{"id":218041,"date":"2024-11-06T05:00:00","date_gmt":"2024-11-06T05:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/schoolsweek.co.uk\/?p=218041"},"modified":"2025-09-19T16:23:00","modified_gmt":"2025-09-19T15:23:00","slug":"schools-need-greater-clarity-on-performing-social-media-checks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/schoolsweek.co.uk\/schools-need-greater-clarity-on-performing-social-media-checks\/","title":{"rendered":"Schools need greater clarity on performing social media checks"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In 2022, Keeping Children Safe in Education<\/em><\/a> was updated to include a requirement for schools to consider carrying out an \u201conline search\u201d on shortlisted candidates to identify \u201cincidents or issues that have happened, and are publicly available online\u201d (2024 wording).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since then, a debate has continued in the sector about how to meet this expectation<\/a> and, specifically, whether reviewing candidates\u2019 public-facing social media posts should form part of this search.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are well-regarded experts on both sides of this argument, which usually means one thing: the guidance needs clarifying so schools know what is expected of them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I took the view in 2022 that social media checks should be carried out and I maintain that view today, primarily for three reasons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Evidence-led policy<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In May 2022, the government response to the consultation on whether to include online checks in the guidance stated that one of the reasons for considering these checks was \u201cthe increasing prevalence of online issues in Teaching Regulations Agency prohibition cases\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It also noted many respondents said their schools and colleges already carried out social media searches, and that some respondents agreed that \u201csocial media identifies things which might not be found on a reference\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Additional points were made both for and against online searches, but the main point to take away was the reference to the Teaching Regulations Agency (TRA) cases, primarily because information on outcomes of these cases is publicly available and meets a high standard threshold for the kind of evidence-informed policy-making we need to keep children safe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A growing evidence base<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

At the time, I reviewed the 80 cases reported on gov.uk up to 30 September 2022. Of those 80, 12 could be said to involve \u2018online issues\u2019 and at least 10 of those 12 involved social media use. That social media use ranged from exchanging messages with pupils to posting\/sharing inappropriate content on social media.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a four-week period from mid-August this year, four teachers were prohibited from teaching following social media use.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Three of the four cases involved social media contact of a sexual nature with pupils, while the fourth related to unprofessional behaviour and a failure to maintain appropriate boundaries with pupils due to the nature of messages sent on social media.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are numerous other reported cases between October 2022 and August 2024 that I have not reviewed, but it is reasonable to assume that a number of them will also include social media use. This issue is not going away.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Public perception<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

As a society, we now expect individuals to take responsibility for their online posts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From high-profile libel cases related to comments on social media platforms to the recent imprisonment of individuals for stirring up hatred and violence following the Southport attack, the public \u2013 and the courts \u2013 hold individuals to account, recognising the power of social media and what the comments say about the individuals posting them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Those working in education (and other public roles) are held to a higher standard. It is right that this should apply online as well as off.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What next?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In its 2022 consultation response, the government recognised that online issues were already a problem. The majority of those online issues were, and still are, found on social media.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At that time, the government recognised that greater clarity was required, noting that \u201cfurther detail should be provided on which sites to search, how far back to go and how to deal with information that is found\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

That clarity was not provided; it is needed now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many schools and trusts are carrying out social media checks; many are not. This is not how safer recruitment in education is supposed to be.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Consistency is key. Expectations are made clear in the rest of part three of Keeping Children Safe in Education<\/em>, and the online check expectation requires the same thorough approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The question of whether social media checks are necessary in education is answered. Questions about privacy aren\u2019t entirely academic, of course, but they will best be resolved with the clearest possible guidance on how to go about delivering this duty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The current guidance is missing vital information, leaving schools in limbo and creating gaps in national school recruitment<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":311124,"featured_media":174105,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,3734],"tags":[],"post-theme":[3726],"class_list":["post-218041","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-opinion","category-the-leader","post-theme-the-legal-leader"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t