HM SCHOOLS INSPECTORATE
Provisional report – provided for information, HMG circulation only
School inspected: Mrs Thwackbottom’s Boarding School for Naughty Boys
Date of inspection: 3 March 2024
Categorisation:
- Type: private, unregistered
- Age range: 34 – 78
- Fee band: Highest (NB, fees paid daily)
- Single sex / co-educational: Unclear (see notes below)
Summary scores:
- Educational excellence: 2/10
- Quality of facilities: 4/10
- Pastoral care 4/10
- Discipline: 10+/10
Background
The Inspectorate was made aware of the existence of Mrs Thwackbottom’s Boarding School for Naughty Boys (hereafter BSNB) only late last year. The legal status of the school is unclear, as is therefore the Inspectorate’s responsibility for the establishment. This report should therefore be considered provisional.
The school is based in a large nineteenth century house, in the London suburb of Streatham. Unusually, it caters only to adult pupils, most of whom are occasional visitors rather than enrolled full-time. The youngest pupil of whom we are aware is 34 years old, the oldest 78. Although advertised as a boarding school, in fact pupils rarely stay for longer than one night, although ocasional ‘long weekends’ are organised, as well as an annual week-long ‘summer school’ for the most eager learners.
The establishment’s single sex status is equally ambiguous. All the pupils our inspectors encountered were male, although about one third of them were considered ‘special girls’ by the school and dressed accordingly. Mrs Smackbottom, the headmistress (who prefers that gender-specific term to our standard ‘Head’) told us that female pupils would be very welcome, but that few women seemed to experience a need for the specific educational services she and her staff provide. One of the younger teachers (female, like all of the teaching staff) does appear to be registered as an occasional pupil, confusingly, but only in one-to-one classes with the Headmistress and only outside regular school hours. This activity features in a part of the school’s web site that can only be accessed by paying a subscription. Other young women do occasionally arrive as pupils but only in a prefectorial capacity – acting, in effect, as classroom assistants – and it was unclear to us what learning goals they themselves were set, if any.
Overall, the school applies a mixed learning environment, in which classes of different abilities and different ages are often taught multiple subjects within a single lesson. Expectations of pupils are relentlessly high, in that approximately 90% of the written work, oral answers in class and test scores appeared to be considered to fall far short of the required standard, resulting in pupils being disciplined for unacceptable work. Similarly, school behavioural rules are exceptionally complicated and it is rare for a pupil to complete a day’s attendance without finding himself in breach of at least one rule. Furthermore, some rules are ‘unwritten’.
Despite this challengingly low level of compliance, student discipline is very high at BSNB, perhaps as a result of the Headmistress’s vigorous emphasis on this aspect of the educational experience. Although some pupils arrive at school seemingly determined to break rules or ‘cheek’ the teachers, the thoroughly strict application of the school’s unusual disciplinary regime seems to instill an increasing desire to avoid further punishment as the school day progresses. The approach to discipline is old-fashioned and can best be described as ‘brutal’. We note that most of the techniques used are not only obsolete in every other school the Inspectorate has evaluated but would be clearly illegal if applied to children. However, all of the pupils are over 18 and have consented in writing to (indeed, typically requested) this harsh regime.
Lesson observation
Our inspectors observed a lesson conducted by ‘Miss Taylor’ (real name: Stacey Lewis, aged 23, with no apparent teaching qualifications, whose normal occupation was later discovered to be ‘glamour model’). There were seven pupils in the class, including three ‘special girls’. The class began with roll-call and a unform inspection, which exemplified the extreme complexity of the school rules mentioned above and the punctiliousness with which the school staff apply them. No fewer than four of the pupils were found to have committed the infractions of the uniform code and although these seemed to our inspectors to be minor (one boy with a tie knot fractionally too wide, a ‘special girl’ wearing the wrong shade of knickers etc), they nonethless resulted in a punishment tawse being applied to the miscreants’ palms. One other pupil received a similar punishment for ‘looking at Miss Taylor funny’ during this procedure. This seemingly arbitrary and brutal start set the tone for the rest of the lesson.
