Mossbourne Academies: investigations into alleged emotional harm and abuse. Why are needlessly strict academies unaccountable?

[ParentOfOne]

The Guardian has published a story https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/dec/07/london-academies-emotional-harm-mossbourne-schools-observer-investigation

about allegation of emotional harm and other forms of mistreatment at "one of the country's leading academy trusts", which runs the following schools in Hackney, North London: https://www.mossbourne.org/our-schools/

It is a follow up to a similar story, on the same topic, published a couple of weeks ago: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/nov/23/teachers-at-mossbourne-academy-in-hackney-screamed-at-and-humiliated-pupils-say-angry-parents

The previous story was based on testimonials from 30 parents, but now 70 parents, more than 30 former students and eight former teachers have come forward

"A dossier of allegations, shared with the Observer and sent to the education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, included Mossbourne teachers being trained in “healthy fear” and “screaming” sometimes “centimetres apart” from children’s faces, several reports of children fainting in line-ups while being shouted at, and children with special educational needs and disabilities (Send) being punished unfairly and “pushed out” to other schools. Many former students said they had suffered mental health issues due to being afraid in school which had lasted long after they left."

Here there were some discussions about how notoriously strict these schools were https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/secondary/5019841-mossbourne-community-academy-any-experiences but no one mentioned this kind of emotional abuse.

My opinion remains that:

• I hate how so many schools have become academies. That's a backdoor privatisation, with teachers being paid less, while the CEOs of these academy trusts earn more than many University vice-chancellors
• I hate that academies are de facto unaccountable to anyone
• It is false that academies do a better job. Some work well, some don't, but lack of transparency and accountability remain big issues. E.g. see academic research by the LSE https://www.lse.ac.uk/social-policy/Assets/Documents/PDF/Research-reports/Academies-Vision-Report.pdf .
• Academies are simply good at showing Ofsted what they want. If this kind of s* happens in a school rated Outstanding, it means ratings are useless
• I am all for strict discipline, and I will absolutely stand by the school if they punish my child for misbehaving. But I absolutely dread needlessly draconian rules, put together by sexually repressed headteachers who didn't get enough love from their mums, and who get off on exercising this kind of authority to crush their students' spirit. I had made some examples here: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/secondary/5168466-how-common-are-detentions-at-secondary?page=9&reply=138524258 where I also talked about a secondary school in London banning bicycles and giving detentions to students caught cycling to school

@pointythings I don't think anything is an excuse for "abuses of power".
I agree. It will come out in an investigation. Let's see.

I haven't followed this whole thread, so many messages but I'm so pleased but horrified to see theses articles. My son recently started secondary school, a lovely school with a lot of talk about kindness. We purposely didn't pick the school we know to be super strict, no talking in corridors etc. Anyway my son has only been there 2 months and had a full day isolation last week, only they didn't call it isolation, they called it inclusion pretending to me that some teacher would be helping him discuss better ways of dealing with his friend hurting him than hurting him back (but in my opinion neither boy was actually injured and a talking to or warning far more sensible) it turns out their inclusion room is full, with an overflow. He sat there in the overflow room alone, no conversation with anyone, no work. He didn't have a drink or go to the toilet for a whole day. Luckily I'd told him to take a book, I think that got him through. Someone took him to lunch to scan his finger print but I get the impression if they could have got away without that courtesy they would have. Of course he could have asked for a drink or the loo but he was petrified. He came home and burst into tears for the first time ever in all his school life. For the record it's the only time he's been in trouble too, the school are lucky to have him. A stupid incident but 11 year olds can be stupid. I just can't get over that schools, and this isn't a big MAT are so crappy. Why would kids be in rooms in school all day not learning, fair enough for a short time to genuinely deal with a situation which is disruptive or harmful but otherwise they should be sent home. Schools should have to publish how often they use this because it must be all the time and you have no way of knowing how frequently or for what as a parent.

