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

And are you going to accept that the extremes of the Mossbourne approach were not required, and that a strict but sensible regime could have been established instead?

No one on this thread has pointed to a ‘strict but sensible regime’ (whatever that is) that has achieved the same success as Mossbourne at any other school in similar circumstances.

We will never be able to come up with an example that would satisfy you, because you've already made it clear that academic success - high grades - is the only measure of success that matters to you.

The whole point of this thread is that a school which damages pupils' well-being, which uses fear as a learning tool, which leaves them in a worse state than when they arrived - this is not a successful school. No matter what grades it achieves.

And, as the OP pointed out about a million pages ago, there should be a system in place so that academies which are failing in this regard can be held accountable.

Mossbourne has only achieved success by one measure. It has failed on others, the arguably more important ones. And of course there is no success for those who are conveniently managed out by destroying their mental health and their sense of safety at school.

When hundreds of parents and teachers are all saying the same thing, a school can either address that or stick its head in the sand. It's clear what Mossbourne and it's fans are doing. They do not care.

Of course academics are not all that matters.

However, what you don’t recognise is that schools with very poor behaviour are not just bad for learning. They are also very dangerous for the wellbeing of the students in them (especially many with SEN).

Do you think the school another poster mentioned where the most vulnerable pupils suffer physical harm and there are organised fights is conducive to good mental health?

There is also strong evidence that good academic outcomes lead to better health and wellbeing later in life. Too many DC in deprived areas still don’t have the opportunity to access those- just as the Mossbourne catchment didn’t used to.

Nobody is arguing with any of that. But you seem to think that screaming at children, instilling a culture of fear and leaving children to soil themselves is acceptable. As is reported from Mossbourne. Why is that? The middle ground is there for the taking. Same day detentions, strict on uniform (with the caveat that uniform should be genuinely affordable to avoid covert selection by affluence), sensible use of isolation (I.e. involving the provision of work that furthers educational progress, with supervision that can explain and support so the child does not fall behind) - all those things can be done. Why does Mossbourne think the extreme stuff is needed?

The problem is there are some parents who don’t support strict rules or don’t believe the rules should apply to their DC. These parents will always be a vocal minority when a school is trying to turn itself around by raising expectations.

I’m not suggesting none of the complaints about Mossbourne are genuine issues, but I certainly think there are some parents who would prefer the poor behaviour, and there are schools catering to that.

Locally its known that pupils leave Mossbourne because they can’t get on with the regime and are excluded, or have a managed move to another school, or elect to leave, or are ‘off-rolled’ despite being previously high achieving because they have a chronic illness thats affecting their work (i know people this has happened to). There are 20 rowing places available in year 9, these aren’t additional places, people have left. Then there are plenty of schools, including locally, where the bottom line figure of, say, the number of pupils achieving 5 in english and maths is not that far behind Mossbourne, say less than 10% behind. But they do it without the Mossbourne practices, they do everything they can to stick with their year 7 intake through to year 11. In my opinion, these schools are as every bit as academically successful as Mossbourne is. And are better than Mossbourne on other measures, or should be measures, such as pupil retention,

Ah, I see. The parents who complained want their kids in a war zone school, and it's all exaggerated, and Mossbourne doesn't do anything wrong. Colour me surprised.

Regardless of the draconian behavioural rules, Mossbourne are great at gaming the system. As *girlgonenorth *says, it's well known locally that they manage to manage out pupils who don't fit their mould. Increasingly schools do this now, but Mossbourne start their GCSE's in year 9, so shrink the curriculum (ie less creative subjects like music, art, etc from year 8 onwards), then cram the exam content into the kids for 3 years not 2. Year 11 is basically pure revision (as they've largely finished the content in year 10). In year 11 they go over and over what they've been taught in years 9 and 10. It's horribly dull but yes, does bring great results. It also provides a far narrower education though.

The year 9 rowing scholarship's a trojan horse to get in more high achieving kids. The children who 'won' one so transferred out from my DC's school were all 'A' grade high achieving academically. That wasn't a coincidence. Mossbourne use it to suck in high achieving pupils from other schools, that then boosts their cohort's results in year 11. Other schools lose a bunch of higher achieving pupils so overall their results suffer.

We can argue till the cows come home about the U.K. education and assessment system (I certainly have my issues with it).

However, that is the system we have and Mossbourne have to work within it. I don’t see why they shouldn’t be trying to get the best GCSE grades possible for their students, given that these will hugely enhance their future opportunities.

I explicitly said in my post that I don’t believe all the complaints are exaggerated. However, no school is immune from complaints and there will always be incidents of specific staff acting inappropriately.

I certainly think there will be parents associated with the schools Mossbourne have recently taken over who don’t want higher standards and/or think their DC should be able to do as they please.

Standards of behaviour and conduct will have been very low at these schools for an extended period, so it is no surprise that trying to quickly raise these quickly will provoke complaints from some.

Mossbourne has been open since 2004! Fobbing this off as 'oh parents don't like the new regime' won't wash. This has been going on for 20 years. It isn't a bug, it's a feature.

And when parents find a school that is accountable to no-one, they will take the logical next step to get some proper scrutiny, which is the media.

Mossbourne could have sorted this by having an open and transparent complaint procedure with accountability, but they haven't. That is their choice and it is a massive failing. My taxes are paying for the institutionalised bullying of children by an unaccountable school. That is not acceptable.

"I certainly think there will be parents associated with the schools Mossbourne have recently taken over who don’t want higher standards and/or think their DC should be able to do as they please." << Do you genuinely think this? Do you really think there is a parent anywhere who thinks higher standard are bad, or that their child should be able to do as they please at school?

