Bridget Phillipson had to ask headteacher Katharine Birbalsingh to “lower her tone” and “allow her to finish her sentences”, official government minutes of a controversial meeting between the pair claim.
The documents, obtained by Schools Week under the freedom of information act, also allege the school leader repeatedly interrupted Phillipson, and also asked her if she was enacting academy reforms because of her own ambitions to lead the Labour Party.
The academies section of the children’s wellbeing and schools bill have prompted a very public spat between the minister and the headteacher of Michaela Community School, who penned an open letter and Spectator article after their meeting on February 3.
Birbalsingh accused the politician of not being “interested” in schools, and accused her of a “Marxist ideological dislike” of academies.
The Mail newspaper today published its own account based on sources, claiming Birbalsingh “became so animated that officials working in the office outside of the closed meeting room could hear her through the walls”.
‘Remove the heat’
But Schools Week has obtained the minutes from the meeting, written by a government official, which shed further light on what allegedly happened.
In the minutes, “SoS” means Phillipson, “KB” is Birbalsingh and “JS” is James Sibley, Michaela’s deputy head.
One section read: “The SoS stated she would need to ask KB to lower her tone, and asked they remove the heat from the discussion.
“The SoS emphasised she would appreciate if KB would allow her to finish her sentences so that she can address KB’s questions and concerns in turn.”
In another section, the DfE said that Birbalsingh had said that “as she herself did not understand politics, she should not expect the SoS to understand education because the SoS has not been a head teacher”.
The document also reveals Birbalsingh said colleagues in Westminster told her to ask if the reason Phillipson is “introducing this Bill, is because she wants to become the leader of the Labour party”.
She also asked the education secretary “hates maths” after a scheme was axed by the government.
‘It was just a conversation’
Birbalsingh has contested some of the minutes, which are not verbatim.
She says Phillipson said she wanted to “cool things down” rather than telling her to “lower your tone”. And she says she did not ask Phillipson why she hates maths.
She also says she was asked to say “nice things” about her school, not what is “working well”.
The headteacher also said a claim in the documents that Michaela “refused” a meeting with officials to explain the bill was incorrect.
She added they were the DfE’s own minutes, and “even if the person was neutral, writing in a meeting is inadequate to cover all that was asked. I asked more questions than are on there.
Officials were also “openly hostile in their body movements”, she claimed.
The headteacher also dismissed claims in the Mail that she could be heard through the walls.
She said “even by their own minutes, it’s obvious that it was just a conversation”.
When Birbalsingh published her initial letter, a government source said Phillipson “doesn’t need lectures from anyone on the importance of a good education for disadvantaged children. She’s lived it.”
Birbalsingh said: “There was no lecture. I was asking questions. I behaved more like a journalist, not showing deference, wanting to know answers to my questions, and wanting to move on when I saw she wasn’t really giving me an answer.”
Here are the DfE’s minutes, in full:
The SoS welcomed KB and JS, and apologised in advance if she is asked to step out of the meeting briefly due to a tragic incident in Sheffield that has just occurred in a school. The SoS thanked KB for coming for this meeting, and for the letter she had written.
The SoS expressed her interest in hearing KB’s views, particularly on what she feels is working well in her school.
Children’s wellbeing and schools bill
KB said she has concerns about the measures in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. KB noted the SoS’s interview in The Times in support of academies which she was encouraged by.
KB’s view is that academies’ ability to innovate is the key to driving up school standards, but the measures in the Bill will not support academies to succeed.
The SoS responded to say that the key underpinning principle behind the Bill measures is to raise the floor and remove the ceiling on the system.
The SoS explained that she wants a consistent high-quality core in how education is delivered for children, whilst encouraging continued best practice and innovation at the top end of the spectrum.
The SoS asked for KB’s view on what changes she feels are restricting innovation. KB reiterated that all freedoms were important, citing curriculum, teacher pay, uniform, and qualified teacher status.
The SoS started to respond, but KB moved on to ask whether the SoS had visited any schools where she had seen examples of good innovation or best practice.
The SoS outlined that she has been to many schools across the country; both high and poor performing, as she feels it is important to see both what is working well and where there are problems.
KB interjected to ask which schools the SoS had visited specifically where she had seen innovation.
The SoS reiterated that she has seen many examples of different schools – both academies and maintained schools – with high quality teaching, a good curriculum, and a strong sense of both discipline and praise for children.
The SoS was clear that she does not need to praise individual schools on a particular approach in this meeting.
KB asked the SoS to give an example of an academy she has seen that is performing poorly.
The SoS said that most of the stuck schools are currently academies, and there has previously been a lack of attention given to addressing the fundamental issues in these schools.
KB asked what the SoS thinks contributes to a well-performing school.
There was a discussion in which the SoS was clear that there are a range of factors in play from delivering a core curriculum (which the SoS thought she had personally benefitted from) to high-quality teaching – KB interrupted to ask the SoS why she thinks children benefit from a core curriculum.
