Ms Nyah Haque

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

Teacher's name: Ms Nyah Haque

Teacher reference number: 0443300

Teacher's date of birth: 1 January 1977

Location teacher worked: Coventry, West Midlands

Date of professional conduct panel: 7 February 2020

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 Nyah Haque formerly employed in Coventry, West Midlands.

The proceedings were held at Cheylesmore House, 5 Quinton Road, Coventry, CV1 2WT at 9.30am on 7 February 2020.

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 Nyah Haque: Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education February 2020 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 4 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Statement of agreed facts 6 Decision and reasons 6 Findings of fact 6 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 9 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 13 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Ms Nyah Haque Teacher ref number: 0443300 Teacher date of birth: 1 January 1977 TRA reference: 18082 Date of determination: 7 February 2020 Former employer: Coundon Court School, (the “School”) Coventry Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 7 February 2020 at Cheylesmore House, 5 Quinton Road, Coventry, CV1 2WT, to consider the case of Ms Nyah Haque. The panel members were Mr Phillip Riggon (teacher panellist – in the chair), Mrs Karen McArthur (lay panellist) and Mr Tony Woodward (former teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mr Prem Thakor of Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP solicitors. In advance of the meeting, after taking into consideration the public interest and the interests of justice, the TRA agreed to a request from Ms Haque that the allegations be considered without a hearing. Ms Haque provided a signed statement of agreed facts admitting the allegations and admitting unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. The panel considered the case at a meeting without the attendance of the presenting officer, Mr Luke Berry or Ms Haque. The meeting took place in private, save for the announcement of the panel’s decision, which was announced in public and recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of meeting dated 30 January 2020. It was alleged that Ms Haque was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that, whilst employed at the School she: 1. On or around 22 May 2018, instructed one or more students to make amendments to their Level 3 Cambridge Technical IT Coursework, after marks had been submitted to the Exam Board, following an internal moderation which indicated that she had over-marked the work. 2. Her instructions to the students referred to at 1, above, requested the students to keep any instructions as may be found proven secret from others. 3. Her conduct as may be found proven at allegations 1 and 2 lacked integrity and/or were dishonest. Ms Haque admitted allegations 1, 2 and 3 in the statement of agreed facts. Ms Haque further admitted that her conduct amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. Preliminary applications The panel considered at the outset whether the allegations should be considered at a public hearing at which the parties would be entitled to attend, or a private meeting without the parties present. The panel considered the interests of justice. Given that the facts of the allegations had been admitted, that Ms Haque had requested a meeting and the fact that the panel had the benefit of Ms Haque’s representations, the panel was of the view that justice would be adequately served by considering the matter at a meeting. The panel carefully considered the public interest. The panel noted that if the case proceeded in a meeting, there would be a public announcement of the panel’s decision. The panel also had in mind that if a hearing was convened, there would be a cost to the public purse, which may not be justified if the matter could be determined in a meeting. The panel also had regard to the delay that would be caused by convening a hearing and considered it to be in the public interest to reach a final determination in this matter without further delay. The panel therefore decided to proceed with a meeting, but noted that it could, at any stage of the meeting, reconsider this issue. In reaching its decision, the panel acknowledged that the notice of referral form in the bundle (signed by Ms Haque on 10 July 2019) only referred to allegations 1 and 3, but 5 that the statement of agreed facts (signed by Ms Haque on 11 December 2019) referred to all three allegations. The panel had sight of the notice of meeting dated 30 January 2020 (which it decided to admit for the reasons below), which confirmed that the allegations against Ms Haque were those specified in the statement of agreed facts. The panel also had sight of email correspondence between the presenting officer and Ms Haque (which it decided to admit for the reasons below) in which Ms Haque confirmed that she had received the notice of meeting (dated 30 January 2020), that she admit the allegations contained within it (as previously admitted in the statement of agreed facts) and that she was content for the panel to consider the case in her absence. The panel was content that Ms Haque was fully aware of the allegations against her and taking into consideration the public interest and the interests of justice, deemed it appropriate for the matter to be considered at a meeting. The notice of meeting dated 30 January 2020 and email correspondence between Ms Haque and the presenting officer were not served in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 4.20 of the Teacher Misconduct: Disciplinary Procedures for the Teaching Profession (“the Procedures”), and as such the panel was required to decide whether the documents should be admitted under paragraph 4.25 of the Procedures. The panel exercised caution in exercising this discretion as neither party was present at the hearing. Pursuant to paragraph 4.18 of the Procedures, the panel was satisfied that the documents were relevant to the case and considered it fair to admit them. In reaching its decision, the panel noted that the documents merely confirmed that the allegations against Ms Haque were those specified in the statement of agreed facts and confirmed that Ms Haque admitted the allegations and was content for the panel to proceed in her absence. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the meeting, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology and anonymised pupil list – pages 2 to 4 Section 2: Notice of referral, statement of agreed facts and presenting officer submissions – pages 6 to 20 Section 3: TRA documents – pages 22 to 61 Section 4: The School’s documents – pages 64 to 174 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 176 to 183 6 In addition, the panel agreed to accept the notice of meeting dated 30 January 2020 and email correspondence between the presenting officer and Ms Haque. The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the meeting and the additional documents admitted by the panel. Statement of agreed facts The panel considered a statement of agreed facts which had been signed by Ms Haque on 11 December 2019. Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case and reached a decision. Ms Haque was employed by the School from May 2016 as a teacher for ICT/Computer Science, until her resignation on 31 May 2018. On 22 May 2018 Ms Haque emailed a group of pupils instructing them to make amendments to coursework which had already been internally moderated and sent to the Examination Board, so as to justify the grades that had been awarded. One or more of the students reported the email which resulted in an internal investigation. 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: 1. On or around 22 May 2018, instructed one or more students to make amendments to their Level 3 Cambridge Technical IT Coursework, after marks had been submitted to the Exam Board, following an internal moderation which indicated that she had over-marked the work. Ms Haque admitted allegation 1. In relation to allegation 1, the statement of agreed facts recorded the following: “3. Ms Haque, as the teacher of this course was responsible for the marking of students’ coursework which made up part of the assessment of the overall qualification. 4. Ms Haque admits that, as a result of the internal moderation process in relation to Unit 8 of the qualification, some candidates whom she had graded distinction would not have secured a distinction grade after moderation. 7 5. Ms Haque admits that she emailed 6 pupils (Pupils D, G, H, I, J, K) on 22 May 2018 instructing them to make amendments to their work so as to justify the distinction grades which they had been marked. [SAF 1-6] 6. Ms Haque admits that she was trying to hide a discrepancy between the grades given and the actual work submitted.” Ms Haque’s admission was supported by evidence presented to the panel, namely a copy of the emails sent to the pupils. The allegation was therefore found proven. 2. Her instructions to the students referred to at 1, above, requested the students to keep any instructions as may be found proven secret from others. Ms Haque admitted allegation 2. In relation to allegation 2, the statement of agreed facts recorded the following: “9. Ms Haque admits that she requested in her email dated 22 May 2018 that the pupils in question did not mention the email to anyone else as she was aware that amending work after internal moderation, in the manner in which Ms Haque did, was contrary to the regulations governing the assessment procedure.” Ms Haque’s admission was sup