MY overwhelming reaction to the report into the death of Bailey Gwynne at Aberdeen’s Cults Academy was: “There but for the grace of God go I.” I suspect there are few present and former headteachers who don’t feel the same way. The report concludes that the tragedy was “potentially avoidable”; with the benefit of hindsight, most things are.

In the inquiry’s aftermath, it will be important to provide reassurance for parents and their children. Looking back over a long career in a variety of schools, I have no doubt that our schools are safer and better places than when I set out. We have yet to successfully address low-level classroom disruption but violence, commonplace in the 1960s and 70s, is a rarity. Much is down to teachers’ ability to build positive relationships with youngsters and their skill in defusing potential conflicts. That, of course, is no consolation for Bailey’s family and, rightly, the focus of Andrew Lowe’s inquiry was to ensure that no family would experience such heartbreak again. Justice Secretary Michael Matheson has committed the Government to a close look at Mr Lowe’s 21 recommendations to “ensure schools are safe places for young people”.

The recommendations contain major implications not only for local and national government but also for parents, children and young people, teachers, police and other agencies. Teachers and police will be already considering the recommendation concerning the searching of pupils.

If headteachers suspect a youngster possesses an illegal weapon or substance, they are most likely to request the voluntary emptying of bags and pockets. Refusal to cooperate would normally result in a phone call to the child’s parents and, if appropriate, the police. I suspect most heads are happy with that situation and would be very cautious in regard to any additional powers.

In England, the extensive guidance on teachers’ stronger powers in respect of searching and screening for, and confiscating, a lengthy list of “prohibited items” demonstrates the complexity of and potential pitfalls in such measures. Potential gains in terms of safety would need to be balanced against damage to relationships and trust.

Mr Lowe has been commendably careful when reflecting on the detrimental effects on school ethos and climate of over-intrusive security measures such as routine searches and airport-type metal detectors. The importance of school ethos should not be underestimated in promoting a violence-free culture in which pupils are willing and feel able to share concerns and confidences with staff.

The role of parents is considered at the outset with the recommendation that they receive and sign a letter setting out the school’s “rules and expectations” regarding weapons. While such a letter may not prevent a similar tragedy, it serves a useful purpose by emphasising the importance of cooperation and partnership between school and home. Too often problems that lie in the wider community and society in general are laid at the school door, particularly when things go wrong.

A notable omission is consideration of what should happen when a headteacher raises concerns. I have written about my decision as a headteacher to permanently exclude a pupil whom I considered a danger to others. The decision was appealed by the council’s social work department and overturned. There was no sense of schadenfreude when the boy stabbed his key worker days later.

I have yet to meet a headteacher who excludes pupils lightly. Yet they are constantly under pressure to minimise exclusions. Figures are compared with the school down the road. They are often told that there is nowhere else for the youngster to go.

Resourcing was not part of Mr Lowe’s remit. Yet, if his recommendations are to be put in place, there is a need for properly resourced provision for young people exhibiting seriously challenging behaviour. If, in the Justice Secretary’s words, our schools are to be truly safe places there is a requirement for ring- fenced staffing and resources for youngsters requiring particular attention and support.

Few teachers would object to the policy of inclusion of all pupils provided the policy is properly planned and supported. Too often, however, schools cope with challenging pupils through gritted teeth and by crossing fingers, hoping that everything will turn out all right. Exactly a year ago it didn’t.

Doug Marr is a former headteacher.