both push‑ and pull- factors that influence engagement. Strong communication with families and sustained pastoral support help to rebuild confidence and ensure learners feel connected to their next steps. Partnerships with primary schools, third‑sector organisations and post‑school providers further strengthen progression planning.
Challenges remain around sustainability, capacity and curriculum flexibility, particularly where effective support relies on short‑term funding or intensive staffing. Digital and hybrid models show potential but require significant resource, and complex home circumstances can continue to affect attendance and motivation.
Despite these obstacles, both pieces of work highlight the impact of proactive, relationship‑centred and data‑informed approaches. Schools reported improved engagement and more confident transitions either into S5 or into positive destinations. Strengthening early identification processes, expanding flexible pathways, enhancing communication and securing sustainable resourcing are key next steps to support wider application of these approaches.
Designed and delivered by Education Scotland, the Quality Improvement (QI) programme supports establishments to improve attendance for targeted learners using a QI methodological approach. Fourteen school establishments plus one pupil support service submitted ‘sharing the learning’ presentations. Within these, all had improved attendance for their identified learner group.
Targeting small groups first was effective and helped staff feel less overwhelmed, allowing for focused intervention work. Working closely with parents was noted as a crucial element to success. Establishments highlighted that communication and partnership with parents played a significant role in improving attendance.
Establishments applied a range of QI tools to analyse and improve attendance, including forcefield analysis, process mapping, fishbone analysis and run charts. Across all settings, learners with significant attendance issues tended to come from vulnerable groups. These demographic patterns emphasise the systemic nature of attendance challenges and the need for targeted equity-focused strategies.
Establishments emphasised the value of actively listening to learners in a supportive and non‑judgemental way. Eliciting pupil voice helped staff understand the underlying reasons for absence. The effective use of real‑time attendance data was a key enabler of improvement across schools, helping staff intervene more quickly. Overall, this initial QI work demonstrates positive early progress in improving attendance for targeted learners.
