Katharine Birbalsingh, often referred to as Britain’s strictest headteacher, has sparked controversy by accusing Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson of acting like a “Marxist” for attempting to centralize control over how academies are run. Birbalsingh, who is the head of Michaela Community School in Wembley, north London, has gained a reputation for her unwavering focus on discipline and high academic standards. Her comments came after a meeting with Phillipson, during which she claimed the Education Secretary aimed to shift power away from individual academies and back to the state. Birbalsingh explained that she used the term “Marxist” because Phillipson’s approach seemed to centralize power, which she believes undermines the autonomy that academies currently enjoy. She argued that academies should retain their freedoms to tailor their education to the specific needs of their students and communities.
Under the current system, academies operate with a significant degree of independence. They are not required to follow the national curriculum, and they have the flexibility to set their own pay and conditions for staff. However, they must adhere to the same rules as other state schools regarding admissions, special educational needs, and exclusions, and their students take the same exams. The proposed education bill, spearheaded by Phillipson, seeks to change this by requiring all state schools, including academies, to teach the core national curriculum. The government argues that this will provide parents with more certainty about the education their children receive. Additionally, the bill would mandate that new teachers in academies must either already hold Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) or be working toward it, and it would standardize the induction process for new staff.
Birbalsingh criticized the reforms, saying they “make no sense” and would strip academy leaders of their ability to provide a “bespoke and tailored approach” to education. She expressed specific concerns about the loss of flexibility in curriculum design and recruitment practices. For instance, academies would no longer have the freedom to adapt their curriculums to meet the unique needs of their students or to hire teaching staff from non-traditional routes. Birbalsingh also raised the issue of school places, claiming that the proposed changes could lead to good schools having fewer available spots. This, she argued, would result in those schools having less money and fewer teachers, ultimately harming the quality of education they provide.
The headteacher claimed that Phillipson was unable to respond when she asked how the Education Secretary would explain the reduction in school places to a desperate parent trying to secure a spot in a good school. Birbalsingh further stated that school leaders across the country are “up in arms” and “very worried” about the bill, though many are reluctant to speak out publicly for fear of repercussions. This sense of unease among educators suggests that the proposed reforms are facing significant opposition from those directly affected by them.
The tension between Birbalsingh and Phillipson also extended to their personal interaction during their meeting. Birbalsingh denied accusations from Phillipson that she had interrupted her, instead claiming that Phillipson and her colleagues were dismissive and intimidating. She even alleged that they did not provide water for her and her team during the meeting. This personal animosity highlights the deep divisions over the direction of education policy in the UK.
The broader context of the debate reveals that Phillipson is already under pressure over other aspects of her education reforms, particularly changes to how schools are inspected. A recent poll by the school leaders’ union NAHT found that 92% of respondents opposed the reforms. Ofsted, the education standards watchdog, plans to introduce a new grading system for schools, which could further compound the challenges faced by educators. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which includes the proposed changes to academies, is currently in its second committee stage, with further debates scheduled. The Department for Education declined to comment on the private meeting between Birbalsingh and Phillipson, leaving many questions about the future of education policy unanswered. As the debate continues, it remains to be seen how these reforms will shape the future of academies and the education system as a whole.
