Free school threatens to separate pupils from their peers and ban them from extra-curricular activities if they continue not to wear uniform

A free school is threatening children with segregation from their peers outside of lessons and a ban on representing it in sports events and taking part in trips if they continue not to wear uniform, Education Uncovered has learned.

In an escalation of its protracted dispute with families who opted for a different ethos under the Steiner system, a school now run by the Avanti Schools Trust has sent letters and emails to parents with warnings of what will happen should pupils continue not to follow its newly-instigated uniform policy.

Secondary children face spending lunch and breaktimes away from their peers, under supervision in a separate teaching block, as well as a ban on extra-curricular activities, while the latter will apply to primary pupils.

The communication, from Phil Arnold, principal at Avanti Hall School in Exeter – the largest of three former Steiner free schools taken over by Avanti in 2019 – warns of this set of consequences should children continue not to wear uniform to the academy.

But the move has enraged parents with whom this website has been in contact, with Arnold’s letter appearing to argue that families actively opted for the Avanti brand and therefore should accept its rules, but parents pointing out that they actually chose Steiner education, which has never had a uniform, rather than the very different version now on offer via the 11-school Avanti chain.

With perhaps a poignant sense of irony, one parent even highlighted a spiritual “vision” statement from Avanti, available on its website. This proclaims that what it calls the “Self” should be “perceived beyond its layers of coverings”.

I sent out emails on Tuesday to key figures running the Avanti trust, but did not get any responses.  

This case continues to have implications for the way the free schools policy is understood, while it might also be a test case as to the ability of schools to require children to be in uniform.

The background

As I reported last week, some children at the three former Steiner free schools in the South West – Avanti Gardens in Bristol and Avanti Park in Frome in Somerset, alongside Avanti Hall – have been arriving at school this term not in uniform, despite Avanti having now imposed a dress code for the first time since the institutions opened.

Parents have pointed out that the lack of uniform was part of the non-mainstream ethos they opted for when choosing the schools before Avanti took them over, which happened after all three failed Ofsted inspections in late 2018. They also highlight a string of broken or watered-down promises by Avanti on the issue, the trust having said before the takeovers that it was “not wedded” to uniform; then that it would consult on the introduction of a dress code; but now seems to have introduced it without such consultation.

Avanti has also replaced much of the other elements of Steiner education, with the schools’ former opt-out of Key Stage 1 Sats no longer applying, a distinctive two-year kindergarten phase going and the practice of teachers staying with their classes as they move through the year groups also dispensed with.

I understand that some children at all three of the schools have been choosing not to wear uniforms.

Last month Mike Younger, Avanti’s chair, and Molly Warrington, chair of its “South West Hub Board” – effectively the three schools’ governing bodies, also controlled by the trust – wrote to families reminding them of the dress code, and warning in bold that all pupils would be expected to “comply” with it from Monday, September 20^th.

However, some children have continued not to wear uniform, with families with whom I have been in touch strongly defending both their children’s right to choose and arguing that this was part of the basis on which the schools were chosen.

Under the uniform rules, boys and girls in the schools’ primary phases are supposed to wear a white polo shirt and grey trousers or skirt, plus a jumper with Avanti logo. For secondary pupils, the rules state white shirt, great trousers or skirt, the Avanti jumper and an Avanti tie.

Avanti is a Hindu organisation, though the three former Steiner schools are said not to run according to a Hindu ethos.

As covered extensively on this website, the three schools have seen pupil numbers plummet, as many parents appear to have voted with their feet at the way the change in ethos has been handled, though some former Steiner families do remain.

This new communication

At Exeter, an “all-through” institution with children aged four to 16, Arnold has now sent a letter and an identical email to parents. It reads: “We want all pupils to take pride in our uniform and feel part of our community. The overwhelmingly positive feedback we have had [though dissenting parents question what evidence there is for this; see below] has reinforced our decision to adopt a uniform to help with our identity, cohesion and equality.