The subject was initially mathematics, but bizarrely shifted to geography halfway through (before concluding with a multi-disciplinary written exercise). Our inspectors have serious concerns about Miss Taylor’s expertise in either subject. Several ‘sums’ written up on the board (a traditional chalk blackboard – the whiteboard revolution, let alone modern AV techniques, not having reached Mrs Thwackbottom’s establishment) were incorrect as, later, were some of the city locations, spellings and pronounciations when Miss Taylor switched to geography. Our inspectors also found that Miss Taylor could benefit from refreshing her class engagement techniques as, far from seeking to develop and encourage a questionning and self-learning environment, her approach was based almost entirely on rote learning and a binary ‘right or wrong’ attitude: for example putting up a ‘sum’, challenging a pupil instantly to solve it, then applying the leather tawse, a wooden classroom ruler or simply the palm of her hand in violent retribution, should the response not be satisfactory. This approach was rendered particularly inappropriate in light of her own errors: on several occasions, pupils were beaten for having given what were clearly the correct answers.
This did not go unnoticed by the pupils themselves. Any sceptical or doubting look was usually met with a slap to the face, Miss Taylor emphasising that she was the teacher, usually accompanying the slap with coarse swear words. One pupil made the grave mistake of taking her to task for her errors in mathematics. He (or she – this was a ‘special girl’ in a gymslip) did so very politely, indeed his demeanour could be described as ‘cringing’ and ‘servile’. It did him no good. Miss Taylor, perhaps due to her lack of training as a teacher, did not attempt to maintain her composure but instead assaulted the poor pupil violently with slaps and even kicks (he was kneeling before her), then dispatched him to the Headmistress’s office for a caning. When he returned he was made to kiss her shoes in apology, which our Inspectors considered a questionnable practice.
In the meantime, perhaps taking the criticism more to heart than she had been prepared to admit, Miss Taylor switched the lesson to geography. Alas, her competence in this discipline was still less. The pupils were forced to memorise lists of cities and their associated countries, in which Vienna was held to be in Germany, Damascus in ‘Damaria’ and Cape Town in ‘Argentina or that long thin one next to it – Chilly’. Perhaps wisely, none of the pupils raised any objections to this. Eventually, Miss Taylor appeared to tire of the class and set them written work, which consisted of copying out pages from a textbook – or rather, different textbooks, as the pupils were all given different books on entirely different subjects. During this time, Miss Taylor either sat at her desk staring at her phone, or ocasionally wandered the classroom, administering blows with various implements for bad handwriting, apparent ‘smiling’ or just ‘having a stupid haircut’. When the bell rang for the end of class, Miss Taylor collected the written work, tore it all up and threw the pieces on the floor, instructing one of the pupils to remain behind and tidy them up. The educational value of this written exercise was therefore not apparent.
As noted in the summary section, what Miss Taylor’s class lacked in subject matter or educational technique, it more than made up for in discipline. Indeed, our Inspectors estimated that no less than about 40% of the class time was taken up with disciplinary action against one pupil or another. Furthermore, while the tirades, scolding and inevitable beatings handed out by Miss Taylor were being conducted, all of the other pupils stopped work and wateched intently. Thus, there was little time available actually for learning, except the learning – of which Miss Taylor several times declared herself a firm devotee – that can be imparted with a tawse or other punishment implement. However, given the inaccurate information Miss Taylor provided in the more conventionally educational sections of the lesson, perhaps this was no loss.
Catering
The food available for pupils at lunch can best be desribed as ‘traditional’. A rather fatty and gristly stew, accompanied by lumpy mashed potatos and boiled cabbage. Regretably, the meal had been prepared too far ahead of time, despite the lunch break beginning precisely on schedule, so it had gone cold by the time the pupils (in some cases gingerly) sat down on the hard wooden bench at the dining table. However, all managed to eat up everything on their plate, as this is apparently a school rule, and one that was supervised quite closely by Mrs Thwackbottom herself.
One of our inspectors pointed out that the vegetables in the meal had been boiled almost to oblivion and questioned whether a cold salad or some such would be healthier, as it would retain vitamins. Mrs Thwackbottom laughed and assured her that pupils regularly ate uncooked food – raw vegetables and suchlike – so possibly lunch on the day we observed was atypical.
