Special school head’s shameful WhatsApp remarks revealed at hearing

Genevieve Hyde also made offensive comments in the group chat about staff members including calling one "Fatty Whiplash” and another “Slither”.

She was dismissed from her job which she held at Wargrave House School and Specialist College in Newton-le-Willows following an internal investigation.

The Whatsapp remarks were made between June 2018 and January 2019 outside the school environment.

Ms Hyde also subsequently faced an investigation by The Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA).

The TRA held a virtual hearing in May this year and has subsequently published its findings in a report into her behaviour which it believes demonstrated a lack of integrity and that she was overall guilty of unacceptable conduct.

The watchdog found that Ms Hyde had “both created and nurtured an environment whereby staff were at liberty to be extremely offensive towards other staff members and a student”.

The TRA panel considered that “Ms Hyde’s conduct fell significantly short of that expected of a teacher and in particular of the Head of Education of a special school”.

But the report also found she had previously had an excellent teaching career and an unblemished record in and accepted that she was deeply remorseful about her actions and showed clear appreciation as to the "abhorrent nature of the messages".

However, the report laid bare the contents of the remarks.

According to the report, the panel was told that on December 31 2018, she shared the message: “Not every flower can say love, but a rose can. Not every plant survives thirst, but a cactus can.

“Not every retard can read, but look at you go, little buddy. I don’t care if you lick windows, or f*** farm animals.

“You hang in there cupcake, because you’re f****** special to me, and you’re my friend. Look at you smiling at your phone, you crayon eating mother f*****!’.”

Ms Hyde admitted sending the messages via WhatsApp to the deputy head of education and assistant head of education of the school.

The report also detailed that following an internal investigation into the comments it was found Ms Hyde had passed confidential information to someone who went on to get a job at the school.

She also shared some terms that she believed that the school’s trustees would like to hear during the interview process.

The panel’s report stated that Ms Hyde disputed that she had done anything to give the candidate an unfair advantage.

However, the panel considered that Ms Hyde identified the applicant as a strong candidate and wanted to do what she could to secure her in the role.

On the balance of probabilities, the panel concluded Ms Hyde did so knowing that the candidate would be provided with an advantage against other applicants.

Meanwhile, in mitigation the panel did consider Ms Hyde had suffered from work-related stress and provided convincing evidence that “she had attempted to raise issues relating to both her workload and her particular difficulties with her line manager, to the trustees of the school on several occasions”.

Ms Hyde stated that she had received “insufficient support to adequately address the issues she had raised”.

The panel took on board character reference and recognised a previously unblemished and excellent career.

The panel found all of the allegations against Ms Hyde proven and found that “those proven facts amount to unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute”.

The panel found that Ms Hyde was in breach of the following standards

▪ Teachers uphold public trust in the profession and maintain high standards of ethics and behaviour, within and outside school, by treating pupils with dignity, building relationships rooted in mutual respect, and at all times observing proper boundaries appropriate to a teacher’s professional position showing tolerance of and respect for the rights of others

▪ Teachers must have proper and professional regard for the ethos, policies and practices of the school in which they teach.

▪ Teachers must have an understanding of, and always act within, the statutory frameworks which set out their professional duties and responsibilities. The panel finds that the conduct of Ms Hyde fell significantly short of the standards expected of the profession.

Concluding, TRA decision maker Alan Meyrick wrote that he had to determine whether the imposition of a prohibition order (teaching ban) is proportionate and in the public interest.

He said he had to consider the matter from the point of view of an “ordinary intelligent and well-informed citizen”.

He said the panel had found Ms Hyde had “a previously excellent teaching record, having qualified as a teacher in 1994 and working her way up to her position as Head of Education, to which she was appointed in 2008”.

He added: “Other than the misconduct found during this hearing, Ms Hyde’s record is unblemished and she had had a lengthy and impressive career, during most of which she had held senior leadership positions at schools with a specialist provision.

“A prohibition order would prevent Ms Hyde from teaching and would also clearly deprive the public of her contribution to the profession for the period that it is in force.

“In this case, I have placed considerable weight on the panel’s comments concerning insight and remorse.

“The panel has said, ‘Ms Hyde expressed her sincere remorse and disappointment. The panel was convinced that Ms Hyde was sorry for and deeply ashamed of her actions. Furthermore, Ms Hyde demonstrated clear and unequivocal insight into the impact of her actions. In particular, in the two years since her dismissal from the school, she has carefully considered and reflected upon her actions and why they occurred’.”

Mr Meyrick added that for those reasons he had “concluded that the publication of the findings of unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute is proportionate and in the public interest”.