Medieval Methodology
On the basis of an extraordinary shoddy piece of analysis, investigation and research, former head teacher Ian Kershaw and retired senior police officer Peter Clarke CVO OBE QPM have produced reports giving veracity to the Trojan Hoax document. Both have concluded that Moseley School was subject to Trojan Horse activity notwithstanding Moseley School was not even mentioned in the original Hoax letter. Neither were former Governors interviewed!
These cherry pickers were highly selective in their use of evidence choosing to accept as the gospel truth, the one-sided rants, unsubstantiated and unproven allegations made by shameless money-grabbing bigots of mediocre calibre i.e. the very people who had failed and discriminated against our children on an industrial scale for many years. The cherry pickers did not take evidence under oath, nor did they carry out any form of cross-examination or present the allegations to the accused. Evidence that contradicted the Trojan Hoax letter was deliberately and conveniently ignored / excluded. An investigation that is carried out in this manner is usually associated with a Banana Republic.
The methodology that was employed was fundamentally flawed because:
- The accused did not know who their accusers were and neither were they given paid legal representation or invited to explain, give context or rebut allegations made against them.
- Uncorroborated allegations - not rooted in evidence - were presented as fact.
- A highly selective, almost surgical approach was taken with key witnesses being ignored / bypassed presumably because of the fear that they would be far more credible and provide a more credible alternative narrative than the one-sided rants of shameless money-grabbing bigots of mediocre calibre who failed and discriminated against our children on an industrial scale for many years and that of their cronies.
- Cherry-picking took place i.e. witness statements and documentary evidence that did not support the Trojan Horse / Hoax narrative were ignored.
- Background contextual information was not provided such as statistics in tabular and graphical form of academic attainment, unemployment, income, etc., broken down by ethnicity, gender, age, ward, constituency.
- It examined 'effect' rather than 'cause and effect'.
This flawed approach was employed deliberately to deliver a particular outcome, namely exonerate head teachers of any wrongdoing and instead lay all the blame at the feet of school governors, who it must be remembered are unpaid volunteers trying to transform failing state schools into outstanding schools against those with vested interests and axes to grind.
An example of the flawed approach can be seen in how Peter Clarke has reviewed Moseley School. By reviewing Moseley School from 2007 onwards he does not have to provide any context to subsequent events. He has conveniently ignored what happened in 2006 when Moseley School hit rock bottom with a risible pass rate of 15% prompting a formal written complaint about unacceptable low standards to local ward and constituency councillors, city officers and Ofsted. However, the complaint did not result in a visit by Ofsted; the issuing of a Statutory Warning Notice (SWN) nor any substantive or meaningful structural intervention by the Local Authority other than paying for an English language consultant to fly in from Scotland to help the school.
Ian Kershaw's report has been given a semblance of legitimacy and respectability because it was produced in partnership with the law firm Eversheds LLP. However, people should not be fooled by this and should not be surprised to see the report discredited by journalists, academics, education experts, etc., as they pore through the report with a fine toothcomb.
Ian Kershaw and Peter Clarke did not interview key witnesses because they are far more credible than those with vested interests and axes to grind. Had they done so, they would have concluded that Moseley School was subject to two sustained Trojan Horse style attacks by:
- What in hindsight could euphemistically be called the 'Moseleians Association Brotherhood' (MAB) - an all-male group of governors on the Moseley School Governing Body pursuing their own agenda at the expense of pupils at the school.
- Highly Respected Headteacher (HRH) Tim financial probity Boyes, who was appointed as Interim Head but then with the help of senior officials in Birmingham City Council, tried to take over Moseley School through a proposed series of destructive and destabilising structural solutions (National Challenge Soft Federation, then National Challenge Hard Federation, then National Challenge Trust, then Trust School before settling on, Foundation School); and seeing himself as the permanent head of an anonymous amalgamation between Moseley School and Queensbridge School). Two of the senior officials in Birmingham City Council involved were named by Khalid Mahmood MP using parliamentary privilege in the House of Commons on 22 July 2014. Tim Boyes was an opportunist trying to grab hold of a school.
Members of the euphemistically called 'Moseleians Association Brotherhood' and their cronies on the Governing Body would vote along sectarian lines and eventually polarised the Moseley School Governing Body. They would defend the school's appalling academic performance and were hostile and fiercely opposed to the statutory daily act of collective worship, a legal requirement since the 1944 Education Act.
The following statement in the report produced by Ian Kershaw and Eversheds exemplifies a key flaw in their approach, analysis and conclusion:
This included strong resistance to an ‘Old Moseleian’ Governor when historically such a post had been reserved.
By failing to interview key witnesses, no background, context or explanation was given whatsoever why there was such strong resistance by concerned governors to having an 'Old Moseleian Governor' on the Governing Body. Perhaps Keith Townsend can explain to Ian Kershaw, Eversheds, Sima Kotecha and the BBC why that was. Perhaps Khalid Mahmood MP can use parliamentary privilege to name the four members of what in hindsight could euphemistically be called the 'Moseleians Association Brotherhood' (MAB) who were on the Governing Body in 2008 and in particular their ringleader.