What I’m gathering from the articles and the general reputation of the chain is that they extend their “authoritarian” ethos to the parent complaint process. Which is to say, they really don’t want to hear it, and you almost have go over their heads if you want to get anywhere.

in any situation where large numbers of people come to see ordinary channels as futile, they will turn to outside pressure. that means going to the press, organized protest, social media, etc. This is true generally, not just with regard to schools.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/dec/15/traumatise-children-education-london-academies-schools?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwY2xjawHMNZVleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHU0NqfWF6jet9swzbDD7nP4OASjItDLZvxyGkdPN4eKTb1PrlPSW_rbI0w_aem_od_E1Q5X0R8VZno3KDiI-Q#Echobox=1734279414

the thing that's puzzling is he majority of people in the uk would prefer to bring back national service to improve behaviour in society, yet when you get academies raising good behaviour's then its omg, its like how was national service any different than some of the method's in the academies ?

@jodeg

I do not see this as a choice between strict and what you refer to as "batshit crazy". I don't understand the need to engage in this way.

Because shouting at children, forcing kids to wear blazers in the summer, forcing them to wet themselves etc IS batshit crazy. What would you call that? Tough love?

You appear to have no respect for anybody who doesn't agree with you.

I have no respect for the bootlickers and the enablers who allow bully headteachers to terrorise and bully kids.
I am so sensitive about this because I know very well the consequences that toxic environments can have on adults. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy, let alone on children. Has your mental health ever been so bad that you lost weight, lost sleep, became a wreck, were unable to function? If not, then you cannot understand.

You refer to "Brits (who) are brainwashed and incapable of realising (things)".

No, I made a very specific and well-substantiated example about uniforms. brits love to say that uniforms lead to better behaviour and better academic results, but the evidence on this is inconclusive at best. Many countries manage well without and the academic studies on the UK do not support the notion that uniforms = better behaviour and better results. Yet uniforms remain so engrained in British culture. I told you that a headteacher said research supports his stance, and when I asked what research he fobbed me off.

If this was such a straightforward open-and-shut case of abuse then surely there would have been Ofsted reports over the last 20 years to imply that something isn't right.

Nonsense. History teaches us that abuse and impropriety can and do go in many organisations for prolonger periods of time. You cannot say that it cannot be true because otherwise it would have been picked up.

Why did abuse in the Catholic Church go on for so long? In the Anglican one, with Welby protecting that despicable individual?
Weinstein? Crispey Odin? Al-fayed?
Why did no one speak out? Were all these cases false because otherwise someone should have spoken out sooner???

Could it be that the school has in fact helped hundreds of children (thousands) to achieve their academic and emotional potential?

So terrorising some kids is fine as long as others are not terrorised????

One of my best friends had serious mental health issues in a toxic work environment. By your logic, why did he complain? Could it be that that firm actually helped so many people towards professional and financial success?? SHAME ON YOU!

But equally my experience is not wrong or untrue.

So what? No one is saying that every single child was terrorised. But that your child wasn't doesn't make it right that others were.

I expect you thought, similarly to us, that it would suit your child. And it didn't.

My child doesn't go there. I have explained why this topic is so sensitive to me

What gives you the right to change something which suits most other people; the majority? This is democracy. Why would you deny other people who want this, the right to have it?

We have laws in this democracy. Terrorising children is against our laws. We are not talking about a disagreement over whether the school should teach Latin or French

The rest of your response to my comments seems to be along the lines of "because I say this so it must be true".

No. I have substantiated every single thing I said.
And I called out the bullshit of those who don't substantiate their claims. Like the false dichotomy that there can be no alternative between anarchy and chaos vs batshit crazy.

I don't feel under any pressure to provide you with peer reviewed anythings.

You don't have to provide me with anything, but it is my right to call out the bullshit of those who hide behind alleged research and studies which do not exist.

The fact that you are so convinced that you are so correct about your position that you can disregard so many other viewpoints makes you only qualified to stand for yourself. And I am sorry for this.

I dismiss the bullshit of those who cannot substantiate their claims.
Again, claiming that these draconian methods are necessary is unsubstantiated bullshit.

one wonders if this is partly driven by a know your place for the superhead teachers and their militaristic style of raising standards if eg its shaming other schools etc (that may be a wild guess)

then you have to only look at schools where standards are more lax but then they are worse on league tables for results etc so surly that disproves the theory that a less strict approach improves results (again a guess)

@DarkAether Other than a handful of unrepresentative, out of touch loonies, no one has an issue with the concept of fair discipline.
Strict but fair and reasonable is good. Strict and batshit crazy is not.

