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

You keep saying the campaign group want to shut down the Mossbourne secondaries and "deny opportunities" to Hackney pupils, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

The BBC report even quoted one of the parents behind the group as saying, "I absolutely do not want the school closed down."

I haven't heard a single voice calling for closure of the school. Yet you keep hammering on about it. I'm beginning to wonder if you just want to ... win the argument?

This is the the 14th or 15th time you’ve asserted that people on here advocate a “no-rules” approach. Not a single person on this thread has done that. Not a single person has even said anything that a reasonable adult, with basic comprehension skills, could construe that way.

It has been explained to you many times that you can advocate strict rules without condoning abuse. This is not, to be blunt, an especially difficult concept to grasp. It certainly shouldn’t tax the intellect of one who benefited from such a strict education as you. And yet like a windup toy running into the same wall over and over, you keep repeating the same thing as if it will magically become true the 21st time you say it.

You write too articulately to as foolish as you are pretending to be. So one has to conclude you are being dishonest.

It by “win the argument” you mean repeat the same infantile, simplistic statements until everyone else loses patience and leaves, I’d say she’s getting there.

@KillerTomato7

No one openly advocates schools having no rules, but that is the consequence when schools do not have strong behaviour systems which are rigorously enforced with consequences.

Both of the terrible schools I linked to upthread will have rules on paper, but their current situation with DC and teachers being assaulted and general chaos is the result of rules not being enforced or consequences not being applied consistently.

The ideology propagated by the anti-Mossbourne campaign group is against punishment and consequences, and would end up with a very similar situation with students thinking they are in charge and a failing school.

@TreeSquirrel The ideology propagated by the anti-Mossbourne campaign group is against punishment and consequences, and would end up with a very similar situation with students thinking they are in charge and a failing school.

It is not. You can be strict but fair without being strict and batshit crazy.

You can ban phones and punish misbehaviour without screaming at children, terrorising them, forcing them to wet themselves, give them detention if they look at a clock on the wall, etc. And without causing permanent emotional damage.

It's not some idealistic utopia - it's what many schools in this country and in many other countries already do and have been doing for a very long while.

Again, shame on you.
Again, only if you see yourself the devastating effect that toxic environments can have on the mental health of a loved one, might you be able to understand.

Can I just ask a question? Is there now an anti campaign within this school community? As in those who are getting together who do not want their school to change? Because this thread is starting to sound like it?

@ParentOfOne

There are no schools serving similarly deprived areas as Mossbourne which use a laissez-faire approach to behaviour and achieve successful results like Mossbourne though.

We have huge educational inequality in this country, largely because many schools in deprived areas have very poor behaviour, which makes it very difficult to deliver good teaching and attainment.

We should be looking at how the successes achieved by schools like Mossbourne can be replicated rather than denigrating their achievements.

@Araminta1003

I have no connection to the school, but I understand that a large group of parents have written a letter stating that the school has transformed the life changes of young people in the local area.

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”.

They added: “While the rules can be draconian … the vast majority of children are well-adjusted, happy and well cared for.”

Again what happens to children with additional needs who aren't able to adhere to these strict rules?

Yes lots of parents love these types of schools as they are selection by the backdoor.

The problem is that these schools see those who are often the most vulnerable as someone else's problem.

Therefore they may not necessarily be adding as much value as some think.

Hopefully the independent review will look into this.

@Emyj15

As has been pointed out, Mossbourne has a significantly higher proportion of students with SEN than average.

Many SEN students cope much better with a calmer environment than a school with lessons disrupted, bullying and fights commonplace.

I'm sure they do as do I suspect non SEN children who don't have to mix with disruptive children.

The point I'm making is there are SEN children who have sensory issues so will struggle to sit still in class, struggling wearing certain shoes or clothes etc.

What happens to these children?

Also what happens to the disruptive child who maybe disruptive because of problems at home etc?

I get the impression that all these schools offer is a place for children who were going to reasonably well at a school a place to do even better.

I'm not sure they really do anything for those with the most challenging needs as some seem to be suggesting.

Did these parents write that they don't believe the allegations, but that if they were true it would be horrible and they would not condone this behaviour?

Or did they write some variation of "it didn't happen to my kid, so who cares if it happened to others" and "I am happy with my kid being brutalised and terrorised at school as long as exam results are good"?

