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

How does that work when the GCSE results are added back onto the school's progress measures?

If a school PEXs, the results get added back on unless it's the second school they have been excluded from. If they're in Alternative Provision because there are no Y11 places available, the results are added back on. If they're out of education, the results are added back on. If they're at another school, the results are still added back on.

In the first week of July, there is a short period to complete the tables checking exercise and provide no more than six pdf pages of evidence to show that an individual kid falls precisely within the extremely limited circumstances. Having SEND is not a reason. Being PEX once is not a reason. Coming from any number of countries and being unable to speak more than rudimentary English is not a reason (because some schools in the country use English) - there's a long, long list where it's a blanket 'just don't bother' and a need for the few remaining to show things that schools aren't party to, such as proof of entry into the UK. Being seriously ill in hospital or having been under compulsory treatment isn't accepted as a reason. Occasionally, actually being imprisoned is accepted, as long as the school has access to documents that they don't have a right to have. And in the majority of cases where it's accepted for the actual year, the school gets the results added back the subsequent one instead. There is no right of appeal, no reviewing of DfE decisions, it's a one off that you only find the outcome for when the provisional P8 data comes through.

I think schools should have sensible rules that are strictly enforced about the things that matter. Important things, like kindness and respect for others.

Insisting children line up in silence etc. Well, they are teenagers, they are supposed to make noise. They need to be quiet in lessons so others can learn but not all day.

It should also be easier to expel students that do really bad stuff like assaulting other students and swearing at teachers.

@Ubertomusic I know where the schools are. I can see from government data that Michaela is not full. It has 117 spaces. It’s also a free school. It has 11% persistent absence. It has over 70% ESL and under 2% with a EHCP. Some cultures value strict schools and these families are a large proportion of those who choose this school. It had 3 pupils taking separate sciences. Their disadvantaged pupils are entered for 7 GCSEs. There’s amazing language provision though!

OP I think that you are conflating a lot of things here.

Being part of an academy chain doesn't automatically mean that the behaviour policy is too harsh.

Having a strict behaviour policy doesn't automatically mean that the students are traumatised.

It is a fact that teachers tend to want to be able to teach and that an effective behaviour policy allows them to do this. It is also a fact that most parents want their children to do as well as possible under the support of great teachers.

I may be wrong about this but it is my understanding that none of these Mossbourne accusations have been upheld so far. So your statements are based on heresay not fact.

In London at least parents have a wide choice where to send their children. Most opt for the schools with stronger and enforced behaviour policies. Those are the only things you can properly assert at the moment.

I’m assuming there’s few schools without strict policies then if most parents opt for the strict ones. Maybe there’s little choice?

Thanks for the data, it tells quite the story.

In the recent court case the claimant was initially put on the waiting list https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Judgement-R-v-Michaela-Community-Schools-Trust.pdf

Waiting list means the school is oversubscribed (at least it was roughly a year ago).

Yes, some cultures value strict discipline, others don't - hence the different priorities and different results. Some posters on this thread say Asians are mentally ill because of their schools - this is racism but no one batted an eyelid, apparently racism is perfectly acceptable on MN.

I've no skin in the game - my DC are not/were not in these schools and we're not even Asian. I just find the standard of discussion involving sexual suppression of HTs and casual racial slurs appalling.

PEX results count unless it is the second school they have been PEX from within the same phase of education.

I'm curious to know, what is the basis for your "understanding that none of these Mossbourne accusations have been upheld so far"?

Why are you posting 11% persistent absence like that is a bad thing instead of an incredible achievement when national persistent absence is 26.5%?

@InformEducateEntertain
Being part of an academy chain doesn't automatically mean that the behaviour policy is too harsh.

Of course. I never said that. But coming up with batshit crazy policies is easier in academies, which are basically unaccountable. Not even the department of Education can get them to change their decisions! See earlier post about their complaint process.

Having a strict behaviour policy doesn't automatically mean that the students are traumatised.

Of course. Indeed those who have read the thread will remember that I said very clearly and multiple times that it is perfectly possible to maintain discipline and punish bad behaviour without resorting to these needless petty capricious authoritarian rules.
We are looking into secondary schools, and the two we like the most are precisely like this: they ban phones, they have a zero-tolerance approach to misbehaviour or missed homework, but they have none of the crazy policies discussed in this thread.

I may be wrong about this but it is my understanding that none of these Mossbourne accusations have been upheld so far. So your statements are based on heresay not fact.

Define "fact" please? Did you even read the article? When the press reports that as many as 100 families, 30 former students and 8 former teachers have come forward all confirming the same type of allegations, and that the department of education is investigating, what do you call that?
You don't think it is worth reporting all of that because... what? Because there hasn't been a trial yet?

@Ubertomusic Some posters on this thread say Asians are mentally ill because of their schools - this is racism but no one batted an eyelid, apparently racism is perfectly acceptable on MN.

Can you please clarify what you are referring to?
I had said (page 3 of the thread( that

"It is perfectly possible to get good academic results at the expense of students' mental health. Many Asian countries are a testament to this very fact."

And I stand by that statement. How on Earth would it be racist to point out that the systems in place in certain cultures obtain good academic results but to the detriment of the students' mental health????
Apparently launching serious but completely invented and unfounded accusations is perfectly acceptable on MN? But I guess I shouldn't be surprised, because you're the same person who came up with those deranged rants about 'wealthy lefties'

This is not dissimilar to saying that in the past the UK had boarding schools with apparently strict discipline yet where bullying was rampant, and schools with corporal punishment - both of which may have obtained good academic results, but often at the expense of mental health.

https://koreapro.org/2023/11/how-south-koreas-academic-pressure-fueling-youth-mental-health-emergency/

www.joghr.org/article/84099-problems-with-complex-college-admissions-policies-and-overloaded-after-school-private-education-on-middle-and-high-school-students-mental-health-in

Apparently launching serious but completely invented and unfounded accusations is perfectly acceptable on MN?

