The Key for School Leaders and RMW

[Brainworm]

The Key is a membership service for school leaders. It provides guidance, resources and CPD. Over half of all schools in England have membership. Every school I know uses it to check their policies and practices are compliant.

One of their 'top articles' this week is called 'Responding to the DfE's consultation on gender questioning children: guidance and resources. They suggest the article provides 'expert advice and resources to help you respond with confidence' to the consultation.

The article basically says during the consultation phase, don't follow the guidance as 'legal advisors' have suggested it may be illegal. It also says schools must continue to support trans pupils (like the guidance suggests you shouldn't).

It suggests Gendered Intelligence and Stonewall are a good resource to guide schools to completing their response and provides a link to the 'Pride and Progress' website, which name drops RMW and the tab labelled 'Supporting Guide for Consultation' takes you through to Stonewall's guide to responding to the consultation.

The reach of The Key shouldn't be underestimated. I think they are either out of loop on all that has been happening in this arena or have been captured. Either way, it's not good!

Oh FFS! Most SLT outsource their thinking to The Key. This is very bad news.

I agree. The Key is a significant influence and highly trusted. I was really surprised by the content. I don't think they have had cause to address these issues before, but maybe they have always been captured and I hadn't looked at the relevant content.

It's all adding up evidence of political capture which is leaving the government no option but to make it law.

And good.

I don't think people realise how embedded GI is in schools. They've been supporting it for years now, they believe it's the right thing to do.

Additional to this they are advised by educational psychologists that affirmation and social transition is the right thing as well as LA officers, social workers and camhs. And teaching unions.

The pushback is really only from a small number of parents.

To shift this culture will take something significant.

😡Hopefully the Key will get some pushback about this. We know that trans groups are incandescent at the likelihood of schools no longer being a source of funding for them. It's not surprising to see them seeking every opportunity to frighten schools into abandoning safeguarding and critical thinking about whether promoting sex change in children should be a key role of a school?

The surprise is the lack of a spine amongst school leaders and their continued ignorance about Cass, the international roll back of experimental medical treatment of children and the unevidenced nature of this social experiment on children.

Is there a meaningful, respected organisation that might contact SLTs to rebut or offer a counter-position to The Key?

How elaborate would the materials have to be to extirpate the biased influence?

Depends upon whether the NGA is also in their sights.

The legal advice to schools from independent advisers as well as from multiple sources such as The Key is that if schools follow this DfE (non statutory) guidance, we could be in breach of the Equalities Act. The DfE have left schools in very difficult territory by writing guidance that has its basis in ideology and not legality.

But isn't the point that the guidance is correct and the advice from "multiple sources" is actually Stonewall law?

Am I correct?

Sounds like Sex Matters should be tackling The Key head on. If anyone is in touch with Sex Matters, perhaps ask what we can do to help - this feels like a pretty important opportunity to free schools. Many SLT’s seem quite relieved when parents push back

I think the issue is that the law hadn't been properly tested so the advice differs quite significantly according to who is providing it.

We can dismiss 'the law as Stonewall wants it to be', but if more measured players are suggestion the guidance is unsound then it's reasonable for people to be cautious

I looked at their website and they seem to just be saying, we are the experts and to be trusted resource on anything you might need and haven't got time to research yourself, as regards best practice in teaching.

I was curious to know what their background was and who their specialists are. None of their team are named or explained, as in biographies and relevant experience and qualifications, which is very vague and unconvincing.
It could simply be that one entrusted person has produced/written the information that is flagged up here on MN.

Would I buy their product/pdfs/generic advice based on how and what they (don't )present?
I dont think so.
They could be brilliant in some areas of course and remiss in others.

Transgender Trend, Sex Matters and Safe Schools Alliance all have good advice for schools, but all have been successfully smeared as transphobic so school heads are reluctant to look at them.

The latest accounts show a turnover of more than £30 million - so plenty of people are paying them!

RMW has been tweeting about this since the guidance was first published. It is worrying that the guidance RMW has helped draft is being promoted by such an influential organisation. I wonder if it includes the stonewall caveat of don’t blame us if it’s wrong we are not providing legal advice.

What is interesting is the silence from RMW on Jo Phoenix’s judgement. Normally we get told why it doesn’t matter or is limited etc.

The Key's business model is to buy in subject matter experts on subjects rather than have in-house expertise, which is what is attractive about them. Through a single membership you can access expertise covering all issues relating to statutory regulation/guidance.

This is the first time I have thought they have made a poor choice regarding the subject matter experts they have consulted.

The latest Whittle fandango that saw TT and SM styled as anti-trans hate groups is sounding more and more strategic, the more that I learn about schools.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5000605-maya-whittle-and-phoenix

Schools have always been susceptible to people selling snake oil. Lots of money has been made through companies making money through selling 'solutions' with little or no sound evidence base.

Progressives and traditionalists take up ideological positions and battle it out on Twitter. I imagine GC thinking arises in both camps, as well as trans activism.

The Key hadn't had to enter into the progressive v trad battles as the don't focus on pedagogy. I they may be somewhat unaware that they are promoting an ideology. I expect they have been succoured in by analogies with Section 28.

I hope someone with a more balanced perspective fills them in with the rest of the story!

Well that's ok then since there is no such thing as the 'Equalities Act'.

I too think that this has Stephen Whittle's finger prints all over it.

"The DfE have left schools in very difficult territory by writing guidance that has its basis in ideology and not legality.".....and here is the evidence that the strategy has worked again. But, as with previous iterations, it will work until there is a test case. I am pretty sure schools will settle though. The government has all but bankrupt them as it is. Governing bodies won't be happy to find litigation when there is risk of them not winning. As we have seen, plenty of GC people will crowd fund. LAs and MATs can't/won't. I just hope money and time wont be wasted getting to that point.

I have access to the Key. I might contact them to complain.

I'm not keeping up with abbreviations! I've been away from modern work culture and the world of education for ages so some of this might seem silly but is SLT senior leadership team (a guess)? Can anyone help me with RMW (I can't work out if this is a person/politician/lawyer/journalist or organisation)? And what do 'MATs' and 'NGA' stand for?
I wonder if it would be possible to have pinned to the top of the threads in 'Feminism: Sex and Gender Discussions' a list spelling out the increasing number of abbreviations that are being used - not criticising since I understand the need for them - just to help dinosaurs like me. Thanks.

Sorry! Three of these abbreviations are education specific- SLT is Senior Leadership Team, MAT is multi academy trust (schools run by trusts rather than the LA) and NGA is non governmental association.

RMW is an FWR abbreviation - Robin Moira White, the barrister, famous for their bundles!

MAT - Multi Academy Trust
NGA - National Governance Association

The NGA could be (ironically enough) the key to it if they stick to explaining the Law, not the opinions of others, as then the school Governance Professionals have the ability to provide clear advice as to the contents of the Law to boards - what with it being their actual job and responsibility to provide clear, unbiased advice - and where necessary, packed up with the text of the actual Law and Guidance, rather than the opinions of writers.

The other possibles would be the major education legal firms, but they have been known to be a bit, um, rainbow fluffy in presentation at least, although that sometimes appears to be for the benefit of their staff and image, rather than in the actual content.

The Catholic Church will also want to be absolutely certain that none of their MATs break the Law (both of the land and canon), so will be more interested in what is fact, rather than what the company that runs GovernorHub says.

Fuckssake

They also have a huuuge Facebook group full of headteachers and slt etc.