{"id":239157,"date":"2025-12-09T15:27:14","date_gmt":"2025-12-09T15:27:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/schoolsweek.co.uk\/?p=239157"},"modified":"2025-12-09T15:27:15","modified_gmt":"2025-12-09T15:27:15","slug":"mossbourne-success-of-high-performing-school-achieved-at-too-high-a-cost-for-some-pupils","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/schoolsweek.co.uk\/mossbourne-success-of-high-performing-school-achieved-at-too-high-a-cost-for-some-pupils\/","title":{"rendered":"Success of top academy achieved ‘at too high a cost for some pupils’"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The success of one of the highest-performing schools in the country has been “achieved at too high a cost for some pupils\u201d, a safeguarding investigation has found.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The probe \u2013 called a local child safeguarding practice review (LCSPR) \u2013 was launched \u201cto investigate widespread concerns regarding the implementation of the behaviour policy\u201d at the Mossbourne Victoria Park Academy in Hackney.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It called on the school to ban staff from shouting at pupils, finding the practice had humiliated and intimidated youngsters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The academy is part of the Mossbourne Federation, the trust originally run by former Ofsted chief inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw<\/a>. In 2024, the school ranked seventh in the country for its progress 8 score. It was rated ‘outstanding’ in all areas by Ofsted in 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The boss of the academy has defended the secondary, arguing parents will not agree with the findings as if they did, they \u201cwould not entrust [their] children to our care on a daily basis\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hundreds of reports<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Sir Alan Wood, who led the review<\/a>, said the \u201cparadox of outstanding results alongside deep distress can be explained by a culture that prioritises compliance and control above all else\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe school’s leadership has created a structured environment that can be positive for those who can navigate its strictures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cHowever, this same system is implemented with a rigidity and a lack of differentiation that does not protect the wellbeing of a vulnerable minority.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

His findings were \u201cbased on a triangulation of evidence\u201d, including 342 reports from \u201cparents, pupils, and staff involving concerns relating to a range of schools within the [Mossbourne] Federation\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Seventy-three \u201cspecific accounts\u201d were focused on Victoria Park. Testimony from current and former teachers described a \u201cclimate of fear\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Concerns from external agencies about the \u201cschool’s inflexible approach, disproportionate sanctions, and the high volume of mental health referrals\u201d were also received.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018Screaming\u2019 at pupils<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The review found that \u201cshouting\u201d was used at Victoria Park \u201cin a manner that humiliates and intimidates pupils\u201d. Wood said incidents would be \u201cpublic, excessive, and directed at individuals\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One teacher told the review pupils \u201cwould be screamed at for turning to look at a clock, or for taking a pen from a bag without asking\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a year 7 assembly during the first week of term they \u201cwitnessed two or three new pupils fainting in line as a result of being screamed at\u201d. Another called the treatment of children \u201cdreadful\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

They saw \u201cmany occasions where teachers are screaming at the pupils directly into their faces, centimetres apart, for a pupil turning around, not having a green pen, their pen running out \u2026 the list is endless\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wood noted that while \u201cnot every teacher engages in this behaviour\u201d and with testimony suggesting \u201conly a small number of teachers are involved\u201d, the evidence suggests \u201ca cultural problem rather than rare individual lapses\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018Desking\u2019<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

He also wrote that pupils were placed at desks in corridors outside the rooms of senior teachers \u201cas a punishment for minor infractions\u201d, a practice he described as \u201cisolating, shaming, and educationally unproductive\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Claims were lodged with the review that the punishment \u2013 called desking \u2013 \u201cdisproportionately affects \u2018black working-class boys\u2019 and pupils with SEND”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wood said the practice \u2013 \u201ccombined with frequent detentions and a generally \u2018harsh environment\u2019\u201d \u2013 was \u201clinked by some to increased pupil anxiety and depression\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A former student \u201crecounted having a panic attack while on a \u2018time-out desk\u2019\u201d. Others \u201cmentioned instances of self-harm and suicidal ideation directly related to the school’s disciplinary regime\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Accounts also \u201cindicated that desks are cleared or moved when \u2018high-profile visitors\u2019 are on campus, raising concerns that the school is attempting to conceal the practice\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhile senior leaders claim this is done to prevent distractions for pupils, the perception among others is that it’s a blatant attempt to hide what is happening, raising questions about the school’s transparency,\u201d Wood said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201c[There is] no data collected to monitor how this sanction is used, its effectiveness and whether there is any disproportionate impact.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Off-rolling allegations<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The report noted that the \u201cevidence presents a complex and polarised picture\u201d on the support offered to pupils with SEND.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many families \u201cprovided positive feedback, describing the school as supportive and effective for their children with similar needs as those who raised concerns\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But Wood called these cases \u201chighly specific and, in some cases, may be dependent on individual staff members rather than a consistent, school-wide policy\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“The stark contrast between these two narratives highlights an issue of inconsistency,” he said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