Shouting at children is batshit crazy.
Punishing children for looking at a clock on the wall, forcing them to wear blazers in a heatwave, forcing them to wet themselves is batshit crazy.

Banning phones and punishing children for misbehaviour is strict but reasonable.

See the difference?

@TreeSquirrel The links you posted described policies whereby blazers have to be worn in corridors. No schools enforce the wearing of blazers in hot classrooms.

No. Like I said, the examples of kids forced to wear blazers in the heat abound.
I know cases at many schools myself, heard directly from parents, not hearsay.
I had posted links about that.
Mumsnet itself is full of discussions on this.
People have commented as much on this very thread.

If you want to ignore the evidence which contradicts your preconceptions be my guest, but don't say there is no evidence.

fair points on those, there has to be a balance but one thats reasonable, as if you give them free passes to rule then you get the results of the average schools etc

There’s a lot of breathing space between enforcing good behavior and what’s going on at these schools, some of which is probably illegal if indeed it occurred (eg forcing a child to kneel to the point of pain, refusing to make any accommodations for SEN, etc).

@KillerTomato7 thanks for explaining this to others. To be honest I'm surprised that some posters seem to fail to grasp (or accept) that this could be possible. I think they're lucky that they haven't had first hand experience of the reality.

Hmm the website seems to be a bit glitchy as I'd quoted KillerTomato and now can't edit my post to add the missing quote. I was responding to this point:

--------

What I’m gathering from the articles and the general reputation of the chain is that they extend their “authoritarian” ethos to the parent complaint process. Which is to say, they really don’t want to hear it, and you almost have go over their heads if you want to get anywhere.
in any situation where large numbers of people come to see ordinary channels as futile, they will turn to outside pressure. that means going to the press, organized protest, social media, etc. This is true generally, not just with regard to schools.

One of the main issues is that in many areas in practice choice does not exist. Popular schools fill up very quickly, usually with siblings and people who live very close by, and therefore if you live a bit further away and put that school down as a first choice it's a wasted choice. If you know the system you work out that you really have little choice but to put down your most local school at least in your top 3 choices, otherwise you risk getting none of your choices so that your child has to travel miles to what may be a lousy school.

It's virtually never a matter of saying "I don't like School A's ethos therefore I'll take a place at School B", because the chances are that a lot of parents think the same way so School B has no places left to offer.

If screaming at children was an effective way of getting them to understand the need to behave well, surely it would be used no matter what type of school is involved?

Nowadays private schools aren't as eager to get rid of pupils as might once have been the case. When the school is struggling with numbers (especially once VAT comes in) it tends not to be quite so keen on expulsion when it means waving goodbye to £20-30K a year or more. The business factor really works the other way round - private schools don't want to drive pupils away so use much more effective ways of teaching, and actually make the effort to meet SEND etc.

I don't think it is "all of a sudden". Mossbourne has a bit of a track record of trying to keep children with SEND out, going back several years. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/22/academies-pupils-special-educational-needs

That clearly hasn’t been very successful then given they have more students with SEN than average.

@TreeSquirrel That clearly hasn’t been very successful then given they have more students with SEN than average.

That's only because Mossbourne lost their case in court. The fact that the school fought in court because they wanted the law on special educational needs not to apply to them says it all about the school, its "leaders", their "values" and their "ethos".
Let us all remember for a second that this is a STATE school, funded entirely by taxpayers, which doesn't want to be accountable to anyone and doesn't want laws to apply to itself. One of the main problems with academies and free schools is exactly this, the lack of accountability.

@Araminta1003 I do not know why you are singling me out in your posts above.

You linked a Torygraph article which was completely nonsense. I debunked the article.

Our school doesn't have a policy on blazers. Some of my colleagues insist that students ask before removing them. With 32 students I think that's ridiculously disruptive.
I have had colleagues in the past who insisted on blazers in the classroom until 'shirt-sleeve order' is announced at start of last summer half term.
I do think the reverse is more common though. When windows had to be open (I still leave mine open as I'm vulnerable) there were plenty of schools who wouldn't let students wear their coats - there were numerous threads about it.

