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

Academies were introduce by Labour but David Cameron's government really pushed the concept. If I remember correctly, the Tories also introduced the concept of "free schools", which have even more autonomy on the curriculum they choose to follow. Religious fruitcakes tried to teach creationism, but luckily lost the battle.

A history can be found here: https://www.education-uk.org/articles/25academies.html

Not all academies are bad, of course. But the unaccountability at the very heart of the academy model is troubling - that the old maintained schools may have also had elements of unaccountability doesn't make it right

Also, many think that in the recent past Ofsted was "incentivised" to fail certain non-academy schools in order to convert them into academies.

I can certainly think of a few schools in my area which were horrible 2 decades ago and are now flourishing as academies. But the area has also gentrified significantly, and the intake of children reflects that. So how much of the academy's success is due to the academy status and how much due to gentrification?

A big selling point of the academy model has always been "autonomy" but schools in multi-academy trusts have little to no autonomy.
I am all for paying for top talent, but paying a handful of school trusts executives hundreds of thousands of pounds while paying the teachers less is not that, it's like expecting to fix the NHS by paying a few executives more but frontline doctors and nurses less.

Academies are funded by everyone's taxes.
Who has decided that a certain school should be managed by a certain trust?
Who is that trust accountable to?
These are all basic questions of democratic transparency and accountability which cannot go unanswered.

You dismissed the point without providing any evidence to back up your dismissal. I am waiting for your counterpoints. 🙂

No, the onus to evidence a statement comes from person who makes the original claim. I take it you haven't any?

OMG I agree with you on something! <faints>

Don't worry I'm sure it won't last long

It's certainly not working to create 'grammar schools' if you actually look at Harris results compared to the other schools in the area. And I have no time for a lot of their practices.

That will be significantly due to the fact that outside having direct supervision of a qualified teacher (so no point employing them), being on a train to teach programme where qualifying is the end point, giving them an ECT with two years' experience and for a few things such as particular sports where a coach is suitably qualified, it's unlawful for a maintained school to employ an unqualified teacher. Or are the NEU simultaneously forgetting that at the same time as forgetting that they are also supposedly representing cover supervisors, teaching trainees and other staff in schools who aren't on teaching contracts?

So using your own logic please provide evidence to dismiss what I said and I have provided evidence.

I await your response.

I am currently going through absolute hell with MVPA right now

Thurrock Council to scrutinise Mossbourne Federation after 93 pupils withdrawn

“..it has been claimed that 93 children have been removed from Fobbing Academy by their parents because of “safeguarding” concerns.
The figure was revealed at a Thurrock Council full council meeting where the council confirmed senior officers will conduct a full review of the data.

www.yourthurrock.com/2025/11/14/thurrock-council-to-scrutinise-mossbourne-federation-after-93-pupils-withdrawn/

I see that Anne Whyte KC has completed the independent review that Mossbourne Federation commissioned in relation to their complaints procedure, as Penny Wrout has responded publicly, but I haven't been able to find the review online. Has it been made public?

x.com/PennyWrout/status/1992232802197377050

I think this is it -

static1.squarespace.com/static/678e086bfa1908742f41fcaa/t/691c3fbcb19221251fb1a6eb/1763459004693/Independent+Review+Anne+Whyte+KC+November+25.pdf

Pretty pleased with Anne Whyte' s Report, I was one of the parents who met with her. Policies fit for purpose, though pretty shocking that MCA and MVPA don't record complaints to see if there are trends or patterns. Parents ticked off for not complaining. Issues with communication and general culture discouraging complaining. I feel vindicated. The Safeguarding Review will be rough for the school, I suspect. But as a consequence, Mossbourne schools will improve.

It is troubling that so many parents had the impression that signing the school's policy meant signing some kind of contract and waiving the right to complain.

NO! Parents are not required to sign anything. They can at most confirm they have had sight of the policies.
But, legally, parents are not required to sign anything, are not required to commit to anything like always supporting the school, and most of all they never waive their right to complain.

This is a crucial distinction that was not made.