The SoS stated she would need to ask KB to lower her tone, and asked they remove the heat from the discussion. The SoS emphasised she would appreciate if KB would allow her to finish her sentences so that she can address KB’s questions and concerns in turn.
KB suggested reverting back to looking at the Bill measures, outlining her concern that flexibility will be stopped via the Bill. The SoS asked for KB’s views on which academy freedoms Michaela most benefits from.
JS provided the statistics for the proportion of Grade 9s that students at Michaela achieve. JS said they felt that a school’s P8 score, and their attainment is directly linked to good behaviour, which is driven by wearing branded uniform items.
School uniform
JS listed a number of schools who have high attainment alongside a high number of branded school uniform items. JS stated that Michaela achieves the same results as Eton and Harrow and reiterated that branded items drive improved behaviour, and therefore, attainment.
The SoS reflected on her own experience: the school she went to expected high standards of her and other pupils without having branded uniform items. The SoS was clear that it is possible to maintain high standards without branded uniform.
JS stated that Michaela’s school uniform is cheaper than other schools’ non-branded items, as they sell their school uniform second hand in a clean and good condition.
JS said Michaela’s second hand branded uniform is cheaper than non-branded items because the claws of capitalist vultures, such as TikTok influencers, drive up the price of non-branded items.
JS gave an example of girls competing to buy trousers that will impress boys. KB interrupted JS to say that this was only on the matter of school uniform; and that curriculum is of utmost importance.
Curriculum programmes
KB said that Michaela actively chooses to cut time in other areas so that they can focus on English and Maths; not because they dislike other subjects, but they see English and Maths as being more important.
KB acknowledged that the SoS says she wants to support poor children, but that the Bill is tying Michaela’s hands in doing so.
KB stated that when she spoke to colleagues in Westminster about meeting the SoS, they said KB must ask if the reason the SoS has taken her position as Education Secretary, and is introducing this Bill, is because she wants to become the leader of the Labour party.
The SoS said she is doing this role because she cares about children and the education system. KB repeated her question to the SoS who reiterated her response.
KB asked if the SoS hates maths. The SoS asked what KB was driving at. KB said that the SoS’ decisions on the maths support programmes indicate she does not support or like maths. KB asked why the SoS will not fund particular programmes, such as the Latin excellence programme.
The SoS said that she has had to take difficult decisions across the board, including on Latin, because of the funding challenge inherited from the previous government. The SoS said that she studied Latin and found it useful – she is supportive of Latin as a subject choice for children.
Admissions
KB outlined her concern with the admissions measures in the Bill. KB asked what the SoS would say in response to parents’ concerns that their children would no longer be able to secure a place at the best schools in their area.
The SoS explained the demographic shift to KB – this will impact schools, and it is important to ensure the right distribution of school places across local areas. There will need to be better coordination and collaboration across the system to achieve this outcome.
The SoS also noted there will be a greater role for the admissions adjudicator, which will mean there will be more mechanisms for appeal than in the current process. JS thought this would just lead to a greater volume of appeals with no action.
The SoS re-emphasised there should be greater collaboration at a system level to support children going to the right schools. We have a responsibility to ensure that there is the right balance of places across an area in light of changing demographics.
Qualified Teacher Status
KB asked the SoS about her views on ensuring teachers gain qualified teacher status (QTS). The SoS explained the government’s position on QTS. The SoS said that the explanatory notes on all of the Bill measures are available online and provide more detail.
JS asked at what point a teacher must acquire QTS if they don’t currently have it. The SoS explained there are already many different routes to obtaining QTS to ensure we get the best possible people into teaching – all of these will remain.
JS said Michaela needs to know exactly what the changes mean before the Bill is introduced, rather than after, so that they can prepare.
For example, JS asked whether another teacher will be required to stand at the back of the room whilst a teacher from France is teaching as a result of this measure.
The SoS said the Bill measures were clear commitments in the government’s manifesto. KB and JS misunderstand what the Bill measures mean. The SoS said that the explanatory notes are already published online – she offered for officials to meet KB and her team to explain the measures in detail. KB refused this offer.
Curriculum
KB said she feels workload for teachers will be negatively impacted as a result of the curriculum and assessment review.
KB said that the SoS has committed to support teacher workload, but suggested the SoS must not understand anything about the education system if she does not understand the curriculum and assessment review will increase teacher workload.
KB asked why the SoS is forcing academies to teach a core curriculum before the review is concluded.
Closing
The SoS said her and KB have fundamentally different viewpoints on the key measures in the Bill. She does not agree with KB that it is necessary to expect parents to pay so much money for branded uniform.
The SoS asked KB why she has said in public that she thinks the SoS is a Marxist. KB responded that it is clear from the measures in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill that the SoS is trying to exercise state control and prevent independence.
KB noted that as she herself did not understand politics, she should not expect the SoS to understand education because the SoS has not been a Head Teacher.
The meeting ended, and KB said that she hopes the SoS visits Michaela so she could see how a successful school is run as she left the room.
