Mr Stephen Lord

The Secretary of State does not make these decisions themselves. They are made by a senior official on the recommendation of an independent panel.

Teacher's name: Mr Stephen Lord

Teacher reference number: 0349759

Teacher's date of birth: 14 August 1970

Location teacher worked: Norfolk, East of England

Date of professional conduct panel: 13 April 2026 to 17 April 2026

Outcome type: Prohibition order

Notice is hereby given that, in accordance with The Teacher's’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012, a professional conduct panel was convened to consider the case of Mr Stephen Lord formerly employed in Norfolk, East of England.

Teacher misconduct

Ground Floor, South

Cheylesmore House

5 Quinton RoadCoventryCV1 2WT

Email TRA.Casework@education.gov.uk

Telephone 020 7593 5393

Information about regulating the teaching profession and the process for dealing with serious teacher misconduct.

Mr Stephen Lord: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education April 2026 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Witnesses 5 Decision and reasons 6 Findings of fact 6 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 24 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 28 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Stephen Lord Teacher ref number: 0349759 Teacher date of birth: 14 August 1970 TRA reference: 23581 Date of determination: 17 April 2026 Former employer: Engage Education, London Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened by way of a virtual hearing between 13 April 2026 and 17 April 2026, to consider the case of Mr Stephen Lord. The panel members were Mr Richard Young (lay panellist – in the chair), Mrs Shabana Robertson (lay panellist) and Ms Kelly Dooley (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mrs Luisa Gibbons of Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Mr Lee Bridges of Kingsley Napley LLP solicitors. Mr Lord was not present and was not represented. The hearing took place in public save that portions of the hearing were heard in private and was recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the Notice of Proceedings dated 13 January 2026 It was alleged that Mr Lord was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute in that whilst working as a Humanities Teacher at the Iceni Academy: 1. Between in or around September 2023 and March 2024, he did not maintain professional boundaries with pupils in that he: a. Stated to pupils that he wanted to “push Individual A down the stairs” or words to that effect; and/or b. Stated to pupils that “the only reason Individual A was not dead was because ‘Satan didn’t want her’” or words to that effect; and/or c. Stated to pupils that he was glad that he thought Individual A had a cold as he “wanted her to suffer” or words to that effect; and/or d. On one or more occasions, he did not use language which was appropriate whilst teaching in that he used words to refer to Individual B such as: i. bitch; and/or ii. cow; and/or e. stated to pupils that he “want to break her neck” or words to that effect when talking about Individual B; and/or f. stated to pupils that he “love all his students, especially the naughty girls” or words to that effect and/or g. stated to pupils that “Hitler would have hated Pupil G” or words to that effect. 2. The language at paragraph 1 above was offensive and/or derogatory. 3. On or around March 2023, he did not disclose during the registration process with Engage Education that he: a. had previously been under investigation; and/or b. had previously faced disciplinary action; and/or c. had been previously dismissed whilst working as a teacher. 5 4. His conduct at paragraphs 3a to 3c above was dishonest and/or lacked integrity. The allegations were amended during the course of hearing as set out in the preliminary applications section below. In the absence of Mr Lord, the allegations were not admitted, nor did he admit conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute and/or conviction of a relevant offence. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology, anonymised pupil list and list of key people– pages 6 to 9 Section 2: Notice of Proceedings and response – pages 10 to 17 Section 3: Teaching Regulation Agency witness statements – pages 18 to 49 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 50 to 634 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 635 to 641 In addition, the panel agreed to accept the following: 1. A service bundle consisting of 69 pages; 2. Exhibit 53; 3. Mr Lord’s statement provided on 9 April 2026; and 4. 