Joshua Sutcliffe

Introduction

Joshua Sutcliffe is a maths teacher and Christian preacher who was banned from teaching indefinitely in May 2023 after a Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) panel found he had committed unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. Some allegations were proved; others, including that he urged pupils to watch his YouTube preaching channel, were not.

Background Information

Born on 5 June 1990 and registered under TRA reference 0017091, Sutcliffe taught maths at The Cherwell School from September 2015 until his dismissal in February 2018, then at St Aloysius College in Islington from September 2018 until resigning on 1 November 2019. A devout evangelical Christian, he also ran a YouTube channel of preaching videos. The Cherwell School’s ethos was explicitly diverse and inclusive, its practice was to use pupils’ preferred pronouns, and it had run staff training on transgender matters in October 2017 which he attended.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Misgendering findings against a transgender pupil, an unprompted remark about a person ‘stopped being gay’, and an unbalanced video shown to a form group.

The events at Cherwell began on 2 November 2017, when Pupil A’s parent complained that Sutcliffe frequently misgendered Pupil A and had aired views about the wrongness of equal marriage in maths classes. Pupil A was a transgender male pupil known by he/him pronouns, and Sutcliffe accepted under cross-examination that he knew this. He was relieved of his classroom teaching duties that day and worked in the school staffroom while the school investigated. On 13 November 2017 he appeared on ITV’s “This Morning” about the incident instead of attending school, and was suspended; a disciplinary hearing went ahead in his absence on 31 January 2018 and he was dismissed.

The pronoun findings rested on several incidents. Sutcliffe admitted telling a group that included Pupil A “well done girls” during a maths lesson, calling it a slip of the tongue he immediately apologised for; the panel noted his account of the group’s size shifted between a pair of students, a small working group and a group of students. Pupil A gave evidence of further occasions when Sutcliffe quietly referred to him as “she”. On the television appearance the panel found he used the female pronoun multiple times about Pupil A. And in an 8 December 2017 email he wrote that he referred to the ’transgender’ pupil “only by her chosen name and avoided using any gender-specific pronouns referring to her” — wording the panel took as showing a failure to use the preferred pronoun. All of this was found proved.

On the religious-views allegations the panel drew careful lines. Sutcliffe accepted saying during a maths lesson, in answer to a direct pupil question, that he was against gay marriage; the panel found that answering a direct question in those terms was not a failure of dignity, respect or safeguarding. By contrast, an unprompted comment that Person D “through God had stopped being gay as it was wrong”, made during a maths lesson, was found proved: the panel found he had failed to consider the impact on pupils, particularly those from the LGBTQ+ community. Pupil A felt the remark implied he needed to be ‘cured’; Pupil B, who identified as LGBTQ+, felt it said her existence was inherently wrong. The panel did not find that holding or expressing mainstream religious beliefs was itself misconduct — its findings were confined to these specific incidents.

At St Aloysius, the panel found proved that on 18 October 2019, during the school day, Sutcliffe showed his year 9 form a ‘PragerU’ video titled ‘Make Men Masculine Again’ without balance or context; the allegations arose after Pupil F’s parent complained on 18 October 2019 and another parent complained on 1 November 2019, the day he resigned. Weighing his free-speech arguments, the panel held that freedom of expression is a qualified right, and that showing the partisan video with no discussion risked it being perceived as the sole position on masculinity. A companion allegation — that he urged pupils to watch his YouTube channel, which included videos such as “Mohammed is a false prophet” — was found not proved: only one of six agreed videos was uploaded while he worked there, and pupils were not found to have been encouraged to watch it.

The contested hearing, at which Sutcliffe gave evidence and was represented by Michael Phillips of Andrew Storch Solicitors, ran from January to May 2023 at Cheylesmore House in Coventry and virtually. The panel found the proved conduct amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The panel found that by repeatedly using female pronouns for a pupil he knew was a transgender male, in class and on national television, Sutcliffe failed to treat Pupil A with dignity and respect and failed to safeguard his well-being; the television appearance also effectively identified Pupil A as transgender to other pupils. His insight and remorse were found to be limited, falling significantly short of what was expected. The panel nonetheless credited his previously good record, found he had not acted maliciously, and recommended prohibition with a two-year review period, for reflection on “the distinct differences between the role and responsibilities of the teacher and the role and responsibilities of the preacher”.

Current Status

On 10 May 2023, Alan Meyrick, deciding on behalf of the Secretary of State following the panel’s determination of 5 May 2023, imposed a prohibition order taking effect from service. Sutcliffe is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. He may apply for the order to be set aside, but not before 15 May 2025; that is not automatic, and without success the indefinite ban stands. He also 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 ban closed out Sutcliffe’s classroom career: dismissed by Cherwell after the Pupil A complaint, resigned from St Aloysius after parent complaints, and prohibited indefinitely. The decision maker accepted he had ability as an educator and a previously good record, but concluded that insufficient insight and remorse left a risk of repetition and that public confidence required prohibition. For a teacher who framed the case as one of religious freedom, the panel’s answer was that his beliefs were never the issue, only how he chose to manifest them.

Sources

• Department for Education, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Joshua Sutcliffe” — source