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

I would just like to remind everyone that Holland Park was the darling of the Labour Party once upon a time, the British dream of comprehensive achievement!
Let’s face it, middle class bright kids with books and pushy parents simply require a different type of education than poor bright kids with less educated parents. The latter should have all the resources thrown at them and the former should be allowed to to mix in a selective way, problem solved.

In addition, all education should be tailored to the child and their home environment. For some children, it is going to be much better to have lots of extra Maths and English classes to achieve 5 solid GCSEs overall for their future (so tailored timetables) and for others with a privileged home life and a work space and dinner made can well do 10 GCSEs. Education simply has to be much more tailored now to both underlying ability, any learning difficulties and home life. It should not be that complicated. And it should not affect what course you study at uni later on either, unless it is very academically rigorous. What is a significant achievement for one child, is not for another. And we should be rewarding effort and resilience in our education system, not just achievement. And we should know all the children. That also applies to parents who sometimes either have too high or too low expectations of their own children.

@Araminta1003 it's deeply ironic how you are suggesting that the current furore around Mossbourne is being politicised when on this thread you are the one making everything about politics!

Nobody ever said it wasn't possible for a school to lose its way. That would be ridiculous. Schools start well and then go wrong, and schools also turn themselves around from a bad situation. Not everything is about politics. The investigation into Mossbourne is not - it's about sorting out a school that has gone wrong, just as Holland Park was. And that is exactly what should happen.

I do actually agree with this. The UK model is far too 'one size fits none' We could do with looking at countries which have a more selective education system where young people get the essentials but cen choose high quality vocational education before 16. We also need to get rid of GCSEs for young people who are going to sit A levels - they're pointless for that group.

In the areas they are in, they don’t have high sen pupils. They have 1.9% with a EHCP and 10 % receiving support. That’s below the national average and definitely below the LA stats.

are you talking about Mossbourne. Have higher numbers of SEN than average school

No. I quoted Michaela. They are lower. What are their LA figures? National is not really helpful.

State mainstream secondary schools in Brent have 2.3% of pupils with EHCPs and 9.7% on SEN Support. So Michaela’s 1.9% isn’t too far out from the LA’s average for EHCPs and 10.1% is slightly above the LA’s rate of pupils on SEN support.

Mainstream state secondary schools in Hackney have 4% of pupils with EHCPs and 13.9% on SEN Support.

I’m not sure grammar schools where students need to perform extremely well in a test to get in can really be compared to a state comp in Barnsley or Canvey Island.

Grammar schools have a naturally motivated and intelligent intake, engaged parents and far lower FSM and SEN figures than a normal school. Most state schools have a large proportion of pupils who aren’t interested in education and disinterested parents.

Around me in a grammar county, there’s no large percentage of parents and pupils who are not interested in education. It’s a relativy small percentage. With between 20-40% in the grammars there are plenty of bright and average dc in the other schools. They also do well. Some don’t but not a large percentage. Most parents are supportive. A minority are not.

Quite, and there's also the fact that it in't the disengaged pupils that you need to worry about as a school - they will be managed out. The problems happen when draconian disciplinary policies impact children who want to succeed and behave well but are then hit by ridiculous heavy handed consequences for the smallest moments of imperfection, like looking at a clock. Those children become scared, walk on eggshells - and when you're in a state of fear you are not going to be able to give of your best. And never mind the memories that you are left with, as is made clear in the interviews with former pupils.

Just found this thread. My DS is at MVPA and I’ve being following it all with interest.The person who called the safeguarding review just made a new statement which in interesting - he doesn’t sound happy about what’s the school’s been saying in letters to parents - https://chscp.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/2.-ISCC-Statement-MVP-Dec-2024.pdf

In his previous statement he said the review was going to be ‘independently led by Sir Alan Wood’. Quite a few people have commented on here about Ofsted - Alan Wood has his own views: https://schoolsweek.co.uk/why-ofsted-should-not-inspect-safeguarding-and-who-should-do-it-instead/

Over 300 parents have now written a matter praising the impact the school has had on their children and the local area:

We are parents and carers of current and former students at Mossbourne Community academy and Mossbourne Victoria Park academy, including parents of children with special needs. We feel the articles in the Observer do not represent the spectrum of experiences and opinions of parents, students and teachers (“Top London academies face mass claims of emotional harm as Whitehall acts on crisis” and “School in leading Mossbourne academy trust faces safeguarding review”).

To give just one example, the Department for Education has (we understand from the school) already investigated a series of allegations and found no evidence to support the concerns about safeguarding practices. Based on DfE school performance data, MVPA and MCA ranked in the top 10 out of 6,542 schools for “Progress 8” [progress across eight qualifications for pupils aged 14-16]. For schools where over 35% of students are disadvantaged, both academies are in the top five. In addition, MCA ranks first in the country for schools with over 50% disadvantaged students by Progress 8. SEND students and low prior attainers do exceptionally well.

Mossbourne can and does change the trajectory of young people’s lives for the better. They are successful schools with brilliant and committed teachers. Their ethos of providing a level playing field for all children from all backgrounds is commendable. MCA is on the site of a previously failed school, and both schools have a very mixed demographic of children from the local community, providing excellent teaching for their students and aspiring to the success of every single one of them.

