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

When you say “suppprt” @BrightYellowTrain is this school diagnosed SEN? So not funded separately?

There are people who could get FSM and could apply for EHCP who do not, for cultural reasons, sometimes (fear of labelling, stigma etc). If Michaela are still providing the SEND support, sounds like a great school to me. Surely you have heard of the fact that certain groups of people do not like to ask for handouts? That they may see it as shameful? It is yet another reason why we cannot just simply rely on statistics as absolute truth.

I know a lot of SEN students actually really like schools like Michaela as there is structure and calm behaviour.

A large number of SEN DC really struggle with the zoo-type places where there is lots of bullying, disruption in lessons, fights and students roaming the building making noise.

@SeaSwim5 That wholly depends on the SEN! Behaviour SEN just isn’t tolerated. Some dc would find this beneficial but not all Sen dc would as they could never stick to the rules and some would become very anxious.

@Araminta1003 SEN support is not just activated by parents. It’s something schools must do. It’s an obligation.

@TizerorFizz for the purpose of the government’s statistics pupils with SEN Support are those pupils coded as K. A diagnosis isn’t required. Schools do not need parental permission before coding a pupil as K, either. Most of these pupils will be supported via element 1 and 2 funding. A very small minority of them may be in receipt of element 3 funding.

This is my son. He does have k status for autism and dyspraxia. School said didn’t need EHCP as adjustments could and were made for him. He goes to MCA for 6th form previously was at MVPA. He absolutely thrived at these schools like so many other children do. Without the support of the staff he wouldn’t be where he is today.

The SEN figures are easily skewed by parents getting diagnoses which provide their darlings with 25% time accommodations. They don't need an EHCP. This, in turn, does wonders for a schools performance in the tables. I'm sure the unassuming Ms Birbalsingh is above that kind of trickery though.

I didn’t say they do need an EHCP. My post specifically mentioned EHCPs and pupils at SEN Support level.

A diagnosis is not required in order for a pupil to be coded as K or have an EHCP or receive EAA. It is a myth that many believe. Conversely, a diagnosis does not automatically equal extra time.

Nor did I suggest that you had. You found the disparity between the ECHP and SEN data 'interesting' enough to comment on it. I simply suggested a possible reason for it.

My comment about the percentage of SEN students was in response to another poster saying they had a higher than average number of SEN pupils when they don’t. Then responding to a different poster tagging me about how that compared to the local data rather than the national data. Nothing to do with how interesting I find it. Merely responding to others posts.

@BrightYellowTrain. Yes - and thank you.

I think that’s really unfair on pupils and the schools. They can’t win. My sons school pushed for his dyspraxia diagnosis and autism as he was struggling. Since all the Mossbourne stuff came to light been told by people who know nothing about our situation that school using it to get more money by him having a EHCP. When I pointed out that they in fact said not to get a EHCP as accommodations could be made within system for him then told it is because they and us using it to get him more time. He was diagnosed by NHS specialists. Then you read about how poor the system is for pupils with SEND and someone writes what you did. In a no win situation.

If you don't agree that the system is being widely abused, I'm not sure what I can say. But yes, it is "really unfair on the pupils" like your son who are in genuine need and deserving of assistance.

I'm not sure I'm following - do you mean that the system is being abused because schools push for more SEN diagnoses than needed, because this means more funding for the schools? I.e. there would be fewer real SEN kids than result from official statistics? Or did you mean something else?

Not to derail your discussion entirely, but in the many responses, one of the strongest themes is that schools like Mossbourne 'work' for some children and are absolutely appalling experiences for others. I know 4 sets of parents with children who have been through or currently attend Victoria Park. Even in that small sample, the division exists.

With regard to SEN, there are strong incentivises in place for both parents and schools to 'game' the system.

Some parents see a way to boost their child's results and therefore prospects for further education and career. The 6-year growth rates in accommodations (overwhelmingly the blunt 25% time addition) in both independent and state schools are quite comparable, though the independent sector is starting from a higher base. The fasted growth rate is actually in selective 6th form colleges. In the next year or two, 50% of those sitting GSCEs at independent schools will be in receipt of an accommodation. State schools will hit similar levels in a further few years.