“While most pupils and families may thrive in the structured environment, others seem to be severely let down by a system that is experienced as inflexible, unresponsive, and, in some cases, potentially harmful.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One staff member reported being told to \u201cbuild evidence that this isn\u2019t the right place for this pupil to be\u201d in the case of one child with an education, health and care plan (EHCP).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wood said this suggested \u201ca potential institutional pressure to remove certain pupils\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cSeveral\u201d accounts also suggested the academy \u201cmay have engaged in practices that could be considered off-rolling, which is the practice of removing a pupil from the school roll without a formal exclusion\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A headteacher from another school \u201creported that a family felt they had \u2018no option but to move their son\u2019 after a \u2018relentless regime of punishments\u2019 and that the school had suggested the parents home educate the child while keeping them on the school roll\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

National implications<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Wood concluded that Victoria Park\u2019s \u201csuccess has been achieved at too high a cost for some pupils\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But he highlighted that \u201cwhile focused on [Victoria Park], concerns extend across the federation\u201d. The trust \u201cmust ensure all\u201d its schools \u201care examined against these findings\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThis review also has national implications,\u201d Wood wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe \u2018no excuses\u2019 model, when implemented rigidly without adequate safeguards, can become one of \u2018zero tolerance\u2019 that causes serious harm to vulnerable pupils.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018Ban shouting\u2019<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Wood told the Mossbourne Federation that data \u201con all sanction types\u201d should be provided to trustees and governors, with \u201cdisproportionality, anti-racism and the correlation between sanctions and outcomes\u201d analysed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To boost transparency, anonymised figures \u201cshould be published\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The review also called on the school to launch a consultation on its behaviour policy. Among other things, it should ask \u201cwhether a \u2018no excuses\u2019 ethos remains compatible with inclusion and dignity\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The trust should also \u201cdirectly engage\u201d with government \u201cabout the appropriateness of “desking” and whether this sanction, as currently practiced, complies with [Department for Education] requirements for pupil dignity and continued education\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If the practice continues, processes should be amended \u201cto ensure there is the proper and accurate recording of it\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wood said the trust\u2019s \u201ccode of conduct should be revised to explicitly prohibit shouting at individual pupils as a disciplinary measure\u201d as well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It should also \u201cprohibit the use of any public reprimand, action, or sanction that has a primary function to draw negative attention to a pupil for the purpose of shaming them\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Head speaks out<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In a letter sent to parents yesterday preparing them for the release of the report, principal Matthew Toothe stressed the academy \u201chas and is taking the review seriously\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He does not believe parents \u201cwill agree with \u2026 [its] conclusions\u201d as if they did, they \u201cwould not entrust [their] children to our care on a daily basis\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He added staff would not choose to work there and \u201cthe countless external professionals who visit the academy \u2026 would not have stood by and been complicit in a system which they thought was causing harm\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Toothe also noted the City and Hackney Safeguarding Children Partnership, which commissioned the review, previously \u201cconfirmed\u201d that \u201cnone of the accounts\u201d indicated a \u201cchild was at any immediate risk of significant harm\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition, \u201curgent action\u201d was not required \u201cin respect of an identified member of staff\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhen the LCSPR is published, I urge you to read it from cover to cover, to focus on its facts and nots its assertions, nor on the media headlines that may be presented in the coming days, to consider your experiences of the academy, and then to draw your own conclusions accordingly,” he wrote.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Review details ‘isolating, shaming’ practices at Mossbourne Victoria Park Academy<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":311204,"featured_media":109919,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[32,383],"post-theme":[2381],"class_list":["post-239157","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-academies","tag-behaviour","post-theme-academies"],"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