Academy trust removes exercises mentioning suicide from primary children’s textbooks, following coverage by Education Uncovered

A high-profile academy chain has told parents it has now removed exercises from textbooks, used by its primary schools, in which children had been asked to imagine themselves as historical figures about to commit suicide.

The move by Future Academies follows community outrage after the existence of the material was revealed by Education Uncovered. I understand the revelations had led to complaints at the gates of at least one of the trust’s three primary schools, while parents have been writing letters asking to see the textbooks in full.

Future also told parents that it is reviewing the entire contents of its textbooks, which were the subject of wider concerns voiced in coverage on this website last week. In a letter to families at one of the schools, it tried to distance itself from the textbooks, saying they had been “written a number of years ago” and perhaps suggesting authorship had not been by its Curriculum Centre, though this has existed since 2012.

Last week I highlighted two exercises mentioning suicide in a textbook used by the children. I have now come across a third, very similar, task, in the same book.

The detail  

As reported by Education Uncovered a week ago, a textbook on Ancient Rome, for teaching to children aged seven to 11, had asked pupils to imagine themselves as the first century philosopher Seneca, as he committed suicide in a hot bath.

Under “Creative Writing Task,” the exercise stated: “Imagine that you are Seneca, in the process of committing suicide, in AD 65. Write your final words to be dictated by your scribe before you immerse yourself in a hot bath and bleed to death.”

Another “creative writing” exercise, this time on Antony and Cleopatra, focused on the latter’s suicide.

The text stated: “Imagine that you are Cleopatra and that Antony has just died in your arms. You have now lost your kingdom and the great love of your life. Write your final thoughts as you prepare to take your own life.”

These texts had been used in the school’s three primary schools in Westminster, central London, for years, I understand. Concerns had been raised by staff, but, I was told, had never led to any action by the trust.

But this appears now to have changed, after the coverage on this website, after which I had tweeted out photographs of the relevant textbook pages.

There was considerable anger from the community, I have been told. One source said: “A huge number of parents were unaware of this content, and are livid.  This has clear safeguarding implications.”

I had raised the issue of the extracts, too, with four charities. I understand that one of them then contacted Future to discuss the resources.

On Monday, I understand that parents at one of the schools, Pimlico Primary, who had asked senior staff about the material were told that it was to be taken out of the textbooks. Millbank Academy staff were told to “strike out” material from the textbooks, too.

On Tuesday, Millbank Academy sent out a letter to parents confirming that the relevant passages were to be removed. There was no apology for the material, however.

Its letter, signed off not by the head, Kate Jefferson, but anonymously by “the Millbank team”, said: “Thank you to parents who have raised concerns regarding the Roman history [Seneca] and Antony and Cleopatra textbooks. We recognise that some of the creative writing tasks are unsuitable and they should not have been included in the textbooks.

“Our immediate action has been to remove these tasks from the textbooks. Alongside this, a detailed review is taking place to identify what further changes are necessary.”

This website’s coverage last week highlighted not just these passages, but wider concerns about the content of textbooks for ancient history and British history. A teaching source who had been close to the school highlighted concerns about only one ethnic minority person being mentioned in the British history textbook, and slavery only being covered in connection to its abolition.

In a detailed critique, a history education expert, Sean Lang, had described the content as visible on Future’s website as “limited and unambitious”. One commenter on social media had criticised illustrations used in the texts as not having been attributed to their sources.

Millbank’s statement to parents saw the trust trying to distance itself from the content.

It continued: “The textbooks were written a number of years ago; curriculum development is now overseen by our Curriculum Centre, where there are more stringent quality assurance processes. Thank you for drawing this to our attention and for your continued support.”

Yet Future’s Curriculum Centre has been in existence since 2012.  Lady Nash - who oversees Future with her husband, the former academies minister and Conservative peer and donor Lord Nash - is described on Future's website as the centre's co-director with Future’s chief executive.

In a 2018 DfE “sponsor template” document – seemingly put together by Future in support of its bid to take on new schools and released under freedom of information during the trust’s hostile takeover of Barclay Academy, Hertfordshire in 2019 - it was stated that Lady Nash herself had set up the Curriculum Centre in 2012.

A job advert for a “co-ordinator” of the centre, in 2018, stated that, “in recent years, the Curriculum Centre has developed English, History (both Ancient and Modern), Latin and Geography curriculums at Key Stage 2 and 3”.

The history textbooks have been integral to these curricula. It may be possible that they pre-dated the Curriculum Centre’s work on the primary curriculum per se; but that would seem strange, given that the content of the textbook will drive curriculum coverage.

In a blog last year on the Department for Education’s website, on Millbank’s preparation for partial return from lockdown last June, a different spin was being applied on the resources, by the school’s headteacher, Jefferson.

In that piece, Jefferson had highlighted the “invaluable” work of the Curriculum Centre, which in this case she linked to the existing textbooks, saying “our cumulative, knowledge-led curriculum is covered thoroughly by our textbooks, which support children’s remote learning”.

One of the textbooks covered in my pieces last week clearly shows Future’s Curriculum Centre branding. The book “Great Events and People from British History” is badged at its end by “the Curriculum Centre: Libertas per cultum”, “copyright ©2020 by Future Academies”.

I can see no such badging on the Ancient Rome textbook, where the exercises mentioning suicide feature. However, sources are in no doubt that this work – whose font and design is the same as that of the British History textbook - was produced by Future, rather than by an external provider.

Rumour has it that Lady Nash and her daughter Jo, who was the subject of media controversy in 2016 after it emerged she was teaching for Future despite lacking teaching qualifications, were heavily involved in the history textbooks’ creation, although I have yet to substantiate this.

Another mention of suicide in imaginative exercise for children

This week, I came across another exercise, also in the lengthy Ancient Rome textbook, which asked pupils to put themselves in the shoes of a historical figure seeking to kill themselves. This task, which seems to follow the same writing formula as that in relation to Cleopatra and Seneca, was about the 1^st century BC king Mithridates.

The exercise reads: “Imagine that you are Mithridates, having just discovered the plot by your son Pharnaces to kill you. Write your final thoughts as you prepare to take your own life, and as you reflect on your unusual childhood, your achievements as King of Pontus, and your son’s betrayal.”

I understand that textbooks have been temporarily removed from key stage 2 history teaching this week, leaving pupils bemused, as they were so central to their lessons.  

A parent source said the developments, coming after internal complaints about the content of the textbook material had “got nowhere”, and despite Ofsted having visited one of the schools less than 18 months ago and giving its curriculum a clean bill of health, showed that only public exposure would exert leverage on the trust to make changes.

They said: “This tells us the power of the media: that it has taken this to happen, and the publication of these extracts, for Future to say what they have.”

Future Academies has not responded to any of my requests for comment on the content of its curriculum, resources, staff management or response to covid-19 over the past four months.