The teaching staff took a pizza delivery order for their own lunch.
Physical Education
In the afternoon, another young (female) teacher, Miss Rylands (whose qualifications the Inspectorate were unable later to verify, not least because each one of her online ventures requires a subscription to view and she states that even ‘direct messages’ over social media will not receive a response unless accompanied by gift cards), took a physical education lesson. Like so many educational facilities in these straitened times, the school lacks a dedicated gym but furniture in the main classroom was pushed to the sides, and a mat laid down, providing adequate space for some simple exercises.
The pupils then changed into ‘gym kit’ of various kinds, closely supervised by Miss Rylands, who seemed not to be familiar with D of E guidance on promoting self esteem in pupils’ bodily image, as her comments both on the unfitness of the bodies revealed during the changing (and afterwards, as most gym outfits were distinctly skimpy), as well as more general comments on physical appearance seemed ill-judged, if her intention was to promote body-positivity feelings. Miss Rylands seemed particularly to hold the view that a small penis is to be disparaged, frequently making comparisons to her apparently well-endowed boyfriend. We believe this does not confirm to best practice. We would also like to take this opportunity to express our regrets on behalf of the female inspector who laughed apparently in response to one of Miss Rylands’ comments: she has assured an internal investigation that she was merely thinking about a funny cat video she had viewed the evening before.
The PE itself consisted mainly of simple in-place exercises: press-ups, star jumps and the like. Unsuprisingly, given the vast age range of the pupils, the requirements were tailored to each individual pupil’s needs, which is commendable, although in every case, our inspectors felt that the targets being set were perhaps a little too stretching, leading pupils to fail with the inevitable consequence – this time from a traditional and flexible rubber gym shoe (or ‘plimsole’, as one of the older inspectors affectionately called it) wielded by Ms Rylands. Ms Rylands did occasionally seek to employ her disciplinary techniques in a positive manner, for example by applying an upward stroke to the thighs to assist a pupil doing star-jumps. However, on other occasions she deliberately hindered the pupils in their task. For example, she often placed her foot on the back of pupils doing press-ups (or stood in such a position that they could not avoid their faces coming into contact with her shoes on the down-stroke) and casually kicked, slapped and tickled the entire row of pupils attempting to stand on one leg, until all failed. While we regard this approach as commendably challenging, one of our inspectors felt that it was unduly discouraging and attempted gently to remonstrate with Miss Rylands, to which she responded with a phrase that we will not reprint here and must record as being thoroughly inappropriate in a classroom environment.
We also have to note that Miss Rylands smoked several cigarettes during this session, obviously against Departmental guidelines (albeit arguably legal, as the the school may count as a private facility) and particularly inappropriate in a physical education lesson. Despite apparently being a habitual smoker, Miss Rylands had neglected to bring an ashtray with her and once again, it was the pupils who had to deal with the consequences of this lapse.
After about 45 minutes, Miss Rylands started to dismiss the pupils, oldest first. Each was instructed to stand with hands on head and nose touching the wall, while the younger (or rather, less elderly) pupils continued the P.E. lesson. Finally, all the pupils were in this position and Miss Rylands simply left the room abruptly. It was not obvious to our inspectors whether the class was at an end or not (and they did not believe it fair to ask any of the pupils for advice, given the likely consequences for the latter of breaking silence), so after a few embarassed minutes they quietly left too, to rejoin the staff in the staffroom, where Ms Rylands appeared to be drinking a can of beer and smoking yet another cigarette – thankfully, this time flicking her ash into a proper receptacle.
Rather than disturb her – as she had taken such vigorous exception to the earlier advice she had been offered – our inspectors quietly tidied their notes, while (presumably) the pupils stood in silence, noses against the wall, for about a half hour, before being dismissed for showers (cold, supervised) and to change back into their uniforms.