The court case linked above was in a year when Mossbourne already had more children with SEN than average admitted. The people who brought the case were determined their child should go to Mossbourne, although there were alternative academies close by. Anyway, this ‘me too’ moment for Mossbourne has been a long time coming, there have been too many stories over the years of what goes on there, too many children pushed out, the 20 places that are suddey avaiable for ‘rowing scholarships’ in year 9 have to come from somewhere

Interesting to see that a number of parents have now written a letter to defend the school from these attacks.

Another group of parents from MCA wrote to the Observer last weekend, describing the academy as a “successful school with brilliant and committed teachers”. Built on the site of a “previously failed school”, the academy, they said, “aspired to the success of every one” of its children from a “very mixed demographic”.

That's not 'interesting ', it's always been the case that some parents love this ethos. That doesn't mean the school has done nothing wrong. Let's see what comes out of the investigation.

@TreeSquirrel what is "interesting" is that none of the families who are coming forward to defend the school are, if I understand correctly, denying the allegations.

The bootlickers are not saying: "no, that's never happened, if it did it would be wrong and of course I'd oppose it". They are saying that they like the school, its methods and the academic results.

See the difference?

Again, a few decades ago we would have had the same conversation about corporal punishments.
A few decades ago we would have had headteachers defending the need for corporal punishments, because they are the experts and know best, and families defending those methods.

Those sick, deranged individuals have ended up on the wrong side of history.
I trust that so will those who are defending Mossbourne and its methods.

Again, none of this means being lax on discipline.
You can and should be strict but fair without being strict and batshit crazy.
Banning phones and punishing misbhevaiour is strict but fair.
Shouting at children, forcing them to wear blazers in a heatwwave, forcing them to wet themselves etc is batshit crazy.

FWIW I have been speaking to some families who considered or sent their kids to these schools.

One family with a child at Ashcroft (the SW London academy that gives you detention if you cycle to school, and which gives you a 5-hour detention (no teacher, no learning, just detention) for every day of school missed) is desperate to leave. Their child was very academic, loved reading, but now the joy of reading and living has been sucked out of him because he gets detentions for the slightest thing, even if he dares question why. Some teachers give homework on Sunday afternoon, and if the kids don't bring it by Monday morning it's detention.

This is the normalisation of bullying and toxicity.

These schools do not cultivate free thinkers with a sceptical, analytical, critical mindset. They cultivate subjects whose job it is to keep their heads down and suck it without questioning the authorities and their injustice.

These schools create young adults who will have normalised injustice and toxicity, and who won't bat an eyelid in an abusive, toxic workplace where capricious bosses treat them like dirt.

Is this what all the politicians and the bootlicker parents want for their children and for society as a whole??

Why the <insert expletive here> should a teacher be allowed to upload homework only on Sunday afternoon? What does this teach the kids, other that life is unfair and rules are petty and capricious??

@jodeg, I'd genuinely be interested to hear what your DC who attended Mossbourne thinks of the accusations. Do they ring true? If so, doesn't it shock you to hear how the children are treated? There are too many reports for it not to be true. Even if your child ducked under the radar, so managed to keep their head down, think how they spent their time there. Scared to even move their head in line up, hearing other kids yelled at so aggressively? The ex-pupil the BBC interviewed was very articulate about the impact on him. He spoke of hearing the Heads of Year yelling at kids and still having nightmares even now he's left. He didn't seem like an agitator to me. Just a nice normal young man who's troubled by it. Your child might have got through it all in an okay way - I really hope they did, but just on the day to day experience, doesn't it make you feel sad? It does me. Schools should be kind, structured places where children thrive. That doesn't negate discipline. I believe in ordered schools where kids can learn. I think most on here do, but the issue with Mossbourne is the way they treat the kids. No one's denying the good results. As the ex-pupil on the BBC interview said, he got good results, but he's not sure it's worth it.

I don’t think the ‘bootlicker’ terminology is at all or conducive to having a serious and considered discussion.