Ms Joanna Broad-Reeder

Introduction

Ms Joanna Broad-Reeder was a teacher whose career at St Margaret Ward Catholic Academy in Stoke-on-Trent ended when a Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) professional conduct panel found that she had had an inappropriate relationship with a pupil. The panel, convening on 7 March 2025, found that between and/or around September 2022 and January 2024, while Pupil A was under 18, she arranged to meet and met him outside school, exchanged telephone numbers with him and exchanged messages of a personal nature. Ms Broad-Reeder admitted the facts and that they amounted to misconduct, and the case was decided without a hearing. On 12 March 2025 she was prohibited from teaching indefinitely.

Background Information

Ms Broad-Reeder joined St Thomas More Catholic High School on 1 January 2022, working as a supply teacher covering for Pupil A’s form tutor until he left the school in July 2022. On 5 September 2022 she moved to St Margaret Ward Catholic Academy. According to the decision, Pupil A later disclosed that he and Ms Broad-Reeder had been messaging via WhatsApp and had met up on one or more occasions between and/or around September 2022 and January 2024. The Academy referred the matter to the TRA on 8 April 2024.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

The case turned on Pupil A’s disclosure, recorded in notes dated 27 February 2024. Pupil A said that while he was at the school he became close with a supply teacher covering for his form tutor, and that they remained in touch after she left. He said he met up with Ms Broad-Reeder on numerous occasions, going for a meal, to an art gallery and the cinema. In an email to her solicitors, Ms Broad-Reeder stated she “[…] did meet up with the student to attend various films, plays, Art exhibitions and concerts[…]”. She admitted the particulars of the allegations in a statement of agreed facts signed on 13 January 2025, but the panel still made its own determination on the facts.

The WhatsApp messages the panel reviewed were unusually candid. In one, she wrote: “[…]Just this very moment, I realise what it is I feel for you. It is love – a love of who I used to be and who I longed for when I was young – which was you.[…]”. In another: “[…]Btw- the deep connection is rare- I don’t have it with [Person B] but I still married him- I didn’t settle, he was just ‘right’. But what I have with you, is what I’ve spent my whole life believing in- I just expected it to be with someone of a similar age.[…]”. She also wrote “[…]I think you are stunning – I didn’t see your masculinity at school – I do now, I think you dress beautifully.[…]”, sent “Miss you x”, and told Pupil A he was her soul mate.

The panel also considered a picture of prose Ms Broad-Reeder had written and sent to Pupil A — an extended passage describing, in intimate detail, her fingers tracing a young man’s face and skin. Pupil A asked her “…is it you or do you just have a literary genius in your class?”, and she replied, “It’s me about you”. The disclosure notes also recorded that she discussed sex with him in general terms and told him she loved him in March 2023.

The panel made no findings about the motivation of the messages, only that they were inappropriate in tone and content and demonstrated an inappropriate relationship with Pupil A. It found allegations 1(a), 1(b) and 1(c) proven, and held that the conduct breached the Teachers’ Standards on observing proper boundaries and safeguarding pupils’ well-being. The panel also found the offence of controlling or coercive behaviour relevant, citing messages that apportioned blame on Pupil A for not replying sooner: “[…] I’m so pissed off now! You read my text and didn’t even bother to make a short reply[…]” and “[…] I was angry because I was worried about you […]”.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The panel found Ms Broad-Reeder guilty of both unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. It held that her conduct fell significantly short of the standards expected of the profession, “as she had developed an inappropriate relationship with Pupil A over a sustained period”. She said she had “foolishly thought that as it was a friendship it would not be deemed inappropriate”, and that Pupil A’s parents had never expressed concerns, but the panel held that her length of service meant she should have known the relationship was inappropriate, and that his mother’s knowledge or approval did not absolve her. Her apologies, the panel found, “did not show true insight or remorse”, being focused largely on herself rather than on Pupil A. It recommended a prohibition order with immediate effect.

Current Status

On 12 March 2025, decision maker David Oatley, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State, imposed a prohibition order with a review period of 4 years. Ms Joanna Broad-Reeder “is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England”. She may apply for the order to be set aside, but not until 18 March 2029, four years from the date of the order at the earliest — and this is not an automatic right. Without a successful application, she remains prohibited from teaching indefinitely. The order takes effect from the date it is served on her, and she has a right of appeal to the King’s Bench Division of the High Court within 28 days of notice.

Impact on Their Career/Life

The prohibition order ended a long teaching career; the panel had “considered Ms Broad-Reeder long service in the teaching profession which had previously been unblemished”. Ms Broad-Reeder herself acknowledged the cost in an email to her solicitors: “[…] I am filled with regret and grief at the loss of my career, the loss of my good reputation, the shame and the loss of a friendship I hoped would be with me till I die […]”. Unless she successfully applies to have the order set aside after 18 March 2029, she cannot teach in England again. The decision maker gave considerable weight to the lack of insight and remorse, judging that it created “some risk of repetition of this behaviour”.

Sources

• Teaching Regulation Agency, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Ms Joanna Broad-Reeder” — source