Bullying HT left today, complaint upheld by Dept Ed, so why can't they enforce it?(22 Posts)
Delighted bullying HT has finally gone today after a very serious complaint was upheld by Dept Education. Would have been nice if Chair Gov had gone too! Despite breaking the Education Act as well as not following various procedures and policies, apparently it is up to the school whether or not they choose to put into practice the recommendations and requirements. Rather baffling - anyone else had similar experience?
If they are an academy, there is no oversight.
If they are an academy, there is no oversight
That simply isn't true.
Regardless of the status of the school it is up to the governors to take action. If they choose not to there is little anyone can do. However, academies are in a weaker position than maintained schools as the EFA can withhold their funding if necessary. Many maintained schools don't allow complaints to be referred to the LA but it is always possible to complain to the EFA about an academy.
seriously unless this is more deepseated than just the head you need to back the chair of governors. If the issue is also with the governors the school is in serious risk of being placed into category by OFSTED. The way of avoiding this is if the governing body can demonstrate their strength in dealing with the situation and holding the head to account.
the EFA can withhold their funding if necessary
has it happened yet?
just that there are thousands of examples of poor Ofsted followed by the LEA parachuting in new GB and SLT almost overnight to turn schools round within two terms
I'd like to see named examples of Academies where the EFA or DfE have acted decisively
tbh excluding the "Trojan Horse" schools which were just a political stitch up
Prh47bridge is correct. The initial bullying incident - I will out myself now! Involved HT taking DS in front of a class, then KS2, and calling him a bully, making him apologise to "alleged victim" not informing parents, not following their anti bullying policy or complaints policy - I could go on and on- for an alleged bullying incident that couldn't have possibly taken place as DS wasn't even in school ! Unfortunately the whole sorry incident snow balled into lying, deceit and attempted cover not only by HT but by Chair Governor. Other parents also had complaints going on and even the MP was involved. Unfortunately for him the stupid Governor tripped himself up by putting his lies into writing, and thanks to our friend FOI we proved this. However, Mr Chair has not done the decent thing and resigned- even though a fellow Gov did to distance himself . You are correct in saying it seems that even if you are a proven liar and unethical, you are untouchable. What sort of example is this to the children?
tobysmum77 Ofsted are fully aware of all of this but cannot get involved in complaints - it's up to Dept of Ed - who have now said it is up to the school if they choose to rectify situation . All a lot of pardon me bollocks ! We were even threatened with legal action in an attempt to make
us drop the complaint. The only good thing to come out of it is the bully has now gone. Sorry very Long!
if its an LEA school, what have THEY done about the Governors?
and the SLT
as LEA schools (where the LEA has any staff left) have tighter oversight
what have THEY done about the Governors
The LA cannot replace individual governors other than the ones they appoint (which will be a small minority). They can replace the entire governing board with an Interim Executive Board or appoint additional governors. The process for doing that starts with giving the school a warning notice. If the school objects to the notice it can take 8 weeks from the time the notice is issued until the LA can intervene.
The LA can only issue a warning notice if academic performance is unacceptable, there has been a serious breakdown in the management of the school which is likely to prejudice academic performance or the safety of pupils or staff is threatened. It is not clear that the situation described by the OP is falls into any of these categories. You could argue that there has been a breakdown in management but is it serious and will it prejudice the school's academic performance?
has it happened yet?
I am not aware of any cases going that far. I would expect a school to back down when faced with a threat of having its funding withheld. In most cases where intervention has been required in an academy the sponsor, who has much more freedom to act than an LA, has stepped in rapidly to make changes. I am not aware of any that have yet been in a position that required the EFA or DfE to step in other than those academies caught up in the "Trojan horse" allegations. That doesn't mean there haven't been any, of course. I note, however, that the National Audit Office in a recent report criticised the DfE, EFA and LAs for failing to tackle underperformance consistently.
no they can't get involved in complaints but they will inspect if there are concerns. This is what happened at dd's school. If a school gets a 4 for management it is usually special measures and is at least serious weakness.
i'm just saying, it's worth being aware as the school ending up in special measures is bloody awful. dd's is a naice school, and has good sats results, most of the parents were utterly shocked.