8 pages of correspondence between the TRA and Mr Lord. The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the hearing and the additional documents that the panel decided to admit. In the consideration of this case, the panel had regard to the document Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession 2020, (the “Procedures”). Witnesses The panel heard oral evidence from the following witnesses called by the presenting officer: Witness D – REDACTED; 6 Witness E – REDACTED; Pupil A Pupil B Pupil C Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case before it and reached a decision. In 2023, Mr Lord commenced a placement as a humanities teacher at Iceni Academy (“the School”), having been placed there by Engage Education (“Engage”), a supply agency. On 1 September 2023, Mr Lord commenced a long-term supply teacher role at the School. On 29 September 2023, concerns were raised regarding alleged inappropriate comments, and the incident was recorded as a low-level concern. On 10 November 2023, Mr Lord was offered the position of head of year 8 until August 2024, as an agency member of staff. On 29 February 2024, an allegation was made that Mr Lord had made further inappropriate comments to pupils. On or around 4 March 2024, Mr Lord’s placement at the School was brought to an end. On 20 March 2024, Mr Lord was suspended by Engage. On 22 April 2024, Mr Lord was referred to the TRA by Engage. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: The panel found the following particulars of the allegations against you proved, for these reasons: Whilst working as a Humanities Teacher at the Iceni Academy: 1. Between in or around September 2023 and March 2024, you did not maintain professional boundaries with pupils in that you: a. Stated to pupils that you wanted to “push individual A down the stairs” or words to that effect; and/or 7 Pupil A explained in his witness statement for these proceedings that these comments had come to light because, on 29 February 2024, he and REDACTED had reported comments having been made by Mr Lord to the REDACTED at a parents’ evening. He stated that, on 5 March 2024, he provided a statement (his “Original Statement”) outlining his concerns to the REDACTED . The panel noted that Pupil A had carefully considered the contents of his Original Statement as he provided a supplemental TRA statement clarifying aspects of it. In Pupil A’s Original Statement, he stated that he had shared with the REDACTED that “Mr Lord has been very unprofessional in class say [sic] that ‘he wants to push Individual A down the stairs and brake [sic] her neck..”. Pupil A confirmed that Mr Lord had used these words in his witness statement for these TRA proceedings. He stated that neither he, nor other pupils would ask about Mr Lord’s personal life, that Mr Lord “just tended to overshare”. He stated that he recalled this comment was made by Mr Lord in his first month of teaching. The panel noted that Pupil A had stated that he did not have a good relationship with Mr Lord because he felt that Mr Lord was not teaching the class, as he gave them worksheets, whilst he just sat at his desk. REDACTED. The panel was, therefore, careful in its assessment of Pupil A’s evidence. Pupil B provided a witness statement for these TRA proceedings. He stated that Mr Lord had said “I want to push Individual A down the stairs” between three and five times in his lessons. He stated that this occurred over the course of multiple lessons, and that pupils had not asked about his relationship with Individual B. He stated that it had been Mr Lord “oversharing” by bringing it up. He stated that he could not remember the exact dates of the comments made by Mr Lord due to it happening more than once, and it being a while ago. He stated that the comments were spread out, sporadically, and building up to a School parents’ evening in February 2024. He explained that these particular comments had been made a longer time before the parents’ evening than another comment Mr Lord had made. Pupil B stated that the comments made by Mr Lord had come up in a conversation with REDACTED, and REDACTED had spoken with other parents about the concerns. He stated that, on 29 February 2024, during the parents’ evening, REDACTED spoke with Individual Cand informed her of the comments. He stated that Individual C took notes and said that she would look into it further. He stated that this had been the end of his involvement until these TRA proceedings. In oral evidence, Pupil B stated that he remembered at break time discussing Mr Lord’s comments with pupils as they thought the comments were strange and a “bit random”. The panel considered that it would have been natural for pupils to discuss this, given that the comments were out of the ordinary. The panel noted that Pupil B did not make any reference to anything that he had any personal motivation for fabricating concerns about the comments. 8 Pupil C stated in her witness statement for these TRA proceedings that Mr Lord would bring up Individual B during lessons at least once a week in some capacity. She stated that she was aware that he was in the REDACTED because he had shared this. She stated that she remembered Mr Lord having made a specific comment that he was “going to push Individual B down the stairs”. Pupil C stated that her concerns regarding comments made by Mr Lord had come to light when she had been talking about them with another pupil in a food technology lesson, taught by her REDACTED, Individual D. She stated that she had told Individual D of the comments made by Mr Lord