“Avanti Hall School operates as a school of choice within a large trust. Therefore, sending your child to our school is an active choice that is made, as opposed to it being within a catchment area, which the majority of schools in the local area prioritise within their admissions process. Therefore, by choosing Avanti Hall, we hope that you are choosing to support all elements of school life, and one of those is our adoption of school uniform.”

The communication then set out consequences for first, primary children, and second, secondary, if they continued not to wear uniform.

For primary pupils, it said: “As of Monday 11^th October, the leadership of the school will start to meet with parents of primary pupils not in uniform to discuss and ensure we can support any reasonable adjustments that may be needed if refusal to wear is based on any SEND [special educational needs and disabilities] need…Unfortunately, those pupils not in uniform will be unable to represent the school in external events and trips.”

For secondary, it said: “For secondary pupils, any pupil not wearing the full uniform will be asked to wear the school uniform on the next school day. Should a young person refuse, and not come to school in uniform the following day, we will assume that this is a refusal to follow our policy and by refusing to be part of the school community and adapt to our expectations, we will be left with no choice but to follow our policy. We will not deny your child a right to their core education, however those pupils will not be able to represent the school in extracurricular activities, for example trips, sports, expeditions and wider extracurricular activities.

“Secondary pupils will be collected during lunch and break times and have these in the secondary classrooms in the teaching block overseen by [a teacher]. Lunch will be collected prior to this to ensure that children have plenty of time to eat.”

Apparent contrast with what parents were told last month

The letter appears to contrast with a statement Avanti sent to dissenting parents individually last month, after some had written to the trust saying their children had a legal right not to wear uniform. It had said: “On behalf of Avanti Schools Trust I acknowledge that you continue to reserve your legal right for your child to access their place of learning and education without prejudice, consequence, punishment or exclusion based on their choice of clothing or how they choose to appear.”

It is hard to see how segregating children from their friends outside of lessons, or denying them the chance to take part in extracurricular activities, does not constitute at least a “consequence” for these children, while arguably it could be seen as “punishment” or “exclusion” too.

Parent reaction

Parents with whom I have been in contact are fuming.

One at Exeter, who has a child not fully following with the uniform code, told me: “Avanti Schools Trust’s continuing pressure on children and parents is causing high levels of stress and anxiety. The non-consenting children are engaged and eager to learn but in this recent letter, Avanti make it clear that they will be separated from their peers and excluded from important aspects of school life.

“Prior to takeover, the Trust was well aware that the three Southwest schools were unlike [Avanti’s] other newly-built Hindu schools and that they had an existing culture, which many parents strongly wished to retain.

“In addition to the pandemic, the children’s education has suffered from the Avanti takeover which saw significant numbers of families leave the three schools as well as the majority of staff being pushed out.

“The recent letter about ‘overwhelming positive feedback (for uniform)’ – what exactly is this statement based on? Have AST conducted a survey about this, or is this propaganda? A recent ‘Town Hall’ meeting in Exeter (according to the school ‘a space for all parents to enter a meaningful dialogue with the school’) had only three parents in attendance.

“AST’s ethos, as taken from its website, says: ‘Our vision for spiritual insight is one where our interconnectedness with all living beings and with the universe, urges acts born out of humility, and the Self is perceived beyond its layers of coverings.’”

The parent continued: “In practice this should mean that outward appearance is superficial and irrelevant. Instead of shaming children who had their own culture, AST should be nurturing all the children and building strong parent relationships within their three secular schools.”

I asked this parent whether their child would continue not to follow the uniform code. They indicated that they would still not be wearing uniform. It was their choice.

They said, of other children at the school, that some were “very resistant,” while others were “torn,” sometimes wearing uniform, sometimes not. Other parents had said that, although their children were currently wearing uniform, they would support them should they change their minds.

Another Exeter parent told me: “I am shocked but not surprised. They have no thought for the children’s wellbeing. With the letter of the law [on whether schools can deny children education on the grounds of not wearing uniform] unclear, they will not deny a child’s right to education but will still punish them by excluding them from all extracurricular activities.