The schools are incentivised through the league tables and progress scores that are obsessed over by so many. When results are used to justify behaviours such as those evident at Mossbourne and Michaela, needs must. As for the financial incentive for schools, I'm less sure of the data so have no comment.

Finally, there is an entire industry that's blossomed over the past decade which is financially incentivised to provide parents with the diagnosis they want or believe their child needs. All 'certified', all 'qualified'. Not all competent or honest.

It should go without saying that those kids with genuine need are being harmed the most as the effect of the small accommodation they receive to assist with their exams is becoming increasingly meaningless.

What you are forgetting is that, at the time it was founded, an awful lot of weight was placed on privately funded academies being the answer to everything and it simply could not be allowed to fail. Therefore it had much more financial investment than other schools at the time, and frankly you'd have to be massively incompetent if you couldn't run any school around with that sort of investment. The trouble is that it used some of that investment to keep inconvenient children with SEN out and to impose a régime which was superficially attractive in terms of the strict rules, strict uniform requirements etc, but which doesn't necessarily provide the best all-round education.

People who think schools push for EHCPs unnecessarily simply demonstrate how little they know. The reality is that many schools are reluctant to apply for EHCPs because, if one is granted, they will have an obligation to pay for the first £6K of provision every year before they can claim any extra funding from LAs. Although schools are notionally funded on the basis of an extra £6K a year for each pupil with SEN, the reality is that it is considerably less per pupil because it is assumed that not every child with SEN needs the full £6K and that there will be economies of scale. Therefore having to take a full £6K out of the budget for every child with an EHCP can make it quite a lot more difficult to get support to pupils without EHCPs.

Candidates don’t need a diagnosis for EAA and a diagnosis alone is not enough to receive EAA.

EHCPs can be fully funded, but LAs won’t do so unless forced. Section 42 of the Children and Families Act 2014 places an absolute duty on the LA to ensure the SEP detailed, specified and quantified in F of the EHCP is provided, that includes ensuring there is sufficient funding.

If the system is skewed by children asking for more time in exams, give them all more time or as much time as they want. Why have a concept of time pressure at all. Exams should be an opportunity for children to show what they learnt, in a reasonable timeframe (a lot of why it is time pressured in the first place may be to do with timetabling and clashes). Accommodations like quiet side rooms, if some kids need it, so what. It is hardly a big deal. And kids who need iPads/readers etc - that is obviously always going to be genuine.

We need a common standard though. Spending all the time you want isn’t remotely what real life is about. Being able to express yourself coherently and quickly and think within a time period matters a lot. We have to maintain time limits. As we do for just about everything else. Or do we have 6 year degrees and no limit to time taken at appointments?

That's correct, but in so doing they are entitled to assume schools apply delegated funding also, given that that is precisely why schools are given that funding.

LAs can assume anything they like, but they are the ones ultimately responsible for the SEP in F and that includes funding it. LAs won’t fully fund EHCPs though unless forced to do so.

Have to agree with this. I was born and educated in Hackney during a time the borough's schools were amongst the worst in the country. It was widely believed that stricter military style schools were needed to deal with the deprived, unruly and semi-literate rabble of pupils (particularly Black boys) in the secondary schools and this ideology really took off.

I did not attend Mossbourne but I know a couple of teachers who taught there. One is of the opinion that the leadership will be secretly delighted if this negative publicity proves to be off-putting for parents of SEND children and encourages those parents who relish the idea of a strict teaching environment. Those are the families they want to attract. The ones who prefer the authoritarian approach and will not question the school's methods.

For anyone interested, Hackney Citizen has just shared news & details for Mossbourne’s own investigation into its complaints processes: https://www.hackneycitizen.co.uk/2025/05/14/mossbourne-federation-announces-independent-review-complaints-procedures/