Ms Georgina Graham

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: Ms Georgina Graham

Teacher reference number: 2355139

Teacher's date of birth: 06 October 1977

Location teacher worked: Barnsley, Yorkshire and The Humber

Date of professional conduct panel: 24 November 2025 to 27 November 2025 and 16 December 2025.

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 Ms Georgina Graham formerly employed in Barnsley, Yorkshire and The Humber.

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.

Ms Georgina Graham: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education December 2025 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 27 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 32 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Ms Georgina Graham Teacher ref number: 2355139 Teacher date of birth: 06 October 1977 TRA reference: 22017 Date of determination: 16 December 2025 Former employer: Hunningley Primary School, Barnsley Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 24 November 2025 to 27 November 2025 by way of a virtual hearing, to consider the case of Ms Georgina Graham. The panel members were Mrs Shabana Robertson (lay panellist – in the chair), Ms Debra Vaughan (lay panellist) and Mrs Olayinka Oshoko (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 Mark Millen of Kingsley Napley LLP solicitors. Ms Graham 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 28 August 2025. It was alleged that Ms Graham was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that whilst working as an Early Years Foundation Stage teacher at Hunningley Primary School: 1. On or around 17 March 2023, she used inappropriate and/or excessive force in relation to Pupil A in that she: a. Pulled and/or lifted up Pupil A from her chair when this was not required; b. Dragged and/or pulled Pupil A across the floor; c. Picked up Pupil A when this was not required; and/or d. Dropped Pupil A on the floor. 2. On or around 17 March 2023, she: a. Slammed her hands down on the table in front of Pupil A; b. Shouted loudly and/or aggressively at Pupil A; and/or c. Shouted at Pupil A with her [Ms Graham’s] face close to hers. 3. On or around 17 March 2023 in relation to the incident with Pupil A, she continued to interact with Pupil A despite other members of staff telling her to stop and/or that they could help. 4. On or around 17 March 2023, she used inappropriate and/or excessive force in relation to Pupil B, in that she: a. Grabbed and/or pulled Pupil B by the wrists; b. Pulled and/or lifted up Pupil B off the ground, and/or c. Dropped Pupil B on the floor. In the absence of Ms Graham, the allegations were taken as not having been admitted, and this case proceeded as a disputed case. The panel also took it as being disputed that Ms Graham was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute given that she was not present at the hearing. 5 However, the panel noted that Ms Graham has made various admissions in correspondence as referred to in the Findings section below. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology and list of key people – pages 4 to 6 Section 2: Notice of proceedings and response – pages 7 to 12 Section 3: Teaching Regulation Agency witness statements – pages 13 to 33 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 34 to 445 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 446 to 466 In addition, the panel agreed to accept the following: A bundle of documents relating to the presenting officer’s proceeding in absence application - 16 pages; Internal TRA correspondence regarding the despatch of the notice of proceedings by special delivery; and Tracking information showing delivery on 30 August 2025. 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 C – [REDACTED] Witness D - [REDACTED] Witness E - [REDACTED] 6 Witness F - [REDACTED] Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case before it and reached a decision. Ms Graham was employed by Hunningley Primary School (“the School”) as an Early Years Foundation Stage teacher from 1 September 2014. On 17 March 2023, the School’s [REDACTED] reported two allegations of common assault of Pupil A and Pupil B to the police. On the same day Ms Graham was suspended, and two police investigations commenced. In May 2023, the police investigation concluded with no further action against Ms Graham. On 22 May 2023, the police referred Ms Graham to the TRA. 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 an Early Years Foundation Stage teacher at Hunningley Primary School: 1. On or around 17 March 2023, she used inappropriate and/or excessive force in relation to Pupil A in that you: b. Dragged and/or pulled Pupil A across the floor; In Witness E’s initial statement she provided to the School on the day of the incident, she described Pupil A having been upset and overwhelmed with her surroundings, but having calmed down after Witness F sat calmly with her. She stated that she heard a scream and turned around to see Ms Graham holding onto Pupil A’s hand, shouting at Pupil A to get up whilst Pupil A was visibly very upset and on the floor. She stated that she saw Pupil A being dragged across the floor by Ms Graham by one hand, “almost like a child dragging a teddy or a doll along the floor behind them.” In Witness E’s statement that she provided to the police she stated that, having heard a scream of “no stop let go”, she turned around to see Ms Graham having hold of either Pupil A’s hand or wrists, and was dragging her out of the lunch hall. She stated that she noticed that Pupil A’s bottom half of her body was limp on the floor, and again she made reference to the similarity of a child dragging a rag doll behind them. 7 Witness E’s witness statement for the current misconduct proceedings, also referred to Ms Graham having dragged Pupil A in the same way. She stated that she could not recall whether Pupil A was being dragged on her front or her back, but that Pupil A was screaming no, and was visibly upset, kicking her legs, screaming and crying. The panel also noted that Individual A had stated in her police statement that “Ms Graham had proceeded to drag Pupil A across the floor, more or less the entire length of the dinner hall up to the exit” and that Ms Graham had bypassed three long tables in doing so. Whilst the panel could not place significant weight on this statement, it being hearsay evidence, the panel noted that her evidence correlated with that of Witness E and that Individual A had stated this in a witness statement to the police, so she would have been aware of the severity of the situation for Ms Graham. Witness F made no reference to Ms Graham dragging Pupil A in the dining hall. Witness F stated in her initial statement on the day of the incident that in the corridor through to the nursery Pupil A was put down and pulled along the corridor. When asked questions during the School’s investigation, Witness F stated that in the corridor, she could not remember the order but that Ms Graham had moved Pupil A in various ways, that Ms Graham had one hand and was doing a “pacey walk” so Pupil A was half tripping, half running so fell and was then dragged. She stated that Ms Graham picked her up too. In Witness F’s police statement, she stated that Pupil A was dragged by one hand in the corridor, and that she also saw Ms Graham having hold of Pupil A by one hand whilst Pupil A was stumbling and trying to keep up with Ms Graham. She stated that Ms Graham was quite tall and had long strides, and that Pupil A fell over due to this. She stated that Ms Graham went through a set of doors and Pupil A was dragged through across the hard flooring. She stated that the area was not carpeted. She stated that, at several points, she asked Ms Graham if she needed support and asked her repeatedly to stop. She stated that Ms Graham did not respond to her at all and just looked at her. In Witness F’s witness statement for the current misconduct proceedings, Witness F stated that, in the corridor, there were times when Ms Graham was holding one of Pupil A’s hands and dragged her, and times when she had two of Pupil A’s hands. She stated that it seemed that initially Pupil A had been “sort of running” to keep up with Ms Graham’s pace and her big strides, but she believed Pupil A may have tripped and fallen, as this then resulted in Pupil A not being able to keep up and being dragged by Ms Graham. She stated that whilst being dragged, Pupil A’s legs were along the floor and she was on her front, but that she was also on her back at times as Pupil A was turning around and kicking out her legs. In Ms Graham’s responses to questions asked during the School’s investigation she stated that when she had hold of Pupil A’s wrist and she lay on the floor, she did drag 8 Pupil A very slightly and gently for around 1 metre. The panel noted that when seeking to agree a statement of a