“[Avanti] are oppressive [and] have little thought for anyone’s beliefs, views or philosophy other than their own. The cruel nature of these sanctions is completely at variance with Avanti's philosophy and ethos...have they completely forgotten what it is they profess to believe in?"

This parent said some children at the Exeter school were due to take part in Duke of Edinburgh activity next week. Would the trust really stop pupils from doing so on the basis of its dress code?

It appears that neither of the other two former Steiner free schools have seen their headteachers take similar action as Arnold has in the latest letter, with parents simply told that their children are expected to comply.

However, a parent at Avanti Gardens, the former Steiner Academy Bristol which is now primary-only after numbers collapsed after the takeover, was equally livid.

They told me: “[Avanti’s] threat to segregate students is entirely unlawful….This is directly prejudice, not allowing children to participate in trips etc is part of their education and the threat to withhold it is based on what they are wearing?!

“Apart from that, none of the parents ‘chose’ to send their kids to an Avanti school, there was only the hard choice to leave their communities and friends when Avanti took over, with false promises…we -children and parents – were here first.

“Avanti appear to be implacably resolved to dishonour, dismantle and destroy any last vestiges of this community’s values and beliefs by brute autocracy. They only continue to build our case against them for us.”

Yesterday morning, I sent requests for comment to Nitesh Gor, Avanti’s chief executive; to Younger, a former head of Cambridge University’s Faculty of Education who is AST’s chair; and to receiving email addresses for the trust as a whole, and for Avanti Hall school.

I have generally not received responses to requests for comment from the trust I recent months. This latest request was no different.

-Ironically perhaps, an academy in Doncaster, south Yorkshire, which has ditched uniforms – XP School – was the subject of positive coverage in The Times yesterday.

Snap analysis re “catchment area” point

Arnold’s statement about parents having actively opted for Avanti is curious to the point of being hard to understand.

To re-state it, his letter said: “Avanti Hall School operates as a school of choice within a large trust. Therefore, sending your child to our school is an active choice that is made, as opposed to it being within a catchment area, which the majority of schools in the local area prioritise within their admissions process.”

This seems to imply that only at Avanti are parents locally actively choosing a school because of its brand or ethos; at others they just go for the nearest institution.

But in reality, of course, parental choice* does exist widely, as any family facing this month’s deadline for expressing a preference for secondary education will attest.

Saying that it does not may imply a sleight on other local schools, suggesting that parents have not actively chosen them for their children, but just accepted an institution based on proximity.

It may be, of course, that some parents have actively chosen Avanti, and thus ventured well away from their homes to make that choice: the chain’s three southwest schools have certainly appeared to have spare places to allow children to be admitted should this be the case.

But set against this, it was certainly true that the Steiner ethos did attract parents specifically to this alternative approach, and that some of them see their children remaining within these institutions, because - although conservative advocates sometimes seem to base policy on the notion that it is as easy for families to change schools as it is to change which supermarket they shop at - in reality transferring children to another institution is often hard.

Implying that all families with children attending have actively chosen Avanti, when in reality the choice was for institutions with very different set-ups, will seem to families on the end of this decision just to underline their unhappiness with how matters have turned out, after Avanti was, in reality of course imposed on these schools without anyone having a choice.

I say this all as an agnostic, personally, on school uniform. But this case continues to underline just how top-down England’s academies system, and its wider education policymaking apparatus, has been allowed to become. As I’ve written before, this is quite a contrast to the original model of free schools which parents were sold, and which these parents were clearly encouraged by the government to buy into.

I asked Avanti to explain the “catchment area” paragraph to me but received no response.

*Yes, in reality, parental “preference” would be more accurate than "choice", as the choice is never unconditional, with no-one guaranteed their child will get into a school of their choice. But the point is that this is true of all schools, not just Avanti.