Michael Duodu

Introduction

Michael Duodu was a qualified teacher at Bright Minds Creative Academy, an independent special day school in Croydon for vulnerable children and young people with special educational needs, until his dismissal in February 2025. In October 2026 a Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) professional conduct panel found proven, on the balance of probabilities, that on or around 25 November 2023 he had provided an employment reference for a former colleague stating that the man had faced no disciplinary procedures and no safeguarding investigations, and that he knew of no material reason why he was unsuitable to work with children or vulnerable adults, while misrepresenting himself as a member of the school’s Senior Leadership Team — a reference he was not permitted to give and whose claims the panel found dishonest. Although the panel recommended no prohibition order, decision maker David Oatley overruled that recommendation and banned Duodu from teaching, with a two-year review period.

Background Information

Duodu, born 22 September 1965 and registered under teacher reference 4033935, worked as a Qualified Teacher at the Academy from 8 September 2022 until his dismissal on 28 February 2025. On 29 September 2023 an incident involving Person A, another staff member, led to safeguarding concerns. In January 2025, as part of the trust’s review of Disclosure and Barring Service referrals, a check of Person A’s emails uncovered the reference Duodu had provided him on 25 November 2023; the trust was concerned he lacked authority to give it and had supplied false information. He was suspended on 6 February 2025, dismissed after a disciplinary hearing on 28 February 2025, and lost his appeal on 20 March 2025. The panel — Mr Tony Coyne (lay panellist, in the chair), Ms Claire Shortt and Mr Benjamin Drouet (teacher panellists), with Mrs Lucy Mosley of Blake Morgan Solicitors advising and Mr Silas Lee, Counsel, presenting for the TRA — met virtually on 28 to 30 September and 12 October 2026. Duodu was present but not represented and denied all allegations.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Banned from teaching — a false, unauthorized employment reference found proved. A TRA panel found that Michael Duodu wrote an employment reference vouching that a colleague raised no safeguarding or disciplinary concerns, when he had no access to the records to know that — and signed himself onto the Senior Leadership Team, which the panel found dishonest.

The reference, sent from Duodu’s Academy email address carrying the trust’s logo and signature bar, ticked “no” to whether Person A had been subject to disciplinary procedures or safeguarding investigations and to whether Duodu was aware of any material reason why he was unsuitable to work with children or vulnerable adults. Duodu signed off as “SLT/ Line Manager/ Science Teacher”. He admitted providing the reference but insisted it was a character reference; the panel rejected this, noting the form asked about re-employment, attendance and safeguarding, and held it should have been obvious to an experienced teacher that it was an employment reference. His own earlier words undercut him: in his TRA response he wrote “On the form, I identified myself as SLT, a position never conferred on me by both BMCA or Horizoncare”, and in a settlement offer “… I identified myself as SLT, a title I do not hold in the school…”.

The panel found he knew the reference would be understood as given on behalf of the Academy, that as a non-SLT member he was not permitted to give it, and that he had verified nothing. Witness A explained the trust’s Employee Relations Team, which held the staff folders, completed references precisely because they could check for ongoing concerns — and that had it completed this one, the safeguarding answers “would have been entirely different”. The panel found the conduct displayed a lack of integrity, and on the dishonesty allegation concluded that “in recording on the reference form that he was a member of the SLT when he was not, his actions were deliberately misleading and tantamount to deception. This was, in the panel’s view, dishonest conduct by the standards of ordinary decent people.” Duodu had completed annual safeguarding training and delivered it to junior colleagues.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The panel found all allegations proved and held that the conduct amounted to both unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, breaching Teachers’ Standards on safeguarding and statutory duties; it also found Duodu’s actions caused the trust to breach the statutory guidance Keeping Children Safe in Education. Yet it recommended against a prohibition order, treating the conduct as an isolated episode — a “misguided attempt to assist a professional colleague” — by a teacher with an otherwise unblemished record who had shown regret, remorse and insight, and where there was no evidence of actual harm. That was not the end of the matter: the decision maker took a different view of the seriousness, finding the conduct heightened the risk that a teacher dismissed for gross misconduct could move to another school unchecked.

Current Status

Decision maker David Oatley, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State on 14 October 2026, rejected the panel’s recommendation and imposed a prohibition order, stating that by providing an unauthorized reference containing false information “Mr Duodu heightened the risk that an individual who had been dismissed for gross misconduct could take up a position in another school without a full risk assessment”. Mr Duodu “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 until 22 October 2028 at the earliest — the two-year review period Oatley concluded “reflects the seriousness of the findings” — and this is not an automatic right; without a successful application he remains prohibited indefinitely.

Impact on Their Career/Life

The reference cost Duodu his post within weeks of its discovery: suspension in February 2025, dismissal, and a failed appeal followed in short order. The prohibition then removed his teaching career in England entirely for at least two years, with any return dependent on persuading a future panel. The panel bore in mind that no doubt had been cast on his abilities as a teacher and that he did not benefit personally from the dishonesty, factors that shaped the two-year rather than longer review period. No further public professional role for Duodu is recorded.

Sources

• Department for Education, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Michael Duodu” — source