Tag Archives: regulation

Teaching; a well behaved profession

Posted on by
Reply

A recent post on LinkedIn asked about whether a ban from teaching, with the possibility of a request for reinstatement after a set period of time was appropriate as a punishment for a drink driving offence by a teacher? This set me thinking about the Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) that oversees the handling of conduct cases against those working as teachers. The Agency also handles requests for Qualified Teacher Status. Their latest report and accounts can be found at:  Teaching Regulation Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2024-25

Drink driving cases involving teachers that come before the TRA are relatively rare. There have been around 12 hearings between January and August 2025 where this was the main issue in relation to misconduct by a teacher. Interestingly, while, overall, cases against male teachers significantly outnumber those heard against female teachers, in drink driving cases there were only three hearings against male teacher compared with nine against female teachers. In three cases no order was made, the finding of the case proved and the associated publicity were deemed enough of a sanction. In the other cases, the teacher could seek to have prohibition notice set aside after a period of between two to five years. If successful they would then be returned to the register of qualified teachers.  

The TRA annual report for 2024-25 notes that there were only four prohibition set-aside hearings during the year for any imposition of a prohibition notice, of which two were successful. So, it seems unlikely that any of these teachers will return to the profession, at least in a regulated setting. As I have noted before, ‘Teacher’ is not officially a reserved occupation terms so, rather like estate agent, anyone can use the term. I would have liked to see the present Bill before parliament provide the status of a reserved occupation to the term ’teacher’, so that only those with QTS or in training could use the title.

The most common reason for prohibition so far in 2025 is misconduct of a sexual nature. This ranges from criminal convictions for anything from rape to the taking of inappropriate photographs. More than 80 male teachers, but fewer than ten female teachers, have had cases of this type of misconduct heard so far in 2025. Most resulted in prohibition orders, with no opportunity for a set-aside request. However, a few cases did allow for requests for reinstatement after a set period. These included the two teachers that had, presumably consensual, sex on school premises.

There were relatively few cases concerning teachers or school leaders interfering with examination or SATs outcomes. Of seven such cases, five resulted on ‘No Order’ and the others a prohibition with permission to request a set-aside after two years. It might seem that the profession has got the message about the need for letting children’s work speak for itself.

Most cases of ‘improper conduct’ that are not sexual in nature have resulted in prohibition with a request for set-aside after two to three years; exceptionally it may be a five-year period that was imposed. These can include single instances of primary school teachers slapping a pupil once, although such instances are mercifully rare, and often reveal the frustration that can face any teacher at any time when in a challenging disciplinary situation.

Teacher conduct is highly regulated, and there is now a considerable body of ‘case law’, so it is not surprising that many hearing are heard ‘in absentia’ as the individual may well have been reconciled to the end of their career in teaching.

The TRA Annual Report listed 297 hearings in 2024-25, with 191 prohibition notices resulting from the hearings. For a profession of well over half a million, this is a credit to the responsible behaviour of almost everyone working as a teacher.   

Did the PM see this one coming?

Posted on by
Reply

Ofsted put a secondary school in the Prime Minister’s constituency into special measures this week. This was the second secondary school in Oxfordshire to go into special measures in less than a year. Between the two schools they garnered a score of seven out of eight possible Grade 4s, with a clean sweep only being prevented by the Grade 2 in the pupil behaviour and safety category awarded to the latest school to enter special measures . The fact that the latest school to be put into special measures was graded ‘outstanding’ last time Ofsted came to call in 2010 must also be matter for some concern.

In the same week Tory MP Nick Boles said he wanted more freedom for head teachers to employ who they want, and not be told by the State who can teach, so presumably he would not agree with the ban imposed by Ofsted on both these schools employing newly qualified teachers. But that is a sideline to the big question of who is responsible for allowing these two schools in middle England to deteriorate to a point where they are judged inadequate? As I know from personal experience, the lack of a middle tier overseeing schools has proved a problem. Last year, a Report suggested the creation of Education Commissioners along the lines of the Police and Crime Commissioners elected last November across most of England. Rumours in the press now suggest that Michael Gove’s officials are considering going further with the idea of unelected officials to oversee the running, and presumably the improvement, of schools. Apparently, this would be a job for former head teachers. On the basis that each ‘controller’ was responsible for 100 schools, that might require around 200 new appointments, with no doubt nine seniors across the regions, and a chief ‘controller’ of schools.

For such a scheme to work, local authorities would need to lose their remaining powers over education, as it would be nonsensical to have two competing bodies trying to achieve the same end. As I have said in the past, such a move would effectively be the completion of the process of the nationalisation of schools started by Mrs Thatcher’s government with grant maintained schools that would bring schooling in line with health as a Westminster function. I don’t see why local councillors should have to wrestle with thorny issues such as paying for school transport and policing absence among pupils, as well as deciding how schools admit pupils, if they have no effective powers to manage the system to best effect when balancing education and costs.

Local authorities could, under such a national system, act more effectively in their role as parents, and challenge school ‘controllers when they felt that schools were not being successful. How ‘controllers’ would respond to challenges from either councils or parents if they were unelected appointees is an interesting question. But, it is not one that has ever seemed to bother the health service, or indeed further education in the twenty years since it was divested from local authority oversight. How much freedom would be allowed to the faith groups and others that now operate schools would be an interesting question that no doubt officials are considering at the present time.

For the Prime Minister, the issue is more parochial, will a school going into special measures cost more votes if it is a national school or will it be better if he can still blame the local authority for the shortcomings?