Yes, there are many parents who think rules shouldn’t apply to their DC or that their DC are angels.

Just ask anyone who works in a school.

@SeaSwim5 Crucially, the parents who wrote in support of Mossbourne did NOT deny any of the allegations.

They didn't say: "Those allegations are false, we can prove they are false, and of course we'd never support a school which abuses its students". NO!

What they said was a combination of "My child wasn't abused so I don't care" and "I don't mind if my child gets shouted at as long as academic results are good".

Jimmy Saville and Harvey Weinstein both had people who defended them.
There were people who had worked with them without being abused.
The correct response is not "oh, so they were good guys".
The correct answer is: "so f###@@!! what???"

I worked in companies where I wasn't abused but other people were.
This doesn't make that abuse any less real nor any more acceptable.

Ofsted is not the be all and end all, but when an outstanding rating is backed up by excellent exam results (that provide life-changing opportunities for disadvantaged DC) and parents falling over themselves to get in, that is a sure sign of a brilliant school.

Both Holland Park and Mossbourne were rated oustanding.
Both schools abused their children.
In both cases, Ofsted completely missed any of that.
The only logical conclusion is that Ofsted is useless.

If you disagree, can you please elaborate why?

It's incredible how loonies keep coming out of the woodworks, insisting with the logical fallacy of the false dichotomy that these methods would be the only alternative to utter chaos and anarchy, ignoring all the evidence on how a sensible

I do not usually think it is even worth spending time debunking these logical fallacies, but I want to say this: if a school is not academically rigorous (and doesn't harm the mental wellbeing of my child) then we can compensate with some tutoring. If a school is academically rigorous but harms the mental wellbeing of my child, then getting help to undo that psychological drama is much more complex and the outcome much more uncertain.

And, before anyone points out that not everyone can afford tutoring: yes, I know very well, but the families who cannot afford tutoring are even less likely to be able to afford any kind of psychological help to deal with all the emotional abuse!!!

You know, everything about your posts, from the overwrought and simplistic terminology (anti-Mossbourne) to your inability to grasp the basics of logical arguement, bear an uncanny resemblance to another poster who seems to have dissapeared from this thread. It's almost like you are the same person, and just want a fresh start after blowing the last of your credibility under your old username.

And since the first incarnation of that poster appears to have been one of the parents writing to papers supporting the school, it make you wonder how many of the others use the same reasoning.

Finding this thread has been a breath of fresh air.

I was criticised very heavily on another thread https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/secondary/5284212-sw-london-schools-info-on-graveney-chestnut-hurlingham-etc?page=1 where I asked for information on SW London schools, and I dared criticise Ashcroft because I said its ethos reminded me too much of Mossbourne and Holland Park.

Apparently, worrying about that is rude and too antagonistic and I should stop harping on about it.

Those who praise Ashcroft should hear the stories of some of the Mossbourne parents.

It’s not really about ‘academic rigour’ though. The vast majority of schools with poor outcomes have terrible behaviour (so good teaching can’t take place and therefore results are bad). It’s a vicious cycle.

An environment where students are running around the corridors fighting each other isn’t really conducive to anyone’s wellbeing.

@SeaSwim5 The vast majority of schools with poor outcomes have terrible behaviour

For the billionth time, while it is true that schools with terrible behaviour are not conducive to productive learning and to good academic results, it does NOT follow that the only alternative is to abuse the children the way Mossbourne and Holland Park have been doing!!!

Do you admit that what happened in those two schools was emotional abuse, yes or no?

You can be strict without terrorising the children.
Strict but reasonable is good.
Strict but batshit crazy isn't.

Also don't forget that the potential to exercise authority with petty, capricious rule attracts a certain type of sick individual who gets off on that power. No, they won't all be like that, but some might - the current system does not recognise this problem and has nothing in place to prevent it.

Other institutions where people exercise power and authority admit the problem and have screenings in place to filter out the weirdos (eg the police); their processes are absolutely flawed and imperfect, but at least they recognise the problem and do something about it.

It's a bit like with boarding schools: of course not every boarding school teacher was an abuser, but boarding schools certainly attracted quite a few abusers. Eg think of how Princess Diana's brother opened up about the abuse endured as a child at boarding school.

I took a quick glance at the thread and saw your comment:
"My sense is that some people are so invested in deluding themselves that their children's school is the best, that wherever they live is the best area etc, that they see any criticism or different opinion as a threat"

This is exactly what I've observed with defensive Mossbourne parents who don't know the 300 plus accounts from teachers, pupils and parents (current and ex) that have been submitted to the investigation.

Without knowing the detail of the accounts, that show patterns, and are corroborated, it seems as though they rushed to the Mossbourne SLT's cry for support (a letter was sent to parents when an article went into the press, and parents mobilised with no knowledge of the accounts).

I see it as a form of cognitive dissonance. Knowing the minds of some local parents, I think the fear may be that if the Mossbourne brand is tarnished it will affect their child's CV.

The reality is that there is room for improvement. Those of us with reasoning skills and rational brains have made it clear in this thread that no-one is calling for Mossbourne to be closed down. What we're asking for is for reasonable improvement.

I would describe what was done to my DC as psychological abuse, after they went through an incredibly traumatic experience. I still don't understand the mentality of someone who might think the way my DC was treated was reasonable, but I do invite them to walk a mile in their shoes and see how well they cope.

To be fair (I can't edit my post now), I understand the parental fear about school reputation / brand alignment, particularly if someone is heading for a law career, as there is a lot of snobbery about what school and university someone went to in some careers.

In other careers, such as TV & Film crew, no-one cares what school or uni the crew went to.