We would recommend that Miss Ryland’s teaching qualifications be revoked, should she possess any. We discussed her case briefly with Mrs Thwackbottom, who merely described her as a ‘mean girl’ and a ‘Class A bitch’ (we regret having to reproduce this sexist slur) – but noted that she made quite a lot of money out of it, several of the school’s pupils apparently seeking her guidance on financial and other matters outside school hours. We did not press the matter further.
Pastoral care
The last item on the timetable for the day turned out to be another classroom exercise, but this time in social skills and sexual health. Mrs Thwackbottom conducted the class with the two other teachers and was able to unite these two apparently unrelated topics, by expounding her view that ‘respect for women’ was being undermined by excessive self-abuse (masturbation) by males in society.
She appeared to hold this view very strongly, along with some perhaps less justfiable concerns about the moral and physical harm potentially caused by excessive masturbation. She expounded very vigorously on these points both in general and with specific reference to the pupils in the class, each of whose sexual history, in turn, was exposed and mocked.
The inspectors therefore found it very surprising when, despite this clearly-expressed opposition to masturbation, Mrs Thwackbottom finished this lesson by insisting on the pupils masturbating to orgasm then and there. Furthermore, during this surprising turn of events, the two other teachers held and stroked one another in blatantly sexualised ways while mocking the masturbating pupils in front of them.
One positive result was that, for the first time in the entire school day, each of the pupils managed to achieve the objectives set for them, albeit after some time for the older members of class (and in one case considerable attention paid to Miss Rylands’ shoes). As each reached the stage of ejaculation, Mrs Thwackbottom and her colleagues expressed profound disgust and mockery but – again, uniquely in our observation of the school’s approach – failed then to take any consequential disciplinary action against what they appeared to consider a filthy sin (albeit one ordered my Mrs Thwackbottom herself). Indeed, it was against those pupils who were slower to reach orgasm that disciplinary measures were threatened, Mrs Thwackbottom repeatedly tapping her cane manacingly against her thigh, or flexing it as if in readiness to administer a beating – but, for once, not carrying out any such brutal action.
Regardless of any opinion they might hold about her view on masturbation itself, therefore, the inspectors felt that Mrs Thwackbottom could try to be more consistent in the way she expresses it in class. Numerous studies have shown the importance of consistency and clear messaging when it comes to communicating moral and social advice in particular, and although the pupils in Mrs Thwackbottom’s class may well have left it feeling satisfied, they must alkso surely have been left somewhat confused about her ambiguous attitude to self-stimulated sexual activity.
More generally, the class itself and the school day then broke up in somewhat ragged style and again the inspectors noticed an inconstency of approach. Despite her consistently rigorous and strict approach throughout the day, Mrs Thwackbottom took on a distinctly informal tone as the day ended, even hugging two of the pupils once they had changed out of uniform and were preparing to take their leave. At the same time, the two teachers who had been close to engaging in a lesbian tryst seemed to lose interest in one another and instead went around gathering up their belongings. Once the last pupil had left, Mrs Thwackbottom collated the fees (which, most unusually, seem to have been payable in cash on the day, each pupil handing over an envelope before registration) and handed some out to the other teachers who then departed. At this point, our inspectors, too, made their excuses and left.
Personal note: Chief Schools Inspector to Special Advisor to the Ministry of Education. Hi Julie. Bit of a strange one, as you can see! Legal seem fairly confident that this is not actually an ‘Educational Establishment’ within the meaning of the Act, so it need not fall within our purview and this report could simply be deleted and forgotten, along with all of the related files. On the other hand, one of our inspectors discovered that the Minister himself occasionally attends the establishment. I must confess myself surprised he can find the time in all his onerous public duties for such continuous education but Mrs Thwackbottom (apparently under the impression we were something to do with HM Tax Inspectorate) insisted he was a regular and we should discuss the matter with him. So we wondered if after all, it might be of interest to forward this to the Department and perhaps even circulate more widely?
What do you think? I really can’t decide, not least because of worries over the continuing uncertainty over our budget for the next two years and especially the crucial issue of senior staff salaries. I do hope a ministerial decision on that will be forthcoming soon… I’m afraid the Minister’s homework on this one is well and truly overdue. Mrs Thwackbottom would not approve, of that I’m quite sure!
All best wishes
Rachel
