Inevitable and constant change is challenging school systems worldwide, and COVID-19 has further intensified the debate on the future. This article examines the possible futures of Finnish comprehensive schools through three scenarios generated by analysing data from a Delphi panel of 30 Finnish experts in the field of education. This study contributes to two major intertwining debates: first, who or what determines the content and goals of the curriculum. The study's theoretical framework builds on the curriculum as a social practice model, which views curriculum work as interwoven layers and sites of practice. Another topical debate concerns the tension between powerful knowledge and competences in the curricula. This is explored through Young and Muller's model of three types of knowledge: knowledge of power, tacit knowledge and powerful knowledge. The results show that Finnish comprehensive schools have various substantially divergent trends. In the three scenarios, the role of the teacher as a curriculum maker varies from non-existent to a strong interpreter. International policy flows can be transferred to schools to varying degrees. The three types of knowledge included in Young and Muller's model can be recognised in the three scenarios. Competences can be identified as learning outcomes in all scenarios, but the intensity varies. Scenarios are not predictions of the future or policy recommendations but an efficient tool for provoking strategic debate, generating new visionary thinking and considering the need for system-wide change in education.