I trust you will appreciate there is a world of difference

I think it will be worrying for all parents at this school. Reputational damage in this climate with falling birth rates is never good, due to pupil and teacher attrition. Let’s hope the investigation is conducted swiftly and lessons learnt across the board. I still think normal channels should always be used fully first so no reputational damage happens and matters are swiftly dealt with. It is a shame the relationship between the school and these parents/ex pupils/ex staff has broken down to this extent that they could not mediate to resolve matters.

I don't know if other people have quoted Naomi Fisher's response, but this nails it for me.

https://x.com/naomicfisher/status/1868632261110677896

The Mossbourne Federation spokesperson says that this is a ‘vexatious campaign’.

Vexatious is a word which drew my attention, because I’ve seen it before. It’s been used by other schools and MATs where many parents are complaining about how their children are treated and the impact on them.

Vexatious means ‘an action which is brought without sufficient grounds, purely to cause annoyance’. Mossbourne Federation are saying, nothing to see here. There’s no issue with us and our practices – but these parents are behaving badly. They’re the problem, not us. It is, in fact, an attempt to shame the parents, to make them seem like troublemakers, out to make a fuss about nothing. It’s a way to avoid listening to what they are saying. It’s a deflection. They’re pointing the finger elsewhere.

This is the response which parents from other schools tell me that they get when they try to raise issues about the impact that harsh discipline polices are having on their children. They get defensiveness, and an insinuation that they and their child are in fact the problem. They get asked questions about whether they are supporting school policies at home, and their own attitude to homework.

When they tried to complain to the LA they were referred to the DfE, who referred them straight back to the school.

This is also the response which I get when I raise these issues on social media. I am accused of lying, of making it up to gain followers, or of trying to convince parents there is a problem where none exists. ‘

Vexatious’ says, we’re not listening. We don’t believe you. You’re making it up to annoy us. And isn’t this exactly what parents are complaining about? For years, no matter what they and their children said, the answer was ‘We’re not listening, because the problem is you’.

@Araminta1003 yes, in an ideal world normal channels should be used first.
But in an ideal world a state funded school shouldn't be able to mark its own homework, with no accountability. I posted the complaints process here: 4 steps with the school only, and a 5th step with the secretary of state, who however cannot overturn a school's decision!

Do you not see how flawed the process is? How unaccountable? Why do we allow this level of unaccountability on a crucial state funded service like education? Why?

@SharpOpalNewt thank you for sharing that tweet.
The parallels with me too,with how victims of sexual violence were not believed, belittled and made to feel guilty are very clear and deeply, deeply, deeply disturbing.

Will this be a me too moment for the unaccountable, draconian, state-funded academies? One can only hope

I really hope so @ParentOfOne

Naomi Fisher has a well-known ideological agenda, including a long-standing antipathy to Mossbourne, so I’d take anything she says about this story with a pinch of salt.

What her and others are not keen to talk about is the much higher number of DC who have their education ruined by disruptive and violent behaviour in schools.

You are STILL thinking in zero sum terms. There is a huge range of policy between Mossbourne style crazy and completely laissez faire. All across the UK, schools are working at that happy medium. Right now I don't know whether you are posting in good faith anymore, because someone as articulate as you is surely able to understand something so simple? There are schools where all is anarchy and failure. That myst change. There are schools which have good, sensible and firm rules. And there are schools like Mossbourne, which if the investigation warrants it, must also change.

Naomi Fisher is a clinical psychologist specialising in trauma. I am inclined to take her seriously because she is an expert in child mental health. That isn't ideology, it's knowledge. You still think anything you don't agree with is ideologically driven and therefore without substance. Clearly the Mossbourne approach is akin to a religion for some.

The Hackney campaign group advocate the Paul Dix style, laissez-faire approach to behaviour, which emphasises things like ‘restorative conversations’ instead of consequences.

That would have a huge negative impact on behaviour and outcomes.

You're on a hiding to nowhere with this. @Treesquirrel's position is summed up simply:

If I agree with it, it's evidence. If I disagree with it, it's ideology.

You can't argue rationally with the faithful.

Omfg have you ever looked at Naomi Fishers work? She's not an ideologue