If you think about Academy chains where they have had schools removed from their "supervision" that is to my mind an example of where the EFA have taken effective action against poorly performing academies.
That is however not the same as we have here with the OP, which is apparently very much more a disciplinary situation arising from unacceptable actions by the head teacher.
I have to say that I am somewhat surprised that the GB as a whole have not insisted that the Chair stand down if as OP suggests they lied in writing. However I think before getting to carried away I would want to know what the actual circumstances are around this. It would be not unreasonable for the Chair to have stated things in the letter which they believed to be true on the basis of information from the head teacher, which now have been proved to be a lie. However as I have said it really needs far more information, which for obvious reasons the OP is not going to disclose on this public site.
TalkinPeace, unfortunately prh47bridge is correct, LEa cannot replace individual Govs. Apparently they are self-governing and it's up to the Board how they choose to respond. However, as the Chair misled, lied and withheld info from the Board, they had no idea what was really going on! FOI is marvellous! The LA were presented with all this but have still not removed Chair. School has not underperformed academically, indeed it has an outstanding Ofsted albeit long time ago. Of course the problem is with the management of the school. Ofsted have filed this said it will examined at next inspection. Of course HT was terrified of losing their badge and at last parents evening stood over parents whilst they completed a satisfaction survey no doubt to be presented to Ofsted! We are astounded that Chair hasn't been removed - aren't the LEA negligent ? And also why Dept Ed seemingly have no power to enforce their recommendations ? Seems schools have a free rein then? Someone suggested complaint/legal action but not sure if can be bothered. Perhaps it would get them to change this ridiculous self- governing fiasco!
my daughters school wasnt underperforming and had previously been good with outstanding features. Inadequate management ONLY is enough to place a school in category.
Do all the governors know the full story now? They can replace the chair, I would think.
As it is a Local Authority school the only body with the power to remove the Chair is the Governing Body. That is, the other Governors.
An LA has no "control" over a Governing Body other than:-
1.If the GB runs a financial deficit without permission the LA can take over the finances of the school.
2. They can take over and run Parent Governor elections - this job is usually delegated to the Head.
3.They can change the Governors they appoint, always a minority.
3..Under special circumstanes as laid out by PRh47 bridge above they can dismiss the ENTIRE GB and replace it with an Interim Board. This does not sound like a situation where this legal power can be excercised
However there are informal things that can happen. Talk to your local elected councillor.
Have you brought a formal complaint against the chair in accordance with the schools complaints procedure?
How did the DoE got involved with your case?
We were informed by the DoE that they won't get involved with individual cases, when we made very serious complaints against a private school HT. Also, the school's trust refused to comply with their complaints procedure. The DoE did instruct the ISI to inspect the school at the next round, but like the DoE, the ISA won't deal with individual cases. So the very badly behaved HT got away with everything she did to us.
Tobymum77 Inadequate mangt ONLY is enough- yes I know. Very puzzling as Chair report into complaint was a sham, lied to MP in writing, lied to GB - we have the minutes. Tobymum77 lightbulb moment ! Just found out that LEa head honcho is no longer and is now Director at Ofsted!! Now that's interesting!
Carddecker - yes most GB now know story only because we sent them the facts as they'd been totally misled by chair. Only 1 resigned. Rest were spineless or stupid.
Nlondondad - complaint was vs HT & what did to DS. Hadn't thought about complaint vs Chair. Long process not sure if have energy ! Local councillor and mp were involved . Old boys network .
Sunflower - have to exhaust entire complaints procedure before stage 4 dept of Ed will get involved. Deliberately make it cumbersome to deter complaints!
Not sure if there are any avenues left now ? Miffed about that director thing uum got me thinking
Is he reaching his full academic potential OP?
Try NCTL Teacher Misconduct.
Parents who complete complaints system can submit a case even when not upheld by governors
Join the discussion
Please login first.