While the rules can be strict and firm, and there is room for improvement in some areas, the vast majority of the children are well adjusted, happy and well cared for. No school is perfect, and we welcome the opportunity to suggest and support some changes in the way the schools operate.

www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2024/dec/22/observer-letters-schools-change-lives-for-better

@TreeSquirrel that last paragraph is what really matters here. It's good to see that Mossbourne parents are able to understand that Progress 8 and the academics are not the be all and end all. Let's hope the invesetigation manages to weed out the things the school is getting wrong and that the school can then become a strict but fair and effective organisation.

That letter is bull and those parents should be stripped of their parental responsibilities.

Note how they do NOT say the allegations are false and they do NOT say that, if they were true, they would oppose those horrors. No.

The whole implication seems to be some combination of "it didn't happen to my kid so who cares" and "who cares if it happened as long as exam results are good".

Not also how they dedicated not a single word to mental health. Again, schools with corporal punishments achieved good academic results but this doesn't justify corporal punishments.

I am one of the parents who signed the letter. Thanks for saying should be stripped of parental responsibility. Anyone want two slightly stroppy teenagers???

anyway nothing was put in the letter about the allegations as the inquiry has been set up and it will do its job. It’s not up to us to say what’s true or not. It was simply a response to the articles which weren’t giving perspective

I don’t recall the school disputing the inquiry. Maybe I read letters differently

@Boldly I disagree with OP's last post. However, I do hope that you will agree that fear based education regimes are not helpful or ethical and that it is possible to have strong, fair discipline. It would have been helpful if the letter had acknowledged that a significant number of pupils suffered at the hands of the regime and that this was not acceptable.

@Boldly you are most welcome. I stand by every single word, and I explained why.

Have you ever seen first hand the impact toxic environments can have on the mental health of adults?
Have you ever seen a loved one reduced to an emotional wreck, unable to sleep eat function? The thought that this is being done to children doesn't let me sleep.

You seem to be one of those people who'll never understand until and unless it happens to them - at this point I even wonder if it happening to a loved one would be enough for you to understand.

Not 10, not 100, but ca 200 people come forward, and your reaction is.... to praise the school because it worked for you?

By the same logic, should we praise those organisation which worked for 90% of their employees because they abused only 10%?

Should sexual abuse in the Churches not be a big deal because the same churches have also helped many people, too? Do you realise how despicable this logic of yours sounds?

Tell me: did you sit down with your children? Did you ask them if anything like that happened maybe not to them but to others?
How would you react if they told you they haven't been emotionally abused but others have?

The letter is bull also because it implies that these draconian methods are necessary to achieve good academic results. They are not! There is no consensus nor any research by experts that they are, while there is significant research on the negative, nefarious consequences of needlessly draconian environments.

Also tell me: what do these policies achieve, why are they necessary, and why do you think that batshit crazy works better than strict but fair? What is achieved by shouting at children or punishing them for looking at a clock on the wall?

My life was made hell by toxic environments and bullies. I am not going to apologise for reminding others of these dangers, nor for my choice of strong words against the bullies who are responsible and the bootlicker enablers who are possibly even more responsible.

For anyone interested, the Financial Times has published a series of articles on the current mental health crisis in the workplace

https://archive.is/WsyQk

If a toxic environment can break an adult, the impact on children can be even worse.

Not to mention that these batshit crazy schools normalise toxicity and bullying, and risk creating a generation of young adults for whom toxicity and bullying will be normal and nothing to complain about, even in the workplace.

You don't need to be a conspiracy theorist to wonder if this is part of the true objectives.

With respect you know nothing about me or my life. I am sorry that you went through an awful time I really am. Being Demeaning and being rude to others doesn’t help matters.

I meant his examples below - I thought I’d seen this in the school’s letters…

“Some statements have recently emerged that are simply wrong. For example, that the CHSCP’s decisions have ignored or bypassed statutory processes and that the triggering of the review has been ideologically influenced by a debate about Academies. To be absolutely clear, the CHSCP has responded thoughtfully, proportionately and in
line with statutory guidance. There is a coherent rationale for the review, and I doubt anyone who puts children first would suggest that the culmination of concerns could or should be ignored.”

@Boldly Do you object to my tone or also to my content?
If I had used kinder words but raised the same points about mental health, the dangers of toxic environments, the risk of normalising toxicity, etc, would you have listened or would you have been just as dismissive?

Just today the Financial Times published a story on financier Guy Hands

https://archive.is/8RE0Q

A special needs child, a target for bullies and corporal punishment, he went on to found a very successful investment firm and, surprise, surprise, the bullied became a bully, the victim of a toxic environment ended up normalising toxicity, terrorising his employees, making sexually inappropriate remarks, etc.

Using the logic of many on this discussion, there is nothing wrong and nothing to discuss, since he attended academically successful schools, he achieved academic success himself, then founded a successful firm which made the financial and professional fortunes of many employees, so who the f cares if a handful of losers felt brutalised terrorised bullied and harassed? Mental health? What mental health? You lot don't even know what that means.

Do you see the flaws in your line of thinking?