‘There is so much freedom that is not being used.’ This observation was at the core of our Teacher Agency Working Group discussions. Like the characters in J.B. Priestley’s An Inspector Calls, we are all implicated in a system of our own making and may be more constrained by fear than by the system itself.

During our conversations within the group, there was a shared sense of surprise that so much within the Curriculum and Assessment Review (CAR) consultation process pointed towards a perceived lack of autonomy, while the curriculum itself, upon closer inspection, appeared relatively open. It was clear from these discussions that educators seem to be opting for, or being directed towards, a leaning towards risk-averse practice. The group also reflected on the (somewhat ironic) reliance on much-loved texts such as An Inspector Calls, with discussions even touching upon whether removing certain staple texts from reading lists altogether might encourage the use of a wider range of texts – another point raised during consultation. So why are educators seeking the familiar while simultaneously calling for greater autonomy?

Fear. Is it, in fact, the inspectors calling, that is causing this comfort-seeking behaviour? Could a removal of the high-stakes accountability model redirect educator energy to a more vulnerable place and enable us to utilise the freedoms that are available? Can we find a safe space; supportive enough to play, be creative and make mistakes?

High-stakes accountability systems have been a consistent part of our conversation as a working group and an ever present threat in my life as a teacher. Creating a climate of fear and compliance, especially for senior leaders, seems to be contributing to a temptation (or need) to control through tidy, organised and consistent practice leaving less space for a slightly messier (but perhaps more effective) playful exploration. With an over-reliance on schemes, and previously successful and familiar texts, are we saying that when an inspector calls, certainty in the form of tried and tested beats the risky nature of exploration?

We also considered evidence-informed practice and agency. Evidence-informed practice is vital, but it must not become all-encompassing. Conversation suggested an absence of consultation amongst staff teams when embedding practices, a clear hierarchy of decision making resulting in teachers lacking an understanding of the value in what they are doing. How do we discover new ways of teaching that might become evidence-informed in the future if we continue to rely on the same safe approaches? Calling for consistency can overlook the importance of learning through experience.

Finally, this meeting saw a discussion around agency and Artificial Intelligence (AI). I wish the concern and caution with which AI lesson planning is being approached had also been applied when schemes were introduced. In my mind, schemes of work may pose a greater risk in reducing autonomy by standardising practice. It is often perceived that a scheme is only worth the money if you show fidelity to it. AI-generated lesson plans however, can enable higher levels of agency if used by experienced teachers to enhance and broaden their practice. It is also important to note the potential risks of AI-generated plans when used by educators still building on their teaching and AI experience or those who require further professional learning opportunities, as it may result in over-reliance and insufficient tweaking and adaptation. 

There appears to be a running theme behind the agency limitations we both perceive and experience as teachers; a combination of professional development shortcomings, isolated thinking, an entrenched hierarchical model and high-stakes accountability measures. Perhaps with the dismantling of these structures and a movement towards collaboration and collective direction, we might find ourselves in a space conducive to utilising the autonomy actually available to us. A space where we are genuinely heard and valued, feel safe to explore, take risks and rediscover playfulness and creativity in our lives as teachers.

Sophie Smith-Tong is the author of Teacher Autonomy. Where Has It Gone and Why We Need It Back published by Routledge. 2026.