Such as "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." as per your OP?

@noblegiraffe https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/hyperbole

First of all, congratulations for the textbook whataboutery.

BTW, it seems that some overly strict schools don't teach a lot of vocabulary these days

I did not accuse anyone specifically of being sexually repressed.

I said, and I stand by that, that these rules can have a terrible effect on a person's mental health, and that the people who put them together and enforce them tend to be repressed individuals, to watch out from.

The same is true in the workplace. In fact, in modern workplaces not even a fraction of that s* would be tolerated!!!!

I am incredibly sensitive to all of this because I have seen first hand the impact that toxic and bullying environment can have on a person's mental health. I can only hope that all the bootlickers who came out of the woodworks defending these policies will never have to witness a loved one reduced to an emotional wreck.

absolutely shameless batshittery.

The number of posters who are more concerned by a few mean words said about headmasters who are accused of abusing children, than they are by the abuse itself, is a sad commentary on their judgment as educators.

Anyway, many of you apparently think that yelling and punitive rules are necessary to build resilience and discipline in children. So forgive the rest of us for not running up with smelling salts when grown adults faint over a bit of hyperbole.

The proportion with EHCPs is unbelievably low. From memory , in my borough most schools have at least 15%

There are approx 1/2 million EHCP pupils out of a school population of 9.1 million. So around 5%. What borough are you for such a high figure?

I think you are thinking of overall SEN (but yes, 2% is low). On my phone so can't do anything very useful with the actual files, but the headline figures (include all phases) in attached screenshot.

https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/special-educational-needs-in-england

Thinking it isn’t ok (and in fact harms your cause) to suggest that certain headteachers are sexually repressed, and weren’t loved by their mothers (then claiming that you haven’t named anyone but making it absolutely clear which schools you are talking about) doesn’t mean that you support abusing kids.

HTH.

National is 2.7%. 2% is below average but not hugely so.

Thank you for explaining, I see how it could be anxiety inducing for conscientious children.

@noblegiraffe
"Thinking it isn’t ok (and in fact harms your cause) to suggest that certain headteachers are sexually repressed, and weren’t loved by their mothers (then claiming that you haven’t named anyone but making it absolutely clear which schools you are talking about) doesn’t mean that you support abusing kids."

Those who are more concerned with, and dedicate more time to, the words used to describe the headteachers responsible than the facts themselves and the impact they can have on children's mental health should be stripped of parental responsibility, IMHO.

Again, maybe I'm making some confusion after so many replies, but I seem to remember that you have spent more times to comment how horrible my choice of words was, than to comment on how horrible the impact on children can be...

I take your point that you would have used different words.

Please take mine that, if you had had the same direct and indirect exposure as me to the disastrous effect that toxic and bullying environments can have on people's mental health, then there's a strong chance you would have reacted and phrased things differently, too.

HTH.

@MrsSchrute

I had said that
^For example, Mossbourne Complaints policy is here: www.mca.mossbourne.org/governance/^
There are 5 stages to a complaint. The first 4 involve only entities and body internal to the academy itself. Only the last stage, stage 5, involves a complaint to the secretary of State.

And you replied that
The vast majority of maintained schools will have complaints policies that are structured like this.

With non-academy schools, the councils used to have a way to get involved, although I understand that this is happening less and less

My point about the lack of accountability stands. I cannot think of many other public services where you can complain only to the entity itself, and if you are unhappy your only options are i) to complain to the relevant Ministry... which however cannot get the body to change its decision!!! or ii) to sue the body in question, which not everyone can afford to do!! Can you think of many other similar cases?

If you have an issue with a bank or insurer, you can escalate the complaint to the Ombudsman and also complain to the regulators.

If you have an issue with your GP or your hospital, you can complain to the General Medical Council, to NHS England (or equivalent), etc.

Imagine a situation where you have a complaint against your GP, and your only options are: to complain to the GP practice itself, to sue the GP, to complain to the Health Secretary!!!

Would that be fair or reasonable? Yet this is exactly what happens with schools!

And please don't give me the usual nonsense about choice.
In most areas, parents' choice is limited non-existent.
Also, we as taxpayers do not have the option not to fund these schools!!! Demanding a modicum of accountability on how public funds are spent is at the very essence of democracy.

For anyone who's interested, that 117 places are for the sixth form, which like all sixth forms has its own entry requirements. Nothing to do with the year 7-11 part of the school being full.

Isn't it ironic? In this line of thinking, children are expected to put up with harsh, unreasonable discipline to "beat out" their inner naughtiness (which is often just immaturity, sometimes SEN, sometimes trouble at home) and make them compliant. Meanwhile, educators, whose job it is to guide and shape these developing minds, are supposed to never be criticiced and are always given the benefit of the doubt.

We’re talking about children, whose brains are still developing and who benefit from positive role models to help them grow into their future selves. In contrast, teachers are adults who have consciously chosen a career in education, using their fully developed brains and thinking capacity to presumably nurture these young minds.

Or is there still a belief that children are simply naughty and require strict, punitive discipline to correct their behaviour, rather than recognising that their actions are often a result of immaturity, and that a more positive, supportive approach to pedagogy is far more effective in fostering long-term development?