Too many schools play on the ignorance of the parents and exploit this confusion. Oh, you signed the policy, now suck it up. No!

If a headteacher tried to force me to sign one of these documents, I would raise hell. And Mossbourne is a perfect example why: because too many dishonest headteachers then use it as an excuse to claim that parents then have no right to complain

That’s a good point. I suspect many sign it because a) they can’t (at that point) perceive of it being used against their family’s interests and b) they imagine if the don’t then they will need to find another school. Would be interesting to know the DfE’s guidance / rules / feelings on it.

Alan Wood's report out in the next few days.

I’ve just seen the letter from the school about it. Whatever is in the report tomorrow it looks like they are refuting all of it.

From the Principal's Letter:
"Dear Parents and Carers,
I hope this letter finds you well. I write to update you about the Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review
(LCSPR) which I understand will be released tomorrow. Please be assured that the academy has and is
taking the review very seriously.
Just as I wrote to you in November 2024, before the academy featured in the newspapers, I write to you
again. I do this because firstly, you are the community we serve and you deserve this courtesy; secondly,
because I said I would keep you updated as and when I knew more; and thirdly, to reiterate the
seriousness with which we take any concerns that are shared with us relating to the safety and wellbeing
of our students, your children.
I personally do not believe you will agree with the review’s conclusions because if you do you would not
entrust your children to our care on a daily basis; the incredibly dedicated and hardworking staff at the
academy would not choose to work here....."

https://chscp.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/MVPA-LCSPR-Report-Published-.pdf

It's a tough read. Harshly critical of the school. 😔

"Please be assured that the academy has and is
taking the review very seriously." and "I personally do not believe you will agree with the review’s conclusions because if you do you would not
entrust your children to our care on a daily basis;"

Oh dear!

Mossbourne Federation, CEO, and Mossbourne schools' SLT, how about you listen to the recommendations in the report?

How about you maintain strong academic results, AND make meaningful adjustments to the way you implement your behavioural policy?

How about you continue to strive for improvement?

I do feel upset by this report. It’s my DD’s nearest secondary school but I would never send her there now. I’d rather home school. The thing that bothers me is not just the horrific experience of some send students and the unforgivable racism but also what it does to children’s developing minds to see others subjected repeatedly to humiliation and shaming. How can this be allowed to continue and what does it do to the whole school community.

A very disturbing read. I went to school in Hackney in the 1990s and witnessed some troubling things but nothing in comparison to what is in this report.

Over 300 reported concerns raised by different people and the school is still maintaining “nope, nothing to see here..”

This is a very upsetting read, and there are now stories coming out of two schools in Essex recently taken over by Mossbourne where the same scenarios are being enacted. A particularly awful example is a student given detention because her mother didn't attend parents' evening - because she's a low paid shift worker. I'm beginning to think this chain with its ethos should be removed from the education system altogether.

From the executive summary of the report:

The review concludes that the concerns raised about practices such as shouting, public humiliation and a lack of reasonable adjustments can be substantiated. A defensive and dismissive leadership culture has refuted these concerns, branding them as "vexatious", and has prioritised academic reputation over engaging with criticism.
[...]
Key evidence:
342 individual reports from parents, pupils, and staff involving concerns relating to a range of schools within the Federation. • 73 specific accounts focused on MVPA that fell within the parameters of the review’s Terms of Reference. • Testimony from current and former teachers describing a "climate of fear," institutionalised shouting, and practices designed to humiliate pupils. • Surveys from pupils and parents revealing that a substantial minority do not feel safe, happy, or believe bullying is handled effectively. • Concerns from external agencies about the school's inflexible approach, disproportionate sanctions, and the high volume of mental health referrals.
[...]
Shouting. This was found to be a routine, not exceptional, practice. Shouting has been used at MVPA in a manner that humiliates and intimidates pupils. • 'Desking'. Pupils are placed at desks in corridors as a punishment for minor infractions. This is isolating, shaming, and educationally unproductive, with no data collected to monitor how this sanction is used, its effectiveness and whether there is any disproportionate impact.